President Donald Trump Pushes Anti-Semitic Trope — Again | All In | MSNBC


>>>HOW DID NRA SEEMINGLY FALLING APART FORCE THE FALLING APART FORCE THE PRESIDENT TO FLIP ON BACKGROUND PRESIDENT TO FLIP ON BACKGROUND CHECKS. CHECKS.>>ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU’RE ON>>ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU’RE ON THAT SLOPE. THAT SLOPE.>>”ALL IN” STARTS RIGHT NOW.>>”ALL IN” STARTS RIGHT NOW. GOOD EVENING FROM NEW YORK. GOOD EVENING FROM NEW YORK. I’M CHRIS HAYES. I’M CHRIS HAYES. THE PRESIDENT IS AT PAINS TO THE PRESIDENT IS AT PAINS TO MAKE IT EXCEEDINGLY CLEAR HE MAKE IT EXCEEDINGLY CLEAR HE THINKS THE MORE THAN 5 MILLION THINKS THE MORE THAN 5 MILLION JEWISH AMERICANS WHO LIVE IN JEWISH AMERICANS WHO LIVE IN THIS COUNTRY, SECULAR, THIS COUNTRY, SECULAR, RELIGIOUS, ZIONIST AND NOT RELIGIOUS, ZIONIST AND NOT ZIONIST ARE FUNDAMENTALLY ZIONIST ARE FUNDAMENTALLY ESSENTIALLY FOREIGN CITIZENS OF ESSENTIALLY FOREIGN CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL WHOSE THE STATE OF ISRAEL WHOSE PRIMARY LOYALTY ARE TO THAT PRIMARY LOYALTY ARE TO THAT STATE. STATE.>>ANY JEWISH PEOPLE WHO VOTE>>ANY JEWISH PEOPLE WHO VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT, I THINK IT SHOWS FOR A DEMOCRAT, I THINK IT SHOWS EITHER A TOTAL LACK OF KNOWLEDGE EITHER A TOTAL LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OR GREAT DISLOYALTY. OR GREAT DISLOYALTY. ALL RIGHT? ALL RIGHT?>>DISLOYALTY.>>DISLOYALTY. OKAY. OKAY. THAT WAS DONALD TRUMP YESTERDAY THAT WAS DONALD TRUMP YESTERDAY AND MANY JEWISH GROUPS CONDEMN AND MANY JEWISH GROUPS CONDEMN TRUMP. TRUMP. SOME JEWISH REPUBLICANS SAY THE SOME JEWISH REPUBLICANS SAY THE COMMENTS WERE NOT AS BAD AS THEY COMMENTS WERE NOT AS BAD AS THEY SOUNDED, LOYAL ACCUSATIONS GOING SOUNDED, LOYAL ACCUSATIONS GOING TO HALLMARKS OF ANTI-SEMITISM TO HALLMARKS OF ANTI-SEMITISM 100 YEARS BACK. 100 YEARS BACK. INTERVIEWING THE EXECUTOR, MATT INTERVIEWING THE EXECUTOR, MATT BROOKS, SAID TALKING ABOUT BEING BROOKS, SAID TALKING ABOUT BEING LOYAL TO YOURSELF, INTERNAL LOYAL TO YOURSELF, INTERNAL RATHER THAN THE STATE OF ISRAEL. RATHER THAN THE STATE OF ISRAEL. TODAY, TRUMP COMPLETELY SAWED TODAY, TRUMP COMPLETELY SAWED THAT LIMB OFF. THAT LIMB OFF.>>IN MY OPINION, YOU VOTE FOR A>>IN MY OPINION, YOU VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT, YOU ARE BEING VERY DEMOCRAT, YOU ARE BEING VERY DISLOYAL TO JEWISH PEOPLE AND DISLOYAL TO JEWISH PEOPLE AND YOU ARE BEING VERY DISLOYAL TO YOU ARE BEING VERY DISLOYAL TO ISRAEL. ISRAEL.>>HE SAID IT, VERY DISLOYAL TO>>HE SAID IT, VERY DISLOYAL TO ISRAEL. ISRAEL. PRETTY CLEAR. PRETTY CLEAR. HE’S SAYING ANY JEWISH-AMERICAN HE’S SAYING ANY JEWISH-AMERICAN WHO VOTES FOR A DEMOCRAT, BY THE WHO VOTES FOR A DEMOCRAT, BY THE WAY, IS ABOUT 80% OF JEWISH WAY, IS ABOUT 80% OF JEWISH AMERICANS, DISLOYAL NOT TO AMERICANS, DISLOYAL NOT TO AMERICAN BUT A FOREIGN AMERICAN BUT A FOREIGN GOVERNMENT. GOVERNMENT. THE REPUBLICAN JEWISH COMMISSION THE REPUBLICAN JEWISH COMMISSION SAID THEY TAKE THE PRESIDENT SAID THEY TAKE THE PRESIDENT SERIOUSLY, NOT LITERALLY I GUESS SERIOUSLY, NOT LITERALLY I GUESS IS ABOUT ALL THEY HAD LEFT. IS ABOUT ALL THEY HAD LEFT. THIS CHARGE OF LOIFLT TO FOREIGN THIS CHARGE OF LOIFLT TO FOREIGN GOVERNMENT IS ONE OF THE — GOVERNMENT IS ONE OF THE — LOYALTY TO FOREIGN GOVERNMENT IS LOYALTY TO FOREIGN GOVERNMENT IS ONE OF THOSE LEFT. ONE OF THOSE LEFT. POPULISTS WITHIN OUR BORDERS AND POPULISTS WITHIN OUR BORDERS AND ATTACKED CONGRESSWOMAN ILHAN ATTACKED CONGRESSWOMAN ILHAN OMAR FOR HER QUESTIONS WHEN SHE OMAR FOR HER QUESTIONS WHEN SHE QUESTIONED THE POLITICAL QUESTIONED THE POLITICAL INFLUENCE IN THE U.S. SAYING INFLUENCE IN THE U.S. SAYING IT’S OKAY TO PUSH FOR ALLEGIANCE IT’S OKAY TO PUSH FOR ALLEGIANCE TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND DENY TO A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND DENY TRUMP IS ANTI-SEMITIC EVEN TRUMP IS ANTI-SEMITIC EVEN THOUGH HIS LATEST COMMENTS THOUGH HIS LATEST COMMENTS AREN’T A SLIP OF THE TONGUE. AREN’T A SLIP OF THE TONGUE. TRUMP TALKS TO JEWISH AMERICANS TRUMP TALKS TO JEWISH AMERICANS AS THOUGH HE WAS TALKING TO AS THOUGH HE WAS TALKING TO ISRAELIS, NOT AMERICANS. ISRAELIS, NOT AMERICANS. LISTEN HOW HE TALKS TO AMERICAN LISTEN HOW HE TALKS TO AMERICAN JEWISH REPUBLICANS. JEWISH REPUBLICANS.>>YOU’RE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT>>YOU’RE NOT GOING TO SUPPORT ME BECAUSE I DON’T WANT YOUR ME BECAUSE I DON’T WANT YOUR MONEY. MONEY. YOU WANT TO CONTROL YOUR OWN YOU WANT TO CONTROL YOUR OWN POLITICIAN. POLITICIAN. THAT’S FINE. THAT’S FINE. I STOOD WITH PRIME MINISTER I STOOD WITH PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU, I STOOD WITH YOUR NETANYAHU, I STOOD WITH YOUR PRIME MINISTER AT THE WHITE PRIME MINISTER AT THE WHITE HOUSE. HOUSE. SNOW WAIT, DO YOU HEAR THAT? SNOW WAIT, DO YOU HEAR THAT? I STOOD WITH YOUR PRIME MINISTER I STOOD WITH YOUR PRIME MINISTER AT THE WHITE HOUSE. AT THE WHITE HOUSE. YOUR PRIME MINISTER, YOU GUYS’ YOUR PRIME MINISTER, YOU GUYS’ PRIME MINISTER, TO A GROUP OF PRIME MINISTER, TO A GROUP OF AMERICANS. AMERICANS. THE PRESIDENT VIEWS YOUS AS A THE PRESIDENT VIEWS YOUS AS A FOREIGN ENTITY, WITH A WEIRD FOREIGN ENTITY, WITH A WEIRD TRANSACTIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH. TRANSACTIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH. BECAUSE HE SAID MOVE IT TO BECAUSE HE SAID MOVE IT TO JERUSALEM AND HAVE A BIG PARTY, JERUSALEM AND HAVE A BIG PARTY, ALL JEWS SHOULD SUPPORT HIM NOW. ALL JEWS SHOULD SUPPORT HIM NOW. TRUMP ACTS AS THOUGH HE CONCEDED TRUMP ACTS AS THOUGH HE CONCEDED TO THE RIGHT WING REQUESTS OF TO THE RIGHT WING REQUESTS OF THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT, JEWS THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT, JEWS SHOULD TREAT HIM LIKE THE SECOND SHOULD TREAT HIM LIKE THE SECOND COMING. COMING. REALLY? REALLY? EVEN BY THE STANDARDS OF A TRULY EVEN BY THE STANDARDS OF A TRULY BIZARRE MOMENT, TRUMP POSTED A BIZARRE MOMENT, TRUMP POSTED A TRANSCRIPTION ON TWITTER OF A TRANSCRIPTION ON TWITTER OF A QUOTE FROM AN INFAMOUS CRACKPOT QUOTE FROM AN INFAMOUS CRACKPOT CONSPIRACY THEORIST WHO CLAIMED CONSPIRACY THEORIST WHO CLAIMED JEWS IN ISRAEL LOVE TRUMP, LIKE JEWS IN ISRAEL LOVE TRUMP, LIKE THE KING OF ISRAEL, THEY LOVE THE KING OF ISRAEL, THEY LOVE HIM LIKE THE SECOND COMING OF HIM LIKE THE SECOND COMING OF GOD. GOD. THERE WAS NO FIRST COMING FOR THERE WAS NO FIRST COMING FOR THE JEWS. THE JEWS. THAT’S THE POINT, KIND OF THE THAT’S THE POINT, KIND OF THE WHOLE THING. WHOLE THING. BY THE WAY, THE CRACKPOT WHO BY THE WAY, THE CRACKPOT WHO SAID THAT SUGGESTED PRESIDENT SAID THAT SUGGESTED PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS HELL BENT ON KILLING OBAMA WAS HELL BENT ON KILLING ALL AMERICANS AND DEMOCRATS WERE ALL AMERICANS AND DEMOCRATS WERE BEHIND THE MURDERS AND OTHER BEHIND THE MURDERS AND OTHER MANY LIES. MANY LIES. THAT’S WHO THE PRESIDENT OF THE THAT’S WHO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WAS QUOTING. UNITED STATES WAS QUOTING. AFTER THAT, WHETHER INTENTIONAL AFTER THAT, WHETHER INTENTIONAL OR NOT, TRUMP FINISHED HIS DAY OR NOT, TRUMP FINISHED HIS DAY BY GRUMPILY YELLING AT THE BY GRUMPILY YELLING AT THE REPORTERS BEHIND THE HEDGES. REPORTERS BEHIND THE HEDGES. HE SAID THE FOLLOWING. HE SAID THE FOLLOWING.>>INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THEFT.

Dear young people, “Don’t Vote”


– Dear young people. – Don’t vote. – Don’t vote. – Everything’s fine the way it is. – Trump, that was us. – He’s our guy. – Tax cuts for the rich, hell yeah, I’m rich as fuck. – Climate change? That’s a you problem, I’ll be dead soon. – Sure, school shootings are sad. – But I haven’t been in
a school for 50 years. – I can’t keep track
of which lives matter. – Sure you don’t like it. – So, you’ll like some meme on Instagram. – If the weather is
nice, maybe you could go to one of those little marches. – You might even share
this video on Facebook. – But you won’t vote. – You young people never do. – But I do. – I do. – I do. – Midterms, primaries. – Every single election. – We’ll be there, but you won’t. – Because we’re a generation of doers. – Not whiners. – We’re doing great. (drum beats)

Maddow: Racism Is ‘A Persistent Infection’ In White American Culture | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC


PLAN B READY AND WAITING.>>HAVE A GOOD SHOW.>>>THANKS TO YOU AT HOME FOR JOINING US THIS HOUR. OKAY. IF YOU DRIVE NORTH FROM SAN FRANCISCO YOU CROSS THE GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE YOU WILL FIND YOURSELF ON HIGHWAY 101 HEADED INTO THE NORTHERN PART OF CALIFORNIA. AND IF YOU KEEP GOING STRAIGHT UP THE HIGHWAY, 120 MILES UP HIGHWAY 101 FROM SAN FRANCISCO YOU GET TO A PLACE CALLED UKIAH. 33 YEARS AGO ON HIGHWAY 101 JUST OUTSIDE UKIAH, THERE WAS AN A ARMORED TRUCK TRAVELING UP THAT HIGHWAY IN BROAD DAYLIGHT AND THE TRUCK GOT AMBUSHED. IT WAS A PORTION OF THE HIGHWAY ON AN UPHILL CLIMB. IT WAS FULLY LOADED, HAD TO SLOW DOWN AS IT WAS CHUGGING UP THE INCLINE AND THAT’S WHEN THE ROBBERS STRUCK. THERE WERE OTHER DRIVERS WHO SAW IT HAPPEN. THAT WAS IN BROAD DAYLIGHT AND THEY DESCRIBED A PROFESSIONAL OPERATION. TWO PICKUP TRUCKS WERE INVOLVED. ONCE THE ARMORED CAR STARTED TO SLOW DOWN ON THE UPHILL CLIMB, ONE OF THE PICKUP TRUCKS PULLED IN RIGHT BEHIND IT AND ANOTHER PICKUP TRUCK PULLED RIGHT IN FRONT OF IT. ONE RIGHT BEHIND AND ONE RIGHT IN FRONT BOXING IN THE ARMORED CAR. AND THEN IN WHAT APPEARED TO BE A WELL-COORDINATED ACTION, GUYS WITH GUNS LEANED OUT OF THE TWO PICKUP TRUCKS AND THEY SHOT OUT THE TIRES OF THE ARMORED CAR. AND THAT FORCED THE ARMORED CAR TO A STOP. THERE WERE REPORTEDLY SIX AGAIN MEN ALL TOGETHER. ALL OF THEM HAD THEIR FACES COVERED. WITH BANDANAS OR SKI MASKS. THREE GUYS IN EACH OF THE TWO PICKUP TRUCKS. AAFTER THEY BROUGHT THE CAR TO A HALT, THEY USED HIGH POWERED GUNS TO SHOOT OUT THE REINFORCED GLASS ON THE ARMORED VEHICLE AND THAT’S HOW THEY GOT INSIDE OF IT. THEY GOT THE DOORS OPEN AND THEY TOOK OFF WITH 10 TO 15 HEAVY BAGS FULL OF LOOT. IT WAS ALL WITNESSED BY OTHER PEOPLE ON THE HIGHWAY. BROAD DAYLIGHT. THEY DROVE UP 101 IN THESE TWO PICKUP TRUCKS, DUMPED THEM NEARBY AND GOT IN ANOTHER VEHICLE AND SPED OFF. IT WAS FAST, IT WAS PROFESSIONAL. I WAS A VERY HEAVILY ARMED OPERATION. AND IT TURNS OUT THEY GOT A HUGE HAUL FROM THAT ONE ARMORED CAR HEIST. $3.6 MILLION IN CASH FROM THAT ONE ARMORED CAR. AND SOME OF THE MONEY DISAPPEARED, WAS NEVER ACCOUNTED FOR AGAIN. BUT WHEN THE GOVERNMENT FILED ITS INDICTMENT THE FOLLOWING YEAR AFTER THE GANG THAT HAD PULLED OFF THAT HEIST ON HIGHWAY 101 IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, THE GOVERNMENT IN ITS FILINGS SAID THAT THEY HAD BEEN ABLE TO TRACE SOME OF THE CASH THAT WAS STOLEN FROM THAT ARMORED CAR IN UKIAH. AND THE LIST OF WHERE THAT MONEY WENT CHANGED EVERYTHING. $300,000 WENT TO A PARTICULARLY VEER LENT AND VIOLENT CHAPTER OF THE KU KLUX KLAN IN NORTH CAROLINA, ANOTHER CLAN LEADER IN CALIFORNIA GOT $250,000, THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE, A NAZI GROUPED BASED IN WASHINGTON, D.C., THEY GOT $50,000, THE ARIAN NATIONS UP IN NORTHERN IDAHO, THEY GOT $40,000. THAT ONE HEIST, THAT UKIAH ARMORED CAR HEIST, IT WASN’T JUST A HUGE MULTIMILLION DOLLAR ROBBERY. IT WAS ALSO SUPPOSED TO FUND THE START OF THE NEXT CIVIL WAR IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THE GUYS WHO ROBBED THAT ARMORED CAR ON HIGHWAY 101 BACK IN 1984, THEY WERE PART OF A NEO-NAZI GANG THAT CALLED ITSELF THE ORDER. AND THE ORDER IS BEST REMEMBERED NOW FOR HAVING ASSASSINATED THIS MAN, A JEWISH TALK RADIO HOST IN 1984, A MAN NAMED ALAN BERG. BUT MOST OF THE CRIMES COMMITTED BY THE ORDER WEREN’T JUST MURDER ANASSASSINATION WHICH WE REMEMBER THEM FOR NOW. MOST OF THEIR CRIMES WERE ABOUT MONEY. WHEN THEY ROBBED ARMORED CARS AND VIDEO STORES AND ROBBED BANKS, ALL OF THESE ROBBERIES THAT THEY COMMITTED ALL UP AND DOWN THE WEST COAST, THEY WERE ALL DESIGNED TO COLLECT CASH TO ARM AND FUND A VIOLENT MOVEMENT THAT WAS GOING TO WAGE A RACE WAR IN AMERICA, CREATING A WHITE’S ONLY HOMELAND IN THE UNITED STATES. AND THESE GUYS IN THIS GANG, THE ORDER, THEY WEREN’T THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO HAD THAT IDEA AT THE TIME. A YEAR AFTER THE ORDER WAS INDICTED AND THE WHOLE GANG WENT ON TRIAL, IT WAS A MARRIED COUPLE IN WYOMING, A MARRIED COUPLEED THIS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND TOOK HOSTAGES. THEY TOOK 150 KIDS AND TEACHERS HOSTAGE. IN EXCHANGE FOR THE LIVES OF ALL OF THOSE KIDS AND TEACHERS, THE COUPLE DEMANDED A MULTIMILLION DOLLAR RANSOM THAT THEY SAID THEY WOULD USE TO FINANCE A WHITE SUPREMACIST REF REVOLUTION. THE COUPLE THAT TOOK ALL OF THE KIDS AND TEACHERS HOSTAGE, THEY BROUGHT IN BOMBS, HOMEMADE GASOLINE BOMBS. A BUNCH OF THE KIDS THAT THEY TOOK HOSTAGE ENDED UP GETTING BURNED. BUT THE ONLY TWO WHO DIED THAT DAY WERE THE TWO HOSTAGE TAKERS. THROUGHOUT THE 1980s INTO THE 1990s IS THERE WERE REGULAR WHITE SUPREMACIST MEETINGS, THE ARIAN NATIONS CONGRESSING UP IN NORTHERN IDAHO. THEY HELD A BIG PIECE OF LAND UP THERE UNTIL THINGS STARTED TO FALL APART FOR THEM IN 1988. A BUNCH OF THE ARIAN NATIONS SECURITY GUARDS WERE OUT PATROLLING WHILE DRUNK ONE NIGHT. THEY ENDED UP BEATING UP AND SHOOTING AT A NAY TIFF AMERICAN MOM AND HER SON WHO HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO PASS BY WHILE THE DRUNK NAZI GUARDS WERE OUT PATROLLING THE PERIMETER OF THAT ARIAN NATIONS LAND. THE LAWSUIT WAS BOUGHT ON BHOOF OF THE WOMAN AND HER SON AND IN THAT LEGAL STRATEGY THEY BASICALLY CAME UP WITH A WAY TOO BANKRUPT THE NAZIS INTO LOSING THAT LAND IN NORTHERN IDAHO. THEY WERE FORCED TO VACATE AND THE TOWN’S FIRE DEPARTMENT GOT PRACTICE AND SATISFACTION ON BURNING DOWN ALL OF THE SENATE ZI’S BUILDINGS ONE BY ONE AFTER THEY HAD BEEN EVICTED VIA THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA HAS A STUBBORN PROBLEM WITH NEO-NAZIISM AND OVERT VIOLENT WHITE SUPREMACY. IT ALWAYS SEEMS AMAZING WHEN IT SURFACES BUT WE’VE ALWAYS HAD IT. AND OVER I’M THEY GO THROUGH RIDICULOUS AND SELF IMPORTANT NAMES AND ITERATIONS AND PATTERNS OF SYMBOLIC BEHAVIOR, RIGHT. BUT OVER TIME IT’S ALL THE SAME BASIC IDEA AND AT ITS CORE IT’S ALWAYS VIOLENT. IT’S THE ORDER. IT’S THE CLAN. IT’S THE ARIAN NATIONS. THE CHRISTIAN IDENTITY MOVEMENT. NOW THEY WANT TO BE CALLED THE ALT-RIGHT. OKAY, WHATEVER. THEIR IDEAS ARE NOT NEW. THEIR VIOLENCE IS NOT NEW. AS A COUNTRY WE’VE WEATHERED EXTREME INCIDENTS OF THEIR VIOLENCE. THE OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING IN 1985 KILLED 168 PEOPLE, INCLUDING DOZENS OF KIDS, BROUGHT DOWN A FEDERAL BUILDING. TODAY A 23-YEAR-OLD EXTREMIST FROM OKLAHOMA HAS BEEN ARRAIGNED FROM TRYING TO BLOW UP A BANK IN NEW YORK CITY TO FOLLOW IN TIM THINK MCVEIGH’S FOOTSTEPS. IN 2012 A KNEE NEO-NAZI, IN WISCONSIN, SHOT AND KILLED SIX PEOPLE IN THE TRUMP L. IN 2015 ANOTHER WHITE SUPREMACIST SHOT AND KILLED NINE PEOPLE, SHOT AND WOUNDED THREE OTHERS AT AN LANDMARK AFRICAN-AMERICAN CHURCH IN SOUTH CAROLINA. HE SAID HIS MOTIVE WAS THEY WERE HOPING TO START A RACE WAR. THEY’RE ALL HOPING TO START A RACE WAR. THEY’RE ALWAYS TRYING TO DO THAT. THIS IS A PERSISTENT INFECTION IN WHITE AMERICAN CULTURE AND IT CAN BE QUITE FATAL. AND WHAT I’VE LEARNED OVER THE COURSE OF MY 44 YEARS IS THAT THIS INFECTION IN MODERN AMERICAN WHITE CULTURE DOESN’T GET BETTER OVER TIME. AND APPARENTLY IT NEVER GOES AWAY. WE ARE HAVING A PARTICULARLY BAD OUTBREAK OF IT RIGHT NOW, THIS YEAR. FEBRUARY, KANSAS, TWO INDIAN ENGINEERS SHOT IN A BARBIE A GUY WHO WAS SCREAMING RACIAL AND RELIGIOUS SLURS AT THEM. ONE OF THE ENGINEERS WAS KILLED, ANOTHER WAS WOUNDED AS WAS A BYSTANDER WHO TRIED TO TO SAVE THEM, IN FEBRUARY. THEN IN MARCH, MANHATTAN, A 66-YEAR-OLD AFRICAN-AMERICAN MAN MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS, WALKING DOWN THE STREET, ATTACKED AND STABBED TO DEATH BY A WHITE MAN WITH A SWORD WHO DROVE TO NEW YORK CITY FROM MARYLAND SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE HE THOUGHT HI COULD GET THE MOST MEDIA ATTENTION FOR HIS PLOT TO KILL RAD COME BLACK MEN ON THE STREET. IN MAY, PORTLAND, OREGON O, TWO GIRLS ON A COMMUTER TRAINED SUBJECTED TO ABUSE BY A GUY SCREAMING AT THEM AND THREATENING THEM, PASSERS BY INTERVENE ON BEHALF OF THE GIRLS, ONE OF THEM GET KILLED. THAT HAPPENED AT THE SAME WEEK THAT THIS YOUNG MAN WAS STABBED AND KILLED THREE DAYS BEFORE HE WAS DUE TO GRADUATE JUST AFTER HE HADS BEEN COMMISSIONED AS A SECOND LIEUTENANT IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY. THE YOUNG WHITE STUDENT WHO KILLED HIM WAS A MEMBER OF HARD CORE RIGHT WING ONLINE GROUPS. AND THIS WEEKEND, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, A WHITE SUPREMACIST MARCH AND RALLY IS FOLLOWED THE NEXT MAN BY DESCRIBED AS A NAZI SYMPATHIZER, DRIVING HIS CAR INTO A CROWD KILLING ONE, INJURING 19 OTHERS. WE ARE EXPERIENCING SOMETHING RIGHT NEW THAT IS NOT NEW BUT WE ARE HAVING A PARTICULARLY BAD OUTBREAK OF IT THIS YEAR. IF YOU’RE COGNIZANT AND HISTORY OF THE STUFF WE’VE GOT TO CONTEND WITH IN THIS COUNTRY WITH THIS AMERICAN CULTURE AND POLITICS, THERE ARE TWO THINGS THAT I THINK ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN THIS PARTICULAR OUTBREAK WE’RE HAVING OF VIOLENT WHITE SO SPREM SCHISM. WE’VE GOT TWO THINGS GOING ON THAT ARE UNUSUAL AND UNPRECEDENTED. THAT JUST MEANS IT’S HARD TO PREDICT WHAT’S GOING TO HAPPEN NEXT. EVEN WITH THE UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THIS HAS PROCEEDED IN THIS PAST, THERE ARE TWO THINGS IN WHAT’S GOING ON RIGHT NOW THAT HAVE DIFFERENT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT’S DIFFERENT IS VERY PRACTICAL AND ONE OF THEM ISS POLITICAL. THE PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE IS IT’S A VERY VERY GRANULAR THING BUT IT MAY END UP BEING IMPORTANT. IT’S THE PUBLIC IDENTIFYABILITY OF THE PARTICIPANTS. ROBBING A BRINGS TRUCK IN 1984, THOSE GUYS WAR SKI MASKS. IN HAYDEN LAKE, IDAHO, THAT WAS SO FAR OFF THE GRID THAT THEY FELT COMFORTABLE MAKING THEIR HOMELAND OND OFF THE GRID BECAU NOBODY COULD FIND THEM. IN WHITE POWER CULTURE AND MUSIC AND GANGS, THERE’S ALWAYS AN ELEMENT OF COVERT ORGANIZING. RIGHT? THAT’S WHAT THE HOODS ARE ALL ABOUT. BUT WHEN THESE GUYS ALL TURNED UP AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ON FRIDAY NIGHT, YES, IT WAS THE DIAGRAM OVERLAP BETWEEN STUPID AND THREATENING THAT THEY’RE ALL STAND TLG IN TORCHLIGHT. THEY’RE ALL STANDING THERE HOLDING HARDWARE STORE TEE KEY TORCHES WHILE YELLING THEIR NAZI SLOGANS. HOWEVER YOU FELT ABOUT THAT EMOTIONALLY SEEING IT, THOSE TORCHES ALWAYS MADE FOR SOME REALLY GOOD LIGHTING IN TERMS OF SEEING WHAT THOSE GUYS ALL LOOK LIKE. AND THERE WAS, HONESTLY, WITH CELL PHONE TECHNOLOGY AND THE WAY WE COVE OUR INTERACTIONS, THERE WAS ONE CAMERA THERE FOR EVERY SINGLE HUMAN BEING ON SIGHT YELLING NAZI SLOGANS AND CARRYING A TORCH. AND BECAUSE OF ALL OF THOSE RECOGNIZABLE FACES, THERE HAS AN BEEN INTERESTING SIDE BAR OF NEWS WHERE THE NEO-NAZISAZIS AN WHITE SUPREMACISTS AND SEPARATISTS WHO SHOWED UP ON TAP AT THE RALLY, THERE’S AN INTERESTING IN SIDE BAR IN THE NEWS WHERE YOU SEE THEM ALL PLUZING THEIR JOBS TODAY OR BEING DENOUNCED FROM THEIR FAMILIES OR HAVING TO EXPLAIN TO THEIR COLLEGE CAMPUSES WHO THEY ARE, WHAT THEY REALLY THINK AND WHAT THEY’RE DOING THERE. THAT’S A PRAK DAL SOMEWHAT SMALL GRANULAR THING BUT THAT WILL BECOME AN ONGOING WILD CARD FOR THIS MOVEMENT AND FOR THIS ONGOING VIOLENT SCOURGE IN THE UNITED STATES THAT WE FACED FOR SO LONG. EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO SHOWED UP AT THAT TORCH LITERALLY FRIDAY NIGHT WILL BE FOREVER IDENTIFIABLE AS SOMEONE WHO SHOWED UP. THEY WERE ALL VERY WELL LIT. THEY WERE ALL VERY VERY WELL PHOTOGRAPHED. ANYBODY WHO WAS JUST, YOU KNOW, FLIRTING WITH WHITE SUPREMACY, BECAUSE IT’S THE HOT NEW THING IN CONSERVATIVE POLITICS IN THE TRUMP ERA, ANYBODY WHO WAS THERE ON A WHIM WHO IS FINDING THEMSELVES AND WONDERING IF THEY’RE MAYBE A NAZI, THEY WILL FIND FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE THAT THEY’RE IDENTIFIED AS A NEOSENATE ZI OR A WHITE SUPREMACIST FOR HAVING BEEN AT THAT EVENT. NONE OF THEM WILL BE ABLE TO CHANGE THAT. YOU THINK HAVING AN EMBARRASSING FACEBOOK FEED IS GOING TO AFFECT YOUR ABILITY TO GET JOBS AFTER GRAD SCHOOL. IMAGINE WHAT IT’S GOING TO DO FOR TO YOU FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE IF YOU’RE WELL LIT ON CAMERA, WELL DEFINED, IDENTIFIABLE AND NAMED AS HAVING BEEN ONE OF THE NAMES SCREAMING NAZI SALUTES AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA 2017. AND THAT ORGANIZED STRATEGY TO HAVE BEEN DONE IT BY TORCHLIGHT, IT MAY HAVE BEEN GENIUS ON PART OF THE ORGANIZER TO LOCK IN A LIFELONG COMMITMENT TO QUIT LITERALLY SHOW THEIR FACES AT THAT EVENT ON FRIDAY NIGHT. THEY’RE NOW IN IT FOR LIFE. SO THAT’S ONE WILD CARD. THAT IS EGITIMATELY NEW IN TERMS OF HOW THE MOVEMENTS HAVE OPERATED IN MODERN HISTORY. THAT’S THE PRACTICAL THING. THE POLITICAL THING, THE OTHER THING THAT’S NEW HERE IS OF COURSE FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY THESE GUYS THINK THEY HAVE A CHAMPION NOT JUST IN POLITICS BUT IN MAINSTREAM POLITICS. DAVID DUKE RAN FOR GOVERNOR IN LOUISIANA AND THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A HOUSE MEMBER HER OAR THERE WHO WAS WILLING TO ASSOCIATE HIMSELF OR HERSELF WITH THE MALITIA MOVEMENT OR FLIRT WITH EXTREMES. BUT WE’VE NEVER HAD THE VIOLENT RIGHT IN THIS COUNTRY ASSOCIATE THEMSELVES SO OPENLY AND SO LOVINGLY WITH A SERVING PRESIDENT. AND THERE’S BEEN A LOT OF TALK TODAY AND OVER THE WEEKEND ABOUT WHAT THAT ASSOCIATION MEANS FOR THIS PRESIDENT AND HOW THIS PRESIDENT TALKS ABOUT THAT MOVEMENT. BUT IT’S WORTH LOOKING AT WHAT THAT CONNECTION TO A PRESIDENCY MEANS FOR THESE NEO-NAZIS. WHAT IT MEANS FOR THIS THING WE CAN’T GET RID OF, THIS PERSISTENT SOURCE OF VIOLENCE AND EXTREMISM AND TERRORISM IN AMERICAN CULTURE. WE’VE SEEN THAT SUBCULTURE WREAK SHAF ROCK EVERY DECADE WE’VE EXISTED AS A COUNTRY. WE’VE NEVER SEEN ONE ALIGN WITH A SITTING U.S. PR

Donald Trump Nominates Advocate Of ‘Ethnonationalism’ For Judgeship | Rachel Maddow | MSNBC


