alternet--2020-09-30--'Tacit endorsement': The Proud Boys are celebrating Trump telling them to 'stand by'

During President Donald Trump 's debate with former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday night , September 29 , conservative moderator Chris Wallace gave Trump every opportunity to denounce violent white nationalist groups .
But Trump refused to do so , falsely claiming that all of violence at recent political demonstrators has been coming from left-wing groups .
Moreover , Trump expressed his solidarity with the far-right Proud Boys and said , `` Proud Boys , stand back and stand by . ''
That expression of solidarity , journalists Sheera Frenkel and Annie Karni report in the New York Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boys — who are celebrating the president 's statement .
The Times journalists explain that `` within minutes '' of Trump 's `` stand back and stand by '' statement , `` members of the group were posting in private social media channels , calling the president 's comments 'historic . '
In one channel dedicated to the Proud Boys on Telegram , a private messaging app , group members called the president 's comment a tacit endorsement of their violent tactics .
In another message , a member commented that the group @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recruits . '
'' The Proud Boys have described themselves as `` western chauvinists '' and `` a pro-western fraternal organization for men . ''
And they are trying bully and intimidate Black Lives Matter activists — who have been protesting the killings of unarmed African-Americans by police , including George Floyd in Minneapolis and Breonna Taylor in Louisville , Kentucky .
Frenkel and Karni point out that the Proud Boys have `` openly endorsed violence '' and `` been tied to several violent incidents at recent protests . ''
Biden , following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Proud Boys were celebrating Trump 's `` stand back and stand by '' statement .
But Jason Miller , a senior adviser to Trump 's reelection campaign , is claiming that Trump was n't encouraging the group and said it was `` very clear he wants them to knock it off . ''
Many of Trump 's critics , however , are n't buying Miller 's awkward attempt at damage control .
Joe Biggs , a Proud Boys organizer , posted , `` Trump basically said to go fuck them up !
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biggs also posted , `` President Trump told the proud boys to stand by because someone needs to deal with ANTIFA ... well sir !
we 're ready !
! ''
The Proud Boys were founded in 2016 by Gavin McInnes , who was among the founders of Vice Media — although Vice has distanced itself from him .
Critics of the Proud Boys have ranged from the Southern Poverty Law Center , which considers them a hate group , to the Anti-Defamation League ( formerly the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boys as `` hardcore white supremacists . ''

During President Donald Trump's debate with former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday night, September 29, conservative moderator Chris Wallace gave Trump every opportunity to denounce violent white nationalist groups. But Trump refused to do so, falsely claiming that all of violence at recent political demonstrators has been coming from left-wing groups. Moreover, Trump expressed his solidarity with the far-right Proud Boys and said, "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by." That expression of solidarity, journalists Sheera Frenkel and Annie Karni report in the New York Times, is not lost on the Proud Boys — who are celebrating the president's statement.
The Times journalists explain that "within minutes" of Trump's "stand back and stand by" statement, "members of the group were posting in private social media channels, calling the president's comments 'historic.' In one channel dedicated to the Proud Boys on Telegram, a private messaging app, group members called the president's comment a tacit endorsement of their violent tactics. In another message, a member commented that the group was already seeing a spike in 'new recruits.'"
The Proud Boys have described themselves as "western chauvinists" and "a pro-western fraternal organization for men." And they are trying bully and intimidate Black Lives Matter activists — who have been protesting the killings of unarmed African-Americans by police, including George Floyd in Minneapolis and Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky. Frenkel and Karni point out that the Proud Boys have "openly endorsed violence" and "been tied to several violent incidents at recent protests."
Biden, following the debate, noted that members of the Proud Boys were celebrating Trump's "stand back and stand by" statement. But Jason Miller, a senior adviser to Trump's reelection campaign, is claiming that Trump wasn't encouraging the group and said it was "very clear he wants them to knock it off." Many of Trump's critics, however, aren't buying Miller's awkward attempt at damage control.
Joe Biggs, a Proud Boys organizer, posted, "Trump basically said to go fuck them up! This makes me so happy." Biggs also posted, "President Trump told the proud boys to stand by because someone needs to deal with ANTIFA...well sir! we're ready!!"
The Proud Boys were founded in 2016 by Gavin McInnes, who was among the founders of Vice Media — although Vice has distanced itself from him. Critics of the Proud Boys have ranged from the Southern Poverty Law Center, which considers them a hate group, to the Anti-Defamation League (formerly the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith). The ADL has denounced the Proud Boys as "hardcore white supremacists."


alternet--2020-09-30--Noam Chomsky: Trump is a ‘sociopathic maniac’ capable of provoking ‘civil war’ if he doesn’t win

`` Unhinged , '' `` thuggish , '' `` racist , '' `` undisciplined '' and `` appalling '' are among the many derogatory adjectives that have been used to describe President Donald Trump 's performance during his debate with former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday , September 29 .
But such adjectives were being used to describe Trump long before the debate , and one author who has not been shy about stressing that he considers Trump to be the most dangerous president of his lifetime is Noam Chomsky — who , in an interview with Smashing Interviews @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a variety of reasons why he is so troubled by Trump 's presidency .
The fact that Chomsky considers Trump 's presidency the absolute worst he has ever lived through is saying a lot considering his age .
The left-wing author , now 91 , was born in Philadelphia on December 7 , 1928 , when Republican Calvin Coolidge was still president and Herbert Hoover was four months away from being sworn into office .
Chomsky is old enough to remember everything from the Great Depression and World War II to Watergate to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ living through the worst health crisis since the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918/1919 .
Trump 's COVID-19 response , Chomsky stressed during the interview , has been disastrous .
Chomsky told Smashing Interviews , `` In Trump 's first days in office back in January 2017 , some of his first acts were to dismantle the pandemic response program that had been executed under ( President Barack ) Obama .
He immediately started efforts to defund the Center for Disease Control and all other health-related aspects of the government .
That went on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as this past February .
While the pandemic was raging , he was denying — and other countries were reacting .
Trump presented his budget proposal for 2021 defunding the Center for Disease Control even further . ''
But COVID-19 is only one of the reasons why Chomsky is so troubled by Trump 's presidency .
Chomsky , during the interview , also lambasted Trump for everything from his terrible environmental record and failing to take climate change seriously to showing a total contempt for liberal democracy .
`` On the climate issue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continues to make it much more dangerous .
Deterioration of democracy has reached a truly incredible point .
Trump 's already cleansed the executive branch of any independent voice .
The inspectors general who are supposed to supervise executive departments started looking into the swamp of corruption Trump has created ; so , he fired them . ''
Chomsky continued , `` The latest move was to publicly state that if he does n't like the outcome of the election , he may refuse to accept it .
That 's never happened in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now , people in high places are taking him seriously .
There 's a high level independent commission of leading figures in the Republican and Democratic parties and other independent analysts that 's been running 'war games , ' asking what 's likely to happen in the coming election if Trump refuses to leave office . ''
The 91-year-old author even went so far as to say that he believes Trump is unhinged enough to encourage a civil war in the United States .
Chomsky told Smashing Interviews , `` Unless Trump wins @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run leads to civil war if Trump and the Republicans just refuse to accept it .
There are a lot of options they could pursue to try and undermine it .
It 's like the actions of a dictator in a neo-colony somewhere — a small country that has a military coup every couple of years .
There is no historical precedent for this in a functioning democratic society .
That 's deterioration of democracy at a level we 've never seen before and being taken very seriously in the most respectable places… @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House . ''

