The real reason Biden isn't getting credit — and what to do about it

(Official White House Photo by Adam Schultz)

Robert Reich

October 25, 2023

As Republicans squabble, Trump brays, Netanyahu mobilizes a ground invasion of Gaza, and Putin pushes more Russian soldiers to the front lines of Ukraine, President Biden continues to be the one adult in the room.

In response to my letter to you last week about Biden’s leadership, a number of you wondered why he isn’t getting more credit for it.

Granted, polls are meaningless more than a year before an election. Even so, it’s bizarre that Trump — indicted for a rash of felonies, liable for sexual harassment, found to have committed business fraud — has such strong support relative to Biden.

Why don’t voters give Biden more credit?

One theory is that Trump and Fox News have poisoned their minds.

This may be true for some, but I keep coming across self-described Republicans — many of them middle-aged men without college degrees — who don’t particularly like Trump and don’t believe what they see on Fox News.

Yet they’re unimpressed with Biden. They tell me he’s “weak.” They ask questions like, “What has Biden done for me?” or “What’s one way I’m better off because of Joe Biden?”

When I mention some of Biden’s accomplishments — his steady hand in foreign policy, for example, or his creation of tens of thousands of good jobs through investments in wind, solar, electric batteries, infrastructure, and semiconductors — they tell me they didn’t know.

Which brings me to the second theory about why Biden isn’t getting credit: Biden is terrible at “messaging.”

I hear this all the time. “He needs a better ‘message,’” they say, or “He doesn’t know how to get across what he’s accomplished,” or “His speeches are deadly dull.”

I’ve gone back and watched several of Biden’s recent speeches, including last Thursday night’s address to the nation about Israel and Ukraine. His speeches aren’t electrifying, to be sure. But he says what needs to be said. He’s truthful. He doesn’t exaggerate. He’s compassionate.

So why aren’t more people hearing him?

This raises a third theory: Biden doesn’t communicate in ways that today’s media and much of the public are able to hear.

I think there’s a lot to this.

I’m old enough to remember when President Dwight D. Eisenhower talked to the nation. Despite Ike’s flat delivery, which was often punctuated with throat-clearing, the public listened and responded, usually positively, because Americans in the 1950s were able to process non-emotive messages. They might disagree with him, but he gave reasons for what he did or proposed and invited voters to deliberate rationally.

The media of that era felt duty-bound to transmit those non-emotive messages.

By “non-emotive,” I mean messages that are straightforward. They don’t cause the recipient to be entertained or inspired, don’t play on fear or bigotry or any other strong negative emotion.

This is no longer the way the media transmits information or how Americans process it. Now, a message has to pack a wallop to be heard.

Everything Trump says and posts is designed to spur an emotional reaction. His anger, ridicule, and vindictiveness are intended to elicit immediate, passionate responses.

Trump gets attention because the media lives off emotive messaging. The more charged the message, the more likely viewers will stop scrolling. The fiercer the words, the more likely readers will take notice.

Joe Biden still lives in the world of rational, non-emotive messaging. He has been in politics for 50 years. He is steeped in rational, conventional argument — the kind Dwight Eisenhower delivered.

When it comes to “messaging” about his accomplishments, neither Biden nor his surrogates do the emotive work that our media ecosystem demands and the American public is now primed to respond to.

When voters tell pollsters they think Trump is “stronger” than Biden on foreign policy or the economy, the “strength” they feel comes from the emotions Trump stirs up — rage, ferocity, vindictiveness, and anger. These emotions are connected to brute strength.

Biden projects strength the old-fashioned way — through mature and responsible leadership. But mature and responsible leadership doesn’t break through today’s media and reach today’s public nearly as well as brute strength.

So what’s the answer? Not for Biden (or his Democratic allies and surrogates) to abandon facts, data, analysis, and reasoned argument.

The best response is to draw the starkest possible contrast between Trump’s unhinged childishness and Biden’s competent adulthood.

Rather than sell Biden’s policies, sell Biden’s character. Rather than dispute Trump’s arguments, condemn his temperament.

And ask Americans the following question: Do they want a psychopathic infant at the helm again, or a sane grown-up?

Do billionaires have a right to exist?

PBS NewsHour (Screenshot)

Robert Reich

October 26, 2023

Last night, United Auto Workers officials alerted local union leaders that the UAW has a tentative deal with Ford to end the strike against the automaker.

The UAW’s battle against the Big Three carmakers has centered on wages and the widening gap between the compensation of the automaker’s top executives and the wages of their average workers. Hopefully, the strike is about to lift the wages of autoworkers significantly.
But Shawn Fain, UAW president, has an even larger vision for where America should be heading. “Billionaires in my opinion don’t have a right to exist,” he says.

What Fain is getting at is that if American capitalism was working as it should, it wouldn’t be producing billionaires — especially when the typical worker’s wages have been nearly stagnant for three decades when adjusted for inflation.

He’s correct.

