BREAKING: The Washington Post critiques CNN!


Masterful understatement:
Don't despair! Next week, we'll take a look at the New York Times' latest report on middle school "desegregation."

(For some, this promise may also serve as a trigger warning.)

Thursday's report was the latest in a long line of heinous reports by the Times on this pseudo-subject. The piece was written by a (well-regarded) youngish reporter who has just joined the Times.

In this instance, "youngish" means six years out of college (Columbia, class of 2012). To such well-intentioned youngish reporters, we will only say this:

At the Times, you'll be asked to traffic in manifest nonsense concerning favored Times hobby horses. There's simply no way to be coherent in the face of such an assignment.

Thursday's report was a case in point. We'll review the report next week.

For today, we postpone that excursion into the ether in favor of an analysis piece by the Washington Post's Paul Farhi, with whom we chatted, long ago, at an undisclosed location.

Farhi is one of those upper-end mainstream scribes who has somehow managed to maintain his sanity down through the many long years. In today's report, he critiques CNN's conduct in its recent fandango involving Lanny Davis.

For the record, Farhi is critiquing CNN today. He isn't critiquing Davis. He isn't critiquing Michael Cohen, Davis' current client.

More specifically, he's critiquing CNN's peculiar conduct in late July in the course of filing a "bombshell report"—a bombshell report for which Davis both was, and wasn't, a source.

Davis was and wasn't a source? Farhi starts with an account of the basic facts of the case. Simply put, CNN used Davis as an anonymous source for its report, then said that he had "declined to comment" about the bombshell report:
FARHI (9/1/18): President Trump and his supporters have seized on a single line in a CNN article to question the credibility of the story and of the network. Why, they ask, was a key source for the article described as not commenting when he later admitted that he very much had?

The question and the criticism open up a broad—and arguably unflattering—vista on the way journalism sometimes works.

CNN has stood by the story, published on July 26 under the byline of three writers, including legendary Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein. The article reported that former presidential lawyer Michael Cohen was prepared to tell special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that he knew that Trump was aware in advance, and had approved, a fateful meeting with Russian operatives at Trump Tower during the 2016 presidential campaign.


The story reported prominently that one of Cohen’s attorneys, Lanny Davis, had declined to comment on the matter.

In fact, CNN was well aware that Davis had commented plenty. The reason: He was one of CNN’s key sources, albeit a “background” source, one who divulges information with the promise of anonymity. Davis himself later acknowledged he was a source, outing himself in an interview . . . on CNN; Davis subsequently backed off the claims he made in the story, but CNN is standing by it, saying other sources have corroborated its reporting.
Are we following that? Davis was an (anonymous) source for the CNN report, which was treated as a bombshell by CNN and MSNBC. But in the course of its report, CNN said that Davis had "declined to comment" about the bombshell report!

Making matters worse, Davis later admitted that he shouldn't have been a source at all, essentially because he hadn't had the slightest idea what he was talking about. By now, he has taken every possible position on the matter at hand, and a few more just for good measure.

That's a problem with Davis' conduct. Farhi examines CNN's behavior in today's piece in the Post.

In the first of several understatements, Farhi says (see above) that his report involves "a broad—and arguably unflattering—vista on the way journalism sometimes works."

Arguably unflattering? We'd have to say that Farhi's report takes us well past that point. As he continues, he suggests that this particular type of sleight of hand is fairly routine within modern journalism. He also authors a second understatement:
FARHI: [P]eople at CNN defend the Cohen-Davis piece by asserting that there’s no contradiction between a reporter speaking to a source on a background basis and then saying that same person declined to comment. Although readers and viewers often aren’t aware of it, “it’s done all the time in Washington,” said one person at CNN, who—yes—declined to be identified or to make an “on-the-record” comment.

But critics say the practice is murky at best and ethically dubious at worst. Reporting that someone “declined to comment” when he or she actually had could mislead readers into believing an individual had no role in shaping a story.
In that passage, Farhi quotes someone at CNN who says this sort of thing is "done all the time." Resorting again to understatement, Farhi says that critics say this practice may be "ethically dubious."

