Dear Commons Community,

Former CIA Director John Brennan sharply criticized President Trump in a Washington Post op-ed published on Friday.  He commented:

The president “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,” Brennan writes.

Brennan says Trump’s actions are based on how they will “personally help or hurt him.”

“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,” Brennan adds. “It never dawned on me that we could face such a development in the United States.”

Brennan has been an outspoken critic of Trump.

Today, Donald Trump simultaneously lied about the Iranian nuclear deal, undermined global confidence in US commitments, alienated our closest allies, strengthened Iranian hawks, & gave North Korea more reason to keep its nukes. This madness is a danger to our national security,” Brennan tweeted on May 8.

“Senator [Mitch] McConnell & Speaker [Paul] Ryan: If Mr. Trump continues along this disastrous path, you will bear major responsibility for the harm done to our democracy,” Brennan wrote in another tweet on May 20. “You do a great disservice to our Nation & the Republican Party if you continue to enable Mr. Trump’s self-serving actions.”

In the Post op-ed, Brennan says he will “continue to speak out loudly and critically until integrity, decency, wisdom — and maybe even some humility — return to the White House.”

Integrity, decency, wisdom, and humility – oh my!

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

What will likely be more common in the future, employees at Google staged a rebellion against the company over its contract to develop artificial intelligence (A.I.) applications that might be used for lethal purposes.  As reported by the New York Times:

“Google, hoping to head off a rebellion by employees upset that the technology they were working on could be used for lethal purposes, will not renew a contract with the Pentagon for artificial intelligence work when a current deal expires next year.

Diane Greene, who is the head of the Google Cloud business that won a contract with the Pentagon’s Project Maven, said during a weekly meeting with employees on Friday that the company was backing away from its A.I. work with the military, according to a person familiar with the discussion but not permitted to speak publicly about it.

Google’s work with the Defense Department on the Maven program, which uses artificial intelligence to interpret video images and could be used to improve the targeting of drone strikes, roiled the internet giant’s work force. Many of the company’s top A.I. researchers, in particular, worried that the contract was the first step toward using the nascent technology in advanced weapons.

But it is not unusual for Silicon Valley’s big companies to have deep military ties. And the internal dissent over Maven stands in contrast to Google’s biggest competitors for selling cloud-computing services — Amazon.com and Microsoft — which have aggressively pursued Pentagon contracts without pushback from their employees.

Google’s self-image is different — it once had a motto of “don’t be evil.” A number of its top technical talent said the internet company was betraying its idealistic principles, even as its business-minded officials worried that the protests would damage its chances to secure more business from the Defense Department.

About 4,000 Google employees signed a petition demanding “a clear policy stating that neither Google nor its contractors will ever build warfare technology.” A handful of employees also resigned in protest, while some were openly advocating the company to cancel the Maven contract.”

We will see more of this type of dispute as A.I. evolves especially for military purposes.  While Google presently has taken a progressive position on this, it is likely that there are other A.I. developers that will jump at the chance for large Pentagon contract.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Walmart announced plans two days ago to subsidize college tuition for its 1.4 million workers in the United States, and joins a growing list of companies that are helping employees pay for higher education.

The retailer will pay tuition for its workers to enroll in college courses — online or on campus — to earn degrees in either supply chain management or business, company officials announced at Walmart’s annual shareholder meeting in Bentonville, Arkansas.   As reported by the New York Times:

“Full- and part-time Walmart workers can use the subsidy to take courses at the University of Florida; Brandman University in Irvine, Calif.; and Bellevue University in Bellevue, Neb.

The three universities were chosen because of their high graduation rates, particularly among part-time students, and their experience with those already in the work force, Walmart executives said. The employees will not be obligated to continue working for Walmart after they get their degrees, and must put up only $1 a day toward the cost of classes.

“We feel like this is another step forward in investing in our associates,” said Julie Murphy, an executive vice president in Walmart’s United States operation.

Walmart, the country’s largest employer, introduced the tuition subsidy as it seeks ways to retain workers at a time of low unemployment. Employers like Starbucks and Amazon also offer tuition support.

Walmart, which has faced criticism over low pay and poor working conditions, is also trying to burnish its image while expanding its presence in more upscale markets online.

