I never thought Obama would stoop to such a low level. Bannon must really be so sort of wizzard that the Dems are so affraid of him.

This is all aimed at misrepresenting, and overrepresenting, the number of anti-Trump poeple in the crowd.

So much for Obama not interferring in the Trump Presidency.

The following text shows that people from the seven countries picked both by the U.S. Congress,Obama, and Trump do pose a significant risk of terrorism, despite the mainstream media's statements to the contrary.

Trump's temporary immigration ban from these seven countries was far from optimal, and may have actually caused considerably more harm than good, but it was not nearly as absurd at the mainstream media is propagandizing people to believe.

A totally false media fact check attack against Trump's White House:

There are multiple important similarities between Obama's order and Trump's. They both relate to strengthening vetting to avoid Islamic terrorists coming from the same group of 7 countries.

P.S.: There are many valid criticisms to be made of what Trump's presidency has done. But the media destroys any valid claim to honesty when it makes false and misleading statements against the Trump Presidency such as this.

I think this is a misquoted. He said if one has a photoID and alleges they are a citizen they should be able to vote.

There is evidence, although far from certain, that there were hundreds of thousands of votes cast illegally for Hillary, Plus there is Podesta's statement that if a person has a photo ID and claims to be a citizen they should be able to vote, a standard that would allow millions of illegals to vote illegally, and Obama's statement to Gena Rodriqez that there would be no punishment of illegal's voting.

This is presumably the research which was posted and trashed by WaPost linked to by me on Hypothes.is previously

Three key skills of emotional intelligence -understanding emotion in self and others -harnessing emotion for useful purposes -regulating emotions in self and others

Finally, the free traders are beginning to understand how China has been using a pretense of "free trade" in its effort to dominate the world. It is almost certain that China will become more powerful than America. The only questions is whether America and western democracies can remain relatively strong enough to resist Communist China's domination. And to do this we have to prevent China from dominating electronics, computing, cyber, and artificial intelligence.

This is a very important issue -- the mainstream media bears much of the responsibility of Trumps having been elected, because they gave him so much free publicity.

In general I consider James Fallows a valuable public voice, but I find this article disappointing. It fails to talk honestly about the serious reasons for fear or anger than many Americans have toward the mainstream media and the liberal intelligentsia. Let me quickly list some of these reasons.

America's relative power in the world is rapidly decreasing. For the first time since the late 1800's America is no longer the world's largest economy by certain important measures. China is, and it it still growing much faster than we are. China is rapidly arming, and is already ahead of us in multiple different types of weapon systems. In thirty year it it could have an economy twice the size of America's and much more sophisticated weaponry.

There are large areas of America in which the real value of average incomes has decreased substantially, such as in the rust belt.

Political correctness means that many tens of millions of people with traditional values are being constantly told by the mainstream media that their value are all wrong. Any one who publicly dares question or provide counter arguments to this political correctness is subject vicious public attack.

Race relations are not allowed to be honestly discussed in our media. For month after month in both the Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown cases the mainstream media's propaganda message was that those killings were unjustified murders -- when, in fact, the majority of the evidence in both cases indicated those killings were totally justified as self defense. The politically correct racism of the media hypes the notion of white guilt, but greatly downplays the much larger problem of black guilt, including the fact that blacks have seven times the per capita violent crime and murder rates as whites and that blacks murder twice as many whites as whites murder blacks.

So why aren't whites allowed to protest that White Lives Matter? Because that would be racist? No! It's because political correctness, itself, is a racist/sexist double standard.

And no major candidate but Trump has had the balls to attack political correctness as much as he has (although his crude attacks are neither well reasoned or articulate).

You want to know how stupid our democracy is: Home & Garden Television has more viewes than CNN.

I have not read this book by I saw the author's BookTV one hour interview. He said that only about 1/4 of U.S citizens know enough about most issues being voted on to vote intelligently. So no wonder our government does so many stupid and wasteful things.

To make democracy intelligent -- i.e., capable of making decisions that provide the greatest good for the large majority of its citizens over long periods of time -- we need to deal intelligently with the issues of voter ignorance, apathy, and stupidity.

