#if her being a prosecutor running against a felon

[vaguelyaperson]

actually Kamala Harris promising to sign codified abortion rights into law, as the first female president, would be pretty damn metal

[ms-hells-bells]

Because senator Kamala Harris is a prosecutor and I am a felon, I have been following her political rise, with the same focus that my younger son tracks Steph Curry threes. Before it was in vogue to criticize prosecutors, my friends and I were exchanging tales of being railroaded by them. Shackled in oversized green jail scrubs, I listened to a prosecutor in a Fairfax County, Va., courtroom tell a judge that in one night I’d single-handedly changed suburban shopping forever. Everything the prosecutor said I did was true — I carried a pistol, carjacked a man, tried to rob two women. “He needs a long penitentiary sentence,” the prosecutor told the judge. I faced life in prison for carjacking the man. I pleaded guilty to that, to having a gun, to an attempted robbery. I was 16 years old. The old heads in prison would call me lucky for walking away with only a nine-year sentence.

I’d been locked up for about 15 months when I entered Virginia’s Southampton Correctional Center in 1998, the year I should have graduated from high school. In that prison, there were probably about a dozen other teenagers. Most of us had lengthy sentences — 30, 40, 50 years — all for violent felonies. Public talk of mass incarceration has centered on the war on drugs, wrongful convictions and Kafkaesque sentences for nonviolent charges, while circumventing the robberies, home invasions, murders and rape cases that brought us to prison.

The most difficult discussion to have about criminal-justice reform has always been about violence and accountability. You could release everyone from prison who currently has a drug offense and the United States would still outpace nearly every other country when it comes to incarceration. According to the Prison Policy Institute, of the nearly 1.3 million people incarcerated in state prisons, 183,000 are incarcerated for murder; 17,000 for manslaughter; 165,000 for sexual assault; 169,000 for robbery; and 136,000 for assault. That’s more than half of the state prison population.

When Harris decided to run for president, I thought the country might take the opportunity to grapple with the injustice of mass incarceration in a way that didn’t lose sight of what violence, and the sorrow it creates, does to families and communities. Instead, many progressives tried to turn the basic fact of Harris’s profession into an indictment against her. Shorthand for her career became: “She’s a cop,” meaning, her allegiance was with a system that conspires, through prison and policing, to harm Black people in America.

In the past decade or so, we have certainly seen ample evidence of how corrupt the system can be: Michelle Alexander’s best-selling book, “The New Jim Crow,” which argues that the war on drugs marked the return of America’s racist system of segregation and legal discrimination; Ava DuVernay’s “When They See Us,” a series about the wrongful convictions of the Central Park Five, and her documentary “13th,” which delves into mass incarceration more broadly; and “Just Mercy,” a book by Bryan Stevenson, a public interest lawyer, that has also been made into a film, chronicling his pursuit of justice for a man on death row, who is eventually exonerated. All of these describe the destructive force of prosecutors, giving a lot of run to the belief that anyone who works within a system responsible for such carnage warrants public shame.

My mother had an experience that gave her a different perspective on prosecutors — though I didn’t know about it until I came home from prison on March 4, 2005, when I was 24. That day, she sat me down and said, “I need to tell you something.” We were in her bedroom in the townhouse in Suitland, Md., that had been my childhood home, where as a kid she’d call me to bring her a glass of water. I expected her to tell me that despite my years in prison, everything was good now. But instead she told me about something that happened nearly a decade earlier, just weeks after my arrest. She left for work before the sun rose, as she always did, heading to the federal agency that had employed her my entire life. She stood at a bus stop 100 feet from my high school, awaiting the bus that would take her to the train that would take her to a stop near her job in the nation’s capital. But on that morning, a man yanked her into a secluded space, placed a gun to her head and raped her. When she could escape, she ran wildly into the 6 a.m. traffic.

My mother’s words turned me into a mumbling and incoherent mess, unable to grasp how this could have happened to her. I knew she kept this secret to protect me. I turned to Google and searched the word “rape” along with my hometown and was wrecked by the violence against women that I found. My mother told me her rapist was a Black man. And I thought he should spend the rest of his years staring at the pockmarked walls of prison cells that I knew so well.

The prosecutor’s job, unlike the defense attorney’s or judge’s, is to do justice. What does that mean when you are asked by some to dole out retribution measured in years served, but blamed by others for the damage incarceration can do? The outrage at this country’s criminal-justice system is loud today, but it hasn’t led us to develop better ways of confronting my mother’s world from nearly a quarter-century ago: weekends visiting her son in a prison in Virginia; weekdays attending the trial of the man who sexually assaulted her.

We said goodbye to my grandmother in the same Baptist church that, in June 2019, Senator Kamala Harris, still pursuing the Democratic nomination for president, went to give a major speech about why she became a prosecutor. I hadn’t been inside Brookland Baptist Church for a decade, and returning reminded me of Grandma Mary and the eight years of letters she mailed to me in prison. The occasion for Harris’s speech was the annual Freedom Fund dinner of the South Carolina State Conference of the N.A.A.C.P. The evening began with the Black national anthem, “Lift Every Voice and Sing,” and at the opening chord nearly everyone in the room stood. There to write about the senator, I had been standing already and mouthed the words of the first verse before realizing I’d never sung any further.

Each table in the banquet hall was filled with folks dressed in their Sunday best. Servers brought plates of food and pitchers of iced tea to the tables. Nearly everyone was Black. The room was too loud for me to do more than crouch beside guests at their tables and scribble notes about why they attended. Speakers talked about the chapter’s long history in the civil rights movement. One called for the current generation of young rappers to tell a different story about sacrifice. The youngest speaker of the night said he just wanted to be safe. I didn’t hear anyone mention mass incarceration. And I knew in a different decade, my grandmother might have been in that audience, taking in the same arguments about personal agency and responsibility, all the while wondering why her grandbaby was still locked away. If Harris couldn’t persuade that audience that her experiences as a Black woman in America justified her decision to become a prosecutor, I knew there were few people in this country who could be moved.

Describing her upbringing in a family of civil rights activists, Harris argued that the ongoing struggle for equality needed to include both prosecuting criminal defendants who had victimized Black people and protecting the rights of Black criminal defendants. “I was cleareyed that prosecutors were largely not people who looked like me,” she said. This mattered for Harris because of the “prosecutors that refused to seat Black jurors, refused to prosecute lynchings, disproportionately condemned young Black men to death row and looked the other way in the face of police brutality.” When she became a prosecutor in 1990, she was one of only a handful of Black people in her office. When she was elected district attorney of San Francisco in 2003, she recalled, she was one of just three Black D.A.s nationwide. And when she was elected California attorney general in 2010, there were no other Black attorneys general in the country. At these words, the crowd around me clapped. “I knew the unilateral power that prosecutors had with the stroke of a pen to make a decision about someone else’s life or death,” she said.

Harris offered a pair of stories as evidence of the importance of a Black woman’s doing this work. Once, ear hustling, she listened to colleagues discussing ways to prove criminal defendants were gang-affiliated. If a racial-profiling manual existed, their signals would certainly be included: baggy pants, the place of arrest and the rap music blaring from vehicles. She said that she’d told her colleagues: “So, you know that neighborhood you were talking about? Well, I got family members and friends who live in that neighborhood. You know the way you were talking about how folks were dressed? Well, that’s actually stylish in my community.” She continued: “You know that music you were talking about? Well, I got a tape of that music in my car right now.”

The second example was about the mothers of murdered children. She told the audience about the women who had come to her office when she was San Francisco’s D.A. — women who wanted to speak with her, and her alone, about their sons. “The mothers came, I believe, because they knew I would see them,” Harris said. “And I mean literally see them. See their grief. See their anguish.” They complained to Harris that the police were not investigating. “My son is being treated like a statistic,” they would say. Everyone in that Southern Baptist church knew that the mothers and their dead sons were Black. Harris outlined the classic dilemma of Black people in this country: being simultaneously overpoliced and underprotected. Harris told the audience that all communities deserved to be safe.

Among the guests in the room that night whom I talked to, no one had an issue with her work as a prosecutor. A lot of them seemed to believe that only people doing dirt had issues with prosecutors. I thought of myself and my friends who have served long terms, knowing that in a way, Harris was talking about Black people’s needing protection from us — from the violence we perpetrated to earn those years in a series of cells.

Harris came up as a prosecutor in the 1990s, when both the political culture and popular culture were developing a story about crime and violence that made incarceration feel like a moral response. Back then, films by Black directors — “New Jack City,” “Menace II Society,” “Boyz n the Hood” — turned Black violence into a genre where murder and crack-dealing were as ever-present as Black fathers were absent. Those were the years when Representative Charlie Rangel, a Democrat, argued that “we should not allow people to distribute this poison without fear that they might be arrested” and “go to jail for the rest of their natural life.” Those were the years when President Clinton signed legislation that ended federal parole for people with three violent crime convictions and encouraged states to essentially eliminate parole; made it more difficult for defendants to challenge their convictions in court; and made it nearly impossible to challenge prison conditions.

Back then, it felt like I was just one of an entire generation of young Black men learning the logic of count time and lockdown. With me were Anthony Winn and Terell Kelly and a dozen others, all lost to prison during those years. Terell was sentenced to 33 years for murdering a man when he was 17 — a neighborhood beef turned deadly. Home from college for two weeks, a 19-year-old Anthony robbed four convenience stores — he’d been carrying a pistol during three. After he was sentenced by four judges, he had a total of 36 years.

Most of us came into those cells with trauma, having witnessed or experienced brutality before committing our own. Prison, a factory of violence and despair, introduced us to more of the same. And though there were organizations working to get rid of the death penalty, end mandatory minimums, bring back parole and even abolish prisons, there were few ways for us to know that they existed. We suffered. And we felt alone. Because of this, sometimes I reduce my friends’ stories to the cruelty of doing time. I forget that Terell and I walked prison yards as teenagers, discussing Malcolm X and searching for mentors in the men around us. I forget that Anthony and I talked about the poetry of Sonia Sanchez the way others praised DMX. He taught me the meaning of the word “patina” and introduced me to the music of Bill Withers. There were Luke and Fats; and Juvie, who could give you the sharpest edge-up in America with just a razor and comb.

When I left prison in 2005, they all had decades left. Then I went to law school and believed I owed it to them to work on their cases and help them get out. I’ve persuaded lawyers to represent friends pro bono. Put together parole packets — basically job applications for freedom: letters of recommendation and support from family and friends; copies of certificates attesting to vocational training; the record of college credits. We always return to the crimes to provide explanation and context. We argue that today each one little resembles the teenager who pulled a gun. And I write a letter — which is less from a lawyer and more from a man remembering what it means to want to go home to his mother. I write, struggling to condense decades of life in prison into a 10-page case for freedom. Then I find my way to the parole board’s office in Richmond, Va., and try to persuade the members to let my friends see a sunrise for the first time.

Juvie and Luke have made parole; Fats, represented by the Innocence Project at the University of Virginia School of Law, was granted a conditional pardon by Virginia’s governor, Ralph Northam. All three are home now, released just as a pandemic would come to threaten the lives of so many others still inside. Now free, they’ve sent me text messages with videos of themselves hugging their mothers for the first time in decades, casting fishing lines from boats drifting along rivers they didn’t expect to see again, enjoying a cold beer that isn’t contraband.

In February, after 25 years, Virginia passed a bill making people incarcerated for at least 20 years for crimes they committed before their 18th birthdays eligible for parole. Men who imagined they would die in prison now may see daylight. Terell will be eligible. These years later, he’s the mentor we searched for, helping to organize, from the inside, community events for children, and he’s spoken publicly about learning to view his crimes through the eyes of his victim’s family. My man Anthony was 19 when he committed his crime. In the last few years, he’s organized poetry readings, book clubs and fatherhood classes. When Gregory Fairchild, a professor at the Darden School of Business at the University of Virginia, began an entrepreneurship program at Dillwyn Correctional Center, Anthony was among the graduates, earning all three of the certificates that it offered. He worked to have me invited as the commencement speaker, and what I remember most is watching him share a meal with his parents for the first time since his arrest. But he must pray that the governor grants him a conditional pardon, as he did for Fats.

I tell myself that my friends are unique, that I wouldn’t fight so hard for just anybody. But maybe there is little particularly distinct about any of us — beyond that we’d served enough time in prison. There was a skinny light-skinned 15-year-old kid who came into prison during the years that we were there. The rumor was that he’d broken into the house of an older woman and sexually assaulted her. We all knew he had three life sentences. Someone stole his shoes. People threatened him. He’d had to break a man’s jaw with a lock in a sock to prove he’d fight if pushed. As a teenager, he was experiencing the worst of prison. And I know that had he been my cellmate, had I known him the way I know my friends, if he reached out to me today, I’d probably be arguing that he should be free.

But I know that on the other end of our prison sentences was always someone weeping. During the middle of Harris’s presidential campaign, a friend referred me to a woman with a story about Senator Harris that she felt I needed to hear. Years ago, this woman’s sister had been missing for days, and the police had done little. Happenstance gave this woman an audience with then-Attorney General Harris. A coordinated multicity search followed. The sister had been murdered; her body was found in a ravine. The woman told me that “Kamala understands the politics of victimization as well as anyone who has been in the system, which is that this kind of case — a 50-year-old Black woman gone missing or found dead — ordinarily does not get any resources put toward it.” They caught the man who murdered her sister, and he was sentenced to 131 years. I think about the man who assaulted my mother, a serial rapist, because his case makes me struggle with questions of violence and vengeance and justice. And I stop thinking about it. I am inconsistent. I want my friends out, but I know there is no one who can convince me that this man shouldn’t spend the rest of his life in prison.

My mother purchased her first single-family home just before I was released from prison. One version of this story is that she purchased the house so that I wouldn’t spend a single night more than necessary in the childhood home I walked away from in handcuffs. A truer account is that by leaving Suitland, my mother meant to burn the place from memory.

I imagined that I had singularly introduced my mother to the pain of the courts. I was wrong. The first time she missed work to attend court proceedings was to witness the prosecution of a kid the same age as I was when I robbed a man. He was probably from Suitland, and he’d attempted to rob my mother at gunpoint. The second time, my mother attended a series of court dates involving me, dressed in her best work clothes to remind the prosecutor and judge and those in the courtroom that the child facing a life sentence had a mother who loved him. The third time, my mother took off days from work to go to court alone and witness the trial of the man who raped her and two other women. A prosecutor’s subpoena forced her to testify, and her solace came from knowing that prison would prevent him from attacking others.

After my mother told me what had happened to her, we didn’t mention it to each other again for more than a decade. But then in 2018, she and I were interviewed on the podcast “Death, Sex & Money.” The host asked my mother about going to court for her son’s trial when he was facing life. “I was raped by gunpoint,” my mother said. “It happened just before he was sentenced. So when I was going to court for Dwayne, I was also going for a court trial for myself.” I hadn’t forgotten what happened, but having my mother say it aloud to a stranger made it far more devastating.

On the last day of the trial of the man who raped her, my mother told me, the judge accepted his guilty plea. She remembers only that he didn’t get enough time. She says her nose began to bleed. When I asked her what she would have wanted to happen to her attacker, she replied, “That I’d taken the deputy’s gun and shot him.”