There are basically only five ways to accumulate a billion dollars and none of them has a legitimate role in free market capitalism.

The first is to exploit a monopoly.

Jamie Dimon is worth $1.6 billion. That’s not because he succeeded in the free market. In 2008, the government bailed out JPMorgan and other giant Wall Street banks because it considered them “too big to fail.”

That bailout created a hidden, government-provided insurance policy for the biggest banks, still in effect, with an estimated value to the banks of $34.1 billion a year. If JPMorgan weren’t so big and hadn’t received that hidden insurance, Dimon would be worth far less than $1.6 billion.

What about America’s much-vaunted entrepreneurs, such as Jeff Bezos, now worth $114 billion? You might say Bezos deserves this because he founded and built Amazon.

But Amazon is a monopolist. The federal government and 17 states have charged it with abusing its position in the marketplace to inflate prices, overcharge sellers, and stifle competition. To be sure, the case hasn’t yet been decided by the courts, but evidence of Amazon’s monopoly power is significant.

In addition, Amazon’s business is protected by a slew of patents granted by the U.S. government. They are very broad and have contributed to Amazon’s market power.

If the government enforced anti-monopoly laws, and didn’t give Amazon such broad patents, Bezos would be worth far less than $114 billion.

A second way to make a billion is to get insider information unavailable to other investors.

Hedge-fund maven Steven A. Cohen, worth $17.5 billion, headed up a hedge fund in which, according to a criminal complaint filed by the Justice Department, insider trading was “substantial, pervasive, and on a scale without known precedent in the hedge fund industry.” Nine of Cohen’s present or former employees pleaded guilty or were convicted. Cohen got off with a fine, changed the name of his firm, and apparently is back at the game.

Insider trading is endemic in C-suites, too. SEC researchers have found that corporate executives are twice as likely to sell their stock on the days following their own stock buyback announcements — the timing of which they determine — as they are in the days leading up to the announcements.

If government cracked down on insider trading, hedge-fund mavens and top corporate executives wouldn’t be raking in nearly as much.

A third way to make a billion is to buy off politicians.

The Trump tax cut was estimated to save Charles and the late David Koch and their Koch Industries an estimated $850 million to $1.4 billion a year, not even counting their tax savings on profits stored offshore and a shrunken estate tax. The Kochs and their affiliated groups spent some $20 million lobbying for the Trump tax cut, including political donations.

Not a bad return on their investment.If we had tough anti-corruption laws preventing political payoffs like this, the Kochs and other major political donors wouldn’t get the special tax breaks and other government subsidies that have enlarged their fortunes.

The fourth way to make a billion is to defraud investors.

Adam Neumann conned JPMorgan, SoftBank, and other investors to sink hundreds of millions into WeWork, an office-sharing startup. Neumann used some of the money to buy buildings he leased back to WeWork and to enjoy a lifestyle that included a $60 million private jet. WeWork never made a nickel of profit.

Elizabeth Holmes was convicted of fraud in connection with her blood-testing company, Theranos. Sam Bankman-Fried, former CEO of crypto-exchange FTX, is now facing federal fraud charges. Oh, and remember a guy named Donald Trump? He’s also now charged with fraud.

At least they were caught. Presumably, if we had tougher anti-fraud laws, more would be caught and we’d have fewer billionaires.

The fifth way to be a billionaire is to get the money from rich parents or relatives.

About 60 percent of all the wealth in America today is inherited, according to estimates by economist Thomas Piketty and his colleagues.

That’s because, under U.S. tax law — which is itself largely a product of lobbying by the wealthy — the capital gains of one generation are wiped out when those assets are transferred to the next, and the estate tax is so tiny that fewer than 0.2 percent of estates were subject to it last year.If unearned income were treated the same as earned income under the tax code, America’s non-working rich wouldn’t be billionaires. And if capital gains weren’t eliminated at death, many heirs wouldn’t be, either.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not arguing against big rewards for entrepreneurs and inventors. The possibility of making a bundle has elicited innovations that benefit us all.

The question is one of scale. Do entrepreneurs and inventors need the incentive of billions of dollars? Wouldn’t, say, a hundred million do?

The social costs of billionaires is substantial. Billionaires have purchased right-wing extremists on the Supreme Court, bought and either destroyed or subverted news organizations (such as the former Twitter), and turned their relationships with politicians into patronage troughs.

All of this has undermined the common good.

If capitalism were working as it should, billionaires wouldn’t exist. Shawn Fain is correct.

What do you think?

There is nothing quite as pitiful as whiny billionaires


Jim Hightower

October 25, 2023

And the whiniest of all is the richest -- Elon Musk. This self-entitled bully runs over anyone in his way, then whines when they protest.

