It’s pretty much the story of the day, that Trump issued a statement tweeted that the intelligence people are stupid and wrong the day after they told the Senate the truth as they understand it via evidence collected by professionals, as opposed to telling the Senate what Trump thinks is the truth via the fuzzy moldy rattling slum that is his brain. He’s mad at them for not saying what he says and instead saying what they consider true via chains of evidence. He’s mad at them so he trashes them on Twitter.

Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said it was dangerous for the president to dismiss the findings of his own intelligence agencies.

“If you’re going to ignore that information, then you’re going to make poor decisions,” Mr. Schiff said in an interview on Wednesday. He added, “It means the country is fundamentally less safe.”

That’s all the more true when to “ignore that information” you add “and just make shit up.” If you’re going to ignore evidence-based information and just make shit up instead, then you’re going to make bad bad BAD decisions.

The threat assessment — an annual report to Congress that ranks threats to American national security from around the world — provides the public with an unclassified and up-to-date summary of the most pressing national security threats to the United States.

Dan Coats, the director of national intelligence, had told lawmakers that North Korea’s leaders “ultimately view nuclear weapons as critical to regime survival.” He said that there was “some activity that is inconsistent with full denuclearization” in the country and that most of what it had dismantled was reversible.

Yeah but Trump had a meeting with Kim, and it was awesome, and Kim loves him, and there’s no way Kim is going to do what Kim thinks is good for Kim instead of what Trump thinks is good for Trump. No way.

Douglas H. Wise, a career C.I.A. official and former top deputy at the Defense Intelligence Agency, said Mr. Trump’s criticism of the intelligence chiefs threatened to corrupt the process. Intelligence officers do not like to be at odds with the president, he said, and Mr. Trump’s comments put them in an uncomfortable position.

“This is a consequence of narcissism but it is a strong and inappropriate public political pressure to get the intelligence community leadership aligned with his political goals,” Mr. Wise said. “The existential danger to the nation is when the policymaker corrupts the role of the intelligence agencies, which is to provide unbiased and apolitical intelligence to inform policy.”

Oh my, he mentioned the narcissism. He’ll probably be in prison before the sun sets.

I guess this is why Trump is saying he knows better than the intelligence people: they were telling senators he’s got everything wrong yesterday.

In open testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Tuesday morning, leaders of the intelligence community knocked down the president’s talking points about ISIS, the nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea, and the value of NATO.

CIA Director Gina Haspel confirmed to Sen. Angus King (I-ME) that Iran is not currently violating the terms of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Last May, President Donald Trump claimed without evidence that Iran had violated its terms and withdrew the United States from the agreement.

We see reporters saying “President Donald Trump claimed without evidence” a lot, because he does that a lot. He just makes shit up, all the time, with no caution or hesitation or embarrassment or anything else you would expect from a grown-ass adult making shit up in public. It’s weird living under a President Toddler.

Haspel, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, and Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Gen. Robert Ashley also told the committee that North Korea was unlikely to give up its nuclear weapons because Kim Jong Un sees them as essential to protecting his regime.

Duh.

Trump, after a meeting with Kim in Singapore in 2018, claimed without evidence that the country was no longer a nuclear threat to the United States.

Just landed – a long trip, but everybody can now feel much safer than the day I took office. There is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea. Meeting with Kim Jong Un was an interesting and very positive experience. North Korea has great potential for the future!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 13, 2018

n his opening statements, Coats also laid out the U.S. Intelligence Community’s consensus view that ISIS has not been defeated, knocking down a popular Trump talking point. Trump announced in December that ISIS was defeated in Syria, although he cited no evidence, and said that this success justified pulling U.S. troops out of Syria.

“While ISIS is nearing territorial defeat,” Coats said, “the group has returned to its guerilla warfare roots while continuing to plot attacks and direct its supporters worldwide. ISIS is intent on resurging and still commands thousands of fighters.”

But Trump claims without evidence that he knows better.

Coats also emphasized the importance of NATO in countering China and Russia’s growing power and influence as U.S. adversaries. He claimed China and Russia are increasingly aligned and coordinating, an aspect of his opening statements King said was alarming and overlooked. Coats’ 2019 national intelligence strategy, issued the week before the hearing, emphasized that China and Russia would coordinate to expand their global influence as the West became more isolationist.

Trump has actively pushed isolationist foreign policies, and has railed against key U.S. alliances like NAFTA and NATO.