We also need to eliminate the censorship of political correctness and mass marketing sponsored media, each of which in their own way prevent important sides of many issues from being properly aired in the public forum.

An article relevant to intelligent democracy, because it shows that opensource-like collaboration often out performs corporate of governmental organizations at solving problems well.

A case in England in which voter fraud changed who was elected for a local office.

Did not know Putin has substantially re-socialized the Russian economy.

A F35, the U.S. equivalent plane cost a minimum of $140 million, or twice as much.

Also smart. How else does America have a hope to compete with China that graduates 5 times as many people as we do in STEM subjects

Much smarter than the notion that everyone should go to college.

This is a web article concerning the fake news generated by this cultural leftist that Soedad O'Brian's tweets helped rebut..

Example of fake news being generated by the cultural left. A Muslim falsely claiming he was kicked of a flight for speaking Arabic over phone to his monther.

Great editorial. It fits with my comment of earlier today about a racist college course attacking white people.

Proof of just how extreme the racism in political correctness really is.

This is an important and disturbing story. Obama's caution is being read by China as a green light for it to be much more imperialistic.

Oh, so we are to be thankful that the return the drone after they have stolen all the technology out of it.

This article is a classic case of mainstream media bias.

It only reports the death threat received by a person promising not to vote for Trump (highlighted below), and not the multiple death threats received by elector promising to vote for him.

It doesn't point out the having electors not reflect the vote in their states upsets the rules for selecting our president that have been respected and upheld for over a century -- and which make the select of a president much LESS DEMOCRATIC (small "d" democratic).

Yes, and Alexander Hamilton was in favor of property requirements for voting, which prevented a large majority of people from voting. Here we have the Democrats saying we should make our selection of the U.S. President less democratic, less responsive to voters -- not more democratic.

I have fears Trump will be a bad President. But I don't like the incredible hypocrisy of those who slandered Trump for not agreeing to accept the results of the election, not only refusing to accept the result, but try to do so by -- not only overturning a tradition that is over a hundred years old -- but doing so in a manner that would make our selection of a president much less responsive to voters.

More mainstream media bias. The revelation about Russia's role in the election, as disturbing as it was, occurred well before the election and was taken into account by the voters.

The fact that it was widely believed that Russia was using hacked documents to tip the US election toward Trump was widely discussed by the time Debbie" Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign from the DNC before the Democratic Convention in July, and even more so once Wikileaks started releasing the Podesta emails. This was even further substantiated by the fact Trump repeatedly refused to say anything negative about Putin and actually asked Russia to release emails about Hillary.

This is stunning.

This implies either that people tallied voted more than once, or that others stuffed the ballot box.

More evidence that the mainstream media's claims there is no illegal voting are nothing but "fake news".

A scary article. Trump claims he is going to clean house at CIA. I hope that doesn't mean he's going to kick out anybody who gives him news he doesn't want to hear -- because news you don't want to hear is often the most important news.

This is a hopeful sign that Bannon actually does care about middle and lower middle class workers. See highlight below

I want to read this in more detail. Sounds interesting.

If this is true -- and because it is stated in InfoWars.com, it should only be taken as a suggestion it is true -- then you would think the ACLU would be all over this story. As the Washington Post admission of mislabeling what is, and is not, "fake news" shows, this would be an extremely dangerous form of censorship by the Silicon Valley left.

Greenwald was the media darling who released Snowdon's emails.

It should be noted that virtually all major news media outlets fit this description, such as by quoting the Russian released John Podesta Wikileaks.

Shows you can't blindly accept mainstream media 'fact checking" or allegations of "fake news".

That doesn't mean you should accept right-wing media blindly either. To best find the truth one has to skeptical of all sources and seek to develop an estimate of the reliability of each.

Claims Signal is one of the best free encrupted messaging services.

This counters some of the common groupthink on education

The key learning from this study.

A great way to say "not interested" on a web interface.

What has humanity come to -- Micrsoft, one of America's leading computer companies, is selling China network AI's that help enforce Communist censorship?