"Unhinged," "thuggish," "racist," "undisciplined" and "appalling" are among the many derogatory adjectives that have been used to describe President Donald Trump's performance during his debate with former Vice President Joe Biden on Tuesday, September 29. But such adjectives were being used to describe Trump long before the debate, and one author who has not been shy about stressing that he considers Trump to be the most dangerous president of his lifetime is Noam Chomsky — who, in an interview with Smashing Interviews Magazine published this week, laid out a variety of reasons why he is so troubled by Trump's presidency.
The fact that Chomsky considers Trump's presidency the absolute worst he has ever lived through is saying a lot considering his age. The left-wing author, now 91, was born in Philadelphia on December 7, 1928, when Republican Calvin Coolidge was still president and Herbert Hoover was four months away from being sworn into office. Chomsky is old enough to remember everything from the Great Depression and World War II to Watergate to 9/11 — and now, he is living through the worst health crisis since the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918/1919. Trump's COVID-19 response, Chomsky stressed during the interview, has been disastrous.
Chomsky told Smashing Interviews, "In Trump's first days in office back in January 2017, some of his first acts were to dismantle the pandemic response program that had been executed under (President Barack) Obama. He immediately started efforts to defund the Center for Disease Control and all other health-related aspects of the government. That went on for years and went on as late as this past February. While the pandemic was raging, he was denying — and other countries were reacting. Trump presented his budget proposal for 2021 defunding the Center for Disease Control even further."
But COVID-19 is only one of the reasons why Chomsky is so troubled by Trump's presidency. Chomsky, during the interview, also lambasted Trump for everything from his terrible environmental record and failing to take climate change seriously to showing a total contempt for liberal democracy.
"On the climate issue," Chomsky warned, "Trump continues to make it much more dangerous. Deterioration of democracy has reached a truly incredible point. Trump's already cleansed the executive branch of any independent voice. The inspectors general who are supposed to supervise executive departments started looking into the swamp of corruption Trump has created; so, he fired them."
Chomsky continued, "The latest move was to publicly state that if he doesn't like the outcome of the election, he may refuse to accept it. That's never happened in the history of parliamentary democracies. And now, people in high places are taking him seriously. There's a high level independent commission of leading figures in the Republican and Democratic parties and other independent analysts that's been running 'war games,' asking what's likely to happen in the coming election if Trump refuses to leave office."
The 91-year-old author even went so far as to say that he believes Trump is unhinged enough to encourage a civil war in the United States.
Chomsky told Smashing Interviews, "Unless Trump wins the Electoral College, every scenario they run leads to civil war if Trump and the Republicans just refuse to accept it. There are a lot of options they could pursue to try and undermine it. It's like the actions of a dictator in a neo-colony somewhere — a small country that has a military coup every couple of years. There is no historical precedent for this in a functioning democratic society. That's deterioration of democracy at a level we've never seen before and being taken very seriously in the most respectable places…. We have a sociopathic maniac in the White House."


alternet--2020-09-30--Fox host panics over Trump’s refusal to condemn white supremacists: Missed 'biggest layup in the his

Fox host panics over Trump’s refusal to condemn white supremacists: Missed 'biggest layup in the history of debates'

`` Fox & Friends '' co-host Brian Kilmeade tried to excuse for President Donald Trump 's refusal to condemn white supremacists , but he came up empty .
The president was asked by debate moderator Chris Wallace to condemn white supremacist and militia groups that tend to support him , but Trump not only refused to do so but appeared to encourage their violence .
`` Sure , I 'm willing to , but I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing , not from the right wing , '' Trump told Wallace , a Fox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do anything , I want to see peace . ''
Trump asked who he should condemn , and Joe Biden twice urged him to denounce the neo-fascist Proud Boys .
`` Proud Boys — stand back and stand by , '' Trump said .
`` But I 'll tell you what , I 'll tell you what .
Somebody 's got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem . ''
Kilmeade tried — but failed — to find an excuse for the president 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ biggest layup in the history of debates by not condemning white supremacists , '' Kilmeade said .
`` I do n't know if he did n't hear it , but he 's got to clarify that right away . ''
`` Why the president did n't just knock it out of the park , I 'm not sure , '' he added .

"Fox & Friends" co-host Brian Kilmeade tried to excuse for President Donald Trump's refusal to condemn white supremacists, but he came up empty.
The president was asked by debate moderator Chris Wallace to condemn white supremacist and militia groups that tend to support him, but Trump not only refused to do so but appeared to encourage their violence.
"Sure, I'm willing to, but I would say almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing," Trump told Wallace, a Fox News anchor. "I'm willing to do anything, I want to see peace."
Trump asked who he should condemn, and Joe Biden twice urged him to denounce the neo-fascist Proud Boys.
"Proud Boys — stand back and stand by," Trump said. "But I'll tell you what, I'll tell you what. Somebody's got to do something about Antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem."
Kilmeade tried — but failed — to find an excuse for the president's failure.
"Donald Trump ruined the biggest layup in the history of debates by not condemning white supremacists," Kilmeade said. "I don't know if he didn't hear it, but he's got to clarify that right away."
"Why the president didn't just knock it out of the park, I'm not sure," he added.


alternet--2020-09-30--Bernie Sanders: Debate showcased why Trump is 'most dangerous president' in US history

Sen. Bernie Sanders said following Tuesday night 's 2020 debate that President Donald Trump 's performance—including his refusal to condemn armed white supremacists , attack on the legitimacy of the election , and rejection of science—showcased why he is `` the most dangerous president in the history of the United States of America '' and must be defeated in November .
`` This is a guy who continues to say he may not lose office , '' the Vermont senator said in an appearance on `` Jimmy Kimmel Live ! ''
late Tuesday .
`` You wan na be shocked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you got a guy in office now who says , 'Well , maybe I will lose the election .
So what ?
That does n't mean to say I 'm gon na leave office because , as you know , everything is fraudulent .
If I lose , by definition the election is rigged . '
Think about that . ''
Sanders was referencing Trump 's false claim—which he has made numerous times in recent weeks , including during the Republican National Convention—that the election is `` rigged '' against him due to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus pandemic .
`` If you believe in democracy , '' Sanders continued , `` if you believe in the Constitution and in the rule of law , Trump has got to go . ''
While Sanders did n't shy away from his disagreements with Democratic nominee Joe Biden on the Green New Deal , Medicare for All , and other progressive policy goals , the Vermont senator said the differences between the former vice president and Trump on climate , healthcare , and other crucial issues are stark and were on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen to think , and I think people saw this tonight , that in Donald Trump , we have the most dangerous president in the history of this country , somebody who not only lies all of the time , Jimmy , but really does n't believe in science , '' Sanders said .
`` We have a president who continues to reject science .
That 's true for the coronavirus , that is true for climate change as well , '' the senator continued .
`` What we need , and I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a government that at least listens to science and develops legislation based on science ...
He understands that climate change is an existential threat to the planet . ''

Sen. Bernie Sanders said following Tuesday night's 2020 debate that President Donald Trump's performance—including his refusal to condemn armed white supremacists, attack on the legitimacy of the election, and rejection of science—showcased why he is "the most dangerous president in the history of the United States of America" and must be defeated in November.
"This is a guy who continues to say he may not lose office," the Vermont senator said in an appearance on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" late Tuesday. "You wanna be shocked, Jimmy? What about learning that you got a guy in office now who says, 'Well, maybe I will lose the election. So what? That doesn't mean to say I'm gonna leave office because, as you know, everything is fraudulent. If I lose, by definition the election is rigged.' Think about that."
Sanders was referencing Trump's false claim—which he has made numerous times in recent weeks, including during the Republican National Convention—that the election is "rigged" against him due to the increase in mail-in voting driven by the coronavirus pandemic.
"If you believe in democracy," Sanders continued, "if you believe in the Constitution and in the rule of law, Trump has got to go."
While Sanders didn't shy away from his disagreements with Democratic nominee Joe Biden on the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, and other progressive policy goals, the Vermont senator said the differences between the former vice president and Trump on climate, healthcare, and other crucial issues are stark and were on full display Tuesday night.
"I happen to think, and I think people saw this tonight, that in Donald Trump, we have the most dangerous president in the history of this country, somebody who not only lies all of the time, Jimmy, but really doesn't believe in science," Sanders said.
"We have a president who continues to reject science. That's true for the coronavirus, that is true for climate change as well," the senator continued. "What we need, and I think Biden will give us, is a government that at least listens to science and develops legislation based on science... He understands that climate change is an existential threat to the planet."
Watch:


alternet--2020-09-30--Robert Reich: The coming civil war caused by Trump’s megalomaniacal ego

