thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Our Stories Are Devastating. Will Reading Them Convince You To Protect Our Rights?

I didn ’ t particularly want to die .
I simply thought it might be preferable to living if I needed another third-trimester abortion and couldn ’ t get it .
The dread of that possibility , stoked by President Trump ’ s constant fearmongering on abortion , consumed more hours of my pregnancy than I like to remember .
I was afraid someone would murder the one doctor in the country I knew would help me .
I was afraid the law would change .
I was afraid the clinic would be bombed .
I carried these anxieties on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new pregnancy after the one before it had ended in ashes .
In the end , the baby ( now a toddler ) and I were both fine .
But in October 2017 , I was 28 weeks pregnant .
It was a boy .
He would have been our third child .
A team of specialists told us if he was born , he would either die or be severely brain-damaged .
There was one man they trusted to help us end the pregnancy safely if that was what we wanted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we came back , we carried on .
I became part of the community of people who have traveled to end their pregnancies in a small clinic in Boulder , Colorado .
Taylor , who has elected to use a pseudonym out of fear for her job and the safety of her children , had had five miscarriages before her “ miracle baby ” was diagnosed with “ Trisomy 5q , a hole in her heart , and a cleft foot ” at 22 weeks .
Two months ago , she learned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow her to end the pregnancy , so she began “ researching ways to force a miscarriage ” before finding out about the Boulder Abortion Clinic .
“ I could have truly hurt myself , ” she told me .
“ I was desperate [ ... ] I was considering hurting myself.
” After traveling to Colorado for her abortion at 23 weeks , she says her “ heart still hurts but they helped me move forward.
” She wants you to know that her abortion was done out of “ love , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Carson discovered the 35-week fetus she was carrying had such severe brain damage that , if born , her baby would not even be able “ to sleep comfortably ” or to swallow .
But she could not get a clear answer on how much medical intervention would take place after her baby , Laurel , was born .
Desperate to avoid forcing Laurel to suffer painful , fruitless interventions , Carson started to make plans to deliver her “ off the grid.
” That such a delivery would likely have either killed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When she was referred to the clinic in Colorado , Carson first thought she had been sent to an illegal , back-alley provider .
She assumed she would at best lose her fertility and at worst , her life .
She got on a plane to Denver two days later anyway .
Kathryn K. was 32 weeks pregnant when she sat in a room with “ six doctors and medical professionals ” at Denver Children ’ s Hospital .
Kathryn told me , “ My baby ’ s brain was only about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was extremely smooth — indicating that her ridging was very , very tiny and that she would suffer up to 100 seizures per day [ ... ] she likely wouldn ’ t be able to breathe on her own or swallow [ ... ] at some point after the birth , we would not be able to refuse life-saving measures for her .
We were told we could hope that nature would take its course during delivery and not monitor her .
We were told that the delivery could become very difficult for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well-being.
” She wants you to know : “ This is personal for me .
Nobody should have to travel to get an abortion , but I was able to go to Colorado to get compassionate care when I needed it .
I have friends who did as well , each with a unique story .
I think people in Colorado will realize they don ’ t want to make such a big , life-changing decision for someone they don ’ t know , which is what this measure is asking them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the streets right now demanding less criminalization for individual behaviors that are logical results of our cruel , inequitable systems .
That conversation has to include pregnancy outcomes , including abortion.
” Just over three months ago , Robin , who is also using a pseudonym to protect her job and family , was 34 weeks pregnant when her fetus suffered a severe stroke in utero .
Two weeks later , her parents drove her and her husband to the airport to travel to Colorado .
At the clinic , she “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hours.
” Robin remembers thinking , the longer I talk , the longer she gets to live .
Robin sang lullabies and held her rosary during the procedure .
If Colorado had not been an option , Robin told me , “ I would have had a C-section .
The doctors would have tried to stabilize her and she would have had an MRI .
There was no surgery or medicine that could fix her or save her .
If she didn ’ t die at birth , I would have held her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ She wants you to know that she is scared of what will happen if she needs an abortion in a future pregnancy and can not access one .
Margot Finn was 29 weeks pregnant when she traveled to Colorado after finding that her fetus had lissencephaly , an incurable brain disorder .
Finn has shared her story widely and written about our community and support groups .
She wants you to know that she hopes anyone “ who votes for an abortion ban that would prevent families like mine from accessing safe and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing providers has to suffer as my baby would have : clenched by seizures , choking on her own saliva , and laboring to breathe through chronic pneumonia while her parents watched her die .
If that doesn ’ t seem like an appropriate fate to wish on someone , perhaps lawmakers shouldn ’ t leave families like mine with no other options.
” At this moment , no reliable studies exist that examine the emotional response to abortion among those who end a wanted pregnancy , as we are a relatively small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Anecdotally , however , after over four years of speaking to others who have been through the same experience , I have learned that my thoughts of suicide and self-harm when I did not know if I would be able to access an abortion are not rare .
They are also distinct from the intense grief most of us feel .
Rather , they represent a desperate response to the lack of control pregnant women have over their own bodies in what is supposedly a civilized country .
If Colorado passes this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future women like us will do .
Because a dying or severely disabled fetus exists within the set of reasons America has deemed marginally morally licit for later abortion , you will be inclined to sympathize with us more than with the other people a 22-week ban will hurt .
You know ― those “ sluts ” who got an abortion at 25 weeks because they didn ’ t have the money at 12 weeks .
Or because their husband beats them .
Or because they lost their job .
Or because they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drugs and drank .
Most of us would prefer to heal in private .
The only reason we open our veins for you is in the event it changes your mind in the voting booth .
If eating our pain lets you rationalize giving all pregnant people bodily autonomy , most of us reckon it a fair trade .
But make no mistake about what is going on here : The public appetite for our grief and pain is obscene and we feed it in exchange for our rights .