"Ethically dubious?" That's what the practice is "at worst," according to Farhi's (unnamed) critics!

We're sorry, but this practice is grossly misleading at best, constitutes an obvious scam when judged by straightforward measures. As Farhi continues, he quotes a professor saying as much—though he had to go all the way to Wisconsin to find someone willing to state this fairly obvious point.

After that, Farhi seems to say, in his own voice, that this type of sleight of hand is hardly unknown in the contemporary press:
FARHI (continuing directly): “If CNN did tell its readers and viewers that Davis did not comment when he was indeed one of their confidential sources, that breaks a bond of trust with the public,” said Kathleen Culver, director of the Center for Journalism Ethics at the University of Wisconsin. “It’s deceptive and wrong. And if it is the case, CNN needs to be as transparent as possible immediately and develop practices to ensure this never happens again.”

It’s not clear how widespread this practice is among reporters or how long it has been used. Mainstream news organizations officially frown on saying someone didn’t comment when they actually spoke on background or off the record (meaning not for attribution or publication in any way). But this guideline isn’t always enforced.
Way off in the heartland, Culver was somehow able to state the obvious about this deceptive practice. According to Farhi, meanwhile, this doesn't seem to have been unprecedented behavior by CNN:

News org "frown on" the practice, he says. But the frowning is sometimes ignored!

As he continues, Farhi describes the hoops through which our journalists sometimes jump in an effort to make this practice seem to be technically ethical. Eventually, he quotes Glenn Greenwald describing the obvious reasons why this sort of thing shouldn't be done.

Meanwhile, sad! Farhi's report begins with the always thoughtful Donald J. Trump saying, in effect, that this CNN report was the latest example of "fake news." We liberals hate to acknowledge the fact, but cons like this help explain why Trump supporters can be induced to believe in sweeping claims of this type.

Full disclosure:

As we read Farhi's report, we thought of a type of complaint we first made in the fall of 1999. Our complaint arose from a punishing New Yorker report in which two major journalists delivered the latest Official Standard Attack on the disfavored Candidate Gore.

The report was built on what seemed to be an array of anonymous sources. But just how many anonymous sources were the journalists actually quoting?

There was no way to know that! It seemed they were quoting a lot of people. Or were they simply quoting one or two disgruntled sources, adjusting the way these sources were described as their screed unfolded?

Star journalists would never do that, you may be inclined to say. And certainly not at The New Yorker!

Our major stars would never do that? Who's being naive now, Kay?

Back then, the guild got its way. By their lights, Gore hadn't savaged Clinton strongly enough for having engaged in sexual conduct without first getting press corps permission.

On that basis, they slimed Gore for twenty straight months, thus sending George Bush to the White House. As we all understand but refuse to discuss, people are dead all over the world because our star journalists did this.

Today, Farhi describes another reindeer game. Our question, if you should choose to discuss it:

If a lynch mob chases a guilty party, isn't it still a mob?

The fall of 1999: In the fall of 1999, then into the winter of 2000, the press corps was simultaneously 1) inventing wild statements by Candidate Gore, and 2) disappearing wild statements by Candidate McCain, with whom they were conducting a childish love affair on a bus.

Eventually, they were forced to admit that they had engaged in Reindeer Game #2, but their confession came and went quickly. Because (as we know) script never dies, the narratives they developed in these ways linger on to this very day.

Our journalism is largely script. Again and again, then again and again, the narrative must go on.


  1. Of course journalism is script and narrative. Humans think in terms of script and narrative because we think about things sequentially in time. Our lives start with "once upon a time" and end with "and lived happily ever after" because that is how our minds work, and journalism reflects that.

    Our minds also work in terms of reconstructions of the past, not veridical playback of video as memory. We use inference in our reconstructions and forget details only to invent them upon recall. That is how our memories work. Journalists do that too, because they rely on the imperfect recall of informants, because they are writing about events they may not have been present at themselves, and yes, they are telling stories.

