#i gave these away for free to american members who voted for free

[kobolding]

Literal wall of eevees I made over the weekend for my discord server

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Clay Bennett, Chattanooga Times Free Press

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 1, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

JUL 02, 2024

Today the United States Supreme Court overthrew the central premise of American democracy: that no one is above the law. 

It decided that the president of the United States, possibly the most powerful person on earth, has “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for crimes committed as part of the official acts at the core of presidential powers. The court also said it should be presumed that the president also has immunity for other official acts as well, unless that prosecution would not intrude on the authority of the executive branch.

This is a profound change to our fundamental law—an amendment to the Constitution, as historian David Blight noted. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that a president needs such immunity to make sure the president is willing to take “bold and unhesitating action” and make unpopular decisions, although no previous president has ever asserted that he is above the law or that he needed such immunity to fulfill his role. Roberts’s decision didn’t focus at all on the interest of the American people in guaranteeing that presidents carry out their duties within the guardrails of the law. 

But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump. 

There is no historical or legal precedent for this decision. The Declaration of Independence was a litany of complaints against King George III designed to explain why the colonists were declaring themselves free of kings; the Constitution did not provide immunity for the president, although it did for members of Congress in certain conditions, and it provided for the removal of the president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”—what would those be if a president is immune from prosecution for his official acts? The framers worried about politicians’ overreach and carefully provided for oversight of leaders; the Supreme Court today smashed through that key guardrail. 

Presidential immunity is a brand new doctrine. In February 2021, explaining away his vote to acquit Trump for inciting an insurrection, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who had also protected Trump in his first impeachment trial in 2019, said: “Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office…. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”

But it was not just McConnell who thought that way. At his confirmation hearing in 2005, now–Chief Justice John Roberts said: “I believe that no one is above the law under our system and that includes the president. The president is fully bound by the law, the Constitution, and statutes.” 

In his 2006 confirmation hearings, Samuel Alito said: “There is nothing that is more important for our republic than the rule of law. No person in this country, no matter how high or powerful, is above the law.” 

And in 2018, Brett Kavanaugh told the Senate: “No one’s above the law in the United States, that’s a foundational principle…. We’re all equal before the law…. The foundation of our Constitution was that…the presidency would not be a monarchy…. [T]he president is not above the law, no one is above the law.”

Now they have changed that foundational principle for a man who, according to White House officials during his term, called for the execution of people who upset him and who has vowed to exact vengeance on those he now thinks have wronged him. Over the past weekend, Trump shared an image on social media saying that former Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), who sat on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, was guilty of treason and calling for “televised military tribunals” to try her. 

Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.” 

Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”

Trump’s lawyers are already challenging Trump’s conviction in the election interference case in which a jury found him guilty on 34 counts. Over Trump’s name on social media, a post said the decision was “BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE, AND CLEARS THE STENCH FROM THE BIDEN TRIALS AND HOAXES, ALL OF THEM, THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS AN UNFAIR ATTACK ON CROOKED JOE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. MANY OF THESE FAKE CASES WILL NOW DISAPPEAR, OR WITHER INTO OBSCURITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife was deeply involved in the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, also took a shot at the appointment of special counsels to investigate such events. Thomas was not the only Justice whose participation in this decision was likely covered by a requirement that he recuse himself: Alito has publicly expressed support for the attempt to keep Trump in office against the will of voters. Trump appointed three of the other justices granting him immunity—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the court.

In a dissent in which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that because of the majority’s decision, "[t]he relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."

“Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy,” she wrote, “I dissent.” 

Today’s decision destroyed the principle on which this nation was founded, that all people in the United States of America should be equal before the law.

The name of the case is “Donald J. Trump v. United States.” 

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[aeolianblues]

“The masterplan was, there was no masterplan. Except to write good songs. Oh yeah, and to be the biggest band in the world. A modest ambition, but it put Oasis on the road to greatness.”

OASIS - THE MASTERPLAN (1998)

Plus some more pics of Oasis albums we have at our stations, sent to us promotionally by Sony Canada on behalf of Creation Records.

Liner notes below the cut:

The masterplan was, there was no masterplan. Except to write good songs. Oh yeah, and to be the biggest band in the world. A modest ambition, but it put Oasis on the road to greatness. "Me mam always used to say, God loves a tryer," Noel Gallagher says. "And I went, 'Why? Has he got a car?' She went, 'No, a tryer-Not a tyre." So the Gallagher boys did try, and if you want proof of how hard they tried then hear these tracks - B-sides, all of them, made by a band who believe a B-side is no excuse not to care. Outside of Britain it hasn't always been easy to hear Oasis B-sides. But in Britain or anywhere else, they sound majestic played back-to-back.

We open heroically with ACQUIESCE which is one of those all-time "shoulda been an A-side" numbers. (Creation Records certainly thought so, and who could blame them?) The song is about friendship in the widest sense and not, as often speculated, about the Gallagher brothers themselves. Noel sings the chorus because, he claims, Liam couldn't reach the high notes. Or he was in the pub. Whatever, it was written on a slow train to Wales and made possible because Noel likes to travel with his guitar. It's no surprise that Acquiesce is present: via the Internet, Oasis fans were asked to vote on this album's choice of tracks.

But the inclusion of UNDERNEATH THE SKY might have been "influenced" by Noel, who cites this as a favourite song. Its happy-wanderer feel was inspired by a pocket-book of travellers' quotes he came across, and the jollity's enhanced by a four-handed piano part courtesy of him and Bonehead (who tackles the tinkly bits, apparently).

TALK TONIGHT is another self-selecting choice, from Noel's acoustic repertoire. Beautifully tender, its thoughtful air derives from a Texas studio session: Noel was back after his brief flounce from the band on a US tour: "Me and Liam had a disagreement, probably about what shoes he was wearing, so I'd fucked off to Las Vegas." It was an Oasis fan in San Francisco who talked him down off the ledge. The same reflective interlude gave us another song, in HALF THE WORLD AWAY (which is Paul Weller's favourite Oasis track). The pressure was already building, though, when Noel began writing (IT'S GOOD TO BE FREE, at the start of those troubled American dates. He finished it in Las Vegas: "Cocaine psychosis," reckoned producer Owen Morris, detecting a Fear And Loathing vibe in that sinister guitar feedback. Accordion expert Bonehead donates the breezy coda, which lends a misleadingly cheerful touch to what was a deeply fraught Oasis session: "Believe me, it was horribe. it wasn't funny at all." The Morse Code segment, by the way, is meaningless so far as anyone knows.

The oldest song here is GOING NOWHERE, written around 1990 before the band was signed ("It's about what we were going to do when we got a shitload of money off Creation"); it was not recorded until after the Be Here Now album, when there was a hankering for something less massive. Noel and drummer Alan White are the only Oasis members involved, with piano, brass and horn players to bring a vaguely Burt Bacharach atmosphere. Noel only wishes he knew another rhyme for "car" and

"Jaguar." Nearly as vintage in its origins, however, was HEADSHRINKER: recorded for Some Might Say in '95, it was written about three years earlier, during the band's punkier phase. It's also one of Liam's greatest vocals, partly because of the freedom from pressure that doing B-sides can offer. Although a load of drug references were binned from the lyric, a manic edge remains to this tale of an early girlfriend Liam could not shake off. It may start out like The Faces' Stay With Me, but Noel says he was thinking of The Rolling Stones at the time. And ROCKIN' CHAIR dates from Noel's days in Manchester, planning to leave his own girlfriend and dreaming of the good life down in London.

FADE AWAY first surfaced on Cigarettes & Alcohol, and was probably elbowed off Definitely Maybe in favour of Slide Away. Since then the chorus alone has guaranteed its popularity with Oasis fans: "The dreams we have as children fade away...

It's about growing up but not growing old," says Noel, echoing a John Lennon belief that you won't get anything unless you've got the vision to imagine it. It's a classic Buzzcocks trick, this, placing a wistful lyric inside the most glorious rush of punk rock energy. That said, it was a relief for Noel to do a track like THE SWAMP SONG, which required no words at all. Alongside Roll With It, The Swamp Song was a warm-up exercise for the Morning Glory sessions; it was also used to set the sound levels at Glastonbury, which is where Alan White's thunderous drumming was taped. Later on, when Paul Weller turned up for Champagne Supernova, he added The Swamp Song's harmonica and duelling guitars: "Very rock'n'roll," chortles Noel, "but we didn't manage to stand back to back once, which I was very upset about!" Its working title "The Jam" was scrapped, tragically.

Contrary to previous credits, I AM THE WALRUS was not recorded at the Glasgow Cathouse, but at a conference of Sony executives, gathered to hear Creation's new signings. Oasis used to play it at gigs in Liverpool, as an act of bravado aimed at the local bands, even The Beatles never did this one live. Technical note: any "looseness" in Noel's guitar playing here is attributed to half a bottle of Sony-financed gin. Speaking of guitars, the soaring LISTEN UP used to boast a solo much longer than the one you hear in this version; Liam had wanted it shorter, so Noel had disagreed on principle ("If you don't argue with Liam he gets upset"). Four years later, Liam has got his way. The poppy STAY YOUNG, meanwhile, was first ear-marked to be "the Digsy's Dinner" of Be Here Now, until Noel wrote Magic Pie and dumped it. Stay Young wound up on D'You Know What I Mean?, and could have been another A-side if its composer had actually liked the song. But he doesn't. (Audiences, who have more sense than songwriters, all love it.)

But we end with a track that Noel Gallagher is definitely proud of. In fact he regards THE MASTERPLAN as his finest piece of work. Even Liam now wishes he'd sung it himself. The writing came easily, inspired in equal measure by a Japanese hotel corridor and a good, relaxing smoke. "I'm the best lyricist in Oasis, is how I like to say it," Noel shrugs. "But to me this sums up your journey through life. All we know is that we don't know." Is it, we might wonder, sung to Liam? ("Please brother let it be") Again the answer is No.

"We're all brothers and sisters," says Noel. And so we are, and so are Oasis whether named

Gallagher, McGuigan, White or indeed Bonehead. They're brothers and they're tryers, all five. They try for themselves and they try for the rest of us. No wonder God loves them.

[queenfriday17]

Source

Today the United States Supreme Court overthrew the central premise of American democracy: that no one is above the law.

It decided that the president of the United States, possibly the most powerful person on earth, has “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for crimes committed as part of the official acts at the core of presidential powers. The court also said it should be presumed that the president also has immunity for other official acts as well, unless that prosecution would not intrude on the authority of the executive branch.

This is a profound change to our fundamental law—an amendment to the Constitution, as historian David Blight noted. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that a president needs such immunity to make sure the president is willing to take “bold and unhesitating action” and make unpopular decisions, although no previous president has ever asserted that he is above the law or that he needed such immunity to fulfill his role. Roberts’s decision didn’t focus at all on the interest of the American people in guaranteeing that presidents carry out their duties within the guardrails of the law.

But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump.

There is no historical or legal precedent for this decision. The Declaration of Independence was a litany of complaints against King George III designed to explain why the colonists were declaring themselves free of kings; the Constitution did not provide immunity for the president, although it did for members of Congress in certain conditions, and it provided for the removal of the president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”—what would those be if a president is immune from prosecution for his official acts? The framers worried about politicians’ overreach and carefully provided for oversight of leaders; the Supreme Court today smashed through that key guardrail.

Presidential immunity is a brand new doctrine. In February 2021, explaining away his vote to acquit Trump for inciting an insurrection, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who had also protected Trump in his first impeachment trial in 2019, said: “Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office…. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”

But it was not just McConnell who thought that way. At his confirmation hearing in 2005, now–Chief Justice John Roberts said: “I believe that no one is above the law under our system and that includes the president. The president is fully bound by the law, the Constitution, and statutes.”

In his 2006 confirmation hearings, Samuel Alito said: “There is nothing that is more important for our republic than the rule of law. No person in this country, no matter how high or powerful, is above the law.”

And in 2018, Brett Kavanaugh told the Senate: “No one’s above the law in the United States, that’s a foundational principle…. We’re all equal before the law…. The foundation of our Constitution was that…the presidency would not be a monarchy…. [T]he president is not above the law, no one is above the law.”

Now they have changed that foundational principle for a man who, according to White House officials during his term, called for the execution of people who upset him and who has vowed to exact vengeance on those he now thinks have wronged him. Over the past weekend, Trump shared an image on social media saying that former Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), who sat on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, was guilty of treason and calling for “televised military tribunals” to try her.

Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.”

Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”

Trump’s lawyers are already challenging Trump’s conviction in the election interference case in which a jury found him guilty on 34 counts. Over Trump’s name on social media, a post said the decision was “BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE, AND CLEARS THE STENCH FROM THE BIDEN TRIALS AND HOAXES, ALL OF THEM, THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS AN UNFAIR ATTACK ON CROOKED JOE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. MANY OF THESE FAKE CASES WILL NOW DISAPPEAR, OR WITHER INTO OBSCURITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife was deeply involved in the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, also took a shot at the appointment of special counsels to investigate such events. Thomas was not the only Justice whose participation in this decision was likely covered by a requirement that he recuse himself: Alito has publicly expressed support for the attempt to keep Trump in office against the will of voters. Trump appointed three of the other justices granting him immunity—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the court.

In a dissent in which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that because of the majority’s decision, "[t]he relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."

“Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy,” she wrote, “I dissent.”

Today’s decision destroyed the principle on which this nation was founded, that all people in the United States of America should be equal before the law.

The name of the case is “Donald J. Trump v. United States.”

