theguardian--2020-07-23--Portland mayor teargassed by federal agents at protest

The mayor of Portland has been teargassed by federal agents as he stood at a fence guarding a courthouse during another night of protest against the presence of federal agents sent by Donald Trump to quell unrest in the city .
Ted Wheeler , the Democratic mayor of the city in Oregon , said it was the first time he had been teargassed and appeared slightly dazed as he put on a pair of goggles someone had handed to him , coughed and drank water .
He did not move from his position .
Around Wheeler the protest raged late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large fire in the space between the fence and the courthouse .
Federal agents deployed teargas and stun grenades into the crowd .
It was not immediately clear if the agents knew Wheeler was in the crowd when they used the teargas .
Earlier in the night , Wheeler was mostly jeered as he tried to rally demonstrators who have clashed nightly with federal agents , but was briefly applauded when he shouted “ Black Lives Matter ” and pumped his fist in the air .
The mayor has opposed the federal agents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city , but has faced harsh criticism and his presence was not welcomed by many , who yelled and swore at him .
“ I want to thank the thousands of you who have come out to oppose the Trump administration ’ s occupation of this city , ” Wheeler told hundreds of people gathered downtown .
“ The reason this is important is it is not just happening in Portland ... we ’ re on the frontline here in Portland.
” Some Portland residents , including city council members , have accused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who have used teargas multiple times before federal agents arrived early this month , in response to nearly two months of nightly protests since the killing of George Floyd .
Others , including business leaders , have condemned Wheeler for not bringing the situation under control before the agents showed up .
Protesters in the crowd held signs that read “ Tear Gas Ted ” in reference to the Portland police bureau ’ s use of the substance before federal agents arrived .
When the mayor left the protest , at about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shouted angrily as he walked away .
One person shouted : “ You ’ ve got to be here every single night !
” While taking questions on Wednesday night , Wheeler was criticised for the actions of his own police department , not defunding the local police and not ensuring they protect people from federal agents .
The mayor said he wanted to use the energy of the protests to make changes .
Wheeler then addressed the much larger crowd from a raised balcony , saying : “ I am here tonight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday , the council banned police from cooperating with federal agents or arresting reporters or legal observers .
Wheeler ’ s tense night-time appearance came hours after attorneys for Oregon urged a judge to issue a restraining order against agents deployed to quell the protests .
The arguments from the state and the US government came in a lawsuit filed by the Oregon attorney general , Ellen Rosenblum , who accused federal agents of arresting protesters without probable cause , whisking them away in unmarked cars and using excessive force .
Federal authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Wednesday that federal agents would be deployed to Chicago and Albuquerque , New Mexico , to fight rising crime .
Democratic mayors of 15 cities condemned the use of federal officers in a letter to the US attorney general .

Portland’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, has accused Donald Trump of conducting “urban warfare” after he was caught up in the teargassing of protesters by federal forces sent to quell Black Lives Matter demonstrations in the city.
But Wheeler, who was left gasping for air by the teargas, was himself the target of anger and mockery from activists who accused him of sending the city police to attack other protests.
“I’m not going to lie. It stings. It’s hard to breathe, and I can tell you with 100% honesty I saw nothing that provoked this response,” Wheeler said as he stood with protesters outside the federal courthouse that has become the focus of confrontation.
“This is flat-out urban warfare, and it’s being brought on the people of this country by the president of the United States, and it’s got to stop now.”
Protests into the early hours of Thursday morning were more contained than in previous nights after the authorities were finally able to erect a fence around the courthouse that could withstand attack by demonstrators.
Protesters quickly tore down barriers on other nights but the stronger fortification kept them from reaching the front of the courthouse which meant members of the Department of Homeland Security taskforce sent by Trump largely remained behind the fence firing teargas over it.
But the standoff showed how far the federal forces have fallen short of the president’s pledge to restore order in Portland, a liberal city with a long history of street protest.
The DHS taskforce is largely trapped inside the courthouse grounds with the protesters generally controlling the streets outside.
Earlier in the evening, Wheeler, who as mayor is also Portland’s police commissioner, attempted to reassure protesters at a large and peaceful demonstration that he was committed to police reform. But he was met with jeers and forced to admit that change had not come quick enough.
“Obviously we have a long way to go,” Wheeler told the crowd.
Large numbers of people at the demonstration remained sceptical of the man derided in graffiti as “Ded Wheeler” and “Fed Wheeler”.
“He’s two-faced,” said Jennifer Bradley, a grandmother who joined the Wall of Moms formed to act as a shield between the protesters and the police. “Wheeler’s been on the side of the police when it was attacking Black Lives Matters before the feds arrived. I don’t think he’s done anything to support this movement.”
01:57 Portland protests: why Trump has sent in federal agents – video report
A daily ritual has evolved in which thousands of protesters rally to the Black Lives Matter cause toward sundown in front of Portland’s justice center which holds the police department and county jail.
Protesters with shields use leaf blowers to diffuse teargas in Portland. Photograph: Caitlin Ochs/Reuters
As that rally disperses after dark, and many of the protesters leave for home, attention then shifts to the neighbouring federal courthouse. A hard core of demonstrators, many in helmets and gas masks, directly challenge the DHS forces, some by attempting to break into the courthouse. They include a contingent of young white people dressed entirely in black who often appear more committed to the wider causes, including anti-capitalism.
Night after night, the federal officers have responded with waves of teargas and stun grenades. On some nights they have also severely beaten protesters.
But after the demonstrators failed to break down the newly-installed fence they were limited to tossing rubbish over it and setting it on fire. Some shot fireworks at the building.
The DHS forces, mostly drawn from the border patrol and US Marshals Service, gave verbal warnings and then let loose with the teargas, dispersing the crowd immediately in front of the courthouse. This back and forth continued for several hours, resolving little but confirming that neither side is ready to back down as yet.
Wheeler’s tense night-time appearance came hours after attorneys for Oregon urged a judge to issue a restraining order against agents deployed to quell the protests.
The arguments from the state and the US government came in a lawsuit filed by the Oregon attorney general, Ellen Rosenblum, who accused federal agents of arresting protesters without probable cause, whisking them away in unmarked cars and using excessive force. Federal authorities have disputed the allegations.
Trump announced on Wednesday that federal agents would be deployed to Chicago and Albuquerque, New Mexico, to fight rising crime. Democratic mayors of 15 cities condemned the use of federal officers in a letter to the US attorney general.
Associated Press contributed to this report


theguardian--2020-07-23--First Thing: is Trump a 'law and order' president, or a lawless one?