Abortion rights supporters celebrate in front of the U.S. Supreme Court after the court, in a 5-3 ruling, struck down a Texas abortion access law in June 2016. Joel Carillet via Getty Images
I used to think about killing myself.
When I was pregnant with my youngest child in late 2018 and early 2019, I would drop my older children off at school, drive home, and sit in the car for an hour before I could get up and go inside the house. I used that time to think about how I could do it: Car accident. Medication. A knife. I saw a therapist every week.
I feel like I am dead, I would think. I feel dead all the time. “I am mostly fine,” I would say. “A little sad.”
Advertisement
I didn’t particularly want to die. I simply thought it might be preferable to living if I needed another third-trimester abortion and couldn’t get it. The dread of that possibility, stoked by President Trump’s constant fearmongering on abortion, consumed more hours of my pregnancy than I like to remember. I was afraid someone would murder the one doctor in the country I knew would help me. I was afraid the law would change. I was afraid the clinic would be bombed. I carried these anxieties on top of the emotional weight of a new pregnancy after the one before it had ended in ashes. In the end, the baby (now a toddler) and I were both fine.
But in October 2017, I was 28 weeks pregnant. It was a boy. He would have been our third child. A team of specialists told us if he was born, he would either die or be severely brain-damaged. There was one man they trusted to help us end the pregnancy safely if that was what we wanted. He lived in Colorado. We went, we came back, we carried on. I became part of the community of people who have traveled to end their pregnancies in a small clinic in Boulder, Colorado.
The Boulder Abortion Clinic has withstood terrorism, vandalism, lawsuits, shootings, and garden-variety harassment for nearly 40 years. It is one of a mere handful of facilities in the country where a third-trimester abortion can be performed safely and legally. It is the only one obstetricians routinely know about and the only one to show up reliably near the top of a Google search for “third-trimester abortion.”
The clinic is owned and operated by Dr. Warren Hern, who, in those 40 years, has seen multiple colleagues gunned down and their homes burned to the ground. His clinic is the end of the line for many who walk through its doors: a last chance at choosing how the worst day of your life is going to play out.
Advertisement
This June, an extremist anti-choice group called Due Date Too Late gained enough signatures to get Initiative 120 on the ballot. Now, on Nov. 3, 2020, Colorado will vote on whether to ban all abortions after 22 weeks. If passed, it is veto-proof. The Boulder Abortion Clinic will close. And the good Catholic citizens of Colorado and others who voted for this initiative will sleep well at night, having kept the evil baby-killers at bay.
“The Boulder Abortion Clinic has withstood terrorism, vandalism, lawsuits, shootings, and garden-variety harassment for nearly 40 years. It is one of a mere handful of facilities in the country where a third-trimester abortion can be performed safely and legally.”
I spoke to six women, who, like me, traveled to Boulder, Colorado, for an abortion after 22 weeks. Because Dr. Hern specializes in later abortions when something has gone terribly wrong with a pregnancy, the rough contours of our stories are the same: the troubling finding during a routine ultrasound. The follow-up ultrasound, followed by an MRI. The team of specialists in a too-small room. And then, a doctor who mentions Colorado as a final option.
While I have removed specifics to protect their identities, the women I spoke with are Black, white, Asian, Christian, Quaker and atheist. I am Jewish. This is what we want you to know about what it would mean for Colorado to ban later abortions.
Taylor, who has elected to use a pseudonym out of fear for her job and the safety of her children, had had five miscarriages before her “miracle baby” was diagnosed with “Trisomy 5q, a hole in her heart, and a cleft foot” at 22 weeks. Two months ago, she learned her home state of Texas would not allow her to end the pregnancy, so she began “researching ways to force a miscarriage” before finding out about the Boulder Abortion Clinic. “I could have truly hurt myself,” she told me. “I was desperate [...] I was considering hurting myself.” After traveling to Colorado for her abortion at 23 weeks, she says her “heart still hurts but they helped me move forward.” She wants you to know that her abortion was done out of “love, not selfishness.”
Advertisement
In 2012, Kate Carson discovered the 35-week fetus she was carrying had such severe brain damage that, if born, her baby would not even be able “to sleep comfortably” or to swallow. But she could not get a clear answer on how much medical intervention would take place after her baby, Laurel, was born. Desperate to avoid forcing Laurel to suffer painful, fruitless interventions, Carson started to make plans to deliver her “off the grid.” That such a delivery would likely have either killed Carson or severely harmed her seemed irrelevant. When she was referred to the clinic in Colorado, Carson first thought she had been sent to an illegal, back-alley provider. She assumed she would at best lose her fertility and at worst, her life. She got on a plane to Denver two days later anyway.
Kathryn K. was 32 weeks pregnant when she sat in a room with “six doctors and medical professionals” at Denver Children’s Hospital. Kathryn told me, “My baby’s brain was only about one-third to half there and the surface was extremely smooth — indicating that her ridging was very, very tiny and that she would suffer up to 100 seizures per day [...] she likely wouldn’t be able to breathe on her own or swallow [...] at some point after the birth, we would not be able to refuse life-saving measures for her. We were told we could hope that nature would take its course during delivery and not monitor her. We were told that the delivery could become very difficult for me and could potentially endanger my own well-being.”
The team referred Kathryn to Dr. Hern, who first reviewed her file with the doctors in Denver and then performed his own ultrasound and exam before euthanizing the fetus and inducing labor at 34 weeks. If Colorado had not been an option, neither Kathryn nor her team knew of any other provider that would have seen her. She wants you to know that she is “disgusted” by the ballot initiative.
Erika Christensen has widely shared the story of her 2016 abortion, at 32 weeks, at the Boulder Abortion Clinic. In the years since, she has become a national advocate for abortion rights and compiled an open letter with many of our names and stories.
She wants you to know: “This is personal for me. Nobody should have to travel to get an abortion, but I was able to go to Colorado to get compassionate care when I needed it. I have friends who did as well, each with a unique story. I think people in Colorado will realize they don’t want to make such a big, life-changing decision for someone they don’t know, which is what this measure is asking them to do. People across the country are in the streets right now demanding less criminalization for individual behaviors that are logical results of our cruel, inequitable systems. That conversation has to include pregnancy outcomes, including abortion.”
Advertisement
“If Colorado passes this law, I do not know what future women like us will do.”
Just over three months ago, Robin, who is also using a pseudonym to protect her job and family, was 34 weeks pregnant when her fetus suffered a severe stroke in utero. Two weeks later, her parents drove her and her husband to the airport to travel to Colorado. At the clinic, she “talked with the doctor and counselor for hours.” Robin remembers thinking, the longer I talk, the longer she gets to live. Robin sang lullabies and held her rosary during the procedure. If Colorado had not been an option, Robin told me, “I would have had a C-section. The doctors would have tried to stabilize her and she would have had an MRI. There was no surgery or medicine that could fix her or save her. If she didn’t die at birth, I would have held her in my arms as she died.” She wants you to know that she is scared of what will happen if she needs an abortion in a future pregnancy and cannot access one.
Margot Finn was 29 weeks pregnant when she traveled to Colorado after finding that her fetus had lissencephaly, an incurable brain disorder. Finn has shared her story widely and written about our community and support groups. She wants you to know that she hopes anyone “who votes for an abortion ban that would prevent families like mine from accessing safe and legal medical care at the hands of willing providers has to suffer as my baby would have: clenched by seizures, choking on her own saliva, and laboring to breathe through chronic pneumonia while her parents watched her die. If that doesn’t seem like an appropriate fate to wish on someone, perhaps lawmakers shouldn’t leave families like mine with no other options.”
At this moment, no reliable studies exist that examine the emotional response to abortion among those who end a wanted pregnancy, as we are a relatively small subgroup of those who seek later abortion. Anecdotally, however, after over four years of speaking to others who have been through the same experience, I have learned that my thoughts of suicide and self-harm when I did not know if I would be able to access an abortion are not rare. They are also distinct from the intense grief most of us feel. Rather, they represent a desperate response to the lack of control pregnant women have over their own bodies in what is supposedly a civilized country. If Colorado passes this law, I do not know what future women like us will do.
Advertisement
Because a dying or severely disabled fetus exists within the set of reasons America has deemed marginally morally licit for later abortion, you will be inclined to sympathize with us more than with the other people a 22-week ban will hurt. You know ― those “sluts” who got an abortion at 25 weeks because they didn’t have the money at 12 weeks. Or because their husband beats them. Or because they lost their job. Or because they were homeless. Or because they took drugs and drank.
Since we are the “sympathetic” cases, I need you to listen to me, now. We are no better or worse than those others. The reasons for our abortions are not your fucking business. If that makes you uncomfortable, we understand — we have wrestled with these choices more than you will ever know.
Most of us would prefer to heal in private. The only reason we open our veins for you is in the event it changes your mind in the voting booth. If eating our pain lets you rationalize giving all pregnant people bodily autonomy, most of us reckon it a fair trade. But make no mistake about what is going on here: The public appetite for our grief and pain is obscene and we feed it in exchange for our rights.
When I was a child, a coyote got stuck in a trap near our house outside Los Angeles. It chewed its leg off. Then it got stuck in another trap. Then it died. That is what this country — and this legislation — does to those who need an abortion.
Abortion is liberty — even when it makes you uncomfortable. That is all you need to know.
Now, will you fight with us?
T. S. Mendola is a writer and editor living in Philadelphia. She has published in The Rumpus, the Los Angeles Review of Books, Lilith, and Rewire.News, among others. Her work has won Best of the Net, a Best American Essays notable, and has been nominated for a Pushcart. Find her on Twitter @tsmendola or at tsmendola.com.
Advertisement
Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch!


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--FCC Approves Shorter '988' Suicide Prevention Hotline

The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday unanimously approved a shorter , three-digit version of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline ― 988 ― to make it easier for Americans to seek help for themselves or a loved one .
Under the new rule , phone service providers will have until July 2022 to activate the new number , which , when dialed , will directly connect the caller to the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline , a national network of crisis centers .
“ Establishing the easy-to-remember 988 as the ‘ 911 ’ for suicide prevention and mental health services will make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ access the help they need , ” FCC chair Ajit Pai said in a statement .
“ Additionally , this achievement , and all the efforts to publicize 988 in the time to come , will reduce the stigma in our society surrounding suicide and mental illness.
” Although people can contact the crisis centers through a 24/7 online chat system , the new phone number will not work for text messages , a limitation that FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel raised in a statement Thursday .
“ In light of the skyrocketing rates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ young people , I think this agency should have been more ambitious , ” she said .
“ As we confront the rise in suicide by teenagers across the country , we should acknowledge that texting is their primary form of communication .
Voice service has its benefits , but it is not native for most young people .
So I regret today ’ s decision is anchored in older technologies and takes a pass on developing texting capabilities with this three-digit hotline .
We should have done so here .
I sincerely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future.
” Currently , there are other text-based resources , including the nonprofit Crisis Text Line and the Veterans Crisis Line , run by the Department of Veterans Affairs .
The issue has taken on added urgency because of the COVID-19 pandemic .
Over the last few months , suicide prevention centers around the country have reported a surge in calls , and mental health experts have warned that the prolonged isolation and stress brought on by the pandemic could have grave effects .
If you or someone you know needs help , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lifeline .
You can also text HOME to 741-741 for free , 24-hour support from the Crisis Text Line .
Outside of the U.S. , please visit the International Association for Suicide Prevention for a database of resources .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday unanimously approved a shorter, three-digit version of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline ― 988 ― to make it easier for Americans to seek help for themselves or a loved one.
Under the new rule, phone service providers will have until July 2022 to activate the new number, which, when dialed, will directly connect the caller to the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline, a national network of crisis centers.
Advertisement
“Establishing the easy-to-remember 988 as the ‘911’ for suicide prevention and mental health services will make it easier for Americans in crisis to access the help they need,” FCC chair Ajit Pai said in a statement. “Additionally, this achievement, and all the efforts to publicize 988 in the time to come, will reduce the stigma in our society surrounding suicide and mental illness.”
The current number, 1-800-273-8255 (1-800-273-TALK), will remain in effect.
Although people can contact the crisis centers through a 24/7 online chat system, the new phone number will not work for text messages, a limitation that FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel raised in a statement Thursday.
“In light of the skyrocketing rates of suicide among our nation’s young people, I think this agency should have been more ambitious,” she said. “As we confront the rise in suicide by teenagers across the country, we should acknowledge that texting is their primary form of communication. Voice service has its benefits, but it is not native for most young people. So I regret today’s decision is anchored in older technologies and takes a pass on developing texting capabilities with this three-digit hotline. We should have done so here. I sincerely hope we can do so in the future.”
A text message option would also help people who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Currently, there are other text-based resources, including the nonprofit Crisis Text Line and the Veterans Crisis Line, run by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Advertisement
The issue has taken on added urgency because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the last few months, suicide prevention centers around the country have reported a surge in calls, and mental health experts have warned that the prolonged isolation and stress brought on by the pandemic could have grave effects.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Trump Gets Testy When Chris Wallace Fact-Checks Him About Joe Biden