We cannot stop other countries from censoring their net, and we should let American vendors sell into nets censored by local law. But -- if we care for democracy and anything even approaching America's current relatively wide equality of power between humans -- we better show the world that a nation with a substantially uncensored, AI-amplified, democratic network can kick butt. Otherwise a democratic human future in the rapidly approaching age of machine superintelligence looks unlikely.

So let's use collective media, collective intelligence, and a basic set of collective human values to create an AI amplified superdemocracy.

The AI singularity is rapidly approaching. Machines that can do virtually everything humans do much faster and better than humans are probably only 5 to 15 years away. If you care at all for anybody, including yourself, that may be living then -- it is important for you that machine superintelligence happen well for humanity. As I wrote in 2010 in an article entitled "Collective Intelligence -- Our Only Hope for Surviving the Singularity":

"The Singularity will NOT occur in a vacuum.

"It will NOT occur in a realm of pure science, engineering, or philosophy. It will NOT occur in one instant, one year, or one decade.

"Instead, it WILL occur --- over multiple decades --- in the real world --- one dominated by struggles for --- personal --- corporate --- political --- and national --- survival, money, and power. How the Singularity's wildly transformative technologies will be developed and deployed will be decided largely by collective entities --- by corporations --- governments --- political parties --- militaries --- bureaucracies --- interest groups --- criminal gangs --- the media --- and public opinion."

So -- if we want the future to be anything other than a sci-fi horror movie -- job one should be using the net and AI to make America and, ultimately humanity, collectively superintelligent.

Is synaptic strength learning between neurons and interneurons. which s is highly relevant

This is a classic case of dishonest factchecking.

I have read multiple articles from multiple different types of news sources that cite occasions instances of votes being cast for dead people. And these are only the cases that are caught -- there is very little checking for such abuse, and Democrats generally oppose efforts to remove dead people (or non-citizens, for that matter) from voter rolls. So the total number of fraudulent votes could be much larger.

So dead people voting is more than" virtually existent".

Another fascinating article about Steve Bannon, who is one hell of an odd, but fascinating, guy.

It indicates that economically Trump may perhaps be to the left of Hillary. We will have to wait and see.

Strong indication the common mainstream media's smear that Bannon is anti-Semitic is fake news.

A fantastic article about how bright Kusher is and what an amazing role he played in Trump's election.

Steven K. Bannon -- Trump's strategic adviser who is hated by the mainstream media -- was the 1975-1976 Student Government Association President at Virginia Tech. Interesting!

Great statistics about the high end of America's distribution of wealth

A good point. Whites have as much power to practice identity politics as anyone else. They have as much moral right as well.

P.S. The KKK was the first identity movement in America politics? I doubt it. What about the Know Nothing Party? What about pro-slavery movements before the Civil War?

This points out the discrimination inherent in much of political correctness. It focuses much more on the right and interests of certain groups rather than those of others.

An incredibly intelligent and revealing report on Steve Bannon, the new bete noire of the mainstream media and media strategist who helped Trump get elected.

You man not like the guy, but have to admit he has brilliantly figured out how to move the needle of American opinion.

This is a big problem-- even bigger than Secretary of State Clinton's huge conflicts of interest with the Clinton Global Initiative.

Trump has business interests worth millions of dollars shared with politically connected businessmen in many corrupt countries -- including, in particular, Russia, which is not only extremely corrupt, but also hostile to both democracy and America. Trump's financial interests can be hurt by offending the leaders in such corrupt countries. Even worse, Trump's businesses could allow these leaders to arrange business deals worth millions or billions to Trump’s business interests in return for US Presidential policies that favor such leaders -- many of which policies could hurt America.

Unfortunately, it's hard to separate a President Trump from his business interests without screwing him financially. This is because one of his sources of income is licensing his own name, "Trump". So it is much harder for Trump to distance himself from the major source of his income than prior presidents. To force Trump to sell his company to someone else would almost certainly substantially reduce its value, because it would take the celebrity Donald Trump out of the "Trump" brand.

One solution to this problem might be to have some government appointed board to overlook his business interests when he is president. Their goal should be to make public to the American people all the conflicts which Trump has as a result of his business interests, and to make public how any decisions he is facing or has made are likely to affect those business interests – and more importantly the interests of our nation.

