thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Senate Passes Bill To Give Paycheck Protection Plan Loan Recipients More Flexibility

The Senate on Wednesday passed a bill that would give small businesses more time to use loans given to them to weather the ongoing coronavirus pandemic , as well as additional flexibility on how they can use the money .
The legislation cleared the House last week in a near-unanimous vote , passing 417-1 .
The measure briefly stalled in the Senate due to objections from some Republican senators who demanded changes , but the chamber reached an agreement Wednesday evening and sent it to President Donald Trump ’ s desk for his signature into law .
The bill would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Program that Congress created earlier this year as part of its emergency response to the pandemic .
The program gave small business owners forgivable loans so long as most of those funds were spent on their payrolls as part of efforts to keep millions of Americans employed .
The new legislation would extend the period small businesses are allowed to use loans to 24 weeks from eight weeks .
It also would allow loan recipients to spend 60 % , rather than 75 % , of their loan proceeds on paying workers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The remaining portion of the loans can be used on other expenses need to keep businesses afloat .
Senate Democrats attempted to pass the bill via unanimous consent earlier Wednesday , warning that the eight-week period for borrowers who first received loans is set to expire next week before some states have fully re-opened and allowed many businesses to operate .
According to a survey done by the National Federation of Independent Businesses , 23 % of businesses that got loans will hit the eight-week deadline next week .
Johnson expressed concern that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at least 60 % of their loans on payroll is too high .
He also questioned the provision to extend the loan program through December .
Johnson said he hoped to enter a letter into the congressional record clarifying the intent of Congress that the program expire at an earlier date before approving the bill .
“ We ’ re so close , ” Johnson said , indicating that he and other lawmakers were working on such a resolution .
“ Maybe we pass this yet tonight or early tomorrow morning.
” “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to all business to pass this bill now and then we ’ ll work in good faith on the small change , ” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer ( D-N.Y. ) said .
The loan program , one key part of the Cares Act that Congress passed in March , has approved more than $ 500 billion out of $ 660 billion in loans to small businesses .
The pace of lending has slowed considerably in recent weeks .
Democrats have called for further reforms to the program to make it more equitable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its recipients , including race , geography , and gender .
This story has been updated with Senate passage of the bill after it had stalled in the chamber earlier on Wednesday .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Senate on Wednesday passed a bill that would give small businesses more time to use loans given to them to weather the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, as well as additional flexibility on how they can use the money.
The legislation cleared the House last week in a near-unanimous vote, passing 417-1. The measure briefly stalled in the Senate due to objections from some Republican senators who demanded changes, but the chamber reached an agreement Wednesday evening and sent it to President Donald Trump’s desk for his signature into law.
Advertisement
The bill would make key changes to the Paycheck Protection Program that Congress created earlier this year as part of its emergency response to the pandemic. The program gave small business owners forgivable loans so long as most of those funds were spent on their payrolls as part of efforts to keep millions of Americans employed.
The new legislation would extend the period small businesses are allowed to use loans to 24 weeks from eight weeks. It also would allow loan recipients to spend 60%, rather than 75%, of their loan proceeds on paying workers and still be eligible for loan forgiveness. The remaining portion of the loans can be used on other expenses need to keep businesses afloat.
Senate Democrats attempted to pass the bill via unanimous consent earlier Wednesday, warning that the eight-week period for borrowers who first received loans is set to expire next week before some states have fully re-opened and allowed many businesses to operate. According to a survey done by the National Federation of Independent Businesses, 23% of businesses that got loans will hit the eight-week deadline next week.
“Small businesses need predictability. We don’t have extra time,” Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the Small Business Committee, said in a floor speech.
Advertisement
But Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) objected to the unanimous consent request.
Johnson expressed concern that the House bill requirement that businesses spend at least 60% of their loans on payroll is too high. He also questioned the provision to extend the loan program through December.
Johnson said he hoped to enter a letter into the congressional record clarifying the intent of Congress that the program expire at an earlier date before approving the bill.
“We’re so close,” Johnson said, indicating that he and other lawmakers were working on such a resolution. “Maybe we pass this yet tonight or early tomorrow morning.”
Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) echoed Johnson’s concerns about the bill.
Democrats, meanwhile, argued that small businesses couldn’t afford a delay.
“It would be very wise and helpful to all business to pass this bill now and then we’ll work in good faith on the small change,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said.
The chamber reached a deal later in the day, however, and the bill passed unanimously after a request from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Advertisement
The loan program, one key part of the Cares Act that Congress passed in March, has approved more than $500 billion out of $660 billion in loans to small businesses. The pace of lending has slowed considerably in recent weeks.
Democrats have called for further reforms to the program to make it more equitable, as well as more detailed data on its recipients, including race, geography, and gender.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Cory Booker Asks A Pointed Question Over And Over In Senate Speech Against Racism

Sen. Cory Booker ( D-N.J. ) on Tuesday delivered an impassioned speech on the Senate floor about racism and the protests that have erupted nationwide since the death of George Floyd .
Booker said the police killing of Floyd in Minneapolis last week was a “ searing ” reminder for many Black Americans that “ this could have been me .
That this even would have been me in the same circumstances.
” Being Black in America is “ to know that a misunderstanding , that an implicit racial bias that an interaction that should be everyday and routine can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turned upside down , your body becomes broken or you are killed , ” continued Booker , who is Black .
“ It ’ s why so many Black Americans scream out : ‘ Do you see me ?
I do not have your equal justice under law .
Do you see me ?
I do not have justice for all .
Do you see me ?
I matter .
I matter .
Black lives matter .
Black bodies matter .
America , I love you , do you see me ?
Do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know the failings of our ideals ?
’ ” “ Hope is essential but it is not enough , ” Booker added .
Booker , the former mayor of Newark , New Jersey , joined the Senate in 2013 and said it was “ literally the least diverse place ” he ’ d seen .
Booker ended his run for president in January .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on Tuesday delivered an impassioned speech on the Senate floor about racism and the protests that have erupted nationwide since the death of George Floyd.
Booker said the police killing of Floyd in Minneapolis last week was a “searing” reminder for many Black Americans that “this could have been me. That this even would have been me in the same circumstances.”
Advertisement
Being Black in America is “to know that a misunderstanding, that an implicit racial bias that an interaction that should be everyday and routine can become a moment that your life is turned upside down, your body becomes broken or you are killed,” continued Booker, who is Black.
“It’s why so many Black Americans scream out: ‘Do you see me? I do not have your equal justice under law. Do you see me? I do not have justice for all. Do you see me? I matter. I matter. Black lives matter. Black bodies matter. America, I love you, do you see me? Do you know my experiences? Do you know the failings of our ideals?’”
“Hope is essential but it is not enough,” Booker added.
Booker, the former mayor of Newark, New Jersey, joined the Senate in 2013 and said it was “literally the least diverse place” he’d seen. Booker ended his run for president in January.
Check out Booker’s address in the video above.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Trump Went Full-On Fascist For A Photo-Op. What’s He Willing To Do To Keep Power?

