Category Archives: Liberal

George Osborne: I have to call it as I see it as editor. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PA

Theresa May has joined Jeremy Corbyn in offering a retreat from international liberalism and globalisation, which marks a sharp shift in direction from David Camerons administration, former chancellor George Osborne has said.

Osborne contrasted the prime ministers approach with what he called the socially liberal, pro-business and pro-free market values he wants to promote in his new role as editor of the Evening Standard.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4s Political Thinking, the former Conservative MP stood by criticisms of Mays policies on social care and immigration, which have been the subject of stinging headlines and editorials since he took the helm at the Standard.

He denied that he was taking revenge on the woman who sacked him from the cabinet last July, but said he would not pull punches in his coverage of the Tory government.

Osborne declined to say whether Londons evening paper would endorse the Conservatives for the 8 June general election. Both Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn are offering, in very different ways, a retreat from international liberalism and globalisation, said Osborne.

That is quite a development in British politics, and I think there are quite a lot of people who are uncertain whether that is the right development and I want to make sure that the Evening Standard is asking on their behalf questions about that.

Shying away from classing the Standard as part of the Tory press, Osborne said: I am taking a slightly different approach, which is that there are a set of values that the Evening Standard has, which are that we are socially liberal, we are pro-business and pro-free market, and we want Britain to have a big role in the world and those values we then apply to whatever the issues are.

Asked if the Standards attacks on Mays policies were a matter of revenge, he said: No. What the paper is doing is standing up for a set of values that the paper has long espoused and by a happy coincidence are also the values I applied as chancellor.

Osborne made clear he was taking a hands-on approach to setting the Standards tone, though he insisted that headlines which have included the damning Strong and stable? PMs care U-turn turmoil were the result of a team effort.

He stood by the papers description of the Conservative manifestos social care proposals, saying: They were clearly badly thought through, because the prime minister herself decided to rethink them.

Osborne explained its denunciation of Mays pledge to cut net migration below 100,000 as politically rash and economically illiterate, saying: The Evening Standard is saying you have got a promise to reduce immigration so tell us how you are going to do it.

Which section of industry is not going to have the labour it currently needs? Which families are not going to be able to be reunited with members of their families abroad? Which universities are not going to have overseas students?

If the Conservative government can answer those questions, all well and good. If they cant, the Evening Standard is going to go on asking the questions. We will also be as ferocious in asking questions of the Labour party and, indeed, I am not particularly kind about the Liberal Democrats or Ukip.

The Standard will definitely make a recommendation on which way it thinks its readers should vote on 8 June, said Osborne. But asked by presenter Nick Robinson whether it would endorse the Tories, he said: You have got to go on picking up your free copy of the London Evening Standard and you will find out, Nick.

Osborne identified the immigration pledge, alongside the failure to reconstruct Libya, as shortcomings in the record of the Cameron administration. He said he was proud of what the former PMs team had achieved but would not spend his time as editor trying to defend its record to the hilt.

He said: I have to call it as I see it as editor. Of course everyone knows I was a Conservative MP for 16 years and I was a member of the Conservative cabinet and I know many of the people in the Conservative government, but it is also my responsibility as the editor to interpret what is going on in politics for my readers. Im not pulling punches, because I would be doing my readers a disservice.

Asked if he was missing politics after stepping down from the Commons, Osborne said: Actually, Im not missing it at all. Im really enjoying covering the campaign as an editor. Its a very different perspective and its good fun.

Follow this link:

May and Corbyn offer 'retreat from international liberalism' says Osborne - The Guardian

By Paul Kane, The Washington Post

WASHINGTON Democrats received a strong reminder from Montana voters that it takes more than just liberal outrage against President Donald Trump and the GOP agenda to win seats that lean toward Republicans.

It takes serious candidates and a policy agenda of their own.

Their nominee, Rob Quist, hailed by liberal activists as a cowboy poet, delivered what most observers in Washington felt was an average performance in a race that was closely watched even before the Republican nominee was charged with assaulting a reporter on the eve of Thursdays special election.

Some Democrats have responded to Trumps victory, which they believe resulted at least partly from fame derived from his reality-television career, by searching for their own unique candidates. But after receiving just 44 percent of the vote, Quists performance may demonstrate the limitations of quirky, first-time candidates.

The showing also raises the stakes for Democrats in the June 20 runoff election for the race to replace Tom Price, the health secretary whose former House district north of Atlanta is seen as political ground zero this season because of its more competitive nature the other special elections held so far.

There, a 30-year-old neophyte and former congressional staffer, Jon Ossoff, is locked in a dead heat. Now more than ever, some party strategists fear that if he cannot put the race away ahead of June 20, late-breaking voters will not view him as a serious enough alternative in these politically turbulent times.

What Montana showed was the need to field candidates with backgrounds that appeal to voters who have tended to back Republicans in congressional races. Its not necessarily an ideological requirement to be a centrist serious candidates, such as Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., or Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., can reside at the edge of the ideological spectrum. But they nearly always need more gravitas than Quist brought from a decades-long career as a guitar player in a popular bluegrass band in the Mountain West.

There are exceptions, of course. Sen. Al Franken of Minnesota is one though its worth noting that Franken spent his first eight years in office avoiding the comedy shtick he was known for on Saturday Night Live because he recognized the need to get serious fast.