PROBLEM NOW? THIS IS OUR LIFE NOW. THIS IS OUR LIFE NOW. ANYWAY, LET’S TALK ABOUT ANYWAY, LET’S TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. SOMETHING ELSE. LET’S TALK ABOUT THE FEDERAL LET’S TALK ABOUT THE FEDERAL COURTS. COURTS. MOST FEDERAL COURT CASES DON’T MOST FEDERAL COURT CASES DON’T GET TO THE SUPREME COURT, RIGHT? GET TO THE SUPREME COURT, RIGHT? THE SUPREME COURT GETS ALL THE THE SUPREME COURT GETS ALL THE ATTENTION BUT THEY DON’T GET ATTENTION BUT THEY DON’T GET THAT MANY CASES. THAT MANY CASES. EVERY YEAR THE SUPREME COURT EVERY YEAR THE SUPREME COURT GETS ASKED TO TAKE 5,000 OR GETS ASKED TO TAKE 5,000 OR 10,000 CASES. 10,000 CASES. THEY ONLY TAKE ABOUT 100 OF THEY ONLY TAKE ABOUT 100 OF THEM, MAYBE 150 OF THEM IN A THEM, MAYBE 150 OF THEM IN A PARTICULARLY BUSY YEAR. PARTICULARLY BUSY YEAR. SO IF YOUR CASE IS IN FEDERAL SO IF YOUR CASE IS IN FEDERAL COURT, ANY KIND OF CASE, THAT COURT, ANY KIND OF CASE, THAT WILL BE BEFORE A FEDERAL WILL BE BEFORE A FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT JUDGE. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE. IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE RULING IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE RULING THAT DISTRICT COURT JUDGE GIVES THAT DISTRICT COURT JUDGE GIVES YOU AND YOU WANT TO PEEL THAT YOU AND YOU WANT TO PEEL THAT RULING, YOUR APPEAL GETS KICKED RULING, YOUR APPEAL GETS KICKED UPSTAIRS TO THE FEDERAL APPEALS UPSTAIRS TO THE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT, WHICH IS CALLED THE COURT, WHICH IS CALLED THE CIRCUIT COURT. CIRCUIT COURT. THERE’S ABOUT A DOZEN CIRCUIT THERE’S ABOUT A DOZEN CIRCUIT COURTS AROUND THE COUNTRY. COURTS AROUND THE COUNTRY. THEY’RE REGIONAL COURTS. THEY’RE REGIONAL COURTS. AND IF THE CIRCUIT COURT DECIDES AND IF THE CIRCUIT COURT DECIDES THAT THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE UP THAT THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE UP YOUR APPEAL IN YOUR FEDERAL YOUR APPEAL IN YOUR FEDERAL CASE, IT WILL BE CIRCUIT COURT CASE, IT WILL BE CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES THAT REVIEW YOUR CASE. JUDGES THAT REVIEW YOUR CASE. FOR THE VAST, VAFLTST, VAST, VAS FOR THE VAST, VAFLTST, VAST, VAS VAST MAJORITY OF FEDERAL COURT VAST MAJORITY OF FEDERAL COURT CASES, THAT IS AS FAR AS YOU ARE CASES, THAT IS AS FAR AS YOU ARE EVER LIKELY TO GO. EVER LIKELY TO GO. EVEN IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE EVEN IF YOU DON’T LIKE THE CIRCUIT COURT RULING THAT YOU CIRCUIT COURT RULING THAT YOU GET AND IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IT GET AND IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IT FURTHER AND APPEAL IT ALL THE FURTHER AND APPEAL IT ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT, YOU WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT, YOU ARE STATISTICALLY SPEAKING ARE STATISTICALLY SPEAKING REALLY NOT LIKELY TO GET THERE. REALLY NOT LIKELY TO GET THERE. FOR FEDERAL CASES, I MEAN IF FOR FEDERAL CASES, I MEAN IF YOU’RE GOING TO GET ANYWHERE, YOU’RE GOING TO GET ANYWHERE, THE CIRCUIT COURT IS ALMOST THE CIRCUIT COURT IS ALMOST ALWAYS THE END OF THE LINE. ALWAYS THE END OF THE LINE. THE SUPREME COURT, AGAIN, GETS THE SUPREME COURT, AGAIN, GETS ALL THE ATTENTION BUT IT’S THESE ALL THE ATTENTION BUT IT’S THESE FEDERAL APPEALS COURTS, THESE FEDERAL APPEALS COURTS, THESE CIRCUIT COURTS THAT DO THE VAST CIRCUIT COURTS THAT DO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE APPELLATE WORK MAJORITY OF THE APPELLATE WORK IN THE FEDERAL SYSTEM. IN THE FEDERAL SYSTEM. SO THESE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE SO THESE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE REALLY POWERFUL. REALLY POWERFUL. THEY’RE REALLY IMPORTANT. THEY’RE REALLY IMPORTANT. THEY’RE IMPORTANT FOR INDIVIDUAL THEY’RE IMPORTANT FOR INDIVIDUAL HUMANS, INDIVIDUAL CASES BUT HUMANS, INDIVIDUAL CASES BUT ALSO BIG POLICY MATTERS THAT END ALSO BIG POLICY MATTERS THAT END UP IN THE COURTS FOR ONE REASON UP IN THE COURTS FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER. OR ANOTHER. THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE THE THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE THE HIGHEST THAT THE VAST MAJORITY HIGHEST THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF THOSE CASES WILL EVER GO. OF THOSE CASES WILL EVER GO. CIRCUIT COURTS ARE ALSO CIRCUIT COURTS ARE ALSO IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF THE JUDGES IMPORTANT BECAUSE OF THE JUDGES THAT SIT ON THEM. THAT SIT ON THEM. THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE THE THE CIRCUIT COURTS ARE THE LOCATION FROM WHICH PRESIDENTS LOCATION FROM WHICH PRESIDENTS OF BOTH PARTIES LIKE TO PLUCK OF BOTH PARTIES LIKE TO PLUCK YOUNG PROMISING APPEALS COURT YOUNG PROMISING APPEALS COURT JUDGES WHEN THEY’RE LOOKING FOR JUDGES WHEN THEY’RE LOOKING FOR A SUPREME COURT NOMINEE. A SUPREME COURT NOMINEE. SO CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES HAVE AN SO CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES HAVE AN IMPORTANT JOB. IMPORTANT JOB. THEY ALSO PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY THEY ALSO PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY ARE YOUNG AND FIRST NOMINATED, ARE YOUNG AND FIRST NOMINATED, THEY’RE REALLY IMPORTANT THEY’RE REALLY IMPORTANT DECISIONS FOR PRESIDENTS BECAUSE DECISIONS FOR PRESIDENTS BECAUSE THOSE ARE SEEN AS THE SORT OF THOSE ARE SEEN AS THE SORT OF BENCH FROM WHICH SUPREME COURT BENCH FROM WHICH SUPREME COURT NOMINEES ARE CHOSEN. NOMINEES ARE CHOSEN. AND ONE OF THE MOST AND ONE OF THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL BUT ALSO MOST CONSEQUENTIAL BUT ALSO MOST BORING POLITICAL STORIES OF THE BORING POLITICAL STORIES OF THE TRUMP ERA, THE TRUMP ERA AND THE TRUMP ERA, THE TRUMP ERA AND THE McCONNELL ERA, IS THAT THE TOP McCONNELL ERA, IS THAT THE TOP REPUBLICAN IN THE U.S. SENATE, REPUBLICAN IN THE U.S. SENATE, MITCH McCONNELL, NOT ONLY HELD A MITCH McCONNELL, NOT ONLY HELD A SUPREME COURT SEAT OPEN DURING SUPREME COURT SEAT OPEN DURING THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY, SO THE OBAMA PRESIDENCY, SO PRESIDENT OBAMA WOULDN’T BE PRESIDENT OBAMA WOULDN’T BE ALLOWED TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE ALLOWED TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE SUPREME COURT, MITCH McCONNELL SUPREME COURT, MITCH McCONNELL ALSO HELD OPEN DOZENS AND DOZENS ALSO HELD OPEN DOZENS AND DOZENS AND DOZENS OF OTHER SEATS ON AND DOZENS OF OTHER SEATS ON FEDERAL COURTS ACROSS THE FEDERAL COURTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, INCLUDING DOZENS OF COUNTRY, INCLUDING DOZENS OF SEATS ON THESE VERY IMPORTANT SEATS ON THESE VERY IMPORTANT CIRCUIT COURTS, THESE APPEALS CIRCUIT COURTS, THESE APPEALS COURTS, SO PRESIDENT OBAMA COURTS, SO PRESIDENT OBAMA COULDN’T FILL THOSE SEATS COULDN’T FILL THOSE SEATS EITHER. EITHER. AND MITCH McCONNELL DID THAT AND MITCH McCONNELL DID THAT SPECIFICALLY SO THE NEXT SPECIFICALLY SO THE NEXT REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT COULD REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT COULD APPOINT THOSE JUDGES INSTEAD. APPOINT THOSE JUDGES INSTEAD. AND THAT IS HOW WE GOT TO THE AND THAT IS HOW WE GOT TO THE POINT WHERE TWO SOMETHING YEARS POINT WHERE TWO SOMETHING YEARS INTO HIS TIME IN OFFICE, INTO HIS TIME IN OFFICE, PRESIDENT TRUMP IS CLOSING IN PRESIDENT TRUMP IS CLOSING IN ALREADY ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF ALREADY ON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES THAT CIRCUIT COURT JUDGES THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS EVER ABLE TO PRESIDENT OBAMA WAS EVER ABLE TO APPOINT IN HIS WHOLE EIGHT YEARS APPOINT IN HIS WHOLE EIGHT YEARS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. IN THE WHITE HOUSE. THEY JUST DIDN’T LET OBAMA THEY JUST DIDN’T LET OBAMA APPOINT JUDGES. APPOINT JUDGES. THEY HELD THOSE SEATS OPEN ON THEY HELD THOSE SEATS OPEN ON FEDERAL COURTS, INCLUDING THE FEDERAL COURTS, INCLUDING THE APPEALS COURTS, THESE CIRCUIT APPEALS COURTS, THESE CIRCUIT COURTS, AND NOW BECAUSE THEY COURTS, AND NOW BECAUSE THEY HELD THEM OPEN THROUGHOUT HELD THEM OPEN THROUGHOUT OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY, NOW TRUMP IS OBAMA’S PRESIDENCY, NOW TRUMP IS VERY QUICKLY FILLING THEM UP AND VERY QUICKLY FILLING THEM UP AND THESE ARE LIFETIME APPOINTMENTS. THESE ARE LIFETIME APPOINTMENTS. AS I SAID, THIS IS A HUGE, SUPER AS I SAID, THIS IS A HUGE, SUPER CONSEQUENTIAL AND OFTEN VERY CONSEQUENTIAL AND OFTEN VERY BORING STORY OF THE TRUMP AND BORING STORY OF THE TRUMP AND MITCH McCONNELL ERA. MITCH McCONNELL ERA. EXCEPT FOR THE DAYS WHEN IT IS EXCEPT FOR THE DAYS WHEN IT IS NOT BORING. NOT BORING. PART OF THE WAY THE REPUBLICAN PART OF THE WAY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY BOTH IN THE WHITE HOUSE PARTY BOTH IN THE WHITE HOUSE AND IN THE SENATE HAS HANDLED AND IN THE SENATE HAS HANDLED THIS GREAT POWER THAT THEY HAVE THIS GREAT POWER THAT THEY HAVE GIVEN THEMSELVES BY MANIPULATING GIVEN THEMSELVES BY MANIPULATING THE JUDICIARY THIS WAY, PART OF THE JUDICIARY THIS WAY, PART OF THE WAY THEY HAVE DEALT WITH THE WAY THEY HAVE DEALT WITH THIS POWER IS THEY HAVE BEEN A THIS POWER IS THEY HAVE BEEN A LITTLE PUNCH DRUNK WITH IT. LITTLE PUNCH DRUNK WITH IT. AND WITH PRETTY GOOD FREQUENCY AND WITH PRETTY GOOD FREQUENCY THEY HAVE APPOINTED WILDLY THEY HAVE APPOINTED WILDLY UNQUALIFIED PEOPLE TO TRY TO UNQUALIFIED PEOPLE TO TRY TO BECOME FEDERAL JUDGES, INCLUDING BECOME FEDERAL JUDGES, INCLUDING SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE LITERALLY SOME PEOPLE WHO ARE LITERALLY EXPLICITLY RATED UNQUALIFIED BY EXPLICITLY RATED UNQUALIFIED BY THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. I MEAN THEY HAVE NOMINATED I MEAN THEY HAVE NOMINATED PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER TRIED A PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER TRIED A CASE, PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN CASE, PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN INVOLVED IN ANY WAY IN INVOLVED IN ANY WAY IN LITIGATION, LITERALLY PEOPLE WHO LITIGATION, LITERALLY PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER STEPPED FOOT IN A HAVE NEVER STEPPED FOOT IN A COURTROOM, THEY HAVE APPOINTED COURTROOM, THEY HAVE APPOINTED TO LIFETIME ROLES ON THE FEDERAL TO LIFETIME ROLES ON THE FEDERAL BENCH. BENCH. AT ONE POINT THEY TRIED TO AT ONE POINT THEY TRIED TO NOMINATE A GUY WHO WAS A FAMOUS NOMINATE A GUY WHO WAS A FAMOUS GHOST HUNTER. GHOST HUNTER. SURE, HE WAS MARRIED TO SOMEBODY SURE, HE WAS MARRIED TO SOMEBODY WHO WORKED IN THE WHITE HOUSE. WHO WORKED IN THE WHITE HOUSE. THEY FIGURED THAT WAS GOOD THEY FIGURED THAT WAS GOOD ENOUGH. ENOUGH. THEY ALSO GAVE A LIFETIME THEY ALSO GAVE A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO LOUISIANA SENATOR APPOINTMENT TO LOUISIANA SENATOR DAVID VITTER’S WIFE WHO DURING DAVID VITTER’S WIFE WHO DURING THE COURSE OF HER NOMINATION THE COURSE OF HER NOMINATION BASICALLY BLEW OFF HER SENATE BASICALLY BLEW OFF HER SENATE QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT HER QUESTIONNAIRE ABOUT HER BACKGROUND INEXPERIENCE, WHO BACKGROUND INEXPERIENCE, WHO TOTALLY BUNGLED HER CONFIRMATION TOTALLY BUNGLED HER CONFIRMATION HEARING, INCLUDING REFUSING TO HEARING, INCLUDING REFUSING TO SAY WHETHER SHE THOUGHT BROWN SAY WHETHER SHE THOUGHT BROWN VERSUS BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS A VERSUS BOARD OF EDUCATION WAS A GOOD IDEA, WHETHER WE SHOULD GO GOOD IDEA, WHETHER WE SHOULD GO BACK TO LEGALLY MANDATED BACK TO LEGALLY MANDATED SEGREGATION. SEGREGATION. HER NOMINATION AND PARTICULARLY HER NOMINATION AND PARTICULARLY HER CONFIRMATION HEARING WAS HER CONFIRMATION HEARING WAS SUCH AN EMBARRASSING DISASTER, SUCH AN EMBARRASSING DISASTER, IT ACTUALLY LOOKED LIKE THEY IT ACTUALLY LOOKED LIKE THEY WERE GOING PUT HER NOMINATION ON WERE GOING PUT HER NOMINATION ON ICE FOR GOOD. ICE FOR GOOD. MITCH McCONNELL ONLY TOOK IT OFF MITCH McCONNELL ONLY TOOK IT OFF THE TRASH HEAP AND RUSHED IT THE TRASH HEAP AND RUSHED IT THROUGH IN A HURRY AFTER THE THROUGH IN A HURRY AFTER THE NOMINEE’S HUSBAND, FORMER NOMINEE’S HUSBAND, FORMER SENATOR DAVID VITTER, LOBBIED SENATOR DAVID VITTER, LOBBIED MITCH McCONNELL TO DROP MITCH McCONNELL TO DROP SANCTIONS ON A RUSSIAN OLIGARCH. SANCTIONS ON A RUSSIAN OLIGARCH. AS SOON AS McCONNELL DID THAT, AS SOON AS McCONNELL DID THAT, VITTER CAME BACK TO McCONNELL’S VITTER CAME BACK TO McCONNELL’S OFFICE TO LET HIM KNOW THAT THE OFFICE TO LET HIM KNOW THAT THE OLIGARCH’S FIRM WAS GOING TO OLIGARCH’S FIRM WAS GOING TO WRITE A $200 MILLION CHECK TO A WRITE A $200 MILLION CHECK TO A NEW ENTERPRISE IN McCONNELL’S NEW ENTERPRISE IN McCONNELL’S HOME STATE OF KENTUCKY. HOME STATE OF KENTUCKY. RIGHT AFTER THAT, MITCH RIGHT AFTER THAT, MITCH McCONNELL SUDDENLY DISCOVERED, McCONNELL SUDDENLY DISCOVERED, HEY, DAVID VITTER’S WIFE’S HEY, DAVID VITTER’S WIFE’S JUDICIAL NALL NATION HADN’T GONE JUDICIAL NALL NATION HADN’T GONE THROUGH AFTER ALL AND HE PULLED THROUGH AFTER ALL AND HE PULLED IT OUT OF THE CIRCULAR FILE AND IT OUT OF THE CIRCULAR FILE AND RUSHED IT THROUGH AND NOW WENDY RUSHED IT THROUGH AND NOW WENDY VITTER IS GOING TO BE ON A VITTER IS GOING TO BE ON A FEDERAL BENCH UNTIL THE END OF FEDERAL BENCH UNTIL THE END OF HER WORKING LIFE. HER WORKING LIFE. SO I MEAN THAT’S HOW THEY HAVE SO I MEAN THAT’S HOW THEY HAVE USED THIS POWER. USED THIS POWER. THEY HAVE HAD SOME DOOZIES WITH THEY HAVE HAD SOME DOOZIES WITH GREAT UNFETTERRED POWER COMES GREAT UNFETTERRED POWER COMES WILD IRRESPONSIBILITY, ALWAYS WILD IRRESPONSIBILITY, ALWAYS AND EVER. AND EVER. BUT THIS NEXT DOCUMENT I’M ABOUT BUT THIS NEXT DOCUMENT I’M ABOUT TO SHOW YOU, THIS IS TO SHOW YOU, THIS IS SOMETHING — I HAVE IT HERE, SOMETHING — I HAVE IT HERE, DON’T I? DON’T I? YEAH. YEAH. THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I NEVER THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I NEVER EXPECTED TO HAVE TO READ AS PART EXPECTED TO HAVE TO READ AS PART OF MY DAY JOB. OF MY DAY JOB. IT IS A LAW REVIEW ARTICLE THAT IT IS A LAW REVIEW ARTICLE THAT IS TITLED ETHNONATIONALISM AND IS TITLED ETHNONATIONALISM AND LIBERAL DEMOCRACY. LIBERAL DEMOCRACY. ETHNONATIONALISM. ETHNONATIONALISM. LIKE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT LIKE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING A LOT IN THIS RECENT WEEKS FOR OBVIOUS IN THIS RECENT WEEKS FOR OBVIOUS AND TERRIBLE REASONS ABOUT WHITE AND TERRIBLE REASONS ABOUT WHITE NATIONALISM, WHICH IS THE NEW NATIONALISM, WHICH IS THE NEW BRANDING THAT DOMESTIC BRANDING THAT DOMESTIC TERRORISTS ARE USING IN THIS TERRORISTS ARE USING IN THIS COUNTRY FOR WHITE SUPREMACY. COUNTRY FOR WHITE SUPREMACY. HERE’S THE THESIS STATEMENT OF HERE’S THE THESIS STATEMENT OF THIS ETHNONATIONALISM LAW REVIEW THIS ETHNONATIONALISM LAW REVIEW ARTICLE. ARTICLE. QUOTE, THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT QUOTE, THIS ARTICLE ARGUES THAT ETHNONATIONALISM REMAPZ A COMMON ETHNONATIONALISM REMAPZ A COMMON AND ACCEPTED FEATURE OF LIBERAL AND ACCEPTED FEATURE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY THAT IS CONSISTENT DEMOCRACY THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH CURRENT STATE PRACTICE AND WITH CURRENT STATE PRACTICE AND INTERNATIONAL LAW. INTERNATIONAL LAW. HMM. HMM. THIS IS A LONG PIECE, IT’S OVER THIS IS A LONG PIECE, IT’S OVER 60 PAGES. 60 PAGES. IT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE IT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW IN 2010. 2010. AND IT TAKES A SORT OF AND IT TAKES A SORT OF INTERNATIONAL TOUR OF INTERNATIONAL TOUR OF ETHNONATIONALISM THROUGH THE ETHNONATIONALISM THROUGH THE AGES, BUT IT ENDS WITH THIS SORT AGES, BUT IT ENDS WITH THIS SORT OF WAR CRY ABOUT HOW A COUNTRY OF WAR CRY ABOUT HOW A COUNTRY CAN’T WORK, HOW DEFINITELY CAN’T WORK, HOW DEFINITELY DEMOCRACY CAN’T WORK UNLESS THE DEMOCRACY CAN’T WORK UNLESS THE COUNTRY IS DEFINED BY A UNIFYING COUNTRY IS DEFINED BY A UNIFYING RACE. RACE. QUOTE, THE IDEA THAT A SOVEREIGN QUOTE, THE IDEA THAT A SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT REPRESENTS DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT REPRESENTS A PARTICULAR ETHNONATIONAL A PARTICULAR ETHNONATIONAL COMMUNITY HAS ITS ROOT IN THE COMMUNITY HAS ITS ROOT IN THE PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION PRINCIPLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION OF PEOPLES. OF PEOPLES. HE QUOTES JON STEWART MILL AND HE QUOTES JON STEWART MILL AND THE SENTIMENT OF NATIONALITY. THE SENTIMENT OF NATIONALITY. THE AUTHOR SAYS THAT SENTIMENT, THE AUTHOR SAYS THAT SENTIMENT, WHICH FACILITATES DEMOCRATIC WHICH FACILITATES DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT, RESTS UPON GOVERNMENT, RESTS UPON ETHNOCULTURAL TIES. ETHNOCULTURAL TIES. ETHNONATIONAL COMMUNITIES, ETHNONATIONAL COMMUNITIES, ETHNOCULTURAL TIES. ETHNOCULTURAL TIES. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT WHAT I ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT WHAT I THINK YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT? THINK YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT? OH, YES, YOU ARE. OH, YES, YOU ARE. AT THE ENDING, SELF-GOVERNMENT AT THE ENDING, SELF-GOVERNMENT REQUIRES A POLITICAL PARTNERSHIP REQUIRES A POLITICAL PARTNERSHIP IN WHICH INDIVIDUALS ARE WILLING IN WHICH INDIVIDUALS ARE WILLING AND ABLE TO REGARD ONE ANOTHER AND ABLE TO REGARD ONE ANOTHER AS EQUAL MEMBERS OF A POLITICAL AS EQUAL MEMBERS OF A POLITICAL COMMUNITY. COMMUNITY. DEMOCRATIC SELF-GOVERNMENT DEMOCRATIC SELF-GOVERNMENT DEPENDS ON NATIONAL DEPENDS ON NATIONAL FELLOW-FEELING, THE CAPACITY OF FELLOW-FEELING, THE CAPACITY OF CITIZENS TO IDENTIFY WITH EACH CITIZENS TO IDENTIFY WITH EACH OTHER. OTHER. ETHNIC TIES PROVIDE THE ETHNIC TIES PROVIDE THE GROUNDWORK FOR THAT SOCIAL TRUST GROUNDWORK FOR THAT SOCIAL TRUST AND POLITICAL SOLIDARITY. AND POLITICAL SOLIDARITY. OH. OH. AT THE SAME TIME SOCIAL AT THE SAME TIME SOCIAL SCIENTISTS HAVE FOUND THAT SCIENTISTS HAVE FOUND THAT GREATER ETHNIC HETEROGENEITY IS GREATER ETHNIC HETEROGENEITY IS ASSOCIATED WITH LOWER SOCIAL ASSOCIATED WITH LOWER SOCIAL TRUST. TRUST. THEY EXHIBIT LESS POLITICAL AND THEY EXHIBIT LESS POLITICAL AND CIVIC ENGAEJMENT, LESS EFFECTIVE CIVIC ENGAEJMENT, LESS EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT AND FEWER PUBLIC GOVERNMENT AND FEWER PUBLIC GOODS. GOODS. THE SOCIOLOGIST ROBERT PUTNAM THE SOCIOLOGIST ROBERT PUTNAM HAS CONCLUDED THAT GREATER HAS CONCLUDED THAT GREATER ETHNIC DIVERSITY WEAKENS SOCIAL ETHNIC DIVERSITY WEAKENS SOCIAL SOLIDARITY, FOSTERS SOCIAL SOLIDARITY, FOSTERS SOCIAL ISOLATION AND INHIBITS SOCIAL ISOLATION AND INHIBITS SOCIAL CAPITAL. CAPITAL. THESE FINDINGS CONFIRM THAT THE THESE FINDINGS CONFIRM THAT THE SOLIDARITY UNDERLYING DEMOCRAT SOLIDARITY UNDERLYING DEMOCRAT POLITICS RESTS IN LARGE PART ON POLITICS RESTS IN LARGE PART ON ETHNIC IDENTIFICATION. ETHNIC IDENTIFICATION. SURELY IT DOES NOT SERVE THE SURELY IT DOES NOT SERVE THE CAUSE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY TO CAUSE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY TO IGNORE THIS REALITY. IGNORE THIS REALITY. THE ETHNONATIONALISM OF STATES THE ETHNONATIONALISM OF STATES IS BECOMING MORE NOT LESS IS BECOMING MORE NOT LESS SIGNIFICANT. SIGNIFICANT. LIBERAL DEMOCRACY REQUIRES A LIBERAL DEMOCRACY REQUIRES A NATIONAL COMMUNITY IF IT IS TO NATIONAL COMMUNITY IF IT IS TO BECOME MORE THAN AN INEFFECTUAL BECOME MORE THAN AN INEFFECTUAL ABSTRACTION. ABSTRACTION. AND BY NATIONAL COMMUNITY, YES, AND BY NATIONAL COMMUNITY, YES, HE’S TALKING ABOUT EVERYBODY HE’S TALKING ABOUT EVERYBODY HAVING THE SAME ETHNICITY. HAVING THE SAME ETHNICITY. I MEAN THIS IS THE LAW I MEAN THIS IS THE LAW REVIEW/ACADEMIC WORDY BIRD REVIEW/ACADEMIC WORDY BIRD ARGUMENT THAT YOU CAN’T REALLY ARGUMENT THAT YOU CAN’T REALLY HAVE A COUNTRY. HAVE A COUNTRY. AT LEAST YOU CAN’T HAVE A AT LEAST YOU CAN’T HAVE A COUNTRY THAT WORKS IF YOU’VE GOT COUNTRY THAT WORKS IF YOU’VE GOT ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN ALL SORTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE IN IT. IT. SURELY IT DOES NOT SERVE THE SURELY IT DOES NOT SERVE THE CAUSE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY TO CAUSE OF LIBERAL DEMOCRACY TO IGNORE THIS REALITY. IGNORE THIS REALITY. THAT’S HOW YOU KNOW THIS IS A THAT’S HOW YOU KNOW THIS IS A HIGH BROW ARGUMENT FOR RACIAL HIGH BROW ARGUMENT FOR RACIAL PURITY IN THE NATION STATE WHEN PURITY IN THE NATION STATE WHEN THEY SAY THINGS LIKE SURELY THEY SAY THINGS LIKE SURELY EVERYONE MUST ADMIT THIS. EVERYONE MUST ADMIT THIS. DON’T YOU JUST FEEL IT IN YOUR DON’T YOU JUST FEEL IT IN YOUR GUT? GUT? THE AUTHOR OF THIS SLIGHTLY THE AUTHOR OF THIS SLIGHTLY BLOOD-CURDLING VERY SERIOUS LAW BLOOD-CURDLING VERY SERIOUS LAW REVIEW ARTICLE IS NAMED STEVEN REVIEW ARTICLE IS NAMED STEVEN MENASHI. MENASHI. THE REASON YOU NEED TO KNOW IT THE REASON YOU NEED TO KNOW IT IS BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP JUST IS BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP JUST NOMINATED HIM TO BE A FEDERAL NOMINATED HIM TO BE A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT JUDGE. APPEALS COURT JUDGE. JUST NOMINATED HIM TO SIT ON THE JUST NOMINATED HIM TO SIT ON THE SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS, WHICH IS THE FEDERAL APPEALS WHICH IS THE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT THAT COVERS NEW YORK STATE COURT THAT COVERS NEW YORK STATE AND OTHER PARTS OF THE AND OTHER PARTS OF THE NORTHEAST. NORTHEAST. AND YOU MIGHT WONDER HOW THE AND YOU MIGHT WONDER HOW THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FINDS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION FINDS THE ACADEMIC DRUM MAJOR FOR ACADEMIC DRUM MAJOR FOR ETHNONATIONALISM TO BECOME A ETHNONATIONALISM TO BECOME A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT NOMINEE, FEDERAL APPEALS COURT NOMINEE, ONE LEVEL BELOW THE U.S. SUPREME ONE LEVEL BELOW THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. COURT. I TEND TO THINK THAT IN ACADEMIA I TEND TO THINK THAT IN ACADEMIA AND POLITICS, THESE PEOPLE ON AND POLITICS, THESE PEOPLE ON THIS FRINGE OF RACIAL THINKING, THIS FRINGE OF RACIAL THINKING, THEY TEND TO FIND EACH OTHER THEY TEND TO FIND EACH OTHER LIKE MAGNETS AND IRON FILINGS LIKE MAGNETS AND IRON FILINGS DO. DO. DO YOU REMEMBER HOW BACK IN THE DO YOU REMEMBER HOW BACK IN THE 2016 CAMPAIGN TRUMP USED TO TELL 2016 CAMPAIGN TRUMP USED TO TELL THIS TOTALLY MADE UP STORY ABOUT THIS TOTALLY MADE UP STORY ABOUT THE WAY WE USED TO GET RID OF THE WAY WE USED TO GET RID OF TERRORISM IS THAT WE’D DIP THE TERRORISM IS THAT WE’D DIP THE BULLETS IN PIG’S BLOOD AND WRAP BULLETS IN PIG’S BLOOD AND WRAP UP THE MUSLIM BODIES IN PIG UP THE MUSLIM BODIES IN PIG SKINS AND THAT’S HOW WE GOT RID SKINS AND THAT’S HOW WE GOT RID OF MUSLIM TERRORISTS IN THE PAST OF MUSLIM TERRORISTS IN THE PAST AND NOW WE’RE TOO WUSSY TO DO AND NOW WE’RE TOO WUSSY TO DO THAT. THAT. THERE’S A LITTLE CONTROVERSY IN THERE’S A LITTLE CONTROVERSY IN THE 2016 CAMPAIGN THAT HE JUST THE 2016 CAMPAIGN THAT HE JUST MADE UP THAT STORY. MADE UP THAT STORY. THIS GUY WHO WAS JUST NOMINATED THIS GUY WHO WAS JUST NOMINATED TO BE A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT TO BE A FEDERAL APPEALS COURT JUDGE HAS ALSO MADE THAT SAME JUDGE HAS ALSO MADE THAT SAME ARGUMENT THAT TRUMP MADE ON THE ARGUMENT THAT TRUMP MADE ON THE STUMP IN 2016. STUMP IN 2016. HE HAS TOLD THAT SAME FAKE STORY HE HAS TOLD THAT SAME FAKE STORY IN THE COURSE OF HIS ACADEMIC IN THE COURSE OF HIS ACADEMIC CAREER. CAREER. THIS WAS CRAZY ENOUGH TO HEAR THIS WAS CRAZY ENOUGH TO HEAR CANDIDATE TRUMP RUN WITH THIS, CANDIDATE TRUMP RUN WITH THIS, THIS COMPLETELY MADE-UP STORY THIS COMPLETELY MADE-UP STORY DURING THE 2016 CAMPAIGN. DURING THE 2016 CAMPAIGN.>>THEY TOOK THE 50 TERRORISTS>>THEY TOOK THE 50 TERRORISTS AND HE TOOK 50 MEN AND HE DIPPED AND HE TOOK 50 MEN AND HE DIPPED 50 BULLETS IN PIG’S BLOOD. 50 BULLETS IN PIG’S BLOOD. YOU HEARD THAT, RIGHT? YOU HEARD THAT, RIGHT? HE FIT — HE TOOK 50 BULLETS. HE FIT — HE TOOK 50 BULLETS. AND HE DIPPED THEM IN PIG’S AND HE DIPPED THEM IN PIG’S BLOOD. BLOOD. AND HE HAD HIS MAN LOAD HIS AND HE HAD HIS MAN LOAD HIS RIFLES AND HE LINED UP THE 50 RIFLES AND HE LINED UP THE 50 PEOPLE AND THEY SHOT 49 OF THOSE PEOPLE AND THEY SHOT 49 OF THOSE PEOPLE AND THE 50th PERSON HE PEOPLE AND THE 50th PERSON HE SAID YOU GO BACK TO YOUR PEOPLE SAID YOU GO BACK TO YOUR PEOPLE AND YOU TELL THEM WHAT HAPPENED. AND YOU TELL THEM WHAT HAPPENED. AND FOR 25 YEARS THERE WASN’T A AND FOR 25 YEARS THERE WASN’T A PROBLEM. PROBLEM. OKAY? OKAY? 25 YEARS THERE WASN’T A PROBLEM. 25 YEARS THERE WASN’T A PROBLEM. ALL RIGHT? ALL RIGHT? SO WE BETTER START GETTING SO WE BETTER START GETTING TOUGH. TOUGH.>>TOTAL BULL PUCKY.>>TOTAL BULL PUCKY. NOT TRUE AT ALL. NOT TRUE AT ALL. THAT STORY WAS NOT TRUE WHEN THAT STORY WAS NOT TRUE WHEN THEN CANDIDATE DONALD TRUMP THEN CANDIDATE DONALD TRUMP PULLED IT OUT OF HIS PROVERBIAL PULLED IT OUT OF HIS PROVERBIAL FORTUNE COOKIE AND RILED UP THAT FORTUNE COOKIE AND RILED UP THAT CROWD IN SOUTH CAROLINA WITH IT CROWD IN SOUTH CAROLINA WITH IT DURING THAT CAMPAIGN. DURING THAT CAMPAIGN. IT WAS ALSO NOT TRUE WHEN SECOND IT WAS ALSO NOT TRUE WHEN SECOND CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS NOMINEE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS NOMINEE STEVEN MENASHI ARGUED IT IN A STEVEN MENASHI ARGUED IT IN A PAPER THAT HE PUBLISHED AT PAPER THAT HE PUBLISHED AT STANFORD UNIVERSITY’S STANFORD UNIVERSITY’S CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK. CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK. LOOK, SAME THING. LOOK, SAME THING. SAME MADE-UP STORY. SAME MADE-UP STORY. HIS FORCES EXECUTED THEM WITH HIS FORCES EXECUTED THEM WITH BULLETS DIPPED IN PIG FAT. BULLETS DIPPED IN PIG FAT. OH, NOT PIG BLOOD. OH, NOT PIG BLOOD. THE APPROACH IS PROBABLY NO THE APPROACH IS PROBABLY NO LONGER IN THE ARMY’S LONGER IN THE ARMY’S COUNTERTERRORISM REPERTOIRE BUT COUNTERTERRORISM REPERTOIRE BUT THE RESULT WAS THAT THE THE RESULT WAS THAT THE GUERRILLA VIOLENCE ENDED. GUERRILLA VIOLENCE ENDED. THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO ISLAMIC THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO ISLAMIC EXTREMISM HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN SO EXTREMISM HAS NOT ALWAYS BEEN SO HARSH OR AS EFFECTIVE. HARSH OR AS EFFECTIVE. I MEAN IT IS ONE THING TO HAVE I MEAN IT IS ONE THING TO HAVE THIS FANTASY. THIS FANTASY. LET’S BUY GREENLAND, YOU KNOW, LET’S BUY GREENLAND, YOU KNOW, MADE UP, SELF-SERVING CLAP TRAP MADE UP, SELF-SERVING CLAP TRAP COME OUT OF THE MOUTH OF AN COME OUT OF THE MOUTH OF AN ANTI-MUSLIM CANDIDATE WHO THEN ANTI-MUSLIM CANDIDATE WHO THEN BECOMES PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED BECOMES PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. STATES. IT ACTUALLY FEELS LIKE IT MIGHT IT ACTUALLY FEELS LIKE IT MIGHT BE WORSE TO HAVE THE EXACT SAME BE WORSE TO HAVE THE EXACT SAME CLAP TRAP, THAT SAME LET’S BUY CLAP TRAP, THAT SAME LET’S BUY GREENLAND LEVEL OF THINKING COME GREENLAND LEVEL OF THINKING COME FROM SOMEBODY WHO HAS JUST BEEN FROM SOMEBODY WHO HAS JUST BEEN NOMINATED FOR A LIFETIME SEAT ON NOMINATED FOR A LIFETIME SEAT ON THE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT ONE THE FEDERAL APPEALS COURT ONE LEVEL BELOW THE UNITED STATES LEVEL BELOW THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. SUPREME COURT. BUT HEY, JUST IN CASE YOU BUT HEY, JUST IN CASE YOU THOUGHT THAT THE PROBLEM IN THIS THOUGHT THAT THE PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY WAS THAT WE DIDN’T HAVE COUNTRY WAS THAT WE DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH OUT LOUD PROPONENTS OF