Harris has studied crime-scene and autopsy photos of the dead. She has confronted men in court who have sexually assaulted their children, sexually assaulted the elderly, scalped their lovers. In her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime,” Harris praised the work of Sunny Schwartz — creator of the Resolve to Stop the Violence Project, the first restorative-justice program in the country to offer services to offenders and victims, which began at a jail in San Francisco. It aims to help inmates who have committed violent crimes by giving them tools to de-escalate confrontations. Harris wrote a bill with a state senator to ensure that children who witness violence can receive mental health treatment. And she argued that safety is a civil right, and that a 60-year sentence for a series of restaurant armed robberies, where some victims were bound or locked in freezers, “should tell anyone considering viciously preying on citizens and businesses that they will be caught, convicted and sent to prison — for a very long time.”

Politicians and the public acknowledge mass incarceration is a problem, but the lengthy prison sentences of men and women incarcerated during the 1990s have largely not been revisited. While the evidence of any prosecutor doing work on this front is slim, as a politician arguing for basic systemic reforms, Harris has noted the need to “unravel the decades-long effort to make sentencing guidelines excessively harsh, to the point of being inhumane”; criticized the bail system; and called for an end to private prisons and criticized the companies that charge absurd rates for phone calls and electronic-monitoring services.

In June, months into the Covid-19 pandemic, and before she was tapped as the vice-presidential nominee, I had the opportunity to interview Harris by phone. A police officer’s knee on the neck of George Floyd, choking the life out of him as he called for help, had been captured on video. Each night, thousands around the world protested. During our conversation, Harris told me that as the only Black woman in the United States Senate “in the midst of the killing of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery,” countless people had asked for stories about her experiences with racism. Harris said that she was not about to start telling them “about my world for a number of reasons, including you should know about the issue that affects this country as part of the greatest stain on this country.” Exhausted, she no longer answered the questions. I imagined she believes, as Toni Morrison once said, that “the very serious function of racism” is “distraction. It keeps you from doing your work.”

But these days, even in the conversations that I hear my children having, race suffuses so much. I tell Harris that my 12-year-old son, Micah, told his classmates and teachers: “As you all know, my dad went to jail. Shouldn’t the police who killed Floyd go to jail?” My son wanted to know why prison seemed to be reserved for Black people and wondered whose violence demanded a prison cell.

“In the criminal-justice system,” Harris replied, “the irony, and, frankly, the hypocrisy is that whenever we use the words ‘accountability’ and ‘consequence,’ it’s always about the individual who was arrested.” Again, she began to make a case that would be familiar to any progressive about the need to make the system accountable. And while I found myself agreeing, I began to fear that the point was just to find ways to treat officers in the same brutal way that we treat everyone else. I thought about the men I’d represented in parole hearings — and the friends I’d be representing soon. And wondered out loud to Harris: How do we get to their freedom?

“We need to reimagine what public safety looks like,” the senator told me, noting that she would talk about a public health model. “Are we looking at the fact that if you focus on issues like education and preventive things, then you don’t have a system that’s reactive?” The list of those things becomes long: affordable housing, job-skills development, education funding, homeownership. She remembered how during the early 2000s, when she was the San Francisco district attorney and started Back on Track (a re-entry program that sought to reduce future incarceration by building the skills of the men facing drug charges), many people were critical. “ ‘You’re a D.A. You’re supposed to be putting people in jail, not letting them out,’” she said people told her.

It always returns to this for me — who should be in prison, and for how long? I know that American prisons do little to address violence. If anything, they exacerbate it. If my friends walk out of prison changed from the boys who walked in, it will be because they’ve fought with the system — with themselves and sometimes with the men around them — to be different. Most violent crimes go unsolved, and the pain they cause is nearly always unresolved. And those who are convicted — many, maybe all — do far too much time in prison.

And yet, I imagine what I would do if the Maryland Parole Commission contacted my mother, informing her that the man who assaulted her is eligible for parole. I’m certain I’d write a letter explaining how one morning my mother didn’t go to work because she was in a hospital; tell the board that the memory of a gun pointed at her head has never left; explain how when I came home, my mother told me the story. Some violence changes everything.

The thing that makes you suited for a conversation in America might be the very thing that precludes you from having it. Terell, Anthony, Fats, Luke and Juvie have taught me that the best indicator of whether I believe they should be free is our friendship. Learning that a Black man in the city I called home raped my mother taught me that the pain and anger for a family member can be unfathomable. It makes me wonder if parole agencies should contact me at all — if they should ever contact victims and their families.

Perhaps if Harris becomes the vice president we can have a national conversation about our contradictory impulses around crime and punishment. For three decades, as a line prosecutor, a district attorney, an attorney general and now a senator, her work has allowed her to witness many of them. Prosecutors make a convenient target. But if the system is broken, it is because our flaws more than our virtues animate it. Confronting why so many of us believe prisons must exist may force us to admit that we have no adequate response to some violence. Still, I hope that Harris reminds the country that simply acknowledging the problem of mass incarceration does not address it — any more than keeping my friends in prison is a solution to the violence and trauma that landed them there.

In light of Harris being endorsed by Biden and highly likely to be the Democratic Party candidate, I thought I would share this balanced, understanding of both sides, article in regard to Harris and her career as a prosecutor, as I know that will be something dragged out by bad actors and useful idiots (you have a bunch of people stating 'Kamala is a cop', which is completely false, and also factless and misleading statements about 'mass incarceration' under her). I'm not saying she doesn't deserve to be criticised or that there is nothing about her career that can be criticised, but it should at least be representative of the truth and understanding of the complexities of the legal system.

[asm5129]

Concerning Biden dropping out: I don’t think we’re doomed.

To be clear: I don’t think this was good, and AOC said it was mainly because democrats were caving to donors. I believe her.

But also—better to have a candidate the Democratic Party can unite behind than someone they’re actively calling to step away who refuses to.

I think having a nominee most elected democrats don’t support is probably one of the worst possible scenarios going into such a high stakes election.

Kamala is most likely to be the immediate pick, particularly if there’s a plan already in place which is likely, but despite the chaos part of me does hope that we have an open election.

Just cuz a big part of the issue with Biden is people felt trapped. They had no other real options.

So part of me feels like giving their base choices for who they have faith in is not the worst idea. I very much doubt there will be an open election though, we don’t have much time so chances are the plan is for Kamala to step in, and the more I think about it the more I think she might actually have a chance.

For one thing, Trump won’t be able to help himself from being blatantly racist and sexist towards her, which will hopefully alienate more potential voters.

And for another, it could build a lot of confidence if the democratic nominee is capable of essentially prosecuting trump on the world stage.

If it is Kamala, there’s three key things that need to be considered:

One, she’s got a long history of being a prosecutor. There’s legitimate reasons not to like her track record there but it’s not horrible experience for a candidate to have when running against a convicted felon.

Two, she needs a very strong VP pick.

three: she needs to fix one of Biden’s biggest flaws—she needs to fight the narratives being spread by Trump and Trump loyalists. Biden rarely communicated to the American public throughout his presidency, which let a lot of narratives take root

[mikeysbride]

Election 2024: The Aftermath

Last week was hard. It has taken me this long to be able to fully formulate my thoughts on how the election for President of United States ended. It did not end as the majority of the people that I know would have liked. It was Kamala Harris versus Donald Trump — literally good versus evil, authoritarianism versus democracy, humanity versus inhumanity. As a prosecutor, Kamala Harris made a career of putting men like Donald Trump in jail. And yet, evil won… Or so it would seem.

It was a devastating blow to democracy. Now, twice in my daughters’ young lives, they have had to witness their country choose the most mediocre of men over a woman of merit who is far more qualified — first, Hillary Clinton in 2016 and now Kamala Harris in 2024. As teenagers, they are now more engaged and aware of what is happening and what all this means. We have all shed many tears and had to regroup.

It has to be said that I’m not wholly convinced Trump actually won. After all, he said months ago that he didn’t need people to vote because he had all the votes he needed, plenty of votes. WTAF was that supposed to mean? Not only that, but after record turnout and new registrations, there were somehow fewer votes? There have been reports of votes that weren’t counted as well. And we are supposed to believe that someone so vile swept every one of the swing states? Let’s also not forget the unfounded bomb threats called in to many democratic-leaning voting precincts. The math isn’t mathing. I feel that Donald Trump stole this election the way he claimed that Joe Biden did in 2020. The difference is that Joe Biden did no such thing and also that, unlike Trump, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are decent humans who will not encourage an insurrection to dispute the election results. That is exactly what he was counting on. Now he and his dictator friends like Putin have the U.S. exactly where they want us, in danger of losing the very freedoms we are supposed to stand for.

So much was on the line in this election. Reproductive rights for women, protection for the gay and trans community, immigration, and income tax and cost of living relief for middle class families are all up for grabs now. If Trump did not orchestrate all this and did actually win, it’s perhaps an even scarier scenario. That means that our country really is filled with people who chose a conman, felon, rapist, liar, and racist over a woman - yet again - who has more than enough experience in all three branches of government to lead this country and to do so with compassion and grace. Frankly, it’s damn embarrassing to be an American right now. The rest of the world has to be looking at us as if we have lost our collective minds, and who can blame them? We had the opportunity to move forward in a big way and then threw it all away.

Once again, the U.S. has shown that women (and especially Black women) are held to a higher standard to the point that she can be an ideal candidate and still fall short to patriarchy, misogyny, and racism even when running against the poorest excuse for a human we’ve seen in quite some time. But he’s a man. A rich white man. And somehow in this country that still carries more weight than being even the most capable woman of any race. That’s a hard pill to swallow, especially for someone like me who is a Black woman raising her daughters to be strong and to believe they can do anything they put their minds to. Can they? I absolutely still believe they can, but recent history shows that being the President may not be included in that dream. There should be a disclaimer that says results may vary.

In the coming weeks, months, and even years, there will be much said about where the Harris campaign went wrong and what she should’ve done differently. But if we are honest, we have to acknowledge that all of that speculation is bullshit. Truth be told, she ran a flawless campaign. It was perfectly executed from start to finish, and she had so much momentum behind her. There were people voting for her who had never voted for a Democrat before. Even longtime Republican leaders were rallying behind her. I have no time or energy for talking heads who want to lay blame as to where she fell short. She did not. It wasn’t the campaign that missed the mark. The bottom line is that this country’s history of racism and misogyny is still alive and well, and until that is dealt with, this is where we will be.

Still, none of this means it’s time to give up the fight for justice. No, instead it means that we have to rail even harder against the forces that would conspire to bring us down. To be silent is to be compliant. We will not go quietly. I have to believe that there’s still enough genuinely good-hearted people in the world that when we join forces good will overcome evil. To live without hope is to not live at all. We must keep fighting for what is right, fighting for our rights, and fighting against all odds because none of us are free until all of us are free.

[bllsbailey]

Kamala Wants to Frame Campaign As Prosecutor Versus Felon: That’s Not Good … for Her

The fledgling campaign for Kamala Harris is reportedly seeking to frame the 2024 presidential election as a prosecutor versus convicted felon narrative.

The initial observation here is that the “felon” in this story is actually not the bad guy.

If the vice president wants to push her record as district attorney in San Francisco and later as California attorney general, she does so at her peril.

Doing so would expose her as an inept investigator, a champion of jailing poor minorities, and an avid supporter of defunding the police while funding criminals.

Let’s take a look, shall we? We’ll start with her issues struggling to connect with minority communities, something Democrats are relying on in making headway in the race against Donald Trump.

A video from an appearance at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco in 2010 shows Harris gleefully relaying a story about threatening parents with jail time if their kids skipped school.

“I believe a child growing without an education is tantamount to a crime,” Harris told the crowd in attendance. “So I decided I was going to start prosecuting parents for truancy.”

The video shows a smiling and laughing Harris sharing this story, noting that she had the political capital to try and “get those kids in school” by threatening their parents.

Critics were quick to point out that those most vulnerable to Harris’s over-zealous prosecution of parents were low-income minority families.

Harris, in another clip, can be heard describing how she tried intimidating a single homeless mother of three kids.

The Democrat can be seen laughing about sending her office’s homicide and gang prosecutors to school to meet with the struggling woman. 

“When you go over there, look really mean,” she recalled.

Harris would later suggest she was simply trying to connect parents to the resources they needed. Then, the charges would be dropped.

Kamala Harris Is Clearly Burdened by What Has Been

HOT TAKES: California Weighs In on a Potential Kamala Harris Presidency

Another sticking point for minority voters has been Harris's history of expanding convictions of marijuana users in California.

As California attorney general, Harris oversaw thousands of marijuana-related convictions. Critics argue that these convictions disproportionately affected black and brown communities and that Harris's office fought against efforts to reduce sentences or expunge records.

Harris later came under additional fire for that prosecutorial record when she claimed she smoked weed in high school, with some branding her a hypocrite.

While Kamala has little in the way of street cred due to her record as a malicious prosecutor, Trump’s own street cred has been amplified by being the victim of malicious prosecutors.

Craig Scott, who described himself as a "Black Robinhood" in a Newsweek op-ed, argued “Trump’s repeated run-ins with the law, and what seems like an unfair obsession with catching him and punishing him disproportionately for his so-called ‘crimes,’ reminds a lot of us of what was done to us” in the black community.

“He’s literally been in my shoes. No other president can brag on that,” Scott said. “And believe me, he will brag about it.”

Harris doesn’t have near the cachet with certain voting blocs that Democrats hope she does. Bring on the prosecutor v. felon push from her campaign.

When she wasn’t targeting poor minorities in the Golden State, Harris was failing women in her own office. As Attorney General, Harris ignored an accusation and lawsuit alleging sexual harassment by a top aide in her office.

That complaint involved “gender harassment” perpetrated against her aide’s former executive assistant, along with allegations that she was forced into “demeaning behavior.”

The case ultimately led to a $400,000 settlement and the resignation of that aide who had been described as one of Harris’s closest professional confidantes. The then-AG feigned ignorance of the whole accusation and lawsuit despite it being reported years earlier.

Only an inept prosecutor would completely miss a harassment case in her own office. But then, ineptitude defines Kamala.

In 2006, she granted probation to a man who went on to murder two people. At the height of the 2020 race riots, Harris encouraged people to contribute to a bail fund to free violent rioters. One of those freed ended up being charged with murder.

She continues to raise money for that bail fund.

When she isn’t jailing people for minor offenses and bailing out those with violent criminal records, Harris has been a vocal supporter of defunding the police.

She supported the movement and said we need to "reimagine" public safety, even applauding the Los Angeles Mayor for slashing police funding by $150 million as the riots were ongoing.

Kamala Harris Championed California's Sanctuary State Policies and People Are Dead As a Result

Think the Border Crisis Is Bad Now? Experts Say a Harris Presidency Would Make It Even Worse

Harris also backed abolishing ICE, the agency that arrests and deports dangerous criminals, insisting that “we need to probably be thinking about starting from scratch.”

You read that right. The woman Joe Biden tapped as border czar wanted to abolish the one enforcement mechanism for prosecuting criminal illegal aliens.

Kamala Harris was never qualified to be San Francisco DA. She was even less qualified to be California’s AG. It’s not even a question when it comes to the White House.

Even on the heels of one of the most incompetent presidencies in history, Harris's history as a prosecutor and the very few things she was tasked with as Veep illustrates she’s not exactly an upgrade over Biden.

