thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Evangelical Leaders Urge Ivanka Trump To Protect Migrant Kids From Trafficking

More than a dozen prominent evangelicals are appealing to first daughter and presidential adviser Ivanka Trump to help ensure the Trump administration adheres to federal anti-trafficking law in its treatment of unaccompanied migrant children .
In a letter to President Donald Trump ’ s daughter sent Monday , the evangelical leaders laud Ivanka Trump for her recent declaration that human trafficking is “ the gravest of human rights violations.
” They urge her to “ use your significant influence within the administration ” to help end the suspension of a federal anti-trafficking law that had provided safeguards for unaccompanied children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many evangelical Christians throughout the United States , fighting human trafficking and standing for vulnerable children are key policy priorities , ” the evangelicals wrote in their letter , which was shared in advance with The Associated Press .
The signatories added that they “ support measures to protect public health , but we believe our government can take appropriate precautions to minimize any public health concerns without disregarding the life-saving protections guaranteed by ” the anti-trafficking law , which was suspended by the Trump administration in the first month of the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the administration has detained migrant children as young as 1 in hotels before deporting them rather than moving them to facilities under the supervision of the Department of Health and Human Services .
The suspended 2008 law , named for the late Christian abolitionist William Wilberforce , requires that unaccompanied migrant children who may be vulnerable to trafficking be transferred from the Department of Homeland Security to HHS custody .
Walter Kim , president of the National Association of Evangelicals , said he and other Christian leaders who signed the letter see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in particular relate to children , that we feel as followers of Jesus it is incumbent upon us to speak up.
” Their aim , Kim said in an interview , is ensuring there is “ a consistent ethic we pursue as a nation with respect to the protection of the vulnerable.
” President Donald Trump addresses the crowd during an `` Evangelicals for Trump '' rally in Miami , FL on Friday , Jan. 3 , 2020 .
The evangelicals note in their letter that several of their groups work in Central @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high risk of trafficking , violence and exploitation ” facing many children expelled back to the countries they attempted to leave by seeking asylum in the United States .
In addition , the letter notes that the administration ’ s acknowledged practice of expelling unaccompanied migrant children after they have tested negative for the coronavirus indicates that applying the anti-trafficking protections of the 2008 law would not pose a pandemic-related risk .
“ We must not allow COVID-19 to serve as a pretext for abandoning our national commitment to standing for vulnerable children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” it said .
“ Our faith compels us to speak up for these children.
” Ivanka Trump is seen at an event honoring Evangelical leadership in the State Dining Room of the White House on August 27 , 2018 in Washington , DC .
Many of the signatories are members of the Evangelical Immigration Table , a group of faith-motivated advocates for comprehensive immigration reform .
Members of that group pressed the Trump administration for changes in its pandemic-related immigration policies in April .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
More than a dozen prominent evangelicals are appealing to first daughter and presidential adviser Ivanka Trump to help ensure the Trump administration adheres to federal anti-trafficking law in its treatment of unaccompanied migrant children.
In a letter to President Donald Trump’s daughter sent Monday, the evangelical leaders laud Ivanka Trump for her recent declaration that human trafficking is “the gravest of human rights violations.” They urge her to “use your significant influence within the administration” to help end the suspension of a federal anti-trafficking law that had provided safeguards for unaccompanied children who cross the border.
Advertisement
“For many evangelical Christians throughout the United States, fighting human trafficking and standing for vulnerable children are key policy priorities,” the evangelicals wrote in their letter, which was shared in advance with The Associated Press.
Ivanka Trump listens as President Donald Trump speaks during an event on human trafficking in the East Room of the White House, Friday, Jan. 31, 2020, in Washington. (AP Photo/ Evan Vucci)
The signatories added that they “support measures to protect public health, but we believe our government can take appropriate precautions to minimize any public health concerns without disregarding the life-saving protections guaranteed by” the anti-trafficking law, which was suspended by the Trump administration in the first month of the coronavirus pandemic.
The AP reported last month that the administration has detained migrant children as young as 1 in hotels before deporting them rather than moving them to facilities under the supervision of the Department of Health and Human Services.
Advertisement
The suspended 2008 law, named for the late Christian abolitionist William Wilberforce, requires that unaccompanied migrant children who may be vulnerable to trafficking be transferred from the Department of Homeland Security to HHS custody.
Walter Kim, president of the National Association of Evangelicals, said he and other Christian leaders who signed the letter see a “continuum of issues, that in particular relate to children, that we feel as followers of Jesus it is incumbent upon us to speak up.”
Their aim, Kim said in an interview, is ensuring there is “a consistent ethic we pursue as a nation with respect to the protection of the vulnerable.”
President Donald Trump addresses the crowd during an "Evangelicals for Trump" rally in Miami, FL on Friday, Jan. 3, 2020. (Photo by Scott McIntyre/For The Washington Post via Getty Images)
The evangelicals note in their letter that several of their groups work in Central America and can attest to the “high risk of trafficking, violence and exploitation” facing many children expelled back to the countries they attempted to leave by seeking asylum in the United States.
Advertisement
In addition, the letter notes that the administration’s acknowledged practice of expelling unaccompanied migrant children after they have tested negative for the coronavirus indicates that applying the anti-trafficking protections of the 2008 law would not pose a pandemic-related risk.
“We must not allow COVID-19 to serve as a pretext for abandoning our national commitment to standing for vulnerable children and against the scourge of human trafficking,” it said. “Our faith compels us to speak up for these children.”
Ivanka Trump is seen at an event honoring Evangelical leadership in the State Dining Room of the White House on August 27, 2018 in Washington, DC. MANDEL NGAN via Getty Images
Other signatories include Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission; Edgar Sandoval Sr., president of World Vision U.S.; Scott Arbeiter, president of World Relief; and Chris Palusky, president of Bethany Christian Services.
Many of the signatories are members of the Evangelical Immigration Table, a group of faith-motivated advocates for comprehensive immigration reform. Members of that group pressed the Trump administration for changes in its pandemic-related immigration policies in April.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Trump's Laughing Postmaster General Has No Idea What It Costs To Mail A Postcard

Postmaster General Louis DeJoy confessed Monday that he has no idea how much it costs to send a postcard through the U.S. mail as he faced a withering grilling from Rep. Katie Porter ( D-Calif. ) before the House Oversight Committee .
DeJoy ’ s lack of knowledge on basic U.S .
Postal Service information added fuel to Democrats ’ accusation that he was named to the job by President Donald Trump to hamstring mail service before the presidential election .
Critics say Trump and DeJoy aim to manipulate mail delivery to sway the vote in the president ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump to challenge results , based on problems over the expected wide use of mail-in ballots , if he loses .
DeJoy , a businessman and prominent contributor to Trump ’ s reelection campaign and the Republican Party , also admitted that he had no idea — even to the “ nearest 10 million ” — how many Americans voted by mail in the last election .
DeJoy did know the cost of a first-class stamp when asked by Porter — but it went downhill from there .
“ I ’ m concerned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Porter replied .
“ I ’ m particularly concerned about it because you started taking very decisive action when you became postmaster general .
You started directing the unplugging and destroying of machines , changing of employee procedures and locking of collection boxes.
” DeJoy has ordered the dismantling of hundreds of mail-sorting machines that speed mail service and had letter collection boxes removed in several states — just ahead of an expected groundswell in mail-in voting as Americans seek to avoid the risk of contracting COVID-19 at crowded polling sites .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ deliveries , causing significant mail delays .
Even as equipment was being dismantled , the USPS sent a letter this month to 46 states warning that voters could be disenfranchised because their mail-in ballots might not be delivered before vote deadlines .
“ If you did not order these actions to be taken , please tell the committee the name of who did , ” Porter said .
Trump has already declared the Nov. 3 election the “ most corrupt ” in American history because of the anticipated surge in the use of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote has been cast .
He has claimed , without any evidence , that the mail-in ballots will be “ rigged , ” even though he and first lady Melania Trump requested mail-in ballots for Florida ’ s primary last week .
Trump has all but admitted he is blocking a desperately needed infusion of funds to the cash-strapped Postal Service to hobble its ability to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots .
The House voted Saturday to reverse the recent changes in USPS operations and provide the Postal Service with $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up service ahead of the Nov. 3 elections .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy confessed Monday that he has no idea how much it costs to send a postcard through the U.S. mail as he faced a withering grilling from Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.) before the House Oversight Committee.
DeJoy’s lack of knowledge on basic U.S. Postal Service information added fuel to Democrats’ accusation that he was named to the job by President Donald Trump to hamstring mail service before the presidential election. Critics say Trump and DeJoy aim to manipulate mail delivery to sway the vote in the president’s favor — or provide an excuse for Trump to challenge results, based on problems over the expected wide use of mail-in ballots, if he loses.
Advertisement
DeJoy, a businessman and prominent contributor to Trump’s reelection campaign and the Republican Party, also admitted that he had no idea — even to the “nearest 10 million” — how many Americans voted by mail in the last election.
DeJoy did know the cost of a first-class stamp when asked by Porter — but it went downhill from there.
“What is the cost of a first-class postage stamp?” Porter asked him.
“Fifty-five cents,” DeJoy said.
“What about to mail a postcard?” she asked.
“I don’t know,” DeJoy said, laughing. (It is 35 cents.)
