alternet--2020-10-14--Why flip-flopping Trump needs Democrats more than boot-licking Senate Republicans

Donald Trump was against a new coronavirus aid package before he was for it .
And now , with time running out before the elections , we 're actually unsure of what the White House wants – other than a second term .
It would seem that the easiest explanation for all the back-and-forthing is that it suddenly has occurred to Trump that giving out relief checks to Americans who have lost jobs to coronavirus might be a good idea after all .
The timing , days before the election , clearly is not coincidental .
It 's not as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start layoffs of thousands , or for landlords to start demanding the rent from people put out of work with extra unemployment benefits running out by Labor Day .
Maybe the Republicans should keep a calendar for aid expiration .
Nevertheless , Trump has been far better at negotiating medical all-clear notes from his doctor than he has in forming anything that will get through Congress .
Last week , Trump shifted from withdrawing from any negotiation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the shape and size of an aid package to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he claims ownership .
He 's offering far more agreement with Pelosi than with Senate Republicans , who oppose any substantial aid , though Pelosi thinks she already has compromised .
So , somehow this week , we can hope that there is an actual tangible deal for Congress to accept or reject .
The quick background here : As coronavirus continues to trample jobs around the country and forces a too-slow rebound , Pelosi and Democrats have been pushing for the big package they passed three months ago for individual checks , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help to depleted state and local government coffers .
The White House , represented by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin , has insisted on no aid for local governments , which Trump says will benefit what he sees as irresponsible spending by blue states .
In other words , what has held all this up is just plain partisan politics .
Over the weekend , the maneuvering on all sides confirmed the primacy of finding a clause here or there that was objectionable , further dooming agreement .
Now , in the last days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go big '' in securing a package that will allow him to take credit for sending aid checks out just before the election – something that puts him at odds with Senate Republicans .
As usual , we 're left watching solely for the imperial word from Trump as to whether people forced from their jobs can pay rent , eat and pay for health care in the midst of a pandemic .
`` I would like to see a bigger stimulus package , frankly , than either the Democrats or the Republicans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a two-hour interview with conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh .
His $ 1.8 trillion proposal is n't actually larger than the $ 3 trillion voted by the House but represents far higher figures than those promoted by his own Republican majority in the Senate .
Trump has managed once again to have the spotlight , but he also has left pretty much all sides confused .
Perhaps Trump is more interested in his political image as a deciding voice than in the outcome .
Still , media coverage of the issues here shows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pretty desperate for aid and financial markets that need certainty .
With any number of Republican senators insisting that they oppose the idea of adding trillions of dollars to the national debt , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has taken the odd role of simply looking at anything that can pass the Senate .
Plus , McConnell has indicated he is far more interested in using Senate time to confirm the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court than on argument , brief or prolonged , over an aid package .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is not immediately clear that Trump 's position even will result in a uniform Senate Republican response that helps him .
It 's a mess , and whatever we call leadership is missing .
In its $ 1.8 trillion offer , the White House made concessions to Pelosi and the Democrats , though apparently more will be needed .
For those wanting detail , the proposal includes $ 300 billion in emergency aid for cities and states , up from $ 250 billion , and money for airlines , restaurants , small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and additional food aid for low-income women and children .
Republicans also are offering direct payments of $ 1,000 per child — up from $ 500 — in addition to the $ 1,200 stimulus checks for individuals , rather than rely on future tax credits .
But who knew a clause about health care money would raise objections from anti-abortion forces , for example ?
What 's noteworthy is that Trump needs the Democrats more than his Republican allies .
All parties are being pushed toward compromise .
The clearest reading here is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for failing to deliver needed aid ahead of the election .
News outlets are reporting that there are plenty of private lobbying efforts under way on Trump , Pelosi and McConnell to provide some form of aid .

Donald Trump was against a new coronavirus aid package before he was for it. And now, with time running out before the elections, we're actually unsure of what the White House wants – other than a second term.
It would seem that the easiest explanation for all the back-and-forthing is that it suddenly has occurred to Trump that giving out relief checks to Americans who have lost jobs to coronavirus might be a good idea after all.
We're left watching solely for the imperial word from Donald Trump as to whether people forced from their jobs can pay rent, eat and pay for health care in the midst of a pandemic.
The timing, days before the election, clearly is not coincidental.
It's not as if Democrats suddenly told the airlines to start layoffs of thousands, or for landlords to start demanding the rent from people put out of work with extra unemployment benefits running out by Labor Day.
Maybe the Republicans should keep a calendar for aid expiration.
Nevertheless, Trump has been far better at negotiating medical all-clear notes from his doctor than he has in forming anything that will get through Congress.
Last week, Trump shifted from withdrawing from any negotiation with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi over the shape and size of an aid package to a total turnaround promoting a package for which he claims ownership. He's offering far more agreement with Pelosi than with Senate Republicans, who oppose any substantial aid, though Pelosi thinks she already has compromised.
So, somehow this week, we can hope that there is an actual tangible deal for Congress to accept or reject.
The quick background here: As coronavirus continues to trample jobs around the country and forces a too-slow rebound, Pelosi and Democrats have been pushing for the big package they passed three months ago for individual checks, small business aid, education funds and help to depleted state and local government coffers. The White House, represented by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, has insisted on no aid for local governments, which Trump says will benefit what he sees as irresponsible spending by blue states.
In other words, what has held all this up is just plain partisan politics. Over the weekend, the maneuvering on all sides confirmed the primacy of finding a clause here or there that was objectionable, further dooming agreement.
Now, in the last days, Trump told his negotiators to "go big" in securing a package that will allow him to take credit for sending aid checks out just before the election – something that puts him at odds with Senate Republicans.
Spotlight on Trump
As usual, we're left watching solely for the imperial word from Trump as to whether people forced from their jobs can pay rent, eat and pay for health care in the midst of a pandemic.
"I would like to see a bigger stimulus package, frankly, than either the Democrats or the Republicans are offering," he said in a two-hour interview with conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh. His $1.8 trillion proposal isn't actually larger than the $3 trillion voted by the House but represents far higher figures than those promoted by his own Republican majority in the Senate.
Trump has managed once again to have the spotlight, but he also has left pretty much all sides confused.
Perhaps Trump is more interested in his political image as a deciding voice than in the outcome. Still, media coverage of the issues here shows stacks and stacks of people who are pretty desperate for aid and financial markets that need certainty.
With any number of Republican senators insisting that they oppose the idea of adding trillions of dollars to the national debt, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has taken the odd role of simply looking at anything that can pass the Senate.
Plus, McConnell has indicated he is far more interested in using Senate time to confirm the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court than on argument, brief or prolonged, over an aid package.
With Trump trailing in the elections, it is not immediately clear that Trump's position even will result in a uniform Senate Republican response that helps him.
It's a mess, and whatever we call leadership is missing.
The Current Offer
In its $1.8 trillion offer, the White House made concessions to Pelosi and the Democrats, though apparently more will be needed.
For those wanting detail, the proposal includes $300 billion in emergency aid for cities and states, up from $250 billion, and money for airlines, restaurants, small businesses, unemployment insurance, food stamps and additional food aid for low-income women and children. Republicans also are offering direct payments of $1,000 per child — up from $500 — in addition to the $1,200 stimulus checks for individuals, rather than rely on future tax credits. But who knew a clause about health care money would raise objections from anti-abortion forces, for example?
What's noteworthy is that Trump needs the Democrats more than his Republican allies.
All parties are being pushed toward compromise.
The clearest reading here is who wants to avoid blame from voters for failing to deliver needed aid ahead of the election.
News outlets are reporting that there are plenty of private lobbying efforts under way on Trump, Pelosi and McConnell to provide some form of aid.
Stay tuned.


alternet--2020-10-14--James Murdoch says family's media empire legitimizes disinformation and obscures facts

