Air pollution renders flower odors unattractive to moths

Tobacco hawkmoths are not attracted to flower odors when ozone levels are high; however, the moths are able to learn that odors modified by ozone may offer a reward, that is, nectar

MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR CHEMICAL ECOLOGY

Research News

    SHARE

 PRINT  E-MAIL

Volume 0%

 

VIDEO: POLLINATION IN THE ANTHROPOCENE: A MOTH CAN LEARN OZONE-ALTERED FLORAL BLENDS view more 

CREDIT: MARKUS KNADEN, MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR CHEMICAL ECOLOGY

A team of researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology in Jena, Germany, and the University of Virginia, USA, has studied the impact of high ozone air pollution on the chemical communication between flowers and pollinators. They showed that tobacco hawkmoths lost attraction to the scent of their preferred flowers when that scent had been altered by ozone. This oxidizing pollutant thus disturbs the interaction between a plant and its pollinator, a relationship that has evolved over millions of years. However, when given the chance, hawkmoths quickly learn that an unpleasantly polluted scent may lead to nutritious nectar (Journal of Chemical Ecology, September 2020, DOI: 10.1007/s10886-020-01211-4).

Pollination in the Anthropocene

Pollination is a critical ecosystem service, one that is performed mainly by insects. Flowers attract insects using floral scents, which are chemical signals that the pollinators can have an innate preference for. This preference is the result of the co-evolutionary relationship between flowers and their pollinators that has evolved over millions of years.

For about 20 years, the term "Anthropocene" has been used in the scientific community to refer to the geological epoch in which humans are responsible for many changes in biological and atmospheric processes. However, until recently, little has been known about the effects of anthropogenic climate change and atmospheric pollution on natural environmental odors that drive chemical communication between organisms.

A team of researchers from the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology and the University of Virginia has investigated whether human-driven ozone pollution in the air influences the attraction of a pollinating moth to the scent of one of their favorite flowers. Ozone is an oxidant, a highly reactive chemical and pollutant known to cause respiratory diseases in humans. Now, ozone is also thought to change the floral scents that flowers emit to attract their pollinators.

For their experiments, the scientists used the tobacco hawkmoth Manduca sexta. "The hawkmoth Manduca sexta is the perfect model for our study. Although it is highly attracted by flower odors, it also uses its visual system to locate flowers. Flowers that usually attract hawkmoth often share specific compounds in their blend and are visually very conspicuous due to their bright white color," says study leader Markus Knaden, who heads a research group in the Department of Evolutionary Neuroethology at the Max Planck Institute.

The research team first determined the exact compositions of the flower odors - with and without increased ozone content - and the respective concentrations of individual odor components using gas chromatography. For the ozone-altered odors, the researchers used ozone concentrations that can be measured on hot days in the natural habitat of tobacco hawkmoths. They tested the responses of the moths in behavioral assays in a wind tunnel, allowing the insect to investigate both the original floral odor and to the ozone-altered floral odor.

"We were surprised, even shocked, that the innate attraction to the odor of tobacco flowers was completely lost in the presence of increased ozone levels," said Knaden, describing what was observed during the experiments.

Tobacco hawkmoths are able to learn

The question remained whether ozone in the air would spoil the appetite of hungry and foraging tobacco hawkmoths, or whether it would prevent insects from finding their food source. Would insects be able to figure out that even polluted flower odors can offer rewards? To answer this question, researchers tested whether tobacco hawkmoths could learn to accept an initially unattractive scent as a food cue if they smelled it while simultaneously being offered a sugar solution reward. The researchers assessed several different ways in which the moth could learn to recognize flowers based on the ozone-altered floral scent. This was critical to relating these experiments to real-world learning. In the real world, a floral scent only becomes ozone-altered as it moves downwind of the flower and mixes with ozone. To see if moths could learn ozone-altered floral scents even when they are decoupled from the sugar reward at the flower, the researchers developed an experiment where the moth had to follow the ozone-altered odor to the flower, but were presented with the original scent at the flower containing the sugar reward.

"While we anticipated that Manduca sexta could learn new floral scents and hoped that they would be able to learn the polluted floral scent of their host flower, we were amazed to see that Manduca sexta could learn the polluted floral blend in a number of different ways, including learning a polluted scent that was decoupled from a sugar reward. This type of learning, which we were surprised to find in Manduca sexta, could be very important in insects' ability to use learning to cope with their rapidly changing environments," says first author Brynn Cook from the University of Virginia. What is especially noteworthy and pertinent about this kind of responsiveness to a changing environment is that it occurs in real time and not over evolutionary timescales.

Learning ability of Manduca sexta is not an all-clear

Although the study shows that tobacco hawkmoths can learn to rely on ozone-altered and initially unattractive plumes to recognize their flowers, air pollution still poses a serious risk to pollination and pollinators. "Learning may be key to insects recognizing their host plants in polluted environments, but one of the major questions remaining from our study is whether pollinators will be able to find their flowers in the first place. Without initially recognizing smells, will pollinators only have visual cues to help them locate host flowers in order to learn the pollution-altered floral scent? Another important aspect to consider is that other pollinators may not have the same facility to learn new smells that Manduca sexta has. Specialist pollinators, for instance, may not have that flexibility in learning. Our study is just a starting point. Field studies are going to be critical to understanding which flowers and insects are most affected by which pollutants, and likely why," says Cook.

Air pollution and climate change have far-reaching consequences for our ecosystem; by no means have all of these been studied and understood. For example, we still know little about the impact of atmospheric changes on the chemical communication between plants and insects. Not only are plant odors altered, but also the sex pheromone female insects use to attract males. Atmospheric changes have the potential to cause alterations in pheromones that could lead to mating failure. Insect mortality has risen dramatically in recent years, and researchers worldwide are searching for the causes. Since 2020, the Max Planck Center next Generation Insect Chemical Ecology, a cooperation between the Max Planck Society and two Swedish universities in which the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology and the co-authors of the study, Bill Hansson and Markus Knaden, play a major role, has been dedicated to this field of research.

###

Original publication:

Cook, B., Haverkamp, A., Hansson, B.S., Roulston, T., Lerdau, M., Knaden, M. (2020). Pollination in the Anthropocene: a Moth can Learn Ozone-altered Floral Blends, Journal of Chemical Ecology, DOI: 10.1007/s10886-020-01211-4

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-020-01211-4

Further Information:

Dr. Markus Knaden, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans-Knöll-Str. 8, 07745 Jena, Germany, Tel. +49 3641 57 1421, E-Mail: mknaden [at] ice.mpg.de

Download of videos and high-resolution photos via http://www.ice.mpg.de/ext/downloads2020.html

Lactose tolerance spread throughout Europe in only a few thousand years

Palaeogeneticists at Mainz University have found evidence of lactase persistence in only a small proportion of human bones from the Bronze Age battlefield in the Tollense valley

JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIVERSITAET MAINZ

Research News

 

IMAGE: BRONZE AGE SKULL IN SITU IN THE TOLLENSE VALLEY. view more 

CREDIT: PHOTO/©: STEFAN SAUER/TOLLENSE VALLEY PROJECT

The human ability to digest the milk sugar lactose after infancy spread throughout Central Europe in only a few thousand years. This is the conclusion reached by an international research team led by Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (JGU). The researchers analyzed genetic material from the bones of individuals who had fallen in a conflict around 1200 B.C. on the banks of the Tollense, a river in the present-day German state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, and report their findings in Current Biology this week. The researchers found that only around one in eight of the assumed warriors had a gene variant that enabled them to break down the lactose in milk. "Of the present-day population living in this same area, around 90 percent have this lactase persistence," explained population geneticist Professor Joachim Burger of JGU, the lead author of the study. "This is a huge difference when you consider that there cannot be many more than 120 human generations between then and today." Aside from lactase persistence and a few other genetic variants, the genomes of the Tollense people are similar to that of today's inhabitants of northern Germany and the Baltic Sea region.

