AUDIO:

POSSIBLE TOPICS: VOTETEXAS.GOV—Voter Information; Republican Precinct Chairman, Precinct 0004; Pearland City Council postpones ethics vote; Montgomery County commissioners decline 10-year tax break for steel factory; NW Harris County residents voice displeasure with Waste Management’s landfill expansion plan; Judge blocks Texas’ pre-Roe abortion law, temporarily resuming abortions for 2 weeks; Supreme Court limits ability to enforce Miranda rights; U.S. Supreme Court allows Louisiana electoral map faulted for racial bias; Supreme Court finds N.Y. law violates right to carry guns outside home; Opinion – The Supreme Court’s gun ruling was a victory over racist policing; John Ratcliffe, former Texas congressman, warned Trump staffers against trying to undermine 2020 election; Turkey lifts its objections to Sweden, Finland joining NATO; More

 

Thinkwing Radio with Mike Honig (@ThinkwingRadio) is now on Wednesdays at 11AM (CT) on KPFT-HD2, Houston’s Community Station. You can also hear the show:

1. Live online at KPFT.org (from anywhere in the world!)
2. Podcast on your phone’s Podcast App
3. Visiting Archive.KPFT.ORG

Welcome to Thinkwing Radio with Mike Honig where we discuss local, state, national, and international stories. My co-host and show editor is Andrew Ferguson.

• An educated electorate is a prerequisite for a democracy.
• You’re entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts.

