Bridges Not Walls

This is the first time in U.S. history a former president has been investigated for possibly violating the 1917 law. But it’s not the first time the Espionage Act has been under scrutiny, experts say.

A new analysis out Wednesday estimates that if the federal minimum wage had grown at the same rate as Wall Street bonuses over the past three and a half decades, it would currently be $61.75 an hour instead of $7.25.

According to fresh data from the New York State Comptroller, the average bonus dished out to Wall Street employees jumped 20% to a record $257,500 in 2021 as big banks reported huge profits despite widespread havoc caused by the coronavirus pandemic. Last year’s average Wall Street bonus was the highest since 2006, prior to the Great Recession.

The comptroller’s office points out that while the securities industry comprises just 5% of private-sector employment in New York City, it makes up one-fifth of total private-sector wages.

Taking the new figures into account, Sarah Anderson of the Institute for Policy Studies notes in a report that the average Wall Street bonus has soared by 1,743% since 1985.

“By contrast, typical American workers lost earnings power in 2021,” Anderson writes, noting that high inflation has eroded the modest wage gains seen by ordinary people. “Average weekly earnings for all U.S. private-sector employees rose by only 2% between January 2021 and January 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.”

“These jaw-dropping numbers are just the latest evidence of unequal sacrifice under the pandemic,” Anderson adds. “While ordinary workers are struggling with rising costs for basic essentials, Wall Street bankers have seen their bonuses rise further into the stratosphere.”

Anderson argues that Wall Street bonuses have been soaring in recent years partly because Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Act—a financial reform measure enacted in the wake of the 2008 crash—has never been implemented.

“Powerful Wall Street lobbyists have succeeded in blocking Section 956… which prohibits large financial institutions from awarding pay packages that encourage ‘inappropriate risks,’” Anderson writes. “Regulators were supposed to implement this new rule within nine months of the law’s passage but have dragged their feet—despite widespread recognition that these bonuses encouraged the high-risk behaviors that led to the 2008 financial crisis, costing millions of Americans their homes and livelihoods.”

Sarah K. Burris at The Raw Story:

Gov. Ron DeSantis was asked a question about the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill in Florida this week and lashed out at the reporter for phrasing it using the moniker. DeSantis complained that the bill says nothing about the gays, rather it says “homosexuals,” and it’s only about Kindergarteners through third grade who can’t be told what the words mean.

“Last Week Tonight” host John Oliver set the record straight, no pun intended, by saying that despite DeSantis’ explanation of the bill, it actually gives parents the ability to sue teachers if they feel like something was told to them in a way that wasn’t “age-appropriate.” What does age-appropriate mean? It doesn’t say.

Legislators tried to amend the legislation so it specifically said that teachers couldn’t talk about human sexuality or sexual activity, so as to not target anyone or marginalize anyone. The GOP author of the bill said that if those changes were made, it would “significantly gut the bill’s intent.”

So, while parents probably don’t want their Kindergartner being told about how two boys have sex, the reality is a Kindergarten teacher with a photo of him and his husband on his desk couldn’t even tell a kid asking, “oh, that’s my husband.” The true “intent” of the bill is to marginalize and target LGBTQ+ people.

While this issue has been discussed nationally, the bill’s author made it clear that the purpose of the legislation was to target LGBTQ+ people. Oliver showed a video of Florida state Sen. Dennis Baxley, a Republican, warning his constituents that there was an “infestation of homosexuals” in a nearby city.

But what bothered Oliver the most was that his “business daddy,” AT&T, and his former company, Disney, were giving money to Republican lawmakers who support the legislation.

John Oliver was spot-on regarding the infamously bigoted “don’t say gay” bill HB1557 and corporate complicity with it by giving money to lawmakers supporting the bill. 

From the 03.13.2022 edition of HBO’s Last Week Tonight:

John Whitehouse at MMFA: 

In January, DirecTV announced that it will not be renewing its contract with One America News. OAN has now filed a lawsuit in California against AT&T, DirecTV, and AT&T’s chairman, William Kennard.

OAN is seeking other carriers (it has a few remaining), and its targeted cable providers should see this lawsuit for what it is: a reckless last-ditch attempt by a revanchist network desperate to save its business model. It’s a clear warning sign for telecoms to stay far away from OAN.

In writing about the lawsuit, Times of San Diego notes that this lawsuit is clearly about OAN facing “financial ruin.”

The details of the suit underscore that it’s about settling political scores. As Times of San Diego lays out, the lawsuit attacks Kennard, chairman of AT&T’s board, for being a registered Democrat who was appointed to positions by Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. It also attacks Kennard for serving as a board member of Staple Street, which OAN notes is linked to Dominion Voting Systems. A spokesperson for AT&T told the outlet that “these allegations are completely without merit, particularly as they relate to AT&T and our independent chairman.”

This attack on Kennard comes after an OAN host urged viewers to dig up dirt on him following DirecTV’s announcement. OAN’s owner Robert Herring Sr. also attacked Kennard in an on-air interview following the decision.

By Ben Rhodes

The Atlantic

March 13, 2022

From the article:

Europe’s largest invasion since World War II is a logical outcome of Vladimir Putin’s dominance of Russian politics in the 21st century, a reminder that grievance-based ethno-nationalism and authoritarianism lead inexorably to conflict. Putin’s efforts to reconstitute empire and “protect” Russian speakers beyond national borders tap into currents of history running deep underneath our collective experience. And in many ways, the tolls of the war—cities reduced to rubble, civilians caught amid armies, refugees moving en masse across European borders, threats of nuclear annihilation—recall the circumstances that shocked world powers into creating an international system to prevent another world war. Perhaps it is no coincidence that at precisely the time when living memory of World War II is fading away, humanity has failed to heed the lessons of our worst history.

Yet despite its historical echoes, the war also feels like the product of the peculiar circumstances of our post–Cold War era. The backlash to globalization, consumerism, and cultural homogeneity sent strongmen in search of an updated brand of identity politics. The corruption that enriched kleptocrats isolated them from accountability, engendering cynicism and apathy within societies. The creation of national-security states veiled the machinations of governments while providing endless justifications for defensive aggression. New technologies facilitated the dissemination of propaganda and disinformation on a mass scale, so that it’s hard to tell where Putin’s invented pretexts end and his own motivations begin.