Of the three special elections, Quist clearly delivered the worst performance, based on a measure crafted by the smart analysts at the Cook Political Report. Democrats received 49 percent in the initial balloting in Prices old district and almost 47 percent in the race in southern Kansas, better than Quists 44 percent.

Moreover, based on recent presidential races, the Kansas nominee performed 12 percentage points better than an average Democrat would have been expected to show, according to Cook. In Georgia, Democrats performed seven percentage points better than an average nominee.

Quist outperformed an average Democrat by just 5 percent. And he lagged woefully when compared with Montanas Democratic governor, Steve Bullock, who won by four points in November against Republican Greg Gianforte the businessman who beat Quist on Thursday despite being charged with assaulting a reporter the night before.

Democrats in Washington saw that as justification for their decision to invest only $500,000 in the race, dismissing Quist as a candidate from backers of Sanders who did not realize he had a hard ceiling around 43 to 45 percent among voters.

DCCC took a smart chance with its investments, refused to waste money on hype, Meredith Kelly, communications director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, wrote in a Friday memo.

Because it was a special election, Quist won the nomination at a party convention where the most liberal activists held sway, rather than a broad statewide primary.

The complaints about money are misguided when comparing this race to the Kansas special election. There, Democrats nominated another Sanders acolyte, James Thompson, who ran in a more conservative district than Quist, on a shoestring budget of just $1.4 million. He received nothing close to the $500,000 Quist got from the DCCC.

Yet Thompson got a larger share of the vote than Quist, who raised and spent more than $6 million.

Perhaps if Montana Democrats had found a nominee with Thompsons profile, they would have been better served.

Homeless as a teenager, Thompson enlisted in the Army and used the GI Bill to finance his education, serving as a civil rights lawyer for 13 years before launching his long-shot bid for Congress.

In their early recruiting for the midterms now 17 months away, Democrats have tried to thread this needle. They are tapping into the anti-Trump energy with first-time candidates who can appeal to anti-establishment progressives but also with personal backgrounds that will demonstrate a serious devotion to governance intended to appeal across party lines.

This has produced an early focus on military veterans more closely aligned with Thompsons background.

In the suburbs east of Denver, Jason Crow is a former Army Ranger and local attorney running in a district where Democrats have underperformed year after year. In a similar district outside Philadelphia where Democrats have failed to put together strong challengers, Chrissy Houlahan is an Air Force veteran who helped run a basketball apparel company and worked in the nonprofit sector.

Beyond candidate recruitment lies a deeper question about the partys agenda and whether Democrats need an update on their policy proposals.

Quist aggressively painted Gianforte as someone who would support Republican efforts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act without ensuring protections for those with preexisting conditions.

Ossoff has been hitting his opponent, Republican Karen Handel, for her efforts to deny funds to Planned Parenthood, while promising to be a problem solver who will work across the aisle to deliver results.

But theres been very little in terms of a specific Democratic agenda should they win the 24 seats needed to take back the House majority next year.

On Thursday, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., joined Sanders at an event to endorse his proposal to create a $15 minimum wage, something Sanders touted in his 2016 presidential campaign.

It showed party leaders were drifting toward the Vermont socialists economic views, but it is likely to do little to generate votes come November 2018.

Raising the minimum wage is an issue that always polls off the charts. But Democrats have pushed this issue in three straight elections, and it has done next to nothing for their candidates, because most voters want a lot more than a minimum-wage job.

Democrats might pull off the win in Prices seat, but if they are going to ride a wave all the way to the majority, they probably need more experienced candidates than Ossoff and Quist and with a sharper message than Ossoffs introductory ad a few months ago.

Ill work with anyone to do whats right for our country, he said.

Link:

Montana election proves that liberal outrage isn't enough - The Daily Herald

Europes resolve is being tested by the extremists as they carry out a series of terrorist attacks in France, Germany and in the United Kingdom. Europe has been the traditional power house of development in the journey of human civilization for several centuries now and the honour was only shared by the US in the last one and now perhaps by China.

Europes history isnt just about worldwide empires and industrial revolution; its also about modernity as a whole. European countries gave birth to great things of human civilization like liberty, freedom, democracy, impartial administration, equality, peoples state i.e. republics, rule of law , human rights, media, civil society and also modern artistic and literary creativeness. As the law of the nature in erstwhile times, the stronger European nations created vast empires and colonies across the globe defeating the local kingdoms. But they spread these modern systems and ideas to those conquered places as well. Places like Asia, Africa and America wouldnt have seen all these in the times they encountered those if it was not for the Europeans.

The Europeans also took in a huge number of people from the countries they previously ruled. America did the same. And the immigrants, like the natives, now get all the amenities offered by these welfare states. It was a matter of great wonder for the people of the Orient and Africa that Europeans accepted people of oriental culture in their country with relative ease. In fact the ideas of multiculturalism and celebrating diversity have been the hallmark of European and North American liberal ideals over the last few decades. A sizable percentage of these immigrants were and, still are, Muslims and they form Muslim communities in those countries. Many families have lived in their adopted countries for more than a generation now. However, the same isnt really the case in the countries from where these Europe bound migrants originated.

