Good morning. Welcome to #247 in my ongoing series “Hey, isn’t this supposed to be APR? Why is he talking?” Yes, yes it is. And because.
Yesterday, Donald Trump tweeted out what would be easy to pass off as #infinity plus one in his ongoing series “Hey look, I’m a fascist asshole.” In this episode, Trump made yet another repetition of his baseless claim that CNN and MSNBC are “fake news.” Which makes this sound like a pretty boring episode. But this time there’s a twist.
This time Trump preceded and trailed that fake news claim with a whine about how social media has been picking on the right. And he threatened to do something about it. That something could be an executive order. It might be a regulation from the FCC. It might even be a bill hastily drafted up by Mark, Devin, Jim, Dana, or any of the two hundred Republicans in the House eager to prove their loyalty. Whatever form it takes, Trump made it clear what he wants: Stop social media sites from banning anyone for anything.
On the surface, that might sound … almost equitable. As Trump says, “Let everybody participate, good & bad, and we will all just have to figure it out!” But here’s the thing. Nobody is getting kicked off social media for being too far right. They’re being kicked off because they’re encouraging violence. Or conducting hate speech. Or, and this is really by far the biggest category of those being kicked off—they’re being kicked of because they’re really just a few dozen lines of script.
What Trump is really arguing is that social media should have more hate, more violence, and more bots. Many, many more bots.
There are a couple of reasons why that works for Trump. The biggest one is: Trump does not read social media. Check it out. He doesn’t Facebook. He has no idea what Instagram means. Even on Twitter, Trump only follows 47 accounts, and that’s including the Trump Organization, and Team Trump, and and a separate account for every single Trump golf course. Trump doesn’t have to worry about “figuring it out!” He. Does. Not. Read. It. Not good, not bad. Not at all.
For Trump, Twitter is a broadcast outlet. All he cares about is the 53M people under the “follow” column. That gives Trump a daily audience that’s more than twice the number who watched Mehgan and Harry on their wedding day. He’s drawing about half a Superbowl. Every day.
The best way to describe what Trump wants is with just one word: NOISE. Trump wants to crank up the noise level in the room. It might seem that noise would drown everyone out equally, but it doesn’t. It drowns out most voices under a sea of hate and spam. Just not the ones with 53M follower bullhorns.
Defending hate speech and calls to violence helps Trump, because his xenophobic and racist positions depend on hate and fear. But that’s a side benefit. The real deal is simply to increase the ratio of noise to signal. To make it harder and harder to find real information in a sea of utter muck. It’s why he mixed this talk with another attack on “fake news.”
Because you can’t speak truth to power if no one can distinguish the truth.
And … hey, look, there are pundits behind this screen. Let’s go in.
The Queen
Leonard Pitts leads off the remembrance.
It’s always good when a pundit can recommend immediate action that you can take.
Aretha Louise Franklin, a preacher’s daughter from Memphis who was broadly acclaimed the greatest singer of the last half century — indeed, one of the greatest singers in the history of American song — died of pancreatic cancer Thursday at her home in Detroit, surrounded by family and friends. She was 76.
And if you are seeking to understand what makes her worthy of those accolades and superlatives, you’re going about it all wrong. Don’t just read this or any other appreciation. Don’t just sit and watch august personages pay homage on the cable news channel.
No, get out your music player and put on “Chain of Fools.” Put on “Freeway of Love” or “(You Make Me Feel Like) A Natural Woman.” Put on her version of “Bridge Over Troubled Water.” And for goodness sake, put on “Respect.” Do that, and you will understand why she was called — with no hint of irony or crass showbiz hokum — the Queen of Soul.
Even better when that action drowns sorrow in wonder.
Candace Allen on why that voice was more than just a fantastic instrument.
It’s 1967, and the Cambridge Common, a park near Harvard University, had never seen our like. A group of black girls on the cusp of womanhood, moving from We Shall Overcome circumspection to Black Pride and Power as we stomp down its central path, singing at the top of our lungs on our way to classes at Harvard Yard:
What you want, baby [world, white folks], I got it!
What you need, you know I got it!
All I’m asking for is a little respect!