James Murdoch , the former CEO of 21st Century Fox and the youngest son of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch , has admitted that he stepped away from his father 's media empire , in part , because it legitimizes disinformation and obscures facts .
`` I reached the conclusion that you can venerate a contest of ideas , if you will , and we all do and that 's important .
But it should n't be in a way that hides agendas , '' Murdoch told The New York Times in his first major interview since his exit .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dowd for a profile published Oct. 10 , Murdoch explained why he had `` pulled the rip cord '' with the family business .
`` A contest of ideas should n't be used to legitimize disinformation , and I think it 's often taken advantage of , '' he said .
`` And I think at great news organizations , the mission really should be to introduce fact to disperse doubt — not to sow doubt , to obscure fact , if you will . ''
`` And I just felt increasingly uncomfortable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some disagreements over how certain decisions are being made , '' he continued .
`` So it was actually not that hard a decision to remove myself and have a kind of cleaner slate . ''
Murdoch left the News Corp board in July , citing editorial disagreements .
The company owns The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post in the U.S. , in addition to The Sun , The Times and Sky News overseas .
His resignation letter read , in its entirety : James Murdoch has made no secret @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what he has characterized as the `` American political project '' of Fox News , a network whose fawning pro-Trump opinion programming has been compared to North Korean state TV .
After Trump praised `` very fine '' white supremacists in Charlottesville , Va. , in 2017 , Murdoch gave $ 1 million to the Anti-Defamation League and told friends in an email that `` I ca n't even believe I have to write this : standing up to Nazis is essential ; there are no good Nazis .
Or Klansmen , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yorker in 2019 that there were `` views I really disagree with on Fox '' before he abandoned the company later that year .
In January 2020 , Murdoch and his wife , Kathryn , expressed their `` frustration '' with climate change denialism at News Corp as wildfires torched 46 million acres in Australia , their home country .
( Fox News personalities pushed a false story about arson driving the fires , which was picked up from Murdoch-owned outlet The Australian . )
Asked in The Times interview about his thoughts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus pandemic , Murdoch replied , `` Look , you do worry about it , and I think that we 're in the middle of a public health crisis .
Climate is also a public health crisis .
Whatever political spin on that — if it gets in the way of delivering crucial public health information , I think is pretty bad . ''
James and Kathryn Murdoch gave $ 2 million to help elect Biden and Democrats , it was reported earlier this summer .
Though Murdoch no longer has an official @ @ @ @ @ @ @ retains his share of the Murdoch Family Trust , which still has voting stakes in News Corp and Fox Corporation — a position Murdoch has suggested was relatively inconsequential .
He has launched an independent foundation called Quadrivium , which is dedicated to supporting voter participation and climate-change initiatives .
`` I think there 's only so much you can do if you 're not an executive , you 're on the board , you 're quite removed from a lot of the day-to-day decisions , obviously , '' he told The Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with those decisions , you have to take stock of whether or not you want to be associated and can you change it or not .
I decided that I could be much more effective outside . ''

James Murdoch, the former CEO of 21st Century Fox and the youngest son of Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch, has admitted that he stepped away from his father's media empire, in part, because it legitimizes disinformation and obscures facts.
"I reached the conclusion that you can venerate a contest of ideas, if you will, and we all do and that's important. But it shouldn't be in a way that hides agendas," Murdoch told The New York Times in his first major interview since his exit.
In the interview, conducted by Maureen Dowd for a profile published Oct. 10, Murdoch explained why he had "pulled the rip cord" with the family business.
"A contest of ideas shouldn't be used to legitimize disinformation, and I think it's often taken advantage of," he said. "And I think at great news organizations, the mission really should be to introduce fact to disperse doubt — not to sow doubt, to obscure fact, if you will."
"And I just felt increasingly uncomfortable with my position on the board having some disagreements over how certain decisions are being made," he continued. "So it was actually not that hard a decision to remove myself and have a kind of cleaner slate."
Murdoch left the News Corp board in July, citing editorial disagreements. The company owns The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post in the U.S., in addition to The Sun, The Times and Sky News overseas. His resignation letter read, in its entirety:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I hereby tender my resignation as a member of the Board of Directors of News Corporation (the "Company"), effective as of the date hereof.
My resignation is due to disagreements over certain editorial content published by the Company's news outlets and certain other strategic decisions.
James Murdoch has made no secret about the ideological gap between him and what he has characterized as the "American political project" of Fox News, a network whose fawning pro-Trump opinion programming has been compared to North Korean state TV. After Trump praised "very fine" white supremacists in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017, Murdoch gave $1 million to the Anti-Defamation League and told friends in an email that "I can't even believe I have to write this: standing up to Nazis is essential; there are no good Nazis. Or Klansmen, or terrorists."
Murdoch told The New Yorker in 2019 that there were "views I really disagree with on Fox" before he abandoned the company later that year. In January 2020, Murdoch and his wife, Kathryn, expressed their "frustration" with climate change denialism at News Corp as wildfires torched 46 million acres in Australia, their home country. (Fox News personalities pushed a false story about arson driving the fires, which was picked up from Murdoch-owned outlet The Australian.)
Asked in The Times interview about his thoughts on Fox News peddling misinformation about the coronavirus pandemic, Murdoch replied, "Look, you do worry about it, and I think that we're in the middle of a public health crisis. Climate is also a public health crisis. Whatever political spin on that — if it gets in the way of delivering crucial public health information, I think is pretty bad."
James and Kathryn Murdoch gave $2 million to help elect Biden and Democrats, it was reported earlier this summer.
Though Murdoch no longer has an official position on the corporate board, he retains his share of the Murdoch Family Trust, which still has voting stakes in News Corp and Fox Corporation — a position Murdoch has suggested was relatively inconsequential. He has launched an independent foundation called Quadrivium, which is dedicated to supporting voter participation and climate-change initiatives.
"I think there's only so much you can do if you're not an executive, you're on the board, you're quite removed from a lot of the day-to-day decisions, obviously," he told The Times. "And if you're uncomfortable with those decisions, you have to take stock of whether or not you want to be associated and can you change it or not. I decided that I could be much more effective outside."


alternet--2020-10-14--Here are 5 things Mark Zuckerberg Must do if he’s serious about preventing election violence

