Elections and Media

[Commentary] The American people are far greater than the sum of our political parties. It is time for us to rise above our broken politics and renew the spirit that enabled us to achieve the seemingly impossible. This is why I am running for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States.

Our government is hamstrung by excessive partisanship. We are letting critical opportunities to improve the country pass us by. And we are not even talking about the most important thing: the future. The victims of this leadership failure are the good people we are sworn to serve, and we are leaving our country ill-prepared for dramatic changes ahead. The current administration is making us less prosperous and less secure. I’m running because I have an original approach to governing and economic policy that can put us on a different course.

President Donald Trump’s voting commission, given a judge’s approval to resume seeking voter data, has issued another request asking states for information and vowing to keep the details confidential. The voting panel has come under intense scrutiny and faced a wave of lawsuits since making a sweeping request in June for reams of “publicly-available voter roll data,” including names, addresses, dates of birth and partial Social Security numbers. State leaders from both parties have expressed privacy concerns about potentially revealing personal information, while some officials and voting experts also have pushed back against the commission, which was formed by Trump after he repeatedly claimed — without evidence — that widespread voter fraud cost him the popular vote in last year’s presidential election.

Facebook is sponsoring the efforts of former Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney campaign managers to combat hacking and disinformation campaigns designed to interfere with elections. Facebook’s chief security officer Alex Stamos announced the company’s $500,000 investment in the effort, called Defending Digital Democracy, today during a keynote at the security conference Black Hat. The project was launched last month by a Harvard University group and Stamos is a member of the group’s advisory committee.

“Our goal is to build an information sharing organization that includes political parties, campaigns, state and local election officials, and tech companies,” Stamos said. The information sharing unit will be modeled on similar efforts within the tech industry to share threat intelligence. Facebook and other major tech companies like Microsoft and Twitter use these kinds of partnerships to share information on terrorist threats, revenge porn, and child exploitation. “If one company detects an attack they can immunize others very quickly,” Stamos said. But Defending Digital Democracy plans to incorporate data not just from participating tech companies—executives from Google and the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike are also on the advisory board—but from election officials as well.

Russia’s ambassador to Washington told his superiors in Moscow that he discussed campaign-related matters, including policy issues important to Moscow, with then-Sen Jeff Sessions (R-AL) during the 2016 presidential race, contrary to public assertions by the embattled attorney general, according to current and former US officials.

Ambassador Sergey Kislyak’s accounts of two conversations with Sen Sessions — then a top foreign policy adviser to Republican candidate Donald Trump — were intercepted by US spy agencies, which monitor the communications of senior Russian officials in the United States and in Russia. Attorney General Sessions initially failed to disclose his contacts with Kislyak and then said that the meetings were not about the Trump campaign. One US official said that AG Sessions — who testified that he had no recollection of an April encounter — has provided “misleading” statements that are “contradicted by other evidence.” A former official said that the intelligence indicates that AG Sessions and Kislyak had “substantive” discussions on matters including Trump’s positions on Russia-related issues and prospects for US-Russia relations in a Trump administration.

On the anniversary of the ouster of the most influential man in conservative politics, who died in May, a legacy is revealed in Trump's anti-media venom, Rupert Murdoch's unrest and a vision that has jumped cable news to become the dominant historical current. It was Roger Ailes' tacit support of Trump that, in part, made his removal from Fox all the more urgent for the Murdochs. And it was not just the liberal sons who were agitated by Ailes' regard for Donald Trump, but also the father, whose tabloid, the New York Post, helped create Trump, but who found him now, with great snobbery, not of "our" conservative class. ("When is Donald Trump going to stop embarrassing his friends, let alone the whole country?" Murdoch senior tweeted the day after Trump officially declared himself a candidate.)

Murdoch instructed Ailes to tilt to anyone but Trump, Ailes confided to me before he was fired, even Hillary. (Ailes, for his part, characterized Murdoch's periodic efforts at interference as similar to Nixon's instructions to bomb this or that country — best ignored.) After the election, a confounded Murdoch had to call on his ex-wife Wendi's friends, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, to broker a rapprochement with the disreputable Donald. Now, to Trump's great satisfaction, a humbled Murdoch is a constant caller.