"The only way to explain this difference between these Bronze Age people and those of today is very strong natural selection," emphasized biologist Professor Daniel Wegmann of the University of Fribourg in Switzerland, who also played a leading role in the study. "We conclude that over the past 3,000 years, lactase-persistent individuals had more children or, alternatively, those children had better chances of survival than those without this trait." The researchers calculate a remarkable selective advantage: "In each generation lactase-persistent individuals have a six percent greater chance of surviving to reproductive age than non-lactase-persistent individuals," added Professor Joachim Burger.

Back in 2007, Burger and his team established that almost none of the first sedentary farmers in Europe were lactase-persistent. "It is astonishing that at the time of the battle at the Tollense, more than 4,000 years after the introduction of agriculture in Europe, lactase persistence in adults was still so rare," said Burger. However, there is as yet no definitive answer to the question: Why did being able to digest the sugar in milk after infancy provide such a big evolutionary advantage? "With milk being a high-energy, relatively uncontamined drink, its ingestion may have provided greater chances of survival during food shortages or when supplies of drinking water were contaminated. Particularly during early childhood, in the years shortly after weaning, this factor often may have been decisive amongst prehistoric populations," Burger concluded.

So far, bones from more than 100 individuals have been discovered on the battlefield.

The study, which was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and the German Research Foundation (DFG), also involved analyzing the genetic material in Bronze Age bones found in Eastern and South-Eastern Europe for comparison. The scientists found that these also showed low frequencies of lactase persistence. Even in bones from individuals from the Eastern European steppes, where previous studies had suspected adult lactase persistence may have originated, the trait was completely absent.

The conflict in the Tollense valley is considered the oldest known battle in Europe. Remains were first discovered there in the 1990s. For over ten years now, archaeologists have been systematically searching a kilometer-long section along the river. So far, the bones of more than 100 individuals have been discovered, many of them exhibiting signs of violent combat. Many still contain arrowheads, while some skulls look to have been crushed by blunt objects. Several thousand men are estimated to have been involved in the conflict, some of whom may have been on horseback.

USA

When a tax cut isn’t a tax cut at all

WHEN IT'S FOR BLUE COLLAR WORKERS
By Roxanne Cooper - Commentary September 4, 2020

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and President Donald Trump 

(Photo: Screen capture)

A passing news item about taxes caught my attention as an example of why people can find government so annoying at times.

Perhaps it’s even more so with this particular White House that promises, but then falters on delivery, spreading distrust for the role of government more generally.

About 1.3 million federal workers, 60% of the total, are about to see an increase in pay as the result of that promised payroll tax deferral – but they will have to repay that tax next year since the deferral is temporary. Only those earning less than $100,000 are affected.

If you’re going to do it, Mr. President, shouldn’t we expect that it will be done completely and not be half-baked?

Donald Trump signed an executive order for this deferral and said he had plans to eliminate the tax altogether. But then, he and Congress are not talking. And, so, any deferred taxes now will have to be repaid later.

Meanwhile, businesses across the country basically are gnoring this order since they don’t want to spend extra money to retool payrolls for deductions that will have to be repaid later.

In other words, this particular proposal – apparently offered both as part of economic stimulus of a seriously weakened economy and election ploy – will do nothing except annoy federal workers.

Now, having looked at it, I’m not a fan of cutting the payroll tax. But if you’re going to do it, Mr. President, shouldn’t we expect that it will be done completely and not be half-baked?

Forget Politics

With all the political division in the country, this one seems pretty simple. This is not pro-Democrat or anti-Trump – or the opposite. It’s a simple plea that we do what we say.

The basics here: The payroll tax is a big support for Social Security and Medicare. It takes 12.4% contribution from tiered portions of salary split evenly between employer and employee to a cap. The deferral applies only to people who earn up to $4,000 on a biweekly basis, and less than $104,000 annually.

When Trump announced that we should have a deferral from September to December payrolls, he said he would seek permanent elimination of this particular tax upon his reelection, which, of course, is not assured. Further, he said he was both for and against cutting funds for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid.

Unions, business, retirees and a wide bipartisan crowd voiced collective unhappiness with his executive order, and few companies have said they would actually do so for such a temporary situation. What it means is that any gain now will result in lower paychecks in 2021.

Moreover, the payroll tax obviously only affects a tax cut for working employees and does nothing to put people back to work. And, it is a back-handed way to undercut Social Security and health services for seniors and low-income people. If Trump wants to do that, he needs to act more broadly and as a major policy debate, all sides agree.

A statement from the Office of Management and Budget said “The president put forward this action to give relief to all Americans during this pandemic,” adding that the executive branch as an employer is “implementing the deferral to give our employees relief as quickly as possible, in line with the presidential memo.”
Now Comes Politics

At base, the move on payroll taxes seems aimed at snubbing Congress, with which the administration is at an impasse over coronavirus aid, and coming up with something that might appeal to voters who just hear the words “tax cut,” and start clapping and voting.

So far, this tax cut is not a tax cut. It is a deferral. Trump’s insistence on using executive orders rather than legislation to accomplish his goals too often ends up with policies that fall short of whatever he wanted in the first place.

Does he mean to short Social Security? Is he accounting for employees who leave the job before repaying the tax? Can he make the cut permanent?

The Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service apparently only issued how-to information four days before the order is to take effect, meaning even businesses wanting to comply won’t possibly know exactly how to change their payment systems. One federal employee union said its members might not be able to support paying a double tax next year.

It does make you wonder whether Trump the politician actually knows Trump the president.

I can understand that Trump wants to act, but not that he does not follow through. Even the smaller government that conservatives want should be effective in what it does.

Far-right protesters clash with UK police at anti-migrant march 

#NOONEISILLEGAL

Police have made several arrests after an anti-immigration demonstration turned violent in the southern English port. Tensions have spiked over a large increase in migrants crossing the English Channel from France.



Dozens of right-wing, anti-immigration protesters gathered in the southern English coastal town of Dover on Saturday to rally against the numbers of migrants sailing to the United Kingdom from France.

"Police officers made 10 arrests as they worked to minimize the disruption caused by protests in #Dover," Kent police reported on Twitter.

Footage posted on social media showed officers scuffling with several anti-migrant activists near Dover's busy harbor.

Those detained were held on suspicion of violent disorder, assaulting an emergency worker and a racially aggravated public order offense, a police statement said.

