New Data Privacy Regulations →

When Marc Zuckerberg testified before both the House and the Senate last month, it became immediately obvious that few US lawmakers had any appetite to regulate the pervasive surveillance taking place on the internet.
Right now, the only way we can force these companies to take our privacy more seriously is through the market. But the market is broken. First, none of us do business directly with these data brokers. Equifax might have lost my personal data in 2017, but I can't fire them because I'm not their customer or even their user. I could complain to the companies I do business with who sell my data to Equifax, but I don't know who they are. Markets require voluntary exchange to work properly. If consumers don't even know where these data brokers are getting their data from and what they're doing with it, they can't make intelligent buying choices.
This is starting to change, thanks to a new law in Vermont and another in Europe. And more legislation is coming.
...
Surveillance is the business model of the internet. It's not just the big companies like Facebook and Google watching everything we do online and selling advertising based on our behaviors; there's also a large and largely unregulated industry of data brokers that collect, correlate and then sell intimate personal data about our behaviours. If we make the reasonable assumption that Congress is not going to regulate these companies, then we're left with the market and consumer choice. The first step in that process is transparency. These new laws, and the ones that will follow, are slowly shining a light on this secretive industry.

Trump's personal corruption is unprecedented in modern presidents →

Let's just call him "Mafia Don" from now on.

Continued:

To put that in perspective, in the preceding 4 cycles -- from 2008 to 2014 -- the GOP spent a combined total of just $166k at Trump properties and companies, about one-tenth of what they've spent since the person benefiting from these payments became the party's standard bearer. And these totals don't even include the funds that the Trump campaign and other Trump-related committees have spent at Trump-owned companies, a total that now stretches to well over $14 million at this point. 
When you piece it all together, you see a striking explosion in money flowing from political sources to companies that the president and his family benefit from directly. It can't be said enough (and I say it often): This is not normal.
We're used to hearing that Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm, or that Obama wouldn't even refinance his 5.9 percent mortgage when rates fell. but Trump's decision to eschew the practices of prior administrations is only one part of the equation. The other side is that the president's political allies have chosen not only to keep quiet about the conflicts of interest this arrangement creates, but to embrace them. They have made a conscious choice to schedule political events and fundraisers at places that will benefit the president directly. As we will see again in just a couple of weeks...
None
of
this
is
normal.

It should outrage anyone who believes that a citizens access to and influence over the most powerful people in the country shouldn't derive from the number of commas on their financial statements. And even if we accept that to some degree the wealthy do have more access and influence, we should fight for it to be disclosed, so that we can track how elected officials pay their financial benefactors back with profitable policies.

Trade sanctions against America won’t work. Sanctioning Trump himself might. →

So, Trump refused to give up his business interests when he became president, leaving the door wide open to control, whether through bribes or sanctions. And he and his family have taken enormous bribes from various authoritarian regimes. We'll see whether our allies figure out they can control Trump by hitting back with personal sanctions instead of tariffs (which would mostly hurt our poor, as if Trump cares at all about anyone but himself).If you want to deal with Trump, you have to do it directly.

Scott Gilmore, from Canada:

 

As I’ve pointed out before, the President can be successfully engaged, and countries like Ukraine, China, and Qatar have demonstrated this. When they want something from the United States, they skip the State Department, and even the White House staff. Instead of approaching their problem state-to-state, they go state-to-man. These countries focus on what Trump wants on a personal level – to enrich his family. So Beijing granted Ivanka trademarks, Qatar invested in one of Jared’s office towers, and Ukraine, with Slavic candor, simply wired half a million dollars to the President’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
Until this President, every previous modern occupant of the White House divested their assets upon assuming office. This eliminated the possibility personal business interests might benefit from political decisions. Conversely, it prevented others from threatening the President by attacking those assets. Trump, by refusing to give up his businesses, and by flagrantly violating the emoluments clause, has inadvertently handed us the perfect stick.
I propose that instead of taxing the import of American serviettes, we tax Trump. In the spirit of the Magnitsky Act, Canada and the western allies come together to collectively pressure the only pain point that matters to this President: his family and their assets. This could take the form of special taxation on their current operations, freezing of assets, or even sanctions against senior staff. Canada could add a tax to Trump properties equal to any tariff unilaterally imposed by Washington.  The European Union could revoke any travel visas for senior staff in the Trump organization. And the United Kingdom could temporarily close his golf course.

