washingtonmonthly--2020-06-05--No, the Unemployment Rate Didn’t Really Drop in May

The Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS ) surprised the markets and most economists Friday with an announcement that the unemployment rate fell from 14.7 percent in April to 13.3 percent in May .
President Donald Trump had the temerity to boast that George Floyd , the unarmed black man killed by a white police officer in Minneapolis , was “ looking down from heaven ” to admire those numbers .
“ This is a great day for him , ” Trump said in the Rose Garden .
“ This is a great day for everybody.
” Beyond the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Floyd , there is good reason to be skeptical of his administration ’ s latest report .
BLS asserts that 20,935,000 Americans were unemployed in May , attributing the decline to employers adding 2,509,000 jobs in May as states allowed “ a limited resumption of economic activity.
” But it ’ s not that simple .
The unexpected decline in the jobless rate is based on a survey of businesses and households conducted over the week of May 16th , and BLS has also reported that 29,965,415 Americans received unemployment insurance benefits in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a gap of 8,980,415 people , enough to raise the May jobless rate 5.7 percentage points to 19.0 percent and much closer to economists ’ expectations .
How did the Labor Department come up with such a low figure ?
Part of it is the Payroll Protection Program : The BLS counted anyone who employers say were still being paid as employed “ even if they were not actually at their jobs.
” Part of it involves how the BLS treats the many millions of people now on furlough and not being paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ temporary layoff.
” But if BLS expects them to return to their old jobs , based on the survey , they do not count among the unemployed .
Those judgments are left to the BLS ’ s discretion , and the agency does not issue any data on those decisions .
Yet a recent analysis from the Becker Friedman Institute at the University of Chicago estimated that 42 percent of people furloughed by the COVID-19 crisis will never get their old jobs back , and only 30 percent of those laid off will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ With 30 million people receiving unemployment benefits , that analysis is more consistent with unemployment at 19.0 percent today than 13.3 percent .
BLS itself acknowledges in its May report that counting those on furlough as unemployed would raise its official rate to 16.3 percent .
Finally , part of the 9 million-person discrepancy may involve how BLS decides whether a person who is not working is still part of the labor force .
If you are out of work but didn ’ t look for a job over the previous four weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ family reasons such as caring for children who are no longer in school , BLS says you are out of the labor force .
If you ’ re not in the labor force , you ’ re not unemployed .
Again , it is BLS ’ s judgment call—and BLS clearly has decided that millions of people who lost their jobs because of COVID-19 shutdowns do not count as unemployed .
In May 2019 , BLS reported that 96,207,000 working-age Americans were not in the labor force ; today , BLS reported that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jumped by 5,865,000 to 102,072,000 .
For reference , the BLS found that 95,636,000 working-age Americans were not in the labor force in 2019 , down 80,000 from 2018 .
Those 5,865,000 people could explain nearly two-thirds of the 9 million-person gap between those receiving unemployment benefits and those counted as unemployed .
Sometimes , unexpected events produce wildly inaccurate results from computer models that assume the unexpected won ’ t happen .
Perhaps there is a glitch in the BLS unemployment model that couldn ’ t accommodate disruptions from the COVID black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump administration interfere with scientific analysis in other areas , such as when it directed what models the U.S. Geological Survey could use for the mandated National Climate Assessment .
It would be unprecedented for the White House to pressure the Labor Department to produce a jobless report that serves Donald Trump ’ s needs and desires .
But unlike the May unemployment report , it would not surprise anyone .

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) surprised the markets and most economists Friday with an announcement that the unemployment rate fell from 14.7 percent in April to 13.3 percent in May. President Donald Trump had the temerity to boast that George Floyd, the unarmed black man killed by a white police officer in Minneapolis, was “looking down from heaven” to admire those numbers. “This is a great day for him,” Trump said in the Rose Garden. “This is a great day for everybody.”
Beyond the president’s remarkable and offensive invocation of Floyd, there is good reason to be skeptical of his administration’s latest report.
BLS asserts that 20,935,000 Americans were unemployed in May, attributing the decline to employers adding 2,509,000 jobs in May as states allowed “a limited resumption of economic activity.” But it’s not that simple. The unexpected decline in the jobless rate is based on a survey of businesses and households conducted over the week of May 16th, and BLS has also reported that 29,965,415 Americans received unemployment insurance benefits in the same week. That’s a gap of 8,980,415 people, enough to raise the May jobless rate 5.7 percentage points to 19.0 percent and much closer to economists’ expectations.
How did the Labor Department come up with such a low figure? Part of it is the Payroll Protection Program: The BLS counted anyone who employers say were still being paid as employed “even if they were not actually at their jobs.” Part of it involves how the BLS treats the many millions of people now on furlough and not being paid. They are considered “unemployed on temporary layoff.” But if BLS expects them to return to their old jobs, based on the survey, they do not count among the unemployed.
Those judgments are left to the BLS’s discretion, and the agency does not issue any data on those decisions. Yet a recent analysis from the Becker Friedman Institute at the University of Chicago estimated that 42 percent of people furloughed by the COVID-19 crisis will never get their old jobs back, and only 30 percent of those laid off will land new jobs later this year. With 30 million people receiving unemployment benefits, that analysis is more consistent with unemployment at 19.0 percent today than 13.3 percent. BLS itself acknowledges in its May report that counting those on furlough as unemployed would raise its official rate to 16.3 percent.
Finally, part of the 9 million-person discrepancy may involve how BLS decides whether a person who is not working is still part of the labor force. If you are out of work but didn’t look for a job over the previous four weeks, or couldn’t work for family reasons such as caring for children who are no longer in school, BLS says you are out of the labor force. If you’re not in the labor force, you’re not unemployed.
Again, it is BLS’s judgment call—and BLS clearly has decided that millions of people who lost their jobs because of COVID-19 shutdowns do not count as unemployed. In May 2019, BLS reported that 96,207,000 working-age Americans were not in the labor force; today, BLS reported that a year later, that number had jumped by 5,865,000 to 102,072,000. For reference, the BLS found that 95,636,000 working-age Americans were not in the labor force in 2019, down 80,000 from 2018. Those 5,865,000 people could explain nearly two-thirds of the 9 million-person gap between those receiving unemployment benefits and those counted as unemployed.
Sometimes, unexpected events produce wildly inaccurate results from computer models that assume the unexpected won’t happen. Perhaps there is a glitch in the BLS unemployment model that couldn’t accommodate disruptions from the COVID black swan. We also have seen the Trump administration interfere with scientific analysis in other areas, such as when it directed what models the U.S. Geological Survey could use for the mandated National Climate Assessment. It would be unprecedented for the White House to pressure the Labor Department to produce a jobless report that serves Donald Trump’s needs and desires. But unlike the May unemployment report, it would not surprise anyone.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-05--The Hate Unleashed by Barr’s Lies Has Consequences

During his press conference on Thursday , Attorney General William Barr offered one of those non-apology apologies for the death of George Floyd .
He said , “ While many police officers do their job admirably and well , it is undeniable that many African Americans lack confidence in our American criminal justice system.
” When asked about that statement later , Barr responded by saying he does not believe there ’ s a systematic problem with law enforcement .
He then went on to brag about how he handled the Rodney King situation .
A lot of people might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attorney general when riots broke out in Los Angeles back in 1992 .
He acted similarly in that situation , counseling then-President George H.W .
Bush to allow him to marshal special operation teams from Border Patrol , the Bureau of Federal Prisons , and other groups to “ dominate ” the scene .
Here is how he responded back then to questions from the president about what was going on in California .
According to the attorney general , the riots in Los Angeles didn ’ t have anything to do with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the beating of Rodney King that we all watched on video .
They were simply street gangs ( read : people of color ) getting out of control .
Now , the best he can do for an apology is to blame African Americans for not having enough trust in law enforcement .
Instead of blaming street gangs this time , the attorney general continues to blame antifa for the violence emanating from the protests over Floyd ’ s death .
Parroting his prior remarks , the only extremist group he called out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going on to refer to groups like antifa , antifa-related groups , and people with antifa-like motivations .
Along with Trump and his other enablers who continue to spread this lie , that makes the attorney general directly culpable for a story coming out of Washington state .
A multi-racial family of four had outfitted a bus to go camping on the Olympic peninsula .
When they stopped in the town of Forks to buy supplies , they were confronted “ by seven or eight carloads of people in the grocery store parking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were antifa protesters .
At least four of those vehicles followed them to their camping site .
When the family heard gun shots and power saws off in the distance , they packed up their tent to leave , but found that trees had been cut down to block their exit .
Four local high schoolers not only cleared the trees for them , but contacted local law enforcement , perhaps saving their lives .
That is the kind of thing this president and attorney general have unleashed with their lies and fear-mongering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden said recently .
What we are witnessing right now is an unleashing of hate , not only by Donald Trump , but by people like William Barr .
While the president is often more direct , the attorney general hides it in platitudes that sound good but spur the kind of reaction that occurred in Forks , Washington this week .
We can only pray that no one gets killed before this nightmare is over .