Heather Cox Richardson

Notes:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/b135ae03-8c5a-467e-96b8-7fd371855fa3.pdf

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/liz-cheney-trump-military-tribunals-b2572220.html

https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/01/politics/trump-challenge-hush-money-verdict-immunity-supreme-court/index.html

X:

JoyceWhiteVance/status/1807833078427201845

AshaRangappa_/status/1807828062509191607

NormOrnstein/status/1807807811801448920

AccountableGOP/status/1807855254006124944

DrEricDing/status/1807973035112083460

highbrow_nobrow/status/1807950188071284971

RpsAgainstTrump/status/1807823684175839622

AccountableGOP/status/1807835389865951253

AccountableGOP/status/1807882444663587082

tribelaw/status/1807936604624826608

https://x.com/davidwblight1/status/1807929332083405056

RonFilipkowski/status/1807884210050326670

JoyceWhiteVance/status/1807903145957409252

joshtpm/status/1807822033239396803

MarkHertling/status/1807909716175057003

AshaRangappa_/status/1807788604833308949

AshaRangappa_/status/1807837356936122433

Threads:

@gtconway3dg/post/C85O7oQpAWK

[misfitwashere]

July 1, 2024

Heather Cox Richardson

Jul 02, 2024

Today the United States Supreme Court overthrew the central premise of American democracy: that no one is above the law. 

It decided that the president of the United States, possibly the most powerful person on earth, has “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for crimes committed as part of the official acts at the core of presidential powers. The court also said it should be presumed that the president also has immunity for other official acts as well, unless that prosecution would not intrude on the authority of the executive branch.

This is a profound change to our fundamental law—an amendment to the Constitution, as historian David Blight noted. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that a president needs such immunity to make sure the president is willing to take “bold and unhesitating action” and make unpopular decisions, although no previous president has ever asserted that he is above the law or that he needed such immunity to fulfill his role. Roberts’s decision didn’t focus at all on the interest of the American people in guaranteeing that presidents carry out their duties within the guardrails of the law. 

But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump. 

There is no historical or legal precedent for this decision. The Declaration of Independence was a litany of complaints against King George III designed to explain why the colonists were declaring themselves free of kings; the Constitution did not provide immunity for the president, although it did for members of Congress in certain conditions, and it provided for the removal of the president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”—what would those be if a president is immune from prosecution for his official acts? The framers worried about politicians’ overreach and carefully provided for oversight of leaders; the Supreme Court today smashed through that key guardrail. 

Presidential immunity is a brand new doctrine. In February 2021, explaining away his vote to acquit Trump for inciting an insurrection, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who had also protected Trump in his first impeachment trial in 2019, said: “Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office…. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”

But it was not just McConnell who thought that way. At his confirmation hearing in 2005, now–Chief Justice John Roberts said: “I believe that no one is above the law under our system and that includes the president. The president is fully bound by the law, the Constitution, and statutes.” 

In his 2006 confirmation hearings, Samuel Alito said: “There is nothing that is more important for our republic than the rule of law. No person in this country, no matter how high or powerful, is above the law.” 

And in 2018, Brett Kavanaugh told the Senate: “No one’s above the law in the United States, that’s a foundational principle…. We’re all equal before the law…. The foundation of our Constitution was that…the presidency would not be a monarchy…. [T]he president is not above the law, no one is above the law.”

Now they have changed that foundational principle for a man who, according to White House officials during his term, called for the execution of people who upset him and who has vowed to exact vengeance on those he now thinks have wronged him. Over the past weekend, Trump shared an image on social media saying that former Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), who sat on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, was guilty of treason and calling for “televised military tribunals” to try her. 

Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.” 

Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”

Trump’s lawyers are already challenging Trump’s conviction in the election interference case in which a jury found him guilty on 34 counts. Over Trump’s name on social media, a post said the decision was “BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE, AND CLEARS THE STENCH FROM THE BIDEN TRIALS AND HOAXES, ALL OF THEM, THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS AN UNFAIR ATTACK ON CROOKED JOE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. MANY OF THESE FAKE CASES WILL NOW DISAPPEAR, OR WITHER INTO OBSCURITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife was deeply involved in the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, also took a shot at the appointment of special counsels to investigate such events. Thomas was not the only Justice whose participation in this decision was likely covered by a requirement that he recuse himself: Alito has publicly expressed support for the attempt to keep Trump in office against the will of voters. Trump appointed three of the other justices granting him immunity—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the court.

In a dissent in which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that because of the majority’s decision, "[t]he relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."

“Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy,” she wrote, “I dissent.” 

Today’s decision destroyed the principle on which this nation was founded, that all people in the United States of America should be equal before the law.

The name of the case is “Donald J. Trump v. United States.” 

[bllsbailey]

The Background on the Alleged Suspect in New Trump Assassination Attempt Is Something Else

Fox News has reported that the alleged suspect in the second Trump assassination attempt is Ryan Wesley Routh, as we reported earlier. 

He allegedly aimed a rifle through the fence on the golf course where Trump was. He was about 300-500 yards away. Law enforcement claimed he had an AK-47 with a scope and a Go-Pro camera at the fence. He also had a bag with ceramic plates. The Secret Service fired at him and he fled in a black SUV. A citizen saw him and took a picture of his license which the citizen gave to police. The suspect was later caught on the highway by the Martin County Sheriff's Office. Sheriff William Snyder said the suspect was "calm" and not armed when he was stopped. He is now in custody. This 

READ MORE: NEW: Fox Has Identified Suspect in New Assassination Attempt on Trump, Per Law Enforcement Sources

UPDATED: Press Conference Reveals Key Details in Second Trump Assassination Attempt

HOT TAKES: Left and Liberal Media Shame Themselves Over Second Trump Assassination Attempt

Now there's more information about this man and it's concerning. 

According to the Sacramento Bee, 

[He had a] criminal history in North Carolina that includes convictions between 2002 and 2010 of possession of weapons of mass destruction, carrying a concealed gun, hit and run, possession of stolen goods and resisting law enforcement, among other charges. He’s registered in North Carolina as an unaffiliated voter. In North Carolina, unaffiliated voters can choose which primary they want to vote in. Routh chose Democrats.

The News and Record had a 2002 report about a Ryan Routh who barricaded himself inside United Roofing and then faced charges including having a "weapon of mass destruction" because they said he had a "fully automatic machine gun." 

The News & Observer said Routh was interviewed in 2022 by Newsweek Romania and in 2023 by The New York Times for helping to recruit civilian volunteers to help Ukraine fight the war against Russia.

“If governments won’t send their official military, then we civilians have to pick up the torch and make this happen,” Routh told Newsweek.

You can also see a report on Semafor where they covered Routh in passing and his effort to raise volunteers for Ukraine. 

According to the NY Times: 

In the interview, Mr. Routh said he was in Washington to meet with the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, known as the Helsinki Commission “for two hours” to help push for more support for Ukraine. The commission is led by members of Congress and staffed by congressional aides. It is influential on matters of democracy and security and has been vocal in supporting Ukraine.

Routh allegedly has also made small donations to Democrats through ActBlue. He purportedly made 19 donations since 2019, including for individual 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidates including former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), Andrew Yang, Tom Steyer, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA). He has not donated to Joe Biden or Kamala Harris. 

According to what people have seen of what is believed to be his X account, he was a huge supporter of Ukraine and he's also made a lot of bizarre posts, like this one to Elon Musk.

“I would like to buy a rocket from you. I wish to load it with a warhead for Putin’s Black Sea mansion bunker to end him. Can you give me a price please. It can be old and used as not returning,” Routh wrote

You can see more of what appears to be his X account here. I was looking at it as it went down, so thanks to Billboard Chris for preserving it. 

According to the NY Post:

He advised Biden, 81, in an April 22 X post when he was still running for reelection, to run a campaign around keeping “America democratic and free.” He claimed Trump wants to “make Americans slaves against master.” “We cannot afford to fail,” Routh continued. “The world is counting on us to show the way.”

While he had been in North Carolina, he relocated to Hawaii. 

What isn't clear is how he knew Trump would be there at that time at the golf course, since that wasn't on Trump's public schedule. That raises even more questions. 

[blondrichclosetwitch]

Today the United States Supreme Court overthrew the central premise of American democracy: that no one is above the law.

It decided that the president of the United States, possibly the most powerful person on earth, has “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for crimes committed as part of the official acts at the core of presidential powers. The court also said it should be presumed that the president also has immunity for other official acts as well, unless that prosecution would not intrude on the authority of the executive branch.

This is a profound change to our fundamental law—an amendment to the Constitution, as historian David Blight noted. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts said that a president needs such immunity to make sure the president is willing to take “bold and unhesitating action” and make unpopular decisions, although no previous president has ever asserted that he is above the law or that he needed such immunity to fulfill his role. Roberts’s decision didn’t focus at all on the interest of the American people in guaranteeing that presidents carry out their duties within the guardrails of the law.

But this extraordinary power grab does not mean President Joe Biden can do as he wishes. As legal commentator Asha Rangappa pointed out, the court gave itself the power to determine which actions can be prosecuted and which cannot by making itself the final arbiter of what is “official” and what is not. Thus any action a president takes is subject to review by the Supreme Court, and it is reasonable to assume that this particular court would not give a Democrat the same leeway it would give Trump.

There is no historical or legal precedent for this decision. The Declaration of Independence was a litany of complaints against King George III designed to explain why the colonists were declaring themselves free of kings; the Constitution did not provide immunity for the president, although it did for members of Congress in certain conditions, and it provided for the removal of the president for “high crimes and misdemeanors”—what would those be if a president is immune from prosecution for his official acts? The framers worried about politicians’ overreach and carefully provided for oversight of leaders; the Supreme Court today smashed through that key guardrail.

Presidential immunity is a brand new doctrine. In February 2021, explaining away his vote to acquit Trump for inciting an insurrection, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who had also protected Trump in his first impeachment trial in 2019, said: “Trump is still liable for everything he did while he was in office…. We have a criminal justice system in this country. We have civil litigation, and former presidents are not immune from being held accountable by either one.”

But it was not just McConnell who thought that way. At his confirmation hearing in 2005, now–Chief Justice John Roberts said: “I believe that no one is above the law under our system and that includes the president. The president is fully bound by the law, the Constitution, and statutes.”

In his 2006 confirmation hearings, Samuel Alito said: “There is nothing that is more important for our republic than the rule of law. No person in this country, no matter how high or powerful, is above the law.”

And in 2018, Brett Kavanaugh told the Senate: “No one’s above the law in the United States, that’s a foundational principle…. We’re all equal before the law…. The foundation of our Constitution was that…the presidency would not be a monarchy…. [T]he president is not above the law, no one is above the law.”

Now they have changed that foundational principle for a man who, according to White House officials during his term, called for the execution of people who upset him and who has vowed to exact vengeance on those he now thinks have wronged him. Over the past weekend, Trump shared an image on social media saying that former Representative Liz Cheney (R-WY), who sat on the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol, was guilty of treason and calling for “televised military tribunals” to try her.

Today, observers illustrated what Trump’s newly declared immunity could mean. Political scientist Norm Ornstein pointed out that Trump could “order his handpicked FBI Director to arrest and jail his political opponents. He can order the IRS to put liens on the property of media companies who criticize him and jail reporters and editors.” Legal analyst Joyce White Vance noted that a president with such broad immunity could order the assassination of Supreme Court justices, and retired military leader Mark Hertling wrote that he was “trying to figure out how a commander can refuse an illegal order from someone who is issuing it as an official act.”

Asha Rangappa wrote: “According to the Court, a President could literally provide the leader of a hostile adversary with intelligence needed to win a conflict in which we are involved, or even attack or invade the U.S., and not be prosecuted for treason, because negotiating with heads of state is an exclusive Art. II function. In case you were wondering.” Trump is currently under indictment for retaining classified documents. “The Court has handed Trump, if he wins this November, carte blanche to be a ‘dictator on day one,’ and the ability to use every lever of official power at his disposal for his personal ends without any recourse,” Rangappa wrote. “This election is now a clear-cut decision between democracy and autocracy. Vote accordingly.”

Trump’s lawyers are already challenging Trump’s conviction in the election interference case in which a jury found him guilty on 34 counts. Over Trump’s name on social media, a post said the decision was “BRILLIANTLY WRITTEN AND WISE, AND CLEARS THE STENCH FROM THE BIDEN TRIALS AND HOAXES, ALL OF THEM, THAT HAVE BEEN USED AS AN UNFAIR ATTACK ON CROOKED JOE BIDEN’S POLITICAL OPPONENT, ME. MANY OF THESE FAKE CASES WILL NOW DISAPPEAR, OR WITHER INTO OBSCURITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA!”

In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas, whose wife was deeply involved in the effort to overturn the 2020 presidential election, also took a shot at the appointment of special counsels to investigate such events. Thomas was not the only Justice whose participation in this decision was likely covered by a requirement that he recuse himself: Alito has publicly expressed support for the attempt to keep Trump in office against the will of voters. Trump appointed three of the other justices granting him immunity—Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett—to the court.

In a dissent in which Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that because of the majority’s decision, "[t]he relationship between the President and the people he serves has shifted irrevocably. In every use of official power, the President is now a king above the law."

“Never in the history of our Republic has a President had reason to believe that he would be immune from criminal prosecution if he used the trappings of his office to violate the criminal law. Moving forward, however, all former Presidents will be cloaked in such immunity. If the occupant of that office misuses official power for personal gain, the criminal law that the rest of us must abide will not provide a backstop. With fear for our democracy,” she wrote, “I dissent.”

Today’s decision destroyed the principle on which this nation was founded, that all people in the United States of America should be equal before the law.

The name of the case is “Donald J. Trump v. United States.”

[creepingsharia]

Minnesota: Terror-linked CAIR say Minneapolis Parks Board refusal to sell city park land for mosque parking violated religious rights

Zoning jihad. The mosque already appears to be in a residential area - possibly converted from a home.

Mosque and CAIR say Minneapolis Parks Board violated religious rights with refusal to sell land for parking

By Christine Douglass-Williams

How does a regional zoning “master plan” that was “spoken for” 15 years ago become an attack on “religious liberty” in 2021? When a mosque and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) say so — or so they see it.

When Islamic supremacists are either challenged over their entitlements or refused such entitlements, invariably they levy accusations of  “Islamophobia” and claim a violation of their “religious rights.”

