washingtonmonthly--2020-05-31--Russia and Turkey Just Escalated a War While You Weren’t Watching

Russia and Turkey just escalated their two-front war over which country will be the big dog in the Middle East .
The two rivals have been at this game for a couple of centuries , but it just got a lot more serious this week when Russia introduced jet fighters into the Libyan civil war .
Coronavirus may have shut down Texas beauty parlors and Louisiana bars , stopped international travel , and cleared streets across the globe , but hasn ’ t brought war to a halt .
Rather , Russia and Turkey are in the midst of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Syria .
Russians have long memories .
They recall when Imperial Russia fought Ottoman Turkey in the bloody Crimean War .
Ottoman Muslim forces fought Christian Tsarist troops on the Black Sea peninsula , where more fighters fell to the Asiatic cholera epidemic than on the battlefield .
Turkey won .
Russia today , however , once again occupies Crimea .
The 19th-century Crimean War was the crucible in which were forged Russo-Turkish antagonisms and their 21st-century imperial dreams .
Both Russia and Turkey want to take advantage of a dysfunctional and shrinking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a China focused on consolidating power in its own neighborhood first .
The global pandemic provides an opening for two ambitious nations to both stand their ground and stake new claims .
Syria and Libya may seem like booby prizes , but what happens in Damascus and Tripoli matters .
It certainly matters to the victims of indiscriminate killings .
People have deeply suffered in Syria , under the brutal Assad regimes and , since 2011 , when a Syrian version of the Arab Awakening was quickly quashed .
Images of the total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post-World War II Berlin .
Russians targeted and ran air sorties hitting hospitals , schools , and any infrastructure providing solace and survival .
Bashar Assad ’ s Russian-supported regime sought total annihilation and rebel capitulation .
Most of the nation was brought to its knees by Putin and Assad ’ s one-two punch .
The only hope for normalcy and peace was in Syria ’ s northeast—a predominantly Kurdish region—where until 2018 , well-protected American forces had a minimal presence and maximal effect .
It was a relatively safe American military investment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s future .
The U.S. presence guaranteed the safety and security of the region ’ s toughest anti-ISIS fighters : the Kurds .
What blew-up this accommodation was not a Russian bomb or a Syrian troop incursion .
What upset this American humanitarian effort and the fragile balance of power was a single , unexpected and capitulating White House phone call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan .
The gist of the conversation ?
America was pulling out ; Turkey could move in .
America ’ s departure was Turkey ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Syrian lives , regional stability , American credibility , allies ’ trust and a seriously messed-up neighborhood with no immediate prospect for lasting peace .
Russia and Turkey continue their violent geopolitical game in Syria , testing each other ’ s will to grab what they can and dig in where they must Moscow and Ankara , fighting for influence , oil and a bigger Mediterranean footprint , have now also squared off in North Africa .
Libya is the new theater for both soldiers of fortune and modern imperial forces .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ planes indicates that things started to go south for Moscow ’ s ally , opposition leader General Khalifa Haftar .
Two major fighting forces act as Turkish and Russian proxies .
One , the U.N.-backed Libyan Government of National Accord , is partly underwritten and fully supported by Turkey and is fighting for dear life .
The other is Haftar ’ s Russian-tied insurgent group with a base of operations in Benghazi .
Haftar claims popular legitimacy , seeks international recognition and , until recently , was rapidly closing in on Libya ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a hot mess .
Libyan lawlessness and violence make the country ungovernable .
That makes it the perfect place for drug runners , migrant smugglers , arms dealers , oil thieves and marauding men terrorizing innocent citizens .
Meanwhile , Russia and Turkey pump up their respective Libyan teams ’ sides and pretend to broker ceasefires .
Lulls in battle allow the warring factions to regroup and jockey for international advantage and sympathy in this endless on-again , off-again war .
Vladimir Putin longs for the days of the Soviet Union .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s lost glory .
Both leaders are facing political challenges at home as the coronavirus crisis runs rampant throughout their countries .
During these unsettling times at home , there is no better distraction for faltering leaders than a foreign war against a traditional foe .
Turkey and Russia are just warming up .
Wartime presidents capitalize on national pride and military adventure .
The losers of these ill-considered and vain wars invariably are civilians .
Last weekend reminded us that Memorial Days come and go , but memories of hardship , horror @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flare anew .

Russia and Turkey just escalated their two-front war over which country will be the big dog in the Middle East. The two rivals have been at this game for a couple of centuries, but it just got a lot more serious this week when Russia introduced jet fighters into the Libyan civil war.
Coronavirus may have shut down Texas beauty parlors and Louisiana bars, stopped international travel, and cleared streets across the globe, but hasn’t brought war to a halt. Rather, Russia and Turkey are in the midst of a multifront proxy escalation in both Libya and Syria.
Russians have long memories. They recall when Imperial Russia fought Ottoman Turkey in the bloody Crimean War. Ottoman Muslim forces fought Christian Tsarist troops on the Black Sea peninsula, where more fighters fell to the Asiatic cholera epidemic than on the battlefield.
Turkey won. Russia today, however, once again occupies Crimea. The 19th-century Crimean War was the crucible in which were forged Russo-Turkish antagonisms and their 21st-century imperial dreams.
Both Russia and Turkey want to take advantage of a dysfunctional and shrinking European Union, a solipsistic America and a China focused on consolidating power in its own neighborhood first. The global pandemic provides an opening for two ambitious nations to both stand their ground and stake new claims. Syria and Libya may seem like booby prizes, but what happens in Damascus and Tripoli matters. It certainly matters to the victims of indiscriminate killings. People have deeply suffered in Syria, under the brutal Assad regimes and, since 2011, when a Syrian version of the Arab Awakening was quickly quashed. Images of the total destruction of Raqqa and Aleppo look like post-World War II Berlin. Russians targeted and ran air sorties hitting hospitals, schools, and any infrastructure providing solace and survival. Bashar Assad’s Russian-supported regime sought total annihilation and rebel capitulation. Most of the nation was brought to its knees by Putin and Assad’s one-two punch. The only hope for normalcy and peace was in Syria’s northeast—a predominantly Kurdish region—where until 2018, well-protected American forces had a minimal presence and maximal effect. It was a relatively safe American military investment for an active role in the region’s future. The U.S. presence guaranteed the safety and security of the region’s toughest anti-ISIS fighters: the Kurds. What blew-up this accommodation was not a Russian bomb or a Syrian troop incursion. What upset this American humanitarian effort and the fragile balance of power was a single, unexpected and capitulating White House phone call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The gist of the conversation? America was pulling out; Turkey could move in. America’s departure was Turkey’s invitation to run amok. The cost? Syrian lives, regional stability, American credibility, allies’ trust and a seriously messed-up neighborhood with no immediate prospect for lasting peace. Russia and Turkey continue their violent geopolitical game in Syria, testing each other’s will to grab what they can and dig in where they must Moscow and Ankara, fighting for influence, oil and a bigger Mediterranean footprint, have now also squared off in North Africa. Libya is the new theater for both soldiers of fortune and modern imperial forces. Russia’s introduction of advanced fighter planes indicates that things started to go south for Moscow’s ally, opposition leader General Khalifa Haftar. Two major fighting forces act as Turkish and Russian proxies. One, the U.N.-backed Libyan Government of National Accord, is partly underwritten and fully supported by Turkey and is fighting for dear life. The other is Haftar’s Russian-tied insurgent group with a base of operations in Benghazi. Haftar claims popular legitimacy, seeks international recognition and, until recently, was rapidly closing in on Libya’s capital, Tripoli. The place is a hot mess. Libyan lawlessness and violence make the country ungovernable. That makes it the perfect place for drug runners, migrant smugglers, arms dealers, oil thieves and marauding men terrorizing innocent citizens. Meanwhile, Russia and Turkey pump up their respective Libyan teams’ sides and pretend to broker ceasefires. Lulls in battle allow the warring factions to regroup and jockey for international advantage and sympathy in this endless on-again, off-again war. Vladimir Putin longs for the days of the Soviet Union. Erdoğan pines for the Ottoman Empire’s lost glory. Both leaders are facing political challenges at home as the coronavirus crisis runs rampant throughout their countries. During these unsettling times at home, there is no better distraction for faltering leaders than a foreign war against a traditional foe. Turkey and Russia are just warming up. Wartime presidents capitalize on national pride and military adventure. The losers of these ill-considered and vain wars invariably are civilians. Last weekend reminded us that Memorial Days come and go, but memories of hardship, horror and war inevitably fade—even as global conflicts flare anew.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-01--Riots Will Not Solve America’s Racism Problem

