Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Celerity
Celerity's Journal
Celerity's Journal
February 1, 2024
https://prospect.org/power/2024-02-01-return-of-koch-brothers/
It’s been a relatively quiet past few years, all things considered, for Koch Industries, almost too quiet for comfort. But of course, that’s how Charles and David Koch (David died in 2019), co-owners of the second-largest private company in the U.S., always preferred to conduct business. At the end of 2023, the fossil fuel and agrochemical giant re-emerged from its recent lull in activity and made a splash in the business press. The company announced its $3.6 billion purchase of OCI Global’s Iowa Fertilizer, among the largest chemical production sites in the state for nitrogen-based fertilizers. Along with seeds, fertilizers are the top inputs in modern agriculture that farmers rely on, which has made the ongoing consolidation of fertilizer production a critical threat. Just four companies, the Kochs among them, have acquired vast market share and now together control 75 percent of all nitrogen fertilizer production.
At the global level, a cartel of agrochemical firms owns most of the production of the other chemical inputs for fertilizer such as potash. As a consequence of this market power, the prices farmers have to pay for fertilizers have shot up and are often bundled together by the agriculture giants with other required farming products at an even higher markup. Among the reduced field of fertilizer players, Iowa Fertilizer has been one of the few remaining direct competitors to the Kochs’ agrochemical operations, especially within the state of Iowa, where the Kochs have been expanding their operations. In addition to the acceleration of concentration, what makes this purchase stand out in particular is that taxpayers are footing the bill. The nitrogen enrichment facility that the Kochs are buying was financed by $550 million in state, local, and even federal tax subsidies brokered by former Republican Gov. Terry Branstad and his current Republican successor, Kim Reynolds, over the past decade.
What’s even more outlandish is that the justification for these lavish tax abatement packages was precisely to bolster competition against agrochemical giants like Koch Industries, with the goal of bringing down costs for farmers. Because no strings were attached to the tax breaks, however, state taxpayers could actually end up funding a new round of consolidation rather than competition, not to mention a huge payout for OCI Global. However, the Koch acquisition may not be completely finalized yet. Last week, 18 agricultural reform and antitrust groups sent a letter to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission calling for regulators to block the deal using their merger review authority. “Should the acquisition be allowed to proceed, taxpayers will have effectively subsidized the expansion of Koch’s control over a critical and heavily concentrated sector of our agricultural economy,” the letter reads.
The deal marks the return of the Koch Brothers into national headlines after a prolonged period of relative reclusiveness. For most of the company’s history, secrecy is how the Kochs chose to run the company. The family-run corporation, which deals in the energy, chemical, and agriculture industries, resisted going public in order to maintain the highest degree of privacy around its business dealings. By the early 2000s, the company quietly ascended to become the second-largest private company in the country, next to Cargill. Its growth went nearly unnoticed by the broader public even as its oil refineries and agrochemical plants rapidly spread across the country. What really put the Koch brothers under the public spotlight were the investigations that started coming out about their shadow network of right-wing political organizations that had taken hold of the Republican Party. Through a number of think tanks and dark-money groups, the Kochs used their vast fortunes to imprint a radical free-market ideology onto Washington and statehouses, always on the side of strangling government, lowering taxes, and slashing regulations.
snip
The Return of the Koch Brothers
Koch Industries is buying an Iowa fertilizer plant built with taxpayer dollars. Will federal authorities block the deal?https://prospect.org/power/2024-02-01-return-of-koch-brothers/
It’s been a relatively quiet past few years, all things considered, for Koch Industries, almost too quiet for comfort. But of course, that’s how Charles and David Koch (David died in 2019), co-owners of the second-largest private company in the U.S., always preferred to conduct business. At the end of 2023, the fossil fuel and agrochemical giant re-emerged from its recent lull in activity and made a splash in the business press. The company announced its $3.6 billion purchase of OCI Global’s Iowa Fertilizer, among the largest chemical production sites in the state for nitrogen-based fertilizers. Along with seeds, fertilizers are the top inputs in modern agriculture that farmers rely on, which has made the ongoing consolidation of fertilizer production a critical threat. Just four companies, the Kochs among them, have acquired vast market share and now together control 75 percent of all nitrogen fertilizer production.
At the global level, a cartel of agrochemical firms owns most of the production of the other chemical inputs for fertilizer such as potash. As a consequence of this market power, the prices farmers have to pay for fertilizers have shot up and are often bundled together by the agriculture giants with other required farming products at an even higher markup. Among the reduced field of fertilizer players, Iowa Fertilizer has been one of the few remaining direct competitors to the Kochs’ agrochemical operations, especially within the state of Iowa, where the Kochs have been expanding their operations. In addition to the acceleration of concentration, what makes this purchase stand out in particular is that taxpayers are footing the bill. The nitrogen enrichment facility that the Kochs are buying was financed by $550 million in state, local, and even federal tax subsidies brokered by former Republican Gov. Terry Branstad and his current Republican successor, Kim Reynolds, over the past decade.
What’s even more outlandish is that the justification for these lavish tax abatement packages was precisely to bolster competition against agrochemical giants like Koch Industries, with the goal of bringing down costs for farmers. Because no strings were attached to the tax breaks, however, state taxpayers could actually end up funding a new round of consolidation rather than competition, not to mention a huge payout for OCI Global. However, the Koch acquisition may not be completely finalized yet. Last week, 18 agricultural reform and antitrust groups sent a letter to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission calling for regulators to block the deal using their merger review authority. “Should the acquisition be allowed to proceed, taxpayers will have effectively subsidized the expansion of Koch’s control over a critical and heavily concentrated sector of our agricultural economy,” the letter reads.
