truthout--2020-06-30--Confronting Prejudice Isn’t Enough. We Must Eradicate the White Racial Frame.

The brutal enslavement of Black people lasted for a full 60 percent of this country ’ s colonialist history .
It is this deadly longevity of anti-Black racism that we must grasp in order to understand the currently palpable and deeply painful anti-Black racist experiences that African Americans continue to endure in the 21st-century U.S. , and the massive multiracial protests that have ensued .
U.S. anti-Black racism was founded upon the brutal enslavement of Black people .
In the decades since the abolition of slavery , systemic white racism and what has been called the “ white racial frame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ degrade Black people and the rich historical magnitude of Black people who have , for centuries , struggled against white supremacy .
In this crucial Truthout interview , nationally and internationally prominent sociologist and social theorist Joe Feagin explores these key concepts and historical phenomena .
Feagin , who is the Ella C. McFadden Distinguished Professor in sociology at Texas A & M University , has done much internationally recognized research on U.S. racism , sexism and political economy issues .
He has written over 200 scholarly articles and 74 scholarly books in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Racism , White Party , White Government , The White Racial Frame and How Blacks Built America .
George Yancy : African Americans have just celebrated Juneteenth in the midst of Black-led protests that are , to my knowledge , unprecedented .
Speak to the possible connection between Juneteenth and these 21st-century protests that embody long sought-after freedoms for Black people .
Joe Feagin : Recent Juneteenth celebrations remind all Americans that this country is founded on the human-torture system called slavery .
No one should be surprised that those targeted by that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of African Americans and their descendants — have actively protested against racial oppression and fought for human liberty and justice for centuries .
From 1619 to 1865 — for 60 percent of this country ’ s colonialist history — whites maintained a brutal enslavement system unjustly enriching whites and unjustly impoverishing African Americans .
After a brief Reconstruction period , slavery was followed by the near-slavery of Jim Crow segregation , which also unjustly enriched the white majority while unjustly impoverishing African Americans .
Generation after generation , African Americans have rebelled , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racial oppression .
During the long slavery era , African Americans engaged collectively in an estimated 250 planned or implemented slave uprisings .
There were also hundreds of thousands of individual protests and rebellions .
During the 90-year Jim Crow era , there were also many dozens of attempted and successful collective demonstrations and uprisings , as well as many thousands of individual protests .
Today we see yet more Black-led and Black-generated demonstrations and uprisings very much in this long freedom tradition .
I have rigorously argued in How Blacks Built America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and revolts against racial oppression African Americans have long pressed for — indeed , arguably invented — the authentic liberty-and-justice-for-all values that have gradually become more central to this country .
The white male “ founders ” version of “ liberty and justice ” values were inauthentic , as they actually had in mind freedom for ( propertied ) white men , a small portion of the population , from British oppression .
Since 1970 , your scholarship has deepened our understanding of the dynamics of Black social protests within the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions that you see operating today that were operating within the 1960s or even the 1990s .
I have researched Black antiracist movements , demonstrations and revolts since the late 1960s .
With Harlan Hahn , I did the major social science book on the hundreds of violent Black revolts against systemic racism in the 1960s-1970s ( Ghetto Revolts : The Politics of American Violence , 1973 ) .
In addition , in numerous other books , such as Racist America , I have examined , for the 1940s-1960s era , Black nonviolent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the early 1990s Black uprisings over the Rodney King beating .
Black demonstrations and uprisings today are similar in several ways to previous demonstrations and uprisings .
Central to all , past and present , are what many researchers call “ underlying conditions ” and “ precipitating events.
” The well-institutionalized , inhumane conditions that underlie Black demonstrations and uprisings include not only white discrimination in policing but also in employment , housing , education , health care and political rights .
In survey and interview studies , most African Americans report regularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demonstrates huge racial inequalities rooted in generations of unjust Black impoverishment at the hands of unjustly enriched whites .
Graphically illustrating 20 generations of white enrichment and Black impoverishment , to take just one major example , is the fact that today the median net worth of white households is about 13 times that of Black households .
A second concept often used by researchers examining specific demonstrations and uprisings accents “ precipitating events ” that trigger them .
A majority of such precipitating events involve discriminatory incidents where a Black person or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In many cases , these involve police brutality or other malpractice incidents — especially those perpetrated by white officers .
One difference in these events today is that the general public is much more likely to see the police malpractice or other white discrimination because of phone cameras carried by many [ people ] .
Unlike in the case of the 1960s and the 1990s demonstrations and uprisings , we often have a video of the triggering event that makes it much harder to deny , especially for whites .
Images of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ millions of television sets and other devices .
You have articulated what you call the “ white racial frame.
” Define what you mean by such a frame and relate it to forms of white policing of Black bodies , which often leads to horrific deaths as in the cases of Breanna Taylor , George Floyd , and , more recently , Rayshard Brooks .
