thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Don’t Fall For The 'Cancel Culture' Scam

What Are We Actually Talking About Here ?
And yet , most actual examples of “ cancel culture ” turn @ @ @ @ @ stakes .
According to the Harper ’ s letter , left-wing intolerance has caused books @ @ @ @ @ alleged inauthenticity.
” This is likely a reference to “ American Dirt , ” a @ @ @ @ @ written by a white author .
And yes , the book received widespread criticism when @ @ @ @ @ .
It was not , however , withdrawn by its publisher .
It was , @ @ @ @ @ .
1 book in America for weeks on end .
Even now , six months @ @ @ @ @ in the top 10 .
Are we really supposed to believe that an author receiving @ @ @ @ @ of copies of her book is some sort of existential crisis for the left ?
@ @ @ @ @ Cries Of ‘ Cancel Culture ’ Are A Tantrum By The Powerful

Illustration: Rebecca Zisser/HuffPost; Photo: Getty
On Monday, 153 prominent writers, academics and public figures signed their names to a statement entitled “A Letter on Justice and Open Debate.” According to the signatories, “The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted.”
While the letter itself, published by the magazine Harper’s, doesn’t use the term, the statement represents a bleak apogee in the yearslong, increasingly contentious debate over “cancel culture.” The American left, we are told, is imposing an Orwellian set of restrictions on which views can be expressed in public. Institutions at every level are supposedly gripped by fears of social media mobs and dire professional consequences if their members express so much as a single statement of wrongthink.
Advertisement
This is false. Every statement of fact in the Harper’s letter is either wildly exaggerated or plainly untrue. More broadly, the controversy over “cancel culture” is a straightforward moral panic. While there are indeed real cases of ordinary Americans plucked from obscurity and harassed into unemployment, this rare, isolated phenomenon is being blown up far beyond its importance.
The panic over “cancel culture” is, at its core, a reactionary backlash. Conservative elites, threatened by changing social norms and an accelerating generational handover, are attempting to amplify their feelings of aggrievement into a national crisis. The Harper’s statement, like nearly everything else written on this subject, could have been more efficiently summarized in four words: “Get Off My Lawn.”
What Are We Actually Talking About Here?
The first question to ask when determining whether you’re falling for a moral panic is whether it’s really a Thing. Societal freakouts over razor blades in Halloween candy, strangers in vans kidnapping kids, and teenagers hosting “rainbow parties” turned out, in hindsight, to be based on tiny numbers of confirmed cases — or none at all.
Advertisement
“Cancel culture” has the same characteristics as previous episodes of pearl-clutchery. Nearly every example cited by the Harper’s letter turns out, upon scrutiny, to be something else entirely.
Take the letter’s ominous warning that “editors are fired for running controversial pieces.” This is almost certainly a reference to James Bennet, the opinion editor of The New York Times who resigned last month after printing an op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) calling for the military suppression of Black Lives Matter protests.
While the op-ed did inspire widespread criticism, Bennet’s resignation is not a case of social-media censorship. The Times’ itself admitted that the piece “fell short of our standards” and represented a “breakdown” in the paper’s editorial process. Bennet eventually admitted that he hadn’t even read it before publishing it.
And beyond Bennet’s incompetence, there is the simple question of accountability. Even before the Cotton op-ed, Bennet hired climate change deniers, neglected fact-checking and printed “pro-mercenary” articles by private military contractors. Are the signatories to the Harper’s letter really saying that Times readers and employees should not have expressed their frustration with these obvious breaches of ethics?
Dozens of journalists, including several at the Times and HuffPost, made this point in a Friday response to the Harper’s letter spearheaded by journalists of color and co-signed by members of the academic and publishing communities.
Advertisement
The Harper’s letter also says, in its oblique way, that in today’s America, “professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class.” This is, in a purely literal sense, true: Last month, a professor named W. Ajax Peris was investigated by UCLA for reading Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail” aloud in class.
That’s not why Peris was investigated, though. He was investigated because he read excerpts of the letter containing the N-word without warning his students first. He also showed graphic footage of lynchings in his class without content warnings. When students complained, he insisted that he should be allowed to use the slur.
Even if you think the complaint against Peris was overly sensitive, he was not “canceled” in any meaningful sense. The UCLA investigation was resolved with a critical letter from his department head. He was not subject to widespread calls for termination and will be teaching classes in the fall.
In other words, Peris’ case was utterly routine. Students complain about their teachers for justifiable reasons and silly ones thousands of times per week in America. These complaints don’t just come from left-wing students: After the 2016 election, a professor at the College of Charleston was targeted by conservatives for dedicating a class to discussing Donald Trump’s victory. The far-right advocacy group Turning Point USA has a Professor Watchlist where Republican pupils can report professors who advance “leftist propaganda in the classroom.”
America is a big country. Sometimes employees disagree with the decisions of their bosses and sometimes 19-year-olds do things that adults disagree with. Simply because these cases happened does not mean that they are new or important.
Advertisement
"American Dirt" author Jeanine Cummins was "canceled" for racial insensitivity, but her book has become a bestseller. The Washington Post via Getty Images
Why Should I Care?
Another sure sign of a moral panic is the elevation of nonevents into national catastrophes. Again and again, the decriers of “cancel culture” intimate that if left unchecked, the left’s increasing intolerance for dissent will result in profound consequences.
And yet, most actual examples of “cancel culture” turn out to have cartoonishly low stakes. According to the Harper’s letter, left-wing intolerance has caused books to be “withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity.” This is likely a reference to “American Dirt,” a novel about the U.S.-Mexico border written by a white author. And yes, the book received widespread criticism when it was published in January. It was not, however, withdrawn by its publisher. It was, in fact, the No. 1 book in America for weeks on end. Even now, six months later, it is still in the top 10. Are we really supposed to believe that an author receiving negative reviews before selling millions of copies of her book is some sort of existential crisis for the left?
Other examples of “cancel culture” have the same pitiful stakes. In 2018, right-wing media exploded after the Association of Library Service to Children renamed its Laura Ingalls Wilder Award due to the author’s racial insensitivity. In June, “cancel culture” beat reporters fretted about a journalist being asked to apologize for sending insensitive tweets. And just last week, New York Magazine published a panicked story about a guy being removed from a group email list.
Given how many crises America finds itself in the middle of, I am reluctant to add award rebrandings and repentant social media posts to the list of things I should be worrying about. Seriously, an email list?
Advertisement
Female and nonwhite authors are regularly harassed by right-wing mobs. "So You Want to Talk About Race" author Ijeoma Oluo's family was targeted with a "swatting" attempt last year. Jim Spellman via Getty Images
Who Is Being Harmed?
The third sign of a moral panic is when the same term is applied to cases with fundamental differences. Consider the following two examples of “cancel culture” run amok:
David Shor, a polling researcher, is fired from his job for sending a tweet summarizing the findings of an academic study. Gillian Philip, a children’s book author, is fired by her publisher after adding “I stand with J.K. Rowling” to her Twitter profile.
While they may look similar on the surface, these cases in fact have little in common.
First, the person being “canceled.” It makes no sense to apply the same standard to public figures and random citizens alike. Philip, unlike Shor, is a public figure. She is a bestselling author and is surely aware that her political statements will affect her standing among her target audience and her publisher. Let’s not be coy about this: Declaring support for J.K. Rowling in July of 2020 is a de facto statement that you agree with her controversial, unpopular views on transgender people.
Public figures certainly have a right to express their controversial views. Readers have the right to react accordingly, and publishers have the right to take these views into account when deciding which books to publish. That’s why it’s called, as “cancel culture” critics love to point out, the “marketplace of ideas.”
Advertisement
So far, there is no indication that private citizens are being held to the same standard as bestselling authors. Philip’s statement in support of Rowling received thousands of supportive replies. This did not trigger a wave of mass firings. The fact is, it remains wildly acceptable for private citizens to state transphobic views. Public figures are held to a different standard, but there is nothing new or troubling about this.
Second, these cases differ in who is doing the “canceling.” Shor, unlike Philip, was never targeted on social media. Last month, he sent a tweet summarizing the findings of an academic paper arguing that race riots in 1968 may have tipped the election to Nixon. He clearly meant the tweet as an argument against the looting taking place during the George Floyd protests “Helping Trump get re-elected is not going to lead to better behavior by cops,” he tweeted following his original post.
While he was indeed criticized for his view, the disagreement was limited and relatively civilized. Much of the pushback came from fellow researchers who believed he had misrepresented the study. A single person tagged his boss at Civis Analytics, the polling firm that employed Shor. A few days later, he was fired. (I should note here that neither Civis nor Shor have confirmed that he was fired for the tweets, something “cancel culture” critics seem weirdly intent on ignoring.)
Shor’s case is not that of a random person being targeted by a hate mob. It is that of a professional pollster using his expertise to advance an argument about current events and then being punished by his employer. It’s not good, obviously, but calling it “cancel culture” performs exactly the same collapse of complexity the Harper’s letter signatories accuse their critics of doing.
If “cancel culture” is a term that encompasses both the famous and the nonfamous, social media mobs and risk-averse employers, firings and consumer boycotts, then it means nothing at all. It is, like “political correctness” before it, simply a name people give to things they do not like.
Advertisement
The real solution to workers being fired for unjust reasons is greater unionization and employment protections. Portland Press Herald via Getty Images
What’s The Solution?
This where we finally get to the parts of the Harper’s letter I agree with. There really are cases of ordinary people losing their jobs after being targeted by social media mobs. Majdi Wadi, the owner of a Minneapolis catering company, was evicted from one of his store locations after racist social media posts from one of his employees (his daughter) surfaced online. Emmanuel Cafferty, a San Diego Gas & Electric company employee, was fired after being falsely accused of making a white supremacist hand gesture.
These cases are indefensible. If the Harper’s statement had limited itself to cases in which social media users unjustly target random citizens for firing, I would agree with it. Hell, I probably would have signed it.
But is the argument of the Harper’s signatories simply that people should not participate in unjust social media mobs? Well, duh. Outside of the darkest corners of the internet, it would be nearly impossible to find anyone who disagrees with that statement.
Plus, if the real issue here is online harassment and abuse, it makes no sense to limit the critique to the left. Some of the most prominent social media firing squads have originated on the right. In 2018, film director James Gunn was removed from “Guardians of the Galaxy 3” after right-wing trolls unearthed insensitive tweets and spammed his studio (Gunn was later reinstated). Numerous journalists — disproportionately female and nonwhite — have been hounded by social media hate mobs. Ijeoma Oluo, the author of “So You Want to Talk About Race,” was the target of an attempt to send a SWAT team to her home.
Advertisement
And while it’s true that J.K. Rowling and other prominent figures have received death threats for expressing “gender critical” — i.e. transphobic — views, trans people who have challenged those views have received death threats too. The unfortunate reality of the internet is that there is enough harassment to go around.
If the signatories of the Harper’s letter were concerned about larger issues of online abuse, death threats and doxxing, they could have proposed solutions to these problems. And they would have been right: Social media platforms could do more to prevent harassment. Police departments and other government agencies should also take these threats more seriously.
Similarly, if “cancel culture” is really about ordinary people being fired after being targeted by social media mobs, the solutions are clear. The vast majority of American employment is “at will,” meaning companies can fire their workers for any reason and at any time. A great way to fix this problem would be to advocate for stronger unions and better employment protections.
But the moral panic over “cancel culture” isn’t about workers losing their jobs or ordinary people facing online abuse. Almost every example included in the Harper’s letter involves powerful people — editors, authors, journalists, “heads of organizations” — being criticized from below.
This is telling. Like most “cancel culture” punditry, the Harper’s letter is not aimed at actors with institutional power. It is almost exclusively directed at the ordinary people who point out the failures of those institutions.
Advertisement
While social media has indeed targeted some people unjustly, it has also become an important vehicle for holding powerful people to account when official systems fail. Christian Alminana via Getty Images
Cries Of ‘Cancel Culture’ Are A Tantrum By The Powerful
If I sound like I have a chip on my shoulder about this, that’s because I do. For the last two years, I have co-hosted a podcast, “You’re Wrong About,” that investigates misremembered historical events. From the McDonald’s hot coffee case to the Terri Schiavo controversy to Janet Jackson’s 2004 Super Bowl halftime show, many of the public’s misperceptions originate with the tiny number of media gatekeepers who traditionally decided which opinions were worthy of airing and which weren’t.
The most stark example of this is the “Ebonics” controversy. In 1996, the Oakland, California, school board released a resolution stating that it was going to recognize the language used by its Black students — now known as African American English but then known as “Ebonics” — as a legitimate form of expression. For years, academic research had demonstrated that African American English followed defined grammatical rules. Furthermore, studies from across the country had found that teaching Black children by contrasting their own language with what’s known as standard English was a more efficient way to teach reading and writing.
The country lost its mind. States started passing laws banning their own schools from recognizing Ebonics. Congress hauled Oakland administrators to Washington for a public hearing. Op-ed columnists claimed that Oakland teachers were going to start teaching white kids Ebonics instead of standard English. TV anchors said the district had given up on teaching Black kids the language skills they needed for college admissions tests and job interviews.
None of it was true, but it didn’t matter. The more complex story about Oakland was outside the realm of acceptable debate. The New York Times ran a prominent ad featuring a photo of Martin Luther King Jr. overlaid with the text “I Has a Dream.” It later emerged that the publisher had given away the page space for free. Meanwhile, when a group of linguists and experts wrote an open letter contextualizing the Oakland resolution and arguing for the validity of African American English, the Times refused to run it.
Advertisement
I spent hours on LexisNexis looking for any defense of the Oakland school board. The closest thing I could find was a New York Times op-ed (with the atrocious headline “The Ebonic Plague”) that said simply that the administrators shouldn’t have received quite so much abuse over a single resolution. No one even tried to defend what the district was doing.
The Ebonics controversy — not J.K. Rowling’s Twitter mentions — is what stifling debate really looks like. For decades, American media was controlled by a tiny number of gatekeepers. Count up all the top editors of all the national news outlets in the pre-internet era and you would have gotten a shockingly small number. If that tiny — and overwhelmingly white, male, straight and cis — group of editors decided that an opinion was not worthy of being heard, it wasn’t.
The moral panic over “cancel culture” feels like a backlash by those editors. Since the early 2000s, we have slowly shifted from a media environment defined by a small group of gatekeepers to one with no gatekeepers at all. Thanks to social media and platforms like Medium, anyone can publish anything now. Every conceivable viewpoint is being expressed somewhere, right this minute.
The actual debate over free speech is about how to decide which of those views deserve space and attention. Outlets like The New York Times and Harper’s bestow credibility on the opinions they publish. Their employees and their readers have the right to argue that some views do not deserve such credibility. That is not the suppression of free speech; it is the exercise of it.
Ultimately, the Harper’s letter represents a much larger problem than oversensitive college students or uber-woke employees: the failure of elite institutions to see through the bad faith of the far right.
Advertisement
For nearly a decade, conservative outlets have highlighted meaningless anecdotes to advance narratives about “campus political correctness gone wrong” and “free speech under attack.” Beyond absurd slippery-slope arguments, they have never provided any evidence that these issues are worthy of the nation’s attention.
“Cancel culture” is nothing more than the latest repackaging of the argument that the true threat to liberalism resides not in lawmakers or large corporations but in overly sensitive college students and random social media users. It is no more sophisticated than the “war on Christmas” and has the same goal: to imply that those pushing back against injustice are equivalent to the injustice itself.
Some of the signatories of the Harper’s letter know this and some of them don’t. All of them should have known better.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Members Of Congress Got PPP Loans Faster Than Most Small Business Owners