Recently arrived at the school we’ve worked so hard to enter, we’ve come from north and south, from comfortable households and those less well off. Scattered evenly about the sister school’s dorms we’ve learned that some of the white girls think us exhibits for their personal edification, watching us in common showers to see what happens to our skin colour, a few girls’ heads rubbed in exploration of the mystery of our hair (they never tried more than once … ). For sanity as much as solidarity, we have found and cleaved to one another. Following Aretha’s example we are declarative, unapologetic and suffused with joy at being exactly who we are.
Nothing ties to a moment like music. The best songs are like a flashbulb going off in your mind, burning everything, including the emotions, deeper. Sometimes the song is the moment. Sometimes it’s the singer. Go read this piece.
Brett Kavanaugh
Ronald Klain on what it would really mean to approve the man who is hiding all his cards.
Far from being “unlikely,” the prospect that Roe will be overturned if Kavanaugh is confirmed is the most obvious outcome. For decades, the court has relentlessly weakened Roe — rejecting a right to abortion access for poor women, upholding restrictions on a woman’s right to choose, even allowing so-called crisis pregnancy centers to mislead women about their choices. An increasingly conservative roster of justices has played judicial Jenga with Roe — pulling out one underpinning after another, waiting to see what will bring it down.
While the court did stop short of overturning Roe during Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s tenure, Kavanaugh — who has lauded the decision’s dissenters , and is backed by an administration dedicated to casting Roe on the “ash heap of history” — is no Kennedy.
But there’s a good case that Kavanaugh wouldn’t stop with just overturning Roe. Not when there’s a chance to criminalize choice.
Is there anything in the jurisprudence of Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Clarence Thomas, Gorsuch or a potential Justice Kavanaugh to suggest they would not come down on that side? The last two were picked by a president who pledged during his campaign to “punish women” who get an abortion and who ran on a platform that called for a constitutional amendment to ban all abortions in all states. Add to that the influence of a vice president who (as governor of Indiana) signed a law requiring women to hold a funeral for an aborted fetus.
Economy
Ganesh Sitaraman on Elizabeth Warren’s Accountable Capitalism Act.
The idea is as simple as the lesson from Spiderman: with great power comes great responsibility. The biggest corporations are extraordinarily powerful, but they often exercise that power in a way that can deepen economic inequality, stack the deck in our politics in favor of the powerful, and undermine the well-being of workers.
The Accountable Capitalism Act addresses these issues. The bill would require corporations with more than $1bn in revenue to apply for a corporate charter from the federal government. To get this charter, the companies would effectively have to become benefit corporations (or b-corps) – companies that recognize that their duties extend beyond maximizing profits for shareholders. In addition, 40% of the board would be elected by employees, top executives would have to hold stock for five years (or three years if there’s a stock buy-back), and three-fourths of the board and shareholders would have to vote before the company used funds for political purposes. These provisions address interlinked problems: companies are too fixated on stock prices, executives frequently try to maximize short-term profits, and workers’ rights and compensation often get the short end of the stick. (Full disclosure: I used to work for Senator Warren.)
I promised some time back in 2016 that I was going to do a series about how we get from where we are, to a economy that, if not a true utopia, at least puts us on the road. That didn’t happen. It didn’t happen because, rather than spending my days complaining about how Hillary isn’t moving fast enough to raise the minimum wage, or strengthen labor, I … we, have all spent the last eighteen months watching decades of progress being put to a tiki torch. But Warren’s bill is at least a recognition that there is another path. Let’s flip the Congress and see what happens.
Autocracy
Jonathan Freedland on why I keep feeling compelled to have this as a regular section.
More than 18 months into his presidency, Donald Trump’s modus operandi – and the danger it represents – is clear. His working method is that of the mafia boss and gangland chieftain, daily wielding his power to settle scores, teach lessons and crush dissent. Anyone who’s seen The Sopranos will know the routine: the casual intimidation, the obsession with loyalty, the brutal ostracism meted out to those who dare defy the man at the top.
This week’s demonstration came at the expense of John Brennan, the former head of the CIA who spent a quarter-century in intelligence and counter-terrorism. He’s no dove: his record includes rendition, drone strikes and illegal spying on the US Senate. But he has become one of the most trenchant critics of Trump – he accuses him of treason – and the president exacted his punishment, stripping Brennan of the security clearance that had given him access, even in retirement, to some of his nation’s secrets.
