Last
year, Democrat Adam Frisch launched what most thought was a longshot
bid for Congress against one of the nation’s most famous conservative
firebrands: Rep. Lauren Boebert. It ended up becoming the closest House race in the country, with the Republican incumbent squeaking through by 546 votes.
Now
Frisch is running again as less of a longshot and more of a certified
contender, arguing the proof of concept he delivered last time will mean
swing voters will be even more open to backing him in 2024.
“People
want to vote for a winner,” Frisch tells TIME, noting that that’s
especially true for those thinking about crossing partisan lines for the
first time.
The
rematch could be one of the most intense House races of 2024. Boebert
first won office in 2020 and quickly drew outsized attention for an
approach to the job that ignited her far-right base, including heckling President
Joe Biden during the State of the Union and promoting conspiracy
theories about the “deep state” and the 2020 presidential election.
What
would Boe-Boe do if she couldn't be a member of Congress? Go back to
her husband? The one who once beat her? The one who her son had to
call 9/11 on earlier this year?
A Boe-Boe out of Congress would be left to fend for herself. Maybe she could move in with Marjorie Taylor Greene?
Republicans
have been outraged all week that the White House hung up a Pride flag
as part of its Pride celebration last Saturday, with one conservative
activist, Roger Marshall, declaring that it’s a sign of the Biden
administration “putting their social agenda ahead of patriotism.”
He
even claimed that the Flag Code was violated because the Pride flag was
between two American flags as he shared a photo of the White House…
that conveniently cropped out the American flag on the roof of the White
House that was flying higher than all the other flags.
Liars.
They have enough problems they should be addressing. Like Boe-Boe, the
left side of her face. She's semi-attractive in a sort of dumbed down
HEE-HAW honies way but the left side of that face is gruesome. (Use the
link to the story above if you haven't noticed it yourself.)
Poor
Boe-Boe. She was probably a pretty, little girl and then, with each
year, as she hated everyone more and more, the ugly on the inside seeped
through her pores and overtook her outsides.
Friday, June 16, 2023. Julian Assange is closer than ever to be brought
to the US where he'd face a kangaroo court and be imprisoned for life,
is self-censorship something we need to protest -- has it really come to
that, we've checked off everything else, Cornel West is out of touch,
Chris Hedges lies as a journalist and will probably get away with it as
everyone looks the other way, all that and Barbra Streisand.
A lot to try to cover. Let's start with the ongoing persecution of Julian Assange.
As Brian Becker notes above,
Julian's appeal to stop extradition to the US has again been denied and
he's looking at, if tried in the US, a lifetime sentence in prison (a
sentence of up to 175 years).
Julian is being
persecuted for the 'crime' of journalism. Julian Assange remains
imprisoned and remains persecuted by US President Joe
Biden who, as vice president, once called him "a high tech terrorist."
Julian's 'crime' was revealing the
realities of Iraq -- Chelsea Manning was a whistle-blower who leaked the
information to Julian. WIKILEAKS then published the Iraq War Logs.
And many outlets used the publication to publish reports of their own.
For example, THE GUARDIAN published many articles based on The Iraq War
Logs. Jonathan Steele, David Leigh and Nick Davies offered, on October 22, 2012:
A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes. Almost 400,000 secret US army field reports have been passed to the
Guardian and a number of other international media organisations via the
whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.
The electronic archive is believed to emanate from the same dissident
US army intelligence analyst who earlier this year is alleged to have
leaked a smaller tranche of 90,000 logs chronicling bloody encounters
and civilian killings in the Afghan war. The new logs detail how: •
US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse,
torture, rape and even murder by Iraqi police and soldiers whose conduct
appears to be systematic and normally unpunished.
• A US helicopter gunship involved in a
notorious Baghdad incident had previously killed Iraqi insurgents after
they tried to surrender. • More than 15,000 civilians died in
previously unknown incidents. US and UK officials have insisted that no
official record of civilian casualties exists but the logs record 66,081
non-combatant deaths out of a total of 109,000 fatalities.