The nation is mourning George Floyd , who died at the hands of Minneapolis police on Memorial Day .
Last weekend ’ s mass protests were ample demonstration of that .
Floyd joined an endless list of Black Americans who have been killed because of the color of their skin—from the dawn of slavery right up to now .
At the same time , we should also have sympathy for Charles Stotts , whose restaurant in nearby St. Paul , Minnesota was destroyed by rioters after Floyd ’ s murder .
“ It ’ s worse than anything I ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Why did my little building on the side of the road do ?
” The answer , of course , is nothing , just as Floyd , Breonna Taylor , and Ahmaud Arbery did nothing to deserve their tragic fate .
The people rightfully protesting racism and police brutality should also find it in their hearts to empathize with the victims of the wanton violence that was triggered by these deaths By Saturday night , at least 75 cities had witnessed looting and other kinds of violence .
In our bitterly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of masks has become a political statement , reactions to the riots broke down along predictably partisan lines .
Conservatives worried about law and order , taking their cue from President Donald Trump ’ s ridiculous tweets inciting violence .
Meanwhile , liberals spoke out about systemic racism and police mistreatment of minorities but evoked little concern for people harmed by the riots .
Disconcertingly , many those victims were black themselves .
They included Ethiopian immigrants Solomon Haile and Rekik Abanieh , whose St. Paul restaurant was burned to the ground .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of one day becoming a chef and letting others enjoy what Ethiopia as to offer , ” their website says .
That dream died—or , at least , got seriously dashed—in the recent riots .
Ditto for the hopes of other black entrepreneurs whose businesses were vandalized or destroyed last week .
“ I look just like them , ” Milwaukee cellphone merchant Katherine Mahmoud told reporters , after African American looters smashed her store ’ s windows and stole all of her merchandise .
“ Why did they do it ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Luther King , Jr. ’ s famous speech at Stanford University in 1967 , during another era of uprisings in American cities .
King described riots as the “ the language of the unheard , ” warning that America “ has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met.
” That ’ s still true .
We can ’ t explain the violence that enveloped our cities recently without considering the enormous injustices suffered by African Americans across our history and into the present .
But explaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand why officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd , we ’ d have to look at the culture of racism in the Minneapolis Police Department .
We ’ d also need to examine Chauvin ’ s own personal background , especially his family and schooling , But nothing we found could possibly excuse murdering Floyd , any more than discrimination against black Americans excuses harming innocent shopkeepers .
And using violence to advance a political agenda—even one as noble as racial justice and equality—dishonors the legacy of freedom fighters like Martin Luther King @ @ @ @ @ @ @ validate violence .
Conveniently , most people who quoted his 1967 Stanford speech about the causes of riots have omitted the part where he denounced rioting itself .
“ Riots are socially destructive and self-defeating , ” King said .
“ Violence will only create more social problems.
” Let ’ s be clear : the vast majority of demonstrators over the weekend did not engage in any kind of violence .
Some of the rioters are reportedly linked to white-supremacist groups and to so-called “ outside agitators ” on the far-left , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to sow racial unrest .
That ’ s a shame , because they are distorting an all-too-important message that needs to seep into the conscience of all Americans .
Of course , the victims of the riots merely lost their livelihoods , whereas George Floyd , Breonna Taylor , and Ahmaud Arbery lost their lives .
But while protests are an important way to initiate change so there are fewer needless deaths of black men and women , it ’ s important that we don ’ t create more needless victims in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as King said .
But they aren ’ t very effective at rectifying it .

The nation is mourning George Floyd, who died at the hands of Minneapolis police on Memorial Day. Last weekend’s mass protests were ample demonstration of that.
Floyd joined an endless list of Black Americans who have been killed because of the color of their skin—from the dawn of slavery right up to now. At the same time, we should also have sympathy for Charles Stotts, whose restaurant in nearby St. Paul, Minnesota was destroyed by rioters after Floyd’s murder. “It’s worse than anything I ever imagined happening,” Stotts told reporters. “What did my little building on the side of the road do?”
The answer, of course, is nothing, just as Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery did nothing to deserve their tragic fate. The people rightfully protesting racism and police brutality should also find it in their hearts to empathize with the victims of the wanton violence that was triggered by these deaths.
By Saturday night, at least 75 cities had witnessed looting and other kinds of violence. In our bitterly polarized nation, where even the wearing of masks has become a political statement, reactions to the riots broke down along predictably partisan lines. Conservatives worried about law and order, taking their cue from President Donald Trump’s ridiculous tweets inciting violence. Meanwhile, liberals spoke out about systemic racism and police mistreatment of minorities but evoked little concern for people harmed by the riots.
Disconcertingly, many those victims were black themselves. They included Ethiopian immigrants Solomon Haile and Rekik Abanieh, whose St. Paul restaurant was burned to the ground. As a girl, Abanieh “dreamt of one day becoming a chef and letting others enjoy what Ethiopia as to offer,” their website says.
That dream died—or, at least, got seriously dashed—in the recent riots. Ditto for the hopes of other black entrepreneurs whose businesses were vandalized or destroyed last week. “I look just like them,” Milwaukee cellphone merchant Katherine Mahmoud told reporters, after African American looters smashed her store’s windows and stole all of her merchandise. “Why did they do it?”
Apologists for the violence trotted out Martin Luther King, Jr.’s famous speech at Stanford University in 1967, during another era of uprisings in American cities. King described riots as the “the language of the unheard,” warning that America “has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met.” That’s still true. We can’t explain the violence that enveloped our cities recently without considering the enormous injustices suffered by African Americans across our history and into the present. But explaining something does not excuse it. To understand why officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd, we’d have to look at the culture of racism in the Minneapolis Police Department. We’d also need to examine Chauvin’s own personal background, especially his family and schooling. But nothing we found could possibly excuse murdering Floyd, any more than discrimination against black Americans excuses harming innocent shopkeepers.
And using violence to advance a political agenda—even one as noble as racial justice and equality—dishonors the legacy of freedom fighters like Martin Luther King, who insisted that victimhood could never validate violence. Conveniently, most people who quoted his 1967 Stanford speech about the causes of riots have omitted the part where he denounced rioting itself. “Riots are socially destructive and self-defeating,” King said. “Violence will only create more social problems.”
Let’s be clear: the vast majority of demonstrators over the weekend did not engage in any kind of violence. Some of the rioters are reportedly linked to white-supremacist groups and to so-called “outside agitators” on the far-left, who see the crisis as an opportunity to sow racial unrest. That’s a shame, because they are distorting an all-too-important message that needs to seep into the conscience of all Americans.
Of course, the victims of the riots merely lost their livelihoods, whereas George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery lost their lives. But while protests are an important way to initiate change so there are fewer needless deaths of black men and women, it’s important that we don’t create more needless victims in the process. Riots certainly reflect injustice, as King said. But they aren’t very effective at rectifying it.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-01--How Trump’s Enablers Are Exploiting the Mass Protests

When it comes to the so-called “ riots ” going on in many cities , everyone has their own narrative about who is to blame .
Most people simply assume that the protests against the murder of George Floyd got out of hand .
But attention has also turned to the influx of “ outside agitators ” who are escalating the situation .
The president ’ s initial response was to blame the protesters and call them “ thugs.
” But over the weekend , even he changed his tune .
The administration ’ s chosen narrative at this point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extremist groups—especially Antifa .
That is what we heard from the attorney general .
Presented with the fact that the Department of Homeland Security is seeing evidence of involvement of extremists from both the left and the right , the president ’ s national security advisor insisted on blaming the left .
Trump ’ s enablers in right wing media are joining the chorus on this one—blaming Antifa and “ the radical left.
” Zeroing in on Minneapolis , where all of this started , one of the first videos to emerge showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white man methodically breaking windows in a storefront and being confronted by protesters .
That scene has been repeated over and over again .
Here are some of the stories Minnesota Public Radio heard from local residents about what they are witnessing .
On his way home from a protest Friday night in Minneapolis , Jonathan Turner Bargen encountered a white man in a red pickup truck .
The man was carrying an assault rifle and a handgun , Turner Bargen said .
Then he noticed a symbol from the far-right militia group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ I circled back and took pictures of the vehicle .
I was concerned about why they were present at the downtown protest , and had no idea who to notify , ” said Turner Bargen in an email to MPR News… Bridget Schumann was out for a run near Calhoun Square in south Minneapolis on Friday night when she saw a truck that was being driven aggressively , honking and intimidating other drivers .
The truck had a big white sticker on the back of the cab with the OK sign symbol @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were two men in the driver and passenger seat and they were wearing camo bulletproof vests and they were armed , ” she said .
Schumann watched them get out of the truck and walk around in an apartment building parking garage like they were looking for something .
She saw them scream at a woman leaving the garage… In the predawn hours of Friday , KJ Starr watched from her yard in the Seward neighborhood , which has been especially hard hit by arson , as nearby buildings were consumed by balls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police and firefighters nowhere in sight , Starr and friends have been trying to fight fires themselves .
When a nearby pizza shop went up in flames , she and some friends walked over to see what they could do .
She was terrified by what she saw .
“ This pickup truck of a dozen armed men just pulls up next to us , ” she said .
“ I just did a total pivot.
” Several news outlets are pointing to this kind of evidence suggesting the involvement of white supremacist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Zach Beauchamp described as “ accelerationists.
” It ’ s called “ accelerationism , ” and it rests on the idea that Western governments are irreparably corrupt .
As a result , the best thing white supremacists can do is accelerate their demise by sowing chaos and creating political tension .
Accelerationist ideas have been cited in mass shooters ’ manifestos — explicitly , in the case of the New Zealand killer — and are frequently referenced in white supremacist web forums and chat rooms .
Accelerationists reject any effort to seize political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the alt-right ’ s attempts to engage in mass politics as pointless .
If one votes , one should vote for the most extreme candidate , left or right , to intensify points of political and social conflict within Western societies .
Their preferred tactic for heightening these contradictions , however , is not voting , but violence .
At this point , there are some things that we both know and don ’ t know about what is happening .
The one thing we know is that the violence we ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests run amok .
There are groups of white people attempting to exploit the situation .
What we don ’ t know is who those groups are .
The president and his enablers are simply wrong to suggest that the only perpetrators are extreme leftists like Antifa .
The actual evidence points to the involvement of white supremacists .

