Russia’s War on Ukraine: Three Years, Three Hundred and Two False Claims; NewsGuard's Reality Check, February 21, 2025

Eva Maitland and Madeline Roache, NEWSGUARD, NewsGuard's Reality Check; Russia’s War on Ukraine: Three Years, Three Hundred and Two False Claims

"As the war in Ukraine approaches the three-year anniversary of the Russian invasion that launched the conflict, NewsGuard has now identified and debunked 302 false claims relating to the war, nearly all of them originating as Russian propaganda.

These 302 claims appear in NewsGuard’s Misinformation Fingerprints proprietary database of viral false narratives that NewsGuard analysts have identified and debunked. NewsGuard analysts have identified 551 websites spreading these false claims...

AI IN ACTION: HOW ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SUPERCHARGES PRO-KREMLIN PROPAGANDA

In 2022, NewsGuard debunked just one AI-generated falsehood emanating from Russia. In the second year of the war, NewsGuard debunked five AI-generated false claims, and there were 16 in the third. Indeed, as AI tools became more readily available, the easy access to AI image, audio, video and text generators has enabled Russia and its allies to reach more people, in more languages, with more convincing false claims...

HOME-GROWN, FOREIGN-TRAINED: THE AMERICAN PROPAGANDIST BEHIND 14 FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT ZELENSKY

The driving force behind these false corruption claims that have amassed so many millions of views appears to be John Mark Dougan, a Florida deputy sheriff turned Kremlin propagandist. Dougan is part of a Russian influence operation dubbed by Microsoft as Storm-1516. It appears to be an offshoot of the Internet Research Agency, a disbanded Russian troll farm.

NewsGuard has debunked 37 false narratives linked to Dougan and Storm-1516 targeting Ukraine, the U.S. 2024 election, the 2024 Paris Olympics, and the German 2025 election."

Ronald Reagan narrated a short film in 1945 about the Tuskegee Airmen; Task & Purpose, February 20, 2025

 MATT WHITE, Task & Purpose; Ronald Reagan narrated a short film in 1945 about the Tuskegee Airmen

"An Army film produced in 1945 on the Tuskegee airmen begins with footage of a fighter taxiing behind a narrator’s familiar voice.

“It’s morning,” says the unmistakable voice of then-Army captain Ronald Reagan, who always enjoyed his ‘morning’ metaphors. On screen, fighters take to the air. “Twenty miles from the enemy,” Reagan says.

The 10-minute Army-produced film is a kind of first draft of history on the Tuskegee Airmen, the famed World War II flyers who were in the news last month when the Air Force removed — and then partially replaced — videos on the unit from its boot camp. But the National Archives video on those airmen is worth watching, both for what it says and for what it doesn’t say. Along with some vintage footage of training, the film is narrated by future-President Ronald Reagan, back when he was an Army officer making films for what was then the War Department...

Perhaps Reagan’s most notable passage comes toward the end, when he firmly divides the world into two sides — the Axis powers versus the American way — and puts the segregation and racism behind the Tuskegee project squarely into the Axis’ camp. 

“Here’s the answer to Hitler and Hirohito,” Reagan says. “Here’s the answer to the propaganda of the Japs and Nazis. Here’s the answer: Wings for this man.” 

It’s almost as if the future President wanted to say that diversity is a strength."

AI and Copyright: Expanding Copyright Hurts Everyone—Here’s What to Do Instead; Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), February 19, 2025

 TORI NOBLE, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF); AI and Copyright: Expanding Copyright Hurts Everyone—Here’s What to Do Instead

[Kip Currier: No, not everyone. Not requiring Big Tech to figure out a way to fairly license or get permission to use the copyrighted works of creators unjustly advantages these deep pocketed corporations. It also inequitably disadvantages the economic and creative interests of the human beings who labor to create copyrightable content -- authors, songwriters, visual artists, and many others.

The tell is that many of these same Big Tech companies are only too willing to file copyright infringement lawsuits against anyone whom they allege is infringing their AI content to create competing products and services.]