Donald Trump has announced a “ surge ” of US troops – not into Iraq or Afghanistan , but into the streets of American cities .
The president on Wednesday said he would send hundreds of federal law enforcement officers to Chicago , Albuquerque and other Democratic-controlled communities , which he claims are “ plagued by violent crime ” .
In response to the announcement , the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted that it would “ continue to defend our constitutional rights from Trump ’ s lawlessness – in Portland , Chicago , and wherever else necessary.
” The move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and anti-racism protesters in Portland .
The Oregon city has quickly become the focus for a national debate , with Trump ’ s deployment of a shadowy police taskforce not simply failing to quell the protests , but in fact giving them fresh energy .
Maeve Higgins says the president ’ s CBP militia , trained in terrorising immigrants , have now been turned against US citizens .
Speaking at a town hall event on Wednesday , Joe Biden described Trump as America ’ s first racist president .
“ The way he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of their skin , their national origin , where they ’ re from , is absolutely sickening , ” said the former vice-president : George Washington , Thomas Jefferson and other early presidents owned slaves , while more recent commanders-in-chief such as Woodrow Wilson strongly supported segregation .
In responding to Biden ’ s remarks , however , Trump compared himself to another of his forebears , claiming : “ I ’ ve done more for black Americans than anybody with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln.
” The daily death toll from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Tuesday , for the first time since June , in yet another sign that the country is still in the depths of the disease crisis .
California has surpassed New York as the state with the most total cases : more than 413,576 since the pandemic began .
In New York , however , there are fears that partying young people have stopped taking the pandemic seriously , and could fuel a fresh rise in cases .
Trump on Wednesday cited Black Lives Matter protests as one “ likely ” cause of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts saying there is little evidence of disease spread linked to the demonstrations .
Following the president ’ s recent conversion to face-mask usage , meanwhile , Republican governors in the south have started at last to issue mask mandates .
• None The administration has agreed to pay Pfizer $ 2bn for 100m doses of a vaccine being developed by the pharmaceutical firm , if they are delivered by December as part of the government ’ s Operation Warp Speed vaccine program .
• None A newly identified cocktail of antibodies could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Covid-19 , with the potential to be manufactured at scale , say researchers at New York ’ s Columbia University .
A wanted Chinese researcher is holed up at the SF consulate With tensions between Beijing and Washington still running hot , a Chinese researcher wanted by the FBI has taken refuge at the country ’ s consulate in San Francisco , after reportedly lying to US law enforcement about her affiliation with the Chinese military .
The story emerged in court documents just as the US ordered China to close its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the theft of “ American intellectual property ” .
China has threatened to retaliate against what it called an “ outrageous ” escalation .
• None The fashion industry is complicit in the abuse of China ’ s Uighur Muslims , according to a coalition of more than 180 human rights groups , who say many of the world ’ s top clothing brands still source cotton produced by the Chinese state ’ s forced labour system .
• None Congress approved spending of $ 9.5bn on US national parks over the next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rare show of bipartisanship that will fund conservation and long overdue park repairs .
• None The suspected killer of a federal judge ’ s son may also have murdered a colleague .
The FBI has linked “ anti-feminist ” lawyer Roy Den Hollander – the suspect in the recent shooting of Esther Salas ’ s family in New Jersey , who later took his own life – to the death of Marc Angelucci in California on 11 July .
• None UK anti-corruption investigators accused their US counterparts of deceiving them over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a dispute that threatened cooperation between the two countries , according to confidential exchanges seen by the Guardian .
• None The owners of a seafood shop in Spain have been accused of offences against historic heritage after police found 13 Roman amphoras being used to decorate the premises .
The owner ’ s son said he found them underwater on his fishing trips .
Reporter Nina Lakhani is the author of Who Killed Berta Cáceres ?
: Dams , Death Squads , and an Indigenous Defender ’ s Battle for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Nina will join the Guardian US international editor , Martin Hodgson , for a live online discussion of what Cáceres ’ s story teaches us about violence , corruption , poverty , and environmental justice in Central America .
You can read an extract from the book here , and join us live for the event here .
What ’ s this year ’ s song of the summer ?
Summer is normally a time for travelling , partying and all sorts of other activities that aren ’ t really allowed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the music hasn ’ t stopped .
From Chloe x Halle to Haim , our critics pick their favourite tracks for an unusual season .
The rise of the private ‘ Zutor ’ With schools set to be online-only in the fall , many families are looking for other solutions to educate their children – including hiring private virtual tutors .
It ’ s just one way in which the pandemic is exacerbating existing inequalities , reports Mario Koran .
Opinion : we don ’ t owe anything to Confederate monuments Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the protection of sacred objects : namely , Confederate statues .
He is displacing the idea of democratic responsibility with that of the politics of eternity , writes historian Timothy Snyder .
Fixated on flaunting his cognitive prowess , Trump on Wednesday explained one of the most “ difficult ” aspects of the brainpower test he recently took to the Fox News medical analyst , Marc Siegel .
The question involved the president remembering and repeating five simple words .
But if you get them in the right order , he insisted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
First Thing is delivered to thousands of inboxes every weekday .
If you ’ re not already signed up , subscribe now .

Good morning,
Donald Trump has announced a “surge” of US troops – not into Iraq or Afghanistan, but into the streets of American cities. The president on Wednesday said he would send hundreds of federal law enforcement officers to Chicago, Albuquerque and other Democratic-controlled communities, which he claims are “plagued by violent crime”.
In response to the announcement, the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted that it would “continue to defend our constitutional rights from Trump’s lawlessness – in Portland, Chicago, and wherever else necessary.”
Trump announces 'surge of federal law enforcement' into cities including Chicago – video
The move comes amid continued clashes between federal agents and anti-racism protesters in Portland. The Oregon city has quickly become the focus for a national debate, with Trump’s deployment of a shadowy police taskforce not simply failing to quell the protests, but in fact giving them fresh energy. Maeve Higgins says the president’s CBP militia, trained in terrorising immigrants, have now been turned against US citizens.
At a time when immigration has almost come to a complete stop and the president is struggling to uphold his strongman image long enough to be re-elected, we should not be surprised that he is using the Department of Homeland Security against his own citizens.
Biden described Trump as America’s ‘first’ racist president
Biden on Trump: ‘We’ve had racists, and they’ve existed. They’ve tried to get elected president. He’s the first one that has.’ Photograph: Drew Angerer/Getty Images
Speaking at a town hall event on Wednesday, Joe Biden described Trump as America’s first racist president. “The way he deals with people based on the colour of their skin, their national origin, where they’re from, is absolutely sickening,” said the former vice-president:
No sitting president has ever done this. Never, never, never. No Republican president has done this. No Democratic president. We’ve had racists, and they’ve existed. They’ve tried to get elected president. He’s the first one that has.
George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other early presidents owned slaves, while more recent commanders-in-chief such as Woodrow Wilson strongly supported segregation. In responding to Biden’s remarks, however, Trump compared himself to another of his forebears, claiming: “I’ve done more for black Americans than anybody with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln.”
America’s daily Covid-19 death toll is back above 1,000
Medics treat a Covid-19 patient in hard-hit Imperial County, California. Photograph: Mario Tama/Getty Images
The daily death toll from the coronavirus in the US topped 1,000 on Tuesday, for the first time since June, in yet another sign that the country is still in the depths of the disease crisis. California has surpassed New York as the state with the most total cases: more than 413,576 since the pandemic began. In New York, however, there are fears that partying young people have stopped taking the pandemic seriously, and could fuel a fresh rise in cases.
Trump on Wednesday cited Black Lives Matter protests as one “likely” cause of the national surge in infections, despite experts saying there is little evidence of disease spread linked to the demonstrations. Following the president’s recent conversion to face-mask usage, meanwhile, Republican governors in the south have started at last to issue mask mandates.
The administration has agreed to pay Pfizer $2bn for 100m doses of a vaccine being developed by the pharmaceutical firm, if they are delivered by December as part of the government’s Operation Warp Speed vaccine program.
A newly identified cocktail of antibodies could be a ‘very potent’ treatment for Covid-19, with the potential to be manufactured at scale, say researchers at New York’s Columbia University.
A wanted Chinese researcher is holed up at the SF consulate
The Chinese consulate in Houston, which the US ordered to close within 72 hours on Wednesday. Photograph: Mark Felix/AFP/Getty Images
With tensions between Beijing and Washington still running hot, a Chinese researcher wanted by the FBI has taken refuge at the country’s consulate in San Francisco, after reportedly lying to US law enforcement about her affiliation with the Chinese military. The story emerged in court documents just as the US ordered China to close its consulate in Houston, citing involvement in the theft of “American intellectual property”. China has threatened to retaliate against what it called an “outrageous” escalation.
The fashion industry is complicit in the abuse of China’s Uighur Muslims, according to a coalition of more than 180 human rights groups, who say many of the world’s top clothing brands still source cotton produced by the Chinese state’s forced labour system.
In other news…
The Appalachian national scenic trail needs about $17m to update its paths. Photograph: Alamy
Congress approved spending of $9.5bn on US national parks over the next five years on Wednesday, in a rare show of bipartisanship that will fund conservation and long overdue park repairs.
The suspected killer of a federal judge’s son may also have murdered a colleague. The FBI has linked “anti-feminist” lawyer Roy Den Hollander – the suspect in the recent shooting of Esther Salas’s family in New Jersey, who later took his own life – to the death of Marc Angelucci in California on 11 July.
UK anti-corruption investigators accused their US counterparts of deceiving them over the extradition of a key suspect, in a dispute that threatened cooperation between the two countries, according to confidential exchanges seen by the Guardian.
The owners of a seafood shop in Spain have been accused of offences against historic heritage after police found 13 Roman amphoras being used to decorate the premises. The owner’s son said he found them underwater on his fishing trips.
Who killed Berta Cáceres?
The Honduran environmental activist Berta Cáceres was shot dead in March 2016. Photograph: Verso Books
Reporter Nina Lakhani is the author of Who Killed Berta Cáceres?: Dams, Death Squads, and an Indigenous Defender’s Battle for the Planet. On Friday at 1pm EDT, Nina will join the Guardian US international editor, Martin Hodgson, for a live online discussion of what Cáceres’s story teaches us about violence, corruption, poverty, and environmental justice in Central America.
You can read an extract from the book here, and join us live for the event here.
Great reads
Haim, HER and Chloe x Halle. Composite: Rex Features/AP
What’s this year’s song of the summer?
Summer is normally a time for travelling, partying and all sorts of other activities that aren’t really allowed in July 2020. But so far, the music hasn’t stopped. From Chloe x Halle to Haim, our critics pick their favourite tracks for an unusual season.
The rise of the private ‘Zutor’
With schools set to be online-only in the fall, many families are looking for other solutions to educate their children – including hiring private virtual tutors. It’s just one way in which the pandemic is exacerbating existing inequalities, reports Mario Koran.
Opinion: we don’t owe anything to Confederate monuments
Donald Trump has decided that human rights are secondary to the protection of sacred objects: namely, Confederate statues. He is displacing the idea of democratic responsibility with that of the politics of eternity, writes historian Timothy Snyder.
A politician of eternity seeks to shift the work of government away from the actual problems of actual people and towards the enforcement of national myth.
Last Thing: ‘Person, woman, man, camera, TV’
This video has been removed. This could be because it launched early, our rights have expired, there was a legal issue, or for another reason. Trump on cognitive test: 'For me it was easy' – video
Fixated on flaunting his cognitive prowess, Trump on Wednesday explained one of the most “difficult” aspects of the brainpower test he recently took to the Fox News medical analyst, Marc Siegel. The question involved the president remembering and repeating five simple words. But if you get them in the right order, he insisted, “you get extra points”.
Sign up
Sign up for the US morning briefing
First Thing is delivered to thousands of inboxes every weekday. If you’re not already signed up, subscribe now.