Authoritarianism experts who worried about Trump ’ s tendencies during his campaign and his first years in office are now sounding fresh alarms following the clearing of a park adjacent to the White House on Monday using gas , flash-bang grenades , pepper pellets and other aggressive tactics ― all so he could stand in front of a church he does not attend and be photographed holding a Bible .
“ It was everything that an autocrat is , ” said Gail Helt , who watched for signs of democratic decay in Asian countries during her dozen years as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off the reins of power .
That image of him holding the Bible .
… I don ’ t know what that was , but it was disturbing.
” In recent months , Trump has begun aggressively attacking mail voting , a process that is standard in some states now and which many others are expanding because of concerns that in-person voting could spread the coronavirus .
Trump has repeatedly claimed that expanding voting by mail will let Democrats cheat , even though he , his press secretary and a top adviser have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Trump has shown at best a hazy grasp of his actual powers during his presidency and instead has made broad statements about his authority under the Constitution .
“ I have an Article II , where I have the right to do whatever I want as president , ” he told supporters last summer .
He does not appear to have any authority to undo an election loss , but his critics warn that the outcome of such assertions on his part could largely be determined by his Cabinet members and Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who oppose him worried .
“ The question is not what Trump is willing to do ; it ’ s what the people around him are willing to enable him to do .
We already know what Trump is capable of , ” said Tom Nichols , a Naval War College professor and prominent Trump critic .
“ Trump is a thug surrounded by weak men and women desperate to be near power .
Trump has no sense of right and wrong and will do anything , ” said Stuart Stevens , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney .
“ The burden is on the Republican Party .
In our system , parties should serve a circuit breaker role .
Republicans have proven that most will not , and it creates a very dangerous situation.
” In 1990 , following the brutal crackdown of protests in Beijing , Trump said : “ When the students poured into Tiananmen Square , the Chinese government almost blew it .
Then they were vicious , they were horrible , but they put it down with strength .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Running for president in 2015 , Trump repeatedly praised Russian leader Vladimir Putin , even calling him a better leader than President Barack Obama .
In 2016 , Trump professed respect for North Korea ’ s Kim Jong Un for murdering his uncle and others as a way to consolidate power .
“ It ’ s incredible .
He wiped out the uncle .
He wiped out this one , that one , ” he said .
In 2018 , he spoke wistfully about Chinese President Xi Jinping ’ s ability to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the number of terms he could serve .
And today he is trying to get Russia reinstated into the Group of 7 , the organization of large democratic economies , even as Putin seeks to extend his presidential term until 2036 and still retains control of a portion of Ukraine , the reason Russia was expelled from what had been the G8 in the first place .
Trump has also in his years in the White House frequently praised the use of violence .
He told police officers in 2017 that they shouldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heads as they place them in patrol cars .
And on a conference call with governors on Monday , he berated them for not “ dominating ” the streets of their cities .
“ Trump is a menace .
It ’ s almost pointless to try and guess what new atrocious thing Trump will come up with , but he has certainly made it clear that there is no line , moral , legal or otherwise , that he won ’ t cross if he thinks it could help him retain power , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Priorities USA super PAC .
It was everything that an autocrat is .
Trying to show off the reins of power .
That image of him holding the Bible .
… I don ’ t know what that was , but it was disturbing .
“ This was an authoritarian spectacle , backed up by the real force of sending military into the streets , ” she said .
“ A cocktail of all the elements authoritarians have used in history : a lawless ruler attacking protesters , using religion as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own people .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON ― If Donald Trump was willing to have Americans gassed and beaten so he could stage a photo opportunity, what will he be willing to do to retain the presidency come election time?
Authoritarianism experts who worried about Trump’s tendencies during his campaign and his first years in office are now sounding fresh alarms following the clearing of a park adjacent to the White House on Monday using gas, flash-bang grenades, pepper pellets and other aggressive tactics ― all so he could stand in front of a church he does not attend and be photographed holding a Bible.
Advertisement
“It was everything that an autocrat is,” said Gail Helt, who watched for signs of democratic decay in Asian countries during her dozen years as a CIA analyst. “Trying to show off the reins of power. That image of him holding the Bible. … I don’t know what that was, but it was disturbing.”
Neither the White House nor the Trump campaign responded to HuffPost queries regarding Trump’s authoritarian tendencies and whether they might worsen the closer we get to an Election Day that may force him from office.
In recent months, Trump has begun aggressively attacking mail voting, a process that is standard in some states now and which many others are expanding because of concerns that in-person voting could spread the coronavirus. Trump has repeatedly claimed that expanding voting by mail will let Democrats cheat, even though he, his press secretary and a top adviser have all voted by mail in recent elections.
“MAIL-IN VOTING WILL LEAD TO MASSIVE FRAUD AND ABUSE,” he claimed in a statement he posted to Twitter last week.
Advertisement
Trump critics, both Democrats and Republicans, believe that he is laying the groundwork to challenge the election results should he lose and that he could try to remain in office by invoking emergency powers.
Trump has shown at best a hazy grasp of his actual powers during his presidency and instead has made broad statements about his authority under the Constitution. “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as president,” he told supporters last summer.
He does not appear to have any authority to undo an election loss, but his critics warn that the outcome of such assertions on his part could largely be determined by his Cabinet members and Republicans in Congress. And that has Republicans who oppose him worried.
“The question is not what Trump is willing to do; it’s what the people around him are willing to enable him to do. We already know what Trump is capable of,” said Tom Nichols, a Naval War College professor and prominent Trump critic.
“Trump is a thug surrounded by weak men and women desperate to be near power. Trump has no sense of right and wrong and will do anything,” said Stuart Stevens, a GOP consultant who worked on the campaigns of George W. Bush and Mitt Romney. “The burden is on the Republican Party. In our system, parties should serve a circuit breaker role. Republicans have proven that most will not, and it creates a very dangerous situation.”
Advertisement
President Donald Trump leaves the White House to walk to St. John's Episcopal Church, across Lafayette Park from the White House, on Monday. BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images
Trump has long spoken admiringly of dictators and of violence as a tool for social control.
In 1990, following the brutal crackdown of protests in Beijing, Trump said: “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength.”
Running for president in 2015, Trump repeatedly praised Russian leader Vladimir Putin, even calling him a better leader than President Barack Obama. In 2016, Trump professed respect for North Korea’s Kim Jong Un for murdering his uncle and others as a way to consolidate power. “It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle. He wiped out this one, that one,” he said.
In 2018, he spoke wistfully about Chinese President Xi Jinping’s ability to change the constitution and scrap limits on the number of terms he could serve. And today he is trying to get Russia reinstated into the Group of 7, the organization of large democratic economies, even as Putin seeks to extend his presidential term until 2036 and still retains control of a portion of Ukraine, the reason Russia was expelled from what had been the G8 in the first place.
Trump has also in his years in the White House frequently praised the use of violence. He told police officers in 2017 that they shouldn’t worry about hitting suspects’ heads as they place them in patrol cars. And on a conference call with governors on Monday, he berated them for not “dominating” the streets of their cities.
Advertisement
“If you don’t dominate, you’re wasting your time. They’re going to run all over you. You’ll look like a bunch of jerks,” he told them.
“I am your president of law and order,” he declared hours later from the White House Rose Garden as police and troops were clearing a park of protesters so he could walk through to take his Bible photo.
“Trump is a menace. It’s almost pointless to try and guess what new atrocious thing Trump will come up with, but he has certainly made it clear that there is no line, moral, legal or otherwise, that he won’t cross if he thinks it could help him retain power,” said Daniela Martins, press secretary of the Priorities USA super PAC.
“It was everything that an autocrat is. Trying to show off the reins of power. That image of him holding the Bible. … I don’t know what that was, but it was disturbing.” - Gail Helt, former CIA analyst
Ruth Ben-Ghiat, an authoritarianism expert at New York University, said Trump’s clearing of Lafayette Square on Monday was a textbook case.
Advertisement
“This was an authoritarian spectacle, backed up by the real force of sending military into the streets,” she said. “A cocktail of all the elements authoritarians have used in history: a lawless ruler attacking protesters, using religion as a prop and declaring war on his own people.”
She said what made it even more worrisome was the presence and support of Attorney General William Barr and Defense Secretary Mark Esper.
“They are his willing tools now,” Ben-Ghiat said. “He will do whatever he needs to to be reelected, starting with the military interventions he’s started with the aim of ending the protests.”
Helt, who now runs the Securities and Intelligence Studies program at King University in Bristol, Tennessee, said she saw democracy fall apart in Malaysia starting in 2011 following anti-government protests. She said she never dreamed it could happen here.
“To watch the president be the most pressing danger that we have is really unnerving,” she said.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Republicans Push 'Return To Work Bonus' As Alternative To Unemployment

The “ Return to Work ” bonus would give workers up to $ 1,200 for going back to work .
The bonus money would be available until the end of July , when the extra $ 600 in federal money that Congress added to weekly unemployment checks also expires .
The extra money was designed to encourage people to stay home , since the new germ is highly transmissible , and there ’ s no good treatment for people who get severely ill. President Donald Trump , however , has said workers should be “ warriors ” and go back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With such a high number of unemployed ― and many workers now actually making more or about the same on unemployment as they were before ― Republicans are looking for ways to entice people back to their jobs .
Brady said on CNBC that Texas businesses have been calling him and that they are “ very frustrated that they can ’ t bring their workforce back.
” But Democrats — who passed legislation in the House that would extend the extra $ 600 in unemployment benefits until the end of the year — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans think a two-week bonus is the solution to a once-in-a-century pandemic and economic crisis , they are delusional about the scale of this crisis , ” Wyden said .
He added that any bonus would need to be paired with hazard pay for workers who ’ ve stayed at their jobs all along .
Democrats have signaled they might be willing to keep the extra benefits in place at a lower number than $ 600 , but they also suggest that some sort of extra compensation should remain in place as long @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the benefits should automatically “ trigger ” off as conditions improve .
The $ 600 boost comes on top of whatever a claimant receives in regular state-funded benefits , and the extra money has been an important lifeline for many of the 40 million people who have become unemployed due to the coronavirus crisis .
( Congress also created special unemployment benefits with broader eligibility criteria for people not normally covered , such as Uber drivers .
Those benefits aren ’ t expiring until the end of the year . )
But the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expanded benefits by encouraging states to cut people off if they refuse to return to work , even though federal regulations say people are supposed to be able to keep disaster unemployment benefits if they refuse jobs that pose a risk to their health .
Brady ’ s proposal also includes a provision “ ensuring employers can report job refusals , ” which is something employers generally can do already .
Brady ’ s proposal to give workers a $ 1,200 bonus is relatively meager when compared to the expanded unemployment benefits .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ effect on the unemployment rate , the proposal could just be a fig leaf for GOP indifference about the financial struggles of those who have lost their jobs because of coronavirus .
Republicans seem intent on not extending those added unemployment benefits , and if they actually do hold the line and refuse to agree to even a smaller number , a proposal like Brady ’ s could be important in helping the GOP avoid charges of heartlessness .
Instead , they can point to Brady ’ s proposal and say , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encouraging jobs .
Several workers have told HuffPost they quit or refused to return to their jobs because it ’ s not worth risking exposure to the coronavirus , even if they wind up with no income at all .