[Excerpt]

"Threats to Socially Valuable Research and Innovation 

Requiring researchers to license fair uses of AI training data could make socially valuable research based on machine learning (ML) and even text and data mining (TDM) prohibitively complicated and expensive, if not impossible. Researchers have relied on fair use to conduct TDM research for a decade, leading to important advancements in myriad fields. However, licensing the vast quantity of works that high-quality TDM research requires is frequently cost-prohibitive and practically infeasible.  

Fair use protects ML and TDM research for good reason. Without fair use, copyright would hinder important scientific advancements that benefit all of us. Empirical studies back this up: research using TDM methodologies are more common in countries that protect TDM research from copyright control; in countries that don’t, copyright restrictions stymie beneficial research. It’s easy to see why: it would be impossible to identify and negotiate with millions of different copyright owners to analyze, say, text from the internet."

How to Organize Our Way Out of the Trump-Musk Putsch; The Nation, February 19, 2025

EZRA LEVIN and LEAH GREENBERG , The Nation; How to Organize Our Way Out of the Trump-Musk Putsch

"For the millions of Americans now desperate to reclaim our democracy from the plutocratic vandalism of the second Trump administration, the main challenge before us is simple: We have to unify and fight back. This isn’t new and it isn’t rocket science—the one thing we know from historical fights against authoritarians is that success depends on a persistent, courageous, broad-based, and unified opposition. What that should look like and what that demands of each of us is the heart of the new movement to defeat a more disciplined and lawless Trump White House, but before we get to where we’re going, we have to start with where we are.

We run a national pro-democracy grassroots movement organization that’s been helping to marshal local volunteer groups against Trumpism for nearly a decade. Trump’s innovation in his second term is his strategic alignment with neoreactionary forces personified in Elon Musk. As one underground memo circulating in pro-democracy circles recently explained, the neoreactionary goal is “replacing the existing Constitutional system with a privatized state structure akin to a corporation, with a monarch-like figure at the top modeled after a CEO.” It’s no wonder that historians like Timothy Snyder and Heather Cox Richardson are raising the alarm about a boiling constitutional crisis...

A week after the election, we published Indivisible: A Guide to Democracy on the Brink, an open-source handbook for building nationwide opposition to the coming authoritarian takeover. The first step: total opposition to Trump’s Project 2025...

We’re under no illusion that any senator or representative can summon forth the opposition on their own. It’s up to each of us to try, and learn, and improve, and build. Constituents should be organizing in their own communities as engaged neighbors, pro-democracy volunteers, and educators. Rank-and-file Democrats should be feeding off that energy and harnessing its power. And Democrats in leadership should be corralling their caucuses to produce a unified front with aggressive, creative tactics and messaging. Nobody has all the answers, and we’re all going to have to try, fail, go back to the drawing board, and try again.

These are frightening times, and frightening times call for active, courageous leadership. Musk and Trump are really seeking to annex the operations of the state to their pet vanity projects, bigotries, and conspiracy theories , but our enemy is not one or two men. Our enemy is apathy, cynicism, and fatalism; the pernicious, authoritarian-friendly belief that we are merely victims of world events rather than active participants in a global struggle for freedom and justice. Every time one of us—a family member, a community organizer, a representative, a senator—takes a step forward in this fight, a thousand pairs of eyes watch and learn. Courage is contagious.

Take that step, and steel yourself with the knowledge that you are the defender of a 250-year experiment in self-governance—a real-life pluralistic democracy, imperfect as it is, striving to be more perfect. Our predecessors deposed a brain-addled king; they crushed the violent insurrectionists of a slaveholding confederacy; they forced the robber barons to contend with workers and unions; they kicked the Nazis’ asses throughout Europe; they broke the back of the southern segregationist political bloc; they fought back against the terrorizing forces at Stonewall. We have planted ourselves in stubborn opposition to monomaniacal fascists of one form or another for a quarter of a millennium. No entitled reality-TV has-been backed by an addle-brained billionaire who cheats at video games is going to roll over us now.