The deal marks the return of the Koch Brothers into national headlines after a prolonged period of relative reclusiveness. For most of the company’s history, secrecy is how the Kochs chose to run the company. The family-run corporation, which deals in the energy, chemical, and agriculture industries, resisted going public in order to maintain the highest degree of privacy around its business dealings. By the early 2000s, the company quietly ascended to become the second-largest private company in the country, next to Cargill. Its growth went nearly unnoticed by the broader public even as its oil refineries and agrochemical plants rapidly spread across the country. What really put the Koch brothers under the public spotlight were the investigations that started coming out about their shadow network of right-wing political organizations that had taken hold of the Republican Party. Through a number of think tanks and dark-money groups, the Kochs used their vast fortunes to imprint a radical free-market ideology onto Washington and statehouses, always on the side of strangling government, lowering taxes, and slashing regulations.
snip
February 1, 2024
Despite her avowed loyalty to the prime minister, the business and trade secretary is the only member on the right, Tory rebels feel, who can unite the party
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-plot-to-replace-rishi-sunak-with-kemi-badenoch-she-has-x-factor-nznn6q260
https://archive.is/APMpA
Tory plotters believe that Kemi Badenoch is best placed to succeed Rishi Sunak if they can manage to oust him in the coming months. The business and trade secretary has accused the plotters of “stirring” and said that they need to “stop messing around and get behind the leader”. However, the Tory rebels believe that Badenoch is the only candidate on the right who stands a chance of uniting the party and selling their policy platform. Suella Braverman, the former home secretary, is seen as too divisive among Tory MPs but Badenoch is perceived to have star quality.
• Getting rid of Rishi Sunak won’t save the Tories, poll says
“The reaction to Suella is too vitriolic,” one MP familiar with the rebels’ thinking said. “She can’t run again. Kemi has the X factor, she has the capacity to cut through and communicate. She can carry off the policy platform that’s being drawn up.” They said she had the “added benefit” of being hated by the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tory MPs. Badenoch clashed with them after she was accused of watering down plans to repeal EU laws. The MP said: “The ERG hate her, which means she’s inoculated by the left. She can bring people together.”
Badenoch has had no involvement with the plotters and has gone out of her way to demonstrate her loyalty to Sunak and Downing Street. However, she has not ruled out another bid to be Tory leader should the opportunity arise. The rebel group is based in central London. The members are said to be working with about ten Tory MPs as they draw up plans to remove Sunak from office. Braverman is said to be among those who believe there needs to be a new prime minister. She has repeatedly said that Sunak needs to “change course”.
There is particular concern among MPs on the right of the party who feel betrayed by Sunak over migration. Those involved include some members of the New Conservatives, a 35-strong group of Tory MPs. Sir Simon Clarke, a former cabinet minister, called for a change of leadership last week after warning that the Tories faced a “massacre” at the general election. In a 1,500-word article the former levelling-up secretary warned that the Tories faced a “massacre” in the general election and were in a state of denial. Sunak, he said, had gone from being an “asset to an anchor” and had to go.
snip
The plot to replace Rishi Sunak with Kemi Badenoch: 'She has X Factor'
Despite her avowed loyalty to the prime minister, the business and trade secretary is the only member on the right, Tory rebels feel, who can unite the party
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-plot-to-replace-rishi-sunak-with-kemi-badenoch-she-has-x-factor-nznn6q260
https://archive.is/APMpA
Tory plotters believe that Kemi Badenoch is best placed to succeed Rishi Sunak if they can manage to oust him in the coming months. The business and trade secretary has accused the plotters of “stirring” and said that they need to “stop messing around and get behind the leader”. However, the Tory rebels believe that Badenoch is the only candidate on the right who stands a chance of uniting the party and selling their policy platform. Suella Braverman, the former home secretary, is seen as too divisive among Tory MPs but Badenoch is perceived to have star quality.
• Getting rid of Rishi Sunak won’t save the Tories, poll says
“The reaction to Suella is too vitriolic,” one MP familiar with the rebels’ thinking said. “She can’t run again. Kemi has the X factor, she has the capacity to cut through and communicate. She can carry off the policy platform that’s being drawn up.” They said she had the “added benefit” of being hated by the European Research Group of Eurosceptic Tory MPs. Badenoch clashed with them after she was accused of watering down plans to repeal EU laws. The MP said: “The ERG hate her, which means she’s inoculated by the left. She can bring people together.”
Badenoch has had no involvement with the plotters and has gone out of her way to demonstrate her loyalty to Sunak and Downing Street. However, she has not ruled out another bid to be Tory leader should the opportunity arise. The rebel group is based in central London. The members are said to be working with about ten Tory MPs as they draw up plans to remove Sunak from office. Braverman is said to be among those who believe there needs to be a new prime minister. She has repeatedly said that Sunak needs to “change course”.