During his press conference on Thursday, Attorney General William Barr offered one of those non-apology apologies for the death of George Floyd. He said, “While many police officers do their job admirably and well, it is undeniable that many African Americans lack confidence in our American criminal justice system.” When asked about that statement later, Barr responded by saying he does not believe there’s a systematic problem with law enforcement. He then went on to brag about how he handled the Rodney King situation.
A lot of people might have forgotten that Barr was also the attorney general when riots broke out in Los Angeles back in 1992. He acted similarly in that situation, counseling then-President George H.W. Bush to allow him to marshal special operation teams from Border Patrol, the Bureau of Federal Prisons, and other groups to “dominate” the scene. Here is how he responded back then to questions from the president about what was going on in California.
The President wanted to know what the violence was about, and I told him that there were a lot of street gangs involved and this was primarily centered on street gang activity. I told him the names of the gangs that were involved, that the violence was largely street gang activity, big-time gang, not like street gangs in the 1950s—Crips-type gangs.
According to the attorney general, the riots in Los Angeles didn’t have anything to do with the fact that cops were acquitted for the beating of Rodney King that we all watched on video. They were simply street gangs (read: people of color) getting out of control. Now, the best he can do for an apology is to blame African Americans for not having enough trust in law enforcement.
Instead of blaming street gangs this time, the attorney general continues to blame antifa for the violence emanating from the protests over Floyd’s death. Parroting his prior remarks, the only extremist group he called out by name on Thursday was antifa, going on to refer to groups like antifa, antifa-related groups, and people with antifa-like motivations.
Along with Trump and his other enablers who continue to spread this lie, that makes the attorney general directly culpable for a story coming out of Washington state. A multi-racial family of four had outfitted a bus to go camping on the Olympic peninsula. When they stopped in the town of Forks to buy supplies, they were confronted “by seven or eight carloads of people in the grocery store parking lot” demanding to know if they were antifa protesters. At least four of those vehicles followed them to their camping site. When the family heard gun shots and power saws off in the distance, they packed up their tent to leave, but found that trees had been cut down to block their exit. Four local high schoolers not only cleared the trees for them, but contacted local law enforcement, perhaps saving their lives.
That is the kind of thing this president and attorney general have unleashed with their lies and fear-mongering. I was reminded of something Joe Biden said recently.
What we are witnessing right now is an unleashing of hate, not only by Donald Trump, but by people like William Barr. While the president is often more direct, the attorney general hides it in platitudes that sound good but spur the kind of reaction that occurred in Forks, Washington this week. We can only pray that no one gets killed before this nightmare is over.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-05--Despite Pentagon Pushback, Trump Still Aims to Dominate the Streets

If things weren ’ t screwed up enough in this country right now , it ’ s been 48 hours since I had power and my utility company says it could be another 36 hours before I can expect to see any .
It ’ s not easy to write using your car as a charger and your throttled phone as a hotspot .
Yet , I don ’ t know how well I ’ d be doing even in better circumstances , because things are so confusing and out of control .
To read David Ignatius , our brave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and stood up to President Trump .
He wanted to use our armed forces to put down anti-police violence protests and they forced him to back down .
That might be true to a certain extent , but then who are the soldiers milling about the capital without insignia or any transparent chain of command ?
Why is the attorney general seemingly in command ?
Muriel Bowser , the mayor of Washington , has had few options this week to hold back the overwhelming show of federal force in her city : the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not request , the Bureau of Prisons and Border Patrol officers the city rarely works with , the troops in unmarked uniforms who have upset residents .
Attorney General William P. Barr has directed all of this , making the nation ’ s capital the primary stage for President Trump ’ s vow to “ dominate the streets ” to quell protests .
It seems to me like the Pentagon has largely extricated itself from this task , but not entirely since the National Guard is still involved .
This looks more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ any kind of affirmative stop to what Trump and Barr have in mind .
It Trump has to relent and allow the 82nd Airborne to demobilize from the DC area , he ’ s still got his border and prison cops , and his mysterious mercenary army .
He may even revive his idea of federalizing the DC police force .
It a good thing that three former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have joined former Defense Secretary James Mattis in condemning Trump ’ s actions , and it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Joint Chiefs chairman have publicly revolted .
But it ’ s unclear that this will be sufficient to prevent the president from finding the men he needs to “ dominate the streets.
” Perhaps the pushback from the Pentagon will increase the political cost , but if congressional Republicans won ’ t break with the president , then he ’ ll probably be able to create the carnage he seeks without too much difficulty .
I don ’ t think anyone should be doling out backslaps or high fives .
The risk is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the military is going to protect the people , they ’ re going to have to do more than let it be known that they don ’ t approve .

If things weren’t screwed up enough in this country right now, it’s been 48 hours since I had power and my utility company says it could be another 36 hours before I can expect to see any. It’s not easy to write using your car as a charger and your throttled phone as a hotspot. Yet, I don’t know how well I’d be doing even in better circumstances, because things are so confusing and out of control.
To read David Ignatius, our brave military leaders have finally found their backbone and stood up to President Trump. He wanted to use our armed forces to put down anti-police violence protests and they forced him to back down. That might be true to a certain extent, but then who are the soldiers milling about the capital without insignia or any transparent chain of command? Why is the attorney general seemingly in command?
Muriel Bowser, the mayor of Washington, has had few options this week to hold back the overwhelming show of federal force in her city: the national guardsmen from outside D.C. whom she did not request, the Bureau of Prisons and Border Patrol officers the city rarely works with, the troops in unmarked uniforms who have upset residents. Attorney General William P. Barr has directed all of this, making the nation’s capital the primary stage for President Trump’s vow to “dominate the streets” to quell protests.
It seems to me like the Pentagon has largely extricated itself from this task, but not entirely since the National Guard is still involved. This looks more like covering their own asses than putting any kind of affirmative stop to what Trump and Barr have in mind. It Trump has to relent and allow the 82nd Airborne to demobilize from the DC area, he’s still got his border and prison cops, and his mysterious mercenary army. He may even revive his idea of federalizing the DC police force.
It a good thing that three former chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have joined former Defense Secretary James Mattis in condemning Trump’s actions, and it’s encouraging that the current Defense Secretary and Joint Chiefs chairman have publicly revolted. But it’s unclear that this will be sufficient to prevent the president from finding the men he needs to “dominate the streets.”
Perhaps the pushback from the Pentagon will increase the political cost, but if congressional Republicans won’t break with the president, then he’ll probably be able to create the carnage he seeks without too much difficulty.
I don’t think anyone should be doling out backslaps or high fives. The risk is as high as ever, and if the military is going to protect the people, they’re going to have to do more than let it be known that they don’t approve.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--Democratic Mayors and City Councils Must Step Up to Hold Police Accountable