When it comes to the so-called “riots” going on in many cities, everyone has their own narrative about who is to blame. Most people simply assume that the protests against the murder of George Floyd got out of hand. But attention has also turned to the influx of “outside agitators” who are escalating the situation.
The president’s initial response was to blame the protesters and call them “thugs.” But over the weekend, even he changed his tune. The administration’s chosen narrative at this point is to blame the violence on far-left extremist groups—especially Antifa. That is what we heard from the attorney general.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1266895821083234304
Presented with the fact that the Department of Homeland Security is seeing evidence of involvement of extremists from both the left and the right, the president’s national security advisor insisted on blaming the left.
Trump’s enablers in right wing media are joining the chorus on this one—blaming Antifa and “the radical left.”
Zeroing in on Minneapolis, where all of this started, one of the first videos to emerge showing the destruction of property was of a white man methodically breaking windows in a storefront and being confronted by protesters.
That scene has been repeated over and over again.
Here are some of the stories Minnesota Public Radio heard from local residents about what they are witnessing.
On his way home from a protest Friday night in Minneapolis, Jonathan Turner Bargen encountered a white man in a red pickup truck. The man was carrying an assault rifle and a handgun, Turner Bargen said. Then he noticed a symbol from the far-right militia group Three Percenters affixed to the truck. “I circled back and took pictures of the vehicle. I was concerned about why they were present at the downtown protest, and had no idea who to notify,” said Turner Bargen in an email to MPR News… Bridget Schumann was out for a run near Calhoun Square in south Minneapolis on Friday night when she saw a truck that was being driven aggressively, honking and intimidating other drivers. The truck had a big white sticker on the back of the cab with the OK sign symbol associated with white supremacists. “There were two men in the driver and passenger seat and they were wearing camo bulletproof vests and they were armed,” she said. Schumann watched them get out of the truck and walk around in an apartment building parking garage like they were looking for something. She saw them scream at a woman leaving the garage… In the predawn hours of Friday, KJ Starr watched from her yard in the Seward neighborhood, which has been especially hard hit by arson, as nearby buildings were consumed by balls of fire and billowing smoke. With police and firefighters nowhere in sight, Starr and friends have been trying to fight fires themselves. When a nearby pizza shop went up in flames, she and some friends walked over to see what they could do. She was terrified by what she saw. “This pickup truck of a dozen armed men just pulls up next to us,” she said. “I just did a total pivot.”
Several news outlets are pointing to this kind of evidence suggesting the involvement of white supremacist groups. Of particular concern are those Zach Beauchamp described as “accelerationists.”
It’s called “accelerationism,” and it rests on the idea that Western governments are irreparably corrupt. As a result, the best thing white supremacists can do is accelerate their demise by sowing chaos and creating political tension. Accelerationist ideas have been cited in mass shooters’ manifestos — explicitly, in the case of the New Zealand killer — and are frequently referenced in white supremacist web forums and chat rooms. Accelerationists reject any effort to seize political power through the ballot box, dismissing the alt-right’s attempts to engage in mass politics as pointless. If one votes, one should vote for the most extreme candidate, left or right, to intensify points of political and social conflict within Western societies. Their preferred tactic for heightening these contradictions, however, is not voting, but violence.
At this point, there are some things that we both know and don’t know about what is happening. The one thing we know is that the violence we’re witnessing is not simply a matter of protests run amok. There are groups of white people attempting to exploit the situation.
What we don’t know is who those groups are. The president and his enablers are simply wrong to suggest that the only perpetrators are extreme leftists like Antifa. The actual evidence points to the involvement of white supremacists.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-01--Trump Is a Spent Force and Should Step Aside

On March 31 , 1968 , President Lyndon Johnson made a national address to the nation and included a surprise announcement that he would not seek reelection .
His reasoning was sound : He didn ’ t suggest that he would continue using his time to make shit-talking tweets about the weak , the oppressed and dispossessed , or his political opponents .
On April 4 , 1968 , Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in Memphis , Tennessee , setting off the same kind national mourning and social unrest that our cities are experiencing in the aftermath of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In retrospect , it was fortunate that LBJ had already realized that his credibility was shot , as well as his ability to unite or lead the nation .
Sometime on Friday night , the Secret Service approached President Donald Trump and told him that an angry mob was threatening to breach the White House compound .
By Sunday , the Secret Service was better prepared , but the seething protestors remained outside , chanting against the police and the president , and setting fire to buildings across Lafayette Park .
Some White @ @ @ @ @ @ @ address the nation and call for calm , but ultimately his senior advisers thought he was not capable of saying anything that would help .
One of the fires on H Street NW a block from the White House may have spread because soon afterward flames erupted in the basement of St. John ’ s Episcopal Church , the iconic “ church of presidents ” attended at least once by every chief executive going back to James Madison , but were soon doused by firefighters .
Businesses far away from the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Mayor Muriel E. Bowser ordered an 11 p.m. curfew .
The White House turned off at least some of its exterior lights .
Mr. Trump remained cloistered inside , periodically sending out Twitter messages like “ LAW & ORDER !
” until the evening , when he went quiet .
Already impeached in the House and credibly prosecuted in the Senate , Trump faces a nation that has lost more than twice as many citizens to COVID-19 in two and a half months as President Johnson lost in Vietnam in five years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deadliest year of the Vietnam conflict , costing us almost 17,000 lives .
Overall , about 48,000 Americans died in Vietnam on LBJ ’ s watch .
The official coronavirus death count surpassed that number in the week of April 18-24 .
Meanwhile , the official unemployment rate for April reached 14.7 percent .
Bloomberg estimates that unemployment might have reached 20 percent in May , with payrolls nationally down about 29 million since the outbreak of the pandemic .
There are protests in nearly every city in the country , and widespread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This trend will exacerbate both the viral outbreak and the staggering levels of job loss .
There is zero chance that Trump can set things right .
His own White House advisers don ’ t even want him to try .
This was probably wise , since Trump only knows how to inflame the situation : He couldn ’ t even make a satisfactory condolence call to George Floyd ’ s brother , Philonise .
The brief conversation that lasted “ probably two minutes ” was in stark contrast to the one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Vice President—I loved this conversation .
He talked to me for like 10 to 15 minutes , ” Philonise said .
“ I was trying to talk his ear off … great conversation.
” In an indication of how insensitive Trump is to the history of African-Americans in our country , he followed up his phone call with Philonese by saying that the Secret Service was prepared to unleash “ the most vicious dogs ” and “ ominous weapons ” on White House protestors .
I ’ m sure that Trump would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was perhaps the most ambitious politician in our nation ’ s history , and he saw the writing on the wall in 1968 .
He knew he was not going to be able to set things right .
He could have fought on to the bitter end , and maybe he even could have been reelected .
But he chose to sacrifice himself for the sake of the country .
LBJ ’ s withdrawal didn ’ t fix everything , because LBJ wasn ’ t the cause of all our problems .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek re-election sent waves of shock and elation through a stunned electorate .
At the same time , his withdrawal from the race crystallized the nature of the conflicts that had split the country along ideological , racial , and class lines so deeply .
But within days it became all too apparent that no single act of political sacrifice could repair the divisions in the country .
Johnson ’ s presidency was a symbol and a reflection of the nation ’ s fissures , but it was not ultimately its root cause @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aside .
It won ’ t fix everything , but he won ’ t fix anything .
He is completely used up and utterly bankrupt .