You can speculate as to why Trump did it and why he did it now. The answer to the first question was provided by the president himself. He contradicted the official line supplied by his own press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders – that Brennan was punished for “erratic conduct and behaviour” – to tell the Wall Street Journal that what really bothered him was Brennan’s early role in the “sham” Russia inquiry that is driving him to increasing fury.
I’m not so worried that Trump did this now to derail the talk about Omarosa. I’m worried he did it now because that talk, or something else, was going to lead to something he really didn’t want talked about before he pitched a fresh bomb into the national conversation.
Racism
Colbert King on Omarosa, tapes, and that word.
Pardon me if I don’t join the hunt for a recording of Trump speaking that foul word. For me at least, Trump’s use or nonuse of a gross racial slur against African Americans is not a litmus test for deciding his fitness for the office. With or without the n-word, Trump is a disgrace to the presidency, a stain on that high office that will take years to eradicate.
Offensive as it is, the n-word is no line in the sand, the crossing of which marks the starting point for racism. Offensive words can surely get you placed in the zone; but it’s your deeds that really gut and destroy. Deeds are how, when and where true feelings get revealed. It is through their prism that Trump should be viewed.
Anyone who is still pretending that Trump isn’t racist until that here that word on tape, deserves to have something nearly as harsh words sent their way.
Social Media
Molly Roberts on just how weak those rules Trump wants to eliminate are in the first place.
Platforms have wished-and-washed for weeks now about whether Alex Jones of Infowars would lose his pulpit on their services. He’s off Facebook and YouTube, and Twitter has put him in timeout, with signs pointing to a permanent suspension from even that free-speechiest of the squadron. But there’s a reason reaching this conclusion took these companies so long and looked so sloppy: They’re operating according to a credo that treats societal ills as if they were caused by an irksome line of code.
When Jack Dorsey suggested Wednesday that “any suspension . . . makes someone think about their actions and behaviors” (and later had to clarify that he doesn’t “assume everyone” actually will change), the remark recalled Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s declaration that there are good-faith Holocaust deniers. That’s because both chief executives were trying to fit outliers into frameworks that are designed to work for everyone — that would, in their language, “operate at scale.” …
… platforms can’t pretend they’re neutral overseers any longer — no matter how many haphazard rules they put in place. Instead, they have to articulate what they want the world to look like beyond the vague objectives that for so long seemed sufficient. Next, they have to rethink their responsibility for helping us get there.
I can think of one place where that approach has worked remarkably well. And put down that pie.
Trump vs All Enemies
Catherine Rampell calls on all those conservatives who were so obsessed over free speech on campuses.
To all those supposed constitutional conservatives out there, consider this your call to arms: The First Amendment is under direct attack, and this time from a much more powerful foe than misguided college freshmen.
By whom I mean: the ostensible leader of the free world.
Again and again, President Trump has used the weight of his office and the broader federal government to inflict financial damage upon critics, whistleblowers, journalists and peaceful protesters for exercising their rights to free speech.
That’s the other half of all Trump’s talks about letting anyone talk — he doesn’t think that’s a requirement. Included in his morning tweets was not just a claim that NBC and CNN were fake news, but a statement that “yet I do not ask that their sick behavior be removed.” Implicit in that remark is Trump’s feeling that he could close down these networks if he wasn’t so … generous. He could go after anyone’s speech.
Elsewhere — again, in recent days — the president and his minions have called the press the enemy of the people and the opposition party. Previously they have blacklisted reporters and entire news outlets (including The Post) whose questions Trump disliked. When unhappy with Post coverage in particular, Trump has threatened government action against Amazon in an apparent attempt to financially punish its chief executive, Jeffrey P. Bezos, who independently owns the paper.
Anyone’s.
David Kris on the problems generated by revoking John Brennan’s security clearance.
First, this is clearly retaliation for public criticism of the president, and it appears designed to intimidate others who might consider doing the same. Brennan has been a fierce Trump detractor, and now he is being punished. Brennan himself will not be deterred, of course, but the president seems intent on sending a message to millions of current and former government officials that their clearances now depend on good behavior as defined by Trump's personal preferences.
Reduce the signal. Increase the noise. Make it impossible for anyone to hear those who don’t have a bullhorn. The Trump Show may have it’s “monster of the week” episodes, but this is its overarching theme. Visit Kris’ column if you want reasons two and three.