Global Climate Strike

As many as four million people marched in support of immediate climate action. Hundreds of events were planned to take place ahead of the United Nations summit.

The Climate Action Summit will showcase new initiatives by government, business and civil society to increase their commitments achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement and work toward reducing emissions to essentially zero by mid-century.

Update (September 23):  Climate activists blocked traffic in Washington, D.C.

Update (October 6):  Tom Engelhardt saw signs of optimism in New York City.

Also, a dramatic depiction of warming within my lifetime (a mean of nearly 1 degree Celsius).

And Extinction Rebellion plans renewed civil disobedience.

Update (October 9):  A feedback loop is growing in the East Siberian Sea.

Russian scientists in the Arctic Ocean said they have discovered the most powerful methane gas fountain ever recorded.

The concentration of methane in the air there was up to 16 parts per million, more than nine times higher than the atmospheric average.

Update (October 15):  Mike Miller considers what it takes to move from protest to power.

Update (October 16):  Robert Hunziker considers what Extinction Rebellion has accomplished so far.

Whistleblower

Amid the routine corruption and threats of war, the Washington Post reports that an intelligence officer brought a complaint to the Intelligence Community Inspector General. This has not been shared with Congress as required by law. The complaint involves "promises" the president made to Ukraine as well as additional incidents. Cody Fenwick:

We don’t actually have to speculate much to see a plausible story. Rudy Giuliani, the president’s attorney, has been open about a campaign to pressure Ukraine to open investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and events related to [Dear Leader's] 2016 campaign manager Paul Manafort, who was accused by Special Counsel Robert Mueller of being an undisclosed agent of Ukraine. As part of his effort to influence Ukrainian policy in a way that could clearly influence the 2020 election, Giuliani even worked with the U.S. State Department, as he has admitted.

[T]his apparent effort to ratchet up pressure on Zelensky seemed to escalate over the summer when the White House tried to delay military aid to Ukraine. Last week, [Fuckface] finally dropped the delay and released the funds following blowback from Congress.

Did [Orangeman] promise to permit the aid to Ukraine in exchange for a probe of Biden? Could he have promised a visit to the White House instead? Or perhaps the "promise" involved "a separate aid package worth $140m" from the State Department, which the Independent reports is potentially still in the works?

Fenwick points out that what we already know about the scheme is highly improper if not illegal, and notes:

The effort to block the complaint suggests it’s even more serious than we would otherwise suspect.

Update (September 20):  Matthew Miller sums up the reactions to the Ukraine revelation:

If he was promising U.S. government action in exchange for a foreign government targeting a political opponent, that is about as high a crime and misdemeanor as one can imagine.

Heather Digby Parton would be "shocked if even one prominent Republican contradicts" "the inalienable right to use the full power of the U.S. government to ensure his re-election".

It appears highly probable that [this whistleblower's urgent report] regarded the alleged extortion of Zelensky's government in hopes of digging dirt on Joe Biden for [this con man's] electoral benefit. We don't know the details, but it seems pretty clear that Giuliani has been working this for some time and that [Fuckface] himself is personally involved.

If all this pans out as the major scandal it appears to be, in a sane world it would mean the end of [Dear Leader's] presidency.

Update (September 23):  As Fuckface seems to admit he did, in fact, discuss Biden with the president of Ukraine (withholding military aid one week before the call to Zelensky was , of course, out of "concern" for corruption not a pressure tactic!), Heather Digby Parton argues Democrats simply cannot avoid their responsibility to impeach.

The president and his enablers are now in open defiance of democratic norms to such an extent that the Democratic leadership's trust that the next election will sort all this out is seriously in doubt. There can be no faith in free and fair elections as long as [Fuckface] brazenly uses the power of the presidency to solicit foreign interference in our elections, apparently having been persuaded that because he was not held responsible for his previous collusion, he had a free hand to do it again.

Amanda Marcotte agrees the risk is worth it.

Impeachment almost certainly won't result in removing [Dear Leader]. But it will create an opportunity for Democrats to make the case — witness by witness, hearing by hearing — for his corruption in a highly public way.