The numerous reports of detainee abuse, often supported by medical
evidence, describe prisoners shackled, blindfolded and hung by wrists or
ankles, and subjected to whipping, punching, kicking or electric
shocks. Six reports end with a detainee's apparent deat
The Biden administration
has been saying all the right things lately about respecting a free and
vigorous press, after four years of relentless media-bashing and legal
assaults under Donald Trump.
The attorney general, Merrick Garland, has even put in place expanded protections for journalists this fall, saying that “a free and independent press is vital to the functioning of our democracy”.
But the biggest test of Biden’s commitment remains imprisoned in a jail cell in London, where WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
has been held since 2019 while facing prosecution in the United States
under the Espionage Act, a century-old statute that has never been used
before for publishing classified information.
Whether the US justice department continues to
pursue the Trump-era charges against the notorious leaker, whose group
put out secret information on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,
Guantánamo Bay, American diplomacy and internal Democratic politics
before the 2016 election, will go a long way toward determining whether
the current administration intends to make good on its pledges to
protect the press.
Now Biden is facing a re-energized push, both inside the United States and overseas, to drop Assange’s protracted prosecution.
The 2022 Booker Prize-winning author Shehan Karunatilaka recently
remarked: “Julian Assange, divisive figure that he may be—he is a hero
to many writers in South Asia because freedom of speech is not something
we take for granted… Journalism has been criminalised in our parts of
the world and so we are looking to the west to see how this case is
prosecuted and how it ends up.”
There is little doubt that Karunatilaka’s description is representative
of the prism through which most of the world views the case against my
husband. And that concern does not just exist outside the west.
At Unesco’s World Press Freedom Day event this year, held at the UN in
New York, the secretary general of Amnesty International, Agnès
Callamard, said: “It is not just what is happening in Iran or in Russia
that should worry us, it is also what is happening here. Who is
imprisoning Julian Assange? Sadly, the playbook of autocracy, the
playbook of control over conscience, or control over speech, has been
well learned by our so-called democratic leaders.” The president of the
Committee to Protect Journalists, Jodie Ginsberg, noted that the US case
against Julian “if brought to fruition could effectively criminalise
journalism anywhere, for journalists everywhere”.
Russia’s trumped-up “espionage” charges against Wall Street Journal
reporter Evan Gershkovich for his newsgathering activities mirror those
brought against Julian for his newsgathering and publishing. The last
US reporter to be prosecuted by Russia for “espionage” was Nicholas
Daniloff in 1986. The playbook did not originate in America, but America
has sunk to Soviet standards and revived it. It won’t stop there. That
is why the Assange case is the greatest threat to press freedom
worldwide.
Julian’s
US accusers use “espionage” as shorthand for “journalism”. They do not
allege that Julian was acting on behalf of—or colluding with—any foreign
power. The WikiLeaks publications expose the killing of tens of
thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan; document evidence of
torture and assassination squads; and reveal at least one potential war
crime involving the slaughter of Reuters employees in Baghdad. The facts
of the case are well-known and uncontested: the source, Chelsea
Manning, was a US army whistleblower who acted on her conscience. She
was sentenced to 35 years. The sentence was commuted by Barack Obama on
his last day in office.
Julian
acted for the public’s benefit, and he is accused—of conspiracy to
publish, and of receiving, obtaining, possessing and communicating
“national defence” information—under a statute from 1917. The
classification system was only invented 35 years after that law was
written. There is no US “Official Secrets Act”. “National defence”
information is whatever the US government says it is.
I don’t know if he will be released, but it would be vitally important
to free him. Firstly, because Assange’s freedom means the defence of
democratic values and the right to information and freedom of the press,
secondly because it is a recognition that we owe him, because thanks to
him, everything we sensed about the illegal invasion of Iraq and the
intervention in Afghanistan, we know to a large extent what the United
States and its allies, including Spain, did. And thirdly, it is the
least we can do, bearing in mind that for us defending human rights does
not mean any risk. To defend Assange is to defend the rest of the
journalists who daily face persecution, imprisonment and murder in most
countries of the world.
