Racism and Russia: The Topics Brian Murphy Claims He Was Ordered to Lie About

Yesterday, Adam Schiff released the whistleblower complaint of Brian Murphy, who was recently demoted from his job in Homeland Security’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis because — he claims — he refused to make lie about what the intelligence showed to match President Trump’s preferred policy objectives.

The whole complaint is worth reading, and Murphy has been subpoenaed for a classified deposition on September 21, after which we may learn more about his complaints.

But I think it’s useful to pull out the topics about which he claims he or others lied:

  • To support President Trump’s claims to need a border wall, Murphy alleges, Kirstjen Nielsen substituted the number of “special interest aliens” — migrants from countries where there is significant terrorism, but against whom the US government has no reason to believe is tied to terrorism — for the number of “known and suspected terrorists,” effectively turning every person from a terrorism-affected country (presumably, with the exception of Saudi Arabia) into a terrorist.
  • Murphy also alleges that Nielsen substituted the number of KSTs who had ever applied for a visa or crossed a US border at any point, 3,755, for the number, 3, who had come across the southern border.
  • Murphy alleges that Ken Cuccinelli demanded that intelligence reports misreport the conditions of corruption, violence, and poor economic conditions in Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador (it’s not clear from the complaint whether Cuccinelli wanted I&A to downplay or exaggerate those conditions, but logically he probably wanted them to downplay the conditions that might support asylum claims).
  • Trump allegedly threatened to fire Murphy’s boss, David Glawe, after he refused to bow to pressure from Republicans on the House Committee for Homeland Security to deny Russian interference in the 2016 election.
  • On more 11 occasions spanning from March 2018 to May 2020, Murphy says he provided analysis about Russian influence, which led to several orders from his superiors either to downplay Russian interference or focus instead on Iranian and Chinese attempts to influence our elections.
  • In March 2020, DHS limited distribution of the Homeland Threat Analysis because of what it said about White Supremacy and Russian influence in the US; in May and June, 2020, Cuccinelli allegedly told Murphy to downplay the threat of White Supremacist terrorism and include claims about left wing terrorism. Ultimately, the document was released with sections on Antifa and anarchist groups that had not originally been there.
  • Between the end of May and July 31, 2020 (the day before Murphy was demoted), Murphy claims Cuccinelli and Chad Wolf ordered him to include claims about Antifa and anarchist groups in reports on Antifa that matched what Trump had already said publicly.

In short, Murphy claims he was ordered to lie about:

  • Both the reasons people migrate to the US and the degree to which migrants across the Southern border include possible terrorists
  • Russian interference and disinformation, past and present
  • The actual and relative danger of right wing terrorists and Antifa

These topics are important not just because they crystalize Trump’s ideology — racism and Russia — but also because people throughout government (most notably and dangerously the Attorney General) are lying about the same topics. Trump spends a lot of time gaslighting about these topics and trying to reassure suburban moms that he’s not a racist sponsored by Russia. But the bureaucratic abuses committed to back Trump’s lies make it clear what his ideology is and where his loyalties lie.

image_print
90 replies
  1. jaango says:

    Marcy,

    You’re to be saluted widely for posting this and with considerable depth of knowledge.

    For those of us and whom reside here in either both Arizona or the state of Sonora (Mexico) our considerable familiarity with this “onslaught” of terrorism is a widely admired Joke and personified as the furthering of the historical joke that intelligently falls into the Camp of the Trumpudo.

    The more damaging “onslaught” come at us in the form of money laundering by the multiplicity of financial institutions, as well as the religious members returning to the USA with their brief cases loaded down with cash dollars collected from the floor sweepers loyal to these religious organizations.

    Now, need I say more? Nah, I don’t think so, given that today’s Common Sense is being replaced by the historical behavior that is the daily blessing of “lying, cheating, and stealing” in its drastic behavior that adds nothing to our invaluable behavior for Decency Personified.

  2. harpie says:

    “a racist sponsored by Russia” <<< love this!