Then Porter, who was not smiling, asked him about the cost of mailing a greeting card in a square envelope.
DeJoy, grinning, responded: “I’ll submit that I know very little about a postage stamp.”
“I’m concerned about your understanding of this agency,” Porter replied. “I’m particularly concerned about it because you started taking very decisive action when you became postmaster general. You started directing the unplugging and destroying of machines, changing of employee procedures and locking of collection boxes.”
Advertisement
DeJoy has ordered the dismantling of hundreds of mail-sorting machines that speed mail service and had letter collection boxes removed in several states — just ahead of an expected groundswell in mail-in voting as Americans seek to avoid the risk of contracting COVID-19 at crowded polling sites. He also cut overtime and eliminated extended deliveries, causing significant mail delays.
Even as equipment was being dismantled, the USPS sent a letter this month to 46 states warning that voters could be disenfranchised because their mail-in ballots might not be delivered before vote deadlines.
DeJoy insisted that the changes were planned before he took over in June.
“If you did not order these actions to be taken, please tell the committee the name of who did,” Porter said.
DeJoy answered: “I do not know.”
Check out the exchange between DeJoy and Porter in the clip up top.
Trump has already declared the Nov. 3 election the “most corrupt” in American history because of the anticipated surge in the use of mail-in ballots, even before a single vote has been cast. He has claimed, without any evidence, that the mail-in ballots will be “rigged,” even though he and first lady Melania Trump requested mail-in ballots for Florida’s primary last week.
Trump has all but admitted he is blocking a desperately needed infusion of funds to the cash-strapped Postal Service to hobble its ability to handle the expected surge in mail-in ballots.
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Most Democratic Voters See The Party As More United Than Divided

Kevin Lamarque / reuters Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , flanked by his wife Jill ( left ) and Sen. Kamala Harris of California , his ticket 's vice presidential candidate , celebrate on a stage in Delaware at the end of last week 's virtual national convention .
Registered voters who identify as Democrats or who say they lean toward the Democratic Party ( for the sake of brevity , “ Democratic voters ” ) say , 61 % to 17 % , that the party is more united than it is divided .
Fully 79 % say that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least somewhat well , although just 29 % say they ’ re represented very well .
Democratic voters say , 48 % to 36 % , that Biden was the party ’ s best option for a nominee , with 72 % saying they ’ re at least satisfied with him and 35 % describing themselves as enthusiastic about him .
Satisfaction with Biden , and belief that he was Democrats ’ best choice , have both ticked up since the former vice president became the presumptive nominee in April .
The share @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as mostly united has also buoyed notably since last summer , when slightly under half said they felt that way .
Younger Democratic voters , though , are distinctly less enthused by the state of the party , the survey finds .
Those under age 45 are 25 percentage points less likely than the older voters to describe the party as united , 20 points less likely to say they are very well represented in the party , and 28 points less likely to describe themselves as enthusiastic about Biden ’ s candidacy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fractures and competing blocs within political parties .
But it ’ s not always clear which of those fault lines ordinary voters see as relevant .
About a year ago , in the early stages of the Democratic primary , we asked voters to weigh in on a number of frameworks for the choice in front of them ― for instance , “ a choice between liberals and moderates , ” or “ a choice between mobilizing the Democratic base and reaching out to swing voters ” ― asking them how well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We found little evidence that most of the party viewed the race as a referendum on any one subject .
With the primary now in the rear-view mirror , that ’ s still the case .
Each of the contrasts we asked about was described by a majority of Democratic voters ― between 58 % and 67 % ― as having defined the primary at least “ somewhat well , ” with frames about ideology and electability being most widely seen as applicable .
Fewer voters thought any one option fit the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the 18 % who thought that the framing of the race as a generational choice was very fitting to the 28 % who saw the electability argument as being definitional .
The poll also asked Democratic voters which of the options , if either , they favored from each set of choices .
They ’ re evenly split between preferring liberals and moderates , and close to split on whether it ’ s more important to energize the base or reach out to swing voters .
By an 11-point margin , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the best ideas over finding the one who ’ s most electable ; by a 14-point margin , they favor continuing former President Barack Obama ’ s policies over taking the country in a new direction ; by a 27-point margin , they say they ’ d rather see a new generation come to power .
As the outcome of the primary suggests , these opinions don ’ t always translate into decision-making .
Democratic voters ’ apparent preference for a “ newer generation , ” for instance , didn ’ t stop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ choice between two candidates in their 70s .
And during the primary , Biden , 77 , maintained a consistent lead on perceived electability , even when he scored behind his rivals on other metrics of enthusiasm .
One reason : Many of the voters said they don ’ t feel they have any particular stakes in these debates .
On each question , a fifth or more aren ’ t sure or say they don ’ t really have a preference , with the voters especially likely to demur on the questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ focus on turning out base voters versus persuading swing voters .
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors .
YouGov ’ s reports include a model-based margin of error , which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling .
If these assumptions are wrong , the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate .
Click here for a more detailed explanation of the model-based margin of error .

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, flanked by his wife Jill (left) and Sen. Kamala Harris of California, his ticket's vice presidential candidate, celebrate on a stage in Delaware at the end of last week's virtual national convention. Kevin Lamarque / reuters
Most Democratic voters are happy with their presidential nominee, Joe Biden, and see their party as largely united, according to a new HuffPost/YouGov poll conducted during last week’s virtual Democratic National Convention.
That said, the survey finds that as during the primary campaign, significant internal divides remain about the party’s ideology and strategy, often falling along generational lines.
Advertisement
Registered voters who identify as Democrats or who say they lean toward the Democratic Party (for the sake of brevity, “Democratic voters”) say, 61% to 17%, that the party is more united than it is divided. Fully 79% say that the party represents people like them at least somewhat well, although just 29% say they’re represented very well.
Democratic voters say, 48% to 36%, that Biden was the party’s best option for a nominee, with 72% saying they’re at least satisfied with him and 35% describing themselves as enthusiastic about him.
Satisfaction with Biden, and belief that he was Democrats’ best choice, have both ticked up since the former vice president became the presumptive nominee in April. The share of Democratic voters who perceive the party as mostly united has also buoyed notably since last summer, when slightly under half said they felt that way.
Younger Democratic voters, though, are distinctly less enthused by the state of the party, the survey finds. Those under age 45 are 25 percentage points less likely than the older voters to describe the party as united, 20 points less likely to say they are very well represented in the party, and 28 points less likely to describe themselves as enthusiastic about Biden’s candidacy.
Advertisement
The survey shows a less pronounced divide along ideological lines, with self-proclaimed liberals 11 points likelier than self-proclaimed moderates to say they consider themselves very well represented.
Results of a new HuffPost/YouGov poll on perceptions among Democratic voters of the party. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
Primary campaigns and conventions often highlight the fractures and competing blocs within political parties. But it’s not always clear which of those fault lines ordinary voters see as relevant. About a year ago, in the early stages of the Democratic primary, we asked voters to weigh in on a number of frameworks for the choice in front of them ― for instance, “a choice between liberals and moderates,” or “a choice between mobilizing the Democratic base and reaching out to swing voters” ― asking them how well each described the dynamics of the election. We found little evidence that most of the party viewed the race as a referendum on any one subject.
With the primary now in the rear-view mirror, that’s still the case. Each of the contrasts we asked about was described by a majority of Democratic voters ― between 58% and 67% ― as having defined the primary at least “somewhat well,” with frames about ideology and electability being most widely seen as applicable. Fewer voters thought any one option fit the race “very well,” ranging from the 18% who thought that the framing of the race as a generational choice was very fitting to the 28% who saw the electability argument as being definitional.
Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
Advertisement
The poll also asked Democratic voters which of the options, if either, they favored from each set of choices. They’re evenly split between preferring liberals and moderates, and close to split on whether it’s more important to energize the base or reach out to swing voters. By an 11-point margin, they say they prioritize finding the candidate with the best ideas over finding the one who’s most electable; by a 14-point margin, they favor continuing former President Barack Obama’s policies over taking the country in a new direction; by a 27-point margin, they say they’d rather see a new generation come to power.
Results of a new HuffPost/YouGov poll on Democratic voters' perceptions about the party. Ariel Edwards-Levy/HuffPost
As the outcome of the primary suggests, these opinions don’t always translate into decision-making. Democratic voters’ apparent preference for a “newer generation,” for instance, didn’t stop the primary from coming down to a choice between two candidates in their 70s. And during the primary, Biden, 77, maintained a consistent lead on perceived electability, even when he scored behind his rivals on other metrics of enthusiasm.
One reason: Many of the voters said they don’t feel they have any particular stakes in these debates. On each question, a fifth or more aren’t sure or say they don’t really have a preference, with the voters especially likely to demur on the questions about generational preference and on weighing a focus on turning out base voters versus persuading swing voters.
Overall, the polling suggests that Democratic voters still see real philosophical differences within their party and disagree about the resolution. At the same time, there’s apparently no single, main fault line cracking party.
Advertisement
The HuffPost/YouGov poll consisted of 1,000 completed interviews conducted Aug. 18-20 among U.S. adults, including 384 Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters, using a sample selected from YouGov’s opt-in online panel to match the demographics and other characteristics of the adult U.S. population.