theguardian--2020-07-23--Portland protests: federal agents' actions draw city into a national debate

Federal agents in Portland , Oregon have detained protesters in unmarked vans , teargassed crowds , beaten reporters and worked without visible identification or insignia in recent days , as Black Lives Matter protests in the city near the end of their eighth consecutive week .
The agents have acted despite the objections of Portland mayor Ted Wheeler , Oregon ’ s governor Kate Brown and Oregon ’ s two Democratic senators .
They have met resistance in the streets from protestors but also now in the courts and from politicians , as Oregonians discern national implications in Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policing in Portland .
Portland has now become the focus for both sides in the conflict .
The US president and his supporters in conservative media , see the intervention as a template to be used in cities around the country .
Meanwhile , his opponents see the city as a rallying cry , strengthening protests and providing a dramatic act which can be used to warn against Trump ’ s authoritarian tendencies .
On Wednesday , Trump announced “ a surge of federal law enforcement into American communities plagued by violent crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ city mayors , including Wheeler , likened Trump ’ s moves to those of an “ authoritarian regime ” , and demanded that federal agents not be sent into their cities ” .
Locally , civil rights leaders in Oregon say Trump ’ s actions have upped the stakes on protests , which until now were mostly focused on the Portland Police Bureau ( PPB ) , which has been accused of heavy-handed and biased policing of protests .
Eric K Ward , executive director of the Western States Center ( WSC ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that while Portlanders have “ our own struggles that are unique to our community , the Trump administration has now put us in the midst of a national debate that has national consequences ” .
He added : “ If this goes with no serious political response and consequence , it opens the door for the president to create his own personal security force that he can deploy anywhere in the country , without regard to the constitution.
” The WSC is now a co-plaintiff in a suit brought against four federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( DHS ) , the US Marshalls Service ( USMS ) , Customs and Border Patrol ( CBP ) , and the Federal Protective Service ( FPS ) .
The suit claims that the administration ’ s actions are unconstitutional , and that it has “ encroached upon powers explicitly reserved to the state of Oregon , and to Oregon ’ s citizens ” , and “ deprived Portlanders the right to protest peacefully ” .
At an online event announcing the suit , Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley condemned Trump ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ administration to governments in “ Turkey , Russia , and the Philippines ” .
Constitutional questions are now at the heart of a series of legal actions brought against local and federal law enforcement by nonprofits and the state of Oregon .
Organizations including the ACLU of Oregon and the Oregon Justice Resource Center ( OJRC ) initially launched suits against the city of Portland , seeking to restrain PPB ’ s use of force .
The ACLU ’ s initial suit focused on the protection of journalists and legal observers .
Earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against police dispersals of identified reporters .
PPB tactics against early protests provoked questions from local media and professional bodies about whether journalists were being specifically targeted .
OJRC sued in June , on behalf of protest groups , winning injunctions against PPB use of teargas , which had been frequent .
But since federal officers have taken a more active role , the focus of civil rights groups has shifted .
Last Friday , the ACLU filed suit , requesting a restraining order , against the DHS and the USMS , again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The ACLU alleged that several reporters had been shot , one being hit with “ plastic bullets launched with enough force to put bullet holes in his ‘ PRESS ’ T-shirt ” .
Jann Carson , interim executive director of the ACLU of Oregon , said : “ The violence and brutality unleashed by police and federal agents is unjustified and unconstitutional .
Federal agents are terrorizing people on the streets of Portland and it must stop .
Federal agents must leave Portland now.
” Also last Friday , Oregon attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DHS , as well as the FPS , Customs and Border Patrol and unnamed individual officers .
It alleged their tactics “ violate the rights of all people detained … and violate the state ’ s sovereign interests ” .
Rosenblum ’ s complaint repeated allegations made by protesters and in press reports , that federal officers had used “ unmarked vehicles to drive around downtown Portland … removing them from public without either arresting them or stating the basis for an arrest ” .
Local Republicans , however , see no immediate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the authority to send in federal police over local objections , James Buchal , chair of the Multnomah county Republican party , said : “ There is a lot of law in this context upholding federal authority to intervene and limiting judicial intervention , though the rule of law seems now in many cases to be placed with ‘ Trump derangement syndrome ’ .
” But most local protest leaders and city officials remain defiant .
On Saturday , Portland city commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty published an open letter to mayor Wheeler in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ occupying force ” and a “ goon squad ” .
On Monday night , as a crowd swollen by reports of the crackdown gathered at the federal courthouse , she retweeted a video of the large crowd , adding : “ That ’ s my city , standing up against federal and local police brutality.
” Asked whether she considered the Trump administration ’ s deployment of federal agents in downtown Portland constitutional , Hardesty replied : “ Absolutely not .
Not only that , but we ’ re in a pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on community members standing up against police brutality.
” Hardesty added that if the Wheeler handed her control of PPB , as she demanded in her letter , “ in the first week I would commit to truly disengaging any and all PPB collaboration with the federal officers and initiate any internal investigations that need to happen ” .
The mayor ’ s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment .
Carson , of the ACLU , wrote : “ Our local police have escalated violence and federal agents are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ worth fighting for , and we are ready to fight for it.
” Ward , of the WSC , said : “ Donald Trump picked the worst city in America to target in his attack on constitutional law .
I think that he will come to regret that he ever said the name Portland .
”