    Exclusive: Russian state hackers suspected in targeting Biden campaign firm – sources
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-cyber-biden-exclusive-idUSKBN2610I4
    SEPTEMBER 10, 2020 / 12:30 AM

    […] The hacking attempts targeted staff at Washington-based SKDKnickerbocker, a campaign strategy and communications firm working with Biden and other prominent Democrats, over the past two months, the sources said. […]

    So…since about July 10, 2020?
    …just for no particular reason, here are some mentions of “JULY” from Mr. Murphy’s whistle-blower complaint:

    […] In addition, the complaint states that DHS’s Chief of Staff directed Mr. Murphy on July 7, 2020, to “cease any dissemination of an intelligence notification regarding Russian disinformation efforts until Mr. Murphy had spoken with Mr. Wolf.” Per the complaint, Mr. Wolf told Mr. Murphy the next day, on July 8, 2020, that “the intelligence notification should be ‘held’ because it ‘made the President look bad.’ […]

    In early July 2020, according to the complaint, “Mr. Wolf relayed the concerns previously outlined by Mr. Cuccinelli regarding the sections on White Supremacy and Russian influence. Mr. Wolf asked for a copy of the HTA so it could be reviewed by policy officials, and so that information regarding the ongoing unrest in Portland, Oregon, could be added into the HTA. […]”

    The complaint states that, “[d]uring multiple meetings between the end of May 2020 and July 31, 2020, Mr. Murphy made protected disclosures to Messrs. Wolf and Cuccinelli regarding abuse of authority and improper administration of an intelligence program with respect to intelligence information on ANTIFA and ‘anarchist’ groups operating throughout the United States. On each occasion, Mr. Murphy was instructed by Mr. Wolf and/or Mr. Cuccinelli to modify intelligence assessments to ensure they matched up with the public comments by President Trump on the subject of ANTIFA and ‘anarchist’ groups.” […]

  3. BayStateLibrul says:

    This will drive BMAZ batshit crazy, but at what point is this treason. I know, I know, it doesn’t fit the definition. However, in this day and age, with all our Federal District Courts circle jerking around, anything is possible. Preponderance of the evidence, his behavior is heretical.

    • Rugger9 says:

      Well, with respect to Russia it is better described as a conspiracy which is plenty criminal enough for prosecution. However, bmaz was looking into a question I had some time ago regarding whether the AUMF still in effect would satisfy the condition of the “enemy” needed for a Constitutional definition as applied to the KSTs, especially ones tied to Al Qaeda which came from Saudi Arabia.

      It might be time to revisit that topic.

      • Geoguy says:

        I am most reluctant to bring up the “t” word but I think you posed your question in Rayne’s post of June 28 titled: THREE THINGS: BOUNTIES, BOUNTIES, BOUNCE. It was with respect to Russian bounties on American soldiers in Afghanistan. For some weird reason only that post won’t load so I can’t review the comments.

          • Nehoa says:

            There are so many other violations to cite. We should have a contest to list them all. I agree that the “t” word should be verboten.

        • Troutwaxer says:

          Sigh. At it again. OK, here’s how it goes. There are two definitions of treason, the colloquial definition and the legal definition. According to the colloquial definition someone who has engaged in behavior which is against their country’s best interests has “committed treason.” In the non-legal, purely colloquial sense Trump is treasonous. (Note my very, very careful avoidance of the word “guilt.”)

          However, there is also a very strict technical, legal definition of treason, which Trump’s actions, however vile, do not meet. According to the U.S. Constitution itself Trump is absolutely, positively one-hundred percent NOT GUILTY of the legal crime of treason.

          Since this blog is dedicated to legal realities colloquial use of the word treason Is Not Accepted Here, as it muddies the waters considerably. If you mistake the colloquial definition of the word treason for the legal definition someone with more authority than I currently possess will doubtless, like Thor summoning his hammer, take up the Mallet of Loving Correction and unleash it upon you, while happily abandoning all proprieties, so don’t ever use the colloquial version of this word!

          If you want to use the word treason in it’s technical, legal sense look the word up in the U.S. Constitution, reading very carefully, and don’t even think of using the word unless ALL the constitutional conditions are met, including a then-current Declaration of War. It is only then that you will safe from the bruising glories of our Mighty Mallet!