'We stated that it was unacceptable for anyone to use the event as an excuse for criminal behavior and we were robust in taking action against those who did," said Chief Superintendent Nigel Brookes.

Earlier in the day the march, which included several people wearing Union Jack masks, managed to block the main road in the town.

Read more: Sudanese teenager found dead on French beach after trying to reach UK


Police in Dover worked to keep the opposing protest groups apart
No warm welcome

Some protesters were heard shouting "England till I die" and singing "Rule Britannia!"

The song has recently garnered criticism for romanticizing the country's colonial past, especially in the context of renewed questioning of the impacts of colonialism, in the wake of the global Black Lives Matter protests.

A counterdemonstration made up of around 100 anti-racist activists came out onto the streets to declare that asylum-seekers are welcome in the UK.

"We are standing up and welcoming people who are in desperate circumstances fleeing from awful situations," said Peter Keenan from the Kent Refugee Help Group.

Read more: Scotland: Support for independence surges
Message on the white cliffs

The humanitarian charity Freedom from Torture projected a message onto the famous white cliffs of Dover on Friday night, with the words "Rise above fear. Refugees welcome."


The number of migrants using boats to cross the English channel has increased in 2020, reaching more than 5,000. The coronavirus pandemic has reduced the opportunities to stow away on trucks or ferries.

The Strait of Dover, 33.8 kilometers (21 miles) at its narrowest point, has seen a spike in the number of rubber dinghies being used to transport people, most of whom go on to seek asylum in the country.

ab/mm (AFP, AP, dpa)

Without public transit, there will be no economic recovery
BY NICK SIFUENTES, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 09/05/20 
THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR

 OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

© Getty Images

Once the epicenter of the world’s worst public health crisis in a hundred years, New York City has emerged as a test case for how discipline and planning can contain the novel coronavirus. As the only region in the U.S. that has so far successfully managed both COVID-19 and a phased reopening, the New York metropolitan area is also likely to be the epicenter of our national economic recovery. Everyone in the U.S., from unemployed service sector workers to the president, has an interest in a rapid return to normal.

Unfortunately, the White House and the Senate have thus far squandered our chances by failing to pass recovery legislation that funds the mass transit systems that ten million daily riders — and billions of dollars in wages, goods and services they produce — rely on to get to jobs in our nation’s biggest financial hub. The current breakdown in talks on emergency relief funding is a stark repudiation of the sacrifices essential workers, who often rely on buses and subways, made during the pandemic’s peak and a rejection of the needs of millions of workers who relied on transit before the shutdown and will need it again when the crisis ebbs.

At the recent New York City Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board meeting, Chairman Pat Foye laid out the stakes — the crisis we face today due to the pandemic is greater than even the Great Depression and the infamous near collapse of the system in the “bad old days” of the 1970s. Without federal emergency funds, the MTA will be forced to cut service virtually in half, hamstringing our recovery before it can even begin.

Just how dire is the crisis on our region’s rails and roads? At the pandemic’s peak, ridership had declined by 93 percent across the New York City region, and the resulting damage to transit agencies’ budgets, which rely heavily on fareboxes and tolls, has been existential in its scale. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), which operates NYC’s subways, buses and commuter rail, needs $12 billion to keep regular service running in 2020 and 2021. The Port Authority, which runs commuter rail and buses serving over 284,000 daily customers, needs $3 billion. New Jersey Transit needs another $1.2 billion to provide service to its 910,000 daily bus and rail riders. In fact, the American Public Transportation Association is now calling for an additional $32 billion in federal funding just to keep public transit viable nationwide.

If the federal government fails to provide relief funds, these agencies will cease to exist as we know them — and so too will New York City. According to the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council, in 2018 nearly 8 million people entered or left Manhattan below 60th Street on an average day, 5.8 million of them via transit. With travel speeds in the midtown core already a meager 4.9mph, imagine if just 10 percent of those transit trips turn into automobile trips: traffic would bring the region to an utter standstill. Pre-pandemic gridlock already cost the New York economy $13 billion a year, according to a study by the Partnership for New York City. The economic damage a failed transit network would wreak is unfathomable.


WHY PUBLIC TRANSIT MUST BE FREE 
Transit will always have a fundamental role to play in our cities’ fiscal health. While some might worry about whether our buses and trains could ever be made safe again, Europe and Asia are already showing that it is entirely possible: as our report “Back on Board” highlights, studies of transit systems in Paris, Vienna, Tokyo and other major cities have demonstrated that even with high levels of ridership, no outbreaks of COVID-19 have been traced back to transit. With high mask wearing compliance and clean, high-frequency service, buses, subways and commuter rail can be safe modes of transportation for returning workforces.



This spring, New Yorkers did the hard work, at great cost, of getting the virus under control. Now it’s time for Congress to do its part. New York’s economic output is almost as big as Canada’s, If New York were its own country, it would be the world’s eleventh largest economy. If the Senate and the White House fail to act responsibly and save transit, the long-term ramifications for our country’s business sector will be catastrophic.

For a White House that has been singularly focused on reopening our economic engines, neglecting the transit that brings workers, tourists, shoppers and diners to our cities will doom a successful recovery.

Nick Sifuentes is the executive director of Tri-State Transportation Campaign, a nonprofit organization fighting for sustainable transportation in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

 UPDATED

GOP lawmaker defends Fox reporter after Trump calls for her firing

BY MORGAN GSTALTER - 09/05/20 

© Greg Nash

GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.) on Saturday defended Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin after President Trump targeted the journalist on Twitter and called for her to be fired.

Trump went after Griffin, a national security correspondent, after she reported that former officials had backed up some details in an explosive report about Trump published this week by The Atlantic.

“She’s one of my favorite reporters. Fair and unafraid,” Kinzinger wrote in response to Trump calling for Griffin to be fired.

She’s one of my favorite reporters. Fair and unafraid. https://t.co/dfieE7HqL4— Adam Kinzinger (@RepKinzinger) September 5, 2020

The president lashed out at Griffin in an earlier tweet after she reported that sources had confirmed key details of the magazine’s report.

The report stirred major criticism of Trump after it alleged he had referred to slain American soldiers buried at a French cemetery as “losers” and “suckers.”

"All refuted by many witnesses. Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting. Never even called us for comment. @FoxNews is gone!" Trump declared in a tweet late Friday.
ADVERTISEMENT

Griffin had said on-air on Friday that sources told her that Trump had said the Vietnam War was “stupid” and anyone who fought in it was a “sucker.” 

Griffin, citing a former Trump administration official, reported that Trump "was not in a good mood" during his trip to France in 2018 and "questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries." 

She also reported that Trump was adamant flags not be lowered to half-staff when the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a fierce critic of Trump, died in 2018.

Her comments came after The Atlantic reported that Trump was reluctant to travel to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in France in 2018, calling the U.S. service members who were buried there during World War I “losers.”

In another conversation, Trump reportedly said that the 1,800 marines who lost their lives in the battle of Belleau Wood were “suckers” for getting killed. The president reportedly asked aides about historic details about WWI, including “Who were the good guys in this war?”