It might not work. [Fuckface], as ignorant as he is, is highly skilled at manipulating the media to advance his lies and falsify scandals against Democrats.

But impeachment is a big story, and most media will feel duty bound to cover it that way — hopefully, to the point where it drowns out [von Clownstick's] lies about his opponents. It's worth a shot, and it's unquestionably the right thing to do.

Update (September 24):  By unanimous consent, the Senate is asking for the whistleblower complaint to be turned over to the intelligence committees. And Speaker Pelosi announced the start of an official impeachment inquiry.

Update (September 25):  The White House did release the complaint and a partial transcript of the July phone call to Ukraine. After Zelensky brought up the topic of military aid (which had just been delayed), Fuckface says,

I would like you to do us a favor, though, because our country has been through a lot, and Ukraine knows a lot about it.

Senator Chuck Schumer is laying the groundwork to put Dear Leader through the wringer.

Having read the documents in [the complaint] I’m even more worried about what happened than I was when I read the memorandum of the conversation. There are so many facts have to be examined.

Cenk Uygur thinks it will only take one administration official to turn against him and the presidency will be over.

Acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire threatened to resign if the Administration restricted what he could say in his upcoming congressional testimony, The Washington Post reported Wednesday citing current and former officials familiar with the matter.

Update (September 26):  The complaint has been publicly released.

In the course of my official duties, I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election. This interference includes, among other things, pressuring a foreign country to investigate one of the President’s main domestic political rivals.

The whistleblower indicates there was a cover up.

In the days following the phone call, I learned from multiple U.S. officials that senior White House officials had intervened to “lock down” all records of the phone call, especially the official word-for-word transcript of the call that was produced-as is customary-by the White House Situation Room. This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call.

Withholding military aid had no known justification.

On 18 July, an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) official informed Departments and Agencies that the President "earlier that month" had issued instructions to sµspend all U.S. security assistance to Ukraine. Neither OMB nor the NSC staff knew why this instruction had been issued.

Naturally, Fuckface lashes out with threats--presumably suggesting execution.

Who’s the person who gave the whistleblower the information? Because that’s close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart with spies and treason, right? We used to handle it a little differently than we do now.

Update (September 30):  The President of the United States endorses the thought that impeachment "will cause a civil war like fracture" in the country and wonders whether the Chair of the House Intelligence Committee should be arrested for treason.

Update (October 2):  More dangerous and deranged talking points from Dear Leader:

As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment, it is a COUP, intended to take away the Power of the People, their VOTE, their Freedoms, their Second Amendment, Religion, Military, Border Wall, and their God-given rights as a Citizen of The United States of America!

Update (October 3):  Dear Leader isn't even hiding it anymore--he seems to think all nations should assist his re-election.

China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.

Add one more count to the list of charges.

Speaking on trade with China moments before recommending that China investigate the Bidens, [Fuckface] said that 'I have a lot of options on China, but if they don’t do what we want, we have tremendous power'.

The art of projection:

Biden and his son are stone-cold crooked.

Update (October 5):  Fuckface discussed Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren with the Chinese in a phone call. And a series of State Department text messages gives evidence of explicit quid pro quo.

Heard from the White House—assuming President Z convinces [Dear Leader] he will investigate / "get to the bottom of what happened" in 2016, we will nail down date for visit to Washington.

A career diplomat expressed some concern.

As I said on the phone, I think it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a political campaign.

All because an insecure Manbaby wants to believe that insane conspiracy theories will vindicate him.

Update (October 8):  Betray Americans and that's no big deal. Just a big joke. Betray the Kurds and now we're outraged! But this is no joke:

[An] eight-page letter, signed Tuesday by White House counsel Pat Cipollone, accused Democratic lawmakers of using the investigation to overturn the 2016 election results and demanded they abandon all impeachment efforts.

Erza Klein notes:

The administration’s flat refusal to cooperate with congressional oversight is, itself, impeachable.

Update (October 9):  Heather Digby Parton isn't sure Republicans think the constitution is still operative.