    Does that make news "fake"? No. It makes news imperfect, just as memory and even first-hand witness (with selective attention filtered through consciousness) is imperfect. Using these imperfections, human frailties, people doing a difficult job, to imply that journalists are crap and that news is made up, fiction, and so on, is just plain wrong.

    Here is another similarity between Trump and Somerby. Trump doesn't want anyone to believe criticisms of him or facts that conflict with his lies, so he impugns the press. Somerby doesn't like what the press said about his roomie, Gore, and he doesn't like the way the press treated him during his brief foray into op-ed writing, and perhaps he didn't like his reviews as a stand-up, so he sets an impossibly high standard of perfection and crucifies those he dislikes using it. He implies the press is wrong, crooked, inept, and so on, urging us to disbelieve everything we read, especially from those we "trust."

    Both howl about fake news. Both say "believe only me" and "I know what is real." Both have their own agendas.

    CNN makes some mistakes but it is generally first with important news. The price for being first is occasionally getting things wrong. They correct their errors and move on. We should allow them the latitude to do that, understanding that news reporting is not history -- it is current events and those events change, are often incompletely reported, and the information available is often manipulated by the sources providing it. Nevertheless, news is important and we are better with it, with all its flaws, than operating without it.

    1. You do know you're a goof ball, right?

    2. 12:59, I think you're actually Rachel Maddow, using CNN as a stalking horse.

      The Howler keeps getting results.


    3. I think Leroy is actually CMike and neither of them voted in the last election.

      The Howler keeps getting results.


    4. 12:59, I can't hold a candle to CMike in any fashion. That guy has chops that make me appear as a mewling infant in comparison. Same goes for deadrat.

      But I did have to rethink your position after reading this:

      “Up until recently, the average politician, the average citizen, didn’t have to be an information analyst, didn’t have to have critical information processing skills, because the information system for the most part did that on the front end. The consumer very rarely received raw information about the world outside of their own immediate sphere of observation.

      “Almost everything you knew about the greater world was filtered through information processing systems by experts.

      “That is no longer true in any fashion. And yet, we operate as if it still is.”

      This is something the Howler observes daily, but not in quite the same fashion as the author of the essay posted below. But the observations of Bob and Jim have a certain synchronicity.


    5. Back in the old days, everything was wonderful. Dogs and cats knew their places. You could eat corn on the fourth of July. Kids didn't talk back. Those were the days!


    6. And Chet and David told us what we needed to know.


    7. I'm Olivia Megan from United State,I'm happy that my husband is back into my life after 2 years of divorce, Dr.AKHERE brought my husband back today and i am so excited. I got DR AKHERE email online when a lady was testifying about the strong spell caster who restored her marriage then I said to myself since he helped her, he can also help me,so i emailed him and told him the pain that I was going through,and he told me what to do and i did it,Then he did an urgent Love spell for me. 48 hours later, my husband came back home and with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me. Then from that day,our marriage was now stronger than how it were before, All thanks to DR AKHERE. Our family is complete again. If you are going through Divorce/Broke-up since DR AKHERE helped me, he can also help him at: ,Thank you DR AKHERE for saving my broken Marriage and brought my husband back to me.
      Email him:

  2. "On that basis, they slimed Gore for twenty straight months, thus sending George Bush to the White House."

    But of course Bob and other good liberals knew Gore was a demigod and voted for him, despite all that "slimming".

    Lib-zombie contempt for ordinary citizens knows no bounds.

    1. No native speaker of English would confuse sliming with slimming.

      Just a coincidence that Jeb Bush counted the votes in Florida for his brother's election, ultimately decided not by the voters but by a suspect Supreme Court decision. Gore decided not to put the country through the agony we are now enduring with the Mueller investigation. Altruism does seem to be a Democratic not Republican trait.

    2. That's the Right-wing Civil War.
      On the one hand they want more and more Daddy Government, on the other hand they are afraid some of that government lqrgesse might go to a black person. It's quite the conundrum, and is pulling the Right-wing apart.

    3. Tells us more about civil wars and pulling wings apart, dear dembot.

    4. 11;16,
      Now you want it in the Russian language?