There is particular concern among MPs on the right of the party who feel betrayed by Sunak over migration. Those involved include some members of the New Conservatives, a 35-strong group of Tory MPs. Sir Simon Clarke, a former cabinet minister, called for a change of leadership last week after warning that the Tories faced a “massacre” at the general election. In a 1,500-word article the former levelling-up secretary warned that the Tories faced a “massacre” in the general election and were in a state of denial. Sunak, he said, had gone from being an “asset to an anchor” and had to go.
snip
February 1, 2024
https://prospect.org/justice/2024-01-31-moral-bankruptcy/
One afternoon in March 2021, Mike Van Deelen found a letter in his mailbox with no return address. Inside was a single typewritten page with an explosive allegation: The Houston-area judge presiding over a lawsuit he had filed against a company he accused of defrauding him was in a romantic relationship with a partner at the company’s law firm, and his case was just part of a corruption scheme whereby companies would hire the girlfriend’s law firm with the expectation that the judge would go easy on them—and by extension, hard on small-time creditors like him. The judge was not just any judge. It was David R. Jones, the Bankruptcy King of the Southwest, a legendary figure who presided over more corporate bankruptcies over the past decade than any other judge in America—well over a thousand in all—during which time bankruptcy became the biggest gravy train in the legal profession. At the time, Van Deelen mainly knew him as a guy who’d been a bigger jerk to him than any other judge he’d ever annoyed (and he’d annoyed quite a few).
Among Jones’s prolific caseload, which includes such household names as Neiman Marcus, JCPenney, and Chesapeake Energy, was the bankruptcy of an engineering firm called McDermott International, in whose stock Van Deelen, a longtime securities analyst and sometime math teacher who claimed membership in Mensa, owned 30,000 now-worthless shares. The company had issued nothing but rosy projections and effusive pronouncements until word slipped out about three months before the bankruptcy filing that both the company and its bondholders had retained the dreaded phalanx of “restructuring advisers.” Van Deelen suspected that McDermott had filed for bankruptcy protection out of opportunism rather than insolvency, as a way for the C-suite to boost its own fortunes by wiping out investors and handing the company over to creditors, who would happily swap the debt for stock that was sure to pop once oil prices recovered.
When Michael Van Deelen feels he has been wronged, he likes to sue. He’s filed dozens of lawsuits against everyone from Little League officials to the Kansas state tax assessor, always representing himself pro se, and once appearing before a sympathetic appeals court judge named Neil Gorsuch. But bankruptcy courts are not ordinary halls of justice. Bankruptcy brings all those other halls to a grinding halt, automatically staying not only all attempts to collect on monies owed, but all litigation pending in any court of any stature. Once a plan of reorganization is approved by relevant creditors, it cannot be amended, barring proof of deliberate fraud. And so Van Deelen had been showing up to the Houston federal courthouse to try and convince Judge Jones there had been a mistake, that the bankruptcy had been filed in bad faith and ought to be halted pending an investigation, perhaps through the appointment of a bankruptcy examiner, to ensure that justice had been served. But that is not how Judge Jones worked. Instead, he questioned Van Deelen’s sanity and threatened to have him arrested.
The nation's bankruptcy code, the constitutionally enshrined system by which Americans are theoretically afforded the chance to discharge unmanageable debts, has over the past decade or two quietly metamorphosed into a vast enabler of reverse wealth redistribution. Corporations have exploited the tremendous privileges of bankruptcy protection to abrogate union contracts, cram down unilateral wage and benefit cuts, eject lawsuits filed by customers and community members killed by toxic products and manufacturing processes, back out of funding pensions and zero out the savings accounts of workers they pressured into investing in company stock as a condition of keeping their jobs, settle wrongful death claims for less than a penny on the dollar, evade responsibility for cleaning up after oil spills or refinery explosions or poisoning groundwater with benzene, and, of course, discharge debt incurred in the process of defrauding vulnerable students into taking out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans they are practically barred by law from discharging in bankruptcy themselves.
snip
much much more at the top link
Moral Bankruptcy
The constitutional grant of a second chance for the destitute has become an enabler of reverse wealth redistribution. One wild case in Houston tells the story.https://prospect.org/justice/2024-01-31-moral-bankruptcy/
One afternoon in March 2021, Mike Van Deelen found a letter in his mailbox with no return address. Inside was a single typewritten page with an explosive allegation: The Houston-area judge presiding over a lawsuit he had filed against a company he accused of defrauding him was in a romantic relationship with a partner at the company’s law firm, and his case was just part of a corruption scheme whereby companies would hire the girlfriend’s law firm with the expectation that the judge would go easy on them—and by extension, hard on small-time creditors like him. The judge was not just any judge. It was David R. Jones, the Bankruptcy King of the Southwest, a legendary figure who presided over more corporate bankruptcies over the past decade than any other judge in America—well over a thousand in all—during which time bankruptcy became the biggest gravy train in the legal profession. At the time, Van Deelen mainly knew him as a guy who’d been a bigger jerk to him than any other judge he’d ever annoyed (and he’d annoyed quite a few).
Among Jones’s prolific caseload, which includes such household names as Neiman Marcus, JCPenney, and Chesapeake Energy, was the bankruptcy of an engineering firm called McDermott International, in whose stock Van Deelen, a longtime securities analyst and sometime math teacher who claimed membership in Mensa, owned 30,000 now-worthless shares. The company had issued nothing but rosy projections and effusive pronouncements until word slipped out about three months before the bankruptcy filing that both the company and its bondholders had retained the dreaded phalanx of “restructuring advisers.” Van Deelen suspected that McDermott had filed for bankruptcy protection out of opportunism rather than insolvency, as a way for the C-suite to boost its own fortunes by wiping out investors and handing the company over to creditors, who would happily swap the debt for stock that was sure to pop once oil prices recovered.