HuffPost has teamed up with YouGov to conduct daily opinion polls. You can learn more about this project and take part in YouGov’s nationally representative opinion polling. More details on the polls’ methodology are available here.
Most surveys report a margin of error that represents some but not all potential survey errors. YouGov’s reports include a model-based margin of error, which rests on a specific set of statistical assumptions about the selected sample rather than the standard methodology for random probability sampling. If these assumptions are wrong, the model-based margin of error may also be inaccurate. Click here for a more detailed explanation of the model-based margin of error.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Boston Doctor Aims To Unseat Longtime Democrat Who Voted Against Obamacare

“ We feel like we ’ re over here on stage left ... with great costumes , and amazing music and everyone is over on the right saying , ‘ I wonder what ’ s happening in Massachusetts in the 8th Congressional District , we don ’ t hear anything or see anything , ’ ” Goldstein , a progressive first-time candidate running to unseat Rep. Stephen Lynch ( D ) , a longtime moderate congressman , said in an interview with HuffPost .
But Lynch isn ’ t campaigning like he ’ s facing a serious challenger ; he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than he has in the past three .
The official campaign arm of the Democratic Party doesn ’ t appear to be on the ground .
Groups like Justice Democrats , which boosts progressive challengers to entrenched Democrats , are focusing their resources in a race on the other side of the state , where local mayor Alex Morse is challenging the high-ranking Democrat Rep. Richard Neal .
The Goldstein race “ has the potential to be one of those sleeper races , ” said Jonathan Cohn , with Progressive Massachusetts , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ] doesn ’ t have a strong presence .
He ’ s not particularly outspoken on much of anything .
I think there is fertile ground to not do as well as people expect.
” Lynch is a less high-profile target .
His hopes to chair the House Oversight and Reform Committee after Rep. Elijah Cummings ( D-Md . )
died last October were dashed , despite serving on the committee for 18 years ( he serves as a subcommittee chairman on national security ) .
He was reluctant to get behind Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump tried to use foreign officials to investigate Biden , whom Lynch endorsed for president last October .
Over his 20-year career , Lynch has been the lead sponsor of five bills that have become law ; two establishing post offices , two commemorative , and one to ensure federal employees who are veterans are guaranteed paid medical leave .
He ’ s co-sponsored more than 100 others ; his record as a Democrat is mixed .
He ’ s an original co-sponsor of the Green New Deal , but once called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He has a long record as a self-described anti-abortion Democrat — and voted to restrict abortions while in the state legislature — but has changed his tone over the last decade , and votes on party lines .
Lynch ’ s most famous vote in Congress is likely his one against the Affordable Care Act .
But his vote differed from most of the moderate Democratic opposition to the landmark health care legislation ; Lynch said he voted against it because it allowed for private insurance companies to become monopolies and did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote was a major factor in his 2013 Senate primary loss against Markey .
But in this race , Lynch is defending the ACA , arguing to expand it instead of working toward a single-payer insurance system , which Goldstein supports .
Lynch is not exactly the same as Rep. Dan Lipinski , the conservative Democrat from Illinois whose anti-abortion , anti-LGBTQ , hardline immigration and conservative health care views lost him his primary to progressive candidate Marie Newman earlier this year .
But he ’ s solidly a centrist — and a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) and Boston ’ s Ayanna Pressley , successfully unseated longtime Democrats in the 2018 midterms , Sean McElwee , the co-founder of liberal think tank Data for Progress , listed Lynch ’ s seat as prime territory for a progressive to win .
“ Over the past 20 years , the district has moved , ” Goldstein said .
“ It has moved to a district that would like a pro-choice representative , it has moved to a district that would like someone who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and is looking for health care expansion .
It is a district that is directly impacted by the climate crisis and is looking for someone who understands the urgency of that issue .
On almost every issue that matters to folks in this district , Stephen Lynch is to the right of where the district is.
” “ I think a lot of people have moved to the left and are more socially progressive than congressman Lynch , ” said Elizabeth Clifford , 78 , a Goldstein supporter who lives in a senior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respect his perspective and his upbringing and I ’ m glad for him , for what he has achieved , but I think society needs to move beyond where we are now.
” Even Ferson , who also advises on the Markey campaign , spends half his time arguing that Massachusetts is moving more toward ideas like Medicare for All , something Markey has backed but Lynch is against .
Ferson admits the district has changed , too , saying issues around climate change or Black Lives Matter weren ’ t big topics @ @ @ @ @ @

Rep. Stephen Lynch, (D-Mass.), seen here speaking during a hearing on election security, is facing a primary challenge from progressive doctor Robbie Goldstein. AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster
Robbie Goldstein, a congressional candidate in Massachusetts’ 8th Congressional District, feels like he’s doing this elaborate tap dance routine and no one is paying attention.
“We feel like we’re over here on stage left ... with great costumes, and amazing music and everyone is over on the right saying, ‘I wonder what’s happening in Massachusetts in the 8th Congressional District, we don’t hear anything or see anything,’” Goldstein, a progressive first-time candidate running to unseat Rep. Stephen Lynch (D), a longtime moderate congressman, said in an interview with HuffPost.
Advertisement
Goldstein, 36, is running for Congress as an infectious disease doctor at Massachusetts General Hospital during a global pandemic. He wants single-payer health care, universal child care, a Green New Deal, and a monthly cash assistance program during the COVID-19 pandemic. He has the endorsements of Andrew Yang, local Sunrise Movement chapters, the Bernie Sanders-aligned Our Revolution, and Indivisible, one of the largest grassroots progressive organizations.
He sees an opening, suggesting that his race could be the next big progressive upset. Internal campaign numbers show him within striking distance — seven percentage points — of ousting Lynch, a nearly 20-year veteran of the House of Representatives and one of Joe Biden’s biggest supporters.
“[Lynch] doesn’t have a strong presence. He’s not particularly outspoken on much of anything. I think there is fertile ground to not do as well as people expect.” - Jonathan Cohn, Progressive Massachusetts
But Lynch isn’t campaigning like he’s facing a serious challenger; he’s raised less money this cycle than he has in the past three. The official campaign arm of the Democratic Party doesn’t appear to be on the ground. Groups like Justice Democrats, which boosts progressive challengers to entrenched Democrats, are focusing their resources in a race on the other side of the state, where local mayor Alex Morse is challenging the high-ranking Democrat Rep. Richard Neal.
Advertisement
The Goldstein race “has the potential to be one of those sleeper races,” said Jonathan Cohn, with Progressive Massachusetts, a statewide advocacy group. “[Lynch] doesn’t have a strong presence. He’s not particularly outspoken on much of anything. I think there is fertile ground to not do as well as people expect.”
Lynch Is A Low-Profile Target
In Massachusetts, two primaries have caught national attention: One is the heated Senate race between incumbent Ed Markey, who is being challenged by Rep. Joe Kennedy. The second is Neal’s primary — a threat to the chair of the most powerful House committee, Ways and Means.
Lynch is a less high-profile target. His hopes to chair the House Oversight and Reform Committee after Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) died last October were dashed, despite serving on the committee for 18 years (he serves as a subcommittee chairman on national security). He was reluctant to get behind Trump’s impeachment inquiry until the allegations that Trump tried to use foreign officials to investigate Biden, whom Lynch endorsed for president last October.
He found himself in the headlines this week after a testy exchange with Trump’s Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, asking him bluntly at a House hearing: “What the heck are you doing?”
Over his 20-year career, Lynch has been the lead sponsor of five bills that have become law; two establishing post offices, two commemorative, and one to ensure federal employees who are veterans are guaranteed paid medical leave. He’s co-sponsored more than 100 others; his record as a Democrat is mixed. He’s an original co-sponsor of the Green New Deal, but once called global warming an “elitist” issue. He has a long record as a self-described anti-abortion Democrat — and voted to restrict abortions while in the state legislature — but has changed his tone over the last decade, and votes on party lines.
Advertisement
His history on LGBTQ issues has become liberal enough that the Human Rights Campaign endorsed Lynch over Goldstein, who is openly gay and runs Massachusetts General Hospital’s Transgender Health Program.
Lynch’s most famous vote in Congress is likely his one against the Affordable Care Act. But his vote differed from most of the moderate Democratic opposition to the landmark health care legislation; Lynch said he voted against it because it allowed for private insurance companies to become monopolies and did away with the public option. That vote was a major factor in his 2013 Senate primary loss against Markey. But in this race, Lynch is defending the ACA, arguing to expand it instead of working toward a single-payer insurance system, which Goldstein supports.
Lynch is not exactly the same as Rep. Dan Lipinski, the conservative Democrat from Illinois whose anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQ, hardline immigration and conservative health care views lost him his primary to progressive candidate Marie Newman earlier this year. But he’s solidly a centrist — and a perennial target for progressives. After progressives, like Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Boston’s Ayanna Pressley, successfully unseated longtime Democrats in the 2018 midterms, Sean McElwee, the co-founder of liberal think tank Data for Progress, listed Lynch’s seat as prime territory for a progressive to win.
The district is a Y-shaped cutout of neighborhoods south of Boston; a Democratic stronghold of some of the most progressive parts of the city with an influx of young professionals, and historically conservative Irish Catholic working-class neighborhoods that have shifted over time.