The Masjid Salaam Cultural Center in northeast Minneapolis expects to be awarded land for parking for their convenience.

The mosque’s imam, Abdimagid Omar, opened the mosque in 2016 and expected to get parking land, despite the fact that the land had been designated for other purposes since 2006. That didn’t matter.

Omar “said no one has harassed him in the vicinity of the mosque, but he would feel safer being able to park closer.”

He went on to say, absurdly:

When you are an immigrant, when you’re Black, when you’re Muslim, when you come into a neighborhood where you don’t live just to pray, anything can happen.

That was his argument. So now the mosque and CAIR are demanding that the city change its plans.

Buying city parkland is almost impossible… The Park Board is required to hold its land in public trust, says general counsel Brian Rice. “The presumption is that this board does not sell land.”

No such presumption is respected by Islamic supremacists when moving into an infidel community. Dhimmis are expected to comply; otherwise they will be slapped with the label of “Islamophobic.”

CAIR, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas jihad terror funding case, is infamous for making outrageous demands, and here is another:

The Council on American-Islamic Relations Minnesota (CAIR-Minnesota) gave the Park Board a deadline this month to avoid a lawsuit.

Until Westerners refuse to be bullied and stop bowing to name-calling, propaganda, and manipulation, the West will keep losing the war against Islamization, as is clearly happening in Minnesota.

“Minneapolis mosque says Park Board’s refusal to sell land for parking infringes on religious liberty,” by Susan Du, Star Tribune, February 12, 2021:

The Masjid Salaam Cultural Center in northeast Minneapolis hosts daily prayers, Sunday school and the occasional food drive. But members say the mosque has one major flaw — it has no designated parking.

That means people coming to the mosque, including the elderly and disabled and the 170 children who attended school there before the pandemic, have to park several blocks away or get out of vehicles on the side of busy Central Avenue.

The mosque has tried for years to persuade the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board to build parking stalls by paving over green space along St. Anthony Parkway. The conflict pits assertions of religious liberty against the sanctity of public parkland, and it’s coming to a head after the Council on American-Islamic Relations Minnesota (CAIR-Minnesota) gave the Park Board a deadline this month to avoid a lawsuit.

When Masjid Salaam opened at 3141 NE. Central Av. in 2016, Imam Abdimagid Omar believed he could persuade the Park Board to sell the mosque a slice of adjacent parkland. Omar isn’t fluent in English, so he appointed congregant Abdi Barkat as his spokesman. Barkat works near Masjid Salaam and has been praying there during his lunch hour for about two years.

He said no one has harassed him in the vicinity of the mosque, but he would feel safer being able to park closer. “When you are an immigrant, when you’re Black, when you’re Muslim, when you come into a neighborhood where you don’t live just to pray, anything can happen,” Barkat says.

Buying city parkland is almost impossible, however. The Park Board is required to hold its land in public trust, says general counsel Brian Rice. “The presumption is that this board does not sell land.”

The Park Board can sell land if commissioners decide it’s obsolete and unusable for any park purpose. Even then, a district judge would have to approve the sale.

But the land is already spoken for in the 2006 St. Anthony Parkway Regional Park Master Plan, which specifically calls for landscaping, public art and seating there.

The mosque could petition the Park Board to change the master plan, which would require a majority vote. But the commissioner for the area, Chris Meyer, is against it, and has been lobbying to get rid of parking lots since before he was elected to the Park Board.

Meyer moved from Sturgis, S.D., to Minneapolis at age 18 so he wouldn’t have to drive. He has never had a driver’s license. In 2015, he bought 13 copies of “The High Cost of Free Parking” by Donald Shoup to give each Minneapolis City Council member, then successfully campaigned to eliminate parking requirements around train stations.

“That has been my thing. That’s what I do,” Meyer says. “My passion is trying to move our city in a less car-dependent direction.”

The mosque persisted. In 2018, it purchased its building and found an ally in Commissioner AK Hassan…

[arcticdementor]

Understanding what drives the revolution that is destroying the American republic gives insight into how the 2020 election’s results may impact its course. Its practical question—who rules?—is historically familiar. But any revolution’s quarrels and stakes obscure the question: to what end? Our revolution is by the ruling class—a revolution from above. Crushing obstacles to its growing oligarchic rule is the proximate purpose.

But the logic that drives the revolution aims at civilization itself.

What follows describes how far along its path that logic has taken America, and where it might take us in the future depending on the election’s outcome.

…

The U.S. Constitution had codified as fine a balance between the powers of the Many, the Few, and the One as Aristotle may have imagined by arming the federal government’s components, the States, and ordinary citizens (via the first ten Amendments as well as elections) with means to maintain the balance. Its authors, however, were under no illusions about the efficacy of “parchment barriers” to prevent interests from coalescing into factions against the common good. During the 19th century, interests and opinions in the South and the North coalesced into antagonistic ruling classes that fought the century’s bloodiest war. In the 20th, the notion that good government proceeds from scientific expertise, as well as the growing identity between big business and government, fostered the growth of a single nationwide Progressive ruling class. Between the 1930s and the early 21st century, the centralization of administrative power in this class’s hands did much to transform the American republic established in 1776-89 into an oligarchy.

…

The European tradition of government by experts reaches back beyond Napoleon and Hegel to royal techno-bureaucrats. Being essentially amoral, it treats transgressors as merely ignorant. It may punish them as rebellious, but not as bad people. That is why the fascists, who were part of that tradition, never made it as totalitarians. People—especially the Church—remained free to voice different opinions so long as they refrained from outright opposition. America’s growing oligarchy, however, always had a moralistic, puritan streak that indicts dissenters as bad people. More and more, America’s ruling class, shaped and serviced by an increasingly uniform pretend-meritocratic educational system, claimed for itself monopoly access to truth and goodness, and made moral as well as technical-intellectual contempt for the rest of Americans into their identity’s chief element. That, along with administrative and material power, made our ruling class the gatekeeper to all manner of goods.

Progressivism’s foundational proposition—that the American way of life suffers from excessive freedom and insufficient latitude for experts to lead each into doing what is best for all—is the intellectual basis of the oligarchy’s ever-increasing size, wealth, and power. The theme that the USA was ill-conceived in 1776-89 and must be re-conceived has resounded from Woodrow Wilson’s Congressional Government (1885) to the campaigns of Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Barack Obama, and Joseph Biden: “listen to the scientists!” The criticism’s main point has been constant: America’s original conception validated the people’s right to live as they please, and made it hard to marshal them for Progressive purposes.

But the Progressive critique adds a moral basis: the American people’s indulgence of their preferences—private ease and comfort, focus on families, religious observance, patriotism—has made for every secular sin imaginable: racism, sexism, greed, etc. Because most Americans are racist, sexist, un-appreciative of real virtue or refinement (these are somehow rolled together), because these Americans resist knuckling under to their betters, America is a sick society that needs to be punished and to have its noxious freedoms reformed.

…

The moral class critique from above was always implicit. It largely stayed in the background of the campaigns for social improvement into which Progressives have led the American people ever since the 1930s, and especially since the 1960s. The ruling class chided Americans for insufficient commitment to education, to well-being for the poor and disadvantaged, to a healthy natural environment, and to public health, as well as for oppressing women, and, above all, for racism. The campaigns for remedying these conditions have been based on propositions advanced by the most highly-credentialed persons in America—experts certified by the U.S. government, whom the media treated as truth-telling scientists, their opponents as enemies of the people.

But each and all of these campaigns produced mostly the ostensible objectives’ opposites while increasing the numbers of the oligarchy’s members and their wealth and power, endowing them with socio-political clienteles as well as with levers for manipulating them. As its members’ powers grew, they developed a taste for disdaining independent Americans and acquired whips for punishing them.

…

Race (and sex, etc.) is yet another set of excuses for transferring power to the ruling class. The oligarchy is no more concerned about race than it is about education, or environmentalism, or sex, or anything else. It is about yet more discretionary power in the hands of its members, for whom not all blacks (or women, or whatevers) are to be advantaged—only the ones who serve ruling class purposes. In education, employment, and personnel management, co-opting compatible, non-threatening colleagues is the objective. As Joseph Biden put it succinctly: if you don’t vote for him, “you ain’t black.” A ruling class of ever-decreasing quality is a result.

…

I noted that this revolution’s logic leads to no logical end. That is because “the logic that drives each turn of our revolutionary spiral is Progressive Americans’ inherently insatiable desire to exercise their superiority over those they deem inferior.” Its force, I observed, “comes not from the substance of the Progressives’ demands,” but rather “from that which moves, changes, and multiplies their demands without end. That is the Progressives’ affirmation of superior worth, to be pursued by exercising dominance: superior identity affirmed via the inferior’s humiliation.” Affirmation of one’s own superiority by punishing inferiors is an addictive pleasure. It requires ever stronger, purer doses of infliction, and is inherently beyond satisfaction.

In short, the Progressive ruling class’s intensifying efforts to oppress those they imagine to be their inferiors is not reversible. It is far less a choice of policy than it is the consequence of its awakening to its own identity—awakening to the powers and privileges to which they imagine their superior worth entitles them. It is awakening to its deep resentment—indeed, to hate—for whoever does not submit preemptively.

Let there be no doubt: the ruling class’s focus on Donald Trump has been incidental. America’s potentates do not fear one pudgy orange-haired septuagenarian. They fear the millions of Americans whom they loathe, who voted for Trump, who gave his party control of House and Senate, and who will surely vote for folks these potentates really should fear.

…

The people who killed one another in 1861-65 respected each other as individuals and shared standards of truth, justice, and civility. But as our ruling class put the rest of America beyond the proverbial pale, what remained of friendship among the American republic’s components drained away.

By 2016, most Americans preferred either Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders over ruling-class candidates for president. And of course, they increasingly despised one another. In short, the popular basis for constitutional restraint had ceased to exist on all sides. But mostly the ruling class, unaccustomed to outright opposition to its presumption of authority, deemed the voters’ recalcitrance to be illegitimate. That began the revolution’s active phase.

At that time, I wrote that, regardless of who won the upcoming election, the United States of America had crossed the threshold of a revolution, and that though no one could know how that would end, we could be sure only that the peaceful American way of life we had known could never return. Hilary Clinton’s or Donald Trump’s victory in the election would merely have channeled the revolution onto different courses. We would look back on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as relics from an age of moderation.

…

The oligarchy’s offensive to forcibly disable the voters began as a mere protest against—and explanation and excuse for—the 2016 elections’ outcome. But, as its identity unfolded according its logic of hate, one thing led to another.

Official and unofficial ruling class confluence in the Resistance turned the Democratic National Committee’s July 2016 throwaway lie that the Russians had hacked its emails into a four-year national convulsion about Trump’s alleged conspiracy with Putin. Ruling class judges sustained every act of opposition to the Trump administration. Thousands of identical voices in major media echoed every charge, every insinuation, nonstop, unquestioned. The Resistance made it official ruling class policy that Trump and his voters’ “racism” and a host of other wrongdoings made them, personally, illegitimate. In 2016 Hillary Clinton had tentatively called her opponents “deplorables.” By 2018 the ruling class had effectively placed the “deplorables” outside the protection of the laws. In any confrontation, the ruling class deemed these presumed white supremacists in the wrong, systemically. By 2020 they could be fired for a trifle, set upon on the streets, and prosecuted on suspicion of bad attitudes, even for defending themselves.

This happened because the Resistance rallied the ruling class’s every part to mutually supporting efforts. Nothing encourages, amplifies, and seemingly justifies extreme sentiments as does being part of a unanimous chorus, a crowd, a mob. Success supercharges them. The Resistance fostered in the ruling class’s members the sense that they were more right, more superior, and more entitled than they had ever imagined. It made millions of people feel bigger, and better about themselves than they ever had.

Ruling class violence started on inauguration day 2017 and grew unceasingly, at first an ominous background to all manner of bureaucratic, oligarchic, and media attacks on the election’s winners. But note well that the black-clad burners and looters were the very opposite of a proletariat and that, Marxist rhetoric aside, they never attacked the wealthy or the powerful—not Wall Street, nor major corporations, certainly not any government, never mind Google, Facebook, or Twitter, America’s most powerful monopolies, or corporate officials. Instead, they received financial contributions from these sources. The violent ones were as troops in the service of the powerful, out to crush the spirit of rebellious subjects. Some Marxists!

…

Most remarkable has been the unbroken consistency with which every part of the ruling class’s entourage joined the campaign while piggybacking its own priorities to it—to the complaisance of all the others. That is the meaning of “intersectionality.” Teachers’ unions, for example, conditioned returning to the classroom on the government banning charter schools; Black Lives Matter (BLM) claimed that “White Racism” must be treated as another public health menace. All other components supported them. All signified solidarity by demanding that all Americans wear masks outdoors, and that those who don’t be jailed. Meanwhile, they insisted that persons convicted of rape, robbery, and murder be released. The world turned upside down.

The riots that began depopulating America’s major cities in late May are intersectionality’s apotheosis. Since blacks commit homicides at five times and other violent crimes at three times the rate of whites, confrontations between black criminals and police are quotidian. Violent reactions to such confrontations are common. Any number of personalities and organizations, mostly black, have made fortunes and careers exploiting them, e.g. New York’s Al Sharpton. Increasingly since 2013 BLM has become the most prominent of these, founded as a project of a hardline Communist organization based in Cuba and funded lavishly and unaccountably by a high percentage of America’s major corporations. Its stated goals of protecting the black community against police brutality notwithstanding, it functions to mobilize black voters on the Democratic Party’s behalf. Along with Antifa, an organization of violent Marxists and anarchists, BLM organized the physical side of the ruling class’s campaign of intimidation against the American people.

The patently counterfactual claim that months of burning, looting and personal attacks by mobs professionally armed, marshaled, and effectively authorized are “mostly peaceful protests” doubly serves the ruling class by warning the victims that they are alone, can expect no help, and that even resenting the mobs is culpable.

