truthout--2020-12-22--Fox News Forced to Debunk Its Own False Voting Machine Claims

Fox News and Fox Business just aired multiple segments debunking false election claims made on their shows for weeks after the voting technology company Smartmatic recently threatened to sue the network — along with fellow right-wing cable channels OANN and Newsmax — for defamation .
Fox Business host Lou Dobbs and Fox News hosts Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro aired the same segment debunking false claims that Smartmatic was involved in a scheme to switch votes from President Donald Trump to President-elect Joe Biden over the weekend .
The segment comes in response to a new lawsuit threat from Smartmatic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rudy Giuliani , former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell , and the hosts pushed the baseless conspiracy theory even though the company was not involved in any elections in the contested swing states .
Powell , who reportedly met with President Donald Trump on Friday amid discussions about naming her a special counsel to investigate unfounded allegations of voter fraud , has for weeks pushed a bizarre conspiracy theory that former Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez had Dominion create software to flip votes that was later used in the 2020 election to flip votes from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Cuba , and others .
There is no evidence to back her claim and the company has threatened to sue her for defamation .
Fox News host Tucker Carlson criticized Powell on air for failing to provide any evidence to back her claim .
Giuliani issued a statement distancing Trump ’ s legal team from Powell after she claimed that Republican Georgia Gov .
Brian Kemp and the CIA were involved in the scheme despite holding a joint news conference with her days earlier .
Giuliani also advised Trump against appointing Powell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The New York Times .
But he has likewise pushed a conspiracy theory about voting machines , even requesting that the Department of Homeland Security seize voting machines in certain states , which it refused to do , according to the Times report .
Giuliani has falsely claimed on Twitter that Dominion was actually a “ front ” for Smartmatic , even though the two companies appear to have no ties .
The two attorneys repeated these baseless allegations on the air , as did Dobbs , prompting Smartmatic to demand a retraction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Washington Post .
“ Fox News has engaged in a concerted disinformation campaign against Smartmatic .
Fox News told its millions of viewers and readers that Smartmatic was founded by [ the late Venezuelan President ] Hugo Chávez , that its software was designed to fix elections , and that Smartmatic conspired with others to defraud the American people and fix the 2020 U.S. election by changing , inflating , and deleting votes , ” the company ’ s attorney said in a letter to the network , calling for corrections to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ during prime time shows to “ match the attention and audience targeted with the original defamatory publications.
” Fox News pointed Salon to the segment aired on the three shows but declined to comment further .
The segment featured Eddie Perez , a voting expert at the OSET Institute in Palo Alto , a nonpartisan election technology research and development nonprofit , who was not informed about the nature of the segment before being interviewed .
“ There was nothing in any of the preliminary conversations that I had with Fox News that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a matter of conversation , ” Perez told CNN .
“ It was never mentioned that this was going to be a discussion about Smartmatic or even claims about private vendors .
I was anticipating a broader discussion about the debate around the election , election integrity.
” Perez said it was “ important ” to discuss the topics on Fox because its hosts made allegations “ that are speculative and not based in fact , many of which are harmful to enhancing public confidence in the legitimacy of election outcomes.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is “ for all intents and purposes ” a completely separate company from Dominion and refuted Giuliani ’ s claim that the company sends votes overseas to be tabulated .
Smartmatic , he explained , created software that was used only in Los Angeles County and none of the states where Trump has challenged the results based on unfounded claims of fraud .
Smartmatic , which was founded by Venezuelan engineer Antonio Mugica , also sent similar lawsuit threats to Newsmax and One America News Network , which have repeatedly amplified Trumpworld ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times ‘ Ben Smith that the conspiracy theory was so “ absurd ” he thought it was “ not going to have legs ” but the claims quickly went from social media fodder to being amplified by the president ’ s lawyer and conservative hosts on national television .
Smartmatic has been mentioned on Fox News and Fox Business at least 118 times and Dominion was mentioned 792 times , according to Smith .
Mugica retained attorney Erik Connolly , who won the largest defamation settlement in history after getting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a beef producer who sued ABC News for describing its “ lean finely textured beef ” as “ pink slime ” but now targets “ red slime , ” lies spread by Republican officials , according to Smith .
“ We ’ ve gotten to this point where there ’ s so much falsity that is being spread on certain platforms , and you may need an occasion where you send a message , and that ’ s what punitive damages can do in a case like this , ” Connolly told @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prominent libel lawyer Tom Clare and threatened to sue the Trump campaign and Powell if they do not retract their “ false statements ” and “ damaging falsehoods ” about the company .
Longtime First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams told Smith that the lawsuits threats from the two companies were “ extremely powerful.
” “ The repeated accusations against both companies are plainly defamatory and surely have done enormous reputational and financial harm to both , ” he said , adding that it was “ too early ” to predict how the cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too early to say that they would be highly dangerous to those sued.
” Mugica argued that the false claims were dangerous to his company too since it could affect its business .
“ This potentially could destroy it all , ” he said .
OAN has not commented on the lawsuit .
Newsmax said in a statement to Smith that the network “ has never made a claim of impropriety about Smartmatic , its ownership or software ” and that it was just providing a “ forum for public concerns and discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clarify ” the network ’ s coverage on Monday .
It ’ s unclear whether the Fox segments satisfied the lawyers ’ demands .
Asked if he would settle for an apology from the networks , Mugica demurred .
“ Is the apology going to reverse the false belief of tens of millions of people who believe in these lies ?
” he told Smith .
“ Then I could be satisfied .
”

Fox News and Fox Business just aired multiple segments debunking false election claims made on their shows for weeks after the voting technology company Smartmatic recently threatened to sue the network — along with fellow right-wing cable channels OANN and Newsmax — for defamation.
Fox Business host Lou Dobbs and Fox News hosts Maria Bartiromo and Jeanine Pirro aired the same segment debunking false claims that Smartmatic was involved in a scheme to switch votes from President Donald Trump to President-elect Joe Biden over the weekend. The segment comes in response to a new lawsuit threat from Smartmatic over several segments in which Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, former Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, and the hosts pushed the baseless conspiracy theory even though the company was not involved in any elections in the contested swing states.
Powell, who reportedly met with President Donald Trump on Friday amid discussions about naming her a special counsel to investigate unfounded allegations of voter fraud, has for weeks pushed a bizarre conspiracy theory that former Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez had Dominion create software to flip votes that was later used in the 2020 election to flip votes from Trump in a scheme funded by China, Cuba, and others. There is no evidence to back her claim and the company has threatened to sue her for defamation. Fox News host Tucker Carlson criticized Powell on air for failing to provide any evidence to back her claim.
Giuliani issued a statement distancing Trump’s legal team from Powell after she claimed that Republican Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp and the CIA were involved in the scheme despite holding a joint news conference with her days earlier. Giuliani also advised Trump against appointing Powell as a special counsel, according to The New York Times. But he has likewise pushed a conspiracy theory about voting machines, even requesting that the Department of Homeland Security seize voting machines in certain states, which it refused to do, according to the Times report.
Giuliani has falsely claimed on Twitter that Dominion was actually a “front” for Smartmatic, even though the two companies appear to have no ties.
The two attorneys repeated these baseless allegations on the air, as did Dobbs, prompting Smartmatic to demand a retraction and threaten to sue, according to The Washington Post.
“Fox News has engaged in a concerted disinformation campaign against Smartmatic. Fox News told its millions of viewers and readers that Smartmatic was founded by [the late Venezuelan President] Hugo Chávez, that its software was designed to fix elections, and that Smartmatic conspired with others to defraud the American people and fix the 2020 U.S. election by changing, inflating, and deleting votes,” the company’s attorney said in a letter to the network, calling for corrections to “be published on multiple occasions” during prime time shows to “match the attention and audience targeted with the original defamatory publications.”
Fox News pointed Salon to the segment aired on the three shows but declined to comment further.
This is very bizarre. Lou Dobbs ran a segment tonight basically debunking his own lies about Smartmatic voting machines pic.twitter.com/FDM91SPtT1 — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 19, 2020
The segment featured Eddie Perez, a voting expert at the OSET Institute in Palo Alto, a nonpartisan election technology research and development nonprofit, who was not informed about the nature of the segment before being interviewed.
“There was nothing in any of the preliminary conversations that I had with Fox News that gave me any indication that Smartmatic would be a matter of conversation,” Perez told CNN. “It was never mentioned that this was going to be a discussion about Smartmatic or even claims about private vendors. I was anticipating a broader discussion about the debate around the election, election integrity.”
Perez said it was “important” to discuss the topics on Fox because its hosts made allegations “that are speculative and not based in fact, many of which are harmful to enhancing public confidence in the legitimacy of election outcomes.”
Perez explained in the segment that Smartmatic is “for all intents and purposes” a completely separate company from Dominion and refuted Giuliani’s claim that the company sends votes overseas to be tabulated. Smartmatic, he explained, created software that was used only in Los Angeles County and none of the states where Trump has challenged the results based on unfounded claims of fraud.
Smartmatic, which was founded by Venezuelan engineer Antonio Mugica, also sent similar lawsuit threats to Newsmax and One America News Network, which have repeatedly amplified Trumpworld’s baseless allegations.
Mugica told The New York Times‘ Ben Smith that the conspiracy theory was so “absurd” he thought it was “not going to have legs” but the claims quickly went from social media fodder to being amplified by the president’s lawyer and conservative hosts on national television.
Smartmatic has been mentioned on Fox News and Fox Business at least 118 times and Dominion was mentioned 792 times, according to Smith.
Mugica retained attorney Erik Connolly, who won the largest defamation settlement in history after getting a payout of at least $177 million to a beef producer who sued ABC News for describing its “lean finely textured beef” as “pink slime” but now targets “red slime,” lies spread by Republican officials, according to Smith.
“We’ve gotten to this point where there’s so much falsity that is being spread on certain platforms, and you may need an occasion where you send a message, and that’s what punitive damages can do in a case like this,” Connolly told the outlet.
Dominion has also retained prominent libel lawyer Tom Clare and threatened to sue the Trump campaign and Powell if they do not retract their “false statements” and “damaging falsehoods” about the company.
Longtime First Amendment lawyer Floyd Abrams told Smith that the lawsuits threats from the two companies were “extremely powerful.”
“The repeated accusations against both companies are plainly defamatory and surely have done enormous reputational and financial harm to both,” he said, adding that it was “too early” to predict how the cases will end but “it is not too early to say that they would be highly dangerous to those sued.”
Mugica argued that the false claims were dangerous to his company too since it could affect its business.
“This potentially could destroy it all,” he said.
OAN has not commented on the lawsuit. Newsmax said in a statement to Smith that the network “has never made a claim of impropriety about Smartmatic, its ownership or software” and that it was just providing a “forum for public concerns and discussion,” but a host did “clarify” the network’s coverage on Monday.
Newsmax just aired this note to “clarify” its coverage of Smartmatic and Dominion. pic.twitter.com/I5XZ7CQpAk — John Whitehouse (@existentialfish) December 21, 2020
It’s unclear whether the Fox segments satisfied the lawyers’ demands. Asked if he would settle for an apology from the networks, Mugica demurred.
“Is the apology going to reverse the false belief of tens of millions of people who believe in these lies?” he told Smith. “Then I could be satisfied.”
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--2020-12-22--The Insufficient COVID Stimulus Must Not Be Followed by Austerity

As Congress passes a $ 900 billion coronavirus relief package , the first new aid since April , critics say the bill does not go far enough in providing direct aid to those most impacted by the economic downturn .
“ It needs to be thought of as a relief bill , as a bridge to get us to a Biden presidency , where we can do something that is far more intense and larger in scale , ” says Darrick Hamilton , professor of economics at The New School and founding director of the Institute for the Study of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : Congress voted Monday night to pass a $ 900 billion coronavirus relief package , the first new aid since April .
The measure is part of a $ 2.3 trillion package that includes $ 1.4 trillion to fund the government .
The combined legislation is among the largest relief packages in U.S. history .
President Trump has until December 28th to sign it .
The coronavirus relief part of the bill includes $ 300-per-week federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ round of $ 600 stimulus checks for people who earn up to $ 75,000 , with another $ 600 per child ; more money for schools and hospitals ; and an extension of an eviction moratorium by a month .
It also includes $ 284 billion for another round of small business aid through the Paycheck Protection Program , as well as $ 20 billion to buy vaccines and make , quote , “ the vaccine available at no charge for anyone who needs it.
” It offers an additional $ 8 billion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a ban on surprise medical bills from out-of-network medical providers ; a restoration of Pell grants for incarcerated students ; $ 35 billion for fund wind , solar and other clean power sources ; and $ 15 billion to U.S. airlines to bail them out .
The government funding part of the bill also allocates nearly $ 1.4 billion for the border wall .
Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont told CNN the COVID relief bill is a step forward but does not go far enough .
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS : Now , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has a lot of very important stuff in it .
I mean , we worked very hard — I worked with Senator Hawley — to make sure there would be direct payments .
I wanted 1,200 bucks ; we ended up with $ 600 , which , for a family of four , the average family of four , will be $ 2,400 .
Will that help ?
Yes , it will .
Is it enough ?
No , it is not .
We managed to extend unemployment for another 11 weeks at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of normal unemployment .
Is that enough ?
No , it should have been for four months , and that number should have been higher .
We provided zero financial aid to states and localities all over this country who are suffering devastating financial problems , which will mean they ’ ll have to lay off firemen and police officers and teachers and so forth and so on .
So , this is a step forward .
It is better than nothing .
But it is nowhere near , in my view , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ GOODMAN : Meanwhile , Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on CNBC hundreds of dollars in direct payments could begin reaching people as early as next week .
AMY GOODMAN : To talk more about this $ 900 billion stimulus package , that ’ s half the size of the $ 2.2 trillion stimulus law passed in March , we ’ re joined by Darrick Hamilton , professor of economics at The New School , where he ’ s also founding director of the newly created Institute for the Study of Race , Stratification @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surrogate and economic adviser on Bernie Sanders ’ 2020 presidential campaign , also one of Sanders ’ appointees to the Biden-Sanders joint task force .
Darrick , welcome back to Democracy Now !
Can you start off by just reacting to the overall stimulus bill ?
What ’ s in there ?
What do you feel needs to be in there ?
DARRICK HAMILTON : Well , it ’ s long overdue .
I ’ m glad it ’ s here .
It needs to be thought of as a relief bill , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Biden presidency , where we can do something that is far more intense and larger in scale and — here ’ s the key point — that becomes leading into transformative policy , so that we will be less vulnerable to the next pandemic or the next economic crisis for everyday vulnerabilities that many Americans live with .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : My concern is , while I see some excellent provisions in this bill that were not in the previous bill — for instance , there is now an allowance for a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wage earner in the family , does not have a Social Security number , may possibly be undocumented , that they would be able to count in terms of being able to get payments and actually even retroactively claim it on their next year ’ s taxes for the previous stimulus that they were not eligible for — but at 5,600 pages , this bill obviously has a lot of stuff that we have not yet clearly heard about .
We ’ re told we ’ re not going to get the final @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And I ’ m wondering : Do you have any concerns about some of the stuff that ’ s already come forward ?
For instance , apparently now they ’ re increasing the deductions that businesses can take for business meals to 100 % from 50 % .
They ’ re allowing controlled foreign corporations to be able to bring back their income from abroad without having to pay taxes that they ’ ve been sheltering abroad .
There ’ s all kinds of other provisions , including an expansion of the new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been , to me , a scam for real estate investors to make super profits — a $ 5 billion expansion of the new markets tax credit .
And we don ’ t know much of what ’ s still in the bill .
Your concerns about that ?
DARRICK HAMILTON : I mean , you ’ re spot-on , Juan .
We certainly know that Washington politics includes pork-barrel politics and some cronyism , where we ’ re going to get things into the bill , and that ’ s problematic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ long , and we just — it just got released , and we haven ’ t had a chance to dissect it , these are all problems .
But there are also some positive things in there that we should recognize .
And the politics of having those positive things in the bills becomes very useful as we get rid of that politics of the past where we load bills with all sorts of special interests that aren ’ t aimed at the American people .
You know , for example , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an industry that we invest in , so there ’ s $ 82 billion in there for education .
There ’ s a relief set aside for transportation .
You and I both know that there needs to be some money in there for state and localities , as well , and that ’ s not in the bill .
So there ’ s a lot of problems .
It was definitely necessary that we had this bill passed .
And what I like is the precedent of interventions in some areas — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , families having access to some relief ; like you also pointed out , having a bill that includes gig workers when we think about the unemployed .
In fact , why should that ever be a distinction ?
Going forward , we need to provide unemployment relief for all American workers , period .
We know this new classification of putting vulnerability onto workers , where they ’ re not formally employed in firms as we traditionally employ them , the fissuring of the workforce .
We need to rethink how we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , documented and undocumented — in fact , we need pathways to having citizenship for people that are undocumented .
But the last point I ’ ll make — and I ’ m sorry if I ’ m rambling on — is that this sets a precedent for us to build upon .
And that ’ s what it needs to be thought of .
It is inadequate .
Senator Sanders is exactly right .
But we need a new politics .
And there ’ s optimism , because if we look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are , I think , standing firm and promoting industrial policy that focuses on workers .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : I ’ m wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the lack of provisions for local governments and state governments ?
New Jersey , for instance , is just this week having to deal with borrowing over $ 4 billion to deal with its expected budget gap this year .
Could you talk about the plight of states and municipalities right now ?
DARRICK HAMILTON : Yeah .
I mean , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ localities are constrained to balance their budget in a way that the federal government is not .
The federal government has the power of the purse and can fund us through a relief , but yet we ’ ve imposed a great deal of burden on state and localities to take care of their citizens , with our increasing federalism , where state and localities are responsible for their residents , as well as balancing their budget .
It ’ s really problematic , that .
And the impact is going to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is receiving the benefits at local levels , as well as who is employed and what austerity is going to mean .
It ’ s going to mean layoffs for teachers if we don ’ t get relief from federal government .
It ’ s going to be reductions in benefits such as contributions to food security , such as contributions to school .
So it is critical and vital that when we get the next package , when Biden takes office , that there ’ s relief directed to state and locality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ last month Public Citizen tweeted a comparison of the wages subsidized by different governments during the coronavirus crisis .
Whereas Japan stood at close to 100 % , the U.S. has subsidized 0 % of wages due to the pandemic .
DARRICK HAMILTON : Yeah .
I mean , a Paycheck Protection Program is what we have right now .
But if we had a paycheck guarantee , that would be more direct , bigger in scale , and provide more security .
So , if we look at our international comparisons , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be doing .
And we have a greater public power to do so .
So , I think the clear narrative is that this was a necessary ingredient , but it ’ s still far short , that there ’ s a lot more work we need to do .
I think that ’ s the resounding message .
AMY GOODMAN : Now , the issue of corporate liability , what Mitch McConnell and others were holding up this bill for , that corporations would be protected from consumers or workers during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ultimately was dropped out of this .
There are many interesting things in this .
If you could respond to that , and also the no-surprise-medical-bill procedures ?
This is an amazing accomplishment , pushed by grassroots health advocates around the country .
They ’ ve worked on this for years .
When you go to an emergency room , you ’ re getting an operation , you have no idea which doctors are working on you .
Some can be out of network .
And then you end up with , instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , something like $ 10,000 .
Private equity groups have bought up emergency room doctor groups just so that they could go out of network and make this fortune .
This is now becoming illegal ?
DARRICK HAMILTON : Yeah .
I mean , ideally , Medicare for All would address all of this , if we had a single-payer health insurance system .
But we know we don ’ t have that at this point .
And I agree with you , Amy .
I think that we have made some progress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is a lot to be disturbed about in this bill , and , you know , Juan started off the conversation describing some of this pork-barrel politics that still exists .
But progressives should be vigilant and steadfast and also feel some sense of accomplishment , and the sense of accomplishment that we were able to keep out corporate liabilities as an emphasis , so , you know , it signals that we need to put workers first .
And with the provision that you just described , so that people aren @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill that they didn ’ t anticipate , that ’ s an accomplishment .
I mean , the fact that we ’ re sending direct checks to American people as relief , that ’ s an accomplishment , albeit too small .
Three hundred dollars is not enough — yeah , $ 600 is not enough ; neither is $ 300 supplemental for [ unemployment ] compensation .
But the fact that we ’ re doing it sets a precedent and can set a tone of what government can actually do .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now is austerity politics , some notion of deficit constraint .
And I think both sides of the aisle , particularly the left side of the aisle , needs to recognize that PAYGO is a problem , particularly in pandemic , that constraining the use of the public purse for relief for Americans is absolutely not what we should be doing .
In fact , we need to be doing more to ensure , as I said earlier , that not only will we have protections during a pandemic , that we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ re not in a peculiar economic crisis , where people can have social mobility , a moral economy .
JUAN GONZÁLEZ : One of the other positive aspects of the bill , it seems to me , and that can be credited to the pressure of the Sanders campaign and the left of the Democratic Party , are the provisions on addressing climate change , in terms of actually , apparently , expansion of credits for solar installations and for research into wind power and longer-serving batteries .
Could you talk about some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yeah .
I mean , to be frank , Juan , I don ’ t know the specific details on it , but I think it goes right back to that narrative that , you know , we were — there was ridicule directed at Bernie Sanders as if he was holding the bill up .
But as we can see , there are provisions in there , and he ’ s not alone .
There ’ s a whole conglomerate within Congress right now that ’ s fighting for the rights of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is illustrated in this bill .
And that , to me , is what we should be celebrating and focusing on also , the fact that we do have a pathway forward .
And you cited one : climate change .
Clearly , if we think about this pandemic in isolation , that ’ s a missed opportunity , that this economic despair , this health risk , we ’ re still going to be vulnerable after this pandemic , after the dissemination of the vaccine .
We have climate catastrophe looming and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything about it .
AMY GOODMAN : Finally , Professor Hamilton , what do you think the Biden administration should do , President Biden should do first thing when he is in office , both through executive action and just pushing forward economic recovery ?
What ’ s most critical ?
DARRICK HAMILTON : Yeah .
I mean , in earnest , there is no silver bullet policy , so we need to be thinking about economic protection across almost a Bill of Rights , various aspects .
But if I were to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , he can address student debt , right ?
We ’ re going to have this benefit cliff even — you know , the pandemic legislation included a moratorium on evictions , moratorium on foreclosure , as well as some relief for students with regards to paying back their debt .
So I would certainly recommend , through executive order , if Congress doesn ’ t act , some relief with regards to student debt that ’ s been accumulated .
But if I have to focus on something , it is jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are building a better human and physical infrastructure for Americans , as well as putting Americans to work with a decent wage and benefits , that put pressure on the private sector to ensure that they also have to have decent wages and benefits if they want to compete in the marketplace for American workers .
AMY GOODMAN : Darrick Hamilton , thanks so much for being with us , professor of economics at The New School , where he ’ s also founding director of the Institute for the Study of Race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up , as hospitalizations from COVID hit another record high here in the United States , and as Britain is cut off from the rest of Europe because of a variant of the coronavirus , we ’ re going to speak to a Virginia doctor who was among the first to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine .
We ’ ll ask him a lot of questions .
Stay with us .

Critics say the $900 billion relief package does not go far enough in providing direct aid to those in most need.
As Congress passes a $900 billion coronavirus relief package, the first new aid since April, critics say the bill does not go far enough in providing direct aid to those most impacted by the economic downturn. “It needs to be thought of as a relief bill, as a bridge to get us to a Biden presidency, where we can do something that is far more intense and larger in scale,” says Darrick Hamilton, professor of economics at The New School and founding director of the Institute for the Study of Race, Stratification and Political Economy.
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: Congress voted Monday night to pass a $900 billion coronavirus relief package, the first new aid since April. The measure is part of a $2.3 trillion package that includes $1.4 trillion to fund the government. The combined legislation is among the largest relief packages in U.S. history. President Trump has until December 28th to sign it.
The coronavirus relief part of the bill includes $300-per-week federal unemployment assistance for 11 weeks; a round of $600 stimulus checks for people who earn up to $75,000, with another $600 per child; more money for schools and hospitals; and an extension of an eviction moratorium by a month. It also includes $284 billion for another round of small business aid through the Paycheck Protection Program, as well as $20 billion to buy vaccines and make, quote, “the vaccine available at no charge for anyone who needs it.” It offers an additional $8 billion for vaccine distribution.
The package includes a ban on surprise medical bills from out-of-network medical providers; a restoration of Pell grants for incarcerated students; $35 billion for fund wind, solar and other clean power sources; and $15 billion to U.S. airlines to bail them out. The government funding part of the bill also allocates nearly $1.4 billion for the border wall.
Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont told CNN the COVID relief bill is a step forward but does not go far enough.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: Now, this bill, to be honest, has a lot of very important stuff in it. I mean, we worked very hard — I worked with Senator Hawley — to make sure there would be direct payments. I wanted 1,200 bucks; we ended up with $600, which, for a family of four, the average family of four, will be $2,400. Will that help? Yes, it will. Is it enough? No, it is not. We managed to extend unemployment for another 11 weeks at a supplement of $300 on top of normal unemployment. Is that enough? No, it should have been for four months, and that number should have been higher. We provided zero financial aid to states and localities all over this country who are suffering devastating financial problems, which will mean they’ll have to lay off firemen and police officers and teachers and so forth and so on. So, this is a step forward. It is better than nothing. But it is nowhere near, in my view, where it should be going.
AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on CNBC hundreds of dollars in direct payments could begin reaching people as early as next week.
TREASURY SECRETARY STEVEN MNUCHIN: So, I think, as you know, you know, we were worried about, you know, something like a Great Depression again, earlier in the year. But this is now much more targeted. I expect it’s needed in a short period of time. And I think this will take us through the recovery.
AMY GOODMAN: To talk more about this $900 billion stimulus package, that’s half the size of the $2.2 trillion stimulus law passed in March, we’re joined by Darrick Hamilton, professor of economics at The New School, where he’s also founding director of the newly created Institute for the Study of Race, Stratification and Political Economy. He was a surrogate and economic adviser on Bernie Sanders’ 2020 presidential campaign, also one of Sanders’ appointees to the Biden-Sanders joint task force.
Darrick, welcome back to Democracy Now! Can you start off by just reacting to the overall stimulus bill? What’s in there? What do you feel needs to be in there?
DARRICK HAMILTON: Well, it’s long overdue. I’m glad it’s here. It needs to be thought of as a relief bill, as a bridge to get us to a Biden presidency, where we can do something that is far more intense and larger in scale and — here’s the key point — that becomes leading into transformative policy, so that we will be less vulnerable to the next pandemic or the next economic crisis for everyday vulnerabilities that many Americans live with.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: My concern is, while I see some excellent provisions in this bill that were not in the previous bill — for instance, there is now an allowance for a family where perhaps one person, one wage earner in the family, does not have a Social Security number, may possibly be undocumented, that they would be able to count in terms of being able to get payments and actually even retroactively claim it on their next year’s taxes for the previous stimulus that they were not eligible for — but at 5,600 pages, this bill obviously has a lot of stuff that we have not yet clearly heard about. We’re told we’re not going to get the final version possibly until sometime next week.
And I’m wondering: Do you have any concerns about some of the stuff that’s already come forward? For instance, apparently now they’re increasing the deductions that businesses can take for business meals to 100% from 50%. They’re allowing controlled foreign corporations to be able to bring back their income from abroad without having to pay taxes that they’ve been sheltering abroad. There’s all kinds of other provisions, including an expansion of the new markets tax credit, which has always been, to me, a scam for real estate investors to make super profits — a $5 billion expansion of the new markets tax credit. And we don’t know much of what’s still in the bill. Your concerns about that?
DARRICK HAMILTON: I mean, you’re spot-on, Juan. We certainly know that Washington politics includes pork-barrel politics and some cronyism, where we’re going to get things into the bill, and that’s problematic. And the fact that it is so long, and we just — it just got released, and we haven’t had a chance to dissect it, these are all problems.
But there are also some positive things in there that we should recognize. And the politics of having those positive things in the bills becomes very useful as we get rid of that politics of the past where we load bills with all sorts of special interests that aren’t aimed at the American people. You know, for example, a recognition that education itself needs to be an industry that we invest in, so there’s $82 billion in there for education. There’s a relief set aside for transportation.
You and I both know that there needs to be some money in there for state and localities, as well, and that’s not in the bill. So there’s a lot of problems.
It was definitely necessary that we had this bill passed. And what I like is the precedent of interventions in some areas — like you pointed out, undocumented people, families having access to some relief; like you also pointed out, having a bill that includes gig workers when we think about the unemployed. In fact, why should that ever be a distinction? Going forward, we need to provide unemployment relief for all American workers, period. We know this new classification of putting vulnerability onto workers, where they’re not formally employed in firms as we traditionally employ them, the fissuring of the workforce. We need to rethink how we design unemployment, so that all American workers, documented and undocumented — in fact, we need pathways to having citizenship for people that are undocumented.
But the last point I’ll make — and I’m sorry if I’m rambling on — is that this sets a precedent for us to build upon. And that’s what it needs to be thought of. It is inadequate. Senator Sanders is exactly right. But we need a new politics. And there’s optimism, because if we look at people going into Congress, they are, I think, standing firm and promoting industrial policy that focuses on workers.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: I’m wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the lack of provisions for local governments and state governments? New Jersey, for instance, is just this week having to deal with borrowing over $4 billion to deal with its expected budget gap this year. Could you talk about the plight of states and municipalities right now?
DARRICK HAMILTON: Yeah. I mean, the plight is such that state and localities are constrained to balance their budget in a way that the federal government is not. The federal government has the power of the purse and can fund us through a relief, but yet we’ve imposed a great deal of burden on state and localities to take care of their citizens, with our increasing federalism, where state and localities are responsible for their residents, as well as balancing their budget. It’s really problematic, that.
And the impact is going to be dramatic, if we think about who is receiving the benefits at local levels, as well as who is employed and what austerity is going to mean. It’s going to mean layoffs for teachers if we don’t get relief from federal government. It’s going to be reductions in benefits such as contributions to food security, such as contributions to school. So it is critical and vital that when we get the next package, when Biden takes office, that there’s relief directed to state and locality.
AMY GOODMAN: Professor Hamilton, last month Public Citizen tweeted a comparison of the wages subsidized by different governments during the coronavirus crisis. Whereas Japan stood at close to 100%, the U.S. has subsidized 0% of wages due to the pandemic.
DARRICK HAMILTON: Yeah. I mean, a Paycheck Protection Program is what we have right now. But if we had a paycheck guarantee, that would be more direct, bigger in scale, and provide more security. So, if we look at our international comparisons, we’re not doing what we should be doing. And we have a greater public power to do so. So, I think the clear narrative is that this was a necessary ingredient, but it’s still far short, that there’s a lot more work we need to do. I think that’s the resounding message.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, the issue of corporate liability, what Mitch McConnell and others were holding up this bill for, that corporations would be protected from consumers or workers during the pandemic, being sued, that ultimately was dropped out of this. There are many interesting things in this. If you could respond to that, and also the no-surprise-medical-bill procedures? This is an amazing accomplishment, pushed by grassroots health advocates around the country. They’ve worked on this for years. When you go to an emergency room, you’re getting an operation, you have no idea which doctors are working on you. Some can be out of network. And then you end up with, instead of a $600 emergency room bill, something like $10,000. Private equity groups have bought up emergency room doctor groups just so that they could go out of network and make this fortune. This is now becoming illegal?
DARRICK HAMILTON: Yeah. I mean, ideally, Medicare for All would address all of this, if we had a single-payer health insurance system. But we know we don’t have that at this point.
And I agree with you, Amy. I think that we have made some progress on the progressive side. So, there is a lot to be disturbed about in this bill, and, you know, Juan started off the conversation describing some of this pork-barrel politics that still exists. But progressives should be vigilant and steadfast and also feel some sense of accomplishment, and the sense of accomplishment that we were able to keep out corporate liabilities as an emphasis, so, you know, it signals that we need to put workers first. And with the provision that you just described, so that people aren’t hit with a surprise medical bill that they didn’t anticipate, that’s an accomplishment. I mean, the fact that we’re sending direct checks to American people as relief, that’s an accomplishment, albeit too small. Three hundred dollars is not enough — yeah, $600 is not enough; neither is $300 supplemental for [unemployment] compensation. But the fact that we’re doing it sets a precedent and can set a tone of what government can actually do.
What we should not be concerned about right now is austerity politics, some notion of deficit constraint. And I think both sides of the aisle, particularly the left side of the aisle, needs to recognize that PAYGO is a problem, particularly in pandemic, that constraining the use of the public purse for relief for Americans is absolutely not what we should be doing. In fact, we need to be doing more to ensure, as I said earlier, that not only will we have protections during a pandemic, that we have a structure that — when we’re not in a peculiar economic crisis, where people can have social mobility, a moral economy.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: One of the other positive aspects of the bill, it seems to me, and that can be credited to the pressure of the Sanders campaign and the left of the Democratic Party, are the provisions on addressing climate change, in terms of actually, apparently, expansion of credits for solar installations and for research into wind power and longer-serving batteries. Could you talk about some of those provisions?
DARRICK HAMILTON: Yeah. I mean, to be frank, Juan, I don’t know the specific details on it, but I think it goes right back to that narrative that, you know, we were — there was ridicule directed at Bernie Sanders as if he was holding the bill up. But as we can see, there are provisions in there, and he’s not alone. There’s a whole conglomerate within Congress right now that’s fighting for the rights of Americans. And I think that momentum is illustrated in this bill. And that, to me, is what we should be celebrating and focusing on also, the fact that we do have a pathway forward. And you cited one: climate change. Clearly, if we think about this pandemic in isolation, that’s a missed opportunity, that this economic despair, this health risk, we’re still going to be vulnerable after this pandemic, after the dissemination of the vaccine. We have climate catastrophe looming and waiting if we don’t do anything about it.
AMY GOODMAN: Finally, Professor Hamilton, what do you think the Biden administration should do, President Biden should do first thing when he is in office, both through executive action and just pushing forward economic recovery? What’s most critical?
DARRICK HAMILTON: Yeah. I mean, in earnest, there is no silver bullet policy, so we need to be thinking about economic protection across almost a Bill of Rights, various aspects. But if I were to single out some, well, one, he can address student debt, right? We’re going to have this benefit cliff even — you know, the pandemic legislation included a moratorium on evictions, moratorium on foreclosure, as well as some relief for students with regards to paying back their debt. So I would certainly recommend, through executive order, if Congress doesn’t act, some relief with regards to student debt that’s been accumulated. But if I have to focus on something, it is jobs, public jobs, public jobs that are building a better human and physical infrastructure for Americans, as well as putting Americans to work with a decent wage and benefits, that put pressure on the private sector to ensure that they also have to have decent wages and benefits if they want to compete in the marketplace for American workers.
AMY GOODMAN: Darrick Hamilton, thanks so much for being with us, professor of economics at The New School, where he’s also founding director of the Institute for the Study of Race, Stratification and Political Economy.
Next up, as hospitalizations from COVID hit another record high here in the United States, and as Britain is cut off from the rest of Europe because of a variant of the coronavirus, we’re going to speak to a Virginia doctor who was among the first to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. We’ll ask him a lot of questions. Stay with us.
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--2020-12-22--Congress Passes COVID Relief With Billions in Handouts for the Wealthy

In late-night votes just hours after nearly 5,600 pages of legislative text were released , the U.S. Congress on Monday approved trillions of dollars worth of government funding and coronavirus relief that will temporarily avert a catastrophic expiration of key benefits , send $ 600 direct payments to many Americans , and provide billions of dollars in handouts to the rich .
The entire Senate Democratic caucus and every Republican but six voted for the roughly $ 900 billion coronavirus relief legislation , which was paired with a $ 1.4 trillion spending package that will fund the federal government through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — Reps. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) and Tulsi Gabbard ( D-Hawaii ) — voted against the coronavirus relief portion of the sprawling package ( pdf ) , which President Donald Trump is expected to sign .
“ I voted against the latest Covid-19 relief legislation because it is woefully inadequate in addressing the needs of people , ” Tlaib said in a statement late Monday .
“ I have watched as many of my colleagues rush to provide billions to corporations and wealthy individuals , while admonishing the needs of the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do all they can do to poison our society further with corporate greed , while abandoning the very people they are supposed to be working for , ” Tlaib added .
“ This is evident by the inclusion of the ‘ three martini lunch ’ tax giveaway.
” The tax deduction for business meals was one of several giveaways to wealthy Americans stuffed in the mammoth legislative package , which was made available to read Monday afternoon after reported computer issues delayed its release .
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) was one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the lack of time lawmakers were given to read the bill before voting on it .
“ Members of Congress have not read this bill .
It ’ s over 5,000 pages , arrived at 2 pm today , and we are told to expect a vote on it in two hours , ” tweeted Ocasio-Cortez , who voted against a rule paving the way for speedy passage but ultimately voted yes on the coronavirus aid portion of the package .
“ This isn ’ t governance .
It ’ s hostage-taking.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are still being combed , progressives noted and denounced the inclusion of billions of dollars in gifts to wealthy Americans — benefits made more obscene by the bill ’ s inadequate relief for people who are hungry , sick , unemployed , and facing eviction .
“ Pathetic , ” said Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) , pointing to the bill ’ s $ 120 billion handout to rich business owners and other provisions that will disproportionately benefit the wealthiest people in the country during the most unequal recession in modern U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the relief legislation , noting that “ the average family of four will receive a direct payment of $ 2,400.
” “ While including these direct payments ultimately improved this bill , given the enormous economic desperation that so many working families across this country are now experiencing , there is no question but that this legislation did not go anywhere near far enough , ” Sanders said in a statement .
The $ 900 billion coronavirus relief package is a far cry from what economists say is necessary to bring the faltering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaningful relief to the increasingly desperate public amid rising poverty and a major hunger crisis .
Some economists are calling for a roughly $ 4 trillion package , warning that anything less would result in “ permanent damage ” to families and the economy .
On top of the paltry direct payments — for which millions of vulnerable people will not be eligible — the newly passed bill provides a non-retroactive $ 300-per-week federal boost to unemployment insurance and an 11-week extension of UI benefits , an extension accompanied by more burdensome documentation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to navigate rickety state systems .
“ States will be asked to implement a significant number of new rules for these programs for a law that will only last 11 weeks , ” noted Andrew Stettner , a senior fellow at The Century Foundation .
“ In reality , many workers won ’ t receive the benefits until well into this short period — and at that point , the states will be forced to cut it off once again .
Worst of all , Congress will be setting itself up for another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will start in mid-March , before the new administration and Congress can be reasonably expected to pass another round of relief.
” “ Congress has given itself little choice but to immediately get to work on the next economic stimulus package as soon as President Biden and the 117th Congress take office , ” Stettner added .
“ That package must build on the CARES Act and include key reforms to make sure benefits are available as long as the economy remains constrained by this disastrous pandemic.
” Robert Greenstein , president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , also raised concerns about the too-short duration of relief and pointed to the bill ’ s inadequate sick and family leave provisions .
“ While the agreement continues the tax credits for employers established under the Families First Act for providing coronavirus-related sick days and family leave , ” Greenstein said in a statement , “ it doesn ’ t extend workers ’ right to take that time off , leaving that to employers ’ discretion.
” “ A likely result , ” Greenstein warned , “ is that a substantial number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home when they are quarantined or ill or will be unable to balance work and family care-giving needs when schools are closed or a family member has Covid-19.
” Rep. Ilhan Omar ( D-Minn. ) , who voted for the final relief package , said late Monday that she is glad the legislation will provide direct payments that were not originally on the table as well as billions of dollars in funding for schools .
“ But that doesn ’ t mean this package is anything close to enough , ” said Omar @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close to sufficient to cover eight months of lost wages , food , or rent expenses… Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues have stonewalled state and local aid , along with survival checks that meet the scale of the crisis .
This is a collective failure in helping Americans in their time of need .
”

In late-night votes just hours after nearly 5,600 pages of legislative text were released, the U.S. Congress on Monday approved trillions of dollars worth of government funding and coronavirus relief that will temporarily avert a catastrophic expiration of key benefits, send $600 direct payments to many Americans, and provide billions of dollars in handouts to the rich.
The entire Senate Democratic caucus and every Republican but six voted for the roughly $900 billion coronavirus relief legislation, which was paired with a $1.4 trillion spending package that will fund the federal government through next September. Just two House Democrats — Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) and Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) — voted against the coronavirus relief portion of the sprawling package (pdf), which President Donald Trump is expected to sign.
“I voted against the latest Covid-19 relief legislation because it is woefully inadequate in addressing the needs of people,” Tlaib said in a statement late Monday. “I have watched as many of my colleagues rush to provide billions to corporations and wealthy individuals, while admonishing the needs of the majority of families.”
“Republicans continue to do all they can do to poison our society further with corporate greed, while abandoning the very people they are supposed to be working for,” Tlaib added. “This is evident by the inclusion of the ‘three martini lunch’ tax giveaway.”
The tax deduction for business meals was one of several giveaways to wealthy Americans stuffed in the mammoth legislative package, which was made available to read Monday afternoon after reported computer issues delayed its release. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) was one of several lawmakers who publicly expressed outrage at the lack of time lawmakers were given to read the bill before voting on it.
“Members of Congress have not read this bill. It’s over 5,000 pages, arrived at 2 pm today, and we are told to expect a vote on it in two hours,” tweeted Ocasio-Cortez, who voted against a rule paving the way for speedy passage but ultimately voted yes on the coronavirus aid portion of the package. “This isn’t governance. It’s hostage-taking.”
While the contents of the measure are still being combed, progressives noted and denounced the inclusion of billions of dollars in gifts to wealthy Americans — benefits made more obscene by the bill’s inadequate relief for people who are hungry, sick, unemployed, and facing eviction.
“Pathetic,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), pointing to the bill’s $120 billion handout to rich business owners and other provisions that will disproportionately benefit the wealthiest people in the country during the most unequal recession in modern U.S. history.
The Vermont senator voted for the relief legislation, noting that “the average family of four will receive a direct payment of $2,400.”
“While including these direct payments ultimately improved this bill, given the enormous economic desperation that so many working families across this country are now experiencing, there is no question but that this legislation did not go anywhere near far enough,” Sanders said in a statement.
You’re getting a one-time $600 check to survive a pandemic, but hey, at least lobbyists can get their three-martini lunches delivered. https://t.co/vlK7CDwttQ — Ron Wyden (@RonWyden) December 21, 2020
The $900 billion coronavirus relief package is a far cry from what economists say is necessary to bring the faltering U.S. economy out of recession and provide meaningful relief to the increasingly desperate public amid rising poverty and a major hunger crisis. Some economists are calling for a roughly $4 trillion package, warning that anything less would result in “permanent damage” to families and the economy.
On top of the paltry direct payments — for which millions of vulnerable people will not be eligible — the newly passed bill provides a non-retroactive $300-per-week federal boost to unemployment insurance and an 11-week extension of UI benefits, an extension accompanied by more burdensome documentation requirements for applicants who are already struggling to navigate rickety state systems.
“States will be asked to implement a significant number of new rules for these programs for a law that will only last 11 weeks,” noted Andrew Stettner, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation. “In reality, many workers won’t receive the benefits until well into this short period — and at that point, the states will be forced to cut it off once again. Worst of all, Congress will be setting itself up for another 10 million-plus worker benefit cut off that will start in mid-March, before the new administration and Congress can be reasonably expected to pass another round of relief.”
“Congress has given itself little choice but to immediately get to work on the next economic stimulus package as soon as President Biden and the 117th Congress take office,” Stettner added. “That package must build on the CARES Act and include key reforms to make sure benefits are available as long as the economy remains constrained by this disastrous pandemic.”
Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, also raised concerns about the too-short duration of relief and pointed to the bill’s inadequate sick and family leave provisions. “While the agreement continues the tax credits for employers established under the Families First Act for providing coronavirus-related sick days and family leave,” Greenstein said in a statement, “it doesn’t extend workers’ right to take that time off, leaving that to employers’ discretion.”
“A likely result,” Greenstein warned, “is that a substantial number of workers will be unable to stay home when they are quarantined or ill or will be unable to balance work and family care-giving needs when schools are closed or a family member has Covid-19.”
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who voted for the final relief package, said late Monday that she is glad the legislation will provide direct payments that were not originally on the table as well as billions of dollars in funding for schools.
“But that doesn’t mean this package is anything close to enough,” said Omar. “Six hundred dollars is not close to sufficient to cover eight months of lost wages, food, or rent expenses… Mitch McConnell and his Republican colleagues have stonewalled state and local aid, along with survival checks that meet the scale of the crisis. This is a collective failure in helping Americans in their time of need.”
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--2020-12-22--After Trump Blocked UN Inquiry of Racist Violence, NGOs Are Conducting Their Own

Shortly after the public lynching of George Floyd , the U.S. Human Rights Network and the ACLU organized an international coalition of more than 600 organizations and individuals to urge the United Nations Human Rights Council to convene a commission of inquiry to investigate systemic racism and police brutality in the United States .
George Floyd ’ s brother , Philonise Floyd , addressed the Council by video , stating , “ You in the United Nations are your brothers ’ and sisters ’ keepers in America.
” He implored the UN , “ I ’ m asking you to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” However , the Trump administration lobbied heavily against this investigation , objecting to limiting the inquiry to the U.S .
The Council subsequently declined a request by a group of African countries within the Council to establish the inquiry commission .
“ The outcome is a result of the pressure , the bullying that the United States did , assisted by many of its allies , ” said Jamil Dakwar , the ACLU ’ s human rights program director .
But the Council did task the High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2021 on “ systemic racism , violations of international human rights law against Africans and people of African descent by law enforcement agencies , especially those incidents that resulted in the death of George Floyd and other Africans and people of African descent , to contribute to accountability and redress for victims.
” In Resolution 43/1 , the Council did not limit the subject matter of the report to violations in the United States .
To assist in the preparation of Bachelet ’ s report , the Council called for input from several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ International Association of Democratic Lawyers , National Conference of Black Lawyers and National Lawyers Guild responded to that call by establishing their own International Commission of Inquiry on Systemic Racist Police Violence Against People of African Descent in the United States .
Rutgers University law professor emeritus Lennox Hinds , who conceived of the idea for the commission , told Truthout , “ This International Commission of Inquiry is an attempt to give voice to the international outrage resulting from the public lynching of George Floyd and to expose the racist and systemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ African descent in the United States and to hold the U.S. government accountable before the international community.
” Twelve commissioners , including prominent judges , lawyers , professors , advocates and UN special rapporteurs from Pakistan , South Africa , Japan , India , Nigeria , France , Costa Rica , the United Kingdom and the West Indies will hold public hearings from January 18 to February 6 .
The commission will hear evidence in 50 cases of police violence that occurred throughout the United States from 2010-2020 , including the killings of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Garner , Breonna Taylor and Tamir Rice .
Many resulted in the deaths of unarmed or nonthreatening African Americans .
Although the commission won ’ t have the money and resources a UN investigation would have commanded ( were it not for Trump ’ s obstruction ) , the scope of this inquiry will go beyond the Council ’ s resolution by giving voice to the families of Black victims of police brutality .
Testimony of victims ’ lawyers and family members , community representatives and acknowledged experts will occur in 25 cities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a report for submission to the UN high commissioner and the public by the end of March .
They will be assisted in the hearings and preparation of their report by a team of four rapporteurs , including this writer .
Students and faculty from Rutgers Law School will provide research support .
The commissioners will ask the UN high commissioner to use our report to inform her report to the Council .
We will also publicize our report widely in the United States and throughout the world for people to use in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a thorough investigation of anti-Black violence perpetrated by police in the United States .
It will examine : 1 ) Cases of victims of police violence , extrajudicial killings and maiming of people of African descent and entrenched structural racism in police practices throughout the U.S. ; and 2 ) The structural racism and bias in the criminal “ justice ” system that results in the impunity of law enforcement officers for violations of U.S. and international law .
The commission will analyze whether several instances of police violence against African Americans violated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 20 largest cities in the United States found none whose lethal force policies complied with international human rights law and standards .
Finally , the commission will consider the lack of accountability for violations of human rights , and recommend effective measures to end impunity in the future .
Treaties the United States ratifies become part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution .
They are the “ supreme law of the land.
” The U.S. has ratified three human rights treaties that enshrine the right to life , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the right to be free from discrimination .
All three require effective measures be taken for violations of the rights protected by those treaties .
During the hearings , the testimony will describe instances of police violence that deprived African Americans of the right to life , and the rights to be free from torture and discrimination .
“ We want the [ UN ] high commissioner [ Michelle Bachelet ] to actually use this report , ” said Kerry McLean , a member of the steering committee that is establishing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing hearings , so we ’ re doing hearings.
” The hearings will be accessible to the public .
The report and findings of the commission will be published in English .

Part of the Series Human Rights and Global Wrongs
Shortly after the public lynching of George Floyd, the U.S. Human Rights Network and the ACLU organized an international coalition of more than 600 organizations and individuals to urge the United Nations Human Rights Council to convene a commission of inquiry to investigate systemic racism and police brutality in the United States. George Floyd’s brother, Philonise Floyd, addressed the Council by video, stating, “You in the United Nations are your brothers’ and sisters’ keepers in America.” He implored the UN, “I’m asking you to help us — Black people in America.”
However, the Trump administration lobbied heavily against this investigation, objecting to limiting the inquiry to the U.S. The Council subsequently declined a request by a group of African countries within the Council to establish the inquiry commission. “The outcome is a result of the pressure, the bullying that the United States did, assisted by many of its allies,” said Jamil Dakwar, the ACLU’s human rights program director.
But the Council did task the High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet with preparing a report by June 2021 on “systemic racism, violations of international human rights law against Africans and people of African descent by law enforcement agencies, especially those incidents that resulted in the death of George Floyd and other Africans and people of African descent, to contribute to accountability and redress for victims.” In Resolution 43/1, the Council did not limit the subject matter of the report to violations in the United States.
To assist in the preparation of Bachelet’s report, the Council called for input from several entities, including nongovernmental organizations.
The International Association of Democratic Lawyers, National Conference of Black Lawyers and National Lawyers Guild responded to that call by establishing their own International Commission of Inquiry on Systemic Racist Police Violence Against People of African Descent in the United States.
Rutgers University law professor emeritus Lennox Hinds, who conceived of the idea for the commission, told Truthout, “This International Commission of Inquiry is an attempt to give voice to the international outrage resulting from the public lynching of George Floyd and to expose the racist and systemic nature of police violence against people of African descent in the United States and to hold the U.S. government accountable before the international community.”
Twelve commissioners, including prominent judges, lawyers, professors, advocates and UN special rapporteurs from Pakistan, South Africa, Japan, India, Nigeria, France, Costa Rica, the United Kingdom and the West Indies will hold public hearings from January 18 to February 6.
The commission will hear evidence in 50 cases of police violence that occurred throughout the United States from 2010-2020, including the killings of George Floyd, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Breonna Taylor and Tamir Rice. Many resulted in the deaths of unarmed or nonthreatening African Americans.
Although the commission won’t have the money and resources a UN investigation would have commanded (were it not for Trump’s obstruction), the scope of this inquiry will go beyond the Council’s resolution by giving voice to the families of Black victims of police brutality.
Testimony of victims’ lawyers and family members, community representatives and acknowledged experts will occur in 25 cities via Zoom. The commissioners will prepare a report for submission to the UN high commissioner and the public by the end of March. They will be assisted in the hearings and preparation of their report by a team of four rapporteurs, including this writer. Students and faculty from Rutgers Law School will provide research support.
The commissioners will ask the UN high commissioner to use our report to inform her report to the Council. We will also publicize our report widely in the United States and throughout the world for people to use in litigation and advocacy.
This will be a thorough investigation of anti-Black violence perpetrated by police in the United States. It will examine: 1) Cases of victims of police violence, extrajudicial killings and maiming of people of African descent and entrenched structural racism in police practices throughout the U.S.; and 2) The structural racism and bias in the criminal “justice” system that results in the impunity of law enforcement officers for violations of U.S. and international law.
The commission will analyze whether several instances of police violence against African Americans violated international law. A 2020 study of the 20 largest cities in the United States found none whose lethal force policies complied with international human rights law and standards.
Finally, the commission will consider the lack of accountability for violations of human rights, and recommend effective measures to end impunity in the future.
Treaties the United States ratifies become part of U.S. law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. They are the “supreme law of the land.” The U.S. has ratified three human rights treaties that enshrine the right to life, the right to be free from torture and the right to be free from discrimination. All three require effective measures be taken for violations of the rights protected by those treaties.
During the hearings, the testimony will describe instances of police violence that deprived African Americans of the right to life, and the rights to be free from torture and discrimination.
“We want the [UN] high commissioner [Michelle Bachelet] to actually use this report,” said Kerry McLean, a member of the steering committee that is establishing the commission. “She’s not doing hearings, so we’re doing hearings.”
The hearings will be accessible to the public. The report and findings of the commission will be published in English.
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--2020-12-22--The Main Public Hospital in the Nation’s Largest County Is Out of ICU Beds

She lay behind a glass barrier , heavily sedated , kept alive by a machine that blew oxygen into her lungs through a tube taped to her mouth and lodged at the back of her throat .
She had deteriorated rapidly since arriving a short time earlier .
“ Her respiratory system is failing , and her cardiovascular system is failing , ” said Dr. Luis Huerta , a critical care expert in the intensive care unit .
The odds of survival for the patient , who could not be identified for privacy reasons , were poor , Huerta said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , was among 50 patients so ill with COVID-19 that they required constant medical attention this week in ICUs at Los Angeles County+USC Medical Center , a 600-bed public hospital on L.A. ’ s Eastside .
A large majority of them had diabetes , obesity or hypertension .
An additional 100 COVID patients , less ill at least for the moment , were in other parts of the hospital , and the numbers were growing .
In the five days that ended Wednesday , eight COVID patients at the hospital died — double @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As COVID patients have flooded into LAC+USC in recent weeks , they ’ ve put an immense strain on its ICU capacity and staff — especially since non-COVID patients , with gunshot wounds , drug overdoses , heart attacks and strokes , also need intensive care .
No more ICU beds were available , said Dr. Brad Spellberg , the hospital ’ s chief medical officer .
Similar scenes — packed wards , overworked medical staffers , harried administrators and grieving families — are playing out in hospitals across the state and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 % of ICU beds were available as of Thursday .
In the 11-county Southern California region , no ICU beds were open , and in the San Joaquin Valley , just 0.7 % were .
The county of Los Angeles , the nation ’ s largest , was perilously close to zero capacity .
County health officials reported Wednesday that the number of daily new COVID cases , deaths and hospitalizations had all soared beyond their previous highs for the entire pandemic .
LAC+USC has had a heavy COVID burden since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the low-income , predominantly Latino community it serves has been hit so hard .
Latinos represent about 39 % of California ’ s population but have accounted for nearly 57 % of the state ’ s COVID cases and 48 % of its COVID deaths , according to data updated this week .
Many people who live near the hospital have essential jobs and “ are not able to work from home .
They are going out there and exposing themselves because they have to make a living , ” Spellberg said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t live in giant houses where they can isolate themselves in a room.
” The worst cases end up lying amid a tangle of tubes and bags , in ICU rooms designed to prevent air and viral particles from flowing out into the hall .
The sickest among them , like the woman described above , need machines to breathe for them .
They are fed through nose tubes , their bladders draining into catheter bags , while intravenous lines deliver fluids and medications to relieve pain , keep them sedated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ level necessary for life .
To take some pressure off the ICUs , the hospital this week opened a new “ step-down ” unit , for patients who are still very sick but can be managed with a slightly lower level of care .
Spellberg said he hopes the unit will accommodate up to 10 patients .
Hospital staff members have also been scouring the insurance plans of patients to see if they can be transferred to other hospitals .
“ But at this point , it ’ s become almost impossible , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Spellberg said .
Two weeks ago , a smaller percentage of COVID patients in the ER were showing signs of severe disease , which meant fewer needed to be admitted to the hospital or the ICU than during the July surge .
That was helping , as Spellberg put it , to keep the water below the top of the levee .
“ Over the last 10 days , it is my distinct impression that the severity has worsened again , and that ’ s why our ICU has filled up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The total number of COVID patients in the hospital , and the number in its ICUs , are now well above the peak of July — and both are nearly six times as high as in late October .
“ This is the worst it ’ s been , ” Spellberg said .
And it will only get worse over the coming weeks , he added , if people travel and gather with their extended families over Christmas and New Year ’ s as they did for Thanksgiving .
“ Think New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Spellberg said .
“ That ’ s how bad things could get.
” They are already bad enough .
Nurses and other medical staffers are exhausted from long months of extremely laborious patient care that is only getting more intense , said Lea Salinas , a nurse manager in one of the hospital ’ s ICU units .
To avoid being short-staffed , she ’ s been asking her nurses to work overtime .
Normally , ICU nurses are assigned to two patients each shift .
But one really sick COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shift — even with help from other nurses .
Jonathan Magdaleno , a registered nurse in the ICU , said he might have to spend 10 hours during a 12-hour shift at the bedside of an extremely ill patient .
Even in the best case , he said , he typically has to enter a patient ’ s room every 30 minutes , because the bags delivering medications and fluids empty at different rates .
Every time nurses or other care providers enter a patient ’ s room , they must put on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ off when they leave .
One of the most delicate and difficult tasks is a maneuver known as “ proning , ” in which a patient in acute respiratory distress is flipped onto his or her stomach to improve lung function .
Salinas said it can take a half-hour and require up to six nurses and a respiratory therapist , because tubes and wires have to be disconnected , then reconnected — not to mention the risks involved in moving an extremely fragile person .
And they must do it twice , because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back later in the day .
For some nurses , working on the COVID ward at LAC+USC feels very personal .
That ’ s the case for Magdaleno , a native Spanish speaker who was born in Mexico City .
“ I grew up in this community , ” he said .
“ Even if you don ’ t want to , you see your parents , you see your grandparents , you see your mom in these patients , because they speak the language.
” He planned to spend Christmas only with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone else to do the same .
“ If you lose any member of your family , then what ’ s the purpose of Christmas ?
” he asked .
“ Is it worth it going to the mall right now ?
Is it worth even getting a gift for somebody who ’ s probably going to die ?
” That the darkest hour of the pandemic should come precisely at the moment when COVID vaccines are beginning to arrive is especially poignant , said Dr. Paul Holtom , chief epidemiologist at LAC+USC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that the light is at the end of the tunnel , ” he said .
“ The vaccine is rolling out as we speak , and people just need to keep themselves alive until they can get the vaccine.
” This story was produced by KHN , which publishes California Healthline , an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation .

She lay behind a glass barrier, heavily sedated, kept alive by a machine that blew oxygen into her lungs through a tube taped to her mouth and lodged at the back of her throat. She had deteriorated rapidly since arriving a short time earlier.
“Her respiratory system is failing, and her cardiovascular system is failing,” said Dr. Luis Huerta, a critical care expert in the intensive care unit. The odds of survival for the patient, who could not be identified for privacy reasons, were poor, Huerta said.
The woman, in her 60s, was among 50 patients so ill with COVID-19 that they required constant medical attention this week in ICUs at Los Angeles County+USC Medical Center, a 600-bed public hospital on L.A.’s Eastside. A large majority of them had diabetes, obesity or hypertension.
An additional 100 COVID patients, less ill at least for the moment, were in other parts of the hospital, and the numbers were growing. In the five days that ended Wednesday, eight COVID patients at the hospital died — double the number from the preceding five days.
As COVID patients have flooded into LAC+USC in recent weeks, they’ve put an immense strain on its ICU capacity and staff — especially since non-COVID patients, with gunshot wounds, drug overdoses, heart attacks and strokes, also need intensive care.
No more ICU beds were available, said Dr. Brad Spellberg, the hospital’s chief medical officer.
Similar scenes — packed wards, overworked medical staffers, harried administrators and grieving families — are playing out in hospitals across the state and the nation.
In California, only 3% of ICU beds were available as of Thursday. In the 11-county Southern California region, no ICU beds were open, and in the San Joaquin Valley, just 0.7% were.
The county of Los Angeles, the nation’s largest, was perilously close to zero capacity.
County health officials reported Wednesday that the number of daily new COVID cases, deaths and hospitalizations had all soared beyond their previous highs for the entire pandemic.
LAC+USC has had a heavy COVID burden since the beginning of the pandemic, largely because the low-income, predominantly Latino community it serves has been hit so hard. Latinos represent about 39% of California’s population but have accounted for nearly 57% of the state’s COVID cases and 48% of its COVID deaths, according to data updated this week.
Many people who live near the hospital have essential jobs and “are not able to work from home. They are going out there and exposing themselves because they have to make a living,” Spellberg said. And, he said, “they don’t live in giant houses where they can isolate themselves in a room.”
The worst cases end up lying amid a tangle of tubes and bags, in ICU rooms designed to prevent air and viral particles from flowing out into the hall. The sickest among them, like the woman described above, need machines to breathe for them. They are fed through nose tubes, their bladders draining into catheter bags, while intravenous lines deliver fluids and medications to relieve pain, keep them sedated and raise their blood pressure to a level necessary for life.
To take some pressure off the ICUs, the hospital this week opened a new “step-down” unit, for patients who are still very sick but can be managed with a slightly lower level of care. Spellberg said he hopes the unit will accommodate up to 10 patients.
Hospital staff members have also been scouring the insurance plans of patients to see if they can be transferred to other hospitals. “But at this point, it’s become almost impossible, because they’re all filling up,” Spellberg said.
Two weeks ago, a smaller percentage of COVID patients in the ER were showing signs of severe disease, which meant fewer needed to be admitted to the hospital or the ICU than during the July surge. That was helping, as Spellberg put it, to keep the water below the top of the levee.
But not anymore.
“Over the last 10 days, it is my distinct impression that the severity has worsened again, and that’s why our ICU has filled up quickly,” Spellberg said Monday.
The total number of COVID patients in the hospital, and the number in its ICUs, are now well above the peak of July — and both are nearly six times as high as in late October. “This is the worst it’s been,” Spellberg said. And it will only get worse over the coming weeks, he added, if people travel and gather with their extended families over Christmas and New Year’s as they did for Thanksgiving.
“Think New York in April. Think Italy in March,” Spellberg said. “That’s how bad things could get.”
They are already bad enough. Nurses and other medical staffers are exhausted from long months of extremely laborious patient care that is only getting more intense, said Lea Salinas, a nurse manager in one of the hospital’s ICU units. To avoid being short-staffed, she’s been asking her nurses to work overtime.
Normally, ICU nurses are assigned to two patients each shift. But one really sick COVID patient can take up virtually the entire shift — even with help from other nurses. Jonathan Magdaleno, a registered nurse in the ICU, said he might have to spend 10 hours during a 12-hour shift at the bedside of an extremely ill patient.
Even in the best case, he said, he typically has to enter a patient’s room every 30 minutes, because the bags delivering medications and fluids empty at different rates. Every time nurses or other care providers enter a patient’s room, they must put on cumbersome protective gear — then take it off when they leave.
One of the most delicate and difficult tasks is a maneuver known as “proning,” in which a patient in acute respiratory distress is flipped onto his or her stomach to improve lung function. Salinas said it can take a half-hour and require up to six nurses and a respiratory therapist, because tubes and wires have to be disconnected, then reconnected — not to mention the risks involved in moving an extremely fragile person. And they must do it twice, because every proned patient needs to be flipped back later in the day.
For some nurses, working on the COVID ward at LAC+USC feels very personal. That’s the case for Magdaleno, a native Spanish speaker who was born in Mexico City. “I grew up in this community,” he said. “Even if you don’t want to, you see your parents, you see your grandparents, you see your mom in these patients, because they speak the language.”
He planned to spend Christmas only with members of his own household and urged everyone else to do the same. “If you lose any member of your family, then what’s the purpose of Christmas?” he asked. “Is it worth it going to the mall right now? Is it worth even getting a gift for somebody who’s probably going to die?”
That the darkest hour of the pandemic should come precisely at the moment when COVID vaccines are beginning to arrive is especially poignant, said Dr. Paul Holtom, chief epidemiologist at LAC+USC.
“The tragic irony of this is that the light is at the end of the tunnel,” he said. “The vaccine is rolling out as we speak, and people just need to keep themselves alive until they can get the vaccine.”
This story was produced by KHN, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.
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--2020-12-22--What Will Trump Attempt in His Last Days? We Must Prepare for Anything.

The endgame being played out by Donald Trump , already ludicrous , has begun to verge on the damned dangerous .
The president of the United States , recently defeated in a clear-cut national election , has spent his guttering days attempting to overthrow the very government he has run so spectacularly into the ground .
Specifically , and among other things , he has inquired about invoking martial law by way of the Insurrection Act .
To wit : Based upon the vapor of debunked conspiracy and the gas emanating from disgraced former General Michael Flynn , Trump should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election in the battleground states he lost .
According to reports , he was keenly interested in the idea .
To call this disquieting is a triumph of understatement .
Trump has spent his waning days in office plowing through his toy box of legal options for upending the people ’ s decision .
His myriad lawsuits have gone nowhere — though he doggedly persists — and his attempts to muscle lower-ranking Republicans in various states have come to naught .
One could find solace in the notion that Trump is apparently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ little passion play .
Further comfort is obtained in the belief that this whole thing is an elaborate charade , a final grift to pad his bank account with gullible dollars until the inevitable descends on January 20 .
For all we know , this is exactly the case… but for the knowledge that Trump ’ s biggest , meanest toys are at the bottom of that toy box , and the bottom of the box is exactly where he finds himself with less than a month to go .
His niece , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her uncle is a grand master when it comes to gaslighting himself , i.e.
, talking himself into believing in the preposterous if it suits his internal narrative of the heroic victim .
What was once a grift , in his mind , may well have become holy writ .
Attempting to disrupt the January 6 Electoral College certification is one of the last toys in Trump ’ s box .
The Insurrection Act , martial law , is the one below that… down at the very bottom , the last available trick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which they almost surely will under direct orders from Mitch McConnell , who is by all indications so totally over this president you guys .
Trump ’ s wrath at being thwarted by His Man In The Senate may be just enough to compel him to reach for that final toy , and if he does , there will be hell to pay .
Is it plausible , though , that Trump would dare to undertake this doomsday martial law scenario ?
To answer that , ask yourself how many times you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t do that , he can ’ t !
” only to see him do just that with extra “ that ” on the side .
Big-name national journalists certainly picked up on a deeply spooked vibe coming from a number of erstwhile Trump loyalists who were in the room when this incendiary option hit the table .
“ Sources who have gotten used to Trump ’ s eruptions over four years sound scared by what ’ s transpired in the past week when I ’ ve talked to them , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tweeted on Saturday .
“ I ’ ve been covering Donald Trump for a while , ” tweeted Jonathan Swan of Axios on the same day .
“ I can ’ t recall hearing more intense concern from senior officials who are actually Trump people .
The Sidney Powell / Michael Flynn ideas are finding an enthusiastic audience at the top.
” They aren ’ t the only ones apparently getting nervous as the pretender-king rages on his crumbling throne .
So far as history can report , no outgoing president has ever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staying in office .
“ On Friday , ” reports The Washington Post , “ Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Gen. James C. McConville , the Army ’ s top officer , released a joint statement that said : ‘ There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election.
’ ” The fact that the Army ’ s top brass felt compelled to release such an astonishing statement is chilling to the bone .
In the face of this , soothing voices preach the gospel of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him , rank and file government officials will never let it happen , he will fail if he tries .
Well and good , let us take those statements as fact .
What Trump has already done to this point has radicalized the well-armed fringe of his party to the brink of violent explosion , and motivated Republican officials in various states to redouble their voter suppression efforts .
He inspired 126 House Republicans to try and overthrow their own government .
What he may do in the last of his waning days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been paying attention .
That , right there , is all by itself a deep injury to the long-term survival of the republic , and perhaps a fatal one at that .
At this juncture , only time can tell the tale .

What Trump may do in his waning days is only unthinkable if you have not been paying attention.
The endgame being played out by Donald Trump, already ludicrous, has begun to verge on the damned dangerous.
The president of the United States, recently defeated in a clear-cut national election, has spent his guttering days attempting to overthrow the very government he has run so spectacularly into the ground. Specifically, and among other things, he has inquired about invoking martial law by way of the Insurrection Act.
To wit: Based upon the vapor of debunked conspiracy and the gas emanating from disgraced former General Michael Flynn, Trump should unleash the military and “rerun” the election in the battleground states he lost. According to reports, he was keenly interested in the idea.
To call this disquieting is a triumph of understatement. Trump has spent his waning days in office plowing through his toy box of legal options for upending the people’s decision. His myriad lawsuits have gone nowhere — though he doggedly persists — and his attempts to muscle lower-ranking Republicans in various states have come to naught.
One could find solace in the notion that Trump is apparently running out of viable moves in this little passion play. Further comfort is obtained in the belief that this whole thing is an elaborate charade, a final grift to pad his bank account with gullible dollars until the inevitable descends on January 20.
For all we know, this is exactly the case… but for the knowledge that Trump’s biggest, meanest toys are at the bottom of that toy box, and the bottom of the box is exactly where he finds himself with less than a month to go. His niece, Mary Trump, has stated publicly that her uncle is a grand master when it comes to gaslighting himself, i.e., talking himself into believing in the preposterous if it suits his internal narrative of the heroic victim. What was once a grift, in his mind, may well have become holy writ.
Attempting to disrupt the January 6 Electoral College certification is one of the last toys in Trump’s box. The Insurrection Act, martial law, is the one below that… down at the very bottom, the last available trick after his 1-6 follies fail in Congress, which they almost surely will under direct orders from Mitch McConnell, who is by all indications so totally over this president you guys.
Trump’s wrath at being thwarted by His Man In The Senate may be just enough to compel him to reach for that final toy, and if he does, there will be hell to pay.
Is it plausible, though, that Trump would dare to undertake this doomsday martial law scenario? To answer that, ask yourself how many times you’ve said, “He wouldn’t do that, he can’t!” only to see him do just that with extra “that” on the side.
Big-name national journalists certainly picked up on a deeply spooked vibe coming from a number of erstwhile Trump loyalists who were in the room when this incendiary option hit the table.
“Sources who have gotten used to Trump’s eruptions over four years sound scared by what’s transpired in the past week when I’ve talked to them,” Maggie Haberman of The New York Times tweeted on Saturday. “I’ve been covering Donald Trump for a while,” tweeted Jonathan Swan of Axios on the same day. “I can’t recall hearing more intense concern from senior officials who are actually Trump people. The Sidney Powell / Michael Flynn ideas are finding an enthusiastic audience at the top.”
They aren’t the only ones apparently getting nervous as the pretender-king rages on his crumbling throne. So far as history can report, no outgoing president has ever openly discussed mutiny as a means of staying in office. “On Friday,” reports The Washington Post, “Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Gen. James C. McConville, the Army’s top officer, released a joint statement that said: ‘There is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election.’” The fact that the Army’s top brass felt compelled to release such an astonishing statement is chilling to the bone.
In the face of this, soothing voices preach the gospel of calm. The military is not with him, rank and file government officials will never let it happen, he will fail if he tries.
Well and good, let us take those statements as fact. What Trump has already done to this point has radicalized the well-armed fringe of his party to the brink of violent explosion, and motivated Republican officials in various states to redouble their voter suppression efforts. He inspired 126 House Republicans to try and overthrow their own government. What he may do in the last of his waning days is only unthinkable if you have not been paying attention.
That, right there, is all by itself a deep injury to the long-term survival of the republic, and perhaps a fatal one at that. At this juncture, only time can tell the tale.
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.