Today , mainstream analysis of issues involving white racism makes heavy use of concepts like prejudice , bias and bigotry .
These terms are skewed toward an individualistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ My young colleagues and I have done much research demonstrating that the concept of systemic racism , including the important concept of its white racial frame , are necessary to fully understand U.S. racial matters .
For centuries , that white racial frame has provided a dominant worldview from which most whites ( and many others ) regularly view this society .
While it includes racist prejudices , even more important are its racist narratives about society , its strong racist images , its powerful racist emotions and its inclinations to racist actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white framing has a very positive orientation to whites as generally superior and virtuous ( a pro-white subframe ) and a negative orientation to various racial “ others ” substantially viewed as inferior and unvirtuous ( anti-others subframes ) .
This frame motivates and rationalizes white racist discrimination targeting African Americans , including police brutality and violence such as that involved in the cases of African American men and women that you mention , and hundreds of others .
The likely motivation for such police malpractice is more than racial bias .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that not only stereotypes and interprets Black people and their actions in negative terms as unvirtuous — e.g.
, dangerous , criminal , violent , druggies — but also portrays whites , including police officers , as virtuous , manly , superior and dominant .
Also central in many such incidents appear to be white emotions of anger , fear , resentment or arrogance .
The way in which whites view themselves in these settings is at least as important as their negative views of those they target with discrimination .
Given that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is learned by whites within quotidian contexts , perhaps even at a white parent ’ s knee , how might this form of framing be challenged and undone ?
I ask this because while there have been many demands for police reform , I have not heard much at all about the more fundamental problem of eradicating the white racial frame .
From decades of experience researching and teaching about white racism , I have concluded it takes much long-term education and re-education for any white person , including myself , to significantly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it with an authentic liberty-and-justice-for-all framing that motivates meaningful anti-racist actions .
This is especially true for whites who are enmeshed in family and friendship networks that vigorously enforce conformity to that frame .
An example is the “ blue line ” — the strong police officer networks .
You not only have to move white individuals into long-term deframing of their own white racial frame , but also into challenging the white racist framing of their important social groups .
Dismantling and replacing even modest amounts of that white racial frame are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the social , material and ideological construction and operation of this country .
This frame shapes what most whites believe , feel and do in regard to racial matters .
For the most part , we don ’ t teach white youth to be deeply critical thinkers when it comes to our society ’ s racial matters .
Most home and institutional schooling encourages them to follow the lead of white economic , political or religious leaders .
Lack of critical thinking about our racist history and institutions reflects and perpetuates that dominant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our racist history and institutions is a good place to start in changing that dominant racial frame .
Decades of teaching thousands of college students and older Americans has led me to see that , until most whites have that accurate instruction , they do not have the essential understandings to be strongly supportive of major changes in systemic racism .
Working with anti-racist organizations has revealed to me that it typically takes long hours of instruction and dialogue over many months to get whites to even begin to think critically about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and interpretations of the dominant white racial frame they fervently cling to .
A key problem , especially for most white Americans , is just how segregated we are from people of color — especially from regular equal-status contacts with people of color beyond the workplace .
We know from social psychological studies that even getting white subjects with a strong racist framing of racial others to seriously observe or read about the latter in positive un-stereotyped settings can often begin to weaken some racist framing .
This seems especially true for young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the socially segregated spaces of whites , including with much more positive framing and information about people of color might , at least for children , begin the slow process of deframing their white racial framing .
If you examine most of contemporary schools ’ curricula , you will see that we are a long way from even these first steps in breaking down and replacing the worst elements of this society ’ s still dominant white racial frame .
There is no way around the hard and necessary goal of much aggressively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about our racist history and contemporary institutions .
Along with eradicating the white racial frame is eradicating white privilege , white power , white hegemony .
How might white people come to understand that eliminating white racism is in their own interest ?
Again , aggressive re-education for whites is one essential step .
For one thing , they need to be taught about the very high price many ordinary whites have paid for systemic racism at certain points in our history .
For example , many whites , especially Southerners , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ era and the Civil War in numerous U.S. movies , so that they do not even know that ordinary whites in the 1860s paid an extremely heavy price for what we misname as the “ Civil War.
” This was really a treasonous uprising against an established United States led by elite white male slaveholders , a minority of Southern whites , who effectively conned ordinary whites — most not slaveholders — into supporting , often with their lives , the elite effort to preserve a slavery system that brought them great wealth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on both sides .
Most of those confederates were ordinary white farmers and workers who died for that elite cause .
Then as now , ordinary whites have often been conned by the ruling white elite into taking racist actions that , to varying degrees , are against their own individual or group interests .
As the brilliant Black sociologist W.E.B .
