New York Sen. Chuck Schumer said Monday that “the only possible explanation” for U.S. President Donald Trump’s lavish endorsement of Russian President Vladimir Putin at their meeting in Helsinki is “the possibility that President Putin holds damaging information over President Trump.” He’s wrong. The much likelier explanation is that, perhaps for the first time in his life, Donald Trump feels a type of love.
Put yourself in Trump’s place for a moment. If you knew that a sword of Damocles was hanging over your head, would you demonstrate your own guilt with every word and deed? No, you would try to make good your debt to Putin without calling attention to that debt. You would criticize Putin publicly and do his bidding privately. And Putin would bank his winnings with a grim little smile and take the criticism. Instead, Trump has done the exact opposite, fawning over Putin in public while allowing sane people in his administration to protect the United States from its most determined adversary. This does Putin much less good.
It is, of course, altogether possible that Trump believes that he is innocent of a crime or impeachable offense of which he is, in fact, guilty. Since the U.S. president appears to be incapable of recognizing any fault or failure of his own, his own inner conviction tells us much less about actual facts than would be true with a normal person. He may very well have obstructed justice, for example by firing FBI Director James Comey last year, without having any belief that an investigation of his behavior would uncover guilt. Nevertheless, the extraordinary lengths to which he has gone to embrace Putin so obviously point to that guilt that even Trump would act otherwise unless some deep emotional commitment is at work.
Source: Trump’s Treason by Father Complex – Foreign Policy
The Cabinet was reportedly presented with a Treasury assessment of the impact of four outcomes to the Brexit talks: no deal, a Canadian-type deal, the EEA…and the Government’s own new scheme. This itself should give pause for thought to the suggestion that, other than the EEA and no deal, there is no alternative to the plan agreed at Chequers. It is a statement of the obvious that there will be as many of the last as there are people willing to propose them.
Far more to the point, however, there was one from within the Government itself – a proposal for it to seek “Canada Plus Plus Plus”, as David Davis once referred to it. It is well known that DexEU was working on a draft of the White Paper that would outline this idea during the run-up to the Chequers meeting. We are told that it went through some nine iterations. The last ones were largely cuts for length. None of them have been made public. Until now.
Today, ConservativeHome publishes key extracts from a full draft of this White Paper. They are not from one of the briefer final versions, but they set before our readers the main pillars of DexEU’s approach, which we are told were unchanged in any of those nine drafts. As we write, we don’t have the advantage of also having seen the Government’s own White Paper, apparently to be published later, and thus the capacity to make comparisons between its text and that we publish today.
However, there will clearly be substantial overlap between the two – but, on the basis of the Government document published in the aftermath of Chequers, some key differences too. A central one is the proposed regulatory treatment of manufactured goods. In her Mansion House speech earlier this year, the Prime Minister referred in this context to “a comprehensive system of mutual recognition”. She also set out in her Florence speech last year a three-basket approach to regulation.
“There will be areas which do affect our economic relations where we and our European friends may have different goals; or where we share the same goals but want to achieve them through different means. And there will be areas where we want to achieve the same goals in the same ways, because it makes sense for our economies,” she said. This was the approach agreed at the Chequers mee
Source: May’s new Brexit plan. There is an alternative – from within the Government itself. | Conservative Home
The backlash to the Trump administration caging immigrant children has led to store owners asking White House officials to not eat in their restaurants and to protesters publicly confronting those supporting Trump’s policies. Now, voices on the far-right are increasingly unified in their only solution to the matter: civil war.
While several far-right figures have been speculating about a looming U.S. break-up for some time, recent rhetoric is a marked escalation from even a few months ago, when certain historical illiterates were only calling for an “amicable divorce.”
Now, according to increasingly shrill analysts — and even certain members of Congress — a fratricidal war is the only potential fix for the United States’ domestic tensions.
Source: Far-right voices are frothing about a looming civil war – ThinkProgress
It’s a little after 3pm in Detroit’s 8 Mile neighbourhood, and the cicadas are buzzing loudly in the trees. Children weave down the pavements on bicycles, while a pickup basketball game gets under way in a nearby park. The sky is a deep blue with only a hint of an approaching thunderstorm – in other words, a muggy, typical summer Sunday in Michigan’s largest city.
“8 Mile”, as the locals call it, is far from the much-touted economic “renaissance” taking place in Detroit’s centre. Tax delinquency and debt are still major issues, as they are in most places in the city. Crime and blight exist side by side with carefully trimmed hedgerows and mowed lawns, a patchwork that changes from block to block. In many ways it resembles every other blighted neighbourhood in the city – but with one significant difference. Hidden behind the oak-lined streets is an insidious piece of history that most Detroiters, let alone Americans, don’t even know exists: a half mile-long, 5ft tall concrete barrier that locals simply call “the wall”.
“Growing up, we didn’t know what that wall was for,” says Teresa Moon, president of the 8 Mile Community Organization. “It used to be a rite of passage to walk on top of the wall, like a balancing beam. You know, just kids having fun, that kind of thing. It was only later when I found out what it was for, and when I realised the audacity that they had to build it.”
Source: Roads to nowhere: how infrastructure built on American inequality : The Guardian