Unfortunately, a section of these immigrant Muslim communities has embraced radicalism and carry out heinous terrorists acts in the countries where they live. In the process, these people are earning a bad name for their communities, the countries of their origin and Muslims worldwide. Now it seems that these radicals take advantage of European liberalism to live and spread their extreme ideologies and do everything to destroy those very liberal ideals that have allowed them to practice their faith and culture peacefully in the first place. The whole phenomenon has now turned out to be a complex and perplexing one. Its apparent that a sizable section hasnt embraced liberal ideals of Europe in the true spirit despite taking advantage of those. They are out there to spread hatred and violence with the aim of achieving an improbable and regressive Islamic theocracy in European countries.

The European governments are trying to tackle the situation as far as they can without undermining their liberal values. But its not easy. Nowadays a terrorist doesnt need guns or explosives. A suicidal terrorist can just drive a vehicle into a crowd and kill innocent people. Its about time the Muslim communities in Europe also take care of their community members and cooperate with the authorities to identify and deter radicalization and de-radicalize the already indoctrinated ones. Or else, it could be too late and they may eventually lose the degree of freedom, opportunities and welfare they had been enjoying in the liberal western societies so far like the other citizens. Every situation in the world is contingent upon certain explicit and tacit conditions of civility. If it is breached by one side, then its natural that others will eventually react. And that may not be a good thing to experience.

*Sarwar Jahan Chowdhury is a freelance contributor on politics, society and international relations. Currently, he works for BRAC Institute of Governance and Development, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

View post:

Extremism vs the liberal ideals - Prothom Alo (English)

Only after winning Montanas special election for the states one seat in the House of Representatives did Greg Gianforte apologize for allegedly body slamming a reporter who had asked him a question about House-passed Trumpcare legislation.

Last night I learned a lesson; last night I made a mistake, Gianforte told his fans while taking his election victory lap.

And we forgive you! someone interrupted.

and I took an action that I cant take back, the politician continued, adding, Im not proud of what happened. I should not have responded in the way that I did, and for that Im sorry.I should not have treated that reporter that way. And for that Im sorry, Mr. Ben Jacobs.

But Gianforte had taken two actions on Thursday night: allegedly attacking Jacobs and then issuing a statement blaming the Guardian reporter for having caused Gianforte to allegedly attack the liberal journalist. Jacobs told CNNs Don Lemon the statement was in some ways far worse than the incident itself.

Within a period of hours, Gianforte was formally charged with assault and was elected Montanas new member of House of Representatives, beating Democratic folk singer Rob Quist with just over 50% of the vote. Media called the special election to replace Ryan Zinke, who now is Trumps Secretary of the Interior, an early test of Trumps popularity, which POTUS acknowledged in an unsolicited shout-out from the G7 summit in Italy. Great win in Montana! Trump said.

Veep Mike Pence spoke at slightly greater length, tweeting: Congrats on great win & gracious speech. Look forward to having you help @realDonaldTrump #MAGA

Here is Gianfortes official statement as to what occurred on the eve of the election:

Tonight, as Greg was giving a separate interview in a private office, The Guardians Ben Jacobs entered the office without permission, aggressively shoved a recorder in Gregs face, and began asking badgering questions, his office said in a statement after the candidate allegedly attacked the reporter. Jacobs was asked to leave. After asking Jacobs to lower the recorder, Jacobs declined. Greg then attempted to grab the phone that was pushed in his face. Jacobs grabbed Gregs wrist, and spun away from Greg, pushing them both to the ground. Its unfortunate that this aggressive behavior from a liberal journalist created this scene at our campaign volunteer BBQ.

Read more here:

Donald Trump Applauds Win As Greg Gianforte Apologizes For Response To Liberal Journalist Trumpcare Question - Deadline

Sign Up for

Our free email newsletters

When open-minded liberal and progressive friends ask me which contemporary conservative thinkers are worth reading and wrestling with, I usually tell them to read Peter Augustine Lawler.

Lawler died unexpectedly on Tuesday morning at the age of 65, which will likely inspire me to offer this advice even more urgently. Indeed, at a time when the post-Goldwater conservative movement finds itself increasingly eclipsed by right-wing populism, Lawler's distinctive vision and voice may be more pertinent than ever.

I first encountered Lawler in writing and in person in the late 1990s, at a time when I was wrestling with the moral challenge of the Socratic philosophy I absorbed in graduate school while studying with students of Leo Strauss. Lawler's respectful but deeply critical engagement with the thought of Strauss' great popularizer Allan Bloom an engagement that continued all the way down to his final essay, which was published the night before he died proved enormously fruitful to me. Lawler's equally searching books and essays on a range of other writers and topics Blaise Pascal, Richard Rorty, bioethics, Alexis de Tocqueville, Carl Sagan, transhumanism, David Brooks, Flannery O'Connor, John Courtney Murray, liberal education in an age of disruption, Francis Fukuyama's "end of history" thesis provided me with a model of intellectual reflection that was accessible to a wide audience while never sacrificing depth or ambition.

Lawler was a great champion of biblical (and specifically Christian) anthropology, with its portrait of human beings as pilgrims wandering in the world, continually, restlessly longing for a sense of completion, home, and belonging that can never be entirely fulfilled in this life. To grasp human beings in all their complexity, politics needs to be given its due as a crucially important mode in which people seek this fulfillment. But politics also needs to be placed in perspective, its limits continually revealed and examined. The philosophical pursuit of wisdom limits politics in this way, and so does the contemplation and worship of God both of which grow out of the elemental human experience of wonderment at the world and its grounds. That's why Lawler was fond of saying that the fundamental truth about the human soul is that we are fated to "wonder as we wander, and wander as we wonder."