Du Bois underscored in his writings , in the past and present , ordinary whites have accepted the “ public and psychological wage of whiteness , ” the sense and privileges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long been offered to them by the white male elite .
Accepting this psychological wage of whiteness has made ordinary whites much less likely over the centuries to organize effectively with African American workers and farmers to improve their societal conditions .
This successful elite strategy of racial divide-and-conquer has cost large numbers of ordinary white families dearly .
That is , a centuries-old lack of united worker organizations — e.g.
, massive , effective and enduring unions across the color line — has meant much less desirable working and living conditions , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also for many ordinary white Americans .
One can observe this negative result today in the substantial differences in the quality of the modern social welfare states ( e.g.
, the health care systems ) serving ordinary citizens in the U.S. and European countries with strong unions .
A majority of whites also pay for continuing systemic racism in elevated levels of racial fear , resentment and ignorance .
Research has shown that whites who are raised in segregated conditions and still live segregated lives are often fearful of Black people and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ few or no equal-status contacts .
Growing up in segregated areas , most white parents and children are unprepared to deal with the soon-to-be demographic reality of being a “ white minority ” in the U.S. Their fear of that significant racial change , undergirded by their racist framing of white superiority and virtuousness compared to people of color , leaves them with a limited ability to deal wisely and democratically with a racially changing country and world , in the present and future .
Going forward , I tend to be pessimistic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ white privilege .
The history of this country supports my pessimism .
For those who share my view , do you see anything on the horizon for which we ought to be optimistic regarding white racism ?
I tend to be an optimistic pessimist .
Those decades of research on our systemic white racism have made me pessimistic about the eradication of white supremacy and privilege .
However , my work with effective anti-racist activist groups like the Midwestern group called Antiracism Study Dialogue Circles Metamorphosis gives me some hope for the future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 2,000 people using long-term anti-racist dialogue groups .
Also , the presence of millions of white Americans in recent demonstrations against police brutality and malpractice seems to offer a glimmer of hope that many ( especially younger ) whites can be educated or re-educated about our systemic racism and about anti-racist action .
Still , given the widespread white fears of the large-scale demographic and voter changes going on now and in the near future , I see a societal future likely to have much more sociopolitical tumult , some of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growth in well-armed white supremacist groups .
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity .

The brutal enslavement of Black people lasted for a full 60 percent of this country’s colonialist history.
It is this deadly longevity of anti-Black racism that we must grasp in order to understand the currently palpable and deeply painful anti-Black racist experiences that African Americans continue to endure in the 21st-century U.S., and the massive multiracial protests that have ensued.
U.S. anti-Black racism was founded upon the brutal enslavement of Black people. In the decades since the abolition of slavery, systemic white racism and what has been called the “white racial frame” continue to valorize white people and degrade Black people and the rich historical magnitude of Black people who have, for centuries, struggled against white supremacy.
In this crucial Truthout interview, nationally and internationally prominent sociologist and social theorist Joe Feagin explores these key concepts and historical phenomena. Feagin, who is the Ella C. McFadden Distinguished Professor in sociology at Texas A & M University, has done much internationally recognized research on U.S. racism, sexism and political economy issues. He has written over 200 scholarly articles and 74 scholarly books in his social science areas, including Systemic Racism, White Party, White Government, The White Racial Frame and How Blacks Built America.
George Yancy: African Americans have just celebrated Juneteenth in the midst of Black-led protests that are, to my knowledge, unprecedented. Speak to the possible connection between Juneteenth and these 21st-century protests that embody long sought-after freedoms for Black people.
Joe Feagin: Recent Juneteenth celebrations remind all Americans that this country is founded on the human-torture system called slavery. No one should be surprised that those targeted by that system of slavery — which involved millions of African Americans and their descendants — have actively protested against racial oppression and fought for human liberty and justice for centuries. From 1619 to 1865 — for 60 percent of this country’s colonialist history — whites maintained a brutal enslavement system unjustly enriching whites and unjustly impoverishing African Americans.
For 60 percent of this country’s history — whites maintained a brutal enslavement system unjustly enriching whites and unjustly impoverishing African Americans.
After a brief Reconstruction period, slavery was followed by the near-slavery of Jim Crow segregation, which also unjustly enriched the white majority while unjustly impoverishing African Americans. Generation after generation, African Americans have rebelled, individually and collectively, against this white racial oppression. During the long slavery era, African Americans engaged collectively in an estimated 250 planned or implemented slave uprisings. There were also hundreds of thousands of individual protests and rebellions. During the 90-year Jim Crow era, there were also many dozens of attempted and successful collective demonstrations and uprisings, as well as many thousands of individual protests.