    5. Sure, dembot. Or Urdu, if that's easier for you.

      And for a comic effect please keep capitalizing random words. I love it.

  3. Can someone loan me some money? I need to send out my bunch of Labor Day greeting cards.

  4. Any place on earth will do, just as long as I'm with you.

    1. Les Paul pioneered the use of Sound on Sound. It works brilliantly in this recording, allowing Connie Francis to sing a duet with herself.

  5. When some source comments a statement that he had made anonymously, that sounds something like the use of a sock-puppet on line.

  6. So the Washington Post, a prominent member of the "guild", calls out the practices of another prominent member of the "guild", which sort of contradicts the notion of an "industry-wide code of silence" we were told about. (

    Sounds like the "guild" is policing itself, which is presumably a good thing. Granted, you have to accept the truth of the Post story in order to believe that CNN was in error. Possibly a catch-22 in there somewhere...

    Who knows. Maybe that code of silence isn't silent, or a code...

    1. The so-called guild is a profession. Professions have a code of ethics because the public cannot ensure the quality of the work done by members of that profession. By definition, they police themselves.

    2. Professions generally have an organization and an Board established to maintain ethics and with the power to punich unethical behavior. My organization, the Casualty Actuarial Society, is set up like that. Journalism has nothing like that.

      I was glad to see WaPo properly criticizing CNN. My impression, as a long-time reader of the New York Times, is that this newspaper is loathe to criticize the media.

    3. Journalism programs are accredited and journalists receive press credentials. People without them don't receive access.

  7. As Bob points out, cons like this help explain why Trump supporters can be induced to believe in claims of large amounts of fake news. This sort of SNAFU also lends credibility to conservative media, because they reported accurately on this matter, and sooner than the mainstream media did.

    1. Only a truly uneducated person would be convinced by evidence like this to believe in fake news. But Trump voters are not generally undereducated. That suggests they have other reasons for going along with Trump's bizarre claims. I support the racism theory -- they don't care what he says and does as long as he protects the master race.

    2. Ask Omarosa whether Trump cares about
      African Americans.

      I'm not president, so my priorities don't matter. I won't vote for a politician who uses the n-word, no matter what the unemployment rate. How many black people work in the White House now that Kelly has fired Omarosa?

    3. @David: you are using the results of Rasmussen, and they are an extreme outlier among polls of African American support for Trump.

    4. One personnel decision means nothing. But, FWIW Trump hired Omarosa, despite a unprepossessing background.

    5. Anon 10:31. You are correct. But an NAACP poll conducted by African American Research Collaborative and Latino Decisions showed that 21% of blacks approve of Trump. That's a pretty high number, too.

    6. "under Trump blacks are doing very well."

      Not only should that be every Republican candidate's campaign slogan, it should run on a FOX News crawl 24/7 and lead each hour of Fox's news reporting for the rest of the year. I mean, it has to be good for at least 2 votes.

    7. When David says "blacks" he actually means "monkeys." When Somerby refers to Planet of the Apes, he actually means blacks.

  8. >David in CalSeptember 1, 2018 at 9:15 PM
    >Anon 6:40 - under Trump blacks are doing very well.

    You don't listen to yourself, do you? Aretha Franklin worked for Trump, Trump says. And you say [the] blacks are doing well... under Trump. If you ever made any sense I might be mad. I am actually getting some good comic relief from "you people". I really enjoyed Jeanine Pirro's attack on Jeff Sessions. She is about your speed, eh?

  9. "(For some, this promise may also serve as a trigger warning.)"

    Somerby thinks trauma is funny.

    1. Tell us about your recent traumas, please.

    2. I thought you were gone but then you came back.

    3. Did it make your head explode again?

  10. Gameroc amd 11:34 -- the difference between not being in the workforce and having a job is huge. Bernie Sanders was right to emphasize the fact that the real unemployment rate for African American youth is 51%. If a young person doesn't get into the workforce, they are not really a part of America's economy. Their whole life is stunted.

