Those that throw labels likely have incentive to not communicate.

It’s not attacking corporations. It’s attacking the greed and corruption that lurks within them. We live in a country that enables and incentivizes the accumulation of wealth at the expense and suffering of others, and one that has decriminalized criminal activity and standardized unethical behavior. You can get as rich as you like–there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s what our country is all about–so long as everyone has a minimally acceptable standard of living. When that boundary is reached, that is, by definition, “rich enough”. That is the system we should live in.

The suggestion that it is “attacking corporations”, is similar to calling those who reasonably criticize Hillary Clinton as “sexist” and those who protested Elijah Cummings’ DNC speech as “racist”. It’s a way of distracting from the issue by attacking the messenger. Taking the most obvious label of the person being criticized, and pretending that the messenger is innately prejudiced against that label.

It’s also similar to equating the slogan “Black Lives Matter” to “anti-cop”. Black Lives Matter means “stop treating us like we are worthless, stop shooting us, because we matter.” There is no anti-anything or -anyone referred to by that slogan. It has nothing to do with anyone but black people. Twisting that to “black lives matter more than all others”, particularly when referring to the police…who, come on, the rare rogue among them happen to be the ones shooting them. It’s a large leap, and in my opinion, perpetuates the disrespectful treatment. Is the disrespectful treatment. Instead of listening and learning, to truly understand the centuries of history and motivation behind that slogan, “All Lives Matter” dismisses it out of hand and twists it into negative aggression.

It’s easy to throw labels. It’s hard to communicate. Those that throw labels likely have incentive to not communicate.

Nuisance: Interview with Lauren Steiner, Bernie Sanders delegate from CA, & longtime activist against the TPP

Interview with Lauren Steiner, Bernie Sanders delegate from California, longtime activist against the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the organizer of a large effort in California to observe the vote counting at the end of primary day.

What’s discussed:

– Lauren tells about her long history of protesting around the country. One of her favorites.
– Why she is so against the TPP, and her theories on why Obama is so strongly for it, and why she thinks his presidential library and the Trans-Pacific Partnership are related.
– The media, and how much of Internet media is dependent on large corporations such as Facebook Live and YouTube Live. Here’s one example she gave about propaganda regarding the Syrian regime change.
– The confusion of Monday morning’s private meeting with Bernie Sanders at the Democratic National Convention, and how that might result in his delegates missing votes at the actual convention. Monday was opening day.
– What happened at the Nevada State Democrat Convention, and how that was the catalyst for creating my news network, Citizens’ Media TV.
– The TPP protest organized by Lauren during Elijah Cummings’ DNC speech on Monday night about the democratic platform. How it was organized and communicated to the delegation, and Elijah Cummings’ reactions to it, both on and off the record.
– How the Bernie delegation was not given much guidance on what to do or what to expect during the DNC.
– The nonbinding Unity Commission created by the DNC platform committee, and the platitude filled speech about it on early Monday.

The resources that came up during our conversation:

  • 13 Bankers, a book by Simon Johnston.
  • Ben Jealous mentions the superdelagate reduction in his debate with Jill Stein. It’s a two-part interview (one, two), and I’m unsure exactly where he said it.
  • The blog of my DNC coverage with Citizens’ Media TV.

Was there fraud in the 2016 Democratic primaries? I don’t think we’ll ever know for sure. Did Hillary Clinton legitimately win the Democratic nomination? Same answer.

What we do know about the 2016 Democratic primaries, is that an almost constant stream of questionable things occurred, and in more states than not. While we cannot definitively say that any of it was fraud, we can most certainly say that there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to suggest further investigation is warranted.

That the election in places like Arizona and New York and Puerto Rico and California and Nevada are being treated as if they are perfectly legitimate, all certified as “official”. That Hillary Clinton confidently states things like “the New York voters chose me”, without any hint of the problems that occurred. This is one of the fundamental reasons why Bernie Sanders supporters feel ignored.