As the protests against police violence continue to build across the country , many progressive activists now see an opportunity for concrete reforms that once seemed unthinkable .
Legislators and activists ( mostly of color ) have been toiling for decades on potential solutions , but have been stymied in a structurally racist country where even white liberals valued their lives far too cheaply .
Some of the proposals advocated by Black Lives Matter activists at Campaign Zero and elsewhere require or would be greatly assisted by federal and state legislation .
And indeed , both Democrats in Congress and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee Joe Biden , whose past record on these issues has been far less than ideal ) have worked in tandem with their communities to promote some excellent legislation .
But the harsh reality is that these federal efforts are easy and largely for show .
As long as a Republican is president and both Republicans and conservative Democrats can support a filibuster , nothing will happen to make them a reality .
They are essentially little more than message bills .
Moreover , it is at the local level that the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ made .
It is mayors and city councils who set municipal budgets , and perpetuate a system where around half of major city discretionary budgets are spent on police departments .
It is mayors who are in the most direct position to influence the policies of their police departments , and mayors who can do the most to hold officers accountable for misconduct .
The legislative dithering and rhetorical cowardice of so many Democratic mayors suggests that they are not truly in control of their cities .
Rather , their cities are functionally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be accountable to their governments .
New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti , the leaders of the two biggest cities in America , have faced criticism for their tepid responses to overreaching police use of force .
One has to wonder why .
De Blasio , who once thought he could contend for the presidency , is being humiliated nightly on national television by the NYPD ’ s ironclad commitment to mass brutality against both protesters and media .
Garcetti has similarly been embarrassed by the LAPD @ @ @ @ @ @ @ video routinely using unnecessary force against demonstrators who posed no threat to them .
America ’ s two biggest cities are not the only ones facing these issues .
In the District of Columbia , the Metropolitan Police Department , apparently not federalized and still under the control of Mayor Muriel Bowser , laid siege overnight to dozens of young protesters who were being sheltered from arrest for curfew violations by a good samaritan who gave them refuge until curfew expired the next morning .
In Buffalo , NY , an officer brazenly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his skull , simply because he stood in a public square .
Neither of these abuses have drawn significant criticism from leadership in their respective cities .
There are structural reasons why it has historically been so difficult for even ideologically committed progressive mayors to enact any sort of substantial reform to police departments , and these reasons range from the banal to the grotesque .
To begin with , police union and benevolent association endorsements are some of the most coveted endorsements in local politics , and can make or break a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strongly reduces the incentives for city government officials to go head-to-head with police departments on matters of budget and policy .
That is politics at its most commonplace .
Sometimes , however , the relationship between city governments and their police forces is downright toxic and abusive .
Consider the case of Minneapolis .
Ward 3 Councilmember Fletcher posted a series of tweets earlier this week stating that for years , the Minneapolis Police Department has intentionally delivered slower response services to Wards represented by politicians who do not toe the police department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then tells Ward residents to take it up with their councilmember .
Councilmembers know this , Fletcher argues , and go along with whatever the department wants so as not to face this quandary .
Chief Newsham of DC ’ s Metropolitan Police Department , meanwhile , stated on the Kojo Nnamdi Show recently that the best way to avoid police brutality was to give the police department more money .
In Buffalo , NY , media are afraid to hold the police department accountable because by doing so , they risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entire city government .
In New York , police associations have acted no better than organized crime syndicates , even going so far as to doxx De Blasio ’ s daughter in an effort to humiliate him .
The reason police departments act like they run the cities they ’ re supposed to serve is because , for all intents and purposes , they do–and when the chips are down , they use violence against the people to reinforce their claim .
This ethic has been entrenched across generations .
It has also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least until recently , police have retained high levels of trust among large ( especially white and suburban ) segments of the voting public .
But there is hope that the brutal police response to the protests against the killing of George Floyd could finally be changing this dynamic .
Public opinion across all racial groups is rapidly shifting against police departments .
This in turn is opening a window for reform-minded leaders to step up to meet the challenge .
In Los Angeles , Mayor Garcetti and City Council President Nury Martinez @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s budget by $ 150 million–something that would be unthinkable city policy before these protests .
In Washington , DC , a progressive challenger , Janeese Lewis-George , just defeated an incumbent City Councilmember in the Democratic primary by running on a platform of reducing the city ’ s police budget .
Coincidentally , this election took place during the height of last week ’ s civil unrest , creating a situation in which polls were open later than the city ’ s mandatory curfew .
Results like these are equally as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than any federal legislation introduced in Congress–at least , until and unless Democrats secure the White House and a Senate majority with the will to pass major reforms .
But change at the local level will not happen unless the same activists that pour their heart and soul into federal elections carry that same spirit of enthusiasm toward holding municipal government accountable and giving a strong tailwind to mayors , city councilmembers , and county executives who are trying to do the right thing .
This week could be a watershed moment for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ municipal government–but only if citizens and activists make it so .
Solutions must begin at a local level .
Enacting those solutions will depend on strengthening the hand of local legislators to defy the intransigence of their police departments–and being willing to primary and replace incumbents who refuse to do so .

As the protests against police violence continue to build across the country, many progressive activists now see an opportunity for concrete reforms that once seemed unthinkable. Legislators and activists (mostly of color) have been toiling for decades on potential solutions, but have been stymied in a structurally racist country where even white liberals valued their lives far too cheaply.
Some of the proposals advocated by Black Lives Matter activists at Campaign Zero and elsewhere require or would be greatly assisted by federal and state legislation. And indeed, both Democrats in Congress and those seeking the presidency (including presumptive nominee Joe Biden, whose past record on these issues has been far less than ideal) have worked in tandem with their communities to promote some excellent legislation.
But the harsh reality is that these federal efforts are easy and largely for show. As long as a Republican is president and both Republicans and conservative Democrats can support a filibuster, nothing will happen to make them a reality. They are essentially little more than message bills. Moreover, it is at the local level that the most direct impacts on the problem can be made. It is mayors and city councils who set municipal budgets, and perpetuate a system where around half of major city discretionary budgets are spent on police departments. It is mayors who are in the most direct position to influence the policies of their police departments, and mayors who can do the most to hold officers accountable for misconduct.
The legislative dithering and rhetorical cowardice of so many Democratic mayors suggests that they are not truly in control of their cities. Rather, their cities are functionally dominated by the police departments that should be accountable to their governments. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio and Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, the leaders of the two biggest cities in America, have faced criticism for their tepid responses to overreaching police use of force.
One has to wonder why. De Blasio, who once thought he could contend for the presidency, is being humiliated nightly on national television by the NYPD’s ironclad commitment to mass brutality against both protesters and media. Garcetti has similarly been embarrassed by the LAPD, whose officers have been shown on video routinely using unnecessary force against demonstrators who posed no threat to them.
America’s two biggest cities are not the only ones facing these issues. In the District of Columbia, the Metropolitan Police Department, apparently not federalized and still under the control of Mayor Muriel Bowser, laid siege overnight to dozens of young protesters who were being sheltered from arrest for curfew violations by a good samaritan who gave them refuge until curfew expired the next morning. In Buffalo, NY, an officer brazenly battered a 75-year-old man and cracked open his skull, simply because he stood in a public square. Neither of these abuses have drawn significant criticism from leadership in their respective cities.
There are structural reasons why it has historically been so difficult for even ideologically committed progressive mayors to enact any sort of substantial reform to police departments, and these reasons range from the banal to the grotesque. To begin with, police union and benevolent association endorsements are some of the most coveted endorsements in local politics, and can make or break a candidate’s political fortunes. That strongly reduces the incentives for city government officials to go head-to-head with police departments on matters of budget and policy. That is politics at its most commonplace. Sometimes, however, the relationship between city governments and their police forces is downright toxic and abusive.
Consider the case of Minneapolis. Ward 3 Councilmember Fletcher posted a series of tweets earlier this week stating that for years, the Minneapolis Police Department has intentionally delivered slower response services to Wards represented by politicians who do not toe the police department’s line in budget discussions, and then tells Ward residents to take it up with their councilmember. Councilmembers know this, Fletcher argues, and go along with whatever the department wants so as not to face this quandary. Chief Newsham of DC’s Metropolitan Police Department, meanwhile, stated on the Kojo Nnamdi Show recently that the best way to avoid police brutality was to give the police department more money. In Buffalo, NY, media are afraid to hold the police department accountable because by doing so, they risk losing access to their sources across the entire city government. In New York, police associations have acted no better than organized crime syndicates, even going so far as to doxx De Blasio’s daughter in an effort to humiliate him.
The reason police departments act like they run the cities they’re supposed to serve is because, for all intents and purposes, they do–and when the chips are down, they use violence against the people to reinforce their claim. This ethic has been entrenched across generations. It has also been reinforced by the fact that at least until recently, police have retained high levels of trust among large (especially white and suburban) segments of the voting public.
But there is hope that the brutal police response to the protests against the killing of George Floyd could finally be changing this dynamic. Public opinion across all racial groups is rapidly shifting against police departments. This in turn is opening a window for reform-minded leaders to step up to meet the challenge.
In Los Angeles, Mayor Garcetti and City Council President Nury Martinez are teaming up to reduce the LAPD’s budget by $150 million–something that would be unthinkable city policy before these protests. In Washington, DC, a progressive challenger, Janeese Lewis-George, just defeated an incumbent City Councilmember in the Democratic primary by running on a platform of reducing the city’s police budget. Coincidentally, this election took place during the height of last week’s civil unrest, creating a situation in which polls were open later than the city’s mandatory curfew.
Results like these are equally as important, if not more so, than any federal legislation introduced in Congress–at least, until and unless Democrats secure the White House and a Senate majority with the will to pass major reforms. But change at the local level will not happen unless the same activists that pour their heart and soul into federal elections carry that same spirit of enthusiasm toward holding municipal government accountable and giving a strong tailwind to mayors, city councilmembers, and county executives who are trying to do the right thing.
This week could be a watershed moment for changing the relationship between police departments and municipal government–but only if citizens and activists make it so. Solutions must begin at a local level. Enacting those solutions will depend on strengthening the hand of local legislators to defy the intransigence of their police departments–and being willing to primary and replace incumbents who refuse to do so.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-06--Trump Thought Brutalizing Protesters Would Save Him. He Was Wrong.