It’s time for America to get smart on trade →

Trump doesn't know (or at least care) what he's talking about (again). His proposed tariffs are primarily going to hurt our poor, our manufacturing, and our closest allies. Europe's already working out deals without us because we're now untrustworthy. And China, unlike what Trump claims, is mostly benefiting from the chaos.

Tariffs are a regressive tax. Trump has tried to claim that tariffs are a way in which the U.S. government can “charge a country” for imported their goods. But tariffs do not do that. They are a tax on U.S. consumers who buy imported goods...
Trump has bragged about “many Billions of Dollars” that the tariffs would bring into U.S. coffers. Those taxes disproportionately hurt poor consumers, however. The next time Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro claims that tariffs help low-income Americans, understand that he is lying.
...
The United States, in violating the rules of the game, guarantees retaliation. The Trump administration is relying on national security provisions of the 1962 Trade Act to impose its tariffs on aluminum and steel. The national security logic is risible in the extreme, especially since these tariffs are disproportionately focused on U.S. allies...

Most Americans don’t realize Robert Mueller’s investigation has uncovered crimes →

...
One can interpret this pattern of behavior in a few ways. One is that Mueller is steadily putting in place the building blocks of a huge, mafia-style takedown that will end with Manafort “flipping” under pressure and new indictments coming against members of Donald Trump’s family and damning evidence about Trump himself. Another would be that when placed under a microscope by an aggressive prosecutor, several Trump aides turn out to have been involved in financial malfeasance only loosely related to the Trump campaign and Trump himself did nothing wrong. But there is definitely evidence of crimes — including some serious ones — by a range of figures, some Russian and some Americans and some working at a very high level in Trumpworld. 
Yet despite what most Americans perceive to be a very steady drumbeat of Trump-Russia news, the majority of the public is completely unaware of these critical facts. 
That suggests that the press as a whole has not done a good job of actually conveying factual information to our audience, that Democrats’ messaging on the investigation has not been clear enough on the most damning point (Trump, even if otherwise innocent, is guilty of hiring crooks and trying to prevent an investigation into their activity), and that Trump’s counterstrategy of muddying the waters around the investigation has been fairly successful.

John Brennan: I will speak out until integrity returns to the White House →

Impeach Trump, then remove him from office.

...Presidents throughout the years have differed in their approaches to policy, based on political platforms, ideologies and individual beliefs. Mr. Trump, however, has shown highly abnormal behavior by lying routinely to the American people without compunction, intentionally fueling divisions in our country and actively working to degrade the imperfect but critical institutions that serve us. 
Although appalling, those actions shouldn’t be surprising. As was the case throughout his business and entertainment careers, Mr. Trump charts his every move according to a calculus of how it will personally help or hurt him. His strategy is to undercut real, potential and perceived opponents; his focus is to win at all costs, irrespective of truth, ethics, decency and — many would argue — the law. His disparagement of institutions is designed to short-circuit legitimate law enforcement investigations, intelligence assessments and media challenges that threaten his interests. His fear of the special counsel’s work is especially palpable, as is his growing interest in destroying its mandate.
For more than three decades, I observed and analyzed the traits and tactics of corrupt, incompetent and narcissistic foreign officials who did whatever they thought was necessary to retain power. Exploiting the fears and concerns of their citizenry, these demagogues routinely relied on lies, deceit and suppression of political opposition to cast themselves as populist heroes and to mask self-serving priorities. By gaining control of intelligence and security services, stifling the independence of the judiciary and discrediting a free press, these authoritarian rulers followed a time-tested recipe for how to inhibit democracy’s development, retard individual freedoms and liberties, and reserve the spoils of corrupt governance for themselves and their ilk. It never dawned on me that we could face such a development in the United States...