1. Make sure you are registered to vote! VoteTexas.GOV – Texas Voter InformationTEXAS SoS VOTE-BY-MAIL BALLOT APPLICATION (ALL TEXAS COUNTIES) HarrisVotes.com­ – Countywide Voting Centers, (Election Information Line (713) 755-6965), Harris County Clerk
   1. Harris County “Vote-By-Mail’ Application for 2022
      1. Fort bend County Elections/Voter Registration Machine takes you to the proper link
      2. GalvestonVotes.org (Galveston County, TX)
      3. Liberty County Elections (Liberty County, TX)
      4. Montgomery County (TX) Elections
      5. Brazoria County (TX) Clerk Election Information
      6. Waller County (TX) Elections
      7. Chambers County (TX) Elections
      8. For personalized, nonpartisan voter guides and information, Consider visiting Vote.ORG.   Ballotpedia.com and Texas League of Women Voters are also good places to get election info.
      9. If you are denied your right to vote any place at any time at any polling place for any reason, ask for (or demand) a provisional ballot rather than lose your vote.
      10. HarrisVotes.com – Countywide Voting Centers, HARRIS COUNTY – IDENTIFICATION REQUIRED FOR VOTING: Do not possess and cannot reasonably obtain one of these IDs?
          1. Fill out a declaration at the polls describing a reasonable impediment to obtaining it, and show a copy or original of one of the following supporting forms of ID:
          2. A government document that shows your name and an address, including your voter registration certificate
          3. Current utility bill
          4. Bank statement
          5. Government check
          6. Paycheck
          7. A certified domestic (from a U.S. state or territory) birth certificate or (b) a document confirming birth admissible in a court of law which establishes your identity (which may include a foreign birth document)
          8. You may vote early by-mail if:You are registered to vote and meet one of the following criteria:
             1. Away from the county of residence on Election Day and during the early voting period;
             2. Sick or disabled;
             3. 65 years of age or older on Election Day; or
             4. Confined in jail, but eligible to vote.
             5. Make sure you are registered:
             6. Ann Harris Bennett, Tax Assessor-Collector & Voter Registrar
             7. CHECK REGISTRATION STATUS HERE
             8. CLICK How to register to vote in Texas
             9. Outside Texas, try Vote.org.
2. BE REGISTERED TO VOTE, and if eligible, REMEMBER TO FILL OUT AND MAIL YOUR MAIL-IN BALLOT APPLICATIONS FOR 2022
   1. You can track your Mail Ballot Activity from our website with direct link provided here https://www.harrisvotes.com/Tracking
   2. Republican – Precinct Chairman, Precinct 0004
      1. 2 of 2 Voting Centers Reporting
      2. Choice                 Votes      Percent
      3. Scott G. Zersen        0          0.00%
      4. Cindy del Moral       4      100.00%
3. Pearland City Council postpones ethics vote; By Jake Magee | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 8:16 PM Jun 27, 2022 CDT
   Updated 8:16 PM Jun 27, 2022 CDT
   11. … Pearland City Council’s … members voted unanimously to postpone the second and final reading of the [city’s ethics ordinance] to July 11.
   12. On June 13, Pearland City Council passed the first reading of an ordinance that would restrict the city from entering into contracts with any council member and any business in which that person has a substantial interest. Pearland City Council at its May 23 regular meeting adopted a separate ordinance that prevents the city from entering into contracts with any former council member and any business they have a substantial interest in for at least 12 months after their successor is sworn in.
   13. According to Council Member Alex Kamkar, these ordinances were proposed to increase transparency between council members and the public. …
   14. Mayor Kevin Cole urged caution. He gave an example of when, in the 1990s, he was on City Council and worked for an insurer that bid on insuring the city of Pearland. To avoid a conflict of interest, the city ended up with a different insurer than the one for which Cole worked despite it being $250,000 cheaper. While transparency with residents is important, City Council should act in the best interests of the city, Cole said.
   15. Council Member Jeffrey Koza proposed an amendment to the second reading. Under the amendment, the city would not be able to authorize a contract with a current or former council member or a business that a current or former council member has a substantial interest in unless the member with the conflict of interest filed a disclosure of that interest; [that] City Council made an affirmative finding that the contract is in the city’s best interest; [that] the council member in question abstained from the vote; and [that] the vote passed with a three-quarters majority [of city council].
   16. After some confusion about the motions and amendments, City Council unanimously voted to postpone the second and final reading to July 11. In the meantime, city staff will update the proposed ordinance based on Koza’s suggestions.
   17. MIKE: Public notice required?
4. Montgomery County commissioners decline 10-year tax break for steel factory; By Jishnu Nair | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 1:20 PM Jun 28, 2022 CDT, Updated 4:33 PM Jun 28, 2022
   1. Montgomery County commissioners declined to vote on a proposed 10-year tax abatement for Husteel America’s planned factory near Splendora, leaving the item to die at a June 28 commissioners court session. Any future abatements will require a 30-day notice before they can be discussed again.
   2. Precinct 4 Commissioner James Metts, who supported the item, attempted to make a motion to approve the item, but did not receive a second to support it. Metts said the move would be justified in the long term.