On March 31, 1968, President Lyndon Johnson made a national address to the nation and included a surprise announcement that he would not seek reelection. His reasoning was sound:
“With America’s sons in the fields far away, with America’s future under challenge right here at home, with our hopes and the world’s hopes for peace in the balance every day, I do not believe that I should devote an hour or a day of my time to any personal partisan causes or to any duties other than the awesome duties of this office—the presidency of your country.”
He didn’t suggest that he would continue using his time to make shit-talking tweets about the weak, the oppressed and dispossessed, or his political opponents. On April 4, 1968, Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated in Memphis, Tennessee, setting off the same kind of national mourning and social unrest that our cities are experiencing in the aftermath of the cold-blooded police murder of George Floyd. In retrospect, it was fortunate that LBJ had already realized that his credibility was shot, as well as his ability to unite or lead the nation.
Sometime on Friday night, the Secret Service approached President Donald Trump and told him that an angry mob was threatening to breach the White House compound.
Nervous for his safety, Secret Service agents abruptly rushed the president to the underground bunker used in the past during terrorist attacks.
By Sunday, the Secret Service was better prepared, but the seething protestors remained outside, chanting against the police and the president, and setting fire to buildings across Lafayette Park. Some White House officials reportedly suggested that Trump should address the nation and call for calm, but ultimately his senior advisers thought he was not capable of saying anything that would help.
One of the fires on H Street NW a block from the White House may have spread because soon afterward flames erupted in the basement of St. John’s Episcopal Church, the iconic “church of presidents” attended at least once by every chief executive going back to James Madison, but were soon doused by firefighters. Businesses far away from the White House boarded up to guard against vandalism, and Mayor Muriel E. Bowser ordered an 11 p.m. curfew. The White House turned off at least some of its exterior lights. Mr. Trump remained cloistered inside, periodically sending out Twitter messages like “LAW & ORDER!” until the evening, when he went quiet.
Already impeached in the House and credibly prosecuted in the Senate, Trump faces a nation that has lost more than twice as many citizens to COVID-19 in two and a half months as President Johnson lost in Vietnam in five years. Of course, 1968 was the deadliest year of the Vietnam conflict, costing us almost 17,000 lives. Overall, about 48,000 Americans died in Vietnam on LBJ’s watch. The official coronavirus death count surpassed that number in the week of April 18-24.
Meanwhile, the official unemployment rate for April reached 14.7 percent. Bloomberg estimates that unemployment might have reached 20 percent in May, with payrolls nationally down about 29 million since the outbreak of the pandemic.
There are protests in nearly every city in the country, and widespread looting and disorder in most major metropolises. This trend will exacerbate both the viral outbreak and the staggering levels of job loss.
There is zero chance that Trump can set things right. His own White House advisers don’t even want him to try.
Some campaign advisers were pressing for a formal address to the nation as early as Sunday. But White House officials, recalling Mr. Trump’s error-filled Oval Office address in March about the spread of the coronavirus, cautioned that it was not necessary.
This was probably wise, since Trump only knows how to inflame the situation:
And other advisers said most top aides were unhappy with Mr. Trump’s 1 a.m. tweet on Friday invoking a 1967 quote from a Miami police chief about “shooting” black people during civil unrest.
He couldn’t even make a satisfactory condolence call to George Floyd’s brother, Philonise.
“He didn’t give me an opportunity to even speak,” Floyd said. “It was hard. I was trying to talk to him, but he just kept, like, pushing me off, like ‘I don’t want to hear what you’re talking about.’ “And I just told him, I want justice. I said that I couldn’t believe that they committed a modern-day lynching in broad daylight,” he said.
The brief conversation that lasted “probably two minutes” was in stark contrast to the one he had with Joe Biden: “The Vice President—I loved this conversation. He talked to me for like 10 to 15 minutes,” Philonise said. “I was trying to talk his ear off … great conversation.”
In an indication of how insensitive Trump is to the history of African-Americans in our country, he followed up his phone call with Philonese by saying that the Secret Service was prepared to unleash “the most vicious dogs” and “ominous weapons” on White House protestors.
I’m sure that Trump would like to be reelected, but LBJ was perhaps the most ambitious politician in our nation’s history, and he saw the writing on the wall in 1968. He knew he was not going to be able to set things right. He could have fought on to the bitter end, and maybe he even could have been reelected. But he chose to sacrifice himself for the sake of the country.
LBJ’s withdrawal didn’t fix everything, because LBJ wasn’t the cause of all our problems.
The news that the President had refused to seek re-election sent waves of shock and elation through a stunned electorate. At the same time, his withdrawal from the race crystallized the nature of the conflicts that had split the country along ideological, racial, and class lines so deeply. But within days it became all too apparent that no single act of political sacrifice could repair the divisions in the country. Johnson’s presidency was a symbol and a reflection of the nation’s fissures, but it was not ultimately its root cause.
Like Johnson, Trump should step aside. It won’t fix everything, but he won’t fix anything. He is completely used up and utterly bankrupt.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-02--Why Cops Who Didn’t Want to Be Held Accountable Were Threatened by Obama

In the aftermath of the killing of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile in 2016 , anti-police brutality protests erupted around the country .
The situation grew dire in Dallas when a gunman went on a rampage , killing five police officers .
Speaking at the memorial service for those officers , President Barack Obama said this .
When the bullets started flying , the men and women of the Dallas police , they did not flinch and they did not react recklessly .
They showed incredible restraint .
Helped in some cases by protesters , they evacuated the injured , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives than we will ever know .
We mourn fewer people today because of your brave actions… We know that the overwhelming majority of police officers do an incredibly hard and dangerous job fairly and professionally .
They are deserving of our respect and not our scorn .
And when anyone , no matter how good their intentions may be , paints all police as biased or bigoted , we undermine those officers we depend on for our safety .
That wasn ’ t enough for officers like Bob Kroll , president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump rally last fall , he said that “ the Obama administration and the handcuffing and oppression of police was despicable.
” Kroll went on to say that “ the first thing President Trump did when he took office was turn that around , got rid of the Holder-Loretta Lynch regime and decided to start takin— letting the cops do their job , put the handcuffs on the criminals instead of us.
” What was it that the Obama administration did that so disturbed officers like Kroll ?
There are a lot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t accomplish anything when it came to police reform .
The truth is that the federal government doesn ’ t play a major role in how local police departments are run .
To understand what can be done at the national level , you need to know about the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice—which was created in 1957 and tasked with the job of enforcing civil rights laws .
Republican administrations have waged an assault of that kind of enforcement for over forty years .
For example , the Bush @ @ @ @ @ @ @ putting political appointees in what had previously been jobs held by civil servants .
They then prioritized cases related to so-called “ religious freedom ” and voter fraud .
As the incoming attorney general , Eric Holder had his hands full when it came to refocusing that division on the work it was designed to do .
The first thing he and Obama did was to put Tom Perez ( the current DNC chair ) in charge .
The second step was to corral an additional $ 22 million for the division ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they used to hire lawyers who actually had civil rights backgrounds .
The Civil Rights Division can intervene with a local police department if they document a “ pattern and practice ” of discrimination against members of a protected class .
Over the course of Obama ’ s tenure , they initiated 15 investigations , more than any other administration in this country ’ s history .
Once the pattern and practice has been established , members of the division negotiate a court-enforced consent decree outlining the reforms the department will enact .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1994 crime bill , which was sponsored by then Senator Joe Biden and signed by President Bill Clinton .
The first police department to be subjected to federal intervention during Obama ’ s presidency was New Orleans .
After that came Seattle , Newark , Akron , and New Haven .
At the time that police shot and killed Tamir Rice in Cleveland , that city was in the midst of negotiating a consent decree .
Similar investigations were conducted in Baltimore , Chicago , and Ferguson .
There are those within law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accountability .
Here is what Jerome Corsi wrote about consent decrees on the website of the Law Enforcement Charitable Foundation .
A consent decree is an agreement or settlement that resolves a dispute between two parties without admission of guilt ( in a criminal case ) or liability ( in a civil case ) .
Through court-ordered consent decrees , the Obama administration Justice Department ( DOJ ) has forced dozens of state and local law enforcement officials to plead guilty rather than fight a Justice Department investigation and civil or criminal complaint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ departments under direction of a court-ordered federal monitor… The radical hard-left of Bill Ayers and Saul Alinsky view police in the United States not as a dedicated force for good willing to risk their lives daily to preserve law and order in communities across the United States , but as an “ occupying force ” employed by capitalistic white elites hired to attack immigrants and suppress minorities , and apply enforce social control by the discriminatory exercise of deadly force and the power to arrest and imprison .
It didn ’ t take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the process .
Here ’ s what former Attorney General Jeff Sessions did as he was heading out the door .
Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has drastically limited the ability of federal law enforcement officials to use court-enforced agreements to overhaul local police departments accused of abuses and civil rights violations , the Justice Department announced on Thursday .
In a major last-minute act , Mr .
Sessions signed a memorandum on Wednesday before President Trump fired him sharply curtailing the use of so-called consent decrees , court-approved deals between the Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ road map of changes for law enforcement and other institutions .
The move means that the decrees , used aggressively by Obama-era Justice Department officials to fight police abuses , will be more difficult to enact .
Mr .
Sessions had signaled he would pull back on their use soon after he took office when he ordered a review of the existing agreements , including with police departments in Baltimore , Chicago and Ferguson , Mo.
, enacted amid a national outcry over the deaths of black men at the hands of officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be a backstop when local officials can ’ t or won ’ t take up the necessary reforms in police departments .
That is precisely what bothers officers like Bob Kroll who do everything possible to limit attempts to hold law enforcement accountable .
From the last four presidents , we can also see that Republicans side with Kroll in fighting efforts to hold police departments accountable , while Democrats have supported reform .
That is why , in ways that we sometimes fail to notice , elections matter .

