truthout--2020-07-27--Trump’s Federal Police Surge Could Provoke an Election Day Constitutional Crisis

Courts must end Trump ’ s paramilitary urban war against Democratic mayors and cities ahead of the November election , voting rights and legal experts tell Truthout , otherwise they leave open the possibility of an unprecedented constitutional crisis buttressed by the president ’ s personal secret police .
As President Trump prepares an additional “ surge ” of federal agents into Democratic-led U.S. cities , including Chicago and Albuquerque , after days of dystopian images of unidentified feds brutalizing and kidnapping protesters in Portland , local leaders are balking .
State and local officials have filed several lawsuits against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Portland , and other targeted states are gearing up for their own legal fights .
At least four lawsuits have been filed in federal court relating to the feds ’ handling of Portland ’ s protests , which have roiled for more than 60 nights after the Minneapolis police-perpetrated killing of George Floyd .
On Thursday , a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring feds from arresting or using physical force against journalists and legal observers in Portland .
On Friday , a federal judge in a separate case denied a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s office for an order that would have required feds in Portland to identify themselves .
If courts fail to permanently enjoin Trump ’ s federal police apparatus from being deployed in cities against the will of local officials , legal experts say there remains a chance that Trump could use his newfound personal paramilitary before and after Election Day in a cynical attempt to intimidate and suppress voters at polls — or even to remain in power if he doesn ’ t accept the election ’ s results .
Senior Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politico they “ expect the unrest to escalate at least through the November election , and noted that the protection of federal buildings falls squarely within their remit , ” based on Trump ’ s Executive Order on Protecting American Monuments , Memorials , and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence , and a 2003 federal statute .
Voting rights experts say that the deployment of federal police in major U.S. cities is enough to potentially suppress in-person voting .
But it could be even worse than that , since without clear restrictions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how far feds could float during voting periods .
Trump ’ s federal police are just the latest front in a wider reelection strategy focused on suppressing mail-in voting , intimidating voters , spreading misinformation and undermining the democratic process .
Last month , Trump called his campaign ’ s potential loss of lawsuits related to states ’ mail-in ballot procedures the “ biggest risk ” to his reelection bid .
Not only is Trump enlisting an army of 50,000 poll watchers to intimidate voters of color in his war against the ballot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to possibly to do the same , while also inflaming tensions and renewed uprisings to justify a potential power grab less than 100 days before the election in one of the most nefarious reelection bids of all time .
Unidentified feds ’ actions against protesters in Portland — including their use of tear gas , impact munitions and unmarked vehicles to snatch , interrogate and transport protesters to unknown locations without informing them of why they ’ re being arrested , and then releasing them with no record of arrest — violate First @ @ @ @ @ @ @ speech , press , due process , and against unreasonable searches and seizures .
The 10th Amendment , which determines that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states , puts “ the safety and welfare of the public , ” including policing powers , in the hands of the states , not the federal government , according to Michael Greenberger , a law professor and the director of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the University of Maryland .
Federal forces , including agents from U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Immigration and Customs Enforcement ( ICE ) , the U.S .
Marshals Service and the Federal Protective Service , are operating under the legal authority of a 2003 statute and Trump ’ s executive order on protecting federal monuments and property but have been patrolling largely nonfederal areas of Portland .
“ It ’ s just a highly unusual and very difficult to defend process that ’ s being used , ” Greenberger told Truthout , as there ’ s no legal precedent that would support the presence of so many unidentified @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cooperation of local and state officials and law enforcement .
Nonetheless , while individuals whose rights have been violated could bring successful challenges against federal police , it may be more difficult for states or cities to end or restrict the presence of feds in their jurisdictions because of issues related to their legal standing to do so , Greenberger says .
While Thursday ’ s temporary restraining order barring feds from using force , threats and dispersal orders against journalists or legal observers is a hopeful sign ; Bush-appointed Federal Judge Michael @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ellen Rosenblum lacked standing to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the state because her office “ hadn ’ t articulated any specific state interest beyond the constitutional rights of individuals.
” During a remote hearing in Oregon ’ s suit last week , Judge Mosman noted that in earlier cases , “ the court has required states to meet the high bar of ‘ quasi-sovereign interest ’ to sue the federal government.
” Judge Mosman also said that compelling feds to identify themselves might prove too limited to give much solace to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ use of unmarked vehicles by police is commonplace , and couldn ’ t be used exclusively to conclude that feds were out of line .
Individual plaintiffs may likewise find it difficult to criminally prosecute federal agents for damages , as feds , much like cops , are protected by immunity .
Greenberger , however , says that suits brought by individual plaintiffs could still prove successful in enjoining federal police , and that “ the actions here are so extraordinary that I think they can overcome a claim of qualified immunity.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s strategy is the 1807 Insurrection Act , which allows such deployments of active-duty military police or federalized National Guards when “ the ability to enforce civil and constitutional rights has been abandoned because local law enforcement has no ability to protect people , ” Greenberger says .
The Act is an exception to federal law that prevents the military from being involved in civilian law enforcement and has been invoked dozens of times in the country ’ s history , most recently during the 1992 uprising over the Los Angeles police officers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ notes the law does not require that state and local officials invite military deployments .
On July 21 , the House of Representatives approved an amendment to the Act that would require the president to consult with Congress before deploying federal troops to U.S. cities .
It compels the administration to certify to Congress that local authorities are unable or unwilling to quell violence .
Without a permanent injunction against Trump ’ s brazen deployments of secret stormtroopers by fall , there remains a chance that he could try to use them to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is recruiting 50,000 partisan poll watchers to deploy in key precincts around the country to intimidate voters of color under the guise of protecting against virtually nonexistent “ voter fraud.
” In 1981 , New Jersey Republicans hired county deputy sheriffs and local police outfitted with revolvers , two-way radios and armbands reading , “ National Ballot Security Task Force ” to patrol majority Black and Latinx precincts in the state .
A New Jersey voter who was turned away from a polling place by a task force member sued , resulting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from intimidating voters of color and deputizing off-duty police as poll watchers .
The 2020 presidential election will be the first in nearly 40 years when the Republican National Committee ( RNC ) won ’ t be bound by the terms of the 1982 decree .
The RNC already is spending millions on a renewed voter suppression scheme involving thousands of poll observers targeting predominantly Black precincts in Philadelphia , for instance , where the Trump campaign is legally challenging not only the state ’ s mail-in ballot procedures but also a state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ serve as a poll watcher .
Depending on the state , partisan poll watchers can challenge a voter ’ s eligibility based on their address , citizenship or even when they registered to vote .
Stipulations regarding poll watchers ’ qualifications , powers , proximity to polling places , and observation process vary widely depending on state and county election codes .
But Republicans aren ’ t just looking to deputize off-duty cops as poll watchers again ; they ’ re also looking to recruit former Navy SEALS to do the job .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vote , a conservative election monitoring group , laid the plan at a closed-door conference in February : “ You get some SEALs in those polls , and they ’ re going to say , ‘ No , no , this is what it says .
This is how we ’ re going to play this show , ’ ” Engelbrecht said , according to a recording obtained by The Intercept .
Add Trump ’ s federal secret police to the mix , and the picture becomes more than ominous for predominantly Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ One thing we need to worry about is CBP and ICE being used to intimidate people at the polls .
I ’ m not predicting it will happen .
I ’ m not saying it will happen .
I ’ m saying that we have to worry about it , ” Jason Stanley , a philosophy professor at Yale University and an expert on fascism , recently told Business Insider .
“ When people encounter law enforcement , they ’ re much less likely to vote ; to participate civically.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : The Politics of Us and Them , cited a study that found probability of voting went down by 8 percent among those who were stopped or questioned by police .
He also cited another study that similarly showed communities with the highest rates of police contact were 50 percent less likely to vote .
Still , with 41 states allowing voters to vote absentee this fall for any reason , if current polling holds , it ’ s unlikely Trump will be able to suppress enough votes to fight an Electoral College @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is confident that by the time of the election , cases will have wended through trial and circuit courts , perhaps even to the Supreme Court , with clear rulings restricting Trump ’ s police-state practices in some form .
“ As these cases are litigated , there will be more concern about this introduction of federal law enforcement officials , ” Greenberger says .
“ The way a constitutional crisis evolves is through litigation and people bringing lawsuits… .
There are longer interlocutory injunctions that could last until the case is resolved.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ arise after the election , as Trump ’ s national deployments raise “ the specter of authoritarian practices , and the fear is that Trump may [ deploy feds ] if he loses the election , ” as Greenberger says .
Since in-person votes could skew Republican this year , according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll , and because in-person votes are typically reported first on election night , the initial results on November 3 might favor Trump and cause him to claim victory prematurely .
But as mailed ballots — skewing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — are counted , Biden could end up taking the lead days later .
Trump could instigate a national crisis if he decries late-counted ballots as fraudulent or refuses to concede .
In such a scenario , though , even if Trump tries to stay in the White House after Biden is inaugurated , it ’ s unlikely that the Defense Department would be willing to back him .
Trump is losing support from his own military brass , including Defense Secretary Mark Esper , who recently raised concerns within the administration about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for law enforcement .
Employees within DHS are also calling the department ’ s deployment of the feds an unusual maneuver that could do long-term damage to the agency ’ s reputation .
Still , with the steadfast backing of DHS Secretary Chad Wolf , Trump could attempt a power grab by employing federal forces with an illegal suspension of civil liberties or even a declaration of martial law .
With renewed unrest over the weekend in several U.S. cities , as protesters faced off with feds in Portland , forced a police @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a courthouse in Oakland , the stage is set .
Greenberger doubts Trump could pull it off , though .
“ There ’ s a better chance of the Republicans trying to replace Trump as a candidate than Trump having enough credibility to use law enforcement , even in his own administration , to keep him in the White House , ” he says .
Even so , if Trump loses , the period between November and January could be one of the most dangerous chapters in the nation ’ s modern @ @