          Hopefully this covers all the issues (and makes Bmaz happy.) Anyone with moderating or top-posting privileges on this blog may freely copy the text of this post, altering it as necessary, and use it to educate the unlearned.

          • bmaz says:

            That is fine. I will note that there arguably may not need to be a formal declaration of war, of which there have been exactly none since 1942 in conjunction with WWII. Prevailing thought is a formal AUMF will also suffice. But Trump’s actions still don’t fit. As Nehoa noted above though, lots of other serious crimes are applicable!

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Never, and no, it’s not.

      As he does everywhere, Trump has gnawed through the decayed mortar in the wall and pushed his fat snout through it. He’s discovered that politics, like business, is whatever you can get away with. So far, he’s gotten away with much more in the former than the latter, but the investigations are really just starting.

    • bmaz says:

      Treason is a criminal offense, which means it has a beyond a reasonable doubt standard, not a flimsy civil “preponderance of the evidence” standard. No, this is simply NOT possible as to Russia. And people should stop blurting that out for jollies.

      • BayStateLibrul says:

        I’m not getting my jollies off. This is serious shit with democracy at stake.
        Let’s put it this way, if the reverse was true and Biden committed these offenses, Cardinal Billy would find a way to prosecute. He might not win but he would prosecute…. and he would cite laws…. and find laws to suit his “craven” as you like to say, purposes.

        • Rugger9 says:

          Functionally, a conspiracy to commit terrorism combined with loss of life will almost certainly be prosecuted as a federal capital offense, so trying to label it as “treason” when it doesn’t meet the Constitutional standard is a distinction without a difference.

          • earlofhuntingdon says:

            Whom do you imagine will prosecute or be charged with a “conspiracy to commit terrorism?”

            The political system voted to keep Trump in office when its leaders knew what the public knows today. State and federal authorities would be unprecedentedly aggressive were they to prosecute him for his personal crimes. No one’s going to touch his choices as president.

            • Rugger9 says:

              DJT after being turfed out, or Erik Prince, “Acting DHS Secretary” Wolf if he keeps downplaying threats to the election and other crimes, etc. not all of them requiring foreign intervention. Or, if we find out that special “considerations” led to MBS being able to place a jihadi in Pensacola, or perhaps quid pro quos for KSA-supported groups.

              I’m leaving the Bushies out for now on the Saudi exodus after 9/11/01 since the statue of limitations has probably expired.

              While I can agree the political norms would preclude such action, we’re dealing with the worst offender against the norms of political life in addition to the rule of law. If not now to uphold the rule of law, when?

  4. John Paul Jones says:

    Cuccinelli doesn’t come off well here:

    “Mr. Cuccinelli expressed frustration with the intelligence reports, and he accused unknown ‘deep state intelligence analysts’ of compiling the intelligence information to undermine President Donald J. Trump’s … policy objectives with respect to asylum. Notwithstanding Mr. Murphy’s response that the intelligence reports’ assessments were consistent with past assessments made for several years, Mr. Cuccinelli ordered Messrs. Murphy and Glawe to identify the names of the ‘deep state’ individuals who compiled the intelligence reports and to either fire or reassign them immediately.”

  5. OldTulsaDude says:

    I’ve read that Mr. Wolf is in his job illegally. Please, what does that even mean anymore? Illegal? Discussing legality with this bunch is like talking about knife-fighting rules with Butch Cassidy: you’re going to end up getting kicked in the nuts.

    • Rugger9 says:

      The GAO says he was appointed outside of the legally defined process, and IIRC he is also something like ten weeks beyond his statutory term while “acting”, so he either has to be confirmed to function in that role or resign.

      I had asked before whether this lack of official legal status would affect the court cases to come against protesters where the basis was their refusal to comply with orders from Mr Wolf. It seems to me that illegal orders are not enforceable, and in the military they are not.

    • Rugger9 says:

      The GAO says he was appointed outside of the legally defined process, and IIRC he is also something like ten weeks beyond his statutory term while “acting”, so he either has to be confirmed to function in that role or resign.