White House counsel has declared that [impeachment] is illegitimate because it is political and therefore the American people must make the final decision in the next election. Mind you, the president has specifically been accused of attempting to sabotage the next election. It's a truly awe-inspiring Catch-22.

Update (October 10):  Andrew O'Hehir and Andrew Bacevich leave me feeling less certain about the value of Democrats getting caught up in a situation that just couldn't be ignored. O'Hehir:

Don’t get me wrong: Impeachment is warranted for a long list of reasons, even if it’s best understood as an episode in the 2020 presidential campaign. But both sides are wandering through a hall of mirrors. Democrats sanctimoniously present themselves as the party of constitutional democracy — in support of the clandestine intelligence agencies and an arcane overseas proxy war no actual citizens understand, let alone voted for. Republicans are breaking new ground, meanwhile, as the only fascist party in history to position themselves as enemies (and victims) of the police state. I don’t know who ends up winning this confrontation, but both sides are playing to lose.

Bacevich wonders how Dear Leader's actions compare to the consequences of events like the Iraq War or the Great Recession.

What are the real crimes? Who are the real criminals? No matter what happens in the coming months, don’t expect the impeachment proceedings to come within a country mile of addressing such questions.

Update (October 12):  Former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Yovanovitch, testified to Congress against orders from the administration.

The veteran foreign service officer, who reportedly delivered those remarks in a closed-door deposition, said she was "disappointed" and "incredulous that the U.S. government chose to remove an Ambassador based, as best as I can tell, on unfounded and false claims by people with clearly questionable motives."

Yovanovitch was abruptly removed from her Ukraine post on May 6 after what appeared to be a months long campaign by [the president's] personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, and others close to the president who complained she was undermining the administration’s efforts to pressure Ukrainian leaders to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden.

She told investigators on Friday that John Sullivan, the deputy secretary of state, had informed her of "a concerted campaign" against her and said [Dear Leader] had been pushing for her removal since the summer of 2018.

Will Fuckface stand by his man?

Federal prosecutors are investigating ... Rudy Giuliani’s links to the sudden recall in May of the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, The New York Times reported Friday. Manhattan investigators are looking into whether Giuliani violated lobbying laws that protect the U.S. government from covert foreign influence.

CNN and Bloomberg reported Thursday that federal prosecutors were also examining Giuliani's financial dealings with associates Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas, who were arrested Thursday on charges that they secretly funneled Russian money to groups that support [Orangeman] and other GOP candidates.

Update (October 15):  Keep that testimony rolling.

Fiona Hill, a former top White House adviser on Russia, revealed to congressional investigators on Monday that [Fuckface von Clownstick] conducted policy toward Ukraine for his personal benefit.

And Rebecca Gordon doesn't want us to forget Dear Leader's higher crimes.

He is, in other words, a threat not just to the American people, or to the rule of law, but to the whole human species.

Update (October 17):  Cody Fenwick describes the "avalanche of confessions" from Mick Mulvaney which, of course, he now blames the media for misconstruing.

"We do that all the time with foreign policy," Mulvaney said when ABC News reporter Jon Karl noted that it would constitute a quid pro quo if the U.S. was withholding funding from Ukraine unless it agreed to do an investigation into the Democrats' server.

Update (October 19):  Is it going to be Syria or Doral that will finally convince Republicans they've had enough of this guy?

So, blaming everyone else except himself, Fuckface changes his mind.

Update (October 22):  Bill Taylor is the author of the "crazy to withhold security assistance" text.

The United States' top diplomat in Ukraine reportedly testified on Tuesday to House lawmakers that [Dear Leader] held up military aid to Ukraine until its president agreed to investigate Joe Biden ― effectively confirming a quid pro quo demand on the part of the White House.

The testimony is being described as "incredibly damaging" and "very troubling".

[Taylor said] he was directly told that military aid to Ukraine was being delayed by [Fuckface] in order to pressure the country to open investigations into Democrats.

Republicans might be getting worried. Meanwhile, Speaker Pelosi released a fact sheet on Orangeman's three stages of wrongdoing.