When Michael Van Deelen feels he has been wronged, he likes to sue. He’s filed dozens of lawsuits against everyone from Little League officials to the Kansas state tax assessor, always representing himself pro se, and once appearing before a sympathetic appeals court judge named Neil Gorsuch. But bankruptcy courts are not ordinary halls of justice. Bankruptcy brings all those other halls to a grinding halt, automatically staying not only all attempts to collect on monies owed, but all litigation pending in any court of any stature. Once a plan of reorganization is approved by relevant creditors, it cannot be amended, barring proof of deliberate fraud. And so Van Deelen had been showing up to the Houston federal courthouse to try and convince Judge Jones there had been a mistake, that the bankruptcy had been filed in bad faith and ought to be halted pending an investigation, perhaps through the appointment of a bankruptcy examiner, to ensure that justice had been served. But that is not how Judge Jones worked. Instead, he questioned Van Deelen’s sanity and threatened to have him arrested.
The nation's bankruptcy code, the constitutionally enshrined system by which Americans are theoretically afforded the chance to discharge unmanageable debts, has over the past decade or two quietly metamorphosed into a vast enabler of reverse wealth redistribution. Corporations have exploited the tremendous privileges of bankruptcy protection to abrogate union contracts, cram down unilateral wage and benefit cuts, eject lawsuits filed by customers and community members killed by toxic products and manufacturing processes, back out of funding pensions and zero out the savings accounts of workers they pressured into investing in company stock as a condition of keeping their jobs, settle wrongful death claims for less than a penny on the dollar, evade responsibility for cleaning up after oil spills or refinery explosions or poisoning groundwater with benzene, and, of course, discharge debt incurred in the process of defrauding vulnerable students into taking out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans they are practically barred by law from discharging in bankruptcy themselves.
snip
much much more at the top link
February 1, 2024
https://www.thedailybeast.com/one-clue-that-kyrsten-sinema-is-retiring-her-weird-spending
https://archive.is/DC5Ni
Once upon a time, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) crusaded against politicians cashing in on perks of their office. In 2018, as a U.S. House member and Senate candidate, Sinema co-wrote a bill seeking to crack down on lawmaker use of public funds for “first class air travel,” among other luxuries. “Arizonans are sick and tired of seeing Washington bureaucrats use their hard-earned tax dollars for personal gain,” Sinema said in a constituent email from July 2018, citing “private luxury travel” specifically.
Now, as Sinema reportedly considers whether to run for another term in 2024, it’s hard to overstate the degree to which she has become a caricature of the type of politician she once bashed. On Monday, The Daily Beast reported on Sinema’s unusual spending of $210,000 in taxpayer funds on private chartered air travel since 2020—a practice that she herself had tried to ban just six years earlier.
But if Sinema pushes the envelope on her use of public funds, her latest campaign finance filings reveal her comfort with spending donor money on just about any perk under the sun—stays at five-star European hotels, luxury vehicles, first-class airfare, and splurges at plush West Coast vineyards.
On top of all of that, Sinema’s personal security expenses carry a staggering burn rate of more than $100,000 a month, most of it to one person—Tulsi Gabbard’s sister. According to Federal Election Commission filings made public this week, for instance, Sinema’s personal political action committee—the “Getting Stuff Done PAC”—spent over $5,800 on first-class airfare for the senator in the second half of 2023.
snip
One Clue That Kyrsten Sinema Is Retiring: Her Weird Spending
Kyrsten Sinema is spending more than $100,000 a month on personal security, barely raising money, and shelling out for first-class plane tickets—after railing against first class.https://www.thedailybeast.com/one-clue-that-kyrsten-sinema-is-retiring-her-weird-spending
https://archive.is/DC5Ni
Once upon a time, Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-AZ) crusaded against politicians cashing in on perks of their office. In 2018, as a U.S. House member and Senate candidate, Sinema co-wrote a bill seeking to crack down on lawmaker use of public funds for “first class air travel,” among other luxuries. “Arizonans are sick and tired of seeing Washington bureaucrats use their hard-earned tax dollars for personal gain,” Sinema said in a constituent email from July 2018, citing “private luxury travel” specifically.
Now, as Sinema reportedly considers whether to run for another term in 2024, it’s hard to overstate the degree to which she has become a caricature of the type of politician she once bashed. On Monday, The Daily Beast reported on Sinema’s unusual spending of $210,000 in taxpayer funds on private chartered air travel since 2020—a practice that she herself had tried to ban just six years earlier.
But if Sinema pushes the envelope on her use of public funds, her latest campaign finance filings reveal her comfort with spending donor money on just about any perk under the sun—stays at five-star European hotels, luxury vehicles, first-class airfare, and splurges at plush West Coast vineyards.
On top of all of that, Sinema’s personal security expenses carry a staggering burn rate of more than $100,000 a month, most of it to one person—Tulsi Gabbard’s sister. According to Federal Election Commission filings made public this week, for instance, Sinema’s personal political action committee—the “Getting Stuff Done PAC”—spent over $5,800 on first-class airfare for the senator in the second half of 2023.
snip
February 1, 2024
Trump says he's more popular than Taylor Swift as allies launch "holy war" against her
January 31, 2024
The conspiracy theory group, flagged as a terror threat by the FBI, makes outlandish claims about the former president’s foes including Michelle Obama and Nikki Haley
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/donald-trump-qanon-conspiracy-theories-shaman-knkbt0xhg
https://archive.is/a9Z7p
Donald Trump paused for a moment as sombre music began to play. “Where we go one, we go all,” cried a heckler. Trump pursed his lips, appeared to identify the man in the crowd, nodded his head, then smiled. This was no ordinary interjection on Trump’s all-conquering campaign trail through New Hampshire. The music, the raised finger salute of the heckler and the slogan are synonymous with QAnon, the sprawling conspiracy cult that emerged from online chatrooms in 2017 and has become an obsession for the US political right. QAnon beliefs evolve with every change in the news cycle — from 9/11 “trutherism” to Covid vaccine scepticism — but at its core, followers are convinced that Trump is facing down a shadowy cabal of Satan-worshipping paedophiles at the heart of American politics, business and media.