But Coats emphasized the strategic importance of coordinating with NATO allies in countering Russia’s influence efforts. NATO, Coats said, was needed to push back on autocratic tendencies within Europe, but it was also essential for NATO to counter Russia’s goal of destabilizing European unity and the U.S.-European alliance.

With Trump’s eager assistance.

The intelligence leaders, in their testimony, also offered a consensus view that Russia would meddle in the 2020 U.S. election; that the government shutdown was harmful to the intelligence community; and that climate change presents a significant security threat to the United States.

But Trump claims without evidence that he knows better.

Via Screechy Monkey at Miscellany Room, the Root fills us in on what really happened with Donnie Two-scoops and his invitation to gorge on french fries.

When Filet-O-Fish aficionado Donald Trump invited the Clemson Tigers to enjoy the White House’s first Presidential Value Meal, most of Clemson’s national championship football team members jumped at the opportunity to meet the original cheeseburger-swallowing clown. But The Root has learned that Clemson’s black players, some specifically citing racism and their disdain for Trump’s divisive politics, passed on the opportunity to hang out with the real-life Mayor McCheese.

“Filet-O-Fish aficionado” heeheeheehee

The Root spoke with three black Clemson players who each separately confirmed that many players, both black and white, had no interest in making the trip. All three acknowledged that Donald Trump was the reason they chose not to attend. Even more telling, most of Clemson’s white players were in attendance while nearly three-fourths of the school’s black football players took a hard pass on the chance to eat cold fries with the president of people who eat salads from McDonald’s.

I  wish I could be invited to do something at Trump’s behest so that I could take a hard pass. I would love to snub Mayor McCheese.

The ones who did go are younger and less starry.

To Clemson’s credit, all three students individually confirmed that Clemson’s coaches, staff or administration did not pressure them to attend the McNugget buffet nor did any official tell them to keep quiet about their reasons for not going. The players also noted that they harbored no ill feelings towards the players who chose to make the trek to McDonaldland.

“This team is a family,” said the freshman baller. “You don’t always agree with your family on everything but still … that’s my brother, no matter what.”

When asked if they regretted their decision to stay in South Carolina once they saw the piles of cold McMeat their teammates got to enjoy, all three laughed.

“Now if it was some Five Guys, I might feel different,” responded one.

Top athletes and they do excellent sarcasm.

In South Dakota news:

South Dakota lawmakers killed a bill that would [have] required trans student athletes to compete according to their sex assigned at birth.

That is, their physical sex as opposed to their “gender identity.”

“We’re thrilled with the committee’s decision,” said Libby Skarin, policy director for the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, in a statement. “No one is harmed by allowing transgender people to compete consistent with who they are. The committee’s motion to kill this bill sends a clear message of inclusion and acceptance for our transgender friends and neighbors and that there is no place for discrimination like this in South Dakota.”

Hmm. Is it true that no one is harmed by allowing transgender people to compete consistent with “who they are” in their heads as opposed to their bodies? Is it true that no women or girls are harmed by being forced to compete with male bodies?

A Senate Education Committee hearing preceding the vote Thursday morning streamed live online. Some SB49 proponents, like Family Heritage Alliance director Norman Woods, said that supporting the bill wasn’t about “valu[ing] one student group over another” but about preserving “a basic standard of fairness.” Other proponents, like South Dakota Catholic Conference executive director Christopher J. Motz, used their time before the committee to undermine trans identities and gendered self-determination.

“Being a male or female is a physical reality,” said Motz. “To be male or female doesn’t proceed from one’s inner experience. It comes through one’s physical body.”

Even executive directors of Catholic groups can be right sometimes.

First this.

There are countless photos of Stacey Abrams and her glorious smile.

Axios must have had to search to find an image to fit the “angry black woman” trope. pic.twitter.com/NvH5HrVOlV

— Leah McElrath (@leahmcelrath) January 29, 2019

Textbook: https://t.co/FSi0PmF4pZ

— Rebecca Traister (@rtraister) January 29, 2019

And then an update.

https://twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/1090353193731661828

I’m not sure what I think about it. There is more than one trope, and another trope is “women must not ever look angry or determined or authoritative or anything other than sweet.” To be honest in the first picture she doesn’t really look angry, to me, so much as…well, serious. Serious while talking. Do we want to flinch away from that?

I don’t think I do.

Ah those pesky breasts. What shall we do about them?

An African practice of “ironing” a girl’s chest with a hot stone to delay breast formation is spreading in the UK, with anecdotal evidence of dozens of recent cases, a Guardian investigation has established.

Community workers in London, Yorkshire, Essex and the West Midlands have told the Guardian of cases in which pre-teen girls from the diaspora of several African countries are subjected to the painful, abusive and ultimately futile practice.