President Trump 's embrace of white-supremacist groups is a love story that has unfolded on the pages of Facebook .
After instructing the Proud Boys to `` stand by '' during the last presidential debate , members of the violent right-wing group took to social media to praise the president and declare themselves ready for action .
And they 're not alone .
Despite Facebook 's frequent claims that it 's addressing calls to violence this election season , hate groups continue to use the world 's largest online platform to deploy their members against people in the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fundamental democratic rights : protesting injustice and casting a vote during elections .
Facebook routinely fails to address these threats in time , if at all .
While it banned the Proud Boys group from its platform in 2018 , individual members and supporters remain active across the network , which they used to mobilize turnout for a Proud Boys ' rally in Portland last month .
Through speeches and social-media posts , President Trump seems intent on encouraging the most virulent of these groups to deploy in November to `` protect the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ imaginary threats .
Trump has posted to Facebook numerous calls for people to enlist in the `` Army for Trump '' as election poll watchers .
During the last debate , he repeated this line to recruit supporters to `` go into the polls and watch very carefully . ''
It 's happened before .
In the run-up to Election Day 2016 , then-candidate Donald Trump told supporters that the election was going to be `` rigged '' and that they should monitor polling places for evidence of so-called fraud .
The militia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to call on its members to `` help stop voter fraud '' by congregating at polling stations to conduct `` intelligence gathering and crime spotting . ''
Neo-Nazi groups , Ku Klux Klan offshoots and the white-nationalist American Freedom Party joined this call , asking their adherents to `` watch the polls . ''
Some did , turning up armed outside voting places nationwide in an apparent attempt to root out alleged voter fraud and suppress the votes of Black Americans and other voters of color across the country .
In reality , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States : Research by Dartmouth College and Trump 's own voter-integrity task force found that there was no evidence to support the fraud concerns the Trump campaign fomented in 2016 .
Trump 's aim in 2020 is not only to scare off certain voters and delegitimize the election .
It 's also to weaponize this fear by mobilizing his most extreme followers to do whatever they can to disrupt the vote and potentially contest the results .
He appears ready to sacrifice people of color as collateral damage in any violence should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has tools that gather ready audiences for voter disinformation and conspiracy theories , and it uses algorithms that seem designed intentionally to amplify and spread divisive messages , regardless of their accuracy .
Not only can members of these groups organize for action on the platform 's event pages — an issue that the advocacy group Muslim Advocates raised for Facebook executives way back in 2015 , to no avail — they can also purchase weapons .
Though Facebook claims it 's clamped down against gun sales over its platform , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marketplace , where sellers dodge the ban by listing gun cases or ammunition for sale — and then use Facebook Messenger to directly sell guns to buyers .
Facebook has the power , and the responsibility , to stop violence from these armed groups before it starts .
But too often it does the absolute bare minimum , and only after blood has been spilled .
In September , Mark Zuckerberg told an interviewer , `` we need to be doing everything that we can to reduce the chances of violence or civil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We 're trying to be sure that we do our part to make sure that none of this is organized on Facebook . ''
The platform even changed some of its policies in an apparent attempt to protect the vote against violence , disinformation and disruption .
Zuckerberg 's words bear no relationship to the reality reflected today in Facebook events , groups and pages .
If he 's serious about this — and he should be — here are five steps Facebook must take : • build tools to systematically increase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the detection and deletion of event pages that promote violence or issue calls to arms ; • prevent white nationalists , hate groups and paramilitary groups from using the platforms altogether ; • stop all gun sales via its platforms by updating Facebook rules to ensure users can not stealthily sell firearms on the Marketplace or share plans for 3-D printed weapons on its network ; • ensure all content moderators receive adequate training on paramilitary content and patterns , including the violent threat that hate groups pose to the general public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook systems to improve the flagging and rapid removal of false voter information , especially disinformation that could threaten the health and welfare of people exercising their rights to vote in person .
By acting on these recommendations , Zuckerberg has the potential to save lives and improve the health of our democracy .
The election season is upon us : It 's time for Zuckerberg to put his words into action .

President Trump's embrace of white-supremacist groups is a love story that has unfolded on the pages of Facebook.
After instructing the Proud Boys to "stand by" during the last presidential debate, members of the violent right-wing group took to social media to praise the president and declare themselves ready for action.
And they're not alone. Despite Facebook's frequent claims that it's addressing calls to violence this election season, hate groupscontinue to use the world's largest online platform to deploy their members against people in the United States who are exercising some of the most fundamental democratic rights: protesting injustice and casting a vote during elections.
Facebook routinely fails to address these threats in time, if at all. While it banned the Proud Boys group from its platform in 2018, individual members and supporters remain active across the network, which they used to mobilize turnout for a Proud Boys' rally in Portland last month.
Through speeches and social-media posts, President Trump seems intent on encouraging the most virulent of these groups to deploy in November to "protect the vote" against a wild range of imaginary threats. Trump has posted to Facebook numerous calls for people to enlist in the "Army for Trump" as election poll watchers. During the last debate, he repeated this line to recruit supporters to "go into the polls and watch very carefully."
It's happened before. In the run-up to Election Day 2016, then-candidate Donald Trump told supporters that the election was going to be "rigged" and that they should monitor polling places for evidence of so-called fraud.
The militia group Oath Keepers took to social networks to call on its members to "help stop voter fraud" by congregating at polling stations to conduct "intelligence gathering and crime spotting." Neo-Nazi groups, Ku Klux Klan offshoots and the white-nationalist American Freedom Party joined this call, asking their adherents to "watch the polls." Some did, turning up armed outside voting places nationwide in an apparent attempt to root out alleged voter fraud and suppress the votes of Black Americans and other voters of color across the country.
In reality, voter fraud is extremely rare in the United States: Research by Dartmouth College and Trump's own voter-integrity task force found that there was no evidence to support the fraud concerns the Trump campaign fomented in 2016.
Trump's aim in 2020 is not only to scare off certain voters and delegitimize the election. It's also to weaponize this fear by mobilizing his most extreme followers to do whatever they can to disrupt the vote and potentially contest the results. He appears ready to sacrifice people of color as collateral damage in any violence should it come.
Facebook, in particular, has tools that gather ready audiences for voter disinformation and conspiracy theories, and it uses algorithms that seem designed intentionally to amplify and spread divisive messages, regardless of their accuracy.
Not only can members of these groups organize for action on the platform's event pages — an issue that the advocacy group Muslim Advocates raised for Facebook executives way back in 2015, to no avail — they can also purchase weapons. Though Facebook claims it's clamped down against gun sales over its platform, you can still buy a gun on Facebook Marketplace, where sellers dodge the ban by listing gun cases or ammunition for sale — and then use Facebook Messenger to directly sell guns to buyers.
Facebook has the power, and the responsibility, to stop violence from these armed groups before it starts. But too often it does the absolute bare minimum, and only after blood has been spilled.
In September, Mark Zuckerberg told an interviewer, "we need to be doing everything that we can to reduce the chances of violence or civil unrest in the wake of this election. We're trying to be sure that we do our part to make sure that none of this is organized on Facebook." The platform even changed some of its policies in an apparent attempt to protect the vote against violence, disinformation and disruption.
Zuckerberg's words bear no relationship to the reality reflected today in Facebook events, groups and pages. If he's serious about this — and he should be — here are five steps Facebook must take:
build tools to systematically increase the proactive enforcement of Facebook rules, including the detection and deletion of event pages that promote violence or issue calls to arms;
prevent white nationalists, hate groups and paramilitary groups from using the platforms altogether;
stop all gun sales via its platforms by updating Facebook rules to ensure users cannot stealthily sell firearms on the Marketplace or share plans for 3-D printed weapons on its network;
ensure all content moderators receive adequate training on paramilitary content and patterns, including the violent threat that hate groups pose to the general public and voters in particular;
upgrade Facebook systems to improve the flagging and rapid removal of false voter information, especially disinformation that could threaten the health and welfare of people exercising their rights to vote in person.
By acting on these recommendations, Zuckerberg has the potential to save lives and improve the health of our democracy. The election season is upon us: It's time for Zuckerberg to put his words into action.


alternet--2020-10-14--Pete Buttigieg hits back at Amy Coney Barrett's not-so-subtle homophobic slur

We all pretty much know who Amy Coney Barrett is .
I see such super-Catholics on my social media feeds pretty regularly because , well , I went to Catholic grade school and high school , and a lot of my old classmates either have n't figured out that I 'm a filthy secular humanist or , to their credit , do n't care .
And by `` super-Catholics '' I do n't mean anyone who 's more Catholic than me — because that would include just about everyone .
I mean people who care about blastulas and zygotes more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Put a couple frozen embryos in an Igloo cooler and stash it in a holding cell at the border and maybe some of these folks would finally wake up to this administration 's inhumanity .
So , needless to say , Barrett is n't exactly forward-thinking when it comes to LGBTQ issues .
Unless the baseline we 're talking about is sometime in the early to mid-11th century .
There 's a lot wrong with that statement .
First of all , it 's an orientation , not a preference .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Watching Glee reruns while stoned out of my mind is my choice .
Secondly , I 'm pretty certain she 's not a friend of the LGBTQ community , so this is all just window dressing anyway .
And bad window dressing at that .
Well , erstwhile presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg noticed Barrett 's verbal sleight-of-hand and was having none of it : That 's my preference , too , Mayor Buttigieg .
Unfortunately , Mitch McConnell 's orientation is reptilian , so do n't hold your breath .
Are you outraged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ donate .
And do everything else you have to do to deliver us a Biden presidency and a Democratic Senate .