The former managers of Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney’s presidential campaigns are leading a new initiative called “Defending Digital Democracy” in the hopes of preventing a repeat of Russia’s 2016 election interference. Robby Mook, Clinton’s 2016 campaign chief, and Matt Rhoades, who managed the 2012 run of GOP nominee Romney, are heading up the project at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs in one of the first major efforts outside government to grapple with 21st century hacking and propaganda operations — and ways to deter them.

“The Russian influence campaign was one of the most significant national security events in the last decade, and it’s a near-certainty that all the other bad guys saw that and will try to do something similar in the United States in 2018 and 2020,” said Eric Rosenbach, co-director of the Belfer Center, which launches the initiative July 18. The bipartisan project aims to develop ways to share key threat information with political campaigns and state and local election offices; create “playbooks” for election officials to improve cybersecurity; and forge strategies for the United States to deter adversaries from engaging in hacks and information operations, among other things.

[Commentary] I ended last week’s column on the hope that Baltimore-based Sinclair would use its clout as the nation’s largest station group to do better journalism, not yield to the temptation of becoming more partisan on behalf of President Donald Trump. On July 10, Sinclair confirmed to Politico that it was adding air time for Boris Epshteyn, the former Trump campaign adviser on messaging and White House aide who now serves as the company’s chief political analyst.

Epshteyn’s commentaries will now appear eight or nine times a week on all stations, Scott Livingston, Sinclair’s vice president of news, told The Sun. They had previously run three times week on a must-run basis. So much for high hopes as to which way Sinclair is headed.

Rep Ro Khanna (D-CA) is starting a new caucus for members who have sworn off contributions from political action committees (PACs) or lobbyists.

The caucus, called the NO PAC Caucus, is “designed to encourage members of Congress to voluntarily not accept PAC money and to push for legislation that ultimately bans PAC money from Congress,” Rep Khanna said. The caucus has just two other members so far — Reps. Beto O'Rourke (D-TX) and Jared Polis (D-CO) — but Rep Khanna is recruiting Republicans and Democrats, including Reps. Phil Roe (R-TN), Francis Rooney (R-FL) and John Sarbanes (D-MD), to give the caucus bipartisan bona fides. Both President Donald Trump and Sen Bernie Sanders (I-VT) campaigned on reducing the influence of special interests in Washington, Rep Khanna noted. “I think this is bipartisan,” he said.

[Commentary] Fake news has been dominating real news since 2016’s US presidential election. Its effect has been debated and politicized, and in the process, the term itself has lost its original meaning and become something of a partisan insult. But an underlying question still needs answering: Can people distinguish legitimate sources of information from fake ones?

A majority of Americans are confident that they can, according to surveys. But it might be more difficult than it seems in an increasingly fragmented media landscape, with countless information sources tailored to every ideological taste. To find out how well-informed people can tell true from false, I conducted a study on a sample of about 700 undergraduates at the University of British Columbia. These were primarily political science students interested in current events, who said they frequently read and watch news, on and offline. I thought that they would easily spot fake news websites. I was wrong.

[Dominik Stecula is a PhD candidate in political science and a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council doctoral fellow at the University of British Columbia.]

Even while under fire for requiring its outlets to run conservative content, Sinclair Broadcast Group is increasing the "must-run" segments across its affiliates featuring former Trump White House official Boris Epshteyn to nine times a week. The move comes as the company is seeking to dramatically expand its holdings by purchasing Tribune Media for $3.9 billion, which would make it the largest local television operator in the country, with more than 200 stations.

But Sinclair's unusual practice of requiring all its stations to run reports dictated from the corporate offices has been flagged by critics of the Tribune acquisition and even become a subject of late-night TV ribbing by HBO's John Oliver. Epshteyn was hired by Sinclair as chief political analyst in April after a short ride in the White House overseeing the choice of Trump surrogates for TV appearances. Now, on Sinclair, he is offering his own political commentary. His "Bottom Line with Boris" segments already air three times a week, but will now triple in frequency, featuring a mix of his political commentary as well as "talk backs" with local stations and interviews with members of Congress. The segments will have a “billboard,” meaning they’re sponsored, but will not be sponsored content, a Sinclair spokesperson said. Epshteyn’s segments are “must runs,” so all the Sinclair stations across the country will air them along with their other “must-run” segments including conservative commentary from Mark Hyman and the Terrorism Alert Desk segments. Epshteyn reliably parrots the White House's point of view on most issues.