The speed of those loans highlights how an emergency relief system that frustrated countless small business owners nevertheless worked quickly and effectively for elite owners .
And while not necessarily proof of wrongdoing ― companies of all stripes , including those tied to lawmakers , are facing financial cataclysm because of the coronavirus pandemic ― this fact raises questions about whether lenders prioritized bailouts for members of Congress while tens of thousands of others struggled to tap into the same program .
All told , among the 20-plus loans that have been identified as going to businesses affiliated with members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through before the first round of funding ran dry .
One of the few exceptions involved a type of business that wasn ’ t initially eligible for a loan — a casino developer run by the husband of Rep. Susie Lee ( D-Nev. ) .
That business was approved for loans a few days after Lee and other representatives from Nevada successfully lobbied the Small Business Administration to change its rules .
When the Paycheck Protection Program first opened on April 3 , it was with a promise that the federal government would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basis .
In reality , Congress gave banks wide latitude over lending decisions .
Some of the country ’ s largest lenders , like Citibank and Chase , moved their most important clients to the front of the line and offered them “ concierge service , ” while ordinary retail customers were forced to apply for loans through broken or overwhelmed online portals .
When the program ran out of money after just 13 days , 80 % of all small businesses that applied were still awaiting an answer .
The Fiesta Restaurant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Debbie Mucarsel Powell ( D-Fla. ) is an executive , received a $ 10 million loan from JPMorgan Chase on April 14 , and another $ 5 million two weeks later .
The company , which trades on the Nasdaq and owns more than 300 restaurants , returned the money after people became outraged that large companies with other means to raise funds had taken PPP loans .
Companies with ties to Congress that received loans in later rounds of PPP funding include the law firm that formerly employed the husband of Rep. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is retired from the firm and retains “ no economic interest , ” her spokesperson has said .
Others included EDI Associates , a hotel investment company in which the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) owns a minor stake , and a winery partly owned by Nunes .
The speed and ease with which Congress members and their businesses were approved for federal aid is not automatically proof of a conflict of interest or an indication that their businesses are misusing the money .
And the loans the companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to continue to employ nearly 2,800 workers , according to figures the businesses reported on their loan applications .
All businesses had to comply with the same requirements to be eligible for a loan , but the handling of their applications and the order is left up to lenders .
Banks had huge discretionary power over how to triage loan applications and few obligations to disclose their decision-making processes .
Businesses with large assets — which describes many businesses owned by members of Congress — as well as those with existing loans and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ easier time receiving aid than small mom-and-pop shops .
The Trump administration and banks later changed the lending rules that made that the case .
And there were benefits to turning to small regional banks : Hern ’ s lender of choice , American Bank and Trust Company , only processed 18 loans over $ 150,000 in the whole state of Oklahoma .
“ If you have a company affiliated with an important person and the bank has total discretion over how to process the loans and who to prioritize , who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ?
It ’ s going to be the member of Congress , ” said Richard Painter , an attorney who served in the George W. Bush administration as an ethics adviser .
“ They ’ re going to place them immediately at the head of the line.
” At least , the banks can do so if they choose .
The PPP loan program was structured so that if there were conflicts of interest , the public would not know .
In the past , if a business had ties to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to seek ethics approval from the Small Business Administration before the business could apply for SBA funds .
But when it launched the loan program , the Trump administration quietly exempted members of government from that waiver process .
The administration cited a need to release aid speedily .
BMO Harris , a large multinational based in Canada , has a history of making substantial loans to Florida Rep. Buchanan at critical moments .
In late 2016 and in 2017 , when Buchanan , who is a powerful member of the House Ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what would become President Donald Trump ’ s tax cut legislation , BMO Harris was lobbying on the issue and lending Buchanan large sums for luxury purchases : between $ 1 and $ 5 million to purchase a yacht and between $ 5 and $ 25 million to purchase a private jet , according to his personal financial disclosures .
A spokesperson for Georgia Rep. Allen said he and his wife relinquished decision-making authority in the construction company they own , and that Allen consulted with the House Office of General Counsel about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a loan .
A spokesperson for Oklahoma Rep. Mullin said he is not involved in the day-to-day operations of his businesses , a group of heating and plumbing companies .
A spokesperson for Lee told The Daily Beast that the Nevada congresswoman doesn ’ t have any control over the casino company or decisions to apply for or approve loans .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
When businesses tied to members of Congress received emergency loans from the Paycheck Protection Program, they had something in common: The loans went through quickly.
On April 5, two days after the program launched, a group of McDonald’s franchises owned by Rep. Kevin Hern (R-Okla.) secured a loan of $1 million to $2 million. The same day, the tractor dealership that Rep. Vicki Hartzler (R-Mo.) owns with her husband secured a loan of between $350,000 and $1 million.
Advertisement
On April 8, a car dealership owned by Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) became one of the first dozen businesses in Florida to receive a loan over $150,000 from BMO Harris Bank; the loan was worth between $2 million and $5 million. A second dealership in which Buchanan has a sizable stake, in North Carolina, received a loan of between $350,000 and $1 million a day later.
The speed of those loans highlights how an emergency relief system that frustrated countless small business owners nevertheless worked quickly and effectively for elite owners. And while not necessarily proof of wrongdoing ― companies of all stripes, including those tied to lawmakers, are facing financial cataclysm because of the coronavirus pandemic ― this fact raises questions about whether lenders prioritized bailouts for members of Congress while tens of thousands of others struggled to tap into the same program.
But given the way the loan program was administered, the public may never learn if there were conflicts of interest.
“Among the 20-plus loans that have been identified as going to businesses affiliated with members of Congress, nearly every loan went through before the first round of funding ran dry.”
Advertisement
All told, among the 20-plus loans that have been identified as going to businesses affiliated with members of Congress, nearly every loan went through before the first round of funding ran dry. One of the few exceptions involved a type of business that wasn’t initially eligible for a loan — a casino developer run by the husband of Rep. Susie Lee (D-Nev.). That business was approved for loans a few days after Lee and other representatives from Nevada successfully lobbied the Small Business Administration to change its rules.
When the Paycheck Protection Program first opened on April 3, it was with a promise that the federal government would process requests on a first-come, first-served basis. In reality, Congress gave banks wide latitude over lending decisions. Some of the country’s largest lenders, like Citibank and Chase, moved their most important clients to the front of the line and offered them “concierge service,” while ordinary retail customers were forced to apply for loans through broken or overwhelmed online portals. When the program ran out of money after just 13 days, 80% of all small businesses that applied were still awaiting an answer.
Congress has since increased the funding for the PPP from $349 billion in early April to a total of $659 billion. And the program has been deemed a huge success by both parties for helping to save more than 50 million jobs in the face of an economic catastrophe without a modern parallel.
But the initial shortfall wasn’t a problem for many members of Congress or their families. Businesses owned or partly owned by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) and Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), Rick Allen (R-Ga.), Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), Devin Nunes (R-Calif.) and Roger Williams (R-Texas) were all approved for loans before the first pot of money ran dry, according to records recently released by the Treasury Department.
The Fiesta Restaurant Group, where the husband of Rep. Debbie Mucarsel Powell (D-Fla.) is an executive, received a $10 million loan from JPMorgan Chase on April 14, and another $5 million two weeks later. The company, which trades on the Nasdaq and owns more than 300 restaurants, returned the money after people became outraged that large companies with other means to raise funds had taken PPP loans.
Advertisement
Companies with ties to Congress that received loans in later rounds of PPP funding include the law firm that formerly employed the husband of Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.); he is retired from the firm and retains “no economic interest,” her spokesperson has said. Others included EDI Associates, a hotel investment company in which the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) owns a minor stake, and a winery partly owned by Nunes.
“If you have a company affiliated with an important person and the bank has total discretion over how to process the loans and who to prioritize, who’s the bank going to kiss up to?” - Richard Painter, ethics adviser in the George W. Bush administration
The speed and ease with which Congress members and their businesses were approved for federal aid is not automatically proof of a conflict of interest or an indication that their businesses are misusing the money. And the loans the companies in this story received will allow them to continue to employ nearly 2,800 workers, according to figures the businesses reported on their loan applications.
All businesses had to comply with the same requirements to be eligible for a loan, but the handling of their applications and the order is left up to lenders. Banks had huge discretionary power over how to triage loan applications and few obligations to disclose their decision-making processes.
Businesses with large assets — which describes many businesses owned by members of Congress — as well as those with existing loans and well-established commercial banking relationships, had an easier time receiving aid than small mom-and-pop shops. The Trump administration and banks later changed the lending rules that made that the case. And there were benefits to turning to small regional banks: Hern’s lender of choice, American Bank and Trust Company, only processed 18 loans over $150,000 in the whole state of Oklahoma.
Advertisement
“If you have a company affiliated with an important person and the bank has total discretion over how to process the loans and who to prioritize, who’s the bank going to kiss up to? It’s going to be the member of Congress,” said Richard Painter, an attorney who served in the George W. Bush administration as an ethics adviser. “They’re going to place them immediately at the head of the line.” At least, the banks can do so if they choose.
The PPP loan program was structured so that if there were conflicts of interest, the public would not know. In the past, if a business had ties to a member of Congress, that member had to seek ethics approval from the Small Business Administration before the business could apply for SBA funds. But when it launched the loan program, the Trump administration quietly exempted members of government from that waiver process. The administration cited a need to release aid speedily.
In May, Reps. Allen, Hartzler, Hern, Kelly, Mullin, Nunes and Williams — all of whom own stakes in businesses that took loans — voted against legislation that would have forced the Trump administration to disclose a list of names of businesses receiving PPP loans. The Treasury Department eventually agreed to release the names of large loan recipients under public pressure.
President Donald Trump poses for a photo after signing the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act during a news conference in the Rose Garden of the White House on June 5, 2020. AP Photo/Evan Vucci
Several financial institutions that loaned to congressionally connected businesses have lobbied Congress or have a web of ties to the members themselves.
Advertisement
BMO Harris, a large multinational based in Canada, has a history of making substantial loans to Florida Rep. Buchanan at critical moments. In late 2016 and in 2017, when Buchanan, who is a powerful member of the House Ways and Means Committee, was helping craft what would become President Donald Trump’s tax cut legislation, BMO Harris was lobbying on the issue and lending Buchanan large sums for luxury purchases: between $1 and $5 million to purchase a yacht and between $5 and $25 million to purchase a private jet, according to his personal financial disclosures.
Buchanan used to sit on a regional board of SunTrust Bank, which became known as Truist after a merger. In addition to getting loans from BMO Harris, one of his businesses got a loan from Truist; the bank made a loan of between $350,000 and $1 million to a Honda dealership Buchanan owns in Florida.
Both loans to the casino companies run by Lee’s husband came from Zions Bancorporation, a Utah bank that lobbies Congress on legislation affecting small business loans. The bank did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment.
Spokespeople for BMO Harris and Truist said the banks did not prioritize loan applications.
“Truist PPP applications were handled through a single application portal made available to clients on a first-come, first access basis, without any preference given to any client, including larger or more affluent clients,” its spokesperson said.
Several members of Congress who voted against legislation to reveal the names of businesses that took loans said the bill created too much red tape for a crucial program.
Advertisement
A spokesperson for Georgia Rep. Allen said he and his wife relinquished decision-making authority in the construction company they own, and that Allen consulted with the House Office of General Counsel about his company’s eligibility to take a loan. A spokesperson for Oklahoma Rep. Mullin said he is not involved in the day-to-day operations of his businesses, a group of heating and plumbing companies. A spokesperson for Lee told The Daily Beast that the Nevada congresswoman doesn’t have any control over the casino company or decisions to apply for or approve loans.
Missouri Rep. Hartzler, whose tractor dealership employs 54 people, said her loan was crucial for maintaining those jobs and that she supported internal government oversight of the loan program.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Trump Back To The ‘Swamp’ To Pick Up Another $10 Million In Big Checks