“I think it’s almost like the Senate race a little bit — I don’t think there isn’t a whole lot of oxygen between how the two of them would vote on most issues.” - Scott Ferson, Rep. Stephen Lynch's campaign spokesperson
Advertisement
“Over the past 20 years, the district has moved,” Goldstein said. “It has moved to a district that would like a pro-choice representative, it has moved to a district that would like someone who supports ‘Medicare for All,’ and is looking for health care expansion. It is a district that is directly impacted by the climate crisis and is looking for someone who understands the urgency of that issue. On almost every issue that matters to folks in this district, Stephen Lynch is to the right of where the district is.”
Lynch’s campaign brushed off the idea.
“I think it’s almost like the Senate race a little bit — I don’t think there isn’t a whole lot of oxygen between how the two of them would vote on most issues,” Scott Ferson, who spoke on behalf of Lynch’s campaign, told HuffPost.
A Potential Opening For A Progressive
Robbie Goldstein, an infectious disease doctor at Massachusetts General Hospital, campaigns to unseat Rep. Stephen Lynch in the state's 8th Congressional District. Courtesy of Robbie Goldstein's Campaign
There’s no denying that progressives in Massachusetts are energized, angry by how the national ticket played out and eager to win races. On top of that, there’s the heated Markey-Kennedy Senate primary that’s being billed as a progressive under attack.
“I think a lot of people have moved to the left and are more socially progressive than congressman Lynch,” said Elizabeth Clifford, 78, a Goldstein supporter who lives in a senior living community in Hingham. “I respect his perspective and his upbringing and I’m glad for him, for what he has achieved, but I think society needs to move beyond where we are now.”
Advertisement
Even Ferson, who also advises on the Markey campaign, spends half his time arguing that Massachusetts is moving more toward ideas like Medicare for All, something Markey has backed but Lynch is against. Ferson admits the district has changed, too, saying issues around climate change or Black Lives Matter weren’t big topics when Lynch came to office.
Lynch, however, doesn’t seem to be taking the challenge too seriously. He told The Boston Globe that his “campaign is just doing my job day-to-day.”
The 65-year-old congressman has a background that was once very familiar in the 8th district — son of a union ironworker, who followed in his father’s footsteps before becoming a lawyer, state lawmaker and then 19-year congressman. That story still resonates in parts of this district.
Goldstein, however, said he’s drawing inspiration from much more contemporary politics, like Pressley, a member of the progressive House “Squad,” and Rep. Lauren Underwood, who unseated Republican Randy Hultgren in the suburbs of Chicago.
Already there’s a growing list of progressives who have challenged sitting Democrats and prevailed this year: Newman beat out Lipinski in Illinois in March. In Missouri, Cori Bush unexpectedly ousted Rep. Lacy Clay. In New York, Jamaal Bowman pushed out Rep. Eliot Engel and Mondaire Jones won an open seat. (The race began as a primary challenge against Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey, who ultimately decided to retire.)
Advertisement
Goldstein says he wants to “build an enormous progressive caucus” by finding Democrats who sit outside the norms of the Democratic Party and replacing them with progressives. And, he says, something else has caught voters’ attention.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--You Won't See These Prominent Republicans At Trump's RNC

President Donald Trump ’ s campaign often touts the strength of his support from the Republican Party , but , similar to 2016 , many of the party ’ s biggest household names won ’ t be involved in his formal nominating convention this week .
Nearly one-third of the scheduled speakers at the Republican National Convention are either Trump ’ s family members or people who work for him .
While conventions traditionally feature former presidents , former nominees and candidates running in competitive down-ballot races , it ’ s the MyPillow founder and a couple who pointed guns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their scheduled appearances at this year ’ s RNC .
Neither George W. Bush nor any of his family members will appear at the RNC .
The former Republican president and his late father , former President George H.W .
Bush , famously sat out the 2016 convention , ending decades of a Bush family presence at the RNC .
As he refused to do during Trump ’ s first campaign , Bush has not made an endorsement in this election .
But he ’ s facing some pressure to endorse former Vice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from his administration declared their support for the Democratic nominee .
Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah , the Republican Party ’ s nominee in 2012 , is another no-show .
Romney , one of the most vocal Trump opponents in the GOP , did not attend in 2016 either but hasn ’ t endorsed any other candidate for president .
The former Massachusetts governor was the lone Republican to vote in favor of convicting Trump during the Senate ’ s impeachment trial earlier this year .
The family of the late Sen. John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s nominee in 2008 , won ’ t be there either .
McCain , who died in 2018 , wasn ’ t there in 2016 either and cast the deciding vote against Trump ’ s effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act in 2017 .
The New York Times reports that his widow , Cindy McCain , is “ almost certain ” to support Biden .
His talk show host daughter , Meghan McCain , has said it “ shouldn ’ t take a rocket scientist ” to figure out who she ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the support he offered her when her father died .
You won ’ t see Dick Cheney , who served eight years as George W. Bush ’ s vice president , at this year ’ s RNC , nor will you see Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming , his daughter and the House ’ s highest-ranking GOP woman .
Though she strongly supported Trump during his impeachment trial , the president ’ s allies have recently bashed her for not supporting him enough and called on her to step down from her House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Wisconsin , who served as House speaker from 2015 to 2019 , won ’ t participate in the convention this year .
Ryan , who was Romney ’ s running mate in 2012 , spoke in support of Trump at the 2016 convention , arguing in his remarks that a divided GOP was better than “ politically correct ” Democrats in the executive office .
He had little to say about Trump during the president ’ s first two years as president but has become a more vocal critic of him since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , George W. Bush ’ s secretary of state from 2001 to 2005 , has declared his support for Biden and will not speak at the convention .
Powell , who worked in four presidential administrations , supported former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Trump in 2016 and said in June that he “ can not in any way ” support Trump this time either .
Biden , however , is closely aligned with him “ on a social matter and on a political matter , ” Powell said .
Former House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself on fire than get involved in the election , ” a spokesperson said earlier this month , so it should be no surprise that the former Ohio lawmaker won ’ t be speaking at the RNC this year .
Though he endorsed Trump in 2016 , he reeled in his support once the president took office .
“ There is no Republican Party .
There ’ s a Trump Party , ” he said in 2018 .
Rep. Ted Cruz of Texas , who ran against Trump for the 2016 nomination , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year , too .
In one of the more memorable moments from the 2016 RNC , the audience booed Cruz during his speech for not offering his endorsement to Trump , who had insulted Cruz ’ s wife and suggested Cruz ’ s father helped assassinate President John F. Kennedy .
He ’ s since been a consistent supporter of Trump ’ s policies but has fought to elect some candidates whom Trump opposed .
Sen. Marco Rubio , another Republican who fought Trump for the 2016 nomination , won ’ t be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Last time , he backed out from his planned appearance and instead submitted pretaped remarks .
Like Cruz , the Florida senator has gone from sharply criticizing Trump ’ s qualifications during the 2016 campaign to largely praising him .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
President Donald Trump’s campaign often touts the strength of his support from the Republican Party, but, similar to 2016, many of the party’s biggest household names won’t be involved in his formal nominating convention this week.
Nearly one-third of the scheduled speakers at the Republican National Convention are either Trump’s family members or people who work for him. While conventions traditionally feature former presidents, former nominees and candidates running in competitive down-ballot races, it’s the MyPillow founder and a couple who pointed guns at protesters who are making headlines for their scheduled appearances at this year’s RNC.
Advertisement
Here are some of the big names you won’t be seeing this week.
George W. Bush
Neither George W. Bush nor any of his family members will appear at the RNC. The former Republican president and his late father, former President George H.W. Bush, famously sat out the 2016 convention, ending decades of a Bush family presence at the RNC. As he refused to do during Trump’s first campaign, Bush has not made an endorsement in this election. But he’s facing some pressure to endorse former Vice President Joe Biden after hundreds of officials from his administration declared their support for the Democratic nominee.
Former President George W. Bush is facing some pressure to endorse the Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden. Ronald Martinez via Getty Images
Mitt Romney
Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, the Republican Party’s nominee in 2012, is another no-show. Romney, one of the most vocal Trump opponents in the GOP, did not attend in 2016 either but hasn’t endorsed any other candidate for president. The former Massachusetts governor was the lone Republican to vote in favor of convicting Trump during the Senate’s impeachment trial earlier this year.
John McCain’s family
The family of the late Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the party’s nominee in 2008, won’t be there either. McCain, who died in 2018, wasn’t there in 2016 either and cast the deciding vote against Trump’s effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act in 2017. The New York Times reports that his widow, Cindy McCain, is “almost certain” to support Biden. His talk show host daughter, Meghan McCain, has said it “shouldn’t take a rocket scientist” to figure out who she’s voting for and praised Biden for the support he offered her when her father died.
Advertisement
The Cheneys
You won’t see Dick Cheney, who served eight years as George W. Bush’s vice president, at this year’s RNC, nor will you see Rep. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, his daughter and the House’s highest-ranking GOP woman. Though she strongly supported Trump during his impeachment trial, the president’s allies have recently bashed her for not supporting him enough and called on her to step down from her House leadership position.
