World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The influence of business executives who helped shape president Trump's views on Mexico, China, Export Import Bank, and other issues is covered by Stokols and Bender of WSJ. On Mexico the departure of Mike Flynn helped moderate views, Wilbur Ross, the Commerce Secretary also provided a moderating influence. The plans are now to change NAFTA but not entirely redo the agreement. On the Export Import Bank the views of Boeing CEO Muilenburg, who explained to Trump why the Bank supported U.S. exports and how other countries had similar banks, led to the president filling the bank vacancies. On China the influence of NEC head, Gary Cohn, former president of Goldman Sachs, and other business executives, led to a less confrontational position. The president once called NATO obsolete during the campaign but he met this week with NATO secretary general Stoltenberg this week and expressed strong support for NATO after rising tensions with Russia.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Following the events in Charlottesville where a car drove into protesters, president Trump's remarks seemed to equate the actions of white supremacists to protesters. This has led to strong criticism from the business community with most business leaders withdrawing from the president's advisory councils from the business community- the Strategy and Policy Forum,  and Manufacturing Council. This includes the CEO's of Johnson and Johnson, Merck, JP Morgan Chase, GM, GE, 3M, and other companies. In his response president Trump disbanded both councils. JP Morgan Chase CEO Dimon said of the president's remarks- 'Constructive economic and regulatory policies are not enough and will not matter if we do not address the divisions in our country." Members of these councils had hoped to use their presence to have a voice. Yet by August 2017, 6 months into the Trump administration this appears to be changing, with CEO's of many companies expressing the view that the Republican policies favoring business would not matter if the basic consensus on tolerance and openness and what the U.S. stands for is allowed to deteriorate. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Wall Street Journal editorial says the Trump-Lighthizer strategy is to blow up global supply chains and a political strategy to win Democratic votes. It is critical of the reduced protections for American business from expropriation, which it says is intended to keep American jobs at home. It is also critical of the attempt to leave NAFTA by setting up separate trade deals with Mexico, and later with Canada. Business has favored keeping the North American supply chains intact. The editorial praises the 16 year duration of the agreement with Mexico offering more certainty for investors.

Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post editorial says many Republican leaders have shown lack of courage to speak up against the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and other extreme positions taken by Trump. A separate op-ed piece by Robert Kagan, says this leaves him little choice as a Republican but to vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton.
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The $787 million settlement is for defamation damages for Dominion Voting Systems and its owner State Street Capital. On the fundamental issue of free and fair elections and freely elected governments, the settlement does not ask for an explicit statement by Fox News of misconduct. To understand what happened one has to look at the origins of the FNN in the Melbourne Herald of 1920-1950 under Keith Murdoch and the political controversy pursued to increase readership in that period. NYT says it has an implicit plea of "no contest" to several pre trial findings by the presiding judge Eric Davis- "The evidence does not support that Fox News Network television carried good faith disinterested reporting." NYT explains this as the judge saying that spreading a conspiracy theory does not fall under legally protected "news gathering." The presiding judge also decided that - "Evidence developed in this civil proceeding demonstrates that it is CRYSTAL clear none of the statements related to Dominion (by Fox News) are true." As the case is not going to trial readers may ask what happened not just in this case but in Fox News and Trump over the last decade that caused risks to the framework of democracy, of elections and transfer of power setup by the founding fathers. Fox News Network has its origins in the Melbourne Herald of the 1920-1950 period when Keith Murdoch setup the business in Australia that was expanded a generation later by Rupert Murdoch. Keith Murdoch was heavily influenced in his newspaper career by Lord Northcliffe, and by Lord Beaverbrook, a Canadian from New Brunswick, who both created a form of journalism that used political controversy to increase readership between the two world wars and in the period after that to 1957. The readership of these papers ran to 3-4 million which in that period in Britain or Australia was huge. Beaverbook took controversial positions that were built on his idea that the bloc Britain should represent was Canada, Australia and Britain with the British Empire, to have little to do with Europe or even the US. For this reason he did not support Britain's entry into the Second World War, or Britain joining in the Cold War against the Soviets till the Berlin Blockade. British prime minister Macmillan held back announcing Britain joining the European Economic Community (predecessor to the EU), because of the power of the Beaverbrook newspapers who were not interested in Europe. And British prime minister Clement Attlee faced the bitter opposition of Churchill and Beaverbrook/Northcliffe papers in sending Mountbatten to negotiate a transfer of power to India in 1947. The win of Labour's Clement Attlee in the 1951 election was opposed by Beaverbrook using the most sensational language. One can see