AP Photo/Andrew Harnik The finances of President Donald Trump 's reelection bid look less like draining the swamp and more like wallowing in it .
Five years after claiming he didn ’ t want rich donors ’ money because he would not be beholden to anybody , President Donald Trump is again at a rich donor ’ s oceanfront mansion on Friday night to collect $ 10 million , with tickets set at $ 580,600 per couple .
A HuffPost analysis of Federal Election Commission data from Jan. 20 , 2017 , through May 30 , 2020 , shows that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican National Committee has collected a total of $ 130.4 million from the 555 donors who have given the party at least $ 100,000 each .
Among them : Elizabeth Uihlein , the president of Wisconsin ’ s Uline Inc. , who has given $ 1,382,600 ; longtime Washington , D.C. , lobbyist C. Boyden Gray , who has given $ 1,033,000 ; and Charles Schwab of the Charles Schwab Corp. , who has given $ 576,300 .
As he started running for president in 2015 , Trump said that the system of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he knew this personally because he could make politicians do “ whatever the hell ” he wanted by donating to their campaigns .
At the first Republican presidential primary debate in Cleveland that August , Trump claimed : “ I gave to many people before this .
Before two months ago , I was a businessman .
I give to everybody .
When they call , I give .
And do you know what ?
When I need something from them two years later , three years later , I call them ― @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winning the nomination , Trump claimed he would “ drain the swamp ” if he became president .
He has repeated that claim through his years in office , even while appointing Cabinet heads who have rolled back environmental and worker safety regulations at the request of campaign donors and signed onto a tax cut package that disproportionately benefited the donor class .
“ From inside deal-making to campaign solicitations , from appointing a lobbyist Cabinet to maintaining business interests and pursuing policies that benefit them , Donald Trump has overseen the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said Robert Weissman , president of the liberal watchdog group Public Citizen .
“ Under Donald Trump , the swamp has won .
Trump has disrupted the standards of etiquette in political Washington , but he has perfected the standards of corruption.
” Trump ’ s actual campaign , like all federal campaign committees , can not accept donations larger than $ 5,600 per election cycle .
The big money for his re-election bid comes from donations to the Republican Party , which because of revised rules can take as much as $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each of the four years of a presidential election cycle , so that a four-year total of $ 1.42 million is possible per donor .
Super PACs are not limited at all in the size of the donations they can accept from individuals or companies , although they legally can not coordinate with the candidates or campaigns they are boosting .
Trump campaign senior adviser Jason Miller would not say what GOP donors expect to get for their money – even though just a few years ago Trump himself said that getting something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Instead , Miller accused presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter of corruption .
“ Joe Biden is one of the most corrupt politicians in American history , ” Miller said .
“ He flew his son Hunter to China on Air Force Two and helped him leave with $ 1.5 billion for his investment fund , and that ’ s just the beginning for ‘ Biden , Inc. ’ Joe Biden ’ s special interest is communist China.
” According to many presidential historians , though , Trump is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modern times .
He has funneled millions of both taxpayer dollars and campaign donor dollars into the cash registers of his own businesses ― at one point even awarding the G-7 conference to his own resort , which would have brought him tens of millions of dollars , but then backtracking because of criticism .
Trump begged China ’ s dictator to help him win reelection by promising to buy large amounts of American farm products , according to his former national security adviser John Bolton , and Trump was impeached for trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helping his reelection bid by announcing that Ukraine would investigate Biden .
“ Donald Trump gave the Chinese government a pass and echoed their propaganda to justify his appalling inaction as the worst public health crisis in a century exploded , ” said Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates .
“ And he did so because he cared more about a worthless reelection talking point regarding trade than he did about over 130,000 American lives or tens of millions of jobs .
”