In the aftermath of the killing of Alton Sterling and Philando Castile in 2016, anti-police brutality protests erupted around the country. The situation grew dire in Dallas when a gunman went on a rampage, killing five police officers. Speaking at the memorial service for those officers, President Barack Obama said this.
When the bullets started flying, the men and women of the Dallas police, they did not flinch and they did not react recklessly. They showed incredible restraint. Helped in some cases by protesters, they evacuated the injured, isolated the shooter, and saved more lives than we will ever know. We mourn fewer people today because of your brave actions… We know that the overwhelming majority of police officers do an incredibly hard and dangerous job fairly and professionally. They are deserving of our respect and not our scorn. And when anyone, no matter how good their intentions may be, paints all police as biased or bigoted, we undermine those officers we depend on for our safety.
That wasn’t enough for officers like Bob Kroll, president of the Minneapolis Police Federation. During a Trump rally last fall, he said that “the Obama administration and the handcuffing and oppression of police was despicable.” Kroll went on to say that “the first thing President Trump did when he took office was turn that around, got rid of the Holder-Loretta Lynch regime and decided to start takin—letting the cops do their job, put the handcuffs on the criminals instead of us.”
What was it that the Obama administration did that so disturbed officers like Kroll? There are a lot of liberals who claim that Obama didn’t accomplish anything when it came to police reform. The truth is that the federal government doesn’t play a major role in how local police departments are run. To understand what can be done at the national level, you need to know about the Civil Rights Division at the Department of Justice—which was created in 1957 and tasked with the job of enforcing civil rights laws.
Republican administrations have waged an assault of that kind of enforcement for over forty years. For example, the Bush administration corrupted the Civil Rights Division by putting political appointees in what had previously been jobs held by civil servants. They then prioritized cases related to so-called “religious freedom” and voter fraud.
As the incoming attorney general, Eric Holder had his hands full when it came to refocusing that division on the work it was designed to do. The first thing he and Obama did was to put Tom Perez (the current DNC chair) in charge. The second step was to corral an additional $22 million for the division (an 18 percent increase), which they used to hire lawyers who actually had civil rights backgrounds.
The Civil Rights Division can intervene with a local police department if they document a “pattern and practice” of discrimination against members of a protected class. Over the course of Obama’s tenure, they initiated 15 investigations, more than any other administration in this country’s history. Once the pattern and practice has been established, members of the division negotiate a court-enforced consent decree outlining the reforms the department will enact. That particular provision was part of the 1994 crime bill, which was sponsored by then Senator Joe Biden and signed by President Bill Clinton.
The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, passed following the savage 1991 beating of African American motorist Rodney King by four LAPD officers and the catastrophic Los Angeles Riots a year later, gave the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice an extraordinary mandate. One of the law’s provisions empowered the government to sue police agencies anywhere in the country if they exhibited a “pattern and practice” of using excessive force and/or violating people’s civil rights—and compel them, under what’s known as a “consent decree,” to change those practices.
The first police department to be subjected to federal intervention during Obama’s presidency was New Orleans. After that came Seattle, Newark, Akron, and New Haven. At the time that police shot and killed Tamir Rice in Cleveland, that city was in the midst of negotiating a consent decree. Similar investigations were conducted in Baltimore, Chicago, and Ferguson.
There are those within law enforcement who objected to that level of accountability. Here is what Jerome Corsi wrote about consent decrees on the website of the Law Enforcement Charitable Foundation.
A consent decree is an agreement or settlement that resolves a dispute between two parties without admission of guilt (in a criminal case) or liability (in a civil case). Through court-ordered consent decrees, the Obama administration Justice Department (DOJ) has forced dozens of state and local law enforcement officials to plead guilty rather than fight a Justice Department investigation and civil or criminal complaint as well as accept to run their departments under direction of a court-ordered federal monitor… The radical hard-left of Bill Ayers and Saul Alinsky view police in the United States not as a dedicated force for good willing to risk their lives daily to preserve law and order in communities across the United States, but as an “occupying force” employed by capitalistic white elites hired to attack immigrants and suppress minorities, and apply enforce social control by the discriminatory exercise of deadly force and the power to arrest and imprison.
It didn’t take the Trump administration long to completely upend the process. Here’s what former Attorney General Jeff Sessions did as he was heading out the door.
Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions has drastically limited the ability of federal law enforcement officials to use court-enforced agreements to overhaul local police departments accused of abuses and civil rights violations, the Justice Department announced on Thursday. In a major last-minute act, Mr. Sessions signed a memorandum on Wednesday before President Trump fired him sharply curtailing the use of so-called consent decrees, court-approved deals between the Justice Department and local governments that create a road map of changes for law enforcement and other institutions. The move means that the decrees, used aggressively by Obama-era Justice Department officials to fight police abuses, will be more difficult to enact. Mr. Sessions had signaled he would pull back on their use soon after he took office when he ordered a review of the existing agreements, including with police departments in Baltimore, Chicago and Ferguson, Mo., enacted amid a national outcry over the deaths of black men at the hands of officers.
The Civil Rights Division is meant to be a backstop when local officials can’t or won’t take up the necessary reforms in police departments. That is precisely what bothers officers like Bob Kroll who do everything possible to limit attempts to hold law enforcement accountable. From the last four presidents, we can also see that Republicans side with Kroll in fighting efforts to hold police departments accountable, while Democrats have supported reform. That is why, in ways that we sometimes fail to notice, elections matter.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-02--Protecting Public Health and Civil Liberties During a Pandemic