The first piece of evidence:

The full report from Election Justice USA, of which I annotated the executive summary (the first eight pages). Now I know why Edison Research is worthy of protesting.

New information, supplied by Edison Research (which conducted the polling in question) directly to the author of the exit poll section of this report, on the adjustments made to the standard and scientific exit poll survey methodology, strongly suggests that the discrepancies between the vote counts and their respective exit polls were likely greater than the discrepancies shown in the tables of this report. The actual discrepancies may range as high as 16%-35% in some of the states. Without access to Edison’s raw exit poll data and a detailed account of the actual adjustments made, the actual discrepancies between the classic exit polls and the vote counts cannot be determined with certainty. The possibility exists that the unadjusted exit polls may show that candidate Sanders may have handily won the Democratic Party primary race.

These discrepancies occurred primarily in the Democratic Party primaries but not in the primaries of the Republican Party. This is remarkable, as the exit polls for both parties were conducted on the same day, in the same precincts, with the same interviewers, and used the same methodologies.

The second piece of evidence is a TYT Politics interview with the lead author of An Electoral System In Crisis, a study that was supported by Election Justice USA, and is complementary to their full report:

The third piece of evidence is this post by Citizens’ Media TV ally, and sometimes correspondent, John Laurits (here’s my one, two, three part conversation-interview with John, recapping the Democratic National Convention). The graphs discussed in the above video are the subject of this post. And the post features this video about jellybeans, making it clear exactly what those graphs mean and why they are important:

So while there’s plenty of evidence to warrant further investigation, and plenty of people want that investigation to proceed, unfortunately, none of them have enough power to break through Billionaire Wall. I don’t want to “prove fraud”. I just want to know the truth.

Interview with Agnes Marsala, president of Chesterfield, NJ’s People Over Pipelines, on the chaotic, postponed permit meeting from Monday.

Interview with Agnes Marsala, president of Chesterfield, New Jersey’s People Over Pipelines, on the chaotic, never started, ultimately postponed permit meeting from August 22, 2016.

The meeting took place at a Ramada Inn, in a conference room having a capacity of 200 people. Approximately 50% was filled by a union, and speculation points to the oil company, Transunion, packing the room in an effort to prevent residents from entering, and to overwhelm genuine comments with “don’t take away my union job” comments. According to Agnes, the oil company is under no obligation for the next decade to pay full union wages, as they were grandfathered in with pay related decision. Some of the union personnel were surprised to learn this. There is also speculation that some union people were paid, and that a list of those attending and not attending was recorded for retaliation purposes.

The parking lot and conference room became so full that police had to intervene and start turning people away. The Ramada Inn reportedly refuses to host related meetings in the future.

According to Agnes, the postponement is a setback for the company, not necessarily a delaying tactic. Filling the room with union people, as well as renting a room that could only fit 200 people, despite that even larger turnout a previous meetings, both backfired.

Here is the original, eye-opening interview I did with People Over Pipelines in April.

An article from the Burlington County Times:

Public hearing on compressor station postponed due to large crowd

By David Levinsky, staff writer; August 22, 2016

BORDENTOWN TOWNSHIP — A public hearing for a controversial natural gas compressor station was postponed Monday evening after hundreds of people showed up to participate, grossly exceeding the capacity of a hotel ballroom where the hearing was scheduled.

The hearing was for a New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection wetlands permit sought by Williams Transco, an Oklahoma utility company that is planning to build the compressor station in Chesterfield, off Route 528, near the New Jersey Turnpike and Bordentown Township border, in order to feed a proposed pipeline through northern Burlington, Monmouth and Ocean counties. It was scheduled inside a ballroom at the Ramada Inn on Route 206, which has a capacity to hold 200 people.

More than triple that number turned out, according to some local officials. The crowd filled the parking lot and forced police to close off the ballroom entrance and turn away people at the hotel entrance.