Hashtag politics: 4 key ways digital activism is inegalitarian | Jen Schradie


A key claim that’s made around digital activism
is that it is this more egalitarian space and also enables a wider variety of people
to participate because of the lowered costs of participation. And this argument is made because of how expensive
it is in terms of time and energy, for example, to print out flyers or go to a meeting to
plan an event. Someone may need to pay bus fare or gas or
pay for child care. And so many have argued that digital activism
really lowers the costs for political participation. However, I found that this argument really
doesn’t consider the costs that people who may not already have a computer or a smartphone
or high-speed internet access or a data plan that allows you to be on social media constantly,
which uses up a lot of data, that these are very high costs for people who are struggling
at the margins. And yes, certainly we hear reports of viral
videos of working-class folks posting something, some injustice, and that’s very real, but
those are outliers compared to people who do have more resources who are able to engage
on a regular basis. And what I found is that the middle- to upper-class
groups were much more likely to have higher levels of online engagement than poor and
working-class groups. And the reason is, first of all, organizationally. So groups who have more middle- to upper-class
members tended to just simply have more computers and skills and general resources, but I also
found individual reasons. The individual members, they really lacked
what I call ASETs. So they tended to lack access — A for access. Some people had to drive, for example, 10
or 20 miles to their aunt’s house who happened to have a computer, or they had to go to the
library, or maybe they had a computer but it’s not working so well. So basic access was important. So the next part of ASETs is S, skills. So really understanding the nuance of how
Twitter works was really intimidating for people — how the Facebook algorithm works. People talked about learning how — maybe
even going to a training to learn about how to build a website but not really being able
to sustain those skills. But most people didn’t even have those basic
skills at all. The other issue that I think is really key
and part of this ASETs — so A-S-E — is empowerment. So many people I talked to said, well, I’m
not a computer person or I don’t get up there in talking about Twitter, this very hierarchical
sense of that’s up there, I’m down here. That’s not for me. One woman told me Twitter is too fast. I just can’t keep up. And this idea of feeling entitled and empowered
to engage in these tools that for middle- to upper-class folks just feel normalized
or part of their everyday routines, but for a lot of people, it’s much more challenging. But the other key point of ASETs is the last
letter, T for time. One worker I spoke with, young guy who’s 25
years old. He was a nursing assistant at a mental hospital. And he had to drive into work. It took him a while. Lived in a very rural area. When he got to work, he had to hand over his
cell phone, and he wasn’t able to use it for his entire shift, sometimes up for 12 hours. And so if you think about then the time that
it took for him to drive back home, he had very little time to be engaged online. And often digital politics happens very quickly. So for people who don’t have consistent online
access like many of us do who have a smartphone and a laptop and perhaps a tablet or other
gadgets that can be substituted in if one isn’t working, for example — that’s not always
the case for a lot of people, and it’s really important to remember that when we see a hashtag
trending that that hashtag may not really be representative of people overall, especially
the poor. And in the issue that I studied, I found over
60,000 tweets, and only one tweet was from a poor, working-class group, which is statistically
zero