ALJAZEERA
offers an illustrated history showing the links between The Pentagon
Papers and Julian Assange with a story by Danylo Hawaleshka, art
direction by Mohamed Dris and artwork by Midjourney AI.
And
let's use that to knock out one of the topics coming up in e-mails in
the last 48 hours. Matt Taibbi is in a tizzy. Censorship!
Censorship!
And why am I not weighing in?
Wasn't really following. Not a fan of trash novels. To me a trash
novel is a fake ass novel. Jackie Collins was a friend but even if she
hadn't been, I wouldn't have accused her of writing a trash novel -- she
created her own worlds in print, fully committed to them. These poser
writers like Elizabeth Gilbert? Their work never interests me. So I
don't know why I'm being asked about it to begin with. Wasn't following
it. So she's written another presumably bad book and it was supposed
to be published and she was promoting it on her Twitter account where
she now has a pinned Tweet explaining that it's not coming out.
Censorship!
Cried
Matt Taibbi. I don't know maybe he's jonesing for another EAT PRAY
LOVE fix -- someone must be, right? Well this novel was going to be set
in Russia but because of Ukraine the small town US gal doesn't feel
it's appropriate to publish right now.
Most of
us could just take the win from knowing that the world was safe from at
least one bad book for the moment but Matt wants to scream censorship.
As it's been explained by the author, she made the decision. In which case, it's self-censorship.
So
presumably . . . we're all supposed to meet Matt this afternoon outside
Gilbert's home where we will march and carry signs declaring "FREE
ELIZABETH GILBERT!" and "STOP ELIZABETH GILBERT FROM SILENCING
ELIZABETH GILBERT!"
It's self-censorship.
Let's
all relax. Is it a stupid move on her part? Completely. But it's not
shocking. Her books are nothing but poses. Why are we now surprised
that she's struk yet another pose?
Now let's
talk real censorship. A friend has a YOUTUBE video and wants me to post
it. No. I don't post stupidity unless I'm going to mock it. And
they're talking about how the world has gone to pieces (possibly) and
how you can trace it all through the last ten years and . . . No. Our
current state has been a long time coming. The friend notes the media
conglomerations among other things.
Daniel
Ellsberg was censored. Like Julian Assange, Daniel tried to bring the
truth to the people. Richard Nixon persecuted Daniel Ellsberg. Tricky
Dick is a dirty joke and a criminal and he's forever remembered for
Watergate, for his enemies list and for what he did to his enemies like
Daniel Ellsberg.
Daniel is, sadly, dying. He's
lived a life to be proud of. Joe Biden should realize that he can end
up the next Richard Nixon in history or he can do something heroic and
stop the persecution of Julian Assange.
Daniel Ellsberg was on Nixon's enemies list. Plural.
Another
person on that list was Barbra Streisand. In May of 1973, Barbra did a
fundraiser for Daniel. It was held at the home of film producer
Jennings Lang and those present could hear Barbra sing whatever
requested song they pledged money for and she also sang over the phone
at the benefit as well (also for donations). She did a lot of standards
like "You're The Top" and "Someone To Watch Over Me." She even sang a
duet with Carl Reiner. Barbra was signed to COLUMBIA RECORDS.
COLUMBIA
needed Streisand product always. They were constantly churning it
out. In 1971, for example, she released two best selling albums -- one
platinum, one gold -- studio albums STONEY END and BARBRA JOAN
STREISAND. That's 1971. 1972, it was LIVE CONCERT AT THE FORUM -- the
concert she did for the George McGovern presidential campaign. It was
now May 1973 and no product. Not even a greatest hits or compilation.
COLUMBIA needed product.