What is America really fighting over in the upcoming election ?
No particular issue .
Not even Democrats versus Republicans .
The central fight is over Donald J Trump .
Before Trump , most Americans were n't especially passionate about politics .
But Trump 's MO has been to force people to become passionate about him – to take fierce sides for or against .
And he considers himself president only of the former – whom he calls `` my people . ''
Trump came to office with no agenda except to feed his monstrous ego .
He has never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fueled him .
Its adoration sustains him .
So does the antipathy of his detractors .
Presidents usually try to appease their critics .
Trump has gone out of his way to offend them .
`` I do bring rage out , '' Trump unapologetically toldjournalist Bob Woodward in 2016 .
In this way , he has turned America into a gargantuan projection of his own pathological narcissism .
His entire re-election platform is found in his use of the pronouns `` we '' and `` them . ''
`` We '' are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` They '' hate him .
In late August , near the end of his somnolent address on the South Front of the White House accepting the Republican nomination , Trump extemporized : `` The fact is , we 're here – and they 're not . ''
It drew a standing ovation .
At a recent White House news conference , a CNN correspondent asked if he condemned the behavior of his supporters in Portland , Oregon .
In response , Trump charged : `` Your supporters , and they are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gentleman . ''
In Trump 's eyes , CNN exists in a different country : Anti-Trump Nation .
So do the putative rioters and looters of `` Biden 's America . ''
So do the inhabitants of blue states whose state and local tax deductions Trump eliminated in his tax overhaul .
So do those who live in the `` Democrat cities , '' as he calls them , whose funding he 's trying to cut .
California is a big part of Anti-Trump Nation .
He wanted to reject its request for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so rageful that people in the state of California did n't support him , '' said former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor .
New York is the capital of Anti-Trump Nation , which probably contributed to Trump `` playing down '' the threat of Covid-19 last March , when its virulence seemed largely confined to that metropolis .
Even now , Trump claims the US rate of Covid-19 deaths would be low `` if you take the blue states out . ''
That 's untrue , but it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blue states do n't count because they 're part of Anti-Trump Nation .
To Trump and his core enablers and supporters , the laws of Trump Nation authorize him to do whatever he wants .
Anti-Trump Nation 's laws constrain him , but they 're illegitimate because they are made and enforced by the people who reject him .
So Trump 's call to the president of Ukraine seeking help with the election was `` perfect . ''
It was fine for Russia to side with him in 2016 , and it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And of course the Justice Department , Postal Service , and Centers for Disease Control should help him win reelection .
They 're all aiding Trump Nation .
By a similar twisted logic , Anti-Trump Nation is dangerous .
Hence , says Trump , the armed teenager who killed two in Kenosha , Wisconsin acted in `` self-defense , '' yet the suspected killer of a right-winger in Portland deserved the `` retribution '' he got when federal marshals gunned him down .
It follows that if he loses the election , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would be the product of Anti-Trump Nation , and Trump is n't the president of people who would vote against him .
As he recently claimed , `` the only way we 're going to lose this election is if the election is rigged . ''
In the warped minds of Trump and his acolytes , this could lead to civil war .
Just last week he refused to commit to a peaceful transition of power .
His consigliere Roger Stone urges him to declare `` martial law '' if he loses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services , warns `` the shooting will begin '' when Trump refuses to stand down .
Civil war is unlikely , but the weeks and perhaps months after Election Day will surely be fraught .
Even if Trump is ultimately forced to relinquish power , his core adherents will continue to view him as their leader .
If he retains power , many if not most Americans will consider his presidency illegitimate .
So whatever happens , Trump 's megalomaniacal ego will prevail : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Trump Nation will have seceded from Anti-Trump Nation .

What is America really fighting over in the upcoming election? No particular issue. Not even Democrats versus Republicans.
The central fight is over Donald J Trump.
Before Trump, most Americans weren't especially passionate about politics. But Trump's MO has been to force people to become passionate about him – to take fierce sides for or against. And he considers himself president only of the former – whom he calls "my people."
Trump came to office with no agenda except to feed his monstrous ego. He has never fueled his base. His base has fueled him. Its adoration sustains him.
So does the antipathy of his detractors. Presidents usually try to appease their critics. Trump has gone out of his way to offend them. "I do bring rage out," Trump unapologetically toldjournalist Bob Woodward in 2016.
In this way, he has turned America into a gargantuan projection of his own pathological narcissism.
His entire re-election platform is found in his use of the pronouns "we" and "them." "We" are people who love him, Trump Nation. "They" hate him.
In late August, near the end of his somnolent address on the South Front of the White House accepting the Republican nomination, Trump extemporized: "The fact is, we're here – and they're not." It drew a standing ovation.
At a recent White House news conference, a CNN correspondent asked if he condemned the behavior of his supporters in Portland, Oregon. In response, Trump charged: "Your supporters, and they are your supporters indeed, shot a young gentleman."
In Trump's eyes, CNN exists in a different country: Anti-Trump Nation.
So do the putative rioters and looters of "Biden's America." So do the inhabitants of blue states whose state and local tax deductions Trump eliminated in his tax overhaul. So do those who live in the "Democrat cities," as he calls them, whose funding he's trying to cut.
California is a big part of Anti-Trump Nation. He wanted to reject its request for aid battling wildfires "because he was so rageful that people in the state of California didn't support him," said former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor.
New York is the capital of Anti-Trump Nation, which probably contributed to Trump "playing down" the threat of Covid-19 last March, when its virulence seemed largely confined to that metropolis. Even now, Trump claims the US rate of Covid-19 deaths would be low "if you take the blue states out." That's untrue, but it's not the point. For Trump, blue states don't count because they're part of Anti-Trump Nation.
To Trump and his core enablers and supporters, the laws of Trump Nation authorize him to do whatever he wants. Anti-Trump Nation's laws constrain him, but they're illegitimate because they are made and enforced by the people who reject him.
So Trump's call to the president of Ukraine seeking help with the election was "perfect." It was fine for Russia to side with him in 2016, and it's fine for it to do so again. And of course the Justice Department, Postal Service, and Centers for Disease Control should help him win reelection. They're all aiding Trump Nation.
By a similar twisted logic, Anti-Trump Nation is dangerous. Hence, says Trump, the armed teenager who killed two in Kenosha, Wisconsin acted in "self-defense," yet the suspected killer of a right-winger in Portland deserved the "retribution" he got when federal marshals gunned him down.
It follows that if he loses the election, Trump will not accept the result because it would be the product of Anti-Trump Nation, and Trump isn't the president of people who would vote against him. As he recently claimed, "the only way we're going to lose this election is if the election is rigged."
In the warped minds of Trump and his acolytes, this could lead to civil war. Just last week he refused to commit to a peaceful transition of power. His consigliere Roger Stone urges him to declare "martial law" if he loses. Michael Caputo, assistant secretary of public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, warns "the shooting will begin" when Trump refuses to stand down.
Civil war is unlikely, but the weeks and perhaps months after Election Day will surely be fraught. Even if Trump is ultimately forced to relinquish power, his core adherents will continue to view him as their leader. If he retains power, many if not most Americans will consider his presidency illegitimate.
So whatever happens, Trump's megalomaniacal ego will prevail: America will have come apart over him, and Trump Nation will have seceded from Anti-Trump Nation.


alternet--2020-09-30--Harris rips Trump following heated debate with Biden: He ‘denigrated the office’ of the POTUS

Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-Calif. ) lambasted President Donald Trump following his debate performance on Tuesday night .
Shortly after the president 's debate clash with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden , Harris appeared on CBS where she weighed in on the debate .
When asked about the debate , Harris admitted she believes the American public did have the opportunity to effectively compare both candidates .
According to Harris , the debate shows how much Trump has `` denigrated '' the office of the presidency .
`` I think that the American people deserve to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the candidates , and I think tonight provided a very clear contrast , '' Harris said .
`` On the one hand , you have Joe Biden who looked into the camera , who spoke to the American people continuously , who understood who was important on that stage , which is American families , '' Harris said of her running mate .
`` And then you have Donald Trump , who really I think really denigrated the office of the president of the United States as much as he has done over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' she added .
Kamala Harris said President Trump `` denigrated the office '' with his performance at first debate Harris also came to Biden 's defense as he opted not to weigh in on ending the filibuster and expanding the Supreme Court if Democratic lawmakers manage to take the White House and regain control of the Senate .
Her remarks came shortly after the first of three presidential debates scheduled ahead of the upcoming election .
When the debate kicked off , it did not take long for the social media @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to maintain his composure throughout the majority of the debate , Trump displayed more aggressive and combative behavior often interrupting Biden and speaking over him .
Trump also faced heightened scrutiny for his attempts to strike down Obamacare while failing to provide any definitive details about his own healthcare alternative .
The president also found himself at the center of controversy for his refusal to denounce white supremacy while constantly insisting Biden has refused to denounce violence and Antifa— which he has already done .
Trump and Biden have two more debates scheduled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Vice President Mike Pence are scheduled to debate on Wednesday , October 7 .

Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) lambasted President Donald Trump following his debate performance on Tuesday night.
Shortly after the president's debate clash with Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, Harris appeared on CBS where she weighed in on the debate. When asked about the debate, Harris admitted she believes the American public did have the opportunity to effectively compare both candidates.
According to Harris, the debate shows how much Trump has "denigrated" the office of the presidency.
"I think that the American people deserve to have an ability to compare and contrast the candidates, and I think tonight provided a very clear contrast," Harris said.
"On the one hand, you have Joe Biden who looked into the camera, who spoke to the American people continuously, who understood who was important on that stage, which is American families," Harris said of her running mate.
"And then you have Donald Trump, who really I think really denigrated the office of the president of the United States as much as he has done over the course of the last four years," she added.
Kamala Harris said President Trump "denigrated the office" with his performance at first debate www.youtube.com
Harris also came to Biden's defense as he opted not to weigh in on ending the filibuster and expanding the Supreme Court if Democratic lawmakers manage to take the White House and regain control of the Senate.
Her remarks came shortly after the first of three presidential debates scheduled ahead of the upcoming election. When the debate kicked off, it did not take long for the social media firestorm to begin.
While Biden managed to maintain his composure throughout the majority of the debate, Trump displayed more aggressive and combative behavior often interrupting Biden and speaking over him. Trump also faced heightened scrutiny for his attempts to strike down Obamacare while failing to provide any definitive details about his own healthcare alternative.
The president also found himself at the center of controversy for his refusal to denounce white supremacy while constantly insisting Biden has refused to denounce violence and Antifa— which he has already done.
Trump and Biden have two more debates scheduled during the month of October. Harris and Vice President Mike Pence are scheduled to debate on Wednesday, October 7.