The finances of President Donald Trump's reelection bid look less like draining the swamp and more like wallowing in it. AP Photo/Andrew Harnik
Five years after claiming he didn’t want rich donors’ money because he would not be beholden to anybody, President Donald Trump is again at a rich donor’s oceanfront mansion on Friday night to collect $10 million, with tickets set at $580,600 per couple.
This particular rich donor, beef jerky magnate Troy Link, lives in a $9 million, 9,000-square-foot home in Hillsboro Beach, a wealthy suburb of Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Trump arrived there late Friday afternoon following an official visit earlier at U.S. Southern Command in nearby Doral.
Advertisement
Taking six-figure donations is no longer at all unusual for Trump.
A HuffPost analysis of Federal Election Commission data from Jan. 20, 2017, through May 30, 2020, shows that during Trump’s presidency, the Republican National Committee has collected a total of $130.4 million from the 555 donors who have given the party at least $100,000 each. Among them: Elizabeth Uihlein, the president of Wisconsin’s Uline Inc., who has given $1,382,600; longtime Washington, D.C., lobbyist C. Boyden Gray, who has given $1,033,000; and Charles Schwab of the Charles Schwab Corp., who has given $576,300.
Trump’s official super PAC, America First Action, has collected $75.3 million from 90 such six-figure donors, including $10 million from Tim Mellon of Saratoga, Wyoming; $8 million from Geoffrey Palmer of Beverly Hills, California; and $5 million each from longtime Republican donors Sheldon and Miriam Adelson of Las Vegas.
As he started running for president in 2015, Trump said that the system of accepting large donations was corrupt and that he knew this personally because he could make politicians do “whatever the hell” he wanted by donating to their campaigns.
At the first Republican presidential primary debate in Cleveland that August, Trump claimed: “I gave to many people before this. Before two months ago, I was a businessman. I give to everybody. When they call, I give. And do you know what? When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them ― they are there for me.”
Advertisement
After winning the nomination, Trump claimed he would “drain the swamp” if he became president. He has repeated that claim through his years in office, even while appointing Cabinet heads who have rolled back environmental and worker safety regulations at the request of campaign donors and signed onto a tax cut package that disproportionately benefited the donor class.
“From inside deal-making to campaign solicitations, from appointing a lobbyist Cabinet to maintaining business interests and pursuing policies that benefit them, Donald Trump has overseen the most corrupt administration in American history,” said Robert Weissman, president of the liberal watchdog group Public Citizen. “Under Donald Trump, the swamp has won. Trump has disrupted the standards of etiquette in political Washington, but he has perfected the standards of corruption.”
Trump’s actual campaign, like all federal campaign committees, cannot accept donations larger than $5,600 per election cycle. The big money for his re-election bid comes from donations to the Republican Party, which because of revised rules can take as much as $355,000 per person per year, for each of the four years of a presidential election cycle, so that a four-year total of $1.42 million is possible per donor.
Super PACs are not limited at all in the size of the donations they can accept from individuals or companies, although they legally cannot coordinate with the candidates or campaigns they are boosting.
The RNC did not respond to HuffPost queries about its large-dollar donors.
Its leaders, however, have routinely boasted in public statements about how they have raised far more money than the Democratic National Committee.
Advertisement
The HuffPost analysis shows that the 17,165 donors who gave at least $1,000 to the RNC in a single donation gave the party a total of $246,743,344 ― for an average of $14,375 per person.
For Democrats, the 13,851 donors who gave at least $1,000 to the DNC in any single donation contributed a total of $106,160,289 ― for an average of $7,664 per person.
Trump campaign senior adviser Jason Miller would not say what GOP donors expect to get for their money – even though just a few years ago Trump himself said that getting something was the only reason they were giving. Instead, Miller accused presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter of corruption.
“Joe Biden is one of the most corrupt politicians in American history,” Miller said. “He flew his son Hunter to China on Air Force Two and helped him leave with $1.5 billion for his investment fund, and that’s just the beginning for ‘Biden, Inc.’ Joe Biden’s special interest is communist China.”
According to many presidential historians, though, Trump is by far the most corrupt president in modern times. He has funneled millions of both taxpayer dollars and campaign donor dollars into the cash registers of his own businesses ― at one point even awarding the G-7 conference to his own resort, which would have brought him tens of millions of dollars, but then backtracking because of criticism. Trump begged China’s dictator to help him win reelection by promising to buy large amounts of American farm products, according to his former national security adviser John Bolton, and Trump was impeached for trying to extort Ukraine’s leader into helping his reelection bid by announcing that Ukraine would investigate Biden.
Advertisement
Further, Trump’s campaign manager is paying the wife of one Trump son and the girlfriend of another $180,000 a year each, through his own private firm, to avoid reporting those payments on FEC filings.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Russia’s Top Diplomat Dismisses Intel Suggesting It Paid Bounties To Taliban