The novel coronavirus is giving rise to novel surveillance tools .
While they can help contain the sweep of COVID-19 , the monitoring and categorization of citizens could survive the pandemic with undue invasions of privacy .
Legal safeguards are necessary to make sure that doesn ’ t happen .
Innovative hardware and software , rushed into production by profiteers , are aimed at recording and storing peoples ’ physiological functions , locations , and immunity levels .
As with any new technology , error rates are high , and the consequences of mistakes will be magnified if used to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , courthouses , and public transportation .
And unless information is automatically erased or sequestered , medical records could be compiled into databases of personal files that are accessible to law enforcement and immigration authorities .
The virtue of monitoring is self-evident during the crisis ; less obvious are the longer-term dangers of doing so .
With no treatment or vaccine , self-quarantine , and social distance are primary means of curtailing the spread .
If people don ’ t know they ’ re sick—and neither do their fellow workers , diners , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , gym users , and the like—the disease can not be contained as public spaces reopen .
This is a matter of security .
As seen after 9/11 , public acceptance of extraordinary measures soars in the moment , then persists long after the need abates .
The Patriot Act , which Congress passed hastily in 2001 , created exceptions to legal protections that had been enacted in the 1970s .
Government agencies had been violating the Fourth Amendment by spying on antiwar campaigners , civil rights leaders , and other political activists @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two decades since the 9/11 attacks , and Congress has applied only minor patches to the holes the Patriot Act tore in the fabric of civil liberties .
The same thing could happen now .
The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred particular interest in three areas of data collection : temperature-taking before admitting people to certain places , testing them for the virus , and tracing their contacts and testing them for antibodies to issue “ immunity passports , ” a prospect raised by officials in the U.S. , Germany , and the U.K @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each of these areas , according to a series of carefully drawn white papers by the American Civil Liberties Union .
They are sensibly balanced and worth summarizing .
( Full disclosure : I donate to the ACLU . )
One , temperature checks as a price of admission might pick up infected individuals , but also generate false positives and false negatives .
Many with the virus don ’ t have a fever , and many who do , don ’ t have the virus .
As Jay Stanley of the ACLU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by sunburn , exercise , menopause , cancer , and other non-COVID conditions .
And readings from the skin are less accurate than core body temperature taken by oral , anal , or ear thermometers .
Furthermore , heat emanating from skin can ’ t be reliably determined unless the measuring device is repeatedly calibrated and held close to a person who stays still .
Stand-off sensors and drones , which are being advertised as unobtrusive means of checking heart and breathing rates as well as temperature , do not work well when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says .
He notes that the Transportation Security Administration ( TSA ) considered , then suspended , a plan called Project Hostile Intent designed to identify potential terrorists by checking temperatures , heart rates , eye movement , and facial movements .
Something of the kind could be revived under the guise of COVID screening , which risks being what Stanley calls “ public health theater.
” Two , contact tracing by real human beings can work , but automated systems use cell phone locations that are imprecise .
They also threaten privacy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a central database , according to Neema Singh Guliani , the ACLU ’ s senior legislative counsel .
She urges that any such tools be voluntary and their use transparent .
The information , already collected by some companies , can reveal where a person goes to church , shops , works , attends meetings , visits medical facilities , or has late-night visits with someone outside the home .
The results can be so extensive that the Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that under the Fourth Amendment , police need a warrant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ applies only to government , not private , companies .
Since the CDC recommends at least six-foot distances from someone who might be infected , most phone data are inadequate .
Connections with cell towers can determine an area or a direction of movement , but not a precise location .
A phone ’ s GPS receiver can fix a position within six feet only with strong signals from multiple satellites ; a more common margin of error is fifteen to fifty feet .
Nor can signals usually be picked up inside , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contact tracing if you ’ re in a store , office , or theater .
China has begun using QR codes that citizens must scan with their phones to get into buses , taxis , subways and some buildings .
That tells authorities when someone enters but not who is close by unless combined with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connections .
The most promising method so far appears to be the Exposure Notification API ( application programming interface ) developed by Apple and Google to allow state health authorities to offer people an app @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close to an infected person .
Use is purely voluntary , according to Jason Cross , writing in Macworld .
You would request the state ’ s app and could disable it at will .
People testing positive would take the initiative to register through the app , but with no identifying information .
If you ’ re not ill and you sign up , and you get close to a virus carrier who ’ s also in the system , your Bluetooth connections will trigger a text giving the date and length @ @ @ @ @ @ @ location .
Cross reports that the information is anonymized—only a phone ’ s Bluetooth code , which changes every several minutes , would be uploaded to a database , with no personal identification .
Once a person tests positive , she could authorize the disclosure of her proximity information from the previous fourteen days .
Again , no names and no locations .
Cross writes that three states so far—Alabama , South Carolina , and North Dakota—have decided to try the system .
Others might prefer one that identifies participants so health authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ACLU notes , is that safe contact might be flagged .
Guliani reports that in Israel , where security services have used location data to enforce quarantines , a woman who merely waved at her infected boyfriend from the street was told to stay home .
If Bluetooth penetrated walls , neighbors in an apartment building might be falsely alerted .
So might drivers near pedestrians , although the Apple-Google system would report the duration ’ s brevity .
This would work only with widespread enrollment .
Yet about 40 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ those earning under $ 30,000 a year do not have smartphones , Guliani says .
And reliance on voluntary cooperation is both bad and good : bad because most people probably won ’ t participate , good because “ coercive health tactics often backfire , ” she notes .
Individualistic , anti-government impulses run strongly through American society .
Witness those protesting stay-at-home orders .
Nevertheless , what seems voluntary can easily become required if landlords , employers , or government officials demand testing or enrollment before renting , hiring , or granting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t prevent such compulsion .
Three , immunity passports would also be highly problematic for similar reasons .
Esha Bhandari , an ACLU senior staff attorney , argues that since antibodies ’ true level of protection from COVID-19 is not yet known , relying on positive tests could produce complacency , endangering both individuals and institutions .
Requiring an immunity certification for work might divide populations between the haves and have-nots—those with antibodies and those without .
It could exacerbate racial disparities , Bhandari says , since low-wage employees in jobs that can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disproportionately black and Latino .
The non-immune “ might never be eligible for a given job short of contracting and surviving COVID-19 if an immune worker is available to take the slot.
” Therefore , immunity passports could also “ create perverse incentives to contract COVID-19 for people who are the most economically insecure , ” Bhandari argues .
This is not as fanciful as it sounds .
It happened in New Orleans during a yellow fever epidemic in 1847 .
“ Without immunity to yellow fever , newcomers would have difficulty finding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a bank loan , and a wife , ” writes Sarah Zhang in the Atlantic , “ Employers were loath to train an employee who might succumb to an outbreak .
Fathers were hesitant to marry their daughters to husbands who might die.
” Slaves who had acquired immunity were worth 25 percent more , she says .
Finally , the ACLU worries—as it always does—that personal information collected in a good cause will be aggregated by corporations and government , in this case forming what Bhandari calls a “ health surveillance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laws probably don ’ t prevent data sharing by private firms , so opportunities are legion for intense discrimination in work , housing , travel , immigration applications , and other areas .
A good deal of legislation is needed to channel data and set limits .
Otherwise , once the pandemic passes , Jay Stanley argues , “ routine and suspicionless collection ” could make physiological surveillance the norm .
“ We don ’ t want to wake up to a post-COVID world where companies and government agencies think they can gather @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whenever they want .
”

The novel coronavirus is giving rise to novel surveillance tools. While they can help contain the sweep of COVID-19, the monitoring and categorization of citizens could survive the pandemic with undue invasions of privacy. Legal safeguards are necessary to make sure that doesn’t happen.
Innovative hardware and software, rushed into production by profiteers, are aimed at recording and storing peoples’ physiological functions, locations, and immunity levels. As with any new technology, error rates are high, and the consequences of mistakes will be magnified if used to exclude non-immune people from jobs, housing, courthouses, and public transportation. And unless information is automatically erased or sequestered, medical records could be compiled into databases of personal files that are accessible to law enforcement and immigration authorities.
The virtue of monitoring is self-evident during the crisis; less obvious are the longer-term dangers of doing so. With no treatment or vaccine, self-quarantine, and social distance are primary means of curtailing the spread. If people don’t know they’re sick—and neither do their fellow workers, diners, shoppers, passengers, theatergoers, sunbathers, gym users, and the like—the disease cannot be contained as public spaces reopen.
This is a matter of security. As seen after 9/11, public acceptance of extraordinary measures soars in the moment, then persists long after the need abates. The Patriot Act, which Congress passed hastily in 2001, created exceptions to legal protections that had been enacted in the 1970s. Government agencies had been violating the Fourth Amendment by spying on antiwar campaigners, civil rights leaders, and other political activists. But it’s been nearly two decades since the 9/11 attacks, and Congress has applied only minor patches to the holes the Patriot Act tore in the fabric of civil liberties.
The same thing could happen now. The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred particular interest in three areas of data collection: temperature-taking before admitting people to certain places, testing them for the virus, and tracing their contacts and testing them for antibodies to issue “immunity passports,” a prospect raised by officials in the U.S., Germany, and the U.K.
There are pluses and minuses in each of these areas, according to a series of carefully drawn white papers by the American Civil Liberties Union. They are sensibly balanced and worth summarizing. (Full disclosure: I donate to the ACLU.)
One, temperature checks as a price of admission might pick up infected individuals, but also generate false positives and false negatives. Many with the virus don’t have a fever, and many who do, don’t have the virus. As Jay Stanley of the ACLU observes, skin temperature can be elevated by sunburn, exercise, menopause, cancer, and other non-COVID conditions. And readings from the skin are less accurate than core body temperature taken by oral, anal, or ear thermometers.
Furthermore, heat emanating from skin can’t be reliably determined unless the measuring device is repeatedly calibrated and held close to a person who stays still. Stand-off sensors and drones, which are being advertised as unobtrusive means of checking heart and breathing rates as well as temperature, do not work well when surveying groups of moving individuals, Stanley says. He notes that the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) considered, then suspended, a plan called Project Hostile Intent designed to identify potential terrorists by checking temperatures, heart rates, eye movement, and facial movements. Something of the kind could be revived under the guise of COVID screening, which risks being what Stanley calls “public health theater.”
Two, contact tracing by real human beings can work, but automated systems use cell phone locations that are imprecise. They also threaten privacy if their location logs are kept in a central database, according to Neema Singh Guliani, the ACLU’s senior legislative counsel. She urges that any such tools be voluntary and their use transparent. The information, already collected by some companies, can reveal where a person goes to church, shops, works, attends meetings, visits medical facilities, or has late-night visits with someone outside the home. The results can be so extensive that the Supreme Court ruled in 2018 that under the Fourth Amendment, police need a warrant first. But the Fourth Amendment generally applies only to government, not private, companies.
Since the CDC recommends at least six-foot distances from someone who might be infected, most phone data are inadequate. Connections with cell towers can determine an area or a direction of movement, but not a precise location. A phone’s GPS receiver can fix a position within six feet only with strong signals from multiple satellites; a more common margin of error is fifteen to fifty feet. Nor can signals usually be picked up inside, so it’s no good for contact tracing if you’re in a store, office, or theater.
China has begun using QR codes that citizens must scan with their phones to get into buses, taxis, subways and some buildings. That tells authorities when someone enters but not who is close by unless combined with Wi-Fi and Bluetooth connections.
The most promising method so far appears to be the Exposure Notification API (application programming interface) developed by Apple and Google to allow state health authorities to offer people an app that would tell them if they came close to an infected person. Use is purely voluntary, according to Jason Cross, writing in Macworld. You would request the state’s app and could disable it at will. People testing positive would take the initiative to register through the app, but with no identifying information.
If you’re not ill and you sign up, and you get close to a virus carrier who’s also in the system, your Bluetooth connections will trigger a text giving the date and length of your encounter, but not its location. Cross reports that the information is anonymized—only a phone’s Bluetooth code, which changes every several minutes, would be uploaded to a database, with no personal identification. Once a person tests positive, she could authorize the disclosure of her proximity information from the previous fourteen days. Again, no names and no locations. Cross writes that three states so far—Alabama, South Carolina, and North Dakota—have decided to try the system. Others might prefer one that identifies participants so health authorities can follow up.
One flaw, the ACLU notes, is that safe contact might be flagged. Guliani reports that in Israel, where security services have used location data to enforce quarantines, a woman who merely waved at her infected boyfriend from the street was told to stay home. If Bluetooth penetrated walls, neighbors in an apartment building might be falsely alerted. So might drivers near pedestrians, although the Apple-Google system would report the duration’s brevity.
This would work only with widespread enrollment. Yet about 40 percent of Americans over 65 and 30 percent of those earning under $30,000 a year do not have smartphones, Guliani says. And reliance on voluntary cooperation is both bad and good: bad because most people probably won’t participate, good because “coercive health tactics often backfire,” she notes. Individualistic, anti-government impulses run strongly through American society. Witness those protesting stay-at-home orders.
Nevertheless, what seems voluntary can easily become required if landlords, employers, or government officials demand testing or enrollment before renting, hiring, or granting benefits. Current laws probably don’t prevent such compulsion.
Three, immunity passports would also be highly problematic for similar reasons. Esha Bhandari, an ACLU senior staff attorney, argues that since antibodies’ true level of protection from COVID-19 is not yet known, relying on positive tests could produce complacency, endangering both individuals and institutions.
Requiring an immunity certification for work might divide populations between the haves and have-nots—those with antibodies and those without. It could exacerbate racial disparities, Bhandari says, since low-wage employees in jobs that can’t be done at home are disproportionately black and Latino. The non-immune “might never be eligible for a given job short of contracting and surviving COVID-19 if an immune worker is available to take the slot.”
Therefore, immunity passports could also “create perverse incentives to contract COVID-19 for people who are the most economically insecure,” Bhandari argues. This is not as fanciful as it sounds. It happened in New Orleans during a yellow fever epidemic in 1847. “Without immunity to yellow fever, newcomers would have difficulty finding a place to live, a job, a bank loan, and a wife,” writes Sarah Zhang in the Atlantic, “Employers were loath to train an employee who might succumb to an outbreak. Fathers were hesitant to marry their daughters to husbands who might die.” Slaves who had acquired immunity were worth 25 percent more, she says.
Finally, the ACLU worries—as it always does—that personal information collected in a good cause will be aggregated by corporations and government, in this case forming what Bhandari calls a “health surveillance infrastructure that endangers privacy rights.” Existing laws probably don’t prevent data sharing by private firms, so opportunities are legion for intense discrimination in work, housing, travel, immigration applications, and other areas.
A good deal of legislation is needed to channel data and set limits. Otherwise, once the pandemic passes, Jay Stanley argues, “routine and suspicionless collection” could make physiological surveillance the norm. “We don’t want to wake up to a post-COVID world where companies and government agencies think they can gather temperature or other health data about people whenever they want.”