It seems almost inane to remark on an electoral horse race at such a historic time .
Why should we care about Donald Trump ’ s electoral chances when energized citizens across America are braving injury and arrest to confront white supremacy and police violence ?
But it ’ s important nonetheless .
That ’ s because while these problems have been centuries in the making from slavery to Jim Crow to Ferguson and beyond , Donald Trump ’ s particular failings as a person and a candidate are fanning the flames of the crisis .
Rather than help be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is intentionally exacerbating the tensions–not only because he himself is a racist whose politics of authoritarian white grievance align with the same forces driving police violence itself , but because he is desperate and in grave political peril .
This isn ’ t news : he has been for some time .
He has consistently trailed all the leading Democratic contenders in national polling since the beginning of the primary campaign—not just nationally , but also in the swing states he needs in the electoral college .
If he loses in November he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a pathway to victory before external forces derailed him , but this would be wrong .
Even when the economy was strong , which normally bodes very well for first-term presidents ’ odds at winning another four years , much of the persuadable public simply found itself so exhausted by Trump ’ s ongoing campaign against public decency that they were ready to vote for an alternative who did not take active measures to offend people on a daily basis .
Matters worsened for him when COVID-19 hit the United States and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ buffoon , but a cynically incompetent one .
The Administration delayed its response , worried that any action they took would hurt the stock market and erode Trump ’ s last remaining electoral strength .
But even as the job losses mounted into the tens of millions as the nation rushed to try to contain an already widespread pandemic , the President personally promoted miracle quack cures like hydroxychloroquine and demonstrated his unbridled personal buffoonery by wondering aloud about the possibility of drinking bleach and injecting sunlight as a method of curing oneself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killing of George Floyd by officers of the Minneapolis Police Department , Trump knew that he would need to maximize his culture war appeal to non-college whites to make up ground lost to the faltering economy .
There can be little doubt that Trump saw opportunity in the protests that followed to dust off the Nixon playbook , vowing to restore “ law and order ” in a country furious that the law seemed to protect only some , while enforcing a brutal order on others .
If Trump ’ s actions threatened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ active shooting war , that would just be collateral damage on the road to his political recovery .
The Trump orbit considers the iconography of jingoistic militarism and the violent suppression of protest to be a political winner .
Consider , for instance , Rudy Giuliani ’ s bizarre 9/11 tribute tweet promoting a video that featured riot police , the military , and high school football squaring off against young protesters replete with counterculture stereotypes , including flag-burners , anti-police sentiment and even men with long hair ( how dare they .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , uses “ law and order ” as a way of “ talking about race without talking about race.
” In this narrative , a president who supports American “ traditional culture ” and stands strong against people who agitate for racial justice will win over a “ silent majority ” of people who just don ’ t want to be disturbed and want to have some peace and quiet from their politics .
In this context , the killing of George Floyd was not a crisis , but an opportunity .
A @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dignity and compassion would have done her best to understand the anguish and grief facing the black community as yet another black person was killed needlessly and with zero remorse by a police force accustomed to no accountability .
A president who made a semblance of caring about the country as a whole would have made at least a show of sympathy .
Trump could not do even this .
This is , first and foremost , because Trump is the same man who published a full-page ad recommending the execution of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refused to apologize for or even retract his position .
He is the same man who , as president , implemented a policy of separating immigrant children from their parents to lock them in cages without blankets or toothpaste , as an explicit deterrent to other potential ( nonwhite , of course ) immigrants seeking a better life .
As Adam Serwer unforgettably said , the cruelty is the point .
Trump enjoys and encourages state brutality against people of color , and black people in particular .
It excites him and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ isn ’ t just based on personal predilections .
It ’ s also based on political considerations .
Trump sees shades of a 1968-style law-and-order culture campaign that can carry him to re-election when literally nothing else can .
Any normal president would have made an Oval Office address to the nation as soon as major protests began .
Trump , despite his braggadoccio , showed characteristic cowardice and indecision for days , choosing to post inflammatory tweets while hiding in a White House bunker .
When he finally did make a public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chest-puffing false bravado of a petty tyrant .
He has encouraged governors to use extreme force against protesters , using “ antifa ” and a small minority of looters and criminals as an excuse .
In a tweet that was flagged with a warning by Twitter for its glorifcation of violence , he used a phrase that harkened back to the segregation era to threaten lethal force against protests .
He has repeatedly threatened to use the military to suppress dissent .
He has rebuffed the calls of Mayor Muriel Bowser of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the protests , and has vowed to replace the troops she refuses with forces beyond her control .
He has turned the District of Columbia , a plurality black city , into a militarized zone with non-uniformed secret police , and the White House as a closed-off fortress in its center .
Across the country , police have intentionally targeted journalists , leaving many with disfiguring injuries .
Can there be any doubt that this unprecedented violence against the press was spurred on by Trump ’ s endless war with any media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump received the support of 84 percent of America ’ s police officers , how could it be otherwise ?
And most egregiously , in what will surely be viewed as one of the most ill-advised stunts in presidential history , the Trump Administration had federal security forces use tear gas and projectiles to vacate Lafayette square by force of arms so Trump could make a show of walking over to St. John ’ s Church and posing awkwardly with a bible held upside down .
The message that Trump wanted to send @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decipher .
It cast him as the warrior of white evangelical Christianity , waging a holy crusade by force of arms against those who would oppose it as the dominant force in American electoral politics .
Trump will fail , however , because neither the bastions of white culture nor the nation ’ s security apparatus are on his side this time .
No matter what Trump did previously , the elements that represented these conservative institutional bastions would not condemn him .
But Trump ’ s effort to use the military as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Americans exercising their constitutional rights has caused the people who should be his allies to turn against him .
It earned him stinging , humiliating rebukes from respected military leaders such as four-star Marine Corps General and former Secretary of Defense James Mattis .
Conservative columnist George Will has called for the removal of Trump and the Congressional leaders who enable him .
This despicable act even earned him condemnation from televangelist Pat Robertson , one his bedrock supporters in the white Christian evangelical movement .
Meanwhile , people of all races across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to commit violent acts of brutality against the people who are legally and peacefully protesting police brutality .
Statistically speaking , white people have historically not believed that institutional racism in the police force is an issue worth their attention .
Now , for the first time , a majority of whites do , and Americans of all races are overwhelmingly supportive of the protests against the killing of George Floyd .
If Trump was planning on dividing Americans by race and cleaving more whites to his side , the plan is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a reverse Midas touch in recent polling on these issues : while Americans were broadly supportive of using the military to quell the civil disturbances at first , Trump ’ s embrace of the tactic seems to have helped drive those numbers into negative territory in just a few days .
In one sense , he ’ s right : people are exhausted with chaos , and they do want a respect for law and order .
The problem for Trump ?
The chaos is in large part of his own making , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he ’ s in the way of solving the problems created by institutional racism and overlapping hierarchies of oppression .
The massive wave of police brutality has woken even many previously disengaged white people up to the need for true equality under the law , and an order in which everyone , including police and the president , are held to account .
And many of the same people Trump is trying to persuade now believe that kicking him out of the White House is a necessary prerequisite for making that vision @ @ @