Today we see yet more Black-led and Black-generated demonstrations and uprisings very much in this long freedom tradition. I have rigorously argued in How Blacks Built America that in their individual and collective protests and revolts against racial oppression African Americans have long pressed for — indeed, arguably invented — the authentic liberty-and-justice-for-all values that have gradually become more central to this country. The white male “founders” version of “liberty and justice” values were inauthentic, as they actually had in mind freedom for (propertied) white men, a small portion of the population, from British oppression.
Since 1970, your scholarship has deepened our understanding of the dynamics of Black social protests within the United States. Speak to some of the underlying conditions that you see operating today that were operating within the 1960s or even the 1990s.
I have researched Black antiracist movements, demonstrations and revolts since the late 1960s. With Harlan Hahn, I did the major social science book on the hundreds of violent Black revolts against systemic racism in the 1960s-1970s (Ghetto Revolts: The Politics of American Violence, 1973). In addition, in numerous other books, such as Racist America, I have examined, for the 1940s-1960s era, Black nonviolent civil rights demonstrations, as well as the early 1990s Black uprisings over the Rodney King beating.
It typically takes long hours of instruction and dialogue over many months to get whites to even begin to think critically about the white racial frame they fervently cling to.
Black demonstrations and uprisings today are similar in several ways to previous demonstrations and uprisings. Central to all, past and present, are what many researchers call “underlying conditions” and “precipitating events.” The well-institutionalized, inhumane conditions that underlie Black demonstrations and uprisings include not only white discrimination in policing but also in employment, housing, education, health care and political rights. In survey and interview studies, most African Americans report regularly facing racial discrimination, and much research demonstrates huge racial inequalities rooted in generations of unjust Black impoverishment at the hands of unjustly enriched whites. Graphically illustrating 20 generations of white enrichment and Black impoverishment, to take just one major example, is the fact that today the median net worth of white households is about 13 times that of Black households.
A second concept often used by researchers examining specific demonstrations and uprisings accents “precipitating events” that trigger them. A majority of such precipitating events involve discriminatory incidents where a Black person or group is publicly targeted by whites. In many cases, these involve police brutality or other malpractice incidents — especially those perpetrated by white officers.
One difference in these events today is that the general public is much more likely to see the police malpractice or other white discrimination because of phone cameras carried by many [people]. Unlike in the case of the 1960s and the 1990s demonstrations and uprisings, we often have a video of the triggering event that makes it much harder to deny, especially for whites. Images of the events typically become viral and appear across millions of television sets and other devices.
You have articulated what you call the “white racial frame.” Define what you mean by such a frame and relate it to forms of white policing of Black bodies, which often leads to horrific deaths as in the cases of Breanna Taylor, George Floyd, and, more recently, Rayshard Brooks.
Today, mainstream analysis of issues involving white racism makes heavy use of concepts like prejudice, bias and bigotry. These terms are skewed toward an individualistic, nonsystemic interpretation of racial matters. My young colleagues and I have done much research demonstrating that the concept of systemic racism, including the important concept of its white racial frame, are necessary to fully understand U.S. racial matters. For centuries, that white racial frame has provided a dominant worldview from which most whites (and many others) regularly view this society. While it includes racist prejudices, even more important are its racist narratives about society, its strong racist images, its powerful racist emotions and its inclinations to racist actions. Especially important is that this broad white framing has a very positive orientation to whites as generally superior and virtuous (a pro-white subframe) and a negative orientation to various racial “others” substantially viewed as inferior and unvirtuous (anti-others subframes).
Elite white male slaveholders effectively conned ordinary whites — most not slaveholders — into supporting, often with their lives, the elite effort to preserve a slavery system that brought them great wealth.
This frame motivates and rationalizes white racist discrimination targeting African Americans, including police brutality and violence such as that involved in the cases of African American men and women that you mention, and hundreds of others. The likely motivation for such police malpractice is more than racial bias. These events typically involve a white racial framing that not only stereotypes and interprets Black people and their actions in negative terms as unvirtuous — e.g., dangerous, criminal, violent, druggies — but also portrays whites, including police officers, as virtuous, manly, superior and dominant. Also central in many such incidents appear to be white emotions of anger, fear, resentment or arrogance. The way in which whites view themselves in these settings is at least as important as their negative views of those they target with discrimination.
Given that the white racial frame is that which is learned by whites within quotidian contexts, perhaps even at a white parent’s knee, how might this form of framing be challenged and undone? I ask this because while there have been many demands for police reform, I have not heard much at all about the more fundamental problem of eradicating the white racial frame.
From decades of experience researching and teaching about white racism, I have concluded it takes much long-term education and re-education for any white person, including myself, to significantly dismantle that white racial frame and replace it with an authentic liberty-and-justice-for-all framing that motivates meaningful anti-racist actions. This is especially true for whites who are enmeshed in family and friendship networks that vigorously enforce conformity to that frame. An example is the “blue line” — the strong police officer networks. You not only have to move white individuals into long-term deframing of their own white racial frame, but also into challenging the white racist framing of their important social groups.
