Pelosi said Trump might not leave office if he loses in 2020. He once said himself he might not.

Pelosi’s specific concern is that if the 2020 election produces a very narrow victory for Democrats, Trump will reject the outcome by claiming that it was rigged, perhaps by regurgitating vacuous claims about Democratic voter fraud. 

…Pelosi said only a decisive, overwhelming victory will convince him to step aside.

Pelosi said Trump might not leave office if he loses in 2020. He once said himself he might not. – ThinkProgress

hmmmm

‘The Problem Of Democracy’ Looks At Personality’s Role In U.S. Leadership

‘The Problem Of Democracy’ Looks At Personality’s Role In U.S. Leadership : NPR

The Peanut Gallery supposes that an accurate representation of the ideal state of things lies not in Adams or Jefferson’s respective versions, but rather somewhere in the middle.

An irony of the debate is that being a Democratic Republic -as opposed to, say, a Democracy- hasn’t seemed to saved us from the cult of personality.

What Changes When the Presidential Field Is Full of Mothers

Of course, no female candidate who hoped to gain an ounce of public approval could have survived that first sentence in the Vanity Fair story: the plaintive wail of a child whose misery was tied to the political ambitions of his parent. No woman, dead or alive, could hope to win the nation’s heart by writing about seeking communion in a Kansas bar while her husband drove carpool in El Paso. 

…During the 2014 gubernatorial race, the New York Times Magazine ran a story headlined “Can Wendy Davis Have It All? A Texas-Size Tale of Ambition, Motherhood, and Political Mythmaking.”

…The tight knot for women in politics (and perhaps in life) has been, will always be, this: Everything associated with motherhood has been coded as faintly embarrassing and less than — from mom jeans to mommy brain to the Resistance. And yet to be a bad mom has been disqualifying, and to not be a mom at all is to be understood as lacking something: gravity, value, femininity. Just this month, Tucker Carlson wondered, about New York representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, whether “someone who’s never even raised children gets the right to lecture me about morality,” as if parents are given a moral compass upon the birth of a child.

…As our expectations for fatherhood rise, even when the fathers castigate themselves for absences, the judgment hasn’t been harsh. 

…How can we get to a place where women’s relationships to their domestic lives are not undermining? Those who’ve been out there have tried a million approaches. 

…“I knew that my male colleagues had come when they were 30. They had a jump on me because they didn’t have children.” But of course they had children; there was simply no expectation that they’d be responsible for raising them.

…Because fatherhood hasn’t been a structural impediment in the way motherhood has, the proportion of childless male presidential candidates has been statistically less significant; neither Cory Booker nor Pete Buttigieg gets asked much about the fact that he doesn’t have children and how that’s shaped his view of the world. Buttigieg, in fact, often positions himself as childlike in wondering what the world will look like in 35 years, when he’s Trump’s age.

…Those privileges aren’t really about fatherhood; they are about childhood.

White men — in life, on streets, in cop cars, within their families, on the pages of magazines, and in politics — are permitted to fuck up, to gain our sympathy and protection. They are offered the possibilities of blamelessness, selfishness, naïveté, and second and third chances. They are offered the benefits of youth itself, no matter their age. It doesn’t matter whether they have kids or how they raise kids; these men who want to lead us get to be kids.

What Changes When the Presidential Field Is Full of Mothers

hmmmm

The Media Gaslighting of Likable Candidates

Warren has always been an exceptionally charismatic candidate. We just forget that fact when she’s campaigning — due, in large part, to our deep and lingering distrust for female intelligence.

Warren is bursting with what we might call “charisma” in male candidates: She has the folksy demeanor of Joe Biden, the ferocious conviction of Bernie Sanders, the deep intelligence of fellow law professor Barack Obama. But Warren is not a man, and so those traits are framed as liabilities, rather than strengths. According to the media, Warren is an uptight schoolmarm, a “wonky professor,” a scold, a wimpy Dukakis, a wooden John Kerry, or (worse) a nerdier Al Gore.

…Casting Warren as a sheltered, Ivory Tower type is odd, given that her politics and diction are not exactly elitist.

…Warren really is an intellectual, a scholar; moreover, she really is running an exceptionally ideas-focused campaign, regularly turning out detailed and exhaustive policy proposals at a point when most of the other candidates don’t even have policy sections on their websites. What’s galling is the suggestion that this is a bad thing.

…Likability is in this way a self-reinforcing accusation, one which is amplified every time the candidate tries to tackle it. (Recall Hillary Clinton, who was asked about her “likability” at seemingly every debate or town hall for eight straight years — then furiously accused of pandering every time she made an effort to seem more “approachable.”)

……Warren is accused, in plain language, of being uppity — a woman who has the bad grace to be smarter than the men around her, without downplaying it to assuage their egos.

…It’s significant that the “I hate you; please respond” line of political sabotage only ever seems to be aimed at women. It’s also revealing that, when all these men talked about how Warren could win them over, their “campaign” advice sounded suspiciously close to makeover tips. In his article, Payne advised Warren to “lose the granny glasses,” “soften the hair,” and employ a professional voice coach to “deepen her voice, which grates on some.” Payne seemed to suggest that Elizabeth Warren look like a model and sound like a man — anything to disguise the grisly reality of a smart woman making her case.