      I had asked before whether this lack of official legal status would affect the court cases to come against protesters where the basis was their refusal to comply with orders from Mr Wolf. It seems to me that illegal orders are not enforceable, and in the military they are not.

    • Rugger9 says:

      The GAO says he was appointed outside of the legally defined process, and IIRC he is also something like ten weeks beyond his statutory term while “acting”, so he either has to be confirmed to function in that role or resign.

      I had asked before whether this lack of official legal status would affect the court cases to come against protesters where the basis was their refusal to comply with orders from Mr Wolf. It seems to me that illegal orders are not enforceable, and in the military they are not.

  6. Rugger9 says:

    The GAO says he was appointed outside of the legally defined process, and IIRC he is also something like ten weeks beyond his statutory term while “acting”, so he either has to be confirmed to function in that role or resign.

    I had asked before whether this lack of official legal status would affect the court cases to come against protesters where the basis was their refusal to comply with orders from Mr Wolf. It seems to me that illegal orders are not enforceable, and in the military they are not.

  7. Rugger9 says:

    The GAO says he was appointed outside of the legally defined process, and IIRC he is also something like ten weeks beyond his statutory term while “acting”, so he either has to be confirmed to function in that role or resign.

    I had asked before whether this lack of official legal status would affect the court cases to come against protesters where the basis was their refusal to comply with orders from Mr Wolf. It seems to me that illegal orders are not enforceable, and in the military they are not.

  8. Vinnie Gambone says:

    There was a case in Philadelphia court just weeks ago where one BLM protester broke the jaw of another protester who was admonishing other protesters not to break windows and destroy stuff. The DA dropped all charges claiming they could not get int ouch with the victim.
    The judge was not happy.

    I fear there are players in these camps who are straight out mercenaries. Trump and the Russians know his re- election depends entirely on keeping the violence and destruction going. I wouldn’t put it past the Russians to put or pay goons to join the protesters. Ditto Eric Prince’s gang.
    The most powerful thing protesters could do right now is stand down until after the election. If the bulk could be convinced to declare a moratorium it would deprive Trump and Eric Prince the chance to light the fuses on the October surprises they most certainly have planed. Among the protesters that remained would be the operatives.
    A reporter recently noted that while the democratic camp seems rattled by every bit of negative press that blows in, the Trump camp, even though are are down in all the polls, “weirdly, are not showing a similar case of the nerves.
    Trump’s team has more up their sleeve than just their arm. I fear the worse.

    • Molly Pitcher says:

      I have been thinking for some time that a number of the worst ‘BLM’ behavers in Portland and Minneapolis and other BLM protest sites were unlikely to be actual BLM supporters. In Oakland and Berkeley there has been infiltrations of guys who show up after the peaceful demonstration has been going a while with the sole intention of tearing things up and giving the demonstration a black eye and providing Trump, Fox News footage for his campaign ads.

        • Molly Pitcher says:

          Not as dark today, and a rather sickly yellowish grey. We are having a snowstorm of micro-ash. Everything is covered with a super fine grime; the air often looks like it is filled with tiny gnats. I think that the light quality looks like 10pm at Brooks Falls in Canada in July. I often watch the bears catching fish at the falls on the Bear-cam. The light has the same eerieness.

          • punaise says:

            Yesterday in Berkeley reminded me of the quiet desperation and eclipse-like light film Melancholia, plus orange. Pantone color 130. Today is just back to “ashtray gray” with a more unhealthy AQI > 200. Blerggh.

            • MB says:

              I forgot to go to the car wash today to wash out grime + ash. Oh well, all the better to catch more tomorrow! Here in Westchester (north of LAX) yellowish-tinged gray overcast all day today. You Bay Area folks are getting the better light show – I’m jealous! My brother sent me pix of his street in El Cerrito yesterday morning. Pantone 130 indeed…

      • graham firchlis says:

        There are reasonably straightforward steps to keep peaceful protesters from being associated with violence.

        End all peaceful protests where tempers run hot well before sunset. Then go home. Those with ill intentions take advantage of the dark, exacerbating fear and corrupting the image of legitimate protesters into apparent mobs. Don’t be there.