Yet the riots may be intersectionality’s downfall because ordering people to tell each other things they know are not true is the most hazardous of political power grabs.

…

The major question overhanging our revolution is how all this has affected the Right side of American society. Since recognizing that the ruling class’s oligarchy surrounded them circa 2008, they sought to keep it at bay. In 2010 their Tea Parties elected the most heavily Republican Congress in a generation. But the Republicans they elected mostly joined the ruling class. Rather than voting for one of them—Mitt Romney for president in 2012—many stayed home.

Then in 2016, sensing that the barbarians were at the gates, they gave short shrift to whoever would not denounce Republicans as harshly as Democrats and elected the loudest denouncer, Donald Trump. By 2020, Trump notwithstanding, the barbarians had proved to be the gatekeepers. They cowed the deplorables, punished them to convince them that they are evil and isolated, deprived them of normal social intercourse, and made them dependent on media that pushed politically correct reality down their masked throats.

The deplorables are angry. But so what?

Why have conservatives mostly obeyed perverted authority? Did the ruling class succeed? Is the revolution over? A minority seem to believe that example may lead leftists once again to recognize their opponents’ equal rights. In short, they are conservatives who yearn to preserve something already gone. They are not yet revolutionaries for their own cause.

…

No one could know for sure how much the empowered oligarchy had cowered ordinary people’s resentment or inflamed it. The fact that some two thirds of respondents told pollsters that they are afraid publicly to voice their views suggests much.

Whatever may happen, it is safe to say that, on the Right side of American life, conventional conservatism is dead, as is political moderation.

…

When the American people vote on November 3, they—like the proverbial husband who walks in on wife in flagrante—will choose whether to believe what they are told or what their senses tell them.

The ubiquity, depth, and vehemence of the ruling class’s denigration of Donald Trump is such as to render superfluous any detailing thereof. Suffice it to note that not a day in four years has gone by without the news media hyperventilating or ruminating on some allegation of Trump’s wrongdoing or wrongbeing. For what? Again, the list of subjects is so exhaustive that it is easier to note that there is hardly any mortal transgression of which he has not been accused. Suffice it to say that, to the extent one depends on the media’s narrative, one cannot help but believe that Donald Trump is the enemy of all good things, that nothing he has done has been any good, that he is responsible for all that is bad.

…

Since 2016 the ruling class have had the luxury of acting as if the deplorables were lifeless punching bags. On November 3 they will find out to what extent that may not be so. Its leaders have already discovered that their “intersectional” entourages are not entirely controllable. After the election, the politicians bidding for leadership of conservatives will make Trump look like milquetoast. As the ruling class tries to suppress them, it will also have to deal with uncontrollable allies, whose violence will spur the conservatives to fiercer resistance.

…

The revolution long since destroyed the original American republic in the minds, hearts, and habits of a critical mass of citizens. They neither want nor are any longer able to live as Americans had lived until so recently. Loudly, they declare that the rest of us are racists, etc., unworthy of self-government. No one can undo that. Chances are against the undoing happening on its own. The longer we pretend to live under precisely the same laws, the likelier we will end up killing one another. We must not do that. And yet regional differences notwithstanding, we are mostly intermingled. Sorting ourselves into compatible groups is part of the American genius and tradition. More of that has been happening and more will happen yet. If we want to live in peace, as we should, we must contrive to agree to disagree to accommodate peace.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

July 17, 2021

Heather Cox Richardson

A year ago tonight, Georgia Representative John Lewis passed away from pancreatic cancer at 80 years old. As a young adult, Lewis was a “troublemaker,” breaking the laws of his state: the laws upholding racial segregation. He organized voting registration drives and in 1960 was one of the thirteen original Freedom Riders, white and Black students traveling together from Washington, D.C., to New Orleans to challenge segregation. “It was very violent. I thought I was going to die. I was left lying at the Greyhound bus station in Montgomery unconscious,” Lewis later recalled.

An adherent of the philosophy of nonviolence, Lewis was beaten by mobs and arrested 24 times. As chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC—pronounced “snick”), he helped to organize the 1963 March on Washington where the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., told more than 200,000 people gathered at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial that he had a dream. Just 23 years old, Lewis spoke at the march. Two years later, as Lewis and 600 marchers hoping to register African American voters in Alabama stopped to pray at the end of the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, mounted police troopers charged the marchers, beating them with clubs and bullwhips. They fractured Lewis’s skull.

To observers in 1965 reading the newspapers, Lewis was simply one of the lawbreaking protesters who were disrupting the “peace” of the South. But what seemed to be fruitless and dangerous protests were, in fact, changing minds. Shortly after the attack in Selma, President Lyndon Baines Johnson honored those changing ideas when he went on TV to support the marchers and call for Congress to pass a national voting rights bill. On August 6, 1965, Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act authorizing federal supervision of voter registration in districts where African Americans were historically underrepresented.

When Congress passed the Voting Rights Act, just 6.7 percent of Black voters in Mississippi were registered to vote. Two years later, almost 60% of them were. In 1986, those new Black voters helped to elect Lewis to Congress. He held the seat until he died, winning reelection 16 times.

Now, just a year after Representative Lewis’s death, the voting rights for which he fought are under greater threat than they have been since 1965. After the 2013 Shelby County v. Holder decision of the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act by taking away Department of Justice supervision of election changes in states with a history of racial discrimination, Republican-dominated state legislatures began to enact measures that would cut down on minority voting.

At Representative Lewis’s funeral, former President Barack Obama called for renewing the Voting Rights Act. "You want to honor John?” he said. “Let's honor him by revitalizing the law that he was willing to die for.” Instead, after the 2020 election, Republican-dominated legislatures ramped up their effort to skew the vote in their favor by limiting access to the ballot. As of mid-June 2021, 17 states had passed 28 laws making it harder to vote, while more bills continue to move forward.

Then, on July 1, by a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court handed down Brnovich v. Democratic National Committee, saying that the state of Arizona did not violate the 1965 Voting Rights Act when it passed laws that limited ballot delivery to voters, family members, or caregivers, or when it required election officials to throw out ballots that voters had cast in the wrong precincts by accident.

The fact that voting restrictions affect racial or ethnic groups differently does not make them illegal, Justice Samuel Alito wrote. “The mere fact that there is some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote.”

Justice Elena Kagan wrote a blistering dissent, in which Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor joined. “If a single statute represents the best of America, it is the Voting Rights Act,” Kagan wrote, “It marries two great ideals: democracy and racial equality. And it dedicates our country to carrying them out.” She explained, “The Voting Rights Act is ambitious, in both goal and scope. When President Lyndon Johnson sent the bill to Congress, ten days after John Lewis led marchers across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, he explained that it was “carefully drafted to meet its objective—the end of discrimination in voting in America.” It gave every citizen “the right to an equal opportunity to vote.”

“Much of the Voting Rights Act’s success lay in its capacity to meet ever-new forms of discrimination,” Kagan wrote. Those interested in suppressing the vote have always offered “a non-racial rationalization” even for laws that were purposefully discriminatory. Poll taxes, elaborate registration regulations, and early poll closings were all designed to limit who could vote but were defended as ways to prevent fraud and corruption, even when there was no evidence that fraud or corruption was a problem. Kagan noted that the Arizona law permitting the state to throw out ballots cast in the wrong precinct invalidated twice as many ballots cast by Indigenous Americans, Black Americans, and Hispanic Americans as by whites.

“The majority’s opinion mostly inhabits a law-free zone,�� she wrote.

Congress has been slow to protect voting rights. Although it renewed the Voting Rights Act by an overwhelming majority in 2006, that impulse has disappeared. In March 2021, the House of Representatives passed the For the People Act on which Representative Lewis had worked, a sweeping measure that protects the right to vote, removes dark money from politics, and ends partisan gerrymandering. Republicans in the Senate killed the bill, and Democrats were unwilling to break the filibuster to pass it alone.

An attempt simply to restore the provision of the Voting Rights Act gutted in 2013 has not yet been introduced, although it has been named: the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act. Only one Republican, Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, has signed on to the bill.  

Yesterday, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, Representative Joyce Beatty (D-OH), was arrested with eight other protesters in the Hart Senate Office Building for demanding legislation to protect voting rights.

After her arrest, Beatty tweeted: “You can arrest me. You can’t stop me. You can’t silence me.”

Last June, Representative Lewis told Washington Post columnist Jonathan Capehart that he was “inspired” by last summer’s peaceful protests in America and around the world against police violence. “It was so moving and so gratifying to see people from all over America and all over the world saying through their action, ‘I can do something. I can say something,’” Lewis told Capehart. “And they said something by marching and by speaking up and speaking out.”

Capehart asked Lewis “what he would say to people who feel as though they have already been giving it their all but nothing seems to change.” Lewis answered: “You must be able and prepared to give until you cannot give any more. We must use our time and our space on this little planet that we call Earth to make a lasting contribution, to leave it a little better than we found it, and now that need is greater than ever before.”

“Do not get lost in a sea of despair,” Lewis tweeted almost exactly a year before his death. “Do not become bitter or hostile. Be hopeful, be optimistic. Never, ever be afraid to make some noise and get in good trouble, necessary trouble. We will find a way to make a way out of no way.”

—-

Notes:

Capehart: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/06/10/john-lewis-black-lives-matter-protesters-give-until-you-cannot-give-any-more/

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2021-07-02/17-states-have-passed-restrictive-voting-laws-this-year-report-says

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/19-1257_g204.pdf

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[chaoticwolfinfluencer]

Diego Maradona: Obituary - Argentina's flawed football icon

Dazzling, infamous, extraordinary, genius, outrageous. Diego Maradona. A flawed football icon.

One of the game's most gifted players, the Argentine boasted a rare combination of flair, flamboyance, vision and speed which mesmerised fans.

He also outraged supporters with his controversial 'Hand of God' goal and plunged into a mire of drug abuse and personal crises off the pitch.

Short and sweet - The football genius Born 60 years ago in a Buenos Aires shanty town, Diego Armando Maradona escaped the poverty of his youth to become a football superstar considered by some to be even greater than Brazil's Pele.

The Argentine, who scored 259 goals in 491 matches, pipped his South American rival in a poll to determine the greatest player of the 20th Century, before Fifa changed the voting rules so both players were honoured.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-tenet-2020-movie/

Maradona showed prodigious ability from a young age, leading Los Cebollitas youth team to a 136-game unbeaten streak and going on to make his international debut aged just 16 years and 120 days.

Short and stocky, at just 5ft 5in, he was not your typical athlete.

But his silky skills, agility, vision, ball control, dribbling and passing more than compensated for lack of pace and occasional weight problems.

He may have been a whizz at running rings round hostile defenders but he found it harder to dodge trouble.

Hand of God & Goal of the Century

Maradona's 34 goals in 91 appearances for Argentina tell only part of the story of his rollercoaster international career.

He led his country to victory at the 1986 World Cup in Mexico and a place in the final four years later.

In the quarter-final of the earlier tournament, there was a foretaste of the controversy that would later engulf his life.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-after-we-collided-2/

The match against England already had an extra friction, with the Falklands War between the two countries having taken place only four years beforehand. That on-field edge was to become even more intense.

With 51 minutes gone and the game goalless, Maradona jumped with opposing goalkeeper Peter Shilton and scored by punching the ball into the net.

He later said the goal came thanks to "a little with the head of Maradona and a little with the hand of God".

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-come-play-2020/

Four minutes later, he scored what has been described as the 'goal of the century' - collecting the ball in his own half before embarking on a bewitching, mazy run that left several players trailing before he rounded Shilton to score.

The first goal was dubious; the second was a bloody miracle Former England manager Sir Bobby Robson "You have to say that is magnificent. There is no doubt about that goal. That was just pure football genius," said BBC commentator Barry Davies.

England pulled one back but Argentina went through, with Maradona saying it was "much more than winning a match, it was about knocking out the English".

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-borat-2-2020-movie/

A hero for Napoli - but drugs take hold Maradona broke the world transfer record twice - leaving Boca Juniors in his home country for Spanish side Barcelona for £3m in 1982 and joining Italian club Napoli two years later for £5m.

There were more than 80,000 fans in the Stadio San Paolo when he arrived by helicopter. A new hero.

He played the best club football of his career in Italy, feted by supporters as he inspired the side to their first league titles in 1987 and 1990 and the Uefa Cup in 1989.

A party to celebrate the first triumph lasted five days with hundreds of thousands on the streets, but Maradona was suffocated by the attention and expectation.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-the-croods-2-2020/

"This is a great city but I can hardly breathe. I want to be free to walk around. I'm a lad like any other," he said.

He became inextricably linked to the Camorra crime syndicate, dragged down by a cocaine addiction and embroiled in a paternity suit.

After losing 1-0 to Germany in the final of Italia 90, a positive dope test the following year triggered a 15-month ban.

He returned and arrested his slide, appearing to get his act together to play in the 1994 World Cup in the USA.

But he alarmed viewers with a maniacal full-face goal celebration into a camera and was withdrawn midway through the tournament after he was found to have taken the banned substance ephedrine.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-honest-thief-2020/

Maradona timeline 1977: Debut for Argentina v Hungary 1984: Joins Napoli after two-year spell with Barcelona 1986: Wins World Cup with Argentina 1990: World Cup runner-up with Argentina. 1991: 15-month ban after positive drugs test Second league title at Napoli 1994: Plays in fourth World Cup but is ejected after positive test 1997: Retires from playing after third positive test 2010: Ends two-year spell as Argentina manager after World Cup quarter-final exit

Life after retirement After his third positive test three years later, he retired from football on his 37th birthday, but continued to be plagued by problems.

Maradona was given a suspended jail sentence of two years and 10 months for an earlier incident where he shot at journalists with an air rifle.

His cocaine habit and alcoholism led to several health issues. He put on weight, rising to 128kg (20 stone) at one point, and suffered a major heart attack in 2004, which left him in intensive care.