MOSCOW ( AP ) — Russia ’ s top diplomat on Friday dismissed U.S. intelligence information alleging that Moscow offered bounties to the Taliban for killing American soldiers as a product of election year politics in Washington .
U.S. intelligence officials said information about Russia ’ s alleged bounties on the heads of troops in Afghanistan was included in an intelligence brief for President Donald Trump in late February .
The White House has denied Trump received the information at that time , arguing that the intelligence wasn ’ t credible enough to bring to the president ’ s attention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the intelligence claims as a sham .
The intelligence assessments that Russia offered bounties were first reported by The New York Times , then confirmed to The Associated Press by American intelligence officials and others with knowledge of the matter .
“ There has been a hype in the United States over speculation on alleged ties between Russia and the Taliban and our alleged push on them to fight against U.S. servicemen or even a reward for their heads , ” Lavrov said during a videoconference on foreign policy issues .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has hinged on unscrupulous speculations , and no concrete facts have been presented whatsoever.
” He charged that the intelligence claims were floated to hurt the Trump administration before the U.S. presidential election in November .
“ The entire story looks like it has been written and designed specifically for the purpose of the domestic political struggle in the run-up to the election , ” he said .
“ Once again , they ’ re trying to attack the incumbent administration and discredit everything it ’ s doing , especially on the Russian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a February peace deal between the U.S. and the Taliban aimed at ending the protracted war in Afghanistan .
“ We have provided assistance via our channels to help this agreement work , ” the Russian foreign minister said .
Top Pentagon leaders told U.S. Congress on Thursday that reports of Russia offering Taliban militants bounties for killing Americans weren ’ t corroborated by defense intelligence agencies , but said they are looking into it and the U.S. will respond if necessary .
Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that the threats were taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been found credible .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
UPDATE: In April 2021, 10 months after The New York Times, Associated Press and Washington Post reported on U.S. intelligence that Russia had offered secret bounties to the Taliban for the deaths of Americans, the Biden administration said that CIA analysts only have “low to moderate confidence” that the bounty program ever existed.
MOSCOW (AP) — Russia’s top diplomat on Friday dismissed U.S. intelligence information alleging that Moscow offered bounties to the Taliban for killing American soldiers as a product of election year politics in Washington.
Advertisement
U.S. intelligence officials said information about Russia’s alleged bounties on the heads of troops in Afghanistan was included in an intelligence brief for President Donald Trump in late February. The White House has denied Trump received the information at that time, arguing that the intelligence wasn’t credible enough to bring to the president’s attention.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov dismissed the intelligence claims as a sham. The intelligence assessments that Russia offered bounties were first reported by The New York Times, then confirmed to The Associated Press by American intelligence officials and others with knowledge of the matter.
“There has been a hype in the United States over speculation on alleged ties between Russia and the Taliban and our alleged push on them to fight against U.S. servicemen or even a reward for their heads,” Lavrov said during a videoconference on foreign policy issues. “I can only say that the entire thing has hinged on unscrupulous speculations, and no concrete facts have been presented whatsoever.”
He charged that the intelligence claims were floated to hurt the Trump administration before the U.S. presidential election in November.
Advertisement
“The entire story looks like it has been written and designed specifically for the purpose of the domestic political struggle in the run-up to the election,” he said. “Once again, they’re trying to attack the incumbent administration and discredit everything it’s doing, especially on the Russian track.”
Lavrov noted that Russia welcomed a February peace deal between the U.S. and the Taliban aimed at ending the protracted war in Afghanistan.
“We have provided assistance via our channels to help this agreement work,” the Russian foreign minister said.
Top Pentagon leaders told U.S. Congress on Thursday that reports of Russia offering Taliban militants bounties for killing Americans weren’t corroborated by defense intelligence agencies, but said they are looking into it and the U.S. will respond if necessary. Defense Secretary Mark Esper said that the threats were taken seriously, but haven’t yet been found credible.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Newly-Discovered Comet Neowise Streaks Past Earth

CAPE CANAVERAL , Fla. ( AP ) — A newly discovered comet is streaking past Earth , providing a stunning nighttime show after buzzing the sun and expanding its tail .
Comet Neowise — the brightest comet visible from the Northern Hemisphere in a quarter-century — swept within Mercury ’ s orbit a week ago .
Its close proximity to the sun caused dust and gas to burn off its surface and create an even bigger debris tail .
Now the comet is headed our way , with closest approach in two weeks .
Scientists involved in the mission said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 5 kilometers ) across .
Its nucleus is covered with sooty material dating back to the origin of our solar system 4.6 billion years ago .
The comet will be visible across the Northern Hemisphere until mid-August , when it heads back toward the outer solar system .
While it ’ s visible with the naked eye in dark skies with little or no light pollution , binoculars are needed to see the long tail , according to NASA .
It will be about 7,000 years before the comet returns , “ so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next pass , ” said the telescope ’ s deputy principal investigator Joe Masiero of NASA ’ s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena , California .
He said it is the brightest comet since the mid-1990s for stargazers in the Northern Hemisphere .
NASA ’ s Bob Behnken shared a spectacular photo of the comet on social media late Thursday , showing central Asia in the background and the space station in the foreground .
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is solely responsible for all content .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — A newly discovered comet is streaking past Earth, providing a stunning nighttime show after buzzing the sun and expanding its tail.
Comet Neowise — the brightest comet visible from the Northern Hemisphere in a quarter-century — swept within Mercury’s orbit a week ago. Its close proximity to the sun caused dust and gas to burn off its surface and create an even bigger debris tail. Now the comet is headed our way, with closest approach in two weeks.
Advertisement
NASA’s Neowise infrared space telescope discovered the comet in March.
Scientists involved in the mission said the comet is about 3 miles (5 kilometers) across. Its nucleus is covered with sooty material dating back to the origin of our solar system 4.6 billion years ago.
The comet will be visible across the Northern Hemisphere until mid-August, when it heads back toward the outer solar system. While it’s visible with the naked eye in dark skies with little or no light pollution, binoculars are needed to see the long tail, according to NASA.
It will be about 7,000 years before the comet returns, “so I wouldn’t suggest waiting for the next pass,” said the telescope’s deputy principal investigator Joe Masiero of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
He said it is the brightest comet since the mid-1990s for stargazers in the Northern Hemisphere.
Astronauts aboard the International Space Station have already caught a glimpse.
NASA’s Bob Behnken shared a spectacular photo of the comet on social media late Thursday, showing central Asia in the background and the space station in the foreground.
Advertisement
“Stars, cities, spaceships, and a comet!” he tweeted from orbit.
___


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--12 Amazing Photos You Missed This Week

12 Amazing Photos You Missed This Week

We ’ re highlighting exceptional photos from around the world for the week of July 4 to 10 .
Check @ @ @ @ @ : Two lightning bolts frame New York City ’ s One World Trade Center as @ @ @ @ @ during a thunderstorm , with the skyline of lower Manhattan as seen from Jersey City @ @ @ @

We’re highlighting exceptional photos from around the world for the week of July 4 to 10. Check them out below.
Above: Two lightning bolts frame New York City’s One World Trade Center as they strike the Hudson River during a thunderstorm, with the skyline of lower Manhattan as seen from Jersey City, New Jersey.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Jada Pinkett Smith Admits Dating August Alsina During Will Smith Separation

Jada Pinkett Smith admitted on Friday that she had an affair with R & B singer August Alsina while she was separated from husband Will Smith .
The actor ’ s reps had previously denied the relationship after Alsina brought it up during a June 30 interview with “ The Breakfast Club ” radio show host Angela Yee .
Although Pinkett Smith ’ s representatives denied Alsina ’ s account , the “ Girls Trip ” actor admitted that he ’ d told the truth during an exchange with her husband Friday on “ Red Table Talk , ” her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revealed that when they were separated about 4½ years ago , Pinkett Smith and Alsina did have an affair .
“ [ You and I ] were over , ” Pinkett Smith said to her husband .
“ From there , as time went on , I got into a different kind of entanglement with August.
” “ One of the things I want to clear up that was kind of swirling in the press was you giving permission , which the only person who can give permission in that particular circumstance is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ But what August was actually trying to communicate — because I could actually see how he would perceive it as permission because we were separated amicably — I think he also wanted to make it clear that he ’ s not a homewrecker , which he ’ s not.
” Pinkett Smith told her husband the “ particular journey ” she took with Alsina allowed her to “ really confront a lot of emotional immaturity , emotional insecurity ” and help her “ do some really deep healing.
” “ And as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain things about you and I , he decided to break all communication with me , which was totally understandable .
And I let that be and hadn ’ t talked to him since , so it is a little weird that all this stuff is coming out now , since this was several [ years ago ] .
” Pinkett Smith expressed happiness that she and Smith have since repaired their relationship .
“ We have really gotten to that new place of unconditional love , ” she said .
Smith added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years ago ” to him .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
Jada Pinkett Smith admitted on Friday that she had an affair with R&B singer August Alsina while she was separated from husband Will Smith.
The actor’s reps had previously denied the relationship after Alsina brought it up during a June 30 interview with “The Breakfast Club” radio show host Angela Yee.
Advertisement
Alsina told Yee that the Smiths are “life partners” but no longer romantically involved.
Although Pinkett Smith’s representatives denied Alsina’s account, the “Girls Trip” actor admitted that he’d told the truth during an exchange with her husband Friday on “Red Table Talk,” her show on Facebook Watch.
The Smiths revealed that when they were separated about 4½ years ago, Pinkett Smith and Alsina did have an affair.
“[You and I] were over,” Pinkett Smith said to her husband. “From there, as time went on, I got into a different kind of entanglement with August.”
Both denied Alsina’s claim that Will Smith gave Alsina permission to date his wife.
“One of the things I want to clear up that was kind of swirling in the press was you giving permission, which the only person who can give permission in that particular circumstance is myself,” Pinkett Smith said. “But what August was actually trying to communicate — because I could actually see how he would perceive it as permission because we were separated amicably — I think he also wanted to make it clear that he’s not a homewrecker, which he’s not.”
Advertisement
Pinkett Smith told her husband the “particular journey” she took with Alsina allowed her to “really confront a lot of emotional immaturity, emotional insecurity” and help her “do some really deep healing.”
She added:
“And as I came through and started to realize certain things about you and I, he decided to break all communication with me, which was totally understandable. And I let that be and hadn’t talked to him since, so it is a little weird that all this stuff is coming out now, since this was several [years ago].”
Pinkett Smith expressed happiness that she and Smith have since repaired their relationship.
“We have really gotten to that new place of unconditional love,” she said. Smith added that the whole thing feels like “years ago” to him.
You can see the complete interview here:


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Pediatricians: 'Science, Not Politics' Should Decide School Reopenings

The American Academy of Pediatrics and national education groups are pushing back against President Donald ’ s Trump ’ s repeated calls to reopen American schools in the fall , saying those decisions should be made by scientists and educators , not politicians .
“ Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools , ” said the AAP , American Federation of Teachers , the National Education Association and The School Superintendents Association in a statement released on Friday .
“ Public health agencies must make recommendations based on evidence , not politics .
We should leave it to health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is best to open up school buildings , and listen to educators and administrators to shape how we do it , ” the groups said .
The statement reflects a sharp split with Trump , who has said repeatedly over the past week that schools must reopen in the fall and has threatened to pull federal funding for those that do not .
However , as HuffPost ’ s Arthur Delaney previously noted : “ Schools are mostly funded by state and local taxes , and federal funds are appropriated by Congress , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much the president ’ s threat matters.
” The AAP previously came out “ strongly ” in favor of in-person learning in the fall despite the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic , citing the many benefits for children .
Estimates suggest that roughly 54 million American children were abruptly sent home when schools closed last spring .
And long-term school closures can lead to significant learning loss in children , the AAP has warned , as well as significant social isolation .
Children are less likely to get enough food and physical exercise and may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems such as domestic abuse .
The Trump administration has pointed to the AAP ’ s support of returning to in-person learning to bolster support for its calls to universally reopen U.S. schools this fall .
At the same time , the administration has publicly sparred with the CDC over its recommendations for reopening schools , calling them too “ tough ” and “ expensive.
” In both of its recent statements on reopening schools this fall , the AAP has emphasized the need for local districts to make individual decisions about how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the classroom , using the most up-to-date data on community spread .
While advocating for school districts to resume in-person learning when possible , the AAP has also acknowledged that those districts will need to be “ flexible ” and “ nimble ” and respond to the fluid nature of the ongoing pandemic .
America ’ s pediatricians and national education groups say they are calling for federal funding for new protocols to allow children to return to school safely , and for elected officials to cooperate with scientists and teachers as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country to truly value children , elected leaders must come together to appropriately support schools in safely returning students to the classroom and reopening schools , ” the AAP said .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
The American Academy of Pediatrics and national education groups are pushing back against President Donald’s Trump’s repeated calls to reopen American schools in the fall, saying those decisions should be made by scientists and educators, not politicians.
“Science should drive decision-making on safely reopening schools,” said the AAP, American Federation of Teachers, the National Education Association and The School Superintendents Association in a statement released on Friday.
Advertisement
“Public health agencies must make recommendations based on evidence, not politics. We should leave it to health experts to tell us when the time is best to open up school buildings, and listen to educators and administrators to shape how we do it,” the groups said.
The statement reflects a sharp split with Trump, who has said repeatedly over the past week that schools must reopen in the fall and has threatened to pull federal funding for those that do not.
However, as HuffPost’s Arthur Delaney previously noted: “Schools are mostly funded by state and local taxes, and federal funds are appropriated by Congress, so it’s not clear how much the president’s threat matters.”
The AAP previously came out “strongly” in favor of in-person learning in the fall despite the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, citing the many benefits for children. Estimates suggest that roughly 54 million American children were abruptly sent home when schools closed last spring.
Advertisement
And long-term school closures can lead to significant learning loss in children, the AAP has warned, as well as significant social isolation. Children are less likely to get enough food and physical exercise and may be less likely to get help with problems such as domestic abuse.
The Trump administration has pointed to the AAP’s support of returning to in-person learning to bolster support for its calls to universally reopen U.S. schools this fall.
At the same time, the administration has publicly sparred with the CDC over its recommendations for reopening schools, calling them too “tough” and “expensive.”
In both of its recent statements on reopening schools this fall, the AAP has emphasized the need for local districts to make individual decisions about how and when to have children return to the classroom, using the most up-to-date data on community spread.
While advocating for school districts to resume in-person learning when possible, the AAP has also acknowledged that those districts will need to be “flexible” and “nimble” and respond to the fluid nature of the ongoing pandemic.
Advertisement
America’s pediatricians and national education groups say they are calling for federal funding for new protocols to allow children to return to school safely, and for elected officials to cooperate with scientists and teachers as well as each other.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Amazon Says Memo Banning TikTok From Phones Sent 'In Error'

( Reuters ) - Amazon.com Inc said it sent an email earlier on Friday that requested employees remove the TikTok app from mobile devices that also had access to company emails in error .
A company spokeswoman said there has been no change in its policy on TikTok .
“ This morning ’ s email to some of our employees was sent in error , ” a company spokeswoman said .
“ There is no change to our policies right now with regard to TikTok.
” Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok , among the fastest growing digital platforms in history @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
India banned TikTok and other Chinese apps in June .
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said earlier this week Washington was considering banning TikTok in the United States .
Asked if Americans should download it , he told Fox News : “ Only if you want your private information in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.
” Two Republican senators in March introduced a bill aimed at banning federal employees from using TikTok on their government-issued phones , amid growing national security concerns around the collection and sharing of data @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government .
Last year the United States Navy banned TikTok from government-issued mobile devices , saying the short video app represented a “ cybersecurity threat.
” Last November , the U.S. government launched a national security review of TikTok owner Beijing ByteDance Technology Co ’ s $ 1 billion acquisition of U.S. social media app Musical.ly , Reuters first reported last year .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
(Reuters) - Amazon.com Inc said it sent an email earlier on Friday that requested employees remove the TikTok app from mobile devices that also had access to company emails in error.
A company spokeswoman said there has been no change in its policy on TikTok.
“This morning’s email to some of our employees was sent in error,” a company spokeswoman said. “There is no change to our policies right now with regard to TikTok.”
Advertisement
Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok, among the fastest growing digital platforms in history, is facing heavy scrutiny outside China. India banned TikTok and other Chinese apps in June.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said earlier this week Washington was considering banning TikTok in the United States. Asked if Americans should download it, he told Fox News: “Only if you want your private information in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.”
Two Republican senators in March introduced a bill aimed at banning federal employees from using TikTok on their government-issued phones, amid growing national security concerns around the collection and sharing of data on U.S. users with China’s government.
Last year the United States Navy banned TikTok from government-issued mobile devices, saying the short video app represented a “cybersecurity threat.”
Advertisement


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-10--Johnny Depp Concludes 4 Days Of Evidence In Libel Case Against Tabloid

LONDON ( AP ) — Johnny Depp said in a London court on Friday that he was left embittered by ex-wife Amber Heard ’ s claims he abused her , which turned him from “ Cinderella to Quasimodo ” in the public eye .
He also said the couple ’ s tempestuous marriage broke down for good after an incident in which he accused Heard or one of her friends of defecating in the couple ’ s bed .
Depp was concluding almost four days of evidence in his libel case against a British tabloid newspaper that accused him of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is suing News Group Newspapers , publisher of The Sun , and the paper ’ s executive editor , Dan Wootton , over an April 2018 article that called him a “ wife-beater.
” In the High Court witness box , Depp has described a volatile relationship with Heard that descended into screaming matches which sometimes turned physical .
But he has strongly denied hitting Heard and accused her of compiling a dossier of fake claims against him as an “ insurance policy.
” Depp , 57 , and Heard , 34 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comedy “ The Rum Diary ” and married in Los Angeles in February 2015 .
Heard , a model and actress , filed for divorce the following year and obtained a restraining order against Depp on the grounds of domestic abuse .
The divorce was finalized in 2017 .
Depp said one of the triggers for the couple ’ s separation came when a cleaner found feces in a bed at their Los Angeles penthouse the morning after Heard ’ s 30th birthday party in April 2016 .
Heard claims the couple fought @ @ @ @ @ @ @ magnum wine bottle at her .
He denies it .
“ It was not left by a three- or four-pound dog .
I was convinced that it was either Ms Heard herself or one of her cohorts involved in leaving human feces on the bed , ” he said .
The court was read a text message Depp sent Heard after their separation in which he sent “ all my love and regrets ...
I wish you nothing but good.
” “ That is what I felt , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be any poison at that time , because the bad part was over , which was the relationship , and now we just had to finish it.
” The Sun ’ s defense relies on a total of 14 allegations by Heard of Depp ’ s violence between 2013 and 2016 , in settings including his private island in the Bahamas , a rented house in Australia and a private jet .
He strongly denies all of them .
Under cross-examination by The Sun ’ s lawyer , Sasha Wass , Depp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a period when he was trying to kick drugs and alcohol , and sometimes lapsing .
The Sun ’ s lawyer alleged that during a fight at the LA penthouse in December 2015 , Depp , in “ an uncontrollable rage , ” trashed Heard ’ s wardrobe , threw a decanter at her , slapped her , pulled her by the hair and headbutted her , causing two black eyes .
Depp claimed Heard was the aggressor , and he had only tried to restrain her “ to stop her flailing and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have headbutted her , but only by accident , and denied causing her injuries .
Depp also rejected Heard ’ s claim that he subjected her to a “ three-day ordeal of assaults ” in March 2015 in Australia , where Depp was appearing as Captain Jack Sparrow in the fifth “ Pirates of the Caribbean ” film .
He agreed that the couple had an altercation , which ended up with their house being trashed and Depp ’ s fingertip being severed to the bone .