Kinzinger, an Air Force veteran who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom, initially called The Atlantic’s report “deeply concerning” and said in a statement that it left him “speechless.”

“This is either the most heinous hit job on a president or the most heinous comments made by a president,” he said. “We need more than unmanned sources, as we have been down this road before only to find these ‘sources’ only hear ‘it’ second-hand or ‘it’ never existed. Regardless, I remain hopeful for a direct source to provide more answers here.”
pic.twitter.com/KacIExA0ez
Trump attacks Fox News reporter after she backs up key details of...
Trump lashes out at 'slimeball reporter' amid furor over alleged war...— Adam Kinzinger (@RepKinzinger) September 4, 2020

Trump has vehemently denied the allegations, calling The Atlantic story "fake" and saying he did not need to apologize since the remarks attributed to him were not true.

“It was a totally fake story, and that was confirmed by many people that were actually there,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Friday. “It was a terrible thing that somebody could say the kind of things — especially to me because I have done more for the military than almost anybody else.” 

Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin: ‘My Sources Are Unimpeachable’

Mark Joyella Senior Contributor Media Sep 5, 2020
I cover political media--and media politics.FORBES

UNSPECIFIED, AFGANISTAN - AUGUST 25: In this handout image provided by FOX News, Gen. David Petraeus (L) speaks with FOX News Channel's Jennifer Griffin for an exclusive cable interview to air on FOX News Channel this evening August 25, 2010 in Afghanistan. Earlier this week Gen. Petraeus claimed that the Taliban's momentum had been reversed by the international troops in Afghanistan. (Photo by Justin Fishel/FOX News Channel via Getty Images)

 GETTY IMAGES

Fox News Channel journalists have rushed to defend their colleague, correspondent Jennifer Griffin, after President Donald Trump suggested on Twitter that Griffin “should be fired” after she confirmed reporting by The Atlantic that detailed President Trump repeatedly disparaging members of the military, the nation’s war dead, and wounded veterans.

In an appearance on Cavuto Live Saturday, Griffin defended her reporting: “My sources are not anonymous to me and I doubt they are anonymous to the president,” Griffin told Neil Cavuto. “I can tell you that my sources are unimpeachable.”

Cavuto noted that “you are a very good reporter—and then some. Jennifer Griffin following the story here. She’s pretty scrupulous when it comes to making sure all the i’s are dotted and all the t’s are crossed.”
Recommended For You

On Friday, Griffin—citing two former senior Trump Administration officials—confirmed key elements of The Atlantic’s story, including Trump’s decision not to drive to the Aisle-Marne Cemetery outside Paris to honor fallen American soldiers. “The President drives a lot,” one of Griffin’s sources said, “the other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn't want to go.”

That angered the president, who called for Griffin’s dismissal and added “Fox News is gone!” But Fox News journalists were quick to join reporters from other outlets in defending Griffin. Bryan Llenas, a Fox News national correspondent, said “Jennifer Griffin is the kind of reporter we all strive to be like. She’s courageous, smart, ethical, fair and a class act.”

Fox News’ Bret Baier said Griffin “is a great reporter and a total class act,” and FNC’s Trey Yingst said of Griffin, “she embodies what the industry is built upon. Truth and accountability.”

Mark Joyella
Mark Joyella has been a news anchor and reporter in Miami, Orlando, Tampa and New York City. He's also been a U.S. contributing correspondent for Australian TV 

Trump slams Fox News reporter who confirmed parts of Atlantic story
\Ursula Perano


President Trump lashed out at Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin, who confirmed parts of a story in The Atlantic that revealed, based on anonymous sources, that the president in 2018 called American service members buried at the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in France "losers."

What they're saying: "All refuted by many witnesses. Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting. Never even called us for comment. @FoxNews is gone!" Trump tweeted late Friday night.
Griffin's reporting, which also relied on anonymous sourcing, said that Trump called the Vietnam War "stupid" and argued that anyone who fought in it was a "sucker."
Trump rebuked The Atlantic's story on Thursday, telling reporters "if people really exist that would have said that, they’re lowlifes and they’re liars. And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more..."
White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said at a briefing on Friday: "The story in the Atlantic has been categorically debunked by eyewitnesses and contemporaneous documents."

Reality check: While the president publicly criticizes anonymous sources, his White House often permits them outright.
It's not unusual for White House press calls or briefings to be conducted with the agreement that speakers be referred to as "senior administration officials" in subsequent reporting.

The other side: Griffin told Fox News on Saturday, "I can tell you that my sources are unimpeachable. I feel very confident with what we have reported at FOX."
"Not every line of The Atlantic article did I confirm, but I would say that most of the descriptions and the quotes in that Atlantic article I did find people who were able to confirm and so you know I feel very confident in my reporting," she added.

Axios has reached out to the White House for additional comment.

Trump Calls for Firing of Fox News Reporter Who Confirmed President Disparaged Veterans
By DANIEL POLITI SEPT 05, 2020

President Donald Trump arrives for a news conference the White House on September 4, 2020 in Washington, D.C. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

President Donald Trump is calling for a Fox News reporter to be fired after she confirmed some details of a bombshell story that said he disparaged veterans. The Atlantic sparked huge controversy after it published a story Thursday alleging that Trump repeatedly belittled fallen military members. One part of the story claims the president referred to American World War I veterans buried in France’s Aisne-Marne American Cemetery as “suckers” and “losers.” The Associated Press and the Washington Post later confirmed aspects of the story and Fox News national security reporter Jennifer Griffin wrote a Twitter thread and also went on the network to lay out how she had confirmed several claims in the piece, although not the specific allegations of what the president allegedly said about those buried in the French cemetery. But she did confirm with two former senior officials that he did not want to drive to honor those buried in the cemetery outside Paris.

President Trump's staff explained he could cancel (his visit to the cemetery), but he was warned, 'They (the press) are going to kill you for this'." The President was mad as a hornet when they did.— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020

Griffin said she confirmed Trump didn’t think highly of those who served in the Vietnam War. “When the President spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’,” her source said. The source added that Trump was confused about why anyone would join the service: “What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money.” She also claims the president said that the inclusion of “wounded guys” in a military parade was “not a good look” because “Americans don’t like that.” Griffin also reported Trump did not want flags to be lowered when Sen. John McCain died but later relented amid insistence from other officials.


Trump was evidently really angry about the claims and took to Twitter a few hours later to share an article from Breitbart that alleged Griffin “Did Not Confirm ‘Most Salacious‘ Part of Atlantic Story.” Trump wrote late Friday that Griffin “should be fired for this kind of reporting,” alleging she never called the White House for comment. “@FoxNews is gone,” he added. Melania Trump also joined her husband in denying the story, a rare instance in which the first lady got involved in political issues. “This is not journalism - It is activism,” she tweeted. “And it is a disservice to the people of our great nation.”