…Educators say that 21st century girls are still afraid to talk in class because of “sexist bullying” which sends the message that smart girls are unfeminine. …We can deplore all this as antiquated thinking, but even now, grown men are still demanding that Warren ditch her glasses or “soften” her hair — to work on being prettier so as to make her intelligence less threatening.

The Media Gaslighting of 2020’s Most Likable Candidate

hmmmm

Mueller Exposes Erik Prince’s Lies About His Seychelles Rendezvous with Top Russian Kirill Dmitriev

Erik Prince, the Trumpworld associate and founder of the private military firm Blackwater, told Congress all sorts of things about his rendezvous with a powerful Moscow financial titan.  

Many of those things weren’t true, Special Counsel Robert Mueller confirmed in his report, released on Thursday.

…Prince was interviewed by the Special Counsel under a proffer agreement, according to the Mueller report. The terms of that agreement have not been made public. But during a recent interview with Al Jazeera’s Mehdi Hassan—an interview in which Prince did a fair amount of fibbing—he said that he was not worried about possible punitive action from the special counsel’s office. Lawmakers have previously asserted that they believed Prince lied to them during his testimony and have discussed the possibility of bringing Prince back in for questioning.

..There were two separate meetings in the Seychelles (though Prince said there was only one). The initial meeting lasted about 45 minutes, according to the report. And although Prince told lawmakers that the talks were mostly about minerals, oil, and gas, at least one of those conversations included an extensive discussion about U.S.-Russia relations.  

…Mueller’s description of Dmitriev and his interaction with Trumpworld paints the clearest picture to date of how members of the Russian government—beyond Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak’s conversations with former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn—attempted to gain inroads with the Trump administration.

…“Dmitriev reported directly to Putin and frequently referred to Putin as his ’boss,’ ” the report said.

…It is unclear if Dmitriev or his fund are still in intimate contact with the administration. The RDIF is currently subject to sectoral sanctions by the U.S. Treasury. Since his Seychelles meeting, Prince has spent time peddling a plan for the war in Afghanistan to Trump administration officials. There’s no evidence to suggest that plan has moved forward.

Mueller Exposes Erik Prince’s Lies About His Seychelles Rendezvous with Top Russian Kirill Dmitriev

hmmm

2020: The logic of Bernie Sanders’s continuing war against Clintonworld

“They all know each other; they all make sure each other is being taken care of financially,” Ray Buckley, the chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party, said. “We use the word establishment because people can grasp what it is. It’s not the establishment versus non-establishment. It’s everyone in the Beltway and everyone not in the Beltway.”

…There are clear ideological divides between Sanders and Clintonworld. Take health care policy: CAP proposes Medicare Extra For All, which, despite having a similar name to Sanders’s Medicare for All, firmly rejects abolishing private insurance. Instead, it proposes a Medicare-based public option. And Sanders’s health care policy team and CAP’s health care policy team do not get along.

The same goes for trade, where the Sanders ethos is much more restrictionist, and on foreign policy, where it is more anti-interventionist.

…Sanders’s rallying cry is that together, the American people will take on pharmaceutical companies, big banks, political party bosses, and despotic world leaders. But for Sanders, the “them” in his “us against them” rhetoric used to be a lot bigger than it is today. He’s less of an outsider in the halls of Congress than he was even three years ago.

2020: The logic of Bernie Sanders’s continuing war against Clintonworld – Vox

hmmm

Civil asset forfeiture has quietly expanded across Pa., led by Berks County

When forfeiture is used as a cash cow, everything can look like drug money. Everything can look like a prize.

And as other counties have scaled up the practice — as Daisilee Cruz’s case and others uncovered through our investigation show — seemingly innocent people are getting caught in the crossfire.

…“As long as forfeiture money is being used to self-fund law enforcement agencies, there is always going to be an abuse of forfeiture practices,” said Darpana Sheth with the Washington-based Institute of Justice, which has been litigating civil asset forfeiture cases for years.

“Law enforcement has a direct financial incentive to not only seize property but pursue forfeiture even when there is a very tangential relationship to criminal activity,” she said.

…Investigators didn’t find any drugs in their sweep, but they did find something else — $3,000 that Smith says she had just cashed from a tax refund. It was days away from her son’s senior prom, and she had hoped to use the money to pay for his suit and rent a limousine.

But, to investigators, the stack of cash was probable drug money.

“They were like, ‘Well, I need to prove it’s not illegal gains,’ and I said, ‘Well, you’re not proving that it is illegal gains. You’re not proving that,’” Smith recalled saying to police, at the time. “I was really, really angry that they took my money.”

…A review of several months of court filings from 2018 shows that small amounts of cash are routinely taken from people never charged with crimes.

…Adams conceded that cases like these do occur, but referred to the money as “abandoned property,” because the individuals didn’t show up to court hearings to contest the takings.

…Police confiscated a piggy bank containing about $98 of birthday money belonging to a suspect drug dealer’s youngest daughter. Neither the target nor the daughter were ever charged with criminal wrongdoing. Still, the process of getting the piggy bank back was arduous.