Dismantling and replacing even modest amounts of that white racial frame are extraordinarily difficult because it is fundamental to the social, material and ideological construction and operation of this country. This frame shapes what most whites believe, feel and do in regard to racial matters. For the most part, we don’t teach white youth to be deeply critical thinkers when it comes to our society’s racial matters. Most home and institutional schooling encourages them to follow the lead of white economic, political or religious leaders. Lack of critical thinking about our racist history and institutions reflects and perpetuates that dominant white racial frame.
Solid information about our racist history and institutions is a good place to start in changing that dominant racial frame. Decades of teaching thousands of college students and older Americans has led me to see that, until most whites have that accurate instruction, they do not have the essential understandings to be strongly supportive of major changes in systemic racism. Working with anti-racist organizations has revealed to me that it typically takes long hours of instruction and dialogue over many months to get whites to even begin to think critically about the racially stereotyped images, beliefs, emotions and interpretations of the dominant white racial frame they fervently cling to.
A key problem, especially for most white Americans, is just how segregated we are from people of color — especially from regular equal-status contacts with people of color beyond the workplace. We know from social psychological studies that even getting white subjects with a strong racist framing of racial others to seriously observe or read about the latter in positive un-stereotyped settings can often begin to weaken some racist framing. This seems especially true for young children. A substantial breaking down of the socially segregated spaces of whites, including with much more positive framing and information about people of color might, at least for children, begin the slow process of deframing their white racial framing.
If you examine most of contemporary schools’ curricula, you will see that we are a long way from even these first steps in breaking down and replacing the worst elements of this society’s still dominant white racial frame. There is no way around the hard and necessary goal of much aggressively honest education, especially for whites, about our racist history and contemporary institutions.
Along with eradicating the white racial frame is eradicating white privilege, white power, white hegemony. How might white people come to understand that eliminating white racism is in their own interest?
Again, aggressive re-education for whites is one essential step. For one thing, they need to be taught about the very high price many ordinary whites have paid for systemic racism at certain points in our history. For example, many whites, especially Southerners, are bamboozled by mythical notions of the slavery era and the Civil War in numerous U.S. movies, so that they do not even know that ordinary whites in the 1860s paid an extremely heavy price for what we misname as the “Civil War.” This was really a treasonous uprising against an established United States led by elite white male slaveholders, a minority of Southern whites, who effectively conned ordinary whites — most not slaveholders — into supporting, often with their lives, the elite effort to preserve a slavery system that brought them great wealth. That bloody conflict took 620,000 lives on both sides. Most of those confederates were ordinary white farmers and workers who died for that elite cause.
Accepting this psychological wage of whiteness has made ordinary whites much less likely over the centuries to organize effectively with African American workers and farmers to improve their societal conditions.
Then as now, ordinary whites have often been conned by the ruling white elite into taking racist actions that, to varying degrees, are against their own individual or group interests. As the brilliant Black sociologist W.E.B. Du Bois underscored in his writings, in the past and present, ordinary whites have accepted the “public and psychological wage of whiteness,” the sense and privileges of being racially superior, that has long been offered to them by the white male elite. Accepting this psychological wage of whiteness has made ordinary whites much less likely over the centuries to organize effectively with African American workers and farmers to improve their societal conditions. This successful elite strategy of racial divide-and-conquer has cost large numbers of ordinary white families dearly. That is, a centuries-old lack of united worker organizations — e.g., massive, effective and enduring unions across the color line — has meant much less desirable working and living conditions, not only for African Americans, but also for many ordinary white Americans. One can observe this negative result today in the substantial differences in the quality of the modern social welfare states (e.g., the health care systems) serving ordinary citizens in the U.S. and European countries with strong unions.
A majority of whites also pay for continuing systemic racism in elevated levels of racial fear, resentment and ignorance. Research has shown that whites who are raised in segregated conditions and still live segregated lives are often fearful of Black people and other people of color with whom they have few or no equal-status contacts. Growing up in segregated areas, most white parents and children are unprepared to deal with the soon-to-be demographic reality of being a “white minority” in the U.S. Their fear of that significant racial change, undergirded by their racist framing of white superiority and virtuousness compared to people of color, leaves them with a limited ability to deal wisely and democratically with a racially changing country and world, in the present and future.
Going forward, I tend to be pessimistic about the eradication of white supremacy and white privilege. The history of this country supports my pessimism. For those who share my view, do you see anything on the horizon for which we ought to be optimistic regarding white racism?