the origins of what happened in the Trump period in the newspaper origins from the 1900-1957 period of Australian and British television networks. Of Keith Murdoch, National Biography of the Australian National University says- he supported the conservative stances of his time, was a remarkable entrepreneur and organizer of industry. Yet it also says his judgement was faulty. That he had "no real social philosophy"and lacked the originality to make useful contributions to public policy. Of Rupert Murdoch it can be said that he was also a remarkable entrepreneur and organizer of industry who built the newspaper business in Australia from one Adelaide paper left to him by Keith Murdoch. Yet his judgement proved faulty and there was no real concept of public policy or "real social philosophy." There is also the fact that like Beaverbrook from New Brunswick, Murdoch from western Australia was raised in the period of the British Empire and Commonwealth, had no real experience or grasp of the idea that is America set by the founding fathers and renewed by Lincoln, then FDR. An awareness of the origins of Murdoch's FNN is useful because it helps the American public close this chapter in the way democracies functioned in the past, and write better chapters for the future before us, keeping alive the idea that is America.     ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ points to Democrats having won consistently 18 states plus District of Columbia adding upto 242 Electoral College votes in every election since 1992. Democrats need 28 more to cross the needed 270 votes. Republicans consistently having 13 states with 102 electoral College votes. Demographic changes in recent years have shifted to where Hillary Clinton may not need to devote resources to Colorado and Virginia because of a more favorable position there.  Carrying Pennsylvania with these 2 states would put Clinton over the 270 required. Vice Presidential candidate for Clinton, Senator Keane is from Virginia and is popular in the state.  Pennsylvania has a long history favoring Democrats. North Carolina has also seen demographic changes favoring Democrats. The Clinton campaign is focussing ads on these states as well as the swing states of Nevada, Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as Georgia, Arizona and Utah which are becoming competitive for Democrats. By keeping up the effort in Georgia, Arizona and Utah, Clinton hopes to make Trump divert resources there. Other two swing states are Ohio and Florida, but this WSJ report says Clinton has to win only one of the four swing states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, and North Carolina to go over 270 and Trump needs all four. Of the 20 media markets Clinton or her super PACs have focussed their ads on 16 are in these 4 states. The Clinton campaign is looking at several alternative routes to 270 Electoral College votes, which gives it more flexibility to plan the campaign.  ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Did a major U.S. chip maker Advance Micro Devices give away advanced computer chip technology in deals that saved the company as it faced a downturn in business. In Jun 2019 the U.S. Commerce Department issued an order that bars several Chinese companies from getting American technology. In the meantime Chinese versions of AMD chips are rolling off production lines in China, according to this report in the WSJ. It shows that AMD's partner in China, a military contractor, already used those chips to build what could be the world's fastest supercomputer. The AMD deals gave China access to state  of the art x86 chips made only by AMD and Intel Corp. Here the WSJ says AMD's CEO in October 2014 Lis Su, faced AMD's financial difficulties when she joined, with lack of cash, large debt, and declining revenues. Some analysts predicting bankruptcy protection. The deal for China's company Sugon to manufacture the x86 chips included $293 million in licensing fees, and $371 million for selling an 85% stake in its two factories in China and Malaysia to China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund Co, a state backed financier. The U.S defense Department tried but failed to get AMD to submit the deals to Cfius, the committee on foreign investment in the U.S. that has people from Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Justice and Energy. The Treasury Department ruled in AMD's favor in the closing months of the Obama administration. Defense Department officials say the deals were structured to sidestep U.S. regulations through two interlinked joint ventures. The first venture focusses on R&D and production controlled by AMD, the second on design and sale controlled by AMD's Chinese partner. The second company venture enables China to show that the resulting product was developed locally in China. In another development Sugon publicly announced that it was using the AMD x86 chip to advance China's chip technology advancement just as it had done for high speed trains. Making indigenous an imported technology, designing it at home, absorbing it, and then innovating to make China a leader. By mid 2017 this information reached General Spalding at the Trump White House. Lawmakers wanted to give Cfius committee new powers. By August 2018 Defense department submitted the Sugon deal for review a second time. After the Defense Department's deputy undersecretary for Research and Engineering criticized the whole deal publicly in front of industry executives, Commerce Department stepped in and on June 21 it asked for the unwinding of the deal with Sugon,  imposing new export restrictions to limit access to U.S. technologies. For AMD the cash infusion from China enabled it to get back from near bankruptcy. China gained x86 technology in its bid to make the fastest supercomputer, the U.S. faced with another loss in technological edge, and AMD shares jumped 80% to $30 per share recently. Brian Spegele, Kate O'Keefe, and Yang Jie in Beijing, covered this story for the Wall Street Journal. ...

