Secret Society?

This is an unfolding story so it is just the beginning and we do not know where it will go next. We have often heard of references to the "deep state," which has usually meant for us the existence of the "permanent" officials of state agencies that continue in place while elected politicians of both parties come and go. The existence of a "deep state" is troubling and it erodes the existence of trust between the public and its elected officials. However, we now have reported the existence of a memo exchanged between two FBI officials that makes reference to a "secret society," (to which they presumably belong) and which one FBI agent thinks should meet to discuss some new item of concern. This is deeply troubling, and makes the "deep state" scenario look like "business as usual," while a "secret society" is a threat to the very meaning of democracy.

Stay tuned. This is an unfolding story. Track it on your own through whatever media sources you use on a regular basis.

Update 1/25/18: Latest news report on the "secret society" email: the two FBI officials who made mention of the "secret society" were known to have emailed each other with some frequency. It now appears that these messages between the two FBI officials over a five-month period cannot be found. This only serves to keep the spotlight on the question of the meaning of a "secret society." This is a very partisan issue, so it is wise to wait and look at all documents before drawing any conclusions.

Update 1/26/18: Our local newspaper reported today that the missing emails between two FBI officials have been found. We can now find out if the "secret society" statement was an in-house joke or whether it has legs.

Update 5/5/18: This is a no-news update. Will we ever learn anything more about the alleged "secret society." I don't think so.

Update 2/9/18: We said this was an unfolding story, but we didn't know it would be this slow. We think that the release of the memo by the Republicans has made all the power centers nervous because they are all implicated by their actions or inactions. Thus, the FBI, DOJ, Big Media, Democrats, and Republicans are moving slowly because they lack full control over the story. Thus, the discussion of "secret society" has disappeared, or moved into a category of  an inside "joke" that the two parties enjoyed, but which is reported to be fiction. So all we can do is to stay tuned, but remember that inaction going forward may also be revealing.

Update 6/15/18: The report on the FBI and DOJ that was released today suggests the existence of a lot of activity inside these two agencies to protect their interests, which may be as low-level as protecting your job and pension, or as high level as advancing the interests of one political faction or party over the interests of an opposing party or faction. But we must still be careful as to whether what was revealed in the FBI/DOJ report are the actions of a "ruling class" or the actions of a "political and economic elite." The "ruling class" argument is supported by apparent FBI/DOJ actions to support a past president and undercut an elected president. I am still inclined to lean toward the "elite" conclusion because their actions sometimes seem very petty and smell of inter-group politics. The one big loser identified in today's FBI report is one of the FBI agents (Peter S.) who appears to be a first-class creep capable of a variety of actions to advance or protect very petty political interests. He is the kind of person who should never serve in any government position.

Personal Consumption and Climate Change

The February 18, 2018 issue of In These Times has an article entitled "Ban Yachts, Not Burgers" that examines the role of personal consumption styles and the climate crisis. For me, the significance of the article is that it brings the views of the "right" and the "left" together when they identify the role of the consumption lifestyle of the wealthy, in addition to multinational corporations, as responsible for carbon emissions. Put in on your reading list. 

We pay--but how much?

Robert is not opposed to the Mueller investigation of Russian interference in the US election. But I would like to know how much is being spent on the salaries of the lead investigator and his staff of 10-15-20 lawyers and their underlings. When I Google Mueller's salary, all I get is articles about how much income he has lost from not working with his corporate law firm and serving corporate clients. His decision to serve his country is admirable, but why can't I find out how much he and his staff are being paid to serve their country?

If some of you know the answer to my question please tell me. Or if you know how I should look for the answer, please tell me. Is it too much to ask for a taxpayer to know how his/her taxes are being spent? We know how much the President earns, and we know about the salaries and staff budgets of members of Congress. Why is the Mueller information so secret?

4/12/18 Update: There have been several short news items on the dollar cost of this investigation. The reports say about $5-7 million, but with little detail about the number of people on this payroll, and about who is paid what.

5/1818 Update: The Mueller-led investigation of Russian interference in the US election has reached the one-year point. I have still not seen a single report on the number of persons on the payroll and how much each is being paid.

It just occurred to me why we don't have any info on how much the Mueller team is getting paid for their investigative work. If the reporter asks them how much they are getting paid, the same question might be turned back on the reporter, and maybe the editor, and maybe the publisher. I am really a fool for having missed the obvious--they are all in the same big money game-- they are the money elites and everything that they do is designed to maintain or enhance their money flow, whether they are "lowly" reporters or part of an elite investigative team. They are all economic elites attacking other economic elites, whether they are Russian oligarchs or Donald Trump. The game that economic elites play is to attack other economic elites because it takes attention away from them as being part of the same system. That is why the prominent big money types like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet take the lead in heading a public relations effort to mobilize the rich to sign on to a plan that "gives away" their money to public projects before the "people with the pitchforks" (that is what they were called by Pat Buchanan when he was a candidate for president) come to take their money without asking.    