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks, Pope Francis and the Dalai Lama are among the names believed to molest children and eat their victims to harvest the chemical adrenochrome. According to the group, Trump will lead “The Storm”, seizing back power from this global elite. The ringleaders will be imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay before facing a military trial and public execution, restoring America to greatness. QAnon followers were prominent among the rioters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, in a last-ditch bid to block certification of Joe Biden’s election victory and keep Trump in power. As the former president steps up his campaign to take back the White House, his nods to the movement have returned as he seeks to rev-up his die-hard supporters.
“Free the J6’ers,” a woman shouted in New Hampshire. “We will,” Trump responded, pointing to her. Trump has been woven into QAnon lore from the outset. On online message boards like 4Chan, where the cult began, the former president is hailed as a messianic figure recruited by American generals. As president, Trump was coy about the movement, which was declared a terrorist threat by the FBI and has inspired scores of violent attacks across the US. Trump claimed to know little of QAnon, though he said its followers were “people who love our country” and “like me very much”. Since launching his political comeback, Trump has kept the movement closer.
The QAnon anthem first appeared at rallies in late 2022 as he announced his third run for the presidency in the shadow of mounting criminal investigations. On his Truth Social platform he has reposted QAnon memes, including the slogan “The Storm is Coming”, referring to the moment awaited by QAnon believers when he will sweep away his political rivals, restoring America to greatness. “Trump has fully embraced what previously was held at arm’s length. True QAnon believers feel like Trump is … on their side,” said Mia Bloom, a professor at Georgia State University who has studied QAnon and wrote a book about the group.
snip
Some conspiracy theorists claim Joe Biden, left, is Lee Harvey Oswald
How Donald Trump fuels QAnon cult that claims Biden killed JFK
The conspiracy theory group, flagged as a terror threat by the FBI, makes outlandish claims about the former president’s foes including Michelle Obama and Nikki Haley
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/donald-trump-qanon-conspiracy-theories-shaman-knkbt0xhg
https://archive.is/a9Z7p
Donald Trump paused for a moment as sombre music began to play. “Where we go one, we go all,” cried a heckler. Trump pursed his lips, appeared to identify the man in the crowd, nodded his head, then smiled. This was no ordinary interjection on Trump’s all-conquering campaign trail through New Hampshire. The music, the raised finger salute of the heckler and the slogan are synonymous with QAnon, the sprawling conspiracy cult that emerged from online chatrooms in 2017 and has become an obsession for the US political right. QAnon beliefs evolve with every change in the news cycle — from 9/11 “trutherism” to Covid vaccine scepticism — but at its core, followers are convinced that Trump is facing down a shadowy cabal of Satan-worshipping paedophiles at the heart of American politics, business and media.
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Tom Hanks, Pope Francis and the Dalai Lama are among the names believed to molest children and eat their victims to harvest the chemical adrenochrome. According to the group, Trump will lead “The Storm”, seizing back power from this global elite. The ringleaders will be imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay before facing a military trial and public execution, restoring America to greatness. QAnon followers were prominent among the rioters who stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, in a last-ditch bid to block certification of Joe Biden’s election victory and keep Trump in power. As the former president steps up his campaign to take back the White House, his nods to the movement have returned as he seeks to rev-up his die-hard supporters.
“Free the J6’ers,” a woman shouted in New Hampshire. “We will,” Trump responded, pointing to her. Trump has been woven into QAnon lore from the outset. On online message boards like 4Chan, where the cult began, the former president is hailed as a messianic figure recruited by American generals. As president, Trump was coy about the movement, which was declared a terrorist threat by the FBI and has inspired scores of violent attacks across the US. Trump claimed to know little of QAnon, though he said its followers were “people who love our country” and “like me very much”. Since launching his political comeback, Trump has kept the movement closer.
The QAnon anthem first appeared at rallies in late 2022 as he announced his third run for the presidency in the shadow of mounting criminal investigations. On his Truth Social platform he has reposted QAnon memes, including the slogan “The Storm is Coming”, referring to the moment awaited by QAnon believers when he will sweep away his political rivals, restoring America to greatness. “Trump has fully embraced what previously was held at arm’s length. True QAnon believers feel like Trump is … on their side,” said Mia Bloom, a professor at Georgia State University who has studied QAnon and wrote a book about the group.
snip
Some conspiracy theorists claim Joe Biden, left, is Lee Harvey Oswald
January 31, 2024
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-lincoln-project-wont-be-gagged-by-no-labels-justice-barr-f2ed2697
https://archive.is/ArRvn
related
The Lincoln Project Won't Be Gagged by No Labels
The last group that attempted to use the Justice Department to attack us was the Trump administration.https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-lincoln-project-wont-be-gagged-by-no-labels-justice-barr-f2ed2697
https://archive.is/ArRvn
On Jan. 18, No Labels attempted to outsource part of its 2024 campaign to the Justice Department. In an outrageous attack on the First Amendment rights of its critics, including the Lincoln Project, No Labels held a news conference and demanded the Justice Department gag our right to speech and assembly.