        Eschew violence in any form, openly, vehemently and often, within the group and in every public statement.

        Shun anyone who won’t pledge and maintain pacifist conduct.

        Openly and promptly condemn all violence, keeping a clear boundary in the public mind.

        Get a permit, if at all possible. Go to court if you must. With a permit, law enforcement is obligated to protect the participants.

        No references, just passing on experience. We started small with the Free Speech and antiwar protests, and we made mistakes. But with this same advice – and much more – from experienced mentors we kept even large marches peaceful and effective.

        Until RFK was shot, and things spiraled out of control. But that’s another story.

        • P J Evans says:

          They’ve been trying to do those things. But the media need pics of fires and looting to keep the ratigns up, the various police agencies are spreading lies as they act violently, and the president and the USAG have a vested interest in pushing the lies.

          • Rugger9 says:

            It apparently got bad enough that the cops in OR had to try to intervene to stop the “antifa arson” rumors. However, the RWNJs are still setting up “checkpoints” to stop the buses that aren’t there.

          • graham firchlis says:

            Who are “they” exactly? Some few family members call for an end to violence, but I hear little but anger from others.

            Could be reporting bias certainly. But the protests in Portland for instance seem to blend seamlessly from peaceful daytime to nightime violence, based on the many independent videos on line.

            Whatever condemnation of violence is being voiced by protest leadership, it needs to be amplified.

      • Rugger9 says:

        It’s a point that has evidence to support it, such as the killing of the federal officer in Oakland and other police by a Santa Cruz County Boogaloo for the purpose of starting a race war. Read David Neiwert on the topic, he’s been reporting on these nuts for years in the Pacific Northwest.

        It’s also a favorite fever swamp idea, and as noted dovetails nicely with the plans of AG Barr.

  9. greengiant says:

    “, Mr. Murphy
    made protected disclosures to Messrs. Wolf and Cuccinelli regarding abuse of authority and
    improper administration of an intelligence program with respect to intelligence information on
    ANTIFA and “anarchist” groups operating throughout the United States ”

    abuse of authority with an “intelligence program”

  10. earlofhuntingdon says:

    FYI, the previous, Devout Catholic post is not loading properly. I have tried several times with different browsers. Half the comments are there, and it lacks the forward-back arrows on the side. Thanks.

    • MB says:

      My workaround to this problem is to go to the page where you want to see the new comments and then click refresh on the browser. That usually brings the new ones in, I’ve found. And then it reverts – if you go to the same page later, the newer comments will be vanished again and then brought back with a new page refresh.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Didn’t work. Tried several other things on different browsers. Now, it’s magically working again. Thanks.

  11. harpie says:

    Marcy: Murphy also alleges that Nielsen substituted the number of KSTs who had ever applied for a visa or crossed a US border at any point, 3,755, for the number, 3, who had come across the southern border.

    Julia Ainsley at NBC has just published some corroboration for the WB about this:

    DHS spokeswoman pushed NBC News to retract accurate story about terrorists at the border
    Katie Waldman [now MILLER!!] said a report saying only six suspected terrorists were caught at the border was wrong. A whistleblower now says DHS wanted to inflate the total.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/dhs-spokeswoman-pushed-nbc-news-retract-accurate-story-about-terrorists-n1239702
    Julia Ainsley Sept. 10, 2020, 5:29 PM EDT / Updated Sept. 10, 2020, 5:53 PM EDT

    A new whistleblower complaint alleges that in late 2018 and early 2019 former senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security sought to inflate the publicly reported number of known or suspected terrorists crossing the border, in a move to increase support for a border wall.

