shareblue--2020-06-30--GOP Senate candidate says 'smart African Americans' should stand up to Black Lives Matter

A GOP Senate candidate said last week that the `` smart African Americans '' need to counter the Black Lives Matter movement .
Corky Messner , Donald Trump 's choice in the New Hampshire primary to challenge Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen this November , made the comments in a radio interview with former Republican New Hampshire House Speaker Bill O'Brien .
Asked about the Black Lives Matter movement , Messner said the killing of George Floyd was `` horrific '' and `` bad '' and that the police officer charged with his murder `` should be held accountable . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that `` 99.999 % '' of Americans ' interactions with the police are `` good , protective , and law enforcement doing the right thing . ''
Messner added that he `` would like to see leaders from the conservative side of the African American community get into this discussion '' because they have a `` perspective '' that is different from `` the Al Sharptons of the world . ''
He praised conservative Black academics Bob Woodson , Thomas Sowell , and Shelby Steele , suggesting that they could counter the Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systemic racism .
`` These are smart African American folks who study this , and they have a totally different perspective on all this , '' Messner said .
`` And I think their perspective , you know , will help the African American community . ''
Messner later added that he believes `` it 's very clear that Black Lives Matter has a leftist agenda and it 's very clear it 's a revolutionary agenda and sadly , the African American community will suffer because of it . ''
`` I 'm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' Messner said in an email , adding , `` I think we can all learn from each other and if there 's anything this crisis has taught us , is that we have to .
This ca n't be about politics anymore . ''
Messner , whose primary is in September , has come under fire in recent weeks for comments against teaching `` multiculturalism '' in public schools and for suggesting a ban on Chinese students at American universities .
Correction : A previous version of this story misspelled Thomas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of The American Independent Foundation .

A GOP Senate candidate said last week that the “smart African Americans” need to counter the Black Lives Matter movement.
Corky Messner, Donald Trump’s choice in the New Hampshire primary to challenge Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen this November, made the comments in a radio interview with former Republican New Hampshire House Speaker Bill O’Brien.
Asked about the Black Lives Matter movement, Messner said the killing of George Floyd was “horrific” and “bad” and that the police officer charged with his murder “should be held accountable.” But, Messner said, he thinks that “99.999%” of Americans’ interactions with the police are “good, protective, and law enforcement doing the right thing.”
Messner added that he “would like to see leaders from the conservative side of the African American community get into this discussion” because they have a “perspective” that is different from “the Al Sharptons of the world.”
He praised conservative Black academics Bob Woodson, Thomas Sowell, and Shelby Steele, suggesting that they could counter the Black Lives Matter movement’s push to address systemic racism.
“These are smart African American folks who study this, and they have a totally different perspective on all this,” Messner said. “And I think their perspective, you know, will help the African American community.”
Messner later added that he believes “it’s very clear that Black Lives Matter has a leftist agenda and it’s very clear it’s a revolutionary agenda and sadly, the African American community will suffer because of it.”
“I’m encouraging people to listen to all sides,” Messner said in an email, adding, “I think we can all learn from each other and if there’s anything this crisis has taught us, is that we have to. This can’t be about politics anymore.”
Messner, whose primary is in September, has come under fire in recent weeks for comments against teaching “multiculturalism” in public schools and for suggesting a ban on Chinese students at American universities.
Correction: A previous version of this story misspelled Thomas Sowell’s name.
Updated with comments from Messner.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-06-30--Top Republican on House Oversight Committee has repeatedly tried to block oversight

The new top Republican on the House oversight panel does not believe in oversight for Donald Trump .
Republican leaders announced Monday that they had chosen Rep. James Comer ( R-KY ) to serve as ranking member on the House Oversight and Reform Committee .
Former Rep. Mark Meadows ( R-NC ) vacated the position when he resigned in March to become White House chief of staff .
On Tuesday morning , Trump congratulated Comer by retweeting a message from Rep. Jim Jordan ( R-OH ) — who had been serving in the role on an interim basis — predicting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watchdog of the federal government . ''
But Comer has a long record of opposing any oversight of Trump and his administration .
In his press release on Monday , he wrote that he was `` committed to holding those accountable who misuse taxpayer dollars and promote corruption in government . ''
`` Unfortunately , rather than conducting credible oversight , House Democrats have spent significant time and resources harassing the Trump Administration purely out of spite and hatred , '' he said .
In April , however , he opposed the decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus pandemic and the federal government 's response .
In a floor speech , Comer denounced addition of `` a new , costly , unnecessary select committee to smear President Trump during an election year . ''
He called it `` an outrageous attempt to — yet again — use Congress to smear President Trump ... just like the impeachment charade a few months ago . ''
Last February , Comer dismissed the Oversight Committee 's decision to hear testimony from Trump 's longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen , who pleaded guilty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for hush money payments on behalf of Trump to two women ahead of the 2016 election .
`` I do n't believe that Michael Cohen is capable of telling the truth and I would hope that , as this Committee moves forward , that when we have the opportunity to subpoena witnesses , we subpoena witnesses that are not recently disbarred , are not [ a ] convicted felon , and witnesses that have n't committed bank fraud and tax fraud , '' Comer said at the time .
In February 2018 , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem if Trump wanted to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein while he was supervising special counsel Robert Mueller 's Russia investigation , which Comer dismissed `` a big distraction . ''
`` The president has the ability to fire his at-will employees , so if the president fired Rosenstein , I would support that , '' Comer told CNN .
`` I think that there are a lot of people in America — especially in my district of Kentucky — that are disappointed in the attorney general and Rosenstein , and you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Russia , then let ’ s get it out .
This has been a year .
This has been a distraction . ''
In May 2017 , Comer also defended Trump against allegations he had pressured former FBI Director James Comey to stop an ongoing investigation into Trump 's former national security adviser , Michael Flynn .
Referencing reports that Trump asked Comey to `` see your way clear to letting this go , to letting Flynn go , '' the Kentucky Republican told the Washington Post it was likely just a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on paper , '' Comer explained .
Comer 's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this article , on whether he 'd support oversight of the White House or Trump administration moving forward in his new role .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The new top Republican on the House oversight panel does not believe in oversight for Donald Trump.
Republican leaders announced Monday that they had chosen Rep. James Comer (R-KY) to serve as ranking member on the House Oversight and Reform Committee. Former Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) vacated the position when he resigned in March to become White House chief of staff.
On Tuesday morning, Trump congratulated Comer by retweeting a message from Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) — who had been serving in the role on an interim basis — predicting that Comer will “be a fierce watchdog of the federal government.”
But Comer has a long record of opposing any oversight of Trump and his administration.
In his press release on Monday, he wrote that he was “committed to holding those accountable who misuse taxpayer dollars and promote corruption in government.”
“Unfortunately, rather than conducting credible oversight, House Democrats have spent significant time and resources harassing the Trump Administration purely out of spite and hatred,” he said.
In April, however, he opposed the decision to create a special subcommittee to investigate the coronavirus pandemic and the federal government’s response. In a floor speech, Comer denounced addition of “a new, costly, unnecessary select committee to smear President Trump during an election year.”
He called it “an outrageous attempt to — yet again — use Congress to smear President Trump…just like the impeachment charade a few months ago.”
Last February, Comer dismissed the Oversight Committee’s decision to hear testimony from Trump’s longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty in December 2018 to campaign finance violations for hush money payments on behalf of Trump to two women ahead of the 2016 election.
“I don’t believe that Michael Cohen is capable of telling the truth and I would hope that, as this Committee moves forward, that when we have the opportunity to subpoena witnesses, we subpoena witnesses that are not recently disbarred, are not [a] convicted felon, and witnesses that haven’t committed bank fraud and tax fraud,” Comer said at the time.
In February 2018, he suggested that he would have no problem if Trump wanted to fire Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein while he was supervising special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, which Comer dismissed “a big distraction.”
“The president has the ability to fire his at-will employees, so if the president fired Rosenstein, I would support that,” Comer told CNN. “I think that there are a lot of people in America — especially in my district of Kentucky — that are disappointed in the attorney general and Rosenstein, and you know, if there is something there with Russia, then let’s get it out. This has been a year. This has been a distraction.”
In May 2017, Comer also defended Trump against allegations he had pressured former FBI Director James Comey to stop an ongoing investigation into Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael Flynn.
Referencing reports that Trump asked Comey to “see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” the Kentucky Republican told the Washington Post it was likely just a big joke.
“It looks different on paper,” Comer explained.
Comer’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this article, on whether he’d support oversight of the White House or Trump administration moving forward in his new role.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--Mississippi is trying to stop abortions with threats of prison