We were disappointed to see former Attorney General William P. Barr championing their cause on these pages (“A Conspiracy Against No Labels,” op-ed, Jan. 25).
Government-subsidized lawfare against critics is a tactic of autocrats, not Americans. No Labels claims the mantle of moderation, but the truth is darker. Far from offering voters a choice, its CEO Nancy Jacobson and her aides will likely choose the No Labels candidate for president.
As part of a broad coalition of groups who have exposed No Labels as a threat to American democracy, we refuse to stand down. The last group that attempted to use the Justice Department to attack the Lincoln Project was the Trump administration when Mark Meadows urged Mr. Barr to go after us. It didn’t work then. It won’t work now.
We were disappointed to see former Attorney General William P. Barr championing their cause on these pages (“A Conspiracy Against No Labels,” op-ed, Jan. 25).
Government-subsidized lawfare against critics is a tactic of autocrats, not Americans. No Labels claims the mantle of moderation, but the truth is darker. Far from offering voters a choice, its CEO Nancy Jacobson and her aides will likely choose the No Labels candidate for president.
As part of a broad coalition of groups who have exposed No Labels as a threat to American democracy, we refuse to stand down. The last group that attempted to use the Justice Department to attack the Lincoln Project was the Trump administration when Mark Meadows urged Mr. Barr to go after us. It didn’t work then. It won’t work now.
Rick Wilson and Reed Galen
Co-founders, Lincoln Project
related
No Labels Asks the Justice Department to Investigate Its Critics
The group said efforts to oppose it and incendiary statements were evidence of an unlawful conspiracy. Such a complaint is unusual in politics, where attacks and pressure campaigns are common.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/18/us/politics/no-labels-doj.html
https://archive.is/s3pa0
Leaders of No Labels at a news conference on Thursday in Washington, D.C. The group filed a complaint with the Justice Department last week.Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times
No Labels, the centrist group that could field a third-party presidential bid, has asked the Justice Department to investigate what it calls unlawful intimidation by groups that oppose it. The group filed a complaint on Jan. 11, accusing a number of political figures and other critics of engaging in voter suppression and violating federal law, including the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, which is often used to combat organized crime. Leaders of No Labels who described the complaint during a news conference on Thursday pointed largely to previously reported details of efforts to oppose the group, as well as incendiary statements that some of its critics had made on political podcasts.
The group compared the efforts of its opponents to those of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1950s and ’60s and the fictional mob boss Tony Soprano. A montage of clips shown by the group included Rick Wilson, a founder of the anti-Trump Republican group the Lincoln Project, saying last spring that the group had to “be burned to the ground,” using an expletive — although the clip had been cut off before Mr. Wilson adds the word “politically.” (After being asked about the shortened clip, the group uploaded a version of the video with the full statement.)
https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1644145691252457473
Other critics featured in the montage were Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark, a conservative news outlet, and Matt Bennett of Third Way, a centrist Democratic group. Former Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina, a national co-chairman of No Labels, said that opponents of the group were “using intimidation to keep people off the ballot,” and attacking “the rights of the American people and our democracy.” In a statement on Thursday, the Lincoln Project accused No Labels of trying to “weaponize the D.O.J.” to “attack their opponents for protected political speech.” In a separate statement, Third Way called the complaint “an all-too-predictable attempt to distract from the fact that No Labels has no chance of winning.” The Bulwark did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The complaint filed by No Labels was unusual for a group involved in campaign politics. Attacks and pressure campaigns against potential candidates, donors and supporters of a party are common in politics, particularly in high-profile presidential races, and are considered widely permissible by courts under First Amendment speech protections. The group’s claims that its opponents are meaningfully infringing on voting rights are also complicated by the fact that a number of third-party presidential candidates have already entered the race, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the prominent environmental lawyer turned anti-vaccine activist.
snip
The group said efforts to oppose it and incendiary statements were evidence of an unlawful conspiracy. Such a complaint is unusual in politics, where attacks and pressure campaigns are common.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/18/us/politics/no-labels-doj.html
https://archive.is/s3pa0
Leaders of No Labels at a news conference on Thursday in Washington, D.C. The group filed a complaint with the Justice Department last week.Credit...Haiyun Jiang for The New York Times
No Labels, the centrist group that could field a third-party presidential bid, has asked the Justice Department to investigate what it calls unlawful intimidation by groups that oppose it. The group filed a complaint on Jan. 11, accusing a number of political figures and other critics of engaging in voter suppression and violating federal law, including the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, which is often used to combat organized crime. Leaders of No Labels who described the complaint during a news conference on Thursday pointed largely to previously reported details of efforts to oppose the group, as well as incendiary statements that some of its critics had made on political podcasts.