    In early 2019 [1/7/19], a DHS spokeswoman [Katie Waldman(-Miller)] pushed NBC News to retract an article based on accurate figures the agency had disclosed in a document to Congress in the months prior that were far lower than the nearly 4,000 in a year the administration had been citing publicly. The January 2019 NBC News article reported that, contrary to those public statements by Trump administration officials, only six immigrants who were known or suspected terrorists had been encountered at the southern border in the first half of fiscal year 2018. […]

    Here’s the article referenced:
    Only six immigrants in terrorism database stopped by CBP at southern border from October to March
    The low number contradicts statements by Trump administration officials.
    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/only-six-immigrants-terrorism-database-stopped-cbp-southern-border-first-n955861
    Julia Ainsley Jan. 7, 2019, 4:10 PM

    • harpie says:

      At the end of the article, a discrepancy is shown between what Murphy has alleged about what Nielsen said in her Congressional testimony. I haven’t looked into this information.

  12. Geoff says:

    Is something broken here, or is T E W. net under attack? the https site loads all the posts, but shows no comments on the last, despite 30 existing. The http://www.e... site (non secure) does not include the last post. Last one is Devout Catholic, showing no comments, but having 149 via the link. Also, Im finding these are not feeding through to my usual RSS reader, which is linked to the secure site. ( I know you guys are on this, just info on my experience.)

    • P J Evans says:

      The site has been having update problems for the last week. Clear your cache, refresh, and some things may get updated.

      • Geoff says:

        Yeah, did all that. I’m not trying to fix it, just trying to relay user experience, in case my situation was different than others. I’m on Firefox, btw, in case anyone cares.

        • P J Evans says:

          It’s something wrong in the software somewhere – not your computer. But refreshing does help find new comments in the post sidebars.

  13. Molly Pitcher says:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/assange-extradition-hearing-hit-by-another-delay-over-fears-lawyer-was-exposed-to-covid-19

    From Reuters via the Daily Beast: “Julian Assange’s extradition hearing in London was put off for months by the coronavirus pandemic. Now it’s been hit by further delay over fears that a lawyer representing the United States may have been exposed to the deadly virus. Judge Vanessa Baraitser told the courtroom that the case will be on hold until next Monday, when the results of the unnamed lawyer’s COVID-19 test will be confirmed. Edward Fitzgerald, the lawyer representing the WikiLeaks founder, told the court that Assange’s waning health means he should be considered “at risk” from the novel coronavirus.”

    • MB says:

      Everybody within physical proximity of the affected attorney is “at risk”, especially if he’s actually turns up positive, not just Julian. Do they wear masks during in-person court hearings? I would hope so. Watched 5 minutes of a Kamala Harris speech from this morning while she was wearing a mask. I guess you don’t have to take them off in order to be heard and understood, (unless you’re in the presence of DJT) …

  14. BayStateLibrul says:

    I enjoyed reading Troutwaxer’s bi-definitional use of the word treason
    Let’s call it the Troutwaxer”s Doctrine for the Unlearned or How to improve your word-robe? (thanks to Rob Kyff)
    Colloquial vs legal.
    Section 3 Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

    Points – Or not And
    Them = Russia
    Aid and Comfort = You know what I’m talking about
    War: Could be undeclared

    The Supreme Court has been known to redefine words, as in “Corporations are People.” Fuck me – I know that corporations are not living people.

    Finally, “High Crimes and Misdemeanors” that phrase has been interpreted at least a zillion times.

    The dead horse has been beaten to death.

    • bmaz says:

      Listen, I am getting seriously tired of this shit. War MUST be declared. That can come from a formal declaration, or from an AUMF.

      But blithely saying it can be Russia or whoever else because we don’t like them is the epitome of bullshit, and is an outright lie. Please stop. We don’t do garbage here, and we do not encourage people being blithely misled.

      • BayStateLibrul says:

        Did you just call me a “liar”?
        I really think that’s beyond the pale.
        I honestly disagree with you, I didn’t lie to you.
        The term “them” has to be “them” because the law cannot be specific, you can go to war with anyone, and we have had many “undeclared” wars. As a student of history, you should know better.

        • bmaz says:

          I firmly stand behind my statement. Wars are not “declared” because it makes people feel good and jolly to pitch crap. That is not what we are about here, and I am so sick of this nonsense I could puke.

          • BayStateLibrul says:

            Final point

            In the law, does it not state the one word “War”
            Yes or no, does it say “Declared War”
            It is silent.
            Please answer yes or no.