It seems almost inane to remark on an electoral horse race at such a historic time. Why should we care about Donald Trump’s electoral chances when energized citizens across America are braving injury and arrest to confront white supremacy and police violence? But it’s important nonetheless.
That’s because while these problems have been centuries in the making from slavery to Jim Crow to Ferguson and beyond, Donald Trump’s particular failings as a person and a candidate are fanning the flames of the crisis. Rather than help be a part of the solution, he is intentionally exacerbating the tensions–not only because he himself is a racist whose politics of authoritarian white grievance align with the same forces driving police violence itself, but because he is desperate and in grave political peril.
This isn’t news: he has been for some time. He has consistently trailed all the leading Democratic contenders in national polling since the beginning of the primary campaign—not just nationally, but also in the swing states he needs in the electoral college. If he loses in November he and his defenders will claim he was on a pathway to victory before external forces derailed him, but this would be wrong. Even when the economy was strong, which normally bodes very well for first-term presidents’ odds at winning another four years, much of the persuadable public simply found itself so exhausted by Trump’s ongoing campaign against public decency that they were ready to vote for an alternative who did not take active measures to offend people on a daily basis.
Matters worsened for him when COVID-19 hit the United States and exposed him not just as a divisive buffoon, but a cynically incompetent one. The Administration delayed its response, worried that any action they took would hurt the stock market and erode Trump’s last remaining electoral strength. But even as the job losses mounted into the tens of millions as the nation rushed to try to contain an already widespread pandemic, the President personally promoted miracle quack cures like hydroxychloroquine and demonstrated his unbridled personal buffoonery by wondering aloud about the possibility of drinking bleach and injecting sunlight as a method of curing oneself of coronavirus.
Even before the brutal killing of George Floyd by officers of the Minneapolis Police Department, Trump knew that he would need to maximize his culture war appeal to non-college whites to make up ground lost to the faltering economy. There can be little doubt that Trump saw opportunity in the protests that followed to dust off the Nixon playbook, vowing to restore “law and order” in a country furious that the law seemed to protect only some, while enforcing a brutal order on others. If Trump’s actions threatened to turn the culture war into an active shooting war, that would just be collateral damage on the road to his political recovery.
The Trump orbit considers the iconography of jingoistic militarism and the violent suppression of protest to be a political winner. Consider, for instance, Rudy Giuliani’s bizarre 9/11 tribute tweet promoting a video that featured riot police, the military, and high school football squaring off against young protesters replete with counterculture stereotypes, including flag-burners, anti-police sentiment and even men with long hair (how dare they.)
Trump, like Nixon before him, uses “law and order” as a way of “talking about race without talking about race.” In this narrative, a president who supports American “traditional culture” and stands strong against people who agitate for racial justice will win over a “silent majority” of people who just don’t want to be disturbed and want to have some peace and quiet from their politics.
In this context, the killing of George Floyd was not a crisis, but an opportunity.
A president with an ounce of self-respect, dignity and compassion would have done her best to understand the anguish and grief facing the black community as yet another black person was killed needlessly and with zero remorse by a police force accustomed to no accountability. A president who made a semblance of caring about the country as a whole would have made at least a show of sympathy. Trump could not do even this.
This is, first and foremost, because Trump is the same man who published a full-page ad recommending the execution of the innocent Central Park 5, and has refused to apologize for or even retract his position. He is the same man who, as president, implemented a policy of separating immigrant children from their parents to lock them in cages without blankets or toothpaste, as an explicit deterrent to other potential (nonwhite, of course) immigrants seeking a better life. As Adam Serwer unforgettably said, the cruelty is the point.
Trump enjoys and encourages state brutality against people of color, and black people in particular. It excites him and his most ardent followers. But his response isn’t just based on personal predilections. It’s also based on political considerations. Trump sees shades of a 1968-style law-and-order culture campaign that can carry him to re-election when literally nothing else can.
Any normal president would have made an Oval Office address to the nation as soon as major protests began. Trump, despite his braggadoccio, showed characteristic cowardice and indecision for days, choosing to post inflammatory tweets while hiding in a White House bunker. When he finally did make a public address, it was little more the chest-puffing false bravado of a petty tyrant.
He has encouraged governors to use extreme force against protesters, using “antifa” and a small minority of looters and criminals as an excuse. In a tweet that was flagged with a warning by Twitter for its glorifcation of violence, he used a phrase that harkened back to the segregation era to threaten lethal force against protests. He has repeatedly threatened to use the military to suppress dissent. He has rebuffed the calls of Mayor Muriel Bowser of the District of Columbia to demilitarize the response to the protests, and has vowed to replace the troops she refuses with forces beyond her control. He has turned the District of Columbia, a plurality black city, into a militarized zone with non-uniformed secret police, and the White House as a closed-off fortress in its center.
Across the country, police have intentionally targeted journalists, leaving many with disfiguring injuries. Can there be any doubt that this unprecedented violence against the press was spurred on by Trump’s endless war with any media that holds him accountable? Given that Trump received the support of 84 percent of America’s police officers, how could it be otherwise?
And most egregiously, in what will surely be viewed as one of the most ill-advised stunts in presidential history, the Trump Administration had federal security forces use tear gas and projectiles to vacate Lafayette square by force of arms so Trump could make a show of walking over to St. John’s Church and posing awkwardly with a bible held upside down.
The message that Trump wanted to send with this stunt is not hard to decipher. It cast him as the warrior of white evangelical Christianity, waging a holy crusade by force of arms against those who would oppose it as the dominant force in American electoral politics.
Trump will fail, however, because neither the bastions of white culture nor the nation’s security apparatus are on his side this time. No matter what Trump did previously, the elements that represented these conservative institutional bastions would not condemn him. But Trump’s effort to use the military as both a political and kinetic weapon against Americans exercising their constitutional rights has caused the people who should be his allies to turn against him. It earned him stinging, humiliating rebukes from respected military leaders such as four-star Marine Corps General and former Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Conservative columnist George Will has called for the removal of Trump and the Congressional leaders who enable him. This despicable act even earned him condemnation from televangelist Pat Robertson, one his bedrock supporters in the white Christian evangelical movement.
Meanwhile, people of all races across America have watched in horror as police continue to commit violent acts of brutality against the people who are legally and peacefully protesting police brutality. Statistically speaking, white people have historically not believed that institutional racism in the police force is an issue worth their attention. Now, for the first time, a majority of whites do, and Americans of all races are overwhelmingly supportive of the protests against the killing of George Floyd. If Trump was planning on dividing Americans by race and cleaving more whites to his side, the plan is backfiring. Trump even seems to have a reverse Midas touch in recent polling on these issues: while Americans were broadly supportive of using the military to quell the civil disturbances at first, Trump’s embrace of the tactic seems to have helped drive those numbers into negative territory in just a few days.
In one sense, he’s right: people are exhausted with chaos, and they do want a respect for law and order. The problem for Trump? The chaos is in large part of his own making, and insofar as it isn’t, he’s in the way of solving the problems created by institutional racism and overlapping hierarchies of oppression. The massive wave of police brutality has woken even many previously disengaged white people up to the need for true equality under the law, and an order in which everyone, including police and the president, are held to account. And many of the same people Trump is trying to persuade now believe that kicking him out of the White House is a necessary prerequisite for making that vision a reality.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--There Is Still An Active Pandemic and Economic Crisis. Trump is Failing to Address Either.

The human brain has a hard time focusing on too many things at time .
So it ’ s more than understandable that the all-encompassing fears surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and its drastic economic effects would take a back seat during the historic wave of protests against police violence .
Living through more than one once-in-several-generations events at a time can make the head spin .
But that ’ s why we have governments with specialized tasks .
What might be overwhelming to an individual should not be impossible for a competent government .
It should be possible for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ begin to address police unaccountability , while mobilizing a pandemic response and shoring up the economy .
Unfortunately , we do not have a competent president or effective president .
Worse , the Trump Administration ’ s malpractice , in fact , extends far beyond benign neglect to actively corrupt malevolence .
The president ’ s sole concern is for his electoral and personal fortune .
The coronavirus was an inconvenience to be wished away and obscured rather than confronted .
The economic fallout from his mishandling of the pandemic was to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a one-time stimulus so long as the stock market held value and the economy reopened regardless of safety or good scientific advice .
When the protests over police violence and murder of George Floyd arrived , Trump saw only the potential to shore up his poll numbers by rehashing the Nixon playbook .
He was already bored with the pandemic and ready to move on , anyway .
But neither the pandemic nor the economic crisis have gone away .
Trump bragged about bogus unemployment numbers ( and grossly misappropriated the memory of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ while Republicans used those same mistaken numbers to dismiss the necessity of another round of economic stimulus to states , municipalities , individuals and small businesses .
Meanwhile , the Trump administration is all but acting as if the pandemic no longer even exists : just yesterday the White House press team forced reporters to sit closer together and defy social distancing just because “ it looks better.
” New cases of the virus in the U.S. are continuing to rise , even as states are beginning to reopen with potentially catastrophic consequences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the governors : the three months of lockdown was supposed to be to give the federal government time to implement a thorough regimen of testing and contact tracing , while keeping the economy basically intact .
The Trump administration failed miserably on the former , and is threatening to fail drastically on the latter if more action is not taken soon .
While the rising death toll from the virus is shocking–over 110,000 in the United States and counting from the first wave alone–the economic statistics are also sobering .
Millions are unemployed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , rents and mortgages .
City and state budgets are decimated , requiring drastic cuts and layoffs .
And there is no help in sight , especially after unemployment insurance expires : This is a catastrophic crisis of both public health and economics .
But the president of the United States doesn ’ t care .
He is more concerned with trying to force the military to “ dominate ” peaceful protesters against police brutality in order to please his deplorable base than he is with doing his actual job .
There is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this , too .
Trump ’ s misreading of the national mood regarding white supremacy , the value of black lives and disenchantment with police brutality has been well-documented in the last few days–even as he has become singularly obsessed with those issues .
But the pandemic ’ s particular lethality to communities of color–and disproportionate economic impact on them–is the result of the same structural racism that led to the necessity of the Black Lives Matter movement .
The decent majority of Americans have taken notice and lost patience , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accordingly .
Joe Biden may not the most charismatic or transformative nominee in American history .
But a country dealing with multiple simultaneous historic events deserves a president at least minimally committed to doing the job .
We don ’ t have one right now , and the unwillingness of Republicans in Congress to remove their categorically unfit , corrupted and disinterested president means that we won ’ t have one until the voters finally get a chance to weigh in this November .