The Mississippi state House and Senate have just passed a bill that seeks to restrict the reasons for which a person can seek an abortion , also known as a `` reason ban . ''
The state 's anti-abortion Republican governor , Tate Reeves , is expected to sign it .
If the bill becomes law , it could discourage people from seeking abortion care in the state .
The Mississippi bill would impose penalties of at least one year in prison for a felony in the case of conviction on a doctor who `` intentionally or knowingly '' performed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or presumed race or sex of the unborn human being or because of the presence or presumed presence of a genetic abnormality . ''
Such bans require an abortion provider to unearth the reason someone wants an abortion .
Doctors essentially either have to make unfounded assumptions about their patients ' reasons , or they have to actively ask about them .
The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said these types of bans `` represent gross interference in the patient-physician relationship , creating a system in which patients and physicians are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in order to ensure access to care . ''
`` By forcing physicians to interrogate women about their motives for obtaining a medical service — in this case safe , legal abortion — this bill would turn doctors into investigators and women into suspects , '' Mary Nolan , executive director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon , said when that state was considering a similar ban in 2017 .
A reason ban is already on the books in Tennessee , though it was immediately challenged in court by abortion providers in that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law and the Mississippi bill , doctors are prohibited from performing abortions when they know the procedure is being chosen for a particular reason .
The legal filing in the Tennessee case explains the problem with the language in these sorts of bills , noting the bans `` do not make clear whether the law targets abortions where the prohibited reason is the patient 's sole reason , a primary reason , or one motivating factor among many . ''
Given that the Mississippi bill imposes criminal penalties , doctors may become wary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they might be aware that one of the forbidden reasons may be a factor .
Megan Donovan , a senior policy manager at the Guttmacher Institute , which tracks abortion laws and policies , says these penalties can deter doctors who would face criminal charges or the loss of their medical licenses .
Reason bans such as the one proposed by Mississippi are also flat-out racist .
The Guttmacher Institute says the bans are `` based on the idea that women of color are coerced into abortions or are complicit in a 'genocide @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Further , race-based bans , which bar someone from having an abortion because of the race of the fetus , `` send the message that women , and especially women of color , can not be trusted to make their own medical decisions . ''
If Mississippi 's bill becomes law , it will join a host of other restrictions on abortion in the state .
Mississippi already mandates both counseling and an ultrasound for people seeking to obtain an abortion , and it imposes a 24-hour waiting period between such counseling and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make two separate trips to a provider .
The state also bars the use of telemedicine for medication abortions , has a mandatory parental consent notification law , and bans one of the most common methods of abortion .
Further , Mississippi bars most abortions later in pregnancy , with an 18-week ban that has very few exceptions .
A total of 99 % of counties in the state have no abortion clinic , and there is currently only one stand-alone clinic left in Mississippi of three providers that remain .
With all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with possible wariness on the part of providers of running afoul of the reason ban , abortion in Mississippi may become close to impossible to obtain .
Guttmacher points out that these bans `` discourage honest , confidential conversations and interfere in the provider-patient relationship . ''
Because of that , `` patients may withhold information or be dissuaded from seeking care from providers altogether . ''
As a result , patients may attempt to get an abortion within the state and be turned away , or they may choose to travel outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their reasons .
Raising money to travel out of state is difficult for many patients and can take a considerable amount of time .
Traveling out of state also incurs secondary costs , such as for hotel room stays , lost wages for missing multiple days of work , and child care .
If a patient is denied abortion care in Mississippi and needs to travel out of state , their driving distance to the nearest clinic increases by nearly 50 % .
Additionally , abortions performed later in pregnancy are simply more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who were seeking abortions at or after the 20-week mark found that many `` attributed their delay in seeking care to logistical issues , such as difficulty finding a provider or raising the funds for the abortion . ''
That same study concluded that when people encounter a delay due to financial difficulty , they may experience a `` negative feedback loop '' : As the cost of abortion rises later in pregnancy , `` that , in turn , could lead to further delay if a woman needs to then raise additional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goes on long enough , people may end up having abortions much later in pregnancy , or being unable to get one at all .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The Mississippi state House and Senate have just passed a bill that seeks to restrict the reasons for which a person can seek an abortion, also known as a “reason ban.” The state’s anti-abortion Republican governor, Tate Reeves, is expected to sign it. If the bill becomes law, it could discourage people from seeking abortion care in the state. And that could mean people in Mississippi could be be forced to wait for the care they seek, travel out of state, and obtain abortions later in pregnancy, when they are more expensive and even more burdensome.
The Mississippi bill would impose penalties of at least one year in prison for a felony in the case of conviction on a doctor who “intentionally or knowingly” performed an abortion “because of the actual or presumed race or sex of the unborn human being or because of the presence or presumed presence of a genetic abnormality.”
Such bans require an abortion provider to unearth the reason someone wants an abortion. Doctors essentially either have to make unfounded assumptions about their patients’ reasons, or they have to actively ask about them.
The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has said these types of bans “represent gross interference in the patient-physician relationship, creating a system in which patients and physicians are forced to withhold information or outright lie in order to ensure access to care.”
“By forcing physicians to interrogate women about their motives for obtaining a medical service — in this case safe, legal abortion — this bill would turn doctors into investigators and women into suspects,” Mary Nolan, executive director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Oregon, said when that state was considering a similar ban in 2017.
A reason ban is already on the books in Tennessee, though it was immediately challenged in court by abortion providers in that state.
According to both the Tennessee law and the Mississippi bill, doctors are prohibited from performing abortions when they know the procedure is being chosen for a particular reason. The legal filing in the Tennessee case explains the problem with the language in these sorts of bills, noting the bans “do not make clear whether the law targets abortions where the prohibited reason is the patient’s sole reason, a primary reason, or one motivating factor among many.”
Given that the Mississippi bill imposes criminal penalties, doctors may become wary of performing abortions in any situation where they might be aware that one of the forbidden reasons may be a factor. Megan Donovan, a senior policy manager at the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion laws and policies, says these penalties can deter doctors who would face criminal charges or the loss of their medical licenses.
Reason bans such as the one proposed by Mississippi are also flat-out racist. The Guttmacher Institute says the bans are “based on the idea that women of color are coerced into abortions or are complicit in a ‘genocide’ against their own community.” Further, race-based bans, which bar someone from having an abortion because of the race of the fetus, “send the message that women, and especially women of color, cannot be trusted to make their own medical decisions.”
If Mississippi’s bill becomes law, it will join a host of other restrictions on abortion in the state. Mississippi already mandates both counseling and an ultrasound for people seeking to obtain an abortion, and it imposes a 24-hour waiting period between such counseling and the procedure, which means patients must make two separate trips to a provider. The state also bars the use of telemedicine for medication abortions, has a mandatory parental consent notification law, and bans one of the most common methods of abortion.
Further, Mississippi bars most abortions later in pregnancy, with an 18-week ban that has very few exceptions. A total of 99% of counties in the state have no abortion clinic, and there is currently only one stand-alone clinic left in Mississippi of three providers that remain.
With all of those restrictions in place, combined with possible wariness on the part of providers of running afoul of the reason ban, abortion in Mississippi may become close to impossible to obtain.
Guttmacher points out that these bans “discourage honest, confidential conversations and interfere in the provider-patient relationship.” Because of that, “patients may withhold information or be dissuaded from seeking care from providers altogether.”
As a result, patients may attempt to get an abortion within the state and be turned away, or they may choose to travel outside the state to avoid being interrogated about their reasons.
Raising money to travel out of state is difficult for many patients and can take a considerable amount of time. Traveling out of state also incurs secondary costs, such as for hotel room stays, lost wages for missing multiple days of work, and child care.
If a patient is denied abortion care in Mississippi and needs to travel out of state, their driving distance to the nearest clinic increases by nearly 50%.
Additionally, abortions performed later in pregnancy are simply more expensive.
One study that examined women who were seeking abortions at or after the 20-week mark found that many “attributed their delay in seeking care to logistical issues, such as difficulty finding a provider or raising the funds for the abortion.” That same study concluded that when people encounter a delay due to financial difficulty, they may experience a “negative feedback loop”: As the cost of abortion rises later in pregnancy, “that, in turn, could lead to further delay if a woman needs to then raise additional funds.”
If that feedback loop goes on long enough, people may end up having abortions much later in pregnancy, or being unable to get one at all.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--McEnany: Trump doesn't need to condemn 'white power' video because he deleted it