[nodynasty4us]

The risks of running Harris are different than the risks of running Biden again, but I am not convinced that they are larger. In fact, it’s hard to argue that Harris is the weaker candidate at this stage. She is part of an administration that has accomplished a great deal, and she’s the most visible member of that administration who is capable of talking about abortion, the one issue Democrats are strongest on.... She has enough distance from Biden on foreign policy that she may be able to avoid being totally hamstrung by the Israel/Gaza issue.... Her weaknesses in 2020—primarily her history as a tough-on-crime prosecutor, which was summed up by the leftist jeer of “Kamala is a cop”—were specific to an extremely odd election year, and look a whole lot more like assets in a 2024 race against a convicted felon. ... There is little doubt Republicans will challenge her candidacy in court��it should tell you something that many of them want Biden, not Harris, as the Democratic presidential nominee—but the fact that she’s already running with Biden certainly makes any replacement of him a simpler financial proposition.

Jill Filipovic, Biden news: Why I support—but fear—a Kamala Harris presidential run, in Slate

[waywardrose-archive]

Hello! How about C and O for Flip??? You're amazing!!!!

I’m not the only amazing one here! 😘 Thank you so much for prompting me! I hope you enjoy, honey.

pairing: flip zimmerman x reader

rating: teen

warning/tags: past physical-abuse mention, brief injury description, off-screen murder, period-typical sexism

Comfort - How would they help their s/o when they feel down/have a panic attack etc.?

On Cloud Nine - What are they like when they are in love? Is it obvious for others? How do they express their feelings?

Prompts from the Fluff Alphabet

-

IT’S TOO LATE TO TURN BACK NOW

The first time Flip saw you, you were bruised and cuffed. The scuttlebutt around the precinct was you had run over and murdered your abusive ex-boyfriend. Some of the officers thought you were unhinged and should be thrown in the looney bin.

Flip did not agree. And neither did the judge. Your bail was set comically low.

He surreptitiously read through your case file and then your ex’s. The ex, while relatively young, had a rap sheet as long as Flip’s leg. How you got involved with him was beyond Flip.

Your trial was cut and dry. You were charged with vehicular homicide, fined $800, and sentenced to two-years probation. Which was better than a five-year prison sentence with a chance of parole at three. Unfortunately, now that you were a felon, you lost your job. The only place that would even talk to you was the little 24-hour diner by the airfield.

Flip didn’t know why he was so interested or why he kept track of you. He chalked it up to being curious. And maybe a little attracted. You were smart, knew when to stay quiet, which lawyer to hire. Your eyes had snapped at the gall of the state when the prosecutor had tried to paint you as just another crazy girl. When the judge had looked at you, you had stared right back and shook your head.

Your lip had still been busted then. Your left eye ringed. Handprints around your neck. You hadn’t hidden behind strategic makeup. You had worn your hair back for all the world to see what your ex had done to you.

Flip had been proud of your chutzpah from his place at the back of the closed courtroom. He was glad that piece of shit was dead. Afterwards, he found out who your probation officer would be. He suggested the community service part of your probation be completed at his precinct.

The officer had snorted, but agreed.

-

Today was the second day of community service. You examined your face in the mirror. The bruising had finally faded. You looked almost normal, but you knew you’d never be able to see your reflection without remembering everything. That deranged look in his eyes, the hard thump against the hood of your car, the crazing of the windshield when he hit.

Your mother called for you from the living room. It had been collectively agreed upon that your ruined car would be sold for parts and you would move back in until your probation was over. That left you feeling like a child.

A child with almost $1000 in debt and a probation officer.

However, in some ways, it made it all easier. Your mother took most of the domestic duties while you had a regulated schedule and kept your head down. You worked part-time at Bo’s Diner during the day. In the evenings, you filed reports and typed inner-office communiques at the police department down the street from your favorite library. At night, you read and went to bed early.

Your mother dropped you off with a reserved grin and a wish for a good evening. She hadn’t been the same since posting your bail. You father, on the other hand, refused to speak with you beyond greetings and orders. He’d gotten you a lawyer for the trial, though, and had moved your bedroom furniture into your old room with the rest going into the basement. You supposed that was something.

You thanked her, got out of the vehicle, and walked into the precinct like you weren’t a convicted felon. You checked in at the front desk and were walked back to the records room. The glass-walled workspace on your left was unoccupied save for a lone detective.

The detective had black shaggy hair, creamy skin, and a cigarette between his full lips. He was handsome in a way you didn’t expect a policeman to be. Your eyes met for a second, and something about his formidable demeanor startled you into a faster pace.

You weren’t scared, you knew that much. No one scared you like him. A dark voice reminded you that you’d killed him, too. There was nothing to be scared of now.

The clerk in the records room gave you the tasks for the shift. There were multiple stacks of files to put away and announcements to be proofread/typed/distributed. You had to use the dreaded mimeo, but, you reminded yourself, it was better than being in jail.

The clerk clocked out after an hour and told you if you had any problems, to take them to the detective in charge. You glanced out the open door to see the detective’s broad back.

-

Without your face beat to shit, you were stunning. He got the impression you would be, but he was not prepared. His palms wouldn’t stop sweating. He could barely concentrate on the report he was trying to finish.

And he couldn’t even see you. You couldn’t really see him, either. He didn’t know what the hell his problem was.

It had been so stupid to take the evening shift for the next two weeks. He had wanted to make sure you settled in fine and no one gave you any crap, though. He was mother-hen-ing a person who didn’t even know he existed. You didn’t need protection, anyway. You were capable and clearly handling your situation just fine.

A quick rap on the open door jolted him from his thoughts. He looked up to see you. Without even thinking about it, he jumped to his feet. Of course it was you. His chair squeaked as it rolled back a few inches.

“Sorry for disturbing you, Detective.” You held up a stack of paper and shrugged. “Memo for tomorrow.”

Oh shit. Holy shit. Fucking shit.

Your voice. So much different than it had been during the trial. Maybe it was acoustics. Whatever it was, whatever the reason, he liked your voice.

Then he realized he’d been staring for too long. He shook himself out of it, wiped his damp hand on his jeans, and held it out as he introduced himself. You shuffled the stack in your arms and shook his hand, offering your name.

“Call me Flip,” he offered. “Can I help?”

“Oh! Uh…” You studied the stack. “Sure, thanks. I hope that’s okay.”

“‘Course it is.”

He took the top half of the papers and began distributing them on the cluttered desks around him. He watched you move to the other side of the bullpen. You didn’t scurry like a frightened mouse, like he expected you to. He tried not to stare at the way your hips swayed as you walked.

“How’re you settling in?” he asked to break the silence.

“I’m okay—all things considered.”

He feigned ignorance. “Oh?” He didn’t want you to know how much he knew.

“I’m sure you’ve heard,” you said as you paused by Myers’ desk.

“I’ve heard a lot of things.”

You grinned. “Seeing as you’re a detective.”

He huffed a little laugh and shrugged.

“I’m okay,” you answered. “Everyone’s been… nice?”

“With a question at the end.”

“I mean, I didn’t expect a party.”

“Of course.”

“But considering my conviction, I expected…”

“Disrespect?” he offered.

You nodded. “Disrespect.”

“Well, if anyone gives you any, you can come to me.”

“Thank you, Detective.”

He corrected, “Flip.”

“Flip,” you said with a smile. Your voice was warmer than it had been.

He absolutely did not feel butterflies in his stomach.

-

A knock on the open records-room door drew you away from filing. It was Flip, of course. It was only the two of you at the back of the building. Somehow, that didn’t make you nervous in the slightest. Though he was tall and broad-shouldered—obviously strong—and had a gun in his shoulder holster, you felt safe around him. Flip wasn’t anything like him.

“Can I buy you a coffee from our gracious break-room?” he asked.

That was code for a half-hour smoke break in the courtyard. It had become routine over the past week or so. You would join him and talk about whatever. Sometimes it was office gossip, or the news, or what you’d been reading. Whatever the topic, that half an hour always flew by quickly.

You agreed to a coffee, and he disappeared from the doorway. You didn’t even have to tell him how you liked your coffee anymore. He remembered.

You waited for him by the outside door and held it open when he returned, since his hands were obviously occupied. He murmured a thanks as he passed.

The late-spring night was just warm enough to enjoy. The pale pea gravel crunched under your heels as you followed him to a bench. He took one end and set the mugs down in the middle. You sat on the opposite end with a tension-relieving sigh. It was nice to sit in the dim courtyard, away from all the reminders of your circumstances.

“I read your file,” Flip said as he put a cigarette between his lips.

You just had to think it, didn’t you? Well, so much for distancing yourself from your circumstances.

“So, you know.”

Now, he was going to admonish you like your father had. How could you date someone like him? What were you thinking? I thought you were smarter than that. You should’ve called the police, should’ve seen it coming.

Shoulda shoulda shoulda.

“Yeah, I read your ex’s, too.” The clink of Flip’s lighter opening punctuated the sentence. “I’m not saying I like what you did, but I understand.”

He lit the cigarette, the soft crackle of his first inhale splintered the tense silence.

You whispered, “I didn’t like it, either.”

“I wish you hadn’t had to do it.”

“He wouldn’t leave me alone after I left him. He called all hours of the night. He broke in and left a bouquet on the kitchen counter. I know he took something, too, but I never figured out what.”

“Why didn’t you call the police?”

“How could I prove it was him? Everyone would’ve thought it was a sweet gesture or something.” You picked up your coffee and took a sip. It was perfect. “I tried to have the landlord change the locks, but he wouldn’t unless I paid him half a month’s rent.”

“Seems a little steep.”

“The asshole didn’t want to drag his sorry ass across town is all.”

“Then it happened.”

“If you’ve read my case, then you know how it went down.”

“Yeah, I know.”

There was something about Flip’s tone, something soft, that made you finally look at him. He met your gaze. His downright pretty eyes glinted in the low light. If you were anyone else, if the circumstances were different, you would’ve leaned over to kiss him. He looked like he might be receptive.

Flip said, “I wanna dig him up and shoot him out of spite.”

You laughed at his unexpected comment. You threw your head back and laughed at the velvet night sky. Oh, how you would love to see Flip, covered in dirt, shooting at the closed casket with your dead ex inside. You’d be covered in dirt, too. You’d set that casket on fire at the end; roast marshmallows over that son-of-a-bitch’s grave.

Your breath stuttered between one chuckle and the next. Why couldn’t you have met Flip before this? You would’ve chosen him any day of the week.

You took a sip of coffee to loosen your suddenly tight throat. Yes, you would’ve picked Flip. But it was too late now. Your eyes flooded at the thought. You looked up and blinked back your tears.

“Hey,” Flip murmured.

You shook your head, and Flip said a gentle “hey” again. The bright cherry on his spent cigarette arched across the courtyard like a lost comet. He scooted closer and put a hand on top of your wrist. His hand was warm and huge and welcome.

“Talk to me.”

You croaked, “It’s too late for me.”

“Too late for what?”

For everything. For love. For avoiding pain. You were damaged goods now. You were a murderer, a felon, an idiot who didn’t see him for what he was. You couldn’t imagine anyone wanting you.

You tried to grin at Flip. “I wish I’d known you earlier.”

“You know me now.”

“You don’t mind?”

“Mind what?”

You wanted to protest, tell him he shouldn’t bother, that he should mind. He plucked the mug from your hand and set it on the bench. He took your hand in both of his and brought it to his lips to kiss. It was such a simple gesture. It made you feel as though it wasn’t too late.

Maybe it wasn’t.

-

tag list: @zaneholtzwrites  @bluesnowyangel  @tinyplanet-explorers  @isislockett  @makingtimemine  @adam-thotty   @nightkitchentarot  @strangesentimentalhuman  @itsthegreatestsworld  @spookynerdygalaxy  @softcrybabykid  @angelicaalien  @opehlia-alexander  @anni–hilation  @ohmagawd-life  @avatamriel  @accio-em  @artttrash  @driverficarchive  (comment or message me to be added)

[allakinwande]

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel/Pat A. Robinson

CHASING DEMOCRACY:

The attack on the American voter.

BY: JB Hanna

_______________________________________________

"Now many of our Christians have what I call the 'goo-goo syndrome.' Good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people. They never have been from the beginning of our country, and they are not now. As a matter of fact our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."

-Paul Weyrich 1968

TARRANT COUNTY TX.

In 1827, Edward E. Tarrant had established himself as a wealthy man, probably the wealthiest in all of Red River County. A veteran of the war of 1812, now a sheriff, he left his mark in Tarrant County Texas, the namesake of the former officer of the “fourth brigade.”

On September 29, 1843, Tarrant along with Texas state attorney general George Whitfield would draft The “Bird’s Fort Treaty.” Which surreptitiously states in Article XXIV, that; “The government of Texas has the right of working all mines that have been discovered or will be discovered on the territory of the Indians.”

Just as surreptitiously as the terms of Crystal Mason’s signed affidavit that stated she was not eligible to vote as a convicted felon, some hundred and seventy five years later in that same Tarrant County. Mason was on community service on November 8, 2016 for a her 2012 conviction on tax fraud. Only voting after the urging of her mother, Ms. Mason was sentenced to five years in prison on voter fraud charges, for a provisional ballet vote that was never counted.

Crystal Mason’s unfortunate miscarriage of justice is the oddity, not the model. The model being the strategy adopted by many incumbents on the right, while the left has historically supported voter registration initiatives, conservatives (since the voting rights act of 2013) have practiced down presser tactics with almost surgical precision. From good ol fashioned jerrymandring to voter caging and voter roll purges.

Stories like that of Crystal Mason, no matter how rare, are aggressively publicized and spun in efforts to paint a fanciful portrait of voter fraud gone wild. These trumped up horrors however, have never been substantiated.

Max Faulkner/Fort Worth Star-Telegram via Getty Images.

During the presidential campaign of 2016,

Vice President nominee, Mike Pence came under scrutiny from voter rights advocates when Indiana State police raided the voter registration office of Patriot Majority USA, in October of 2016. Indiana progressives called conspiracy on the would be VIce president.

The nonprofit Patriot Majority, had registered over 45,000 voters, mostly African American. Just one week from the voter registration deadline and 5,000 voters short of their 50,000 target at the time of the raid. Founded in 2005, PM was accused of registering voters twice, in addition to applications that had missing or unverified zip codes and addresses. This is often a problem with grassroots voter registration initiatives staffed by everyday citizens, the lack of experience, training, and in many cases, after work hours by constituents looking to supplement their income, have always bore such inconsistencies. Though well meaning, these efforts give way to questionable voter registration applications, that ones opponent will rightfully pounce.

When you open Patriot Majority’s web sight, the home page is striking. Waves of red and white stripes, the famous Washington crossing the Delaware painting emblazoned on the header. With the current political climate, rife with its suede patriotism and the far lefts deepening dive into a socialist creed, one might expect Patriot Majorities home page to spawn links to diatribes of pro gun advocacy and states rights. But PM claims to be a bipartisan movement. While it seems that the issue is the shotty work of some canvassers, Common Cause Indiana and the NAACP have filed a federal lawsuit against Marion County of Indian after the raid on charges of voter suppression by closing early voting in a sector with over 700,000 registered voters. Former Indiana governor mike Pence, now ironically, head of the Elections Integrity Commission, boasts “What is historic here is that our president-elect won 30 to 50 states. He won more counties than any candidate on our side.