He had gastric-bypass surgery to help stem his obesity, and sought sanctuary in Cuba while battling to overcome his drug addiction.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-the-new-mutants/

Despite all this, Maradona was named manager of the Argentina national team in 2008 and took the side to the World Cup quarter-finals two years later before his reign ended with a 4-0 defeat by Germany in the quarter-finals.

Various managerial roles followed for a figure who continued to divide opinion, and continued to make headlines.

He needed reconstructive surgery on his lip after one of his pet shar pei dogs bit him, and publicly recognised his son Diego Armando Junior who was born from an extra-marital affair.

A snapshot of his chaotic lifestyle came when he attended Argentina's match against Nigeria at the 2018 World Cup in Russia.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-freaky-2020-movie/

He unveiled a banner of himself, danced with a Nigeria fan, prayed to the heavens before the game, wildly celebrated Lionel Messi's opener, fell asleep and gave a double middle finger salute after Argentina's second goal.

Some reports suggested he needed medical treatment afterwards.

Disgraceful, inspired, entertaining, great, over the top. Diego Maradona. A life less ordinary.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-war-with-grandpa/

Tonight's scheduled match between Sport Club Internacional and Boca Juniors has been postponed following the death of Diego Maradona.

The match will now take place in Porto Alegre on 2 December at 21:30 local time, with the second leg to follow on 9 December.

A funeral worker who took a photo next to the open coffin of Argentine football icon Diego Maradona has asked fans for forgiveness.

Claudio Fernández was pictured standing next to Maradona's body, alongside his son, who made a thumbs-up gesture. A third man appeared in his own photo.

Maradona died at his home in Tigre, near Buenos Aires, on Wednesday.

Site: https://rwandaartsinitiative.com/community/profile/full-watch-come-away-2020/

The images surfaced online as Maradona's body lay in repose at the presidential palace, provoking outrage.

The footballer's lawyer, Matías Morla, has vowed to take action against "the scoundrel" responsible for the photos.

Mr Fernandez told Radio 10 on Friday that the decision to take the photo was "something instantaneous".

The Sepelios Pinier funeral parlour said the three men were "outsourced employees" who had helped carry the coffin.

Manager of the parlour, Matías Picón, told the TN news channel that the company was "devastated" by the images.

He said his company had organised funeral services for other members of the Maradona family. "The family has total confidence in us, that's why we are so affected," he said.

"My father is 75 years old and he is crying, I am crying, my brother too, we are destroyed," Mr Picón added.

Site: https://movietracker23.medium.com/diego-maradona-obituary-argentinas-flawed-football-icon-b08dce1827c3

[lastsonlost]

LAST APRIL, Tara Reade watched as a familiar conversation around her former boss, Joe Biden, and his relationship with personal space unfolded on the national stage. Nevada politician Lucy Flores alleged that Biden had inappropriately sniffed her hair and kissed the back of her head as she waited to go on stage at a rally in 2014. Biden, in a statement in response, said that “not once” in his career did he believe that he had acted inappropriately. But Flores’s allegation sounded accurate to Reade, she said, because Reade had experienced something very similar as a staffer in Biden’s Senate office years earlier.

After she saw an episode of the ABC show “The View,” in which most of the panelists stood up for Biden and attacked Flores as politically motivated, Reade decided that she had no choice but to come forward and support Flores. She gave an interview to a local reporter, describing several instances in which Biden had behaved similarly toward her, inappropriately touching her during her early-’90s tenure in his Senate office. In that first interview, she decided to tell a piece of the story, she said, that matched what had happened to Flores — plus, she had filed a contemporaneous complaint, and there were witnesses, so she considered the allegation bulletproof.

The short article brought a wave of attention on her, 

along with accusations that she was doing the bidding of Russian President Vladimir Putin. So Reade went quiet.

As the campaign went on, Reade, who first supported Sen. Elizabeth Warren and then Sen. Bernie Sanders, began to reconsider staying silent. She thought about the world she wanted her daughter to live in and decided that she wanted to continue telling her story and push back against what she saw as online defamation. To get legal help, and manage what she knew from her first go-around would be serious backlash, she reached out to the organization Time’s Up, established in the wake of the #MeToo movement to help survivors tell their stories.

The Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund was the recipient of an outpouring of donations over the past two-plus years, and is set up as a 501(c)3 nonprofit housed within the National Women’s Law Center. It was launched in December 2017 and was the most successful GoFundMe in the site’s history, raising more than $24 million. Among the accusers backed so far by Time’s Up are some of those assaulted by Harvey Weinstein, as well scores of others with allegations against executives in male-dominated industries. The group has committed more than $10 million toward funding cases.

In January of this year, Reade spoke with a program director at NWLC and was encouraged by the conversation. The fact that she was a Sanders supporter and had come forward previously in incomplete fashion didn’t dissuade Time’s Up. The program director referred her to outside attorneys, Reade said, and suggested that the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund might be able to provide funding for PR and subsidize legal assistance.

The program director shared with Reade the note she planned to forward to attorneys, which read, in part:

She began publicly sharing the harassment she experienced in April 2019 but was attacked … online including by Richard Painter (Univ. of MN law professor who worked in the Obama administration) and journalist Edward-Isaac Dovere for being a Russian operative. There is more to the story of the harassment that she did not feel safe sharing at that time. She is looking for support in sharing her story and guidance on any possible legal action she may be able to take against online harassers. [Editor’s note: Painter served in the Bush, not Obama, administration, and ran for Senate in 2018 as a Democrat.]

The references to Dovere, a reporter with The Atlantic, and Painter stem from their Twitter posts that highlighted favorable comments Reade had made about Putin in a now-deleted post on Medium. “What if I told you that everything you learned about Russia was wrong?” she had written in one 2018 post. “President Putin scares the power elite in America because he is a compassionate, caring, visionary leader. … To President Putin, I say keep your eyes to the beautiful future and maybe, just maybe America will come to see Russia as I do, with eyes of love. To all my Russian friends, happy holiday and Happy New Year.”

Reade says that she learned about Russia and Putin through a Russian friend in her creative-writing group; she is currently writing a novel set in Russia. She wrote the post in the spirit of world peace and solidarity with her friend, she said, adding that the writing should have nothing to do with her allegation. Reade’s leftist mother had raised her to oppose American imperialism and be skeptical of American exceptionalism. She hoped that Time’s Up would be able to help push back against the attacks she knew would be coming.

By February, she learned from a new conversation with Time’s Up, which also involved Director Sharyn Tejani, that no assistance could be provided because the person she was accusing, Biden, was a candidate for federal office, and assisting a case against him could jeopardize the organization’s nonprofit status.

On February 11, the NWLC program director wrote to Reade that she “wanted to let you know that after our conversation I talked further with our Director, Sharyn Tejani, about our ability to offer funding or public relations support in your case. Unfortunately, the Fund’s decision remains the same. … Please know how much I appreciate your courage in speaking out and appreciate what you shared over the phone, that you are speaking out so that your daughter and other young people can start their careers free of harassment.”

When reached for comment by The Intercept, the program director Reade had spoken to referred questions to a NWLC spokesperson, Maria Patrick, who said that the organization has legal constraints. “As a nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization, the National Women’s Law Center is restricted in how it can spend its funds, including restrictions that pertain to candidates running for election,” Patrick responded, when asked why the organizing declined to provide funds to Reade. “Our decision on whether or not to provide certain types of support to an individual should not be interpreted as our validation or doubt of the truthfulness of the person’s statements. Regardless, our support of workers who come forward regarding workplace sexual harassment remains unwavering.”

By February, Reade learned that no assistance could be provided because Biden was a candidate for federal office, and assisting a case against him, Time’s Up said, could jeopardize the organization’s nonprofit status.

Ruling out federal candidates marks as off-limits any member of Congress running for reelection, as well as President Donald Trump. Ellen Aprill, a professor of tax law at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said that Time’s Up’s analysis is too conservative, and the group wouldn’t be putting its tax-exempt status at risk by taking a case involving a candidate for federal office as long as it followed its standard criteria for taking on cases. “As a legal matter, if the group is clear regarding the criteria used as to whom it is taking to court, show that these are long-established neutral criteria, and they are being applied to individuals completely independent of their running for office, it would not be a violation of tax law. Groups are allowed to continue to do what they have always done,” she said.

The public relations firm that works on behalf of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund is SKDKnickerbocker, whose managing director, Anita Dunn, is the top adviser to Biden’s presidential campaign. A spokesperson for Biden declined to comment. The SKDK spokesperson assigned to Time’s Up referred questions back to the NWLC.

As for influencing the election, Reade said that she was deeply conflicted about continuing to come forward, given that Biden’s opponent in the general election is someone she sees as far worse politically. “I don’t want to help Trump. But what can I do?” she said. “All I can do is stand on my truth.”

Update: March 26, 2020 Reade has given an interview with podcast host Katie Halper, describing her time in Biden’s office, and what she described as a sexual assault in 1993. At the time, she told her mother, brother, and a friend who worked in Sen. Ted Kennedy’s office about the incident. Her mother has since passed away, but both her friend and brother told The Intercept they recalled hearing about it from her at the time. Reade’s friend, who asked to remain anonymous so as not to be part of the public blowback, said she discouraged Reade from coming forward at all, concerned that she would be attacked and would never get the apology she was hoping for. Reade and her brother, Collin Moulton, both said that their mother urged her to call the police, but her brother urged her to move on instead. “Woefully, I did not encourage her to follow up,” he said. “I wasn’t one of her better advocates. I said let it go, move on, guys are idiots.” (Moulton, who lives in Georgia, said he voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 and has no intention to vote for either Biden or Donald Trump.)

The experience in Biden’s office derailed her life, Reade’s friend said. “Back then people assumed girls just get over it,” she said. “But no, it plants a seed and lives can spin out of control. Yes, everybody’s an adult, but guess what, so is he.” At the time, there was just no way that Reade’s effort to right the wrong could succeed, her friend said, but this time, she’s determined to be heard. “It was the ‘90s,” she said. “There was no Me Too. There was no Time’s Up.”

Update: March 27, 2020

The Biden campaign has denied the allegation, releasing two statements, one from Communications Director Kate Bedingfield and the other from former executive assistant to then-Senator Biden Marianne Baker, who served him from 1982-2000.

Bedingfield’s statement:

Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims. We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false.

Baker’s statement: 

For nearly 20 years, I worked as Senator Biden’s executive assistant and supervised dozens of employees who reported to me.  I took very seriously my duties with respect to human resources, following the direction of a Senator whose insistence on a professional workplace was embedded in our culture. In all my years working for Senator Biden, I never once witnessed, or heard of, or received, any reports of inappropriate conduct, period — not from Ms. Reade, not from anyone. I have absolutely no knowledge or memory of Ms. Reade’s accounting of events, which would have left a searing impression on me as a woman professional, and as a manager.  These clearly false allegations are in complete contradiction to both the inner workings of our Senate office and to the man I know and worked so closely with for almost two decades.

[msjr0119]

Cordonian Wags

Part 1- Welcome to the team

In a world full of Professional footballers and their demanding wives- can their football team nicknamed the ‘Cordonian Apples’ succeed? An American female physiotherapist joins the club. Will this cause issues with the footballers wives?

*This series is based on The Royal Romance characters who belong to Pixelberry - AU Plot switch*

Read the introduction here

Disclaimer: Quite a bit of swear words and a lot of dialogue- Sorry 😐

Tags: @annekebbphotography @burnsoslow @drakesensworld @ladyangel70 @kingliam2019 @bbrandy2002 @butindeed @bascmve01 @drakewalker04 @pedudley @captain-kingliamsqueen @duchessemersynwalker @insideamirage @of-course-i-went-to-hartfeld @kozabaji @texaskitten30 @ibldw-main @kimmiedoo5 @nikkis1983 @dangerouseggseagleartisan @gnatbrain @walker7519 @lodberg @cmestrella @hopefulmoonobject @addictedtodrakefanfic @angi15h @liamxs-world @rafasgirl23415 @notoriouscs @whenyourheartskipsabeat @nz1091 @jovialyouthmusic @yukinagato2012

******

Riley hadn’t had the chance to unpack yet- due to the invitation to the pre season party. Her main priority was to prepare the paperwork for the players to fill out for her knowledge. When she had been offered the job- she checked out accommodation to rent in Cordonia. Most places only offered a years contract- she accepted this, knowing that she would have to pay the remaining months once the season had finished.

If the Cordonian Wags were anything like the British ones- they would all be trying to out stage each other at these type events. Causing trouble. Fighting for attention. Riley was the odd one out at any event- technically she was classed as a ‘wag’ but in her mind she was just the physio. Pulling out a simple little black dress with matching black heels, she looked like she was going to a funeral rather than a party. Keeping her make up to a minimal and her natural brown curls loosely fall effortlessly down her back- the simple look. This was the first time Riley had been out for a while. She avoided leaving the house having the British press stalk her every movement.

Let’s get this over and done with.

*****

Savannah had persuaded Bertrand to allow Drake to get ready at their house and attend with them. Drake refused at first - his number one characteristic was his stubbornness. Your sister will blame me all night if you don’t come with us- and you know how angry she can become. Please. Drake eventually agreed after the ‘peer pressure’ from his brother in law. He hated receiving the sympathy vote from everyone even if it was self infliction for him not ending his relationship with Kiara. Whilst waiting for the sitter to arrive, the trio began to pre-drink.

“Darling, I spoke to Riley before. She seems really nice. And ambitious. I was hoping to become friends with her- she seems so much nicer than the other women here - apart from Hana. I believe she and Hana would get on very well.”

“Who the fuck is Riley?” Drake demanded frowning at his sister.

“Erm. No one, Drake. Well obviously she is someone. You’ll be formally introduced to her later.”

Bertrand responded, he knew how his wife’s mind ticked, she wound her brother up constantly. Deep down she wanted her brother to be happy in a relationship, so believed she was testing the water. Bertrand knew exactly what her intentions for this random conversation were.