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Wednesday that Donald Trump did n't need to condemn a video he had promoted featuring a supporter yelling `` white power '' because he later deleted the tweet .
Trump retweeted the video on Sunday morning .
The video showed an unnamed man confronting anti-Trump protesters during a pro-Trump demonstration at The Villages retirement community in Florida .
Trump did not remove his tweet until over three hours later .
FRANCESCA CHAMBERS , MCCLATCHY DC : The president has come under criticism this week for statements that he has made that his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ certain segment of his base , that he is trying to gin up for reelection .
Those include comments like `` kung-flu , '' `` our heritage '' while talking about Confederate statues , and most recently , they include the video — that I know you discussed in here the other day — but the video of a supporter of his using the term `` white power . ''
So why has n't the president denounced that video and called that a hateful statement ?
McENANY : The president took down that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What I would note — the president has repeatedly condemned hate .
August of 2019 , `` In one voice , our nation must condemn racism , bigotry , and white supremacy .
These sinister ideologies must be defeated .
Hate has no place in America . ''
On April 2019 , `` We have no tolerance for those who disrupt this peace , and we condemn all hate and violence , especially in our places of worship . ''
August 2018 , `` I condemn all types of racism . ''
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But why has n't he denounced that specific video and said that that is hateful language that was used in it ?
McENANY : He deleted it .
The deletion speaks for itself .
His repeated condemnations of hate speak for themselves .
And this is a president who 's repeatedly condemned hate and repeatedly encouraged for us all to come together .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Wednesday that Donald Trump didn’t need to condemn a video he had promoted featuring a supporter yelling “white power” because he later deleted the tweet.
Trump retweeted the video on Sunday morning. The video showed an unnamed man confronting anti-Trump protesters during a pro-Trump demonstration at The Villages retirement community in Florida. Trump did not remove his tweet until over three hours later.
From a July 1 press briefing:
FRANCESCA CHAMBERS, MCCLATCHY DC: The president has come under criticism this week for statements that he has made that his detractors say are dog whistles to a certain segment of his base, that he is trying to gin up for reelection. Those include comments like “kung-flu,” “our heritage” while talking about Confederate statues, and most recently, they include the video — that I know you discussed in here the other day — but the video of a supporter of his using the term “white power.” So why hasn’t the president denounced that video and called that a hateful statement? McENANY: The president took down that video. That deletion speaks strongly. What I would note — the president has repeatedly condemned hate. August of 2019, “In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America.” On April 2019, “We have no tolerance for those who disrupt this peace, and we condemn all hate and violence, especially in our places of worship.” August 2018, “I condemn all types of racism.” He’s repeatedly done this. CHAMBERS: But why hasn’t he denounced that specific video and said that that is hateful language that was used in it? McENANY: He deleted it. The deletion speaks for itself. His repeated condemnations of hate speak for themselves. And this is a president who’s repeatedly condemned hate and repeatedly encouraged for us all to come together.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--Trump judicial nominee wants to make it harder to vote in Alabama

Edmund LaCour , Alabama 's solicitor general and a recent Trump judicial nominee , has asked the Supreme Court to make it harder for people in his state to vote amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic .
LaCour filed an emergency appeal with Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday asking the high court to overrule a lower court decision that would allow counties to offer curbside voting during a July 14 runoff election , AL.com reported on Tuesday .
On June 15 , the 11th U.S .
Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that Alabama could not prevent counties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also stopped the state from enforcing its voter ID requirement for some absentee voters who may be at higher risk of complications from the virus .
LaCour argued in his emergency appeal that state law does not allow for curbside voting and the federal courts should not be able to change state law so close to an election .
He claimed specifically that allowing safer voting measures `` undermines voter confidence '' and `` creates an unworkable mishmash of law that can not be uniformly administered . ''
Alabama 's Republican governor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — which will determine whether Republican Senate candidate Tommy Tuberville or former Attorney General Jeff Sessions will take on Democratic Sen. Doug Jones this November — earlier this year from March 31 to July 14 .
LaCour 's emergency appeal comes as Alabama sees a spike in coronavirus cases .
The state experienced a record-high 776 COVID-related hospitalizations on Tuesday , surpassing its previous high of 715 on Monday .
Cases are rising so quickly that the Trump campaign canceled a rally it was planning to hold in the state next weekend , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have pushed back against efforts to make voting safer amid the pandemic in recent months .
In April , for instance , the conservative-leaning Wisconsin Supreme Court , backed by Republican lawmakers in the state , forced voters to risk their health by voting in person during the primary election on April 7 .
Gov .
Tony Evers , a Democrat , had tried to allow voters more time to cast a mail-in ballot but was ultimately overruled .
Officials later identified dozens of cases likely tied to the decision to force voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly lied about absentee voting , making false claims about mail-in ballot fraud that have no basis in fact .
`` Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting , '' Trump tweeted on April 8 .
`` Democrats are clamoring for it .
Tremendous potential for voter fraud , and for whatever reason , does n't work out well for Republicans . ''
There is no evidence that voting by mail increases voter fraud .
In May , the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fight in court against efforts to protect and expand voting rights .
An RNC official at the time told Politico they were prepared to sue Democrats `` into oblivion and spend whatever is necessary '' to stop voter safety measures in their tracks .
Trump first nominated LaCour to serve as a judge for the United States District Court in Alabama on May 20 .
Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby applauded the decision at the time , saying LaCour was `` a highly-qualified candidate for this esteemed role '' and would be `` a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system . ''
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall also praised the move , saying in a statement that LaCour would be `` an outstanding jurist for Alabama ’ s Middle District Court . ''
`` I have no doubt our state and country will continue to benefit from his public service as a federal judge , '' Marshall said .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Edmund LaCour, Alabama’s solicitor general and a recent Trump judicial nominee, has asked the Supreme Court to make it harder for people in his state to vote amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.
LaCour filed an emergency appeal with Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday asking the high court to overrule a lower court decision that would allow counties to offer curbside voting during a July 14 runoff election, AL.com reported on Tuesday.
On June 15, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court ruling that Alabama could not prevent counties from offering curbside voting. The ruling also stopped the state from enforcing its voter ID requirement for some absentee voters who may be at higher risk of complications from the virus.
LaCour argued in his emergency appeal that state law does not allow for curbside voting and the federal courts should not be able to change state law so close to an election.
He claimed specifically that allowing safer voting measures “undermines voter confidence” and “creates an unworkable mishmash of law that cannot be uniformly administered.”
Alabama’s Republican governor, Kay Ivy, delayed the runoff election — which will determine whether Republican Senate candidate Tommy Tuberville or former Attorney General Jeff Sessions will take on Democratic Sen. Doug Jones this November — earlier this year from March 31 to July 14.
LaCour’s emergency appeal comes as Alabama sees a spike in coronavirus cases.
The state experienced a record-high 776 COVID-related hospitalizations on Tuesday, surpassing its previous high of 715 on Monday.
Cases are rising so quickly that the Trump campaign canceled a rally it was planning to hold in the state next weekend, according to CNN.
Republicans more broadly have pushed back against efforts to make voting safer amid the pandemic in recent months.
In April, for instance, the conservative-leaning Wisconsin Supreme Court, backed by Republican lawmakers in the state, forced voters to risk their health by voting in person during the primary election on April 7.
Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, had tried to allow voters more time to cast a mail-in ballot but was ultimately overruled. Officials later identified dozens of cases likely tied to the decision to force voters to the polls.
Trump himself has repeatedly lied about absentee voting, making false claims about mail-in ballot fraud that have no basis in fact.
“Republicans should fight very hard when it comes to state wide mail-in voting,” Trump tweeted on April 8. “Democrats are clamoring for it. Tremendous potential for voter fraud, and for whatever reason, doesn’t work out well for Republicans.”
There is no evidence that voting by mail increases voter fraud.
In May, the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee also announced a $20 million effort to fight in court against efforts to protect and expand voting rights.
An RNC official at the time told Politico they were prepared to sue Democrats “into oblivion and spend whatever is necessary” to stop voter safety measures in their tracks.
Trump first nominated LaCour to serve as a judge for the United States District Court in Alabama on May 20.
Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby applauded the decision at the time, saying LaCour was “a highly-qualified candidate for this esteemed role” and would be “a great addition to our nation’s judicial system.”
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall also praised the move, saying in a statement that LaCour would be “an outstanding jurist for Alabama’s Middle District Court.”
“I have no doubt our state and country will continue to benefit from his public service as a federal judge,” Marshall said.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--Supreme Court abortion ruling is a win for LGBTQ health care