   3. “I’ve met with these folks and have had good experiences with them,” Metts said. “I don’t see any reason why we can’t be good neighbors.”
   4. However, County Judge Mark Keough said while Montgomery County is “pro-business,” he believed the company should still see the benefits of existing within the county’s tax structure as it stands. Keough also said it was “not great optics” to approve a tax abatement when residents are “struggling” with property taxes. …
   5. The proposed abatement would relieve 100% of taxes for the 10-year period, which is the maximum amount allowed under state law. …
   6. County Attorney B.D. Griffin, who presented the item to commissioners, said the company’s planned investment would total around $122 million in both new construction and personal property, and that 101 new jobs would be created. …
   7. East Montgomery County Improvement District … communications officer Kelley Mattlage said, “Husteel has proposed a great manufacturing project that stands to benefit the residents of East Montgomery County as well as the entire county.” … “Most importantly, Husteel would create more than 100 jobs locally and be the largest taxpayer to Splendora ISD, which is seeing incredible growth. We look forward to see this project come up for a vote with the county commissioners in the future.”
5. NW Harris County residents voice displeasure with Waste Management’s landfill expansion plan; Author: Matt Dougherty | KHOU.COM | Published: 10:16 PM CDT June 28, 2022, Updated: 10:16 PM CDT June 28, 2022
   1. … Waste Management wants to expand the landfill to more than 200 acres and increase the amount of waste it accepts up to 340,000 tons per year.
   2. The residents aren’t happy about the proposed expansion and said their community has become the dumping ground for the rest of Harris County. …
   3. The Hawthorn Park Landfill currently comprises 171 acres in the mixed industrial-residential area called Carverdale. Only waste from construction may be dumped at the site, like concrete, drywall, dirt, brick, asphalt and wood. No residential trash is allowed.
   4. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality officials said a protective layer beneath the soil protects the groundwater from contamination, and they said another layer may be added. …
   5. For neighbors, the assurances weren’t enough. They said their neighborhood has paid the price since the landfill first arrived in the 1970s, and since then, property values have depreciated.
   6. Waste Management officials said residential homes make up only 11% of the area, most of which they said are commercial or industrial properties. They said the state encourages expanding existing landfills rather than creating more. …
   7. MIKE: Waste has to go somewhere, but nothing is sustainable indefinitely. This speaks to an increasingly pressing need for better recycling and disposal techniques.
6. Judge blocks Texas’ pre-Roe abortion law, temporarily resuming abortions for 2 weeks; By Hannah Norton | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 6:10 PM Jun 28, 2022 CDT, Updated 6:10 PM Jun 28, 2022 CDT
   1. A Harris County judge granted a temporary restraining order June 28, allowing some Texas clinics to provide abortions for the next two weeks. The restraining order blocks a 1925 abortion ban that was in place before Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973. …
   2. Following the reversal of Roe on June 24, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in an advisory that prosecutors could “choose to immediately pursue criminal prosecutions based on violations of Texas abortion prohibitions predating Roe that were never repealed by the Texas Legislature.”
   3. But District Judge Christine Weems [D] ruled Texas’ pre-Roe ban was previously repealed and cannot be enforced. The temporary restraining order, according to the court, preserves “patients’ legal right to obtain, and plaintiffs’ and their physicians’ legal right to provide, abortions in Texas until the trigger ban is in effect.”
   4. After the temporary restraining order was filed, Paxton wrote on Twitter that he was “immediately appealing” the judge’s decision and would make sure Texans had “all the legal tools” for a “pro-life” Texas. …
   5. A second hearing is set for July 12, when Weems will determine whether to issue a longer-term injunction. The temporary restraining order will last for 14 days and expire at 5 p.m. July 12.
   6. The restraining order follows a lawsuit filed by several Texas abortion providers June 27. The suit argues previous abortion bans were automatically repealed when Roe v. Wade was passed. Therefore, the providers argue, criminal penalties cannot be enforced until the Texas trigger law takes effect.
   7. Texas is one of at least 13 states with a trigger law [passed 2021], which will ban and criminalize abortions 30 days after the Supreme Court issues its final judgment on the June 24 ruling, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Experts estimated the Supreme Court to issue the judgment roughly one month after the original ruling. …
7. MIKE: This ruling got sort of lost in the uproar over the overturning of ROE: Supreme Court limits ability to enforce Miranda rights; By Tierney Sneed and Ariane de Vogue, CNN | Updated 1:32 PM ET, Thu June 23, 2022
   1. The Supreme Court limited the ability to enforce Miranda rights in a ruling Thursday that said that suspects who are not warned about their right to remain silent cannot sue a police officer for damages under federal civil rights law even if the evidence was ultimately used against them in their criminal trial.
   2. The court’s ruling will cut back on an individual’s protections against self-incrimination by barring the potential to obtain damages. It also means that the failure to administer the warning will not expose a law enforcement officer to potential damages in a civil lawsuit. It will not impact, however, the exclusion of such evidence at a criminal trial.