I tend to be an optimistic pessimist. Those decades of research on our systemic white racism have made me pessimistic about the eradication of white supremacy and privilege. However, my work with effective anti-racist activist groups like the Midwestern group called Antiracism Study Dialogue Circles Metamorphosis gives me some hope for the future, as their multiracial organization has reached more than 2,000 people using long-term anti-racist dialogue groups. Also, the presence of millions of white Americans in recent demonstrations against police brutality and malpractice seems to offer a glimmer of hope that many (especially younger) whites can be educated or re-educated about our systemic racism and about anti-racist action.
Still, given the widespread white fears of the large-scale demographic and voter changes going on now and in the near future, I see a societal future likely to have much more sociopolitical tumult, some of which may well be violent given the growth in well-armed white supremacist groups.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.
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--2020-06-30--Trump Is Either Lying or Out of the Loop on Afghanistan. Both Are Bad.

The corporate media has been straining at its collective leash since the weekend , firing a volley of barks our way about Russian intelligence agents paying the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers , and my God , did Donald Trump know ?
The high dudgeon in these reports is unmistakable ; one CNN article by Paul Begala calls it “ the worst of Trump ’ s outrages.
” It ’ s a story that has everything , if you like that sort of thing : war , international intrigue , tragedy , politics .
Plus , because did Donald Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia connection is enough to give John le Carré the vapors .
As matters stand today , a Russian intelligence agency is believed to have paid bounties to Taliban-allied militants for targeting and killing U.S. troops in Afghanistan .
No one seems sure of how many troops came to grief by way of this program — perhaps one , perhaps more .
Some 20 U.S. servicemembers were killed over there in 2019 , the year that is apparently in question regarding these activities .
Intelligence officers and Special Operations soldiers raised the alarm @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and suspicions continued to grow when a snowdrift of U.S. currency was found at a Taliban outpost after a raid .
“ Interrogations of captured militants and criminals played a central role in making the intelligence community confident in its assessment that the Russians had offered and paid bounties in 2019 , ” reports The New York Times .
This may all be absolutely true , but let ’ s be clear : The discovery of a pile of U.S. currency in Afghanistan pretty much proves only that our government has been slinging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a hell of a lot of years now .
Here ’ s a report from April of 2013 , about three months after Obama ’ s second inauguration : For more than a decade , wads of American dollars packed into suitcases , backpacks and , on occasion , plastic shopping bags have been dropped off every month or so at the offices of Afghanistan ’ s president — courtesy of the Central Intelligence Agency .
All told , tens of millions of dollars have flowed from the C.I.A .
to the office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ current and former advisers to the Afghan leader .
The United States was not alone in delivering cash to the president .
Mr. Karzai acknowledged a few years ago that Iran regularly gave bags of cash to one of his top aides… .
Like the Iranian cash , much of the C.I.A.
’ s money goes to paying off warlords and politicians , many of whom have ties to the drug trade and , in some cases , the Taliban .
The “ did Donald know ” question squatting atop this situation is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ himself .
According to a Friday report in the Times , Trump was briefed on the situation months ago , but as the story broke over the last few days , the White House has denied he knew anything .
This Times article from Sunday has former national security adviser John Bolton claiming “ that he was not aware of the intelligence assessment ” in question .
Yet this article from the Associated Press reads , “ Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its part , seems pretty convinced Trump had been briefed .
They have two unnamed ( of course ) intelligence officials who claim the Russian bounty data was included in the President ’ s Daily Brief document , and one of them pegs the specific date as February 27 .
They can hash it all out with AP at their leisure .
So… did Trump know about all this and lie , as is his way ?
Was he briefed and immediately forgot about it , as is also his way ?
Did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of whom see Trump as an active menace to national security — simply not tell Trump about it at all because , really , what ’ s the point ?
It ’ s difficult to decide which scenario is worse , frankly .
Trump lying to cover his ass is as commonplace as pavement in the city , but that doesn ’ t make it any less galling .
If he was told and forgot , well , his inability to retain or synthesize information is the stuff of legend , so no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that the president of the United States is such a national security threat that his own intelligence officers don ’ t tell him important things pretty much sucks hard enough to bend the light .
At some point , maybe , we will find out which of these is true .
In the meantime , and in case you are wondering where all of this first started , allow me to introduce you to something that was called Operation Cyclone .
Not to be confused with the same-name Allied operation for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Operation Cyclone was the C.I.A.
’ s program to fund and arm the mujahideen in Afghanistan during their war against the invading Soviet Union .
“ Arming the rebels has cost the United States more than $ 2 billion over eight years , ” reported the Times in April 1988 , “ although the exact amounts of appropriations are secret because the operation is not officially acknowledged by Washington .
The program has had strong bipartisan support in Congress throughout.