On Monday , the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of abortion access by striking down a Louisiana restriction on the procedure .
If the Louisiana law had been upheld , it would have threatened to close the state 's last three abortion clinics .
The decision is being celebrated as a victory by members of the LGBTQ community , who often rely on the health care providers that were threatened by the law , such as Planned Parenthood , to safely obtain affirming care .
LGBTQ people are often left out of discussions about reproductive health care , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decision , as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh 's dissent , imply that only women are affected by barriers to abortion ; however , trans men and nonbinary people also may have unwanted pregnancies .
Chase Strangio , deputy director for transgender justice with the ACLU 's LGBT & HIV Project , stated soon after the ruling came down , `` Though it is painful that we still have to have these fights , we are relieved that the law was struck down not only for all women but also for the transgender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortion care .
In many communities , reproductive health care providers are one of the only sources of trans-affirming health care . ''
LGBTQ equality advocates and health care experts say that striking down restrictions such as the Louisiana law helps LGBTQ people continue to access all kinds of LGBTQ-affirming health care .
Clinics that provide abortions often provide a more welcoming environment for LGBTQ people than other health centers they may find in their area , they say .
Many also provide services such hormone therapy for trans people .
If abortion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people lose options for health care .
Dr. Bhavik Kumar , medical director of primary and trans care at Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast , which operates health care centers in Louisiana and Texas , said that if the restriction had been allowed to stand , it would have meant that even more LGBTQ people who need abortions , particularly Black and Indigenous people and other people of color , would have been left with no options at all .
Planned Parenthood centers offer a variety of health services that LGBTQ people need , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ More than 200 health centers in 31 states provide hormone therapy for trans patients , Kumar said .
Planned Parenthood also provides LGBTQ health-training programs to its health centers across the United States .
Without this kind of training , doctors may , in the case of many queer women , tell patients they do n't need cervical cancer screenings , for example , or they may just assume patients are straight or cisgender .
`` We are an essential and irreplaceable provider of hormone therapy as well as general care to trans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major cities where we are often the only provider doing this work , '' Kumar said .
He added , `` For many LGBTQ+ people , especially those who are BIPOC , Planned Parenthood is often their only source of affordable , nonjudgmental , and high-quality care .
Attacks on abortion and abortion providers like Planned Parenthood health centers and other clinics threaten our ability to stay open and provide essential health care to trans patients . ''
LGBTQ people , and particularly transgender people , say they face discrimination in health care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are well-trained in LGBTQ-inclusive medical care .
According to a nationally representative survey conducted in 2017 by the Center for American Progress of lesbian , gay , bisexual , and queer respondents , 8 % of those who visited a doctor 's office in the preceding year said a doctor had refused to see them because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation , and 29 % of transgender people said they had been refused care due to their actual or perceived gender .
A 2017 survey of Boston University School of Medicine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of transgender and intersex health lagged behind their knowledge of health issues affecting lesbian , bisexual , and gay people .
Cazembe Jackson , a 40-year-old Black queer trans man who had an abortion during his college years at a Planned Parenthood in Austin , Texas , welcomed the Supreme Court 's ruling .
`` It 's good news .
It 's the result of a lot of hard work of organizers on the ground in Louisiana , '' Jackson said .
Jackson noted that some advocates leave trans men and nonbinary people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortion access .
Jackson became pregnant in college after a group of men raped him , an attack he has called a `` corrective '' rape .
Corrective rape can be defined `` broadly to refer to the rape of any member of a group that does not conform to gender norms or heterosexuality when the motive of the perpetrator is to 'correct ' the individual , '' according to an article published in the University of California , Hastings Women 's Law Journal .
Jackson said that although the people leading fights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the South are often queer women , there should be more recognition of the links between fights for LGBTQ equality and fights for health care access .
`` We have to be fighting on all fronts .
I do .
I 'm a Black trans man , which means I 'm fighting for Black liberation too , and I 'm working class , so I 'm always thinking about the class analysis of what it means to access abortion as far as costs and travel and being able to get off of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think there needs to be more conversations about abortion access and supporting abortion in the queer community and more conversations in the reproductive health world about queer and trans folks . ''
Although the Supreme Court 's ruling comes at a critical time , as LGBTQ people endure a pandemic and widespread unemployment , the threat to their access to health care , including abortion , remains .
Chief Justice John Roberts joined in striking down the Louisiana law , but his concurring opinion made it clear that states could pursue other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abortion care .
He said in a footnote that the `` validity of admitting privileges law depends on numerous factors that may differ from state to state . ''
`` I think there 's more work to do because it was a close vote and ultimately it means we ca n't afford four more years of Trump .
We ca n't afford another conservative Supreme Court justice put on the bench , '' Jackson said .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of abortion access by striking down a Louisiana restriction on the procedure. If the Louisiana law had been upheld, it would have threatened to close the state’s last three abortion clinics.
The decision is being celebrated as a victory by members of the LGBTQ community, who often rely on the health care providers that were threatened by the law, such as Planned Parenthood, to safely obtain affirming care.
LGBTQ people are often left out of discussions about reproductive health care, especially abortion access. The Supreme Court’s decision, as well as Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent, imply that only women are affected by barriers to abortion; however, trans men and nonbinary people also may have unwanted pregnancies.
Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice with the ACLU’s LGBT & HIV Project, stated soon after the ruling came down, “Though it is painful that we still have to have these fights, we are relieved that the law was struck down not only for all women but also for the transgender and nonbinary people who need access to abortion care. In many communities, reproductive health care providers are one of the only sources of trans-affirming health care.”
LGBTQ equality advocates and health care experts say that striking down restrictions such as the Louisiana law helps LGBTQ people continue to access all kinds of LGBTQ-affirming health care.
Clinics that provide abortions often provide a more welcoming environment for LGBTQ people than other health centers they may find in their area, they say. Many also provide services such hormone therapy for trans people. If abortion restrictions result in fewer clinics, LGBTQ people lose options for health care.
Dr. Bhavik Kumar, medical director of primary and trans care at Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, which operates health care centers in Louisiana and Texas, said that if the restriction had been allowed to stand, it would have meant that even more LGBTQ people who need abortions, particularly Black and Indigenous people and other people of color, would have been left with no options at all.
Planned Parenthood centers offer a variety of health services that LGBTQ people need, including abortion and gender-affirming hormone therapy. More than 200 health centers in 31 states provide hormone therapy for trans patients, Kumar said. Planned Parenthood also provides LGBTQ health-training programs to its health centers across the United States. Without this kind of training, doctors may, in the case of many queer women, tell patients they don’t need cervical cancer screenings, for example, or they may just assume patients are straight or cisgender.
“We are an essential and irreplaceable provider of hormone therapy as well as general care to trans patients, especially in areas outside of major cities where we are often the only provider doing this work,” Kumar said.
He added, “For many LGBTQ+ people, especially those who are BIPOC, Planned Parenthood is often their only source of affordable, nonjudgmental, and high-quality care. Attacks on abortion and abortion providers like Planned Parenthood health centers and other clinics threaten our ability to stay open and provide essential health care to trans patients.”
LGBTQ people, and particularly transgender people, say they face discrimination in health care and often struggle to find physicians who are well-trained in LGBTQ-inclusive medical care. According to a nationally representative survey conducted in 2017 by the Center for American Progress of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and queer respondents, 8% of those who visited a doctor’s office in the preceding year said a doctor had refused to see them because of their actual or perceived sexual orientation, and 29% of transgender people said they had been refused care due to their actual or perceived gender.
A 2017 survey of Boston University School of Medicine students found that students’ self-reported knowledge of transgender and intersex health lagged behind their knowledge of health issues affecting lesbian, bisexual, and gay people.
Cazembe Jackson, a 40-year-old Black queer trans man who had an abortion during his college years at a Planned Parenthood in Austin, Texas, welcomed the Supreme Court’s ruling. “It’s good news. It’s the result of a lot of hard work of organizers on the ground in Louisiana,” Jackson said.
Jackson noted that some advocates leave trans men and nonbinary people out of arguments in favor of increased abortion access.
Jackson became pregnant in college after a group of men raped him, an attack he has called a “corrective” rape. Corrective rape can be defined “broadly to refer to the rape of any member of a group that does not conform to gender norms or heterosexuality when the motive of the perpetrator is to ‘correct’ the individual,” according to an article published in the University of California, Hastings Women’s Law Journal.
Jackson said that although the people leading fights for reproductive justice on the state level in the South are often queer women, there should be more recognition of the links between fights for LGBTQ equality and fights for health care access.
“We have to be fighting on all fronts. I do. I’m a Black trans man, which means I’m fighting for Black liberation too, and I’m working class, so I’m always thinking about the class analysis of what it means to access abortion as far as costs and travel and being able to get off of work,” Jackson said. “I think there needs to be more conversations about abortion access and supporting abortion in the queer community and more conversations in the reproductive health world about queer and trans folks.”
Although the Supreme Court’s ruling comes at a critical time, as LGBTQ people endure a pandemic and widespread unemployment, the threat to their access to health care, including abortion, remains. Chief Justice John Roberts joined in striking down the Louisiana law, but his concurring opinion made it clear that states could pursue other avenues to shutting down clinics and restricting abortion care. He said in a footnote that the “validity of admitting privileges law depends on numerous factors that may differ from state to state.”
“I think there’s more work to do because it was a close vote and ultimately it means we can’t afford four more years of Trump. We can’t afford another conservative Supreme Court justice put on the bench,” Jackson said.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--Trump ignores pleas to cancel July 4 festivities despite virus concerns