Barbra had her
performance at the benefit for Daniel recorded. COLUMBIA wanted
product. Barbra singing torch songs live? They loved the idea. But
Barbra also wanted the money the album raised to go to Daniel's defense
fund.
Problem.
COLUMBIA
was part of CBS. CBS was already facing 'issues' with the Nixon White
House over their coverage of Watergate and over Walter Cronkite's THE
SELLING OF THE PRESIDENT documentary that they had done. The corporate
order came down that they didn't need any more pressure and the album
was killed. It's still in the vaults by the way, it could be released
now as a way to honor Daniel Ellsberg while he's still with us.
But
the point is there is censorship that is imposed from outside and we
can and should protest that. Self-censorship? I've real problems and
issues to deal with. Second point is, our current situations have
evolved for decades to bring us to this point.
Now let's turn to the hot mess that is Cornel West.
The video above has a little bit of a discussion of the
interview that we included last time where BLACK POWER MEDIA
interviewed Cornel West. The video below is Renee Johnstone sharing her
take on the interview.
For
those who missed it, despite last week announcing he was a US
presidential candidate for The People's Party, Cornel is now one of
potentially many candidates for The Green Party's presidential
nomination. He's gone from candidate for president to someone seeking a
presidential nomination. It is a downgrade but they're still giving
frequent flier miles. Or at least a lot of fluffing.
He
went on Bri's show yesterday and was hysterical. If you miss the 90s,
that is. I said it before, he can't adapt. He's stuck in the past.
RFK Jr.'s must be on the crack pipe. Didn't he just say that about Joe
Biden? Yes, he did. It's his same, crusty old joke. That's never
really funny. But he can speechify and we're supposed to all chuckle
like idiots. Grow the hell up.
And for those
of you who really want him to win the Green Party nomination, buy a damn
clue. You're not helping him with your attacks on Howie Hawkins or
your other efforts. You're not of the Green Party. It is a political
party. You've sneered at it for years and years.
That's
all of left media. DEMOCRACY NOW! -- as we've pointed out since 2008 --
gives a headline -- if they're lucky -- to the Green Party's national
convention. They do a week for the Democratic Party, a whole week.
They do a week for the Republican Party. And Amy Goodman's one of the
few people that does cover it.
You're not of
that party. Stop White-manning-it into a foreign country. You are not
of that party, you do not control that party. When you start attacking a
Howie Hawkins or anyone else, as a non-Green, you're not helping Cornel
West.
Ann
has been a Green her whole life. Her parents are Greens, she was
raised a Green. While you've spent decades now ignoring that party --
or hurling abuse at it insisting it's stealing votes from your candidate
on the Democratic ticket -- the party has emerged. And it's not going
to take bullying or insulting so you're trying to do so on behalf of
Cornel is only going to hurt his campaign because, unlike you, the Green
Party turns out to support the Green Party. You're temporarily
fascinated but people have spent their lives building this party and
they're not going to take kindly to outsiders telling them what's going
to happen and who they're going to support.
Okay,
let's note Paul Rudnick and then we'll return for the climatic closing
where we explain Chris Hedges' latest bit of journalistic malpractice.
Chris Hedges. Chrissy Lynn. "Why does it matter that he lied about Iraq?" An e-mailer asked that.
Honestly, I think the answer is that it doesn't matter to you.
Why that is, you'll have to ask yourself. I don't know you. And seriously doubt that I'd want to at this point.
Over
a million Iraqis are dead because of an illegal war. I don't fake
ass. I'm not Tulsi Gabbard lying to Joe Rogan and then revealing her
real colors on the debate stage when she's finally standing next to Joe
Biden and can call him out but chooses not to and goes even further by
excusing his vote for the Iraq War and then spending the following days
repeating that excuse to anyone who will put her on camera. With that
face -- she might consider a chemical peel -- she's never going to get
many chances to be on air. FOX "NEWS" needs her so they ignore her cult
membership and the fact that the cult is extremely anti-Christian.