With Republicans intent on letting expanded unemployment benefits expire at the end of July, a new GOP proposal would instead give workers a bonus for returning to their jobs.
The “Return to Work” bonus would give workers up to $1,200 for going back to work. The bonus money would be available until the end of July, when the extra $600 in federal money that Congress added to weekly unemployment checks also expires.
Advertisement
More than 40 million Americans have filed unemployment claims since the coronavirus pandemic shuttered businesses across the country.
The extra money was designed to encourage people to stay home, since the new germ is highly transmissible, and there’s no good treatment for people who get severely ill. President Donald Trump, however, has said workers should be “warriors” and go back to their jobs despite the risk.
With such a high number of unemployed ― and many workers now actually making more or about the same on unemployment as they were before ― Republicans are looking for ways to entice people back to their jobs.
The ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee ― Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas ― recently introduced the return to work legislation, calling the proposal “an important part in preventing a prolonged recession.”
Advertisement
Brady said on CNBC that Texas businesses have been calling him and that they are “very frustrated that they can’t bring their workforce back.”
But Democrats — who passed legislation in the House that would extend the extra $600 in unemployment benefits until the end of the year — are panning the idea.
The Senate Democrat who negotiated the higher unemployment benefits, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), characterized the proposal as inadequate.
“If Republicans think a two-week bonus is the solution to a once-in-a-century pandemic and economic crisis, they are delusional about the scale of this crisis,” Wyden said. He added that any bonus would need to be paired with hazard pay for workers who’ve stayed at their jobs all along.
Democrats have signaled they might be willing to keep the extra benefits in place at a lower number than $600, but they also suggest that some sort of extra compensation should remain in place as long as the economy is suffering and that the benefits should automatically “trigger” off as conditions improve.
Advertisement
The $600 boost comes on top of whatever a claimant receives in regular state-funded benefits, and the extra money has been an important lifeline for many of the 40 million people who have become unemployed due to the coronavirus crisis. (Congress also created special unemployment benefits with broader eligibility criteria for people not normally covered, such as Uber drivers. Those benefits aren’t expiring until the end of the year.)
But the Trump administration has already been undercutting the expanded benefits by encouraging states to cut people off if they refuse to return to work, even though federal regulations say people are supposed to be able to keep disaster unemployment benefits if they refuse jobs that pose a risk to their health. Brady’s proposal also includes a provision “ensuring employers can report job refusals,” which is something employers generally can do already.
Brady’s proposal to give workers a $1,200 bonus is relatively meager when compared to the expanded unemployment benefits. And rather than actually having a significant effect on the unemployment rate, the proposal could just be a fig leaf for GOP indifference about the financial struggles of those who have lost their jobs because of coronavirus.
Republicans seem intent on not extending those added unemployment benefits, and if they actually do hold the line and refuse to agree to even a smaller number, a proposal like Brady’s could be important in helping the GOP avoid charges of heartlessness.
Instead, they can point to Brady’s proposal and say, while Democrats are incentivizing unemployment, Republicans are encouraging jobs.
Several workers have told HuffPost they quit or refused to return to their jobs because it’s not worth risking exposure to the coronavirus, even if they wind up with no income at all.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Progressive Groups To Spend Big On Unseating Bronx Rep. Eliot Engel

Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/Getty Images Rep. Eliot Engel ( D-N.Y. ) speaks at an event in Washington .
Progressive challenger Jamaal Bowman has blasted Engel for his absence from the district at the height of the pandemic .
Bowman ’ s bid to unseat Engel in the June 23 primary for New York ’ s 16th Congressional District is one of the left ’ s last chances to unseat an incumbent congressional Democrat in an election cycle where progressive activists have thus far succeeded in ousting just one .
Engel , who is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy stances , including his opposition to the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement .
But he has also accrued a more progressive record on domestic policy , backing single-payer health care and the Green New Deal .
Helen Brosnan , a spokesperson for Justice Democrats ’ independent spending arm , said the group sees Bowman , a Bronx middle school principal , as someone who would fight more passionately for the priorities that Engel has formally endorsed .
She noted that Bowman , unlike Engel , is refusing to accept donations from corporate political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bowman are using independent spending entities to promote Bowman in cable television and internet ads , as well as a robust paid phone-canvassing operation .
The independent nature of the spending prevents the groups from coordinating with Bowman but frees them of campaign spending limits and the need to disclose individual donors before the primary .
The phone-banking operation will also be a key way to try to educate voters about the opportunity to cast absentee ballots .
New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo ( D ) issued an executive order allowing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ regardless of their health .
The state is sending all voters absentee ballot request forms , but voters must complete the request forms by June 16 to receive the ballots .
They must subsequently also complete the ballots and either mail them to the state by June 22 or drop them off in person by the end of the day on June 23 .
Engel , 73 , has represented parts of the Bronx and neighboring Westchester County since 1989 .
As the highest-ranking foreign policy official in the House , he has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate President Donald Trump , including , most recently , Trump ’ s firing of the State Department ’ s internal watchdog .
But the infusion of outside cash for Bowman , 44 , arrives amid growing momentum for his candidacy , including a gaffe from Engel that went viral and handed Bowman the best fundraising day of his campaign .
In remarks caught on a hot mic at a Bronx news conference about police brutality and vandalism on Tuesday , Engel said he would not be so insistent on speaking were it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Absent context , though , the comments sound as if Engel were admitting that he would not be as interested in appearing attentive to the community if it were not politically necessary .
“ If I didn ’ t have a primary , I wouldn ’ t care , ” he said .
By the time the video of Engel had racked up more than a million views on Twitter , Bowman and his allies had already been hammering Engel for weeks for staying at his home in the Washington suburbs during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s presence in the New York district , by contrast , helped him win the unlikely endorsement of the New York State Nurses Association , the state ’ s largest nurses union .
The 30-second spot interprets Engel ’ s quote liberally .
Engel has never explicitly said that he only returned to New York because of his reelection .
He was referring to his desire to speak at a news conference .
Justice Democrats targeted Engel partly because of his conservative foreign policy views .
He is , for example , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Congress ― and the single biggest recipient in the House of campaign cash from pro-Israel groups this cycle .

Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) speaks at an event in Washington. Progressive challenger Jamaal Bowman has blasted Engel for his absence from the district at the height of the pandemic. Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/Getty Images
Two left-wing groups plan to spend more than $500,000 on advertising and phone outreach to help progressive Jamaal Bowman unseat Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.).
The sizable investment from the Working Families Party and Justice Democrats, which recruited Bowman to run, aims to help close the funding gap between the candidates in a closely watched race in which Engel looks increasingly vulnerable.
Advertisement
Bowman’s bid to unseat Engel in the June 23 primary for New York’s 16th Congressional District is one of the left’s last chances to unseat an incumbent congressional Democrat in an election cycle where progressive activists have thus far succeeded in ousting just one.
“This is one of the best opportunities this year to elect a transformative progressive voice to Congress,” said Joe Dinkin, the Working Families Party’s national campaigns director.
Engel, who is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, is best known for his hawkish foreign policy stances, including his opposition to the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement. But he has also accrued a more progressive record on domestic policy, backing single-payer health care and the Green New Deal.
“There’s a difference between lip service and actually being committed every single day to the issues you say you’re fighting for.” - Helen Brosnan, Justice Democrats
Advertisement
Helen Brosnan, a spokesperson for Justice Democrats’ independent spending arm, said the group sees Bowman, a Bronx middle school principal, as someone who would fight more passionately for the priorities that Engel has formally endorsed. She noted that Bowman, unlike Engel, is refusing to accept donations from corporate political action committees.
“We need a real progressive champion,” she said. “There’s a difference between lip service and actually being committed every single day to the issues you say you’re fighting for.”
The two organizations backing Bowman are using independent spending entities to promote Bowman in cable television and internet ads, as well as a robust paid phone-canvassing operation. The independent nature of the spending prevents the groups from coordinating with Bowman but frees them of campaign spending limits and the need to disclose individual donors before the primary.
Phone banking is particularly important for an insurgent candidate like Bowman, who would typically benefit from volunteer canvassing but cannot do so because of public health restrictions in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The phone-banking operation will also be a key way to try to educate voters about the opportunity to cast absentee ballots. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) issued an executive order allowing all New York voters to cast absentee ballots regardless of their health. The state is sending all voters absentee ballot request forms, but voters must complete the request forms by June 16 to receive the ballots. They must subsequently also complete the ballots and either mail them to the state by June 22 or drop them off in person by the end of the day on June 23.
Advertisement
Jamaal Bowman, seen here speaking last year at an event about Black maternal mortality, is capitalizing on a verbal gaffe Rep. Eliot Engel made on Tuesday. Jamaal Bowman for Congress
Engel, 73, has represented parts of the Bronx and neighboring Westchester County since 1989. As the highest-ranking foreign policy official in the House, he has been at the center of efforts to investigate President Donald Trump, including, most recently, Trump’s firing of the State Department’s internal watchdog.
But the infusion of outside cash for Bowman, 44, arrives amid growing momentum for his candidacy, including a gaffe from Engel that went viral and handed Bowman the best fundraising day of his campaign. In remarks caught on a hot mic at a Bronx news conference about police brutality and vandalism on Tuesday, Engel said he would not be so insistent on speaking were it not for his competitive reelection race.
Absent context, though, the comments sound as if Engel were admitting that he would not be as interested in appearing attentive to the community if it were not politically necessary. “If I didn’t have a primary, I wouldn’t care,” he said.
By the time the video of Engel had racked up more than a million views on Twitter, Bowman and his allies had already been hammering Engel for weeks for staying at his home in the Washington suburbs during the height of the pandemic. Bowman’s presence in the New York district, by contrast, helped him win the unlikely endorsement of the New York State Nurses Association, the state’s largest nurses union.
Advertisement
The first TV ad that the two groups are airing focuses exclusively on Engel’s absence from the district.
A second ad combines the critique with video of Engel’s Tuesday remarks.
“Engel only came back to win re-election, to help himself ― to save his job, not our lives,” the narrator of the second ad says after the clip plays.
The 30-second spot interprets Engel’s quote liberally. Engel has never explicitly said that he only returned to New York because of his reelection. He was referring to his desire to speak at a news conference.
“I thought it was important for people to know where I stand. That’s why I asked to speak,” he said in a statement Tuesday.
Justice Democrats targeted Engel partly because of his conservative foreign policy views. He is, for example, one of the staunchest supporters of Israeli policy in Congress ― and the single biggest recipient in the House of campaign cash from pro-Israel groups this cycle.
Advertisement
But first, due to the pandemic, and then, in light of the social unrest over police brutality, the race to unseat Engel eventually became about whether he successfully represents his constituents.
To begin with, the demographics of New York’s 16th District, where the combined populations of Black and Latino residents outnumber their white neighbors, make Engel one of the few remaining white congressmen to represent a majority-minority district.
Engel can still point to the support he has received from his colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus.
He invoked the group’s most famous member, civil rights leader John Lewis (D-Ga.), in a debate with Bowman that aired on Tuesday night.
Referring to the need to confront racism in the country, Engel quoted Lewis, saying, “We may have come here on different ships, but now we’re all in the same boat together.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--William Barr's Vast, Nameless Army Is Being Brought To Bear On D.C. Protesters