Donald Trump has not backed down from plans to hold events to mark the Fourth of July in Washington , D.C. , despite pleas from local lawmakers and elected officials who say going ahead with them is an unnecessary risk amid the COVID-19 pandemic and will cost far too much for a region already struggling with budget shortfalls due to the pandemic .
The White House announced the `` Salute to America '' event on the White House 's south lawn and on the Ellipse in a statement on June 19 , weeks after officials had asked Trump not to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In addition to music , military demonstrations , and flyovers to honor our Nation 's service members and veterans , the President will deliver remarks that celebrate our independence and salute our amazing heritage .
The evening will culminate with a spectacular fireworks display over the National Mall . ''
Trump hosted a `` Salute to America '' last year , ordering that military vehicles be displayed on the National Mall after he was denied the military parade he wanted and giving an address from the Lincoln Memorial .
The event lead to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a political tool to boost his own political fortunes .
He also faced criticism for how much money was spent on the event .
The `` Salute to America '' cost $ 13 million , almost double the cost of previous July Fourth celebrations on the National Mall , according to a report released last month by the Government Accountability Office .
Members of Congress from Virginia and Maryland , and Eleanor Holmes Norton , the congressional delegate representing the District of Columbia , urged Trump not to hold the event this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vanity project '' that will `` needlessly risk the health and safety of thousands of Americans . ''
Because the White House grounds and the National Mall are federal lands , Washington , D.C. , Mayor Muriel Bowser does n't have the authority to block Trump from holding events there .
But at a news conference on June 25 , Bowser urged D.C. residents to `` celebrate the Fourth of July at home or near their home in small gatherings . ''
`` We have not eradicated the virus , we are still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bowser said .
The District of Columbia , as well as the surrounding areas of Virginia and Maryland , have been able to curb the spread of the coronavirus , according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University .
However , experts fear that if revelers from states where the coronavirus is spiking travel to the region for the July Fourth events , they could bring on a new outbreak .
Trump personally has routinely ignored pleas from local health officials to take measures to stop the spread of the coronavirus .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts say are effective in preventing person-to-person transmission of the virus .
And he held a campaign rally in Oklahoma , where attendees did n't practice social distancing or wear face coverings .
Public health officials in Tulsa , where the rally took place , had urged him not to come out of fear the mass gathering would worsen the coronavirus outbreak in the state .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Donald Trump has not backed down from plans to hold events to mark the Fourth of July in Washington, D.C., despite pleas from local lawmakers and elected officials who say going ahead with them is an unnecessary risk amid the COVID-19 pandemic and will cost far too much for a region already struggling with budget shortfalls due to the pandemic.
The White House announced the “Salute to America” event on the White House’s south lawn and on the Ellipse in a statement on June 19, weeks after officials had asked Trump not to hold the event this year. “In addition to music, military demonstrations, and flyovers to honor our Nation’s service members and veterans, the President will deliver remarks that celebrate our independence and salute our amazing heritage. The evening will culminate with a spectacular fireworks display over the National Mall.”
Trump hosted a “Salute to America” last year, ordering that military vehicles be displayed on the National Mall after he was denied the military parade he wanted and giving an address from the Lincoln Memorial.
The event lead to criticism that Trump was using the military as a political tool to boost his own political fortunes. He also faced criticism for how much money was spent on the event. The “Salute to America” cost $13 million, almost double the cost of previous July Fourth celebrations on the National Mall, according to a report released last month by the Government Accountability Office.
Members of Congress from Virginia and Maryland, and Eleanor Holmes Norton, the congressional delegate representing the District of Columbia, urged Trump not to hold the event this year, calling it an expensive “vanity project” that will “needlessly risk the health and safety of thousands of Americans.”
Because the White House grounds and the National Mall are federal lands, Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser doesn’t have the authority to block Trump from holding events there.
But at a news conference on June 25, Bowser urged D.C. residents to “celebrate the Fourth of July at home or near their home in small gatherings.”
“We have not eradicated the virus, we are still reporting new cases each day,” Bowser said.
The District of Columbia, as well as the surrounding areas of Virginia and Maryland, have been able to curb the spread of the coronavirus, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.
However, experts fear that if revelers from states where the coronavirus is spiking travel to the region for the July Fourth events, they could bring on a new outbreak.
Trump personally has routinely ignored pleas from local health officials to take measures to stop the spread of the coronavirus.
He’s refused to wear masks, which experts say are effective in preventing person-to-person transmission of the virus. And he held a campaign rally in Oklahoma, where attendees didn’t practice social distancing or wear face coverings.
Public health officials in Tulsa, where the rally took place, had urged him not to come out of fear the mass gathering would worsen the coronavirus outbreak in the state.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--McConnell vows to slash unemployment as virus forces businesses to close again

As more and more businesses close again due to coronavirus case spikes , Senate Majority Mitch McConnell wants to reduce unemployment benefits .
His reasoning : If temporarily unemployed workers get too much in unemployment benefits , they might not return to their jobs .
McConnell ( R-KY ) said Tuesday that the Republican majority in the Senate would not continue an emergency pandemic benefit that provides a $ 600 weekly federal supplement to unemployment insurance .
The program is set to expire on July 31 .
`` Unemployment is extremely important .
And we need to make sure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recover their jobs , unemployment is adequate , '' he told reporters .
`` That is a different issue from whether we ought to pay people a bonus not to go back to work .
And so I think that was a mistake . ''
McConnell claimed that he and other Senate Republicans are `` hearing it all over the country , that it 's made it harder actually to get people back to work . ''
The temporary $ 600 benefit was a provision in the bipartisan coronavirus relief bill passed in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CARES Act , approved $ 2.3 trillion in funds to stabilize the economy .
The $ 600 amount was designed to bring total unemployment benefits up to 100 % of what the average worker would otherwise earn .
Economists say the program is an essential lifeline for workers and the nation 's economy .
A June report from Congress ' Joint Economic Committee predicted that , without an extension of the federal supplement , another 2.8 million Americans could lose their jobs .
The Economic Policy Institute 's Working Economics Blog estimated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mid-2021 `` would provide an average quarterly boost to gross domestic product ( GDP ) of 3.7 % and employment of 5.1 million workers . ''
Senate Democrats proposed on Wednesday that the provision should continue as long as the unemployment rate remains over 11 % .
But Republicans have objected to the program , using the argument that it encourages people not to work .
Donald Trump reportedly told GOP senators in May that the program was `` hurting the economic recovery . ''
( Experts have disputed the assumption that unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — especially when the economy is poor . )
Since the COVID-19 pandemic swept the nation in March , millions of businesses have temporarily or permanently closed .
As of the week ending June 6 , more than 30 million Americans were claiming unemployment benefits .
As some states rushed to end social distancing rules — ignoring the advice of economists and public health experts — those states have seen spiking numbers of new coronavirus cases and more damage to their economies .
Last week , the nation saw its record high for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have also broken their own records in recent days .
Many workplaces have proven to be breeding grounds for COVID-19 cases .
For vulnerable workers , including older adults and those with other medical conditions , returning to work could prove deadly .
And even if workers feel they can safely go back to their jobs , many do not have that option .
According to CNN , as of Monday at least 16 states had rolled back or delayed reopening plans .
Some areas are now re-closing businesses that were previously reopened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will not come until a vaccine is widely available .
On May 15 , the House passed a bill — the Heroes Act — that includes a provision to extend the $ 600 emergency benefit through early 2021 .
McConnell has refused to bring the bill up for a vote in the Senate , calling it `` dead on arrival . ''
McConnell 's office did not immediately respond to an inquiry for this story .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