            • bmaz says:

              Alright, here is my “final point”. You know damn well what the Constitution and 18 USC §2381 describe. What “war” means has been relentlessly described and reported here. STOP bandying about the term “treason” because it gives you jollies to falsely do so.

              • Ginevra diBenci says:

                With a president throwing accusations of “treason” at career civil servants like Peter Strzok, followed by threats of execution, I believe it serves us better to resist falling into the same rhetorical trap. It’s not just sloppy–it could be lethal, whoever deploys it.

  15. mospeck says:

    just a spec–could the law about to be going through a revolution? Not a lawyer so of course I’m uncertain and could be wrong. But, going by analogy, physics went through troubled times circa 1900 with the ultraviolet catastrophe and the photoelectric effect. Uncertainty principle became a main result saying that you can’t simultaneously know a particle’s position and momentum, nor its energy and time. Just how does one do civil liberties vs. NatSec in our modern times?…with the natural time constants involved?! For ex, how do the judges speed up the show so that the law actually works in real time without it being gamed up by clever lawyers with no ethics or scruples?

  16. punaise says:

    OT, here’s a knee-slapper of a headline (Washington Monthly):

    Will an Endorsement From Joe Lieberman Help Susan Collins?

    Digging up an old chestnut from the FDL days: My contempt for Joe Lieberman will never abate.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Joe Lieberman is not a Democrat. His pretending to be one – and his claim that Susan Collins’s re-election is so important, he must put country ahead of party and back her – is LOL funny.

      Joe Lieberman has never put anything, certainly not the people of Connecticut, ahead of himself. He’s a worm hoping for one last turn. He should not get it.

      • Rugger9 says:

        I don’t think Joementum is well liked in Maine, so perhaps he was paid for this. Mainers usually don’t go for phonies, and the only reason Paul LePage was able to win his races was because Maine didn’t have ranked choice voting and he won both terms with 38% (more or less) of the vote in a three-way race.

        It does point to how desperate (and silly) Collins’ campaign is to think Joe Lieberman has any coattails.

        • earlofhuntingdon says:

          I have no doubt Joe got paid, and his ad should have acknowledged it. Unlike Paulie Manafort, he never does anything for free.

    • MB says:

      And don’t forget he was Gore’s VP pick in the ill-fated 2000 election. I’ve already given money to Sara Gideon (Collins’ challenger)…

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        He was the safe one, who would rein in Al’s progressive instincts and bring in the corporate vote and money. (It’s how he tutored the early Obama in the Senate.) Someone must have thought Al Gore wa a progressive threat.

        Joe also nixed any stronger response from Gore during the Florida recount debacle.

        • bmaz says:

          Also, keep in mind that Lieberman was really who McCain wanted as his running mate before he wigged out and chose Palin.

          • Molly Pitcher says:

            Neither Lieberman nor Palin ever had any business being near the VP position. One is a turncoat the other is a whack job.

  17. graham firchlis says:

    Reply to nahoma and molly pitcher above:

    Organize. An unorganized crowd is just a mob, disaster waiting to happen.

    Educate. People won’t accept rules if they don’t understand the why. We held workshops incessently on pacifist protest and civil disobedience. Educate law enforcement. The more clearly they understand your goals and objectives, the less thier fear. Better all around.

    Never compromise pacifist principles. Never.

    Formulate actionable objectives. Obviously achievable objectives give people hope of success, and only hope sustains beneficial mass movements. Occupy failed because “damn the rich” was far too vague. “Votes for Women” is a good example; “Defund the Police” a poor one.

    Focus message and action on the centers of power you wish to change. Peacefully filling the streets of downtown Kenosha puts pressure on business leaders and the city through lost revenues. Burning down the Danish Brotherhood Lodge foments fear, and just pisses them off.

    Measure words and deeds so as to grow your movement. Without attracting increasing support, movements will fail.

    Plan for success. Failure to do so doomed the Kerensky socialist-democratic Russian government, and the so-called Arab Spring movements. What does victory look like, structurally, and how are gains codified to ensure enduring effect?

Comments are closed.