Is there a way to find if this is true, or just bogus alt-right propaganda? (After all it is on InfoWars.com, the nastier fringe of the right wing media -- but some of its stuff is true.)

There is strong evidence the Democrats were encouraging illegals to vote.

Podesta told a team of Hillary's campaign staff trying to increase voter turn out that if a person has a photo ID and attests they are a citizen they should be allowed to vote. That would let any illegal willing to falsely claim citizenship vote.

When Obama was asked by and advocate for illegal aliens if it was safe for them; to vote free of repercussions, he strongly suggested it was. This was shown starting at 3:23 in the following video https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaemYNcQbzuQKJu6BnxgmxA

.(Note, this video was removed shortly before the election because the right wing media pointed out how outrageous Obama's remarks were. It might be removed or edited if there is any serious investigation into illegal voting. if so, please google for video of Obama of telling Gina Rodriguez it was safe for illegals to vote.)

But so is the Black Lives Matter Movement, which routinely makes anti-white racist statements and has, whether purposely or not, encouraged its uglier elements to murder policemen.

Trump certainly should try to reduce true racism and seek to promote racial and cultural peace.

But he should not accept the racist hypocrisy of the cultural left, which says blacks and Latinos are allowed to say racist things against whites, but whites are not allowed to honestly discuss problems affecting blacks and Latinos, such as that they have higher crime rates and lower IQ scores. The problems of racial inequality cannot be solved if we are not allowed to discuss them honestly.

Oh, thanks. One sentence suggesting their just might be racism and discrimination among anti-Trump forces.. In fact, the racism and violence in anti-Trump groups, such as Black Lives Matter and the more militant Hispanic groups -- such as La Raza whose name means "The Race" -- far exceeds that by Trump supporters.

At the peak of its power in the 1920's the Klan was and extremely ugly and dangerous force. Today, it has little power, thank god. Its rhetoric is still ugly, but no more ugly that a lot of what is said in the Black Lives Matter Movement.

This is not the type of language a President of the United States should use, but it is not absurd. Muslim immigration into Europe has created exactly such a problem.

Illegal Hispanic immigrants have roughly 3 times the per capita crime rate as non-Hispanic American whites.

This fact should be central to immigration policy, but it is virtually never mentioned by the mainstream media. Donald's statement that Mexican immigrants are rapists is true -- because some are -- but it was phrased in a way that did overstate the problem. But which is worse to overstate a problem the way Trump did, or act as if the problem doesn't exist as the mainstream media has.

Unlike the comment in the last sentence, this does sounds like something that might have been written by some in the ugly fringe of Trump supporters.

This was almost certainly written by anti-Trump posteriors.

I have heard many comparisons of Trump to Hitler by his opponents. None by his supporters.

Trump should repudiate statements or discrimination that are unjustified or unfair. And some of what is said and done by Trump supporters is just that.

But much of what the New York Times considers racist or otherwise "discriminatory" is no more unjustified than much of the propaganda and attacks from the left by groups, such as Black Lives Matter, which the New York Times supports.

Trump has shown some cruelty, such as his public ridicule of a journalist with a movement disorder.

But much of his alleged "cruelty" is merely political incorrectness. And we know that saying anything politically incorrect is labeled by the mainstream media/intelligentsia as "cruel" or "hateful".

For example, stating that people who are in America illegally should leave can be viewed as no more selfish than saying that someone who as stolen something should give it back, even if doing so would cause significant hardship in their life..

The right to be a citizen of America, or to even live in it legally, are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why is it cruel for Trump to want to stop theft of something of so much value -- in order to save it instead for immigrants who are likely to do more to help America stay competitive with China.

Let us remember, Trump has said from the start he is in favor of a relatively large amount of legal immigration, and on multiple occasion he has hinted that -- if the invasion of this country by illegals could be stopped and the criminal illegals could be deported -- he might allow many of the current illegals to stay..

If you had followed all the many Clinton scandal as I have you would understand the Clintons have committed so many crimes, some of them very serious, that they should have been locked up.