” Cyclone went on from 1979 to 1989 , accelerating massively after Ronald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1987 , the C.I.A was pumping more than $ 600 million annually into the mujahideen fight , which two years later resulted in the defeated withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan and the eventual collapse of the U.S.S.R. At the time , it was called “ the last battle of the Cold War.
” All in all a bully op for U.S. intelligence , but for the fact that the mujahideen eventually morphed into the Taliban , which harbored Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda , who blew up a couple of very tall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after the Soviet war ended , and were able to do so because we taught the mujahideen how to effectively fight a superpower in the first place .
The C.I.A.
’ s money and weapons over that decade helped the mujahideen kill around 15,000 Soviet soldiers over the course of the conflict .
Now , if the reports are to be believed , the descendants of those mujahideen fighters we funded were killing U.S. soldiers to collect a bounty from the Russians , who used to be the Soviets , all in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Afghanistan in the same fashion we bogged them down there almost 40 years ago .
In a final irony , John Bolton was in the Reagan administration when Cyclone became the hood-ornament op for U.S. intelligence .
Now he can ’ t get his story straight on whether or not he told Trump that Russia is getting its vengeance for Cyclone all these years later .
I really don ’ t know what to make of all this just yet , but one thing is crystal clear to me : We have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Afghanistan since 1979 , U.S. troops were maybe being killed for pay so the Russians could tag us for our prior acts in that country , and Donald Trump is absolutely , positively not up to the task of effectively dealing with any of this .
Beyond that , here ’ s mud in your eye .
Now you can see as clearly as the president .

The corporate media has been straining at its collective leash since the weekend, firing a volley of barks our way about Russian intelligence agents paying the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers, and my God, did Donald Trump know? The high dudgeon in these reports is unmistakable; one CNN article by Paul Begala calls it “the worst of Trump’s outrages.”
It’s a story that has everything, if you like that sort of thing: war, international intrigue, tragedy, politics. Plus, because did Donald Trump know is in the mix, the Russia connection is enough to give John le Carré the vapors.
As matters stand today, a Russian intelligence agency is believed to have paid bounties to Taliban-allied militants for targeting and killing U.S. troops in Afghanistan. No one seems sure of how many troops came to grief by way of this program — perhaps one, perhaps more. Some 20 U.S. servicemembers were killed over there in 2019, the year that is apparently in question regarding these activities.
Intelligence officers and Special Operations soldiers raised the alarm as early as January of 2019, and suspicions continued to grow when a snowdrift of U.S. currency was found at a Taliban outpost after a raid. “Interrogations of captured militants and criminals played a central role in making the intelligence community confident in its assessment that the Russians had offered and paid bounties in 2019,” reports The New York Times.
This may all be absolutely true, but let’s be clear: The discovery of a pile of U.S. currency in Afghanistan pretty much proves only that our government has been slinging shady cash around in that country for a hell of a lot of years now. Here’s a report from April of 2013, about three months after Obama’s second inauguration:
For more than a decade, wads of American dollars packed into suitcases, backpacks and, on occasion, plastic shopping bags have been dropped off every month or so at the offices of Afghanistan’s president — courtesy of the Central Intelligence Agency. All told, tens of millions of dollars have flowed from the C.I.A. to the office of President Hamid Karzai, according to current and former advisers to the Afghan leader. The United States was not alone in delivering cash to the president. Mr. Karzai acknowledged a few years ago that Iran regularly gave bags of cash to one of his top aides…. Like the Iranian cash, much of the C.I.A.’s money goes to paying off warlords and politicians, many of whom have ties to the drug trade and, in some cases, the Taliban.
The “did Donald know” question squatting atop this situation is every bit as bewildering as the man himself.
According to a Friday report in the Times, Trump was briefed on the situation months ago, but as the story broke over the last few days, the White House has denied he knew anything. This Times article from Sunday has former national security adviser John Bolton claiming “that he was not aware of the intelligence assessment” in question. Yet this article from the Associated Press reads, “Then-national security adviser John Bolton also told colleagues he briefed Trump on the intelligence assessment in March 2019.”
The Times, for its part, seems pretty convinced Trump had been briefed. They have two unnamed (of course) intelligence officials who claim the Russian bounty data was included in the President’s Daily Brief document, and one of them pegs the specific date as February 27. They can hash it all out with AP at their leisure.
So… did Trump know about all this and lie, as is his way? Was he briefed and immediately forgot about it, as is also his way? Did members of the intelligence services — many of whom see Trump as an active menace to national security — simply not tell Trump about it at all because, really, what’s the point?
It’s difficult to decide which scenario is worse, frankly. Trump lying to cover his ass is as commonplace as pavement in the city, but that doesn’t make it any less galling. If he was told and forgot, well, his inability to retain or synthesize information is the stuff of legend, so no galloping surprise there. Meanwhile, the fact that the president of the United States is such a national security threat that his own intelligence officers don’t tell him important things pretty much sucks hard enough to bend the light.