We all pretty much know who Amy Coney Barrett is.
I see such super-Catholics on my social media feeds pretty regularly because, well, I went to Catholic grade school and high school, and a lot of my old classmates either haven't figured out that I'm a filthy secular humanist or, to their credit, don't care.
And by "super-Catholics" I don't mean anyone who's more Catholic than me — because that would include just about everyone. I mean people who care about blastulas and zygotes more than they care about kids in cages. Put a couple frozen embryos in an Igloo cooler and stash it in a holding cell at the border and maybe some of these folks would finally wake up to this administration's inhumanity.
So, needless to say, Barrett isn't exactly forward-thinking when it comes to LGBTQ issues. Unless the baseline we're talking about is sometime in the early to mid-11th century.
BARRETT: "I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not ever discriminate on the basis of sexual preference."
There's a lot wrong with that statement. First of all, it's an orientation, not a preference. For instance, my orientation is heterosexual. Watching Glee reruns while stoned out of my mind is my choice. Secondly, I'm pretty certain she's not a friend of the LGBTQ community, so this is all just window dressing anyway. And bad window dressing at that.
Well, erstwhile presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg noticed Barrett's verbal sleight-of-hand and was having none of it:
That's my preference, too, Mayor Buttigieg.
Unfortunately, Mitch McConnell's orientation is reptilian, so don't hold your breath.
Are you outraged? Well, then vote. And donate. And do everything else you have to do to deliver us a Biden presidency and a Democratic Senate.
Make it so.


alternet--2020-10-14--Watch: Amy Coney Barrett stumbles when Cory Booker asks about religion and marriage

Amy Coney Barrett had a challenging day before Senate Democrats .
She offended a great many people during her Supreme Court nomination hearing Tuesday when she used the term `` sexual preference , '' instead of `` sexual orientation , '' forcing a rare apology from a SCOTUS nominee later in the day .
Judge Barrett claimed she would never discriminated for any reason , which is provably false as she has already in her life outside the courts , but it was one set of questions from Senator Cory Booker ( D-NJ ) that seemed to trip up Judge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to serve an interracial couple 's wedding , because they disapprove of interracial marriages ? ''
Sen. Booker asked .
`` Well , Loving v. Virginia follows directly from Brown , and it makes unconstitutional any attempt to prohibit or for forbid interracial marriage , '' Barrett replied .
`` Could they refuse to serve a black couple 's wedding ? ''
Booker asked .
`` Could a baker or a florist refuse to – Title VII prohibits any sort of discrimination on the basis of race by places of public accommodation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did n't ask about `` a baker or a florist , '' he asked about a hairdresser .
Coincidentally , the anti-LGBTQ hate group Judge Barrett has ties to has clients who are bakers and florists , and two of its top cases involve a baker and a florist .
Not a hairdresser .
Booker continued , asking about an interfaith couple , and that 's when Barrett put the brakes on .
`` Well , Senator , I feel like you 're taking me down a road of hypotheticals that is going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as you know I ca n't opine on how cases would be resolved , and I 've said that whether they 're easy questions or hard questions .
I ca n't do that , '' Barrett insisted .
`` So I 'm not the lawyer that you are , '' Booker replied graciously .
( He is in fact a highly-regarded attorney . )
`` But you seem to honor the precedents that are enough to protect discrimination against African Americans , interracial couples , but you stop on saying that unequivocally about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Muslim couple or interfaith wedding ? ''

Amy Coney Barrett had a challenging day before Senate Democrats. She offended a great many people during her Supreme Court nomination hearing Tuesday when she used the term "sexual preference," instead of "sexual orientation," forcing a rare apology from a SCOTUS nominee later in the day.
Judge Barrett claimed she would never discriminated for any reason, which is provably false as she has already in her life outside the courts, but it was one set of questions from Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) that seemed to trip up Judge Barrett.
"Can a hairdresser refuse to serve an interracial couple's wedding, because they disapprove of interracial marriages?" Sen. Booker asked.
"Well, Loving v. Virginia follows directly from Brown, and it makes unconstitutional any attempt to prohibit or for forbid interracial marriage," Barrett replied.
"Could they refuse to serve a black couple's wedding?" Booker asked.
Judge Barrett offered a very strange response.
"Could a baker or a florist refuse to – Title VII prohibits any sort of discrimination on the basis of race by places of public accommodation," Barrett said.
But Sen. Booker didn't ask about "a baker or a florist," he asked about a hairdresser.
Coincidentally, the anti-LGBTQ hate group Judge Barrett has ties to has clients who are bakers and florists, and two of its top cases involve a baker and a florist. Not a hairdresser.
Booker continued, asking about an interfaith couple, and that's when Barrett put the brakes on.
"Well, Senator, I feel like you're taking me down a road of hypotheticals that is going to get me into trouble here because as you know I can't opine on how cases would be resolved, and I've said that whether they're easy questions or hard questions. I can't do that," Barrett insisted.
"So I'm not the lawyer that you are," Booker replied graciously. (He is in fact a highly-regarded attorney.) "But you seem to honor the precedents that are enough to protect discrimination against African Americans, interracial couples, but you stop on saying that unequivocally about people stopping on religious discrimination against a Muslim couple or interfaith wedding?"


alternet--2020-10-14--'A picture of voter suppression': Hours-long lines plague first day of early voting in Georgia

Some Georgia voters were forced to wait more than 10 hours to cast their ballots on the first day of early voting in the state .
There were several reports of technical glitches , but state officials said the hours-long waits primarily were the result of `` record turnout . ''
Some voters braved lines for up to 11 hours on Monday .
Nearly 128,000 Georgians voted on Monday , up from 91,000 in 2016 , according to the secretary of state 's office .
While the first day drew high turnout , the Atlanta Journal Constitution noted that 253,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Friday before Election Day four years ago .
Georgia , which saw similar wait times during a primary impacted by shuttered polling sites and a shortage of workers , has shut down 214 polling places since the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013 .
Critics accused the state of `` voter suppression '' in response to videos showing long lines on Monday .
`` This is a picture of voter suppression , '' former Sen. Claire McCaskill , D-Mo.
, tweeted .
`` Why do Americans have to wait @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poll closures disproportionately impacted communities of color , though it is unclear whether the same trend continued on Monday .
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger 's office said the long waits were unsurprising because of voter `` enthusiasm . ''
`` Georgia is seeing record turnout for early voting because of excitement and enthusiasm of the upcoming election , '' Raffensperger spokesman said Walter Jones told CNN .
`` Long lines are to be expected — voters need to be aware of all of their options , including three weeks of early voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the election . ''
But technical difficulties did contribute to the delays .
Voting at the Atlanta Hawks ' State Farm Arena was delayed for about an hour due to a glitch with electronic pollbooks used to check in voters , multiple individuals reported .
`` I am very upset that we were put into this position , '' Hawks CEO Steve Koonin told CNN .
`` That 's why we required people on site , and I 'm glad to say it got resolved quickly . ''
`` It was a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Crowley told AJC .
But voters were generally prepared for the waits — and eager to make their voice heard .
`` I would have waited all day if I had to , '' Crowley said .
Cobb County voter Steve Davidson said he could not leave , because the late Rep. John Lewis , D-Ga. , and other civil rights figures had fought for too long to give Black voters like himself the right to vote .
`` They 've been fighting for decades .
If I 've got to wait six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ duty to do that , '' he told the Associated Press.
`` I 'll do it happily . ''
`` I think the positive thing is that there 's a lot of people out there waiting to vote , '' Fulton County elections director Rick Barron told Georgia Public Broadcast .
`` We expected to have lines on the first day — a lot of people have been anxious to vote for a long time — so we were expecting this . ''
`` We 're seeing extreme and tremendous turnout on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs told AJC .
`` There 's a lot of enthusiasm around this election , and you 're going to see high turnout .
Because of that , we 're going to see lines . ''
More than 600,000 voters have already cast their ballots in Georgia , including about 470,000 who have voted by mail .
The state is expected to be one of the key swing votes in the upcoming election .
President Donald Trump and Democratic rival Joe Biden are separated by about one to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Cook Political Report has rated both of its Senate races as toss-ups .
Election experts predicted that the lines would improve once the early rush died down .
`` Early voting gives people a choice when they wish to vote , a large number of people are enthusiastic to vote at the first chance they get , thus long lines , '' University of Florida professor Michael McDonald said on Twitter .
`` Ironically , they report high satisfaction with their voting experience .
Lines will shorten after the initial rush .
@