alternet--2020-09-30--Experts sound off after messy and chaotic Trump-Biden debate

Alison Gash , University of Oregon ; Alexander Cohen , Clarkson University , and Rashawn Ray , University of Maryland President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden took part in a presidential debate Sept. 29 that exemplified the lack of civility in American politics .
The president frequently interrupted and spoke over his challenger , Biden told Trump to “ shut up , '' and few issues were discussed in enough depth to provide much information to undecided voters .
We asked three scholars to discuss themes brought up by moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Wallace opened with a question on the minds of many voters : Who should fill the vacancy left by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 's death ?
Democrats viewed Ginsburg as the last line of defense for abortion rights , voting rights , the Affordable Care Act and other traditionally liberal policies .
Trump has nominated conservative jurist and scholar Amy Coney Barrett to fill Ginsburg 's seat on the bench .
Trump has already exerted a significant influence over the federal bench .
He has appointed more federal appellate judges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barrett is appointed , he will have filled more Supreme Court vacancies than any president since Ronald Reagan and will have shaped the court in ways that could last generations .
Biden all but conceded the appointment as a lost cause , pivoting to one of the few areas where a Biden win could conceivably limit the conservative influence of the Roberts Court — by stalling potential litigation over the Affordable Care Act .
The Trump administration has publicly and actively supported litigation to overturn the ACA .
Judge Barrett , Biden reminded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Even with Ginsburg on the bench , the ACA enjoyed only fragile court support .
Biden intimated that continued litigation in an even more conservative Supreme Court could limit health care coverage for millions of Americans .
Biden mentioned Roe v. Wade — and Barrett 's likely opposition — only as an afterthought .
In response , Trump stated cryptically , “ There 's nothing happening there .
And you do n't know her view on Roe v .
Wade . ''
On the whole , the debate did little to resolve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — other than to shore up Supreme Court nominations as political bombs with volatile consequences .
“ Why should voters trust you … to deal with the race issue facing this country ? ''
Wallace asked a straightforward question about the troubling state of race relations in America , but the two candidates answered it in very different ways .
Biden highlighted the “ systemic injustice in this country , in education , in work , and in law enforcement '' that required an approach grounded in equity , equality , decency and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ law and order '' and brought up the Biden co-sponsored 1994 Crime Bill – legislation that has long been criticized for contributing to the disproportionate mass incarceration of Black Americans .
But recent Trump advertisements have tried to suggest that violence will increase under a Biden presidency – paradoxically showing images of unrest under the current Trump administration .
Trump seemingly wanted to attack this “ tough on crime '' Biden of the 1990s while simultaneously portraying his rival as being in league with what the president would like voters to believe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reality is different .
Despite over 90 % of Black Lives Matter protests being nonviolent , much of the media 's focus has been on the less than 10 % of demonstrations that have turned violent .
This debate did nothing to dispel that false narrative .
In fact , some of the violence of recent months has been committed by right-wing extremists .
But when asked directly to condemn white supremacy , Trump hesitated and seemed to be searching for words .
Instead , he sent a shoutout to the Proud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hate organization by the Southern Poverty Law Center .
Trump said , “ Proud Boys , stand back and stand by .
But I 'll tell you what , somebody 's got to do something about antifa and the left . ''
“ He 's the racist , '' said Biden during their exchanges .
Meanwhile , on policing policy , Biden proposed a 21st-century redo to bring various stakeholders to the table .
But eerily for Republicans and Democrats – and not at all in keeping with the debate itself – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ views about the defunding police movement .
“ I am totally opposed to defunding the police .
They need more assistance , '' said Biden during the debate .
Earlier Trump had stated , “ There wo n't be dismantling of our police , and there 's not going to be any disbanding of our police . ''
The integrity of the election When asked about the integrity of mail-in ballots , Biden and Trump offered different answers .
Biden projected faith in the mail-in system .
Unsurprisingly , Trump continued to assault @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots .
This echoes his mantra in 2016 , when he argued that the popular vote count was incorrect and fraudulent – a notion that was widely debunked .
Likewise , the assertion that mail-in voting leads to voter fraud has been widely challenged .
Most studies suggest that voting by mail does not benefit one party over the other and that voting by mail is not prone to manipulation .
However , such studies on voting by mail tend to examine scenarios where state and local governments were well prepared for ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voting brought on by COVID-19 is creating at least some confusion among voters .
It is plausible that not all states are ready to handle the flood of mail-in votes .
This could complicate the voting process and prolong vote counts in some states .
Such delays could be incredibly significant .
The last time a key state struggled to tally votes was 2000 .
Then , the Supreme Court intervened to halt a recount in Florida , handing the victory to Republican George W. Bush over Democrat Al Gore in a close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots linger beyond Election Day , the Supreme Court may again intervene .
If President Trump 's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett is quickly confirmed , conservatives will enjoy a 6-3 majority on the Court .
Three of these justices will have been appointed by Trump .
Trump has laid the groundwork for disputing the results of any close election .
If neither candidate wins decisively , the nation should brace itself for a lengthy , and divisive , struggle .
Such a struggle could be dangerous to American democracy because it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ process .
While rule of law generally prevails when close elections are disputed , it does appear that the United States could be headed toward uncharted territory .
What question were you hoping to hear tonight that was left out in the midst of this chaotic debate ?
Cohen : I would have liked to ask : “ Do you think that there are consequences for the decreasing civility in American politics , as demonstrated in this debate ? ''
Gash : I would like to have seen a question about the role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ balances .
This is , what I think , Wallace was trying to get at in his question about court-packing .
But the question fell flat .
Ray : Black people are disproportionately more likely to experience police use of force , even when they are unarmed and not attacking .
How do we reduce racial disparities in use of force – as with George Floyd and Breonna Taylor – and improve relations between Black communities and law enforcement ?
Alison Gash , Associate Professor of Political Science , University of Oregon ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Science , Clarkson University , and Rashawn Ray , Associate Professor of Sociology , University of Maryland This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