Remember that the next time FOX tries to pose as though they're devoted
church goers.
Over a million Iraqis are dead.
In the desert sun
Every step that you take could be the final one In the burning heat Hanging on the edge of destruction, oh You can't stop the pain of your children crying out in your head Oh, they always said that the living would envy the dead
Tina Turner singing her hit "One Of The Living" written by Holly Knight.
And
it's the truth. The dead are the luckier ones of the two, they're
gone. It's their children and friends and family that are left behind
to suffer the loss.
Or
they don't matter as much as your need to fan-boy Chrissy Lynn?
"Friend of the show," Katie Halper calls him. Do journalism ethics not
matter to Katie Halper?
I
have known Cornel for many years. We drove together, leaving at 3:00 am
from our homes in Princeton, New Jersey, to attend the trial at Fort Meade of U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning.
I was in the visitors room at the prison in Frackville, Pennsylvania,
as Cornel gripped the shoulders of the political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal and told him “You have Frederick Douglass in you, brother!” Tears streamed down Mumia’s face. Cornel and I held a People’s Hearing of Goldman Sachs in Zuccotti Park during the Occupy movement where
those who were evicted and bankrupted by big banks testified against
the heartlessness and greed of corporate capitalism. We have spoken
together at rallies in support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement against the Israeli-apartheid state. We walked three
miles on a sweltering July day in Philadelphia with thousands of
homeless people to the Wells Fargo Center during the 2016 Democratic
National Convention, because housing is a human right.
I
was with Cornel when Bernie Sanders delegates, disgusted by the
machinations of the Democratic National Committee against their
candidate and his endorsement of Hillary Clinton, walked out of the convention. Cornel turned to me and said presciently, “Bernie lost his political moment.”
We have taught classes together in East Jersey State Prison. We have spoken on stages at universities where Cornel has demanded reparations for Black people and called for a guaranteed income for all citizens. I have heard him denounce the prison industrial complex as “a crime against humanity.” I have listened to him call for universal health care, canceling student debt, free university education, freedom for Julian Assange and heard him thunderagainst those who deny women access to abortion.
Cornel officiated, along with the theologian Dr. James Cone, at my ordination as a Presbyterian minister. We spoke, and wept, at James’ funeral in 2018 at Riverside Church. James wrote that we must stand, no matter the cost, with the crucified of the earth.
Check
my math but I believe the column that's from is 30 paragraphs long.
Those are the only paragraphs in the column -- about Cornel West being
the People's Party's presidential nominee where Chris talks about
knowing Cornel. And the comments are from "when we spoke about his decision" on that car ride he mentioned in the above excerpt.
Do you see the problem?
Maybe
not. But it's a lie. It's a full on lie. When Chrissy published his
lies, he thought he could get away with it. I mean the garbage we just
quoted from SCHEER POST -- but actually, he thought he could get away
with it at THE NEW YORK TIMES as well. He got away with it at THE
TIMES. It was years before Jack Fairweather at MOTHER JONES and FAIR's
COUNTERSPIN noted Chrissy's Iraq lies. Then it was circle the wagon and
protect the creep.
Which
is why everyone knows Judith Miller's name today but no one knows Chris
Hedges in regards to pimping a war on Iraq. Judith Miller wasn't the
co-author of the piece Dick Cheney waved around on MEET THE PRESS --
Chrissy was.
Chrissy lies. It's a pattern he cannot break.
And he lied at SCHEER POST. Oh, he shared how they were friends and all the times they did this and that.
So people think he told the truth about Cornel and about the nomination. They think he did. But he lied.
And he might have gotten away with it if the nomination from The People's Party hadn't blown up in Cornel's face.
[Video added below for those who had trouble finding it on their own.]
Then go back and read Chrissy Lynn's lies. Grasp that Chrissy is just a detached observer in his 'report' on the news.