Senators Call For Oversight In Olympic Sports | Morning Joe | MSNBC


>>>FORMER OLYMPIC GYMNASTICS>>>FORMER OLYMPIC GYMNASTICS DOCTOR NASSAR WAS SENTENCED LAST DOCTOR NASSAR WAS SENTENCED LAST YEAR TO 40 TO 175 YEARS IN YEAR TO 40 TO 175 YEARS IN PRISON FOR MOLESTING YOUNG GIRLS PRISON FOR MOLESTING YOUNG GIRLS UNDER THE GUISE OF TREATMENT. UNDER THE GUISE OF TREATMENT. DURING THE MARATHON SENTENCING DURING THE MARATHON SENTENCING HEARING, 156 OF NASSAR’S HEARING, 156 OF NASSAR’S ACCUSERS GAVE STATEMENTS OF HOW ACCUSERS GAVE STATEMENTS OF HOW THE DISGRACED PHYSICIAN ABUSED THE DISGRACED PHYSICIAN ABUSED THEM INCLUDING OLYMPIC GOLD THEM INCLUDING OLYMPIC GOLD MEDALIST ALY RAISMAN AND JORDAN MEDALIST ALY RAISMAN AND JORDAN WIEBER. WIEBER. HE IS ALSO SERVING A SENTENCE HE IS ALSO SERVING A SENTENCE FOR POEGSSESSION OF CHILD FOR POEGSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY. PORNOGRAPHY. CRITICS BELIEVE THAT THE ABUSE CRITICS BELIEVE THAT THE ABUSE COULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED SOONER COULD HAVE BEEN STOPPED SOONER IF ACTION WAS TAKEN BY IF ACTION WAS TAKEN BY INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS MICHIGAN INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY WHERE HE HAD A STATE UNIVERSITY WHERE HE HAD A SPORTS MEDICINE PRACTICE AND SPORTS MEDICINE PRACTICE AND WHICH RECEIVED REPORTS OF SEXUAL WHICH RECEIVED REPORTS OF SEXUAL ABUSE BY HIM AS EARLY AS THE ABUSE BY HIM AS EARLY AS THE 1990s. 1990s. FOLLOWING AN 18 MONTH SENATE FOLLOWING AN 18 MONTH SENATE INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED AFTER INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED AFTER NASSAR’S SENTENCING THAT FOUND NASSAR’S SENTENCING THAT FOUND THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE AND THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE AND USA GYMNASTICS KNOWINGLY USA GYMNASTICS KNOWINGLY CONCEALED THE SEXUAL ABUSE OF CONCEALED THE SEXUAL ABUSE OF GYMNASTS, LAWMAKERS ARE GYMNASTS, LAWMAKERS ARE INTRODUCING NEW LEGISLATION THAT INTRODUCING NEW LEGISLATION THAT WOULD HOLD THE SPORTS GOVERNING WOULD HOLD THE SPORTS GOVERNING BODIES TO ARE MORE STRINGENT BODIES TO ARE MORE STRINGENT ACCOUNTABILITY. ACCOUNTABILITY. AND JOINING US, TWO OF THE AND JOINING US, TWO OF THE DRIVING FORCES BEHIND THE DRIVING FORCES BEHIND THE LEGISLATION. LEGISLATION. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL AND JERRY RICHARD BLUMENTHAL AND JERRY MORAN. MORAN. YES, THINGS ARE HAPPENING BEYOND YES, THINGS ARE HAPPENING BEYOND TRUMP LAND HERE, TRYING TO GO TRUMP LAND HERE, TRYING TO GO GET THINGS DONE IN WASHINGTON. GET THINGS DONE IN WASHINGTON. SENATOR BLUMENTHAL, TELL US WHAT SENATOR BLUMENTHAL, TELL US WHAT THE LEGISLATION DOES THAT WOULD THE LEGISLATION DOES THAT WOULD PREVENT WHAT HAPPENED. PREVENT WHAT HAPPENED.>>YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT>>YOU’RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT LARRY NASSAR WAS A MONSTER LARRY NASSAR WAS A MONSTER PREDATOR. PREDATOR. HE WILL SPEND THE REST OF HIS HE WILL SPEND THE REST OF HIS LIFE BEHIND BARS. LIFE BEHIND BARS. BUT HE WAS NOT A LONE WOLF. BUT HE WAS NOT A LONE WOLF. HE WAS ENABLED BY THE U.S. HE WAS ENABLED BY THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE AND BY THE OLYMPIC COMMITTEE AND BY THE GHAGS GHAGS NATIONAL GOVERNING BOARDS. NATIONAL GOVERNING BOARDS. THERE IS A LONG LIST OF OTHER THERE IS A LONG LIST OF OTHER PREDATORS STILL OUT THERE, A PREDATORS STILL OUT THERE, A LONG LIST OF ENABLERS WHO HAVE LONG LIST OF ENABLERS WHO HAVE TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. AND OTHER SPORTS LIKE SWIMMING, AND OTHER SPORTS LIKE SWIMMING, WRESTLING AND FIGURE SKATES WRESTLING AND FIGURE SKATES WHERE THERE HAS BEEN SIMILAR WHERE THERE HAS BEEN SIMILAR KINDS OF ABUSE. KINDS OF ABUSE. SO OUR LEGISLATION WOULD PRODUCE SO OUR LEGISLATION WOULD PRODUCE A SEISMIC CHANGE IN CULTURE. A SEISMIC CHANGE IN CULTURE. NO MORE MEDALS AND MONEY ABOVE NO MORE MEDALS AND MONEY ABOVE MORALS. MORALS. USA GYMNASTICS WAS ROTTEN TO THE USA GYMNASTICS WAS ROTTEN TO THE CORE. CORE. WE’LL HOLD U.S. OLYMPICS WE’LL HOLD U.S. OLYMPICS RESPONSIBLE. RESPONSIBLE. THEY WILL BE LEGALLY THEY WILL BE LEGALLY ACCOUNTABLE. ACCOUNTABLE. THEY WILL HAVE REPORTING DUTIES. THEY WILL HAVE REPORTING DUTIES. THEY WILL HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE THEY WILL HAVE TO DISCLOSE THE NAMES OF THOSE PREDATORS THAT NAMES OF THOSE PREDATORS THAT ARE FOUND. ARE FOUND. AND THEY WILL HAVE TO BE LEGALLY AND THEY WILL HAVE TO BE LEGALLY LIABLE. LIABLE. EVERY INDIVIDUAL. EVERY INDIVIDUAL. AND EVERY OFFICIAL AND THE AND EVERY OFFICIAL AND THE ORGANIZATION ITSELF. ORGANIZATION ITSELF. CONGRESS WILL BE ABLE TO DISBAND CONGRESS WILL BE ABLE TO DISBAND AND FIRE THEM IF THEY FAME TO DO AND FIRE THEM IF THEY FAME TO DO THE RIGHT THING. THE RIGHT THING. AND I THINK THE FIRST TEST IS AND I THINK THE FIRST TEST IS WHETHER THE OLYMPIC COMMITTEE WHETHER THE OLYMPIC COMMITTEE SUPPORTS THE LEGISLATION. SUPPORTS THE LEGISLATION.>>AND SENATOR MORAN, WHAT IS>>AND SENATOR MORAN, WHAT IS THE POSSIBILITY OF SEEING DEBATE THE POSSIBILITY OF SEEING DEBATE AND GETTING PASSED? AND GETTING PASSED?>>I THINK THIS IS AN>>I THINK THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY THAT WE DON’T SEE OPPORTUNITY THAT WE DON’T SEE OFTEN ENOUGH IN CONGRESS, THE OFTEN ENOUGH IN CONGRESS, THE UNITED STATES SENATE, VERY UNITED STATES SENATE, VERY BIPARTISAN EFFORT, A VERY BIPARTISAN EFFORT, A VERY SERIOUS 18 MONTH INVESTIGATION. SERIOUS 18 MONTH INVESTIGATION. I DON’T SEE HOW IT CANNOT BECOME I DON’T SEE HOW IT CANNOT BECOME LAW. LAW. THE SENATE IS POISED CERTAINLY THE SENATE IS POISED CERTAINLY OUR COMMITTEE TO PASS — DEBATE OUR COMMITTEE TO PASS — DEBATE AND PASS THIS LEGISLATION. AND PASS THIS LEGISLATION. WE WOULD EXPECT TIME ON THE WE WOULD EXPECT TIME ON THE SENATE FLOOR. SENATE FLOOR. THE HOUSE THEN ENACT IT AND THE HOUSE THEN ENACT IT AND BECOME LAW. BECOME LAW. AND SINGLE THECERTAINLY THE EFFO AND SINGLE THECERTAINLY THE EFFO SENATE AND I COMMEND SENATOR SENATE AND I COMMEND SENATOR BLUMENTHAL FOR OUR WORK BLUMENTHAL FOR OUR WORK TOGETHER. TOGETHER. BUT IT IS THE SURVIVES, THE BUT IT IS THE SURVIVES, THE ATHLETES WHO CAME BEFORE OUR ATHLETES WHO CAME BEFORE OUR COMMITTEE WHO APPEARED WITH US, COMMITTEE WHO APPEARED WITH US, WHO SPOKE OF THEIR STORIES, WHO WHO SPOKE OF THEIR STORIES, WHO TOLD WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM. TOLD WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM. AND THEIR COURAGE IS WHAT THEN AND THEIR COURAGE IS WHAT THEN REQUIRES, ENABLES, INSISTS THAT REQUIRES, ENABLES, INSISTS THAT WE RESPOND BY MAKING CERTAIN WE RESPOND BY MAKING CERTAIN THAT THERE IS A RESULT FROM THAT THERE IS A RESULT FROM THEIR COURAGEOUS ACTIONS. THEIR COURAGEOUS ACTIONS. TOO OFTEN — AND THE ATHLETES TOO OFTEN — AND THE ATHLETES SAID THAT THEY WERE FAILED BY SAID THAT THEY WERE FAILED BY THOSE THEY EXPECTED TO PROTECT THOSE THEY EXPECTED TO PROTECT THEM, INSTITUTIONS AND PEOPLE. THEM, INSTITUTIONS AND PEOPLE. AND THEIR REQUEST WAS PLEASE AND THEIR REQUEST WAS PLEASE MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE ARE NOT MAKE CERTAIN THAT WE ARE NOT FAILED BY THE UNITED STATES FAILED BY THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS. CONGRESS. AND SENATOR PLUMEBLUMENTHAL AND AND SENATOR PLUMEBLUMENTHAL AND COMMITTED TO MAKING CERTAIN THAT COMMITTED TO MAKING CERTAIN THAT THIS LEGISLATION BECOMES LAW AND THIS LEGISLATION BECOMES LAW AND THAT IT PROTECTS THOSE WHO ARE THAT IT PROTECTS THOSE WHO ARE IN THIS KIND OF CIRCUMSTANCE IN IN THIS KIND OF CIRCUMSTANCE IN THE FUTURE AND THAT IT PROVIDES THE FUTURE AND THAT IT PROVIDES JUSTICE FOR THOSE WHO JUSTICE FOR THOSE WHO ENCOUNTERED LARRY NASSAR AND ENCOUNTERED LARRY NASSAR AND OTHERS TO DATE. OTHERS TO DATE. SO THIS IS — NO QUESTION IN MY SO THIS IS — NO QUESTION IN MY MIND THIS IS A TASK THAT MUST BE MIND THIS IS A TASK THAT MUST BE ACCOMPLISHED AND WILL BE. ACCOMPLISHED AND WILL BE.>>THIS IS KASIE HUNT.>>THIS IS KASIE HUNT. SENATOR BLUMENTHAL, YOU SENATOR BLUMENTHAL, YOU MENTIONED THAT IT WILL BE A KEY MENTIONED THAT IT WILL BE A KEY TEST IF USA GYMNASTICS ACTUALLY TEST IF USA GYMNASTICS ACTUALLY SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION. SUPPORTS THIS LEGISLATION. I’M INTERESTED TO KNOW IN THE I’M INTERESTED TO KNOW IN THE COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, COURSE OF YOUR INVESTIGATION, DID YOU FIND THAT THESE MAJOR DID YOU FIND THAT THESE MAJOR INSTITUTIONS, THE U.S. OLYMPIC INSTITUTIONS, THE U.S. OLYMPIC COMMITTEE, USA GYMNASTICS AND COMMITTEE, USA GYMNASTICS AND ALSO MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, ALSO MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, DID THEY FACILITATE THE WORK DID THEY FACILITATE THE WORK THAT YOU DID OR DID THEY STAND THAT YOU DID OR DID THEY STAND IN YOUR WAY? IN YOUR WAY? WHAT SIGNALS DID ANY SEND TO YOU WHAT SIGNALS DID ANY SEND TO YOU ABOUT HOW SERIOUS THEY ARE ABOUT ABOUT HOW SERIOUS THEY ARE ABOUT FIXING THIS? FIXING THIS?>>VERY BLUNTLY ALL OF THOSE>>VERY BLUNTLY ALL OF THOSE INSTITUTIONS FACILITATED AN INSTITUTIONS FACILITATED AN ECOSYSTEM THAT IN EFFECT ECOSYSTEM THAT IN EFFECT CONDONED, ENABLED THIS KIND OF CONDONED, ENABLED THIS KIND OF ABUSE. ABUSE. THEY TURNED A BLIND EYE. THEY TURNED A BLIND EYE. AND THESE ATHLETES WERE SO AND THESE ATHLETES WERE SO MOVING. MOVING. THE ATHLETES ARE PROFILES IN THE ATHLETES ARE PROFILES IN COURAGE. COURAGE. THESE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR THESE INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR OFFICIALS ARE PROFILES IN OFFICIALS ARE PROFILES IN COWARDICE COWARDICE COWARDICE. COWARDICE. WE HAVE REFERRED ONE OF THEM, WE HAVE REFERRED ONE OF THEM, FORMER CHIEF EXECUTIVE SCOTT FORMER CHIEF EXECUTIVE SCOTT BLACKMAN FOR CRIMINAL BLACKMAN FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. PROSECUTION. AND ANOTHER, HEAD OF USA AND ANOTHER, HEAD OF USA GYMNASTICS, IS UNDER STATE GYMNASTICS, IS UNDER STATE INDICTMENT. INDICTMENT. THERE ARE OTHER POTENTIAL THERE ARE OTHER POTENTIAL INDIVIDUALS WHO SHOULD BE HELD INDIVIDUALS WHO SHOULD BE HELD CULPABLE CRIMINALLY AND CIVILLY. CULPABLE CRIMINALLY AND CIVILLY. BUT THE EXAMPLE OF THESE BUT THE EXAMPLE OF THESE ATHLETES WHO SPOKE TRUTH TO ATHLETES WHO SPOKE TRUTH TO POWER OUGHT TO GIVE VOICE AND POWER OUGHT TO GIVE VOICE AND FACE TO OTHERS. FACE TO OTHERS. AND PART OF WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO AND PART OF WHAT WE’RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS TO CREATE SAFE SPACES DO HERE IS TO CREATE SAFE SPACES AT THE LOCKER ROOMS, FIELDS, SO AT THE LOCKER ROOMS, FIELDS, SO THAT SAFE SPORTS WILL ACTUALLY THAT SAFE SPORTS WILL ACTUALLY KEEP PEOPLE SAFE AND MAKE THEM KEEP PEOPLE SAFE AND MAKE THEM ABLE TO COME FORWARD WITHOUT ABLE TO COME FORWARD WITHOUT FEAR EVER RETALIATION. FEAR EVER RETALIATION.>>AND THIS WAS THE SURPRISING>>AND THIS WAS THE SURPRISING DISCOURAGING DAMNING THING OF MY DISCOURAGING DAMNING THING OF MY OBSERVATION OF WHAT TRANSZPIRED OBSERVATION OF WHAT TRANSZPIRED WAS TOO MANY PEOPLE LOOKED THE WAS TOO MANY PEOPLE LOOKED THE OTHER WAY. OTHER WAY. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT — I BELIEVE IT SEEMS TO ME THAT — I BELIEVE ALL OF US HAVE A RESPONSIBLE IF ALL OF US HAVE A RESPONSIBLE IF SOMEBODY BRINGS US A STORY OF SOMEBODY BRINGS US A STORY OF SEXUAL ABUSE, OF EMOTIONAL SEXUAL ABUSE, OF EMOTIONAL ABUSE, PARTICULARLY THESE YOUNG ABUSE, PARTICULARLY THESE YOUNG WOMEN, BUT YOUNG PEOPLE, ANYONE WOMEN, BUT YOUNG PEOPLE, ANYONE THAT WE ALL HAVE A MORAL AND THAT WE ALL HAVE A MORAL AND LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPOND. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY TO RESPOND. AND WE DID NOT SEE THAT OFTEN AND WE DID NOT SEE THAT OFTEN ENOUGH. ENOUGH. WE SAW IT RARELY. WE SAW IT RARELY. AND SO THIS WAS — THIS JUST ONE AND SO THIS WAS — THIS JUST ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REMIND ALL OF OF THE THINGS THAT REMIND ALL OF US OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT US OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT WE HAVE TO TRY TO PROTECT THOSE WE HAVE TO TRY TO PROTECT THOSE WHO ARE MORE VULNERABLE, TRY TO WHO ARE MORE VULNERABLE, TRY TO PROTECT EVERY PERSON FROM THIS PROTECT EVERY PERSON FROM THIS KIND OF HEINOUS BEHAVIOR AND IT KIND OF HEINOUS BEHAVIOR AND IT DIDN’T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN. DIDN’T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN.>>SENATORS, THANK YOU BOTH VERY>>SENATORS, THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH. MUCH.>>>STILL AHEAD, NBC NEWS>>>STILL AHEAD, NBC NEWS OBTAINS DOCUMENTS THAT SUGGEST OBTAINS DOCUMENTS THAT SUGGEST NEW EFFORTS TO CRACKDOWN ON NEW EFFORTS TO CRACKDOWN ON CREDIBLE ASYLUM CLAIMS. CREDIBLE ASYLUM CLAIMS. ANOTHER STEVENPHEN MILLER SPECIA ANOTHER STEVENPHEN MILLER SPECIA FOR YOU. FOR YOU.>>>PLUS THE PRESIDENT TRIES TO>>>PLUS THE PRESIDENT TRIES TO FIRE UP HIS BUSINESS WITH FIRE UP HIS BUSINESS WITH INCREASINGLY DIVISIVE RHETORIC. INCREASINGLY DIVISIVE RHETORIC. WE HAVE THE NEW POLL NUMBERS WE HAVE THE NEW POLL NUMBERS THAT SNOW JUST HOW MUCH IT IS THAT SNOW JUST HOW MUCH IT IS NOT WORKING FOR HIS RE-ELECTION

DiEM25 will contest the European Parliament elections in Italy – Yanis Varoufakis | DiEM25