Trump and the Also-Rans

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ says one of the mysteries of the Republican campaign primaries of 2016 is why each candidate, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Christie, and Carson, all took on each other and not Trump- in the process leaving Trump to be "winning, winning, winning."
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This article by Rosenthal of the NYT followed the interview by NYT's Baker and Haberman with president Trump in July 2017. 

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the WSJ responds to Donald Trump's comments about the system being "corrupt" and "crooked" and saying there could be violence at the convention. It says the rules are transparent and long standing in Wyoming, Colorado and other states where Trump has not campaigned or sought support. It calls on the Republican National Committee not to be intimidated by Trump's statements, especially as it says the the Republican party should not nominate a candidate who has the highest negative perceptions rating of a shocking 65% with national voters in a general election. Trump never complained when he won 99 delegates in Florida with 45% of the vote and 50 delegates in South Carolina with 32% of the votes cast- securing the most delegates because of a winner take all or winner take most system. It says Trump has so far won only 37% of all votes cast and won about 45% of the delegates, a process that can be seen as disproportionately favoring Trump because of the rules. This is particularly true because Trump's core support has remained at about 35%, and the fragmentation of the remaining vote has hurt the other candidates. About 83% of eligible voters have not voted in the primaries, making the process less representative than it should be. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A study by BuzzFeed shows that all but three of 20 fake stories by hoax sites or hyper partisan elements with likes on Facebook spread fake news with stories on Trump or denigrating Hillary Clinton. During the last 3 months of the campaign in 2016 the fake stories or bogus news stories appearing online and on social media had a greater reach than authoritative reporting by mainstream news outlets, according to a study of Facebook activity by BuzzFeed. President Obama and chancellor Merkel took aim at the fake stories on social media and hate opinions in talking to the public in Berlin at their final meeting in November 2016. Obama said "because in an age when there is so much active misinformation and it is packaged very well and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on television." He added it is a big problem that 43 percent of eligible voters do not vote and when "we are not serious about facts and what's true and what's not, particularly in age of social media when so many people are getting their information in sound bites and off their phones." Merkel compared the situation today with digitization to the social disruptions during the Industrial Revolution and gave her own warnings. ...