The fact sheet dubbed the three stages "the shakedown", "the pressure campaign" and "the cover-up".

Update (October 26):  Hard to keep up, but it is important to ask about every possible aspect of wrongdoing (was it two crimes or four crimes?) even if it doesn't pass as an article of impeachment. And the Department of Justice has been ordered to turn over grand jury testimony from the Mueller investigation to House committees.

Update (October 29):  Collusion with Russia didn't rise to the level of criminal conspiracy, so Dear Leader declared exoneration and felt free to seek further election meddling. With impeachment looming, Heather Digby Parton has a warning against a perceived lack of strategy.

[I]t's a mistake to assume that [von Clownstick] and the Republicans are flailing around without any purpose, and attacking the process for lack of any other options. They're doing this because it's worked before, and they figure they might just get away with it again.

But the evidence is pouring in. National Security Council member Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, who actually witnessed the famous Fuckface call to Ukraine, testified that he did raise concerns about how the requested investigations "had nothing to do with national security". Dan Froomkin:

[S]ustaining and strengthening a bulwark against Russian expansion apparently had no value to [Dear Leader], if he even understood what was going on there. His personal and political impulses overwhelmed any interest in national security. That's the story. That's what will get him impeached.

Update (November 1):  The House of Representatives has formalized the impeachment process by a vote of 232 to 196. And the testimony continues.

Update (November 2):  Rachel Maddow, citing David Ignatius, speculates that Dear Leader had a quid pro quo with Ukraine in 2017 only to get caught when he tried it again this year.

Update (November 4):  House Democrats are starting to release transcripts from the impeachment inquiry.

It started with a warning to watch her back, that people were "looking to hurt" her. From there, former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch told House investigators, it escalated into a chilling campaign to fire her as [Dear Leader] and his allies angled in Eastern Europe for political advantage at home.

Update (November 5):  Looks like supporter Gordon Sondland is changing his tune now that transcripts are being released.

The [testimony] update marks the first admission by a senior official in direct contact with [Dear Leader] that military aid to Ukraine was tied to a demand for a probe of Biden.

Update (November 8):  Sondland's revised testimony makes it clear President Zelensky knew why aid was being withheld. Ukraine was prepared to do what Fuckface wanted until Congress intervened.

The New York Times reported on Thursday that Zelensky had planned to announce an investigation into [von Clownstick's] political rivals during a September interview on CNN, but those plans had been scrapped once [Dear Leader] released promised security aid.

Update (November 9):  Fuckface has argued that by releasing the funds before the investigation started, he did nothing wrong. But:

It wasn’t [Dear Leader] who released the first part of the Ukraine military aid, but the State Department after lawyers determined that the White House freeze on the funds was illegal, several sources have told Bloomberg.

Update (November 11):  An attorney for Giuliani's pal talked to the New York Times.

[Lev] Parnas allegedly traveled to Kyiv just before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was inaugurated in May and told the incoming government to announce an investigation into [von Clownstick's] political rival Joe Biden, otherwise the U.S. would freeze military aid to the country.

Update (November 12):  Amanda Terkel lists key facts in the Ukraine scandal.

[Fuckface] pressured a foreign country to investigate his political rival.
[He] withheld U.S. military aid to Ukraine.
The White House tried to cover up [Dear Leader's] actions.
Rudy Giuliani had an outsized role in foreign policy, despite not being in government.
The whistleblower complaint remains correct ― and largely irrelevant.

Update (November 16):  Tim Morrison recalls being told by Gordon Sondland that military aid to Ukraine depended on the public announcement of a Biden investigation.

In his private testimony to impeachment investigators made public Saturday, Morrison recounted that Sondland also told him he was discussing the Ukraine matters directly with [Dear Leader].

Morrison was warned to stay away from these activities by John Bolton and noted that these investigations weren't part of "the proper policy process that I was involved in on Ukraine". Morrison indicated Sondland and Fuckface spoke five times over the summer before aid was forced to be released.

Update (November 18):  Lev Parnas claims Dear Leader personally assigned him to a "secret mission" in Ukraine.