Former Vice President Dick Cheney and his daughter Liz Cheney, a Wyoming congresswoman. Bill Clark via Getty Images
Paul Ryan
Former Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, who served as House speaker from 2015 to 2019, won’t participate in the convention this year. Ryan, who was Romney’s running mate in 2012, spoke in support of Trump at the 2016 convention, arguing in his remarks that a divided GOP was better than “politically correct” Democrats in the executive office. He had little to say about Trump during the president’s first two years as president but has become a more vocal critic of him since leaving office last year.
Colin Powell
Colin Powell, George W. Bush’s secretary of state from 2001 to 2005, has declared his support for Biden and will not speak at the convention. Powell, who worked in four presidential administrations, supported former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over Trump in 2016 and said in June that he “cannot in any way” support Trump this time either. Biden, however, is closely aligned with him “on a social matter and on a political matter,” Powell said.
John Boehner
Former House Speaker John Boehner would “rather set himself on fire than get involved in the election,” a spokesperson said earlier this month, so it should be no surprise that the former Ohio lawmaker won’t be speaking at the RNC this year. Though he endorsed Trump in 2016, he reeled in his support once the president took office. “There is no Republican Party. There’s a Trump Party,” he said in 2018.
Advertisement
Ted Cruz
Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who ran against Trump for the 2016 nomination, will be absent from the convention this year, too. In one of the more memorable moments from the 2016 RNC, the audience booed Cruz during his speech for not offering his endorsement to Trump, who had insulted Cruz’s wife and suggested Cruz’s father helped assassinate President John F. Kennedy. He’s since been a consistent supporter of Trump’s policies but has fought to elect some candidates whom Trump opposed.
Marco Rubio
Sen. Marco Rubio, another Republican who fought Trump for the 2016 nomination, won’t be involved in this year’s RNC. Last time, he backed out from his planned appearance and instead submitted pretaped remarks. Like Cruz, the Florida senator has gone from sharply criticizing Trump’s qualifications during the 2016 campaign to largely praising him.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Historic Fires In California: 1.2 Million Acres Burned, 170,000 Evacuated

As of Monday , two major fires in Northern California — the LNU Lightning Complex fires in Napa County and the SCU Lightning Complex fires in Santa Clara County — had both blazed through over 345,000 acres , making them , respectively , the second- and third-largest fires in state history .
In a press conference Monday , California Gov .
Gavin Newsom ( D ) called the 2020 fire season “ historic , ” noting that by this time last year , the state had experienced over 4,200 fires that burned about 56,000 acres .
Meanwhile , this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 1.4 million acres — with about 1.2 million acres burning in just over a week .
For comparison , over the last five years , an average of about 450,000 acres burned per year .
Over the past week , winds have spread smoke across the region , bringing air quality the EPA deemed “ unhealthy ” across the San Francisco Bay Area and far beyond .
More than 170,000 Californians have been ordered to evacuate their homes , according to Cal Fire .
The state has provided some 2,200 residents with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are grappling with how to safely shelter people in the middle of a pandemic .
About 1,500 evacuees — about two-thirds of those the state is sheltering — have been placed in hotel rooms .
Another 700 or so are staying in 17 different congregate shelters where evacuees undergo health screenings as they enter , with some shelters setting up tents to enable social distancing .
The number of COVID-19 cases continues to grow in California , with a seven-day average of nearly 5,800 confirmed cases per day and an average daily death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The governor said wearing masks is “ essential to protect you from air quality and to protect you and others from this virus.
” This fire season follows a devastating trend of record-breaking fires in California in recent years .
The 2017 fires in Sonoma were the deadliest ever in state history , killing 44 people — only until the fires in Paradise overtook them in 2018 , killing 85 people and burning thousands of homes .
Firefighters have been making “ demonstrable ” progress in fighting the current blazes , Newsom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 22 % contained so far and the SCU Complex 10 % contained .
The governor praised the “ incredible firefighters out there on the front lines.
” There are currently 14,000 firefighters battling over 600 fires across the state .
Over a thousand incarcerated people are among the state ’ s firefighters , getting paid only a few dollars a day for the dangerous labor .
As smoke has blanketed the region , people in prisons have been breathing the unhealthy air , which could make them even more susceptible to severe complications @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some detention facilities .
In the state that has seen a worsening homelessness crisis in recent years , unhoused people have been suffering disproportionately from the smoke .
The constant exposure to air pollutants leaves them at risk for respiratory issues that unsheltered people are already more likely to have .
Meanwhile , homeless people are also at higher risk of contracting COVID-19 , which affects the respiratory system .
“ We ’ re doing everything we can , bringing them on the grounds , windows shut , ” JoLyn McMillan , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Homeless , told HuffPost last week .
“ But that ’ s a Catch-22 because public health says keep windows open because it ’ s better for COVID to have ventilation .
It ’ s COVID versus smoke inhalation .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Over a dozen major fires are burning across California, killing seven people so far, destroying over 1,200 structures, spurring tens of thousands of evacuees — and reaching record-breaking proportions.
As of Monday, two major fires in Northern California — the LNU Lightning Complex fires in Napa County and the SCU Lightning Complex fires in Santa Clara County — had both blazed through over 345,000 acres, making them, respectively, the second- and third-largest fires in state history.
Advertisement
In a press conference Monday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) called the 2020 fire season “historic,” noting that by this time last year, the state had experienced over 4,200 fires that burned about 56,000 acres. Meanwhile, this year, over 7,000 fires have burned more than 1.4 million acres — with about 1.2 million acres burning in just over a week. For comparison, over the last five years, an average of about 450,000 acres burned per year.
Over the past week, winds have spread smoke across the region, bringing air quality the EPA deemed “unhealthy” across the San Francisco Bay Area and far beyond.
More than 170,000 Californians have been ordered to evacuate their homes, according to Cal Fire. The state has provided some 2,200 residents with shelter, Newsom said — but officials are grappling with how to safely shelter people in the middle of a pandemic.
About 1,500 evacuees — about two-thirds of those the state is sheltering — have been placed in hotel rooms. Another 700 or so are staying in 17 different congregate shelters where evacuees undergo health screenings as they enter, with some shelters setting up tents to enable social distancing.
Advertisement
“We’re battling this pandemic as we’re battling these historic wildfires up and down California,” Newsom said.
Alyssa Medina reacts to the charred remains of her family home, burned by the LNU Lightning Complex fire in Vacaville, California, on Aug. 23, 2020. JOSH EDELSON via Getty Images
The number of COVID-19 cases continues to grow in California, with a seven-day average of nearly 5,800 confirmed cases per day and an average daily death toll of 128 people across the state.
The governor said wearing masks is “essential to protect you from air quality and to protect you and others from this virus.”
This fire season follows a devastating trend of record-breaking fires in California in recent years. The 2017 fires in Sonoma were the deadliest ever in state history, killing 44 people — only until the fires in Paradise overtook them in 2018, killing 85 people and burning thousands of homes.
Advertisement
Firefighters have been making “demonstrable” progress in fighting the current blazes, Newsom said, with the LNU Complex fires 22% contained so far and the SCU Complex 10% contained. The governor praised the “incredible firefighters out there on the front lines.” There are currently 14,000 firefighters battling over 600 fires across the state.
Over a thousand incarcerated people are among the state’s firefighters, getting paid only a few dollars a day for the dangerous labor. As smoke has blanketed the region, people in prisons have been breathing the unhealthy air, which could make them even more susceptible to severe complications from the coronavirus that has already devastated some detention facilities.
In the state that has seen a worsening homelessness crisis in recent years, unhoused people have been suffering disproportionately from the smoke. The constant exposure to air pollutants leaves them at risk for respiratory issues that unsheltered people are already more likely to have. Meanwhile, homeless people are also at higher risk of contracting COVID-19, which affects the respiratory system.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--Wisconsin Gov. Calls For Special Session On Cops' Use Of Force After Black Man Shot In Back

Wisconsin ’ s governor has called for a special legislative session on the use of force by his state ’ s law enforcement officers after police repeatedly shot a Black man in his back on Sunday , an act that the state ’ s lieutenant governor said “ was not an accident.
” “ For over two months , our legislative leaders have ignored the calls for change from people in every part of our state , and now another Black man is fighting for his life due to the actions of law enforcement , ” Lt. Gov .
Mandela @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black lieutenant governor , said in a statement Monday .
“ The people of our state are done waiting for the Legislature to act , and so are we.
” Gov .
Tony Evers ’ ( D ) executive order for a special session would consider a package of bills that would ban police chokeholds and no-knock search warrants , make it harder for officers to resort to lethal force and would require law enforcement agencies maintain an employment file for each employee .
These files would be available to view by other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ looking to move to a different agency .
The order calls attention to Sunday ’ s shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha , as well as the recent killings of Breonna Taylor in Kentucky and George Floyd in Minnesota .
These individuals , along with several other named Black Wisconsinites killed by law enforcement , are “ all examples of Black lives extinguished as a result of systemic injustice and racism , ” the governor ’ s order states .
Blake was entering the driver ’ s side door of a parked SUV @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two officers , following him with guns drawn , were filmed appearing to shoot him multiple times at point-blank range .
“ Let me be clear , this was not an accident .
This wasn ’ t bad police work .
This felt like some sort of vendetta being taken out on a member of our community , ” said Barnes .
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump , who is now representing Blake ’ s family , said Monday that Blake had been helping to deescalate a domestic incident that evening when he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As he was walking away to check on his children , police officers fired their weapons into his back .