The Georgia State showdown

Georgia’s Democratic candidate for governor Stacey Abrams finds herself in a historical yet tight race in Georgia’s gubernatorial midterms. The Gulfport native faces off against opponent Brian kemp, the self proclaimed “politically incorrect conservative.” The cautionary view in mid August was that Kemp could have a strong surge in the last two months leading to the peach state showdown, much like Nathan Deal in 2014. But as of reporting, the race is still in a dead heat. Kemp has been mocked for his ads that some on the left liken to a Dave Chapelle or SNL skit. But while democrats laugh, Brian Kemp is practicing more “politics as usual” than his campaign readaric may assert. Kemp’s influence on voter registration as Secretary of State should be no laughing matter to democrats.

The heat was on as the summer closed out in Randolph County Georgia, a sort of patient zero for the National attention to suspected voter suppression. The Georgia county quickly beat back a move to close seven of nine polling places in the historically black canton. But the victory, while sweet, is little to stop the suppression of voters in the rest of the state. Like Tarrant in Texas, Randolph county is named after another slave owning statesman, Ol’ John Randolph of Roanoke. A career politician who also served as prosecutor of the associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Samuel Chase on charges of impeachment. Chase would later be acquitted by the senate. Roanoke famously stated,

“The most delicious of all privileges, spending other people’s money.” Might be proud of his states insidious politico operandi.

Several groups, including the Georgia Democratic Party, Common Cause and the NAACP, have called on Kemp to step down from his position as secretary of state while he runs for Governor.

Greg Palast, the New York based investigative journalist and author of the compelling

The best democracy money can buy, has been hunting down Kemp and also, Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach for the past several months. Armed with a Federal subpoena accusing Kobach of purging hundreds of thousands of Kansans from the voting rolls. Like his counterpart in Georgia, as Secretary of State, Kobach has oversight of the states voter rolls and similar to Brian Kemp of Georgia, Kobach has also successfully closed polling stations in low income counties as well.

As Carol Anderson of the New York Times put it, “Brian Kemp is a master of voter suppression.” For example, Kemp made a statement in 2014 regarding another lawsuit his office faced regarding over 40 thousand names of voters disappearing from the Georgia voting rolls. The Secretary of State emphasized that “The lawsuit filed by 3rd sector development, is frivolous and totally without merit. The claim that there are over forty thousand unprocessed voter registration applications, are false.” Kemp went on to contravene with the 6,525 voter applications his office found had issues of no longer being with us, had no valid date of birth, where convicted felons or provided no county or address. ( some states report day of birth instead of DOB, which substantially increases the chance of two records being reported for the same person.)

Kemp also provided a Potboiler about an application filled out by, Johnny B Cool, who’s city was listed as, Yo’ Town. While this smacks of incompetence of the registrating body or the voting applicant themselves, it seems a stretch to think that a political scenic, who would name themselves Johnny B Cool who Haile’s from Yo town would be a tactical move that any well minded voter fraud conspirator would employ. But the great voter fraud conspiracy rolls on. Kemp, by the way,

Was found to be guilty of voter suppression in 2014.

GETTY IMAGES

LOCKED AND LOADED

Prior to Shelby v Holder, (2013) Texas, along with the several other Jim Crow states had coordinated a preemptive lockout of minority, elderly and millennial prospective votes in anticipation of provisions 4 & 5 of the voting rights act being overturned. The first domino to fall was that unsuspecting, overlooked little Diddy called Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District No. 1 v. Holder, or the MUD case. The stories of out of town voters using the address of a local motel to vote illegally, harassment of MUD’s minority community and a strange cloud of mystery preceding the Shelby v. Holder decision, stains the “Municipal Utility District,” just north of Austin.

That was 2009, and four years later, Shelby county found it unconstitutional for the federal government to suppress their ability to molest the Hispanics, black, elderly and young voting populous. The Supreme Court would concede that, “voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that.” But the 5-4 decision of the highest court in the land would contradict their own logic by wiping away the voting rights act protection of historically disenfranchised constituents, specifically articles 4 and 5.

But back in Tarrant Texas, and many other counties in the Lone star state, there’s been a battle raging to oppress voter turnout since voting became public freewill. Ted Cruz and Beto O’Rourke are in the mezzo of a 12 round barn burner as the country tumbles towards it’s midterms like a radioactive meteor with no direction. Could it be, the land of steers could finally be done with Ted Cruz? Or is Beto’s hype just that? Progressive turnout or conservative suffragist subterfuge may answer these questions.

And yet, one of the few cases of actual voter fraud, ironically in that same state of Texas, is more doleful than relevant. Crystal Mason began her five year sentence for voter fraud in September. After being walked through the provisional ballet process by a state appointed election official, she still stands condemned by adjudication. Alison Grinter, of Mason’s legal team explained, “the federal government has stepped over the state and found Crystal guilty of violating the law.”

In august an 11 year old child hacked a Florida electronic ballet in this years DEFCON 26,

The annual hacking convention held this year in sandy Las Vegas. Emmett Brewer and 30 other kids ranging in age from 8 - 16 years old where all able to hack Florida’s faulty system. The national association of Secretaries of State responded to DEFCON with one of many proclamations in their

(Long comment regarding a proposed Exemption under 17 U.S. code 1201)

The senate stated to ES&S, the countries largest supplier of voting machines;

“Currently there are significant barriers that prevent states from working with independent, qualified, good faith researchers to conduct cyber security on election systems.”

Now it seams, after the midterms, ES&S May have to deal with not just the Senate but the people.

But the talk is done. Bluster deflated. Red and Blue candidates enter November 6th like combatants on the world stage. Like heavyweight champions with the future of democracy on the line. I’ll be watching the fight on November 6th just like Crystal Mason.

Hoping the country does right by its future.

[yesjustcallmewes]

Police Pursuits

Like many of you, I watched transfixed last week as body-cam video of Las Vegas police officer William Umana shooting at a fleeing car THROUGH HIS PATROL CAR WINDSHIELD played out. I tried to imagine what would have happened to me if I or one of my officers had even tried such a stunt, no matter how tempted I might have been to do the same at times over the years chasing people through the streets of Baltimore.

Of course, this was no stunt. Officer Umana’s shots were directed at suspects Fidel Miranda and Rene Nunez as he pursued their stolen vehicle through downtown Las Vegas. According to the commentary accompanying the video, Umana was aware that Miranda and Nunez were suspected of shooting Thomas Romero several times at a Las Vegas carwash, killing him. They were also shooting at the officer as they fled.

Many people will automatically condemn the officer’s actions, of course, and even good people can and will have honest disagreements about this pursuit and shooting. However, here you have armed homicide suspects shooting at cops. If the police don’t mount a vehicle pursuit under these circumstances, then under what circumstances WOULD they pursue for?

As I watched, I more or less automatically reviewed what I knew about the incident to assess, in my own mind at least, the appropriateness of such an extreme response. Here’s how that went; first, I knew that the officer was pursuing armed homicide suspects. CHECK. Second, the suspects showed a total disregard for the extreme risk to the public resulting from their gunshots and reckless driving. CHECK. Third, the armed homicide suspects were still shooting, this time at pursuing officers. CHECKMATE!

My visceral reaction as a cop who didn’t care much for murderers of any sort, especially those trying to murder me, was to excuse the officer’s actions as entirely justified. Balancing known elements of this chase, I focused on the risks to the public (and to the officer) versus the rewards to the public of capturing these bad guys as opposed to just letting them go to live another day.

I took into consideration factors such as is it worth the very real risk of a stray round – the officer’s or the suspect’s, who were continuing to fire at him as they fled – hitting granny waiting in line to get into a casino, or a bullet striking little Sally while her mother walked her in her stroller? And what about the kids inside the elementary school the suspects eventually crashed into? Finally, what about any “innocent” passengers that may be in the car? These are all legitimate public safety concerns, evoking a question for society: Are the rewards in this incident - or others like it - worth the risks?

Is it more beneficial for society to let criminals get away because an innocent person MIGHT get hurt or killed when officers try to apprehend them? Many times, yes - perhaps most times. Obviously, it depends on the nature and severity of the violent crime involved. But what if letting the bad guys go means they are LIKELY to hurt or kill an innocent person while committing a future crime? Might or likely – that’s the conundrum – and only the first of many.

Do we ask, which hypothetical victim is more valuable? Do we prevent a possible victim now in exchange for likely future victims? Shouldn’t we consider what police actions are more likely to prevent future criminals from running from the cops in the first place? Shouldn’t this issue be a part of the discussion? Shouldn’t those in the criminal justice arena – police, courts, prosecutors, law-makers – take actions now to reduce the chances future criminals will run from the cops, setting up more scenarios just like this one?

If you were a bad guy, which would prevent you from attempting to elude the police? If you knew the cops WON'T chase you, or if you know for sure they WOULD chase you, catch you, and hold you accountable for every felony and misdemeanor crime, traffic violation, and other infraction you commit during your attempted escape, that you’ll receive a mandatory extra five-year enhancement on your sentence when they do catch you - assuming such a law existed in the local jurisdiction (this is where the law-makers come in)?

Things to consider when deciding whether to pursue or not are things like the possibility of the fleeing suspect being known to officers (if you know who he or she is, it’s easier to locate them later), the time of day, weather conditions, traffic congestion, road conditions, terrain, etc. Regardless of these considerations, the trend, especially in politically leftist-run cities, seems to be to just let the bad guys get away by use of a blanket prohibition of all chases.

This discussion is about balancing the risk-reward to society: capture vs. escape. What was the crime? If violent, does the escape put the public at imminent risk of harm? For example, if the bad guy just shot or killed somebody, what wouldn’t that person do to avoid capture? And keep in mind, the mere act of eluding the police is (or should be) a felony, and driving recklessly is a violent act. Is it worth the risk to the next person—man, woman, or child—who may cross the bad guy’s path?

Now, I’m of the school that it’s on the criminal if there are damages or injuries that happen while in pursuit of a dangerous felon who ran from the cops. And the punishment should be such that few would even contemplate putting the public at such risk by running from the police. But, they ain’t asking my opinion. I mean, what would a cop know about police work anyway, right?

So, there was quite a risk of innocents being hurt in the Vegas incident. But I suppose those future victims who are still uninjured or alive because those bad guys didn’t escape, so they couldn’t hurt or kill them, are good with it—even if they’ll never know it.

Many departments have adopted policies where officers are not allowed to use deadly force against a suspect where the vehicle is the only weapon (my department, Baltimore, has had a policy since before my rookie year - 1970 - that prohibited officers from firing at any moving vehicle in virtually any circumstance). In fact, some policies direct officers to move out of the way rather than fire on the guy who would have run them down if they hadn’t moved. This brings up some interesting considerations, eh? Think for a minute about this:

If a bad guy is in front of me pointing a gun at me, I can shoot him. If a bad guy is in front of me with a knife, within a certain distance, I can shoot him. The same goes for a bad guy with a rock, a club, or a bowling ball, if I can infer I’m about to sustain serious bodily harm, I can shoot him. Try to come at me with those things, and I could fire away at will.

But, according to these policies, if a bad guy is in front of me, revving the engine of his two-thousand-pound car, and he guns it and heads toward me with the clear intent to kill or seriously injure me, I cannot shoot him. Does that seem right?

Now, obviously, jumping out of the way should always be a part of the officer’s total strategy. But it certainly seems like a surefire loophole for bad guys to make it to their cars before they try to kill the cop. Kind of like home-base in a game of tag. You can’t get me! Perhaps, mayors and city councils can call it the 'sanctuary vehicle policy.'

Call me old school, but what is wrong with making the bad guys pay a higher price for their violent acts? You have bad guys running from the cops, shooting bystanders or killing or injuring them with cars, and the criminal justice system is changing its rules to make the cops more and more liable for the violent acts of criminals. Does this make sense?

[expatimes]

US House debates article of impeachment against Trump: Live

US House impeaches Trump for ‘incitement to insurrection’: Live

The US House of Representatives has impeached President Donald Trump for “incitement of insurrection” for his behaviour and remarks leading up to last Wednesday’s siege of the US Capitol.

Trump has become first president in US history to be impeached twice, with legislators voting 232 to 197.

Ten Republicans joined Democrats in voting for impeachment.

The move comes after Vice President Mike Pence said he would not invoke the 25th Amendment and declare Trump unable to perform duties.

Welcome to Al Jazeera’s coverage of US politics. This is Joseph Stepansky and Mersiha Gadzo.

4 mins ago (22:57 GMT)

Senate Intelligence Committee to hold hearing on Friday

The US Senate Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing on Friday on President-elect Joe Biden’s nomination of Avril Haines to be director of national intelligence, according to a statement.

24 mins ago (22:38 GMT)

Man with ‘Camp Auschwitz’ sweatshirt, Olympic swimmer charged over Capitol riots

A man clad in a ‘Camp Auschwitz’ sweatshirt, a gold medal-winning Olympic swimmer, and a Proud Boys supporter are among those arrested by the FBI in connection with the January 6 riots at the US Capitol, the Department of Justice has said.

Robert Keith Packer, a Virginia man identified as having worn the Nazi-linked shirt, was charged with unlawful entry and disorderly conduct, and allowed to be released following a virtual hearing in the US District Court in Norfolk.

In a separate case, prosecutors in New York charged Eduard Florea with being a felon in possession of a firearm after the FBI said he possessed more than 1,000 rounds of rifle ammunition, military combat knives, and shotgun rounds.

While Florea did not travel to the Capitol, prosecutors said he made verbal threats on the conservative social media platform Parler to carry out violence.

Florea was a supporter of the Proud Boys and had applied to become a member, the government said during his hearing.

31 mins ago (22:30 GMT)

Second impeachment historic, but conviction may be ‘bridge too far’

Shawn Zeller, editor of CQ Magazine, told Al Jazeera Trump’s second impeachment “is a historic moment”, but wondered what it means for the Republican party.

A record number of Republicans, 10, voted to impeach Trump, but Zeller said that’s “not enough for there to be any real consequences for Donald Trump, beyond just shaming him.”

Zeller noted 17 Republicans will be needed to convict, and then to bar Trump from holding office again.

“To get 17 Republicans to vote to convict after only 10 broke in the House, seems like a bridge too far,” Zeller said.

35 mins ago (22:27 GMT)

Democratic leader Schumer says Senate will act on impeachment

“Donald Trump has deservedly become the first president in American history to bear the stain of impeachment twice over,” Schumer said in a statement after the House vote.

“The Senate is required to act and will proceed with his trial and hold a vote on his conviction,” said Schumer who is poised to become the Senate’s majority leader after January 20.

“Make no mistake, there will be an impeachment trial in the United States Senate; there will be a vote on convicting the president for high crimes and misdemeanors; and if the president is convicted, there will be a vote on barring him from running again,” Schumer said.

39 mins ago (22:23 GMT)

Schumer says Senate could vote on barring Trump from running for office again

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer has said that if Trump is convicted at his Senate impeachment trial, the chamber will hold a separate vote on barring him from running for office again.