And Fuckface trashed an advisor to Mike Pence who characterized the call to Zelensky (she heard the actual call) as related "to his personal political agenda" more than any foreign policy objective.

Tell Jennifer Williams, whoever that is, to read BOTH transcripts of the presidential calls, & see the just released ststement [sic] from Ukraine. Then she should meet with the other Never [Fuckfacers], who I don’t know & mostly never even heard of, & work out a better presidential attack!

He always slams non-white or non-male hardest. More witness intimidation?

Update (November 25):  The Washington Post reports that Mick Mulvaney was scrambling in August to justify withholding aid to Ukraine. The efforts

focused on the legal question of how to comply with the congressional Budget and Impoundment Act, which requires the executive branch to spend congressionally appropriated funds unless Congress agrees they can be rescinded.

Update (November 27):  So Giuliani may have had some side deal going on in Ukraine. Dear Leader claims not to know what his lawyer was doing in Ukraine since "Rudy has other clients other than me. I'm one person." But Giuliani says he only had one client.

Meanwhile, Aaron Maté says the "bombshell" testimony isn't amounting to much and Jim Kavanagh argues Democrats are mainly defending the neoliberal status quo and are quite happy to go along with an extended Senate trial to wreak the Sanders and Warren campaigns.

Update (December 17):  Rudy Giuliani admits that the U.S. ambassador was a problem for his scheme.

I believed that I needed Yovanovitch out of the way. She was going to make the investigations difficult for everybody.

Pathocracy

A parody about the "chosen one" is soon outdated by subsequent insanity. Paul Rosenberg cites Elizabeth Mika for an "understanding our sociopolitical situation".

The tyrant shows up in a society that is already weakened by disorder, blind to it, and unable and/or unwilling to take corrective measures that would prevent a tyrannical takeover.

This political environment damages our well-being. Mika defines the disease and offers a way out.

Pathocracies spread into general populace like cancer, taking over and destroying organs of social and political life, along with individual human beings. People living under pathocracies become demoralized and despondent. Depression and despair, along with various social pathologies, are predictable consequences of being forced to adjust to immoral and inhumane socio-political systems based on lies and exploitation.

Awakening to the reality of pathocracy, mobilizing against it and dismantling it, is a process of positive disintegration during which individuals come to realize the importance of higher values, and start implementing them, little by little, in their daily lives.

Rosenberg notes that resistance to Fuckface began immediately after the election, but worries that "it has waned with exhaustion and overwhelming onslaught" and that Dear Leader "clearly believes he can outlast this opposition". Further, if we don't address the reasons tyranny is rising, then the appeal of pathological solutions (racist policies, etc) will remain.

In a time of crisis, picking a status quo candidate means we're only going to be stuck with the actual status quo. Mika elaborates:

This is where the role of courageous and morally advanced leaders becomes so important as they articulate a vision of a better life, along with a critique of the current pathological system. 

[W]e need a transformational candidate, one who is experienced, principled, determined and open-minded to be able to preside over the unprecedented challenges facing us and help us navigate them in ways that enable genuine democracy-promoting changes.

Mika is optimistic about positive change:

Our developmental trajectory leads always toward our highest values, despite — and because of — periods of trials and tribulations.

Update (December 1):  Paul Rosenberg is reminded that a "return to normal" isn't possible since "normal" is how we got here. Elizabeth Mika notes the cult is already well formed.

[A]lmost the entire Republican Party has become a mirror eagerly reflecting [von Clownstick's] psychopathology and protecting him from reality, no matter the cost to the country and the world.

We face the danger that a "wildly disordered worldview becomes the new normal, and everyone else must adjust". Mika:

The rule of a pathological leader and his similarly disordered coterie that defines pathocracy normalizes and champions the worst human impulses. We saw this under communism in Eastern Europe, under fascism in Germany, in the former Yugoslavia where neighbors turned against each other. We see it everywhere when the pathological political leaders give people permission to act on their primitive instincts. We learn quickly how fragile our civilized norms and mores are.

Rosenberg quotes Ian Hughes on four unpleasant facts the media won't report.