Hi everyone, we will do this conference
in English. that’s the first information to let you
know. But there will be the possibility to ask
questions in Italian. They will be translated, Alessio is the one
who’s going to do it. Of course replies will be translated. I would like to thank Yanis Varoufakis,
for accepting our invitation to come here and tell us the latest news
about his movement, and of course his opinion on what is going on in Italy. I’m going to ask actually a question, exactly on this, it’s going to be my first
question : If you can give us some insight on your
agenda and your new alliances in Europe. I’m thinking of course about the European
elections of next year. There were some talking about five
movement stars (5 Star movement)
and also Mélenchon so we would like to understand, if you can
tell us something about your plans for the next weeks and months? Tank you! Well tank you so much, tanks to all of you.
for being here. Tank you for your hospitality. Thank you for your question. The main reason why we’re here is because
Italy today is being torn apart by two destructive forces. One is Brussels, and
the other is Salvini. By the failed establishment of Renzi,
Merkel, Junker, Moscovici on the one hand and by the reckless, racist, xenophobic,
anti-European Salvini project. What we are doing as Diem25 in Italy,
France, Germany, Greece has to be seen in this context. Today Italy is ground
zero of the European crisis. Italy should be in the focus of
progressives around the World. Brussels and Salvini, this is a statement
that may surprise some of you, Brussels and Salvini are working very well
together, as we speak, against the interests of Italians, in particular, and
of Europeans in general. Salvini is Brussels’ greatest supporter.
Junker, Merkel, Macron et al. are hanging on to power with the argument:
“whatever mistakes we have made in Brussels in Berlin, in Rome (talking about Renzi),
after us comes Salvini. So you’d better support us. And Brussels is
is also Salvini’s greatest supporter. By imposing on Italy rules that guarantee
Italy’s stagnation, and falling income for the average Italians, they enable Salvini’s
sortie into xenophobic populism. Allow me to turn directly to the issue
that concern most of you here in Italy today. The clash on the Italian budget
with Brussels. Our position as Diem25 is that both
Brussels and the Lega-5 Stelle government are profoundly and intentionally wrong.
Brussels is wrong to impose on Italy fiscal and banking rules that guarantee
Italy’s stagnation. Rules that were agreed too, by the now
collapsing Italian establishment. The EU’s revamped fiscal rules are
analytically baseless. There is no such things as a structural
deficit. It can not be measured and it should not be measured. It based on faulty
economics. They are forcing Rome to introduce
austerity at a time when Italy’s growth has collapsed to almost 0%. If the Italian
government, any Italian government, were to follow the fiscal compact, you would have an increase in
the debt to GDP ratio. Not a fall, because the denominator, your GDP, would
go into reversal. You would have an other recession. The Lega-5Stelle government is wrong also.
This budget will not boost growth sufficiently to make a difference to most
people, the result would be a deficit overshoot without much benefit. Cutting for instance
the top tax rate will not boost growth. When the rich receive a hand-out, they
take it to Switzerland or to Luxembourg, or save it. Even worse, it is our view that
both Brussels and this government know that they are wrong. Brussels is
choosing to be wrong, because Brussels, the bureaucracy, is more interested in
maintaining control over our countries than they are in shared prosperity across
Europe. And the Lega-5 Stelle government is
choosing to be wrong, because Salvini and Di Maio are more interested in
maintaining this precarious alliance than in the prosperity of the Italian
people. So, here we are as Diem25 facing this
situation : Italy stagnates because its centrist establishment agreed to EU rules
that choked Italy, causing its own political demise, the political demise
of the establishment that approved these rules, and paving the ground for Salvini.
The ancient regime of Renzi et al. and his patrons in Brussels and the Lega-
5 Stelle government are two faces of the same problem. And they will continue to
reinforce each other while Italy sinks, while Europe fragments. One of the side
effects, the collateral damage of this clash between Salvini and Brussels is that we
have stopped talking about the Eurozone reforms, that are absolutely necessary
to keep Italy in the Eurozone. To keep Greece in the Eurozone, to keep
the Eurozone sustainable. Reforms that even Macron discussed are
now dead in the water. The oligarchic establishment the PD, Forza
Italia…, caused the problem and today they cannot pretend to be part of the
solution. Salvini is exploiting this to bring through his rabid xenophobia a new
fascist moment in Italy. While 5stelle is increasingly discredited
as a crutch on which Salvini is leaning to take over government completely
next year. We must act now, Italy has an urgent need
for a new progressive alternative to the implicit but destructive alliance
between the establishment and Salvini’s nationalism. But what Italy does
not need from us progressives is yet another sad leftist alliance of
the usual left wings suspects. Italy does not need another Frankenstein
left wing list that stitches together the dead parts of what used to be Italy’s
glorious left. The last thing Italians needs is another
list of leftist candidates lacking a coherent program of change. A Europeanist
program of change that answers the question what do you do with the banks,
what do you do with public debt What do you do with poverty, not only in
Italy but also in France, in Germany, in Greece. This is why we are here today, to
announce that we are going to put together such a list, with a single, coherent,
credible program. You may very well ask : and who are you?
Who are we, who are going to do this? Last march, in Napoli, Diem25, I was there,
colleagues, political movements from Poland, Denmark, Portugal, my friend B.
Hamon from France together with Luigi De Magistris, the mayor of Napoli we
embarked upon this project of putting together a transnational list with a
coherent program across Europe. This program is now complete, after many
months of very hard work It is the progressive, ecological, feminist
humanist, rational program of the pan-European coalition that we now call :
“Primavera europea”, “European spring”. What we propose, because this is Italy and
we have a major crisis, allow me to start with Italy. Let me give you an
example of the kind of proposal we are bringing to the table, that address the
local, the national and the European at the same time. The first thing we propose, regarding the
Italian budget, is that the component of it which concerns minimum guaranteed income
is introduced and indeed expanded. Simultaneously, number 2, scrap Salvini’s
top tax cuts – when you give hand-outs to the rich, as I said before, you are not
boosting growth, we have known this forever Why have we forgotten it now? Replace those
tax-cuts with a growth enhancing green investment plan, that pushes the deficit,
not to 2.4% of GDP, but to 3% of GDP, but most of it is made up of public
investment, we are talking about something like 20 billion, for 3 purposes: first, the
industrial and ecological transition necessary in this country, to solve
for instance problems like ILVA in Taranto and off-shoring of low-added-value
manufacturing; secondly, environmental safety, beginning
with a plan for seismic prevention, that we have included in our program,
and thirdly, investment in infrastructure to avoid repetition of the Genoa disaster
and invest in sustainable transport. And what about the fiscal rules of the EU?
Our proposal is that we go from 2.4 to 3 but in a growth enhancing manner. Well,
if the EU wants Italy to adhere to the fiscal compact, it can be done. Our proposal
is that the government of Italy calls for an EU council summit, to propose
the following: in order to reduce the fiscal deficit of
Italy from 3% to 0,8%, even to 0%, if Europe cares for this so badly, that we
adopt, as the EU, the EU council can give this green light, as a result of one simple
decision, no need for any treaty changes whatsoever, to give the
green light to the European Investment bank that belongs to all EU member states, for
issuing EIB bonds up to 5% of Eurozone GDP per year, for 5 years, this is about 500
billion Euros, with the European Central Bank standing by
in the secondary bond market to purchase those bonds, in the same way that it has
been doing for the last few years. This way you boost investment, public
investment, through the EIB in Italy in Germany, in Greece, by 5% of GDP, and
that way you can ameliorate, then you could have an Italian government, which is
reducing Italian deficit down to the levels prescribed by the European Council and
the fiscal pact. This is part of our New Deal for Europe,
you can see that we are combining a solution for Italy with a solution for
Europe. Europe desperately needs a large scale green investment program
to create the good quality jobs that we are lacking across Europe, which are
causing our young into precarious jobs in Germany as much as in Italy, which feeds
the nationalist internationalism across Europe, racism, xenophobia,
we need to make this investment in the green energy union that we do not have,
for many reasons, for the planet’s sake, but also for the sake of becoming decoupled
from Putin’s Gazprom. Diem25, in every country, we just gave you
an example here in Italy, combine solutions at the pan-European level, with solutions
at the national level, indeed, the regional level. Ladies
and Gentlemen, austerity for the many and socialism for the bankers, has given
rise to the present fascist moment in Italy to the collapse of the political centre
everywhere, to the reactionary, divided Europe that Mr. Trump dreams of.
Today here in Rome we are saying: Enough! We are saying another Italy,
another Europe, is not only possible but it is here, in the form of our
transnational movement, with a single coherent program that people
can believe in in Italy, in Germany, in France, everywhere. Talking about our next steps: we are here
as part of the process that we began in Napoli, in March of this year, with Luigi
De Magistris, with Benoît Hamon of Génération, with the Alternativet party
in Denmark, with Razem in Poland, with Livre in Portugal, with Mera25, our
new party in Greece, with green parties that we are in discussions with, with
leftist parties, but what matters to us is that we do not simply present to you
a list of people who want to be elected, that our list should have one common
radical europeanist program, Whoever wants to discuss this program with
us. Which is at a very advanced stage you can go into europeanspring.net, and
read our program for Europe as a whole, anyone who wants to discuss this, you can
come along. The discussion ‘are you with Melenchon’,
are you with… whoever, is not the kind of discussion that people out there care for.
This is old style politics, we are not interested in it, we are interested in
solutions. Anyone who wants to join us on the basis of one program for the whole
of Europe that works for Italy, that works for Germany, can come with us and will be
part of this list. The European Parliament elections of May
2019, they are only a start, they give us an opportunity to have this debate.
We will use the May elections to transcend the fake conflict between Salvini and
Brussels, between the authoritarian incompetent establishment and the
misanthropic nationalist international. Diem Italia is here, we are moving up and
down the country, we are scheduling 3 major events in November, there is going to be
one, the final one in Milano, there is going to be one in Taranto, there are going to be
3 major events, we are beginning to collect the signatures that are necessary for Diem
Italia to run in Italy, we invite all the various partners that we embarked upon this
journey last March in Napoli, to join us but there is no more time to waste.
We are moving, we are declaring our presence in Italy and elsewhere, because we are
going to be doing the same thing, there will be a similar announcement of a
political party belonging to Diem25 in Germany on the 24th and 25th of November
in Greece we have already started, in France… we are here not only to contest
an election, but we are here to bring to the people of Italy a scent of next May’s
European Spring, with a message: Italian progressives are no longer alone!
Thank you. Than you Yanis,
We open the questions, so, if there are any? Do you need a translation, anything in
particular? OK, yes, so… Hello, Angela Maoro, Huffington Post Italy:
You didn’t talk about the immigration, which is a topic on which Salvini gains votes.
So what do you have to say about that? I think it’s a topical point in the next
European electoral campaign for everybody.
Thanks. Europe does not have a migration crisis.
Italy and Greece, we have a migration problem. Why? Because there is no such
things as a EU. Europe as a whole is large enough and rich
enough to deal with this problem in a humane way. We must bind together in order
to change the position of the EU regarding migration. But we are not going to do it
through using migrants as scape goats We are not going to succeed either saving
our countries or our Europe, by turning xenophobia, or turbo-charging, I should say
xenophobia, like Salvini is doing. The fact that Salvini is gaining votes
in Italy by becoming increasingly racist is simply a
symptom of inability of progressives to bind together to combine a rational
approach to the problem with a humanism which is in the heart and in the minds of
Italians and Europeans. Our position is very simple. The migrants that are coming
to our shores are an essential ressource for the future. Europe needs migration. We
are an ageing society at the European level, but you can not pile up migrants
and in Greece on the basis of xenophobia in Austria, in Germany, in France, which
then gives a xenophobe like Mr Salvini the opportunity to gather power in Italy,
through turning humans against humans. [Italian translation of the answer] Q: Hi I’m Simon ?? from the Norwegian weekly
paper Morgenbladet, I wanted to ask you: you became yourself famous for opposing
the EU commission and its economic politics I was wondering if you could be a bit
more specific on what exactly is the difference in the way, back in your days,
you criticised the EU commission and the way the Italian government is doing it now
when it comes to the ‘manovra’, the budget? Obviously there is lots of differences when it
comes to immigration for example but exactly the way there are claiming their right to
have their own economic policy. And then, a second question : On 5 Stelle
have you completely giving up hope on seeing the 5 Star movement as a progressive
force in Europe, you now count them as equal to Lega or do you see possibility
in the future of changing that situation? Regarding the difference, between our
opposition to the Brussels establishment and that of the Lega, we are radical Euro-
peanists, we want to bring Europe together. We want… ehm… if you want, a federal Europe, that works
democratically whereas Mr Salvini and his Lega would like to see the dismemberment
of the EU and maybe then its retention as nothing more than a trade zone, that is a
profound difference. We are opposing Brussels, because we are Europeanists and
as Europeanists we are against the policies of Brussels that are destroying Europe and
giving Mr Salvini the opportunity to finish it off On the second question, we never give
up hope on anyone. Some of us are atheists within Diem25m but
we are all believers in humanity. 5 Stelle have to decide for themselves
whether they want to continue this path of being the crutch of a racist,
xenophobic Lega and to be working for them, before Mr Salvini chews them up,
and spits them out, after the European parliament election, or whether they want
to return to a humanist block. If they do we will welcome them. Do you need a translation? So we can save
time and go to the next question, ok? Yes? OK. Can you give us a small summary,
thanks. [Interpreter’s translation] Giovanna Ferrara, “Il Manifesto”, I wanted
to ask this question: from the point of view of new architecture
of Europe, what do you think about the unique situation that has crystallised
in Italy, regarding conflicts within the institutions: I’m talking about the
case of Mimmo Lucano, and of those municipalities that declare “open ports”,
against the directives of the government, and I’m thinking about the “Mediterranea”
organisation, which was born precisely to become the anvil between… inside this
conflict within the institutions. [Interpreter’s translation for Yanis] Diem25 is a municipalist movement, not just
a Europeanist movement. We believe that, within a united Europe, a
democratic Europe, regions and municipalities should have a lot more
autonomy. Indeed the Eurozone crisis has reduced the autonomy of mayors, of
regional authorities by pushing authority down to level of the local. The result is
a greater crisis, both the of local economies and of democracy. In the case of Riace,
you will allow me to simply add to that which you all know, that I find personally
quite interesting and worrying that in an area where you have a particular mayor,
effectively damaging the interests of the mafia, by taking away contracts from them,
that this government, that at least part of it was suppose to be absolutely
determined to make a difference in this fight, is targeting this particular mayor
in the way that they are doing it. This is why, Diem believes very strongly
that this fake contradiction, this fake conflict between the establishment
and the anti-establishment government, is fake. Even down to the level of
Riace. You see how fake it is. Do you need the translation? Yes? [Interpreter’s translation] I have a question also for you Y. : It’s a curiosity, actually, because we hear
a lot talking about communication strategies, to also attract the sceptical citizens, the
euro-sceptical citizens that are apparently growing and I would like you to say some
words on it, I mean do you have a specific communication specific communication strategy? Spin doctors and these new tools,
are you planning to use new tools to… I mean to spread your ideas? We have no spin doctors, we do not have
image makers. Not because we can’t afford them, no I don’t think we can afford them,
but we don’t want them, and we don’t want them because I think that people out there
have had enough of spin. They have had enough of fudges, they have had enough of
politicians. We are not politicians, we are engaging in politics, not because we
want to become ministers or members of parliament but because we feel a historic
duty to intervene in this fake conflict between the establishment and the so
called anti-establishment. The way we are approaching, those who are
sceptical, not just about Europe but about politics, about the future, about the
capacity of democracy to change anything. Those who agreed in the end with W.
Schäuble, when he said that the democracy can not be allowed to change anything.
We are determined to address particular issues, with very specific proposals. Not
wishful thinking, not ‘we want another Europe, another world’, No, you heard
before the specific proposal about the Italian budget. We argued that, yes to the minimum
guaranteed income, and no to the tax cuts, use this money for public investment. We
explained where we think the money should go. Maybe boost the deficit of three percent,
but at the same time go to the EU with a proposal, which is completely legal and,
and within the treaties on how to shrink that deficit down, while boosting
investment within a pan-European. So, speaking to people, to people’s worries
answering their number one question, which is : why should I be optimistic about
the future of my children? The answer is, because we have a capacity
as Europeans, as Italians, to invest in good quality green jobs for your children. And
this is how we could do it. That is us spin doctoring. It isn’t an utopia, what you are saying? What is a utopia, is to think that we can
continue the way we are continuing! What is utopic, is to think for Brussels
that if only Mr Renzi where to return to power in Italy, to impose the rules of
Brussels, everything would be fine. That is utopia. What is utopia, is to think
that Mr Salvini beats up even more hatred for the foreigners and clashes with Europe
without a plan for green investment, that things are going to be better. What we are
proposing is the only realistic plan. Is it utopia to think that realism can
succeed? Well maybe, but it’s a realistic utopia, and that is the only thing that can
stop an awful dystopia from setting in! You need a translation ? No? Ok, here. Good Morning, I am Luca Mariani,
Agenzia Italia, if it’s possible I would like to speak in Italian. Yes of course, you can. Three questions. The first: will you be
the frontrunner for the EU commission? Let’s ask 2… Oh no, very short ones. Will the frontrunner
for the EU commission be Mr. Varoufakis? Second: who will be the frontrunner of your
movement in Italy? De Magistris, the mayor of Naples?
Third: I see Salvini declaring that he is safer in Moscow than in the European capitals,
I see Trump having a privileged relationship with Conte and Farage, maybe this is not
an opposition between Bruxelles and Salvini maybe there is a slightly larger game at
play here? What do you think? Of course, it is a much bigger game. But
Mr Salvini is a major player. S. Bannon will concur. There are other
players, Mr Seehofer in Munich, Those who will probably replace Mrs. Merkel.
Mr. Orban, Mr. Kurz, and so on and so forth… but let me answer your question about
the Spitzenkandidat (frontrunner) : This process has already died according to
the Christian-democrats, they don’t believe in it. The Social-democrats have ceased to
exist. It seems to me that this process has been shown up for what it was, a fake
democratic process. Now Diem25, European Spring, our alliance, are going
to have an open primary before May to decide who is going to represent us in
Brussels. So you can think of this as the Spitzenkandidat of the movement. If You
are asking me personally, I’m going to make myself available to the movement.
But let me also say, that we are absolutely determined to break free of national
divisions in the European parliament elections our movement is going to have
a German leading the ticket in Greece, there will be Greeks contesting European
parliament seats in Germany, there will be Italians in France, and so on. This is our
symbolic way of doing away with this fake division between North and South. There is
no division, between North and South No clash between Italy and Germany, or
Greece and Germany. There is only one clash between progressives and those who
are undoing our societies everywhere. And that clash happens in Greece, in Italy
everywhere. I think that is more or less what I want
to say on this issue. You need translation?
No? A question here… I can speak in English but it’s better
maybe in Italian I just wanted to ask: last week there were
elections in Bavaria, regional elections, with the victory of the green party, led
by a 34-year-old, I wanted to know if these elections, in which, for the first
time the green party, such a young woman, in Bavaria, the land of the German
automobile industry, a green party that is not scared to talk about a numerus
clausus regarding migration policies, I’d like to know if there is a possibility
of an alliance, within Germany, of the German DiEM, and, considering that
we were talking earlier about humanism as the answer to the migration problem, what
does DiEM stand for, can one talk unabashedly about limiting migrant numbers, obviously
considering the available resources for education, for offering work and a
dignified reception to the migrants arriving in all of Europe. [translation for Yanis] We welcome the fact that the green party
did well, in Munich. They did not win Bavaria. They simply took the votes of the
collapsing social democrats. The winners in Bavaria, remain the forces
of the right. The CSU together with the AFD. A crushing victory by them. Let us not
forget that. Would we want to align ourselves with the green parties of Europe?
Absolutely! We are in discussions with them, but I
will answer the question in the same way that I would answer it if you were to
ask me about the Linke, about liberals, anti-systemic liberals, by saying
We are not interested in labels. We are interested in getting things done.
So, we put out a program, which we call a new green deal for Europe. Where we make
proposals about this investment program of 500 billions in green transition, a year,
every year for 5 years. We have a program for what to do with public debt, with the
non-performing loans of the banks, with poverty, with democratisation and so
on. It’s a very comprehensive program. And we are inviting everyone to discuss it
with us, not to accept it. To tell us where we are wrong, and we should do differently.
And we wish that the green, the left, the liberals, progressive-conservatives even
come to us and we can have this discussions in order to start tabula rasa
a new progressive movement in Europe. This is our position, and we are going to
stick to it. On the question of humanism, humanism is
inconsistent with electrified border fences! Full stop. So we have a question here. And we have
some more, so plz keep your answers short. Sorry, you answer too, but the
questions short. Hi, it’s Eric Reg??? of the Globe and Mail,
of Canada. The Italian government insists it doesn’t
want to leave the Euro. But my question do you believe them, do they secretly or
not so secretly want to leave the Euro? And, if they do, is it not a bad idea
to do so in the sense that, for 20 years, since the introduction of the Euro in
Italy, this country has been a corpse it’s just hasn’t worked for this country.
Thank you! No, I don’t believe them. What I do believe
is that Mr. Salvini has chosen a two phase strategy. First beat up anti-migration
rage, xenophobia before the European parliament elections in order to garner
votes but keep the Euro question under wraps for now. So that after the
European parliament elections, he can became prime minister and then
go into phase 2, which will be… not necessarily… there will be no
referendum about the Euro, or anything like that. But he will cause a crisis, that will make
it a natural progression for Italy to forge a parallel currency, that then is the
precursor of something very much like Italexit. This is my personal view. But it
is neither here nor there. The second question, would it be a good
idea to get out of the Euro. I have been very steadfast in my view on
this, regarding Greece, regarding Italy regarding all Euro-Zone member states.
It is this : some people think there is a contradiction in what I am going to say.
There is no contradiction. First we should not have entered the Euro-
Zone. Italy should not have entered it. Greece should not have entered it. We
should not have created the Eurozone Not that the common currency would be a
bad idea, but THIS common currency with THESE rules. Think about it . We created a
central bank without a treasury, to have its back and we have 19 treasuries without
a central bank to look after national banking systems, that they cannot ever save
during a crisis. It is as if we had created a monetary union designed to cause problems
for our citizens. That’s point number one.
Point number two : We should not have a policy of exiting
that terrible monetary union. Some people say, hang on a second, you
just said that we should not have entered it but now you say we should not exit it.
Yes! Because it’s one thing to say, We should not have come in, it’s quite
another to say we should get out. It’s not the same thing. Because, once we
get in, things change. And getting out has a major cost for Europe as a whole,
for Italy. It does not mean that we should not prepare a parallel currency, I prepared
one, when I was a minister. It does not mean that we should stay in the
Euro, even if our countries collapse. No! it means that should be prepared, on
the one hand to go to Brussels, to go to Berlin and put forward proposals for
making changes to the Euro-Zone, that will allow Italy to breathe within it and at the
same time, prepare for exiting for the very simple reason, that even the Bundes-
bank is preparing for an exit of Germany. Because this is a very unstable currency. Tank you Y. There is a question over there. Sorry to bring you back to the Italian
politics… Don’t be sorry, this is why I’m here. OK, thank you. Francesca ??? from Agorà.
I want to ask you, in case of a crisis of the Italian government, what are the
chances of Mr. Di Maio to be your partner? And then: do you see a default of Italy
as a possibility? I’ll start from the second part. I think a
default will be unlikely. But there are ways of hair-cutting debt,
that do not count as default, so for instance, one of the things that is
not unlikely, is that there will be, in the case of Italy and Italian public debt,
financial incentives for Italian savers to buy more bonds, with tax-breaks that
clash with Brussels’ rules. For instance, a parallel currency would, if there was
re-denomination of part of the debt, would also be an effective haircut, that would
not count necessarily as a default. But this is a theoretical discussion. What
really matters, is that we avoid this clash between this government and Brussels, a
clash that is not leading to any improvement in the lives of Italians or the rest
of Europe. On the first question that you asked, I
think I’ve already answered it. As I said, we are atheists who happen to be faithful
in human nature, if Mr. Di Maio drops out of this government and stops being the
crutch of Mr. Salvini, and 5Stelle join again the ranks of humanist rational political
forces, we would be welcoming them as well But I do not see this happening. Every day
they stay within this coalition, I believe 5Stelle is losing its soul. But have you been in conversation,
for example, with Fico? The one who is considered on the left of the… We’ve been in conversations with many
people, not with the particular person that you mention, at least not me, maybe
somebody from our movement has,
maybe I can ask one of our DiEM25 representatives here, to answer
the question. But this is not the issue. The issue is: is 5Stelle interested in
reclaiming its position on the humanist side of politics? Thank you. There is another question over
there and then here… I’m Italian, and Deutsch-Italian from Berlin.
We know that you are going to meet, as soon as possible, Bernie Sanders, so we would
like to know something about the “Internazionale progressista” as we call it.
Thanks. Well thank you for the question, because
this is something quite exciting. DiEM25 is not only europeanist, or actually
we are europeanist because we are internationalist. Europe is a source of
great instability for the rest of the world We are causing serious problems for the
rest of the world, through our inability to solve our crisis. At the same time we
have an American president who is determined to destabilise what is left of
the stability of the world, and we have the complete failure of the West, of the EU and
the US, to get their act together, to deal with the global crisis which began in 2008
and which has not finished. Anyone who thinks it has finished, should reconsider
their views. This is why we need to go beyond the limits
of Europe. You see, the financiers are internationalists, they know how to bind
together to make sure that the majority of people in every country bails them out after
they’ve made their huge errors, the fascists, the nationalists, the racists,
like Trump, Bannon, Seehofer, Salvini, are internationalists, they bind together
magnificently, the only people who are failing, are the progressives. So on the
30th of November, Bernie Sanders and I are going to be launching the progressive
international in Vermont, and we’re going to issue an open call to political forces
from across Europe, from Africa, from Asia from Latin America, from Central America,
to join us. It is going to be a very difficult process, but at least there is going to be
a start. Thank you. Ehm, Paddy? Paddy A??, Sunday Independent,
Professor, to change theme slightly, Brexit. Eh… Is… you say Salvini is
working toward the disintegration of the EU that’s his aim, but have Mr. Farage and
Boris Johnson started the job already? And do you feel that we’re in a Brexit
situation where the 27 countries say ‘unless we get an Irish border resolution,
there’ll be no deal’. Do you think the 27 countries will hold together on that? Yes. But then the question is, will London
prefer a no-deal to a united Ireland? ‘Cause that is the issue, really. I do
believe that, remember that DiEM25 is a movement with a presence in Ireland, both
the Republic and Northern Ireland, and we’re very proud of that, and we’ve brought people
together that would not have been in the same movement if DiEM was not in Ireland.
We think that this is a magnificent opportunity to bring back the concept, in a
non-sectarian way, of a united Ireland. The border must never return. The Good
Friday Agreement must be maintained and supported, and Europe has a role to play
in this. But let me say something about Brexit: you mentioned Mr. Johnson and
Mr. Farage, they would never have succeded to win the Brexit referendum if it was not
for the incompetence of Brussels and Frankfurt in handling the inevitable crisis
of the Eurozone, between 2010 and 2016, and let me explain this: at a time when the
financial world was collapsing, between 2008 and 2010, the ECB, completely hostage
of its charter, that was written by the Bundesbank, was shrinking the money supply
while the Bank of England was boosting the money supply as if there was no tomorrow,
the Bank of Japan, the Fed in the US, the result was hundreds of thousands of
Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, moving to England, at a time where Mr. Osbourne
the Tory party treasurer, was imposing austerity on the majority of the English people. So
you have the refloating of the financial markets in England, drawing people from
the continent, while British workers were being treated with austerity. That was the
recipe for creating the Brexit movement. It was Brussels and Frankfurt’s policies
that gave rise to the disintegration of the EU with Brexit. This is why DiEM25 is
determined to clash with the Brussels establishment in order to save the EU, in
order to make sure that borders, like the one between the Republic and Northern
Ireland never come back. There is a question there. May I? Eva Giovannini, “Mezz’ora in più”,
Rai3. I wanted to come back to what my colleague
asked about earlier concerning Russia, there are explicit encouragements both from
Washington as from Moscow to the government to keep going with this “manovra” (budget proposal)
and there is even talk of potential economic support from the Kremlin, to buy
Italian public debt, they talk about 6 billion I’d like to know from you, politically
speaking, what would it mean for us, for Italians, to be Moscow’s debtors, and so
for Moscow to be Italy’s creditors? Thanks. It is a very bad Idea, very bad idea. For
two reasons. Firstly : Russia is bankrupt and the most they can do, is buy 4% of
your debt issuance for the next year. In the next year your debt issuance is 250
billion €. If they choose to, they would buy 4%, it’s irrelevant. So they can’t
help Italy. That’s one reason. Secondly : you should
not want to be helped by Mr.Putin. The last thing we need in Europe, in Italy
is more dependence on Mr. Putin. Or indeed Mr Trump for that matter.
Remember Mr Trump and Mr Putin are united by a wish to see a Europe that is
disintegrating and becoming more reactionary and more right wing and more
fascistic. This is why we are here. We are here because we need to fight
against Mr Putin, against Mr Trump, against the Brussels establishment that is
making Mr Salvini powerful enough to be playing these games with Mr Trump
and Mr Putin. Plus, if I don’t… I remember something
similar promised to Greece, right? I mean, Russia also promised to buy Greek
bonds some years ago? I’ve written about this in my last book,
which is exists in Italian : “Adults in the room.” and I explained why I was the
one member of the Greek cabinet under Mr Tsipras who effectively vetoed any
discussion with Putin on us being helped by Russia against our struggle with the
troika. For the same reason that I outlined here, I refused even to go
to Moscow along with Mr Tsipras. In the end, of course, Mr Putin did
exactly as I predicted, and said to Mr Tsipras : ” We are not going
to help you!” OK, do you need a final translation? It’s
OK ? OK? So Yanis Varoufakis, tank you again very
much for being here. Tank you to you all. Tank you.