The alternative is to lose ourselves in ersatz forms of satisfaction to delude ourselves into thinking that perfect fulfillment and completion are possible in the world. One example is the idea of moral progress that permeates so much of modern liberal and left-wing thinking. The promise of continual moral improvement eventually culminating in the achievement of perfect justice and reconciliation animates progressivism in all of its forms just as some forms of conservatism bleed over into a counter-narrative of moral decline. Lawler never tired of reminding his readers and students of the deeper truth that history is always becoming at once better and worse (in different respects), and that the effort to make us fully at home in the world has the paradoxical effect of making us feel more homeless than ever.

It's in this sense that Lawler embraced postmodernism, provided it was "rightly understood" as a critique of the progressive assumptions embedded in modern culture and politics, as well as in the decline narratives that often crop up in reaction to them. To be postmodern in the decisive respect is to be liberated from the modern prejudice in favor of unidirectional historical development. It is to embrace "realism" about the human soul which lives and thrives in relation to others, loves and hates with passionate intensity, and strives nobly for truth and wisdom.

In cultivating this postmodern realism, Lawler took novelist Walker Percy as an unlikely guide especially Percy's under-appreciated 1983 book Lost in the Cosmos. Lawler loved this quirky and brilliant book, which takes the form of an existentialist self-help manual. Unlike every other self-help book, which aims to provide pat, facile answers to life's perplexities, Percy's version does the opposite, revealing to readers that they are in fact mysteries to themselves, unsure of why they've set out in search of help in the first place, or even of what would count as helping. To read the book cover to cover, taking its seemingly endless series of amusing quizzes and tests, is to find oneself productively confused about the most basic of questions of human life. It is to come face to face with one's own ignorance about oneself.

And that's the best place the truest place from which to begin thinking about how to live, how to worship, how to engage in politics, and how to make sense of ourselves and the world around us. It's also the soundest starting point from which to achieve some modicum of wisdom about all of these crucially important topics.

Though Lawler was never my teacher in the strict sense, I learned an awful lot from him over the years. Thankfully, his writings remain to educate, edify, and provoke deep thinking. They are a gift to anyone who longs to understand what it means to be human.

Originally posted here:

Why every smart liberal should read conservative philosopher Peter ... - The Week Magazine

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

On Wednesday, a number of companies includingCars.com, Peloton, and Leesa Sleeppulled their ads from Hannity following pressure from left-wing activists over Hannitys pursuit of now-retracted claims made by Fox News that murdered DNC employee Seth Rich had contact with Wikileaks before his death.

In a series of tweets, Hannity accusedfigures including George Soros, David Brock of Media Matters, and failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton of liberal fascism, after his advertisers were reportedly inundated with emails from left-wing groups asking them to stop advertising on the show.

Now Bozell, whose organizationthe Media Research Center analyzes liberal bias across the mainstream media, has accused advertisers ofjoining in the liberal cause and advancing the liberal strategy and becoming servants of the politically correct.

He also attacked the military financial services company USAA for succumbing to the pressure of left-wing extremists, adding that Hannity has for decades been a fierce supporter of the military at every turn.

Hannityis now the second Fox News show to have ads pulled this year, after over 90 companies droppedadvertising on Bill OReillys showThe OReilly Factor over allegations of sexual harassment, following pressure from left-wing activists. OReilly was eventually released by the network, despite being Americas highest-rated cable news host.

We have remained silent for far too long. A bridge has been crossed. Stay tuned, Bozell added.

You can follow Ben Kew on Facebook, on Twitter at @ben_kew,oremail him at bkew@breitbart.com

Go here to see the original:

Brent Bozell: Attack on Hannity Part of 'Liberal Strategy to Monopolize the Media' - Breitbart News

A little more than 24 hours before Guardian U.S. reporter Ben Jacobs was knocked to the ground, choked, and punched by GOP congressional candidate Greg Gianforte, Fox News host Sean Hannity tweeted that Liberal Fascism and the corrupt media were trying to silence him from reporting a debunked story about murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich. Hannity has been doggedly pursuing the non-story for days now with increasingly irresponsible methods, even thoughhis own employer Fox News has retracted the story about Richs death that fueled the speculation. Indeed, byhis own admission, on May 23s Hannity, the host is avoiding the storyout of respect for the familys wishes. But since Tuesday, the conservative talking head has been methodically attacking the liberal media, corrupt media, and/or the Destroy Trump media for quashing his narrative, with well-trod detours that invoke the specters of liberals such asbillionaire George Soros and Media Matters for America founder David Brock as being involved in the effort to silence him. It is a performance of embattled integrity, when in fact, journalistic practice could not be further from his concerns.

As I wrote just a few days ago, Hannitys rapt embrace of the Seth Rich murder conspiracy showcases the conservative media machine at its most craven, creating a blatant distraction from the still-unfolding coverup of President Donald Trumps ties to Russia. The situation came to a head on Tuesday, as Fox News employees privately groused to reporters at CNN that focusing on the unsourced conspiracy theory lowered the standards of the entire network. Hours later, in a laudable move for the news organization, Fox News retracted the inciting story.

But Hannitys restraint in primetime has not stopped the conservative talking head from tweeting about the conspiracy theory all day and talking it up on his radio show. Indeed, on his national syndicated radio program on Tuesday, which is distributed by iHeartRadio and not associated with Fox, he stood by the debunked story: All of you in the liberal media: I am not Fox.com or FoxNews.com. I retracted nothing, he asserted.