Jennifer Griffin of Fox News Did Not Confirm ‘Most Salacious‘ Part of Atlantic Story https://t.co/rUpbSWhHac via @BreitbartNews All refuted by many witnesses. Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting. Never even called us for comment. @FoxNews is gone!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 5, 2020

.@TheAtlantic story is not true. It has become a very dangerous time when anonymous sources are believed above all else, & no one knows their motivation. This is not journalism - It is activism. And it is a disservice to the people of our great nation.— Melania Trump (@FLOTUS) September 4, 2020

Chaos at Fox as some refuse to believe the network’s own reporting on Trump’s contempt for troops

 September 5, 2020 Bob Brigham

Fox News via the network's Facebook page.

On Friday, Fox News confirmed much of the reporting by The Atlantic on President Donald Trump disparaging American service members.

The network followed the Associated Press and The Washington Post in largely confirming the reporting.

But even after Fox News reporters matched the reporting, Fox News personality Greg Gutfield falsely claimed on-air that the story had been “debunked.”

As Fox's own reporters confirm parts of the Atlantic story, Greg Gutfeld refers to it on air as a "hoax" and a "scam" pic.twitter.com/Fg938GaSyf
— nikki mccann ramírez (@NikkiMcR) September 4, 2020

The split continued throughout the day.

“Fox contributor knocks Fox reporter for noting Fox has now confirmed key details of The Atlantic’s reporting,” CNN senior media reporter Oliver Darcy noted.

Fox contributor knocks Fox reporter for noting Fox has now confirmed key details of The Atlantic's reporting. https://t.co/8kFBS08MHq
— Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) September 4, 2020

Darcy also noted a bizarre headline on the Fox News website following the network’s confirmation of the reporting. This was noticed by his CNN colleague Jon Passantino, who used to manage the webpage for Fox News, and suggested the editorial choice was “extraordinary and unusual.”

I used to manage the Fox News dot com homepage. This would be an extraordinary and unusual decision to run this denial as the top story despite having confirmed key details of reporting https://t.co/GOf2RUjXcV
— Jon Passantino (@passantino) September 4, 2020

But Fox News personality Laura Ingraham seemed to be bashing her colleagues for a “fake” story on Friday evening.

It would save a lot of time if the Media would just tell us what fake stories they will be announcing over the next six weeks, and when each story will be released
— Laura Ingraham (@IngrahamAngle) September 5, 2020

The uncomfortable position the network is in was hilariously driven home by Pete Buttigieg on Friday evening.

Even if you don’t believe the multiple news organizations—including @FoxNews—that have confirmed these reports, believe your own eyes.

These comments are part of Donald Trump’s pattern of disrespect for the military since he faked an injury to get out of serving in Vietnam. pic.twitter.com/JwAR3URCT6
— Pete Buttigieg (@PeteButtigieg) September 5, 2020

Chaos at Fox News as analysts refuse to believe the network’s reporting — because makes Trump look awful

Here is the Fox News reporting:


Oh  pic.twitter.com/VrybRJAmbt
— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) September 4, 2020

Two former sr Trump admin officials confirm .@JeffreyGoldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris.
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020


This former official heard the President say about American veterans: "What's in it for them? They don't make any money." Source: "It was a character flaw of the President. He could not understand why someone would die for their country, not worth it."
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020


Re: trip to mark 100th anniversary of WW I
Source: "The President was not in a good mood. Macron had said something that made him mad about American reliability and the need perhaps for a European army. He questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries. 'Why do I have to do two'?"
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020

When asked IF the President could have driven to the Aisne-Marne Cemetery, this former official said confidently: "The President drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn't want to go."
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020


Regarding McCain, "The President just hated John McCain. He always asked, 'Why do you see him as a hero?" Two sources confirmed the President did not want flags lowered but others in the White House ordered them at half mast. There was a stand off and then the President relented.
— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020

Fox News confirms shocking story on Trump’s contempt for American troops — after the president argued it was ‘fake’
Published on September 4, 2020 By Bob Brigham

President Donald J. Trump salutes U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Michael L. Howard. (DoD Photo by U.S. Army Sgt. James K. McCann)

Fox News has joined the Associated Press and The Washington Post in confirming shocking details from the bombshell report in The Atlantic on President Donald Trump’s contempt for American troops.

“The Atlantic Magazine is dying, like most magazines, so they make up a fake story in order to gain some relevance. Story already refuted, but this is what we are up against,” Trump claimed, falsely stating the story had been refuted.

But now Fox News is confirming details in a thread posted on Trump’s favorite social media platform:
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.

NEW, @JenGriffinFNC confirms former Trump admin official confirms details in The Atlantic story, including quotes about veterans. When the President spoke about the Vietnam War he said, “It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker.”
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) September 4, 2020

MORE from @JenGriffinFNC Regarding the President’s July 4th military parade planning, during a planning at White House after seeing the Bastille Day parade in 2017, the President said regarding the inclusion of “wounded guys” “that’s not a good look” “Americans don’t like that.”
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) September 4, 2020

Per @JenGriffinFNC, this is all acccording to a former senior Trump administration official who was in France travelling with the President in Nov 2018.
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) September 4, 2020

“…He questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries. ‘Why do I have to do two?’ His staff explained he could cancel, l but he was warned, ‘They (the press) are going to kill you for this’.” He (The President) was mad as a hornet when they did.” Per @JenGriffinFNC reporting
— Jacqui Heinrich (@JacquiHeinrich) September 4, 2020

Trump lashes out at 'slimeball reporter' amid furor over alleged war dead remarks

BY TAL AXELROD - 09/05/20 

President Trump on Saturday lashed out at the journalist behind this week's explosive report that claimed he had disparaged slain American soldiers buried in France, calling the reporter a "slimeball."

Trump suggested in a pair of tweets that the author of the report, The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, may have been working with "disgruntled people" intent on seeing him lose reelection. He compared the magazine story to the controversial dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele in 2016, which alleged that Russia had compromising material on Trump.

“You work so hard for the military, from completely rebuilding a depleted mess that was left by OBiden, to fixing a broken V.A. and fighting for large scale military pay raises, and then a slimeball reporter, maybe working with disgruntled people, makes up such a horrible charge,” Trump tweeted without mentioning Goldberg by name.
ADVERTISEMENT

“This reminds me of the Dirty Dossier, which was pushed hard by John McCain, & then with a thud turned out to be a total fraud. So many other scams also. The Radical Far Left is VICIOUS, they will do or say anything to win. But they won’t, we will WIN, & have four great years!” Trump added.

....This reminds me of the Dirty Dossier, which was pushed hard by John McCain, & then with a thud turned out to be a total fraud. So many other scams also. The Radical Far Left is VICIOUS, they will do or say anything to win. But they won’t, we will WIN, & have four great years!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 5, 2020

Trump separately went after a Fox News reporter on Saturday morning, calling for her to be fired after she reported that former officials had confirmed key details of The Atlantic's story to her.

Goldberg serves as editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, and the magazine has stood by its story since it was published on Thursday.

Trump's latest broadside comes as the White House plays defense over the report, which alleged that Trump had called slain American soldiers buried at a French cemetery “losers” and “suckers.”

Goldberg reported that Trump decided to not go to a ceremony at the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in France in 2018 because he was worried that rain would dishevel his hair.

"Why should I go to that cemetery? It's filled with losers," Trump reportedly told aides.

Multiple news outlets have confirmed certain details of the initial report.