President Donald Trump’s Dismal State-By-State Job Approval | All In | MSNBC


>>>IF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION>>>IF THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WERE HELD TODAY, ACCORDING TO WERE HELD TODAY, ACCORDING TO BRAND NEW STATE-BY-STATE POLLING BRAND NEW STATE-BY-STATE POLLING OF TRUMP’S JOB APPROVAL, HE OF TRUMP’S JOB APPROVAL, HE COULD LOSE THE ELECTION BY 300 COULD LOSE THE ELECTION BY 300 ELECTORAL VOTES. ELECTORAL VOTES. THAT’S A CALCULATION FROM “NEW THAT’S A CALCULATION FROM “NEW YORK” MAGAZINE EXTRAPOLATING YORK” MAGAZINE EXTRAPOLATING FROM THE LATEST DATA OF THE FROM THE LATEST DATA OF THE ONLINE POLLING GROUP CIVICS. ONLINE POLLING GROUP CIVICS. 419 ELECTORAL VOTES TO THE 419 ELECTORAL VOTES TO THE DEMOCRATS, STILL TO BE DEMOCRATS, STILL TO BE DETERMINED. DETERMINED. 119 ELECTORAL VOTES TO THE 119 ELECTORAL VOTES TO THE REPUBLICAN, DONALD TRUMP. REPUBLICAN, DONALD TRUMP. FOR MORE ON THAT AND THE 2020 FOR MORE ON THAT AND THE 2020 RACE, I’M JOINED BY THE SENIOR RACE, I’M JOINED BY THE SENIOR ELECTIONS ANALYST AT REAL CLEAR ELECTIONS ANALYST AT REAL CLEAR POLITICS. POLITICS. WELCOME TO BOTH OF YOU. WELCOME TO BOTH OF YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US. THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH US. SHAWN, FIRST OF ALL, JUST SHAWN, FIRST OF ALL, JUST INTERPRET THAT FOR ME. INTERPRET THAT FOR ME. THAT IS A POLL ABOUT DONALD THAT IS A POLL ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S APPROVAL RATING TRUMP’S APPROVAL RATING EXTRAPOLATED INTO IF MORE PEOPLE EXTRAPOLATED INTO IF MORE PEOPLE IN THE STATE DON’T LIKE DONALD IN THE STATE DON’T LIKE DONALD TRUMP THAN DO, HE MAY NOT WIN TRUMP THAN DO, HE MAY NOT WIN THAT STATE’S ELECTORAL COLLEGE THAT STATE’S ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES. VOTES. THEY PILED THAT ALTOGETHER AND THEY PILED THAT ALTOGETHER AND CAME OUT WITH THAT RESULT. CAME OUT WITH THAT RESULT. AS A POLLSTER, WHAT DO YOU AS A POLLSTER, WHAT DO YOU THINK? THINK?>>YOU KNOW, I THINK IT’S A>>YOU KNOW, I THINK IT’S A USEFUL KIND OF RULE OF THUMB USEFUL KIND OF RULE OF THUMB WHERE THINGS STAND. WHERE THINGS STAND. I THINK WE ALL KNOW THE I THINK WE ALL KNOW THE PRESIDENT’S JOB APPROVAL IS NOT PRESIDENT’S JOB APPROVAL IS NOT STRONG AND THAT THAT’S GOING TO STRONG AND THAT THAT’S GOING TO TRANSLATE TO A DIFFICULT TRANSLATE TO A DIFFICULT ELECTION FOR HIM. ELECTION FOR HIM. THE PROBLEM IS WHEN WE ACTUALLY THE PROBLEM IS WHEN WE ACTUALLY GET TO THE ELECTION, IT’S NOT GET TO THE ELECTION, IT’S NOT GOING TO BE JUST ANY DEMOCRAT GOING TO BE JUST ANY DEMOCRAT WHO’S RUNNING AGAINST HIM, IT’S WHO’S RUNNING AGAINST HIM, IT’S GOING TO BE A DEMOCRAT WITH REAL GOING TO BE A DEMOCRAT WITH REAL POLICIES, SOME OF WHICH WILL BE POLICIES, SOME OF WHICH WILL BE POPULAR, SOME OF WHICH WILL BE POPULAR, SOME OF WHICH WILL BE LESS SO. LESS SO. THAT’S GOING TO SHAPE THE THAT’S GOING TO SHAPE THE DIRECTION OF THE 2020 ELECTION. DIRECTION OF THE 2020 ELECTION.>>SO THAT’S AN IMPORTANT POINT,>>SO THAT’S AN IMPORTANT POINT, THAT THE PRESIDENT OR DONALD THAT THE PRESIDENT OR DONALD TRUMP CAN BE UNDERWATER IN TERMS TRUMP CAN BE UNDERWATER IN TERMS OF POPULARITY OR MORE PEOPLE CAN OF POPULARITY OR MORE PEOPLE CAN THINK HE’S POPUNPOPULAR THAN THINK HE’S POPUNPOPULAR THAN POPULAR BUT IT’S RELATIVE TO WHO POPULAR BUT IT’S RELATIVE TO WHO HE’S RUNNING AGAINST. HE’S RUNNING AGAINST.>>YEAH, AND WE SAW THAT VERY>>YEAH, AND WE SAW THAT VERY CLEARLY IN 2016 WHEN YOU SAW TWO CLEARLY IN 2016 WHEN YOU SAW TWO CANDIDATES WHO WERE UNPOPULAR CANDIDATES WHO WERE UNPOPULAR AND VOTERS WERE HAVING TO MAKE AND VOTERS WERE HAVING TO MAKE THE CHOICE OF THE LESSER OF TWO THE CHOICE OF THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS. EVILS. I THINK THERE’S A CONSTITUTIONAL I THINK THERE’S A CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT THAT SOMEBODY POINTS REQUIREMENT THAT SOMEBODY POINTS THIS OUT BUT THE POLLS AREN’T THIS OUT BUT THE POLLS AREN’T PREDICTIVE YET BECAUSE WE DON’T PREDICTIVE YET BECAUSE WE DON’T KNOW WHO THE CANDIDATE IS AND KNOW WHO THE CANDIDATE IS AND THERE’S STILL SO MUCH LEFT TO THERE’S STILL SO MUCH LEFT TO HAPPEN IN THIS CAMPAIGN. HAPPEN IN THIS CAMPAIGN.>>SEAN, THERE IS A POLL FROM>>SEAN, THERE IS A POLL FROM REAL CLEAR POLITICS THAT TALKS REAL CLEAR POLITICS THAT TALKS ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S APPROVAL ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S APPROVAL RATINGS. RATINGS. INSOFAR AS THESE NUMBERS INSOFAR AS THESE NUMBERS INDICATE, THEY’RE IN LINE WITH INDICATE, THEY’RE IN LINE WITH THE POLLING THAT “NEW YORK” THE POLLING THAT “NEW YORK” MAGAZINE USED. MAGAZINE USED. 43% APPROVE, 53% DISAPPROVE. 43% APPROVE, 53% DISAPPROVE. THERE’S NOT A TON OF MOVEMENT IN THERE’S NOT A TON OF MOVEMENT IN THESE NUMBERS. THESE NUMBERS.>>NO.>>NO. THE PRESIDENT’S JOB APPROVAL IS THE PRESIDENT’S JOB APPROVAL IS REMARKABLY CONSISTENT OVER THE REMARKABLY CONSISTENT OVER THE LAST ALMOST YEAR AT THIS POINT. LAST ALMOST YEAR AT THIS POINT. SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 42%, 41% ON SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 42%, 41% ON THE LOW END. THE LOW END. SOMETIMES IT GETS UP TO 45%. SOMETIMES IT GETS UP TO 45%. LOOK, IF IT STAYS IN THAT BAND, LOOK, IF IT STAYS IN THAT BAND, HE’S GOING TO HAVE A VERY, VERY HE’S GOING TO HAVE A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TIME WINNING DIFFICULT TIME WINNING RE-ELECTION, THERE’S NO DOUBT RE-ELECTION, THERE’S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. ABOUT THAT.>>THERE ARE SOME PLACES,>>THERE ARE SOME PLACES, THOUGH, ARIEL, THAT YOU WOULDN’T THOUGH, ARIEL, THAT YOU WOULDN’T THINK A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT THINK A REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE A TOUGH TIME WINNING WOULD HAVE A TOUGH TIME WINNING RE-ELECTION BUT TEXAS COMES UP RE-ELECTION BUT TEXAS COMES UP TO COME UP AS A TOPIC, A STATE TO COME UP AS A TOPIC, A STATE THAT IS IN PLAY. THAT IS IN PLAY. POLITICO WRITES WROEGT FROM WILL POLITICO WRITES WROEGT FROM WILL HURD, IF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN HURD, IF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN TEXAS DOESN’T START LOOKING LIKE TEXAS DOESN’T START LOOKING LIKE TEXAS, THERE WON’T BE A TEXAS, THERE WON’T BE A REPUBLICAN PARTY IN TEXAS, SAID REPUBLICAN PARTY IN TEXAS, SAID RETIRING CONGRESSMAN WILL HURD. RETIRING CONGRESSMAN WILL HURD. LAST CYCLE WAS WITHOUT A DOUBT A LAST CYCLE WAS WITHOUT A DOUBT A WAKE-UP CALL TO MOST ELECTED WAKE-UP CALL TO MOST ELECTED OFFICIALS. OFFICIALS. TEXAS IS INDEED PURPLE. TEXAS IS INDEED PURPLE. DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE IS LEADING A DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGE IS LEADING A LOT OF THAT. LOT OF THAT. THAT’S NOT JUST DONALD TRUMP’S THAT’S NOT JUST DONALD TRUMP’S UNPOPULARITY. UNPOPULARITY.>>YEAH.>>YEAH. AND I MEAN I THINK TEXAS IS ONE AND I MEAN I THINK TEXAS IS ONE OF THOSE STATES THAT’S SO OF THOSE STATES THAT’S SO HEAVILY SYMBOLIC THAT THERE’S HEAVILY SYMBOLIC THAT THERE’S ALWAYS A LOT OF ATTENTION TO ALWAYS A LOT OF ATTENTION TO WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE THE WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE THE CYCLE THAT IT FINALLY FLIPS. CYCLE THAT IT FINALLY FLIPS. BUT THE FACT THAT WE’RE TALKING BUT THE FACT THAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THAT DOES MEAN SOMETHING. ABOUT THAT DOES MEAN SOMETHING. YOU KNOW, DEMOGRAPHICS ALWAYS YOU KNOW, DEMOGRAPHICS ALWAYS SORT OF TEND TO LAG AT THE SORT OF TEND TO LAG AT THE BALLOT BOX BEHIND WHAT’S BALLOT BOX BEHIND WHAT’S ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN THE ACTUALLY HAPPENING IN THE STATES, BUT WE’LL SEE WHETHER STATES, BUT WE’LL SEE WHETHER THAT CAN ACTUALLY CATCH UP THIS THAT CAN ACTUALLY CATCH UP THIS TIME AROUND. TIME AROUND.>>SEAN, THE DEMOCRATS HAVE PUT>>SEAN, THE DEMOCRATS HAVE PUT IN POLLING AND FUND-RAISING IN POLLING AND FUND-RAISING GOALS TO ENSURE THEY DON’T HAVE GOALS TO ENSURE THEY DON’T HAVE 25 PEOPLE ON A STAGE AT THE NEXT 25 PEOPLE ON A STAGE AT THE NEXT DEBATE. DEBATE. ABOUT NINE PEOPLE I THINK HAVE ABOUT NINE PEOPLE I THINK HAVE QUALIFIED SO FAR. QUALIFIED SO FAR. IN TERMS OF THE FUND-RAISING IN TERMS OF THE FUND-RAISING PART OF IT, THE NUMBER OF PART OF IT, THE NUMBER OF INDIVIDUAL DOERPNORS, AND THAT INDIVIDUAL DOERPNORS, AND THAT MEANS THEY CAN GIVE ANY AMOUNT MEANS THEY CAN GIVE ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY, TOM STEYER HAS OF MONEY, TOM STEYER HAS QUALIFIED ON THAT FRONT. QUALIFIED ON THAT FRONT. HE STILL NEEDS ONE MORE POLL IN HE STILL NEEDS ONE MORE POLL IN WHICH HE’S ABOVE 2% IN ORDER TO WHICH HE’S ABOVE 2% IN ORDER TO QUALIFY. QUALIFY. THAT HAS LED TO A LOT OF THAT HAS LED TO A LOT OF CRITICISM THAT THESE DNC RULES CRITICISM THAT THESE DNC RULES ABOUT THE NUMBER OF DONORS ARE ABOUT THE NUMBER OF DONORS ARE OUT OF STEP WITH POLLING AND OUT OF STEP WITH POLLING AND ALLOW A GUY AS RICH AS TOM ALLOW A GUY AS RICH AS TOM STEYER TO SOME EXTENT TO BUY HIS STEYER TO SOME EXTENT TO BUY HIS WAY. WAY. STEVE BULLOCK SAID TO BUY HIS STEVE BULLOCK SAID TO BUY HIS WAY ONTO THE DEBATE STAGE. WAY ONTO THE DEBATE STAGE.>>WELL, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW>>WELL, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW SOMEONE LIKE GOVERNOR BULLOCK OR SOMEONE LIKE GOVERNOR BULLOCK OR SENATOR GILLIBRAND OR SOME OF SENATOR GILLIBRAND OR SOME OF THESE CANDIDATES WHO HAVE BEEN THESE CANDIDATES WHO HAVE BEEN IN AND ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE IN AND ARE STRUGGLING TO MAKE THE STAGE COULD BE FRUSTRATED. THE STAGE COULD BE FRUSTRATED. BUT LOOK, STEYER, THE ONLY WAY BUT LOOK, STEYER, THE ONLY WAY HE CAN MAKE THAT STAGE IS IF HE HE CAN MAKE THAT STAGE IS IF HE CONVINCES 130,000 PEOPLE TO GIVE CONVINCES 130,000 PEOPLE TO GIVE HIM A DOLLAR. HIM A DOLLAR. AND IF HE GETS SOME LEVEL OF AND IF HE GETS SOME LEVEL OF SUPPORT IN THE POLLS. SUPPORT IN THE POLLS. THAT’S WHAT THESE CUTOFFS ARE THAT’S WHAT THESE CUTOFFS ARE MEANT TO DO. MEANT TO DO. IT’S MEANT TO ASSURE THAT THIS IT’S MEANT TO ASSURE THAT THIS LATE IN THE GAME THERE’S AT LATE IN THE GAME THERE’S AT LEAST SOME LEVEL OF SUPPORT FOR LEAST SOME LEVEL OF SUPPORT FOR THE CANDIDATES. THE CANDIDATES. I THINK WHEN WE GET TO NOVEMBER I THINK WHEN WE GET TO NOVEMBER STEYER WILL HAVE A MUCH TOUGHER STEYER WILL HAVE A MUCH TOUGHER TIME MAKING THAT CUTOFF. TIME MAKING THAT CUTOFF.>>AND THEY CAN INCREASE THE>>AND THEY CAN INCREASE THE POLLING REQUIREMENT, BUT IS POLLING REQUIREMENT, BUT IS THERE SOME ARGUMENT TO BE MADE THERE SOME ARGUMENT TO BE MADE FOR THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE FOR THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF OF TALKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF DONORS RESULTING IN CANDIDATES DONORS RESULTING IN CANDIDATES SPENDING FAR MORE THAN A DOLLAR SPENDING FAR MORE THAN A DOLLAR TO GET A DOLLAR FROM A DONOR? TO GET A DOLLAR FROM A DONOR?>>YEAH, YOU CERTAINLY HAVE>>YEAH, YOU CERTAINLY HAVE CREATED A SET OF INCENTIVES CREATED A SET OF INCENTIVES WHERE THAT’S WHAT CANDIDATES ARE WHERE THAT’S WHAT CANDIDATES ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON IF THOSE ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON IF THOSE ARE THE REQUIREMENTS. THE REQUIREMENTS. LOOK, I DON’T KNOW IF THERE’S LOOK, I DON’T KNOW IF THERE’S ANY PARTICULAR PERFECT WAY TO ANY PARTICULAR PERFECT WAY TO MAKE THE CUTOFF, BUT EVENTUALLY MAKE THE CUTOFF, BUT EVENTUALLY THIS FIELD WILL HAVE TO START THIS FIELD WILL HAVE TO START WINNOWING DOWN AND VOTERS WILL WINNOWING DOWN AND VOTERS WILL HAVE TO FOCUS ON A COUPLE OF HAVE TO FOCUS ON A COUPLE OF REALISTIC OPTIONS. REALISTIC OPTIONS.>>SEAN, LET’S TALK ABOUT WHITE>>SEAN, LET’S TALK ABOUT WHITE NATIONALISM AND THE ROLE THAT’S NATIONALISM AND THE ROLE THAT’S GOING TO PLAY. GOING TO PLAY. PEOPLE HAVE THOUGHT IT’S A PEOPLE HAVE THOUGHT IT’S A THREAT FOR A LONG TIME BUT IT’S THREAT FOR A LONG TIME BUT IT’S POSSIBLE IT BECOMES CENTRAL TO POSSIBLE IT BECOMES CENTRAL TO THE ELECTION. THE ELECTION. A RECENT HUFF POST/UGOV POLL A RECENT HUFF POST/UGOV POLL ASKED IS WHITE NATIONALISM A ASKED IS WHITE NATIONALISM A THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES. THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES. 56 SAID YES. 56 SAID YES. DO YOU THINK PRESIDENT TRUMP DO YOU THINK PRESIDENT TRUMP SUPPORTS WHITE NATIONALISM, 44% SUPPORTS WHITE NATIONALISM, 44% SAID YES. SAID YES. HOW DOES DONALD TRUMP DEAL WITH HOW DOES DONALD TRUMP DEAL WITH THIS? THIS?>>WELL, I THINK DONALD TRUMP IS>>WELL, I THINK DONALD TRUMP IS JUST DONALD TRUMP AND HE DOES JUST DONALD TRUMP AND HE DOES WHAT HE THINKS. WHAT HE THINKS. I DON’T KNOW THAT THERE’S ANY I DON’T KNOW THAT THERE’S ANY WAY HE PARTICULARLY DEALS WITH WAY HE PARTICULARLY DEALS WITH IT. IT. IT’S A BLEMISH ON HIS IT’S A BLEMISH ON HIS ADMINISTRATION, IT’S A BLEMISH ADMINISTRATION, IT’S A BLEMISH ON HIS RECORD. ON HIS RECORD. WHAT HIS STRATEGY PROBABLY IS, WHAT HIS STRATEGY PROBABLY IS, IS TO TRY TO SCARE PEOPLE ABOUT IS TO TRY TO SCARE PEOPLE ABOUT THE DEMOCRATS AND HOPE THAT THE