Federal agents in Portland, Oregon, have detained protesters in unmarked vans, teargassed crowds, beaten reporters and worked without visible identification or insignia in recent days, as Black Lives Matter protests in the city near the end of their eighth consecutive week.
The agents have acted despite the objections of Portland’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, the Oregon governor, Kate Brown, and Oregon’s two Democratic senators.
They have met resistance in the streets from protesters but also now in the courts and from politicians, as Oregonians discern national implications in Donald Trump’s insertion of federal forces into policing in Portland.
Portland has now become the focus for both sides in the conflict. The US president and his supporters in conservative media, see the intervention as a template to be used in cities around the country. Meanwhile, his opponents see the city as a rallying cry, strengthening protests and providing a dramatic act which can be used to warn against Trump’s authoritarian tendencies.
On Wednesday, Trump announced “a surge of federal law enforcement into American communities plagued by violent crime”.
01:14 Portland mayor teargassed by federal agents during protest – video
On Tuesday, 15 US city mayors, including Wheeler, likened Trump’s moves to those of an “authoritarian regime”, and demanded that federal agents not be sent into their cities”.
Locally, civil rights leaders in Oregon say Trump’s actions have upped the stakes on protests, which until now were mostly focused on the Portland police bureau (PPB), which has been accused of heavy-handed and biased policing of protests.
Eric K Ward, executive director of the Western States Center (WSC), a Portland-based civil rights organization, said that while Portlanders have “our own struggles that are unique to our community, the Trump administration has now put us in the midst of a national debate that has national consequences”.
He added: “If this goes with no serious political response and consequence, it opens the door for the president to create his own personal security force that he can deploy anywhere in the country, without regard to the constitution.”
The WSC is now a co-plaintiff in a suit brought against four federal agencies: the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the US Marshals Service (USMS), Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Federal Protective Service (FPS).
The suit claims that the administration’s actions are unconstitutional, and that it has “encroached upon powers explicitly reserved to the state of Oregon, and to Oregon’s citizens”, and “deprived Portlanders the right to protest peacefully”.
At an online event announcing the suit, Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon condemned Trump’s “secret police tactics”, likening the administration to governments in “Turkey, Russia and the Philippines”.
Constitutional questions are now at the heart of a series of legal actions brought against local and federal law enforcement by non-profits and the state of Oregon.
Organizations including the ACLU of Oregon and the Oregon Justice Resource Center (OJRC) initially launched suits against the city of Portland, seeking to restrain PPB’s use of force. The ACLU’s initial suit focused on the protection of journalists and legal observers. Earlier this month, they won an injunction against police dispersals of identified reporters.
PPB tactics against early protests provoked questions from local media and professional bodies about whether journalists were being specifically targeted. OJRC sued in June, on behalf of protest groups, winning injunctions against PPB use of teargas, which had been frequent.
A demonstrator covers his face as teargas envelops him during protests in Portland, Oregon, on 29 March. Photograph: Dave Killen/AP
But since federal officers have taken a more active role, the focus of civil rights groups has shifted. Last Friday, the ACLU filed suit, requesting a restraining order, against the DHS and the USMS, again on behalf of journalists and legal observers.
The ACLU alleged that several reporters had been shot, one being hit with “plastic bullets launched with enough force to put bullet holes in his ‘PRESS’ T-shirt”.
Jann Carson, interim executive director of the ACLU of Oregon, said: “The violence and brutality unleashed by police and federal agents is unjustified and unconstitutional. Federal agents are terrorizing people on the streets of Portland and it must stop. Federal agents must leave Portland now.”
Also last Friday, Oregon’s attorney general, Ellen Rosenblum, filed suit against USMS and DHS, as well as the FPS, Customs and Border Protection and unnamed individual officers. It alleged their tactics “violate the rights of all people detained … and violate the state’s sovereign interests”.
Rosenblum’s complaint repeated allegations made by protesters and in press reports, that federal officers had used “unmarked vehicles to drive around downtown Portland … removing them from public without either arresting them or stating the basis for an arrest”.
Local Republicans, however, see no immediate constitutional issues.
Asked if Trump had the authority to send in federal police over local objections, James Buchal, chair of the Multnomah county Republican party, said: “There is a lot of law in this context upholding federal authority to intervene and limiting judicial intervention, though the rule of law seems now in many cases to be placed with ‘Trump derangement syndrome’.”
But most local protest leaders and city officials remain defiant.
On Saturday, the Portland city commissioner, Jo Ann Hardesty, published an open letter to Mayor Wheeler in which she described federal agents as an “occupying force” and a “goon squad”. On Monday night, as a crowd swollen by reports of the crackdown gathered at the federal courthouse, she retweeted a video of the large crowd, adding: “That’s my city, standing up against federal and local police brutality.”
Asked whether she considered the Trump administration’s deployment of federal agents in downtown Portland constitutional, Hardesty replied: “Absolutely not. Not only that, but we’re in a pandemic and they’re using war weapons on community members standing up against police brutality.”
Hardesty added that if the Wheeler handed her control of PPB, as she demanded in her letter, “in the first week I would commit to truly disengaging any and all PPB collaboration with the federal officers and initiate any internal investigations that need to happen”.
The mayor’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Carson, of the ACLU, wrote: “Our local police have escalated violence and federal agents are adding to the escalation. America is worth fighting for, and we are ready to fight for it.”
Ward, of the WSC, said: “Donald Trump picked the worst city in America to target in his attack on constitutional law. I think that he will come to regret that he ever said the name Portland.”


theguardian--2020-07-23--Revealed: Rod Rosenstein advised there was no age limit on child separations

Rod Rosenstein , the former deputy attorney general , advised US attorneys implementing the 2018 zero tolerance policy that there could be no blanket ban on prosecuting migrant parents who had children under the age of five , the Guardian has learned .
The comments on a conference call in May 2018 privately shocked some border state prosecutors because , in effect , it meant that no child was too young to be separated from its parents under the policy , which called for all migrants entering the US illegally to be criminally prosecuted .
The family separations that followed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the gravest domestic human rights violations to have occurred under the Trump administration .
The policy was in place for six weeks and resulted in the separation of 2,814 children from their parents and guardians , about 105 of whom were under the age of five and 1,033 under the age of 10 .
Rosenstein issued his guidance to US attorneys from border states about two weeks after the then attorney general , Jeff Sessions , issued an order that there would be an “ escalated effort ” to prosecute all illegal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ border , according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to the Guardian under the condition of anonymity .
Previously , under the Obama administration , most families who crossed the border illegally were detained together if they were arrested or were released pending an immigration trial , but were only separated if authorities deemed children to be in danger .
There were questions among the border state US attorneys at that time about how the zero tolerance policy would be implemented and the conference call with Rosenstein sought to address those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US attorney , John Bash of the western district of Texas , said he had declined to prosecute several cases that had been referred to him by Customs and Border Protection ( CBP ) that involved children under the age of five .
In response , sources familiar with the matter said , Rosenstein told the US attorneys that they could not decline to prosecute cases based on the age of the children who would be separated from their parents because there was “ no categorical exemption ” under the order .
During @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether prosecutors could decline to prosecute parents with children who only spoke indigenous languages , meaning they were unable to communicate in English or Spanish , or those whose children had intellectual disabilities .
Rosenstein said that prosecutors could opt to decline to prosecute individuals with children under those two circumstances on a case-by-case basis , sources said .
The comments were met with shock by some of the US attorneys , sources said , because there was concern that children who were under the age of five would not know their own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it posed a risk to children potentially getting lost in the system .
“ Everyone , but especially the DoJ , should have known that tearing children away from their parents was patently unconstitutional .
The ACLU should never have had to file a lawsuit to establish that obvious point , ” said Lee Gelernt , a senior ACLU immigration lawyer .
Rosenstein , who retired from the justice department in 2019 and is now a partner at King & Spalding , a top Washington law firm , said in a statement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not separate parents from children .
The policy the Attorney General adopted for the Department of Justice in April 2018 was unambiguous : every defendant the Department of Homeland Security arrested and referred for prosecution would be evaluated by federal prosecutors without any categorical exemption.
” Under the zero-tolerance policy , hundreds of parents were deported to their home countries without their children and the family separations were later deemed by a California judge to be unconstitutional , “ brutal ” and “ offensive ” .
The government ’ s conduct , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the “ sacred bond between parent and child ” .
The policy was in place from 6 April 2018 to 20 June 2018 when , facing intense legal and congressional pressure , it was ended under an executive order by Donald Trump .
One former DOJ official defended the Justice Department ’ s actions and told the Guardian that the attorney general ’ s order had “ no effect ” unless DHS referred cases , which the person claimed was solely under DHS ’ s purview .
“ DHS repeatedly complained to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prosecuting enough cases .
They were driving the train , ” the former official said .
Kirstjen Nielsen , who served as DHS secretary at the time , has defended her actions in that period , saying she was “ enforcing the law ” .
An investigation by the internal watchdog at the Department of Homeland Security found that CBP , a division of the DHS that enforces border controls , relied on “ ad hoc ” measures to record and track family separations and that it knew as early as November 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DoJ has so far received far less scrutiny for its involvement in the child separation policy than the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Health and Human Services , which had custody of the children once they were separated .
The DoJ has consistently denied that it ever had a policy to separate children from their parents .
But the new information suggests that the DoJ ’ s knowing cooperation facilitated the execution of the zero-tolerance policy and that it was fully aware that the immigration policy would result in children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those under the age of five .
Other participants on the conference call included Iris Lan , an associate deputy attorney general who has been nominated by the Trump administration to fill a lifetime appointment as a judge for the southern district of New York , and Adam Braverman , who was serving as an acting US attorney in the southern district of California at the time and has been nominated to serve as a judge in that district .
Their nominations have not yet been reviewed or approved by the Senate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ US attorneys have been shared with the inspector general ’ s office of the DoJ , which is conducting a review of the “ planning and implementation ” of the zero-tolerance policy by the department .
A spokesperson for the DoJ said US attorneys had “ maintained discretion to make prosecutorial decisions on a case-by-case basis ” .
It declined to comment on “ internal deliberations ” but , in response to questions sent to Lan by the Guardian , said that Lan would “ have had no policy decision-making role ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Braverman but did not immediately receive a response .
A spokesperson for the US attorney ’ s office in the western district of Texas declined to comment .
Rosenstein is not believed to have been a driving force behind the zero-tolerance policy , which was launched by Sessions in conjunction with the White House as part of Trump ’ s campaign to crack down on undocumented migrants .
He gained an unusually high profile in his role as the number two official at the DoJbecause he had oversight of Robert Mueller ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election .
For many Democrats , Rosenstein ’ s longtime career at the DoJ and his institutional role was seen at the time as an assurance that the investigation would be protected from possible interference by the Trump administration .
His role in the zero-tolerance policy has received far less scrutiny .
Rosenstein publicly defended the zero-tolerance policy at an American Bar Association conference in August 2018 , where he said he believed it was consistent with the rule of law and reflected a surge in illegal immigration into the US .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re prosecuting everyone without regard to the law , ” he said , adding that the DoJ was committing resources to ensure that everyone was treated equally under the law rather than “ picking and choosing ” who will be prosecuted .
Agencies in the federal government including the DoJ had already experimented with a “ pilot programme ” of child separation in the western district of Texas in 2017 , which resulted in the separation of 1,556 children from their parents .
Court-ordered efforts to reunite parents with their children in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come to a halt ” in Latin America during the coronavirus crisis , according to immigration lawyers at the ACLU , which has helped lead the effort .