39 mins ago (22:22 GMT)

Parler CEO says social media app, favoured by Trump supporters, may not return

Social media platform Parler, which was cut off by major service providers that accused the app of failing to police violent content, may never get back online, its CEO John Matze has said.

As a procession of business vendors severed ties with the two-year-old site following the storming of the Capitol last week, Matze said in an interview with Reuters news agency that he does not know when or if it will return.

“It could be never,” he said. “We don’t know yet.”

The app said in a legal filing it has over 12 million users.

Amazon cut Parler, a platform which styles itself as a “free-speech” space and is favoured by supporters of Trump, off its servers this weekend for failing to effectively moderate violent content.

Apple Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google also kicked Parler from their app stores.

55 mins ago (22:06 GMT)

Texas Republican fears future findings may put him ‘on wrong side’ of debate

The ten Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in the House set a record for lawmakers voting to impeach a president from their party.

None from Texas voted in support, but one legislator fears he might be in the wrong.

Texas Representative Michael McCaul, who represents the Texas’ southeastern 10th District, said in a statement he believed the House was “not given the time to truly look at the facts and evidence” before the vote was held.

McCaul, a former prosecutor, likened the vote to “attempting to indict a case before it’s been presented to the grand jury”.

But he “truly” fears “there may be more facts that come to light in the future that will put me on the wrong side of this debate”.

My full statement on impeachment: pic.twitter.com/dORsBNQxU3

— Michael McCaul (@RepMcCaul) January 13, 2021

58 mins ago (22:04 GMT)

McConnell says ‘there is simply no chance’ Senate trial will happen before Trump leaves office

Senate Majority Leader Mitch Mcconnell has said “there is simply no chance” that a Senate trial will happen before Trump leaves office on January 20.

“Given the rule, procedures, and Senate precedents that govern presidential impeachments trials, there is simply no chance that a fair or serious trial could conclude before President-elect Biden is sworn in next week,” he said in a statement.

He noted that previous Senate impeachment trials lasted 83, 37 and 21 days.

“In light of this reality, I believe it will best serve our nation if Congress and the executive branch spend the next seven days completely focused on facilitating a safe inauguration and an orderly transfer of power to the incoming Biden administration,” he said.

2 hours ago (21:31 GMT)

Trump impeached for second time

The US House voted to impeach President Trump for “inciting” the mob that stormed the US Capitol, making him the first president in US history to be impeached twice.

Ten Republicans bucked the president, joining House Democrats in agreeing that the president committed “high crimes and misdemeanors” with his actions and remarks leading up to last week’s riot.

The article of impeachment now heads to the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday that the earliest an impeachment trial will begin is January 19, a day before Trump’s final day in office,

That guarantees any Senate vote would take place after Trump is no longer president, something that has never happened in US history.

BREAKING: US lawmakers to vote on an article of impeachment against President Donald Trump over the violent siege of the US Capitol.

Read More: https://t.co/SsXVlvXOQ2 https://t.co/2hbL6k3U3P

— Al Jazeera News (@AJENews) January 13, 2021

2 hours ago (21:13 GMT)

Republican Meijer says he supports impeachment

Representative Peter Meijer of Michigan has become the seventh Republican indicate he will vote in favour of impeachment.

“This vote is not a victory. It isn’t a victory for my party, and it isn’t the victory the Democrats might think it is” Meijer said in a statement.

“With a heavy heart, I will vote to impeach President Donald J Trump.”

2 hours ago (20:54 GMT)

Debate concludes and legislators vote on impeachment

Two hours of debate have concluded, with Republican and Democratic legislators condemning the violence at the US Capitol, while disagreeing on how to move forward.

Democrats, and at least seven Republicans, have called for Trump to be impeached.

The majority of Republicans argued that the impeachment was rushed and would further divide the country.

2 hours ago (20:40 GMT)

Democrat Steny Hoyer gives closing statements

Democratic House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer gave closing statements, concluding two hours of debate.

He referenced Republican Representative Liz Cheney’s condemnation of Trump’s actions and her vow to vote to impeach.

“There has never been, she said, a greater betrayal by the president of the United States of this office, of his office and his oath to the constitution,” he said.

“This attack was not from abroad, it was, as Liz Cheney said, summoned, assembled, and inflamed by the president of the United States of America,” he said.

This will be no ordinary roll call,” he said of the upcoming voting. “This is about our country, our Constitution and our democracy. These votes will be inscribed on the scroll of history.”

US House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer gave closing statements in the two-hour debate preceding a vote on an article of impeachment against Trump

2 hours ago (20:37 GMT)

Republican Steve Scalise gives closing statements

In closing statements, Republican Representative Steve Scalise condemned the violence but said that impeachment would further divide.

“I’ve seen the dark evil of political violence first hand,” said Scalise, who was shot by a gunman at a charity baseball game in 2017.

“I oppose this rushed impeachment brought forward without a single hearing,” he said. “It will only serve to further divide a nation that is calling out for healing”.

National Guard members assemble in the Capitol Visitor’s Center on Capitol Hill on Wednesday

3 hours ago (20:12 GMT)

Trump ‘will try to remain in the spotlight’: Analyst

If Trump does get impeached and if it goes through to a trial in the Senate, Shawn Zeller of the Congressional Quarterly Magazine told Al Al Jazeera that he believes Trump “will try to remain in the spotlight”.

“He’s a fighter. That’s all he knows how to do, is to punch back. He is never conciliatory, he never apologises,” he said.

“I think he very much intends to stay in the political limelight to retain control over the Republican party as much as possible. I do not think he will resign,” Zeller said.

3 hours ago (19:47 GMT)

Podcast: We are asking, again, will the president be prosecuted?

In the aftermath of the January 6 insurrection on the United States Capitol, Al Jazeera’s The Take podcast asks what comes next?

https://art19.com/shows/4e4a1167-d88f-4ffb-ab1c-20ac555bd5f3/episodes/5ffad0ef-2e4c-4249-aed7-5fe71b66eaf9/embed?theme=dark-orange” style=”width: 100%; height: 200px; border: 0 none;” scrolling=”no”>iframe>

4 hours ago (19:26 GMT)

Republican Dan Newhouse says he will vote impeach Trump

Republican Representative Dan Newhouse has said in a tweet that he will vote impeach Trump.

The statement brings the number of House Republicans who have publicly said they will vote for impeachment six.

“A vote against this impeachment is a vote to validate the unacceptable violence we witnessed in our nation’s capital,” he said in a statement.

“It is also a vote condone Trump’s inaction,” Newhouse said. “He did not strongly condemn the attack nor did he call in reinforcements when our officers were overwhelmed.”

“Our country needed a leader, and President Trump failed to fulfill his oath of office,” he added.

My full statement on the House impeachment vote: pic.twitter.com/X74Sgq1Nqu

— Rep. Dan Newhouse (@RepNewhouse) January 13, 2021

4 hours ago (19:08 GMT)

Trump urges ‘NO violence’ at pre-inauguration protests

President Trump, in a statement released by the White House, has urged “NO” violence, lawbreaking and vandalism” at pre-inauguration demonstrations.

The statement comes days after an internal FBI bulletin warned against “armed” protests in all 50 states and the US capital in the days leading up to the January 20 inauguration.

“In light of reports of more demonstrations, I urge that there must be NO violence, NO lawbreaking and NO vandalism of any kind,” said Trump, who has been banned from all mainstream social media.

“That is not what I stand for, and it is not what America stands for. I call on ALL Americans to help ease tensions and calm tempers. Thank You,” he said.

The White House released the statement as the House debated an article of impeachment against. His ally, Representative Jim Jordan, read the statement during the proceedings.

President Donald Trump gave a fiery address to supporters shortly before rioters breached the US Capitol last week

4 hours ago (18:50 GMT)

Top House Republican: Trump ‘bears responsibility’ for Capitol riot, impeachment a ‘mistake’

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy has said Trump’s “bears responsibility” for the deadly Capitol Hill riot, but called impeachment a “mistake”.

“Americans want durable bipartisan justice,” McCarthy said. “That path is still available, but is not the path we are on today.”

“That doesn’t mean the president is free from fault. The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters,” he said. “They should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding.”

McCarthy said he supports a Congressional fact finding commission.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy walks to the chamber at the Capitol in Washington

5 hours ago (18:21 GMT)

Google to stop selling political ads for foreseeable future

Alphabet Inc’s Google will stop selling political ads referencing US elections across its services until at least January 21, following last week’s violence at the Capitol, according to an email to advertisers seen by Reuters news agency.

The email said the action was taken “following the unprecedented events of the past week and ahead of the upcoming presidential inauguration,” which takes place on January 20.

In a statement, Google said it would “temporarily pause all political ads in addition to any ads referencing impeachment, the inauguration, or protests at the US Capitol.”

The move, to take effect on Thursday, will make no exceptions for news organizations or merchandisers running ads.

5 hours ago (18:11 GMT)

Senate will not convene this week amid Trump impeachment: McConnell spokesman

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell will not use emergency powers to immediately reconvene the chamber this week as the House moves forward with its vote on Trump’s impeachment, his spokesman said in a post on Twitter.

The House is expected to vote Wednesday on impeaching Trump following last week’s riot in the US Capitol, and House Democratic leaders have said they could send it to the Senate as soon as this week.

McConnell spoke to Democratic Minority leader Chuck Schumer to say he would not reconvene the Senate under emergency authorities, almost certainly pushing an impeachment trial for Trump until after he leaves office, his spokesman said.

Can confirm —> https://t.co/l2U1WlyQSF

— Doug Andres (@DougAndres) January 13, 2021

5 hours ago (18:05 GMT)

Schiff: Now is ‘moment’ to protect country

Representative Adam Schiff, a key figure in the first impeachment proceedings against Trump, said “this is one of those moments” for Americans to stand up and protect the country.

“America has been through a civil war, world wars, a great depression, pandemics, McCarthyism, and now a Trumpist and white nationalist insurrection,” he said.

“And yet, our democracy endures, it endures because at every juncture, every pivotal moment, when evil threatened to overtake, good patriotic Americans step forward to say, enough,” he said.

Representative Adam Schiff looks at his phone as he walks on Capitol Hill in Washington

5 hours ago (17:58 GMT)

McClintock: ‘What did Trump actually say?’

Republican Representative Tom McClintock argued that Trump’s speech before the Capitol Hill riot did not amount to inciting violence.

“What did he actually say?” McClintock said, noting that Trump at one point in the speech, said that his supporters would be protesting “peacefully”.

“If we impeached every politician who gave a fiery speech to a crowd of partisans this Capitol would be deserted,” he said. “That’s what the President did, that is all he did. He specifically told the crowd to protest peacefully and patriotically, and the vast majority of them did.”

5 hours ago (17:46 GMT)

Jordan says Dems motivated by ‘politics and the fact they want to cancel the president’

Representative Jim Jordan, the first Republican to speak during the debate on impeachment, accused Democrats of being motivated by “politics and the fact they want to cancel the president”.

Jordan portrayed the second attempt to impeach Trump as the continuation of a Democratic vendetta against the president that preceded the Capitol Hill violence.

“It’s always been about getting the president, no matter what,” he said. He added that Democrats have been obsessed with “cancelling the president and anyone that disagrees with them.”

“And now with just one week left, they’re still trying,” said Jordan who has been the most vocal defender of Trump in the House since the mob attack.

“In seven days, there will be a peaceful transfer of power just like there has been every other time in our country but Democrats are gonna impeach President Trump again. This doesn’t unite the country,” Jordan said.

Representative Jim Jordan, an ally of President Donald Trump, condemned Democrats attempts to impeach Trump

5 hours ago (17:38 GMT)

Pelosi opens debate on impeachment, says Trump ‘clear and present danger’

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has begun a two-hour period of debate proceeding a vote on an article of impeachment against Trump, calling the president a “clear and present danger” to the country.

“We know we experienced the insurrection that violated the sanctity of the People’s capital and attempted to overturn the duly recorded will of the American people,” Pelosi said. “And we know that the President of the United States incited this insurrection this armed rebellion against our common country.”

“He must go,” she said.

Pelosi called the rioters who breached the Capitol “domestic terrorists”.

“Those insurrectionists were not patriots. They were not part of a political base to be catered to. They were domestic terrorists and justice must prevail,” Pelosi said.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi of Calif., walks through Statuary Hall on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 13, 2021. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

6 hours ago (17:27 GMT)

US House to debate on impeaching Trump after procedural vote passes

The House has voted 221 to 203 to begin debating an article of impeachment against Trump.

Debate will be two hours equally divided between Democrats and Republican.

A final vote on the impeachment of Trump is expected this afternoon.

6 hours ago (17:15 GMT)

Uncertain if Biden wants to see impeachment move forward: Analyst

Matthew Mackowiak, chairman of Potomac Strategy Group told Al Jazeera that one has to consider how holding Trump to account for the riot that occurred on Wednesday could divide the country and bring about potential violence over the next week.

“I was talking to a Republican member of congress yesterday who told me that this week will be worse than last week in terms of violence. That is a really scary thought,” Mackowiak said.“I do believe the inauguration is going to be a very safe event but there could be violent riots at that event as well.

“These are the considerations you have to take into account. When you’re in a leadership position, you don’t get easy decisions,” he said. “I’m not sure if President-elect Joe Biden really wants to see this impeachment move forward.”

“I’m sure he does want to see the president be held accountable, and everyone involved in criminal activity last Wednesday held accountable, but he cannot possibly want additional violence, additional division and additional uncertainty against his administration just one week from today,” Mackowiak said.

President-elect Joe Biden will take office on January 20

6 hours ago (17:00 GMT)

Full text: Donald Trump impeachment resolution

The House is expected vote on an article of impeachment against Trump, accusing him of “incitement of insurrection” for his role in egging on supporters before the Capitol Hill riots.

If the House impeaches Trump, the article will be sent to the US Senate, which is required to hold a trial to determine whether Trump should remain in office or be prevented from holding office in the future.

Red the full text of the article of impeachment here.

Here is the article of impeachment I just introduced, along with 213 colleagues, against President Trump for Incitement of Insurrection.

Most important of all, I can report that we now have the votes to impeach. pic.twitter.com/RaJIjzQSvm

— David Cicilline (@davidcicilline) January 11, 2021

6 hours ago (16:36 GMT)

New York City to cut ties with Trump over incitement

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has said that New York City will cut ties with Trump’s company, citing his incitement of violence at the US Capitol last week.

“The President incited a rebellion against the United States government that killed five people and threatened to derail the constitutional transfer of power,” de Blasio said in a statement. “The City of New York will not be associated with those unforgivable acts in any shape, way or form, and we are immediately taking steps to terminate all Trump Organization contracts.”

Contracts between New York City and the Trump Organization bring the company $17 million a year, according to the Washington Post.

New York City doesn’t do business with insurrectionists.

We’re taking steps to TERMINATE agreements with the Trump Organization to operate the Central Park Carousel, Wollman and Lasker skating rinks, and the Ferry Point Golf Course.

— Mayor Bill de Blasio (@NYCMayor) January 13, 2021

7 hours ago (16:31 GMT)

Jordan says Cheney should be removed from role: Report

Representative Jim Jordan, who has remained a steadfast defender of Trump, told reporters on Capitol Hill that Representative Liz Cheney, a Republican, should be removed from her role as the party’s third highest ranking member in the chamber.