The story also said the president made disparaging remarks about the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and opposed lowering flags to half-staff following his death in 2018.

The president has vehemently denied the report, but he has continued to face intense criticism over it, with Democrats saying the story is further proof that he is not fit to serve as commander in chief.

Esper defends Trump amid fallen troops firestorm
Overnight Defense: Critics continue to swipe at Trump over his...

“If what is written in The Atlantic is true, it’s disgusting,” Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden said Friday. “It affirms what most of us believe to be true, that Donald Trump is not fit to be the commander in chief.”

Several White House aides have come out to deny The Atlantic article, and Vice President Pence on Friday also dismissed it as an "anonymous smear job."

"If they really exist, if people really exist that would have said that, they’re low lifes and they’re liars," Trump told reporters on Thursday evening. "And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more."

Trump attacks Fox News reporter after she backs up key details of Atlantic story

BY TAL AXELROD - 09/05/20 

President Trump went after Fox News reporter Jennifer Griffin after she backed up some details of a bombshell story from The Atlantic that said he had referred to slain American soldiers buried at a French cemetery as “losers” and “suckers.”

Trump shared an article late Friday from far-right outlet Breitbart News declaring that Griffin "Did Not Confirm 'Most Salacious' Part of Atlantic Story" after the reporter shared on the air that sources had confirmed to her certain key details of the magazine's story.

"All refuted by many witnesses. Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting. Never even called us for comment. @FoxNews is gone!" Trump declared in a tweet.

Jennifer Griffin of Fox News Did Not Confirm ‘Most Salacious‘ Part of Atlantic Story https://t.co/rUpbSWhHac via @BreitbartNews All refuted by many witnesses. Jennifer Griffin should be fired for this kind of reporting. Never even called us for comment. @FoxNews is gone!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 5, 2020

The rebuke came hours after Griffin, a national security correspondent for Fox News, reported that sources had confirmed key details of The Atlantic's report. Griffin said sources told her that Trump had said the Vietnam War was “stupid” and anyone who fought in it was a “sucker.” 

Trump famously received a number of draft deferrals for the Vietnam War from a doctor who said he suffered from bone spurs.

Griffin, citing a former Trump administration official, reported that Trump "was not in a good mood" during his trip to France in 2018 and "questioned why he had to go to two cemeteries." 

She also reported that Trump was adamant flags not be lowered to half-staff when the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a fierce critic of Trump, died in 2018.

Two former sr Trump admin officials confirm .@JeffreyGoldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris.— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020

The Atlantic’s bombshell report, which was published Thursday, said Trump bailed on his appearance at Aisne-Marne American Cemetery in France in 2018 because he was worried that rain would tousle his hair.

"Why should I go to that cemetery? It's filled with losers," Trump allegedly told aides before canceling his trip to Belleau, France.

Trump and a number of White House aides have fiercely denied the report, though multiple news outlets have confirmed certain details.

“If they really exist, if people really exist that would have said that, they’re lowlifes and they’re liars. And I would be willing to swear on anything that I never said that about our fallen heroes. There is nobody that respects them more,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews after a campaign stop in Pennsylvania on Thursday evening.

Trump has criticized Fox News at times over coverage he perceives as unfavorable, with the network drawing the president's ire after releasing polls showing Trump trailing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden both nationally and in swing states.

“Do you notice that any time Fake News Suppression Polls are put out, like @FoxNews, the Stock Market goes DOWN. We are going to WIN!” Trump tweeted earlier this week.

Do you notice that any time Fake News Suppression Polls are put out, like @FoxNews, the Stock Market goes DOWN. We are going to WIN!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2020

Peter Strzok alleges investigators found it "conceivable" Trump was controlled by Russia

Ursula Perano

Former FBI agent Peter Strzok. Photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images

Ex-FBI agent Peter Strzok alleges in his new memoir, "Compromised," that investigators believed it was "conceivable, if unlikely" that President Trump was controlled by Russia after being elected in 2016, per the Washington Post.

What he's saying: "Given what we knew or had cause to suspect about Trump’s compromising behavior in the weeks, months, and years leading up to the election, moreover, it also seemed conceivable, if unlikely, that Moscow had indeed pulled off the most stunning intelligence achievement in human history: secretly controlling the president of the United States — a Manchurian candidate elected," Strzok wrote.

“We certainly had evidence that this was the case: that Trump, while gleefully wreaking havoc on America’s political institutions and norms, was pulling his punches when it came to our historic adversary, Russia,” Strzok writes.

“Trump’s apparent lies — public, sustained, refutable, and damaging if exposed — are an intelligence officer’s dream,” Strzok adds. “For that very reason, they are also a counterintelligence officer’s nightmare.”

Why it matters: Strzok helped open the FBI’s probe into Trump’s 2016 campaign and possible coordination with the Kremlin.

The former FBI deputy assistant director was dismissed from his role in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation and became a talking point for Trump after the Department of Justice discovered that Strzok had exchanged disparaging text messages about the president from his FBI phone.
In his book, Strzok draws from his 20 years as a counterintelligence investigator "to explain how the elevation by President Trump and his collaborators of Trump’s own personal interests over the interests of the country allowed Putin to succeed beyond Stalin’s wildest dreams."

The big picture: Strzok’s book isn't the only disclosure from former agency officials on investigations into Trump. Both former FBI director James Comey and former deputy director Andrew McCabe have pursued similar book projects.

What to watch: Strzok's memoir is set to be released on Sept. 8.

Expert on the radical right warns that vigilantes are preparing ‘to launch a coup’

 WELL OF COURSE THEY ARE 

Published on September 5, 2020 By Chauncey Devega, Salon
 

People fight around a Confederate flag during an extreme-right rally and left-wing counter-demonstration at Stone Mountain, Georgia, on August 15, 2020 Logan Cyrus AFP/File

In the Age of Trump, Portland, Oregon, is no longer just another city. Now it is a symbol and almost a Rorschach test for the country’s deep and explosive political divides.

For Trumpists, Republicans and members of the far right, Portland is all that is wrong with “the Left” and “Liberals,” a chaotic nightmare zone where Black Lives Matter, antifa and other “enemies” are running amok while they attack “patriotism” and “real American values.”

To TrumpWorld, Portland and other Democratic-led big cities (which of course is virtually all of them) are hives of scum and villainy, overrun by criminals and “rioters,” which must be conquered by Trump’s enforcers and armed vigilante supporters.
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.

Trump’s “law and order” politics, and its inherent racism and violence, are believed by many to be his path back to the White House. In this view, Portland and other “Democrat cities” and communities are targets of opportunity for the Trump regime.

Writing at Washington Monthly, David Atkins explains Trump’s mindset:

He sees the violence as politically beneficial, a useful cudgel against Democratic nominee Joe Biden — even though the violence is happening while Trump himself is president, not Biden.

Trump’s election theme is that Americans won’t be safe in a Biden presidency. The opposite is true. Americans won’t be safe as long as a white supremacist president is leading a movement of bigots to incite a civil war, and attempting to ensure that the majority of Americans with cosmopolitan, egalitarian values remain politically disenfranchised and under the thumb of those who fear and despise them.