Elon's latest high-pitched screech was prompted by public demands that his profiteering schemes obey clean-water and safety regulations. He owns a corporation named (believe it or not) the Boring Company -- an underground tunnelling venture based in Bastrop, Texas, digging out tons of soil, chemicals and contaminated groundwater. But where to put all the waste? I'll just dump the stuff in the nearby Colorado River, said Lord Musk. Lots of stuff -- 140,000 gallons of wastewater per day!
But that river is our main water source, said local people -- you'll need to comply with water treatment and disposal rules. Outrageous, whined Elon, maniacally squealing that "Construction is becoming practically illegal" in America. So, he proceeded to dump his waste without a permit.

Then he encountered Chap Ambrose, a Boring neighbor and former Musk admirer. Chap began asking questions and getting nothing but evasions, lies and disrespect. Musk was messing with Texas, so Ambrose rallied local opposition through a website he named "Keep Bastrop Boring," promoting it on a local billboard. With a drone, he videoed Musk's expanding industrial mess, broadcasting the videos throughout the area. He filed actions with county, state and national regulatory authorities, and got his state senator to hold a hearing, attended by hundreds of residents in this rural county.

Musk can bamboozle powerful officials, but not feisty people like Chap, who recently ridiculed the pouty billionaire. "I'm sorry, neighbor," Ambrose told him. "Development remains legal in Bastrop, but what is illegal is polluting Texas water... You're making this way harder than it has to be."

The fight goes on -- and I'm betting on Chap.

THE SECRETIVE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY THAT EXCLUDES YOU
Are you excited by -- or do you dread -- the upcoming presidential election season? Either way, buckle up, for it's only 12 weeks till the Iowa caucuses, and then (zoom!) there's nonstop voting across America for the rest of 2024. Democracy at work!
Well... unless you don't notice the Plutocratic Primary, where -- shhhh! -- presidential voting is already taking place. However, this balloting is only open to a teensy number of very exclusive voters: billionaires.

These privileged ones don't have to go to public campaign events; candidates come to them for closed-door tete-a-tetes, making undisclosed promises in exchange for millions of dollars in campaign funds. This secretive primary lets moneyed elites initiate or eliminate policies that candidates obediently support. Moreover, by granting or withholding large donations, billionaires can determine which candidates are considered "viable," letting the superrich have a heavy hand in "choosing the choices" that we commoners will have next year.

The New York Times reports that this flexing of the money muscle was recently exercised at a closed meeting of GOP sugar daddies in Utah. Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Chris Christie and other presidential wannabes were on display, pleading with the donors to choose them as the party's alternative to former President Donald Trump -- and to shoo the other Republican contenders out of the race.

Haley bluntly appealed to the rich clique's plutocratic ego: "I think it's up to the donors to decide which candidates should get off the stage." Christie went a step further toward plutocratic rule, asking the elite attendees to decide who would be "the best president."

No one in the room bothered asking the obvious question: Best for whom? Everyone knew he meant best for the rich. No need for messy elections; let the billionaires choose!

President Carter’s many months on hospice highlight a surprising truth | Opinion

Story by Diana Franchitto, Rhode Island Current •

Former President Jimmy Carter image by Nir Levy, Shutterstock© provided by AlterNet

Isaw a clip last month of President Jimmy Carter, now 99 years old, taking a ride with his wife through a peanut festival in their hometown. That’s a happy story for many reasons. As the former president approaches his eighth month on hospice care, it’s also a chance to clear up a common myth.

Back in February, when the president’s family announced he was ending curative treatments and beginning hospice, it was perhaps natural to assume he wouldn’t live much longer. Instead, President Carter has spent the better part of a year not just holding on, but truly living — in the ways that matter most to him, like with a celebratory drive beside his sweetheart.

Like many others, I was grateful to President Carter for publicly sharing his decision to begin hospice those many months ago, because it helped us raise awareness about this crucial type of care. Now, his long run on hospice gives us a chance to spotlight a truth that many find surprising: Some patients actually live longer on hospice.

We sense this regularly in our work at HopeHealth, as the region’s largest and oldest non-profit hospice and palliative care organization. We have the privilege of supporting patients and families through their final time together, and we care for patients who get an extra summer with their loved ones, who are able to attend that big family reunion, who defy all expectations and live long enough to meet their grandchild.

His long run on hospice gives us a chance to spotlight a truth that many find surprising: Some patients actually live longer on hospice.

Several landmark studies back up these personal observations with research, including a 2007 report in the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management00724-X/fulltext) and a 2018 report in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology: Heart Failure. These studies offer several theories for why patients may live longer on hospice than if they had remained on curative-focused care. In general, they come down to this: Hospice offers extra support at a time when it often matters most.