“I think she’s wrong,” Jordan said of Cheney, the highest ranking House Republican to publicly support impeachment, the Washington Post reported.

When asked about the possible removal of Cheney from the post, Jordan replied House Republicans “ought to vote on that”.

Representative Jamie Raskin talks with Representative Liz Cheney in the US Capitol

7 hours ago (16:08 GMT)

Tracking the business backlash against Trump after Capitol siege

From social media bans to cancelled golf tournaments and city contracts, the business backlash continues after supporters of United States President Donald Trump stormed the US Capitol building last week.

The violent siege left at least five people dead and caused extensive damage. Now, Trump is facing a renewed impeachment drive as well as possible removal from office with only eight days to go before his term ends.

It’s a major blow for a reality TV star turned US president who has long boasted of his business acumen and styles himself as a master negotiator.

But Trump and his brand have become increasingly toxic as consumers demand that businesses, politicians, and other powerful figures take a stand against the outgoing US president and the assault on the democracy made in his name.

Here is a list of firms, institutions and cities cutting ties with Trump.

7 hours ago (16:03 GMT)

Airbnb to cancel DC bookings during Inauguration week

Home-sharing giant Airbnb and HotelTonight, which it bought in 2019, are blocking and cancelling all hotel reservations in the Washington DC Metro area during the week of President-elect Biden’s inauguration, it said on Wednesday.

“This decision was informed by inputs from our host community as well as local, state and federal officials,” Airbnb said in a brief statement.

Airbnb said it had banned from its platform some individuals who were found to have ties with hate groups or were involved in last week’s deadly storming of the US Capitol.

“We are aware of reports emerging yesterday afternoon regarding armed militias and known hate groups that are attempting to travel and disrupt the Inauguration,” Airbnb said.

The company did not immediately specify if its decision to block reservations was a result of a request from law enforcement agencies.

AirBnb has said it will cancel and block reservations in the Washington, DC metro area during inauguration week

7 hours ago (15:48 GMT)

House voting on rule preceding debate on article of impeachment

The House is currently voting on a procedural motion that, if passed, will open the chamber to debate on the article of impeachment against Trump.

If the rule vote passes, the House will debate the article of impeachment for two hours before a final vote.

7 hours ago (15:44 GMT)

Republican Representative argues impeachment ‘ignores due process’

Republican Representative Guy Reschenthaler argued on the House floor that impeaching Trump “ignores all precedent and ignores all due process”.

Reschenthaler added: “Trump’s words would not even meet the definition of incitement under criminal statutes.”

Members of the National Guard gather at the US Capitol as the House of Representatives prepares to vote to impeach Trump

7 hours ago (15:40 GMT)

Omar: ‘We cannot simply move past this or turn the page’

Speaking during a debate on rules preceding a debate on the article of impeachment introduced against Trump, Representative Ilhan Omar said of the Capitol Hill riot: “We cannot simply move past this or turn the page.”

“For us to be able to survive as a functioning democracy, there has to be accountability,” she said.

7 hours ago (15:35 GMT)

Hoyer tells reporters as many as 20 Republicans could vote to impeach

House Majority leader Steny Hoyer told reporters on Wednesday he expected between 10 and 20 House Republicans to vote in support of impeaching Trump.

So far, five House Republicans, including ranking member Liz Cheney, have said they intend to join Democrats.

Steny also said he expects the article of impeachment would be sent to the Senate as soon as its passed.

Members of the National Guard were deployed to the US Capitol as Congress debates impeaching Trump

8 hours ago (15:27 GMT)

Spirited impeachment debate underway

Supporters of Trump’s impeachment along with his defenders are taking to the floor of the US House as debate gets underway.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer argued, “There has never been a greater betrayal by a president of the United States of his office and his oath of Constitution – to the Constitution.”

“There is no doubt in my mind that the president of the United States broke his oath and incited this insurrection,” he added.

Ohio Representative Jim Jordan, a steadfast supporter of Trump, argued that Democrats’ accusations are unfair and moving to impeach Trump is “frightening for the country.”

“Democrats can raise bail for rioters and looters this summer, but somehow when Republicans condemn all the violence, the violence this summer, the violence last week, somehow we’re wrong,” Jordan said, citing the Black Lives Matters protests and looting that took place in some cities in the wake of those protests.

“I do not know where all this goes, and this is frightening for the country. We should defeat this rule and defeat the impeachment resolution when it comes up,” Jordan added.

House presiding officer: "All members are reminded to wear face coverings while on the floor."

Apparently, via @MEPFuller, this was directed at Rep. Jim Jordan.

Reminder: C-SPAN does not control cameras in the House chamber. pic.twitter.com/rHVUdYusaK

— Jeremy Art (@cspanJeremy) January 13, 2021

8 hours ago (15:20 GMT)

Some Republican legislators argue impeachment will further divide

While several House Republicans have indicated they support impeaching Trump, others have argued that doing so would further divide the country during the already fraught period.

“I can think of no action the House can take that is more likely to further divide the American people than the action we are contemplating today,” Republican Congressman Tom Cole said during debate on rules proceeding an expected debate on the impeachment article itself.

WATCH LIVE: US House of Representatives meet to consider an article of impeachment against President Donald Trump.

Read more: https://t.co/RPDFsLf6w5 https://t.co/prw4PYIejI

— Al Jazeera News (@AJENews) January 13, 2021

8 hours ago (15:15 GMT)

Debate on ‘rules’ begins ahead of impeachment vote

Debate proceeding a procedural vote, which will kick off debate on the impeachment article itself.

Legislators were expected to debate for one hour.

Opening the proceedings, Democratic Representative Jim McGovern, the chairman of the House Rules Committee, said: “We wouldn’t be here if it weren’t for the president of the United States.”

McGovern recounted as Congress met to certify the election results at “a rally a mile and-a-half down Pennsylvania Avenue, Donald Trump was stoking the anger of a violent mob.”

“He said Vice President Pence has to come through and told the mob to walk down to the Capitol,” he said.

“We can’t have unity without truth and without accountability,” he said.

8 hours ago (14:40 GMT)

John Kelly says Trump suffering from a ‘manhood’ issue

Trump’s former chief of staff John Kelly has said the president cannot admit to making a mistake because “his manhood is at issue here”.

“I don’t understand it, although I had to deal with it every day,” said Kelly, a retired four-star Marine general, during an event in Des Moines on Tuesday, the Des Moines Register reported.

Trump made his first public appearance on Tuesday, but refused to take responsibility for allegedly egging on rioters before Capitol violence.

“People thought that what I said was totally appropriate,” Trump said.

8 hours ago (14:35 GMT)

Congresswoman accuses colleagues of giving ‘reconnaissance’ tours before Capitol breach

Representative Mikie Sherrill has said she saw members of Congress leading “groups” through the Capitol on January 5, a day before rioters breached the complex, calling it “reconnaissance for the next day”, New Jersey newspaper the Bergen Record reported.

Sherill made the statement during a Tuesday night Facebook live event, adding, “I’m going to see they are held accountable, and if necessary, ensure that they don’t serve in Congress.”

Sherill did not specify if the groups in question were Trump supporters who had come to the Capitol as Congress met to certify the vote.

Pro-Trump rioters stormed the Capitol Building on January 6

9 hours ago (14:20 GMT)

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: ‘I thought was going to die’

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a progressive Democrat, has recounted when rioters breached the US Capitol last week, saying “I thought I was going to die.”

Cortez, in a video posted on her Instagram, said: “I did not know if I was going to make it to the end of that day alive … “Not just in a general sense, but in a very, very specific sense.”

Cortez said she could not further explain her statement, citing “security concerns”, but said firmly “I thought I was going to die”.

9 hours ago (14:05 GMT)

US House opens Trump impeachment session

The Democrat-controlled US House of Representatives on Wednesday opened debate on an historic second impeachment of President Donald Trump over his supporters’ attack of the Capitol that left five dead.

Lawmakers in the lower chamber are expected to vote for impeachment around 3pm (20:00 GMT) – marking the formal opening of proceedings against Trump.

The president is expected to be impeached with bipartisan support.

Alia Chughtai/Al Jazeera

#world Read full article: https://expatimes.com/?p=16740&feed_id=28299 #news #unitedstates #usampcanada #uselections2020

[rdcharny]

Another article on The Honorable Amy Barret

From Reuters on October 12, 2020

U.S. Supreme Court nominee Barrett has proven steadfastly conservative By 

Andrew Chung & Lawrence Hurley

6 MIN READ

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump’s U.S. Supreme Court nominee, has staked out conservative positions on key hot-button issues including abortion and gun rights as a federal appellate judge and legal scholar.

Abortion rights groups have voiced concern that Barrett, picked by Trump on Sept. 26 to replace the late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, would vote to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide if confirmed by the Senate.

While a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, a Catholic institution in Indiana, Barrett in 2006 signed on to an advertisement in an Indiana newspaper calling for Roe v. Wade to be overturned.

“It’s time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore law that protects the lives of unborn children,” the advertisement, purchased by an anti-abortion organization called St. Joseph County Right to Life, stated.

Barrett, whose Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing is scheduled to run from Monday through Thursday, is a devout Roman Catholic and a favorite of religious conservatives. Trump in 2016 promised to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Barrett, 48, was appointed by Trump to the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2017. She has proven reliably conservative in that post, voting in favor of one of Trump’s hardline immigration policies and showing support for expansive gun rights. She also authored a ruling making it easier for college students accused of campus sexual assaults to sue their institutions.

She has not yet ruled directly on abortion. But Barrett twice signaled opposition to rulings that struck down Republican-backed Indiana abortion-related restrictions - one in 2018 requiring fetal remains to be buried or cremated after an abortion, the other in 2019 involving parental notification for minors seeking an abortion - voting to have those decisions reconsidered.

In 2019, Barrett joined a ruling that upheld a Chicago measure that places limits on anti-abortion activists gathered outside abortion clinics. The ruling, written by Judge Diane Sykes, said the court had to apply Supreme Court precedent.

In a 1998 law journal article, she and another author said that Catholic judges who are faithful to their church’s teachings are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty and should recuse themselves in certain cases. Barrett also has spoken publicly about her conviction that life begins at conception, according to a 2013 article in Notre Dame Magazine.

Barrett faced queries during her 2017 Senate confirmation hearing on her current judgeship over whether her Catholic faith would sway her decisions on the bench, a line of questioning that her defenders said revealed religious bigotry by Democrats.

Senator Dianne Feinstein told Barrett at the time: “The dogma lives loudly within you.” Barrett said her religious faith would not affect her judicial decisions.

GUN RIGHTS

Barrett indicated support for gun rights in a 2019 dissent when she objected to the court ruling that a nonviolent felon could be permanently prohibited from possessing a firearm, writing: “Founding-era legislatures did not strip felons of the right to bear arms simply because of their status as felons.”

She authored a ruling that revived a lawsuit by a male student who had been suspended from Purdue University in Indiana after being accused of sexual assault. He accused the school of discriminating against him on the basis of his gender. It was plausible, Barrett wrote, that Purdue officials chose to believe the female accuser “because she is a woman” and to disbelieve the male student accused “because he is a man.”

Barrett two decades ago served as a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a stalwart conservative who died in 2016, and said “the lessons I learned still resonate.”

“His judicial philosophy is mine too: A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold,” Barrett said at the White House ceremony where Trump announced her nomination.

Barrett is married to Jesse Barrett, a lawyer in private practice and a former federal prosecutor in Indiana. They have seven children, two of whom were adopted from Haiti. Barrett and her family have been members of a Christian religious group called People of Praise, according to other members.

Craig Lent, the group’s overall coordinator, said in 2018 that the organization, whose membership is mostly Catholic, centers on close Christian bonds and looking out for one another. The group’s members also share a preference for charismatic worship, which can involve speaking in tongues.

Certain leadership positions are reserved for men. And while married men receive spiritual and other advice from other male group members, married women depend on their husbands for the same advice, Lent said.

“We’re not unaware that could be misunderstood. Every member is free and responsible for their own decisions. No one should be servile, no one should be domineering,” Lent said.

Some women in leadership positions used to be called handmaids, but now are referred to as “women leaders,” Lent said, to avoid the perception of servility.

Reporting by Andrew Chung and Lawrence Hurley; Additional reporting by Téa Kvetenadze; Editing by Will Dunham

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

[fullspectrum-cbd-oil]

Trump and 2020 Democrats Brand Themselves Criminal Justice Reformers

Donald Trump and the Democrats hoping to unseat him as president all say they want to reform the criminal justice system in the United States, which held 2.3 million people behind bars in 2019

Here is a look at the criminal justice platforms for leading Democrats running for the presidential nomination as well as Trump’s record during his first term in office.

DONALD TRUMP

The Republican president signed into law the First Step Act, which reduced mandatory minimum sentences, required officials to try to place inmates in prisons near family, expanded drug treatment programs for prisoners and parolees, and allowed some federal prisoners to finish their sentences early with good behavior.

The measure expanded a 2010 law that reduced higher penalties for possession of crack cocaine, a drug used more by the poor and minorities, than for powder cocaine, used more by the wealthy.

Still, Democrats accuse the Trump administration of lax oversight over local police departments accused of civil rights violations and criticize Trump’s endorsement of the death penalty and other policies that disproportionately affect minorities.

Trump has also sought to re-start executions of federal death row inmates, but the request was rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in December.

JOE BIDEN

Biden, who served as vice president under former U.S. President Barack Obama, proposed eliminating prison sentences for drug use, decriminalizing marijuana and eliminating sentencing disparities for offenses involving crack and powder cocaine.

He also would eliminate the death penalty. He promises to end mandatory sentencing that takes discretion away from judges, eliminate private prisons and end the federal system of cash bail, under which defendants who cannot afford to pay must await trial in jail.

Biden also has pledged to reform the juvenile justice system, including keeping youths from being incarcerated with adults. He plans efforts to eliminate barriers for felons re-entering society from prison, including restrictions on allowing them to receive food stamps, educational Pell grants and housing support.

BERNIE SANDERS

Sanders, a U.S. senator from Vermont, wants to ban for-profit prisons, abolish the death penalty and tighten rules and penalties for police misconduct.

His plan would end 1990s-era “three strikes and you’re out” laws, which mandated life sentences for people convicted of more than two felonies, even if the third crime is a minor offense.

Sanders says he will change the way police officers are trained and deployed, bringing in social workers or conflict negotiators to defuse dangerous situations and mandating criminal charges against officers who engage in misconduct that violates someone’s civil rights.

ELIZABETH WARREN

Warren, a U.S. senator from Massachusetts, says the United States has “criminalized too many things.” She calls for increasing social services that help young people stay out of prison, decriminalizing truancy and relying on counselors and teachers rather than police officers in schools.

Warren has vowed to push to repeal the 1994 crime bill, which imposed harsh sentences on major and minor crimes alike and removed much of the discretion judges have in deciding who should be incarcerated and for how long. She would also legalize marijuana at the federal level and erase past convictions for use of the drug.

PETE BUTTIGIEG

Buttigieg, the former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, focuses his criminal justice plan on the system’s disproportionate impact on African Americans.

His proposal would end prison sentences for drug possession and expand diversion programs aimed at keeping people with mental health and addiction problems out of the criminal justice system.