Trump’s campaign of racial authoritarianism and stochastic terrorism, as well as overt threats of “law and order,” resulted in a group of his supporters driving into Portland last weekend, armed with mace and paintball guns, to seek out confrontations with Black Lives Matter and anti-fascist protesters. During one such encounter, a member of the right-wing militia group Patriot Prayer, Aaron Danielson, was shot and killed. On Thursday night, the apparent shooter, Michael Reinoehl, was himself shot and killed by U.S. marshals in Olympia, Washington.

Despite this lamentable violence — for which Trump and the right must bear ultimate responsibility — for progressives and other people of conscience Portland is a symbol of resistance and hope. As part of the nationwide people’s uprising sparked by the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, protesters have been outside the Portland federal courthouse for more than 100 days.

The protests were largely peaceful until Trump and acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf deployed federal police forces to the city in July. Their presence, as designed, escalated the tension and led to increasing levels of property damage and incidents of violence.

Previewing Trump’s plan for other parts of the nation, these federal shock troops made journalists and reporters a special focus of their violence. They also kidnapped protesters and other “enemies” of Donald Trump’s regime off the street as though they were operating in a banana republic.

Much of the mainstream American news media’s coverage of the recent events in Portland lacks meaningful context. Writing at Medium, a Portland press collective describes one such example of this “parachute journalism”:

One night last week, during one of the smaller demonstrations, a tall white man in a clean ballistic helmet and brand-new plate carrier emblazoned with “PRESS” strolled through the crowd in front of the Hatfield Federal Courthouse in Portland, Oregon. He stopped by a gaggle of other journalists, most out-of-towners. “I’ve only been around for the last week,” he said, “but the protests in Portland feel a lot more performative than the ones I’ve seen in other cities. Less genuine.” A local journalist mentioned having been present for over 50 nights of the protests, starting in early June. “Yeah, I can only speak for what I’ve seen this week,” said Clean Helmet. “I’m flying back to DC tomorrow.” … Clean Helmet was on the ground in Portland, by his own description, for less than a week. This means that he was present for approximately 1/10th of Portland’s BLM protests, thus far. I’m sure he got some great footage.

The Parachutes (as we have come to know them) come with money, and zero community connections. Their goal is the clip that can make the nightly news. They want a story that will dominate the news cycle. They do not know what is happening in Portland, and they do not care. They are coming to a city with a vibrant, scrappy community of street-level journalists. By and large, they do not want the context that those journalists can provide. And soon they will come to a city near you. When the Feds and the Parachutes come to your town, you’ll want everyone to understand the context there, too. And they are coming. Clean Helmet is already back in DC, and on to the next assignment.

The important context which “the Parachutes” usually omit includes the way Portland is depicted as a liberal oasis in America’s popular imagination. In reality, Portland is a very race and class-segregated city. As historian and activist Walidah Imarisha and others have richly documented, the Oregon territory passed laws in 1844 explicitly excluding Black people from the region under punishment of whippings and other violence. The state of Oregon formally included white supremacy in its constitution, explicitly banning nonwhites.

To this day, Oregon remains a redoubt of white supremacy, where white supremacists and other right-wing extremists have a large presence in the state and surrounding region. Portland itself has a long and ongoing history of right-wing violence.

Alexander Reid Ross is a doctoral fellow at the Center for Analysis of the Radical Right. His most recent book is “Against the Fascist Creep.” Ross has also completed new research which documents more than 500 incidents in which white vigilantes and other right-wing extremists have confronted Black Lives Matter protests. This includes hundreds of acts of intimidation and other threats as well as dozens of examples in which right-wing extremists have assaulted or attacked Black Lives Matter protesters

In this conversation Ross shares his firsthand experiences with the recent George Floyd protests in Portland. He also provides some context for those events and the police and federal response. Ross also details the long history of right-wing paramilitaries and political street gangs in Portland and their relationship with local police and other law enforcement.

Reid warns that Portland, the right-wing vigilante killings in Kenosha, Wisconsin, and the hundreds of other attacks by right-wing extremists on Black Lives Matter protesters is just a preview of the massive violence that Donald Trump and his movement may unleash before and after Election Day — perhaps including the arrest or imprisonment of prominent Democrats, journalists, and others deemed to be enemies of the state.

After almost four years of Trump and his regime’s authoritarian, neofascist behavior, some voices in the mainstream American news media now use that correct and appropriate language to describe the reality of the situation. Why was there so much fear and denial about the obvious? Even when they use the correct terminology, the coverage is largely superficial and avoids serious discussion of the dire implications.

You must also take into account that many so-called left-leaning voices have also been interfering with bringing that truth to light. There were writers at the Guardian, for example, who were trying to sound the alarm about the dangers of right-wing extremism and fascism in America, but they were derided by their peers across the political spectrum.

I also believe that publications such as the Washington Post and the New York Times saw themselves as being aloof from questions of the mob and political violence in America. There is a tendency among elite voices to want to say that, “We’re above political violence here in America and we resolve our differences through conversation. Therefore, let’s give everyone a hearing and let’s debate these issues, regardless of how extreme they may be. That is what a democratic country should act like.”

In a sense, they put their faith completely in some abstract idea of “democracy” instead of taking the temperature of what is really happening on the ground.

You live in Portland. How is your experience different from the narrative being offered by the mainstream American news media and other outside observers?

We in Portland have been dealing with right-wing extremists and police abuse for a long time. Portland has experience with the likes of right-wing extremist groups such as Patriot Prayer and the Proud Boys. This is not new to us.

I would go out to protests and see how the political violence is not a result of the breakdown in the monopoly of violence held by the police. The political violence was a result of the Proud Boys and the police effectively acting as two different elements of the same side. It wasn’t that the police had lost the monopoly of violence. It was the police were shooting us in order to allow the Proud Boys to march through the city without proper permits.

Most mainstream news media coverage of the protests which have taken place here in Portland, recently and before, totally fail to acknowledge or even fathom the police involvement in the rise of the far right in this community. That failure has cascaded to the point that we are now at a point where the press is painting the current crisis as some type of grudge match between the feds and the anarchists. In fact, the protest movement is a very diverse group of people — especially by Portland standards — who are coming out night after night and making extraordinarily clear demands and being absolutely brutalized in the streets every night.

What too many reporters in many cases are trying to do is figure out how to resolve the situation, rather than understanding it and properly explaining to the public what is really happening and the context for it. By doing so, too many reporters are creating false equivalencies regarding the various forces at play here in Portland.

What does Portland exemplify, in terms of the protests and the Trump’s regime’s reaction?

It is an example of Donald Trump attempting to rise to the level of a right-wing political strongman. Donald Trump is using classic authoritarian tactics that one does not often see in a healthy democracy. Donald Trump is deliberately undermining the Constitution by using federal law to circumvent local governments’ control over their police forces.

Trump and William Barr’s de facto secret police are literally disappearing people off the streets of Portland and in other parts of the country where the Democratic Party is in power. How do you explain what is happening to people who do not live in those communities? Who are not being targeted by Trump and his henchmen?