As more and more businesses close again due to coronavirus case spikes, Senate Majority Mitch McConnell wants to reduce unemployment benefits. His reasoning: If temporarily unemployed workers get too much in unemployment benefits, they might not return to their jobs.
McConnell (R-KY) said Tuesday that the Republican majority in the Senate would not continue an emergency pandemic benefit that provides a $600 weekly federal supplement to unemployment insurance. The program is set to expire on July 31.
“Unemployment is extremely important. And we need to make sure, for those who are not able to recover their jobs, unemployment is adequate,” he told reporters. “That is a different issue from whether we ought to pay people a bonus not to go back to work. And so I think that was a mistake.”
McConnell claimed that he and other Senate Republicans are “hearing it all over the country, that it’s made it harder actually to get people back to work.”
The temporary $600 benefit was a provision in the bipartisan coronavirus relief bill passed in March. The legislation, known as the CARES Act, approved $2.3 trillion in funds to stabilize the economy. The $600 amount was designed to bring total unemployment benefits up to 100% of what the average worker would otherwise earn.
Economists say the program is an essential lifeline for workers and the nation’s economy. A June report from Congress’ Joint Economic Committee predicted that, without an extension of the federal supplement, another 2.8 million Americans could lose their jobs. The Economic Policy Institute’s Working Economics Blog estimated last week that keeping the benefits through mid-2021 “would provide an average quarterly boost to gross domestic product (GDP) of 3.7% and employment of 5.1 million workers.”
Senate Democrats proposed on Wednesday that the provision should continue as long as the unemployment rate remains over 11%.
But Republicans have objected to the program, using the argument that it encourages people not to work. Donald Trump reportedly told GOP senators in May that the program was “hurting the economic recovery.” (Experts have disputed the assumption that unemployment benefits provide a significant disincentive to employment — especially when the economy is poor.)
Since the COVID-19 pandemic swept the nation in March, millions of businesses have temporarily or permanently closed. As of the week ending June 6, more than 30 million Americans were claiming unemployment benefits.
As some states rushed to end social distancing rules — ignoring the advice of economists and public health experts — those states have seen spiking numbers of new coronavirus cases and more damage to their economies.
Last week, the nation saw its record high for new daily coronavirus cases. Several states have also broken their own records in recent days.
Many workplaces have proven to be breeding grounds for COVID-19 cases. For vulnerable workers, including older adults and those with other medical conditions, returning to work could prove deadly.
And even if workers feel they can safely go back to their jobs, many do not have that option. According to CNN, as of Monday at least 16 states had rolled back or delayed reopening plans. Some areas are now re-closing businesses that were previously reopened. Some experts predict a full recovery will not come until a vaccine is widely available.
On May 15, the House passed a bill — the Heroes Act — that includes a provision to extend the $600 emergency benefit through early 2021.
McConnell has refused to bring the bill up for a vote in the Senate, calling it “dead on arrival.”
McConnell’s office did not immediately respond to an inquiry for this story.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--GOP senator suggests residents of DC are not 'real people'

Sen. Steve Daines ( R-MT ) said on Wednesday that politicians should leave Washington , D.C. , and go where `` the real people '' are to find out how they feel about issues .
`` Sometimes I think it 's important for senators and congressmen , in fact most of the time , get out of this city , go out to where the real people are at , across our country , and ask them what they think , '' Daines said .
Daines made his comment at a press conference arranged by Sen. Lindsey Graham ( R-SC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House legislation that would make Washington , D.C. , a state .
Donald Trump recently threatened to veto the legislation if it passes both houses of Congress .
Over 720,000 American citizens live in the city .
According to the 2010 census , over 50 % of D.C. residents are Black , 9.1 % are Latino , and 3.5 % are Asian .
Those residents do not have representation in the Senate and are represented in the House by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton , who can not vote on legislation .
Residents of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ taxes .
SEN. STEVE DAINES ( R-MT ) : You get outside the Beltway and the craziness here of Washington , D.C. , the American people agree with us .
In 2019 , Gallup polled this .
Sixty-four percent of the American people did not want to see D.C. statehood .
Only 29 % supported it .
Sometimes I think it 's important for senators and congressmen , in fact most of the time , get out of this city , go out to where the real people are at , across our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think .
They see this as a power grab , and they see this as Pelosi and D.C. at its worst .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT) said on Wednesday that politicians should leave Washington, D.C., and go where “the real people” are to find out how they feel about issues.
“Sometimes I think it’s important for senators and congressmen, in fact most of the time, get out of this city, go out to where the real people are at, across our country, and ask them what they think,” Daines said.
Daines made his comment at a press conference arranged by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) to voice opposition to recently passed House legislation that would make Washington, D.C., a state. Donald Trump recently threatened to veto the legislation if it passes both houses of Congress.
Over 720,000 American citizens live in the city. According to the 2010 census, over 50% of D.C. residents are Black, 9.1% are Latino, and 3.5% are Asian.
Those residents do not have representation in the Senate and are represented in the House by Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, who cannot vote on legislation. Residents of D.C. do, however, pay federal taxes.
From a July 1 press conference:
SEN. STEVE DAINES (R-MT): You get outside the Beltway and the craziness here of Washington, D.C., the American people agree with us. In 2019, Gallup polled this. Sixty-four percent of the American people did not want to see D.C. statehood. Only 29% supported it. Sometimes I think it’s important for senators and congressmen, in fact most of the time, get out of this city, go out to where the real people are at, across our country, and ask them what they think. They see this as a power grab, and they see this as Pelosi and D.C. at its worst.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-01--Kellyanne Conway: Actually, Russia wants Biden to win

Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway claimed on Wednesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants former Vice President Joe Biden to win the 2020 election .
`` I think if the Biden campaign could get Putin to vote , by mail of course , in Michigan or Pennsylvania , they would have him do it , '' Conway told the hosts of `` Fox & Friends . ''
She added , `` They clearly want him to be the president . ''
The Russian government under Putin interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump .
That was an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and later affirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee .
Putin himself said in 2018 that he wanted Trump to win because he believed Trump would be less hostile to the Russian government .
Trump is currently under fire for failing to respond to intelligence showing that Russia had placed bounties on the lives of American soldiers serving in Afghanistan .
From the July 1 edition of Fox News ' `` Fox & Friends '' : KELLYANNE CONWAY : And number two , the amateurs hear the word `` Russia '' and they say @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one hundred dollars every time we vomit that on TV or put it in an article , '' sight unseen , they did that for two and a half years .
Do n't be fooled , Americans .
Joe Biden was soft on Russia , soft on China for 40 years .
They all want him to be elected .
I think if the Biden campaign could get Putin to vote , by mail of course , in Michigan or Pennsylvania , they would have him do it .
Published with permission of @ @ @ @ @

Senior White House adviser Kellyanne Conway claimed on Wednesday that Russian President Vladimir Putin wants former Vice President Joe Biden to win the 2020 election.
Putin backed Donald Trump in 2016.
“I think if the Biden campaign could get Putin to vote, by mail of course, in Michigan or Pennsylvania, they would have him do it,” Conway told the hosts of “Fox & Friends.” She added, “They clearly want him to be the president.”
The Russian government under Putin interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump. That was an assessment made by multiple U.S. intelligence agencies and later affirmed by the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Putin himself said in 2018 that he wanted Trump to win because he believed Trump would be less hostile to the Russian government.
Trump is currently under fire for failing to respond to intelligence showing that Russia had placed bounties on the lives of American soldiers serving in Afghanistan.
From the July 1 edition of Fox News’ “Fox & Friends”:
KELLYANNE CONWAY: And number two, the amateurs hear the word “Russia” and they say, “Wow, we get paid one hundred dollars every time we vomit that on TV or put it in an article,” sight unseen, they did that for two and a half years. Don’t be fooled, Americans. Joe Biden was soft on Russia, soft on China for 40 years. They all want him to be elected. I think if the Biden campaign could get Putin to vote, by mail of course, in Michigan or Pennsylvania, they would have him do it.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-02--GOP senator: Helping unemployed Americans amid pandemic was 'a mistake'