    I don't think Sanders' policies would have solved the problem he pointed out. But, Trump's policies are solving that problem, or, at least, ameliorating it. Anyone who cares about the underclass should be aware of this economic trend and should be happy about it.

    It must be hard for Trump-haters to get their heads around the fact that Trump's policies are solving a serious problem that Bernie Sanders pointed out. Which is larger: Your concern for the underclass or your hatred for Trump?

    1. Trump-haters = Every Republican in 2019.
      Including, David "Trump? Never heard of him" in Cal.

    2. It must be hard for Republican, what with Trump helping black people, while at the same time gutting the EPA rules that keep corporations from polluting our land, air and water, so the Establishment Elites can make more profit. Which is larger, your concern for keeping black people down or for the Establishment Elites to make even more $$?

    3. 11:23,
      Have I told you about my recent health scare?
      I was reading the Trump's tax returns, which he released, while leaning against the wall Trump built and Mexico paid for, when I got a terrible pain in my chest. Fortunately, I was able to go to a doctor using the cheaper and better healthcare Trump gave me.
      The good news is, I wasn't having a heart attack. Turns out it was just gas (lighting).

    4. Keep spreading your diarrhea, and one day you may become a dembot assistant manager.

      And from that point it's only a few short decades till you make enough money to have your very own tax return...

    5. "Black, brown, yellow, and pink people worship The Donald ..."

      I'd love it if they got 2 votes for every white vote, but I'll settle with the Republicans not suppressing their votes. I'd appreciate it if you and your fellow Russians could put that in the GOP's platform this year.
      Thanks in advance.

    6. No, thank you, dembot, for the tasty word-salad. Mm-mmm.

    7. Oops, sorry 3:30. Here it is in your ntive russian:
      Мне бы это понравилось, если бы они получили 2 голоса за каждый белый голос, но я соглашусь с тем, что республиканцы не подавят свои голоса. Я был бы признателен, если бы вы и ваши соотечественники могли поставить это на платформе Республиканской партии в этом году.
      Заранее спасибо.
      Mne by eto ponravilos', yesli by oni poluchili 2 golosa za kazhdyy belyy golos, no ya soglashus' s tem, chto respublikantsy ne podavyat svoi golosa. YA byl by priznatelen, yesli by vy i vashi sootechestvenniki mogli postavit' eto na platforme Respublikanskoy partii v etom godu.
      Zaraneye spasibo.

    8. Whoa, an amazing dembot, capable of copy/pasting from google translate? Or did your dembot supervisor help?


      Now you need to learn to spell-check and bright future is waiting for you...

  11. "Next week, we'll take a look at the New York Times' latest report on middle school "desegregation."

    That doesn't sound any different than the usual fare. Wonder what happened to the changes he teased us about a couple of posts ago?

  12. From Somerby (

    "According to the code of silence, one guild member doesn't blow the whistle on the others."

    I'm still wondering how today's Somerby post isn't a complete contradiction of Somerby's own notional precept about the so-called "code of silence" from a year ago. (It's right there in the title: "The Washington Post critiques CNN!", i.e. WaPo is engaging in whistle-blowing)

  13. "At the Times, you'll be asked to traffic in manifest nonsense concerning favored Times hobby horses...Thursday's report was a case in point."

    Although the report seemed to be an objective report about some actual ongoing efforts to desegregate certain schools in NYC, one can fault the reporter for not acknowledging that desegregation efforts are a 50-year fraud perpetrated by liberals, who don't care about poor or black or Hispanic kids. What a one-sided story!

  14. >David in CalSeptember 2, 2018 at 10:59 AM
    >But, Trump's policies are solving that problem, or, at >least, ameliorating it

    Nope. Just WHAT POLICIES Trump has instituted via Executive Order or via Paul "Wonkey Wonk" Ryan/Mitch "Thief" McConnell that shows this? I hate to say this but Trump is more believable with is addled brain than YOU ARE with your useless platitudes and comments. Begone.

    1. Below is a list of Trump's actions that reduced minority unemployment. Gamaroc (and other liberals) -- what did Obama do to reduce minority unemployment?