The specific federal forces involved are BORTAC — the Border Patrol Tactical Unit — and the U.S. Marshals Special Operations Group and others, under the coordination of the Department of Homeland Security. BORTAC have been in Portland shooting at people and launching tear gas. BORTAC is not trained for crowd or riot control. They are trained to engage in raids against migrants and to separate children from their mothers. That is what BORTAC does. They pride themselves on being the most militarized branch and group of the U.S. law enforcement community. BORTAC members are extreme Trump supporters. What is happening in Portland and other parts of the country is the border closing in on the citizens of the United States.BORTAC is loyal to Donald Trump and that’s why he is using them. He’s not using them because they’re the most skilled and adept at riot and crowd control management. That also explains why there are so many incidents of people being shot in the face and otherwise abused here in Portland and other places where BORTAC and other such forces are being deployed by the Trump administration.They don’t know what they’re doing at all.

BORTAC is being used because Trump feels that they are his most loyal forces. That is fully in keeping with the tactics of authoritarian leaders who cultivate secret police whose main function is to serve as the government leader’s private force, one that operates outside of any restraints such as internal review.

The [former] Chilean dictatorship is explicitly supported by Trump’s own supporters, who wear T-shirts that say, “Right-wing death squad” and “Pinochet did nothing wrong.” The American mainstream news media is far too charitable with its narrative that “Trump is playing to his base.”

During the recent protests in Portland, were there moments where you feared that the federal forces were going to start shooting the crowd with lethal rounds?

The fear is very real and it’s constant. The federal forces have assault rifles. They are loaded with live rounds. There are protesters who were throwing fireworks and things of that sort at the courthouse. What if one of the feds has an itchy trigger finger? What if a firework explodes and they then open fire on an entire group of unarmed people?

Trump and their defenders and other apologists will just say, “Well, these poor agents have been overworked for 60 days and look at all the things that have been thrown at them” and so on and so forth. We know what the narrative will be. All a person can do when protesting is to act accordingly and stay focused.

You have been documenting what are now almost 500 attacks, acts of intimidation, vehicular assaults, shootings and other threats by Trump supporters and other members of the right against Black Lives Matter protests. What do we know?

I have never seen this amount of anti-left vigilantism from the right. During the first year of Barack Obama’s administration, the Tea Party was huge, and they mobilized with events all over the country. There were also armed protests in opposition to Obamacare. But those right-wing protesters were not coming out to confront and intimidate a much smaller group of anti-racists. Of course, those anti-Obama Tea Party and anti-health-care type protesters were extremely racist and a breath away from being fascists, but there was not that same energy and menace that we are seeing today.

The idea of these right-wing protesters and militia types being “anti-government” — again, a narrative circulated by the mainstream American news media — is very uncritical, a total misnomer. They are really pro-government. They are entirely in favor of the United States government as controlled by Donald Trump. Their claim to be “libertarians” is a joke.

Those right-wing militias and others sympathetic to them are arming in opposition to Democrats, liberals and progressives.

Right-wing extremists and other terrorists, including white supremacists and neo-Nazis, are also coordinating at times with the police.

They actually say that they are at the protests to “protect the police.” Think about that claim: They are “anti-government” vigilantes who promise that they are trying to protect the police. In essence, these right-wing militias and the like are American citizens who believe it is their role not to become police, but to guard the police. Such a claim is ludicrous. It is a paramilitary force. These right-wing forces are coordinating and positioning themselves to be able to launch a coup against American democracy and the Democratic Party, if the latter gains control of the presidency and government.

The closest parallel with what we are seeing with Trump’s movement would be the “massive resistance” by white people against racial integration in the South during the civil rights movement. I am of the opinion that the United States has not seen such a mobilization of violent, far-right forces to this extent since the 1960s.

Recently, a Trumpist and right-wing militia supporter traveled to Kenosha, Wisconsin and involved himself in the protests there. He apparently shot three people, killing two of them. He crossed state lines illegally with a weapon he was not allowed to own. He was only a teenager, and was radicalized online into right-wing extremism. He is now being valorized by the right-wing media machine. Trump has defended this young man as a hero who was fighting against “criminals” and “looters.” This apparent killer now has hundreds of thousands of dollars pledged to his defense.

Trump has defended Kyle Rittenhouse with the claim he was firing in “self-defense.” In essence, Donald Trump supports the right-wing vigilante movement, which represents the disintegration of the rule of law.

We are witnessing an erosion of democratic norms in this country by Republicans. They accept breaking the law as being viable if it supports “traditional values” — meaning racism. As a practical matter, Donald Trump is spearheading the movement of the Republican Party into a full-on violent racist organization that encourages vigilantism.

In terms of engaging in the worst type of “both-sides-ism” and false equivalencies that helped Trump win and now keep power, the American mainstream news media is now advancing a “mutual combat” narrative in its coverage of Trump’s supporters and the violence in Portland last weekend. How does that narrative contradict what really happened in Portland?

The “mutual combat” framing is inane, legally a non-starter, and obviously supportive of the aggressive party, which is typically the Trump supporters. Their strategy is to provoke fights and then call for “law and order” intervention from a corrupt president.

Patriot Prayer leader Joey Gibson has not been leading protests in Portland for a long time. He is a marginal figure, but the American news media has suddenly selected him and lifted him up for no apparent reason other than that he participated in an aggressive and bellicose Trump “caravan” last week during which right-wing vigilantes tried to run people over with their trucks, shot protesters and bystanders with paintball guns, and used pepper spray to attack people.

Should Black Lives Matter, antifascist and other human rights and social justice supporters stop protesting in order to deny Trump’s supporters and other right-wing hooligans a narrative that could hurt Joe Biden nd the the Democrats? In essence, should they make a tactical withdrawal to deny Trump a strategic victory, because of how events will likely be distorted by the media to his advantage?

I will not say what protesters should or shouldn’t do. I do not think what they choose to do or not do will matter much. What is significant is that the far right will deepen its insurgency against the left the more that Donald Trump falters and as he continues demanding “law and order.”

The left would be remiss to engage them on this level. The left is not in the streets to spark a civil war or escalate violent encounters to the point of breaking civil society into protracted sectarian warfare. The left is in the streets to make life better for ordinary people, and to present a version of the future that would be better and more prosperous for everyone. The more the left maintains its sanity against overwhelming odds, the more the right’s paranoia and hysteria will marginalize it in American society. This will create new spaces for progressive causes and movements.

What do you want to warn the American people about? What do you think happens next?

I am worried about crackdowns by Donald Trump and his forces against their direct enemies. This would involve dragging Democrats in front of kangaroo courts and starting to criminalize dissent such that the average American who has a bumper sticker or other affiliation with the Democratic Party or liberal or progressive causes becomes a target for Trump’s zealots. I worry that Trump will find some way to round up the leaders of the Democratic Party and put them in jail or execute them.

That is the future that right-wing conspiracists such as the QAnon people want. They are the crowd that Donald Trump is signaling to. I do not believe that there is much stopping Donald Trump from following through on his extreme impulses. At this point Donald Trump is desperate. If Trump wins again it will just be more fuel on the fire for his followers. The right wing will follow through on his cues and start attacking regular people, not just protesters, who they believe are Democrats.