Sen. John Cornyn ( R-TX ) reiterated his belief that additional assistance to unemployed Americans in the middle of a recession and pandemic was `` a mistake '' during a call on Friday with the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants .
`` This is one area where we found that we did make a mistake , '' Cornyn said , `` because we actually added a $ 600 a week benefit from the federal government .
And some people , we found out , in some wage brackets , were actually making more money not to work than to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we ’ re not going to do that again . ''
The comments were first flagged by American Bridge , a progressive opposition research organization .
Cornyn has made similar comments in the past .
Since late March , he has taken several different positions on the unemployment benefits , which were a part of a coronavirus relief package known as the CARES Act .
On March 25 , Cornyn was one of 48 senators who voted for an amendment to the CARES Act to make those unemployment benefits less generous .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ bragged about the very benefits he opposed , calling the overall legislation a `` lifeline '' for families that would help `` cover their rent , groceries , electric bills , and other expenses until they can make other arrangements , like apply for unemployment insurance under our beefed up provisions . ''
In May , Cornyn shifted back to opposing the benefits , telling NBC News reporter Julie Tsirkin that `` we just made a mistake '' in approving additional unemployment benefits .
Cornyn ’ s insistence that the benefits not be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain high in both Texas and across the country .
Texas saw a 13 % unemployment rate in May 2020 , compared to a 3 % unemployment rate a year ago .
More than 2.7 million Texans have filed for unemployment since mid-March , more unemployment claims than all of 2019 , according to the Texas Tribune .
Nationwide , 17.8 million Americans remain out of work and the unemployment rate stood at 11.1 % on Thursday morning .
Economic experts have said that the unemployment benefits Cornyn opposes have the potential to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits stayed in place through the middle of 2021 , they would `` provide an average quarterly boost to gross domestic product ( GDP ) of 3.7 % and employment of 5.1 million workers , '' according to a recent analysis from the Economic Policy Institute 's Working Economics Blog .
Cornyn 's comments also come as the country grapples with a spike in new coronavirus cases , causing many states to shutter businesses that were only recently reopened .
Earlier this week , governors in both Texas and Florida rolled back plans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as record levels of coronavirus cases were confirmed in their states .
The economic impact of the surge in virus cases remains to be seen , but experts recently said states with a high number of cases are not doing well .
Deutsche Bank economists noted that `` states with faster case growth are now underperforming economically based on measures of small business activity , restaurant bookings and consumer spending . ''
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) reiterated his belief that additional assistance to unemployed Americans in the middle of a recession and pandemic was “a mistake” during a call on Friday with the Texas Society of Certified Public Accountants.
“This is one area where we found that we did make a mistake,” Cornyn said, “because we actually added a $600 a week benefit from the federal government. And some people, we found out, in some wage brackets, were actually making more money not to work than to work. So that expires in July and we’re not going to do that again.”
The comments were first flagged by American Bridge, a progressive opposition research organization.
Cornyn has made similar comments in the past.
Since late March, he has taken several different positions on the unemployment benefits, which were a part of a coronavirus relief package known as the CARES Act.
On March 25, Cornyn was one of 48 senators who voted for an amendment to the CARES Act to make those unemployment benefits less generous.
A day after that vote, Cornyn bragged about the very benefits he opposed, calling the overall legislation a “lifeline” for families that would help “cover their rent, groceries, electric bills, and other expenses until they can make other arrangements, like apply for unemployment insurance under our beefed up provisions.”
In May, Cornyn shifted back to opposing the benefits, telling NBC News reporter Julie Tsirkin that “we just made a mistake” in approving additional unemployment benefits.
Cornyn’s insistence that the benefits not be extended past July comes as unemployment rates remain high in both Texas and across the country.
Texas saw a 13% unemployment rate in May 2020, compared to a 3% unemployment rate a year ago. More than 2.7 million Texans have filed for unemployment since mid-March, more unemployment claims than all of 2019, according to the Texas Tribune.
Nationwide, 17.8 million Americans remain out of work and the unemployment rate stood at 11.1% on Thursday morning.
Economic experts have said that the unemployment benefits Cornyn opposes have the potential to dramatically help the economy.
If the benefits stayed in place through the middle of 2021, they would “provide an average quarterly boost to gross domestic product (GDP) of 3.7% and employment of 5.1 million workers,” according to a recent analysis from the Economic Policy Institute’s Working Economics Blog.
Cornyn’s comments also come as the country grapples with a spike in new coronavirus cases, causing many states to shutter businesses that were only recently reopened.
Earlier this week, governors in both Texas and Florida rolled back plans to reopen some segments of the economy as record levels of coronavirus cases were confirmed in their states.
Arizona’s governor soon followed suit.
The economic impact of the surge in virus cases remains to be seen, but experts recently said states with a high number of cases are not doing well.
Deutsche Bank economists noted that “states with faster case growth are now underperforming economically based on measures of small business activity, restaurant bookings and consumer spending.”
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-02--Trump's next target: Homeless transgender people

The Trump administration is moving forward with a rule change that will give single-sex homeless shelters the green light to discriminate against transgender people .
The change would gut a rule established by the Obama administration in 2016 titled `` Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual ’ s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs . ''
The 2016 Equal Access rule required that single-sex shelters that received funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development accommodate and place `` an individual in temporary , emergency shelters and other buildings and facilities with physical limitations or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have shared sleeping quarters or shared bathing facilities ... in accordance with the individual 's gender identity . ''
Last year , HUD said that the new rule would be part of the regulatory agenda and on Wednesday , the department released a statement announcing that it is moving forward with it .
HUD Secretary Ben Carson argued that the change was meant to safeguard victims of domestic violence and human trafficking and protect the religious beliefs of shelter providers .
Carson said , `` Mission-focused shelter operators play a vital and compassionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Federal Government should empower them , not mandate a single approach that overrides local law and concerns . ''
Last year , Carson visited HUD 's office in San Francisco and , according to agency staffers interviewed by the Washington Post , said society did n't seem to know the difference between men and women anymore .
They said that Carson also said he was concerned about `` big , hairy men '' attempting to get inside homeless shelters for women .
Following HUD 's announcement , Sharita Gruberg , senior director for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Center for American Progress , stated , `` This proposed rule risks the lives and safety of people who are transgender or gender nonconforming , whose ability to obtain lifesaving housing services will be up to the whims and potential biases of individual providers . ''
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the safety measures states have taken to keep Americans at home , the unemployment rate in the United States is currently 11.1 % , and 17.8 million Americans are out of work .
According to the National Alliance to End @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more likely to experience unsheltered homelessness than cisgender adults .
More people could be at risk of losing housing soon .
A Human Rights Campaign report released in May found that 14 % of LGBTQ people of color asked for delays in paying rent because of the pandemic .
Transgender people , who face discrimination in housing discrimination , health care , and employment , are particularly vulnerable right now , advocates for LGBTQ equality say , and this rule would make matters worse .
Gruberg said , `` Giving shelters a license @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong at any time , but to do so in the midst of a pandemic and an economic crisis constitutes an act of wanton cruelty . ''
Dylan Waguespack , public policy and external affairs director at True Colors United , an organization that focuses on youth homelessness and LGBTQ young people , said in a statement : `` The current regulations provide safety in HUD-funded programs , and Trump 's proposed rule change would only leave trans people less safe and more at risk , especially during a global health crisis .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Washington , D.C. , office of civil rights organization Lambda Legal , said Carson 's theories about abusers sneaking into shelters are not supported by any evidence .
The 22 states with laws explicitly prohibiting housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in particular have shown no evidence of such abuse , Buchert said .
`` It 's [ Carson 's ] own bias matched up against the reality of shelters functioning with trans people protected under the law . ''
Buchert said the rule will result in confusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whom will not go to shelters if they believe they will experience discrimination and not be protected against it in the law .
It could also affect any person experiencing homelessness , including cisgender people , who does n't conform to gender stereotypes .
Buchert said that any proposed rule would not change the Fair Housing Act which she said should protect transgender people from discrimination .
A historic ruling in June by the U.S. Supreme Court that LGBTQ workers are protected against sex discrimination by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said , adding that she would shocked if Lambda Legal did n't eventually move forward with a lawsuit against the rule .
`` We have argued for a long time that sex discrimination protections do n't end at Title VII and the courts have agreed with us .
... All these statutes are read consistently and it would be irrational , at least , to suggest it should be interpreted one way by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bostock and a completely different way under the Fair Housing Act .
What they 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as well , '' Buchert said .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The Trump administration is moving forward with a rule change that will give single-sex homeless shelters the green light to discriminate against transgender people. The change would gut a rule established by the Obama administration in 2016 titled “Equal Access in Accordance With an Individual’s Gender Identity in Community Planning and Development Programs.”
The 2016 Equal Access rule required that single-sex shelters that received funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development accommodate and place “an individual in temporary, emergency shelters and other buildings and facilities with physical limitations or configurations that require and are permitted to have shared sleeping quarters or shared bathing facilities … in accordance with the individual’s gender identity.”
Last year, HUD said that the new rule would be part of the regulatory agenda and on Wednesday, the department released a statement announcing that it is moving forward with it. HUD Secretary Ben Carson argued that the change was meant to safeguard victims of domestic violence and human trafficking and protect the religious beliefs of shelter providers.
Carson said, “Mission-focused shelter operators play a vital and compassionate role in communities across America. The Federal Government should empower them, not mandate a single approach that overrides local law and concerns.”
Last year, Carson visited HUD’s office in San Francisco and, according to agency staffers interviewed by the Washington Post, said society didn’t seem to know the difference between men and women anymore. They said that Carson also said he was concerned about “big, hairy men” attempting to get inside homeless shelters for women.
Following HUD’s announcement, Sharita Gruberg, senior director for the LGBTQ research and communications project at the Center for American Progress, stated, “This proposed rule risks the lives and safety of people who are transgender or gender nonconforming, whose ability to obtain lifesaving housing services will be up to the whims and potential biases of individual providers.”
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the safety measures states have taken to keep Americans at home, the unemployment rate in the United States is currently 11.1%, and 17.8 million Americans are out of work. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, transgender and nonbinary adults are more likely to experience unsheltered homelessness than cisgender adults.
More people could be at risk of losing housing soon. A Human Rights Campaign report released in May found that 14% of LGBTQ people of color asked for delays in paying rent because of the pandemic. Transgender people, who face discrimination in housing discrimination, health care, and employment, are particularly vulnerable right now, advocates for LGBTQ equality say, and this rule would make matters worse.
Gruberg said, “Giving shelters a license to discriminate against transgender people would be wrong at any time, but to do so in the midst of a pandemic and an economic crisis constitutes an act of wanton cruelty.”
Dylan Waguespack, public policy and external affairs director at True Colors United, an organization that focuses on youth homelessness and LGBTQ young people, said in a statement: “The current regulations provide safety in HUD-funded programs, and Trump’s proposed rule change would only leave trans people less safe and more at risk, especially during a global health crisis.”
Sasha Buchert, a senior attorney in the Washington, D.C., office of civil rights organization Lambda Legal, said Carson’s theories about abusers sneaking into shelters are not supported by any evidence. The 22 states with laws explicitly prohibiting housing discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in particular have shown no evidence of such abuse, Buchert said. “It’s [Carson’s] own bias matched up against the reality of shelters functioning with trans people protected under the law.”
Buchert said the rule will result in confusion for many transgender people, some of whom will not go to shelters if they believe they will experience discrimination and not be protected against it in the law. It could also affect any person experiencing homelessness, including cisgender people, who doesn’t conform to gender stereotypes.
Buchert said that any proposed rule would not change the Fair Housing Act which she said should protect transgender people from discrimination. A historic ruling in June by the U.S. Supreme Court that LGBTQ workers are protected against sex discrimination by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 adds further protection, she said, adding that she would shocked if Lambda Legal didn’t eventually move forward with a lawsuit against the rule.
“We have argued for a long time that sex discrimination protections don’t end at Title VII and the courts have agreed with us. … All these statutes are read consistently and it would be irrational, at least, to suggest it should be interpreted one way by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bostock and a completely different way under the Fair Housing Act. What they’re proposing clearly violates the Fair Housing Act as well,” Buchert said.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-02--GOP senator fails in bid to protect Confederate military base names