CNN Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
CNN reporter Cassie Spodak provides this exceptional report into the minds of New Hampshire Democratic voters who gave Bernie Sanders a 22 percent lead in the New Hampshire Democratic primary over Hillary Clinton. In October 2016 Hillary Clinton has the support of Bernie Sanders against Donald Trump in the U.S. presidential election. She described it as "100 percent support" in television debate. Sanders has appeared with Clinton twice, and campaigned 4 times in New Hampshire, and continually across the country. Younger New Hampshire voters still long for Sanders as their favored candidate. Older voters and some who have been motivated by Sanders to run for local office see the shaping of the Democratic Party platform as a victory for Sanders. Key planks of Sanders, taxes on the wealthy and higher incomes to pay for student tuition, infrastructure, and helping working class families, are now key parts of the Democratic platform. These voters see this as a pragmatic step and are enthusiastic in their support for Hillary Clinton. Overall Clinton now has 87 percent of Democratic voter support in New Hampshire according to a WMUR/UNH poll in mid October 2016, and she is doing well with millenials and independents nationally, a critical bloc of voters for Clinton to show nationwide support. One member of the steering committee for Sanders in New Hampshire named Dudley Dudley, reflects the opinion that has shifted the party to emerge united during and even more so in the final months of the presidential campaign of 2016- she tells the CNN reporter Spodak that she supports Hillary because "of the way she has grown, and stretched," and the way Clinton and Sanders are now campaigning together and working together. Both Clinton and Sanders deserve credit for their extraordinary ability to grow during their campaigns and during the party's way to shape the way forward. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Kristof of the NYT says the narrative about Hillary Clinton being dishonest is clearly overdone and inaccurate. He says the gaffes about the use of personal email server have unfairly created a distorted narrative. On changing positions on trade and minimum wage- this happens frequently with all the candidates. Some are glib enough for not being noticed, Clinton not a natural politician drawing attention. On Libya, and on Syria, Clinton is blamed for the President's errors and not given credit for pushback in league with Panetta, Gen. Kean and Gen. Jones, that has influenced changes made in 2016, and the president accepting blame for errors. In this instance Clinton has been far from shifty by publicly allying herself with Leon Panetta's position in "Worthy Fights," and Gen. Jones's remarks. Far from having erred on Libya and Syria policy, Hillary Clinton, like Chuck Hagel and others in the administration including Joe Biden, showed exceptional patience in dealing with the president, national security advisor, and McDonough in policy matters- when they were right but the country was weary of what were seen as futile global engagements in remote areas setting too high a bar for any action. Clinton rightly described this as a pendulum swinging too far in the opposite direction after the Bush/Cheney years. On young women and being "progressive" Hillary Clinton is from a older generation that experienced the kind of discrimination that young women fail to grasp, according to a recent analysis of University of Massachusetts polling survey results cited in the Washingon Post. A PolitiFact Pulitzer winning fact checking site shows 50% of the Clinton statments are either true or mostly true, compared to 49% for Bernie Sanders, 9 percent for Trump, 22% for Ted Cruz, and 52% for John Kasich. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A survey of 414 National Association of Business Economics (NABE) economists shows Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson with 15%, overtaking Trump at 14% on who would best manage the economy. On protectionist views only 9% support this. 15% said they have no opinion and 55% said Hillary Clinton would do the best job of managing the economy. About 62% say the election uncertainty is holding back growth. Some aspects of Hillary Clinton's economic plan are the $275 billion infrastructure investment over 10 years, taking action against companies that ship jobs overseas, a capital gains tax paln that encourages long term investments, supporting $15 minimum wage, making upward mobility a top priority, providing government financed access to public colleges for working class and lower income groups. Donald Trump's plan has suffered form lack of specifics, shifting comments, lack of careful study, and excessive use of slogans. Both candidates oppose trade agreements that shift jobs overseas. Trump's plan also suffers from lack of credibility overseas as this is important in a global business structure, with fears of protectionism increasing. and reminding people of the protectionism under Smoot-Hawley that increased the damage from the depression of the thirties. ...
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that about 13 million Americans without insurance gained health insurance under the Obama plan. He says if it is turned back 8 million whites without a college degree in that 13 million will lose health insurance. Of these eight million about two out of three voted for Trump, so that 5 million Trump supporters could now lose health insurance even though they are older and have more health conditions. Krugman says this aspect of the election campaign was not covered well in the misinformation and social media information of the 2016 campaign, and the lack of media focus on the important issues in the election. On manufacturing jobs he says most of the jobs lost are not returning, and only token jobs such as at a Carrier plant in the news will take their place.

Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial on March 7 with Cruz winning in Maine and Kansas with wide margins, and Trump winning narrowly by 3.6% in Louisiana and in Kentucky, says that the Cruz win in Maine shows he could win in other states. It points out that Trump actually lost in Louisiana with those who voted on election day, that early voters made a difference. As Trump gets not just media attention on which he thrives, but also close scrutiny in media the situation appears to be changing. The WSJ calls for Trump to release his tax returns, particularly important in Trump's situations says the Journal because of his flamboyant statements about competence as a wealthy businessman. Also a factor in the elections in March will be how much Trump spends on ads as he has spent little so far.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
With so much coverage of other aspects of China,  to really understand China and Xi Jinping one has to understand the rural urban situation in China. Xi's long experience as a teenager in the cultural revolution of Mao was in rural areas, the 8 years he spent there till the age of 22, as this report by James Areddy with help of Yijun, Cheng and Qi aptly shows. It traces the shift and mass migration to cities starting with Deng's modernization drive in 1979. This shift of labor to city and town factories as the U.S. and Europe shifted factories and production to China is the story of our times. How it has both helped and hurt China and how it has become the dominant issue of our times, and a lesson for India in the middle of its own modernization and shift of labor to cities. It has helped China modernize with the shift during 1979 to 2016 and run into a road block with president Trump leading a movement in the U.S. of people most hurt by the outsourcing of factories and production to China. It was not meant to be this way. Yet the shift also led to ripping up the fabric of communities and towns with loss of factories across America over three decades. Because China is a large country the impact was huge decade after decade, leading to a backlash against lost jobs in the U.S. and in Europe.  Xi Jinping has romantic view of rural China as he spent 7 years in Shanxi province rural areas during the cultural revolution under Mao. During this period he toiled as part of farm labor alongside villagers which allowed him to get to know villagers and farmers in the countryside well, and formed his view of the world around him. As it is described in a description of the man in Chinese sources- "He arrived at the village as a slightly lost teenager and left as a 22 year old man determined to do something for the people."  China's system separated migrants from city dwellers not  giving same rights to better education, to schools and housing, and official documents separating the two, city dwellers and migrant populations from rural areas. As a result as China modernized and population shifted -shown here in excellent graphic charts over four decades- in 1979 from about 80% in rural areas and 20% in urban the shift goes to 50-50 by 2001. Today it is 40-60 with 60% in rural areas but a population of 40% suffering from severe inequalities and  low incomes. So that GDP per capita of $10,000 for China is deceiving. The real incomes in average disposable income is about $4300 in urban and $1700 in rural area, according to National Bureau of Statistics. High school education is hard enough to get in rural areas, medical care is very basic and the $1700 would hardly get a room in low income housing in a large town in China, says premier Li Keqiang. Keqiang did his masters thesis on urbanization and has studied this shift from his college days. Just as in Gandhi's India, Mao's China is the story of the villages, with 128,000 villages for 600 million people in Mr. Xi Jinping's anti-poverty drive. Hong Kong other issues have to be understood in the context of these concerns of China's leadership today- the sense that strong central leadership alone can keep the country together and bring a decent life to the people in the villages and in the countryside outside the cities.  Modernization of cities still set in the context of China's vast rural population and essential to its full uplift and progress. Xi has allocated $80 billion each year to bring roads, schools, medical facilities, and other amenities including electricity and modern heating. The idea now is to shift people back to the villages, find opportunities for jobs and livelihoods in farming, tourism with guesthouse facilities, and other occupations in the villages. The villages are being turned into attractive places to live one by one in this party drive and providing new enthusiasm and support for the party's efforts. India can learn from this experience in China. The western nations of the U.S. and Europe can no longer and will no longer undertake the wholesale shift of factories with loss of jobs to China or India to offer the prospect of bringing these countries to the kind of urbanization and overall prosperity of small nations like Japan and South Korea, which are a tiny fraction of the population of China and India+ Pakistan + Bangladesh. As a result China is changing strategy now with a return to some aspects of the informal economy in Chengdu with street peddlers and tiny retail, and return of migrants back to better built and improved villages in the countryside. A better life than in cities is possible this view says for people from these rural areas, if the rural areas are given modern facilities and construction and resources are allocated, job creation locally tackled. The villages can offer better air quality, better quality of life where villagers who earlier migrated to cities with ownership of land, when they are modernized with better roads and have better facilities for education, housing and healthcare, better amenities. The new approach is to strike a good balance for urbanization, by modernizing and investing in villages and small towns, so that cities can cope and overall life can be better than with mass migration and wholesale urbanization. It is also a balance that works well for the U.S. and Europe which can redirect manufacturing to their home regions as part of a better distributed and balanced supply chain than the one that was unwittingly built over the last three decades.    ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Katrina Vanden Heuvel describes the problems with media coverage in the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, where what dominated she says was fake news, fake coverage, and misinformation, failure to adhere to the American values that would censure any denigration of women, and failure to cover the critical issues of how the election would affect the economy, the middle and working class.  She points out that the election of a first female president was not treated with the same respect that the election of a first black person as president was. 