First, it is highly likely that [Dear Leader] has a dangerous narcissistic character disorder that makes him psychologically incapable of functioning within a rules-based democratic system. In fact, as we are seeing, his character disorder compels him to dismantle that system.

Second, the Republican Party is no longer a democratic party. It too has rejected the rules and values of democracy and is pursuing a power-at-all-costs authoritarian agenda.

Third, and most unpleasantly perhaps, a sizable fraction of the U.S. population would be happy to live within such an authoritarian system if those they despise are "put in their place".

And finally, violence and aggression are increasingly an indispensable means for the alliance between [Fuckface], the GOP and core [Fuckface] supporters to achieve their goals. 

Update (December 14):  In an interview with Chauncey DeVega, Chris Hedges notes that Americans lie to ourselves about our history of violence.

That inability to face reality means that in a crisis you cannot respond rationally. And this crisis essentially creates a social environment where people do not look for healthy political leaders. They look for cult leaders ... . [P]eople gravitate to the figure who appears omnipotent and promises a return to a mythical golden age. The leader promises to crush these dark forces, which are embodied in demonized groups and individuals.

[The white working class feels] utterly betrayed by the Democratic party and the established elites, and they are not wrong to feel that way. All the frustration and rage and economic stagnation that the working class is now experiencing primed them for a cult leader.

Update (August 3, 2020):  Paul Rosenberg expands on the need to root out pathocracy before it really takes hold. The greater struggles lie beyond this year's election. Rosenberg quotes John Feffer:

To avoid a second Civil War, however, a second American Revolution would need to address the root causes of [von Clownstickism], especially political corruption, deep-seated racism, and extreme economic inequality.

Otherwise, even if [Dear Leader] loses this election, the political creature he represents will rise from the ashes and eventually return to power.

Positive Double Prime

Anyone who thinks we can "solve" the climate emergency is deluded. Not that any kind of accomplishment isn't worthwhile, but at this point it only seems realistic to hope things might get worse less quickly.  And improved scientific understanding tells us even that requires massive social change. Jonathan Franzen offers his thoughts on what that change would look like.

The first condition is that every one of the world’s major polluting countries institute draconian conservation measures, shut down much of its energy and transportation infrastructure, and completely retool its economy.

The actions taken by these countries must also be the right ones. Vast sums of government money must be spent without wasting it and without lining the wrong pockets.

Finally, overwhelming numbers of human beings, including millions of government-hating Americans, need to accept high taxes and severe curtailment of their familiar life styles without revolting.

Few people are willing admit that's not much upon which to hang any sort of "hope". And so Franzen wonders "what might happen if, instead of denying reality, we told ourselves the truth". His article immediately attracted critics, but I don't think his argument is reckless.

First of all, even if we can no longer hope to be saved from two degrees of warming, there’s still a strong practical and ethical case for reducing carbon emissions.

In fact, it would be worth pursuing even if it had no effect at all. To fail to conserve a finite resource when conservation measures are available, to needlessly add carbon to the atmosphere when we know very well what carbon is doing to it, is simply wrong.

More than that, a false hope of salvation can be actively harmful. ... [I]f you accept the reality that the planet will soon overheat to the point of threatening civilization, there’s a whole lot more you should be doing.

Does it sound like admitting defeat? Is he really calling "the fight against climate change useless"?

If your hope for the future depends on a wildly optimistic scenario, what will you do ten years from now, when the scenario becomes unworkable even in theory? Give up on the planet entirely? To borrow from the advice of financial planners, I might suggest a more balanced portfolio of hopes.

Any good thing you do now is arguably a hedge against the hotter future, but the really meaningful thing is that it’s good today.

There may come a time, sooner than any of us likes to think, when the systems of industrial agriculture and global trade break down and homeless people outnumber people with homes. At that point, traditional local farming and strong communities will no longer just be liberal buzzwords. Kindness to neighbors and respect for the land—nurturing healthy soil, wisely managing water, caring for pollinators—will be essential in a crisis and in whatever society survives it.