The group compared the efforts of its opponents to those of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1950s and ’60s and the fictional mob boss Tony Soprano. A montage of clips shown by the group included Rick Wilson, a founder of the anti-Trump Republican group the Lincoln Project, saying last spring that the group had to “be burned to the ground,” using an expletive — although the clip had been cut off before Mr. Wilson adds the word “politically.” (After being asked about the shortened clip, the group uploaded a version of the video with the full statement.)
https://twitter.com/ProjectLincoln/status/1644145691252457473
Other critics featured in the montage were Jonathan V. Last of The Bulwark, a conservative news outlet, and Matt Bennett of Third Way, a centrist Democratic group. Former Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina, a national co-chairman of No Labels, said that opponents of the group were “using intimidation to keep people off the ballot,” and attacking “the rights of the American people and our democracy.” In a statement on Thursday, the Lincoln Project accused No Labels of trying to “weaponize the D.O.J.” to “attack their opponents for protected political speech.” In a separate statement, Third Way called the complaint “an all-too-predictable attempt to distract from the fact that No Labels has no chance of winning.” The Bulwark did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The complaint filed by No Labels was unusual for a group involved in campaign politics. Attacks and pressure campaigns against potential candidates, donors and supporters of a party are common in politics, particularly in high-profile presidential races, and are considered widely permissible by courts under First Amendment speech protections. The group’s claims that its opponents are meaningfully infringing on voting rights are also complicated by the fact that a number of third-party presidential candidates have already entered the race, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the prominent environmental lawyer turned anti-vaccine activist.
snip
January 31, 2024
Convincing AI-generated videos are proliferating and the scariest thing is that people don’t care if they’re phoney
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-deepfake-deluge-has-only-just-begun-cq82q5zrb
https://archive.is/nYrpv
Joe Biden, for all his many fine attributes, is not super at talking. He slurs, he stumbles, he drifts. At times, he threatens to go the full Grandpa Simpson. So you might think an AI-generated fake that sounds like him but also gets all the words right could do him a favour. Not so in New Hampshire. Over the past few days, a deluge of fake pornographic images of the pop star Taylor Swift has attracted huge global condemnation, but they should not have been the big deepfake story of the moment. That honour ought to go to an automated call sent to voters shortly before the primary last week, in which an artificial voice that sounded as though it belonged to the president told people to save their vote for November. “What a bunch of malarky,” it began. What followed was stilted, robotic and uninspiring. But then, isn’t it always?
It is possible, sometimes, to see something coming a long way off and still be flummoxed about what to do about it. I was made into an AI avatar myself for a magazine feature last year, an experience that was more eerie than terrifying, although only just. I first started writing about the threat of fake news shortly after the 2016 US election and I have learnt since that the great challenge is persuading people to care. Partly this is because the roots of disinformation, even when you can find them, tend to be convoluted and bizarre. On rare occasions you can trace fakery back to malign state actors, such as the Russian Internet Research Agency troll factory. A more typical example, though, back in 2016, was a preposterous story about Biden threatening to barricade himself in the Oval Office and never leave, shared on Facebook more than 100,000 times. Created by a Canadian satirist, it was then mocked up as real by Macedonian teenagers chasing advertising revenue clicks, to be circulated by older, internet-naive users who had not read it properly. Suggest that 60-plus million Americans voted for Donald Trump because of stuff like this, and you sound preposterous. Yet suggest that it made zero difference and I think you are missing something.
Another problem is that once our decisions are made we are all incredibly poor at properly comprehending why we have made them. Tell people they have been fooled and they are apt to both bristle and bargain. In New Hampshire, if there were any Democrats who opted not to vote after hearing Robot Joe, I would wager that by now they have convinced themselves that they were not going to vote anyway. Or consider the horrible image of a baby amid rubble that circulated at the start of Israel’s current assault on Gaza. Spread thousands of times, it has appeared on placards at demonstrations and, through that, into newspapers worldwide. Like an awful lot of viral Gaza images, it was in fact AI-generated, and fairly obviously so, not least because the baby had too many fingers. For those who believed it, though, so what? Doubtless many would now counter that there have been many babies crawling through rubble these past months, just not that one.
Fakery is already playing a role in elections. Last year in Indonesia, spoof footage of monoglot presidential candidates speaking fluent Arabic was circulated, presumably by their supporters. In Bangladesh, conversely, one female politician was hit by mocked up pictures of her posing in a bikini, and another in a swimming pool. It is not hard to envisage how something like the New Hampshire call could affect our own elections. Imagine a fake audio recording of Sir Keir Starmer in his lawyer days, expressing sympathy for terrorist suspects. Or of Rishi Sunak speaking to the American healthcare industry and agreeing to turn the NHS into an app. Eventually they would be debunked but anybody fooled would be likely to keep on telling themselves that these guys probably would say those things, even if in these cases they had not. As in, even when the lie is exposed, do not imagine that minds will change.
snip
The deepfake deluge has only just begun
Convincing AI-generated videos are proliferating and the scariest thing is that people don’t care if they’re phoney
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-deepfake-deluge-has-only-just-begun-cq82q5zrb
https://archive.is/nYrpv
Joe Biden, for all his many fine attributes, is not super at talking. He slurs, he stumbles, he drifts. At times, he threatens to go the full Grandpa Simpson. So you might think an AI-generated fake that sounds like him but also gets all the words right could do him a favour. Not so in New Hampshire. Over the past few days, a deluge of fake pornographic images of the pop star Taylor Swift has attracted huge global condemnation, but they should not have been the big deepfake story of the moment. That honour ought to go to an automated call sent to voters shortly before the primary last week, in which an artificial voice that sounded as though it belonged to the president told people to save their vote for November. “What a bunch of malarky,” it began. What followed was stilted, robotic and uninspiring. But then, isn’t it always?