Like other prominent conservative pundits, Hannity tends to point the finger at the liberal media while framing himself as a beleaguered outsider crusading for truth. But he is, according to the New York Observer, among the highest-paid TV and radio personalities in the country a cool $29 million a year from Fox News and his radio program. Sean Hannity is as much the media establishment as CNNs Anderson Cooper or MSNBCs Rachel Maddow or even CBS Stephen Colbert, all of whom Hannity regularly lambastes. Following almost a year of tumultuous firings and contentious departures from Fox News, Hannity has by force of attrition become the channels biggest star. Its irresponsible for him to act as if he does not have enormous influence. And it has been irresponsible to engage with the Rich non-story, which has caused the victims family so much grief.

As Jacobs assault has made clear, the language that Hannityand other conservative media pundits use with impunity about the fact-based news media has consequences. Wednesday evening in Bozeman, Mont.,Jacobs was assaulted by Gianforte, who is now facing a misdemeanor charge. The audio recording of the encounter indicates that Gianforte, angered by Jacobs question about the Republican healthcare bill currently moving through Congress, attacked the reporter rather than answer. Gianfortes campaign responded by labeling Jacobs a liberal journalist who created this scene with aggressive behavior. Every indication, including Gianfortes own statement, suggests that this aggressive behavior was holding a tape recorder close to Gianfortes face.

The past week has been an awful case study in just how much conservative rhetoric has endangered the fourth estate. Hannitys blatant disregard for journalism is mirrored by Gianfortes violence against Jacobs.

What is most interesting in this saga is that Fox News appears to have subtly broken away from Hannitys narrative. It is already surprising enough that the network issued a rare retraction of its original story, which was posted May 16 on its website. Its also intriguing that Hannity would continue to talk about this theory on his radio show and on Twitter but refrain from fanning the flames on his biggest platform.

Hannity denied any interference from the network in an interview with Huffington Posts Michael Calderone. Nobody tells me what to say on my show. They never have and frankly they never will. Im not that type of person you can say, Go on air and say this. Thats been the beauty of Fox News all these years. They leave me alone, he said. But given that both the hostand the network would have a vested interest in maintaining Hannitys image as an independent maverick, its hard to not conclude that theres more to Hannitys movement away from the Rich story than whats been made public.

After all, there are more sides to Fox News than just its primetime opinion hosts. The primary witnessesto Jacobsencounter with Gianforte included a trio of Fox News reporters who were setting up for an interview with the candidate. As conservative commentators Laura Ingraham (a frequent Fox News guest) sought to defend Gianforte and denigrate Jacobs using the convoluted argument that real men settled conflicts in certain ways Fox News Alicia Acuna published a candid, first-person story that corroborated Jacobs version of the encounter. (Indeed, Acunas version paints an even more violent picture than what was first reported online.)

It is absurd that an assault on a reporter is a partisan issue, but bipartisanship has deteriorated so much in this country that some conservatives are not-so-quietly applauding Gianforte for his violence against Jacobs. President Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized deeply sourced reporting from mainstream outlets simply because it counters his own interests. And the assault on Jacobs is just one in a series of escalating hostility against the members of the fourth estate, all tacitly sanctioned by Republicans in power.

Fox News is typically a media outlet that is deeply beholden to and supportive of those same Republicans in power. But with the Jacobs incident, the news channel is undercutting itself by offering competing narratives of the encounter. On Thursday morning, Fox & Friends contradicted Fox News own account of what happened by repeating the campaigns stance that Gianforte and Jacobs fell as if it were a mutual altercation instead of one man attacking the other. Thursday evening, a Fox contributor called Gianfortes actions Montana justice.

More than ever, it is clear that there is a side of Fox News that prioritizes strong reporting and fact-based commentary. But the opinion side of Fox News that was directed by Roger Ailes, popularized by Bill OReilly, and exploited by Roger Stone seems determined to stamp out any journalistic integrity that the network has to offer. In sowing so much distrust for the liberal media, Fox News runs the risk of convincing viewers that fact-based reporting is propaganda that cant be trusted. Unfortunately, the logical extension of that becomes a narrative in which Fox News core conservative viewers wont even trust Fox News for much longer.

Read the original:

Fox News' Dueling Narratives: Journalism That Clashes With Fury Over 'Liberal Media' - Variety

May 24, 2017 Cover Story

You may have heard on the internet last week that, according to multiple sources close to the intelligence, justice, and law enforcement communities, the marshal of the Supreme Court had commenced the sacred impeachment-notification riteyou know, the one you learned about in civics class, in which the marshal marches to the White House in a cool costume and tells the president that proceedings for his removal have begun. The notification was given, as part of the formal process of the matter, in order that Mr. Trump knew he was not able to use his powers of pardon against other suspects in Trump-Russia cases, Louise Mensch explained on her website Patribotics. She added, Sources have confirmed that the Marshal of the Supreme Court spoke to Mr. Trump.

Earlier this month, Mensch and Claude Taylor had reported for Patribotics that separate sources with links to the intelligence and justice communities have stated that a sealed indictment has been granted against Donald Trump. While the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution forestalled Trumps immediate prosecution, Orrin Hatchthe federal governments designated survivorwas already receiving copies of security briefings to ensure a smooth transition of power. Meanwhile, Paul Ryan awaited arrest for racketeering.