Related video: U.S. President Jimmy Carter turns 99! (WRBL Columbus)
Duration 1:58
View on Watch

Jimmy And Rosalynn Carter Make Rare Public Appearance At Hometown Peanut Festival
0:37

Jimmy Carter admirers across generations celebrate the former president's 99th birthday
0:27

Admirers celebrate Jimmy Carter's 99th birthday
1:14


For example, as part of his hospice care, President Carter has had access to experts who can help with difficult medical decisions, and coordinate between all his doctors. He has a doctor who specializes in making sure he is on the right medications to feel his best, and a medical team that comes out regularly for home visits, noticing and managing any problems early. If he experiences a difficult symptom at any time of day or night, his family can call a 24/7 nurse to come to his side, instead of rushing to the hospital. They have the extra support of a hospice aide for activities of daily living, so they can focus on quality time together. They have access to chaplains and social workers, for spiritual and emotional support.

Above all, President Carter and his family have a team who helps them identify and honor the ways they want to spend their precious time together — like, for example, a pleasant drive through a local peanut festival.

All of these services are available to every patient and family on hospice, not just former presidents. Whether it lasts months, weeks or days, that’s the value of this type of care: It helps us fill our final chapter with comfort, hope and meaning.

I know that President Carter’s final chapter will be every bit as full and meaningful as the life he lived. As in every other chapter, he is leading from the heart.

The six-minute mystery of the 'Alien TV Broadcast' remains unsolved

Story by By Walla! • 1d

© (photo credit: INGIMAGE)

It has been 46 years since the chilling message sent shockwaves through Britain.

During a live television broadcast on Saturday, November 26, 1977, Southern TV's 5 o'clock news suddenly featured the disappearance of broadcaster Andrew Gardner and a peculiar beeping sound. Subsequently, a mysterious voice proclaimed, "This is the voice of Vrillon, a representative of the Ashtar Galactic Command, speaking to you. For many years you have seen us as lights in the skies. We speak to you now in peace and wisdom as we have done to your brothers and sisters all over this, your planet Earth. We come to warn you of the destiny of your race and your world so that you may communicate to your fellow beings the course you must take to avoid the disaster which threatens your world, and the beings on our worlds around you."

Listen to the message below:


Vrillon concluded with a stern warning: "Only those who learn to live in peace will pass to the higher realms of spiritual evolution."

However, no further explanation was given. The immediate assumption was that it was a prankster hijacking the regional television broadcast. A spokesperson for Southern Television commented at the time, stating, "An unidentified party disrupted our broadcast in the North Hampshire area by transmitting very closely to it."

Representatives of independent TV networks asserted that orchestrating such a hoax required "considerable technical knowledge." Nevertheless, the alleged prankster never stepped forward to claim responsibility for the peculiar transmission, maintaining the secret for over four decades. Even after locating the relay station responsible for the transmission, no one took explicit responsibility for the incident.

Nevertheless, it remains a possibility that the Rylons, if they exist, observe our actions and await the dismantling of nuclear weaponry before accepting us into the intergalactic community. Prior to the broadcast, individuals claimed for years that they served as conduits for communication with an alien entity known as Ashtar. One of the earliest claims came from George Van Tessel, an American pilot and aircraft technician, who asserted that he was taken on a journey aboard a spaceship by aliens from Venus in 1953.

Watch George Van Tessel discussing aliens, spacecraft, and time travel:



Following this extraordinary journey, Van Tessel commenced hosting meditation and channeling conferences at Giant Rock, which gained considerable popularity, attracting up to ten thousand participants at its peak. Van Tessel and other communicators gradually introduced the concept of Ashtar, a disembodied being overseeing a military or police force, whose mission was to warn Earth's inhabitants of impending doom if they persisted in their malevolent ways, particularly the development of more atomic weapons

THE OTHER VENUSIAN ABDUCTEE CIRCA 1954

History.com

https://www.history.com/news/george-adamski-ufo-alien-photos

George Adamski Got Famous Sharing His UFO Photos and Alien .... 

Jan 9, 2020 ... To some, he was a prophet. To others, a laughing stock. Even today, more than half a century after his death, George Adamski remains one of ...

Si.edu

https://www.si.edu/object/siris_sil_18409

Flying saucers have landed by Desmond Leslie and George Adam... 

Object Details ; Author: Leslie, Desmond 1921-: Adamski, George 1891-1965 ; Call number: TL789 .L46X: TL789.L46X ; Type: Books ; Physical description: 232 p. illus.

History.denverlibrary.org

https://history.denverlibrary.org/news/man-who-boarded-flying-saucer-allegedly

THE MAN WHO BOARDED A FLYING SAUCER (ALLEGEDLY) 

Sep 20, 2022 ... When last we spoke of George Adamski, he claimed to have met a man from Venus in the Colorado Desert (Part of the Sonoran Desert) near Desert ...

En.wikipedia.org

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Adamski

George Adamski - Wikipedia 

George Adamski (17 April 1891 – 23 April 1965) was a Polish-American author who became widely known in ufology circles, and to some degree in popular ...

Quebec’s Tuition Hike: A Threat to Montreal’s Diversity and Inclusivity

 BNN Breaking

In the heart of Quebec, the sound of student voices in protest is growing louder, echoing through the streets of Montreal. Their discontent stems from a decision by the Quebec government, one that threatens to nearly double tuition fees for out-of-province students attending English universities. A move seen by many as not just an affront to their wallets, but an attack on the multicultural fabric of their city.