Alison Gash, University of Oregon; Alexander Cohen, Clarkson University, and Rashawn Ray, University of Maryland
President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden took part in a presidential debate Sept. 29 that exemplified the lack of civility in American politics. The president frequently interrupted and spoke over his challenger, Biden told Trump to “shut up," and few issues were discussed in enough depth to provide much information to undecided voters. We asked three scholars to discuss themes brought up by moderator Chris Wallace of Fox News, who struggled throughout the debate to keep control.
The Supreme Court
Alison Gash, University of Oregon
Wallace opened with a question on the minds of many voters: Who should fill the vacancy left by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death?
Democrats viewed Ginsburg as the last line of defense for abortion rights, voting rights, the Affordable Care Act and other traditionally liberal policies. Trump has nominated conservative jurist and scholar Amy Coney Barrett to fill Ginsburg's seat on the bench.
Trump has already exerted a significant influence over the federal bench. He has appointed more federal appellate judges than any president since Carter. If Barrett is appointed, he will have filled more Supreme Court vacancies than any president since Ronald Reagan and will have shaped the court in ways that could last generations.
Biden all but conceded the appointment as a lost cause, pivoting to one of the few areas where a Biden win could conceivably limit the conservative influence of the Roberts Court — by stalling potential litigation over the Affordable Care Act. The Trump administration has publicly and actively supported litigation to overturn the ACA. Judge Barrett, Biden reminded viewers, believes the ACA is unconstitutional. Even with Ginsburg on the bench, the ACA enjoyed only fragile court support. Biden intimated that continued litigation in an even more conservative Supreme Court could limit health care coverage for millions of Americans.
Biden mentioned Roe v. Wade — and Barrett's likely opposition — only as an afterthought. In response, Trump stated cryptically, “There's nothing happening there. And you don't know her view on Roe v. Wade."
On the whole, the debate did little to resolve questions about the future of the court — other than to shore up Supreme Court nominations as political bombs with volatile consequences.
Racism, Policing and Black Lives Matter Protests
Rashawn Ray, University of Maryland
“Why should voters trust you … to deal with the race issue facing this country?"
Wallace asked a straightforward question about the troubling state of race relations in America, but the two candidates answered it in very different ways. Biden highlighted the “systemic injustice in this country, in education, in work, and in law enforcement" that required an approach grounded in equity, equality, decency and the Constitution.
Trump pivoted quickly to “law and order" and brought up the Biden co-sponsored 1994 Crime Bill – legislation that has long been criticized for contributing to the disproportionate mass incarceration of Black Americans. But recent Trump advertisements have tried to suggest that violence will increase under a Biden presidency – paradoxically showing images of unrest under the current Trump administration. Trump seemingly wanted to attack this “tough on crime" Biden of the 1990s while simultaneously portraying his rival as being in league with what the president would like voters to believe is an unruly and violent left.
The reality is different. Despite over 90% of Black Lives Matter protests being nonviolent, much of the media's focus has been on the less than 10% of demonstrations that have turned violent. This debate did nothing to dispel that false narrative.
In fact, some of the violence of recent months has been committed by right-wing extremists. But when asked directly to condemn white supremacy, Trump hesitated and seemed to be searching for words. Instead, he sent a shoutout to the Proud Boys – a group deemed to be a hate organization by the Southern Poverty Law Center. Trump said, “Proud Boys, stand back and stand by. But I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left."
“He's the racist," said Biden during their exchanges.
Meanwhile, on policing policy, Biden proposed a 21st-century redo to bring various stakeholders to the table.
But eerily for Republicans and Democrats – and not at all in keeping with the debate itself – Trump and Biden seem to espouse similar views about the defunding police movement.
“I am totally opposed to defunding the police. They need more assistance," said Biden during the debate. Earlier Trump had stated, “There won't be dismantling of our police, and there's not going to be any disbanding of our police."
The integrity of the election
Alexander Cohen, Clarkson University
When asked about the integrity of mail-in ballots, Biden and Trump offered different answers. Biden projected faith in the mail-in system. Unsurprisingly, Trump continued to assault the integrity of an election using mail-in ballots. This echoes his mantra in 2016, when he argued that the popular vote count was incorrect and fraudulent – a notion that was widely debunked.
Likewise, the assertion that mail-in voting leads to voter fraud has been widelychallenged. Most studies suggest that voting by mail does not benefit one party over the other and that voting by mail is not prone to manipulation.
However, such studies on voting by mail tend to examine scenarios where state and local governments were well prepared for ballot distribution. The increased demand for mail-in voting brought on by COVID-19 is creating at least some confusion among voters. It is plausible that not all states are ready to handle the flood of mail-in votes. This could complicate the voting process and prolong vote counts in some states.
Such delays could be incredibly significant. The last time a key state struggled to tally votes was 2000. Then, the Supreme Court intervened to halt a recount in Florida, handing the victory to Republican George W. Bush over Democrat Al Gore in a close presidential race.
If disputes over mail-in ballots linger beyond Election Day, the Supreme Court may again intervene. If President Trump's Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett is quickly confirmed, conservatives will enjoy a 6-3 majority on the Court. Three of these justices will have been appointed by Trump.
Trump has laid the groundwork for disputing the results of any close election. If neither candidate wins decisively, the nation should brace itself for a lengthy, and divisive, struggle.
Such a struggle could be dangerous to American democracy because it may undermine fundamental faith in the electoral process. While rule of law generally prevails when close elections are disputed, it does appear that the United States could be headed toward uncharted territory.
What question were you hoping to hear tonight that was left out in the midst of this chaotic debate?
Cohen: I would have liked to ask: “Do you think that there are consequences for the decreasing civility in American politics, as demonstrated in this debate?"
Gash: I would like to have seen a question about the role of the court in preserving checks and balances. This is, what I think, Wallace was trying to get at in his question about court-packing. But the question fell flat.
Ray: Black people are disproportionately more likely to experience police use of force, even when they are unarmed and not attacking. How do we reduce racial disparities in use of force – as with George Floyd and Breonna Taylor – and improve relations between Black communities and law enforcement?
Alison Gash, Associate Professor of Political Science, University of Oregon; Alexander Cohen, Assistant Professor of Political Science, Clarkson University, and Rashawn Ray, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Maryland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-10-01--‘We will kill you’: Video shows what the Proud Boys 'gang' is really like

White supremacist and far-right group the Proud Boys has garnered more attention this week after Donald Trump mentioned the hate group during Tuesday night 's presidential debate .
Instead of denouncing white supremacy as he was asked to do , Trump gave the group orders : `` Proud Boys : Stand back and stand by , '' he said .
`` But I 'll tell you what , somebody 's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem , this is a left-wing [ problem ] . ''
Since its inception in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaged in politically motivated violence .
Trump 's words were taken as a call to prepare for action by many members , who also happen to be his supporters .
Both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center have noted that the `` gang '' is violent and hateful , with `` anti-Muslim and misogynistic rhetoric . ''
In a video that resurfaced and went viral Thursday , multiple clips of Proud Boys co-founder Gavin McInnes depict the reality of the group .
McInnes is depicted not only openly calling `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he encourages members to use violence to express themselves .
`` We need more violence from the Trump people , '' he says in one of the video clips .
But of course , as he does with most of his statements , Trump denied knowing who the Proud Boys are Wednesday—a day after mentioning them in the debate .
It seems like Republicans wanted him to distance himself from the violence the group perpetuates .
`` I do n't know who the Proud Boys are .
You 'll have to give me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know who they are .
I can only say they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work .
... As people see how bad this radical liberal Democrat movement is and how weak , the law enforcement is going to come back stronger and stronger .
But again , I do n't know who Proud Boys are , but whoever they are , they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work . ''
Yet the foundation of the Proud Boys lies in the fact that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be strategically ignored by law enforcement .
`` I think it 's our job to do it and the cops to turn a blind eye , '' McInnes can be heard saying in the video .
Throughout the gruesome video , acts of violence performed on behalf of members of the group in addition to audio with McInnes clearly instigating violence are portrayed .
`` Choke a motherfucker , choke a bitch , choke a tranny , '' McInnes encourages .
The video first made appearances on Twitter in September following an interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of McInnes as a `` mostly fun '' guy .
Popular video editor Vic Berger IV shared the video with commentary , including a recollection of the Proud Boys allegedly visiting his home to threaten and scare him .
Berger IV notes that Rogan , in addition to other popular media hosts , often introduce people like McInnes with a `` soft '' image that ultimately , whether they know it or not , normalizes their behavior .
While McInnes has publicly disassociated himself from the group since 2018 following advice from his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the group still remain .
Since Trump 's statement at the debate , white supremacists and other members of the alt-right group have taken the words as a call to action .
A current chairman of the group , Enrique Tarrio , who also serves as Florida state director for Latinos for Trump , wrote : `` I will stand down sir !
!
!
Standing by sir .
So Proud of my guys right now , '' on the alternative discussion network Parler on Wednesday .
Other members also took to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Daily Beast reported .
`` Trump basically said to go fuck them up !
this makes me so happy , '' Proud Boys leader Joe Briggs said .
Tarrio was one of the organizers of a recent event in Portland , Oregon .
Hundreds of people gathered in Portland last week , many of them wearing military body armor and no masks , for a rally organized by the Proud Boys .
While local law enforcement claims the rally ended without serious violence , footage shared on social media shows an assault , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegedly kicked another man who was live-streaming the rally .
Just like the Proud Boys want , law enforcement in Portland seem to turn a blind eye to their violence while creating violence and fear in peaceful spaces where anti-ICE and Black Lives Matter demonstrators gather .
Interest in the Proud Boys group reportedly increased following the election of Trump and continuous sexist and Islamophobic comments made by McInnes .
By the end of 2017 , more than 20,000 people joined the group , which had started only a year before , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the importance of being `` American '' and proud of it , McInnes himself is n't American .
That 's right—the man encouraging violence in the U.S. in the name of Trump is actually Canadian .
According to BBC News , because of its nature and advocacy for violence , the group has been banned from social media sites including Facebook , Instagram , Twitter , and YouTube .
Trump 's statement to the group acknowledges that not only does he know what Proud Boys are , but that he supports them and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Official shirts and gear endorsed by the Proud Boys quickly made it to the market following the debate with a reply to Trump 's words : `` Standing by . ''
The video speaks for itself : The Proud Boys are a violent and terroristic organization .