For those of us who havent yet found a great hiding spot behind the gold curtains in the Oval Office, its impossible to know with certainty whats going on in the Trump administration. Menschs blog and Twitter feed, larded as they are with double secret indictments, SCOTUS marshals sounding the horn of impeachment, and Russian spies in every desk drawer, invite all of us into the White House through a side door, one thats accessible only via the 11th dimension. Sources with links to the intelligence, justice, and literary communities tell me that Menschs overheated, conspiratorial prose is very easy to mock. After her Supreme Court marshal scoop started to crawl across the web, pundits ridiculed it as the saddest fanfic ever and another hot scoop rooted in finely granular knowledge of how the U.S. government does not operate.

But Louise Mensch shouldnt be dismissed as a crank with a Wi-Fi connection. In March, she penned a widely publicized piece for the New York Times titled What to Ask About Russian Hacking. Her reportingwell, some of her reportinghas been confirmed by the Times and Washington Post, and she gets cited in tweets by celebrities, DNC staffers, and congresspeople. Last month, Keith Olbermann alluded to a bombshell shed dropped claiming Carter Page had ferried a tape from Washington to Moscowa recording that allegedly featured Trump reciting a series of promises to shift U.S. policy in a Putin-friendly manner in exchange for Russias helpful interference in the 2016 election.

Mensch is the paranoid bard of the age of Trump. While more sober outlets reel from the presidents madness and question whether the sky is blue, she deftly weaves plentiful, narcotic tales about Russian infiltration. She has become a new stock character in this shambolic White House opera: the liberal conspiracy theorist, remaking a certain corner of progressive discourse in the image of Breitbart News and Infowars. She is a mirror for the lefts Hitchcockian fantasies and an avatar of our political dysfunction, a symbol of how far off the deep end one has to travel to reach a land beyond believability. According to the Post, Russian propaganda may have beguiled James Comey into bungling the FBIs probe of Hillary Clintons private email server. If this is the reality of 2017, then where is the fringe? Its a place where Anthony Weiner is a Russian operative, and where Vladimir Putin pulls the strings of Black Lives Matter.

Menschs rightward tilt doesnt stop left-wing readers from ingesting her hatred like adrug.

On Twitter, where Mensch boasts 283,000 followers, her short-form musings flutter in a chamber of looniness alongside those of compatriots John Schindler (a former NSA spy who resigned from his teaching position at the Naval War College after a controversy involving a dick pic) and the aforementioned Claude Taylor (a D.C.based photographer with the username @TrueFactsStated). As Zack Beauchamp chronicled in Vox, the members of this febrile amen circle spur and amplify each other, sprinkling their fevered accusations with terms of art from the world of espionage, among them deza (short for dezinformatsiya, or disinformation) and Chekist (the word for former KGB officers who now enjoy political prominence in Putins Russia). On Menschs own feed, she chops up and remixes handles and hashtags to score her delirious mood music: Romanian hackers, @Yandex, #hostkey. @FBI, @GCHQ. Komprat? Agitprop. GLOMAR! Combative and righteous, she refers to Republican senators like Pat Toomey as douchebags. She posted that she hopes Trump will die in jail, at least stay there til the tertiary syphillis really kicks in :).

As Beauchamp observes, the through line of these florid conjectures is not so much a single conspiracy ( la birtherism) as a vision of insidious and saturating Russian influence. On the websites Heat Street and Patribotics, Mensch has suggested that Putin had Andrew Breitbart killed so Steve Bannon could take up his mantle, that a nightclub massacre in Istanbul was engineered by Russians posing as ISIS terrorists, and that the Kremlin lurked behind the Boston Marathon attacks. Her tapestry of GOPMoscow collusion evokes both the Cold War and Mission Impossible. A self-described conservative, Mensch calls herself a pronational security partisan and a patriot in the service of the intelligence community. If she despises the Republican Party, it is because she thinks it is abetting a hostile foreign power. Menschs rightward tilt doesnt stop left-wing readers from ingesting her hatred like a drug. The technical language and the multiple sources imply that a real doctor prepared the dose.

Mensch, who was born in London in 1971, has a talent for sexy narratives. She first made her name in the mid-1990s as a chick lit novelist, publishing steamy (yet feminist!) books with titles like Desire and Passion. In 2006, she was recruited to David Camerons Conservative bloc as part of an effort to strengthen the political presence of women and minorities. The glamorous fluffy bunny won election to parliament four years later, becoming a folk hero soon after thanks to her sharp, precise, coolly scornful interrogation of global media magnates Rupert and James Murdoch vis--vis their tabloids phone-hacking scandal. Mensch revealed her flair for the gotcha moment when she asked the elder Murdoch why, when the News of the Worlds misdeeds came to light, he didnt take the fall and resign. She later invoked that moment of glory in the New York Times, proposing questions the House Intelligence Committee might put to witnesses testifying about the Russia scandal. I have some relevant experience, she noted.

After leaving parliament and moving to the United Statesthe former president of Oxfords rock society, she wed the manager of Metallica and resettled with him in New Yorkthe British expat launched a new career in online journalism. Heat Street, which she founded in April 2016, was touted by the Daily Beast as Gawker for the right, a site that slung scoops about, for instance, the alleged financial misdeeds of Bernie Sanders wife Jane Sanders. A conspiracy theorist would note here that Heat Street was financed by none other than Rupert Murdoch. (Hey, were just asking questions!) The reality is that the hard-charging, publicity-savvy former MP always had the disposition of a U.K.style tabloid reporter. Her profile rose in the U.S. when she melded that journalistic approach with a flag-waving, America-first mission to smoke out the traitors in our midst.