The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks says one of the good things about the ugly election campaign of 2016 and its depletion of moral capital, is the way people are responding to it by finding their voice for something better and uplifting. He cites Michelle Obama as one example of someone who acts not as a politician but as a mother in her behaviour and talk. He praises Hillary Clinton for adopting this Michelle tone and giving 3 answers he calls great in the final debate with Trump. The answers came on the questions about Trump and denigration of women,  on the contrast between the experience gained on a television show "Apprentice," and the experience of Clinton as senator and secretary of state. Brooks says they were given in a gradual understated manner, showing moral sentiment and a quiet contempt, similar to how a mother or parent would respond and not a politician. Another way to look at it is that the contrast was so great between her and her opponent's experience and respect for parenthood, and the campaign so long with so many people who had shown indifference when they should have known and done better, that Hillary Clinton simply stood her own ground based on her own Protestant Methodist faith and conviction.  ...
Washington Post Original article ›
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post editorial following the New York primary points out the misstatements, exaggerations, and extreme statements that have characterized the Trump campaign, about women, minorites, the media, and other candidates.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Responding to criticism of the Clinton Foundation which has affected Hillary Clinton's ability to win voter support in her contest with Bernie Sanders, the Clinton family has decided to take action in August 2016. The Clinton Global Initiative will be discontinued in 2017. Bill Clinton and Chelsea Clinton will stop raising funds for the Clinton foundation. The Clinton Foundation will not accept funds from foreign donors. What started as a do-good effort to raise funds for worthy causes such as world health, poverty and hunger turned out -because of its very success in raising large amounts of money from corporate donors- into a distraction for the election campaign of Hillary Clinton in 2016. It opened up Hillary Clinton to charges of having conflicts of interest from outsiders Sanders and Trump. Hillary Clinton discontinued her association as a board member of the foundation in 2015 when she began her campaign. Bill Clinton continued to give paid speeches and raised $2.6 million. All that fund raising appears to have been a big mistake and not even fair to the candidate, as it gave rise to misperceptions about the candidate going far beyond what the Clintons ever understood about was happening. As former Labor Secretary Robert Reich put it, it gives rise to accusations of impropriety that may affect an election, without the voters getting a chance to evaluate the candidates on the basis of what each candidates program or agenda is. In this the Clinton family may have realized that in retrospect the entire foundation activity appears to be a small matter, when put next to the choices facing the U.S. and the world in 2016 for the next decade and beyond. The Clinton Foundation in future would be managed by people independent of the Clinton family and circle. The next step would be setting it up as a public foundation, a new board and professional staff. Was it all worth the problems it has created for voters being able to get a clear idea of what each candidate offered, an not acting as a huge and dangerous distraction which Hillary Clinton and the country and the world could do without, considering the significance of making good choices in a general election- very much so. The foundation and the fund raising made it possible for outsiders Sanders and Trump to turn this election into one of slogans and accusations, to which the Clintons were unprepared to respond, acting as a distraction  which was bad for the country and the world. ...
The New York Times Original article ›

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us