If courts don’t stop Trump’s police, feds could bolster the ranks of 50,000 poll watchers or be called upon if he loses.
Part of the Series Voting Wrongs
Courts must end Trump’s paramilitary urban war against Democratic mayors and cities ahead of the November election, voting rights and legal experts tell Truthout, otherwise they leave open the possibility of an unprecedented constitutional crisis buttressed by the president’s personal secret police.
As President Trump prepares an additional “surge” of federal agents into Democratic-led U.S. cities, including Chicago and Albuquerque, after days of dystopian images of unidentified feds brutalizing and kidnapping protesters in Portland, local leaders are balking. State and local officials have filed several lawsuits against Trump’s unprecedented police-state practices in Portland, and other targeted states are gearing up for their own legal fights.
At least four lawsuits have been filed in federal court relating to the feds’ handling of Portland’s protests, which have roiled for more than 60 nights after the Minneapolis police-perpetrated killing of George Floyd.
On Thursday, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring feds from arresting or using physical force against journalists and legal observers in Portland. On Friday, a federal judge in a separate case denied a request by the Oregon attorney general’s office for an order that would have required feds in Portland to identify themselves.
If courts fail to permanently enjoin Trump’s federal police apparatus from being deployed in cities against the will of local officials, legal experts say there remains a chance that Trump could use his newfound personal paramilitary before and after Election Day in a cynical attempt to intimidate and suppress voters at polls — or even to remain in power if he doesn’t accept the election’s results.
Senior Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials told Politico they “expect the unrest to escalate at least through the November election, and noted that the protection of federal buildings falls squarely within their remit,” based on Trump’s Executive Order on Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence, and a 2003 federal statute.
Voting rights experts say that the deployment of federal police in major U.S. cities is enough to potentially suppress in-person voting. But it could be even worse than that, since without clear restrictions from courts, it remains unclear just how far feds could float during voting periods.
“It’s just a highly unusual and very difficult to defend process that’s being used.”
Trump’s federal police are just the latest front in a wider reelection strategy focused on suppressing mail-in voting, intimidating voters, spreading misinformation and undermining the democratic process. Last month, Trump called his campaign’s potential loss of lawsuits related to states’ mail-in ballot procedures the “biggest risk” to his reelection bid.
Not only is Trump enlisting an army of 50,000 poll watchers to intimidate voters of color in his war against the ballot; he’s enlisting secret stormtroopers to possibly to do the same, while also inflaming tensions and renewed uprisings to justify a potential power grab less than 100 days before the election in one of the most nefarious reelection bids of all time.
Can Courts Rein In Trump’s Secret Police?
Unidentified feds’ actions against protesters in Portland — including their use of tear gas, impact munitions and unmarked vehicles to snatch, interrogate and transport protesters to unknown locations without informing them of why they’re being arrested, and then releasing them with no record of arrest — violate First, Fourth and Fifth Amendment protections of speech, press, due process, and against unreasonable searches and seizures.
The 10th Amendment, which determines that powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states, puts “the safety and welfare of the public,” including policing powers, in the hands of the states, not the federal government, according to Michael Greenberger, a law professor and the director of the Center for Health and Homeland Security at the University of Maryland.
“The actions here are so extraordinary that I think they can overcome a claim of qualified immunity.”
Federal forces, including agents from U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the U.S. Marshals Service and the Federal Protective Service, are operating under the legal authority of a 2003 statute and Trump’s executive order on protecting federal monuments and property but have been patrolling largely nonfederal areas of Portland.
“It’s just a highly unusual and very difficult to defend process that’s being used,” Greenberger told Truthout, as there’s no legal precedent that would support the presence of so many unidentified federal police in U.S. cities without the cooperation of local and state officials and law enforcement.
Nonetheless, while individuals whose rights have been violated could bring successful challenges against federal police, it may be more difficult for states or cities to end or restrict the presence of feds in their jurisdictions because of issues related to their legal standing to do so, Greenberger says.
While Thursday’s temporary restraining order barring feds from using force, threats and dispersal orders against journalists or legal observers is a hopeful sign; Bush-appointed Federal Judge Michael Mosman ruled Friday that Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum lacked standing to bring a lawsuit on behalf of the state because her office “hadn’t articulated any specific state interest beyond the constitutional rights of individuals.”
During a remote hearing in Oregon’s suit last week, Judge Mosman noted that in earlier cases, “the court has required states to meet the high bar of ‘quasi-sovereign interest’ to sue the federal government.”
Judge Mosman also said that compelling feds to identify themselves might prove too limited to give much solace to would-be protesters. He added that the use of unmarked vehicles by police is commonplace, and couldn’t be used exclusively to conclude that feds were out of line.
“One thing we need to worry about is CBP and ICE being used to intimidate people at the polls.”
Individual plaintiffs may likewise find it difficult to criminally prosecute federal agents for damages, as feds, much like cops, are protected by immunity. Greenberger, however, says that suits brought by individual plaintiffs could still prove successful in enjoining federal police, and that “the actions here are so extraordinary that I think they can overcome a claim of qualified immunity.”
The other legal framework undergirding Trump’s strategy is the 1807 Insurrection Act, which allows such deployments of active-duty military police or federalized National Guards when “the ability to enforce civil and constitutional rights has been abandoned because local law enforcement has no ability to protect people,” Greenberger says.
The Act is an exception to federal law that prevents the military from being involved in civilian law enforcement and has been invoked dozens of times in the country’s history, most recently during the 1992 uprising over the Los Angeles police officers’ beating of Rodney King. Greenberger notes the law does not require that state and local officials invite military deployments.
On July 21, the House of Representatives approved an amendment to the Act that would require the president to consult with Congress before deploying federal troops to U.S. cities. It compels the administration to certify to Congress that local authorities are unable or unwilling to quell violence.
A Test Run for Election Day?
Without a permanent injunction against Trump’s brazen deployments of secret stormtroopers by fall, there remains a chance that he could try to use them to bolster another army: The Republican Party is recruiting 50,000 partisan poll watchers to deploy in key precincts around the country to intimidate voters of color under the guise of protecting against virtually nonexistent “voter fraud.”
In 1981, New Jersey Republicans hired county deputy sheriffs and local police outfitted with revolvers, two-way radios and armbands reading, “National Ballot Security Task Force” to patrol majority Black and Latinx precincts in the state. A New Jersey voter who was turned away from a polling place by a task force member sued, resulting in a 1982 consent decree barring the party from intimidating voters of color and deputizing off-duty police as poll watchers.
“The way a constitutional crisis evolves is through litigation. There are longer interlocutory injunctions that could last until the case is resolved.”
The 2020 presidential election will be the first in nearly 40 years when the Republican National Committee (RNC) won’t be bound by the terms of the 1982 decree. The RNC already is spending millions on a renewed voter suppression scheme involving thousands of poll observers targeting predominantly Black precincts in Philadelphia, for instance, where the Trump campaign is legally challenging not only the state’s mail-in ballot procedures but also a state statute that places limits on who may serve as a poll watcher.
Depending on the state, partisan poll watchers can challenge a voter’s eligibility based on their address, citizenship or even when they registered to vote. Stipulations regarding poll watchers’ qualifications, powers, proximity to polling places, and observation process vary widely depending on state and county election codes.
But Republicans aren’t just looking to deputize off-duty cops as poll watchers again; they’re also looking to recruit former Navy SEALS to do the job. Catherine Engelbrecht, founder of True the Vote, a conservative election monitoring group, laid the plan at a closed-door conference in February: “You get some SEALs in those polls, and they’re going to say, ‘No, no, this is what it says. This is how we’re going to play this show,’” Engelbrecht said, according to a recording obtained by The Intercept.
Add Trump’s federal secret police to the mix, and the picture becomes more than ominous for predominantly Black and Latinx inner-city polling places this fall.
“One thing we need to worry about is CBP and ICE being used to intimidate people at the polls. I’m not predicting it will happen. I’m not saying it will happen. I’m saying that we have to worry about it,” Jason Stanley, a philosophy professor at Yale University and an expert on fascism, recently told Business Insider. “When people encounter law enforcement, they’re much less likely to vote; to participate civically.”
Stanley, author of How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them, cited a study that found probability of voting went down by 8 percent among those who were stopped or questioned by police. He also cited another study that similarly showed communities with the highest rates of police contact were 50 percent less likely to vote.
“This raises the specter of authoritarian practices, and the fear is that Trump may deploy feds if he loses the election.”
Still, with 41 states allowing voters to vote absentee this fall for any reason, if current polling holds, it’s unlikely Trump will be able to suppress enough votes to fight an Electoral College loss. Moreover, law professor Greenberger is confident that by the time of the election, cases will have wended through trial and circuit courts, perhaps even to the Supreme Court, with clear rulings restricting Trump’s police-state practices in some form.
“As these cases are litigated, there will be more concern about this introduction of federal law enforcement officials,” Greenberger says. “The way a constitutional crisis evolves is through litigation and people bringing lawsuits…. There are longer interlocutory injunctions that could last until the case is resolved.”
But a national crisis could also arise after the election, as Trump’s federal deployments raise “the specter of authoritarian practices, and the fear is that Trump may [deploy feds] if he loses the election,” as Greenberger says.
Since in-person votes could skew Republican this year, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll, and because in-person votes are typically reported first on election night, the initial results on November 3 might favor Trump and cause him to claim victory prematurely.
But as mailed ballots — skewing Democratic, according to the same poll — are counted, Biden could end up taking the lead days later. Trump could instigate a national crisis if he decries late-counted ballots as fraudulent and/or refuses to concede.
In such a scenario, though, even if Trump tries to stay in the White House after Biden is inaugurated, it’s unlikely that the Defense Department would be willing to back him.
“There’s a better chance of the Republicans trying to replace Trump as a candidate than Trump having enough credibility to use law enforcement to keep him in the White House.”
Trump is losing support from his own military brass, including Defense Secretary Mark Esper, who recently raised concerns within the administration about Trump’s use of federal forces for law enforcement. Employees within DHS are also calling the department’s deployment of the feds an unusual maneuver that could do long-term damage to the agency’s reputation.
Still, with the steadfast backing of DHS Secretary Chad Wolf, Trump could attempt a power grab by employing federal forces with an illegal suspension of civil liberties or even a declaration of martial law.
With renewed unrest over the weekend in several U.S. cities, as protesters faced off with feds in Portland, forced a police retreat in Seattle, and set fire to a courthouse in Oakland, the stage is set.
Greenberger doubts Trump could pull it off, though, saying he doesn’t have “enough credibility to use law enforcement, even in his own administration, to keep him in the White House.”
Further, even if Trump declared martial law, he still wouldn’t be able to postpone the November 3 election. Only Congress can alter the federal statute to change the date that states convene electors. Even then, the president’s term would still expire at noon on January 20, 2021. The powers of the office would then succeed to the Speaker of the House.
Nonetheless, if Trump loses, the period between November and January could be one of the most dangerous chapters in the nation’s modern history — especially if courts do not restrain the president’s federal paramilitary force.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-26--White House Privately Warned 11 Cities to Take “Aggressive” Action Against COVID