It all started when Wallace asked Trump about what he ’ s going to do about the deaths and shootings that seem to be going on .
Trump placed blame on “ Democrat-run cities ” that are “ stupidly run ” and then claimed it ’ s “ because they want to defund the police — and Biden wants to defund the police.
” Biden has repeatedly said he opposes defunding police , and Wallace interrupted the president to make that point .
Trump rolled his eyes in shock that he was being questioned before trying to make his case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ says nothing about defunding the police , ” and Trump got testy .
“ Oh , really ?
It says abolish .
It says — let ’ s go .
Get me the charter , please , ” Trump said , interrupting the interview .
In the video below , Wallace tells Fox News host Bill Hemmer that the president then combed over highlights from the Biden-Sander charter .
“ He found a lot of things that he objected to that Biden agreed to , but he couldn ’ t find any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any ― that Joe Biden has sought to defund and abolish the police , ” Wallace said .
The complete interview airs Sunday , and Wallace , possibly sensing that Fox News viewers might not enjoy watching Trump being caught in a lie , threw some red meat their way .
He promised that the president “ takes some shots at Joe Biden I ’ ve never heard before ” during the interview .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
In fact, as a preview video shows, the president got downright testy.
It all started when Wallace asked Trump about what he’s going to do about the deaths and shootings that seem to be going on.
Advertisement
Trump placed blame on “Democrat-run cities” that are “stupidly run” and then claimed it’s “because they want to defund the police — and Biden wants to defund the police.”
Biden has repeatedly said he opposes defunding police, and Wallace interrupted the president to make that point.
“Sir, he does not,” the Fox News host said.
Trump rolled his eyes in shock that he was being questioned before trying to make his case.
“Look, he signed a charter with Bernie Sanders,” Trump said.
Wallace pointed out that the document “says nothing about defunding the police,” and Trump got testy.
“Oh, really? It says abolish. It says — let’s go. Get me the charter, please,” Trump said, interrupting the interview.
Advertisement
In the video below, Wallace tells Fox News host Bill Hemmer that the president then combed over highlights from the Biden-Sander charter.
“He found a lot of things that he objected to that Biden agreed to, but he couldn’t find any indication ― because there isn’t any ― that Joe Biden has sought to defund and abolish the police,” Wallace said.
The complete interview airs Sunday, and Wallace, possibly sensing that Fox News viewers might not enjoy watching Trump being caught in a lie, threw some red meat their way.
He promised that the president “takes some shots at Joe Biden I’ve never heard before” during the interview.
Fox's Chris Wallace fact checks Trump and tells Trump that he's wrong to claim that Biden wants to defund the police. pic.twitter.com/arNNZb8K01 — Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) July 17, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Says She Is Receiving Chemotherapy

On May 19 , I began a course of chemotherapy ( gemcitabine ) to treat a recurrence of cancer .
@ @ @ @ @ followed by a biopsy revealed lesions on my liver .
My recent hospitalizations to remove @ @ @ @ @ infection were unrelated to this recurrence .
Immunotherapy first essayed proved unsuccessful .
The chemotherapy @ @ @ @ @ yielding positive results .
Satisfied that my treatment course is now clear , I am @ @ @ @ @ most recent scan on July 7 indicated significant reduction of the liver lesions and no @ @ @ @ @ tolerating chemotherapy well and am encouraged by the success of my current treatment .
I @ @ @ @ @ keep my cancer at bay , and am able to maintain an active daily routine @ @ @ @ @ kept up with opinion writing and all other Court work .
I have often said @ @ @ @ @ of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam .
I @ @ @ @ @ that .

On May 19, I began a course of chemotherapy (gemcitabine) to treat a recurrence of cancer. A periodic scan in February followed by a biopsy revealed lesions on my liver. My recent hospitalizations to remove gall stones and treat an infection were unrelated to this recurrence.
Immunotherapy first essayed proved unsuccessful. The chemotherapy course, however, is yielding positive results. Satisfied that my treatment course is now clear, I am providing this information.
My most recent scan on July 7 indicated significant reduction of the liver lesions and no new disease. I am tolerating chemotherapy well and am encouraged by the success of my current treatment. I will continue bi-weekly chemotherapy to keep my cancer at bay, and am able to maintain an active daily routine. Throughout, I have kept up with opinion writing and all other Court work.
I have often said I would remain a member of the Court as long as I can do the job full steam. I remain fully able to do that.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Twitter Users Think Biden Should Use Nikki Haley's Tweet As A Campaign Ad

Nikki Haley attempted to scare voters away from Joe Biden , but her efforts made some people wonder if she was actually working for the Democrats .
The former Republican governor of South Carolina tweeted a link to an Axios story about the influence that Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-Mass . )
will have on Biden ’ s campaign .
“ If Biden wins in November , it ’ s clear that Warren will significantly shape his approach — on domestic policy in particular — whether or not her name ’ s on the ticket.
” If Biden wins in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will significantly shape his approach — on domestic policy in particular — whether or not her name 's on the ticket.https : //t.co/odrqI0eIAJ — Nikki Haley ( @ NikkiHaley ) July 17 , 2020 The tweet was intended to sway potential undecided voters toward President Donald Trump , but it ignored the fact that many Democratic voters actually want Biden to embrace more progressive policies .
As a result , many Twitter users thought Haley ’ s tweet actually made a good case for a Biden presidency .
Good !
Warren 's anti-corruption @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like best about her .
https : //t.co/WsmDuwQLoI — Cheri Jacobus ( @ CheriJacobus ) July 17 , 2020 You mean that she might actually have some kind of a `` plan '' to combat a global pandemic and prop up a dying economy ?
Ewwwwww shudder at the thought !
https : //t.co/crKLiuuWD2 — Jason Bailey ( @ jasondashbailey ) July 17 , 2020 With Biden at the top of the ticket , this sort of messaging is much less likely to push American voters away from him than it is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
https : //t.co/GcRPWtLtz6 — ( ( ( Yair Rosenberg ) ) ) ( @ Yair_Rosenberg ) July 17 , 2020 its like you guys are trying to convince skeptical people on the left .
people are like `` im worried biden will be too centrist '' and these guys are going with `` he 's going to enact all the stuff your favorite progressives want ! ''
https : //t.co/9RRfGTLlPE — Oliver Willis ( @ owillis ) July 17 , 2020 Some wondered if Haley was actually endorsing Biden .
I mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy seems to be `` let em all die let 's eat beans '' so ... https : //t.co/qWbZ3SeFQb — Curtis er død allerede 🏳🌈✡🥪 ( @ cebsilver ) July 17 , 2020 This is the third time in a week that a Republican has tweeted something intended to be anti-Democrat only to get the opposite reaction .
On Thursday , Steve Guest , the Republican Party ’ s rapid response director , was brutally mocked on Twitter after he tried to link Warren to voter fraud for joking that her dog , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” in November .
On Monday , Guest attempted to tie Biden to Washington ’ s controversial NFL team by posting an old photo of him at a game .
Problem was , Guest used an adorable photo of the former vice president with one of his sons and only ended up making Biden look like a doting dad .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Nikki Haley attempted to scare voters away from Joe Biden, but her efforts made some people wonder if she was actually working for the Democrats.
The former Republican governor of South Carolina tweeted a link to an Axios story about the influence that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) will have on Biden’s campaign.
Advertisement
“If Biden wins in November, it’s clear that Warren will significantly shape his approach — on domestic policy in particular — whether or not her name’s on the ticket.”
If Biden wins in November, it's clear that Warren will significantly shape his approach — on domestic policy in particular — whether or not her name's on the ticket.https://t.co/odrqI0eIAJ — Nikki Haley (@NikkiHaley) July 17, 2020
The tweet was intended to sway potential undecided voters toward President Donald Trump, but it ignored the fact that many Democratic voters actually want Biden to embrace more progressive policies.
As a result, many Twitter users thought Haley’s tweet actually made a good case for a Biden presidency.
Advertisement
Good! Warren's anti-corruption agenda is strong and is what I like best about her. https://t.co/WsmDuwQLoI — Cheri Jacobus (@CheriJacobus) July 17, 2020
You mean that she might actually have some kind of a "plan" to combat a global pandemic and prop up a dying economy? Ewwwwww shudder at the thought! https://t.co/crKLiuuWD2 — Jason Bailey (@jasondashbailey) July 17, 2020
With Biden at the top of the ticket, this sort of messaging is much less likely to push American voters away from him than it is to unite more skeptical Democratic voters behind him. https://t.co/GcRPWtLtz6 — (((Yair Rosenberg))) (@Yair_Rosenberg) July 17, 2020
its like you guys are trying to convince skeptical people on the left. people are like "im worried biden will be too centrist" and these guys are going with "he's going to enact all the stuff your favorite progressives want!" https://t.co/9RRfGTLlPE — Oliver Willis (@owillis) July 17, 2020
Some wondered if Haley was actually endorsing Biden.
Are you campaigning for him? Bc this is very helpful https://t.co/PXL8iyQk7U — Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) July 17, 2020
Advertisement
Best campaign ad I've seen for Biden in a minute https://t.co/rJB4R8EYkb — At the Mountains of Mattness (@drmattdambrosio) July 17, 2020
I mean, good? Right now our domestic policy seems to be "let em all die let's eat beans" so... https://t.co/qWbZ3SeFQb — Curtis er død allerede 🏳🌈✡🥪 (@cebsilver) July 17, 2020
This is the third time in a week that a Republican has tweeted something intended to be anti-Democrat only to get the opposite reaction.
On Thursday, Steve Guest, the Republican Party’s rapid response director, was brutally mocked on Twitter after he tried to link Warren to voter fraud for joking that her dog, Bailey, would be “voting Democrat” in November.
On Monday, Guest attempted to tie Biden to Washington’s controversial NFL team by posting an old photo of him at a game.
Advertisement
Problem was, Guest used an adorable photo of the former vice president with one of his sons and only ended up making Biden look like a doting dad.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Police Union Boss Won’t Talk About That QAnon Mug He Keeps Putting On TV