WASHINGTON ― Just a few hundred feet north of the White House on Wednesday afternoon , armed agents of the federal government , dressed in a patchwork of colors and protective gear , stared down peaceful protesters demonstrating for Black lives .
Yet what was perhaps most alarming was what was not visible on many of the officers : any insignia revealing their identity or even the name of the agency they work for .
Some members of the Drug Enforcement Administration and FBI stationed throughout downtown Washington wore outfits that at least identified their agency , even if they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ identified them personally .
But the police line just north of the White House on Wednesday afternoon featured a patchwork of colors and agents wearing generic outfits ― sometimes what appeared to be just T-shirts under their protective gear that gave no indication of even their department or military branch .
Attorney General William Barr is leading this aggressive response that has brought in an alphabet soup of law enforcement agencies to guard federal property and suppress unrest : FBI ; the Bureau of Alcohol , Tobacco , Firearms and Explosives ( ATF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DEA ) ; the U.S .
Marshals ; and the federal Bureau of Prisons .
Those Department of Justice forces join Homeland Security officers , the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department , the Capitol Police , the Federal Protective Service , the Secret Service and the District of Columbia National Guard .
Many of these Justice Department components , especially the BOP , have opaque internal affairs systems that don ’ t hold federal law enforcement officers accountable even in normal circumstances .
But Bromwich said he has never seen a situation in which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t been identifiable by name or even by agency .
“ I don ’ t know if there ’ s any historical precedent for that.
” “ We ’ re pulling in people from all over the country to help secure a city , ” the senior DOJ official said .
“ We ’ re focused on getting them fed ... making sure that they have the proper equipment they need .
Frankly , the logistical elements that have been done here have been amazing.
” ‘ This is an incredibly volatile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
“ So to the extent people are asking ‘ Who are you , who are you with , what are you doing ?
’ I don ’ t think you should read anything [ into it ] if people aren ’ t responding .
This is very different than a normal law enforcement function.
” During the Obama administration , the DOJ said in a letter to the Ferguson Police Department in Missouri that allowing officers to work anonymously creates “ mistrust and undermines accountability ” and “ conveys a message @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , officers may seek to act with impunity.
” An after-action report of the police response to the Ferguson demonstrations over the police killing of Michael Brown ― a report that former members of law enforcement co-authored ― said that the removal of nameplates “ defeated an essential level of on-scene accountability that is fundamental to the perception of procedural justice and legitimacy.
” “ By failing to ensure that their officers are identifiable , and thus more readily held accountable if they violate people ’ s rights , federal law enforcement officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Minneapolis : aligning themselves with those who would commit and conceal police abuse rather than sending a clear message to the public and to their own officers that such abuse will not be tolerated , ” Lopez said .
Bromwich said it was “ very problematic ” to send components of the Justice Department with very specific responsibilities into an environment divorced from their typical duties .
Members of the FBI hostage team , who have also been spotted on the streets of D.C. , are “ not used to dealing with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rep. Don Beyer ( D-Va. ) and Del .
Eleanor Holmes Norton ( D-D.C. ) are working on writing a bill to require federal law enforcement officers in uniform to clearly show their names and agencies when patrolling First Amendment protests .
The law wouldn ’ t apply to undercover law enforcement officers or to military units like the National Guard , which has also been deployed to protests .
Beyer said military personnel are typically easily identifiable because of their recognizable fatigues .
Beyer and Holmes Norton proposed legislation requiring body cameras @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last November , the DOJ started a pilot program allowing federally deputized officers to wear body cameras for the first time .
The law enforcement officers at the protests were not seen wearing body cameras .
“ When you can ’ t tell who people are , then there is no accountability at all , ” Beyer said .
“ You can go out and bust any heads you want to because who is going to hold you accountable if you are anonymous — especially with the big face masks.
” Beyer , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , said he could not distinguish federal personnel but that local law enforcement officers were also covering their badge numbers with black tape , a practice that was initially done to honor colleagues who died of the coronavirus .
Police in D.C. are required in police guidelines to identify themselves when asked and keep their badge numbers present while on the job .
“ The risk of using excessive force is that you ’ ll be accused of it and that it will be sustained and it will be punished , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been removed .
”

Illustration: Isabella Carapella/ HuffPost; Photos: Getty Images and Associated Press
WASHINGTON ― Just a few hundred feet north of the White House on Wednesday afternoon, armed agents of the federal government, dressed in a patchwork of colors and protective gear, stared down peaceful protesters demonstrating for Black lives. Yet what was perhaps most alarming was what was not visible on many of the officers: any insignia revealing their identity or even the name of the agency they work for.
Some members of the Drug Enforcement Administration and FBI stationed throughout downtown Washington wore outfits that at least identified their agency, even if they weren’t wearing name tags that identified them personally. But the police line just north of the White House on Wednesday afternoon featured different uniforms and agents wearing generic outfits ― sometimes what appeared to be just T-shirts under their protective gear that gave no indication of even their department or military branch.
Advertisement
Attorney General William Barr is leading this aggressive response that has brought in an alphabet soup of law enforcement agencies to guard federal property and suppress unrest: FBI; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA); the U.S. Marshals; and the federal Bureau of Prisons. Those Department of Justice forces join Homeland Security officers, the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, the Capitol Police, the Federal Protective Service, the Secret Service and the District of Columbia National Guard.
Bringing in so many law enforcement agencies has the potential to create problems ― each has its own culture, practices and command structures. Allowing federal law enforcement to operate with anonymity all but eliminates accountability when force is inevitably used against demonstrators. Critics say it also breeds government distrust and is reminiscent of authoritarian regimes.
Members of federal law enforcement line up with riot gear and face shields near the White House on Wednesday. Ryan J. Reilly/HuffPost
At least some of the officers on the police line by the White House appeared to be with the Bureau of Prisons, which dispatched Special Operations Response Teams that the BOP told HuffPost are “highly trained tactical units capable of responding to prison disturbances” and “specialize in crowd control scenarios” behind bars.
Advertisement
A senior Justice Department official credited Barr with the idea of bringing in federal prison corrections officers, calling it an example of Barr’s “outside the box” thinking. “He brought those people in,” the official said, because dealing with riots is “exactly what they do best.”
The senior Justice Department official confirmed that the prison bureau officers were stationed near the White House, though the BOP declined to verify whether the armed men photographed facing off with peaceful demonstrators Wednesday did, in fact, work for BOP.
Back outside the White House. Today the perimeter has been pushed back another half block. Federal law enforcement of some kind, but they won’t identify themselves, and all insignias and name plates have been removed. pic.twitter.com/q5dmdMgkLV — Garrett Haake (@GarrettHaake) June 3, 2020
“We cannot verify the individuals in the photos you referenced,” the Bureau of Prisons told HuffPost. “For safety and security reasons, we are not providing more specific information about law enforcement operations.”
A Huge Problem For Oversight
Michael Bromwich, the former inspector general of the Justice Department who oversaw internal investigations, said that allowing federal law enforcement officers to operate anonymously “creates a huge problem” for oversight.
Advertisement
“It completely undermines the ability to hold law enforcement personnel who engage in misconduct accountable,” said Bromwich. “You’ve got to know who they are, and certainly which agency they represent.”
Many of these Justice Department components, especially the BOP, have opaque internal affairs systems that don’t hold federal law enforcement officers accountable even in normal circumstances. But Bromwich said he has never seen a situation in which large numbers of law enforcement personnel haven’t been identifiable by name or even by agency. “I don’t know if there’s any historical precedent for that.”
The senior Justice Department official said that concerns about officer identity are a “red herring” because surveillance video would make it easy to identify any officers as necessary.
“We’re pulling in people from all over the country to help secure a city,” the senior DOJ official said. “We’re focused on getting them fed... making sure that they have the proper equipment they need. Frankly, the logistical elements that have been done here have been amazing.”
The Justice Department has downplayed concerns that federal government agents refused to identify their agency to protesters or to journalists.
Advertisement
“I could understand why some of these individuals simply wouldn’t want to talk to people about who they are,” Barr told reporters at a press conference Thursday.
The senior DOJ official chalked it up to the “incredibly volatile scene” at the protests. “So to the extent people are asking ‘Who are you, who are you with, what are you doing?’ I don’t think you should read anything [into it] if people aren’t responding. This is very different than a normal law enforcement function.”
A member of federal law enforcement stands among members of the National Guard on Wednesday. Without nametags or ID on uniforms, especially for officers in riot gear, it could be difficult to identify a particular officer in a misconduct complaint. Ryan J. Reilly/HuffPost
During the Obama administration, the DOJ said in a letter to the Ferguson Police Department in Missouri that allowing officers to work anonymously creates “mistrust and undermines accountability” and “conveys a message to community members that, through anonymity, officers may seek to act with impunity.” An after-action report of the police response to the Ferguson demonstrations over the police killing of Michael Brown ― a report that former members of law enforcement co-authored ― said that the removal of nameplates “defeated an essential level of on-scene accountability that is fundamental to the perception of procedural justice and legitimacy.”
Christy Lopez, the former Justice Department official who warned Ferguson about the lack of nameplates, said the anonymity of officers on the streets of D.C. was “an indication of how upside-down this administration is.”
Advertisement
“By failing to ensure that their officers are identifiable, and thus more readily held accountable if they violate people’s rights, federal law enforcement officials are acting akin to the bystander officers in Minneapolis: aligning themselves with those who would commit and conceal police abuse rather than sending a clear message to the public and to their own officers that such abuse will not be tolerated,” Lopez said.
Bromwich said it was “very problematic” to send components of the Justice Department with very specific responsibilities into an environment divorced from their typical duties. Members of the FBI hostage team, who have also been spotted on the streets of D.C., are “not used to dealing with mass protests,” Bromwich said.
“They’ve probably never had even an hour training about that,” Bromwich said. “It’s unfair to them and unfair to protesters to have them deployed to do this.”
Congress Doesn’t Know Either
House Democrats, led by Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), have formally requested information on the various agencies policing protesters in D.C. In a letter delivered Wednesday to Barr, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf, Nadler and other Democratic leaders asked which authority the administration used to establish this interagency force, and when.
Democratic leaders were not informed of the agencies deputized to patrol the protests. A House Democratic aide familiar with the committee’s work said it is in the process of figuring out what each agency has been deployed to do as the scene unfolds around them.
Advertisement
Members of Congress also asked for specifics on which agencies had officers on the ground Monday, when federal law enforcement advanced on peaceful protesters with pepper spray, smoke canisters and nonlethal projectiles as they cleared the way for President Donald Trump to hold a photo-op outside of St. John’s Church.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) also formally requested that the DOJ inspector general investigate Barr’s role in the Monday evening incident.
Federal law enforcement officers wear unidentifiable uniforms, some with plain T-shirts under their military-style gear, while they hold a line near the White House on Wednesday. Ryan J. Reilly/HuffPost
Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) are working on writing a bill to require federal law enforcement officers in uniform to clearly show their names and agencies when patrolling First Amendment protests. The law wouldn’t apply to undercover law enforcement officers or to military units like the National Guard, which has also been deployed to protests. Beyer said military personnel are typically easily identifiable because of their recognizable fatigues. Beyer and Holmes Norton proposed legislation requiring body cameras on federal law enforcement in 2019; last November, the DOJ started a pilot program allowing federally deputized officers to wear body cameras for the first time. The law enforcement officers at the protests were not seen wearing body cameras.
“When you can’t tell who people are, then there is no accountability at all,” Beyer said. “You can go out and bust any heads you want to because who is going to hold you accountable if you are anonymous — especially with the big face masks.”
Advertisement
Beyer, who has been watching videos of protests, said he could not distinguish federal personnel but that local law enforcement officers were also covering their badge numbers with black tape, a practice that was initially done to honor colleagues who died of the coronavirus. Police in D.C. are required in police guidelines to identify themselves when asked and keep their badge numbers present while on the job.
“You don’t know who they are, who they represent,” Beyer said. “Are they even allowed to carry weapons in Washington, D.C.?”
Beyer hopes they can bring the bill up for a vote in the next two months.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) also tweeted Wednesday night that he planned to introduce legislation “to require uniformed federal officers performing any domestic security duties to clearly identify what military branch or agency they represent.”
We cannot tolerate an American secret police.
I will be introducing legislation to require uniformed federal officers performing any domestic security duties to clearly identify what military branch or agency they represent. pic.twitter.com/2kaFAlWUow — Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) June 4, 2020
“We cannot tolerate an American secret police,” the senator wrote.
Bromwich, the former Justice Department watchdog, said that the rhetoric from Trump and Barr could give federal law enforcement officials cover to use excessive force on demonstrators.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--'Appalled' Jim Mattis Says Trump Has Divided The Nation

Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis excoriated President Donald Trump ’ s response to nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd , writing Wednesday he had abused his power and sown division rather than working to unite outraged Americans .
“ Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try , ” Mattis wrote in a letter to The Atlantic .
“ Instead he tries to divide us .
We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without mature leadership.
” '' Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try .
Instead , he tries to divide us . ''
-- James Mattis .
Read more at @ TheAtlantic : https : //t.co/5fiRg9I9O7 — Jeffrey Goldberg ( @ JeffreyGoldberg ) June 3 , 2020 The comments are an extraordinary rebuke of the president .
Trump has been roundly criticized by Democrats after he vowed to unleash the force of the U.S. military on anti-racist protests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ removal of largely peaceful demonstrators near the White House this week so the president could have a photo-op in front of a nearby church .
Trump responded to the letter later Wednesday , saying he was “ glad ” Mattis was gone and didn ’ t like “ his ’ leadership style or much else about him.
” “ Probably the only thing Barack Obama and I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis , the world ’ s most overrated General , ” the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him a new life , things to do , and battles to win , but he seldom ‘ brought home the bacon.
’ ” Probably the only thing Barack Obama and I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis , the world ’ s most overrated General .
I asked for his letter of resignation , & felt great about .
His nickname was “ Chaos ” , which I didn ’ t like , & changed it to “ Mad Dog ” ... — Donald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 4 , 2020 Floyd , a Black man in Minneapolis , died last week after a white police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes .
His death has sparked more than a week of demonstrations calling for dramatic police reform and accountability for the treatment of people of color in custody .
Four officers were fired and have been charged in the killing , and the Minnesota attorney general upgraded charges Wednesday against Derek Chauvin , the officer who pressed his knee on Floyd ’ s neck , to second-degree @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retired four-star Marine general , resigned at the end of 2018 in protest after Trump chose to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria .
He had largely remained quiet about his former boss , although he told The Atlantic ’ s Jeffrey Goldberg : “ There is a period in which I owe my silence .
It ’ s not eternal .
It ’ s not going to be forever.
” That silence ended Wednesday .
In his letter , he wrote that he had watched the week ’ s events “ angry and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation.
” “ When I joined the military , some 50 years ago , I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution , ” he wrote .
“ Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens — much less to provide a bizarre photo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military leadership standing alongside .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis excoriated President Donald Trump’s response to nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd, writing Wednesday he had abused his power and sown division rather than working to unite outraged Americans.
“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try,” Mattis wrote in a letter to The Atlantic. “Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership.”
Advertisement
(Read the full letter at The Atlantic.)
"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us." -- James Mattis. Read more at @TheAtlantic:https://t.co/5fiRg9I9O7 — Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) June 3, 2020
The comments are an extraordinary rebuke of the president. Trump has been roundly criticized by Democrats after he vowed to unleash the force of the U.S. military on anti-racist protests around the country and for the violent removal of largely peaceful demonstrators near the White House this week so the president could have a photo-op in front of a nearby church.
But few Republicans have joined in.
Trump responded to the letter later Wednesday, saying he was “glad” Mattis was gone and didn’t like “his ’leadership style or much else about him.”
“Probably the only thing Barack Obama and I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis, the world’s most overrated General,” the president wrote on Twitter. “I gave him a new life, things to do, and battles to win, but he seldom ‘brought home the bacon.’”
Advertisement
Probably the only thing Barack Obama and I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis, the world’s most overrated General. I asked for his letter of resignation, & felt great about. His nickname was “Chaos”, which I didn’t like, & changed it to “Mad Dog”... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 4, 2020
Floyd, a Black man in Minneapolis, died last week after a white police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes. His death has sparked more than a week of demonstrations calling for dramatic police reform and accountability for the treatment of people of color in custody.
Four officers were fired and have been charged in the killing, and the Minnesota attorney general upgraded charges Wednesday against Derek Chauvin, the officer who pressed his knee on Floyd’s neck, to second-degree murder without intent.
Mattis, a retired four-star Marine general, resigned at the end of 2018 in protest after Trump chose to withdraw U.S. forces from Syria. He had largely remained quiet about his former boss, although he told The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg: “There is a period in which I owe my silence. It’s not eternal. It’s not going to be forever.”
That silence ended Wednesday. In his letter, he wrote that he had watched the week’s events “angry and appalled,” saying the protests were “defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation.”
Advertisement
Mattis directly pointed to the response outside the White House on Monday when heavily armed officers used gas canisters and flash-bang grenades to clear Lafayette Square.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-04--George Conway's Group Says 'Coward' Trump Just 'Became What We Always Feared'