I'm guessing there's a lot of people who would like to be able to "solve" the problem and not really change anything else. I assume I'm part of the global one percent and I don't know what sacrifices might be in store. Poor choices now might prolong my comfortable life style for a while, only to come crashing down later.

Update (September 13):  Kate Marvel promises we are not doomed as she tells Franzen to "shut up". But she gives an odd defense for hope:

The risk of something terrible increases with the concentration of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere.

But it is precisely the fact that we understand the potential driver of doom that changes it from a foregone conclusion to a choice, a terrible outcome in the universe of all possible futures. I run models through my brain; I check them with the calculations I do on a computer. This is not optimism, or even hope. Even in the best of all possible worlds, I cannot offer the certainty of safety. Doom is a possibility; it may that we have already awakened a sleeping monster that will in the end devour the world. It may be that the very fact of human nature, whatever that is, forecloses any possibility of concerted action.

But I am a scientist, which means I believe in miracles.

Faith is comforting, but not much of a basis for hope. Guy McPherson thinks Franzen actually hedges too much and attacks Marvel for using essentially fascist tactics. I think a full discussion is important to make the best decisions, but it is troubling that McPherson really does advocate doing nothing -- he argues that cutting emissions will increase warming due to the reversal of "global dimming". But the magnitude is disputed which makes choices even harder. If advocates of a Green New Deal are portrayed as the bad guys (as calling for something not just futile but actively harmful), that only seems to bolster the climate deniers.

Update (September 16):  Carl Safina defends Franzen.

This is thoughtful stuff, not deserving of a shrieking, “Shut up.” His information is correct, his reasoning is logical, his conclusions thoughtful, his tone caring, his call to action on all fronts could correctly be viewed as energizing.

Franzen offered food for thought. Me, I need all the nourishment I can get, even if it comes seasoned with a pinch of reality.

Update (September 17):  Robert Jensen would seem to be on Franzen's side with the point of view he takes in a review of Naomi Klein's book On Fire: she's too inspirational.

At the conclusion of these 18 essays that bluntly outline the crises and explain a Green New Deal response, Klein bolsters readers searching for hope: "[W]hen the future of life is at stake, there is nothing we cannot achieve." It is tempting to embrace that claim, especially after nearly 300 pages of Klein’s eloquent writing that weaves insightful analysis together with honest personal reflection.

The problem, of course, is that the statement is not even close to being true.

Jensen says the truth is that we're going to have to accept our limits.

Our challenge is to highlight not only what we can but also what we cannot accomplish, to build our moral capacity to face a frightening future but continue to fight for what can be achieved, even when we know that won’t be enough.

At the same time, both authors acknowledge what Jensen's friend called a "state of profound grief". It's Jensen's reason for not relying on hope.

At best, we struggle to come to terms with a “bleak and austere” future.

But that’s exactly why we need to engage rather than avoid the distressing realities of our time. If we are afraid to speak honestly, we suffer alone. Better that we tell the truth and accept the consequences, together.

This appeal to reality comes as an article in Nature summarizes a "tough Arctic summer" and as new climate models suggest warming as been faster than previously understood.

Earth’s average temperature could rise a "terrifying" 6.5 - 7.0°C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century if dramatic action is not immediately taken to slash carbon emissions.

Update (October 22):  It does seem that "staying positive" is not quite the same as "having hope". Hoping for a solution that is no longer possible doesn't seem as helpful as taking the best positive action available. Bringing a community together for a common purpose is still worthwhile even as our material lives deteriorate. 

Twenty-fifth Amendment

I didn't want to dignify this episode as something even worth noting, but in fact this goes way beyond his usual set of lies.

It started with a false claim by Dear Leader about hurricane Dorian.

In addition to Florida - South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, will most likely be hit (much) harder than anticipated.

The National Weather Service clarified their report in the interest of giving those affected an accurate forecast.

Alabama will NOT see any impacts from Dorian.

When the insane clown was also fact-checked in the news, he shot back:

Such a phony hurricane report by lightweight reporter [Jonathan Karl] of [ABC News]. I suggested yesterday at FEMA that, along with Florida, Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina, even Alabama could possibly come into play, which WAS true. They made a big deal about this.