But they and their large network of Clintonistas spread across the nexus of politics, media, and business are so powerful and have so bought off, or so ingratiated themselves with, this country's major power sources that they have gotten away with crime after crime.

Trump does seem to have some character problems.

We don't know yet how much they will hurt our nation. It's quite conceivable they might hurt a lot. Can he attract intelligent, talented people around him. Can he listen to people who disagree with him. Can he learn fast. Can he disciplined enough to always talk diplomatically about things that must be discussed diplomatically.

Trump has many flaws and we don't yet (on day two after the 216 election) how deep they run.

But to suggest his campaign and voters represented nothing but "raw ego and proud illiteracy" shows Keillor isn't even trying to be fair or accurate.

The liberal Democrats have been supporting some destructive policies -- policies that might possibly, in the long run, do more harm than Trump's. (We don't know yet how much harm Trump might do.)

These destructive policies include: relatively open borders; continued discrimination in favor of blacks (which translates into discrimination against otherwise equal whites); failure to honestly discuss the harm caused by higher per capita rates of minority violence and social pathogy; letting other nations take advantage of us in trade policies, and addiction to deficit spending. (Although, on deficit spending Trump's tax and spending policies might be much worse than Hillary's)

I have normally heard "people are people" to mean people are not saints, people are not perfect. people fuck up.

And you know what, people are not perfect, people do fuck up. And it only reflects a stupid bias to think otherwise.

I don't enjoy seeing anybody suffer "tough noogies", except perhaps the selfish, unfairly hateful, dishonest, and criminal.

I do want to see a nation that seeks to help people who need help -- to the extent we, the people, are willing to pay for it in taxes, donations of money, and/or donations of time and effort. But borrowing against our future to reduce as many tough noogies as we can now will only make it harder to pay to reduce tough noogies in the future.

One of the major things that motivates people is the feedback loop. People are inherently motivated to seek good noogies, and avoid bad noogies. If we remove bad noogies from all the feedback loop, fewer people will be motivated to take responsibility for their own actions and lives.

Net net, tough noogies are often expensive to remove once created, and paying to remove to many of them will reduce people's own efforts to avoid creating them in the first place.

"Life is what you make it", at least to a significant extent in most case. Who could argue otherwise.

No matter what hand life has dealt you, you own behavior can usually make it better -- if only by affecting how you think about things.

The liberal elitist's and mainstream media's minimization of this vital concept is one of the major reason why America has such a large underclass. America spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year trying to lift up our huge underclass, and some of it works. But in a large number of cases -- it is exactly those people in the underclass who, despite the mainstream media, believe "life is what you make it" who have lifted themselves up the most.

Yes, Trump's pre-election speeches indicate a lot of ignorance about many fields.

He or his administration will have to become much more knowledgeable in if his Presidency is to succeed. But now, just after the election, it is too early to know if he can surround himself with bright people and listen to them. There is reason to doubt he can, but we can't be sure.

There has actually been much more violent behavior by anti-Trump forces against Trump supporters than visa versa. Here is one of many such violent attacks https://hyp.is/7nb1cqeEEeaKhtslAr07hw/www.infowars.com/shock-video-black-mob-viciously-beats-white-trump-voter/

Cohen is to the left of me. I disagree with him on many things, but I think he is a valuable voice.

So true. And so important.

This is a valid fear. Russians has repeatedly made fools of the U.S. in Syria because we have been stupid enough to keep seeking their promised cooperation. There is reason to believe Trump -- who has little experience in international relations -- will -- in his effort to have a friendlier relation with Putin -- be made an even greater fool.

But, to be fair, Trump has negotiated with some of the biggest pricks in the business world. So maybe he knows something about how to deal with the Putins and the Xis of the world.

A good abbreviated summary of much of Trump's appeal.

But it fails to discuss that -- since Trump has no record of governance that can be used against him, and since our mass market place of ideas has little capacity to discuss issues with any complexity -- Trump was able to get away with promising he, somehow, could fix all of America's major problems.

Yes. It's time to focus on fact that Trump will be our president -- and on what can be done to make him a better president and to minimize his potential harm.

Yes, InfoWars posts some really offensive shit.