Some Georgia voters were forced to wait more than 10 hours to cast their ballots on the first day of early voting in the state.
There were several reports of technical glitches, but state officials said the hours-long waits primarily were the result of "record turnout." Some voters braved lines for up to 11 hours on Monday.
Nearly 128,000 Georgians voted on Monday, up from 91,000 in 2016, according to the secretary of state's office. While the first day drew high turnout, the Atlanta Journal Constitution noted that 253,000 voted early in a single day on the Friday before Election Day four years ago.
Georgia, which saw similar wait times during a primary impacted by shuttered polling sites and a shortage of workers, has shut down 214 polling places since the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013. Critics accused the state of "voter suppression" in response to videos showing long lines on Monday.
"This is a picture of voter suppression," former Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., tweeted. "Why do Americans have to wait in lines this long?"
Previous poll closures disproportionately impacted communities of color, though it is unclear whether the same trend continued on Monday.
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's office said the long waits were unsurprising because of voter "enthusiasm."
"Georgia is seeing record turnout for early voting because of excitement and enthusiasm of the upcoming election," Raffensperger spokesman said Walter Jones told CNN. "Long lines are to be expected — voters need to be aware of all of their options, including three weeks of early voting, no-excuse absentee and in-person voting day of the election."
But technical difficulties did contribute to the delays. Voting at the Atlanta Hawks' State Farm Arena was delayed for about an hour due to a glitch with electronic pollbooks used to check in voters, multiple individuals reported.
"I am very upset that we were put into this position," Hawks CEO Steve Koonin told CNN. "That's why we required people on site, and I'm glad to say it got resolved quickly."
"It was a little frustrating," Atlanta voter Adrienne Crowley told AJC.
But voters were generally prepared for the waits — and eager to make their voice heard.
"I would have waited all day if I had to," Crowley said.
Cobb County voter Steve Davidson said he could not leave, because the late Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., and other civil rights figures had fought for too long to give Black voters like himself the right to vote.
"They've been fighting for decades. If I've got to wait six or seven hours, that's my duty to do that," he told the Associated Press. " I'll do it happily."
"I think the positive thing is that there's a lot of people out there waiting to vote," Fulton County elections director Rick Barron told Georgia Public Broadcast. "We expected to have lines on the first day — a lot of people have been anxious to vote for a long time — so we were expecting this."
"We're seeing extreme and tremendous turnout on the ground and around the state," Deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs told AJC. "There's a lot of enthusiasm around this election, and you're going to see high turnout. Because of that, we're going to see lines."
More than 600,000 voters have already cast their ballots in Georgia, including about 470,000 who have voted by mail. The state is expected to be one of the key swing votes in the upcoming election. President Donald Trump and Democratic rival Joe Biden are separated by about one to two points in recent polls, and the Cook Political Report has rated both of its Senate races as toss-ups.
Election experts predicted that the lines would improve once the early rush died down.
"Early voting gives people a choice when they wish to vote, a large number of people are enthusiastic to vote at the first chance they get, thus long lines," University of Florida professor Michael McDonald said on Twitter. "Ironically, they report high satisfaction with their voting experience. Lines will shorten after the initial rush."


alternet--2020-10-14--Sexist Tomi Lahren tweet about masks perfectly illustrates why Biden is crushing Trump among women

Female voters really do n't like the impeached president .
According to CNN , the five most recently conducted live interview polls found Joe Biden leading Trump among women by an average of a whopping 25 points—with the gap sitting at an even whoppinger 34 points in CNN 's own poll .
If that trend holds , we 're talking about double the recent margins among women achieved by Hillary Clinton against Trump four years ago ( 12 points ) , as well as those of President Obama in 2008 ( 13 points ) , and 2012 ( 11 points @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden 's spectacular edge among female voters than there are tubes of self-tanner in the Orange Julius Caesar 's bathroom .
But two of them—misogyny and his utterly anti-scientific response to COVID-19—are intimately intertwined .
These delusions came together recently in a single tweet from one of his minions .
As this tweet makes abundantly clear , in the deluded mindset of Trumpworld 's denizens , wearing a mask is : a ) a sign of weakness , and b ) a sign of , somehow , being a woman—which is itself seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weakness .
If that sounds absurd to you , it 's a pretty solid indication that you are : a ) not deluded , and b ) neither Trump nor one of his minions .
Tomi Lahren may not be valuable enough to the cause to merit two hours of The Man Who Lost The Popular Vote 's time—not to mention the Medal of Freedom to boot .
Still , she has 1.7 million Twitter followers , was dubbed a `` rising media star '' by the New York Times , and hosts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this single tweet , she managed to encapsulate the stupidity , misogyny , and hatefulness of Donald Trump .
She also makes crystal clear why women voters are overwhelmingly supporting Joe Biden .
Ian Reifowitz is the author of The Tribalization of Politics : How Rush Limbaugh 's Race-Baiting Rhetoric on the Obama Presidency Paved the Way for Trump ( Foreword by Markos Moulitsas )

Female voters really don't like the impeached president. According to CNN, the five most recently conducted live interview polls found Joe Biden leading Trump among women by an average of a whopping 25 points—with the gap sitting at an even whoppinger 34 points in CNN's own poll. If that trend holds, we're talking about double the recent margins among women achieved by Hillary Clinton against Trump four years ago (12 points), as well as those of President Obama in 2008 (13 points), and 2012 (11 points).
There are more reasons for Biden's spectacular edge among female voters than there are tubes of self-tanner in the Orange Julius Caesar's bathroom. But two of them—misogyny and his utterly anti-scientific response to COVID-19—are intimately intertwined. These delusions came together recently in a single tweet from one of his minions.
As this tweet makes abundantly clear, in the deluded mindset of Trumpworld's denizens, wearing a mask is: a) a sign of weakness, and b) a sign of, somehow, being a woman—which is itself seen, by them, as equivalent to weakness. If that sounds absurd to you, it's a pretty solid indication that you are: a) not deluded, and b) neither Trump nor one of his minions.
Tomi Lahren may not be valuable enough to the cause to merit two hours of The Man Who Lost The Popular Vote's time—not to mention the Medal of Freedom to boot. Still, she has 1.7 million Twitter followers, was dubbed a "rising media star" by the New York Times, and hosts a show on Fox Nation. In this single tweet, she managed to encapsulate the stupidity, misogyny, and hatefulness of Donald Trump.
She also makes crystal clear why women voters are overwhelmingly supporting Joe Biden.
Ian Reifowitz is the author of The Tribalization of Politics: How Rush Limbaugh's Race-Baiting Rhetoric on the Obama Presidency Paved the Way for Trump (Foreword by Markos Moulitsas)


alternet--2020-10-14--'Outrageous': Civil Rights advocates warn Supreme Court Trump victory will result in 'irreversible d

'Outrageous': Civil Rights advocates warn Supreme Court Trump victory will result in 'irreversible damage'