Fox News Ed Mullins , president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association , appears Thursday on Fox News with a black `` QAnon '' coffee mug behind him .
The head of one of New York City ’ s largest police unions appeared on Fox News twice this week with a “ QAnon ” coffee mug but claims to have no knowledge of the extremist cult .
Ed Mullins , president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association , was invited on Fox News on Monday and Friday to discuss crime in New York City .
During both appearances , Mullins could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , sitting on what looks like a printer or scanner behind him , is a black coffee mug bearing a giant red-white-and-blue “ Q.
” The mug is also inscribed with the word “ QAnon , ” as well as the letters “ WWG1WGA , ” an acronym for “ Where We Go One , We Go All , ” the signature slogan of QAnon , a far-right conspiracy movement .
Reached by phone after his Fox News appearance Friday afternoon , Mullins claimed neither the mug nor the office belonged to him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no idea ” what QAnon was .
Mullins said the office “ wasn ’ t even in New York ” but wouldn ’ t tell HuffPost where it was or to whom it belonged .
He also wouldn ’ t say whether the office belongs to the Sergeants Benevolent Association .
“ You see the red-white-and-blue flag behind me ?
” he said .
“ Why don ’ t you talk about that ?
” Mullins is just the latest prominent political figures to have been tied to QAnon , a conspiracy theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fantastical allegations — that Democratic officials are secretly operating a worldwide pedophilia ring .
And a report from the liberal watchdog group Media Matters found that there are more than 50 Republican candidates for public office who have either “ endorsed or given credence ” to QAnon .
At least 11 of those candidates will appear on ballots in November .
QAnon is , put simply , an ever-mutating cluster of baseless conspiracy theories .
Its foundational belief is that a high-ranking government official known only as “ Q ” has been using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transmit clues about nefarious elites and so-called deep state bad actors who are waging a secret spiritual war against President Donald Trump .
QAnon conspiracy theorists hold on to the authoritarian fantasy that one day soon Trump will use the military to arrest , imprison and possibly execute his political opponents .
The FBI considers the ever-growing QAnon movement — whose adherents have been implicated in multiple crimes — to be a potential domestic terrorism threat .
Media consultant Timothy Burke first spotted the QAnon coffee mug behind Mullins on Fox News on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Twitter .

Ed Mullins, president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association, appears Thursday on Fox News with a black "QAnon" coffee mug behind him. Fox News
The head of one of New York City’s largest police unions appeared on Fox News twice this week with a “QAnon” coffee mug but claims to have no knowledge of the extremist cult.
Ed Mullins, president of the Sergeants Benevolent Association, was invited on Fox News on Monday and Friday to discuss crime in New York City. During both appearances, Mullins could be seen speaking from the same office where, sitting on what looks like a printer or scanner behind him, is a black coffee mug bearing a giant red-white-and-blue “Q.”
Advertisement
The mug is also inscribed with the word “QAnon,” as well as the letters “WWG1WGA,” an acronym for “Where We Go One, We Go All,” the signature slogan of QAnon, a far-right conspiracy movement.
A closer look at the QAnon coffee mug behind Sergeants Benevolent Association President Ed Mullins. Fox News
Reached by phone after his Fox News appearance Friday afternoon, Mullins claimed neither the mug nor the office belonged to him. He also claimed to have “no idea” what QAnon was.
Mullins said the office “wasn’t even in New York” but wouldn’t tell HuffPost where it was or to whom it belonged. He also wouldn’t say whether the office belongs to the Sergeants Benevolent Association.
Advertisement
“You see the red-white-and-blue flag behind me?” he said. “Why don’t you talk about that?”
“This is ridiculous,” he added before hanging up.
Mullins is just the latest prominent political figures to have been tied to QAnon, a conspiracy theory that falsely claims — among many other fantastical allegations — that Democratic officials are secretly operating a worldwide pedophilia ring.
President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn recently posted a video in which he uses QAnon phrases and slogans.
And a report from the liberal watchdog group Media Matters found that there are more than 50 Republican candidates for public office who have either “endorsed or given credence” to QAnon. At least 11 of those candidates will appear on ballots in November.
(The Sergeants Benevolent Association, incidentally, has previously promoted articles from the far-right police news website Law Enforcement Today, which has endorsed a QAnon-supporting congressional candidate.)
As HuffPost’s Luke O’Brien recently explained:
QAnon is, put simply, an ever-mutating cluster of baseless conspiracy theories. Its foundational belief is that a high-ranking government official known only as “Q” has been using cryptic posts on internet message boards to transmit clues about nefarious elites and so-called deep state bad actors who are waging a secret spiritual war against President Donald Trump.
QAnon conspiracy theorists hold on to the authoritarian fantasy that one day soon Trump will use the military to arrest, imprison and possibly execute his political opponents.
The FBI considers the ever-growing QAnon movement — whose adherents have been implicated in multiple crimes — to be a potential domestic terrorism threat.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--When Trump Feels Threatened, White Supremacy Is His Only Weapon

Tom Brenner / Reuters Whether it 's the gassing of anti-racist protesters to make way for a photo-op or an ad calling for the execution of innocent Black teens , Donald Trump 's M.O .
has always been to use racism and fearmongering as a distraction .
But when his future looks bleak , Trump has one ace up his sleeve that he ’ s always used : his whiteness .
He ’ s never been afraid to weaponize his status as a white man , and for his fervent supporters , the ploy works .
Studies suggest that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mostly white supporters , that fueled Trump ’ s victory in 2016 .
To his supporters , Trump ’ s racism has been a feature , not a flaw .
And now , as the U.S. is set to surpass 140,000 coronavirus deaths , and more than a million laid-off workers are filing for unemployment benefits each week , Trump is prioritizing white grievance politics over virtually all other issues , including the spread of a deadly disease .
Few moments pass without the president and his administration amplifying supposed white grief and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nothing new .
Using racism and fearmongering as a distraction has been Trump ’ s modus operandi his entire career .
In 1989 , the same year Trump ’ s businesses recorded over $ 90 million in losses , he published an advertisement calling for five Black teens to be executed for a crime they didn ’ t commit , capping off a decade of poor investments that The New York Times said “ nearly led him to ruin.
” Trump ’ s smearing of the five men now known as the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims are guilty ) was a harbinger of things to come .
Whenever Trump is hemorrhaging credibility , he relies on racism and fear to replenish it .
His latest lashing out puts his base and his conservative peers in an awkward , even deadly , position .
They ’ re forced to decide whether to defend a demonstrable racist when he gasses anti-racist protesters outside a church to make way for a photo-op .
He forces them to ask whether to rely on health advice from game show host Chuck Woolery over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
( Woolery himself publicly recanted after his son was diagnosed with COVID-19 . )
His demand is , effectively , the same as it has always been : for his supporters to join him in unabashed white supremacy and conspiracy theories , through whichever catastrophe they encounter .
Anyone who deviates from his narrative is thrown directly under the bus .
What remains of Trump ’ s public-facing reelection campaign is an outwardly racist ― and loyal ― gripe machine .
His senior adviser Stephen Miller , whose white nationalist views have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ extremist file ” on the Southern Poverty Law Center website .
His latest press secretary , Kayleigh McEnany , attacks the press and defends his every racist move , even calling the coronavirus the “ kung flu.
” Donald Trump is a racist white man .
He has always had that going for him , especially during the times he hasn ’ t had much else .
And with little to hang his hat on as the country reels from multiple crises , Trump ’ s reelection campaign depends on millions of @ @ @ @ @

Whether it's the gassing of anti-racist protesters to make way for a photo-op or an ad calling for the execution of innocent Black teens, Donald Trump's M.O. has always been to use racism and fearmongering as a distraction. Tom Brenner / Reuters
But when his future looks bleak, Trump has one ace up his sleeve that he’s always used: his whiteness. He’s never been afraid to weaponize his status as a white man, and for his fervent supporters, the ploy works. Studies suggest that it was racial resentment, fostered by his mostly white supporters, that fueled Trump’s victory in 2016.
Advertisement
To his supporters, Trump’s racism has been a feature, not a flaw. And now, as the U.S. is set to surpass 140,000 coronavirus deaths, and more than a million laid-off workers are filing for unemployment benefits each week, Trump is prioritizing white grievance politics over virtually all other issues, including the spread of a deadly disease.
“What remains of Trump’s public-facing reelection campaign is an outwardly racist ― and loyal ― gripe machine.”
Advertisement
Few moments pass without the president and his administration amplifying supposed white grief and downplaying everything else. The tactic is nothing new. Using racism and fearmongering as a distraction has been Trump’s modus operandi his entire career. In 1989, the same year Trump’s businesses recorded over $90 million in losses, he published an advertisement calling for five Black teens to be executed for a crime they didn’t commit, capping off a decade of poor investments that The New York Times said “nearly led him to ruin.”
Trump’s smearing of the five men now known as the “Exonerated Five” (who he still claims are guilty) was a harbinger of things to come. Whenever Trump is hemorrhaging credibility, he relies on racism and fear to replenish it.
His latest lashing out puts his base and his conservative peers in an awkward, even deadly, position. They’re forced to decide whether to defend a demonstrable racist when he gasses anti-racist protesters outside a church to make way for a photo-op. He forces them to ask whether to rely on health advice from game show host Chuck Woolery over that of virologists during a deadly pandemic. (Woolery himself publicly recanted after his son was diagnosed with COVID-19.) His demand is, effectively, the same as it has always been: for his supporters to join him in unabashed white supremacy and conspiracy theories, through whichever catastrophe they encounter. Anyone who deviates from his narrative is thrown directly under the bus.
Donald Trump is a racist white man. He has always had that going for him, especially during the times he hasn’t had much else. And with little to hang his hat on as the country reels from multiple crises, Trump’s reelection campaign depends on millions of white Americans feeling similarly.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Pentagon Bans Confederate Flag Using Veiled Speech To Avoid Angering Trump