But unless you thinks this video is better-than-Hollywood fakery -- you will see in it absolutely disgusting, cruel, vicious behavior. And this behavior comes from a significant constituency of the Democratic Party -- the black underclass -- represented here by Black-Lives-Matter-Movement muscle.

Such un-American behavior from the black underclass, and the harm it causes to both whites and blacks, has been under reported and under condemned by the mainstream media and the intelligentsia.

Such political correctness is a major reasons why white voters -- particularly those poor enough to have to live in much more frequent fear of such people -- have supported Trump.

P.S., I welcome reasoned debate. I am a "truth_seeker". If you can make reasoned arguments against anything I say, please reply or comment me.

– –Meaning she's less admirable and lovable because she has huge flaws and we know them – and to many that greatly diminishes the step forward for women she symbolizes. – –What this article and most of the reporting in the mainstream press about Hillary fails to drive home is just how corrupt, unethical, and criminal evidence suggests the Clintons have acctually been. They are smart and many of their policies make sense. But they have gotten away with it because they have created a large network of thousands of wealthy and/or powerful people to do favors for them, pull strings for them, fix problems for them, and share in the benefit and profit from such collective governmental power.

--Yes, it is a march toward greater equality provided we remember that women can be just as sexist as men and that men are entitled to equality also. --Many radical feminists are man haters, but many feminists are not. I am not aware of any evidence Hillary is a man hater.

This article describes one of the more important stupidities in our democratic process -- that very little resources are allocated by either voters, political parties, or the government to making it easy for voters to know who and what they are voting for in any depth.

There have been multiple articles before the 2016 election stating the right-wing media is totally opposed to "truth" because it casts doubts on "fact checking". This article is a classic example of why, in fact, the mainstream media's alleged "fact checking" cannot be trusted. At a minimum this alleged factcheck is highly one-sided and misleading..

We can't know with 100% certainty exactly what Podesta meant by saying having a photo ID and attesting to citizenship should qualify one to vote -- but it's clear that if he meant what his words actually say he would be authorizing a standard that would allow the millions of non-citizens in America who had photo IDs to vote as long as they were willing to falsely claim they were citizens -- something that is clearly illegal, and something that could get the Democrats hundreds of thousands, if not millions of votes in 2016, and following, elections.

This "factcheck" claims the email chain containing Podesta's statement was only about making voting easier. It makes no mention of the central fact that all of the political operative in this email chain would know: (1) that one of the major objections by Republican to Democratic efforts to "making voting easier" is that such efforts tend to make voting by non-citizens easier -- and (2) that the voting eligibility standard Podesta chose would, in fact, allow widespread, allow exactly the predominantly pro-Democratic voting by non-citizens which both is illegal, and which the Republicans will oppose.

The statement that "Podesta said no such thing" is at a minimum a gross exageration.

Trump's paraphrase, highlighted here, of Podesta's words is a fairly accurate representation of the likely meaning of Podesta's wikileaked statement. There are only two differences worth noting: First , Podesta did not explicitly refer to non-citizens voting. But the standard he set would allow them to do so -- and that is something that would benefit the political campaign Podesta was running greatly. Second, Podesta said photo-IDed voters should have to claim they are citizens to vote. But this is a relatively minor distinction because millions of non-citizens could falsely claim citizenship and vote according to Podesta's standard with little chance of punishment. There is very little effort to check the validity of voter registrations, such efforts are generally opposed by Democrats, and even where such false claims of citizenship have been detected -- such as where the non-citizens themselves bring attention to the invalidity of the citizenship change or some other fluke does -- there is seldom any punishment.

To indicate just how much Democrats want non-citizen votes -- and this is stunning -- in a video at (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCaemYNcQbzuQKJu6BnxgmxA) -- from 3:22 to 4:41 into the video -- Gina Rodriguez asks President Obama if non-citizen voters can vote in the 2016 election without fear of repercussions. The President says there is little chance of any such repercussions. That is, the President of the United States strongly implies that illegals can vote with little danger of punishment.