Mensch, who told the Daily Beasts Lloyd Grove in May 2016 that she didnt fit neatly into the GOP, predicted at that stage that Ted Cruz would win the Republican nomination. My personal objection to Donald Trump, she said in her interview with Grove, is that he has said very racist things, is lying to the voters, and is a fairly radical left-wing Democrat. Yet on Heat Street, Mensch offered up a series of tepidly pro-Trump posts, chiding Democrats for puzzling over the TV stars electoral win and praising several of his Cabinet appointees. She saved her most vehement denunciations of the president for Twitter while churning out furious critiques of Putin on all possible platforms.

The night before Election Day, Mensch published a huge, Trump-related scoop. Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of U.S. persons in Donald Trumps campaign with ties to Russia, she proclaimed under a headline blaring EXCLUSIVE. The Washington Post and New York Times corroborated her reporting months later, revealing that the Justice Department had obtained permission to wiretap Trump adviser Carter Page.

Rather than push her toward Grey Ladyapproved fact-finding methods, Menschs brush with legitimacy seemed to encourage her to abandon the strictures of traditional journalism. She departed from Heat Street in January to focus on Patribotics, a new venture devoted to unraveling Vladimir Putins war on America. While her articles grew more monomaniacal in theme and tone, they also drew legitimacy from Menschs March piece in the Times and her rising profile as a television pundit. Even as she bathed in the presss fascination with her own project, Mensch blasted the hidebound Fourth Estate for its slow-footededness and criticized the Times and NBC for stealing her work (via screenshots extravagantly underlined in sensational red).

Menschs scoops defy common sense and make a mockery of U.S. institutions. But so doesTrump.

Meanwhile, as Voxs Beauchamp describes, political elites like former Democratic National Committee chair Donna Brazile and current DNC communications hand Adrienne Watson were tweeting her exclusives. Several Obama staffers, a constitutional law professor at Harvard, and Olbermann also cited Patribotics posts, clotted now more than ever with assurances about sources close to the intelligence community. A few weeks ago, Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey apologized after propagating the Menschian whisper that a New York grand jury was investigating Trump and Russia. (Why, you might be wondering, would sources close to the intelligence community leak to the likes of Louise Mensch rather than a major newspaper? Because, as Mensch recently explained on Twitter, people linked to intel are impressed when patriot amateurs WORK and try to help.)

That push-pull between belief and dismissiveness hints at a crossroads for liberals in the age of Trump. Unlike the fringy right, which has long relied on sites like Infowars and Breitbart to ratify its dreams and fears, the left lacks a well-developed infrastructure for spreading toxic and intoxicating innuendo. But progressives are angry and scared. They do seek out the pleasures of outrage and worldview confirmation. No political moment since at least the Nixon presidency has provided such fertile ground for conspiracy theories. Leaks spill ceaselessly from the White House, the Justice Department, and the FBI, a drip drip drip thats as ceaseless as a ticking clock. (Five oclock or thereabouts has become the new political witching hour, when all manner of inversions and mischief might occur.) Menschs scoops defy common sense and make a mockery of U.S. institutions. But so does Trump. Even her most tenuously sourced, outrageous tales feel like theyre on the cusp of tipping over into truth.

Outside of her filter bubble, Mensch isnt taken particularly seriously. Yet to write her off entirely feels almost as nave as to buy her product. Whether or not she believes that Trump is a pawn of Moscow, Mensch has discovered an unmanned stall in the information marketplace and transformed it into a hub. We cant know the degree to which shes fueled by ideological commitment as opposed to savvy opportunism. We can, though, ponder how a taste of mainstream approval and enthrallment might have converted a libertarian into a left-wing crusader, and how our desire to make sense of this hallucinatory president may have enlisted an entrepreneurial British woman in a peculiarly American story. Louise Mensch fashions wares we didnt know we needed and delivers them to us through channels we didnt realize we had. We say we want nothing but the truth. Her cottage industry of conspiracies thrives because, like the best sleuths and salespeople, she sees right through us.

See the original post:

How Louise Mensch Became the Queen of the Liberal Lunatic Fringe - Slate Magazine

B.C. Liberal leader Christy Clark waves to the crowd following the B.C. Election in Vancouver, B.C., Wednesday, May 10, 2017. (Jonathan Hayward/Canadian Press)

VICTORIA British Columbia entered a new stage of political uncertainty Wednesday as the final vote count from an election held more than two weeks ago confirmed the provinces first minority government in 65 years.

But with the balance of power firmly in his grasp, Green Leader Andrew Weaver indicated he wants to end the confusion that has gripped the province since May 9 by trying to reach a deal with either the Liberals or the NDP on a minority government by next Wednesday.

Were committed to bring stability to this province and were committed to ensuring the decisions we make in the next few days are those that actually make government work in British Columbia, he told a news conference.

We recognize its important over the next week or so to give certainty to British Columbia and thats our target as we stand today.

Weaver said hes aiming for Wednesday or earlier to broker a working agreement with either the Liberals or the NDP, but hes open to an extension if required.

Its not a deal breaker if were so close and we still need more time, he said.