Dr. Deborah Birx , a leader of the White House Coronavirus Task Force , warned state and local leaders in a private phone call Wednesday that 11 major cities are seeing increases in the percentage of tests coming back positive for COVID-19 and should take “ aggressive ” steps to mitigate their outbreaks .
The cities she identified were Baltimore , Cleveland , Columbus , Indianapolis , Las Vegas , Miami , Minneapolis , Nashville , New Orleans , Pittsburgh and St. Louis .
The call was yet another private warning about the seriousness of the coronavirus outbreaks given to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ large .
It came less than a week after the Center for Public Integrity revealed that the White House compiled a detailed report showing 18 states were in the “ red zone ” for coronavirus cases but did not release it publicly .
Increasing test positivity — an indicator that a community does not have an outbreak under control — should be expected in areas that reopened and grew more relaxed about social distancing measures , said Harvard epidemiologist Bill Hanage .
He said the warnings and data from the White House should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a pandemic .
You can not hide it under the carpet , ” he said .
“ The best way to deal with a crisis or a natural disaster is to be straight with people , to earn their trust and to give the information they need to make decisions for themselves and their communities.
” Birx told hundreds of emergency managers and other state and local leaders that they should act quickly to stem the outbreaks .
Among her recommendations were to trace the contacts of patients testing positive for COVID-19 in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ When you first see that increase in test positivity , that is when to start the mitigation efforts , ” she said in a recording obtained by Public Integrity .
“ I know it may look small and you may say , ‘ That only went from 5 to 5-and-a-half [ percent ] , and we ’ re gon na wait and see what happens.
’ If you wait another three or four or even five days , you ’ ll start to see a dramatic increase in cases.
” Birx @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declines in test positivity in places like Phoenix and San Antonio but warned that the outbreak in the Sunbelt was moving north .
“ What started out very much as a southern and western epidemic is starting to move up the East Coast into Tennessee , Arkansas , up into Missouri , up across Colorado , and obviously we ’ re talking about increases now in Baltimore , ” she said .
“ So this is really critical that everybody is following this and making sure they ’ re being aggressive about mitigation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard the warnings and was invited to the call , which was hosted by the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and closed to the press .
Baltimore and Cleveland were two of the cities Birx warned were facing rising test positivity , but a spokeswoman for the Cleveland mayor ’ s office , Nancy Kelsey-Carroll , said they did not participate in the call .
And Baltimore health department leaders didn ’ t know about it , agency spokesman Adam Abadir said in an email .
That city today announced a mask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The test positivity rates may not have been news to some elected officials .
For example , Pennsylvania already publicly reports that data by county .
Birx ’ s warning came a day after President Donald Trump resumed his televised coronavirus briefings .
The president offered a rosier picture of the pandemic than Birx , focusing on examples of improvements in the fight against the virus , such as better treatment with the drug remdesivir .
Her call also came the same day that Democratic Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi had insisted on greater data transparency in a meeting with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows .
Schumer said they would push for legislation to “ ensure that COVID-19 data is fully transparent and accessible without any interference from the administration.
” And on Tuesday , former CDC Director Tom Frieden and colleagues released a list of data points they would like states to publish in real-time , standardized , to give officials and residents better information .
“ It ’ s not just people who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Caitlin Rivers , an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University , on a call with reporters .
“ The more that we can provide information to people to keep themselves and their families safe , the better off we ’ ll be.
” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Birx ’ s warnings , nor did it answer repeated questions over several days from Public Integrity on why it had not made the “ red zone ” report public .
Birx said on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent to governors for four weeks .
One staffer for a governor said his boss received only the section of the report related to his state , not the entire report .

The call was yet another warning about the seriousness of the outbreaks given to local officials but not the public.
This article about coronavirus aggressive action was originally published by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit newsroom based in Washington, D.C.”
Dr. Deborah Birx, a leader of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, warned state and local leaders in a private phone call Wednesday that 11 major cities are seeing increases in the percentage of tests coming back positive for COVID-19 and should take “aggressive” steps to mitigate their outbreaks.
The cities she identified were Baltimore, Cleveland, Columbus, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Miami, Minneapolis, Nashville, New Orleans, Pittsburgh and St. Louis.
The call was yet another private warning about the seriousness of the coronavirus outbreaks given to local officials but not the public at large. It came less than a week after the Center for Public Integrity revealed that the White House compiled a detailed report showing 18 states were in the “red zone” for coronavirus cases but did not release it publicly.
Increasing test positivity — an indicator that a community does not have an outbreak under control — should be expected in areas that reopened and grew more relaxed about social distancing measures, said Harvard epidemiologist Bill Hanage. He said the warnings and data from the White House should be made public.
“This is a pandemic. You cannot hide it under the carpet,” he said. “The best way to deal with a crisis or a natural disaster is to be straight with people, to earn their trust and to give the information they need to make decisions for themselves and their communities.”
Birx told hundreds of emergency managers and other state and local leaders that they should act quickly to stem the outbreaks. Among her recommendations were to trace the contacts of patients testing positive for COVID-19 in areas where test positivity is going up.
“When you first see that increase in test positivity, that is when to start the mitigation efforts,” she said in a recording obtained by Public Integrity. “I know it may look small and you may say, ‘That only went from 5 to 5-and-a-half [percent], and we’re gonna wait and see what happens.’ If you wait another three or four or even five days, you’ll start to see a dramatic increase in cases.”
Birx said the federal government was seeing encouraging declines in test positivity in places like Phoenix and San Antonio but warned that the outbreak in the Sunbelt was moving north.
“What started out very much as a southern and western epidemic is starting to move up the East Coast into Tennessee, Arkansas, up into Missouri, up across Colorado, and obviously we’re talking about increases now in Baltimore,” she said. “So this is really critical that everybody is following this and making sure they’re being aggressive about mitigation efforts.”
It’s unclear who heard the warnings and was invited to the call, which was hosted by the White House Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and closed to the press. Baltimore and Cleveland were two of the cities Birx warned were facing rising test positivity, but a spokeswoman for the Cleveland mayor’s office, Nancy Kelsey-Carroll, said they did not participate in the call. And Baltimore health department leaders didn’t know about it, agency spokesman Adam Abadir said in an email. That city today announced a mask mandate and new restrictions on indoor dining.
The test positivity rates may not have been news to some elected officials. For example, Pennsylvania already publicly reports that data by county.
Birx’s warning came a day after President Donald Trump resumed his televised coronavirus briefings. The president offered a rosier picture of the pandemic than Birx, focusing on examples of improvements in the fight against the virus, such as better treatment with the drug remdesivir.
Her call also came the same day that Democratic Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor that he and House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi had insisted on greater data transparency in a meeting with White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows. Schumer said they would push for legislation to “ensure that COVID-19 data is fully transparent and accessible without any interference from the administration.”
And on Tuesday, former CDC Director Tom Frieden and colleagues released a list of data points they would like states to publish in real-time, standardized, to give officials and residents better information.
“It’s not just people who are holding office who need to make decisions,” said Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, on a call with reporters. “The more that we can provide information to people to keep themselves and their families safe, the better off we’ll be.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Birx’s warnings, nor did it answer repeated questions over several days from Public Integrity on why it had not made the “red zone” report public. Birx said on the call that the weekly report had been sent to governors for four weeks. One staffer for a governor said his boss received only the section of the report related to his state, not the entire report.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-07-26--Legal Complaint Against Venmo Challenges Anti-Muslim Discrimination

No one should have to justify what they ate for lunch and why after dining out with friends , just because they are Muslim , Arab or South Asian .
But that ’ s the sad reality for many New Yorkers who are regularly singled out when they make payments , and the reason why our organization , the Council on American-Islamic Relations , New York ( CAIR-NY ) , is representing Brooklyn native and community organizer Shahana Hanif in a discrimination complaint against payment processor Venmo before the New York City Commission on Human Rights , filed on July @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on certain transactions amount to profiling , lead to embarrassing social stigmas , and are an unacceptable and discriminatory barrier for whole groups of people to enjoy the same access to services as others .
The case is the first in the nation to challenge Venmo ’ s policy of targeting transactions on the basis of religion ( Islam ) and ethnicity .
We bring this case to force Venmo to change its policy and to be transparent about how it filters and reviews transactions .
Venmo will also serve as a warning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we will not allow them to escape responsibility for their unlawful conduct .
Our complaint against Venmo stemmed from a lunch that Hanif had with friends in late 2019 at the Al-Aqsa Restaurant in the Bronx .
Hanif , of Bangladeshi descent , is also a candidate to become the first Muslim woman and South Asian on the New York City Council .
As often happens at lunch , one person covered the bill and the others paid her back .
But when Hanif tried to send $ 14 to her friend over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her description of the payment , the transaction was flagged and restricted .
She was contacted by Venmo , demanding she explain the purpose of the payment and provide a “ complete and detailed explanation ” of what she purchased and where .
Hanif provided details but felt embarrassed , singled out and unwelcome , wondering why she had to justify getting lunch .
“ Al-Aqsa ” happens to be associated with the Al-Aqsa Mosque , one of the holiest sites in Islam , located in Jerusalem .
Venmo ultimately approved the transaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maintains a generalized policy of pausing transactions with certain terms for administrative review without looking at the context or location of the users .
This practice has a disparate impact on those belonging to certain races or religions and is thus discriminatory in its nature and denies equal access to whole communities .
Experiences like that of Hanif are not isolated incidents .
When she shared her experience on Twitter , many people quickly reported similar experiences of having transactions blocked for payments , ranging from a ticket for a Syrian play to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Syrian lemonade.
” This trend facing Muslims and those of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent became so prevalent that Newsweek conducted an investigation into Venmo last year .
Newsweek discovered that transactions mentioning Persian restaurants were regularly flagged , while transactions mentioning “ Cuba sanctions ” or “ North Korea food ” were not .
The advocacy group MPower Change also conducted its own investigation , and found that terms surrounding Middle Eastern or Muslim terms were flagged but terms like “ KKK ” or “ cocaine , ” which both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , were not .
Such regimes are discriminatory and overbroad .
They create a reality where some individuals are forced to go through additional steps purely based on their perceived identity .
If the police did the same — subjecting certain people to additional scrutiny and questioning just because of certain generalized terms or associations with a certain race or religion — that would be obviously unconstitutional .
In New York City , special laws require businesses to provide their services to New Yorkers on equal footing and with equal access .
Why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payments in a discriminatory manner ?
Venmo is not the first financial entity to have these problems .
“ Banking while Muslim ” is a trend impacting American Muslims regularly that goes back to passage of the USA Patriot Act .
Financial institutions regularly single out American Muslims for discriminatory treatment .
In one case filed last year with the Commission on Human Rights by CAIR-NY , a hijab-wearing woman who tried to open a savings account at Citibank was rebuffed without explanation when she tried to open a new account after she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In another case filed in federal court , Citibank shutdown down , without reason or explanation , bank and credit accounts of a Muslim customer .
CAIR-NY has documented many similar instances of “ banking while Muslim ” where accounts are closed because of the account holder ’ s ethnicity or religious background .
In April , numerous members of Congress even sent a letter to federal financial regulators and three banks calling on them to address disparities and difficulties experienced by individuals , businesses and charities .
“ Banking as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are not crimes and must stop being treated as such , ” they wrote .
“ We are therefore advocating for a more inclusive financial system , and we reject the notion that there is a binary choice between creating financial inclusion and protecting our financial system from abuse by illicit actors.
” The Congresspersons cited LaunchGood , a crowdfunding platform focused on serving the Muslim community , which raised half a million dollars for coronavirus relief alone , and was warned by WePay and Chase Bank that the platform would be cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be high risk .
The Congresspersons noted that despite internal policies and due diligence , LaunchGood was unfairly targeted for discrimination based on the community it serves .
In other cases , bank accounts held by Muslims , or even those simply perceived to be Muslim , have been closed .
Unfortunately , this issue is only growing .
Ultimately these trends make whole communities feel unwelcome in an unacceptable way .
Hanif , we hope , will not have to have a transaction blocked and justify herself the next time she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with friends .

This is the first U.S. case against Venmo’s policy of targeting transactions on the basis of religion and ethnicity.
No one should have to justify what they ate for lunch and why after dining out with friends, just because they are Muslim, Arab or South Asian. But that’s the sad reality for many New Yorkers who are regularly singled out when they make payments, and the reason why our organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, New York (CAIR-NY), is representing Brooklyn native and community organizer Shahana Hanif in a discrimination complaint against payment processor Venmo before the New York City Commission on Human Rights, filed on July 21. The types of restrictions placed on certain transactions amount to profiling, lead to embarrassing social stigmas, and are an unacceptable and discriminatory barrier for whole groups of people to enjoy the same access to services as others.
The case is the first in the nation to challenge Venmo’s policy of targeting transactions on the basis of religion (Islam) and ethnicity. We bring this case to force Venmo to change its policy and to be transparent about how it filters and reviews transactions. Venmo will also serve as a warning to others in the financial sector that we will not allow them to escape responsibility for their unlawful conduct.
Our complaint against Venmo stemmed from a lunch that Hanif had with friends in late 2019 at the Al-Aqsa Restaurant in the Bronx. Hanif, of Bangladeshi descent, is also a candidate to become the first Muslim woman and South Asian on the New York City Council. As often happens at lunch, one person covered the bill and the others paid her back. But when Hanif tried to send $14 to her friend over Venmo, mentioning “Al-Aqsa” in her description of the payment, the transaction was flagged and restricted.
She was contacted by Venmo, demanding she explain the purpose of the payment and provide a “complete and detailed explanation” of what she purchased and where. Hanif provided details but felt embarrassed, singled out and unwelcome, wondering why she had to justify getting lunch.
“Al-Aqsa” happens to be associated with the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of the holiest sites in Islam, located in Jerusalem. Venmo ultimately approved the transaction after a delay. It appears Venmo maintains a generalized policy of pausing transactions with certain terms for administrative review without looking at the context or location of the users. This practice has a disparate impact on those belonging to certain races or religions and is thus discriminatory in its nature and denies equal access to whole communities.
Experiences like that of Hanif are not isolated incidents. When she shared her experience on Twitter, many people quickly reported similar experiences of having transactions blocked for payments, ranging from a ticket for a Syrian play to, ridiculously, a gelato flavor called “Syrian lemonade.” This trend facing Muslims and those of Middle Eastern or South Asian descent became so prevalent that Newsweek conducted an investigation into Venmo last year. Newsweek discovered that transactions mentioning Persian restaurants were regularly flagged, while transactions mentioning “Cuba sanctions” or “North Korea food” were not. The advocacy group MPower Change also conducted its own investigation, and found that terms surrounding Middle Eastern or Muslim terms were flagged but terms like “KKK” or “cocaine,” which both violate Venmo’s terms of service, were not.
“Banking while Muslim” is a trend impacting American Muslims regularly that goes back to passage of the USA Patriot Act.
Such regimes are discriminatory and overbroad. They create a reality where some individuals are forced to go through additional steps purely based on their perceived identity. If the police did the same — subjecting certain people to additional scrutiny and questioning just because of certain generalized terms or associations with a certain race or religion — that would be obviously unconstitutional. In New York City, special laws require businesses to provide their services to New Yorkers on equal footing and with equal access. Why then are payment processors allowed to flag payments in a discriminatory manner?
Venmo is not the first financial entity to have these problems. “Banking while Muslim” is a trend impacting American Muslims regularly that goes back to passage of the USA Patriot Act. Financial institutions regularly single out American Muslims for discriminatory treatment. In one case filed last year with the Commission on Human Rights by CAIR-NY, a hijab-wearing woman who tried to open a savings account at Citibank was rebuffed without explanation when she tried to open a new account after she mentioned her husband’s Arabic surname. In another case filed in federal court, Citibank shutdown down, without reason or explanation, bank and credit accounts of a Muslim customer. CAIR-NY has documented many similar instances of “banking while Muslim” where accounts are closed because of the account holder’s ethnicity or religious background.
In April, numerous members of Congress even sent a letter to federal financial regulators and three banks calling on them to address disparities and difficulties experienced by individuals, businesses and charities. “Banking as a charity/nonprofit and ‘banking while Muslim’ are not crimes and must stop being treated as such,” they wrote. “We are therefore advocating for a more inclusive financial system, and we reject the notion that there is a binary choice between creating financial inclusion and protecting our financial system from abuse by illicit actors.”
The Congresspersons cited LaunchGood, a crowdfunding platform focused on serving the Muslim community, which raised half a million dollars for coronavirus relief alone, and was warned by WePay and Chase Bank that the platform would be cut off from service because it was perceived to be high risk. The Congresspersons noted that despite internal policies and due diligence, LaunchGood was unfairly targeted for discrimination based on the community it serves.
In other cases, bank accounts held by Muslims, or even those simply perceived to be Muslim, have been closed.
Unfortunately, this issue is only growing. Ultimately these trends make whole communities feel unwelcome in an unacceptable way. Hanif, we hope, will not have to have a transaction blocked and justify herself the next time she wants to enjoy a Bangladeshi meal out with friends.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-28--Jayapal: Barr Called BLM “Terrorists” But Ignored Armed Michigan Protesters

In an exchange with Rep. Pramila Jayapal ( D-Washington ) before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday , Attorney General William Barr revealed that he is oblivious to widely reported threats of violence made by right-wing “ reopen ” protesters , even as he has backed the Trump administration ’ s vicious crackdown on racial justice protesters .
When asked about the death threats made against Michigan Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer by right-wing demonstrators who oppose public health measures taken by the state to curb the spread of COVID-19 , Barr said he was not aware that such threats against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s comment came as he was being questioned about the federal agents that the Trump administration sent to quell protests in Portland , Oregon , and in a number of other cities across the country .
Throughout the House Judiciary Committee session , he was also grilled by Democratic lawmakers on issues ranging from the government ’ s response to police brutality to his controversial interventions in high-profile federal cases .
During her exchange with Barr , Jayapal mentioned a recent phone conversation between Trump and several U.S. governors in which he told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrators , describing them as “ terrorists.
” Because the Trump administration had sent federal agents to Portland , purportedly to protect government buildings there , Jayapal questioned why the administration didn ’ t take the same action against conservative protesters who opposed precautionary stay-at-home orders from governors to prevent the spread of coronavirus .
In Michigan , for example , protesters , many armed with guns , stormed the capitol building , with some calling for Whitmer to be harmed physically due to her orders .
Jayapal asked Barr if he was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s life or that they had engaged in other violent rhetoric .
Barr , to her surprise , said he was not .
“ Major protests in Michigan , you ’ re the attorney general , and you didn ’ t know the protesters called for the governor to be lynched , shot and beheaded ?
” she questioned .
“ Well , there are a lot of protests around the United States , ” Barr began , but Jayapal stopped him there to give her assessment of what the attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world .
“ You are aware of certain kinds of protesters , but in Michigan , when protesters carried guns , Confederate flags , and swastikas , and call for the governor of Michigan to be beheaded and shot and lynched , somehow , you ’ re not aware of that , ” she noted .
Jayapal added that the contrast between Barr ’ s inaction in Michigan and the administration ’ s crackdown in Portland lays bare the priorities and loyalties of the White House .
“ When white men with swastikas @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is no need for the president to ‘ activate ’ you , because they ’ re getting the president ’ s personal agenda done , ” she said .
“ But when Black people and people of color protest police brutality , systemic racism , and the president ’ s very own lack of response to those critical issues , then you forcibly remove them with armed federal officers [ and ] pepper bombs because they are considered terrorists by the president.
” Jayapal elaborated on the point she was making to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approach to Black Lives Matter protests , but not to right-wing extremists threatening to lynch a governor if it ’ s for … the president ’ s benefit , ” she said .
For his own part , Barr earlier in the day explained that he disagreed with the premise that there is a systemic problem in policing when it comes to race .
“ I don ’ t agree there ’ s systemic racism in the police department , generally in this country , ” he said .
Later in the day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) offered a scathing critique of Barr ’ s opening statement , saying he had shown once more that he has “ no concern for Black lives ” by delivering an opening statement devoid of “ sympathy and understanding that Black lives matter .
”

Barr had said he wasn’t aware of protests in Michigan, where some had called for violence against Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.
In an exchange with Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Washington) before the House Judiciary Committee on Tuesday, Attorney General William Barr revealed that he is oblivious to widely reported threats of violence made by right-wing “reopen” protesters, even as he has backed the Trump administration’s vicious crackdown on racial justice protesters.
When asked about the death threats made against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer by right-wing demonstrators who oppose public health measures taken by the state to curb the spread of COVID-19, Barr said he was not aware that such threats against Whitmer had been made.
Barr’s comment came as he was being questioned about the federal agents that the Trump administration sent to quell protests in Portland, Oregon, and in a number of other cities across the country. Throughout the House Judiciary Committee session, he was also grilled by Democratic lawmakers on issues ranging from the government’s response to police brutality to his controversial interventions in high-profile federal cases.
During her exchange with Barr, Jayapal mentioned a recent phone conversation between Trump and several U.S. governors in which he told them to “dominate” racial justice demonstrators, describing them as “terrorists.”
Because the Trump administration had sent federal agents to Portland, purportedly to protect government buildings there, Jayapal questioned why the administration didn’t take the same action against conservative protesters who opposed precautionary stay-at-home orders from governors to prevent the spread of coronavirus.
In Michigan, for example, protesters, many armed with guns, stormed the capitol building, with some calling for Whitmer to be harmed physically due to her orders.
Jayapal asked Barr if he was aware that those individuals had threatened Whitmer’s life or that they had engaged in other violent rhetoric. Barr, to her surprise, said he was not.
“Major protests in Michigan, you’re the attorney general, and you didn’t know the protesters called for the governor to be lynched, shot and beheaded?” she questioned.
“Well, there are a lot of protests around the United States,” Barr began, but Jayapal stopped him there to give her assessment of what the attorney general had just revealed to her and the world.
“You are aware of certain kinds of protesters, but in Michigan, when protesters carried guns, Confederate flags, and swastikas, and call for the governor of Michigan to be beheaded and shot and lynched, somehow, you’re not aware of that,” she noted.
.@RepJayapal: "You are aware of certain kinds of protesters, but in Michigan when protesters carried guns & Confederate flags & called for the governor of Michigan to be shot and lynched, somehow you are not aware of that … there is a discrepancy." pic.twitter.com/qAr8HGhr1F — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 28, 2020
Jayapal added that the contrast between Barr’s inaction in Michigan and the administration’s crackdown in Portland lays bare the priorities and loyalties of the White House.
“When white men with swastikas storm a government building with guns, there is no need for the president to ‘activate’ you, because they’re getting the president’s personal agenda done,” she said. “But when Black people and people of color protest police brutality, systemic racism, and the president’s very own lack of response to those critical issues, then you forcibly remove them with armed federal officers [and] pepper bombs because they are considered terrorists by the president.”
Jayapal elaborated on the point she was making to Barr. “You take an aggressive approach to Black Lives Matter protests, but not to right-wing extremists threatening to lynch a governor if it’s for … the president’s benefit,” she said.
For his own part, Barr earlier in the day explained that he disagreed with the premise that there is a systemic problem in policing when it comes to race. “I don’t agree there’s systemic racism in the police department, generally in this country,” he said.
Later in the day, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) offered a scathing critique of Barr’s opening statement, saying he had shown once more that he has “no concern for Black lives” by delivering an opening statement devoid of “sympathy and understanding that Black lives matter.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-28--As COVID Deaths Pass 151,000, Trump Says “Not Sure I Could have Done Any More”

During an interview with a local television station in North Carolina on Monday evening , President Donald Trump suggested he was one of the most successful chief executives this country has ever seen .
“ Nobody ’ s accomplished more in the first three-and-a-half years than I have , ” Trump told a reporter from NBC station affiliate WRAL , without providing details about which accomplishments he had in mind .
“ I ’ m not sure I could have done any more , because we ’ ve really done a lot , ” the president added .
“ We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than any administration has ever done in the first three-and-a-half years , and nobody even challenges that.
” Trump was also asked whether he would have done anything differently if he could relive the past four or five months of the coronavirus .
But he largely avoided answering the question , responding instead about his closing off travel from China as evidence of his doing well .
However , most Americans give Trump negative marks when it comes to his response to COVID-19 , with 68 percent in a recent Associated Press/NORC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they disapprove of how he ’ s handled the crisis compared to 32 percent who say they approve .
In a broader sense , that same poll found that most Americans were upset with his time as president in general .
Just 38 percent said he was doing a good job , while 61 percent gave him negative marks .
Trump also touted how well he ’ s handled the economy , blaming recent downturns in the market on the coronavirus pandemic , which he called a “ plague from China ” during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts not to describe COVID-19 in such terms .
But even on that metric , Americans are starting to sour on Trump .
For most of his time in office , the president has been given credit from voters for what appears to most to be good economic outcomes ( even though , as many have pointed out , positive economic indicators began long before he took office ) .
But when it comes to the economy , the U.S. population is now split , with 51 percent saying they disapprove of how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 48 percent saying they approve .
It ’ s not unusual for Trump to tout himself , even while doing poorly in the eyes of the American public .
In mid-March , after he finally relented and decided to take action on the coronavirus pandemic ( following weeks of inaction when he kept ridiculing it as a “ hoax ” used against him politically ) , the president was asked by reporters in the White House to rate his response to the crisis on a scale of 1 to 10 .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , I think we ’ ve done a great job , ” Trump said .
As of Tuesday afternoon , there have been more than 4.4 million cumulative cases of COVID-19 reported in the United States , with nearly 151,000 having died as a result of the disease .

During an interview with a local television station in North Carolina on Monday evening, President Donald Trump suggested he was one of the most successful chief executives this country has ever seen.
“Nobody’s accomplished more in the first three-and-a-half years than I have,” Trump told a reporter from NBC station affiliate WRAL, without providing details about which accomplishments he had in mind.
“I’m not sure I could have done any more, because we’ve really done a lot,” the president added. “We’ve done, I think, more than any administration has ever done in the first three-and-a-half years, and nobody even challenges that.”
Trump was also asked whether he would have done anything differently if he could relive the past four or five months of the coronavirus. But he largely avoided answering the question, responding instead about his closing off travel from China as evidence of his doing well.
However, most Americans give Trump negative marks when it comes to his response to COVID-19, with 68 percent in a recent Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll stating they disapprove of how he’s handled the crisis compared to 32 percent who say they approve.
In a broader sense, that same poll found that most Americans were upset with his time as president in general. Just 38 percent said he was doing a good job, while 61 percent gave him negative marks.
Trump also touted how well he’s handled the economy, blaming recent downturns in the market on the coronavirus pandemic, which he called a “plague from China” during the interview, despite advice from medical experts not to describe COVID-19 in such terms.
But even on that metric, Americans are starting to sour on Trump. For most of his time in office, the president has been given credit from voters for what appears to most to be good economic outcomes (even though, as many have pointed out, positive economic indicators began long before he took office). But when it comes to the economy, the U.S. population is now split, with 51 percent saying they disapprove of how Trump has performed on the issue, and 48 percent saying they approve.
It’s not unusual for Trump to tout himself, even while doing poorly in the eyes of the American public. In mid-March, after he finally relented and decided to take action on the coronavirus pandemic (following weeks of inaction when he kept ridiculing it as a “hoax” used against him politically), the president was asked by reporters in the White House to rate his response to the crisis on a scale of 1 to 10.
“I’d rate it a 10, I think we’ve done a great job,” Trump said.
As of Tuesday afternoon, there have been more than 4.4 million cumulative cases of COVID-19 reported in the United States, with nearly 151,000 having died as a result of the disease.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-28--“F-35s Don’t Help Families Pay Their Bills”: GOP Slips Pentagon Into COVID Bill

In a floor speech late Monday , Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell described the GOP ’ s newly released coronavirus stimulus package as a “ carefully tailored ” plan to provide financial relief to desperate Americans .
But a look at the legislative text ( pdf ) released by Senate Republicans shows the HEALS Act is replete with massive gifts to the Pentagon and defense contractors that would do nothing to aid the unemployed , provide nutrition assistance to hungry children , prevent an avalanche of evictions , or stop the spread of coronavirus .
“ Last time I checked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their bills , ” Rep. Chuy García ( D-Ill. ) tweeted in response to the GOP ’ s proposal of $ 686 million in spending on new fighter jets .
The legislation also includes hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for surveillance planes , Apache helicopters , and armored vehicles .
The HEALS Act proposes a total of $ 29.4 billion in new military spending just a week after the House and Senate approved a $ 740.5 billion Pentagon budget for fiscal year 2021 .
Meanwhile , as Common Dreams reported earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money for state and local governments , election assistance , or the U.S .
Postal Service .
The legislation would also slash the weekly federal unemployment insurance boost from $ 600 to $ 200 .
Roll Call ’ s John Donnelly reported Monday that “ Senate Republicans have laced their roughly $ 1 trillion coronavirus relief package with at least $ 7 billion for weapons , most of which are built by leading contractors that contribute heavily to congressional campaigns.
” The draft appropriations portion , made public Monday evening , includes money @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ships , and armored vehicles that the measure ’ s authors have deemed “ emergency ” spending that is not capped by the budget control law… The top two defense contractors , Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. , would do especially well under the measure .
The list of weapons is topped by fully $ 1 billion for an unstated number of Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime surveillance jets .
Also on the list is $ 283 million for Boeing Apache helicopters for the Army .
Boeing ’ s Ground-Based Midcourse Defense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intercepting incoming ballistic missiles from sites in Alaska and California , would receive $ 200 million , and $ 243 million more would go to a missile defense radar program .
“ People are dying , or worried about keeping a roof over their families ’ heads , or cutting hours because their kids ’ schools are closed , ” said Anthony Weir , a lobbyist on nuclear disarmament and Pentagon spending at the Friends Committee on National Legislation .
“ And this is the time to jam some military procurement into this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last year ?
”

The GOP’s HEALS Act is replete with massive gifts to the Pentagon and defense contractors.
In a floor speech late Monday, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell described the GOP’s newly released coronavirus stimulus package as a “carefully tailored” plan to provide financial relief to desperate Americans.
But a look at the legislative text (pdf) released by Senate Republicans shows the HEALS Act is replete with massive gifts to the Pentagon and defense contractors that would do nothing to aid the unemployed, provide nutrition assistance to hungry children, prevent an avalanche of evictions, or stop the spread of coronavirus.
“Last time I checked F-35s don’t help families pay their bills,” Rep. Chuy García (D-Ill.) tweeted in response to the GOP’s proposal of $686 million in spending on new fighter jets.
The legislation also includes hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for surveillance planes, Apache helicopters, and armored vehicles.
The HEALS Act proposes a total of $29.4 billion in new military spending just a week after the House and Senate approved a $740.5 billion Pentagon budget for fiscal year 2021.
Meanwhile, as Common Dreams reported earlier Tuesday, the Republican package includes no money for state and local governments, election assistance, or the U.S. Postal Service. The legislation would also slash the weekly federal unemployment insurance boost from $600 to $200.
The Senate Republican plan: – $29,400,000,000 for the Pentagon
– $0 for hazard pay
– $0 for nutrition assistance
– $0 for the uninsured/under-insured
– $0 for the Postal Service
– $0 for state and local governments
– 100% deduction for three-martini CEO lunches What a disaster. — Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) July 27, 2020
Roll Call’s John Donnelly reported Monday that “Senate Republicans have laced their roughly $1 trillion coronavirus relief package with at least $7 billion for weapons, most of which are built by leading contractors that contribute heavily to congressional campaigns.”
According to Donnelly:
The draft appropriations portion, made public Monday evening, includes money for fighter jets, helicopters, radars, ships, and armored vehicles that the measure’s authors have deemed “emergency” spending that is not capped by the budget control law… The top two defense contractors, Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co., would do especially well under the measure. The list of weapons is topped by fully $1 billion for an unstated number of Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime surveillance jets. Also on the list is $283 million for Boeing Apache helicopters for the Army. Boeing’s Ground-Based Midcourse Defense anti-missile system, which is aimed at intercepting incoming ballistic missiles from sites in Alaska and California, would receive $200 million, and $243 million more would go to a missile defense radar program.
“People are dying, or worried about keeping a roof over their families’ heads, or cutting hours because their kids’ schools are closed,” said Anthony Weir, a lobbyist on nuclear disarmament and Pentagon spending at the Friends Committee on National Legislation. “And this is the time to jam some military procurement into this year that you didn’t get last year?”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-07-28--GOP Stimulus Bill Shows McConnell and Trump Are Perfectly Happy to Watch You Die

Let us now turn our primers to the chapter titled , “ Stuff That Should Have Happened Months Ago But Didn ’ t Because Mitch McConnell Said ‘ No.
’ ” Two months and tens of thousands of corpses ago , Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions ( HEROES ) Act , a $ 3 trillion COVID-19 relief package that would be the largest of its kind in U.S. history if passed by the full Congress .
After passing in the House , the HEROES @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks on the desk of Mitch McConnell like a dead bird by the side of some dusty Kentucky road .
On the day it passed the House , nearly 86,000 people in the U.S. had succumbed to COVID .
Today , the death toll stands at nearly twice that number , and continues to increase by about 1,000 souls a day .
Back in early spring when the COVID banshee was screaming all up and down the East coast , McConnell had little choice but to pass the CARES Act , the first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no exaggeration to say the CARES Act salvaged the country in a time of bleakest need , and soon after , even more was needed .
For McConnell and his ilk , however , providing more government aid to the people was ideologically unsound .
Thus , the HEROES Act has languished in Senate Republican limbo since the first green grass broke through to the light .
Now , as the COVID pandemic has become worse than it was even in the darkest hours of the springtime , McConnell is confronted once @ @ @ @ @ @ @ avoid .
Among the tallest reasons why the pressure is on to pass a new relief bill is the fact that a $ 600 weekly emergency unemployment benefit is set to expire within days .
With COVID rampaging through the South and West , swaths of businesses are either scaling back or closing outright , many for the second time .
Without that emergency stipend , tens of millions of people will be staring down the barrel of food shortages and eviction .
McConnell and the GOP seek to cut that emergency benefit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 1 trillion Health , Economic Assistance , Liability , and Schools ( HEALS ) Act , unveiled in parts by Republicans on Monday , would protect corporations from coronavirus-related lawsuits via a sweeping five-year liability shield — something McConnell has been pushing for months .
The Republican package would also do nothing to expand federal nutrition aid and offers no additional emergency relief to the struggling U.S .
Postal Service .
Tallest of all reasons in the immediate moment is the giant , furious elephant in the room : Reopening schools .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ weeks , Donald Trump has made sending the kids back to the classroom amid this uncontrolled pandemic a top priority , and yet school districts from one side of the country to the other are thoroughly unprepared and shamefully underfunded to complete this nigh-impossible task .
Remote learning ?
Not nearly ready yet , either .
So , of course , the Senate Republican rejoinder to these twin crises is to lowball their aid offer , offering no new aid to states and cities to address the insurmountable challenges before them .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tried to zero out funding for new testing , and demanded money to build a new FBI headquarters in downtown Washington , D.C. Why a new headquarters ?
Because it would be across the street from a Trump hotel property .
Why no new testing ?
If you have to ask now , you ’ ll never understand .
According to multiple reports , the Senate Republican caucus is in utter disarray .
Prominent GOP senators believe half the caucus will vote against whatever the leadership coughs up , no matter what is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stalk the halls of the Capitol rattling the rusty old chains of fiscal responsibility even as the dome caves in on his head .
Meanwhile , more than 20 GOP senators are up for reelection next month , many from states now deeply affected by COVID .
If they come away from this with nothing to show , there will be hell to pay come November .
The short version is that Speaker Pelosi should have a very strong negotiating hand when she sits down with McConnell and his pack of brigands this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act is incomplete medicine , but far better than the dregs being peddled by McConnell and the White House .
It is to be hoped that Pelosi can summon every last ounce of canniness and strength gathered over her decades in office for this one pivotal , all-important moment .
I am running out of usable words for Trump , McConnell and every other free-market fraud who is actively dooming the people to death in defense of an ideology that failed decades ago and has been rotting right out in the open ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lazy ” is the shortest racist shorthand in U.S. history , but that — along with pure venal greed — is why we have been made to wait for a spoonful of help from a government that spends trillions on the art of dealing death far away , and right here at home .
Pass the goddamn HEROES Act , and then pass another bill , and then another , as many as are needed to save lives , ensure testing , and keep people safe until the long burn of COVID runs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the worst people at the worst possible time , and the Republican reaction to this stimulus package debate is exactly the kind of thinking that will leave this nation a bowl of ashes far sooner than we think .
The only thing inevitable in life is death , and it is knocking on our national door .

The only thing inevitable in life is death, and thanks in large part to Republicans, it’s knocking on our national door.
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Let us now turn our primers to the chapter titled, “Stuff That Should Have Happened Months Ago But Didn’t Because Mitch McConnell Said ‘No.’”
Two months and tens of thousands of corpses ago, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic majority in the House of Representatives passed the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act, a $3 trillion COVID-19 relief package that would be the largest of its kind in U.S. history if passed by the full Congress.
After passing in the House, the HEROES Act has moldered for almost a dozen weeks on the desk of Mitch McConnell like a dead bird by the side of some dusty Kentucky road. On the day it passed the House, nearly 86,000 people in the U.S. had succumbed to COVID. Today, the death toll stands at nearly twice that number, and continues to increase by about 1,000 souls a day.
Back in early spring when the COVID banshee was screaming all up and down the East coast, McConnell had little choice but to pass the CARES Act, the first stimulus package of the pandemic. It is no exaggeration to say the CARES Act salvaged the country in a time of bleakest need, and soon after, even more was needed.
For McConnell and his ilk, however, providing more government aid to the people was ideologically unsound. Thus, the HEROES Act has languished in Senate Republican limbo since the first green grass broke through to the light. Now, as the COVID pandemic has become worse than it was even in the darkest hours of the springtime, McConnell is confronted once again with a decision he cannot avoid.
Among the tallest reasons why the pressure is on to pass a new relief bill is the fact that a $600 weekly emergency unemployment benefit is set to expire within days. With COVID rampaging through the South and West, swaths of businesses are either scaling back or closing outright, many for the second time. Without that emergency stipend, tens of millions of people will be staring down the barrel of food shortages and eviction. McConnell and the GOP seek to cut that emergency benefit by $400 a week.
The $1 trillion Health, Economic Assistance, Liability, and Schools (HEALS) Act, unveiled in parts by Republicans on Monday, would protect corporations from coronavirus-related lawsuits via a sweeping five-year liability shield — something McConnell has been pushing for months. The Republican package would also do nothing to expand federal nutrition aid and offers no additional emergency relief to the struggling U.S. Postal Service.
Tallest of all reasons in the immediate moment is the giant, furious elephant in the room: Reopening schools. The bell is set to ring within weeks, Donald Trump has made sending the kids back to the classroom amid this uncontrolled pandemic a top priority, and yet school districts from one side of the country to the other are thoroughly unprepared and shamefully underfunded to complete this nigh-impossible task. Remote learning? Not nearly ready yet, either.
We are being led by the worst people at the worst possible time, and the Republican reaction to this stimulus package debate is exactly the kind of thinking that will leave this nation a bowl of ashes far sooner than we think.
So, of course, the Senate Republican rejoinder to these twin crises is to lowball their aid offer, offering no new aid to states and cities to address the insurmountable challenges before them. The White House, for its part, tried to zero out funding for new testing, and demanded money to build a new FBI headquarters in downtown Washington, D.C. Why a new headquarters? Because it would be across the street from a Trump hotel property. Why no new testing? If you have to ask now, you’ll never understand.
According to multiple reports, the Senate Republican caucus is in utter disarray. Prominent GOP senators believe half the caucus will vote against whatever the leadership coughs up, no matter what is included. Wreckers like Sen. Ted Cruz stalk the halls of the Capitol rattling the rusty old chains of fiscal responsibility even as the dome caves in on his head. Meanwhile, more than 20 GOP senators are up for reelection next month, many from states now deeply affected by COVID. If they come away from this with nothing to show, there will be hell to pay come November.
The short version is that Speaker Pelosi should have a very strong negotiating hand when she sits down with McConnell and his pack of brigands this week. The House’s CARES Act is incomplete medicine, but far better than the dregs being peddled by McConnell and the White House. It is to be hoped that Pelosi can summon every last ounce of canniness and strength gathered over her decades in office for this one pivotal, all-important moment.
I am running out of usable words for Trump, McConnell and every other free-market fraud who is actively dooming the people to death in defense of an ideology that failed decades ago and has been rotting right out in the open ever since.
“Aid money makes people lazy” is the shortest racist shorthand in U.S. history, but that — along with pure venal greed — is why we have been made to wait for a spoonful of help from a government that spends trillions on the art of dealing death far away, and right here at home.
Pass the goddamn HEROES Act, and then pass another bill, and then another, as many as are needed to save lives, ensure testing, and keep people safe until the long burn of COVID runs its course.
We are being led by the worst people at the worst possible time, and the Republican reaction to this stimulus package debate is exactly the kind of thinking that will leave this nation a bowl of ashes far sooner than we think. The only thing inevitable in life is death, and it is knocking on our national door.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-28--Don Jr. Suspended From Twitter for Promoting False Cures for COVID

Donald Trump Jr. , the eldest child of President Donald Trump , has received a suspension from the social media site Twitter for sharing potentially harmful information related to coronavirus .
Don Jr. shared “ misleading and potentially harmful information ” about coronavirus , resulting in his suspension on Tuesday morning , the social media site explained .
“ The Tweet is in violation of our COVID-19 misinformation policy , ” a spokesperson for Twitter said .
“ The account will be locked until the account owner removes the Tweet.
” Twitter announced in March that it would regulate and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear call to action that could directly pose a risk to people ’ s health or well-being.
” That includes content with descriptions “ of alleged cures for COVID-19 , ” as well as the promotion of “ harmful treatments or protection measures which are known to be ineffective.
” The post in question that Don Jr. had shared seems to fit those descriptors .
The president ’ s son retweeted a post that falsely promoted hydroxychloroquine as a cure for coronavirus .
The video also showed individuals , claiming to be doctors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t need masks ” to protect themselves from the disease , contradicting recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) .
In spite of the fact that President Trump has himself come around on the issue of masks , he , too , shared the dubious and misinformative video on his Twitter account on Tuesday , which also took aim at Anthony Fauci , the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases .
Twitter removed the original post , but took no action against the president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a separate policy around world leaders ’ accounts , stating that they will be allowed to remain in place because of their “ public interest value.
” However , Twitter appears not to have followed through on its policy of placing such tweets “ behind a notice that provides context about the violation ” in this case , though it has done so to the president ’ s tweets in the past .
Other social media sites , including Facebook and YouTube , have also taken actions against users who have shared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actions come after President Trump petitioned the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) to take more regulatory steps toward social media sites earlier this week .
Trump is seeking to require such companies to “ publicly disclose accurate information regarding its content-management mechanisms ” in order to allow “ users to make more informed choices about competitive alternatives.
” Trump also complained on Monday about Twitter ’ s trending topics feature , arguing that it was promoting content that portrayed him in a negative way .
“ They look for anything they can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible , and blow it up , trying to make it trend , ” he said .
Moves to change how the FCC treats social media are being opposed by the two Democratic appointees on the commission , who view the attempts to do so as a means for Trump to politically pressure the site .
“ While social media can be frustrating , turning this agency into the President ’ s speech police is not the answer , ” FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said in response to Trump ’ s request .

Donald Trump Jr., the eldest child of President Donald Trump, has received a suspension from the social media site Twitter for sharing potentially harmful information related to coronavirus.
Don Jr. shared “misleading and potentially harmful information” about coronavirus, resulting in his suspension on Tuesday morning, the social media site explained.
“The Tweet is in violation of our COVID-19 misinformation policy,” a spokesperson for Twitter said. “The account will be locked until the account owner removes the Tweet.”
Twitter announced in March that it would regulate and remove content “when it has a clear call to action that could directly pose a risk to people’s health or well-being.” That includes content with descriptions “of alleged cures for COVID-19,” as well as the promotion of “harmful treatments or protection measures which are known to be ineffective.”
The post in question that Don Jr. had shared seems to fit those descriptors.
The president’s son retweeted a post that falsely promoted hydroxychloroquine as a cure for coronavirus. The video also showed individuals, claiming to be doctors, telling viewers “you don’t need masks” to protect themselves from the disease, contradicting recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In spite of the fact that President Trump has himself come around on the issue of masks, he, too, shared the dubious and misinformative video on his Twitter account on Tuesday, which also took aim at Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Twitter removed the original post, but took no action against the president’s account, as the company has a separate policy around world leaders’ accounts, stating that they will be allowed to remain in place because of their “public interest value.” However, Twitter appears not to have followed through on its policy of placing such tweets “behind a notice that provides context about the violation” in this case, though it has done so to the president’s tweets in the past.
Other social media sites, including Facebook and YouTube, have also taken actions against users who have shared the same video.
Twitter’s actions come after President Trump petitioned the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to take more regulatory steps toward social media sites earlier this week. Trump is seeking to require such companies to “publicly disclose accurate information regarding its content-management mechanisms” in order to allow “users to make more informed choices about competitive alternatives.”
Trump also complained on Monday about Twitter’s trending topics feature, arguing that it was promoting content that portrayed him in a negative way.
“They look for anything they can find, make it as bad as possible, and blow it up, trying to make it trend,” he said.
Moves to change how the FCC treats social media are being opposed by the two Democratic appointees on the commission, who view the attempts to do so as a means for Trump to politically pressure the site.
“While social media can be frustrating, turning this agency into the President’s speech police is not the answer,” FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said in response to Trump’s request.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.