WASHINGTON ( AP ) — After weeks of wrangling , the Pentagon is banning displays of the Confederate flag on military installations , in a carefully worded policy that doesn ’ t mention the word ban or that specific flag .
The policy , laid out in a memo released Friday , was described by officials as a creative way to bar the flag ’ s display without openly contradicting or angering President Donald Trump , who has defended people ’ s rights to display it .
Signed by Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Thursday night , the memo lists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ displayed at military installations .
The Confederate flag is not among them — thus barring its display without singling it out in a “ ban.
” Details of the policy were first reported by the AP .
“ We must always remain focused on what unifies us , our sworn oath to the Constitution and our shared duty to defend the nation , ” Esper ’ s memo states .
“ The flags we fly must accord with the military imperatives of good order and discipline , treating all our people with dignity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Confederate flags , monuments and military base names have become a national flashpoint in the weeks since the death of George Floyd .
Protesters decrying racism have targeted Confederate monuments in multiple cities .
Some state officials are considering taking them down , but they face vehement opposition in some areas .
According to a Defense Department official familiar with the matter , the decision not to name a specific prohibited flag was to ensure the policy would be apolitical and could withstand potential legal challenges based on free speech .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the new policy .
According to Esper ’ s memo , the display of unauthorized flags — such as the Confederate banner carried during the Civil War — is acceptable in museums , historical exhibits , works of art or other educational programs .
The Marine Corps has already banned the Confederate flag .
Gen. David Berger , the commandant of the Marine Corps , directed his commanders in early June to remove public displays of the Confederate battle flag .
That flag , which some embrace as a symbol of heritage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feelings of division ” and can weaken the unit cohesion that combat requires , Berger said .
The other three military services were all moving to enact similar bans , but they paused when Esper made it known he wanted a consistent policy across the whole department .
Now they will instead issue this new policy to their troops and employees .
An early draft of the Defense Department plan banned display of the Confederate flag , saying the prohibition would preserve “ the morale of our personnel , good order and discipline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” That version was shelved , and officials have been struggling since then to come up with a policy that would have the same effect but not create political havoc .
Esper discussed the matter with senior leaders during a meeting Wednesday , including some of the legal issues surrounding a variety of bans , which some officials believe could be challenged in court .
The final version is a compromise that enables Esper to enact a ban that passes legal muster and gives military leaders what they want , but doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to the official , the new policy doesn ’ t undo the bans already in place , and service chiefs and secretaries will still be able to enact additional more stringent policies restricting symbols they believe are divisive and harmful to unit cohesion .
The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss decisions not yet made public .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
WASHINGTON (AP) — After weeks of wrangling, the Pentagon is banning displays of the Confederate flag on military installations, in a carefully worded policy that doesn’t mention the word ban or that specific flag. The policy, laid out in a memo released Friday, was described by officials as a creative way to bar the flag’s display without openly contradicting or angering President Donald Trump, who has defended people’s rights to display it.
Signed by Defense Secretary Mark Esper on Thursday night, the memo lists the types of flags that may be displayed at military installations. The Confederate flag is not among them — thus barring its display without singling it out in a “ban.” Details of the policy were first reported by the AP.
Advertisement
“We must always remain focused on what unifies us, our sworn oath to the Constitution and our shared duty to defend the nation,” Esper’s memo states. “The flags we fly must accord with the military imperatives of good order and discipline, treating all our people with dignity and respect, and rejecting divisive symbols.”
Acceptable flags listed in the memo include the U.S. and state banners, flags of other allies and partners, the widely displayed POW/MIA flag and official military unit flags.
Confederate flags, monuments and military base names have become a national flashpoint in the weeks since the death of George Floyd. Protesters decrying racism have targeted Confederate monuments in multiple cities. Some state officials are considering taking them down, but they face vehement opposition in some areas.
According to a Defense Department official familiar with the matter, the decision not to name a specific prohibited flag was to ensure the policy would be apolitical and could withstand potential legal challenges based on free speech. The official said the White House is aware of the new policy.
Advertisement
Trump has flatly rejected any notion of changing base names, and has defended the flying of the Confederate flag, saying it’s a freedom of speech issue.
According to Esper’s memo, the display of unauthorized flags — such as the Confederate banner carried during the Civil War — is acceptable in museums, historical exhibits, works of art or other educational programs.
The Marine Corps has already banned the Confederate flag. Gen. David Berger, the commandant of the Marine Corps, directed his commanders in early June to remove public displays of the Confederate battle flag. That flag, which some embrace as a symbol of heritage, “carries the power to inflame feelings of division” and can weaken the unit cohesion that combat requires, Berger said.
Military commands in South Korea and Japan quickly followed suit. The new policy does not affect or rescind those bans.
The other three military services were all moving to enact similar bans, but they paused when Esper made it known he wanted a consistent policy across the whole department. Now they will instead issue this new policy to their troops and employees.
Advertisement
Defense leaders have for weeks been tied in knots over the incendiary issue of banning the Confederate flag,
An early draft of the Defense Department plan banned display of the Confederate flag, saying the prohibition would preserve “the morale of our personnel, good order and discipline within the military ranks and unit cohesion.” That version was shelved, and officials have been struggling since then to come up with a policy that would have the same effect but not create political havoc.
Esper discussed the matter with senior leaders during a meeting Wednesday, including some of the legal issues surrounding a variety of bans, which some officials believe could be challenged in court.
The final version is a compromise that enables Esper to enact a ban that passes legal muster and gives military leaders what they want, but doesn’t infuriate the commander in chief.
According to the official, the new policy doesn’t undo the bans already in place, and service chiefs and secretaries will still be able to enact additional more stringent policies restricting symbols they believe are divisive and harmful to unit cohesion. The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss decisions not yet made public.
Advertisement
Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy told reporters on Thursday that he is still working on a policy that would remove all divisive symbols from Army installations.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Jamaal Bowman Unseats Rep. Eliot Engel In New York Primary

Jamaal Bowman ’ s victory is proof that New York ’ s multiracial progressive movement is ascending — and here to stay .
Sochie Nnaemeka , state director of the New York Working Families Party But Bowman sought to make the race about the veteran congressman ’ s lack of connection to the economically polarized 16th Congressional District , which is now home to more Black and Latino residents than white residents .
As a Black educator living in Yonkers and working in the heart of the Bronx , Bowman was exactly the kind of candidate who activists hoped could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who are often reluctant to abandon establishment politicians with whom they have existing relationships .
In his announcement video , which captured Bowman walking through the subway , he described his vision for a brighter future ― one with “ Medicare for All , ” tuition-free public college , a Green New Deal and racial equity ― from the vantage point of someone who grew up in poverty and remains on the front lines of the fight against it .
“ As educators , we work with children and families who suffer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homelessness , lack of health care , ” he said .
In recent years , Engel had amassed a relatively progressive domestic policy record , co-sponsoring Medicare for All legislation and the Green New Deal resolution .
But he staked his career on steering foreign , rather than domestic , policy .
His membership in the business-friendly New Democrat Coalition , which is opposed to Medicare for All , and his reliance on corporate PAC donations also raised skepticism about the urgency with which he was fighting for the left ’ s goals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it emerged in mid-May that he had spent the height of New York ’ s COVID-19 outbreak at his home in a Maryland suburb of Washington .
A mask-clad Bowman , by contrast , had stayed in the district , distributing food at pantries and joining a protest against the lack of personal protective equipment at a public hospital .
His activism in the latter effort helped secure him the endorsement of New York ’ s largest nurses union .
Bowman ’ s campaign really took off days later when Engel made one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incumbent member of Congress in recent history .
While attending a press conference in the Bronx focused on addressing theft and property damage around the peaceful Black Lives Matter demonstrations , a live TV broadcast captured Engel asking the emcee for a speaking slot .
“ If I didn ’ t have a primary , I wouldn ’ t care , ” Engel said by way of explanation .
Overnight , Bowman ’ s bid picked up momentum .
Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party began their independent spending efforts the day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s remarks to his absence from the district .
“ Engel only came back to win reelection , to help himself ― to save his job , not our lives , ” the narrator of one of the spots said .
For more than a week , the groups hammered Engel on the airwaves with no analogous ad blitz from him and his outside backers .
“ For decades , the establishment machine stymied progressive visionaries by saying , ‘ Wait your turn , that ’ s not realistic , ’ and then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like they did in the final weeks of this campaign , ” Rojas said in a statement .
“ But our movement , and the ideas Justice Democrats are championing in the streets and in Congress , match the scale of the crises we face , and it ’ s not easy to stop us anymore .
”