…

“It’s usually done in the UK, not abroad like female genital mutilation (FGM),” [an anonymous activist] said, describing a practice whereby mothers, aunties or grandmothers use a hot stone to massage across the breast repeatedly in order to “break the tissue” and slow its growth.

Ouch.

They do it as often as every week.

The perpetrators, usually mothers, consider it a traditional measure which protects girls from unwanted male attention, sexual harassment and rape. Medical experts and victims regard it as child abuse which could lead to physical and psychological scars, infections, inability to breastfeed, deformities and breast cancer.

…

Nyuydzewira, who was herself subjected to the abuse as a girl, said British authorities were not taking the problem seriously, and have not prosecuted those doing breast-ironing on their children on grounds of it being seen as a “cultural practice”.

“The British people are so polite in the sense that when they see something like that, they think of cultural sensitivities,” she said. “But if it’s a cultural practice that is harming children … any harm that is done to a little girl, whether in public or in secrecy, that person should be held accountable.”

It’s politeness toward the “cultural sensitivities” of the adults. What about the girls? How about putting the girls first instead of the adults? Wouldn’t that be a more reasonable way to approach “cultural practices” that more powerful people inflict on less powerful people? Ask cui bono but also ask cui noxa.

Interesting. Public service media report on how Facebook helps advertisers target users of Facebook, and Facebook creates code to stop them. ProPublica is one:

A number of organizations, including ProPublica, have developed tools to let the public see exactly how Facebook users are being targeted by advertisers.

Now, Facebook has quietly made changes to its site that stop those efforts.

ProPublica, Mozilla and Who Targets Me have all noticed their tools stopped working this month after Facebook inserted code in its website that blocks them.

No transparency for you-oo, sorrreee.

“This is very concerning,” said Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., who has co-sponsored the Honest Ads Act, which would require transparency on Facebook ads. “Investigative groups like ProPublica need access to this information in order to track and report on the opaque and frequently deceptive world of online advertising.”

…

Facebook has made minor tweaks before that broke our tool. But this time, Facebook blocked the ability to automatically pull ad targeting information.

The latest move comes a few months after Facebook executives urged ProPublica to shut down its ad transparency project. In August, Facebook ads product management director Rob Leathern acknowledged ProPublica’s project “serves an important purpose.” But he said, “We’re going to start enforcing on the existing terms of service that we have.” He said Facebook would soon “transition” ProPublica away from its tool.

Facebook has launched an archive of American political ads, which the company says is an alternative to ProPublica’s tool. However, Facebook’s ad archive is only available in three countries, fails to disclose important targeting data and doesn’t even include all political ads run in the U.S.

ProPublica’s tool regularly found advertisers that Facebook’s missed.

What it all adds up to, said Knight First Amendment Institute senior attorney Alex Abdo, is “we cannot trust Facebook to be the gatekeeper to the information the public needs about Facebook.”

Is that kind of like the way we can’t trust Trump’s family to be impartial government servants?

Time to refresh our memories, again, on why Trump can’t enforce NDAs against people who work in his administration:

But such NDAs for government workers, when they go beyond prohibiting the disclosure of classified information, are unconstitutional on their face. I know, because I have litigated more pre-publication-review classification challenges against the government during the past 25 years than any other attorney. For decades, courts have made it clear that the government may not censor unclassified material, “contractually or otherwise.” Legal challenges during the 1970s and 1980s against the CIA settled the question that the government has no legitimate interest under the First Amendment in censoring unclassified information.

Oddly enough, Trump’s engorged ego doesn’t overrule that.

No known prior administration has relied upon the use of NDAs to try to silence public employees, because any such document was correctly perceived as legally unenforceable and problematic on so many levels. I never came across any similar attempts in my time in Washington during President Bill Clinton’s first term. The only comparable agreement that I’m aware of is one congressional intelligence committee staffers are requested to sign that prohibits post-employment discussion of committee procedures. The constitutionality of such an agreement is also suspect, but no known legal challenge has ever been made.

Trump however is not a fast learner.

A low level staffer that I hardly knew named Cliff Sims wrote yet another boring book based on made up stories and fiction. He pretended to be an insider when in fact he was nothing more than a gofer. He signed a non-disclosure agreement. He is a mess!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2019

Asia Bibi is free to leave, at last.

Asia Bibi, the Christian farm labourer who spent eight years on death row in Pakistan for blasphemy, is expected to leave the country after the supreme court upheld her acquittal.