A conservative group critical of President Donald Trump fired off a new video accusing him of misusing the military to attack Americans and for abusing the Bible as a political prop for a photo opportunity .
“ When Donald Trump came out of hiding this week , he didn ’ t do it to bring us together or heal the nation , ” the video from The Lincoln Project states .
“ He wasn ’ t there to offer words of calm and comfort .
Instead , he became what we always feared , evoked the worst of our past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump spent much of the weekend out of the public eye and was at one point whisked to an underground bunker as protests erupted outside the White House .
On Monday , he threatened to use the U.S. military to quell the civil unrest that has sprung up around the nation after Minneapolis police killed George Floyd , a Black man , last week .
Peaceful protesters were then swept out of Lafayette Square with tear gas and flash-bangs so that Trump could walk through the park and pose for a photo holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Episcopal Church , which had been damaged by vandals .
“ Washington transformed into a war zone for this coward , ” the spot from The Lincoln Project says : The group was co-founded by conservative attorney George Conway , husband of counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway , along with other longtime GOP insiders , including Rick Wilson , Jennifer Horn and Steve Schmidt .
Last month , after one The Lincoln Project ’ s videos said Trump has left the country “ weaker and sicker and poorer , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s “ deranged loser of a husband.
” The attention helped : The Lincoln Project raised $ 1.4 million in the three days after the ad aired on TV , The New York Times reported last week .
It is one of several anti-Trump Republican groups releasing videos and TV spots as the presidential election approaches .
Another , Republican Voters Against Trump , has been highlighting the voices of rank-and-file party members disillusioned with the president .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
A conservative group critical of President Donald Trump fired off a new video accusing him of misusing the military to attack Americans and for abusing the Bible as a political prop for a photo opportunity.
“When Donald Trump came out of hiding this week, he didn’t do it to bring us together or heal the nation,” the video from The Lincoln Project states. “He wasn’t there to offer words of calm and comfort. Instead, he became what we always feared, evoked the worst of our past, threatened our governors and states.”
Advertisement
Trump spent much of the weekend out of the public eye and was at one point whisked to an underground bunker as protests erupted outside the White House.
On Monday, he threatened to use the U.S. military to quell the civil unrest that has sprung up around the nation after Minneapolis police killed George Floyd, a Black man, last week.
“Washington transformed into a war zone for this coward,” the spot from The Lincoln Project says:
Advertisement
The group was co-founded by conservative attorney George Conway, husband of counselor to the president Kellyanne Conway, along with other longtime GOP insiders, including Rick Wilson, Jennifer Horn and Steve Schmidt.
Last month, after one The Lincoln Project’s videos said Trump has left the country “weaker and sicker and poorer,” the president attacked Conway as Kellyanne Conway’s “deranged loser of a husband.”
The attention helped: The Lincoln Project raised $1.4 million in the three days after the ad aired on TV, The New York Times reported last week.
It is one of several anti-Trump Republican groups releasing videos and TV spots as the presidential election approaches. Another, Republican Voters Against Trump, has been highlighting the voices of rank-and-file party members disillusioned with the president.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-04--Anderson Cooper Dismantles Kayleigh McEnany’s ‘Like Churchill’ Defense Of Trump

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Wednesday likened President Donald Trump ’ s church photo-op stunt to the symbolic images of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill inspecting the rubble of buildings bombed during World War II .
And CNN ’ s Anderson Cooper was not having the comparison .
Peaceful protesters on Monday were violently cleared from around St. John ’ s Episcopal Church , near the White House , by federal authorities using chemical gas and rubber bullets so Trump could pose with a Bible as a purported show of strength amid the protests over the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a White House briefing Wednesday that Trump had “ wanted to send a very powerful message that we will not be overcome by looting , by rioting , by burning , this is not what defines America ” and that the stunt was “ a very important moment ” to show “ resilience , ” as other presidents and world leaders have previously done .
“ Like Churchill , we saw him inspecting the bombing damage , it sent a powerful message of leadership to the British people , ” she boasted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ children of privilege who led their respective countries .
But , for the host of “ Anderson Cooper 360 , ” there the likeness ended .
Cooper noted how Churchill saw combat , was a prisoner of war , wrote books and “ one of the greatest orators in modern times.
” “ Burned out church , a Bible in his hand , the country divided , and he couldn ’ t think of anything to say except to ask a bunch of other white guys to stand around him and just take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a Bible in his hand , the country divided , and he could n't think of anything to say except to ask a bunch of other white guys…to stand around him and just take a picture , '' says @ andersoncooper , on the WH comparison of Pres .
Trump to Winston Churchill .
pic.twitter.com/I4JVRqEfkR — Anderson Cooper 360° ( @ AC360 ) June 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany on Wednesday likened President Donald Trump’s church photo-op stunt to the symbolic images of former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill inspecting the rubble of buildings bombed during World War II.
And CNN’s Anderson Cooper was not having the comparison.
Peaceful protesters on Monday were violently cleared from around St. John’s Episcopal Church, near the White House, by federal authorities using chemical gas and rubber bullets so Trump could pose with a Bible as a purported show of strength amid the protests over the death of George Floyd.
Advertisement
McEnany claimed during a White House briefing Wednesday that Trump had “wanted to send a very powerful message that we will not be overcome by looting, by rioting, by burning, this is not what defines America” and that the stunt was “a very important moment” to show “resilience,” as other presidents and world leaders have previously done.
“Like Churchill, we saw him inspecting the bombing damage, it sent a powerful message of leadership to the British people,” she boasted.
(Check out the full video of McEnany’s comments above).
Cooper acknowledged Trump and Churchill were both children of privilege who led their respective countries.
But, for the host of “Anderson Cooper 360,” there the likeness ended.
Cooper noted how Churchill saw combat, was a prisoner of war, wrote books and “one of the greatest orators in modern times.”
Advertisement
Trump? Not so much.
“Burned out church, a Bible in his hand, the country divided, and he couldn’t think of anything to say except to ask a bunch of other white guys to stand around him and just take a picture.”
Check out Cooper’s monologue here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-04--NYT Staffers Slam Paper For Publishing Senator's 'Send In The Troops' Op-Ed