White supremacist and far-right group the Proud Boys has garnered more attention this week after Donald Trump mentioned the hate group during Tuesday night's presidential debate. Instead of denouncing white supremacy as he was asked to do, Trump gave the group orders: "Proud Boys: Stand back and stand by," he said. "But I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem, this is a left-wing [problem]."
Since its inception in 2016, the Proud Boys group has engaged in politically motivated violence. Trump's words were taken as a call to prepare for action by many members, who also happen to be his supporters. Both the Anti-Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Law Center have noted that the "gang" is violent and hateful, with "anti-Muslim and misogynistic rhetoric." In a video that resurfaced and went viral Thursday, multiple clips of Proud Boys co-founder Gavin McInnes depict the reality of the group. McInnes is depicted not only openly calling "for violence generally" but emphasizing that he encourages members to use violence to express themselves. "We need more violence from the Trump people," he says in one of the video clips.
But of course, as he does with most of his statements, Trump denied knowing who the Proud Boys are Wednesday—a day after mentioning them in the debate. It seems like Republicans wanted him to distance himself from the violence the group perpetuates.
"I don't know who the Proud Boys are. You'll have to give me a definition because I really don't know who they are. I can only say they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work. ... As people see how bad this radical liberal Democrat movement is and how weak, the law enforcement is going to come back stronger and stronger. But again, I don't know who Proud Boys are, but whoever they are, they have to stand down and let law enforcement do their work."
Yet the foundation of the Proud Boys lies in the fact that they believe they should commit violence and be strategically ignored by law enforcement. "I think it's our job to do it and the cops to turn a blind eye," McInnes can be heard saying in the video. Throughout the gruesome video, acts of violence performed on behalf of members of the group in addition to audio with McInnes clearly instigating violence are portrayed. "Choke a motherfucker, choke a bitch, choke a tranny," McInnes encourages.
The video first made appearances on Twitter in September following an interview Joe Rogan conducted during which he spoke of McInnes as a "mostly fun" guy. Popular video editor Vic Berger IV shared the video with commentary, including a recollection of the Proud Boys allegedly visiting his home to threaten and scare him. Berger IV notes that Rogan, in addition to other popular media hosts, often introduce people like McInnes with a "soft" image that ultimately, whether they know it or not, normalizes their behavior. While McInnes has publicly disassociated himself from the group since 2018 following advice from his legal team, his words and mission for the group still remain.
Since Trump's statement at the debate, white supremacists and other members of the alt-right group have taken the words as a call to action. A current chairman of the group, Enrique Tarrio, who also serves as Florida state director for Latinos for Trump, wrote: "I will stand down sir!!! Standing by sir. So Proud of my guys right now," on the alternative discussion network Parler on Wednesday. Other members also took to Parler to express their reaction, the Daily Beast reported. "Trump basically said to go fuck them up! this makes me so happy," Proud Boys leader Joe Briggs said.
Tarrio was one of the organizers of a recent event in Portland, Oregon. Hundreds of people gathered in Portland last week, many of them wearing military body armor and no masks, for a rally organized by the Proud Boys. While local law enforcement claims the rally ended without serious violence, footage shared on social media shows an assault, including an incident during which a man allegedly kicked another man who was live-streaming the rally. Just like the Proud Boys want, law enforcement in Portland seem to turn a blind eye to their violence while creating violence and fear in peaceful spaces where anti-ICE and Black Lives Matter demonstrators gather.
Interest in the Proud Boys group reportedly increased following the election of Trump and continuous sexist and Islamophobic comments made by McInnes. By the end of 2017, more than 20,000 people joined the group, which had started only a year before, according to Forbes. While the group emphasizes the importance of being "American" and proud of it, McInnes himself isn't American. That's right—the man encouraging violence in the U.S. in the name of Trump is actually Canadian.
According to BBC News, because of its nature and advocacy for violence, the group has been banned from social media sites including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube. Trump's statement to the group acknowledges that not only does he know what Proud Boys are, but that he supports them and knows he has an influence over them. Official shirts and gear endorsed by the Proud Boys quickly made it to the market following the debate with a reply to Trump's words: "Standing by."
The video speaks for itself: The Proud Boys are a violent and terroristic organization.


alternet--2020-10-01--The Texas governor pushes an 'outrageous act of voter suppression' as the race tightens

Texas is in play and Governor Greg Abbott is doing everything he can to make sure Republicans stay in power .
At least four congressional seats could flip to Democrats , and Joe Biden is tightening Donald Trump 's lead .
Today Trump is ahead of Biden by just 3.2 percentage points in the Real Clear Politics polling average .
Governor Abbott is taking action – to make it harder for Texans to vote .
He 's just issued a proclamation cutting ballot drop off boxes to just one per county `` to maintain the integrity of our elections , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ duty .
`` The State of Texas has a duty to voters to maintain the integrity of our elections , '' Gov .
Abbott says in his proclamation .
`` As we work to preserve Texans ' ability to vote during the COVID-19 pandemic , we must take extra care to strengthen ballot security protocols throughout the state .
These enhanced security protocols will ensure greater transparency and will help stop attempts at illegal voting . ''
There is no evidence of illegal voting , and no evidence reducing the number of ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ someone is determined to vote illegally , they 'll find the ballot boxes .
But a voter overwhelmed by the coronavirus and possibly out of work , finding it hard to put food on the table might not have the time to drive around their county looking for a ballot drop off box .
`` The proclamation also requires early voting clerks to allow poll watchers to observe any activity conducted at the early voting clerk 's office location related to the in-person delivery of a marked mail ballot , '' Abbott 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reporter Chuck Lindell notes some counties are dropping from 12 ballot boxes to one .
DNC attorney Marc Elias warns Democrats are not taking this sitting down .

Texas is in play and Governor Greg Abbott is doing everything he can to make sure Republicans stay in power.
At least four congressional seats could flip to Democrats, and Joe Biden is tightening Donald Trump's lead. Today Trump is ahead of Biden by just 3.2 percentage points in the Real Clear Politics polling average.
Governor Abbott is taking action – to make it harder for Texans to vote.
He's just issued a proclamation cutting ballot drop off boxes to just one per county "to maintain the integrity of our elections," Abbott says, calling it his duty.
"The State of Texas has a duty to voters to maintain the integrity of our elections," Gov. Abbott says in his proclamation. "As we work to preserve Texans' ability to vote during the COVID-19 pandemic, we must take extra care to strengthen ballot security protocols throughout the state. These enhanced security protocols will ensure greater transparency and will help stop attempts at illegal voting."
There is no evidence of illegal voting, and no evidence reducing the number of ballot boxes would make a difference. If someone is determined to vote illegally, they'll find the ballot boxes. But a voter overwhelmed by the coronavirus and possibly out of work, finding it hard to put food on the table might not have the time to drive around their county looking for a ballot drop off box.
"The proclamation also requires early voting clerks to allow poll watchers to observe any activity conducted at the early voting clerk's office location related to the in-person delivery of a marked mail ballot," Abbott's press release reads.
Austin American-Statesman veteran reporter Chuck Lindell notes some counties are dropping from 12 ballot boxes to one.
DNC attorney Marc Elias warns Democrats are not taking this sitting down.


alternet--2020-10-01--America's dark side: We've grown numb to Trump's madness and evil