The court on Tuesday rejected a challenge to October’s ruling brought by an extreme Islamist party, which led violent protests across the country in the autumn and called for Bibi to be killed.

Bibi, who has been held at a secret location since her death sentence was overturned, could be flown out of the country within hours. Two of her children are reportedly already in Canada, which has offered Bibi asylum.

Her lawyer told reporters she will probably leave today. (That seems risky and provocative at first glance, but maybe the idea is to say don’t even bother to riot because you’ll be too late.)

Hafiz Ehtisham Ahmed, an Islamist activist linked to the extremist Red Mosque in Islamabad, said Bibi may not be safe wherever she goes. “She deserves to be murdered according to sharia. If she goes abroad, don’t Muslims live there? If she goes out of Pakistan … anybody can kill her there,” she told AFP.

The Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) party, which was formed to defend Pakistan’s blasphemy laws and which led violent protests demanding Bibi’s execution after her acquittal, called on Tuesday for its members to be ready for action.

Murder people for the glory of god – one of the most enduring bad ideas humans have come up with.

Dave Ricks alerted me to this item in the CHE:

Two years ago, Harvard’s fraternities, sororities, and “final clubs,” which are not officially affiliated with the institution, faced an order from the university’s president: Go coed, or your members will lose the ability to hold campus-leadership positions and to be endorsed for outside scholarships. On Monday, Greek life struck back. A group of fraternities, sororities, and three students filed lawsuits against Harvard’s leaders, in both state and federal court, for allegedly discriminating against the organizations with the new policy.

It’s like single-sex schools and universities – I think they’re bad for male people and useful for female people. For similar reasons, all-white organizations are not the same kind of thing as all-black organizations. Underlings need to organize more than overlings do.

The policy was announced in 2016 by Drew Gilpin Faust, Harvard’s president at the time, after a university task force on sexual-assault prevention found that “final clubs” fostered “a strong sense of sexual entitlement.”  But the new policy that followed applied as well to the Greek organizations, barring their members from leadership positions and endorsements for such scholarships as the Rhodes and the Fulbright.

Some members of all-female final clubs and sororities protested the new policy, arguing that women needed a single-gender safe space. Critics also questioned why women’s groups had to follow the same rules as men’s groups, which the task force’s report found to be more often a source of trouble.

Sometimes the “one rule for everyone” approach doesn’t work all that well.

Yer doin it rong.

Authorities in the United Arab Emirates have been ridiculed after it emerged that all of the winners of an initiative designed to foster gender equality in the workplace were men.

Well they have a gender too ya know!

“We are proud of the success of Emirati women and their role is central to shaping the future of the country,” a tweet from the official Dubai media office said. “Gender balance has become a pillar in our government institutions.”

But that doesn’t mean we nominate them for awards, for heaven’s sake. Let’s have a little common sense here.

However, according to rights groups, gender discrimination is still an entrenched problem across the UAE, particularly in the legal system, which prioritises men’s rights in family and personal status matters such as marriage, divorce and custody of children. UAE law also permits domestic violence as long as the assault does not exceed the limits set by Islamic law.

That’s why it’s safest for men to win all the awards.

Oh christ he’s serious.

The question I think we all should be asking ourselves is: at this time in America when there's so much evidence that our political system is broken – that both parties at the extreme are not representing the silent majority of the American people – isn't there a better way? pic.twitter.com/Gy1wf1cf8F

— Howard Schultz (@HowardSchultz) January 28, 2019

What an idiot. We don’t need another one of those. The fucking silent majority for god’s sake? That Nixonian relic?

And he emphasizes “extreme” in that empty little word-porridge. “Both parties at the extreme” – the extreme of what? It’s ludicrous to pretend the Democrats are at the extreme left in the same sense that the Republicans are at the extreme right. Nearly all Democrats avoid the real left as if it were Ebola.

Yes, of course there’s a better way, but no I don’t think the former CEO of Starbucks knows what it is or how to get us there. Not for a second.

Mister Starbucks shyly confesses his plans.

I love our country, and I am seriously considering running for president as a centrist independent.

— Howard Schultz (@HowardSchultz) January 28, 2019

In other words he’s hoping to throw another election to the orange criminal by running as a third party-er. So that right there is reason enough to tell him to fuck off.

But also…a centrist independent? Wtf? Center between what and what? Lunatic conservatives and reasonable conservatives? So, what, he’ll be a little bit wack but not as wack as Trump? Gee, that’s alluring.