Rod Rosenstein, the former deputy attorney general, advised US attorneys implementing the 2018 zero-tolerance policy that there could be no blanket ban on prosecuting migrant parents who had children under the age of five, the Guardian has learned.
The comments on a conference call in May 2018 privately shocked some border state prosecutors because, in effect, it meant that no child was too young to be separated from its parents under the policy, which called for all migrants entering the US illegally to face criminal prosecution.
The family separations that followed are seen today by experts as one of the gravest domestic human rights violations to have occurred under the Trump administration.
The policy was in place for six weeks and resulted in the separation of 2,814 children from their parents and guardians, about 105 of whom were under the age of five and 1,033 under 10.
Rosenstein issued his guidance to US attorneys from states on the Mexican border about two weeks after the then attorney general, Jeff Sessions, issued an order that there would be an “escalated effort” to prosecute all illegal entries into the US along the southern border, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to the Guardian under the condition of anonymity.
Previously, under the Obama administration, most families who crossed the border illegally were detained together if they were arrested or were released pending an immigration trial, but were only separated if authorities deemed children to be in danger.
There were questions among the border state US attorneys at that time about how the zero-tolerance policy would be implemented and the conference call with Rosenstein sought to address those issues.
On the call, one US attorney, John Bash of the western district of Texas, said he had declined to prosecute several cases that had been referred to him by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) that involved children under the age of five.
In response, sources familiar with the matter said Rosenstein told the US attorneys that they could not decline to prosecute cases based on the age of the children who would be separated from their parents because there was “no categorical exemption” under the order.
During the call, Rosenstein was also asked whether prosecutors could decline to prosecute parents with children who only spoke indigenous languages, meaning they were unable to communicate in English or Spanish, or those whose children had intellectual disabilities. Rosenstein said that prosecutors could opt to decline to prosecute individuals with children under those two circumstances on a case-by-case basis, sources said.
The comments were met with shock by some of the US attorneys, sources said, because there was concern that children who were under the age of five would not know their own names or their parents’ names and that it posed a risk of children potentially getting lost in the system.
Migrant families in McAllen, Texas. The policy was in place for six weeks and resulted in the separation of 2,814 children from their parents and guardians. Photograph: Spencer Platt/Getty Images
Lee Gelernt, a senior immigration lawyer, with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), said: “Everyone, but especially the DoJ, should have known that tearing children away from their parents was patently unconstitutional. The ACLU should never have had to file a lawsuit to establish that obvious point.”
Rosenstein, who retired from the Department of Justice (DoJ) in 2019 and is now a partner at King & Spalding, a top Washington law firm, said in a statement to the Guardian: “Federal prosecutors did not separate parents from children. The policy the attorney general adopted for the Department of Justice in April 2018 was unambiguous: every defendant the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] arrested and referred for prosecution would be evaluated by federal prosecutors without any categorical exemption.”
Under the zero-tolerance policy, hundreds of parents were deported to their home countries without their children and the family separations were later deemed by a federal judge in California to be unconstitutional, “brutal” and “offensive”. The government’s conduct, Judge Dana Sabraw said, arbitrarily tore at the “sacred bond between parent and child”.
The policy was in place from 6 April 2018 to 20 June 2018 when, facing intense legal and congressional pressure, it was ended by an executive order by Donald Trump.
One former DoJ official defended the department’s actions and told the Guardian that the attorney general’s order had “no effect” unless the DHS referred cases, which the person claimed was solely under the DHS’s purview.
“DHS repeatedly complained to the White House that DoJ was not prosecuting enough cases. They were driving the train,” the former official said.
Kirstjen Nielsen, who served as DHS secretary at the time, has defended her actions in that period, saying she was “enforcing the law”.
An investigation by the internal watchdog at the Department of Homeland Security found that CBP, a division of the DHS that enforces border controls, relied on “ad hoc” measures to record and track family separations and that it knew as early as November 2017 that its systems were deficient.
The DoJ has so far received far less scrutiny for its involvement in the child separation policy than the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Health and Human Services, which had custody of the children once they were separated.
The DoJ has consistently denied that it ever had a policy to separate children from their parents. But the new information suggests that the DoJ’s knowing cooperation facilitated the execution of the zero-tolerance policy and that it was fully aware that the immigration policy would result in children being separated from their parents, including those under the age of five.
Other participants on the conference call included Iris Lan, an associate deputy attorney general who has been nominated by the Trump administration to fill a lifetime appointment as a judge for the southern district of New York, and Adam Braverman, who was serving as an acting US attorney in the southern district of California at the time and has been nominated to serve as a judge in that district. Their nominations have not yet been reviewed or approved by the Senate.
Details about Rosenstein’s call with US attorneys have been shared with the inspector general’s office of the DoJ, which is conducting a review of the “planning and implementation” of the zero-tolerance policy by the department.
A spokesperson for the DoJ said US attorneys had “maintained discretion to make prosecutorial decisions on a case-by-case basis”. It declined to comment on “internal deliberations” but, in response to questions sent to Lan by the Guardian, said that Lan would “have had no policy decision-making role”. The Guardian also requested a comment from Braverman but did not immediately receive a response.
A spokesperson for the US attorney’s office in the western district of Texas declined to comment.
Rosenstein is not believed to have been a driving force behind the zero-tolerance policy, which was launched by Sessions in conjunction with the White House as part of Trump’s campaign to crack down on undocumented migrants.
He gained an unusually high profile in his role as the No 2 official at the DoJbecause he had oversight of Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
For many Democrats, Rosenstein’s longtime career at the DoJ and his institutional role was seen at the time as an assurance that the investigation would be protected from possible interference by the Trump administration. His role in the zero-tolerance policy has received far less scrutiny.
Everyone, but especially the DoJ, should have known that tearing children away from their parents was unconstitutional Lee Gelernt
Rosenstein publicly defended the zero-tolerance policy at an American Bar Association conference in August 2018, where he said he believed it was consistent with the rule of law and reflected a surge in illegal immigration into the US.
“It would be wrong to say we’re prosecuting everyone without regard to the law,” he said, adding that the DoJ was committing resources to ensure that everyone was treated equally under the law rather than “picking and choosing” who will be prosecuted.
Agencies in the federal government including the DoJ had already experimented with a “pilot programme” of child separation in the western district of Texas in 2017, which resulted in the separation of 1,556 children from their parents. Court-ordered efforts to reunite parents with their children in hundreds of those cases have largely “come to a halt” in Latin America during the coronavirus crisis, according to immigration lawyers at the ACLU, which has helped lead the effort.


theguardian--2020-07-23--US ambassador to UK accused of making racist and sexist remarks

The US ambassador to the UK , Woody Johnson , was reportedly investigated by a state department watchdog over alleged racist and sexist comments to staff and for allegedly trying to use his position to advance Donald Trump ’ s business interests .
The outcome of an investigation by the Office of the Inspector General ( OIG ) has not yet been published , and the former inspector general Steve Linick was fired in May .
Johnson , a billionaire Trump supporter , is reported by CNN to have become agitated before a Black History Month event in 2018 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ a whole bunch of black people ” .
Johnson is said to have questioned why there needed to be a Black History Month , claiming that the “ real challenge ” was that black fathers did not stay with their families .
The ambassador is also reported to have hosted official events at the men-only White ’ s club in London , from which female embassy staff were excluded .
He allegedly resisted holding an event on gender-based violence , telling staff he was not interested because he was “ not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and CNN reported that , at the president ’ s request , the ambassador lobbied the UK ’ s secretary of state for Scotland at the time , David Mundell , for the British Open golf tournament to be held at the Trump-owned Turnberry course .
But Johnson said that the accusations were false .
He tweeted : “ These false claims of insensitive remarks about race and gender are totally inconsistent with my longstanding record and values.
” The UK government denied that Johnson had raised the issue with Mundell in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Golf Club , which organises the tournament , said Turnberry remained in the pool of possible courses to host the tournament .
However , none of the next four Opens will be played at the Ayrshire course .
Some of the allegations are reported to have been raised with the OIG , a traditionally independent watchdog body .
That independence was called into question when Linick was fired by the secretary of state , Mike Pompeo , at a time when his office was looking into complaints that Pompeo had abused his office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Democratic congressman from California , called for Johnson to resign if the allegations against him were confirmed .
“ There is no place for racism , sexism or corruption in our [ state department ] , ” Lieu said on Twitter , calling on the House foreign affairs committee to look into whether the OIG investigation of Johnson was a contributing cause in Linick ’ s dismissal .
A state department spokesperson said : “ Ambassador Johnson is a valued member of the team who has led Mission UK honorably and professionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look forward to him continuing to ensure our special relationship with the UK is strong .
”