      A. Actions that promoted addition businesses success and additional hiring of minorities and others
      1. Approved Keystone pipeline
      2. Cut corporate tax rate
      3. Cut personal taxes
      4. Reduced regulations
      5. Appointed judges less favorable to the Plaintiff's Bar
      6. Generally pro-business attitude
      7. Action on tariffs is of uncertain effect. If Trump succeeds in getting other countries to reduce their barriers to American imports, that will help minority employment. OTOH if he precipitates a trade war, that will hurt minority employment.

      B. Actions to reduce illegal immigration, thus leave more jobs available for American minorities
      1. Increased enforcement of immigration law
      2. Moving ahead on the wall
      3. Opposed Sancturary Cities
      4. Anti-illegal immigrant attitude discourages illegal immigration

    2. Can you explain how cutting personal taxes reduces minority unemployment? While you do so, can you explain how stiffing government employees pay raises also reduces minority unemployment.

      I bet even a mouth-breathing moron, like yourself, could figure out how the 5+% unemployment drop under Obama led to a reduction in minority unemployment. It doesn't mean you won't play stupid, as usual. It just means even a mouth-breathing moron like yourself can figure it out.

    3. That's a good question about the lack of Obama actions during the worst economic crisis in 5 decades, due to the GOP blocking his actions to make the citizens suffer deeper and longer, so Obama couldn't get credit.
      BTW, have you heard that it's liberals who are okay with the citizens suffering for political gain? You should have, it's part of the Right-wing's "Every accusation is a confession" program.

    4. Garmaroc,

      Ask questions of a moral and intellectual idiot like DA in CA, and you’re gonna get morally bankrupt answers or intellectually vapid answers or both.

      You can waste your time countering the numbered list. It’s not that hard to do. For instance, the Keystone pipeline will do nothing to reduce minority unemployment. There are only a few thousand construction jobs at stake, they are all in areas like Montana where few minority workers live, they are all temp jobs, and most importantly the work on the next phase of endangering America’s aquifers won’t even begin until 2019 according to TransCanada.

      Likewise, it’s likely none of the right-wing ideologues that Trump has appointed have even heard their first federal cases yet, so even if you accept the dubious and unsupported assertions that things will be less favorable to the “Plaintiff’s Bar” and that this less favorable environment will enhance employment in any significant way, it hasn’t happened yet.

      And so on.

      Since you may safely ignore anything DA in CA posts, why bother to ask him questions? You’re better off working on your disappearance spell. “Begone” just isn’t going to cut it.

    5. David is an extremely dishonest troll.

      Plus he is a strong proponent of the "Fuhrer principle"

      Hitler was building the case for the “Führer principle” — a belief in the iron infallibility of the leader. It was an elaborate, historically wrought version of the “I alone” principle. With it, Hitler eventually won power in Germany and governed as an absolute despot

      Literally a month after the inauguration David was writing rapturously about how trump had turned the economy around.

      It is no good to engage David, because of his extreme dishonesty.

      Saying that black unemployment is this low “because of my policies” may seem a bit much, given the rate has simply kept falling at about the same rate that it had for the six years before Trump was elected.

      But this means nothing to David. He has his stock answer, that everything good that happened during the Obama 2 terms was just th ineluctable consequence of normal economic cycles but it would have ended the day trump was sworn and only the blessed event of trump taking office avoided the inevitable collapse. Yes, David said these things.

      As I said, David is an extremely dishonest person.

    6. "what did Obama do to reduce minority unemployment?"

      Dear David. I have no idea what "minority unemployment" is (sounds like some lib-zombie PC bullshit), but of course voting out globalist/neocon liberal scum is the only way to ensure any meaningful employment at all...

    7. AnonymousSeptember 3, 2018 at 1:45 PM

      Cutting personal tax rates makes it a bit easier for wealthy people to start new businesses. But, your point is well taken. IMHO this tax cut has only a tiny boost to the economy.