LOADING ERROR LOADING
LONDON (AP) — Johnny Depp said in a London court on Friday that he was left embittered by ex-wife Amber Heard’s claims he abused her, which turned him from “Cinderella to Quasimodo” in the public eye.
He also said the couple’s tempestuous marriage broke down for good after an incident in which he accused Heard or one of her friends of defecating in the couple’s bed.
Advertisement
“I thought that was an oddly fitting end to the relationship,” he said.
Depp was concluding almost four days of evidence in his libel case against a British tabloid newspaper that accused him of physically abusing Heard. The Hollywood star is suing News Group Newspapers, publisher of The Sun, and the paper’s executive editor, Dan Wootton, over an April 2018 article that called him a “wife-beater.”
In the High Court witness box, Depp has described a volatile relationship with Heard that descended into screaming matches which sometimes turned physical. But he has strongly denied hitting Heard and accused her of compiling a dossier of fake claims against him as an “insurance policy.”
Depp, 57, and Heard, 34, met on the set of the 2011 comedy “The Rum Diary” and married in Los Angeles in February 2015. Heard, a model and actress, filed for divorce the following year and obtained a restraining order against Depp on the grounds of domestic abuse. The divorce was finalized in 2017.
Depp said one of the triggers for the couple’s separation came when a cleaner found feces in a bed at their Los Angeles penthouse the morning after Heard’s 30th birthday party in April 2016. Heard claims the couple fought after the party and Depp threw a magnum wine bottle at her. He denies it.
Advertisement
Heard blamed one of the couple’s Yorkshire terriers, Pistol and Boo, for the defecation incident, but Depp was convinced a person had done it.
“It was not left by a three- or four-pound dog. I was convinced that it was either Ms Heard herself or one of her cohorts involved in leaving human feces on the bed,” he said.
He said he initially laughed at the “absurd” incident, with one text message referring to “Amber Turd.”
But soon after, he said, he realized that the marriage couldn’t be saved.
“I wanted nothing to do with her,” Depp said.
The court was read a text message Depp sent Heard after their separation in which he sent “all my love and regrets ... I wish you nothing but good.”
“That is what I felt,” he said. “I didn’t think there needed to be any poison at that time, because the bad part was over, which was the relationship, and now we just had to finish it.”
Advertisement
By June 2016, however, Depp said he had become “quite bitter” because he felt he was being publicly depicted as “a wife beater.”
Heard obtained a restraining order against Depp in May 2016, claiming he’d hit her and thrown a cellphone at her during an argument, bruising her cheek. Depp denies the allegation.
“I went, if you’ll forgive the analogy, from Cinderella to Quasimodo in 0.6 seconds and I was without a voice,” he said.
That August, Depp wrote in a text to an associate that Heard was “begging for total global humiliation ... She’s gonna get it.”
The Sun’s defense relies on a total of 14 allegations by Heard of Depp’s violence between 2013 and 2016, in settings including his private island in the Bahamas, a rented house in Australia and a private jet. He strongly denies all of them.
Advertisement
Under cross-examination by The Sun’s lawyer, Sasha Wass, Depp depicted a tumultuous relationship with Heard during a period when he was trying to kick drugs and alcohol, and sometimes lapsing.
He recalled telling Heard several times: “Listen, we are a crime scene waiting to happen.” But he denied being violent.
The Sun’s lawyer alleged that during a fight at the LA penthouse in December 2015, Depp, in “an uncontrollable rage,” trashed Heard’s wardrobe, threw a decanter at her, slapped her, pulled her by the hair and headbutted her, causing two black eyes.
Depp claimed Heard was the aggressor, and he had only tried to restrain her “to stop her flailing and punching me.” He conceded he might have headbutted her, but only by accident, and denied causing her injuries.
Depp also rejected Heard’s claim that he subjected her to a “three-day ordeal of assaults” in March 2015 in Australia, where Depp was appearing as Captain Jack Sparrow in the fifth “Pirates of the Caribbean” film.
Advertisement
He agreed that the couple had an altercation, which ended up with their house being trashed and Depp’s fingertip being severed to the bone.
Depp accuses Heard of cutting off his fingertip by throwing a vodka bottle at him. She denies being in the room when the digit was severed.
A short section of Friday’s hearing, which related to allegations of sexual violence, was heard in private after the judge agreed to a request by The Sun’s lawyers.
Near the end of his testimony, Depp was asked by his lawyer, David Sherborne, about medical notes from August 2014 that referred to Heard’s “history of substance abuse,” including an addiction to cocaine. The notes said Heard experienced anxiety, insecurity and jealousy and had “severe outbursts of anger and rage.”
The lawyer asked Depp whether the description tallied with his experience of Heard.
“Yes,” Depp said.
Heard is attending the three-week trial and is scheduled to testify next week.


thehuffingtonpost--2020-07-11--What I’ve Learned About Academic Ableism As A University Employee With Chronic Pain

While I have yet to see “ challenging the inherent ableism in academia ” listed in my job description , I understood the need for this work within weeks of liaison with university faculty .
It is often why I am told by those in administration that my notes still read as if I ’ m taking on the role of a therapist — a position I held at the school previously — but one can not do justice to this work without a thorough understanding of oppression .
In fact , it was because of how powerless I often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ skills for what was often rooted in systemic oppression that I left my job as a therapist .
Some of them thrived , as anxiety no longer limited attendance to those with the ability to participate via Zoom .
Others found it more challenging , as the uncertainty of such an unprecedented time made sleep difficult , escalated panic and limited the concentration needed to complete the winter term .
Even more heartbreaking were the stories from East Asian students who also had to contend with racism and xenophobia on top of medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
While some may view the scope of my role as primarily to assess a student ’ s disability needs and liaison with faculty regarding academic accommodations , I know far better .
I know that students respond to commonality between our lived experiences when they feel comfortable sharing how ableism intersects with racism .
Those disclosures require an ethical response from a social worker committed to anti-oppressive practice , which means I validate those feelings and take the time necessary to help students move from such distress toward the academic plans referenced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shortage of reasons why students might experience a flare-up of symptoms at a time when so little felt like it was within their control , I was devastated by how many of them would beat themselves up for not being productive with their plans for writing lengthy papers or studying for final exams .
Every day , I would spend hours of my time reminding students that we have no experience surviving a global pandemic , so we should try to be understanding with ourselves if we are struggling more than usual to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I knew all too well that my own ability to concentrate on my work duties had been undeniably affected by my increasing challenges with back pain , sleep and migraines , as well as the accompanying lack of understanding from less equity-minded folx in administration .
Following my last day of work on campus in March , I proceeded to visit my chiropractor ’ s office for my twice-weekly appointment and was told they would be closed for the next three weeks to help flatten the curve of coronavirus infections .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I naively thought that quarantine measures would be brief , so I rationalized that it would be nice to not have to commute for two hours daily .
As weeks passed , though , I missed no one more than my beloved chiropractor .
Given how benign the description of “ soft tissue injuries ” sounds , the back pain that has tormented me for decades feels much worse .
Meanwhile , sleep issues following workplace harassment in 2016 feel like the ultimate betrayal , as they came after 30 long years during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the end of each day .
Migraine disorder was the first to grace my chart in the doctor ’ s office , and that diagnosis came after I repeatedly complained about my headaches .
At first I hesitated to take sick time , especially when students were writing final exams in late spring .
As the weeks went on , the ability to function at work became less and less within my control , so I took more sick days than I had in my prior two years at the university , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would miss a day or two of work and apologize profusely to students upon my return , in an attempt to challenge their internalized ableism about not working hard enough .
This was necessary when another extension was needed , or a makeup test had to be facilitated .
There was not a shadow of doubt in my mind that such accommodations were necessary due to unavoidable flare-ups .
Unfortunately , employment at three universities in my decadelong career as a social worker had taken its toll , as I knew better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s altar of ableism .
I had grown accustomed to daily violations of my humanity , clothed in condescending language to gaslight , silence and derail me .
Unfortunately , my experience mirrors that of other BIPOC folx — our work is more heavily policed when the unoppressed even deign to let the likes of us into the whiteness of academia .
I know this both from countless anecdotes shared between labored breaths and wailing sobs , as well as the research that academia prefers to engage in rather than believe our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grew more comfortable with using my own pandemic experience of pain issues for appropriate self-disclosure to help students understand that many of us were struggling , especially when quarantine measures reduced access to necessary treatment for our health .
As I reflect on this , I realize that the visceral distance from that physical campus space has undoubtedly supported my ability to shake off those ableist confines of academia that bound me .
Turns out , it would take COVID-19 for me to grow more comfortable with accepting my own identity as disabled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ challenge internalized ableism with any population I served in various social work roles .
Although I cringed when students questioned their worth due to exacerbated disability issues limiting their academic plans , I somehow had less understanding for my own gaps in functioning due to disrupted chiropractic treatment for weeks .
As my students with disabilities struggled more than usual with executive functioning , which exacerbated their internalized negative beliefs about themselves , my work of challenging those beliefs allowed me to gradually accept my own disability .
I worked on unpacking internalized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the trap of thinking that good health was a moral obligation when they were struggling to be productive in academia .
It was then that I realized I , too , needed a reminder that disability issues require accommodations for equity , whether they required more sick time or a group work alternative .
I understand this personally , as my own boss is aware that migraines , sleep issues and back pain are all chronic health conditions that can be aggravated by stress , and he is also aware that medical documentation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet that does not stop his ableist expectations .
As I reinforce to students that bureaucratic opposition never invalidates their disabilities , it serves as a good reminder for me as well .
I will happily maintain this work of confronting internalized ableism for me and my students , because if the current pushback is any indication , these reminders will continue to be needed .