Trump's only looking out for himself: foreign policy edition

Trump's foreign policy is a window into his management style (and soul): he ignores information and expertise; he routinely contradicts himself after a day or two, undermining his own negotiating positions. He doesn't care about the country; he only cares about what'll get him the most media coverage (and bribes). Ilan Goldenberg on Twitter:

Continued:

North Korea: first he undercuts Tillerson’s negotiating effort. Calls Kim Jung Un “Little Rocket Man,” and escalates for no reason. Then out of nowhere with no consultation with advisors he agrees to a summit that everyone thinks is a bad idea & is a big concession to the North Koreans sending his advisors scrambling. Then without consulting Japan or South Korea, he unilaterally walks isolating us from our allies. But his letter to KJU is so pathetic & clearly shows a desire to do the summit that even while trying to look tough and walking away, he manages to weaken the US position. All the while he refuses to take actual briefings on the details of North Korea’s nuclear program, which after all is a central subject of the summit.
Israel/Palestine: he talks for months about doing the ultimate deal. Gets Kushner, Greenblatt and a whole team working on it at the White House. He meets with Abbas at the UN in September and privately tells him that he can get him a great deal. He can get him 1967 lines with swaps that give him better land than the land he is giving up. Total nonsense for anyone who knows anything about the conflict. And then boom. Out of nowhere. Moving the embassy to Jerusalem with no political concessions for the Palestinians. He blows everything up. Again, doing it all last minute with little consultation with his advisors. Palestinian senior delegation was at the White House 2 days before the announcement and Trump’s team didn’t even raise this possibility. No wonder they were so angry. And since then just making it worse. Choosing the day Palestinians commemorate the “Nakba” (catastrophe) as the day to move the embassy & needlessly throwing fuel in the fire while cutting off aid to UNRWA further destabilizing Gaza.
Iran: announcing time and again that he will only stay in the deal if he gets concessions from Europe & Congress to “fix” the deal. Intense negotiations followed and The Europeans made significant concessions that could have allowed Trump to declare victory & push Iran. But when Macron & Merkel came to visit Trump in April & try to convince him to stay in the deal, they came away with the impression he wasn’t even familiar with any of the details of the negotiations. Two weeks later Trump unilaterally walked away. Now Iran is working with the other powers to save the deal while isolating the US even as Pompeo has laid out an achievable list of demands with no plan on how to achieve them.
China: he pushes us into new trade negotiations by threat of sanctions and tariffs. But then he refuses to engage in any detail and give his negotiators guidance. So they all disagree amongst themselves & the Chinese see it & try to split the negotiating tram. Then he publicized through twitter major US concessions causing immediate Hill backlash & reducing his negotiating space. To compensate, administration then leaks the major Chinese concessions which of course causes the Chinese to walk them back & negotiations blow up.
Syria: he undercuts our position & leverage by announcing out of nowhere we are pulling out of Eastern Syria. If we were to do that the big winners would be ISIS, which would have new opportunities to come back & Iran which would have greater battlefield flexibility. Cuts off all support for opposition groups in Southwest Syria who have played key role in keeping a buffer that protected JOrdan & Israel. And even held $200 million for things such as the White Helmets - a group that bravely digs Syrians out of the rubble after air strikes. By doing all that he’s dramatically reduced US leverage, creates opportunities for Russia/Iran/Assad/ISIS. And it will inevitably draw us in deeper when it blows up in his face.
In all of these cases there has been no strategy. No plan. No consultation. The President wakes up and decides on his own & everyone scrambles. This is not a “playbook.” It is pure ignorance, ego & stupidity. Fortunately we have yet to have a REAL foreign policy crisis like an Ebola outbreak or a genuine military standoff. Terrifying to think what happens at that point.