It is possible, sometimes, to see something coming a long way off and still be flummoxed about what to do about it. I was made into an AI avatar myself for a magazine feature last year, an experience that was more eerie than terrifying, although only just. I first started writing about the threat of fake news shortly after the 2016 US election and I have learnt since that the great challenge is persuading people to care. Partly this is because the roots of disinformation, even when you can find them, tend to be convoluted and bizarre. On rare occasions you can trace fakery back to malign state actors, such as the Russian Internet Research Agency troll factory. A more typical example, though, back in 2016, was a preposterous story about Biden threatening to barricade himself in the Oval Office and never leave, shared on Facebook more than 100,000 times. Created by a Canadian satirist, it was then mocked up as real by Macedonian teenagers chasing advertising revenue clicks, to be circulated by older, internet-naive users who had not read it properly. Suggest that 60-plus million Americans voted for Donald Trump because of stuff like this, and you sound preposterous. Yet suggest that it made zero difference and I think you are missing something.
Another problem is that once our decisions are made we are all incredibly poor at properly comprehending why we have made them. Tell people they have been fooled and they are apt to both bristle and bargain. In New Hampshire, if there were any Democrats who opted not to vote after hearing Robot Joe, I would wager that by now they have convinced themselves that they were not going to vote anyway. Or consider the horrible image of a baby amid rubble that circulated at the start of Israel’s current assault on Gaza. Spread thousands of times, it has appeared on placards at demonstrations and, through that, into newspapers worldwide. Like an awful lot of viral Gaza images, it was in fact AI-generated, and fairly obviously so, not least because the baby had too many fingers. For those who believed it, though, so what? Doubtless many would now counter that there have been many babies crawling through rubble these past months, just not that one.
Fakery is already playing a role in elections. Last year in Indonesia, spoof footage of monoglot presidential candidates speaking fluent Arabic was circulated, presumably by their supporters. In Bangladesh, conversely, one female politician was hit by mocked up pictures of her posing in a bikini, and another in a swimming pool. It is not hard to envisage how something like the New Hampshire call could affect our own elections. Imagine a fake audio recording of Sir Keir Starmer in his lawyer days, expressing sympathy for terrorist suspects. Or of Rishi Sunak speaking to the American healthcare industry and agreeing to turn the NHS into an app. Eventually they would be debunked but anybody fooled would be likely to keep on telling themselves that these guys probably would say those things, even if in these cases they had not. As in, even when the lie is exposed, do not imagine that minds will change.
snip
January 31, 2024
New York design studio Order has created a nostalgic new brand identity for Herman Miller that harkens back to the mid-century modern heritage of the American design brand. Last updated at the end of the 1990s, in the era of Web 1.0, the branding previously featured the "computer-friendly" FF Meta font and the company's enduring M logo from 1946, emblazoned on a red circle.
Tasked with bringing this identity into the 21st century while staying true to Herman Miller's legacy, Order took inspiration from the brand's own history – specifically the modernist branding that was introduced by graphic designer John Massey in the late 1960s. Much like this predecessor, the updated logo now features a Helvetica-style typeface, while the swooping M symbol was once again freed from the confines of its circular backdrop so it can be used as a graphic design element rather than just a trademark.
The brand's identity was last overhauled in 1999. "The M symbol has stayed consistent through every iteration of the identity since Irving Harper drew it in 1946, so changing it was never an option," Order design director Garrett Corcoran told Dezeen. "As we looked at its role over time, we saw early uses embraced it as both an identity mark and in the full visual language. However, in the 90s it evolved to the circle, which created some limitations around its use."
"Removing the circle was a way to again celebrate the symbol in its simplest form and allow it to seamlessly integrate with other brand elements like typography or photography," Corcoran continued. The Herman Miller wordmark is now styled in the Söhne typeface by Klim Type Foundry – a modern homage to the Helvetica originally used by Massey.
snip
Herman Miller unveils first rebrand in over two decades
https://www.dezeen.com/2024/01/23/herman-miller-rebrand-order-design/New York design studio Order has created a nostalgic new brand identity for Herman Miller that harkens back to the mid-century modern heritage of the American design brand. Last updated at the end of the 1990s, in the era of Web 1.0, the branding previously featured the "computer-friendly" FF Meta font and the company's enduring M logo from 1946, emblazoned on a red circle.
Tasked with bringing this identity into the 21st century while staying true to Herman Miller's legacy, Order took inspiration from the brand's own history – specifically the modernist branding that was introduced by graphic designer John Massey in the late 1960s. Much like this predecessor, the updated logo now features a Helvetica-style typeface, while the swooping M symbol was once again freed from the confines of its circular backdrop so it can be used as a graphic design element rather than just a trademark.
The brand's identity was last overhauled in 1999. "The M symbol has stayed consistent through every iteration of the identity since Irving Harper drew it in 1946, so changing it was never an option," Order design director Garrett Corcoran told Dezeen. "As we looked at its role over time, we saw early uses embraced it as both an identity mark and in the full visual language. However, in the 90s it evolved to the circle, which created some limitations around its use."
"Removing the circle was a way to again celebrate the symbol in its simplest form and allow it to seamlessly integrate with other brand elements like typography or photography," Corcoran continued. The Herman Miller wordmark is now styled in the Söhne typeface by Klim Type Foundry – a modern homage to the Helvetica originally used by Massey.
snip
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleHometown: London
Home country: US/UK/Sweden
Current location: Stockholm, Sweden
Member since: Sun Jul 1, 2018, 07:25 PM
Number of posts: 43,551