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-02--The Most Shameful Stunt of Trump’s Presidency

I had it in my mind that I would write something about the odd way that President Trump physically handles the Holy Bible , but I hadn ’ t come up with anything specific before I saw how McKay Coppins went about it : Either image does the job of conveying that there ’ s something unnatural going on .
When Trump flashed the Bible on Monday at St. John ’ s Church near Washington ’ s Lafayette Park , he was holding it upside down and backwards , almost as if the book—or any book—has an unknown purpose .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was using the Bible as a prop , and that his appearance in front of the church was an effort to pander to the religious right .
In order to reach the location of the photo op , a block from the White House , he used the National Guard and the Secret Service to disperse protestors in his path .
They utilized tear-gas and flash-bang grenades and rubber bullets to clear Lafayette Park , even though it was only a half hour before an announced citywide curfew and there had been no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tirado , a freelance photojournalist , was blinded in her left eye by a rubber bullet in Minneapolis .
She also lacks heath insurance and is looking perhaps at almost a quarter million dollars in health care costs .
Rubber bullets are no joke .
As for tear gas , the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says , “ prolonged exposure , especially in an enclosed area , may lead to long-term effects such as eye problems including scarring , glaucoma , and cataracts , and may possibly cause breathing problems such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is less likely to cause serious harm , but it ’ s not without risks .
It ’ s highly immoral to blast tear gas and rubber bullets into a crowd without a corresponding risk you ’ re looking to counteract .
In this case , the risk was that some harm would come to the president of the United States if he attempted to stroll through Lafayette Park while the crowds were still there .
But all risk could have been avoided if Trump had decided that a visit to St. John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before curfew wasn ’ t a good idea .
No one in the White House thought to notify the Church that they were coming , and this brought severe condemnation from both the city ’ s Episcopalian bishop and St. John ’ s presiding priest : The Rt .
Rev .
Mariann Budde , the bishop of Washington who helped organize the clergy presence at the church , said Trump ’ s arrival at St. John ’ s happened without warning and left her “ outraged.
” “ The symbolism of him holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standing in front of our church as a backdrop when everything that he has said is antithetical to the teachings of our traditions and what we stand for as a church — I was horrified , ” she told Religion News Service .
“ He didn ’ t come to pray .
He didn ’ t come to lament the death of George Floyd .
He didn ’ t come to address the deep wounds that are being expressed through peaceful protest by the thousands upon thousands .
He didn ’ t try @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exploding with pain.
” The Rt .
Rev .
Michael Curry , presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church , also criticized the move , accusing the president of using “ a church building and the Holy Bible for partisan political purposes.
” The president ’ s behavior was widely criticized throughout the capital , but some on his campaign team believed it had been a success .
This was just one incident in an extremely violent day that saw the president implore the nation ’ s governors to get tough and “ dominate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ try to comply .
The president ’ s short field trip may have given his campaign a nice picture of him “ walking to the church with a coterie of aides in his wake , ” but it ’ s likely to be remembered as one of the most shameful stunts of his entire presidency .

I had it in my mind that I would write something about the odd way that President Trump physically handles the Holy Bible, but I hadn’t come up with anything specific before I saw how McKay Coppins went about it:
He wielded the Bible like a foreign object, awkwardly adjusting his grip as though trying to get comfortable. He examined its cover. He held it up over his right shoulder like a crossing guard presenting a stop sign. He did not open it. “Is that your Bible?” a reporter asked. “It’s a Bible,” the president replied.
I misread this the first time I looked at it. I thought Coppins was asking me to picture President Trump holding a red octagonal sign like he was presenting a gift. On my second reading, I understood he instead meant that Trump looked like a crossing guard holding up traffic, only with a Bible in his hand.
Either image does the job of conveying that there’s something unnatural going on. When Trump flashed the Bible on Monday at St. John’s Church near Washington’s Lafayette Park, he was holding it upside down and backwards, almost as if the book—or any book—has an unknown purpose.
This made is painfully clear that he was using the Bible as a prop, and that his appearance in front of the church was an effort to pander to the religious right.
In order to reach the location of the photo op, a block from the White House, he used the National Guard and the Secret Service to disperse protestors in his path. They utilized tear-gas and flash-bang grenades and rubber bullets to clear Lafayette Park, even though it was only a half hour before an announced citywide curfew and there had been no violence or other threatening disturbances.
Linda Tirado, a freelance photojournalist, was blinded in her left eye by a rubber bullet in Minneapolis. She also lacks heath insurance and is looking perhaps at almost a quarter million dollars in health care costs. Rubber bullets are no joke.
As for tear gas, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says, “prolonged exposure, especially in an enclosed area, may lead to long-term effects such as eye problems including scarring, glaucoma, and cataracts, and may possibly cause breathing problems such as asthma.”
Using tear gas outside is less likely to cause serious harm, but it’s not without risks. It’s highly immoral to blast tear gas and rubber bullets into a crowd without a corresponding risk you’re looking to counteract.
In this case, the risk was that some harm would come to the president of the United States if he attempted to stroll through Lafayette Park while the crowds were still there. But all risk could have been avoided if Trump had decided that a visit to St. John’s Church a half an hour before curfew wasn’t a good idea.
No one in the White House thought to notify the Church that they were coming, and this brought severe condemnation from both the city’s Episcopalian bishop and St. John’s presiding priest:
The Rt. Rev. Mariann Budde, the bishop of Washington who helped organize the clergy presence at the church, said Trump’s arrival at St. John’s happened without warning and left her “outraged.” “The symbolism of him holding a Bible … as a prop and standing in front of our church as a backdrop when everything that he has said is antithetical to the teachings of our traditions and what we stand for as a church — I was horrified,” she told Religion News Service. “He didn’t come to pray. He didn’t come to lament the death of George Floyd. He didn’t come to address the deep wounds that are being expressed through peaceful protest by the thousands upon thousands. He didn’t try to bring calm to situations that are exploding with pain.” The Rt. Rev. Michael Curry, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, also criticized the move, accusing the president of using “a church building and the Holy Bible for partisan political purposes.”
The president’s behavior was widely criticized throughout the capital, but some on his campaign team believed it had been a success.
By late Monday, campaign officials were already tweeting a black-and-white photo of him walking to the church with a coterie of aides in his wake. Tim Murtaugh, the campaign’s top spokesman, posted the picture without a caption.
This was just one incident in an extremely violent day that saw the president implore the nation’s governors to get tough and “dominate” and then watched many of them try to comply.
The president’s short field trip may have given his campaign a nice picture of him “walking to the church with a coterie of aides in his wake,” but it’s likely to be remembered as one of the most shameful stunts of his entire presidency.