Jacob Ammentorp Lund via Getty Images
In my day job as an accessibility adviser at a university, I support students with disabilities to complete their undergraduate studies with academic accommodations. From intake through graduation, if all goes as planned, I work to provide students with extensions and makeup tests when health conditions make these necessary despite their best attempts to avoid that outcome.
While I have yet to see “challenging the inherent ableism in academia” listed in my job description, I understood the need for this work within weeks of liaison with university faculty. It is often why I am told by those in administration that my notes still read as if I’m taking on the role of a therapist — a position I held at the school previously — but one cannot do justice to this work without a thorough understanding of oppression. In fact, it was because of how powerless I often felt when supporting students with individual coping skills for what was often rooted in systemic oppression that I left my job as a therapist.
Advertisement
After 22 months in my current position, I still often feel powerless to help students when faculty are unreceptive to liaison from Accessibility Services, especially when folx in administration fail to see how the body I inhabit has an impact on how I am received.
By the time COVID-19 changed how the institution operated in March, students with disabilities were especially affected. They saw that instructors were taking health concerns seriously, and so many of them shared their frustrations that it took a global pandemic for such a necessary shift in the culture.
Some of them thrived, as anxiety no longer limited attendance to those with the ability to participate via Zoom. Others found it more challenging, as the uncertainty of such an unprecedented time made sleep difficult, escalated panic and limited the concentration needed to complete the winter term. Even more heartbreaking were the stories from East Asian students who also had to contend with racism and xenophobia on top of medical diagnoses, which often exacerbated disability issues.
While some may view the scope of my role as primarily to assess a student’s disability needs and liaison with faculty regarding academic accommodations, I know far better. I know that students respond to commonality between our lived experiences when they feel comfortable sharing how ableism intersects with racism. Those disclosures require an ethical response from a social worker committed to anti-oppressive practice, which means I validate those feelings and take the time necessary to help students move from such distress toward the academic plans referenced in my job description.
Advertisement
“I feel powerless to help students when faculty are unreceptive to liaison from Accessibility Services, especially when folx in administration fail to see how the body I inhabit has an impact on how I am received.”
Despite no shortage of reasons why students might experience a flare-up of symptoms at a time when so little felt like it was within their control, I was devastated by how many of them would beat themselves up for not being productive with their plans for writing lengthy papers or studying for final exams. Every day, I would spend hours of my time reminding students that we have no experience surviving a global pandemic, so we should try to be understanding with ourselves if we are struggling more than usual to keep up our productivity levels right now.
I knew all too well that my own ability to concentrate on my work duties had been undeniably affected by my increasing challenges with back pain, sleep and migraines, as well as the accompanying lack of understanding from less equity-minded folx in administration. Following my last day of work on campus in March, I proceeded to visit my chiropractor’s office for my twice-weekly appointment and was told they would be closed for the next three weeks to help flatten the curve of coronavirus infections. I will admit that in the beginning, I naively thought that quarantine measures would be brief, so I rationalized that it would be nice to not have to commute for two hours daily. As weeks passed, though, I missed no one more than my beloved chiropractor.
Unfortunately, it would be three long months until my chiropractic treatment could resume, during which I dealt with increasingly greater back pain, which limited sleep and exacerbated migraines. Although each of these challenges individually may have been manageable, the unholy trinity together proved debilitating.
Given how benign the description of “soft tissue injuries” sounds, the back pain that has tormented me for decades feels much worse. Meanwhile, sleep issues following workplace harassment in 2016 feel like the ultimate betrayal, as they came after 30 long years during which I had come to expect rest at the end of each day. Migraine disorder was the first to grace my chart in the doctor’s office, and that diagnosis came after I repeatedly complained about my headaches.
Advertisement
“Often, I would miss a day or two of work and apologize profusely to students upon my return, in an attempt to challenge their internalized ableism about not working hard enough.”
In the long months before my diagnosis, assumptions that I was just partying too much in university was what passed for care in the medical-industrial complex, as my doctor failed to see the humanity of a young woman from the Caribbean.
I understand the struggles of students with disabilities because I face my own health challenges. During this global pandemic, back pain, migraines and sleep issues converged to wreak havoc on my daily functioning.
At first I hesitated to take sick time, especially when students were writing final exams in late spring. As the weeks went on, the ability to function at work became less and less within my control, so I took more sick days than I had in my prior two years at the university, despite my best efforts.
Often, I would miss a day or two of work and apologize profusely to students upon my return, in an attempt to challenge their internalized ableism about not working hard enough. This was necessary when another extension was needed, or a makeup test had to be facilitated. There was not a shadow of doubt in my mind that such accommodations were necessary due to unavoidable flare-ups.
Advertisement
Unfortunately, employment at three universities in my decadelong career as a social worker had taken its toll, as I knew better than to expect compassion from the academia’s altar of ableism. I had grown accustomed to daily violations of my humanity, clothed in condescending language to gaslight, silence and derail me. Unfortunately, my experience mirrors that of other BIPOC folx — our work is more heavily policed when the unoppressed even deign to let the likes of us into the whiteness of academia. I know this both from countless anecdotes shared between labored breaths and wailing sobs, as well as the research that academia prefers to engage in rather than believe our lived experiences.
A good snapshot of the mindfuck that has been my experience is what I navigated earlier this year, when I simultaneously received a letter from management about concerns regarding my work and was also nominated for an award, based on demonstration of outstanding commitment to service to students.
Over time, I grew more comfortable with using my own pandemic experience of pain issues for appropriate self-disclosure to help students understand that many of us were struggling, especially when quarantine measures reduced access to necessary treatment for our health. As I reflect on this, I realize that the visceral distance from that physical campus space has undoubtedly supported my ability to shake off those ableist confines of academia that bound me.
Turns out, it would take COVID-19 for me to grow more comfortable with accepting my own identity as disabled, despite working hard for decades to challenge internalized ableism with any population I served in various social work roles. Although I cringed when students questioned their worth due to exacerbated disability issues limiting their academic plans, I somehow had less understanding for my own gaps in functioning due to disrupted chiropractic treatment for weeks.
“I realize that the visceral distance from that physical campus space has undoubtedly supported my ability to shake off those ableist confines of academia that bound me.”
Advertisement
As my students with disabilities struggled more than usual with executive functioning, which exacerbated their internalized negative beliefs about themselves, my work of challenging those beliefs allowed me to gradually accept my own disability. I worked on unpacking internalized ableism with students when they fell into the trap of thinking that good health was a moral obligation when they were struggling to be productive in academia. It was then that I realized I, too, needed a reminder that disability issues require accommodations for equity, whether they required more sick time or a group work alternative.
Unfortunately, unpacking internalized ableism will continue to be necessary in the current context whereby able-bodied folx largely dictate the terms of reference for what is required. It is why I support students when faculty members question whether an entire week’s extension is needed, even though that’s their academic accommodation based on their disability.
I understand this personally, as my own boss is aware that migraines, sleep issues and back pain are all chronic health conditions that can be aggravated by stress, and he is also aware that medical documentation will be based on my self-report, yet that does not stop his ableist expectations. As I reinforce to students that bureaucratic opposition never invalidates their disabilities, it serves as a good reminder for me as well. I will happily maintain this work of confronting internalized ableism for me and my students, because if the current pushback is any indication, these reminders will continue to be needed.
Have a compelling first-person story or experience you want to share? Send your story description to pitch@huffpost.com.