      Reducing the amount by which federal employees are overpaid doesn't reduce unemployment IMHO. It does save some government money that can be used for other purposes, like healthcare or the environment. And, the saving comes at no loss of government services, since federal jobs are still overpaid and remain very desirable.

      Yes, the big drop in unemployment during Obama's Presidency no doubt meant a drop in minority unemployment. But, was that drop due to Obama's actions or to some other factors? I find it difficult to list specific actions taken by Obama that led to the improving economy.

      mm - you claim I portray Trump as infallible. Yet, the very comment you're responding contemplates that Trump's tariffs may fail. I wrote, "OTOH if [Trump] precipitates a trade war, that will hurt minority employment."

      BTW the reason the Keystone pipeline boosts the economy is not the jobs involved in building the pipeline. As you say, that's trivial. It's the additional available energy, which helps businesses all over the country.

    8. Make TransAmerica pay for all of the associated costs of the use of fossil fuels. Having society pay for those costs is socialism.

    9. "It's the additional available energy, which helps businesses all over the country."

      Can I assume that Republicans stole the wind and sun, like everything else of value that isn't nailed down?

    10. mm - you are implicitly assuming that a growing economy automatically keeps growing the same rate, like Newton's First Law of Motion. The 8 years of Obama's Presidency disprove that idea. There was considerable economic growth during Obama's first 6 years, but the growth had slowed down during his last two years. Growth since Trump was elected is a big jump from Obama's last two years. This chart is impressive.

    11. AnonymousSeptember 3, 2018 at 3:15 PM -- Unfortunately wind and solar power produce only a small portion of America's energy needs -- around 5%. Wind and solar produce around 10% of electricity. I believe electricity represents around half of US fuel usage. The remainder is direct burning of fossil fuels in vehicles, etc.

    12. amm,

      Is DA in CA a dishonest troll? If he’s dishonest, then he knows he’s telling untruths; if he’s a troll, then he’s doing so to provoke. And I just don’t have enough information to know whether those things are true. I think it’s just simpler to assume that DA in CA is simply incapable of making reasoned arguments, either moral or intellectual.

      Which is why I call him a moral and intellectual idiot.

      And the best course of action is to ignore such persons. All the more so if I’m wrong, and DA in CA actually is a dishonest troll.

      What do you do with someone who thinks that “growing the [sic, presumably “at the”] same rate is “like Newton’s First Law Motion”? Newton’s 1stLOM says that objects maintain their velocity, i.e., their speed does not grow, unless they’re acted upon by a force.

      What do you do with someone who thinks that “additional available energy … helps businesses all over the country” in an economy that’s been a net exporter of oil for seven years and is within a couple of years of being a net exporter of energy. The country is about 90% self-sufficient in energy now, so all that “additional available energy” will help only on the margins and not “all over the country.”

      Do you really think DA in CA understands any of this?

      You, both in the common and in the indeterminate sense, may simply ignore anything DA in CA has to say.

    13. mm -- analogies are just ways to hopefully help someone understand the point you're making. They may be apt or inapt, but they cannot be true or false.

      Due to the law of supply and demand, additional energy reduces the price of energy. Lower energy costs help businesses, and help individuals as well.

    14. DavidinCal,
      I hope you'll keep up your ruse of caring about workers and the poor by calling your Senators and telling them not to confirm the anti-women, anti-worker, anti-environment Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. It is literally, the least you could do for the workers you pretend to care about.

  15. Spells To Get Your Ex Back Fast after breakup/divorce even if your situation seems hopeless!Contact: is certainly the best spell caster online and his result is 100% guarantee.
    My Name Olivia Stephen form Tx,USA. After 12years of marriage, me and my husband has been into one quarrel or the other until he finally left me and moved to California to be with another woman. I felt my life was over and my kids thought they would never see their father again. i tried to be strong just for the kids but i could not control the pains that torments my heart, my heart was filled with sorrows and pains because i was really in love with my husband. Every day and night i think of him and always wish he would come back to me, I was really upset and i needed help, so i searched for help online and I came across a website that suggested that Dr Unity can help get ex back fast. So, I felt I should give him a try. I contacted him and he told me what to do and i did it then he did a Love spell for me. 28 hours later, my husband really called me and told me that he miss me and the kids so much, So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and the kids. Then from that day,our Marriage was now stronger than how it were before, All thanks to Dr Unity. he is so powerful and i decided to share my story on the internet that Dr.Unity is real and powerful spell caster who i will always pray to live long to help his children in the time of trouble, if you are here and you need Love-spell to Win your Man Back from Another Woman or Win your Boyfriend/girlfriend back forever. Do not cry anymore, contact this powerful spell caster now. Here’s his contact:
    Call/WhatsApp: +2348071622464 ,
    Email: ,
    blogsite: .