A Contested Policy

The government's decision to increase fees from around $9,000 to approximately $17,000 starting next fall is framed as a solution to rebalance the scales between French and English university networks. It aims to curb the influx of Canadian students, who flock to Quebec for the university education then leave upon graduation, taking their skills and potential contributions elsewhere. As the government seeks to stem the decline of the French language in Quebec, it also plans to impose a $20,000 charge on universities for every international student they admit - money earmarked for reinvestment in French-language institutions.

An Inclusive Vision Threatened

The policy, however, has been met with vehement opposition from both English and French-speaking students and university leaders. They argue that the government's actions will precipitate the erosion of Montreal's rich cultural diversity and inclusivity. English universities like McGill, Concordia, and Bishop's, known for their international student populations, will bear the brunt of the blow.

Even heads of French-language universities have voiced their disapproval, rejecting the portrayal of non-Quebec students as threats to the French language. They argue that these students contribute to the excellence, quality, diversity, and relevance of their institutions. The policy, they contend, only serves to redistribute funds, not invest in the local universities' future.

A Rising Tide of Resistance

The response from student bodies has been equally passionate. Student unions, including those at French-language universities, believe the policy will fail to protect the French language and are incensed that Canadian students are being indiscriminately affected. They argue that the government's plan lacks clarity and transparency.

The looming tuition hike has left many students in a state of uncertainty and disappointment. Those from outside Quebec, who had dreamt of studying at English universities in the province, are now being forced to reconsider their options due to financial constraints. Some even question whether they wish to move to a place that appears to be discouraging diversity and non-French speakers.

As Monday approaches, students are preparing to march through the city in protest. They are seeking to reverse the decision and advocate for a more inclusive and equitable approach to education in Quebec. They believe there are alternative ways to preserve the French language without disincentivizing bright and ambitious students from attending English-speaking universities.

As the protest draws near, the controversy over the tuition hike for out-of-province students attending English universities in Quebec continues to gain momentum. It has sparked a conversation about the future of education in Quebec, the value of diversity, and the importance of an inclusive educational environment. The echoes of student voices in protest grow louder, a testament to the power of unity in the face of adversity.

ACCIDENT NOT SABOTAGE

Finland says broken anchor from Chinese vessel caused Balticconnector damage 


Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo addressing the press for the discovered damages in the Balticconnector pipeline, 10th October 2023. Credit: Antti Yrjonen/NurPhoto via Getty Images© Antti Yrjonen/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Investigators from Finland say they have evidence of a Chinese container ship damaging the Baltic Sea gas pipeline earlier this month.

The Balticconnector pipeline transports natural gas from Finland to Estonia and had been shut down after initial warnings of a possible puncture.

The investigation began on 8 October when the Finland police informed of a rupture to the subsea Balticconnector pipeline as well as two telecom cables. While the damage was caused by external mechanical force, it was yet to be determined whether it was accidental or an attempt of sabotage.

On Tuesday, Finland’s National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) said they retrieved a lost anchor from the seabed, and the information indicated a Hong Kong-flagged, Chinese-owned cargo vessel, NewNew Polar Bear, being involved. The NBI told reporters in Helsinki that the container ship was missing a front anchor.

Finland’s central criminal police said the anchor weighed 6 tonnes, was missing one of its prongs and had been lifted from the seabed using a navy crane. The anchor had also caused deep drag marks on both sides of the fractured pipeline.

The NBI tried to contact the ship’s captain to no avail and suspected that the movement of the vessel closely coincided with the pipeline damage.

Related video: Finland can't rule out 'state actor' involvement in pipeline damage (France 24)
Duration 1:52   View on Watch

“The next questions are about whether it was intentional, negligence, poor seamanship, and that’s where we get into whether there could be a motive for what’s going on. It’s too early to answer that at this stage,” said Robin Lardot, the NBI chief.

Finland relies on gas for 5% of its energy supplies. The pipeline operators have said it will take at least five months to carry out repairs, and the facility will be in operation in April 2024 at the earliest.

Earlier this month, Offshore Technology reported the Balticconnector has an annual capacity of 2.6 billion cubic metres. At the time of the incident, it was transporting approximately 30 gigawatt-hours of gas per day.

In April 2023, Finland became a member of NATO after abandoning its longstanding policy of non-alignment in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. On 11 October, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said, "If it is proven to be a deliberate attack on NATO-critical infrastructure, then this will be, of course, serious, but it will also be met by a united and determined response from NATO."

Originally created and published by Offshore Technology, a GlobalData owned brand.

UK
I need the fossil fuel lobby to stay out of our MPs' ears - and pockets

Story by Caroline Lucas • METRO UK

It’s time to break with the past and make sure that our politics is fossil fuel free once and for all 

I’ve learned a lot in my 13-plus years in Parliament – but one rule seems to be self-evident.