The human brain has a hard time focusing on too many things at one time. So it’s more than understandable that the all-encompassing fears surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and its drastic economic effects would take a back seat during the historic wave of protests against police violence. Living through more than one once-in-several-generations events at a time can make the head spin.
But that’s why we have governments with specialized tasks. What might be overwhelming to an individual should not be impossible for a competent government. It should be possible for an effective administration to soothe the nation and begin to address police unaccountability, while mobilizing a pandemic response and shoring up the economy.
Unfortunately, we do not have a competent or effective president. Worse, the Trump Administration’s malpractice, in fact, extends far beyond benign neglect to actively corrupt malevolence.
The president’s sole concern is for his electoral and personal fortune. The coronavirus was an inconvenience to be wished away and obscured rather than confronted. The economic fallout from his mishandling of the pandemic was to be blamed on governors, and hand-waived with a one-time stimulus so long as the stock market held value and the economy reopened regardless of safety or good scientific advice. When the protests over police violence and murder of George Floyd arrived, Trump saw only the potential to shore up his poll numbers by rehashing the Nixon playbook. He was already bored with the pandemic and ready to move on, anyway.
But neither the pandemic nor the economic crisis have gone away. Trump bragged about bogus unemployment numbers (and grossly misappropriated the memory of George Floyd in the process), while Republicans used those same mistaken numbers to dismiss the necessity of another round of economic stimulus to states, municipalities, individuals and small businesses. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is all but acting as if the pandemic no longer even exists: just yesterday the White House press team forced reporters to sit closer together and defy social distancing just because “it looks better.”
New cases of the virus in the U.S. are continuing to rise, even as states are beginning to reopen with potentially catastrophic consequences. It’s difficult to blame the governors: the three months of lockdown was supposed to be to give the federal government time to implement a thorough regimen of testing and contact tracing, while keeping the economy basically intact. The Trump administration failed miserably on the former, and is threatening to fail drastically on the latter if more action is not taken soon.
While the rising death toll from the virus is shocking–over 110,000 in the United States and counting from the first wave alone–the economic statistics are also sobering. Millions are unemployed, cannot pay their car loans, rents and mortgages. City and state budgets are decimated, requiring drastic cuts and layoffs. And there is no help in sight, especially after unemployment insurance expires:
And millions of people are getting help from all kinds of lenders. According to the latest available numbers from the credit bureau TransUnion, about 3 million auto loans and 15 million credit card accounts are in some kind of program to let people skip or make partial payments. Those are probably low estimates. According to the analytics company Black Knight, 4.75 million homeowners — or 9% of all mortgages — have entered into forbearance plans.
This is a catastrophic crisis of both public health and economics. But the president of the United States doesn’t care. He is more concerned with trying to force the military to “dominate” peaceful protesters against police brutality in order to please his deplorable base than he is with doing his actual job.
There is a unifying social justice aspect to all of this, too. Trump’s misreading of the national mood regarding white supremacy, the value of black lives and disenchantment with police brutality has been well-documented in the last few days–even as he has become singularly obsessed with those issues. But the pandemic’s particular lethality to communities of color–and disproportionate economic impact on them–is the result of the same structural racism that led to the necessity of the Black Lives Matter movement. The decent majority of Americans have taken notice and lost patience, and Trump’s approval rating has fallen accordingly.
Joe Biden may not the most charismatic or transformative nominee in American history. But a country dealing with multiple simultaneous historic events deserves a president at least minimally committed to doing the job. We don’t have one right now, and the unwillingness of Republicans in Congress to remove their categorically unfit, corrupted and disinterested president means that we won’t have one until the voters finally get a chance to weigh in this November.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--Donald Trump’s Failed Counterinsurgency Against America

Over the weekend , CBS News broke the story that during the height of the mass protests across the country in response to the police killing of George Floyd , President Trump had yet another meltdown .
In a heated exchange with Attorney General William Barr , Secretary of Defense Mark Esper , and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley , he demanded 10,000 active-duty troops be deployed across the country to suppress protest activity .
According to CBS , these officials rejected Trump ’ s demand , but tried to placate him by urging state Governors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now infamous “ dominate the streets ” call with the President .
Now , before delving further , it ’ s worth pointing out that a cabinet official ’ s only proper response to a president demanding 10,000 active-duty servicemembers to crush protected speech should be to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove the President from office .
But that would be expecting too much from Esper and Barr .
In this instance , they chose to refuse the order but placate their unstable , intemperate and incompetent Commander-in-Chief .
It was Esper @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ dominating the battlespace ” when referencing crowd control measures at protests , and Barr who is still defending the assault on peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square to clear a path to deliver Trump a photo op at a church .
It ’ s clear that President Trump views himself as a wartime president waging a counterinsurgency against his own citizens .
He does not view protesters as Americans who are exercising their constitutional right to free speech and to petition their government for redress of grievances .
Instead , he views protesters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opponents of America ’ s occupation forces in Iraq , Afghanistan , and elsewhere .
For those in the profession of arms , this is a repulsive and dangerous attitude .
Professional military education in the United States emphasizes not just the military ’ s constitutional acquiescence to civilian authority , but also the extremely limited and very unwanted circumstances in which the military can be ethically and legally deployed against , rather than on behalf of , its fellow Americans on United States soil..
It is no surprise that Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country ’ s most respected military leaders , including Retired Generals James Mattis and Martin Dempsey .
But Trump ’ s desired counterinsurgency response isn ’ t just vicious , immoral and unconstitutional .
It ’ s also completely incompetent and counterproductive .
David Galula was a French military officer who participated in the brutal French colonial counterinsurgency campaigns in Algeria and Southeast Asia , and drew on these experiences to argue against the use of excessive force in counterinsurgency campaigns .
He is widely credited with being one of the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his works form part of the core curriculum on counterinsurgency theory for American professional military education .
In Counterinsurgency Warfare , Galula argued that insurgencies depend on just causes , and therefore , “ depriving an insurgent of a good cause amounts to solving the country ’ s basic problems.
” Consequently , the barbaric use of massive force by the French in Algeria was countereffective , because use of force has to be applied extremely judiciously .
Successful countcounterinsurgent force does not want to be seen as a country ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ every military move has to be weighed with regard to its political effects.
” Mattis himself was heavily influenced by Galula , and applied these lessons to counterinsurgency in Iraq by trying to make his Marines as non-threatening as possible given the situation : “ Yes , when soldiers walk into a city , and they ’ re foreign soldiers , the first thing people are going to look at is all that gear and the weapons hanging off them .
Generally the second place people look is into people ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trust them .
So Marines removed their sunglasses and we tried to build the trust one act at a time .
They learned quickly to trust us ; they would even protest against us at times .
On the suggestion of my Catholic chaplain , the marines would take chilled drinking water in bottles and walk out amongst the protestors and hand it out .
It is just hard to throw a rock at somebody who has given you a cold drink of water and it ’ s 120 degrees outside.
” Of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country by force on false pretenses and are killing its civilians on a near-daily basis , you will become a cause for protest and insurgency regardless of whether you ’ re handing out water bottles or not .
Still , compare Mattis ’ approach to the Trump Administration ’ s approach to the protests in the District of Columbia .
Instead of trying to sympathize with the protesters , Attorney General Barr has deployed nameless , faceless , non-uniformed personnel in order to provide an unaccountable show of force , and in so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a cause for further protest .
At a time when many citizens of America ’ s largest cities already see the police as a hostile and even illegitimate occupying force for myriad reasons , Trump ’ s instinct to double down on and reinforce that perception is not only evil but blindingly stupid .
To re-emphasize , it is extremely dangerous and disqualifying for a president to view himself as leading a counterinsurgency against his own people .
But the Trump Administration has a unique ability to match its malevolence with an equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , police violence is one of this country ’ s basic problems .
But instead of doing his part to address the unmet needs of the protesters , Trump has escalated the situation and made himself and his administration a further reason for massive protests in the nation ’ s capital , across the country , and around the world .
Short of actually accomplishing the massive bloodshed on the streets that Trump seemed so eager for , it is hard to imagine how he could have handled this situation any worse .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump as an a vicious and incompetent authoritarian who is overmatched by this moment in every single way and makes a daily case for his own immediate removal from office .