The US ambassador to the UK, Woody Johnson, was reportedly investigated by a state department watchdog over alleged racist and sexist comments to staff and for allegedly trying to use his position to advance Donald Trump’s business interests.
The outcome of an investigation by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) has not yet been published, and the former inspector general Steve Linick was fired in May.
Johnson, a billionaire Trump supporter, is reported by CNN to have become agitated before a Black History Month event in 2018, asking aides if the audience would be “a whole bunch of black people”.
Johnson is said to have questioned why there needed to be a Black History Month, claiming that the “real challenge” was that black fathers did not stay with their families.
The ambassador is also reported to have hosted official events at the men-only White’s club in London, from which female embassy staff were excluded. He allegedly resisted holding an event on gender-based violence, telling staff he was not interested because he was “not a woman”.
The New York Times and CNN reported that, at the president’s request, the ambassador lobbied the UK’s secretary of state for Scotland at the time, David Mundell, for the British Open golf tournament to be held at the Trump-owned Turnberry course.
But Johnson said that the accusations were false. He tweeted: “These false claims of insensitive remarks about race and gender are totally inconsistent with my longstanding record and values.”
I have followed the ethical rules and requirements of my office at all times. These false claims of insensitive remarks about race and gender are totally inconsistent with my longstanding record and values. — Ambassador Johnson (@USAmbUK) July 22, 2020
The UK government denied that Johnson had raised the issue with Mundell in their introductory meeting. The Royal and Ancient Golf Club, which organises the tournament, said Turnberry remained in the pool of possible courses to host the tournament. However, none of the next four Opens will be played at the Ayrshire course.
Some of the allegations are reported to have been raised with the OIG, a traditionally independent watchdog body. That independence was called into question when Linick was fired by the secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, at a time when his office was looking into complaints that Pompeo had abused his office for personal advantage.
Ted Lieu, a Democratic congressman from California, called for Johnson to resign if the allegations against him were confirmed.
“There is no place for racism, sexism or corruption in our [state department],” Lieu said on Twitter, calling on the House foreign affairs committee to look into whether the OIG investigation of Johnson was a contributing cause in Linick’s dismissal.
A state department spokesperson said: “Ambassador Johnson is a valued member of the team who has led Mission UK honorably and professionally. We stand by Ambassador Johnson and look forward to him continuing to ensure our special relationship with the UK is strong.”


theguardian--2020-07-23--Joe Biden calls Donald Trump America's 'first' racist president

Joe Biden has called Donald Trump the country ’ s “ first ” racist president , saying the way he deals with people based on the the colour of their skin is “ absolutely sickening ” .
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee ’ s comments came during a virtual town hall organised by the Service Employees International Union .
When a questioner complained of racism linked to the coronavirus outbreak and mentioned the president referring to it as the “ China virus ” , Biden responded by blasting Trump and “ his spread of racism ” .
“ The way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colour of their skin , their national origin , where they ’ re from , is absolutely sickening , ” the former vice president said .
“ No sitting president has ever done this .
Never , never , never .
No Republican president has done this .
No Democratic president .
We ’ ve had racists , and they ’ ve existed .
They ’ ve tried to get elected president .
He ’ s the first one that has.
” Biden also suggested that Trump was using race “ as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the pandemic .
Many presidents – including the nation ’ s first , George Washington – owned slaves .
President Woodrow Wilson , the country ’ s 28th president , is having his name removed from Princeton University ’ s public policy school after recent protests against institutional racism and police brutality .
Wilson , who served in the early 20th century , supported segregation and imposed it on several federal agencies .
Responding to Biden ’ s comments at a White House briefing on Wednesday , Trump pointed to his administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ legislation and expanding opportunity zones , as well as the low unemployment numbers for minority groups before the coronavirus outbreak .
“ I ’ ve done more for Black Americans than anybody with the possible of exception of Abraham Lincoln , ” the president said .
“ Nobody has even been close.
” Katrina Pierson , a senior adviser for Trump ’ s re-election campaign , said in a statement that “ no one should take lectures on racial justice from Joe Biden.
” Biden has vowed that , if elected , he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first 100 days of office .
It is not the first time Biden has suggested Trump ’ s actions were racist .
Biden has built his campaign on the election being a “ battle for the soul of the nation ” and said he felt compelled to run after he saw Trump respond to a deadly 2017 white supremacist attack on counterprotesters in Charlottesville , Virginia , by saying there were “ some very fine people ” on both sides .
When Trump said last year that four Democratic congresswomen of colour should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Biden called it a “ flat , racist attack .
”

Joe Biden has called Donald Trump the country’s “first” racist president, saying the way he deals with people based on the the colour of their skin is “absolutely sickening”.
The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee’s comments came during a virtual town hall organised by the Service Employees International Union. When a questioner complained of racism linked to the coronavirus outbreak and mentioned the president referring to it as the “China virus”, Biden responded by blasting Trump and “his spread of racism”.
“The way he deals with people based on the colour of their skin, their national origin, where they’re from, is absolutely sickening,” the former vice president said. “No sitting president has ever done this. Never, never, never. No Republican president has done this. No Democratic president. We’ve had racists, and they’ve existed. They’ve tried to get elected president. He’s the first one that has.”
Biden also suggested that Trump was using race “as a wedge” to distract from his mishandling of the pandemic.
Many presidents – including the nation’s first, George Washington – owned slaves. President Woodrow Wilson, the country’s 28th president, is having his name removed from Princeton University’s public policy school after recent protests against institutional racism and police brutality. Wilson, who served in the early 20th century, supported segregation and imposed it on several federal agencies.
Responding to Biden’s comments at a White House briefing on Wednesday, Trump pointed to his administration’s efforts passing criminal justice reform legislation and expanding opportunity zones, as well as the low unemployment numbers for minority groups before the coronavirus outbreak.
“I’ve done more for Black Americans than anybody with the possible of exception of Abraham Lincoln,” the president said. “Nobody has even been close.”
Katrina Pierson, a senior adviser for Trump’s re-election campaign, said in a statement that “no one should take lectures on racial justice from Joe Biden.”
Biden has vowed that, if elected, he will begin addressing institutional racism within his first 100 days of office.
It is not the first time Biden has suggested Trump’s actions were racist.
Biden has built his campaign on the election being a “battle for the soul of the nation” and said he felt compelled to run after he saw Trump respond to a deadly 2017 white supremacist attack on counterprotesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, by saying there were “some very fine people” on both sides.
When Trump said last year that four Democratic congresswomen of colour should “go back” to their countries, Biden called it a “flat, racist attack.”


theguardian--2020-07-23--Take it from a historian. We don't owe anything to Confederate monuments | Timothy Snyder