What pops into your head when you hear the number 1,000 in a political-military context ?
Having studied German military history , I immediately think of Adolf Hitler 's confident boast that his Third Reich would last a thousand years .
In reality , of course , a devastating world war brought that Reich down in a mere 12 years .
Only recently , however , such boasts popped up again in the dark dreams of Donald Trump .
If Iran dared to attack the United States , Trump tweeted and then repeated on Fox & Friends , the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ greater force . ''
Think about that for a moment .
If such typical Trumpian red-meat rhetoric were to become reality , you would be talking about a monumental war crime in its disproportionality .
If , say , the Iranian Revolutionary Guard shot a missile at an American base in the region and killed 10 U.S. military personnel , Trump is saying that , in response , he 'd then seek to kill 10,000 Iranians -- an act that would recall Nazi reprisals in World War II when entire villages like Lidice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been killed .
Back then , Americans knew that such murderous behavior was evil .
So why do so many of us no longer flinch at such madness ?
If references to `` evil '' seem inappropriate to you , keep in mind that I was raised Catholic and one idea the priests and nuns firmly implanted in me then was the presence of evil in our world -- and in me as a microcosm of that world .
It 's a moral imperative -- so they taught me -- to fight @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as humanly possible , a place in our lives , even turning the other cheek to avoid giving offense to our brothers and sisters .
Christ , after all , did n't teach us to whip someone 1,000 times if they struck you once .
Speaking of large numbers , I still recall Christ 's teaching on forgiveness .
How many times , he asked , should we forgive those who offend us ?
Seven times , perhaps ?
No , seventy times seven .
He did n't , of course , mean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hyperbolic number , Christ was saying that forgiveness must be large and generous , as boundless as we imperfect humans can make it .
Trump loves hyperbolic numbers , but his are plainly in the service of boundless revenge , not forgiveness .
His catechism is one of intimidation and , if that fails , retribution .
It does n't matter if it takes the form of mass destruction and death ( including , in the case of Americans , death by coronavirus ) .
By announcing such goals so openly , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us into his accomplices .
Passively or actively , if we do nothing , we accept the possibility of mass murder in the service of Trump 's dark dreams of smiting those who would dare strike at his version of America .
It 's easy to dismiss his threats as nothing more than red meat to his base , but they are also distinctly anti-Christian .
The saddest thing , however , is that they are , unfortunately , not at all un-American , as any quick survey of this country 's record @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So while I do reject all Trump 's murderous words and empty promises , I find them strangely unexceptional and unnervingly all-American .
Indeed , my own guess is that he 's won such a boisterous following in this country precisely because he does so visibly , so thunderously , so bigly embody its darkest dreams of destruction , which have all too often become reality when visited upon recalcitrant peoples who refused to bend to our will .
Americans today are sold an image of war as almost antiseptic -- hardly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this country 's `` forever wars . ''
But as history reminds us , real war is n't like that .
It never was , not when colonists were killing Native Americans in vast numbers ; nor when we were busy killing our fellow Americans in our Civil War ; nor when U.S. troops were ruthlessly putting down the Filipino insurrection in the early twentieth century ; nor when our air force firebombed Dresden , Tokyo , and so many other cities in World War II and later nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bombing in the early 1950s ; nor when Vietnam , Cambodia , and Laos were bludgeoned by bombs , napalm , and Agent Orange in the 1960s and early 1970s ; nor when Iraqis were killed by the tens of thousands during the first Gulf war of 1990-1991 .
And that , of course , is only a partial and selective accounting of the wanton carnage overseen by past presidents .
In reality , Americans have never been shy about killing on a mass scale in the alleged cause of righteousness and democracy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rhetoric of mass destruction is truly nothing new under the sun ( except perhaps in its pure blustering bravado ) ; Trump , that is , just salivates more openly at the prospect of inflicting pain on a mass scale on peoples he does n't like .
And even that is n't as new as you might imagine .
In this century , Republicans have been especially keen to share their dreams of massively bombing others .
On the campaign trail in 2007 , to the tune of the Beach Boys ' cover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and former bomber pilot and Vietnam POW ) John McCain smirkingly sang of bombing Iran .
( `` Bomb bomb bomb , bomb bomb Iran ! ''
) Similarly , during the Republican presidential debates of 2016 , Senator Ted Cruz boasted of wanting to `` utterly destroy '' the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq by carpet-bombing its territory and , in doing so , making the desert sand `` glow in the dark . ''
The implication was , of course , that as president he 'd happily use nuclear weapons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about all options being on the table ! )
Consider two examples from the nuclear era , then and now .
In the depth of the Cold War years , in response to a possible Soviet nuclear attack , this country 's war plans envisioned a simultaneous assault on the Soviet Union and China that military planners estimated would , in the end , kill 600 million people .
That would have been the equivalent of 100 Holocausts , notes Pentagon whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg , who was privy to those plans .
Whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Soviet attack did n't matter .
As communists , they were guilty by association and so to be obliterated anyway .
Ellsberg notes that only one man present at the briefing where this `` plan '' was presented objected to such a mindless act of mass murder , David Shoup , a Marine general and Medal of Honor winner who would later similarly object to the Vietnam War .
Fast forward to today and our even more potentially planet-ending nuclear forces are still being `` modernized '' to the tune of $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any Ohio-class SSBN nuclear submarine in the Navy 's inventory , for example , could potentially kill millions of people with its 24 Trident II ballistic missiles ( each carrying as many as eight nuclear warheads , each warhead with roughly six times the destructive power of the Hiroshima bomb ) .
While such vessels are officially meant to `` deter '' nuclear war , they are , of course , ultimately built to fight one .
Each is a submerged holocaust waiting to be unleashed .
Rarely , if ever , do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ represent , historically speaking .
Meanwhile , the Pentagon continues to `` invest '' ( as the military likes to say ) in ever-newer generations of nuclear-capable bombers and land-based missiles , promising a holocaust of planetary proportions if ever used .
To grasp what an actual nuclear war would mean , you would have to update an old saying : one death is a tragedy ; several billion is a statistic .
Aggravating such essential collective madness in this moment ( and the president 's fiery and furious fascination with such weaponry @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for what might be thought of as the nuking of our history : the installation of a truly `` patriotic '' education in our schools ( in other words , a history that would obliterate everything but his version of American greatness ) .
That would , of course , include not just the legacy of slavery and other dark chapters in our past , but our continued willingness to build weaponry that has the instant capacity to end it all in a matter of hours .
As a history professor , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our past would be totally antithetical to sound learning in this or any world .
History must , by definition , be critical of the world we 've created .
It must be tough-minded and grapple with our actions ( and inactions ) , crimes and all , if we are ever to grow morally stronger as a country or a people .
History that only focuses on the supposedly good bits , however defined , is like your annoying friend 's Facebook page -- the one that shows photo after photo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exclusive parties , puppies , ice cream , and rainbows , that features a flurry of status updates reducible to `` I 'm having the time of my life . ''
We know perfectly well , of course , that no one 's life is really like that -- and neither is any country 's history .
History should , of course , be about understanding ourselves as we really are , our strengths and weaknesses , triumphs , tragedies , and transgressions .
It would even have to include an honest accounting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ J. Trump , a failed casino owner and celebrity pitchman as president at a moment when most of its leaders were still claiming that it was the most exceptional country in the history of the universe .
I 'll give you a hint : we got him because he represented a side of America that was indeed exceptional , just not in any way that was ever morally just or democratically sound .
Jingoistic history says , `` My country , right or wrong , but my country . ''
Trump wants to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My country and my leader , always right . ''
That 's fascism , not `` patriotic '' history , and we need to recognize that and reject it .
The United States has been the imperial power of record on this planet since World War II .
Lately , the economic and moral aspects of that power have waned , even as our military power remains supreme ( though without being able to win anything whatsoever ) .
That should tell you something about America .
We 're still a `` SmackDown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from professional wrestling , in a world that 's increasingly being smacked down anyway .
Harold Pinter , the British playwright , caught this country 's imperial spirit well in his Nobel Prize lecture in 2005 .
America , he said then , has committed crimes that `` have been systematic , constant , vicious , remorseless , but very few people have actually talked about them .
You have to hand it to America .
It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even witty , highly successful act of hypnosis . ''
Anyone with a knowledge of our history knows that there was truth indeed in what Pinter said 15 years ago .
He noticed how this country 's leaders wielded language `` to keep thought at bay . ''
Like George Orwell before him , Pinter was at pains to use plain language about war , noting how the Americans and British had `` brought torture , cluster bombs , depleted uranium , innumerable acts of random murder , misery , degradation and death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ed ] it bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East . ''
The point here was not simply to bash America .
It was to get us to think about our actions in genuine historical terms .
A decade and a half ago , Pinter threw down a challenge , and even if you disagreed with him , or maybe especially if you did so , you need the intellectual tools and command of the facts to grapple with that critique .
It should never be enough simply to shout `` USA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fashion and hope it will drown out not only critics and dissenters but reality itself -- and perhaps even your own secret doubts .
And we should have such doubts .
We should be ready to dissent .
We should recognize , as America 's current attorney general most distinctly does not , that dissenters are often the truest patriots of all , even if they are also often the loneliest ones .
We should especially have doubts about a leader who threatens to bring violence against another country 1,000 times greater than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I do n't need the Catholic Church , or even Christ in the New Testament , to tell me that such thinking is wrong in a Washington that now seems to be offering a carnivorous taste of what a future American autocracy could be like .
I just need to recall the wise words of my Polish mother-in-law : `` Have a heart , if you 've got a heart . ''
Have a heart , America .
Reject American carnage in all its forms .
William Astore , a retired Air @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 years .
A TomDispatch regular , he also has a personal blog , Bracing Views .
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook .
Check out the newest Dispatch Books , John Feffer 's new dystopian novel ( the second in the Splinterlands series ) Frostlands , Beverly Gologorsky 's novel Every Body Has a Story , and Tom Engelhardt 's A Nation Unmade by War , as well as Alfred McCoy 's In the Shadows of the American Century : The Rise and Decline of U.S .
Global Power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Century : War and Terror Since World War II .