The Senate rejected an effort by Sen. Josh Hawley ( R-MO ) on Thursday to preserve the names of U.S. military facilities named after leaders of the Confederacy .
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell filed a cloture motion to end debate on the bill without a vote on Hawley 's amendment .
The amendment would have eliminated a requirement — agreed to on June 11 by the Senate Armed Services Committee — that the Defense Department remove the names of Confederate generals from 10 major military bases within three years .
The bipartisan provision was included as part of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Defense Authorization Act .
Hawley sought unanimous consent to get a vote on removing it , but a colleague objected .
`` I 've been told that we ca n't even have a vote , '' Hawley lamented afterward , in a floor speech .
`` No vote !
We ca n't even call the roll on this .
No , we 've just got to swallow it and move on as the woke cancel culture moves on , steamrolling our history and our traditions , and yes , our best traditions as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the nation reckons with its racist history and present .
Protesters around the world have marched to demand an end systemic racism and , in the United States , have pushed to remove statues of those who led and fought with the Confederacy during the Civil War .
Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D-MA ) , who proposed the name-change rule , said previously that it was `` long past time to end the tribute to white supremacy on our military installations . ''
Hawley objected to the requirement at the time , calling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
`` This latest effort to unilaterally rename bases and remove war memorials , all behind closed doors , smacks of the cancel culture the Left wants to impose on the nation , '' the first-term senator said .
`` Any discussion about renaming bases should be had in the light of day , out in the open , and it should involve military families , veterans , and state and local stakeholders . ''
He added that `` the mob will keep marching through all our cultural institutions until every American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancelled . ''
Hawley 's proposal would have removed the renaming requirement and replaced it with a commission to `` gather input from military families and veterans '' and suggest specific name changes to Congress .
Donald Trump has similarly defended keeping the names of Confederate figures on U.S. bases , tweeting in early June that `` these Monumental and very Powerful Bases have become part of a Great American Heritage , and a history of Winning , Victory , and Freedom . ''
He vowed that his administration would `` not even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Fabled Military Installations . ''
If the House and Senate pass the annual Defense authorization — which is generally regarded as `` must-pass '' legislation — with the renaming language in it , Trump will have to decide whether to veto the whole bill or accept the new requirement .
He claimed Tuesday that he would veto if the name-change requirement were included .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

The Senate rejected an effort by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) on Thursday to preserve the names of U.S. military facilities named after leaders of the Confederacy.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell filed a cloture motion to end debate on the bill without a vote on Hawley’s amendment.
The amendment would have eliminated a requirement — agreed to on June 11 by the Senate Armed Services Committee — that the Defense Department remove the names of Confederate generals from 10 major military bases within three years.
The bipartisan provision was included as part of the larger annual defense package, the National Defense Authorization Act.
Hawley sought unanimous consent to get a vote on removing it, but a colleague objected.
“I’ve been told that we can’t even have a vote,” Hawley lamented afterward, in a floor speech. “No vote! We can’t even call the roll on this. No, we’ve just got to swallow it and move on as the woke cancel culture moves on, steamrolling our history and our traditions, and yes, our best traditions as Americans.”
The move comes as the nation reckons with its racist history and present.
Protesters around the world have marched to demand an end systemic racism and, in the United States, have pushed to remove statues of those who led and fought with the Confederacy during the Civil War.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who proposed the name-change rule, said previously that it was “long past time to end the tribute to white supremacy on our military installations.”
Hawley objected to the requirement at the time, calling it a “left-wing assault on history.”
“This latest effort to unilaterally rename bases and remove war memorials, all behind closed doors, smacks of the cancel culture the Left wants to impose on the nation,” the first-term senator said. “Any discussion about renaming bases should be had in the light of day, out in the open, and it should involve military families, veterans, and state and local stakeholders.”
He added that “the mob will keep marching through all our cultural institutions until every American whom the woke crowd deems unjust is cancelled.”
Hawley’s proposal would have removed the renaming requirement and replaced it with a commission to “gather input from military families and veterans” and suggest specific name changes to Congress.
Donald Trump has similarly defended keeping the names of Confederate figures on U.S. bases, tweeting in early June that “these Monumental and very Powerful Bases have become part of a Great American Heritage, and a history of Winning, Victory, and Freedom.”
He vowed that his administration would “not even consider the renaming of these Magnificent and Fabled Military Installations.”
If the House and Senate pass the annual Defense authorization — which is generally regarded as “must-pass” legislation — with the renaming language in it, Trump will have to decide whether to veto the whole bill or accept the new requirement.
He claimed Tuesday that he would veto if the name-change requirement were included.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.


shareblue--2020-07-02--Ben Carson: 'Black Lives Matter' just as bad as the Confederate flag

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Wednesday compared painting `` Black Lives Matter '' on city streets to `` painting the Confederate flag , '' during an interview on Fox News .
Protests against police brutality have occurred in all 50 states over the past month following the death of George Floyd , a Black man killed by a white police officer in Minnesota .
In response to the protests , several municipalities have painted the phrase `` Black Lives Matter '' on their streets .
Donald Trump responded earlier on Wednesday to one of those paintings by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hate . ''
From the July 1 edition of Fox News ' `` The Story '' : MARTHA MacCALLUM : The phrase `` symbol of hate '' that the president tweeted about the Black Lives Matter paint that 's going down right now in front of city hall , downtown , was that a mistake on his part , to call it that ?
Or not ?
BEN CARSON : Well , I guess the larger question is when you 're in a public forum , a public square , do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , you know , a political statement ?
I wonder what people would say if somebody painted a Confederate flag on a public street ?
So we really need to take into consideration those things .
On private property , absolutely do whatever you want .
This is a free country .
But we have to recognize that when we put political symbols on public property , we have to take responsibility for that .
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation .

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson on Wednesday compared painting “Black Lives Matter” on city streets to “painting the Confederate flag,” during an interview on Fox News.
Protests against police brutality have occurred in all 50 states over the past month following the death of George Floyd, a Black man killed by a white police officer in Minnesota. In response to the protests, several municipalities have painted the phrase “Black Lives Matter” on their streets.
Donald Trump responded earlier on Wednesday to one of those paintings by referring to them as a “symbol of hate.”
From the July 1 edition of Fox News’ “The Story”:
MARTHA MacCALLUM: The phrase “symbol of hate” that the president tweeted about the Black Lives Matter paint that’s going down right now in front of city hall, downtown, was that a mistake on his part, to call it that? Or not? BEN CARSON: Well, I guess the larger question is when you’re in a public forum, a public square, do you have the right to put on there, you know, a political statement? I wonder what people would say if somebody painted a Confederate flag on a public street? So we really need to take into consideration those things. On private property, absolutely do whatever you want. This is a free country. But we have to recognize that when we put political symbols on public property, we have to take responsibility for that.
Published with permission of The American Independent Foundation.