Over the weekend, CBS News broke the story that during the height of the mass protests across the country in response to the police killing of George Floyd, President Trump had yet another meltdown. In a heated exchange with Attorney General William Barr, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, he demanded 10,000 active-duty troops be deployed across the country to suppress protest activity. According to CBS, these officials rejected Trump’s demand, but tried to placate him by urging state Governors to request a military presence on the now infamous “dominate the streets” call with the President.
Now, before delving further, it’s worth pointing out that a cabinet official’s only proper response to a president demanding 10,000 active-duty servicemembers to crush protected speech should be to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove the President from office. But that would be expecting too much from Esper and Barr. In this instance, they chose to refuse the order but placate their unstable, intemperate and incompetent Commander-in-Chief. It was Esper, after all, who referred to “dominating the battlespace” when referencing crowd control measures at protests, and Barr who is still defending the assault on peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square to clear a path to deliver Trump a photo op at a church.
It’s clear that President Trump views himself as a wartime president waging a counterinsurgency against his own citizens. He does not view protesters as Americans who are exercising their constitutional right to free speech and to petition their government for redress of grievances. Instead, he views protesters as violent insurgents little different from the opponents of America’s occupation forces in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
For those in the profession of arms, this is a repulsive and dangerous attitude. Professional military education in the United States emphasizes not just the military’s constitutional acquiescence to civilian authority, but also the extremely limited and very unwanted circumstances in which the military can be ethically and legally deployed against, rather than on behalf of, its fellow Americans on United States soil. It is no surprise that Trump’s attitude has drawn condemnation from some of the country’s most respected military leaders, including Retired Generals James Mattis and Martin Dempsey.
But Trump’s desired counterinsurgency response isn’t just vicious, immoral and unconstitutional. It’s also completely incompetent and counterproductive. David Galula was a French military officer who participated in the brutal French colonial counterinsurgency campaigns in Algeria and Southeast Asia, and drew on these experiences to argue against the use of excessive force in counterinsurgency campaigns. He is widely credited with being one of the most influential figures in modern counterinsurgency theory, and his works form part of the core curriculum on counterinsurgency theory for American professional military education. In Counterinsurgency Warfare, Galula argued that insurgencies depend on just causes, and therefore,“depriving an insurgent of a good cause amounts to solving the country’s basic problems.”
Consequently, the barbaric use of massive force by the French in Algeria was countereffective, because use of force has to be applied extremely judiciously. Successful countcounterinsurgent force does not want to be seen as a country’s basic problem. As Galula wrote, “every military move has to be weighed with regard to its political effects.”
Mattis himself was heavily influenced by Galula, and applied these lessons to counterinsurgency in Iraq by trying to make his Marines as non-threatening as possible given the situation:
“Yes, when soldiers walk into a city, and they’re foreign soldiers, the first thing people are going to look at is all that gear and the weapons hanging off them. Generally the second place people look is into people’s eyes, to see if they can trust them. So Marines removed their sunglasses and we tried to build the trust one act at a time. They learned quickly to trust us; they would even protest against us at times. On the suggestion of my Catholic chaplain, the marines would take chilled drinking water in bottles and walk out amongst the protestors and hand it out. It is just hard to throw a rock at somebody who has given you a cold drink of water and it’s 120 degrees outside.”
Of course, when you have conquered a country by force on false pretenses and are killing its civilians on a near-daily basis, you will become a cause for protest and insurgency regardless of whether you’re handing out water bottles or not. Still, compare Mattis’ approach to the Trump Administration’s approach to the protests in the District of Columbia. Instead of trying to sympathize with the protesters, Attorney General Barr has deployed nameless, faceless, non-uniformed personnel in order to provide an unaccountable show of force, and in so doing has made himself and his forces a cause for further protest.
At a time when many citizens of America’s largest cities already see the police as a hostile and even illegitimate occupying force for myriad reasons, Trump’s instinct to double down on and reinforce that perception is not only evil but blindingly stupid.
To re-emphasize, it is extremely dangerous and disqualifying for a president to view himself as leading a counterinsurgency against his own people. But the Trump Administration has a unique ability to match its malevolence with an equal amount of incompetence. To echo Galula, police violence is one of this country’s basic problems. But instead of doing his part to address the unmet needs of the protesters, Trump has escalated the situation and made himself and his administration a further reason for massive protests in the nation’s capital, across the country, and around the world.
Short of actually accomplishing the massive bloodshed on the streets that Trump seemed so eager for, it is hard to imagine how he could have handled this situation any worse. The recent protest movement has fully exposed Trump as a vicious and incompetent authoritarian who is overmatched by this moment in every single way and makes a daily case for his own immediate removal from office.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--America’s Big China Mistake

America’s Big China Mistake

Since President Nixon ’ s historic “ opening to China ” in 1972 and President Carter ’ s formal recognition of the communist regime in Beijing , U.S. policy has been to promote trade and investment with China .
I myself was a leader of the first U.S. trade mission to Beijing in 1982 .
Our strategy then and thereafter was founded on the notion that free global trade and investment would stimulate not only economic growth but also the spread of democracy and peace .
At the time , it seemed like a smart bet .
The collapse of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader Deng Xiaoping ’ s 1992 statement that “ to get rich is glorious ” seemed to confirm our ideas .
Both unleashed euphoria in the West .
Francis Fukuyama ’ s book , The End of History and the Last Man , was widely acclaimed .
Despite having shot at least several hundred and perhaps thousands of its own students in Tiananmen Square on June 4 , 1989 , the Beijing regime was welcomed as a trading partner by the free world .
Clinton campaigned for President under the slogan “ no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” but as President adopted a policy of “ positive engagement , ” eventually negotiating to bring China into the World Trade Organization .
Of China ’ s attempts to censor the internet , he joked : “ I ’ d like to see them try to control the internet .
It will be like trying to nail jello to the wall.
” But from early on , it should have been clear that this policy was misguided .
The Clinton administration ’ s argument for bringing China into the WTO , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy establishment , was that doing so would liberalize China while dramatically reducing the U.S. trade deficit with Beijing .
None of this took place .
China became more authoritarian .
The deficit mushroomed from about $ 80 billion annually to $ 500 billion .
Many U.S. companies moved their factories to China to take advantage of cheap labor , the absence of unions , and the lack of safety and environmental regulations .
Chinese State-Owned Enterprises ( SOEs ) , meanwhile , began to raise billions of dollars of new capital by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stock Exchange without meeting the same accounting standards as U.S. corporations .
George W. Bush and Barack Obama adopted similar policies , with similarly dangerous consequences .
In 2005 , as they continued to move production to China , free-world companies began suffering theft of their innermost secrets by hackers with ties to Beijing .
Few people raised alarm .
Similarly , no one seemed to be concerned when in 2012 , General Electric Chairman Jeffrey Immelt , then also Chairman of President Obama ’ s Commission on Jobs and Competitiveness , transferred @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China as part of a joint venture with China ’ s state-owned Avic .
Because avionics is not labor intensive , cost reduction could not have been the reason for the move .
Clearly , China had let GE know that if it wanted to sell avionics in China , it would be best to make them there .
It was all evidence that , rather than disappearing , SOEs were consolidating and becoming ever more powerful—as was the Communist Party .
China began subsidizing economic sectors such as the semiconductor industry in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ began investing heavily and strategically abroad in everything from ports in Europe to telecommunications infrastructure in Australia .
The country began dredging reefs and militarizing artificial islands in the South China Sea , along with sinking the fishing boats of other nations—all as part of its plan to seize control of the Sea .
It began mass arresting its Uyghur minority .
This was not at all in keeping with the long held free world expectations , and eventually , even the biggest cheerleaders of free trade began to admit that , far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the liberal , global order , ” China was bent on becoming the hegemon of its own authoritarian order .
On March 1 , 2018 , The Economist announced in its cover story that the West had made the wrong bet on China .
It simply wasn ’ t becoming more market oriented or liberal .
By now there has already been talk of companies targeted by China ’ s industrial policies “ de-coupling ” from the country : leaving completely .
They began to move production to places like Vietnam and even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has also been economic analysis by MIT Professor David Autor and others showing that the offshoring of U.S. jobs has contributed to overall unemployment , and that it has been a drag on working—and middle-class incomes .
Still , there ’ s resistance to departing China by many companies .
Billions of their dollars have gone into putting factories and supply chains in China and training their workers .
The cost of tearing it all down and moving elsewhere , even if elsewhere has cheaper labor , seems daunting .
Now , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s continued militarization of the South China Sea , its drive for high-tech autarky , and its muscling of Hong Kong have put the cost question in a different light .
Previously , few asked about the potential cost of over-dependence on fragile supply chains anchored to a single production site in a somewhat hostile country .
What would be the costs to the company or to a country if that supply chain went down ?
What was the cost of not being able to obtain key drugs , masks , ventilators or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but had long ago outsourced ?
The virus has revealed the answer to be “ very high indeed.
” Simply questioning the Communist Party invites retaliation , as Australia discovered when it called for an international inquiry into the origins of the virus pandemic .
The world is slowly realizing that the risks from dependency on China are much greater and more dangerous than ever imagined .
The United Kingdom , once ready to embrace Huawei technology , has said it will not .
Countries like Japan have already budgeted billions of dollars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ factories back home .
Germany and others have imposed strict limits on investment in their countries by Chinese companies .
The United States must learn from this experience and these examples .
Indeed , there is already a bill in the U.S. Congress to add $ 100 billion to the budget of the National Science Foundation specifically for the purpose of maintaining U.S. technology leadership over China .
The Trump administration is also now limiting exports of some advanced U.S. semiconductor technology to China .
This is not to say that globalization can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is to say that globalization must be guided by better understanding of its true costs and benefits—and by consideration of the welfare of all citizens , not just that of big corporations .
No democracy with a rule of law can afford to be tightly coupled economically with an authoritarian China .