What the fossil fuel lobby wants, the fossil fuel lobby gets.

I worry about the impact of the cosiness between energy giants and our top politicians – and for the sake of our country and our planet, it can’t go on any longer.

Shocking new analysis published this week by Fossil Free Parliament claims that in the 12 months following Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, trade body Offshore Energies UK (formerly Oil and Gas UK) and its members including BP, Shell and Equinor, met with ministers over 200 times.

Some meetings between ministers and trade bodies and other outside groups are to be expected – but you would be forgiven for thinking that this kind of lobbying effort is potentially influencing policy.

Indeed, major loopholes in the so-called windfall tax have benefited fossil fuel companies.

Related video: Global fossil fuel demand will peak before 2030, report says (cbc.ca)

Duration 2:02   View on Watch

Because these aren’t just routine meetings between industry and government – events from fossil fuel companies and groups include a summer reception for MPs attended by the Minister for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and a ‘fiscal forum’ with the man who was then Chancellor and is now Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak.

Of course we don’t know what was said at these meetings, but whether by accident or design, the premiership of Sunak has, in my view, been very good for fossil fuel companies – and very bad for the planet.

Because in just 12 short months we’ve seen Sunak approve a coal mine in Cumbria, grant over 100 new oil and gas licences, wage a culture and misinformation war against critical climate and health measures by talking up a fictitious ‘war against motorists’, and give the green light to Rosebank – the biggest undeveloped oil field in the North Sea.

The OEUK welcomed the approval of the Rosebank deal, and in fact called on the government to go even further.

I truly believe some of Sunak’s decisions wouldn’t have gone ahead without influence like this from industry, and I worry about what that means.

The premiership of Sunak has, in my view, been very good for fossil fuel companies – and very bad for the planet 

Fossil fuel interests have no place in our parliament.

They have no place in the receptions where ministers are wined and dined, and they have no place bankrolling political parties.

And at the very least, if any meetings do take place, full transparency of such discussions is critical.

In my view, not only is the current system of lobbying for fossil fuel interests undemocratic – it’s also deeply dangerous for climate action, given their priority is putting forward policies that can undermine the UK’s climate commitments.

This Government has a seemingly insatiable addiction to fossil fuels – and the lobby is their enabler.

We need to change things to end this toxic relationship.

So what could that mean in practical terms?


According to analysis by Fossil Free Parliament, Offshore Energies UK and its members, including Shell, met with ministers over 200 times 

First – I think fossil fuel companies should be banned from political party conferences.

Chevron was co-hosting an event at Tory Party conference, with the tagline: ‘Can fossil fuel companies play a role in the energy transition?’

Evidence suggests to me the only role they want to play is to delay and obfuscate – so why should they be able to pay to get this privileged access to the governing party.

Second – they should be banned from donating to MPs or to political parties, and from sponsoring parliamentary groups.

There can be no justification for allowing the fossil fuel lobby to even give the suggestion they are buying favours.

Third – the rules on other conflicts of interest need overhauling as well. Theresa Villiers, a former Environment Secretary, had over £70,000 worth of shares in Shell while doing the job – failing to declare them at the time.

The rules as they stand are clearly not fit for purpose.


Theresa Villiers, former Environment Secretary, had over £70,000 worth of shares in Shell 

Fourth, those cosy dinners and drinks events with fossil fuel lobbyists must be dragged into the sunlight.

If ministers who are making huge decisions on the future of the planet have conversations about policy with someone from the oil and gas sector, or another sector that stands to benefit, they should be required to make it public without delay.

Transparency is meaningless if it only emerges months and years afterwards.

Fifth and last, the revolving doors between Whitehall and the fossil fuel companies should come to an end.

This means MPs having no more second jobs in the industry.

It means far greater periods of time elapsing between someone moving from a ministerial role to consulting for an oil and gas firm, for example.

The current toothless two-year ‘cooling off’ period in between such positions, when ex-ministers simply have to seek advice from a government body, hasn’t worked and isn’t fit for purpose.

The actions of the fossil fuel companies are criminal in my view.

But the degree to which they are being aided and abetted by our political system is even more alarming. So it’s time to break with the past, as everyone knows we must, and make sure that our politics is fossil fuel free once and for all.

CRIMINAL CRYPTO CAPITALI$M

Bankman-Fried dodges questions during his US crypto trial

2023/10/26

Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the collapsed crypto firm FTX, plans to testify in his own defense at his criminal fraud trial

New York (AFP) - Sam Bankman-Fried, founder of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, parried with a federal prosecutor on Thursday in high-stakes legal jousting at his criminal fraud trial that seemed to frustrate the judge.

Bankman-Fried was scheduled to take the witness stand after three weeks of devastating testimony for the 31-year-old crypto wunderkind, accused of stealing billions of dollars from clients.