In a victory for President Donald Trump and a blow to civil rights , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the administration can order the Census Bureau to halt this year 's count of the nation 's population prematurely .
Kristen Clarke , president and executive director of the Lawyers ' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law , which represented the plaintiff 's in the suit in question , National Urban League , et al .
vs. Ross , said the court 's majority order ( pdf ) was a `` disappointing '' decision that `` will result in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' `` We know the Bureau has indicated that it takes several days to terminate the enumeration process , '' said Clarke .
`` As we explore options , we will continue to push undercounted communities in states such as Louisiana and Mississippi to participate while the counting process remains open and active .
This fight is about ensuring that our nation 's hard-to-count populations , including Black people , communities of color , immigrants and other vulnerable populations were captured in the count . ''
Reversing decisions by lower courts that forced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 31 , the high court granted an emergency stay ( pdf ) requested by Trump 's Department of Justice .
There was no explanation for the decision , which required the assent of at least five of the court 's eight justices .
Local governments and civil rights groups had filed suit against the administration , arguing that its effort to shorten the 2020 census was meant to exclude undocumented immigrants from being counted in the apportionment process that determines allocation of federal resources and how many seats in the House of Representatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ order itself was unsigned , Justice Sonya Sotomayor issued a dissent warning the `` harms caused by rushing this year 's census count are irreparable '' and that `` respondents will suffer their lasting impact for at least the next 10 years . ''
In her lone dissent , Sotomayor argued that `` even a fraction of a percent of the Nation 's 140 million households amounts to hundreds of thousands of people left uncounted .
And significantly , the percentage of nonresponses is likely much higher among marginalized populations and in hard-to-count @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lands .
When governments allocate resources using census data , those populations will disproportionately bear the burden of any inaccuracies . ''
`` Every American deserves a voice in our democracy , '' said Karen Hobert Flynn , president of Common Cause , in the pro-democracy group 's reaction to the order , which she called `` a blow to our democracy . ''
As CNBC notes in its reporting , the battle over the timeline for this year 's count is not the only census fight before the court : Clarke , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a similar sentiment .
`` The silver lining is that millions of Americans have been counted who would have been excluded were the Bureau allowed to move forward with their earlier curtailment plans , '' Clarke said .
`` As we have fought the Trump administration in the courts , we have helped to secure more time on the clock to achieve a fair and accurate count . ''
Still , the order by the court—especially given its long-term political implications—was denounced far and wide by progressives : Mark Joseph Stern , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the order as allowing Trump to `` sabotage the Census in the eleventh hour . ''
`` If even a few thousand people are undercounted , lawmakers will draw district lines that do not , in reality , give equal weight to every person 's vote , '' explained Stern in his coverage .
`` Regions with more minority communities will be underrepresented in the legislature .
As Sotomayor explained , that 's why the Obama administration extended the 2010 census for an extra month after hitting a 99 percent response rate .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's order , Brian Fallon , executive director of Demand Justice , said the order should only strengthen the resolve of Democrats and other voters opposed to the pending confirmation of Trump 's latest right-wing nominee , Amy Coney Barrett .
`` The biggest warning shot to Democrats during these Senate confirmation hearings was not any revelation that came from their questioning of Amy Coney Barrett , but this order from the Roberts Court to shut down the Census , '' Fallon said in a statement .
`` The Roberts Court is actively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entrench its own power by rigging the democratic process , and it will only be further emboldened if Barrett joins the Court . ''
For Democrats , he added , it is time `` to recognize what we are up against and stop approaching this battle over Amy Coney Barrett 's nomination like just another confirmation process .
If Republicans follow through with jamming Barrett onto the Court before the election , Democrats have no choice but to immediately pursue structural reform of the Court . ''

In a victory for President Donald Trump and a blow to civil rights, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the administration can order the Census Bureau to halt this year's count of the nation's population prematurely.
Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which represented the plaintiff's in the suit in question, National Urban League, et al. vs. Ross, said the court's majority order (pdf) was a "disappointing" decision that "will result in irreversible damage to the 2020 Census."
"We know the Bureau has indicated that it takes several days to terminate the enumeration process," said Clarke. "As we explore options, we will continue to push undercounted communities in states such as Louisiana and Mississippi to participate while the counting process remains open and active. This fight is about ensuring that our nation's hard-to-count populations, including Black people, communities of color, immigrants and other vulnerable populations were captured in the count."
Reversing decisions by lower courts that forced the administration to keep counting until October 31, the high court granted an emergency stay (pdf) requested by Trump's Department of Justice. There was no explanation for the decision, which required the assent of at least five of the court's eight justices.
Local governments and civil rights groups had filed suit against the administration, arguing that its effort to shorten the 2020 census was meant to exclude undocumented immigrants from being counted in the apportionment process that determines allocation of federal resources and how many seats in the House of Representatives each state is allotted.
While the order itself was unsigned, Justice Sonya Sotomayor issued a dissent warning the "harms caused by rushing this year's census count are irreparable" and that "respondents will suffer their lasting impact for at least the next 10 years."
In her lone dissent, Sotomayor argued that "even a fraction of a percent of the Nation's 140 million households amounts to hundreds of thousands of people left uncounted. And significantly, the percentage of nonresponses is likely much higher among marginalized populations and in hard-to-count areas, such as rural and tribal lands. When governments allocate resources using census data, those populations will disproportionately bear the burden of any inaccuracies."
"Every American deserves a voice in our democracy," said Karen Hobert Flynn, president of Common Cause, in the pro-democracy group's reaction to the order, which she called "a blow to our democracy."
As CNBC notes in its reporting, the battle over the timeline for this year's count is not the only census fight before the court:
A lower court has blocked the Trump administration's plans to exclude undocumented immigrants and the Supreme Court has not said whether it will review the matter. The justices are scheduled to discuss the case at their private conference on Friday.
Melissa Arbus Sherry, a partner at the law firm Latham & Watkins, which argued on behalf of the challengers in the case, said in a statement that the Supreme Court's order "does not erase the tremendous progress that has been made as a result of the district court's rulings."
"We've come a long way since the district court enjoined defendants from prematurely winding down census field operations on September 11," she said. "As a result, millions more Americans have been counted—a fact used by Defendants themselves as an argument for staying the preliminary injunction."
Clarke, of the Lawyer's Committee, offered a similar sentiment. "The silver lining is that millions of Americans have been counted who would have been excluded were the Bureau allowed to move forward with their earlier curtailment plans," Clarke said. "As we have fought the Trump administration in the courts, we have helped to secure more time on the clock to achieve a fair and accurate count."
Still, the order by the court—especially given its long-term political implications—was denounced far and wide by progressives:
Mark Joseph Stern, who covers the court for Slate, characterized the order as allowing Trump to "sabotage the Census in the eleventh hour."
"If even a few thousand people are undercounted, lawmakers will draw district lines that do not, in reality, give equal weight to every person's vote," explained Stern in his coverage. "Regions with more minority communities will be underrepresented in the legislature. As Sotomayor explained, that's why the Obama administration extended the 2010 census for an extra month after hitting a 99 percent response rate."
In his reaction to the Tuesday's order, Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, said the order should only strengthen the resolve of Democrats and other voters opposed to the pending confirmation of Trump's latest right-wing nominee, Amy Coney Barrett.
"The biggest warning shot to Democrats during these Senate confirmation hearings was not any revelation that came from their questioning of Amy Coney Barrett, but this order from the Roberts Court to shut down the Census," Fallon said in a statement. "The Roberts Court is actively supporting the Republican Party's bid to entrench its own power by rigging the democratic process, and it will only be further emboldened if Barrett joins the Court."
For Democrats, he added, it is time "to recognize what we are up against and stop approaching this battle over Amy Coney Barrett's nomination like just another confirmation process. If Republicans follow through with jamming Barrett onto the Court before the election, Democrats have no choice but to immediately pursue structural reform of the Court."