New York Times staff members banded together and slammed the newspaper for publishing an essay by Sen. Tom Cotton ( R-Ark . )
that calls on the president to deploy troops to the racial justice protests happening around the country .
More than a dozen former and current Times staffers said that the paper ’ s decision to give Cotton a platform to promote using the military to shut down protests puts Black Americans ’ lives at risk .
For nearly a week , anti-racist protesters across the U.S. have marched on the streets to protest the May 25 police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black man and father of three in Minneapolis , and the alarming cases of police brutality against Black people across the country .
Police officers have clash with demonstrators as protests have turned violent and looting and vandalism has occurred , but also even when protesters have appeared to have been marching peacefully .
In his op-ed , Cotton urged the federal government to use the Insurrection Act to deploy U.S. military personnel at protests to shut them down .
Cotton also pointed out several instances of violence that targeted police officers — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Las Vegas — but he didn ’ t mention instances of police using unnecessary force against protesters , including police driving cars into marchers .
Without proof , Cotton accused anti-fascist activists , which he referred to as a “ cadre of left-wing radicals , ” of causing the violence at the protests and using the marches “ for their own anarchic purposes.
” “ Supporting my colleagues , and particularly the black ones , ” Herndon tweeted .
“ If electeds want to make provocative arguments let them withstand the questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not unvarnished and unchecked.
” Amy Qin , a China correspondent , said she was horrified to see Cotton ’ s headline , “ Send in the Troops , ” on June 4 , the anniversary of China ’ s Tiananmen Square protest for democracy in 1989 .
1 .
Black people already feel under siege & in danger 2 .
There are *limits* to what 's acceptable discourse for this peerlessly influential & defining space .
This is outside the limits , IMO .
3 .
US is a tinderbox now 4 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( and rev his 2024 campaign ) elsewhere .
— Margaret Sullivan ( @ Sulliview ) June 4 , 2020 The NewsGuild of New York , which represents the Times ’ union , issued a statement denouncing the paper ’ s decision to run Cotton ’ s op-ed , saying that the senator ’ s message “ undermines the journalistic work of our members , puts our Black staff members in danger , promotes hate , and is likely to encourage further violence.
” In response to the backlash , James Bennet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , defended the op-ed ’ s publication by highlighting the section ’ s previous essays by people who support the protests and provide more context on the systematic racism in America .
Jazmine Hughes , an editor of the New York Times magazine , said she recognized that the paper ’ s opinion department has to publish diverse opinions but stated , “ Cotton ’ s op-ed , however , clearly crosses a line.
” I loved working at @ nytopinion and respect & admire so many of my former colleagues who still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at this moment - with the most unstable/despotic president in history in command of our troops - is irresponsible & dangerous .
Retract the essay .
pic.twitter.com/kPAgWERUZB — Lydia Dallett ( @ Ldallett ) June 4 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
UPDATE: 6:39 p.m. June 4 — A spokesperson for the New York Times said that the paper’s opinion department rushed through the editorial process of publishing Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) controversial essay, according to an internal review.
As a result of the review, the paper will reduce the number of opinion articles it publishes.
Marc Tracy, the paper’s media reporter, posted the Times’ response to the backlash on Twitter.
“We’ve examined the piece and the process leading up to its publication. This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our standards,” the unattributed statement read.
Advertisement
The newspaper’s leadership plans to “examine both short term and long term changes” to its editorial process “to include expanding our fact checking operation and reducing the number of Op-Eds we publish.”
NEW: Times spokeswoman sends mea culpa pic.twitter.com/phBVjA21AT — marc tracy (@marcatracy) June 4, 2020
Previously:
New York Times staff members banded together and slammed the newspaper for publishing an essay by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) that calls on the president to deploy troops to the racial justice protests happening around the country.
More than a dozen former and current Times staffers said that the paper’s decision to give Cotton a platform to promote using the military to shut down protests puts Black Americans’ lives at risk.
Advertisement
For nearly a week, anti-racist protesters across the U.S. have marched on the streets to protest the May 25 police killing of George Floyd, an unarmed Black man and father of three in Minneapolis, and the alarming cases of police brutality against Black people across the country.
Police officers have clash with demonstrators as protests have turned violent and looting and vandalism has occurred, but also even when protesters have appeared to have been marching peacefully.
Many staffers tweeted a screenshot of Cotton’s op-ed with a phrase similar to this: “Running this puts all black people in danger, including @nytimes staff members.”
Running this puts all black people in danger, including @nytimes staff members. pic.twitter.com/BZcbwqSfCI — Jen Parker (@JenParker393) June 3, 2020
just to be crystal clear:
Running this puts Black @nytimes staff in danger. pic.twitter.com/2mZfnQegs7 — rat king (@MikeIsaac) June 4, 2020
Advertisement
In his op-ed, Cotton urged the federal government to use the Insurrection Act to deploy U.S. military personnel at protests to shut them down.
Cotton argued that using military force to address the protests wouldn’t “amount to ‘martial law’ or the end of democracy.”
He called for an “overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers.”
Cotton also pointed out several instances of violence that targeted police officers — including officers being shot in St. Louis and Las Vegas — but he didn’t mention instances of police using unnecessary force against protesters, including police driving cars into marchers.
Without proof, Cotton accused anti-fascist activists, which he referred to as a “cadre of left-wing radicals,” of causing the violence at the protests and using the marches “for their own anarchic purposes.”
A Times report published Monday showed that the theory that the so-called antifa led rioting was a part of protest misinformation, noting that it was “the biggest piece of protest misinformation tracked” by research company Zignal Labs.
Advertisement
Reporters for the Times called out their own paper for publishing the senator’s essay despite the false claims within it.
“White supremacy is not an opinion,” television critic Margaret Lyons tweeted.
Technology reporter Davey Alva, who covers online disinformation for the paper, flagged Cotton’s antifa claim and noted: “Our own newspaper has reported that this is misinformation.”
HuffPost reached out to the Times for further comment.
Our own newspaper has reported that this is misinformation https://t.co/G2C3FIZPui pic.twitter.com/Xqc2twTKXm — Davey Alba (@daveyalba) June 3, 2020
Astead Herndon, a Times national political reporter, criticized the paper for allowing Cotton to make unproven claims without fact-checking him.
“Supporting my colleagues, and particularly the black ones,” Herndon tweeted. “If electeds want to make provocative arguments let them withstand the questions and context of a news story, not unvarnished and unchecked.”
Advertisement
Nikole Hannah-Jones, a New York Times Magazine correspondent, said she was “deeply ashamed” of the paper as both a Black woman and a journalist.
Amy Qin, a China correspondent, said she was horrified to see Cotton’s headline, “Send in the Troops,” on June 4, the anniversary of China’s Tiananmen Square protest for democracy in 1989.
During that protest, China deployed the military to quell the student-led protests, and it is estimated that thousands of people were killed.
Supporting my colleagues, and particularly the black ones. if electeds want to make provocative arguments let them withstand the questions and context of a news story, not unvarnished and unchecked https://t.co/MwiD8BenzO — Steadman™ (@AsteadWesley) June 4, 2020
Surreal and horrifying to wake up on the morning of June 4 - the 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown - to this headline. pic.twitter.com/vNtiFz3vqq — Amy Qin (@amyyqin) June 4, 2020
Advertisement
I’ll probably get in trouble for this, but to not say something would be immoral. As a black woman, as a journalist, as an American, I am deeply ashamed that we ran this. https://t.co/lU1KmhH2zH — Ida Bae Wells (@nhannahjones) June 4, 2020
Margaret Sullivan, a former public editor for the Times, said she wouldn’t have published Cotton’s essay because “Black people already feel under siege & in danger.”
On Twitter, Sullivan listed four more reasons Cotton’s op-ed was unfit for publication.
Number three on her list: “US is a tinderbox now.”
I would not have published that piece, for a multitude of reasons. About fifth on the list is that ridiculous line about ‘radical chic’ https://t.co/Fet1xU6TEk — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) June 3, 2020
1. Black people already feel under siege & in danger
2. There are *limits* to what's acceptable discourse for this peerlessly influential & defining space. This is outside the limits, IMO.
3. US is a tinderbox now
4. He can get his views out (and rev his 2024 campaign) elsewhere. — Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) June 4, 2020
The NewsGuild of New York, which represents the Times’ union, issued a statement denouncing the paper’s decision to run Cotton’s op-ed, saying that the senator’s message “undermines the journalistic work of our members, puts our Black staff members in danger, promotes hate, and is likely to encourage further violence.”
Advertisement
“Cotton’s Op-Ed pours gasoline on the fire,” the union wrote. “Media organizations have a responsibility to hold power to account, not amplify voices of power without context and caution.”
In response to the backlash, James Bennet, the head of the Times opinions department, defended the op-ed’s publication by highlighting the section’s previous essays by people who support the protests and provide more context on the systematic racism in America.
“Times Opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter-arguments, particularly those made by people in a position to set policy,” Bennet said.
“We understand that many readers find Senator Cotton’s argument painful, even dangerous. We believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate.”
Jazmine Hughes, an editor of the New York Times magazine, said she recognized that the paper’s opinion department has to publish diverse opinions but stated, “Cotton’s op-ed, however, clearly crosses a line.”
Advertisement
The Guild statement – which I helped draft with many, many others – fully recognizes that the op-ed desk has a responsibility to publish a diverse array of opinions, many of which people may find disagreeable! Cotton's op-ed, however, clearly crosses a line. https://t.co/D1vL0gX4in — Jazmine Hughes (@jazzedloon) June 4, 2020
Running this puts Black @nytimes staff in danger. pic.twitter.com/LooAax8SCz — Johanna Barr (@johannabarr) June 3, 2020
An estimated 5,000 National Guard troops have already been deployed to respond to protests in 15 states and Washington, D.C.
There are also 2,000 troops prepared to go if reinforcements are needed, a spokesperson for the National Guard told Military Times.
Cotton first suggested using the military to face off with “Antifa terrorists” earlier this week.
“If local law enforcement is overwhelmed and needs backup, let’s see how tough these Antifa terrorists are when they’re facing off with the 101st Airborne Division. We need to have zero tolerance for this destruction,” Cotton tweeted.
Advertisement
“If necessary, the 10th Mountain, 82nd Airborne, 1st Cav, 3rd Infantry —whatever it takes to restore order. No quarter for insurrectionists, anarchists, rioters, and looters.”
President George H.W. Bush invoked the Insurrection Act of 1807 during the 1992 uprising in Los Angeles after the acquittals of four white police officers who were filmed brutally beating Black motorist Rodney King.
Let it be known I write for the @nytimes and I thoroughly disagree with Tom Cotton's atrocious op-ed. So do many editors and fellow writers. — Wajahat "Social Distance Yourself" Ali (@WajahatAli) June 3, 2020
I stand in solidarity with my black colleagues, who are dealing with enough right now. https://t.co/iuYY6pb06t — Somini Sengupta🥭 (@SominiSengupta) June 4, 2020
I loved working at @nytopinion and respect & admire so many of my former colleagues who still work there. But publishing this piece, at this moment - with the most unstable/despotic president in history in command of our troops - is irresponsible & dangerous. Retract the essay. pic.twitter.com/kPAgWERUZB — Lydia Dallett (@Ldallett) June 4, 2020
Advertisement
Running this puts all black people in danger, including @nytimes staff members. pic.twitter.com/BZcbwqSfCI — Jen Parker (@JenParker393) June 3, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-04--Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: Racism Won’t Stop Until We ‘Accept Jesus Christ’

Texas Lt. Gov .
Dan Patrick on Wednesday night claimed that the root of America ’ s racial problems was the lack of faith by “ the left.
” Speaking after more than a week of demonstrations against the police killing of George Floyd , a Black man in Minneapolis , Patrick tried to pin the nation ’ s long and deep-rooted racial problems on people not being religious enough ― and more specifically , “ the left ” not accepting Jesus Christ .
Patrick said on Fox News that Floyd ’ s killing and the unrest breaks his heart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of “ loving God.
” “ You can not love your fellow man if you don ’ t love God , ” he said .
“ And we have a country where we ’ ve been working really hard , particularly on the left , to kick God out.
” Patrick also said laws can ’ t fix racism , only Jesus and God can : “ You can not change the culture of a country until you change the character of mankind .
And you can ’ t change that unless you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of us on the planet , we believe you can ’ t do that unless you accept Jesus Christ or unless you accept God .
God has been left out of this equation through all of this and we need tremendous healing .
We can not heal through commissions and blue-ribbon panels and more laws.
” “ The Bible tells us it ’ s not optional , ” she said .
“ Love your neighbor as yourself.
” Patrick neglected to mention that while many use faith as a means to share a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have done just the opposite .
Religion ― including Christianity ― has been used to justify both racism and slavery .
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center , the KKK and other white supremacist groups use the Bible and believe the book “ is the family history of the white race.
” Slate reported that the fires of Klan cross burnings “ symbolize faith in Christ.
” And the Bible was used historically to justify slavery in the United States .
See more of their interview below :

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick on Wednesday night claimed that the root of America’s racial problems was the lack of faith by “the left.”
Speaking after more than a week of demonstrations against the police killing of George Floyd, a Black man in Minneapolis, Patrick tried to pin the nation’s long and deep-rooted racial problems on people not being religious enough ― and more specifically, “the left” not accepting Jesus Christ.
Advertisement
Patrick said on Fox News that Floyd’s killing and the unrest breaks his heart and that it’s an issue of “loving God.”
“You cannot love your fellow man if you don’t love God,” he said. “And we have a country where we’ve been working really hard, particularly on the left, to kick God out.”
Patrick also said laws can’t fix racism, only Jesus and God can:
“You cannot change the culture of a country until you change the character of mankind. And you can’t change that unless you change the heart, and for billions of us on the planet, we believe you can’t do that unless you accept Jesus Christ or unless you accept God. God has been left out of this equation through all of this and we need tremendous healing. We cannot heal through commissions and blue-ribbon panels and more laws.”
Fox News host Shannon Bream agreed.
“The Bible tells us it’s not optional,” she said. “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
Patrick neglected to mention that while many use faith as a means to share a message of love and integration, others have done just the opposite. Religion ― including Christianity ― has been used to justify both racism and slavery.
Advertisement
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the KKK and other white supremacist groups use the Bible and believe the book “is the family history of the white race.” Slate reported that the fires of Klan cross burnings “symbolize faith in Christ.” And the Bible was used historically to justify slavery in the United States.
See more of their interview below:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-04--NYPD Uses Aggressive Tactics On Peaceful Demonstrators Out After Curfew