We don’t need any new “centrists” because we’re already stuck between two conservative parties. People scream in horror about the extremism of Alexandra Ocasio Cortez because she thinks we should have universal Medicare aka a national health service, while all the other developed nations have had universal health insurance for decades. There is no left in electoral politics in the US, there is only right and far right.

Plus, what the hell does Howard Schultz know about being president? No more than Trump did and does. We don’t need more of that. Go away.

Siva Vaidhyanathan reminded us of this thing he wrote four years ago about Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz, who has apparently announced that he’s running for president ffs.

The next time you order one of those faux-Italian-named sweetened coffee drinks at a Starbucks store, you are likely to receive a cup with the hash-tagged words “Race Together” written on it, just above your misspelled name. If you ask the Starbucks employee what it’s about, she or he will tell you that it’s part of a new corporate initiative to inspire customers to discuss racial issues with employees and among themselves.

Dear god. Why would I want to do that? Why would anyone?

Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz is no doubt sincere about his belief in Starbucks as a site and his employees as facilitators of measured deliberation about the legacies of 400 years of slavery, segregation, violence, and migration. But his commitment rests on the naïve arrogance of privilege.

Along with, I’m guessing, a generous helping of vanity.

“What can we do to create more empathy, more compassion, more understanding?,” Shultz asked his employees this week (the company calls them “partners” to mask the nature of the labor-management relationship). “Perhaps we could do something that could be catalytic for the country.”

While making hot drinks from combinations of coffee and sweet syrups, or making change at the cash register. I don’t think so.

All over the United States, teachers, clergy, police officers, and community activists have always fostered carefully moderated conversations about race. In communities large and small, these conversations have had modest but largely local effects. Even after years of experience and deep training in facilitating such discussions, those who run them don’t necessarily find them easy or comfortable. In fact, the less comfortable the discussions are, the more good they might do.

Schultz has expressed no recognition of these longstanding efforts and conversations that hard-working professionals have been pursuing through the public sector and houses of worship. He seems to think that Starbucks should fill some vacuum he perceives in American public life. In doing so, he overestimates the centrality of a corporate chain of overpriced coffee shops to that civic experience.

Which is putting it mildly. Teachers, clergy, police officers, and community activists all get some training or education in the field, especially if they’re going to be fostering conversations on it. Baristas, not so much. It’s of course possible that some or many baristas have deep experience and education on racial issues, but they don’t all have it because that’s a major part of their job.

But if he thinks his employees somehow magically know how to facilitate conversations on racial issues, no wonder he thinks he somehow magically knows how to be president.

They’ve done it – on a Sunday afternoon. Everybody’s watching the game, so nobody will notice!

We notice.

Trump and his co-conspirators have lifted the sanctions on Deripaska.

The Trump administration on Sunday lifted sanctions on three companies, including the aluminum giant Rusal, linked to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Democrats had led a push in Congress to continue the restrictions.

Roger Stone is fighting back (or punching himself in the face – one of those.)

Since Friday, Stone has engaged in a blitz of media interviews, an unusual approach for someone who has been indicted.

Asked what he hopes to gain, Stone said he wanted to draw attention to what he saw as the inappropriate way his arrest took place.

“This was an expensive show of force to try to depict me as public enemy number one, the OG, to attempt to poison the jury pool,” Stone said, using a slang expression that means “original gangster.”

“These are Gestapo tactics,” he said.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) later told ABC that Stone used arguments that are typical for someone accused of white-collar crime.

“I think he’s going to need a much better defense than the one you just heard,” said Schiff, a former federal prosecutor.

Larry Tribe explains why they’re not.

https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1089606237287862272

It’s not as if Stone is not the kind of guy who would destroy evidence if he had the chance, now is it.

Politico has more:

In a court filing Thursday, Mueller wrote that he wanted to keep the Stone indictment under wraps until the arrest because of a concern that publicizing the charges “will increase the risk of the defendant fleeing and destroying (or tampering with) evidence.” Stone was not persuaded by that logic.

“The idea that a 29-member SWAT team in full tactical gear with assault weapons would surround my house,“ Stone said Sunday, “17 vehicles in my front yard, including two armored vehicles, a helicopter overhead, amphibious vehicles in the back where my house backs on to a canal — that I would open the door looking down the barrel of assault weapons, that I would be frog-marched out front barefooted and handcuffed when they simply could have contacted me, I think people need to know about that.”

Stone said he had posed no flight risk and would not have tampered with evidence critical to the special counsel’s probe before the FBI searched of his residences in South Florida and Manhattan.

Oh well he says so, and he must be telling the truth, because he has such a long history of…lying.