Things became heated after officials tried to start the hearing only to be interrupted by opponents who griped about the venue being too small and people being turned away. A large contingent of labor union members were also in the audience to support the project, and the two sides began shouting before DEP officials announced the postponement.

“Our goal as the department is to hear what everyone has to say,” the DEP official said. “We’re going to stop the hearing and reschedule it so it can be in a place where everyone can be heard.”

A new date and location will be announced soon.

Several opponents of the compressor station said the decision to reschedule was the right one.

“It’s the best decision DEP has made in a long time,” said Doug O’Malley, a leader with Environment New Jersey, a nonprofit environmental advocacy group. “This was a public safety issue. The room was too small and you shouldn’t be turning away people at a public hearing, so DEP should be given credit.”

“It’s too bad people’s comments couldn’t be heard tonight, but we hope they’ll come out and be heard again at a better venue,” said Patty Cronheim, outreach coordinator, ReThink Energy NJ.

The compressor station would link the Williams Transco gas line between Mercer and Gloucester counties with New Jersey Natural Gas’ planned Southern Reliability Link pipeline through northern Burlington, Monmouth and Ocean counties.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities have already approved construction of both the compressor station and pipeline, but those approvals are contingent on the projects obtaining several related environmental permits.

Although the compressor station and pipeline are being built by different companies, both projects are related and intended to enhance the reliability of gas delivery to New Jersey Natural Gas’ service territory, which is predominantly in Ocean and Monmouth counties but also includes parts of Morris and Middlesex counties, the Lakehurst side of Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst and small portion of Burlington County and Bass River.

Both projects have drawn from residents and elected officials in Chesterfield, Bordentown Township and North Hanover, who consider them significant safety and pollution risks. Environmental groups have also objected.

Tom Gilbert, campaign director for the New Jersey Conservation Foundation, said the large crowd was indicative of the growing opposition to this project and others like it.

“I think the DEP now has a better understanding about how concerned about this people are and the opposition that’s out there,” Gilbert said. “People are paying attention about the threat these projects pose, and they’re trying to protect their communities and water and they’re counting on the DEP to do their job.”

Other opponents accused Williams Transco of choosing the venue in order to stifle public comments against the proposed station.

“It was a boondoggle from the get go, just like the pipeline and compressor station,” Bordentown Township Mayor Jill Popko said. “They had no business scheduling (the hearing) in a room that only holds 200 people.”

A Williams Transco spokesman could not immediately be reached for comment after the hearing’s postponement.

Earlier, the spokesman said the utility has been working closely with the Department of Environmental Protection to obtain the required permits.

“We’re looking forward to securing the remaining outstanding clearances needed to construct this important infrastructure project and meet the state’s growing energy needs with reliable natural gas service,” Williams Transco spokesman Christopher Stockton said.

In addition to the wetlands permit, the company is still awaiting DEP approval of a water diversion permit, which would allow it to temporarily divert as many as 7 million gallons of groundwater a month from the compressor site for about 10 months while the station is being built.

A public hearing on that permit application was held in April in Chesterfield and attracted several hundred people.

Williams Transco officials had originally objected to holding a public hearing on the outstanding wetlands permit, arguing in a June letter to the department that months had passed since the company submitted its application in July 2015 and that additional delays could jeopardize the station’s planned August 2017 in-service date.

DEP officials responded that the long review was necessary due to the scope of the project and that the additional opportunity for public comment was in the public’s interest.

Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, said the postponement should be considered a small victory for opponents of the natural gas projects, but he said moving to a bigger venue was not enough and that the department should extend the public comment period for the permit and hold two public hearings instead of just one.

“What DEP did was shameful and now they need to correct it,” Tittel said. “They should hold two public hearings so people have time to comment.”

The DEP also planned to hold a public hearing on a water permit application filed by New Jersey Natural Gas for its Southern Reliability Link pipeline. That hearing was to scheduled Sept. 7 at 6 p.m. at the same Ramada Inn.

It was unknown Monday if that hearing date would also be postponed or moved to a different venue.