But federal Judge Lewis Kaplan took the unusual step of sending the jury home Thursday and listening to Bankman-Fried, his defense lawyers and a prosecutor go over technical aspects of his upcoming testimony.

The move pushed Bankman-Fried's appearance before the jury back until at least Friday.

Bankman-Fried, once one of the most respected figures in crypto, has been charged with seven counts of fraud, embezzlement and criminal conspiracy.

If convicted, he could face a de facto life sentence of more than 100 years in prison.

Thursday's hearing initially seemed confined to points of detail, but assistant US Attorney Danielle Sassoon soon found Bankman-Fried, known widely as SBF, offering evasive answers, drawing a pointed remark from the judge.

She asked Bankman-Fried about business practices, specifically whether any internal document laid out how Alameda Research, his personally owned trading company, could use funds placed in FTX, which he could not fully answer.

Initially calm, Bankman-Fried grew visibly surprised and delivered evasive answers.

"The defendant has an interesting way of answering questions," Judge Kaplan said.

At another moment, Bankman-Fried would not make it clear whether he knew that Alameda owed money to FTX, or that the investment company enjoyed preferential treatment over other clients.

Throughout the hearing, Bankman-Fried's lawyer, Mark Cohen, suggested that the questions went beyond the scope of a technical hearing, but the judge did not intervene.

"Our position is that the use of funds was not improper and that our client didn't believe it was improper," Cohen said.

For his part, Bankman-Fried repeatedly challenged Sassoon's formulation that Alameda used FTX customer funds to invest.

At the time of FTX's bankruptcy in November 2022, some $8.7 billion was unaccounted for. Most of the funds have since been recovered by liquidators and should be paid out to customers in early 2024.

Bankman-Fried has blamed former colleagues for FTX's sudden collapse.

But key witnesses in recent weeks, all former FTX or Alameda employees, refuted his account.

Supported by internal documents compiled by the prosecution, they said he was behind the breaches and did not lose sight of the financial situation of FTX and Alameda.
Ex-girlfriend offers damning evidence

Among those taking the stand was Caroline Ellison, Bankman-Fried's former business partner and girlfriend.

She offered damning evidence against him and delivered details on his management, saying he was involved in all major decisions.

Ellison, a Stanford University mathematics graduate, was appointed by Bankman-Fried in 2021 to head Alameda, whose activities were largely financed by money from customers of FTX without their knowledge.

She has pleaded guilty to fraud charges and agreed to cooperate with the prosecution, as have two other close associates of Bankman-Fried.

Bankman-Fried's decision to testify in his own defense is unusual in a country where criminal defendants generally decline to do so because they have to face cross-examination and run the risk of incriminating themselves.

Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein, comedian Bill Cosby, singer R. Kelly and drug trafficker Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman were among high-profile defendants who declined to testify at their recent trials.

© Agence France-Press

US prosecutors rest case against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried


Sam Bankman-Fried, the founder of bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, arrives at court as lawyers push to persuade the judge overseeing his fraud case not to jail him ahead of trial, at a courthouse in New York, U.S., August 11, 2023. 

REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz//File Photo© Thomson Reuters

By Luc Cohen and Jody Godoy

NEW YORK (Reuters) -Federal prosecutors rested their case against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried on Thursday after presenting 12 days of testimony in which former colleagues at the now-bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange said he directed them to divert customer funds to his hedge fund and lie to investors and lenders.

That paves the way for the defense to begin presenting its case in the fraud trial. Defense lawyer Mark Cohen said in a court hearing on Wednesday that Bankman-Fried would testify, a risky move that would give prosecutors the chance to cross-examine the 31-year-old former billionaire about testimony from former close colleagues that he directed them to commit crimes.

The final prosecution witness, FBI agent Marc Troiano, testified about Bankman-Fried's use of the encrpyted messaging application Signal when the trial resumed on Thursday morning in federal court in Manhattan after a week-long break.

Troiano said Signal groups that Bankman-Fried was in with colleagues often were set to delete messages automatically, as jurors saw screenshots from a phone belonging to Caroline Ellison, the former chief executive of Bankman-Fried's Alameda Research hedge fund and his on-and-off girlfriend.

Ellison testified earlier in the trial that Bankman-Fried directed employees to "be careful with what we put in writing, and not put into writing something that could get us into legal trouble."

Cohen said on Wednesday the defense plans to call three brief witnesses before Bankman-Fried takes the stand.

Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty to two counts of fraud and five counts of conspiracy. If convicted, Bankman-Fried could face decades in prison. Prosecutors have said Bankman-Fried used the misappropriated funds to prop up his crypto-focused hedge fund, Alameda Research, make speculative venture investments, and donate more than $100 million to U.S. political campaigns.

Legal experts have said Bankman-Fried has little to lose by bucking conventional wisdom and testifying, given weeks of testimony against him by insiders painting an unflattering portrait of his character.