   3. The court clarified that while the Miranda warning protects a constitutional right, the warning itself is not a right that would trigger the ability to bring a civil lawsuit.
   4. “Today’s ruling doesn’t get rid of the Miranda right,” said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at the University of Texas School of Law. “But it does make it far harder to enforce. Under this ruling, the only remedy for a violation of Miranda is to suppress statements obtained from a suspect who’s not properly advised of his right to remain silent. But if the case never goes to trial, or if the government never seeks to use the statement, or if the statement is admitted notwithstanding the Miranda violation, there’s no remedy at all for the government’s misconduct.” …
   5. The Biden administration sided with Vega.
   6. [Roman Martinez, a lawyer for Vega, said,] “As the Court explained, the landmark Miranda decision establishes an important prophylactic rule protecting the Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination,” he added. “But the failure to give a Miranda warning does not automatically equate to a violation of the Fifth Amendment.”
   7. [Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar argued in court papers,] “Because the Miranda rule concerns the introduction of evidence at trial, a suspect may not sue the police officer under Section 1983 for violating that rule,”.
   8. Lawyers for Tekoh argued that Vega refused to accept Tekoh’s denials and that “with a hand resting on his firearm,” Vega threatened to report Tekoh and his family members to immigration. Tekoh has a green card, and deportation could lead to persecution in Cameroon.
   9. MIKE: So now you have a secret right to an attorney. You just have to know to ask. Increasingly, it’s looking like the truth might or might not set you free. Best to let a decent lawyer decide.
   10. ANDREW: Also, a good time to remember this advice from the Detroit chapter of the National Lawyers’ Guild: when the police ask you questions, and your lawyer isn’t present, shut the f*** up.
8. S. Supreme Court allows Louisiana electoral map faulted for racial bias; By Andrew Chung | REUTERS.COM | June 28, 2022, 11:58 PM CDT, Last Updated 4 hours ago
   1. The Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated a Republican-drawn map of Louisiana’s six U.S. House of Representatives districts that had been blocked by a judge who found that it likely discriminates against Black voters, a setback for Democrats as they try to retain control of Congress in November’s elections. …
   2. The conservative-majority nine-member court’s three liberal justices dissented from the decision. …
   3. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on June 12 had refused to reinstate the Republican-drawn Louisiana districts, calling evidence presented by Black voters who challenged the map “stronger” than evidence presented in defense of the map.
   4. The plaintiffs said in their lawsuit that the Republican-drawn map maximizes “political power for white citizens” by packing large numbers of Black voters into a single district and dispersing the rest into the five others where they are too few to elect their preferred candidates.
   5. The Louisiana legislature passed the map in February. Democratic Governor Jon Bel Edwards then vetoed it – criticizing it for failing to include a second Black-majority district considering that Black voters comprise almost a third of the state’s population – but the legislature overrode the veto. …
   6. MIKE: What we’re seeing is that there are no longer any swing votes in SCOTUS. It’s a conservative monolith.
9. MIKE: The following two stories offer two difference perspectives on the SCOTUS ruling on NY State’s gun law:
   1. Supreme Court finds N.Y. law violates right to carry guns outside home; The 6-to-3 ruling clears the way for legal challenges to similar restrictions in California, New Jersey, Maryland, Hawaii and Massachusetts. By Robert Barnes and Ann E. Marimow | WASHINGTONPOST.COM | Updated June 23, 2022 at 10:46 p.m. EDT | Published June 23, 2022 at 10:48 a.m. EDT
      1. The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that law-abiding Americans have a right to carry a handgun outside the home for self-defense, issuing a watershed constitutional ruling against firearm restrictions as the nation reels from a spate of mass shootings and its political leaders are divided over how to curb such violence.
      2. The court’s conservatives prevailed in a 6-to-3 decision that struck a New York law requiring a special need for carrying a weapon and puts at risk similar laws in Maryland, California, New Jersey, Hawaii and Massachusetts. The ruling is likely to make it easier to carry guns in some of the nation’s biggest cities.
      3. Justice Clarence Thomas, the court’s longest-serving justice and perhaps its most outspoken Second Amendment advocate, wrote a sweeping, 66-page opinion for the court’s conservatives that was specific to New York’s law, but also raises substantial obstacles at the high court for future gun-control measures.
      4. “The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees,’ ” Thomas wrote, referring to a previous Supreme Court ruling. “We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need.”
      5. The court’s dissenting liberals said the majority distorted history and ignored the court’s precedents. President Biden and Democratic officials called the ruling tone-deaf and ill-timed in the wake of recent mass killings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Tex., which have spurred Congress to advance bipartisan legislation strengthening federal gun laws….
      6. In dissent, Justice Stephen G. Breyer pointed to the more than 275 mass shootings since January and to data showing that gun violence has surpassed car crashes as the leading cause of death among children and teens. The majority’s decision, he said, will make it more difficult for state lawmakers to take steps to limit the dangers of gun violence.