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Bronx middle school principal Jamaal Bowman ousted New York Rep. Eliot Engel in a June primary, landing a major win for the activist left and a stunning defeat for the Democratic establishment.
Due to the unprecedented volume of absentee ballots, local election authorities didn’t certify the result until some weeks after Election Day. Bowman had declared victory after the polls closed on June 23, having amassed a 25-percentage-point lead over Engel in in-person votes.
Advertisement
“I’m ready to get to work,” Bowman said Friday in a statement. “I cannot wait to get to Washington and cause problems for the people maintaining the status quo.”
Engel, the House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman, has represented parts of the Bronx and lower Westchester County since 1989. His defeat at the hands of a first-time candidate likely marks the end of a congressional career that began 32 years ago with his own successful primary challenge against a longtime incumbent.
“Engel’s lack of presence in his district was noticed by voters,” said Christina Greer, a Fordham University political science professor. “Even though he’s been an incumbent, his district wanted a change.”
Engel’s loss, which came despite the support of Democratic Party leaders, shows that the traditional incumbent advantages ― cash, name recognition and high-profile endorsements ― don’t inoculate party veterans against the challenge of a left insurgency.
Advertisement
That’s particularly true in New York City, which was also the site of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s landmark primary win in 2018. That Bowman, an unabashedly left-wing Black candidate, was able to prevail in a district that includes predominantly white, affluent suburbs is, in some ways, even more remarkable.
“It’s no longer enough to rest on being a Democrat,” Greer said. “You have to understand the ideological diversity of the party and obviously the racial and ethnic diversity of the party.”
Jamaal Bowman's presence in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic marked a sharp contrast with Rep. Eliot Engel, who weathered the early days of the outbreak in the Washington suburbs. Jeenah Moon/Getty Images
Rachel Pinotti, a librarian and resident of New Rochelle, framed her vote for Bowman, who is 44, in part as a rebuke of Engel’s lengthy tenure.
“Bowman has a good platform. He’s progressive,” she said. “And I just think people shouldn’t be allowed to be in Congress for more than 15 years.”
Advertisement
Greater awareness of racism following George Floyd’s death at the hands of Minneapolis police appears to have increased the appeal of Bowman’s candidacy as well. Bowman spoke personally about the impact of racist policing practices on his life, including a violent arrest he endured at age 11.
Daria Harris, a Black school administrator from Co-op City in the Bronx who voted for Bowman, mentioned that her son is just a year younger than Bowman was at the time of his traumatic run-in with cops.
“He can identify with police brutality as a Black man,” Harris said. “I know that he’s experienced it.”
“Jamaal Bowman’s victory is proof that New York’s multiracial progressive movement is ascending — and here to stay.” - Sochie Nnaemeka, state director of the New York Working Families Party
Bowman’s win is also the result of critical mistakes by Engel, 73, and a uniquely robust, cohesive left-wing effort to support Bowman. In particular, two groups ― the Working Families Party and Justice Democrats, the latter of which recruited Bowman ― invested heavily in his bid, jointly spending more than $1.3 million on an independent advertising, mail and phone-banking campaign.
Advertisement
Sochie Nnaemeka, the state director of the New York Working Families Party, said in a statement that the strength of Bowman’s bid, coming amid the Black Lives Matter protests that gripped New York City, showed that Ocasio-Cortez’s win was not the fluke that naysayers argued.
“Jamaal Bowman’s victory is proof that New York’s multiracial progressive movement is ascending — and here to stay,” she said.
Progressives across the country had seized on Bowman’s race as a potential silver lining in an otherwise disappointing election cycle. Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), the left’s preferred presidential candidates, both lost that primary race. And before Bowman’s win, progressives had succeeded in unseating just one incumbent congressional Democrat this cycle, Illinois Rep. Dan Lipinski. (Lipinski’s opposition to abortion rights and other conservative social views earned him the opposition of mainstream liberal groups as well.)
Engel had elicited particular disdain from the left for his hawkish foreign policy record. He voted for the Iraq War, opposed then-President Barack Obama’s nuclear nonproliferation deal with Iran and applauded President Donald Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
But Bowman sought to make the race about the veteran congressman’s lack of connection to the economically polarized 16th Congressional District, which is now home to more Black and Latino residents than white residents. As a Black educator living in Yonkers and working in the heart of the Bronx, Bowman was exactly the kind of candidate who activists hoped could gain traction among working-class voters of color, who are often reluctant to abandon establishment politicians with whom they have existing relationships.
Advertisement
In his announcement video, which captured Bowman walking through the subway, he described his vision for a brighter future ― one with “Medicare for All,” tuition-free public college, a Green New Deal and racial equity ― from the vantage point of someone who grew up in poverty and remains on the front lines of the fight against it. “As educators, we work with children and families who suffer from poverty, asthma from pollution, homelessness, lack of health care,” he said.
In recent years, Engel had amassed a relatively progressive domestic policy record, co-sponsoring Medicare for All legislation and the Green New Deal resolution. But he staked his career on steering foreign, rather than domestic, policy. His membership in the business-friendly New Democrat Coalition, which is opposed to Medicare for All, and his reliance on corporate PAC donations also raised skepticism about the urgency with which he was fighting for the left’s goals.
Referring to the kitchen-table issues on the minds of the 16th District’s many impoverished families, Bowman told HuffPost in April, “I don’t see Eliot Engel saying anything about these issues or leading from the front in any way.”
For months, Bowman toiled in relative national obscurity, knocking on doors and doing local media hits while Sanders, Warren and Texas House primary challenger Jessica Cisneros absorbed the lion’s share of progressive attention and resources. Even as the coronavirus pandemic deprived his campaign of the left’s bread and butter ― a grassroots door-knocking operation ― volunteers from allied groups like the Jewish Vote and the left-leaning Sunrise Movement helped Bowman’s team make what they estimate were 1.5 million phone calls to prospective voters.
Engel gave Bowman an opening when it emerged in mid-May that he had spent the height of New York’s COVID-19 outbreak at his home in a Maryland suburb of Washington. A mask-clad Bowman, by contrast, had stayed in the district, distributing food at pantries and joining a protest against the lack of personal protective equipment at a public hospital. His activism in the latter effort helped secure him the endorsement of New York’s largest nurses union.
Advertisement
Around the same time, Nnaemeka of the New York Working Families Party was engaged in the kind of behind-the-scenes politicking that is normally the bailiwick of the Democratic establishment. She helped negotiate the withdrawal of Andom Gebreghiorgis, a fellow educator competing with Bowman for progressive votes in the primary. Gebreghiorgis endorsed Bowman on June 1.
Rep. Eliot Engel's insistence that he "brings home the bacon" for an economically polarized district was not enough to secure a primary win. Samuel Corum/Getty Images
Bowman’s campaign really took off days later when Engel made one of the gravest errors committed by an incumbent member of Congress in recent history. While attending a press conference in the Bronx focused on addressing theft and property damage around the peaceful Black Lives Matter demonstrations, a live TV broadcast captured Engel asking the emcee for a speaking slot. “If I didn’t have a primary, I wouldn’t care,” Engel said by way of explanation.
Overnight, Bowman’s bid picked up momentum. Justice Democrats and the Working Families Party began their independent spending efforts the day after with TV ads tying Engel’s remarks to his absence from the district. “Engel only came back to win reelection, to help himself ― to save his job, not our lives,” the narrator of one of the spots said. For more than a week, the groups hammered Engel on the airwaves with no analogous ad blitz from him and his outside backers.
Bowman would go on to pick up the support of Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders. The blessing of the New York Times editorial board provided critical mainstream validation.
Advertisement
Soon he could point to evidence that his effort was picking up steam. A public poll that Bowman’s campaign commissioned showed him leading Engel by 10 percentage points in mid-June.
Engel put up a fight with his own series of big endorsements from Democratic Party leaders, including the Congressional Black Caucus PAC. The party’s 2016 presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton, made him her first endorsement of the cycle. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer also threw their weight behind Engel.
He argued that his seniority has helped him secure resources for the district, like money in the COVID-19 relief package for local safety-net hospitals. “I bring home the bacon, I bring home the money,” he said in a June debate.
Engel also benefited from the largesse of hawkish pro-Israel groups eager to protect an influential foreign-policy maker. The Democratic Majority for Israel PAC, which despite its name relied on cash from at least a few Republican mega-donors, spent over $1.5 million propping up Engel and tearing down Bowman.
In the end, the counter-offensive wasn’t enough to stop Bowman’s surge.
His victory is evidence that the nascent left’s ideas ― and increasingly sophisticated tactics ― are gaining traction, said Alexandra Rojas, the executive director of Justice Democrats. She noted that Bowman is the fourth candidate the group backed to unseat a Democratic incumbent. (In addition to Bowman, Ocasio-Cortez and Newman, Justice Democrats supported Rep. Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, who unseated then-Rep. Michael Capuano in September 2018.)
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Trump Reacts To Niece's Book On President's Family: 'She's A Mess'

The book , “ Too Much and Never Enough : How My Family Created the World ’ s Most Dangerous Man , ” was released Tuesday and racked up a record of 950,000 copies sold on its first day .
On Friday , the president posted his gripes on Twitter about the many books that have been written about him in recent months .
Calling himself the “ ultimate member of The Book of the Month Club , ” the president first railed against “ lowlife dummy John Bolton , ” whom he called a “ war mongering fool ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law by releasing classified information just to “ make a few dollars ” that “ will all end up going to the government anyway.
” I am the ultimate member of The Book of the Month Club .
First I have lowlife dummy John Bolton , a war mongering fool , violating the law ( he released massive amounts of Classified Information ) and an NDA in order to build badly needed credibility and make a few dollars , which — Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) July 17 , 2020 The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the daughter of his late older brother , Fred Trump Jr. , calling her “ a seldom seen niece who knows little about me ” and “ says untruthful things about my wonderful parents ( who couldn ’ t stand her ! )
” He also claimed she violated a nondisclosure agreement and broke the law by giving his tax returns to The New York Times .
... .will all end up going to the government anyway .
Next up is Mary Trump , a seldom seen niece who knows little about me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents ( who couldn ’ t stand her ! )
and me , and violated her NDA .
She also broke the Law by givng out my ... .
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) July 17 , 2020 ... .Tax Returns .
She ’ s a mess !
Many books have been written about me , some good , some bad .
Both happily and sadly , there will be more to come !
— Donald J. Trump ( @ realDonaldTrump ) July 17 , 2020 The president then attacked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a mess !
” before striking an almost philosophical tone : “ Many books have been written about me , some good , some bad .
Both happily and sadly , there will be more to come !
” Mary Trump has yet to comment on her uncle ’ s reaction , but other Twitter users found the president ’ s tweets enlightening in ways he probably didn ’ t intend .
Did he just admit the information used in the NY Times Trump finances story was accurate , based off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( @ SAA48193 ) July 17 , 2020 You know you have a great family dynamic when you have NDAs with all your relatives — Jonathan Glazer ( @ jsglazer1 ) July 17 , 2020