washingtonmonthly--2020-06-02--Why Have Police Reform Efforts Failed?

Why Have Police Reform Efforts Failed?

It has always been clear that Donald Trump views every interaction as a zero-sum game in which winning via domination is paramount .
He made that clear during a phone call with governors on Monday night .
President Trump told some of the nation ’ s governors Monday that they are “ weak ” and they need to “ dominate ” the protesters who have taken to the streets in dozens of cities across the country in recent days to express their rage , frustration , and sadness about police brutality and racism .
“ If you don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Trump reportedly told the governors .
“ They ’ re going to run over you , you ’ re going to look like a bunch of jerks .
You have to dominate.
” The president isn ’ t the only one to hold that view .
Police departments all over the country are demonstrating this kind of warrior mentality in response to protests .
But as Maggie Koerth and Jamiles Lartey document , we ’ ve known for decades now that it doesn ’ t work .
Back in the early @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for runaway and homeless teens .
It wasn ’ t unusual for a man to show up ( usually a father or a pimp ) threatening to get physical if the young person they were looking for wasn ’ t turned over to them .
The woman who worked as our receptionist had once been employed as part of Prince ’ s security detail and , at the time , held a similar position at the nightclub in downtown Minneapolis where he launched his career .
When confronted with a threat , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not want any of the men who worked at the shelter to come to her aid as a show of muscle .
She explained that she could deal with men like that by using her brain and her words to de-escalate the situation .
A show of muscle was simply an invitation for a physical confrontation .
That is basically what these researchers have found when police departments respond with escalating force in an attempt to dominate a group of protesters .
But if security services and researchers have known for decades that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work , why do police departments continue to respond that way ?
Koerth and Lartey get to the heart of the matter when they talk about the difficulty of changing police culture , which can take decades .
Even when the leadership of a police department is committed to reform , data shows that police chiefs rarely last more than three years .
Having a sustained commitment to change is therefore uncommon .
The first step in the process of changing a warrior culture is for leadership to envision a different model .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the alternative of viewing police as community guardians here at the Washington Monthly back in 2015 .
Both Warriors and Guardians seek to protect the communities they serve , of course , but the guardian mindset takes both a broader and a longer view of how to achieve that goal .
Put simply , the guardian mindset prioritizes service over crime-fighting , and it values the dynamics of short-term encounters as a way to create long-term relationships .
It instructs officers that their interactions with community members must be more than legally justified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fair , respectful , and considerate .
It emphasizes communication over command , cooperation over compliance , and legitimacy over authority .
In the use-of-force context , the Guardian mindset emphasizes restraint over control , stability over action .
But the concept is even broader ; it seeks to protect civilians not just from crime and violence , but also from indignity and humiliation .
Stoughton goes on to document the kind of training that is necessary when it comes to implementing a guardian mindset .
While that is critical , the step @ @ @ @ @ @ @ examination of the methods used to recruit and screen potential new officers .
I am indebted to a commenter on a previous thread for pointing out these two videos that demonstrate the point .
Newport Beach is going to recruit people who are drawn to police work because they want to be warriors .
On the other hand , Decatur will attract people who want to work in partnership with the community to solve problems—which is pretty much the definition of community policing .
While they haven ’ t gotten as much attention @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that have been putting the guardian approach into action with the protests that have occurred over the last week .
What all of this comes down to is the choice of world views Riane Eisler identified in her book , The Chalice and the Blade .
As Stoughton points out , the warrior model of policing is steeped in dominance as a response to fear , whereas a guardian mentality is rooted in the long-term strategy of building partnerships with the community via trust .
Until police reform is grounded in being clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

It has always been clear that Donald Trump views every interaction as a zero-sum game in which winning via domination is paramount. He made that clear during a phone call with governors on Monday night.
President Trump told some of the nation’s governors Monday that they are “weak” and they need to “dominate” the protesters who have taken to the streets in dozens of cities across the country in recent days to express their rage, frustration, and sadness about police brutality and racism. “If you don’t dominate you’re wasting your time,” Trump reportedly told the governors. “They’re going to run over you, you’re going to look like a bunch of jerks. You have to dominate.”
The president isn’t the only one to hold that view. Police departments all over the country are demonstrating this kind of warrior mentality in response to protests. But as Maggie Koerth and Jamiles Lartey document, we’ve known for decades now that it doesn’t work.
Researchers have spent 50 years studying the way crowds of protesters and crowds of police behave — and what happens when the two interact. One thing they will tell you is that when the police respond by escalating force — wearing riot gear from the start, or using tear gas on protesters — it doesn’t work. In fact, disproportionate police force is one of the things that can make a peaceful protest not so peaceful.
Back in the early 80s, I worked at a shelter for runaway and homeless teens. It wasn’t unusual for a man to show up (usually a father or a pimp) threatening to get physical if the young person they were looking for wasn’t turned over to them. The woman who worked as our receptionist had once been employed as part of Prince’s security detail and, at the time, held a similar position at the nightclub in downtown Minneapolis where he launched his career.
When confronted with a threat, this woman made it clear that she did not want any of the men who worked at the shelter to come to her aid as a show of muscle. She explained that she could deal with men like that by using her brain and her words to de-escalate the situation. A show of muscle was simply an invitation for a physical confrontation. That is basically what these researchers have found when police departments respond with escalating force in an attempt to dominate a group of protesters.
But if security services and researchers have known for decades that a show of force doesn’t work, why do police departments continue to respond that way? Koerth and Lartey get to the heart of the matter when they talk about the difficulty of changing police culture, which can take decades. Even when the leadership of a police department is committed to reform, data shows that police chiefs rarely last more than three years. Having a sustained commitment to change is therefore uncommon.
The first step in the process of changing a warrior culture is for leadership to envision a different model. Former police officer Seth Stoughton wrote about the alternative of viewing police as community guardians here at the Washington Monthly back in 2015.
Both Warriors and Guardians seek to protect the communities they serve, of course, but the guardian mindset takes both a broader and a longer view of how to achieve that goal. Put simply, the guardian mindset prioritizes service over crime-fighting, and it values the dynamics of short-term encounters as a way to create long-term relationships. It instructs officers that their interactions with community members must be more than legally justified; they must also be empowering, fair, respectful, and considerate. It emphasizes communication over command, cooperation over compliance, and legitimacy over authority. In the use-of-force context, the Guardian mindset emphasizes restraint over control, stability over action. But the concept is even broader; it seeks to protect civilians not just from crime and violence, but also from indignity and humiliation.
Stoughton goes on to document the kind of training that is necessary when it comes to implementing a guardian mindset. While that is critical, the step that has to precede training is an examination of the methods used to recruit and screen potential new officers. I am indebted to a commenter on a previous thread for pointing out these two videos that demonstrate the point.
Newport Beach is going to recruit people who are drawn to police work because they want to be warriors.
On the other hand, Decatur will attract people who want to work in partnership with the community to solve problems—which is pretty much the definition of community policing.
While they haven’t gotten as much attention, there are police officers and departments that have been putting the guardian approach into action with the protests that have occurred over the last week.
What all of this comes down to is the choice of world views Riane Eisler identified in her book, The Chalice and the Blade.
Underneath all the complex and seemingly random currents and crosscurrents, is the struggle between two very different ways of relating, of viewing our world and living in it. It is the struggle between two underlying possibilities for relations: the partnership model and the domination model.
As Stoughton points out, the warrior model of policing is steeped in dominance as a response to fear, whereas a guardian mentality is rooted in the long-term strategy of building partnerships with the community via trust. Until police reform is grounded in being clear about the difference, it will fail.