Savannah secretly laughed, she knew she was frustrating Drake. He hated secrets being kept from him. Handing him a whiskey- she was going to continue rising his blood pressure with the frustration and curiosity. Sibling love at its best.

“Did you know she’s getting divorced? So she’s technically single?”

“Savannah, let’s not talk about her personal life. She’s not here to look for love. Keep her away from Leo Rhys for gods sake.”

The sitter was late, much to Bertrand’s annoyance- he liked everyone to be punctual. When it came to meeting people he would request that people meet him an hour earlier than needed, to ensure that there was extra time for situations such as this. The doorbell rang, Bertrand immediately shot up- it was one of two people- the babysitter or Riley. He had invited Riley to attend with them as she didn’t know anyone else.

“Good evening Riley.” Bertrand pulled her in for a welcoming hug, as she handed him a bottle of wine as a thank you for supporting her already.

“Thank you for the invitation. Your home is absolutely stunning”

Bertrand guided her into the large open spaced lounge, offering her a glass of champagne which she accepted politely. The Walker siblings were sat talking, before both abruptly turning mute.

“Hi Riley, it’s so nice to see you again. I didn’t know you was coming?” Savannah slowly stood up and gave Riley a friendly squeeze. Riley wasn’t sure if she was an overly touchy- feely person or if she was just a genuinely friendly person with a heart of gold.

“I... I’m sorry if I’ve interrupted....Mr Beaumont suggested it.... As i don’t know anyone but you guys and Mr Rhys.”

“Don’t need to apologise. I’m happy that you’re here. Saves me from being bored shitless with these two misery’s..I want to get to know you better- we can be friends? This is my brother Drake by the way.”

Savannah gave her brother dagger eyes after observing her brother’s lack of politeness. Scowling at the woman stood nervously in front of them he rolled his eyes back not really willing to take much notice of the newbie-great another gold digger he thought. Riley bit her lip due to the awkward silence. Drake Walker’s stereotypical nickname was known as the ‘grumpy stubborn one’.

“Nice to see you in the flesh Walker. I look forward to working with you all.” Riley gulped the champagne back in one go- impatiently waiting for a non existent response. He hadn’t looked at her- uh he’s such an ignorant arsehole.

‘I look forward to working with you all’ - Drake suddenly was knocked out of his trance, trying to figure out who she could be after that sentence. Fixating his gaze on her, his eyes locked on hers- he couldn’t help but admire her beauty. No I’m with Kiara- stop gawping at her. Shaking his head, taking a deep breath, he stood up and shook Riley’s hand- feeling a bolt of lightening spread throughout his body, he now had butterflies in his stomach. They both let go of each other before fixing their gaze towards the marble floor. Savannah and Bertrand noticed the interaction and gave each other that knowing look.

“So, how are you enjoying your first day? Drake, Riley is the teams new physio- when Connie introduces her act surprised!”

Bertrand begged his brother in law- he knew it was the chairman’s responsibility to introduce the newest member of the team to everyone.

“It’s different.. it’s nice to not be stalked by the paparazzi..”

“Isn’t that what the job title includes for a Wag?” Savannah sarcastically said, whilst winking.

She’s a wag... she’s a physio.... Drake’s mind was working overtime- if she’s a footballers wife, where is he? Why is she here? Surely she doesn’t need to work and can fend off her husbands paycheck like other wives.

“I was never a ‘wag’ Savannah. I hate them. I was the odd one out. Biggest mistake of my life has been marrying a footballer- no offence Drake.”

“Um.. none taken... you’re married to a footballer... you’re a physio.... anything else you need to confess?”

“Excuse me? Mr Rhys knows all about my background, my estranged husband. There’s nothing more to tell. It’s none of your business Walker. My business is to make sure that none of you dumbasses injure yourselves too much!”

“You’re going to be trouble, I can already tell!” Drake snapped, whilst gulping another whiskey.

“What is your issue?” Riley snapped back- she didn’t like his attitude. What a wanker.

“You are.. look no offence. But this place is vicious. Full of secrets. If I was you I’d get back on a plane to America pronto!”

Riley felt anger build through her body. She had never met someone that was such a jerk on their first meeting. She shrugged her shoulders and blanked him- as far as she was aware the miserable man was non existent. This is going to be a long nine months.

******

Liam and Olivia were almost ready to attend the party. They had chosen to go in matching outfits. Well, Olivia had suggested it- Liam didn’t have a choice in the matter. She wore the trousers in the relationship after all.

“Liv, hurry up! We are going to be late!”

Liam had been ready for a while- the scotch was running smoothly down his throat every time he drank some more. His wife was taking forever to get ready. Typical footballers wife. At times, he wished he was single- looking out for ‘me, myself and I’. Olivia was a nightmare - at times he regretted marrying her, all she did was moan. She was jealous of his brother being the captain of the team, she hated the fact that Constantine favoured Leo over Liam. Frustrated that her husband couldn’t grow some bollocks and stand up to his father.

“Okay! Okay! You’re such an arse. Never rush a woman getting ready, Li. Do we even have to go? Your father is just going to be praising golden bollocks all night!”

“Yes Liv! We all have to attend!” Liam snapped as he was frustrated at his wife’s questions. She knew the answer to her idiotic question.

“Kiara isn’t... I could be doing anything better than socialise with those people!” Folding her arms, she frowned at her husband spitting her dummy out.

“That’s Kiara.... they aren’t married so get away with it.”

Olivia rolled her eyes back, the only positive thing about these events was the unlimited free bar and winding Madeleine up.

****

Leo had ignored his wife ever since he had returned home from training. Quickly he got dressed up into one of his many designer tuxedos. Styling his hair to perfection- he loved himself too much. Leo Rhys you sexy mother fucker - he said to himself checking himself out in the mirror, placing a condom in his pocket- just in case. Hitting the bottle- he was eager to get to the party just to escape from his wife’s constant lectures that were like a vinyl on loop. Same shit, different day. Finally she made an appearance- her eyes narrowed at him like always, as if her facial expression was superglued to that same resting bitch expression .

“Oh darling you look amazing.” She said sarcastically rolling her eyes back.

“Baby I’d say the same about you. But... You have something on the end of your nose. You don’t look flattering at all...”

“It’s just a bit of powder. I dread to think what’s on the end of your dick! After all, you stick it in all sorts of places!”

“The answer to your question.... a bell is at the end of it!”

Leo slammed his tumbler of the brown liquid on the table, before heading outside to the waiting car. Madeleine slowly caught up- Leo held the door open for her before slamming it shut with an almighty force.

****

Zeke and Penelope hated these types of events- mainly because they had to leave their daughters behind. They felt guilty if they returned home drunk. Everyone had told them to let their hair down every once in a while. This couple were the most responsible out of them all- mainly due to their family which they were grateful for.

“Girls, be good for Amber. And look after the poodles for your Mom. Promise? I love you both.”

“Yes, daddy.” Emma and Emily said in unison.

“Love you little darlings. See you in morning.” Penelope said whilst still hesitating about leaving them.

The two girls jumped into their parents arms giving them the tightest bear hug. Tip toeing out of the front door- the parents looked back at their adorable daughters before leaving. Sorrow in their eyes as Emma and Emily waved slowly at them. The couple promised each other to leave early and too not drink too much.

****

Maxwell and Hana arrived separately, keeping their relationship under pretentious again. They had seen how majority of their friends relationships had crumbled. Knowing the minute they became official the press would hound them.

Maxwell entered the room, and immediately hit the dance floor. Spotting Hana he couldn’t resist spending time with her- all their friends had an inkling regarding their relationship. What’s the harm in dancing with a ‘friend’? You look beautiful Miss Lee, dance with me?

Hana nodded providing a seductive smile. After a while they both stumbled over to the bar- where Drake was sat drowning his sorrows.

“Hey buddy. What’s up?”

“My life. That’s what’s up Max. My girlfriend can’t even be arsed showing up. Why haven’t I got the guts to dump her and throw her out of MY house? She keeps walking all over me. I just allow it. I say ‘love you’, she ignores it. I might just go home.”

“Well... we all advised you to end it but we also understand how hard it must be when you love someone. You’ll move on buddy. I’ll take you home once Constantine has done his speech okay?”

‘You’ll move on....’ ha I wish Max.

“Thanks Max. I don’t know where I’d be without you.”

“No probs. Whiskey?”

Drake nodded, he was glad his friend knew him inside and out. Maxwell pat him on the shoulder, giving him a whiskey before persuading Drake to join him and Hana having shots.

*****

The group of friends all stood the corner, impatiently waiting for the chairman to arrive. Both Savannah and Leo, were intoxicated- Bertrand had tried to conceal his wife’s behaviour up- but she just became louder and louder. Leo was just Leo. The usual drunk.

“Looks like your father has traded Regina in for a younger model.” Olivia whispered to Liam and Leo. Leo quickly looked over. As did the other men. Chinese whispers began spreading throughout the room - ‘who is she?’ was the common question that was unanswered. Drake just rolled his eyes- for some reason he hated her. He couldn’t comprehend why? Leo straightened his tie, checking his hair in a nearby mirror and headed straight over to his father and Riley.

“Why, hello there gorgeous. I haven’t seen you around here before.” Showing an exasperated expression, she wondered how long it would take for the local playboy to attempt to make a move.

“Leo, so nice to meet you. I’ve heard so much about you.” You’re a wanker, you’re a cheat, you’re a mess. You are a girls worse nightmare. Her mind talked sense- she wasn’t going to say her thoughts out loud risking her job before she’s even started it.

Leo pulled her into his embrace, she played along with his flirting to begin with, teasing him. Caressing his cheek, whispering in his ear- unknown to a drunk Leo he didn’t understand the sarcasm in her voice. You love yourself don’t you. Why wouldn’t you? You are quite handsome. I bet the women love you.... Riley felt his jeans tighten as he held her, making her skin crawl- she shuddered at the thought. Not giving a shit, he swiftly moved closer and kissed her on the neck- before she pushed him away. Everyone joined the trio, needing to rescue the mystery woman from the womaniser. She held the record for being the only woman that they had ever witnessed turn down Leo Rhys.

“Touch me again Mr Rhys- and you’ll be wishing that one of them break your legs on the pitch instead of me. And I won’t help you recover.”

“You’re a fiesty one. Come on babe. You’re gorgeous. And so am I. You know you wanted to kiss me back. I’ll take you on date sometime... Miss?” Riley didn’t know whether to punch that smirk off his face or just scowl at the disgusting man stood in front of her.

“It’s Mrs... Mrs Riley López your new physio.”

She winked at Constantine- technically she was still married so could stil use the marriage card. Constantine shook his head - disappointed in his son’s behaviour. Thanking the lord that this girl could protect herself. Clearing his throat, he grabbed the microphone, ready to make his announcement.

“Everyone, I’m assuming you have many questions regarding who this woman standing by my side is. Gentlemen this is Riley Brooks, your new physio. Miss Brooks has some paperwork for you all to complete before you attend training tomorrow. Please make her feel welcome, and of course- everyone enjoy the party!” Constantine kept his speech sort- he didn’t want to elaborate on anything- so walked away from the crowd with his wife Regina.

“So MISS Brooks.... you’re not a Mrs... About that date...” Leo thought he had a second chance- smirking at her flashing his pearly whites.

“Fuck you Leo. I’m getting a divorce. And I’m not interested in married men- especially not interested in footballers.”

“Fuck you... oh I do want you to do that.”

“N. O. Spells NO! Goodnight Mr Rhys.”

Riley walked over to the bar, taking a few shots back in a flash. Leo reminded her of her husband. She hadn’t been introduced to his wife as of yet- but she already felt empathy towards her. Swallowing the last shot, she was spooked as someone tapped her on the shoulder.

“Miss Brooks, I do apologise on behalf of my brother for his appalling attitude.” Liam the other Rhys brother- he’s not like Leo. As far as I’m aware.

“No worries Liam, I can handle men like him.”

“How do you know who I am?”

“Bertrand explained to me earlier on who was who before I was spying on you all at training. Leo- the playboy, Drake- The grump and stubborn one, Maxwell- the hyper one, Zeke - the family man and you Liam. You’re the nice brother. The loyalist of them all. The other players didn’t really get awarded with a nickname. I just assume Mr Beaumont is closer to you guys.”

“Heh. Bertrand has got us to a T... my brother wasn’t lying when he called you gorgeous. I think we can all agree on that. Myself and Drake saw you before with Savannah, and I actually called you that too. Great minds and all that.... I hope you settle in and enjoy your time here. Erm, there’s gossip spreading about your marriage- if you ever need anyone to talk to about it, I’ll always be here.” Gently holding her hand as he said this, she could tell by the sparkle of his eyes and his smile that his words were genuine.

“Thank you, But i would rather not talk about it. I’m here to do my job. Hoping that you all make it easy for me and have no injuries this season.”

“I can’t promise that none of us won’t get any injuries. If I don’t see you later on, I’ll see you tomorrow.” Liam kissed Riley on the cheek, a slight blush showed up on her face. She was thankful for the dark lightening hoping no one would see it. His soft touch was still lingering even after he had left.

*****

Savannah introduced Riley to Max, Hana, Zeke and Penelope. She felt that these people were the only normality in the room. Looking over her shoulder she overheard a red head and blonde sniping insults to each other, whilst staring at her with looks that could kill. Typical footballers wives, she thought as she quietly laughed to herself at the irony. Riley would feel intimidated in the past with these actions but now she honestly couldn’t care less- she knew these type of women.

“Ah just ignore them, they are always like that.” Hana stated as she shook her head, in response to the entertainment happening in the background.

“I gathered. Let’s hope the Rhys brothers don’t become injured - I couldn’t cope with associating with women like that.”

“No I don’t blame you. Myself and Hana are having a party tomorrow - I call them ‘Beaumont bashes’. You’re welcome to come Riley. I know we are all going to be the best of friends.” Max grinning like a Cheshire Cat- he loved making new friends.

“Sure. It’ll be nice to get to know normal people.”