Could Scientists Predict the Next Political Crisis?


For centuries, people have been trying to
predict the future. The Greeks had their oracles; the Romans had
their soothsayers. And today we have… well, for some things,
we have scientists. Like, thanks to the laws of physics, I can
tell you with near certainty when the sun will rise tomorrow, if you give me your exact
location. Technically, it’s still not 100%, since
some weird freak planetary collision could nudge Earth out of its typical orbit. But it’s a very reliable guess. Seriously. Don’t lose sleep over that. We’re not getting hit by a planet. As scientists have learned more about how
the world works — and we’ve started feeding computers a lot of data — we’ve gotten
better and better at making predictions about the future. In a way, it’s surprising how much we can
predict. And yet, there are still these gaping holes,
especially when it comes to human behavior. Do you remember for example, all of 2016. Psychologists, though, are actually making
headway on figuring out how we can learn to be better predictors. So today, on SciShow, here’s what we can
and can’t predict with much accuracy — and how science is moving the art of prediction
forward. [♪ INTRO] Perhaps the best success story — and cautionary
tale — for prediction science is the weather. The forecast used to be not much more than
a guess about what the next few days’ weather would hold. But by learning more about how clouds form,
and how pressure interacts with temperature, meteorologists have dramatically improved
their predictions in recent decades. These days, they use complicated computer
models that take into account the underlying physics. And by feeding those models reams of data
from a variety of instruments all over the world, their five-day forecasts today are
as accurate as three-day forecasts in 2005. That’s a huge improvement in a pretty short
period of time. And it’s not just helpful for planning your
weekend cookout. Getting better with the weather also means
we’ve been able to save more lives during natural disasters. But while we’ve improved, we’re still
pretty bad about forecasting weather much beyond a week. That’s because of inherent unpredictability
in the way something like a cloud forms. We can know every detail of it, but part of
it still depends on an initial starting condition. And according to chaos theory, small changes
that you cannot predict will change that outcome. This is also known as the butterfly effect. So we can keep learning more and improving
our measurements and models, but most of our progress will be incremental. There’s a limit to how accurate long-range
forecasts can get. All things considered, though, weather prediction
is pretty darn good, as long as you go in with the right expectations. On the other hand, there are certain things
that you’d think we’d be able to predict that we just haven’t been able to crack. Like earthquakes. They’re largely a natural phenomenon, which,
like weather, you’d think we’d be able to understand the basics of and then load
in a bunch of data to model. But so far, we can’t — at least, not in
the same way. We do know a lot about them, like where they’re
most likely, based on fault lines and historical data. But seismologists haven’t yet found a signal
that reliably precedes a quake that we can follow for advanced warning. You can detect rumbling just prior to one,
but it’s not enough time to evacuate an entire city. We just don’t understand the factors that
go into how two tectonic plates will interact with each other. So, the timing and magnitude of any single
specific earthquake remains a mystery. Which is obviously bad for trying to keep
people safe. Maybe, one day, seismologists will discover
new basic phenomena that will allow us to forecast earthquakes with much better foresight. But it’s also possible that we won’t. And without that foundation, earthquakes will
remain an enigma that we can only loosely estimate. It’s a reminder that predicting the future
depends on mountains of carefully collected data — which is great, but also sometimes
hard to come by. The vast majority of things that we have real
trouble predicting, though, aren’t based on the physical world. There, at least we can partially model things
to get some unbiased idea of the probability. Instead, the real mystery is… you, and me,
and us. Elections, stock markets, political uprisings
— things that hinge on people and societies — these are much more challenging, which
is not that big of a surprise. The classic approach to these questions is
to use experts. After all, if someone knows a lot about a
specific country, they should be able to say with more accuracy whether a foreign leader
will make a certain trade deal, right? Well, it turns out that experts aren’t very
good at economic and political forecasts. In one landmark experiment that collected
these kinds of predictions from more than 280 experts over nearly two decades, the so-called
‘experts’ were only a tad better than random guessing. We’ll get back to why scientists think experts
aren’t very good — it has a lot to do with how they think and common psychological
biases we all fall prey to. But don’t always assume that knowledge is
power when it comes to the future. At least, when people are involved. The other main way to tackle these sorts of
questions is to use data. For something like an election, you can use
polling data — and the more there is, the better. And if you know a bit about the quality of
each poll, you can weight them accordingly and aggregate them together to get your best
guess. This isn’t foolproof, but this type of analytical
approach is usually much better than asking a single expert. Depending on the question you’re trying
to answer, you can even use artificial intelligence and machine learning to make forecasts, although
this is work in progress. In machine learning, computers use algorithms,
which are basically just a set of rules, to teach themselves over time. The advantage here is if you don’t actually
know how something works — like, say, what causes political violence — you can feed
a computer a bunch of data, and see if it can find any patterns for you. So far, this method hasn’t pulled off any
notable victories — at least, in those tricky human situations — but it’s something
to keep tabs on in, that future we’ve been talking about. It’s all pretty new, but as we keep trying
out this technology and improving it, we’ll hopefully make some progress. Okay, so we know that experts aren’t as
good as we’d think they’d be. But the whole story is a little more complicated. Because one of the things that that long-running
study found was that some experts are
better than others. Experts who believed in big, grand ideas — like
the idea that all governmental regulation is bad, or that the environment is doomed
— generally didn’t do so well. Those who were less wedded to these kinds
of concepts, and were willing to change their opinions, did far better. This suggests that personality and styles
of thinking are important for our ability to make good predictions. And that perhaps, if you’re willing, you
can learn to get better at it, too. The strongest case for this comes from a remarkable
project sponsored by a US agency called Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity, or IARPA. It’s kind of like DARPA, but for military
intelligence. Back in 2011, IARPA realized that even well-trained
intelligence officers weren’t so hot at predicting events, and that maybe they could
find a better way. So they set up a four-year forecasting tournament
for people to predict political or economic outcomes. It was a contest, but also an experiment. Different teams tried out different ideas
for coming up with a strategy to produce the most accurate predictions. And one team, called the Good Judgment Project,
blew the other four out of the water — so much that the government stopped funding the
others just to focus on the winner. The Good Judgment Project was actually led
by the same psychologist behind the other study showing that experts are, on average,
poor predictors. But what he also realized was that a small
number of people are remarkably good at answering certain questions — stuff like, ‘Will
Serbia leave the EU in the next six months?’ or, ‘Will this politician resign by March?’ It wasn’t just luck, and it wasn’t just
that these people were smart or well-versed on international affairs, either. The participants were normal folks who volunteered;
they had no particular expertise. And they outperformed intelligence analysts
with access to classified material. Which sounds, like pretty humbling for those
intelligence analysts. What set these so-called superforecasters
apart were certain shared personality traits, like an openness to consider new ideas, and
a willingness to revise them in the face of new facts. They’re intelligent, but not geniuses, and
while they are usually comfortable with numbers, they weren’t using statistics or models
to arrive at their answers. Instead, the superforecasters were thinking
through the problems probabilistically. In other words, they carefully assessed the
likelihood of various things, and factored everything into their decision. This prevented them from being susceptible
to a lot of biases, including our natural tendency to make quick, intuitive decisions
by falling back on heuristics, or shortcuts. For instance, forecasters who read a lot about
terrorism, even in an effort to become more informed, might begin to think terrorism is
more frequent than it actually is, simply because they’re exposed to it a lot. This is known as the availability heuristic. But by becoming aware of these pitfalls, and
sticking to probabilistic thinking, these superforecasters could avoid it. Fortunately for us mere mortals, the Good
Judgment Project was able to develop a short training program that can improve accuracy
by 10% over a year. In it, participants learn about cognitive
biases and are encouraged to break down big problems into smaller parts so they can think
more easily about them. They’re also taught to think about problems
from all sorts of perspectives. They learned not overreact or underreact to
new information. And most importantly, to learn from their
mistakes. This is where most experts don’t put in
the work. But if you never pause to think about where
you went wrong, you can’t learn how to be better. Which is true for a lot of things, come to
think about it. To arrive at its winning predictions, the
Good Judgment Project team also took advantage of the wisdom of the crowd, but added a tweak
to traditional methods. Basically, if you average everyone’s predictions,
they’re usually fairly close. But this team didn’t stop there. Instead, they then gave extra weight to their
group of 40 or so superforecasters, and finally, adjusted that number up or down a bit further,
in what is called extremizing. This technique worked really well. It’s still not perfect, of course but is
proof that sometimes, people can be fairly good about glimpsing the future. Well, as long as you ask a lot of them, and
do some fancy math to bias things towards your most talented group. Like with any prediction, data is still really
important. This method won’t work for everything, and
many people think there are very rare, but still very important events that are too hard
to predict — something like 9/11. They call these black swans. But it’s possible breaking things down and
learning more will allow us to get better at these, too. Ultimately, most experts agree that the best
predictions about these sorts of tough questions will come from a combination of human and
machine. Really, though, the only thing we can be certain
of is that we won’t be able to predict everything. Thank you for watching this episode of SciShow! If you want to learn more about how our minds
work and influence the ways we think and respond to things, we have a channel called SciShow
Psychology and you can check it out over at youtube.com/scishowpsych. [♪ OUTRO ]

Netanyahu faces tough political battle in competitive Israeli election


JUDY WOODRUFF: One leader who welcomed today’s
announcement by the U.S. was Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel and Iran are longtime foes, and Netanyahu
tweeted to President Trump in Hebrew: “Thank you for responding to another important request
of mine which serves the interests of our countries and countries of the region.” As it happens, Israel holds hotly contested
elections tomorrow that will decide whether Netanyahu wins another term as prime minister. We sent John Yang to find out what’s at stake
for the nation of Israel and for the political and personal fortunes of Netanyahu himself. JOHN YANG: Less than 24 hours before Israeli
polls open, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu greeted voters in Jerusalem’s main market. In the campaign’s closing days, he has made
full use of the stature and the perks of his office, meeting with Russian President Vladimir
Putin in Moscow, helping lay to rest the returned remains of an Israeli soldier killed in Lebanon
in 1982, and, just this weekend, reversing course to say that the time is right for Israel
to annex parts of the West Bank. Israelis have a term for Netanyahu’s last-minute
pre-election surprises. They call it his gevalt campaign, using the
Yiddish expression of alarm. Netanyahu and his center-right Likud Party
have dominated Israeli politics during his 10 straight years in office. Now he faces his toughest reelection challenger
yet. He’s Benny Gantz, who led supporters on motorcycles
on his final day of campaigning. Gantz is a retired Israeli army general and
served as army chief of staff under Netanyahu during the 2014 Gaza war. DANA WEISS, Journalist: After 10 years, there
is suddenly an alternative. JOHN YANG: Dana Weiss is chief political correspondent
for Israel’s Channel 12. DANA WEISS: When people are asked in approval
rates who is fit to be prime minister, for the first time, there is a tie between Prime
Minister Netanyahu and the person standing against him. JOHN YANG: Gantz leads a center-right coalition
that includes two other former army chiefs of staff, Gabi Ashkenazi and Moshe Ya’alon,
who also served as Netanyahu’s defense minister. They hope their combined military experience
offsets Netanyahu’s reputation as Israel’s mister security. BENNY GANTZ, Israeli Prime Minister Candidate:
On my watch, Iran will not threaten Israel by taking over Syria, Lebanon or the Gaza
Strip., nor will it undermine pragmatic regime in the Middle East. On my watch, Iran will not have nuclear weapons. JOHN YANG: Netanyahu trumpets his close alliance
with President Trump. The president has boosted his Israeli counterpart’s
standing by moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem, cutting aid to the Palestinians, and during
a White House visit just two weeks before the election recognizing Israeli sovereignty
over the Golan Heights, which Israel seized from Syria in the 1967 War. The White House even agreed to release its
likely controversial Middle East peace plan after the election so it wouldn’t become an
issue. BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, Israeli Prime Minister:
Mr. President, over the years Israel has been blessed to have many friends who sat in the
Oval Office, but Israel has never had a better friend than you. JOHN YANG: But analysts say tomorrow’s vote
could be a referendum on the effect on the nation of Netanyahu’s policies and politics,
which some call divisive. DANA WEISS: It’s not security, it’s not international
relationship, it’s not even economy. It’s what he is doing to the society inside
Israel, us against them, against the elites, against the left, against the liberals, against
the Arabs, in order to stay in power. JOHN YANG: Listen to these anti-Netanyahu
voters at Jerusalem’s main market. Rachel Ben-Schlomo is a physical therapist,
and undecided, except about Netanyahu. RACHEL BEN-SCHLOMO, Physical Therapist: I
want a change and wanting to be something that will contribute to societal living, you
know, not only the security all the time. JOHN YANG: Rochali Kashivitsky says she will
vote for the once powerful left-wing Labor Party. She used Netanyahu’s nickname. ROCHALI KASHIVITSKY, Political Scientist:
No, no, no, no, not Bibi. I want somebody that think about the people,
that take care about the people. JOHN YANG: Netanyahu supporters say they’re
better off now than before he was prime minister, when the economy was slumping and Palestinian
suicide bombers were attacking Israeli buses, the issue responsible for his first narrow
1996 election as prime minister. Schlomo Peretz was having coffee in the market. SCHLOMO PERETZ, Israel (through translator):
I don’t believe that someone else can come in and improve. In my opinion, Bibi is the right man in the
right place. JOHN YANG: In this campaign season, the market
sees some good-natured debates. Dozens of parties are fielding candidates
for the 120-seat legislature called the Knesset. Some are very small and very extreme. Itamar Ben-Gvir, leader of the far-right anti-Arab
party called Jewish Power, did a little retail politicking at the market. The minor parties’ results could be very important. Polls show voters closely divided between
Netanyahu and Gantz. If each ends up with roughly the same number
of seats in the Knesset, that could give small parties outsized influence in forming a coalition
government. Analysts say Netanyahu’s task of coalition-building
could be complicated by looming corruption indictments. In February, the attorney general, a Netanyahu
appointee, said he intends charge him with trading official favors for positive news
coverage and for hundreds of thousands of dollars of cigars, jewelry and champagne. BENJAMIN NETANYAHU (through translator): I
intend to serve you and the country as prime minister for many more years. Don’t believe all the spin. JOHN YANG: Netanyahu denies the charges and
says it’s a left-wing political persecution. While the announcement didn’t move Netanyahu’s
poll numbers, Gantz is trying to make it an issue. BENNY GANTZ (through translator): The mere
notion that, in Israel, a prime minister can remain in office while under indictment is
ridiculous, in my view. It won’t happen. JOHN YANG: Reelection could be Netanyahu’s
strongest protection from prosecution, and he would demand that coalition partners help
him, suggests Dana Weiss. DANA WEISS: This coalition is what we call
the indictment coalition, because Prime Minister Netanyahu is going to make sure, you want
to join my party? Please give me your promise that you’re going
to do what it takes to make sure I’m not going to go through my legal procedures. JOHN YANG: And Netanyahu refuses to rule out
seeking legislation that would outlaw the indictment of a sitting prime minister. RONEN BERGMAN, Journalist: This is going to
be very complicated. JOHN YANG: Ronen Bergman writes for Israel’s
largest newspaper and is author of “Rise and Kill First” about the country’s history of
targeting killings. RONEN BERGMAN: Not all of these parties, maybe
not even one of them, would agree to go for something that would be seen, even by their
base, by their constituency, as a break of any kind of ethical, lawful, legal prosecution
of the law. JOHN YANG: While the campaign is the subject
of intense interest in Israel, just a short drive away, it is largely ignored. In the past, Israeli elections were closely
watched on the streets of the Palestinian West Bank for clues about the future of the
peace process, but not this time. ®MD-BO¯ GHASSAN KHATIB, Birzeit University:
There is no partner for the peace process with the Palestinians in Israel. JOHN YANG: Ghassan Khatib is a political scientist
at Birzeit University in the West Bank and a former Palestinian peace negotiator. GHASSAN KHATIB: The issue of the Palestinian-Israeli
relations is not a major issue in this election at all, because the major parties in this
election are in agreement over the need to continue the Israeli occupation over the Palestinian
territories, West Bank. It’s wise to expect that the current status
quo is going to continue for a long while. And I think the Palestinians are learning
that there is no solution in the horizon. JOHN YANG: In Israel, despite Netanyahu’s
standing in the polls, few are counting him out. RONEN BERGMAN: He’s the best campaigner and
the best spinner and the best politician in Israel, by far. He understands the system. He understands Israeli electorate. He understands the public. He understands Israeli psyche and Israeli
mind-set. He understands what he needs to do in the
last few weeks, the last few days, in order to get these small fractions of votes that
will give him the next coalition. JOHN YANG: And he may need all those skills
in order to fend off Benny Gantz and win a fourth consecutive term leading Israel. For the “PBS NewsHour,” I’m John Yang in Jerusalem.