We will not finish this fight, but we can each be damn sure to do our part while we’re here. Together, we are the opposition, and this is our republic—if we can keep it. This is the part where we keep it."

‘The greatest propaganda op in history’: Trump’s reshaping of US culture evokes past antidemocratic regimes; The Guardian, February 16, 2025

David Smith  , The Guardian; ‘The greatest propaganda op in history’: Trump’s reshaping of US culture evokes past antidemocratic regimes

"Long a master of branding, Trump is making propaganda a core element of his strongman presidency. This comes as little surprise to critics who regard it as an extension of last year’s election campaign in which he sold himself as a champion of the forgotten people and victim of a weaponised justice department.

Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill, said: “Donald Trump’s re-election is the greatest, most successful propaganda op in history. Propaganda is why Donald Trump is president again and they know this, which is why they undermined the press, expertise and science.”

Since taking office, Trump has outpaced his predecessors by signing 64 executive orders and 27 memos and proclamations in less than a month. His blitz on immigration, trade and the federal bureaucracy was expected. But the president’s aggressive approach to reshaping national identity through symbolism and language has taken opponents by surprise.

When Trump used his inaugural address to assert his vision of US dominance by promising to change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, the former secretary of state Hillary Clinton burst out laughing. But the switch came with a sinister edge.

This week, the White House banned the Associated Press, one of the world’s biggest news outlets, because it has not changed its stylebook entry for Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America (the AP serves numerous countries that do not recognise the new name). The punitive measure prompted CNN to invoke “newspeak” from George Orwell’s novel 1984, in which language is a tool of control and can be narrowed to limit thought."

Scoop: Why Trump targets AP; Axios, February 17, 2025

 

• Marc Caputo, Axios; Scoop: Why Trump targets AP

"One of the big reasons President Trump is limiting AP reporters' White House access is to protest what aides see as years of liberal word choices that the wire service's influential stylebook spread across mainstream media, according to top White House officials.

Why it matters: The trigger was the announcement by The Associated Press that it would continue using the 400-year-old "Gulf of Mexico" rather than switch to "Gulf of America," as declared by Trump in a Day 1 executive order. But it turns out that broader underlying grievances made AP a target.

The big picture: By spotlighting AP, Trump is amplifying Republican and conservative criticisms that the AP Stylebook, a first reference for most U.S. news organizations, shapes political dialogue by favoring liberal words and phrases concerning gender, immigration, raceand law enforcement.

• "This isn't just about the Gulf of America," White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich told Axios. "This is about AP weaponizing language through their stylebook to push a partisan worldview in contrast with the traditional and deeply held beliefs of many Americans and many people around the world."
• The dispute with AP is part of Trump's broader effort to discredit legacy media outlets and the public's trust in the press — already at a record low.

The other side: AP — which has long been considered the gold standard of neutrality — rejects any accusation of bias. Lauren Easton, vice president of corporate communications, told Axios that AP "is a global, fact-based, nonpartisan news organization with thousands of customers around the world who span the political spectrum."

• "If AP journalism wasn't factual and nonpartisan, this wouldn't be the case," she said.
• Easton said AP provides "guidance on issues brought to us by members and customers, and it is up to them what they choose to use. Again, this is guidance. It's not surprising that political parties, organizations or even individuals may disagree with some entries. The Stylebook doesn't align with any particular agenda.""

Actress Julianne Moore shares ‘great shock,’ claims her children’s book was banned by Trump Administration; Fox News, February 17, 2025

Rachel del Guidice , Fox News; Actress Julianne Moore shares ‘great shock,’ claims her children’s book was banned by Trump Administration

"Actress Julianne Moore said in an Instagram post Sunday that she is in "great shock" over her children’s book being allegedly banned by President Donald Trump’s Department of Defense. 

"It is a great shock for me to learn that my first book, Freckleface Strawberry, has been banned by the Trump Administration from schools run by the Department of Defense," Moore said in an Instagram post. 

Moore, who won an Oscar in 2015 for her film, "Still Alice," published a children’s book in 2007 called, "Freckleface Strawberry," about a young girl who has freckles and learns to accept differences in herself and others."

Kennedy Library closes abruptly; Politico, February 18, 2025

KELLY GARRITY and SEB STARCEVIC, Politico; Kennedy Library closes abruptly

[Kip Currier: The chaos is the point.

Remember what Steve Bannon said: Flood the zone with ****]

[Excerpt]

"The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum closed abruptly Tuesday afternoon amid a flurry of mass firings at federal agencies across the government.

The effort to slash the federal workforce spearheaded by the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency hit the Boston-based intuition Thursday afternoon, when the National Archives passed down an order telling leadership to terminate probationary employees, former Rep. Joe Kennedy III said Tuesday evening...

The closure, which began at 2 p.m. Tuesday, isn’t expected to last long. According to a statement from the National Archives, the library “will be open tomorrow, and the National Archives staff looks forward to welcoming guests, visitors, and researchers.”"

Elon Musk ridiculed a blind person on X. Then a mob went to work.; The Washington Post, February 18, 2025

Pranshu Verma, The Washington Post ; Elon Musk ridiculed a blind person on X. Then a mob went to work

[Kip Currier: Elon Musk repeatedly shows us exactly who and what he is: the richest person on the planet and a man who is to be pitied for the severe impoverishment of character, decency, and ethical principles from which he suffers.

We can't easily counter the hate speech, disinformation, and chaos that are the democracy-damaging byproducts of this wannabe-Bond-villain's amoral philosophical approach to life. But we can support the brave souls whom Musk and his minions ruthlessly target with their cyberbullying and scare tactics.

Thanks to all those willing to stand up for the rule of law, fairness, accountability, truth, service to those in need, and human dignity.]

[Excerpt]

"Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette works at the Project on Government Oversight,a nonpartisan watchdog group focused on reducing bureaucratic waste. He also happens to be blind. So when he criticized Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service in testimony on Capitol Hill last week, Musk unleashed an online attack Hedtler-Gaudette described as “surreal” in its juvenile bigotry.

First, Musk retweeted a post on X noting that the “blind director of watchdog group funded by George Soros testifies that he does not see widespread evidence of government waste” and added two laughing/crying emojis. The tweet garnered more than 21 million views, and sparked dozens of hateful messages to Hedtler-Gaudette’s account...

Digital rights experts say the situation has created an unprecedented imbalance in power. Musk’s massive online following, his ownership of a social media platform where he can dictate content moderation rules, and his position heading a government entity with access to private data, give him a unique ability to threaten those who question him and chill dissenting speech."

AI and ethics: No advancement can ever justify a human rights violation; Vatican News, February 16, 2025

Kielce Gussie, Vatican News; AI and ethics: No advancement can ever justify a human rights violation

"By 2028, global spending on artificial intelligence will skyrocket to $632 billion, according to the International Data Corporation. In a world where smartphones, computers, and ChatGPT continue to be the center of debate, it's no wonder the need for universal regulation and awareness has become a growing topic of discussion.

To address this issue, an international two-day summit focused on AI was held in Paris, France. The goal was to bring stakeholders from the public, private, and academic sectors together to begin building an AI ecosystem that is trustworthy and safe.

Experts in various areas of the artificial intelligence sphere gathered to partake in the discussion, including Australian professor and member of the Australian Government’s Artificial Intelligence Expert Group, Edward Santow. He described feeling hopeful that the summit would advance the safety agenda of AI.

Trustworthiness and safety

On the heels of this summit, the Australian Embassy to the Holy See hosted a panel discussion to address the ethical and human rights challenges in utilizing AI. There, Prof. Santow described his experience at the Paris summit, highlighting the difficulty in building an atmosphere of trust with AI on a global scale."

As Musk reshapes the government, some ask: Where are the guardrails?; The Washington Post, February 16, 2025

Lisa Rein , The Washington Post; As Musk reshapes the government, some ask: Where are the guardrails?

"Some dismissed civil servants are preparing lawsuits against the administration, citing the guardrails that Congress erected to protect their jobs. Legal experts are closely watching to find out if they will survive."

ABA condemns remarks questioning legitimacy of courts and judicial review; American Bar Association (ABA), February 11, 2025

American Bar Association (ABA); ABA condemns remarks questioning legitimacy of courts and judicial review

"Last week, the administration lost a pretrial motion in a federal district court, which halted government efforts to gain access to Department of Treasury records including private records of many, if not all, U.S. citizens.  

It is certainly not the first time an administration has not prevailed in a pretrial motion in one of thousands of cases it files or defends each year. There is no final judgment in this case and, in any event, the government can appeal in a manner it has done countless times over the years. The right to appeal is there for any party dissatisfied with a court’s decision. It is also the right of every American and the government to criticize a decision made by the courts.   

What is never acceptable is what was said by representatives of this administration, including the misleading assertion that judges cannot control the executive’s legitimate power and calls for impeachment of a judge who did not rule in the administration’s favor. It is also not acceptable to attack the judge making the ruling or try to interfere with the independence of the court.   

These statements attack the legitimacy of judicial oversight just because a court’s ruling is not what the administration wants in a particular case. It is a fundamental cornerstone of our democracy that the courts are the protectors of the citizenry from government overreach. All lawyers know that judges have the authority to determine whether the administration’s actions are lawful and a legitimate exercise of executive branch authority. It is one of the oldest and most revered precedent in United States legal history — Marbury v. Madison. This is a key principle that is taught in the first year of law school.  

These bold assertions, designed to intimidate judges by threatening removal if they do not rule the government's way, cross the line. They create a risk to the physical security of judges and have no place in our society. There have also been suggestions that the executive branch should consider disobeying court orders. These statements threaten the very foundation of our constitutional system.   

The ABA calls for every lawyer and legal organization to speak with one voice and to condemn the efforts of any administration that suggests its actions are beyond the reach of judicial review. We also call for condemnation and rejection of calls for the impeachment of a judge who did not rule in a certain way.   

This is not the first time we have called out criticism and efforts to demonize the courts. The ABA spoke last fall during the previous administration and called out comments from both sides.  

We recognize the potential risk to our profession, the ABA and our members, by speaking. But to stay silent is to suggest that these statements are acceptable or the new norm. They are not. And we will not be silent in the face of such words that are contrary to our constitutional system. They pose a clear and present challenge to our democracy and the separation of powers among the three independent branches. We will stand for the rule of law today as we have for nearly 150 years.  

The ABA is one of the largest voluntary associations of lawyers in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law. View our privacy statement online."

Trump DOJ Assigns Sensitive Ethics Powers to Political Aides; Bloomberg Law, February 16, 2025

Ben Penn, Bloomberg Law; Trump DOJ Assigns Sensitive Ethics Powers to Political Aides

"The Trump Justice Department has assigned politically appointed newcomers decisionmaking power over sensitive matters, including ethics, employee discipline, and release of information sought by inspectors general and Congress, stripping these authorities from the longstanding oversight of a senior career official.

Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, in a Jan. 27 memo reviewed by Bloomberg Law, handed the authorities to two of his staffers — one a former criminal defense lawyer for President Donald Trump and another a 2021 law school graduate...

Delegating such weighty tasks to political aides — both first-time DOJ employees — without a career official’s involvement is a dramatic departure from past practice."

ESSAY: Home of the brave? Really? Who will stand up for democracy?; The Ink, February 18, 2025

ANAND GIRIDHARADAS, The Ink ; ESSAY: Home of the brave? Really? Who will stand up for democracy?

"As I write this, there are scattered and inspiring examples of bravery all around us — prosecutors, judges, even the occasional lawmaker. But in the main, we are proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that we are not the home of the brave. We are a country full of people smilingly capitulating to a tyrant...

Collaborating. Exactly that. It is fashionable now. Bravery, less so.

It’s the media owners who are rejecting advertisements from the pro-democracy movement and letting go of cartoonists who challenge power and settling bogus lawsuits to protect their wider commercial interests, and trying to position themselves in the Dear Leader’s good graces. Why do they even own newspapers? Maybe they would be better off owning banks. Do they know what newspapers are for?...

Then there are the CEOs, who, five years ago, proudly positioned themselves as avatars of a new future of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and now purge those programs from their own companies. They have more power with the resources at their command than most people who have ever lived, but it is not enough to give them courage. They would sell out their own colleagues, make them feel less part of the team, in order to please a Dear Leader who would sell them out in a Wall Street second...

It is the university leaders who, instead of defending their faculty — one of the only bastions of protected thinkers who can actually tell the truth without fear because of tenure — are bending over backwards to please the wannabe autocrat. Campuses are now full of fear of a new McCarthyism. How does it feel to work for leaders who do not have your back?

Collaborating.

We are learning about ourselves as a country. We are learning who among us and around us is brave."

Ethics Column: When to Recuse or Disclose?; American Bar Association (ABA), December 30, 2024

Hon. W. Kearse McGill , American Bar Association (ABA); Ethics Column: When to Recuse or Disclose?

"When judicial recusal should occur is a perilous topic to discuss these days; in fact, to describe it as perilous may even be an understatement given recent public attention on this topic.  As judges, most of us will become quite anxious if we are hearing a case where our impartiality could be questioned.  What should we consider when this issue presents itself?

As a starting point, we can consider the ethical concept that underpins the issue of recusal or disqualification (while recusal is a judge’s sua sponte withdrawal from a case and disqualification is removal based on a party’s motion or required by statute, both terms are often used interchangeably).  A judge’s ethical duty to recuse arises from the duty to act impartially, which is based in our understanding of procedural due process as a constitutional principle." 

Trump administration asks US Supreme Court to remove order blocking firing of ethics agency head; Jurist news, February 17, 2025

 Sean Beeghly | U. Pittsburgh School of Law, US, Jurist news; Trump administration asks US Supreme Court to remove order blocking firing of ethics agency head

"The Trump administration prepared an application on Sunday asking the US Supreme Court to remove a lower court order blocking the firing of the head of the Office of Special Counsel. The request argued the order was “an unprecedented assault on the separation of powers that warrant[ed] immediate relief.”...

The Office of Special Counsel was created in 1979 to serve as “a secure channel for federal employees to blow the whistle by disclosing wrongdoing.”"

Appeals court rejects Trump in showdown over firing of ethics watchdog; Politico, February 16, 2025

JOSH GERSTEIN and KYLE CHENEY, Politico ; Appeals court rejects Trump in showdown over firing of ethics watchdog

"A divided federal appeals court panel has again turned down President Donald Trump’s request to follow through with his effort to fire a federal official from a post overseeing enforcement of workplace protections for federal employees.

In an order released late Saturday night, a panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals voted, 2-1, not to disturb a temporary restraining order a lower court judge issued preventing Trump from moving forward with the removal of Office of Special Counsel chief Hampton Dellinger, an appointee of President Joe Biden."

Revealed: Google facilitated Russia and China’s censorship requests; The Observer via The Guardian, February 15, 2025

Siân Boyle, The Observer via The Guardian; Revealed: Google facilitated Russia and China’s censorship requests

"Google has cooperated with autocratic regimes around the world, including the Kremlin in Russia and the Chinese Communist party, to facilitate censorship requests, an Observer investigation can reveal.

The technology company has engaged with the administrations of about 150 countries since 2011 that want information scrubbed from their public domains.

As well as democratic governments, it has interacted with dictatorships, sanctioned regimes and governments accused of human rights abuses, including the police in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

After requests from the governments of Russia and China, Google has removed content such as YouTube videos of anti-state protesters or content that criticises and alleges corruption among their politicians."