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Spoiler alert: He’s not happy.
The book, “Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man,” was released Tuesday and racked up a record of 950,000 copies sold on its first day. On Friday, the president posted his gripes on Twitter about the many books that have been written about him in recent months.
Calling himself the “ultimate member of The Book of the Month Club,” the president first railed against “lowlife dummy John Bolton,” whom he called a “war mongering fool” and said he’d violated the law by releasing classified information just to “make a few dollars” that “will all end up going to the government anyway.”
Advertisement
I am the ultimate member of The Book of the Month Club. First I have lowlife dummy John Bolton, a war mongering fool, violating the law (he released massive amounts of Classified Information) and an NDA in order to build badly needed credibility and make a few dollars, which — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 17, 2020
The president then went after Mary Trump, the daughter of his late older brother, Fred Trump Jr., calling her “a seldom seen niece who knows little about me” and “says untruthful things about my wonderful parents (who couldn’t stand her!)”
He also claimed she violated a nondisclosure agreement and broke the law by giving his tax returns to The New York Times.
....will all end up going to the government anyway. Next up is Mary Trump, a seldom seen niece who knows little about me, says untruthful things about my wonderful parents (who couldn’t stand her!) and me, and violated her NDA. She also broke the Law by givng out my.... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 17, 2020
Advertisement
....Tax Returns. She’s a mess! Many books have been written about me, some good, some bad. Both happily and sadly, there will be more to come! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 17, 2020
The president then attacked his niece by saying, “She’s a mess!” before striking an almost philosophical tone:
“Many books have been written about me, some good, some bad. Both happily and sadly, there will be more to come!”
Mary Trump later responded to the president with her own tweet that her publicist told HuffPost referred to the number of viewers that watched her interview on Thursday’s “Rachel Maddow Show” on MSNBC versus the president’s town hall with Sean Hannity on Fox News.
5.23 million v. 5.11 million#seldomseen🤔 — Mary L Trump (@MaryLTrump) July 18, 2020
Advertisement
Meanwhile, other Twitter users found the president’s tweets enlightening in ways he probably didn’t intend.
Did he just admit the information used in the NY Times Trump finances story was accurate, based off HIS taxes returns? — Scott Anderson (@SAA48193) July 17, 2020
You know you have a great family dynamic when you have NDAs with all your relatives — Jonathan Glazer (@jsglazer1) July 17, 2020
'Barely new her', sounds about right. — Stephen Smith (@stephen_r_smith) July 17, 2020


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--New Emails Reveal Warm Relationship Between Kamala Harris And Big Tech

Justin Sullivan via Getty Images Sen. Kamala Harris and Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg talk at Facebook headquarters on Feb. 10 , 2015 , in Menlo Park , California .
Harris delivered the keynote speech at the event .
These were the days before Facebook had been weaponized to incite genocide in Myanmar or livestream mass shootings in New Zealand or proliferate the far-right propaganda that helped elect Donald Trump .
But there were plenty of indications that something was amiss with the world ’ s most popular social network ― which was already under a November 2011 consent order from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take better care of user data and privacy .
Those acquisitions took place in 2012 and 2014 , during Harris ’ tenure as AG .
And yet Harris , like federal regulators in the Obama administration , never confronted these metastasizing threats to American democracy from an antitrust perspective , nor brought legal action against them on consumer protection grounds .
Even well into her 2020 presidential campaign , she pursued a soft touch with Big Tech , issuing vague promises to secure consumer privacy protections as her rivals for the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ D-Mass . )
― vowed to break up Facebook and implement ambitious new regulatory regimes .
Harris was far from the only public figure to join in the marketing splash .
When Lean In came out in March 2013 , Sandberg ’ s memoir was celebrated as a women ’ s rights triumph ― a road map to everything women could aspire to be in the corporate hierarchy .
“ Sandberg is not just tough , ” wrote Anne-Marie Slaughter in a glowing New York Times review .
“ She also comes across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likable ” ― everything an ambitious young woman could hope to be .
Slaughter was a former State Department official about to be named head of the New America Foundation , a liberal think tank .
But there were rumblings that the platforms ― Google , Facebook , Twitter ― were losing control of what they had created .
In 2013 , public fury began to mount over revenge porn , a practice in which men posted nude or compromising photos or videos of ex-girlfriends hoping to humiliate them .
Revenge porn specialists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tech giants gave them public reach .
A website in a lonely corner of the internet wouldn ’ t get much traffic if Google , Facebook and Twitter never directed anybody to it , or refused to host such images on their platforms .
But she didn ’ t go after the tech companies themselves .
In 2013 , she brought a case against Kevin Bollaert , the 27-year-old founder of UGotPosted.com , a site that invited misogynists to post photos of their exes .
Bollaert was also the founder of ChangeMyReputation.com , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take down those damaging photos .
It was a clever scam : letting bad actors post material without consent on one site and then forcing victims to pay him to take it down through another site .