UPDATE: As of Election Day 2016 in several of my attempts to use the above link -- the one to the video in which Obama strongly suggests it is safe for illegals to vote in the U.S. election -- YouTube said the video was unavailable. So I am posting this link to a video copy of the most important part of the above mentioned 3:22 to 4:41 segement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQKAz7l5Es4

Of course Podesta's statement does not explicitly say he wants non-citizens to vote. Saying something like that, even on emails assumed to be private, could get him in trouble, and Podesta is smart enough to know it. But his statement does advocate a standard that would, in practice allow millions of them to vote, and Podesta, and those in this email chain, are smart enough to know how much that could help the Presidential campaign they are running.

And as mentioned in my comment above, when Gina Rodriquez asked President Obama if it was safe for non-citizens to vote, he strongly implied it was safe for them to commit such an illegal act.

This is the Podesta language at issue. If it were the standard, it would allow any illegal immigrant who was willing to falsely attest they were a citizen to vote.

The following factors, among others, indicate Democrats seek substantial illegal voting by non-citizens -- which would be massive voter fraud: (1) Podesta's statement discussed in this article; (2) Democratic and Latino efforts to oppose efforts to insure only citizens can vote, and (3) Obama's statement to Gena Rodriguez cited in my previous comment above -- strongly suggesting it is personally safe for illegal aliens to vote in the 2016 election.

I largely agree with this comment. Trump seems to have surprisingly little concern for even the appearance (to the reasonably well informed) of honesty and consistency.

But the notion that elevating lies to the center of political discourse is somehow new, or that only Trump has done it, is either dishonest or childishly ill informed.

For example, one lie that is at the very center of much of American political rhetoric is the statement that all men and women are equal. But, of course, who would want the quarterback of their favorite football team picked at random from college quarterbacks. Who, facing brain surgery, would want their surgeon picked at random, without regard to their appropriate skill. Who, if they could avoid it, would want to move with their loved ones into an extremely high crime neighborhood. Virtually no one.

This is historically important news.

The almost identical 8th grade math score distributions for white and black students shown in this article is a wonderful sign. Equality in math scores (as well as other forms of academic performance) is correlated with equality in IQ.

American blacks have, on average, traditionally had IQ scores 15 points below average and have done much worse in school. This has been one of the major reasons why blacks tend to earn less than whites. In "The Bell Curve", Herrnstein and Murray's 1994 book about the importance of IQ, it was shown that if you normalize for IQ -- by randomly picking a population of white people with 100 IQ and a population of black people with 100 IQ -- 70% of the alleged racist wage differential between blacks and whites disappears. This indicates that the major reason why most blacks make less money than whites is because of they have traditionally had lower IQs.

But this article shows that we are learning how to educate black children in ways that drastically improve academic performance correlated with higher IQs. This indicates that most, if not all, of the traditional difference between black and whites IQs can be removed.

That is wonderful news for the future of race relations in America. Equality of intelligence is one of the most important forms of equality. Let us learn from this articles and widely institute its teachings.

This applies equally to the Pentagon papers and the other leaks mentioned in my annotation above.

Similarly, wanton destruction of the privacy of the Pentagon's efforts to open the disastrous policies of President Johnson and his top general in Vietnam to secret internal criticism, effectively smothers such institutional criticism in the future. Similarly Wikileaks wanton destruction of the privacy of diplomatic cables smothers the ability of America's diplomats to discuss within the State department the very secrets which are essential to diplomacy.

I agree with much of this article -- except the implication that the dump of Podesta's emails is some how so much worse than the release of the Pentagon Papers, the wikileak of hundreds of thousands of U.S. State Department diplomatic cables, or Edward Snowdon's release of hundreds of thousands of files explaining much of our cyber offense and defense to our enemies. Those leaks probably hurt America much more than the leaks against Podesta.

But yes, in general leaking of mass amounts of information can be dangerous and threatening to human rights.

P.S., Regarding the Pentagon papers, they were a politically risky study within the Pentagon to try to more honestly assess the many problems with the war. By the release of those papers, and the mainstream media's embrace of their leaker as a hero, the likelihood that such attempts within government bureaucracy to honestly evaluate their own fuck-ups has almost certainly been reduced.