This year, Walmart raised its base wage $2, to $11 an hour, and expanded its maternity and family leave benefits. The company has also begun offering lower-level store managers more job training programs called “Walmart Academies,” where employees learn basic management skills…

…Walmart officials did not provide an estimated cost for the tuition subsidy, but they expected that about 68,000 employees would probably enroll during the first five years, based on those who have expressed interest and an analysis of similar programs in other industries.

The University of Florida is probably the best known of the universities in the Walmart program. Brandman University, which has multiple campuses in California and an online curriculum, has a focus on Hispanic students. The billionaire investor Joe Ricketts, who founded TD Ameritrade, is among Bellevue University’s benefactors.

Walmart said its goal was to help employees obtain a college degree without having to take out loans. Walmart workers enrolled in the program would not be required to pay for their education upfront and seek reimbursement later.”

This appears to be a good move by Walmart. Its workers should take advantage of it.

Tony

Dear Commons Community,

Former Republican House speaker John Boehner said yesterday  that:  “There is no Republican Party. There’s a Trump Party. The Republican Party is kinda taking a nap somewhere.”  As reported in the Washington Post:

“Boehner’s message appears to be twofold, with an implicit criticism directed at his former colleagues: That President Trump has taken over the Republican Party, and that Republicans are letting him do it.

But the accusation Boehner is lodging raises a question that’s at the heart of the Republican Party’s future: Is it possible to oppose Trump and stay influential enough to keep your job? Evidence suggests not.

Of the three most vociferous GOP critics of Trump right now in the Senate, two aren’t running for reelection. One, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), is retiring specifically because vocalizing his concerns about Trump made him unelectable in a Republican primary.

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said on Oct. 24 that he will not seek reelection in 2018. Here are the highlights from his speech.(Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

“The path that I would have to travel to get the Republican nomination is a path I’m not willing to take, and that I can’t in good conscience take,” he said as he announced his retirement in the fall.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the next Trump critic on our GOP Senate list, compared the president to a toddler, accused him of “debasing the nation” and asked if he was stable enough to govern.

Corker saw his popularity in Tennessee turn upside down after that. He’s not running for reelection, and despite having made up with Trump, Corker got booed when Trump mentioned his name on stage at a Nashville rally this week. This happened in Corker’s own state.

The third GOP Senate critic, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), hasn’t been in Washington this year as he battles brain cancer, and it’s not clear how much longer he’ll remain in office.

But with little to no sensitivity for McCain’s health, Trump finds a way to bash McCain nearly every time he is in front of a microphone and his supporters. The White House also hasn’t apologized for one of its aides brushing off McCain’s opposition to a Trump nominee by saying McCain is “dying anyway.”

Before he announced his diagnosis, McCain, too, watched his popularity dip among Republicans.

There is at least one GOP never-Trumper attempting to leverage his anti-Trump creds to run for office. But he’s not counting on Republicans to do it: Richard Painter, a former ethics lawyer and registered Republican in the George W. Bush administration, is running for Senate in Minnesota as a Democrat.

Meanwhile, Trump’s other critics have largely fallen in line with the president. Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) for a time consistently called out the president’s controversial decisions.

Graham has since golfed with the president, praised the president’s golf game and his golf course, and acknowledged his strategy is to remain on the president’s good side to be influential.

Critics like Boehner would probably point out that for Graham, being on Trump’s good side also means reversing his previously strongly held positions about the rule of law.

Graham once warned the president there would be “holy hell to pay” if Trump fired his attorney general, Jeff Sessions. But this week, Graham suggested to the Associated Press that firing Sessions wasn’t such an outrageous idea. Cabinet positions, Graham said, are “not lifetime appointments.”

Would it be easier for Republicans to speak out if more did it? Sure. Look at how a number of Trump’s GOP allies in the Senate are severely criticizing his tariff policy, and without significant repercussion. But GOP lawmakers know they are risking their jobs to stand up to a president their base still supports in large numbers.

In one sense, Boehner is spot on: All the evidence suggests Trump’s supporters are Trump’s supporters more than they are Republican voters.

But here’s where Boehner gets its wrong, according to what we’ve seen unfold: The Republican Party isn’t taking a nap under Trump. It is being held hostage, so much so that would-be Trump critics must be willing to risk their influence and reputation and even their job to speak their mind on Trump like Boehner just did.”

Good analysis of what has happened to the Republican Party!

Tony