“ Even worse , his three sons witnessed their father collapse after being riddled with bullets , ” Crump said in a statement .
“ Their irresponsible , reckless , and inhumane actions nearly cost the life of a man who was simply trying to do the right thing by intervening in a domestic incident .
It ’ s a miracle he ’ s still alive.
” “ This can only be our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from another attack on a Black man by law enforcement , as communities grieve and exercise their first amendment rights to demand justice and as Jacob Blake fights for his life , we are all reminded that racism is a public health crisis .
There ’ s no time to waste , ” he said at Monday ’ s press conference .
Milwaukee ’ s police association fired back at Evers in its own statement , however , accusing the governor of “ pushing a false ideology ” by speaking out about what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Let the facts come out before making a statement that a person has ‘ been shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement in our state , ’ ” the police association said .
“ By rushing to judgment , without knowing all of the facts , this will only fuel the cause of others to protest in a manner that isn ’ t peaceful .
Reckless comments , without all of the facts , can only lead someone to a rush of judgment which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hundreds of people took to the streets into the early hours of Monday following the police shooting in Kenosha .
Several vehicles were set on fire and windows were smashed .
Officers in riot gear and in SWAT vehicles responded to the uproar and used tear gas to disperse groups of people , The Associated Press reported .
“ Equal justice has not been real for Black Americans and so many others .
We are at an inflection point .
We must dismantle systemic racism .
It is the urgent task before us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a statement .
“ We must fight to honor the ideals laid in the original American promise , which we are yet to attain : That all men and women are created equal , but more importantly that they must be treated equally .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Wisconsin’s governor has called for a special legislative session on the use of force by his state’s law enforcement officers after police repeatedly shot a Black man in his back on Sunday, an act that the state’s lieutenant governor said “was not an accident.”
“For over two months, our legislative leaders have ignored the calls for change from people in every part of our state, and now another Black man is fighting for his life due to the actions of law enforcement,” Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, the state’s first Black lieutenant governor, said in a statement Monday. “The people of our state are done waiting for the Legislature to act, and so are we.”
Advertisement
Gov. Tony Evers’ (D) executive order for a special session would consider a package of bills that would ban police chokeholds and no-knock search warrants, make it harder for officers to resort to lethal force and would require law enforcement agencies maintain an employment file for each employee. These files would be available to view by other law enforcement agencies if the individual is looking to move to a different agency.
A small group of demonstrators pray while protesting Sunday evening's police shooting of a Black man in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Jacob Blake was shot in front of his three children, his attorney said. Scott Olson via Getty Images
The order calls attention to Sunday’s shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, as well as the recent killings of Breonna Taylor in Kentucky and George Floyd in Minnesota. These individuals, along with several other named Black Wisconsinites killed by law enforcement, are “all examples of Black lives extinguished as a result of systemic injustice and racism,” the governor’s order states.
Blake was entering the driver’s side door of a parked SUV in Kenosha when one of at least two officers, following him with guns drawn, were filmed appearing to shoot him multiple times at point-blank range.
Advertisement
He was hospitalized in serious condition, authorities said, and the officers involved were placed on administrative leave ― a standard practice in a police shooting ― while the state Justice Department investigates.
“Let me be clear, this was not an accident. This wasn’t bad police work. This felt like some sort of vendetta being taken out on a member of our community,” said Barnes.
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who is now representing Blake’s family, said Monday that Blake had been helping to deescalate a domestic incident that evening when he was first Tasered by responding police. As he was walking away to check on his children, police officers fired their weapons into his back.
The family of Jacob Blake has retained @BenCrumpLaw. We will seek #JusticeForJacobBlake and his family. We demand answers from @KenoshaPolice. pic.twitter.com/hpOr2tmdif — Ben Crump (@AttorneyCrump) August 24, 2020
“Even worse, his three sons witnessed their father collapse after being riddled with bullets,” Crump said in a statement. “Their irresponsible, reckless, and inhumane actions nearly cost the life of a man who was simply trying to do the right thing by intervening in a domestic incident. It’s a miracle he’s still alive.”
Advertisement
Evers urged his state’s legislative officials to put politics aside and come together to take action.
“This can only be our first step. As our state reels from another attack on a Black man by law enforcement, as communities grieve and exercise their first amendment rights to demand justice and as Jacob Blake fights for his life, we are all reminded that racism is a public health crisis. There’s no time to waste,” he said at Monday’s press conference.
Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Paul said Monday that his department is “vigorously and thoroughly investigating” Sunday’s shooting and “will unwaveringly pursue justice in the case.”
Police in riot gear stand outside the Kenosha County Court House on Monday following overnight protests over the shooting of a Black man by police. ASSOCIATED PRESS
Milwaukee’s police association fired back at Evers in its own statement, however, accusing the governor of “pushing a false ideology” by speaking out about what happened without knowing all of the facts.
Advertisement
“Let the facts come out before making a statement that a person has ‘been shot or injured or mercilessly killed at the hands of individuals in law enforcement in our state,’” the police association said. “By rushing to judgment, without knowing all of the facts, this will only fuel the cause of others to protest in a manner that isn’t peaceful. Reckless comments, without all of the facts, can only lead someone to a rush of judgment which will result in emotions taking over.”
Hundreds of people took to the streets into the early hours of Monday following the police shooting in Kenosha. Several vehicles were set on fire and windows were smashed. Officers in riot gear and in SWAT vehicles responded to the uproar and used tear gas to disperse groups of people, The Associated Press reported.
Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden was among those calling for a “full and transparent investigation” into the shooting on Monday.
Yesterday, Jacob Blake was shot seven times in the back by police. His kids watched from the car. Today, we woke to grieve yet again.
We need a full and transparent investigation. https://t.co/9X7l25nq8d — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) August 24, 2020
“Equal justice has not been real for Black Americans and so many others. We are at an inflection point. We must dismantle systemic racism. It is the urgent task before us,” the former vice president said in a statement. “We must fight to honor the ideals laid in the original American promise, which we are yet to attain: That all men and women are created equal, but more importantly that they must be treated equally.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-25--I Had COVID-19 But Tested Negative 5 Times. Here's What You Should Know About Testing.

Not so long ago , if you had a mild sore throat and nasal congestion , you probably weren ’ t worried that something sinister was brewing inside you .
Most likely you would have appropriately diagnosed yourself with a common cold , purchased some decongestants and rested .
If you developed a fever , you might have had influenza , but usually , you could safely assume that what you were experiencing was a temporary inconvenience rather than a life-threatening illness .
It was just another virus .
Brush it off , get back to work .
As an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ m often asked by friends whether they should be concerned that a symptom they ’ re experiencing may be due to COVID-19 , or whether it ’ s just related to allergies or another virus .
My neighbor ’ s daughter developed a fever with abdominal pain ― could it be COVID-19 ?
A friend developed a headache with body aches ― did he have COVID-19 ?
My brother felt extreme fatigue with nausea ― was it COVID-19 and should he obtain testing ?
What should he tell his wife ?
What about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ months , it has become clear that the symptoms of COVID-19 are numerous and include not only fever , cough and shortness of breath but also body aches , significant fatigue , diarrhea , nausea and loss of taste or smell .
Because there are so many potential symptoms and combinations of symptoms ― and so much confusion about the disease in general ― more and more people are afraid that they might have a potentially devastating illness , and so they are seeking reassurance through medical experts and testing at earlier and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ husband immediately isolated himself at a hotel that was being used as a haven for infected health care providers and I was sent home .
We were worried about his testing positive , that he may have transmitted the disease to me , and what might happen if either of us became very ill , but at that early stage of the disease , all we could do was wait to see what might happen .
Two days later , I was tested again using the rapid antigen assay .
This test also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ completely surprising since I still had not developed symptoms .
To more accurately verify whether I was infected , I was also tested using the PCR viral test .
Unlike the rapid antigen test , this test detects actual viral RNA , but results usually are not returned quickly and mine were not going to be available for another two days .
This dual testing protocol is often initiated when there is a high suspicion that an individual has COVID-19 and the initial rapid antigen test is negative .
Though I seemed fine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be asymptomatic and I didn ’ t want to pass the disease to my 11-year-old son , whom I had to take care of by myself because my husband was isolating at the hotel .
I wanted to keep our son as safe as possible but I also knew that he still needed my love , attention and general care .
So I manically cleaned surfaces around our house , wore a mask when I had to come in close contact with him and relegated him to playing video games in a room @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was healthy and , especially as a physician , I knew that the likelihood of him becoming significantly ill was low if he did contract COVID-19 .
I still couldn ’ t stop myself from fearing that he might be one of the kids who got seriously sick ― or worse ― from the disease .
My husband thought I might have a different virus because I had been caring for many patients with many different illnesses the prior week .
Maybe it was just a cold .
Maybe it was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to think .
I wasn ’ t sure if I should feel reassured by my three negative COVID-19 tests ( I was still waiting on the PCR results ) and I was wary about not wearing a mask around my son .
I knew tests can return false negatives and I knew that COVID-19 symptoms can continue to appear and worsen over time , so all I could do was continue to monitor how I felt .
This concern was described by the Mayo Clinic Proceedings in June .
Internal and Emergency Medicine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ man in China who had seven negative PCR tests before testing positive on day eight of his illness .