If you approach me to ask me a question , and I hit you with a baton and spray teargas in your face , I have committed a crime .
If you are walking down the street and I forcibly pull you into a van , I have committed a crime .
These are now the routine actions of employees of the federal government directed against American citizens .
“ Rapid deployment teams ” of federal employees , now in Portland and soon in other American cities , are committing crimes on the basis of a theory which holds that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Why ?
Because a statue might be endangered .
For Donald Trump , the concept of human rights has been replaced by the concept of the protection of sacred objects .
The president of the United States has declared that the entities that enjoy rights are not people but monuments ( all of them , apparently ) .
When federal officials speak now of “ violence ” or threats to “ homeland security ” , they do not mean racism or the pandemic but graffiti .
Humans figure as potential violators of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are to be surveilled because we might be thinking of damaging a statue and arrested or beaten because we are in a place where there is a statue .
This is not just a distraction or an overreaction .
It is an anti-democratic form of politics which is characteristic of the new authoritarianism worldwide .
In my books I call it the “ politics of eternity ” : a displacement of the real challenges of the actual world with a myth of a sacred past that must be protected .
We face a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a pandemic that has taken nearly 150,000 lives .
A responsible government would address these problems .
The Trump administration is not just distracting us from them by creating lawless mayhem but building a different idea of the task of government – from policy to memory .
It is displacing the idea of democratic responsibility with that of the politics of eternity .
A politician of eternity seeks to shift the work of government away from the actual problems of actual people and towards the enforcement of national myth .
Although politicians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ word “ history ” , the politics of eternity is not at all about history .
It is a myth of guilt and innocence .
It proposes that , at some mystical moment in the past , our nation ( or race ) was innocent and perfect , and that we must commune with that image , closing our eyes to the complications of both past and present , and forget entirely about the future .
For Trump , statues of Confederate notables , often erected between the two world wars , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Of course , these statues do not embody “ history ” .
The erection and the destruction of monuments are facts in history , not history itself .
Like all monuments , Confederate statues represent a moment of social consensus and political power .
In this case , the moment was the triumph of white supremacy and the success of racial cleansing in American towns and cities two and three generations after the end of the civil war .
Every monument that has ever gone up will at some point come down .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ During the first world war , Americans insisted on national self-determination in Europe , and at its end the statues of the old emperors came down .
After the next world war , American GIs watched in Europe as city squares named after Adolf Hitler were renamed .
( The German term for “ rapid deployment teams ” , by the way , was “ taskforces ” , or Einsatzgruppen . )
Americans cheered when the Lenin monuments came down after the revolutions of 1989 .
Americans themselves brought down a statue of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now be restored ?
Free people aware of their history can debate and dispute what should go up and what must come down .
History is not a fictive permanence where an autocrat tells us that we are right and the others are wrong because we have mystical objects in the sacred locations .
History can not be captured by the dead weight of metal or cement and transformed into an object of worship , the meaning of which is defined by a leader ’ s whim .
That is the politics of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
History , by contrast , is about recording and understanding change .
It takes for granted that the past structures the present , but also that people can understand those limitations and find ways to transcend them .
That is freedom .
Democracy requires history , because free people must always be judging our leaders , and ourselves , for our past mistakes .
The history of those years between and around the world wars , if we attend to it , tells us things that we need to know .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first world war were beaten and humiliated .
African Americans were purged from American cities .
America after the first world war suffered from a pandemic .
We failed , then as now , to establish national public health .
Then , as now , a sense of white entitlement got in the way of a system in which everyone would have access to care .
We chose “ racial hygiene ” over public health , and have ever since .
Adolf Hitler admired the Jim Crow laws of the interwar years and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ army to fight the second world war .
The men who returned very often found that they could not vote nor enter public places .
Then , as now , the separation of African Americans from their basic rights makes us all less free .
American history tells us that freedom is impossible for all when it is denied to the few , and that public health is thwarted by racism .
If our democracy is to survive , and if we are to contain a pandemic that has defined this year and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 400 years , we will need to reckon with our actual past , insist on everyone ’ s rights in the present , and plan for a different and better future .
The politics of eternity must give way to a politics of responsibility : where we see the past as a source of inspiration , caution , and reflection .
Humans have rights because we are capable of this , and democracies will thrive when we do .
• None Timothy Snyder is the Levin professor of history at Yale University .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ his books On Tyranny and The Road to Unfreedom .
His forthcoming book , this September , is entitled Our Malady

If you approach me to ask me a question, and I hit you with a baton and spray teargas in your face, I have committed a crime. If you are walking down the street and I forcibly pull you into a van, I have committed a crime. These are now the routine actions of employees of the federal government directed against American citizens. “Rapid deployment teams” of federal employees, now in Portland and soon in other American cities, are committing crimes on the basis of a theory which holds that Americans are due no legal protection.
Why? Because a statue might be endangered. For Donald Trump, the concept of human rights has been replaced by the concept of the protection of sacred objects. The president of the United States has declared that the entities that enjoy rights are not people but monuments (all of them, apparently). When federal officials speak now of “violence” or threats to “homeland security”, they do not mean racism or the pandemic but graffiti. Humans figure as potential violators of the moral order created by things. We are to be surveilled because we might be thinking of damaging a statue and arrested or beaten because we are in a place where there is a statue.
For Donald Trump, the concept of human rights has been replaced by the concept of the protection of sacred objects
This is not just a distraction or an overreaction. It is an anti-democratic form of politics which is characteristic of the new authoritarianism worldwide. In my books I call it the “politics of eternity”: a displacement of the real challenges of the actual world with a myth of a sacred past that must be protected.
We face a racial crisis that threatens African Americans and a pandemic that has taken nearly 150,000 lives. A responsible government would address these problems. The Trump administration is not just distracting us from them by creating lawless mayhem but building a different idea of the task of government – from policy to memory. It is displacing the idea of democratic responsibility with that of the politics of eternity. A politician of eternity seeks to shift the work of government away from the actual problems of actual people and towards the enforcement of national myth.
Although politicians such as Trump like to use the word “history”, the politics of eternity is not at all about history. It is a myth of guilt and innocence. It proposes that, at some mystical moment in the past, our nation (or race) was innocent and perfect, and that we must commune with that image, closing our eyes to the complications of both past and present, and forget entirely about the future. For Trump, statues of Confederate notables, often erected between the two world wars, are the touchstone of our national communion.
Of course, these statues do not embody “history”. The erection and the destruction of monuments are facts in history, not history itself. Like all monuments, Confederate statues represent a moment of social consensus and political power. In this case, the moment was the triumph of white supremacy and the success of racial cleansing in American towns and cities two and three generations after the end of the civil war.
Every monument that has ever gone up will at some point come down. That is what history looks like. During the first world war, Americans insisted on national self-determination in Europe, and at its end the statues of the old emperors came down. After the next world war, American GIs watched in Europe as city squares named after Adolf Hitler were renamed. (The German term for “rapid deployment teams”, by the way, was “taskforces”, or Einsatzgruppen.) Americans cheered when the Lenin monuments came down after the revolutions of 1989. Americans themselves brought down a statue of Saddam Hussein. Should all of this now be restored?
Free people aware of their history can debate and dispute what should go up and what must come down. History is not a fictive permanence where an autocrat tells us that we are right and the others are wrong because we have mystical objects in the sacred locations. History cannot be captured by the dead weight of metal or cement and transformed into an object of worship, the meaning of which is defined by a leader’s whim. That is the politics of eternity, used to make us unfree.
History is about recording and understanding change
History, by contrast, is about recording and understanding change. It takes for granted that the past structures the present, but also that people can understand those limitations and find ways to transcend them. That is freedom. Democracy requires history, because free people must always be judging our leaders, and ourselves, for our past mistakes. The history of those years between and around the world wars, if we attend to it, tells us things that we need to know.
The black American GIs who returned from the first world war were beaten and humiliated. African Americans were purged from American cities. America after the first world war suffered from a pandemic. We failed, then as now, to establish national public health. Then, as now, a sense of white entitlement got in the way of a system in which everyone would have access to care. We chose “racial hygiene” over public health, and have ever since. Adolf Hitler admired the Jim Crow laws of the interwar years and emulated them. We sent a segregated army to fight the second world war. The men who returned very often found that they could not vote nor enter public places. Then, as now, the separation of African Americans from their basic rights makes us all less free.
American history tells us that freedom is impossible for all when it is denied to the few, and that public health is thwarted by racism. If our democracy is to survive, and if we are to contain a pandemic that has defined this year and a history of racism that goes back 400 years, we will need to reckon with our actual past, insist on everyone’s rights in the present, and plan for a different and better future. The politics of eternity must give way to a politics of responsibility: where we see the past as a source of inspiration, caution, and reflection. Humans have rights because we are capable of this, and democracies will thrive when we do.


theguardian--2020-07-22--Revealed: US spends millions of taxpayer dollars on ineffective voting restrictions