Buttigieg has pledged to improve rehabilitation services for inmates re-entering society. He also opposes imprisoning people or suspending their drivers’ licenses for failing to pay fines and court costs. He has promised $100 million to states that replace youth prisons with support services, and has proposed additional investment in black communities disproportionately hit by imprisonment.

AMY KLOBUCHAR

Klobuchar, a former prosecutor and a U.S. senator from Minnesota, built her criminal justice proposals around a call for providing mental health rather than law enforcement interventions when appropriate, and creating a clemency board to review long sentences and consider releasing many offenders.

She was a co-sponsor of the First Step Act, which eased harsh sentences for many nonviolent crimes. As president, Klobuchar would also further reform the system of requiring mandatory minimum sentences for many crimes, including first-time drug offenses.

MICHAEL BLOOMBERG

Bloomberg, a former mayor of New York City, has been criticized by supporters of criminal justice reform for his onetime embrace of a policy known as stop-and-frisk, which allowed police to detain and search people on the street and disproportionately affected communities of color. Bloomberg in November apologized for the program and called it a mistake, although it was for years an accepted practice during his administration.

In December, Bloomberg decried mass incarceration and vowed to seek alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent defendants awaiting trial and to cut in half the number of juveniles behind bars.

ANDREW YANG

Yang, a businessman, would end the use of for-profit prisons. He would review sentencing laws to bring prison terms in line with what data shows are effective. He also has vowed to investigate racial disparities in the criminal justice system and to better fund programs aimed at reducing recidivism and aiding re-entry to society for people who have completed their terms.

TOM STEYER

Steyer, a billionaire former hedge fund manager and political activist, reflects the views of most progressive Democrats on criminal justice. He decries the prison system as racist and promises to work to eliminate private prisons, end cash bail and reduce the prison population.

He would create incentives for states to repeal “stand your ground” laws, which allow people to use deadly force for self-defense, even when retreating from the situation would also keep them safe.

(Reporting by Trevor Hunnicutt and Sharon Bernstein; Editing by James Oliphant and Daniel Wallis)

from IJR https://ift.tt/2tTdGG3 via IFTTT

[deniscollins]

Trump vs. Cohen: The Breakup of a New York Relationship

What would you do if you were President Donald Trump’s long time personal lawyer involved in negotiations for a Trump hotel in Moscow, and in 2017, you were asked by a congressional panel investigating Russian connections to his presidential campaign the status of hotel negotiations: (1) lie and say that hotel negotiations ended in January 2016, before the first presidential primaries, or (2) admit that they continued for months after the start of the presidential primaries to protect your client? Why? What are the ethics underlying your decision?

He has spent months inside his Park Avenue apartment glued to cable news, his legal bills growing and federal prosecutors amassing evidence against him they would use as leverage.

He watched his onetime friend and former boss, now the president of the United States, smear him on Twitter and make vague, public threats about his family.

His work for Donald J. Trump, and the lies he told about it, are sending him to prison for years.

On Tuesday, his law license was revoked.

On Wednesday, Michael D. Cohen exacted his revenge.

It was a nasty, public breakup of a New York relationship forged over a decade that was a mix of the bond between a father and son, the professional distance of a lawyer and client, and — as Mr. Cohen and associates have described it — the blind devotion of a henchman to a crime boss.

“People that follow Mr. Trump as I did blindly are going to suffer the same consequences that I’m suffering,” he told a packed hearing of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform — a blunt warning to congressional Republicans he said have assumed the same role as Mr. Trump’s protectors that he played for years.

During hours of lurid testimony, the president’s once-loyal lawyer and fixer recalled shady business deals and racist comments, and spoke in devastating, uncomfortable detail about his private conversations with the man he had idolized and still refers to only as “Mr. Trump.”

Such deference did not keep him from painting a damning portrait of the president, including Mr. Trump’s attempts to dodge Vietnam War service and his efforts to strong-arm academic institutions from making his grades public. There were the routine indignities, like when the president put Mr. Cohen on the phone with the first lady to lie to her about a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, the pornographic film star with whom Mr. Trump is alleged to have had an affair.

Mr. Cohen described Mr. Trump as a “con man” and a “cheat,” and estimated there might have been 500 occasions on which he directly threatened someone at the behest of his boss. He was Mr. Trump’s enforcer, a role he once seemed to relish.

“If somebody does something Mr. Trump doesn’t like, I do everything in my power to resolve it to Mr. Trump’s benefit,” he told an interviewer in 2011. “If you do something wrong, I’m going to come at you, grab you by the neck, and I’m not going to let you go until I’m finished.”

More recently, after Mr. Cohen agreed to tell prosecutors about hush-money payments before the 2016 election, it was the president’s turn to use a Mafioso’s description of his formerly loyal aide. He called him a “rat.”

Such was the vernacular the two men honed over years spent navigating gritty but potentially lucrative New York industries — construction, real estate and taxicabs. At the hearing, Mr. Cohen gave the House panel a tutorial of sorts on the folkways of a New York ecosystem in which he and Mr. Trump had thrived.

On the day that Mr. Cohen was the star witness in a congressional hearing devised to exhume the president’s past, Mr. Trump was thousands of miles away — preparing for a summit meeting with North Korea’s leader he was hoping would lend gravitas to his embattled presidency, and distract from what was taking place back home.

For Mr. Cohen, a man who once walked the hallways of the Trump Organization with a pistol strapped to his ankle and seemed to bask in Mr. Trump’s reflected glory, Wednesday was a moment to absorb the light.

“Michael would describe it as being something akin to a cult,” said Donny Deutsch, the advertising executive and friend of Mr. Cohen. “Michael got sucked into it. And his life is in shambles because of it. And he’s the first one to say that.”

The Beginnings

The relationship between the two men began in the way that many of Mr. Trump’s relationships do: with an act of fealty.

In 2006, residents of Trump World Tower — a gleaming glass tower near the United Nations — were pushing to strip Mr. Trump’s name from the building and take control of the building’s management.

Mr. Cohen, a former personal injury lawyer who had made millions in the New York City taxicab business, intervened after Mr. Trump’s son Donald Jr. asked for help. Mr. Cohen had already bought several condominiums in Trump buildings, persuaded family and friends to do the same, and had twice read Mr. Trump’s book “The Art of the Deal.” He helped Mr. Trump put down the East Side rebellion, orchestrating a coup that removed the revolting tenants from the condominium board. Mr. Trump took notice.

In some ways, it was an unequal relationship between two men of different ages, different upbringings and vastly different financial circumstances. Mr. Cohen, the son of a Holocaust survivor, was just 40 years old when he began working for Mr. Trump — 20 years his elder and the son of a real estate magnate who would inherit millions of dollars of his father’s money.

But Mr. Cohen had a comfortable upbringing in Lawrence, on Long Island, a dozen or so miles from the house in Queens where Mr. Trump had been raised. And like his future boss, Mr. Cohen combined raw business savvy with help from a family member — in his case, his father-in-law — to make a mark in the boroughs outside Manhattan.

Mr. Cohen was soon a Trump Organization employee, put in charge of disparate elements of Mr. Trump’s business empire. In 2008, he became chief operating officer of Affliction Entertainment, a venture started by Mr. Trump to bring mixed martial arts fights to a pay-per-view audience.

“I’m nearly speechless knowing Mr. Trump and Affliction have the trust in me for an event that features the greatest assembly of M.M.A. fighters for one show in M.M.A. history,” Mr. Cohen said in a news release announcing his new position, adding that the coming event was “like having Ali, Frazier, Tyson, Holyfield and other top heavyweights all on the same boxing card.”

Working for Mr. Trump, he told lawmakers on Wednesday, was “intoxicating.”

“When you were in his presence,” he said, “you felt like you were involved in something greater than yourself — that you were somehow changing the world.”

He tried to appeal to his boss by embodying the qualities that Mr. Trump had once admired in his own mentor, Roy Cohn. A Bronx-born lawyer, Mr. Cohn rose to prominence working for Senator Joseph McCarthy’s anti-Communist crusade and then spent years as Mr. Trump’s lawyer. Like Mr. Cohen, he was disbarred for unethical conduct.

“Roy was brutal, but he was a very loyal guy,” Mr. Trump once told a biographer. “He brutalized for you.”

Over time, Mr. Cohen learned how Mr. Trump liked to do business.

“He doesn’t give you questions, he doesn’t give you orders,” he said on Wednesday. “He speaks in code, and I understand the code because I’ve been around him for a decade.”

Shunted to the Sidelines

In 2011 Mr. Cohen began scouting prospects for another brawl, a possible presidential run by Mr. Trump in 2012. He traveled to Iowa and accompanied Mr. Trump to a speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, where he acted like a bar bouncer keeping reporters away from his celebrity boss. Mr. Cohen set up a website called ShouldTrumpRun.org.

He did not. But almost immediately after the presidential race was over, Mr. Cohen began compiling information for his boss for the next time. He kept a thick binder on his desk at Trump Tower packed with information about filing deadlines in different states for the 2016 election and other campaign minutiae.

But he was shunted to the sidelines when the campaign began, prohibited by Mr. Trump’s children and other political operatives from making day-to-day campaign decisions. He pursued other business ventures for Mr. Trump, including the ambitious idea of building the tallest skyscraper in Moscow emblazoned with the Trump name.

Trying to gain access to influential figures in Moscow, Mr. Cohen turned to Felix Sater, a Russian immigrant, felon and F.B.I. informant who had helped Mr. Trump with other development deals and had explored various ventures in Russia.

This effort became a central focus of the investigation by Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, who is examining Russia’s attempts to sabotage the 2016 election and any role Mr. Trump’s advisers played in coordinating with Moscow. And the lies Mr. Cohen told about the negotiations put him in even more legal jeopardy.

On Wednesday, he apologized to lawmakers for lying to a different congressional panel in 2017, when he said that the Trump Tower Moscow negotiations ended in January 2016, before the first presidential primaries. In fact, they continued for months longer.

“To be clear,” he said, “Mr. Trump knew of and directed the Trump Moscow negotiations throughout the campaign and lied about it. He lied about it because he never expected to win. He also lied about it because he stood to make hundreds of millions of dollars on the Moscow real estate project.”

“And so I lied about it, too,” he added.

After he won the election, Mr. Trump brought many of his longtime confidants to the White House, but Mr. Cohen was left behind. He was disappointed but remained a loyal backbencher, raising money for Mr. Trump’s re-election fund and publicly attacking celebrities like Snoop Dogg and Johnny Depp for their anti-Trump comments.

Republicans at Wednesday’s hearing tried to cast Mr. Cohen as an embittered former aide trying to get payback for being excluded from a White House job. On Twitter, Mr. Trump’s son Eric said that Mr. Cohen was known within the campaign to be seeking a job.

Mr. Cohen has insisted over the past two years — and did again on Wednesday — that he never had any interest in moving to Washington, uprooting his family and giving up his job as Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer. He said that Mr. Trump had wanted him for a White House job, and was upset when it did not work out.

Regardless of the actual circumstances, Mr. Cohen’s absence from the administration created a distance between Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump that would become a chasm.

Implicating the Boss

When F.B.I. agents raided Mr. Cohen’s office and apartment last April, carting off years of business records, emails and other documents, Mr. Cohen relied on his first instinct — he would not flip.

He took at least one call from Mr. Trump, who urged him to stay strong. His lawyers strategized with the president’s, and Mr. Trump praised him and insisted his former fixer and lawyer would never cooperate with prosecutors.

That would change by July, as his legal problems mounted and his friends urged him not to take the fall for Mr. Trump. He changed his Twitter bio page, removing any mention of being Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, a move people close to him said was a deliberate signal of his independence.

Around that time, officials at Mr. Trump’s company began to balk at paying some of Mr. Cohen’s legal fees.

He pleaded guilty in August to financial crimes, and in his guilty plea he implicated his former boss in a scheme to pay hush money to two women before the 2016 election.

It was an extraordinary turn for a once-devoted soldier — a decision that Mr. Cohen on Wednesday described as a catharsis.

“I have lied, but I am not a liar. I have done bad things, but I am not a bad man,” he said before a hushed room.

“I have fixed things. But I am no longer your fixer, Mr. Trump.”

[bedwardd]

Vote?

don't let anyone downplay what went down last night:

• Two Muslim women were elected to Congress. Ilhan Omar won in Minneapolis, and she was a Somali refugee. She fled Somalia’s civil war at age 8 and is now in Congress. Rashida Tlaib is the daughter of Palestinian immigrants, and she took John Conyers seat, a democrat who resigned for sexual harassment allegations. • Alexandrias Ocasio-Cortez became the youngest woman ever elected to Congress. • A Native American lesbian woman, Sharice Davids, was elected to Congress in Kansas. • In Wisconsin, Tammy Baldwin hung on and remains the only lesbian Senator. • Jared Polis became America's first openly gay Governor in Colorado. • Kris Kobach, a fringe conservative known for disenfranchising voters, lost to a really cool woman for Governor of Kansas, Laura Kelly. I repeat, Kansas just elected a female Democrat to be its Governor. • Scott Walker, one of the most horrible politicians in the country, and one of the hardest to defeat, went down. Tony Evers, who beat him, has been the Superintendent of Public Instruction there. • We won anti-gerrymandering reforms in Missouri, Colorado and Michigan, and Ohio passed anti-gerrymandering legislation earlier this year. These laws REALLY help end extremism in politics. Hard to overstate the importance of these laws for the health of our democracy. • In Nevada, Jacky Rosen won BIG in a PICKUP for the US Senate. Just a few years ago she was the president of her synagogue. Just months after first being elected to Congress she was asked to run for US Senate. She ran a masterful campaign. • Lauren Underwood, an African American nurse who worked in the Obama administration, was elected to Congress from Illinois. • Voters in Florida passed Amendment 4, which restores voting rights to 1.5 million ex-felons (the most convicted felons in the country), giving a civil right back to people who have paid their debt to society or who served time in prison due to racist drug laws. • Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who famously refused to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples, was ousted. • Colin Allred, a former NFL player and a civil rights lawyer, knocked out Pete Sessions in Texas. • Lizzie Fletcher knocked off John Culbertson also in Texas. • Democrats flipped the Colorado state Senate from red to blue. Now Colorado has a clean sweep of state government. • We have also flipped Maine Senate, and New Hampshire House and Senate. • We also flipped the New York State Senate, where Cuomo was just re-elected. This gives New York a clean sweep of state government. Also in NY, Max Rose ousted the last remaining Republican member of Congress from NYC. • California elected Gavin Newsom, a progressive champion with an amazing record of LGBT equality, gun reform, and climate protection. In San Francisco, voters passed a tax on wealthy corporations to address homelessness, against the wishes of its business-interest-leaning mayor. • Antonio Delgado beat John Faso in New York, another minority elected in a white swing district. • Kendra Horn elected to Congress in OKLAHOMA, defeating a man in one of the reddest states. In 2016, Steve Russell, who held the seat, won by 20 points. • Kate Brown was re-elected in Oregon. The nation’s first openly bisexual governor, she had a tough fight. • Virginia elected THREE new Democratic women to the House, two of whom unseated Republican men. Abigail Spanberg is a former CIA operations officer. Elaine Luria is a former Navy Commander who defeated a Republican Navy SEAL. Jennifer Wexton is a prosecutor. • Mary Scanlon was elected to Congress from Pennsylvania, replacing a man who resigned due to sexual harassment allegations. Also in PA, Chrissy Houlahan beat Greg McCauley, and Susan Wild beat Marty Nothstein. Three new women, just from PA. Conor Lamb was also elected to a full term. 🙂 • Democrats broke supermajorities in the NC State House & Senate. • Janet Mills is the new governor of Maine, which is a flip. • Angie Craig unseated Jason Lewis (particularly bad guy) in Minneapolis suburbs. Dean Phillips also won in these suburbs, where a Republican has been in office since 1961! We also flipped the Minnesota state house, which is awesome. • Turnout in 2014 was 83 million votes, turnout this year is 114 million votes. That’s a 73% increase in voters from one midterm election to the next. Wow. (h/t Kha Itum) • Democrats took control of the House of Representatives. This means Dems now control committees, setting the agenda, giving them subpoena power for information and witnesses. Trump is no longer able to pass legislation without bipartisan support. Remember, each of these new Democratic members is a story. A veteran, a doctor, a nurse, a mom who ran because of Trump and will bring tremendous energy, vitality, and energy to Washington. Nancy Pelosi will return to her post as the only Speaker of the House in US history to have never lost a floor vote.