But the reality is that it's Chris who recruited Cornel for that nomination.
It's Chris who planned to be his running mate -- but Chris' wife said no at the last minute.
That's not in the 'report,' is it?
A backroom deal took place and Chrissy, in 'reporting' on the news, leaves all that out.
Again,
he didn't expect to get caught or, rather, outed. He thought he'd get
away with lying yet again. What happened though was Cornel made a huge
mistake -- huge -- and wasn't ready to sink with the ship by himself.
Or, if we're being charitable, maybe he just saw Chrissy as a life
preserver.
Floatation
device or not, Chrissy lied. If he'd done that at THE NEW YORK TIMES,
he would have been fired on the spot. If this column had been published
by THE NEW YORK TIMES when he worked there, he would be fired. Not
warned. Not written up. Fired.
You do not get away, as a journalist, with writing about a campaign that you instigated when you're not revealing that detail.
Why didn't he?
Is it somehow damaging?
Doesn't let him present himself as just an observer, no, but he flat out lied.
Robert
Scheer is a huge disappointment and has been to most on the left since
at least the mid-seventies -- which is why when THE LOS ANGELES TIMES
dumped him, no other paper came forward. Then he had TRUTH DIG until he
didn't. Now he has SCHEER POST -- however much longer that lasts. It
shouldn't last a day more since it won't correct Chrissy's lies --
there will be no needed note such as :"We were disappointed to learn --
after publishing this column -- that Mr. Hedges was actually active in
seeking and securing the presidential nomination for Cornel West. At
SCHEER POST, we take disclosure seriously and would never knowingly
attempt to deceive our readers."
My
favorite quote in that article about Chris plagiarized for a piece on
poverty that he submitted to HARPER'S? The HARPER'S fact checker
explaining, "Hedges
not only used another journalist’s quotes, but he used them in
first-person scenes, claiming he himself gathered the quotes. It was one of the worst things I’d ever seen as a fact-checker at the magazine. And it was endemic throughout the piece."
Remember
that when you're reading Chrissy Lynn or when you see him on a YOUTUBE
program. Remember that he's a liar. Not just Iraq, not just Cornel but
a serial liar in print. Over and over.
I
don't like being hustled. I don't like being lied to. And Cornel only
squealed because he was on the spot and trying to save his own ass. Do
you really think a journalist has a right to write about a presidential
campaign and not to disclose that he is the one who brokered the
nomination and, that when he did, he was planning to share the ticket
with Cornel, to be his running mate?
Those
aren't minor details. And Robert Scheer, if he doesn't issue a
correction to that column, just flushed whatever was left of his
reputation down the drain. (And he already knows a number of people are
biting their tongues until he passes at which point they plan to talk
loudly about Scheer's journalism issues.) So it's win-win for me.
Big
brave truth teller exposed as a liar? I'm loving it. Read that linked
to article and love it when the fact checker explains how Chrissy tried
to hush the whole thing down after he was caught by rushing off to Rick
MacArthur (owner of HARPER'S). You really need to read the article.
I'd forgotten how good it was. Chris even ripped off the writer's
wife. I'd forgotten how bad the plagiarism was and how he went off on a
UT professor for catching his plagiarism of Hemingway. He's a nasty
little thing, that Chrissy Lynn. Marvel over how he lies that the stuff
he stole from the wife's reporting was supposed to block quoted:
But
he never addressed why he made so many small changes to the original
text: the tweaking of some sentences and lines but not others, the
adding of a hyperlink not in the original, the changing of phrases such
as “my local reporter” to “a local reporter.”
He
even tries to lie about how his piece was rejected, blaming it on one
person, when it was an editorial decision that involved the publisher.
But
mainly note how Robert Scheer, Katrina vanden Heuvel and others deny
that plagiarism. At least Naomi Klein, whom he also stole from, just
said "No comment."
I can't stop laughing at that article. It really should be required reading for all of Chrissy Lynn's accolades.