Police officers in New York City cracked down on largely peaceful protesters gathering across the city Wednesday in defiance of a curfew .
Thousands of demonstrators stepped out in Manhattan and Brooklyn during the third night of a citywide curfew amid ongoing protests calling for dramatic police reform following the death of George Floyd .
But the gatherings quickly escalated as the 8 p.m. restrictions set in , according to local reports .
Jumaane Williams , New York City ’ s Public Advocate , shared footage of police officers aggressively moving demonstrators , some using batons , away from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ slammed the administration of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio , saying he did not expect the behavior after the mayor “ came into office pledging to reform the type of aggressive policing I experienced tonight.
” “ I can ’ t believe what I just witnessed & experienced .
The force used on nonviolent protestors was disgusting .
No looting/no fires .
Chants of ‘ peaceful protest , ’ ” Williams wrote on Twitter .
“ What happened was completely avoidable .
I ’ m so ashamed of [ de Blasio @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is a moment after cops , unprompted as far as I can tell , charged protestors , including a sheltered group of nurses and medics trying to tend to bleeding , injured people who got struck by batons .
They had just called an ambulance .
pic.twitter.com/fQRBnWBPGT — Ali Watkins ( @ AliWatkins ) June 4 , 2020 There were reports late Wednesday that three NYPD officers sustained non-life-threatening injuries in Brooklyn , including one who was possibly shot .
A press secretary for the mayor said de Blasio was heading to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s unclear if the injuries were linked in any way to Wednesday ’ s protests .
Terence Monahan , the NYPD ’ s chief of department , told reporters there would be “ no more tolerance ” after several demonstrations devolved into looting and vandalism in recent days , saying officers had given those gathered some leeway but ultimately enforced the citywide curfew .
“ When we have these big crowds , especially in this area , especially where we ’ ve had the looting , no more tolerance , ” Monahan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Times .
“ They have to be off the street .
An 8 o ’ clock curfew — we gave them to 9 o ’ clock .
And there was no indication that they were going to leave these streets.
” The New York Daily News noted dozens of protesters had been arrested , but said the night appeared calmer than demonstrations earlier this week .
Both the NYPD and the mayor have faced sharp criticism over their handling of the protesters .
Thousands of New Yorkers have been arrested since the demonstrations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during clashes with heavily armed police .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Police officers in New York City cracked down on largely peaceful protesters gathering across the city Wednesday in defiance of a curfew.
Thousands of demonstrators stepped out in Manhattan and Brooklyn during the third night of a citywide curfew amid ongoing protests calling for dramatic police reform following the death of George Floyd. But the gatherings quickly escalated as the 8 p.m. restrictions set in, according to local reports.
Advertisement
Jumaane Williams, New York City’s Public Advocate, shared footage of police officers aggressively moving demonstrators, some using batons, away from a gathering outside Brooklyn Borough Hall. He slammed the administration of New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, saying he did not expect the behavior after the mayor “came into office pledging to reform the type of aggressive policing I experienced tonight.”
“I can’t believe what I just witnessed & experienced. The force used on nonviolent protestors was disgusting. No looting/no fires. Chants of ‘peaceful protest,’” Williams wrote on Twitter. “What happened was completely avoidable. I’m so ashamed of [de Blasio].”
Others shared similar accounts.
More later, but this is a moment after cops, unprompted as far as I can tell, charged protestors, including a sheltered group of nurses and medics trying to tend to bleeding, injured people who got struck by batons. They had just called an ambulance. pic.twitter.com/fQRBnWBPGT — Ali Watkins (@AliWatkins) June 4, 2020
Advertisement
People stuck in traffic are witnessing NYPD beat up folks on their way home. pic.twitter.com/AkUGPQQOIf — Josh Fox BlackLivesMatter (@joshfoxfilm) June 4, 2020
There were reports late Wednesday that three NYPD officers sustained non-life-threatening injuries in Brooklyn, including one who was possibly shot. A press secretary for the mayor said de Blasio was heading to the hospital following the incident. It’s unclear if the injuries were linked in any way to Wednesday’s protests.
Terence Monahan, the NYPD’s chief of department, told reporters there would be “no more tolerance” after several demonstrations devolved into looting and vandalism in recent days, saying officers had given those gathered some leeway but ultimately enforced the citywide curfew.
“When we have these big crowds, especially in this area, especially where we’ve had the looting, no more tolerance,” Monahan said Wednesday, per The New York Times. “They have to be off the street. An 8 o’clock curfew — we gave them to 9 o’clock. And there was no indication that they were going to leave these streets.”
The New York Daily News noted dozens of protesters had been arrested, but said the night appeared calmer than demonstrations earlier this week.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-06-03--Obama Offers Further Support Of Anti-Racism Protests: 'I'm Proud Of You Guys'

Former President Barack Obama held a virtual town hall on Wednesday in support of anti-racism protests , signaling his increasing willingness to step into the political fray after years of staying largely on the sidelines .
Obama ’ s remarks at the event largely focused on how protesters who are outraged by the police killing of George Floyd and systemic racism in the U.S. can channel that anger into policy changes .
“ As activists and everyday citizens raise their voices , we need to be clear about where change is going to happen and how we can bring about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the livestreamed event that featured a number of other politicians and activists .
Addressing the recent “ chatter on the internet ” that encouraging people to vote won ’ t solve the complex injustices facing the Black community , Obama called for a different outlook .
“ It is mayors and county executives that appoint most police chiefs and negotiate collective bargaining agreements with police unions , and that determines police practices in local communities , ” he said .
“ It ’ s district attorneys and state ’ s attorneys that decide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate and ultimately charge those involved in police misconduct .
And those are all elected positions.
” Fed-up Americans shouldn ’ t view their activism as a choice between two avenues , Obama urged .
“ This is not an ‘ either/or.
’ This is a ‘ both-and.
’ To bring about real change , we both have to highlight a problem and make people in power uncomfortable , but we also have to translate that into practical solutions and laws that can be implemented , ” he said , then listed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now to change how Black people are policed in their communities .
The mayors of San Francisco , New York , Minneapolis , Chicago , Atlanta and Washington , D.C. , have already vowed to take the actions Obama outlined .
Obama has spoken out multiple times in the last week in support of the protests following Floyd ’ s death ― a noted shift from when he left office in hopes of unifying Democrats instead of focusing on the heated issues within the party .
He urged many of the same actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Medium post on Monday .
He ’ s joined by all three other living ex-presidents in striking a drastically different tone from President Donald Trump , who vowed on Monday to crack down on anti-racism protests with “ thousands of heavily armed soldiers , military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting , looting , vandalism , assaults and the wanton destruction of property.
” That same day , Trump had police tear-gas peaceful protesters near the White House so he could be photographed holding the Bible in front of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , police have also used tear gas , rubber bullets and other violent means of stopping protests , even when they ’ re peaceful .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Former President Barack Obama held a virtual town hall on Wednesday in support of anti-racism protests, signaling his increasing willingness to step into the political fray after years of staying largely on the sidelines.
Obama’s remarks at the event largely focused on how protesters who are outraged by the police killing of George Floyd and systemic racism in the U.S. can channel that anger into policy changes.
Advertisement
“As activists and everyday citizens raise their voices, we need to be clear about where change is going to happen and how we can bring about that change,” he said during the livestreamed event that featured a number of other politicians and activists.
Addressing the recent “chatter on the internet” that encouraging people to vote won’t solve the complex injustices facing the Black community, Obama called for a different outlook.
“It is mayors and county executives that appoint most police chiefs and negotiate collective bargaining agreements with police unions, and that determines police practices in local communities,” he said. “It’s district attorneys and state’s attorneys that decide, typically, whether or not to investigate and ultimately charge those involved in police misconduct. And those are all elected positions.”
Fed-up Americans shouldn’t view their activism as a choice between two avenues, Obama urged. “This is not an ‘either/or.’ This is a ‘both-and.’ To bring about real change, we both have to highlight a problem and make people in power uncomfortable, but we also have to translate that into practical solutions and laws that can be implemented,” he said, then listed a number of things local leaders can do now to change how Black people are policed in their communities.
Advertisement
The mayors of San Francisco, New York, Minneapolis, Chicago, Atlanta and Washington, D.C., have already vowed to take the actions Obama outlined.
Obama has spoken out multiple times in the last week in support of the protests following Floyd’s death ― a noted shift from when he left office in hopes of unifying Democrats instead of focusing on the heated issues within the party. He urged many of the same actions and offered similar support to protesters in a Medium post on Monday.
He’s joined by all three other living ex-presidents in striking a drastically different tone from President Donald Trump, who vowed on Monday to crack down on anti-racism protests with “thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults and the wanton destruction of property.”
That same day, Trump had police tear-gas peaceful protesters near the White House so he could be photographed holding the Bible in front of a church. Elsewhere across the country, police have also used tear gas, rubber bullets and other violent means of stopping protests, even when they’re peaceful.
Obama ended his address with a very different message to protesters and activists: “I’m proud of you guys.”