“Sorry Max- we won’t be able to attend. The girls have a riding competition. And we want to spend time with them to celebrate afterwards.” Zeke said with sorrow in his eyes. He loved a Beaumont bash but his family always came first.

“Ah man. Okay.” Maxwell pretended to cry, over dramatically wiping his tears away. But he understood that Zekes and Penelope’s children were their priority.

“Oh. I love riding. I haven’t been able to do it since I moved to England. I used to do it on a regular basis back in the states. I can only imagine how proud you are of your children Zeke and Penny.”

“We are Riley. We are so proud. You will have to come for a ride one day. I’m more of a dog person- I have two poodles. We are an animal loving family.”

“Thank you for the invite. I will be honoured to come one day.” Penelope and Zeke smiled at her pulling her in for a group hug.

They were all sociably talking, getting to know Riley. After a while she excused herself, explaining she needed a bit of air- as the room had become slightly stuffy.

*****

Walking out on the veranda, the cool air as well as the alcohol hit Riley suddenly. The moonlit sky was beautiful- stars scattered evenly.

Feeling much cooler, she turned around not looking where she was going as she bumped straight into someone. He caught her and held her tight- their eyes fixated on each other. The two of them ended up covered in a fusion of alcohol.

Before Riley could escape, he grabbed her wrist pulling her closer to him. There was a tingling sensation spreading throughout his stomach. Standing frozen, she could hear his heartbeat rapidly increase, every second he held her. Slowly he lent down, before crashing his lips onto hers whilst inhaling her fruity fragrance. The short kiss- made him feel intoxicated, she was going to be his newest drug- one he couldn’t wait to taste again. Riley looked at him with sorrow in her eyes as she pushed him away with an almighty force. Immediately she ran away as fast as she could. Not looking back, she was hoping to just be able to sneak out of the party without anyone noticing her. She was uncontrollably shaking, regretting that she didn’t do anything to prevent the interaction that had just occurred.

[soranihimawari]

No risk, No reward...

taglist: @kaidasen

Side note: I couldn’t format my texts in time since I use google docs for everything, so please be patient with the formatting of my long af text posts. I had a lot of fun writing this drabble. Tbh, I wasn’t sure how long I was going to make this story, but just know that I’ll have to queue up some parts. Thanks for reading! ::insert quarantine air five here::

next >>

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

ℙ𝕒𝕣𝕥 𝟙: 

13:07 

      to: ಥ⌣ಥmiserablerage_muda ಥ⌣ಥ 

     Frm: ┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘blessed_setter keiji┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘

     I got a favor to ask you.

15:49

     to: ┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘blessed_setter keiji┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘

     Frm: ಥ⌣ಥ miserablerage_muda ಥ⌣ಥ

Sorry, i was busy with putting away the archery equipment                             earlier,   so i just saw this. >.< i’m the worst senpai. T^T Is this about tutoring Bo-kun, right? 

17:45

     to: ಥ⌣ಥmiserablerage_muda ಥ⌣ಥ

     Frm: ┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘blessed_setter keiji┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘

You’re not the worst senpai. We’ve been friends for five y e a r s. We just wrapped up practice too, could you please meet us on campus? Give me a few minutes. Bokuto-san is about to enter his dejected mode again. 

                                                       ***

I glanced down at my phone and sighed. Of course Akasshi would text me this late in the afternoon especially when it comes to taking care of Bo-kun, I shook my head at the negative thoughts that were fogging up my tired brain.

“Doesn’t anyone on the Fukurodani Volleyball Club know that I have my own schedule to keep?” I mumbled to myself. My face was warm and sticky with sweat from archery practice. I was kind of in my own dejected mode too after I received news from the student council the Archery Club was going to be dissolved. I was the only active member now and when I pleaded in  my case for it to be saved, the treasurer scoffed. I wore my midnight blue archery jacket (the logo of the bubo blakistoni’s quill were embroidered on the front and the kanji on the back read: FUKURODANI ARCHER CAPTAIN): 

“There’s no reason to have an Archery Club when it only has one member here,” the secretary said. My hazel eyes darted around the room and it seemed like that vote was unanimous before I even stepped into their approved space.

“Our Volleyball Club has actually put Fukurodani Academy on the map. We’re a powerhouse school because of how strong our team is,” the vice president reminded me; she folded her arms over her chest when she leaned in. I couldn’t state my case since I knew she was right, so instead, I thought of the best solution for the student council.

“V. President-san, may I have one request before you hand the club sponsor the termination form?” I inquired. 

“What is it Muda-senpai?” although she was a second year, she did add the honorific as a sign of respect. I might not like what this meeting was about, but what I do understand is that my club had consistently seen a decline of interest over the last six years at Fukurodani. 

“There is a tournament next month,” I placed my hands in my jacket pocket. “Please let me use the equipment for solo-practice until the day after the tournament.”

The vice-president of the student council drew in a breath and when she exhaled, she nodded in approval. She wrote on the school’s official document and placed her signature stamp on the bottom of the form. 

“The president of student council is absent today due to hay fever, but I will personally let him know of the situation. I’m really sorry about the formalities of this meeting Muda-senpai,” her voice was sincere this time.

“It’s quite alright and thank you. Now, if you’ll excuse me,” my voice sounded polite, but the student council members who knew me from last year saw my lips pressed flatly into a scowl. I bowed and departed for the closest women’s restroom where I locked myself in the first stall and began to let frustrated tears run down my face for a few minutes before I patted my cheeks dry at the sink. I gazed at my reflection (my hair was a bit frazzled due to the rain this morning), yet the thought of clearing out the photos of our team through the years were what really got me down. I worked so hard to be in a club for a sport I am the most passionate about, which required the most patience to learn (and teach in physical education starting in junior high) was being taken away from me in my third year of high school by the volleyball club.  

Akaashi, Bokuto, and I have been friends throughout junior high and as luck would have it after much deliberation and late night jungle gym talks, we decided to take the entrance exams for Fukurodani Academy. I’ll never understand why those two friends of mine chose the volleyball club over the archery club, but over the course of the last three years I was able to witness the rise of one of the top five aces in Japan. 

Maybe it was my own selfishness being the only female student they would listen to, or perhaps it was the fact that I defended their honor from insulting rumours about who they were dating or crushing on in our adolescent years, but we were inseparable. Only until recently, I noticed that other members of their team would approach me when I had a tournament (mostly it was Kaori and Yukie wishing me luck after classes were done for the day). 

The two owls I had befriended in junior high were high caliber players for the volleyball club. I never really paid attention when both of them grew into their features quite nicely; as Akaashi grew taller, Bokuto and I began to have height competitions. There were days in the fall where I’d forget my gloves because both of them would hold my hands like I was gonna lose them in my own neighborhood. I never really understood why Akaashi was always in charge of buying me a birthday gift and Bokuto was in charge of purchasing the card until I heard them planning what to get me earlier this past October:

“Akaashi! Muda already has this charm for her bracelet, right?” Bokuto asked. He seemed a little deflated that day due to the fact that all his ideas were being put in the “maybe we’ll see” list of ideas.

“You know, you could just ask me, right?” I said when I snuck up behind them. Akaashi laughed when Bokuto yelped as he jumped back in surprise. “And yes, I do have that owl charm. You gave it to me last year. You could always buy me more Jun Ito mangas.”

When the school day was over, I immediately walked home to begin my nightly review for the calculus exam planned for Tuesday morning. Mathematics and chemistry were my strongest subjects; modern literature and poetry were my free period classes, but my grades were high enough to secure a passing grade; and finally American English was my weakest subject. I was barely passing it at the start of the second semester, but for some reason, Bokuto was actually proficient in American English. Akaashi was always hovering over my workbook when we would study in the campus library and noticing my grammatical errors. 

One day before fall break, I told Akaashi that I wanted a recording of Bokuto talking in English to one of the reporters when his name gained traction for being one of the Top 5 Aces in Volleyball Monthly. 

“You hear him talk all the time,” Akaashi said. We were having lunch together outside on the covered terrace. He stuck a straw on the top of his milk box while watching me eat my mother’s homemade salmon onigiri.

“Maybe hearing Bo-kun speak English might help me pass this class,” I said in between bites. “I’ll even throw in some maths group study. Our boy is this close to failing trig and then he can’t play volleyball. I’m not babysitting him this time, Keiji.”

“You’re fingers are actually touching this time,” Akaashi said when he noticed my hand gesture. He handed me a juice box when he realized I was trying to laugh. I poked the top of the box with the spear like straw and began to take a few sips.

“I’ll text you after practice,” he said as soon as he stood up. “It might just be Bokuto though since I don’t know what our coach’s strategy is for the upcoming tournaments.”

“Mmkay. I’ll be at home today. I told the archery coach I was going to be doing some solo practice in lieu of the free gym being under reconstruction.”

Akaashi nodded and left back to his classroom.

[asweethistory]

Fannie Lou Hamer

Local Honey Ice Cream with Candied Bacon and Celery Seed/Sunflower Seed Brittle

Fannie Lou Hamer was born in 1917 as the youngest and 20th child of sharecroppers in Montgomery County, Mississippi. She grew up in poverty, worked in the cotton fields as young as age 6, and had to drop out of school at age 12 to work. Starting in the mid 1940s, Fannie worked along side her husband Perry at a Mississippi plantation until 1962 when she was fired for attempting to vote. In 1962, Fannie was one of the many black woman who underwent a forced sterilization by a white doctor during a tumor removal operation. This incredibly common act in Mississippi, which left Fannie unable to have children, was meant to “reduce the black population.” The Hamers still started a family with two adopted girls, yet one died after the hospital denied her admission due to Fannie’s activism.

During the 1960s, Fannie became increasingly involved in the Civil Rights Movement. She and her husband moved to Sunflower County, since their property had been taken away when Fannie was fired. In 1964, Fannie co-founded to Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, which argued for integrated state delegations. At the Democratic National Convention that year, Fannie delivered a moving speech, which included her famous quote, “I am sick and tired of being sick and tired!” That same year, Fannie decided to run for the Mississippi House of Representatives, but wasn’t allowed to be on the ballot. In 1971, Fannie co-founded the National Women’s Political Caucus.

By the end of the decade, Fannie learned how food could be used as a means of resistance. In 1967, Fannie founded the Freedom Farm Cooperative. The FFC started with 640 acres of land for collective farming and living. Fannie organized a pig bank, which gave free pigs to black farmers to raise, breed, and use for sustenance. By the mid-1970s, the FFC was one of the county’s largest employers, which additionally provided education, healthcare, and financial counseling. Monica White’s book Freedom Farmers notes, “While the media has often focused on white members of the urban agriculture/food justice/sovereignty movements, both have a strong African American contingent who draw on generations of farming knowledge and a recognition that the existing power structure has little stake in our well-being.”

Despite having a limp from childhood polio, kidney damage from a beating while jailed for sitting at a whites-only restaurant with other members of the Student Non-Violent Committee, and being shot at by white supremacists, Fannie’s stamina never wavered and she continued to be an ardent supporter of the Black freedom movement, women’s rights, voting rights, and the power of agricultural resistance. Fannie died in 1977 from breast cancer.

[blackfreethinkers]

The 2020 Democratic presidential campaign has been surprisingly promising when it comes to addressing poverty. Candidates have offered a host of ideas that would have a significant anti-poverty effect, from universal health care to debt-free college, a living wage, housing for all, universal child care, and more. They have also pledged to push for a debate focused exclusively on the issue—a promise they still need to make good on. But one region that hasn’t received the attention it needs in this or previous elections is the rural Black Belt, specifically the persistently poor counties in 11 Southern states that are home to more than half of the nation’s non-metro poor.

The name “Black Belt” originally referred to the region’s dark, clay soil, before eventually coming to signify its high population of African Americans as well. Today, the region’s roughly 300 rural counties—in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia—each have populations that are between 30 and 80 percent African American. As of 2008, the Black Belt was home to 83 percent of African Americans living outside metropolitan areas. We’re just two weeks away from the South Carolina Democratic primary, on February 29; six more Black Belt states will vote on March 3. It’s time for a presidential candidate to not only engage with the needs of people living in this region but also begin to rectify a history of exploitation and neglect.

There is precedent for it: then-Senator John F. Kennedy’s visit to West Virginia during the 1960 Democratic primary. As Ronald D. Eller describes in his 2008 book Uneven Ground, Kennedy was “genuinely stunned” at the mass poverty he saw, particularly that of unemployed coal miners. He pledged on camera to introduce an aid program for the state if elected—and, after he was, he created a presidential task force to explore a unique federal-state-local partnership for regional development in Appalachia. The task force outlined a program that would support highway construction, health care facilities, land stabilization, timber development, water facilities and sewer treatment, and vocational training. But it would take until 1965 for President Lyndon B. Johnson to succeed in pushing it through Congress, establishing the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC).

Since then, the ARC has received a total of $38 billion in federal funding (adjusted for inflation), benefiting counties across 13 states. While Appalachia still faces challenges such as labor force participation and poor access to health care, the ARC has contributed to largely eliminating the gap between the region’s rates of high school graduation and unemployment and those found nationally. It has helped both to cut Appalachian poverty from 31 to around 17 percent, and to lower the number of high-poverty counties in the region, from 295 to 107.

The idea for a corresponding regional development program in the Black Belt isn’t a new one. Scholars at Southern universities and some politicians—including Democratic US Representative (2003–11) Artur Davis of Alabama and the late Senator (2000–05) Zell Miller of Georgia—have pushed for it since the 1990s. The black rural South’s current unemployment rate of approximately 14 percent and child poverty rate of 51 percent are double those found in rural counties included in the ARC, according to a forthcoming paper from the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies.

“I’ve heard it my whole life: ‘There’s nothing in the Black Belt.’ Are you kidding me?” says Dr. Veronica Womack, a Black Belt native and executive director of the Rural Studies Institute at Georgia College and State University. “This is a region where the people have always made a way out of no way. You can’t find any more hardworking, caring people—people who have continued to raise families, build community, go to church on Sundays, in spite of all of the challenges that have been put in place.” What has been lacking, Womack says, is a commitment to the region so people can “operate at their fullest potential.”