The "First" Harvey Weinstein

Robert often wonders why there has been no mainstream media story about Teddy Kennedy being the "first" Harvey Weinstein. After all, the Chappaquiddick story about Teddy and Mary Jo has all the ingredients of the powerful man-vulnerable intern scenario that any journalist might want to explore. Do you have any guesses about why you have not seen such a story?

Update 3/22/18: I just learned tonight (8:57 pm) that we will be seeing a TV movie about Teddy and Chappaquiddick. Maybe someone read our earlier Blogger message?

Poll Data--Again

We have warned our readers in past blogs (Poll Data) to be wary of figures reported to be the results of a public poll until you know how the questions were asked. In USA Today the paper reports the results of a recent poll with the following "table."

"Who wins? What group of Americans will get the most benefits from the tax-cut bill, if one is signed into law?
The poor: 6%
The Middle Class: 17%
The Wealthy: 64% "

It would be helpful to know what dollar value was used (or if any was used) to define the meaning of "the poor" or the other two categories. The paper also reports three "volunteered" categories of Everybody, Nobody, and Undecided/Refused, but do not tell readers how the "volunteered" responses were obtained (were they responses from those who did not answer in terms of the three established categories, or were they in addition to established category responses). This kind of table and this kind of "data" reporting would never make it through an introductory research methods course in sociology, but USA Today thinks it is fine for their readers.

Swamp Rats

Robert noticed in todays newspaper of calls for continued investigations of Trump and associates by Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. The Senator is a frequent guest on evening and Sunday news shows. What is never mentioned by the media is the fact that in the recent past Senator Blumenthal has lied about his service in Vietnam, and his achievements while he was there. As best I could determine, the Senator never was in Vietnam in  any capacity. His main achievement during the Vietnam War was to obtain five deferments from his draft board. Apparently this never bothered the voters in Connecticut who elected him to be their Senator.

I think that the people of Connecticut should get together with the people of Alabama and have a discussion about who is in their swamps.

Update, 12/13/17: The citizens of Alabama have started to drain their swamp. Will the citizens of Connecticut do the same?

Update, 1/29/18: On NPR this morning Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut was calling for the impeachment of Trump, which he has every right to do. But why does the media not give him credit for being a draft evader and for lying about his military service. We need to know who is speaking, whether they had KKK backgrounds or were draft evaders and liars.

Perps' Profile:Early Warnings or Apple Pie

We have identified thirty-six men who have been accused of some form of sexual harassment. In order to get ahead of the rush to judgement we have decided to take a look at their personal and professional lives to see if there are any strong similarities that could serve as "warning signs" of what would come. Working from available public profiles, we looked at their early years as boys and young men, looking for evidence of early troubles at home or at school. We turned next to their post-college years in order to examine their career paths, searching for evidence of ordinary professional lives, or early indications of "young stars" on the move. In short, we looked at the normal profiles of events that occur over the life course and that have been a part of all of their lives.

Concerning age, the Perps are neither randy Millenials nor over-active Octagenarians. They are mostly middle-age men with ages between the upper 40s and mid-60s. This age category is probably closely correlated with their careers and the opportunities they have to oversee those who work with them and for them.

In their early lives, they were mostly raised in conventional middle-class families, often with parents who were both employed in stable careers. We found only one case of what could be called a dysfunctional family. As young adults, only about 30 percent entered into conventional marriages, and as a result there are not many children of these Perp parents.

There is no evidence of extensive early socialization with religion. Only one-third provide any evidence of religious up-bringing, and in these cases 10 Perps report being Jewish and 3 Christian. The absence of information about religious preference in the biographical material suggests that most had little or no religious preference.

There is an indication of involvement in selective early education, usually in so-called Academies aimed at being college-prep schools. Beyond the high school prep years, well over one-half of the Perps (25) obtained a college degree, with less than one-half (11) having graduated from an elite college or university.

The careers of the Perps are primarily in journalism, TV production, and animation. Contrary to expectations, there is no evidence of their having received a "leg up" in their careers or having done anything other than high quality professional work. There is evidence of  their professional achievements in the form of having shows nominated for professional awards. In short, their professional careers reflect continuous efforts to produce high quality journalism, films, or TV shows.

If the Perps are high achievers, they probably enjoyed the high regard of their professional colleagues. Why, then, would they believe that is was acceptable to use their positions to intimidate women working with or for them to act in ways that resulted in sexual harassment? The answer to this question would require an examination of the culture of these workplaces in the entertainment and television industries.