Researchers from Johns Hopkins determined that testing for COVID-19 too early in the course of infection increases the possibility of a false-negative result .
According to their study , published in the Annals of Internal Medicine , there was a 67 % chance of patients receiving a false-negative if they were tested within four days of contracting the virus .
The study found that when the test was administered on the day of symptom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infected , the probability of receiving a false-negative dropped to 38 % .
Researchers noted that testing was more accurate when administered three to four days after symptom onset , but even then , the probability of receiving a false-negative was 20 % .
The New England Journal of Medicine further described issues with COVID-19 testing and false negatives , ultimately concluding that “ clinicians should not trust unexpected negative results ( i.e.
, assume a negative result is a ‘ false negative ’ in a person with typical symptoms and known exposure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made that in some situations , testing might be unnecessary and even dangerous because it could provide false reassurance , would not change how the disease was managed in that individual and could use up limited testing supplies .
So it ’ s reasonable to wonder if everyone who feels they need a COVID-19 test should get tested .
And if the answer is no on a micro level , couldn ’ t it be argued that it ’ s still valuable to do the testing to aid public health monitoring on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ true that widespread testing can help determine where the disease is most prevalent and how to react , this strategy is most useful when robust contact tracing and educational procedures are also put in place .
Unfortunately , these programs are currently severely lacking in the United States .
If widespread testing is available without proper tracing and education , patients with negative results , especially those with mild symptoms , may mistakenly assume they do not have the disease and therefore can not transmit it and may not continue recommended isolation procedures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the dangers of false-negative results and considering limited testing supplies , I tell patients who had known exposures to COVID-19 and are now experiencing mild symptoms that they most likely have the disease and that they need to isolate themselves without seeking further testing .
I indicate that I would hate to offer a test that returns a false-negative , which in turn provides a false reassurance of safety .
I empathize with their frustrations and explain that testing is more accurate when significant symptoms develop .
And although the waiting game @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , social distancing , isolation and careful self-monitoring is the best advice at that time .
For me , after another 48 hours of worsening cough , worsening body aches , and uncomfortable diarrhea , I was pretty sure I had COVID-19 , but my viral PCR test was also negative .
Another two days passed and then my son developed a fever .
To obtain testing again for both of us , I decided to visit urgent care , instead of the hospital where I work , on the off chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facility .
This test was also negative .
However , my son ’ s test was positive .
Because I had been his sole caretaker in recent days , I was fairly convinced that he most likely contracted COVID-19 from me , even though I had never tested positive .
As we continue to learn more about this disease ― and how to best test , track and fight it ― hopefully we will see fewer and fewer false-negative results .
But until we have more sensitive and accurate ways to detect this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bodies and medical experts .
If you ’ ve been exposed to COVID-19 and you develop mild symptoms , you should stay home and adhere to appropriate isolation protocols .
If you develop significant symptoms , please seek medical care .
And if you want and are able to get tested , go for it .
But just remember that a negative result doesn ’ t necessarily mean that you aren ’ t infected ― or that you can ’ t transmit it to those around you .

The author, shown wearing protective gear, returned to work in the emergency department of her hospital on July 3, 2020. Courtesy of Christine Zink
Not so long ago, if you had a mild sore throat and nasal congestion, you probably weren’t worried that something sinister was brewing inside you. Most likely you would have appropriately diagnosed yourself with a common cold, purchased some decongestants and rested. If you developed a fever, you might have had influenza, but usually, you could safely assume that what you were experiencing was a temporary inconvenience rather than a life-threatening illness. It was just another virus. Brush it off, get back to work.
But now getting sick is viewed very differently.
As an emergency physician these days, I’m often asked by friends whether they should be concerned that a symptom they’re experiencing may be due to COVID-19, or whether it’s just related to allergies or another virus. My neighbor’s daughter developed a fever with abdominal pain ― could it be COVID-19? A friend developed a headache with body aches ― did he have COVID-19? My brother felt extreme fatigue with nausea ― was it COVID-19 and should he obtain testing? What should he tell his wife? What about his kids?
Advertisement
Over the last few months, it has become clear that the symptoms of COVID-19 are numerous and include not only fever, cough and shortness of breath but also body aches, significant fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and loss of taste or smell. Because there are so many potential symptoms and combinations of symptoms ― and so much confusion about the disease in general ― more and more people are afraid that they might have a potentially devastating illness, and so they are seeking reassurance through medical experts and testing at earlier and earlier stages of their illness.
In mid-June, when Texas lifted stay-at-home orders and allowed businesses to reopen, the hospital where I worked quickly became much busier than it had been. It was during that time that my husband, also an emergency physician, contracted COVID-19.
I was working an overnight shift the evening that he developed a fever and fatigue and tested positive for the coronavirus. Even though I had no symptoms, because I had potentially been exposed to the virus via my husband, my hospital immediately required me to be tested as well. My test came back negative.
My husband immediately isolated himself at a hotel that was being used as a haven for infected health care providers and I was sent home. We were worried about his testing positive, that he may have transmitted the disease to me, and what might happen if either of us became very ill, but at that early stage of the disease, all we could do was wait to see what might happen.
Advertisement
Two days later, I was tested again using the rapid antigen assay. This test also came back negative. This was not completely surprising since I still had not developed symptoms. To more accurately verify whether I was infected, I was also tested using the PCR viral test. Unlike the rapid antigen test, this test detects actual viral RNA, but results usually are not returned quickly and mine were not going to be available for another two days.
This dual testing protocol is often initiated when there is a high suspicion that an individual has COVID-19 and the initial rapid antigen test is negative. Though I seemed fine, I was worried that I could be asymptomatic and I didn’t want to pass the disease to my 11-year-old son, whom I had to take care of by myself because my husband was isolating at the hotel.
I wanted to keep our son as safe as possible but I also knew that he still needed my love, attention and general care. So I manically cleaned surfaces around our house, wore a mask when I had to come in close contact with him and relegated him to playing video games in a room I did not enter. I knew he was healthy and, especially as a physician, I knew that the likelihood of him becoming significantly ill was low if he did contract COVID-19. I still couldn’t stop myself from fearing that he might be one of the kids who got seriously sick ― or worse ― from the disease.
The next day, I developed a minor cough and chills. I knew something was not right, but I did not have a fever and I was unimpressed with my symptoms. I obtained a fourth COVID-19 test and, once again, it came back negative.
My husband thought I might have a different virus because I had been caring for many patients with many different illnesses the prior week. Maybe it was just a cold. Maybe it was the flu. I had no idea what to think. I wasn’t sure if I should feel reassured by my three negative COVID-19 tests (I was still waiting on the PCR results) and I was wary about not wearing a mask around my son. I knew tests can return false negatives and I knew that COVID-19 symptoms can continue to appear and worsen over time, so all I could do was continue to monitor how I felt.
Advertisement
“According to [a Johns Hopkins] study, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, there was a 67% chance of patients receiving a false-negative if they were tested within four days of contracting the virus.”
While I waited to see if I would experience new or worse symptoms, I began to do more research about the accuracy of COVID-19 testing. Viral and antigen tests commonly used in hospital emergency departments detect active infection, whereas antibody tests are used to detect previous exposure or infection. However, if viral and antigen tests have weak sensitivity or are administered too soon, patients may receive false-negative results.
This concern was described by the Mayo Clinic Proceedings in June. Internal and Emergency Medicine published a case report of a 30-year-old man in China who had seven negative PCR tests before testing positive on day eight of his illness. Researchers from Johns Hopkins determined that testing for COVID-19 too early in the course of infection increases the possibility of a false-negative result. According to their study, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, there was a 67% chance of patients receiving a false-negative if they were tested within four days of contracting the virus. The study found that when the test was administered on the day of symptom onset, typically four days after becoming infected, the probability of receiving a false-negative dropped to 38%. Researchers noted that testing was more accurate when administered three to four days after symptom onset, but even then, the probability of receiving a false-negative was 20%. The New England Journal of Medicine further described issues with COVID-19 testing and false negatives, ultimately concluding that “clinicians should not trust unexpected negative results (i.e., assume a negative result is a ‘false negative’ in a person with typical symptoms and known exposure).”
An argument could be made that in some situations, testing might be unnecessary and even dangerous because it could provide false reassurance, would not change how the disease was managed in that individual and could use up limited testing supplies. So it’s reasonable to wonder if everyone who feels they need a COVID-19 test should get tested. And if the answer is no on a micro level, couldn’t it be argued that it’s still valuable to do the testing to aid public health monitoring on a macro level?
Advertisement
While it’s true that widespread testing can help determine where the disease is most prevalent and how to react, this strategy is most useful when robust contact tracing and educational procedures are also put in place. Unfortunately, these programs are currently severely lacking in the United States. If widespread testing is available without proper tracing and education, patients with negative results, especially those with mild symptoms, may mistakenly assume they do not have the disease and therefore cannot transmit it and may not continue recommended isolation procedures when these are needed most.
Due to the dangers of false-negative results and considering limited testing supplies, I tell patients who had known exposures to COVID-19 and are now experiencing mild symptoms that they most likely have the disease and that they need to isolate themselves without seeking further testing. I indicate that I would hate to offer a test that returns a false-negative, which in turn provides a false reassurance of safety. I empathize with their frustrations and explain that testing is more accurate when significant symptoms develop. And although the waiting game is extremely difficult and anxiety-producing for most people, social distancing, isolation and careful self-monitoring is the best advice at that time.