Though it has been lost in the mists of other scandals, back in 2014, Facebook was in the middle of what was then the biggest public relations debacle in company history. That June, a Facebook data scientist and two academics released a paper demonstrating that users could be emotionally manipulated based on the information Facebook’s engineers fed into their accounts.
The conclusions of the study were alarming. But even more shocking was the means by which researchers had reached them. Facebook had used 700,000 of its users as social science guinea pigs without their consent. Not only could Facebook manipulate its users; it had manipulated them, without any regard to the ethical implications.
Advertisement
A firestorm of bad press and user fury ensued. Then, in December 2015, The Guardian reported that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) had harvested “psychological data” from millions of Facebook users for his presidential campaign, relying on a small firm known as Cambridge Analytica.
These were the days before Facebook had been weaponized to incite genocide in Myanmar or livestream mass shootings in New Zealand or proliferate the far-right propaganda that helped elect Donald Trump. But there were plenty of indications that something was amiss with the world’s most popular social network ― which was already under a November 2011 consent order from the Federal Trade Commission requiring the company to take better care of user data and privacy.
At that time, Kamala Harris was the top state law enforcement official overseeing Facebook and every other major tech company in Silicon Valley. As attorney general of California, she possessed sweeping powers to restrain the growing power of those tech platforms.
“There’s a lot that attorneys general across the country could have done to rein in Big Tech,” said Sally Hubbard, director of enforcement strategy at the Open Markets Institute, an anti-monopoly think tank. “Most notably, challenging the Instagram and WhatsApp mergers.”
Advertisement
“Harris, like federal regulators in the Obama administration, never confronted these metastasizing threats to American democracy from either an antitrust or a consumer protection perspective.”
Those acquisitions took place in 2012 and 2014, during Harris’ tenure as AG. And yet Harris, like federal regulators in the Obama administration, never confronted these metastasizing threats to American democracy from an antitrust perspective, nor brought legal action against them on consumer protection grounds. Even well into her 2020 presidential campaign, she pursued a soft touch with Big Tech, issuing vague promises to secure consumer privacy protections as her rivals for the Democratic nomination ― particularly Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) ― vowed to break up Facebook and implement ambitious new regulatory regimes.
More than 1,400 pages of emails obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request help explain this inaction, showing that Harris generally viewed Big Tech as a partner rather than a threat. At times, she even teamed up with tech companies to market herself as a rising star in American politics ― a depiction that proved correct with her election to the Senate in 2016.
Travis LeBlanc, a special assistant AG during Harris’ tenure in California, challenged the idea that she was soft on tech platforms and noted the specific example of the sex advertising forum Backpage.
“She prosecuted Backpage at a time when Congress wasn’t doing anything. She broke up sex trafficking rings,” said LeBlanc. “The idea that she didn’t do enough or was working too close with tech platforms instead is an absurd premise. She was arguably the national leader on the issue.”
Advertisement
Today, Harris is a leading contender for the Democratic Party’s vice presidential nomination. One of the most pressing questions for the next administration will be how it chooses to grapple with the corporate behemoths that have come to dominate American culture. This look inside Harris’ record with Big Tech suggests a politician who identifies with the tech elite and is wary of substantive reform.
Leaning In, Leaning Out
In February 2013, Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg wrote to Harris asking for a glossy photograph of the AG and a personal anecdote demonstrating how Harris had “leaned in.” Sandberg was looking for stories of powerful women proving their mettle in the male-dominated upper echelons of American power, from boardrooms to statehouses. As the top law enforcement official in the biggest state in the country, Harris was a natural target.
Sandberg was asking Harris to participate in a massive PR rollout for her soon-to-be-released book ”Lean In.” The ”Lean In” marketing campaign was intimately connected to Facebook itself. Ordinary women who wanted to follow the Lean In movement had to sign up through a Facebook account and “like” Lean In to receive further career advice.
Harris passed along a headshot and her own “Lean In” story ― a tale of how she got her start in electoral politics running for district attorney of San Francisco in 2003 as a long-shot upstart who defeated several well-connected male challengers.
Harris was far from the only public figure to join in the marketing splash. When Lean In came out in March 2013, Sandberg’s memoir was celebrated as a women’s rights triumph ― a road map to everything women could aspire to be in the corporate hierarchy. “Sandberg is not just tough,” wrote Anne-Marie Slaughter in a glowing New York Times review. “She also comes across as compassionate, funny, honest and likable” ― everything an ambitious young woman could hope to be. Slaughter was a former State Department official about to be named head of the New America Foundation, a liberal think tank.
Advertisement
So nobody made a fuss about a state law enforcement official joining a PR push for a top official at a company she ostensibly policed. The idea that either Sandberg or her company represented any kind of public policy problem was beyond the scope of what most politicians considered political.
But there were rumblings that the platforms ― Google, Facebook, Twitter ― were losing control of what they had created. In 2013, public fury began to mount over revenge porn, a practice in which men posted nude or compromising photos or videos of ex-girlfriends hoping to humiliate them. Revenge porn specialists were typically isolated grifters, but the tech giants gave them public reach. A website in a lonely corner of the internet wouldn’t get much traffic if Google, Facebook and Twitter never directed anybody to it, or refused to host such images on their platforms.
As AG, Harris made revenge porn a signature issue, eventually broadening the scope of her crackdown to include all “cyber exploitation” ― efforts to profit from abuse, particularly of women, online.
But she didn’t go after the tech companies themselves. In 2013, she brought a case against Kevin Bollaert, the 27-year-old founder of UGotPosted.com, a site that invited misogynists to post photos of their exes. Bollaert was also the founder of ChangeMyReputation.com, a site that charged people a fee to take down those damaging photos. It was a clever scam: letting bad actors post material without consent on one site and then forcing victims to pay him to take it down through another site.
Harris threw the book at Bollaert, who was eventually sentenced to 18 years in prison. For women’s rights activists, it was a victory ― free speech claims online didn’t include efforts to humiliate people sexually without their consent.
Advertisement
“She took on cyber exploitation,” said Danielle Citron, a law professor at Boston University who received a MacArthur Foundation “Genius” grant in 2019 and took part in the meetings. “No other AG in the country did that.” Citron is a vice president at the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, which has received funding from Facebook and Twitter.
Harris’s arguments in the case explicitly shielded Silicon Valley from any potential implications of a guilty verdict. Bollaert was responsible for what happened on his site because he was a publisher, not a neutral platform.
But as it became increasingly impossible to ignore the role Big Tech was playing in the revenge porn problem, Harris sent company representatives a note on Jan. 9, 2015, inviting them to her San Francisco office for a Feb. 4 meeting. The emails don’t indicate much about what occurred during that discussion, but six days later, Harris appeared onstage with Sandberg at Facebook’s Menlo Park headquarters, smiling and waving to the crowd before giving a talk about cyberbullying.
Kamala Harris on stage at Facebook HQ with Sheryl Sandberg on Feb. 10, 2015. Justin Sullivan via Getty Images
The emails show that Harris convened private meetings for her cyber exploitation program throughout most of the year, finally launching the initiative as a public campaign in October of 2015. Tech companies committed to changing the way they monitored abusive content on their platforms. Harris praised their efforts in a June 2015 Marie Claire profile, which her office repeatedly emailed out to representatives from the firms over the months ahead of the October launch.
Advertisement
“I asked some online companies to come in for a meeting about how we could create a safer environment online,” Harris told Marie Claire. “They were wonderful. Many companies really want to lead on this issue.”
According to a February 2019 Politico profile, Harris relied on an advocacy tactic known as “interest convergence theory,” which maintains that activists have better success with reform projects when they align their goals with the interests of powerful institutions. Showing Facebook and Google that revenge porn was hurting their bottom line would help bring them along.
The problem with this reasoning is that in many cases, Big Tech directly profits from socially destructive policies.
“Revenge porn, election integrity, the destruction of journalism ― you can’t fix any of these problems at Facebook without changing the way Facebook makes its money,” notes Open Markets’ Hubbard.
On the day of the launch, Harris’ office described it as a “nine month collaboration between Attorney General Kamala Harris’s office, major tech companies, law enforcement and victims’ advocates.”
Advertisement
For Harris, tech companies were part of the solution, not the problem. “I cannot emphasize enough how leaders in technology have stepped up,” she said during a press conference.
It was hard to miss the different approaches Harris had taken with powerful political actors and small-time crooks. Bollaert got 18 years, while Google and Facebook got a private meeting and public praise.
A Soft Touch And Big Checks
Harris’ initiative was not totally fruitless. “Within a month of our task force launching, Google took action to de-index the names of people from their platform,” notes Citron ― meaning the search engine would not direct queries for individual names to revenge porn sites.
But many victims’ advocates maintain that Google is still a serious problem. Whatever its formal guidelines, the search engine lets a lot of harmful material slide.
Facebook is even worse. In 2017, a nonprofit military journalism outlet reported that veteran and active-duty Marines had been using Facebook to share nude photos of ex-girlfriends and strangers without their consent ― including dozens of active-duty female servicemembers. Four years after its meeting with Harris in San Francisco, Facebook was still a breeding ground for revenge porn.
Advertisement
By 2017, Harris was no longer in state government. She was elected to the Senate in 2016, backed by roughly $214,000 in campaign contributions from Big Tech, including the maximum individual donation allowed under California law from Sandberg herself.
Two days after the election, Sandberg wrote to congratulate Harris.
Kamala, CONGRATULATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!! We need you now more than ever. I just did a Facebook post about you and all the women. Cheering you on! Sheryl
The emails do not include a response from Harris. But as a top contender for Joe Biden’s VP slot, Harris’ record with Big Tech is more than a historical curiosity.
For most of her tenure as California AG, Harris was aware that something was going wrong at the most powerful and profitable institutions in her state. But she chose not to pursue them, training her sights instead on bad actors who didn’t carry political influence.
Meanwhile, the tech giants matured into a grave threat to American democracy. Today, Facebook is not merely a hotbed for cruel sexual vendettas, but a vector for Russian propaganda, white nationalist organizing and even terrorism.
Advertisement
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has developed a close relationship with Trump and is bending the platform to fit far-right proclivities. Sandberg has made a point of attending photo ops with Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.
As a senator, Harris has been mostly quiet on policy-making issues that carry implications for Facebook and Google. She sat out the debate on a 2018 sex trafficking bill ― once her signature issue ― only entering her name as a co-sponsor after it was clear the bill would pass by a wide margin.
Last year, as other contenders for the 2020 presidential nomination called to break up Facebook and Google, Harris again suggested a lighter approach.
“I believe that the tech companies have got to be regulated in a way that we can ensure and the American consumer can be certain that their privacy is not being compromised,” Harris told The New York Times in January 2019.
When pressed on whether that included break-ups, Harris dodged. “My first priority is going to be that we ensure that privacy is something that is intact.”
Advertisement
For most tech experts, that approach is simply unrealistic.
“All of the problems with Facebook all come down to two things,” notes Hubbard. “Its business model and the fact that it’s a monopoly power. You can’t fix that with better privacy standards alone.”


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-17--Joe Biden Says More Money, Planning Is Needed To Reopen U.S. Schools

July 17 ( Reuters ) - Democrat Joe Biden ’ s presidential campaign on Friday hammered President Donald Trump ’ s approach to reopening schools during a pandemic , and suggested $ 34 billion in additional funding may be needed to educate children safely .
Biden ’ s campaign laid out a five-part plan for how the federal government should approach school reopenings , arguing that they can only happen once more measures are taken to stop the novel coronavirus .
That could include as much as $ 34 billion in more federal aid than even Biden ’ s Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ districts make modifications for social distancing , protective equipment , sanitation and upgrading internet broadband , Biden ’ s campaign said .
The Trump administration has been pushing for schools to reopen in the fall , which would allow many parents to return to work and help revive the economy .
School districts across the country are taking a cautious approach to reopening after the summer break as the coronavirus has infected more than 3.5 million Americans and killed nearly 140,000 , both figures leading the world .
The issue of school reopenings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 election , with both candidates playing to parents struggling to balance their duties to employers and their families since schools closed .
U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Friday that he expects the next coronavirus aid bill to provide a “ significant amount of money ” to help U.S. K-12 schools to reopen safely .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
July 17 (Reuters) - Democrat Joe Biden’s presidential campaign on Friday hammered President Donald Trump’s approach to reopening schools during a pandemic, and suggested $34 billion in additional funding may be needed to educate children safely.
Biden’s campaign laid out a five-part plan for how the federal government should approach school reopenings, arguing that they can only happen once more measures are taken to stop the novel coronavirus.
Advertisement
That could include as much as $34 billion in more federal aid than even Biden’s Democratic Party has already proposed to help school districts make modifications for social distancing, protective equipment, sanitation and upgrading internet broadband, Biden’s campaign said.
The Trump administration has been pushing for schools to reopen in the fall, which would allow many parents to return to work and help revive the economy.
School districts across the country are taking a cautious approach to reopening after the summer break as the coronavirus has infected more than 3.5 million Americans and killed nearly 140,000, both figures leading the world.
The issue of school reopenings is quickly becoming key to the Nov. 3 election, with both candidates playing to parents struggling to balance their duties to employers and their families since schools closed.
Advertisement