      7. The Second Amendment allows states to “take account of the serious problems posed by gun violence,” wrote Breyer, who was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. He added: “Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of gun violence … by passing laws that limit, in various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of different kinds. The Court today severely burdens States’ efforts to do so.”
      8. Thomas’s opinion was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.
      9. Writing separately in a concurring opinion, Alito criticized Breyer for leading his dissent with a recounting of the nation’s horrible mass shootings. “Does the dissent think that laws like New York’s prevent or deter such atrocities?” Alito wrote. “How does the dissent account for the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of its list took place in Buffalo? The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator.”
      10. In a statement, Biden said he is “deeply disappointed” with the court’s ruling that “contradicts both common sense and the Constitution, and should deeply trouble us all.” …
      11. Thomas expressed displeasure with judicial deference to states when considering gun restrictions. Judges should not weigh a law’s burden on the Second Amendment right and the strength of the state’s interest in imposing the challenge, as Breyer advised in his dissent.
      12. Instead, “the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation,” he said. …
   2. Opinion – The Supreme Court’s gun ruling was a victory over racist policing; By Aimee Carlisle, Christopher Smith and Michael Alexander Thomas | WASHINGTONPOST.COM | June 28, 2022 at 8:11 a.m. EDT; Aimee Carlisle, Christopher Smith and Michael Alexander Thomas are attorneys at the nonprofit the Bronx Defenders, which represents low-income individuals in New York.
      1. When the Supreme Court last week struck down a long-standing New York law placing strict limits on carrying guns in public, the response from many was centered on the false dichotomy of gun rights vs. public safety and barely acknowledged the effect the decision could have on mass incarceration. We share the collective concern about gun violence. But feeding the prison pipeline with a steady stream of Black and Brown people, as New York’s law did, is not the answer.
      2. As public defenders in New York City who represent … people who, according to the New York City Police Department’s own data, are almost invariably Black and Brown — we see the majority’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen as an important step to ending mass incarceration. That’s why we joined other public defenders in filing an amicus [a-MEE-cus] brief in the case asking the court …consider the law’s impact on those people who bear the brunt of New York’s gun laws … . Leading Second Amendment scholars agreed that New York’s law needed to be struck down because of the law’s racist impact.
      3. In our brief, we shared stories of clients who made the personal choice to carry a firearm for self-defense. Of police ransacking cars to look for guns and frisking people on the streets. Of people who were arrested, couldn’t afford bail and languished at Rikers Island, one of the most dangerous jails in the country.
      4. Because possession of an unlicensed, loaded firearm is a “violent felony” under New York law, people with no criminal record who are convicted face a mandatory minimum sentence of 3½ years in prison; the maximum is 15 years. They can lose their jobs, … housing, . children and, if they are not citizens, their right to live in the United States. All for carrying a gun without ever threatening anyone or pulling the trigger — conduct that in many states is not a crime at all.
      5. Further, New York gun laws extend broadly. For example, a gun can be considered “loaded,” triggering higher sentences, even when it is not — for example if ammunition is not in the gun itself but instead is somewhere in the same room, even buried in a closet. If a firearm is in a car, the government regularly charges every person in the car for possessing that firearm, even when one person admits the gun was theirs. Ask yourself: The last time a friend gave you a ride, did you search the car for guns? Should you face a 3½-year mandatory minimum prison sentence if you didn’t?
      6. The Reconstruction Congress enacted the 14th Amendment to require states to follow the Bill of Rights. Congress explicitly did so to extend the rights of citizenship — the right to vote, to serve on a jury and to bear arms — to Black people, who had long been denied those rights under a system that did not even believe [Black people] were human. In response, New York and other states subsequently passed laws to prevent disfavored racially and ethnically marginalized people from possessing firearms. New York’s now-unconstitutional law accomplished this through a complex statutory process for obtaining a license that required completing an invasive application, paying up to hundreds of dollars in fees and then sitting for an interview to convince police officers, who made the ultimate determination, that the license was justified. New York does not place such a burdensome, discretionary standard upon any other fundamental constitutional right, such as the right to protest. …
10. John Ratcliffe, former Texas congressman, warned Trump staffers against trying to undermine 2020 election; White House staffer Cassidy Hutchinson testified about Ratcliffe’s warnings before the U.S. House committee investigating the events leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection. She was an assistant to former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows. by Abby Livingston | TEXASTRIBUNE.ORG | June 28, 2022 Updated: 12 hours ago
    1. John Ratcliffe, a former Texas congressman who served as director of national intelligence under former President Donald Trump, warned White House staffers against following through with efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election ahead of the insurrection, [former White House staffer Cassidy Hutchinson] testified Tuesday before members of Congress. …
    2. “Director Ratcliffe felt like that it wasn’t something the White House should be pursuing,” she added in a separate video clip. …
    3. “It felt it was dangerous for the president’s legacy,” Hutchinson said of Ratcliffe’s mindset. “He had expressed to me he was concerned it could spiral out of control and potentially be dangerous either for our democracy or the way things were going for [Jan.] 6.” …
    4. At the time, Ratcliffe was serving in the top post overseeing the United States intelligence community. … As a member of Congress, Ratcliffe was one of Trump’s staunchest Capitol Hill defenders. …
    5. Before her time as a White House staffer, Hutchinson was an intern in U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz’s office. …
    6. MIKE: And so we are left again with the question: Why didn’t these very serious concerns for our democracy ever get outside the White House from people who knew? Or even after Jan. 6? Why did they have to be asked or subpoenaed to testify under oath up to 18 months later?
11. Turkey lifts its objections to Sweden, Finland joining NATO; By JILL LAWLESS and JOSEPH WILSON | APNEWS.COM | 2022-6-27
    1. Turkey agreed Tuesday to lift its opposition to Sweden and Finland joining NATO, ending an impasse that had clouded a leaders’ summit opening in Madrid amid Europe’s worst security crisis in decades, triggered by the war in Ukraine. …
    2. NATO operates by consensus, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had threatened to block the Nordic pair, insisting they change their stance on Kurdish rebel groups that Turkey considers terrorists.
    3. After weeks of diplomacy and hours of talks on Tuesday, Finnish President Sauli Niinistö said the three leaders had signed a joint agreement to break the logjam.
    4. Turkey said it had “got what it wanted” including “full cooperation … in the fight against” the rebel groups. …
    5. Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson said the agreement was “good for Finland and Sweden. And it’s good for NATO.”
    6. She said completing the process of membership should be done “the sooner the better.”
    7. “But there are 30 parliaments that need to approve this and you never know,” Andersson told the Associated Press.
    8. Turkey hailed Tuesday’s agreement as a triumph, saying the Nordic nations had agreed to crack down on groups that Ankara deems national security threats, including the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK, and its Syrian extension. It said they also agreed “not to impose embargo restrictions in the field of defense industry” on Turkey and to take “concrete steps on the extradition of terrorist criminals.”
    9. Turkey has demanded that Finland and Sweden extradite wanted individuals and lift arms restrictions imposed after Turkey’s 2019 military incursion into northeast Syria.
    10. Turkey, in turn, agreed “to support at the 2022 Madrid Summit the invitation of Finland and Sweden to become members of NATO.”
    11. Details of exactly what was agreed were unclear. Amineh Kakabaveh, an independent Swedish lawmaker of Kurdish origin whose support the government depends on for a majority in Parliament, said it was “worrisome that Sweden isn’t revealing what promises it has given Erdogan.”
    12. Andersson dismissed suggestions Sweden and Finland had conceded too much.
    13. Asked if the Swedish public will see the agreement as a concession on issues like extraditions of Kurdish militants regarded by Ankara as terrorists, Andersson said “they will see that this is good for the security of Sweden.” …
    14. Stoltenberg said Monday that NATO allies will agree at the summit to increase the strength of the alliance’s rapid reaction force nearly eightfold, from 40,000 to 300,000 troops. The troops will be based in their home nations, but dedicated to specific countries on NATO’s eastern flank, where the alliance plans to build up stocks of equipment and ammunition. …
    15. There are also differences on how hard a line to take on China in NATO’s new Strategic Concept — its once-a-decade set of priorities and goals. The last document, published in 2010, didn’t mention China at all.
    16. The new concept is expected to set out NATO’s approach on issues from cybersecurity to climate change — and the growing economic and military reach of China, and the rising importance and power of the Indo-Pacific region. For the first time, the leaders of Japan, Australia, South Korea and New Zealand are attending the summit as guests.
    17. Some European members are wary of the tough U.S. line on Beijing and don’t want China cast as an opponent.
    18. In the Strategic Concept, NATO is set to declare Russia its number one threat. …
    19. ANDREW: I still don’t think NATO membership expansion is a good idea. I worry that it could have a similar effect on Russia to the conditions enforced on Germany in the aftermath of WWI. They were deserved, but they caused embarrassment which drove an already nationalist people further into nationalism, and eventually into fascism. That backslide was the German establishment’s own fault, and the postwar terms were justified, but a gentler approach may have been able to avoid WWII.

==================================================

Remember!  When you donate to KPFT, your dollars pay for:

• Transmitter and equipment costs
• Programs like Thinkwing Radio, Politics Done Right, and other locally-generated political talk shows
• KPFT’s online streaming
• Maintaining a wide variety of music programs

Each time you turn on the radio, you can hear your dollars at work!

Make your contribution to this station right now. Just call 713 526 5738. That’s 713-526-5738. Or give online at KPFT.org!