alternet--2020-10-14--Postmaster General DeJoy's $700,000 donation to GOP convention aligns with Senate probe of wife

Postmaster General Louis DeJoy , whose political contributions are the subject of multiple congressional investigations and a campaign finance complaint , donated nearly $ 700,000 to the host committee who put on the Republican National Convention , according to recent Federal Election Commission filings .
One $ 250,000 donation came the same day that DeJoy gave $ 210,600 to Trump Victory , a donation which is currently part of an inquiry led by Senate Democrats into a series of donations surrounding the nomination of his wife , Aldona Wos , to be the next U.S. ambassador to Canada .
DeJoy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was the convention 's lead fundraiser before being appointed postmaster general last spring by the U.S .
Postal Service ( USPS ) Board of Governors .
Congressional Democrats and secretaries of state have questioned a series of reforms made by DeJoy over the summer , which they allege appear to be part of a coordinated effort to leverage the USPS to aid the re-election of President Donald Trump .
Filed last Friday , the Charlotte Host Committee 's report lists four contributions from DeJoy between late December 2018 and March 31 of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ total $ 685,230 .
DeJoy 's penultimate donation of $ 250,000 came Feb. 19 , 2020 , or the same day he made the $ 210,600 donation to Trump Victory , the joint fundraising vehicle shared between the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee .
Six days later , Trump nominated Wos to be an ambassador .
The donations align with a series of major donations made by DeJoy to the Trump campaign and Senate Republicans leading up to his wife 's nomination as ambassador , a Salon investigation revealed .
Senate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opening an investigation into the donations .
Wos ' Senate confirmation remains pending .
DeJoy was previously tapped to raise cash for the 2020 Republican National Convention .
Host committees — non-profits — depend on corporate and individual donors to fund the extravagant nomination celebrations every four years .
The high-profile political events are an attractive target for corporations with lobbying interests , Brett Kappel , a nonprofit and lobbying law expert at D.C. firm Harmon Curran told Salon .
`` The host committee is a 501 ( c ) ( 3 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deductible , '' Kappel said .
`` Lobbying expenditures , in contrast , are not tax deductible as business expenses . ''
This year 's committee reported taking in more than $ 44 million in receipts , and it spent more than $ 38 million of that amount .
Trump all but canceled the convention amid after North Carolina Gov .
Roy Cooper , a Democrat , refused to suspend public health restrictions to limit the spread of the coronavirus pandemic .
While Republican delegates still met formally in Charlotte , Trump ultimately @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House lawn .
DeJoy 's $ 700,000 outstripped contributions from some corporations .
Software maker Oracle , for example , which has business before the Trump administration in the form of a bid to purchase the social media platform TikTok , contributed $ 500,000 .
Private prison corporations Geo Group and CoreCivic gave $ 250,000 each .
Telecom giant AT & T donated $ 1 million .
A local company called Charlotte Pipe & Foundry — a century-old company owned by the wealthy Dowd family , whose executives have been reliable financial backers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R-N.C. — gave $ 500,000 to the committee .
Charlotte Pipe , which employs some 1,200 people , announced this May that it would relocate its flagship plant out of the city to nearby Stanly County .
David Teppen , the hedge-fund billionaire and owner of the Carolina Panthers , has eyed the company 's property for a new stadium .
Charlotte Pipe also gave $ 25,000 to the NRA Victory Fund in August 2020 , the same month as the convention , FEC records show .
The donation was itemized as `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not money but a permitted equivalent such as gold or securities .
Charlotte Pipe , which is privately owned , does not have shares to sell off , and the company does not manufacture gun parts , a company spokesperson told Salon .
( The Tillis campaign has been accused of illegal coordination with the National Rifle Assocation . )
The same day that Charlotte Pipe gave $ 250,000 to the convention committee , the company donated $ 25,000 to Results for NC , a PAC affiliated with the Tillis campaign .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has poured millions into helping the embattled candidate salvage his re-election bid .
It is also led by a USPS official .
A House committee announced last month that it was launching its own investigation into DeJoy following reports that he led an alleged criminal straw donor scheme by reimbursing employees at his former company for donating to GOP candidates .
That was followed by an announcement from Senate Democrats of the probe into DeJoy 's donations connected to his wife .
Later that month , a campaign finance watchdog filed an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ company XPO Logistics alleging that the scheme continued at least through 2018 , in total allowing DeJoy to disguise possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions .
Those contributions included over $ 50,000 to Trump Victory .

Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, whose political contributions are the subject of multiplecongressional investigations and a campaign finance complaint, donated nearly $700,000 to the host committee who put on the Republican National Convention, according to recent Federal Election Commission filings.
One $250,000 donation came the same day that DeJoy gave $210,600 to Trump Victory, a donation which is currently part of an inquiry led by Senate Democrats into a series of donations surrounding the nomination of his wife, Aldona Wos, to be the next U.S. ambassador to Canada.
DeJoy, a Republican mega-donor and logistics mogul, was the convention's lead fundraiser before being appointed postmaster general last spring by the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) Board of Governors. Congressional Democrats and secretaries of state have questioned a series of reforms made by DeJoy over the summer, which they allege appear to be part of a coordinated effort to leverage the USPS to aid the re-election of President Donald Trump.
DeJoy has denied the allegations.
Filed last Friday, the Charlotte Host Committee's report lists four contributions from DeJoy between late December 2018 and March 31 of this year, which amount to a total $685,230.
DeJoy's penultimate donation of $250,000 came Feb. 19, 2020, or the same day he made the $210,600 donation to Trump Victory, the joint fundraising vehicle shared between the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee. Six days later, Trump nominated Wos to be an ambassador.
The donations align with a series of major donations made by DeJoy to the Trump campaign and Senate Republicans leading up to his wife's nomination as ambassador, a Salon investigation revealed. Senate Democrats announced last month that they were opening an investigation into the donations. Wos' Senate confirmation remains pending.
DeJoy was previously tapped to raise cash for the 2020 Republican National Convention. Host committees — non-profits — depend on corporate and individual donors to fund the extravagant nomination celebrations every four years. The high-profile political events are an attractive target for corporations with lobbying interests, Brett Kappel, a nonprofit and lobbying law expert at D.C. firm Harmon Curran told Salon.
"The host committee is a 501(c)(3) organization, so these contributions are tax deductible," Kappel said. "Lobbying expenditures, in contrast, are not tax deductible as business expenses."
This year's committee reported taking in more than $44 million in receipts, and it spent more than $38 million of that amount. Trump all but canceled the convention amid after North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, refused to suspend public health restrictions to limit the spread of the coronavirus pandemic. While Republican delegates still met formally in Charlotte, Trump ultimately gave his acceptance speech from the White House lawn.
DeJoy's $700,000 outstripped contributions from some corporations. Software maker Oracle, for example, which has business before the Trump administration in the form of a bid to purchase the social media platform TikTok, contributed $500,000. Private prison corporations Geo Group and CoreCivic gave $250,000 each. Telecom giant AT&T donated $1 million.
A local company called Charlotte Pipe & Foundry — a century-old company owned by the wealthy Dowd family, whose executives have been reliable financial backers of Trump and Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. — gave $500,000 to the committee.
Charlotte Pipe, which employs some 1,200 people, announced this May that it would relocate its flagship plant out of the city to nearby Stanly County. David Teppen, the hedge-fund billionaire and owner of the Carolina Panthers, has eyed the company's property for a new stadium.
Charlotte Pipe also gave $25,000 to the NRA Victory Fund in August 2020, the same month as the convention, FEC records show. The donation was itemized as "other federal receipts," meaning it was not money but a permitted equivalent such as gold or securities. Charlotte Pipe, which is privately owned, does not have shares to sell off, and the company does not manufacture gun parts, a company spokesperson told Salon. (The Tillis campaign has been accused of illegal coordination with the National Rifle Assocation.)
The same day that Charlotte Pipe gave $250,000 to the convention committee, the company donated $25,000 to Results for NC, a PAC affiliated with the Tillis campaign. Another Tillis-backing super PAC, American Crossroads, has poured millions into helping the embattled candidate salvage his re-election bid. It is also led by a USPS official.
A House committee announced last month that it was launching its own investigation into DeJoy following reports that he led an alleged criminal straw donor scheme by reimbursing employees at his former company for donating to GOP candidates. That was followed by an announcement from Senate Democrats of the probe into DeJoy's donations connected to his wife.
Later that month, a campaign finance watchdog filed an FEC complaint against DeJoy and his former company XPO Logistics alleging that the scheme continued at least through 2018, in total allowing DeJoy to disguise possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars in political contributions.
Those contributions included over $50,000 to Trump Victory.
DeJoy denies all wrongdoing.


alternet--2020-10-14--What kind of recovery will we have from the recession?