OPINION: What has become of my British Columbia?

The Liberals finished one seat short of a majority, with 43 seats in the 87-seat legislature. The NDP has 41 seats and the Greens have three a historic achievement for the party as it built on the lone seat held by Weaver before the election.

The focus during the final count was on the riding of Courtenay-Comox, which the NDP won by 189 votes after holding a slim nine-vote lead on election night. The Liberals had hoped to swing the riding in their favour once absentee ballots were counted.

Elections BC says none of the races finished close enough to trigger automatic applications for judicial recounts.

B.C. NDP Leader John Horgan watches election results on television at a hotel after the provincial election polls closed, in Vancouver, B.C., on Tuesday May 9, 2017. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press)

Exploratory talks involving possible political collaborations with the Greens have been underway since the election, but the parties have said they were awaiting the final results to begin the talks in earnest on the shape of a minority government.

Premier Christy Clark issued a statement saying the Liberals intend to form a government.

With 43 B.C. Liberal candidates elected as MLAs, and a plurality in the legislature, we have a responsibility to move forward and form a government, she said.

The final result reinforces that British Columbians want us to work together, across party lines, to get things done for them.

The Liberals were trying to win their fifth successive majority government in the general election.

As the incumbent premier with the most seats, Clark would normally be given the first chance to form a minority government by the lieutenant-governor.

But NDP Leader John Horgan said the results of the election show voters want change and he believes he can work with Weaver to govern.

Christy Clark and the B.C. Liberals came up short and after 16 years, its time for a new government, Horgan told a news conference at the legislature.

RELATED: Why the B.C. Green Party should be wary of a coalition

The popular vote between the two major parties was absolutely split down the middle and this is an opportunity to build on a minority situation, to demonstrate, in my opinion, that people can have a government that works for them, can have a government that co-operates with like-minded people to bring in things like proportional representation, to finally ban the big money the B.C. Liberals have been so, so addicted to over the past 16 years.

The popular vote tightened as Elections BC finished counting almost 180,000 absentee ballots to finalize the results. The Liberals received just 1,566 more votes than the NDP from almost 1.8 million total ballots cast across the province.

Weaver has said the major demands his party will be seeking in a minority government include being granted party status in the legislature. The Greens fell one seat short of official status after the election.

The Greens also want reforms to the electoral system to allow for proportional representation and changes to party fundraising rules that currently allow unlimited donations from corporations, unions and individuals.

Michael Prince, a social policy expert at the University of Victoria, said Clark is gambling that British Columbians are not in the mood to head back to the polls and the longer she can stay in power, if she can reach a deal with the Greens, her chances of winning another election improve.

I think shell be hoping therell be no appetite for an instant election, he said. She can try to bring in a throne speech and a budget with a lot of green tinges.

Read the original:

B.C. Liberals say they want to form minority government - Macleans.ca

Attorney General Jeff Sessions has a roadmap for recovering money that former President Barack Obama's team gave to Native American groups, a plan that was conceived of by a federal judge and is being championed by a top House Republican.

"[T]he Trump administration may have an opportunity to claw back $380 million for taxpayers, but it must act fast," House Judiciary Committee chairman Bob Goodlatte wrote to Sessions.

The money traces back to a settlement fund that the Obama administration used to compensate for racial bias against Native Americans allegedly committed by the Agriculture Department a deal that was struck even though the Justice Department was poised to win in the courts. But most of the people who received money in the settlements never claimed to have faced discrimination.

Moreover, the settlement was so large that there was money left over after making the payments, so the Obama administration sent that money to non-profit groups who were not a part of the lawsuit.

Goodlatte spent years trying to block the Justice Department from using a Judgment Fund to settle lawsuits and send the money to third-party groups. "Congress must not tolerate Justice Department political appointees using settlements to funnel money to their liberal friends," he said in January. "This is also an institutional issue. Once direct victims have been compensated, deciding what to do with additional funds recovered from defendants becomes a policy question properly decided by elected representatives in Congress, not agency bureaucrats or prosecutors."

Now he's gotten a boost from a federal judge. "This is not justice," Judge Janice Rogers Brown, who sits on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, wrote in a May 16 court document. "It is not even law."

Brown issued that criticism as part of a dissent to a circuit court ruling that affirmed the settlement could stand. But that lawsuit didn't involve a direct challenge to the settlement as a whole; instead, the plaintiff in that case argued that the extra money should have been used to increase the payments made to the Native American individuals, rather than to third-party groups. "In short, everyone apparently presumed a bloodied-shirt party could be thrown at the taxpayer's expense," Brown wrote. "Why risk Congress being a killjoy?"

As part of the dissent, she suggested that the Sessions-led Justice Department could void the agreement to send money to third-party groups. "The Justice Department can argue, as explained above, that the Executive Branch lacked the constitutional and statutory authority to enter into these [agreements]," Brown wrote. "The conduct of those in this case proves how little the Constitution will matter when good character ceases to be informed by adherence to one's oath of office, and is primarily defined by how generous you are willing to be with someone else's money."

That's music to Goodlatte's ears. "These settlements were an abuse of the discretion that Congress granted DOJ in creating the Judgment Fund," he wrote to Sessions, urging the new AG "to reverse some of the damage wrought by your predecessors."

Read more from the original source:

Bob Goodlatte urges Sessions to seize money directed to Obama's ... - Washington Examiner