Then this chart was displayed at a news conference in the Oval Office.

It turns out that passing off a modified National Weather Service forecast as official is against the law.

After [von Clownstick] displayed the altered forecast Wednesday, a White House reporter asked him about the map, saying "it looked like someone took a Sharpie....," the Washington Post reported.

"I don’t know. I don’t know," [he] reportedly replied, repeating the false claim that Alabama was in the storm’s path.

Update:  Refusing to back down, Fuckface sent out another chart produced four days before his comment about Alabama by which time NWS had already updated the forecast. So why the Sharpie? Why the inability to acknowledge Alabama was no longer probable and that to have claimed otherwise was mistaken?

Update (September 6):  The Washington Post reports Manbaby himself scribbled on the weather map to prove he was right all along. Pia Guerra knows what this leads to.

Update (September 8):  The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration actually repudiated their own scientists in this saga, and Republican-appointed former NWS director Elwood Friday gave this response:

This rewriting history to satisfy an ego diminishes NOAA. We don’t want to get the point where science is determined by politics rather than facts.

Also, the Washington Post obtained an email to NOAA staff sent shortly after Dear Leader's initial erroneous statement. They were warned to not contradict that statement and "only stick with official National Hurricane Center forecasts if questions arise from some national level social media posts which hit the news this afternoon". One meteorologist responded:

This is the first time I’ve felt pressure from above to not say what truly is the forecast. It’s hard for me to wrap my head around. One of the things we train on is to dispel inaccurate rumors and ultimately that is what was occurring — ultimately what the Alabama office did is provide a forecast with their tweet, that is what they get paid to do.

Update (September 9):  The New York Times reports that the NOAA repudiation of the NWS came after Wilbur Ross threatened to fire NOAA administrators.

Ross phoned Neil Jacobs, the acting administrator of NOAA, from Greece where the secretary was traveling for meetings and instructed Dr. Jacobs to fix the agency’s perceived contradiction of the president.

Dr. Jacobs objected to the demand and was told that the political staff at NOAA would be fired if the situation was not fixed, according to the three individuals, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the episode.

Update (September 10):  Paul Krugman notes that one way that democracies die is when "institutions meant to serve the public became tools of the ruling party".

[E]ven the leadership of NOAA, which should be the most technical and apolitical of agencies, is now so subservient to [Fuckface] that it’s willing not just to overrule its own experts but to lie, simply to avoid a bit of presidential embarrassment.

Think about it: If even weather forecasters are expected to be apologists for Dear Leader [sic], the corruption of our institutions is truly complete.

Krugman has a further example about how the Justice Department is being used for intimidation.

Modern de facto dictatorships don’t usually murder their opponents (although [von Clownstick] has been fulsome in his praise for regimes that do, in fact, rely on brute force). What they do, instead, is use their control over the machinery of government to make life difficult for anyone considered disloyal, until effective opposition withers away.

And it’s happening here as we speak. If you aren’t worried about the future of American democracy, you aren’t paying attention.

Update (September 11):  Though Wilbur Ross and the White House deny involvement with putting pressure on NOAA, the New York Times reports that Mick Mulvaney told Ross to have NOAA publicly disavow the statement from the Birmingham office of the National Weather Service.

Update (September 12):  The New York Times reports that Mulvaney acted on the request of Fuckface himself.

Update (February 2, 2020):  Newly released e-mails about the Dorian map incident includes the following exchange between Makeda Okolo and Benjamin Friedman:

Apparently the President is convinced that Alabama was in the path of Dorian and someone altered a NOAA map (with a sharpie) to convince folks.

Yep, crazy.

Update (July 10, 2020):  A report from Commerce Department Inspector General Peggy Gustafson details the digusting politics involved in protecting Manbaby's delicate ego.

Instead of focusing on NOAA’s successful hurricane forecast, the Department unnecessarily rebuked NWS forecasters for issuing a public safety message about Hurricane Dorian in response to public inquiries — that is, for doing their jobs.