He has already taken an unusual approach for a criminal defendant. Instead of laying low after he was charged, he published blog posts on his view of what went wrong and met with several journalists.

Bankman-Fried has maintained that while he made mistakes running FTX, he never intended to steal funds. His lawyers have said three of his former colleagues, who have pleaded guilty and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, tailored their testimony to implicate Bankman-Fried in the hopes of receiving lenient sentences.

Cohen in a Wednesday evening court filing told U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan he wanted to ask Bankman-Fried about FTX lawyers' involvement in structuring loans from Alameda to FTX executives, which prosecutors have said was a key way the defendant and others took funds from unwitting customers.

But Cohen said Bankman-Fried's "knowledge that lawyers were involved in structuring and documenting the loans would be probative of his good-faith belief that there was nothing inappropriate."

Prosecutors may ask Bankman-Fried about why he did not disclose Alameda's privileges to FTX customers or equity investors, and why he posted on social media in the midst of a wave of customer withdrawals last November that FTX was "fine" when he knew it was short billions of dollars in funds.

In the letter, Cohen said Bankman-Fried reserves the right to decide not to testify.

Cohen said on an earlier conference call the defense could finish presenting its case by Friday, paving the way for closing arguments and jury deliberations next week.

(Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Will Dunham, Noeleen Walder and Jonathan Oatis)

Governor hopeful quoted Hitler and downplayed the Holocaust in unearthed posts: Report

Lieutenant governor of North Carolina and a leading Republican candidate for governor, Mark Robinson, quoted Hitler and downplayed the Holocaust in an unearthed Facebook post, according to a new report.

Robinson has a long history of regurgitating antisemitic conspiracy theories and downplaying of the Holocaust, according to Jewish Insider. But at a press conference two weeks ago, he denied that he is antisemitic

Robinson said his past social media posts had been dealt with and he had "moved past" them.

But he has been hit with new accusations that, in a Facebook post, he quoted Hitler and suggested the horror of the Holocaust wasn't as bad as the abuses of communism. He also compared the removal of Confederate statues to anti-Jewish pogroms in 1930s Europe, the Jewish Insider reported.

“We often speak of the 'appeasement’ of Hitler. But the biggest ‘appeasement’ of ALL TIME is how we turned a blind eye to the clear and present danger of MARXISM,” Robinson said in a post from 2019.



“It is EXTREMELY distressing that many well-meaning and intelligent people are so focused on long dead Hitler while the living political descendants of Stalin are currently fighting to destroy our REPUBLIC,” he wrote in a separate post days earlier.




Some GOP activists are worried that the discovery of more comments will hurt Robinson's chances of winning the governor race.

"The lieutenant governor, whom polls show as the front-runner, is now facing five Republican primary challengers, including Bill Graham, a wealthy trial lawyer who announced his campaign last week, vowing to spend millions of his own money," Jewish Insider reported. "The winner is expected to face off against a Jewish Democrat, Josh Stein, who is the state’s attorney general. Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, is term-limited."

Read the full report over at Jewish Insider.

Taliban free Afghan activist arrested 7 months ago after campaigning for girls’ education




KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — The Taliban have freed an Afghan activist who campaigned for the education of girls, a local nonprofit organization said Thursday. Matiullah Wesa was arrested seven months ago and spent 215 days in prison, according to the group, Pen Path.

Wesa has been outspoken in his demands for girls to have the right to go to school and repeatedly called on the Taliban-led government in Afghanistan to reverse its bans on female education.

Since their takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021, the Taliban have barred girls from school beyond the sixth grade. Last December, they banned women from going to universities. Afghanistan is the only country in the world with restrictions on female education.

Pen Path gave no further details on Wesa’s release or his condition.

The U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, welcomed the news about Wesa.

In a post on X, formerly known as Twitter, Bennett also called for the “immediate and unconditional release of all Afghanistan human rights defenders who are arbitrarily detained for standing up for their own rights & the human rights of others."

Amnesty International said Wesa should never have been jailed for promoting girls' rights to education.

“The Taliban de-facto authorities must release human rights defenders and women protesters Rasool Parsi, Neda Parwani, Zholia Parsi and Manizha Sediqi and all others who are unfairly kept behind bars for standing up for equality and denouncing repression,” the rights group said on X.

Related video: Elham Ehsas on Afghanistan: There's gender apartheid going on under Taliban regime (WION)
Now, in an exclusive conversation with Beyond Samarpita,
Duration 3:47   View on Watch

Prior to his arrest, Wesa and others from Pen Path launched a door-to-door campaign to promote girls’ education.

“We have been volunteering for 14 years to reach people and convey the message for girls’ education,” Wesa said in social media posts. “During the past 18 months we campaigned house-to-house in order to eliminate illiteracy and to end all our miseries.”

Wesa’s brother Attaullah said Taliban forces surrounded the family home in late March, beat family members, and confiscated Matiullah’s mobile phone.

The Associated Press