Recessions – typically defined as two consecutive quarters of declining economic output – are always painful in terms of how they affect our economic well-being .
Like all bad things , fortunately , they eventually end and a recovery begins .
But not all recoveries or recessions look the same .
And economists have a tendency to compare their varying paths with letters of the alphabet .
For example , during the current situation , you may have the heard the direction the recovery might take compared with a “ V , '' a “ W '' or even a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I know this alphabet soup can be confusing for a lay reader .
So here 's a guide to some of the most commonly used letters .
While recessions are never a good thing , the “ V-shaped '' recovery is deemed the best-case scenario .
In a recession with a V shape , the decline is rapid , but so is the recovery .
A good example of this type of recession took place in 1981 and 1982 .
That recession occurred after then-Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker rapidly raised interest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to curb high inflation .
This caused a sharp recession – leading to what was then the highest unemployment rate in the U.S. since the Great Depression .
But outside of economic circles , this recession is little remembered .
Why ?
Primarily because the recovery was so rapid .
After Volcker began cutting interest rates in the second half of 1982 , the economy entered a recovery as sharp as the recession .
Conversely , a “ U-shaped '' recession generally has a longer duration , both for the downturn and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed the dot-com bubble and the 9/11 attacks fits into this category .
In some ways , the post-dot-com recession was a mild one .
The fall in employment from the job market 's peak in February 2001 until the trough in August 2003 was only slightly less than 2 % .
Yet it took over two years of decline for the economy to bottom out , and it took another year and a half for the number of jobs to exceed the pre-recession peak .
Furthermore , the amount of time spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relatively long .
The last U.S. recession , which coincided with the financial crisis of 2008 , was especially brutal .
Economists call it an “ L-shaped '' recession because there was an initial sharp downturn , but a very plodding recovery .
To see the L , you need to imagine the letter sort of reclining backward on its end .
The economy declined rapidly after the September 2008 failure of Lehman Brothers , and employment plunged about 6.3 % from its pre-recession peak before reaching its low point .
The pace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very slow .
It took almost 4½ years to recover all the jobs lost .
It may be hard to see how a K could be applied to data on a graph , but it 's the letter increasingly being used to describe the path of the current recession and eventual recovery .
Fed Chair Jerome Powell did n't call it a “ K '' but that 's basically what he meant when he discussed the current economic trajectory in a recent address .
He expressed concerns that the U.S. will experience a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get better quickly for some people , while staying bad for others .
Is that the kind of recession we 're in ?
It 's unclear .
So far , looking at the whole economy , the U.S. has what has been called a “ checkmark '' or “ swoosh '' recession .
It began to look something like a V , with a sharp drop in employment and then the beginnings of a rapid increase .
But that recovery has begun to stall – though not for everyone .
[ Deep knowledge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conversation 's newsletter . ]
As Powell suggested , the recovery could look different to various groups .
White-collar workers may see a “ V , '' as their jobs are more capable of being done remotely .
Blue-collar workers are seeing something closer to a U or L. One analysis shows that medium- to high-wage workers have gained back virtually all the jobs lost during the shutdown earlier this near .
Conversely , employment of lower-wage workers is still more than 20 % below its pre-COVID-19 peak .
Recessions are tough for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the shape of the recovery can make it more or less bearable .
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

by William Hauk, University of South Carolina
Recessions – typically defined as two consecutive quarters of declining economic output – are always painful in terms of how they affect our economic well-being. Like all bad things, fortunately, they eventually end and a recovery begins.
But not all recoveries or recessions look the same. And economists have a tendency to compare their varying paths with letters of the alphabet.
For example, during the current situation, you may have the heard the direction the recovery might take compared with a “V," a “W" or even a “K."
As a macroeconomist, I know this alphabet soup can be confusing for a lay reader. So here's a guide to some of the most commonly used letters.
'V' for victory
While recessions are never a good thing, the “V-shaped" recovery is deemed the best-case scenario. In a recession with a V shape, the decline is rapid, but so is the recovery.
A good example of this type of recession took place in 1981 and 1982. That recession occurred after then-Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker rapidly raised interest rates beginning in 1979 in an effort to curb high inflation. This caused a sharp recession – leading to what was then the highest unemployment rate in the U.S. since the Great Depression.
But outside of economic circles, this recession is little remembered. Why? Primarily because the recovery was so rapid. After Volcker began cutting interest rates in the second half of 1982, the economy entered a recovery as sharp as the recession.
'U' and a long bottom
Conversely, a “U-shaped" recession generally has a longer duration, both for the downturn and the recovery period. The 2001 recession that followed the dot-com bubble and the 9/11 attacks fits into this category.
In some ways, the post-dot-com recession was a mild one. The fall in employment from the job market's peak in February 2001 until the trough in August 2003 was only slightly less than 2%. Yet it took over two years of decline for the economy to bottom out, and it took another year and a half for the number of jobs to exceed the pre-recession peak. Furthermore, the amount of time spent near the bottom of the recession was relatively long.
The reclining 'L'
The last U.S. recession, which coincided with the financial crisis of 2008, was especially brutal.
Economists call it an “L-shaped" recession because there was an initial sharp downturn, but a very plodding recovery. To see the L, you need to imagine the letter sort of reclining backward on its end.
The economy declined rapidly after the September 2008 failure of Lehman Brothers, and employment plunged about 6.3% from its pre-recession peak before reaching its low point. The pace of job creation in the recovery was very slow. It took almost 4½ years to recover all the jobs lost.
'K' and a two-track recovery
It may be hard to see how a K could be applied to data on a graph, but it's the letter increasingly being used to describe the path of the current recession and eventual recovery.
Fed Chair Jerome Powell didn't call it a “K" but that's basically what he meant when he discussed the current economic trajectory in a recent address. He expressed concerns that the U.S. will experience a “two-track recovery" in which things get better quickly for some people, while staying bad for others.
Is that the kind of recession we're in?
It's unclear. So far, looking at the whole economy, the U.S. has what has been called a “checkmark" or “swoosh" recession. It began to look something like a V, with a sharp drop in employment and then the beginnings of a rapid increase. But that recovery has begun to stall – though not for everyone.
[Deep knowledge, daily.Sign up for The Conversation's newsletter.]
As Powell suggested, the recovery could look different to various groups. White-collar workers may see a “V," as their jobs are more capable of being done remotely. Blue-collar workers are seeing something closer to a U or L. One analysis shows that medium- to high-wage workers have gained back virtually all the jobs lost during the shutdown earlier this near. Conversely, employment of lower-wage workers is still more than 20% below its pre-COVID-19 peak.
Recessions are tough for anyone to live through. However, the shape of the recovery can make it more or less bearable.
William Hauk, Associate Professor of Economics, University of South Carolina
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.