“It took us over a year to get that $98 back,” he said.

Civil asset forfeiture has quietly expanded across Pa., led by Berks County

sigh…

Charlotte NC police release Danquirs Franklin shooting video

The male officer shouts to Franklin: “Sir, put the gun down.” Kerl yells, “Put the gun down!”

The last command Kerl yells before firing is, “Put it on the ground!”

Franklin reached his right hand toward a pocket and pulled out a gun by the barrel. He appeared to be lowering the weapon when Kerl fired two shots, the video shows.

Moments after being shot, Franklin turns his face toward the officers and can be heard saying: “You told me to…”

The video cuts off seconds later, after he slumps over.

…“There is no way” the shooting was justified, she said. “He was sitting there in the most non-threatening way possible. His two choices were get killed for complying with them or get killed for not complying. He was going to get killed no matter what.”

…“In hindsight, the officers probably could have said, ‘Put your hands up. Don’t move. Don’t reach toward the gun. And if you move toward your gun, we’ll shoot you.’ ”

Seth Stoughton, a former police officer and professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law, said he believes the video “raises some serious questions about the officers’ tactics.

“In this case, one of the officers was standing less than a car-length away from an armed subject with nothing but air between them for more than 30 seconds,” he wrote in an email to the Observer. “If, for example, the officers had taken positions of relative safety, they might have been more comfortable waiting to see if Mr. Franklin was going to put the gun on the ground the way that they had commanded him to, rather than shooting him at the moment they did.”

Charlotte NC police release Danquirs Franklin shooting video | Rock Hill Herald

Fuck, “objectively reasonable” excuses.

If an officer cannot keep their head under stress and make split second assessments (like, is he putting the gun down?) and then act on them (like, maybe I shouldn’t shoot him because he is not a threat and it would be murder to do so) then they have no business in that line of work. Period. It’s too dangerous for them and everyone around them.

Mueller report reveals Sarah Sanders lied for Trump

Page 284 of the Mueller report reads: “In the afternoon of May 10, 2017, deputy press secretary Sarah Sanders spoke to the President about his decision to fire Comey and then spoke to reporters in a televised press conference…Sanders said, ‘Look, we’ve heard from countless members of the FBI that say very different things’…Sanders told this Office that her reference to hearing from ‘countless members of the FBI’ was a ‘slip of the tongue.’ She also recalled that her statement in a separate press interview that rank-and-file FBI agents had lost confidence in Comey was a comment she made ‘in the heat of the moment’ that was not founded on anything.”

…In other words, the chief spokesperson for the president of the United States admitted to Mueller’s team that she had invented interactions with members of the FBI to validate her boss’s decision to terminate James Comey. In the process, she knowingly advanced a narrative designed to undermine the credibility of the person who had been running the nation’s premier law enforcement investigative organization.

…Sanders isn’t the White House press secretary as much as she is America’s main minister of propaganda. Make no mistake about it, Sanders isn’t a “complicit” bystander to the “porn star presidency,”she is a partner in it.

Mueller report reveals Sarah Sanders lied for Trump. It’s time for her to resign.

The woman lies like a rug. Not sure why this is news to anyone.

FTC Facebook privacy investigation may target Mark Zuckerberg

Two sources speaking with The Post said the FTC was considering whether to “seek new, heightened oversight” of Zuckerberg’s leadership. The Post previously reported that the FTC might be seeking a multibillion-dollar fine for the social network as well.

…The investigation is looking into whether Facebook violated the terms of a 2011 settlement with the FTC, specifically something called the “consent decree,” which essentially made Facebook responsible for being transparent with users about how their data was being used on the platform — with future violations punishable by huge fines.

…The report comes in the wake of recent revelations discovered by Business Insider that Facebook collected the email contact lists of 1.5 million new users without their knowledge or permission.

…Facebook could be violating a variety of regulations, including the FTC consent decree; the European Union privacy law known as GDPR; and perhaps even the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, a US criminal statute involving computer fraud and abuse.

FTC Facebook privacy investigation may target Mark Zuckerberg: report – Business Insider

“A now-discontinued email-verification system that Facebook used with new users caused the tech giant to inadvertently collect email contact information from 1.5 million new users.”

Inadvertent, my ass.  Programs are written by humans, not by accident.

Facebook Drops A Bomb On Mueller Day, Tucks It Away In An Update To An Old Blog Post

Facebook admitted Thursday night in an updated post from March that the company collected millions of additional users’ Instagram passwords.

…The update was connected to a March 21 blog post that disclosed how hundreds of millions of Facebook users’ passwords had been stored unencrypted on the firm’s servers.

…“Since this post was published, we discovered additional logs of Instagram passwords being stored in a readable format,”

…Zuckerberg and other executives used privacy data as leverage over competitors, media reports show. In one case, Facebook allegedly gave Amazon premium access to data for its new smartphone, but phased out access for a messaging application that threatened a similar app Facebook managed.

Facebook Drops A Bomb On Mueller Day, Tucks It Away In An Update To An Old Blog Post | The Daily Caller

Sigh…