  16. I hope that fainting couch is big enough for TDH and all his friends. If I’m following the narrative here

    1. Davis was an anonymous source for CNN’s report on Cohen’s claim that Trump knew beforehand about the Trump Tower meeting.

    2. CNN’s report also said that Davis “‘declined to comment’” about the report.” (emphasis mine)

    3 Davis thereby lied because Davis very much had commented on Cohen’s knowledge of Trump’s guilt. (emphasis mine again)

    4. CNN suborned Davis’ lie by printing it.

    How can anyone write for a living and fail to understand the language? Davis refused to comment on his own (as it turned out, false) disclosure to CNN. This seems like SOP for an anonymous source. In any event, Davis didn’t “comment” for CNN’s report. He informed CNN or disclosed to CNN.

    The problems with anonymous sources are obvious, especially when dealing with liars and grifters like the Trumpsters. CNN says they corroborated Davis’ original claim, so we’ll see. But while we’re waiting, it’s senseless to play word games to pretend that CNN’s malfeasance extended beyond listening to grifters.


  17. I'm Olivia Megan from United State,I'm happy that my husband is back into my life after 2 years of divorce, Dr.AKHERE brought my husband back today and i am so excited. I got DR AKHERE email online when a lady was testifying about the strong spell caster who restored her marriage then I said to myself since he helped her, he can also help me,so i emailed him and told him the pain that I was going through,and he told me what to do and i did it,Then he did an urgent Love spell for me. 48 hours later, my husband came back home and with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me. Then from that day,our marriage was now stronger than how it were before, All thanks to DR AKHERE. Our family is complete again. If you are going through Divorce/Broke-up since DR AKHERE helped me, he can also help him at: ,Thank you DR AKHERE for saving my broken Marriage and brought my husband back to me.
    Email him:

  18. Hello,

    I'm Dr Ogudugu, a real and genuine spell caster/Spiritual healer with years of experience in spell casting and an expert in all spells, i specialize exclusively in LOVE SPELL/GET REUNITE WITH EX LOVER, MONEY SPELL, POWERFUL MAGIC RING, ANY COURT CASES, FRUIT OF THE WOMB, HIV CURE, CURE FOR CANCER, HERPES, DIABETE, HERPERTITIS B, PARKINSON’S HERBAL CURE, BECOMING A MERMAID, BECOMING A VAMPIRE, SAVE CHILD BIRTH. They are all %100 Guaranteed QUICK Results, it most work. If you have any problem and you need a real and genuine spell caster to solve your problems, contact me now through my personal Email Address with problem case...Note-you can also Text/Call on WhatsApp.

    Contact me -
    WhatsApp No: +27663492930

  19. LOTTO, lottery,jackpot.
    Hello all my viewers, I am very happy for sharing this great testimonies,The best thing that has ever happened in my life is how I win the lottery euro million mega jackpot. I am a Woman who believe that one day I will win the lottery. finally my dreams came through when I email and tell him I need the lottery numbers. I have spend so much money on ticket just to make sure I win. But I never know that winning was so easy until the day I meant the spell caster online which so many people has talked about that he is very great in casting lottery spell, . so I decide to give it a try.I contacted this great Dr Believe and he did a spell and he gave me the winning lottery numbers. But believe me when the draws were out I was among winners. I win 30,000 million Dollar. Dr Believe truly you are the best, all thanks to you forever
    You can also check on Dr Believe page on Facebook