What pops into your head when you hear the number 1,000 in a political-military context? Having studied German military history, I immediately think of Adolf Hitler's confident boast that his Third Reich would last a thousand years. In reality, of course, a devastating world war brought that Reich down in a mere 12 years. Only recently, however, such boasts popped up again in the dark dreams of Donald Trump. If Iran dared to attack the United States, Trump tweeted and then repeated on Fox & Friends, the U.S. would strike back with "1,000 times greater force."
Think about that for a moment. If such typical Trumpian red-meat rhetoric were to become reality, you would be talking about a monumental war crime in its disproportionality. If, say, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard shot a missile at an American base in the region and killed 10 U.S. military personnel, Trump is saying that, in response, he'd then seek to kill 10,000 Iranians -- an act that would recall Nazi reprisals in World War II when entire villages like Lidice were destroyed because one prominent Nazi official had been killed. Back then, Americans knew that such murderous behavior was evil. So why do so many of us no longer flinch at such madness?
If references to "evil" seem inappropriate to you, keep in mind that I was raised Catholic and one idea the priests and nuns firmly implanted in me then was the presence of evil in our world -- and in me as a microcosm of that world. It's a moral imperative -- so they taught me -- to fight evil by denying it, as much as humanly possible, a place in our lives, even turning the other cheek to avoid giving offense to our brothers and sisters. Christ, after all, didn't teach us to whip someone 1,000 times if they struck you once.
Speaking of large numbers, I still recall Christ's teaching on forgiveness. How many times, he asked, should we forgive those who offend us? Seven times, perhaps? No, seventy times seven. He didn't, of course, mean 490 acts of forgiveness. Through that hyperbolic number, Christ was saying that forgiveness must be large and generous, as boundless as we imperfect humans can make it.
Trump loves hyperbolic numbers, but his are plainly in the service of boundless revenge, not forgiveness. His catechism is one of intimidation and, if that fails, retribution. It doesn't matter if it takes the form of mass destruction and death (including, in the case of Americans, death by coronavirus). By announcing such goals so openly, of course, he turns the rest of us into his accomplices. Passively or actively, if we do nothing, we accept the possibility of mass murder in the service of Trump's dark dreams of smiting those who would dare strike at his version of America.
It's easy to dismiss his threats as nothing more than red meat to his base, but they are also distinctly anti-Christian. The saddest thing, however, is that they are, unfortunately, not at all un-American, as any quick survey of this country's record of wanton destructiveness in war would show.
So while I do reject all Trump's murderous words and empty promises, I find them strangely unexceptional and unnervingly all-American. Indeed, my own guess is that he's won such a boisterous following in this country precisely because he does so visibly, so thunderously, so bigly embody its darkest dreams of destruction, which have all too often become reality when visited upon recalcitrant peoples who refused to bend to our will.
Destruction as Salvation
Americans today are sold an image of war as almost antiseptic -- hardly surprising given our distance and detachment from this country's "forever wars." But as history reminds us, real war isn't like that. It never was, not when colonists were killing Native Americans in vast numbers; nor when we were busy killing our fellow Americans in our Civil War; nor when U.S. troops were ruthlessly putting down the Filipino insurrection in the early twentieth century; nor when our air force firebombed Dresden, Tokyo, and so many other cities in World War II and later nuked Hiroshima and Nagasaki; nor when North Korea was flattened by bombing in the early 1950s; nor when Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos were bludgeoned by bombs, napalm, and Agent Orange in the 1960s and early 1970s; nor when Iraqis were killed by the tens of thousands during the first Gulf war of 1990-1991.
And that, of course, is only a partial and selective accounting of the wanton carnage overseen by past presidents. In reality, Americans have never been shy about killing on a mass scale in the alleged cause of righteousness and democracy.
In that sense, Trump's rhetoric of mass destruction is truly nothing new under the sun (except perhaps in its pure blustering bravado); Trump, that is, just salivates more openly at the prospect of inflicting pain on a mass scale on peoples he doesn't like. And even that isn't as new as you might imagine.
In this century, Republicans have been especially keen to share their dreams of massively bombing others. On the campaign trail in 2007, to the tune of the Beach Boys' cover "Barbara Ann," Senator (and former bomber pilot and Vietnam POW) John McCain smirkingly sang of bombing Iran. ("Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!") Similarly, during the Republican presidential debates of 2016, Senator Ted Cruz boasted of wanting to "utterly destroy" the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq by carpet-bombing its territory and, in doing so, making the desert sand "glow in the dark." The implication was, of course, that as president he'd happily use nuclear weapons in the Middle East. (Talk about all options being on the table!)
Alarming? Yes! Very American? USA #1!
Consider two examples from the nuclear era, then and now. In the depth of the Cold War years, in response to a possible Soviet nuclear attack, this country's war plans envisioned a simultaneous assault on the Soviet Union and China that military planners estimated would, in the end, kill 600 million people. That would have been the equivalent of 100 Holocausts, notes Pentagon whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, who was privy to those plans.
Whether China had joined or even known about the Soviet attack didn't matter. As communists, they were guilty by association and so to be obliterated anyway. Ellsberg notes that only one man present at the briefing where this "plan" was presented objected to such a mindless act of mass murder, David Shoup, a Marine general and Medal of Honor winner who would later similarly object to the Vietnam War.
Fast forward to today and our even more potentially planet-ending nuclear forces are still being "modernized" to the tune of $1.7 trillion over the coming decades. Any Ohio-class SSBN nuclear submarine in the Navy's inventory, for example, could potentially kill millions of people with its 24 Trident II ballistic missiles (each carrying as many as eight nuclear warheads, each warhead with roughly six times the destructive power of the Hiroshima bomb). While such vessels are officially meant to "deter" nuclear war, they are, of course, ultimately built to fight one. Each is a submerged holocaust waiting to be unleashed.
Rarely, if ever, do we think about what those subs truly represent, historically speaking. Meanwhile, the Pentagon continues to "invest" (as the military likes to say) in ever-newer generations of nuclear-capable bombers and land-based missiles, promising a holocaust of planetary proportions if ever used. To grasp what an actual nuclear war would mean, you would have to update an old saying: one death is a tragedy; several billion is a statistic.
Aggravating such essential collective madness in this moment (and the president's fiery and furious fascination with such weaponry) is Trump's recent cynical call for what might be thought of as the nuking of our history: the installation of a truly "patriotic" education in our schools (in other words, a history that would obliterate everything but his version of American greatness). That would, of course, include not just the legacy of slavery and other dark chapters in our past, but our continued willingness to build weaponry that has the instant capacity to end it all in a matter of hours.
As a history professor, I can tell you that such a version of our past would be totally antithetical to sound learning in this or any world. History must, by definition, be critical of the world we've created. It must be tough-minded and grapple with our actions (and inactions), crimes and all, if we are ever to grow morally stronger as a country or a people.
History that only focuses on the supposedly good bits, however defined, is like your annoying friend's Facebook page -- the one that shows photo after photo of smiling faces, gourmet meals, exclusive parties, puppies, ice cream, and rainbows, that features a flurry of status updates reducible to "I'm having the time of my life." We know perfectly well, of course, that no one's life is really like that -- and neither is any country's history.
History should, of course, be about understanding ourselves as we really are, our strengths and weaknesses, triumphs, tragedies, and transgressions. It would even have to include an honest accounting of how this country got one Donald J. Trump, a failedcasino owner and celebrity pitchman as president at a moment when most of its leaders were still claiming that it was the most exceptional country in the history of the universe. I'll give you a hint: we got him because he represented a side of America that was indeed exceptional, just not in any way that was ever morally just or democratically sound.
Jingoistic history says, "My country, right or wrong, but my country." Trump wants to push this a goosestep further to "My country and my leader, always right." That's fascism, not "patriotic" history, and we need to recognize that and reject it.
Learning without Flinching from History
The United States has been the imperial power of record on this planet since World War II. Lately, the economic and moral aspects of that power have waned, even as our military power remains supreme (though without being able to win anything whatsoever). That should tell you something about America. We're still a "SmackDown" country, to borrow a term from professional wrestling, in a world that's increasingly being smacked down anyway.
Harold Pinter, the British playwright, caught this country's imperial spirit well in his Nobel Prize lecture in 2005. America, he said then, has committed crimes that "have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them. You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis."
Anyone with a knowledge of our history knows that there was truth indeed in what Pinter said 15 years ago. He noticed how this country's leaders wielded language "to keep thought at bay." Like George Orwell before him, Pinter was at pains to use plain language about war, noting how the Americans and British had "brought torture, cluster bombs, depleted uranium, innumerable acts of random murder, misery, degradation and death to the Iraqi people and call[ed] it bringing freedom and democracy to the Middle East."
The point here was not simply to bash America. It was to get us to think about our actions in genuine historical terms. A decade and a half ago, Pinter threw down a challenge, and even if you disagreed with him, or maybe especially if you did so, you need the intellectual tools and command of the facts to grapple with that critique. It should never be enough simply to shout "USA! USA!" in an ever-louder fashion and hope it will drown out not only critics and dissenters but reality itself -- and perhaps even your own secret doubts.
And we should have such doubts. We should be ready to dissent. We should recognize, as America's current attorney general most distinctly does not, that dissenters are often the truest patriots of all, even if they are also often the loneliest ones. We should especially have doubts about a leader who threatens to bring violence against another country 1,000 times greater than anything that country could visit upon us.
I don't need the Catholic Church, or even Christ in the New Testament, to tell me that such thinking is wrong in a Washington that now seems to be offering a carnivorous taste of what a future American autocracy could be like. I just need to recall the wise words of my Polish mother-in-law: "Have a heart, if you've got a heart."
Have a heart, America. Reject American carnage in all its forms.
William Astore, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, taught history for 15 years. A TomDispatch regular, he also has a personal blog,Bracing Views.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Books, John Feffer's new dystopian novel (the second in the Splinterlands series) Frostlands, Beverly Gologorsky's novel Every Body Has a Story, and Tom Engelhardt's A Nation Unmade by War, as well as Alfred McCoy's In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power and John Dower's The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II.
Copyright 2020 William J. Astore