Restrictive “ voter identification ” laws pushed by Republicans , and widely regarded to be ineffective and discriminatory , have cost taxpayers at least $ 36m in just a few states , the Guardian can reveal .
It ’ s well documented that restrictive voter ID laws are ineffective and discriminatory .
The type of voter fraud they claim to prevent is a myth , and the burden of showing an ID disproportionately lands on students , low-income voters and African Americans .
However , these laws are also extraordinarily expensive to implement and defend .
Based on information obtained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has found that the partial costs of litigation , free identification cards , public education and other fees amount to tens of millions across the country .
However , even with many states having to slash their budgets due to the economic crisis , one state , Kentucky , has decided to spend millions implementing a new ID law .
While the rest of the state was under “ stay-at-home ” advisories because of coronavirus , the Kentucky legislature convened in early March and April in order to pass its voter ID bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s veto .
When SB2 went into effect on 15 July , Kentucky became the 19th state , according to the National Conference of State Legislatures , that requires voters to present a photo ID at the polls , and voters who apply for absentee ballots must include a copy of their ID .
But passing this bill required some expensive tweaks – most significantly , the state would have to offer IDs for free to all residents or the law would probably be ruled unconstitutional , says Wendy Weiser , director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Center for Justice , a non-partisan thinktank and public interest law center .
According to the bill ’ s fiscal note statement , just that provision of the law could cost up to $ 3.6m a year .
Senator Robert Mills , the bill ’ s primary sponsor , didn ’ t respond to a request for comments about whether SB2 was an appropriate use of taxpayers ’ money , nor did 11 of the co-sponsors .
When Georgia passed its original voter ID bill in 2006 , it offered free IDs only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ afford them .
According to a report from the Brennan Center , a federal court later blocked that aspect because “ many voters for whom a fee would pose a burden might be reluctant to take the oath out of embarrassment or because they do not believe they are indigent ” .
In fact , the Missouri supreme court found that the state must pay even for the documents required to get the ID , such as a birth certificate .
Since 1 January 2006 , Indiana , which also has a photo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 30.5m to issue roughly 2.7m of these free IDs .
Meanwhile , in Texas , the process of implementing a strict voter ID law dragged on for almost seven years , during which the state spent at least $ 3.5m on attorney ’ s fees , outside counsel , travel expenses and expert witnesses .
In addition , the litigation was so time-consuming that the attorney general had to pull in lawyers from other departments .
In total , the state invested more than 12,400 hours in these cases .
Ultimately , Texas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – but at a high price .
In May , a federal judge ordered the state to pay the plaintiffs ’ $ 6.8m in legal fees ( the state says it will appeal against the ruling ) .
Often these lengthy lawsuits exacerbate another set of costs for states : educating the public every time there ’ s a change .
After Georgia passed its ID law , it ran public service announcements on unpopular radio stations during off-peak hours and planned to distribute a letter that , according to the courts , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the voters who are most likely to lack a photo ID ” .
However , that court went on to add that “ if the state undertakes sufficient steps to inform voters of the [ law ’ s ] requirements before future elections , the statute might well survive a challenge ” .
During the first three years of its ID laws , Kansas spent at least $ 430,000 on its public outreach , while Wisconsin spent $ 631,899 in its first year alone .
Even with heavily discounted rates from TV and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has spent nearly $ 1.2m on its “ Bring It to the Ballot ” campaign , which includes radio spots , brochures and TV ads .
Yet the $ 36m price tag may only be the tip of the iceberg .
The departments of justice in several states claim that their lawyers don ’ t track their time , making it impossible to document the bulk of the costs of defending these ID laws .
“ We want to get you what you need , ” said Gillian Drummond , communications director for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ breakdown of the agency ’ s litigation expenses , “ but I can ’ t create something that wasn ’ t tracked previously ” .
Despite the recent passage of SB2 in Kentucky , the legal tide may be turning .
When these voter ID laws first were ratified , “ the understanding of voter fraud was very ill-formed ” , says Weiser .
“ The supreme court ’ s decision to uphold the [ Indiana ] law was based on conjecture and was highly deferential to states.
” Since then , empirical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in practice , which has helped persuade at least one judge that they aren ’ t constitutional .
Richard Posner , a Reagan appointee , wrote the original decision upholding Indiana ’ s ID law .
However , in 2014 , he voted to suspend Wisconsin ’ s law , writing in a dissent on the 7th circuit court of appeals that legislation like it was “ a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was challenged almost immediately in state and federal court .
Says one of the lawsuits , “ Put simply , a pandemic is no time to impose a new requirement for identification that forces voters to enter government offices , have in-person interactions with election officials , and/or enter other public spaces to obtain a copy of their ID.
” The case could reach the supreme court , which has recently been voting to uphold voter restrictions in Florida , Wisconsin and Alabama .
Experts say it ’ s likely the law will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , taxpayers will foot a sizeable bill .

Restrictive “voter identification” laws pushed by Republicans, and widely regarded to be ineffective and discriminatory, have cost taxpayers at least $36m in just a few states, the Guardian can reveal.
It’s well documented that restrictive voter ID laws are ineffective and discriminatory. The type of voter fraud they claim to prevent is a myth, and the burden of showing an ID disproportionately lands on students, low-income voters and African Americans.
However, these laws are also extraordinarily expensive to implement and defend. Based on information obtained through open records requests, the Guardian has found that the partial costs of litigation, free identification cards, public education and other fees amount to tens of millions across the country.
However, even with many states having to slash their budgets due to the economic crisis, one state, Kentucky, has decided to spend millions implementing a new ID law.
While the rest of the state was under “stay-at-home” advisories because of coronavirus, the Kentucky legislature convened in early March and April in order to pass its voter ID bill and then again to override the governor’s veto. When SB2 went into effect on 15 July, Kentucky became the 19th state, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, that requires voters to present a photo ID at the polls, and voters who apply for absentee ballots must include a copy of their ID.
But passing this bill required some expensive tweaks – most significantly, the state would have to offer IDs for free to all residents or the law would probably be ruled unconstitutional, says Wendy Weiser, director of the Democracy program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a non-partisan thinktank and public interest law center. According to the bill’s fiscal note statement, just that provision of the law could cost up to $3.6m a year. Senator Robert Mills, the bill’s primary sponsor, didn’t respond to a request for comments about whether SB2 was an appropriate use of taxpayers’ money, nor did 11 of the co-sponsors.
When Georgia passed its original voter ID bill in 2006, it offered free IDs only to those who swore they could not afford them. According to a report from the Brennan Center, a federal court later blocked that aspect because “many voters for whom a fee would pose a burden might be reluctant to take the oath out of embarrassment or because they do not believe they are indigent”. In fact, the Missouri supreme court found that the state must pay even for the documents required to get the ID, such as a birth certificate.
Often these lengthy lawsuits exacerbate another set of costs for states: educating the public every time there’s a change
Since 1 January 2006, Indiana, which also has a photo ID law, has spent nearly $30.5m to issue roughly 2.7m of these free IDs.
Meanwhile, in Texas, the process of implementing a strict voter ID law dragged on for almost seven years, during which the state spent at least $3.5m on attorney’s fees, outside counsel, travel expenses and expert witnesses. In addition, the litigation was so time-consuming that the attorney general had to pull in lawyers from other departments. In total, the state invested more than 12,400 hours in these cases.
Ultimately, Texas’s ID law survived these challenges – but at a high price. In May, a federal judge ordered the state to pay the plaintiffs’ $6.8m in legal fees (the state says it will appeal against the ruling).
Often these lengthy lawsuits exacerbate another set of costs for states: educating the public every time there’s a change.
After Georgia passed its ID law, it ran public service announcements on unpopular radio stations during off-peak hours and planned to distribute a letter that, according to the courts, was “not reasonably calculated to reach the voters who are most likely to lack a photo ID”. However, that court went on to add that “if the state undertakes sufficient steps to inform voters of the [law’s] requirements before future elections, the statute might well survive a challenge”.
During the first three years of its ID laws, Kansas spent at least $430,000 on its public outreach, while Wisconsin spent $631,899 in its first year alone. Even with heavily discounted rates from TV and radio stations, the critical swing state has spent nearly $1.2m on its “Bring It to the Ballot” campaign, which includes radio spots, brochures and TV ads.
Yet the $36m price tag may only be the tip of the iceberg. The departments of justice in several states claim that their lawyers don’t track their time, making it impossible to document the bulk of the costs of defending these ID laws. “We want to get you what you need,” said Gillian Drummond, communications director for the Wisconsin DoJ when asked for a breakdown of the agency’s litigation expenses, “but I can’t create something that wasn’t tracked previously”.
Despite the recent passage of SB2 in Kentucky, the legal tide may be turning. When these voter ID laws first were ratified, “the understanding of voter fraud was very ill-formed”, says Weiser. “The supreme court’s decision to uphold the [Indiana] law was based on conjecture and was highly deferential to states.”
Since then, empirical research has shown how discriminatory these laws are in practice, which has helped persuade at least one judge that they aren’t constitutional. Richard Posner, a Reagan appointee, wrote the original decision upholding Indiana’s ID law. However, in 2014, he voted to suspend Wisconsin’s law, writing in a dissent on the 7th circuit court of appeals that legislation like it was “a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government”.
As expected, Kentucky’s SB2 was challenged almost immediately in state and federal court. Says one of the lawsuits, “Put simply, a pandemic is no time to impose a new requirement for identification that forces voters to enter government offices, have in-person interactions with election officials, and/or enter other public spaces to obtain a copy of their ID.”
The case could reach the supreme court, which has recently been voting to uphold voter restrictions in Florida, Wisconsin and Alabama. Experts say it’s likely the law will be ruled constitutional, but either way, taxpayers will foot a sizeable bill.