[newssplashy]

Opinion: Charged with murder, but the pastor didn't pull the trigger

DOTHAN, Ala. — A Google search will show that Pastor Kenneth Glasgow first made news in 2001 as the former crack addict and prison inmate who was fretted over by his older half brother, the Rev. Al Sharpton Jr.

The local media in Dothan, a small, unprepossessing city in Alabama’s Wiregrass region, have long followed his story of reinvention from felon to do-gooder who hand-delivered meals, organized unity marches and — in a place where few were willing to speak out — crusaded against brutality and racism.

During the Senate race between Roy Moore and Doug Jones last year, Glasgow gained attention with his effort to register as voters thousands of people with felony records, a campaign that thrilled left-wing groups while outraging Breitbart News.

Nowadays, though, one thing tops the search results: a mug shot, his eyes hooded, his white goatee jutting out at a defiant angle.

In March, Glasgow was charged with capital murder.

The day before the fatal shooting took place, he spoke at the local March for Our Lives for gun control. To an East Coast journalist who has been visiting Dothan for a decade, the idea that this man could be facing death row seemed, if not Shakespearean (tragic and predestined), then perhaps Faulknerian (grotesque and confounding).

First, there were so many people in Dothan who would revel in his downfall. In a place known for the excesses of its criminal justice system, Glasgow has been the critic-in-chief of police, prosecutors and jailers.

And then there is the fact that he did not actually kill anyone.

The police say that a passenger in a car that Glasgow was driving got out and fatally shot another motorist. Under Alabama’s complicity law, also known as the “aiding and abetting” statute, an accomplice to a crime is just as guilty as the main actor. To make their case against Glasgow, prosecutors must prove that he knew, or reasonably should have known, that violence was going to occur. He says he had no idea.

“I don’t do violence,” he said when I went down to Dothan to hear the story firsthand. “To know that I’m the cause, or involved in, a black woman’s death? It’s like the death of me, really.”

I had arrived at the office of his defense lawyer, Derek Yarbrough, to find a surprise guest: Rickey Stokes, a bail bondsman, news blogger, private investigator, 911 board chairman and assistant coroner.

Stokes and Glasgow have a history that is Dothanesque. They have been adversaries — Glasgow, who is black, once protested when Stokes, who is white, chained two African-American bail-bond clients to the courthouse doors. Stokes was convicted of misdemeanor unlawful imprisonment, and complained that Glasgow had unduly made a racial issue out of it.

But it all turned out to be nothing personal: Glasgow has now requested Stokes’ investigative services on his very bizarre case.

Here’s what happened: On Sunday, March 25, Glasgow was in the Bottom, the poor neighborhood where he does much of his work, with a friend known as Little John. A young man, Jamie Townes, who Glasgow says was an acquaintance, approached and reported that his car was missing. Glasgow believed he had seen the car, a Monte Carlo, a few blocks away.

Townes, a woman named Choyce Bush, Little John and Glasgow got into the car Glasgow was driving that day, a borrowed brand-new Toyota Camry, to go look for it.

The Monte Carlo had gone on a wild ride, careening through church grounds, fields and ditches, knocking over a street sign and ramming into a tree in someone’s front yard. Finally, with its hood popped open, blocking the driver’s view, it plowed into the front of the Camry on the driver’s side.

“We didn’t find the car,” Glasgow said. “The car found us.”

After the collision, Townes got out of the back seat of the Camry and, the police say, began firing at the driver of the Monte Carlo, who everyone assumed was a man.

It turned out to be Breunia Jennings, a young woman with a long history of mental illness, who in the preceding hours had cut her hair short, fled from a motel barefoot and barely dressed, donned men’s clothing and, apparently, found Townes’ car with the motor running. The police now believe that she was driving so erratically because she was being chased.

There’s more to the story. Glasgow says that not only did the Monte Carlo hit the Camry from the front, but another vehicle hit the Camry from behind. (Bush also told the police about a rear-end collision, and Townes said he was “punch drunk” from “multiple collisions,” according to police testimony.) The Camry did suffer some rear damage, but no third vehicle was ever found.

Thinking there was some sort of ambush in progress, Glasgow says, he ducked, and did not see the shooting. Nor, he says, was he aware that Townes had gotten out of the car.

Dothan is a city where judgment is swift and punishment can be harsh. It is the seat of Houston County, which ranks among the top 10 in the nation for death row convictions. It has a relatively new district attorney; the previous one was known for striking African-Americans from juries.

But at Glasgow’s preliminary hearing, where he appeared in handcuffs and an orange jumpsuit, Judge Benjamin Lewis seemed dubious that criminal charges were warranted.

“What is it he did, other than pick him up and give him a ride, really?” he asked.

Lewis took the rare step in a capital murder case of allowing Glasgow to post bond. A grand jury will decide whether to indict him.

While he waits, the police, some local news coverage and the Dothan rumor mill have portrayed him as callous and indifferent. Much has been made of the fact that he did not call the police to report the Monte Carlo missing, nor did he call 911 after the accident.

To the first point, Glasgow says, he and his passengers believed the car had been taken by a friend. To the second, the police arrived at the scene moments after the shooting, so he says there was no need to call them.

There has been surprisingly little controversy over what may be the most unflattering part of the episode: Glasgow spent the minutes after the accident trying to commit insurance fraud. The Camry’s owner was concerned that her insurance would not cover the accident, so she hurried to the scene in order to stand in as the driver.

At the time, Glasgow says, he did not know that anyone had died. When Glasgow learned, hours later at the police station, that the situation was far more serious than just a car wreck, he says he promptly confessed to having been the driver.

Glasgow, 53, says he did not know that Townes, 27, had a gun. Even so, prosecutors may try to argue that it was reasonable to expect that Townes, who police say is a drug dealer, would commit violence. Townes had previous state charges for theft and drug possession, but not for violent offenses.

Townes’ lawyer, James Parkman III, says his client fired in self-defense, pointing to a Facebook post in which Jennings said she was going to “stab and shoot” and “catch a murder case.”

In the eyes of the police, Glasgow’s association with Townes is suspicious. But helping people with unsavory pasts is Glasgow’s calling. It was some two decades ago, during Glasgow’s most recent of several stints in prison, that he and a friend conceived of a ministry focused on addiction, poverty and life after incarceration. They called it The Ordinary People Society.

Glasgow’s operation, housed in a run-down old shopping plaza and cluttered with the unruly archives of Mama Tina, Glasgow’s mother and co-missionary, can seem picayune. But Glasgow’s reach becomes apparent when he walks down the street: Every pedestrian and car stops to greet him. And over the years he has scored some improbable legal and political victories.

“The real story of what happens in America happens in these small towns, and in these small towns there are people whose rights have been completely upended,” said Asha Bandele, until recently a senior director at the Drug Policy Alliance, which helped finance Glasgow’s work for years.

Dothan’s population is about one-third African-American, but the city has an entrenched white power structure: It has never had a black mayor, police chief, circuit judge, county sheriff or school superintendent. It is the type of place where, if you call the police chief or the district attorney with a complaint, he may offer to pray with you right there on the line. In part through the common ground of Christianity, Glasgow has been able to forge some relationships with white businessmen who help pay for his work.

But where some see an advocate, many others — particularly white people in town — see a charlatan. The murder charge complicated matters. Though his hearing was packed with supporters, some African-American residents have turned against Glasgow as well.

The city was teeming with unfounded rumors: That Townes was actually Glasgow’s son. That they were in cahoots as drug kingpins. That Glasgow and Townes had terrorized and raped Jennings, then hunted her down. I heard that one from Jennings’ mother, Lakesia Reeves, who said she heard it from an anonymous caller.

In that environment, it is perhaps not surprising that Glasgow, too, would believe he is being deliberately targeted. For his opponents, he says, restoring voting rights to felons was bad enough — but the victory of Jones, a Democrat, in the Senate race was the final straw. “They want me dead,” he insisted.

Accustomed to being an activist for others, Glasgow now finds himself without a champion of his own. But as he awaits the grand jury’s decision, he has found a new crusade: changing the accomplice law.

“I did my time for what I did,” he said, speaking of previous armed robbery and drug convictions. “I’m not going to do it for something I didn’t do.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

Shaila Dewan © 2018 The New York Times

source https://www.newssplashy.com/2018/07/opinion-charged-with-murder-but-pastor.html

[benrleeusa]

[John K. Ross] Short Circuit: A roundup of recent federal court decisions

Through its "Bias Response Team," the University of Michigan investigates and punishes students for speech that might evoke "bothersome" or "hurtful" "feelings." Which runs afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment's protections against laws that don't give fair warning of what is and isn't prohibited. So argues Sheldon Gilbert, the director of IJ's Center for Judicial Engagement, over at The Weekly Standard.

Fifteen-year-old robs Norfolk, Va. house party at gunpoint. His two (adult) confederates plead guilty, get 10- and 13-year sentences. The teen goes to trial, gets 118 years plus six life sentences (with the remote possibility of geriatric release at age 60). He files a habeas petition arguing his sentence is too long, violates the Eighth Amendment. In the meantime, then-Gov. Bob McDonnell reduces his sentence to 40 years. Is the habeas petition moot? Fourth Circuit: Yes.

Man kills 6-year-old boy near Iowa, La. in 1992. Defense: He's mentally ill, could not have understood his actions. Trial 1: Guilty of first-degree murder. Overturned on appeal due to judge's missteps (used race in jury-foreperson selection). Trial 2: Acquit on first-degree murder (which requires finding of intent to kill) but convict on second-degree murder (which does not). Overturned on appeal due to judge's missteps (e.g., judge was absent during significant portions of the proceedings). Trial 3 (with a new judge): Guilty of second-degree murder, as he intended to kill the boy. Fifth Circuit: Double jeopardy. The jury in the second trial found he lacked intent. The state can charge him with some other crime that does not involve intent, but this conviction can't stand. (Related: After the victim's mother testified she didn't want to see defendant put to death, prosecutors allegedly tried to have her other child taken away from her. H/t: Ethan Brown)

Midway through a state-court murder trial, the court discovers one of the jurors is the victim's niece. Oops! The niece is dismissed, and the trial goes on after the judge asks the jury as a group whether the dismissed juror had talked to any of them and receives no response—which might have been error on a direct appeal in federal court, says the Sixth Circuit (over a dissent), but isn't enough to warrant habeas relief.

Collusion, financial intrigue, and under-the table payments for political endorsements. Naturally, we're talking about the 2012 Ron Paul campaign. Eighth Circuit: No need to reconsider any convictions.

Plaintiff spent 20 years in prison for murder after a San Francisco police sergeant allegedly fabricated evidence and manipulated a witness into falsely identifying him. District court: The sergeant isn't liable because the prosecutor exercised independent judgment in bringing the murder charges. Ninth Circuit: Right, but that judgment may have been based on the phony evidence. Remanded for trial.

Allegation: Activists used false pretenses to enter Planned Parenthood conferences and set up interviews, which the activists then surreptitiously recorded and mendaciously edited so as to make it seem like Planned Parenthood sells aborted fetal tissue, setting off a national furor. Activists: The suit is a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, meant to punish us for protected First Amendment activity. Ninth Circuit: The case can proceed.

Are Seattle's attempts to unionize Uber and Lyft drivers preempted by federal antitrust law? They very well may be, says the Ninth Circuit.

Allegation: Man flees from traffic stop on foot, clutching his waistband. He flings away an object, which turns out to be a gun. Several seconds later, a Riverside, Calif. officer shoots him in the back, paralyzing him. Ninth Circuit (over a dissent): Qualified immunity.

In Colorado, once city officials declare property "blighted," owners have 30 days to file a lawsuit—or they are barred from challenging the designation, which can trigger seizure of their property via eminent domain (for seven years). Question: Do officials have to notify property owners of a blight designation? Indeed so, says the Tenth Circuit, but it's up to owners to figure out they only have 30 days to object. In the instant case, Glendale, Colo. officials' failure to notify the owners of carpet store (that sits in the footprint of a proposed mall) violates due process.

The feds arrest, freeze assets of Casper, Wyo. physician accused of illegally prescribing medication. Uh oh, he needs that money to pay for his defense! District Court: Well, they didn't take ALL of his money. Tenth Circuit: That is not the test.

Two Muskogee County, Okla. jail officials are convicted for holding "meet and greets," where they beat up new inmates. District court: Such displays "of strength and control may have served a purpose in the control of disorderly inmates and the overall safety of the jail staff." The officers get below-guidelines sentences of one and two years. Tenth Circuit (over a dissent): Which isn't unreasonable.

Aurora, Colo. police run tags on car with broken tail light, discover the car was seized three weeks earlier in weapons-possession case and a man (a known gang member) associated with the car was arrested. They pull it over; the man is in it; they frisk him and find a gun. He's charged with being a felon in possession. Suppress the evidence? No need, says the Tenth Circuit. Though he was calm and compliant, officers were justified in patting him down to ensure their safety. Dissent: The gov't is going to use this decision to justify frisks in a much broader variety of circumstances than the ones here.

Florida prison officials bar inmates from receiving magazine that, in addition to covering criminal justice issues, publishes ads advertising services (like three-way calling, pen-pal solicitations, and people locators) that inmates use to conduct criminal activities. A First Amendment violation? The Eleventh Circuit, citing Oscar Wilde, says no. (For some more fun, Ctrl+F for "la-la-land." Or have a gander at Footnote 11.)

St. Pete Beach, Fla. officials encourage the public to trespass on privately owned beachfront property. Does the city have to pay the owners? Jury: You bet. Pay $1.5 million. Eleventh Circuit: Affirmed. And for its money, the city gets a permanent easement across the parcel.

This week, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed into law a bill that creates a statewide licensing scheme for food trucks. Huzzah! No longer will mobile food vendors be forced to obtain separate permits—and comply with a dizzying array of varying rules—from each town, city, and county where they want to operate. The law also prevents municipalities from imposing egregious red tape, like mandates to move every few hours or stay hundreds of feet away from brick-and-mortar restaurants. Click here to read more.