For me, after another 48 hours of worsening cough, worsening body aches, and uncomfortable diarrhea, I was pretty sure I had COVID-19, but my viral PCR test was also negative. Another two days passed and then my son developed a fever. To obtain testing again for both of us, I decided to visit urgent care, instead of the hospital where I work, on the off chance that an error was occurring at my facility. This test was also negative. However, my son’s test was positive. Because I had been his sole caretaker in recent days, I was fairly convinced that he most likely contracted COVID-19 from me, even though I had never tested positive.
My family and I are well now, and thankfully, none of us suffered severely while sick. My son had a fever for only one night. My husband and I are back at work. In late July, we all tested positive for long-term COVID-19 antibodies, which officially confirmed that I did have COVID-19, even though a total of five viral and antigen tests had come back negative.
As we continue to learn more about this disease ― and how to best test, track and fight it ― hopefully we will see fewer and fewer false-negative results. But until we have more sensitive and accurate ways to detect this virus, we must listen to our bodies and medical experts. If you’ve been exposed to COVID-19 and you develop mild symptoms, you should stay home and adhere to appropriate isolation protocols. If you develop significant symptoms, please seek medical care. And if you want and are able to get tested, go for it. But just remember that a negative result doesn’t necessarily mean that you aren’t infected ― or that you can’t transmit it to those around you.
Advertisement
Dr. Christine Zink is an emergency physician and freelance medical writer who lives in San Antonio. She attended medical school at Weill Cornell Medical College and completed her residency at New York-Presbyterian Hospital in 2010. She now combines clinical emergency medicine with freelance writing. View her writing work at www.chrissys.ink.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-25--MSNBC’s Dr. Vin Gupta Slams Trump Campaign's Coronavirus ‘Propaganda’ At RNC

“ Democrats , the media and the World Health Organization got coronavirus wrong , ” the RNC video claims .
It ignored all the times Trump downplayed the virus threat ― including when he declared in February that cases would soon be “ down to close to zero ” ― and his repeated claims the virus will just “ go away ” on its own .
So far , more than 177,000 Americans have been confirmed dead from the infection , including more than 25,000 in August alone .
“ To say that 170,000 souls lost in our country up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any measure , is fantasy , ” Gupta said .
“ It ’ s disrespectful to the families who ’ ve lost loved ones , to front-line clinicians who put their lives at risk .
It ’ s just fantasy .
It ’ s propaganda.
” Gupta also pointed out that the administration continues to fail to deliver essential personal protective equipment to health care workers on the front lines of the pandemic .
“ We had to import insufficient , inadequate PPE ― KN95 masks that did not meet any recognizable U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ places overseas , because we didn ’ t have enough PPE in our strategic national stockpile , ” he said .
And Gupta lit into the delays and failures in rolling out testing .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
“Democrats, the media and the World Health Organization got coronavirus wrong,” the RNC video claims. It ignored all the times Trump downplayed the virus threat ― including when he declared in February that cases would soon be “down to close to zero” ― and his repeated claims the virus will just “go away” on its own.
Advertisement
So far, more than 177,000 Americans have been confirmed dead from the infection, including more than 25,000 in August alone.
Gupta, a pulmonologist, ripped into the RNC over the video.
“To say that 170,000 souls lost in our country up to now is a success, by any measure, is fantasy,” Gupta said. “It’s disrespectful to the families who’ve lost loved ones, to front-line clinicians who put their lives at risk. It’s just fantasy. It’s propaganda.”
Gupta also pointed out that the administration continues to fail to deliver essential personal protective equipment to health care workers on the front lines of the pandemic.
“We had to import insufficient, inadequate PPE ― KN95 masks that did not meet any recognizable U.S. standard ― from China, from other places overseas, because we didn’t have enough PPE in our strategic national stockpile,” he said.
Advertisement
And Gupta lit into the delays and failures in rolling out testing.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-08-24--St. Louis Couple Defends Decision To Point Guns At BLM Protesters During RNC Address

During a fearmongering address for the Republican National Convention ’ s opening night on Monday , a white couple from St. Louis who face criminal charges for pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters falsely claimed that Democrats want to “ abolish the suburbs.
” Mark and Patricia McCloskey , in remarks recorded ahead of the convention , defended their decision to brandish firearms at protesters in June , and praised President Donald Trump ’ s leadership .
“ At this moment in history , if you stand up for yourself and for the values our country was founded on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their allies in the media ― will try to destroy you , ” Mark McCloskey said .
“ You ’ ve seen us on your TV screens and Twitter feeds , ” he went on .
“ You know we ’ re not the kind of people who back down .
Thankfully , neither is Donald Trump .
President Trump will defend the God-given right of every American to protect their homes and their families.
” Mark and Patricia McCloskey , the St. Louis couple who pointed guns at BLM protesters , declare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no matter where you live , your family will not be safe in the radical Democrats ' America . ''
pic.twitter.com/MhhOSPO8F8 — Right Wing Watch ( @ RightWingWatch ) August 25 , 2020 The McCloskeys , both lawyers in their 60s , face felony charges of unlawful use of a weapon for waving their guns at several hundred protesters as they marched by the couple ’ s mansion in a gated community in St. Louis .
Mark McCloskey brandished a semi-automatic rifle and his wife held a semi-automatic handgun .
No shots were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner described the protesters as “ peaceful ” and “ unarmed.
” But the McCloskeys have claimed the demonstrators ignored “ No Trespassing ” and “ Private Street ” signs before breaking through a gate to get into the community .
Trump believes the charges against the McCloskeys constitute an “ egregious abuse of power , ” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said during a press briefing last month .
“ They are not satisfied with spreading the chaos and violence into our communities .
They want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home zoning , ” Patricia McCloskey said .
“ This forced rezoning would bring crime , lawlessness and low-quality apartments into thriving suburban neighborhoods.
” “ These are the policies that are coming to a neighborhood near you , ” she continued .
“ So make no mistake : No matter where you live , your family will not be safe in the radical Democrats ’ America.
” In fact , the platform of former Vice President Joe Biden , the Democratic nominee for president , calls for eliminating single-family-only zoning regulations in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desegregate the suburbs .
Trump has stoked fear and racial animosity among his supporters by claiming low-income housing would “ invade their neighborhood ” under a Biden presidency .
Black , Native American and Hispanic households are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters , according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition .
“ The ‘ suburban housewife ’ will be voting for me , ” Trump tweeted earlier this month .
“ They want safety & are thrilled that I ended the long running program where low income @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would reinstall it , in a bigger form , with [ Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey ] in charge !
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
During a fearmongering address for the Republican National Convention’s opening night on Monday, a white couple from St. Louis who face criminal charges for pointing guns at Black Lives Matter protesters falsely claimed that Democrats want to “abolish the suburbs.”
Mark and Patricia McCloskey, in remarks recorded ahead of the convention, defended their decision to brandish firearms at protesters in June, and praised President Donald Trump’s leadership.
Advertisement
“At this moment in history, if you stand up for yourself and for the values our country was founded on, the mob ― spurred on by their allies in the media ― will try to destroy you,” Mark McCloskey said.
“You’ve seen us on your TV screens and Twitter feeds,” he went on. “You know we’re not the kind of people who back down. Thankfully, neither is Donald Trump. President Trump will defend the God-given right of every American to protect their homes and their families.”
Mark and Patricia McCloskey, the St. Louis couple who pointed guns at BLM protesters, declare that if Biden is elected, "no matter where you live, your family will not be safe in the radical Democrats' America." pic.twitter.com/MhhOSPO8F8 — Right Wing Watch (@RightWingWatch) August 25, 2020
The McCloskeys, both lawyers in their 60s, face felony charges of unlawful use of a weapon for waving their guns at several hundred protesters as they marched by the couple’s mansion in a gated community in St. Louis. Mark McCloskey brandished a semi-automatic rifle and his wife held a semi-automatic handgun. No shots were fired during the confrontation.
Advertisement
Democratic St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner described the protesters as “peaceful” and “unarmed.” But the McCloskeys have claimed the demonstrators ignored “No Trespassing” and “Private Street” signs before breaking through a gate to get into the community.
Trump believes the charges against the McCloskeys constitute an “egregious abuse of power,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said during a press briefing last month.
In their RNC address Monday night, the McCloskeys falsely accused “radical Democrats” of seeking to endanger and destroy suburban communities.
“They are not satisfied with spreading the chaos and violence into our communities. They want to abolish the suburbs altogether by ending single-family home zoning,” Patricia McCloskey said. “This forced rezoning would bring crime, lawlessness and low-quality apartments into thriving suburban neighborhoods.”
“These are the policies that are coming to a neighborhood near you,” she continued. “So make no mistake: No matter where you live, your family will not be safe in the radical Democrats’ America.”
Advertisement
In fact, the platform of former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee for president, calls for eliminating single-family-only zoning regulations in an effort to reduce housing barriers and desegregate the suburbs.
Trump has stoked fear and racial animosity among his supporters by claiming low-income housing would “invade their neighborhood” under a Biden presidency. Black, Native American and Hispanic households are more likely than white households to be extremely low-income renters, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition.