Just Do It Already

Every presidential scandal has at least one memorable line that everyone recognizes immediately. Nixon had “I am not a crook,” and Bill Clinton will be forever remembered for “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” The line that will likely be most remembered from the Trump regime is from the Mueller report: when Attorney General Jeff Sessions told Donald Trump that a special counsel had been appointed. He slumped in his chair and said, “Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my presidency. I’m fucked.”

The Mueller investigation had Trump in despair from the very beginning. He was so anxious about it that he spent the next year and a half obstructing justice in a dozen different ways, publicly trashing everyone involved in it and attacking the reputations of the FBI and the Department of Justice. Whether that reflected his guilt over his behavior in the Russia matter or concern that the FBI was turning over other rocks he’d rather not be touched is still unknown. These are not the actions of an innocent man.

The debate about impeachment gets hotter wth Lord Dampnut’s every refusal to acknowledge congressional power under the Constitution. On Thursday the Washington Post reported that Nancy Pelosi held a closed-door meeting with the Democratic caucus, telling them to stick to policy issues that people really care about and forget about impeachment. She acknowledged that some Democrats are feeling a little down about the refusal to consider impeachment, but no one in the room objected to her edict. Evidently, they are all convinced that voters are not concerned about whether their president is a criminal or that American democracy is in peril.

Voters are not going to buy that. People understand that getting a conviction in the Senate in an impeachment trial will be nearly impossible, but they also know that passing any Democratic bills in the Senate, and then getting Trump to sign them, is just as unlikely.

Every Democrat knows that Donald Trump deserves impeachment. They just can’t decide whether it’s good strategy to do it. Pelosi obviously doesn’t think so. Others are saying they should.  Many legal observers believe that impeachment proceedings will give the House leadership the clout they need with the courts to force the administration to comply with subpoenas, so in that sense it’s almost a necessity.

Voters didn’t hand Democrats a big majority in the midterms for the purpose of passing a dream agenda only to watch it die in the Senate. There are currently 23 presidential candidates talking about the bread-and-butter issues every single day (the ones that will actually talk about policy anyway), and people will be hearing all about them. They sent the Democrats to Washington in 2018 for one reason: To stop Trump.

It’s becoming more important every day that Democrats focus on doing that. Trump is still the most powerful man in the world and downplaying the threat of impeachment gives him a green light to keep doing everything he’s doing. It’s not just about the 2016 election or even the pattern of obstruction of justice anymore. It’s about what he’s doing right now.

Even if Democrats never actually vote on articles of impeachment, holding hearings, using the power of their congressional mandate, and showing the Gröpenführer that they will turn over every rock whether he likes it or not is the only way to keep him from doing his worst.

Bullies only back down when someone stands up to them.

Moonquakes Too

In 2010, an analysis of images from NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) found that the Moon shriveled like a raisin as its interior cooled, leaving behind thousands of cliffs called thrust faults on the lunar surface. A new analysis of archival data from seismometers deployed during the Apollo missions gives the first evidence that these thrust faults are still active and likely producing moonquakes today as the Moon continues to gradually cool and shrink.

Researchers found that a number of the quakes recorded in the Apollo data happened very close to the faults seen in the LRO imagery. The LRO images also show physical evidence of geologically recent fault movement, such as landslides and tumbled boulders.

Image result for moon

Astronauts placed five seismometers on the Moon’s surface during the Apollo 11, 12, 14, 15, and 16 missions. The Apollo 11 seismometer operated only for three weeks, but the four remaining instruments recorded 28 shallow moonquakes from 1969 to 1977. On Earth, the quakes would have ranged in magnitude from about 2 to 5.

Using the revised location estimates from their new algorithm, scientists found that the epicenters of eight of the 28 shallow quakes were within 19 miles of faults visible in the LRO images. This was close enough for the team to conclude that the faults likely caused the quakes.

The researchers also found that six of the eight quakes happened when the Moon was at or near its apogee, the point in the Moon’s orbit when it is farthest from Earth. This is where additional tidal stress from Earth’s gravity causes a peak in the total stress on the Moon’s crust, making slippage along the thrust faults more likely.

The LRO imaged more than 3,500 fault scarps on the Moon. Some of these images show landslides or boulders at the bottom of relatively bright patches on the slopes of fault scarps or nearby terrain. Brighter areas indicate regions that are freshly exposed by an event such as a moonquake.

Other LRO fault images show fresh tracks from boulder falls, suggesting that quakes sent these boulders rolling down their cliff slopes. Such tracks would be erased relatively quickly, in terms of geologic time, by the constant rain of micrometeoroid impacts on the Moon.

The study appears in the journal Nature Geoscience.

Drumbeats in the Distance

Has the American media learned anything since George W. Bush drove the country into the Iraq War on false pretenses and warped intelligence? Hopefully it has, but we are be on the verge of a high-stakes test of this hypothesis.

The Trump administration appears to be on the cusp of walking us into a conflict with Iran. And we need to be clear about how this all started: Against the advice of many of his top aides, Trump decided to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal crafted under President Barack Obama. The deal strictly limited Iran’s ability to create a nuclear weapon, a goal nearly everyone in the U.S. shares, but Republicans decided that anything with Obama’s name on it made them sad, so it had to go. Then, last month, the administration announced it was labeling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, and unprecedented and aggressive move.

That brings us to this month, when officials have been trying to convince the public that there is intelligence suggesting that the threat from Iran is growing even though U.S. Central Command released a report saying the regime had no interest in going on the offense against the United States unless provoked.

So the administration decided to provoke them. National Security Adviser, and talking mustache, John Bolton announced that he would send aircraft carriers and bombers to the Persian Gulf in response to some new information. But Bolton is the quintessential unreliable narrator. He was, after all, a part of the administration that manipulated the intelligence to make the case for the Iraq War under Bush. Even Bush would later sour on his former ambassador to the United Nations, saying, “I don’t consider Bolton credible.”

The Associated Press credulously reported Monday that a U.S. official said that the military has assessed that Iran is likely responsible for a recent attack on oil tankers near the United Arab Emirates over the weekend. But the story was thinly sourced, relying only on one anonymous official citing a military assessment.

Bolton has never seen a regime that he didn’t want to overthrow and he is clearly gunning for Iran. And given how stupid and easy to manipulate Trump is, Bolton may well lead him into war.

Reporters must be particularly skeptical of what administration sources are saying, whether they’re speaking anonymously or before Congress. Who’s agenda are they serving? How reliable is the information they’re citing? We’ve seen how the government can manipulate the media into banging the war drums for them. And there are signs it is making such a mistake again.

The American role in any rising tensions, beginning with Trump’s tearing up of the nuclear deal, is the important context for understanding any emerging conflict. Reporters need to be particularly skeptical of any claims they’re hearing as the Trump administration, with John Bolton at the helm of national security, coalesces around the idea that Iran poses an imminent threat.


Last month, NASA’s Mars Odyssey orbiter captured a new thermal image of Phobos, the larger of Mars’ two moons. Each color in the full-moon image represents a temperature range detected by Odyssey’s Thermal Emission Imaging System (THEMIS) camera. Each observation is done from a slightly different angle or time of day, providing new kinds of data.

The new, full-moon view is better for studying material composition, whereas earlier half-moon views are better for looking at surface textures. With the half-moon views, scientists could see how rough or smooth the surface is and how it’s layered. With the new full-moon views, scientists can gather data on what minerals are in it, including metals.

These three views of the Martian moon Phobos were taken by NASA’s Mars Odyssey orbiter using its THEMIS camera. Each color represents a different temperature range. The upper image was taken in a full-moon phase, which is better for studying material composition. The two views below were taken while Phobos was in a half-moon phase, which is better for studying surface textures. Image credit: NASA / JPL-Caltech / ASU / SSI.

Iron and nickel are two such metals. Depending on how abundant the metals are, and how they’re mixed with other minerals, researchers might be able to determine whether Phobos is a captured asteroid or a pile of Mars fragments blasted into space by a giant impact long ago.

Human exploration of Phobos has been discussed in the space community as a distant, future possibility, and a Japanese sample-return mission to the tiny moon is scheduled for launch in the 2020s. These and future observations could help future missions identify hazards and find safe areas to land of the surface.

Hubble Finds More Interesting Stuff

New data from the Spitzer and Hubble space telescopes show that in particular wavelengths of infrared light, some of the first galaxies to form in the Universe (less than 1 billion years after the Big Bang) were considerably brighter than astronomers anticipated.

No one yet knows for sure when the first stars in our Universe burst to life. Evidence suggests that between 100 million and 200 million years after the Big Bang, the Universe was filled mostly with neutral hydrogen gas that had perhaps just begun to coalesce into stars, which then began to form the first galaxies.

By about 1 billion years after the Big Bang, the Universe had become a sparkling firmament. Something else had changed, too: electrons of the omnipresent neutral hydrogen gas had been stripped away in a process known as ionization.

The Epoch of Reionization, the changeover from the Universe full of neutral hydrogen to one filled with ionized hydrogen, is well documented.

Before this Universe-wide transformation, long-wavelength forms of light, such as radio waves and visible light, traversed the Universe more or less unencumbered. But shorter wavelengths, including ultraviolet light, X-rays and gamma rays, were stopped short by neutral hydrogen atoms. These collisions would strip the neutral hydrogen atoms of their electrons, ionizing them.

But what could have produced enough ionizing radiation to affect all the hydrogen in the Universe? Was it individual stars? Giant galaxies?

If either were the culprit, those early cosmic colonizers would have been different than most modern stars and galaxies, which typically don’t release high amounts of ionizing radiation. Then again, perhaps something else entirely caused the event, such as quasars.

Researchers found that early galaxies were particularly bright in two specific wavelengths of infrared light produced by ionizing radiation interacting with hydrogen and oxygen gases within the galaxies. This implies that the galaxies were dominated by young, massive stars composed mostly of hydrogen and helium. They contain very small amounts of heavy elements, like nitrogen, carbon and oxygen, compared to stars found in modern galaxies.

These stars were not the first stars to form in the Universe (those would have been composed of hydrogen and helium only) but were still members of very early generations of stars.

The Epoch of Reionization wasn’t an instantaneous event, so while the new results are not enough to close the book on this cosmic event, they do provide new details about how the Universe evolved during this time and how the transition played out.

The findings are published in the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.