There have been piecemeal legislative efforts to increase the flow of investment to parts of the Black Belt. But none include all 11 states, focus exclusively on Black Belt counties, or—critically—prioritize community participation in designing and leading a commission to address the Black Belt’s unique challenges. “If you understand the tenacity and the resilience of the people who live there, then you understand the importance of them being a part of whatever solutions you have,” Womack says. “The commission has to know the history—the social, political, and economic dynamics of the place and space.”

In 2000, the Delta Regional Authority (DRA) was created as a state-federal partnership that is presided over by eight Southern state governors and a federal cochair. It includes some counties in five Black Belt states and received $25 million for fiscal year 2019. Seventy-five percent of the moneys are supposed to go to distressed counties, and half of those are required to be used on transportation and infrastructure. However, it does not include most of the Black Belt, and none of its board members are African American. It also lacks the community participation and leadership element that Womack says is key.

Arguably the most promising effort was the Southeast Crescent Regional Commission (SCRC), created under the 2008 Farm Bill. Modeled after the ARC, it encompassed counties within seven Black Belt states, and was intended to focus on funding distressed communities for transportation, infrastructure, job training and entrepreneurial development, telecommunications, and sustainable energy solutions. However, while the SCRC was authorized to receive at least $30 million every year through 2019, it was never appropriated more than $250,000 at a time, and “does not appear to be active” as of March 2019, according to the Congressional Research Service. In contrast, the Northern Border Regional Commission—created in the same Farm Bill to address economic hardship in the primarily white populations of northern Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York—has received steady funding, including $10 million to $20 million in each of the past three fiscal years.

The SCRC was championed by the Democratic Representatives Hank Johnson of Georgia and Elaine Luria of Virginia, as well as majority whip James Clyburn, of South Carolina. “Congressman Clyburn has been committed to the SCRC since its inception,” says Hope Derrick, his communications director. “[He] is ready to fight for more funding when the administration appoints a federal cochair, the last hurdle in standing up the commission.”

Womack isn’t surprised by the lack of urgency the SCRC or Black Belt Commission proposals have received from most of the political elite. “When you start talking about policy that will be interpreted as benefiting a region significantly [comprising] black people, then where is the will to actually get that done?” she says. “Even though the Black Belt has all kinds of people in it, there is also a particular combination that our country has had a great difficulty addressing: poor people, and then poor people of color, and then poor black people.”

The need for a commission focused exclusively on the rural Black Belt is most apparent in places like Lowndes County, Alabama, where people are living with raw sewage in their yards.

Lowndes County is located between Selma and Montgomery, and every year tourists pass through, following the route of the historic 1965 civil rights march led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Mostly made up of small rural communities, it has a declining population of under 10,000 people, of whom more than 72 percent are African American. Residents here struggle against the soil that gave the Black Belt its name and made Alabama’s cotton king: Water can’t percolate smoothly through the chalky clay. Traditional septic tanks don’t work there; plumbing backs up when it rains, sending wastewater back into homes through sinks, tubs, and toilets.

The median household income in Lowndes County is $28,000 a year—and the kind of tank that residents would need can cost up to $30,000 for purchase and installation. Some residents resort to “straight piping,” which involves running a PVC pipe away from the home and into the yard, where it discharges untreated waste. As a result of not having affordable waste treatment, families have no choice but to contaminate their own properties. A 2017 study of Lowndes County residents by the Baylor College of Medicine found that 34.5 percent tested positive for hookworm, an intestinal parasite associated with the developing world. After the UN’s special rapporteur on extreme poverty visited homes in Lowndes County and nearby Butler County, he described the waste crisis as “very uncommon in the first world…. I’d have to say that I haven’t seen this.”

“You can say all day long that [people] ought to just move, but [they] are born and raised here,” says Lenice Emanuel, executive director of the nonprofit organization Alabama Institute for Social Justice, who has worked with residents on this issue. “They don’t have the money to just uproot their lives and move to Montgomery 25 miles away. Then you have a transportation issue too—getting back and forth to their jobs,” since many work in the community. She also notes that there are businesses—most of which, advocates say, are white-owned—that do have the necessary infrastructure in place to treat their waste, just a half-mile away from homes dealing with raw sewage. Engineers say that simply expanding municipal sewer lines could help solve the problem for some Black Belt homes. For that, the County would need funding.

According to Emanuel, when county residents have invited state officials to come and witness the conditions firsthand, they have been subjected to “intimidation tactics” such as being threatened with arrest warrants, or even fined for lacking septic tanks they could not afford. These reactions from the state have also made it more difficult for residents to feel sufficiently safe to organize and advocate for change. While Alabama says it stopped issuing arrest warrants for sewage in 2002, a black pastor was arrested as recently as 2014 because a septic tank failed and his church wasn’t able to deal with the overflow. Emanuel says that the damage of past warrants is already done: Many people who received them now have a criminal record, and some have lost or can’t find jobs as a result.

Emanuel draws an analogy between the way people are being treated over the waste issue and the KKK’s showing up in their communities—“I liken it to that kind of terror.” She says it leaves people feeling “helpless” and “at the mercy of the institutions and power structures in the community. And it’s similar all over [Alabama’s] Black Belt counties.”

Alabama Democratic representative Terri Sewell sponsored the Rural Septic Tank Access Act—which passed in the 2018 Farm Bill—to help her constituents in Lowndes County and other rural areas access grants of up to $15,000 to install or maintain wastewater systems. This is still significantly lower than the cost of appropriate septic tanks in many homes. An aide to Sewell says she is working to increase the resources devoted to the issue, including the maximum allowable grant.

It can also be difficult for Black Belt communities to navigate the federal protocols to obtain funds—in part, Womack says, because these local governments just don’t have the staff to work on chasing grants. Case in point: Lowndes County is actually eligible for Delta Regional Authority funding, but if you look at the DRA’s most recent grants for infrastructure in Alabama Black Belt communities, the county with sanitation conditions comparable to the Third World is nowhere to be found. In contrast, the DRA did provide $509,000 to extend an industrial park’s water and sewer system to serve Enviva, the world’s largest wood pellet producer.

When Kennedy visited West Virginia in 1960, poverty in the region was stark: 33 percent of Appalachian families lived in poverty, compared to a national poverty rate of 20 percent; unemployment was 40 percent higher than the US average. Many more workers had given up on finding a job and left the workforce. That year, the Conference of Appalachian Governors declared that underdevelopment had meant that people in the region were “denied reasonable economic and cultural opportunities through no fault of their own.” Moreover, inadequate infrastructure for things like “transportation and water resources [had] hindered the local ability to support necessary public services and private enterprise.”

“The ARC is reparations,” says Spencer Overton, the president of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies. He says that in the coming months, the Joint Center will release a proposal for a Black Belt Regional Commission, hoping to address “an area of our country that once required a large number of people to work there. Those places became automated over time, but large populations are still there and there are fewer jobs. And so we have to come up with policy solutions. That’s the case when we talk about Appalachia; that’s the case when we talk about the Black Belt.”

Kennedy may have advocated for the ARC, in part, because he needed to win over West Virginia voters in the primary. As Michael Bradshaw describes in his 1992 book about the ARC, the senator’s visit to Appalachia came at a key moment in the campaign, when his challenger already had the support of organized labor. Kennedy announced his pledge for a state development program on the day before the vote. He had discussed black Southerners’ struggles during his campaign, but the fact that Appalachia was associated with white poverty made the program politically palatable to white voters and politicians.

Overton points to Appalachia and the Black Belt’s parallel histories of exploitation and resource extraction. In the case of the Black Belt, he says, it has been about “profiting off of cheap labor—whether that is slavery, Jim Crow, or the factories with low taxes, cheap wages, and no unions. Recognizing the unique history and consequent struggles in Appalachia, but not in the Black Belt, is like saying we’re going to treat the opioid crisis as a health epidemic, but we’re going to use the criminal code to deal with the crack epidemic.”

Andy Brack, former press secretary for the late South Carolina Democratic Senator Ernest Hollings and a longtime journalist and editor covering Southern politics, has no doubt as to the root of the structural inequality we see in the Black Belt today. In a 2013 piece, he compared a map showing deep poverty rates with a map of slavery in 1860: “With the blink of an eye, it’s easy to see that these areas easily correlate with where enslaved people lived in 1860. The [Black Belt] is a remnant of plantation life…. One hundred and fifty years after the Civil War, it’s time that this area starts receiving the same attention that Appalachia did.”

Researchers with the Southern Economic Advancement Project (SEAP)—an initiative founded by Stacey Abrams that focuses on policy solutions and capacity-building for vulnerable populations in the South—recently embarked on a listening tour in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and North Carolina. (SEAP is a fiscally sponsored project of the Roosevelt Institute, where I am a journalist-in-residence.) As they spoke with nonprofits and grassroots groups to get a better sense of local challenges, there were some consistent concerns, including a lack of access to transportation, struggles with raw sewage and other environmental issues, and lack of investment from banks. One participant noted the “weight of racism”—as seen in housing separated by race, resegregated schools, and uneven development between predominately white and predominately black areas. Multiple groups cited the challenge of stigma, from outsiders who viewed their communities as hopeless and lacking potential.

Dr. Sarah Beth Gehl, SEAP’s research director, says that in western North Carolina and northern Alabama, which both have ARC funding-eligible counties, the local-state-federal partnership came up repeatedly—for example, for supporting children’s services, local government capacity-building, and transportation for those in addiction recovery. But when SEAP traveled to south Georgia or south Alabama, where counties aren’t covered by the ARC, the conversations were very different. “It was a lot about a lack of resources and a lack of attention,” says Gehl. “The infrastructure needed to take some innovative approaches to tackling deep challenges in these Black Belt communities—that piece was missing.” Moreover, when it came to what some people on the tour called “the basics needed for a dignified life”—like a grocery store, transportation, housing stock, or medical facilities—the resources just weren’t there.

“Economic progress for the Black Belt requires innovation and deep commitment, which means providing consistent investment to address the interconnected issues that hinder growth and block equity,” says Abrams in a statement to The Nation. “Funding the Black Belt Regional Commission would be a declaration of real intent to finally serve this Southern arc, and it is long overdue.”

It is easy to imagine the arguments against a Black Belt Regional Commission that would be loosely based on the ARC. If there is still extensive poverty in Appalachia, why would we repeat the model? But the ARC has had an enormous impact. In the 2018 fiscal year alone, it reported that its investments would create or help retain more than 26,600 jobs, and train and educate more than 34,000 students and workers. The ARC’s $125 million investment was matched by $188.7 million in public and other moneys, and is expected to attract over $1 billion in private investments.

There are ways too that a Black Belt Commission could be done differently. The ARC covers a huge region, including areas that do not suffer from persistent widespread poverty; funds are weighted toward distressed areas, but the appropriated money is inadequate to cover that expanse. A Black Belt Commission could focus exclusively on distressed communities. Also, much of the early ARC money was spent on highway construction through Appalachia—which, as Michael Bradshaw writes, the original ARC director felt was necessary in order to connect poorer economies with wealthier ones. (He also thought it would show legislators “results.”) While infrastructure is vital, a Black Belt Regional Commission could equally emphasize investment in people—their health, education, training, and the creation of jobs that would allow for upward mobility.

Dr. Veronica Womack says she would start with education—from early childhood to higher education—as well as infrastructure development, including for broadband Internet access, investment in start-ups and rural entrepreneurships, and rural health services for people who currently live in “health care deserts.”

“That’s just a start. Because if you’re not healthy, or you don’t have the proper education and training, the likelihood of you being successful in the 21st century is very small,” she says.

Spencer agrees. “Too often, there has been the notion that economic development is attracting a poultry processing plant—very hard, low-wage, unattractive work without a lot of prospects for growth,” he says. “We need to invest in human beings. It gets back to the concept of Black Lives Matter: We really want to recognize the humanity of people, and invest in people so they can achieve their potential.”

In addition to having local elected officials at the table, Womack says a commission should include community-based organizations that have been working in the region for decades, such as the Black Belt Community Foundation, the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, Southwest Georgia Project, and other similarly focused organizations “connected to agriculture and the land—a big piece of how we can be sustainable.” She would also want to invite historically black colleges and universities, technical and community colleges, and land grant and rural institutions such as Georgia College and State University that “understand rural places and are working in the region already.” Crucially, the commission should also hear from activists who are not attached to any particular organization, Womack says, because “the people in their community look to them and their leadership.”

“These folks can tell you exactly where the hiccups are—where the challenges and barriers lie in their being able to develop their communities,” says Womack. “And so, if we are going to hit the mark, it’s going to require us to do a different type of policy and a different type of policy implementation that doesn’t block off people from even being able to participate in the decision-making.”

Yet none of this will be possible without presidential leadership—the kind Kennedy embraced when he visited poverty-stricken areas in West Virginia.

Bernie Sanders, who has called poverty a death sentence, visited Lowndes County last May and pledged to a resident, “This is just the beginning. We have to get attention to the issue, and then we’ll do something about it.” That resident, Pamela Rush, also spoke at a forum on poverty convened by Elijah Cummings and Elizabeth Warren in 2018. Pete Buttigieg noted at one of the debates that poverty hadn’t come up, and that “it deserves a lot of attention”; both he and Amy Klobuchar have struggled to win over black voters. And while Joe Biden has touted his poll numbers with African Americans, he has struggled to connect with younger generations, many of whom feel he falls short in addressing systemic issues.

If any of these or other candidates spend more time in the Black Belt, will they offer so bold a proposal as a Black Belt Regional Commission? Or will they ignore the generational poverty and continued isolation of the region?

Lenice Emanuel says that elected leaders need to take stock of how they are serving, or failing to serve, the people of the region. “We have got to look inward at our own culpability in maintaining these systems of inequity,” she says. “We have to be real with ourselves about that. That’s where the answer lies.”