Since President Nixon’s historic “opening to China” in 1972 and President Carter’s formal recognition of the communist regime in Beijing, U.S. policy has been to promote trade and investment with China. I myself was a leader of the first U.S. trade mission to Beijing in 1982. Our strategy then and thereafter was founded on the notion that free global trade and investment would stimulate not only economic growth but also the spread of democracy and peace.
At the time, it seemed like a smart bet. The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s 1992 statement that “to get rich is glorious” seemed to confirm our ideas. Both unleashed euphoria in the West. Francis Fukuyama’s book, The End of History and the Last Man, was widely acclaimed. Despite having shot at least several hundred and perhaps thousands of its own students in Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989, the Beijing regime was welcomed as a trading partner by the free world. Clinton campaigned for President under the slogan “no coddling of dictators from Baghdad to Beijing,” but as President adopted a policy of “positive engagement,” eventually negotiating to bring China into the World Trade Organization. Of China’s attempts to censor the internet, he joked: “I’d like to see them try to control the internet. It will be like trying to nail jello to the wall.”
But from early on, it should have been clear that this policy was misguided. The Clinton administration’s argument for bringing China into the WTO, widely supported by the economics and foreign policy establishment, was that doing so would liberalize China while dramatically reducing the U.S. trade deficit with Beijing. None of this took place. China became more authoritarian. The deficit mushroomed from about $80 billion annually to $500 billion. Many U.S. companies moved their factories to China to take advantage of cheap labor, the absence of unions, and the lack of safety and environmental regulations. Chinese State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs), meanwhile, began to raise billions of dollars of new capital by listing their shares on the New York Stock Exchange without meeting the same accounting standards as U.S. corporations.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama adopted similar policies, with similarly dangerous consequences. In 2005, as they continued to move production to China, free-world companies began suffering theft of their innermost secrets by hackers with ties to Beijing. Few people raised alarm. Similarly, no one seemed to be concerned when in 2012, General Electric Chairman Jeffrey Immelt, then also Chairman of President Obama’s Commission on Jobs and Competitiveness, transferred GE’s U.S.-based avionics division to China as part of a joint venture with China’s state-owned Avic. Because avionics is not labor intensive, cost reduction could not have been the reason for the move. Clearly, China had let GE know that if it wanted to sell avionics in China, it would be best to make them there.
It was all evidence that, rather than disappearing, SOEs were consolidating and becoming ever more powerful—as was the Communist Party. China began subsidizing economic sectors such as the semiconductor industry in pursuit of international leadership. Its SOEs began investing heavily and strategically abroad in everything from ports in Europe to telecommunications infrastructure in Australia. The country began dredging reefs and militarizing artificial islands in the South China Sea, along with sinking the fishing boats of other nations—all as part of its plan to seize control of the Sea. It began mass arresting its Uyghur minority.
This was not at all in keeping with the long held free world expectations, and eventually, even the biggest cheerleaders of free trade began to admit that, far from becoming a “responsible stakeholder in the liberal, global order,” China was bent on becoming the hegemon of its own authoritarian order. On March 1, 2018, The Economist announced in its cover story that the West had made the wrong bet on China. It simply wasn’t becoming more market oriented or liberal.
By now there has already been talk of companies targeted by China’s industrial policies “de-coupling” from the country: leaving completely. They began to move production to places like Vietnam and even back to the United States. There has also been economic analysis by MIT Professor David Autor and others showing that the offshoring of U.S. jobs has contributed to overall unemployment, and that it has been a drag on working—and middle-class incomes.
Still, there’s resistance to departing China by many companies. Billions of their dollars have gone into putting factories and supply chains in China and training their workers. The cost of tearing it all down and moving elsewhere, even if elsewhere has cheaper labor, seems daunting.
Now, however, the COVID-19 virus, China’s continued militarization of the South China Sea, its drive for high-tech autarky, and its muscling of Hong Kong have put the cost question in a different light. Previously, few asked about the potential cost of over-dependence on fragile supply chains anchored to a single production site in a somewhat hostile country. What would be the costs to the company or to a country if that supply chain went down? What was the cost of not being able to obtain key drugs, masks, ventilators or anything else that you had once made but had long ago outsourced? The virus has revealed the answer to be “very high indeed.”
Simply questioning the Communist Party invites retaliation, as Australia discovered when it called for an international inquiry into the origins of the virus pandemic. The world is slowly realizing that the risks from dependency on China are much greater and more dangerous than ever imagined. The United Kingdom, once ready to embrace Huawei technology, has said it will not. Countries like Japan have already budgeted billions of dollars to assist their companies in bringing their factories back home. Germany and others have imposed strict limits on investment in their countries by Chinese companies. The United States must learn from this experience and these examples. Indeed, there is already a bill in the U.S. Congress to add $100 billion to the budget of the National Science Foundation specifically for the purpose of maintaining U.S. technology leadership over China. The Trump administration is also now limiting exports of some advanced U.S. semiconductor technology to China.
This is not to say that globalization can or should be halted. But it is to say that globalization must be guided by better understanding of its true costs and benefits—and by consideration of the welfare of all citizens, not just that of big corporations. No democracy with a rule of law can afford to be tightly coupled economically with an authoritarian China.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--There’s Still a Pandemic and Economic Crisis. Trump Is Making Both Worse.

The human brain has a hard time focusing on too many things at time .
So it ’ s more than understandable that the all-encompassing fears surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and its drastic economic effects would take a back seat during the historic wave of protests against police violence .
Living through more than one once-in-several-generations events at a time can make the head spin .
But that ’ s why we have governments with specialized tasks .
What might be overwhelming to an individual should not be impossible for a competent government .
It should be possible for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ begin to address police unaccountability , while mobilizing a pandemic response and shoring up the economy .
Unfortunately , we do not have a competent or effective president .
Worse , the Trump Administration ’ s malpractice , in fact , extends far beyond benign neglect to actively corrupt malevolence .
The president ’ s sole concern is for his electoral and personal fortune .
The coronavirus was an inconvenience to be wished away and obscured rather than confronted .
The economic fallout from his mishandling of the pandemic was to be blamed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one-time stimulus so long as the stock market held value and the economy reopened regardless of safety or good scientific advice .
When the protests over police violence and murder of George Floyd arrived , Trump saw only the potential to shore up his poll numbers by rehashing the Nixon playbook .
He was already bored with the pandemic and ready to move on , anyway .
But neither the pandemic nor the economic crisis have gone away .
Trump bragged about bogus unemployment numbers ( and grossly misappropriated the memory of George @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans used those same mistaken numbers to dismiss the necessity of another round of economic stimulus to states , municipalities , individuals and small businesses .
Meanwhile , the Trump administration is all but acting as if the pandemic no longer even exists : just yesterday the White House press team forced reporters to sit closer together and defy social distancing just because “ it looks better.
” New cases of the virus in the U.S. are continuing to rise , even as states are beginning to reopen with potentially catastrophic consequences .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ governors : the three months of lockdown was supposed to be to give the federal government time to implement a thorough regimen of testing and contact tracing , while keeping the economy basically intact .
The Trump administration failed miserably on the former , and is threatening to fail drastically on the latter if more action is not taken soon .
While the rising death toll from the virus is shocking–over 110,000 in the United States and counting from the first wave alone–the economic statistics are also sobering .
Millions are unemployed , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rents and mortgages .
City and state budgets are decimated , requiring drastic cuts and layoffs .
And there is no help in sight , especially after unemployment insurance expires : This is a catastrophic crisis of both public health and economics .
But the president of the United States doesn ’ t care .
He is more concerned with trying to force the military to “ dominate ” peaceful protesters against police brutality in order to please his deplorable base than he is with doing his actual job .
There is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this , too .
Trump ’ s misreading of the national mood regarding white supremacy , the value of black lives and disenchantment with police brutality has been well-documented in the last few days–even as he has become singularly obsessed with those issues .
But the pandemic ’ s particular lethality to communities of color–and disproportionate economic impact on them–is the result of the same structural racism that led to the necessity of the Black Lives Matter movement .
The decent majority of Americans have taken notice and lost patience , and Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Joe Biden may not the most charismatic or transformative nominee in American history .
But a country dealing with multiple simultaneous historic events deserves a president at least minimally committed to doing the job .
We don ’ t have one right now , and the unwillingness of Republicans in Congress to remove their categorically unfit , corrupted and disinterested president means that we won ’ t have one until the voters finally get a chance to weigh in this November .


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-07--Democratic Mayors and City Councils Must Hold Police Accountable