At some point, maybe, we will find out which of these is true.
In the meantime, and in case you are wondering where all of this first started, allow me to introduce you to something that was called Operation Cyclone.
Not to be confused with the same-name Allied operation for the invasion of Noemfoor in 1944, this Operation Cyclone was the C.I.A.’s program to fund and arm the mujahideen in Afghanistan during their war against the invading Soviet Union.
“Arming the rebels has cost the United States more than $2 billion over eight years,” reported the Times in April 1988, “although the exact amounts of appropriations are secret because the operation is not officially acknowledged by Washington. The program has had strong bipartisan support in Congress throughout.”
Cyclone went on from 1979 to 1989, accelerating massively after Ronald Reagan took office in 1981. By 1987, the C.I.A was pumping more than $600 million annually into the mujahideen fight, which two years later resulted in the defeated withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan and the eventual collapse of the U.S.S.R. At the time, it was called “the last battle of the Cold War.”
All in all a bully op for U.S. intelligence, but for the fact that the mujahideen eventually morphed into the Taliban, which harbored Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, who blew up a couple of very tall buildings in New York City 11 years after the Soviet war ended, and were able to do so because we taught the mujahideen how to effectively fight a superpower in the first place.
The C.I.A.’s money and weapons over that decade helped the mujahideen kill around 15,000 Soviet soldiers over the course of the conflict. Now, if the reports are to be believed, the descendants of those mujahideen fighters we funded were killing U.S. soldiers to collect a bounty from the Russians, who used to be the Soviets, all in an effort to further bog the U.S. down in Afghanistan in the same fashion we bogged them down there almost 40 years ago.
In a final irony, John Bolton was in the Reagan administration when Cyclone became the hood-ornament op for U.S. intelligence. Now he can’t get his story straight on whether or not he told Trump that Russia is getting its vengeance for Cyclone all these years later.
I really don’t know what to make of all this just yet, but one thing is crystal clear to me: We have been slowly sinking into the quicksand of Afghanistan since 1979, U.S. troops were maybe being killed for pay so the Russians could tag us for our prior acts in that country, and Donald Trump is absolutely, positively not up to the task of effectively dealing with any of this.
Beyond that, here’s mud in your eye. Now you can see as clearly as the president.
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--2020-06-30--Trump Was Golfing and Unreachable for 3 Hours After Sharing “White Power” Tweet

After President Donald Trump shared a video on Twitter this past weekend , showcasing one of his supporters shouting out “ white power ” toward others protesting against the president , the White House scrambled to get him to take the tweet down , as it had generated a great amount of condemnation online for the racist remark .
Aides were unable to reach Trump , however , because the president was golfing and had set his phone down , according to their account of the matter .
Trump on Sunday shared the video , praising the individuals showing their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the great people of The Villages , ” he wrote in a tweet , referencing the Florida retirement community where the incident had taken place .
Trump deleted the tweet several hours later that same day .
White House spokesman Judd Deere explained to reporters that Trump hadn ’ t heard the racist statement made by the man in the video .
The White House wouldn ’ t comment further , however , on whether it condemned those remarks .
According to a report from NBC News on Tuesday morning , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hours to get Trump to remove the tweet , describing the situation as a “ five-alarm fire ” because they were unable to reach him to do so .
Trump was golfing at his club in Virginia when efforts to reach him were made .
The White House also tried to reach deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino , who helps the president manage his Twitter account .
Once Trump was reached , he agreed with staff that the tweet should be deleted , especially after condemnations from Sen. Tim Scott , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were brought to his attention .
While aides told NBC News about these frantic attempts to reach the president to get him to delete the tweet , others were more skeptical about the tale .
Joyce Alene , a professor of law at the University of Alabama and a former federal prosecutor , expressed doubts about the story .
“ I don ’ t buy this , ” Alene wrote in a tweet .
“ If the President ’ s top aides can ’ t reach him for 3 hours while he ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even more dangerously dysfunctional than we ’ ve been led to believe.
” Democratic congressional aide Dan Riffle also expressed being surprised by the fact Trump was unreachable .
“ It ’ s Trump , so the ‘ white power ’ video honestly , sadly didn ’ t shock me , ” Riffle said on Twitter .
“ It is shocking though that the president can be unreachable for three hours while golfing .
Somewhere there is an assistant regional manager of a Staples who has to always be on call.
” Stephen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists , an organization dedicated to informing the public about human-made existential threats , expressed relief that it was nothing more serious that required the president ’ s attention .
“ Good thing it wasn ’ t a national emergency then , ” Schwartz wrote .
“ Did no one try to reach Trump via the Secret Service or the White House Military Office ?
Or just call the club and track him down ?
” There are also doubts over whether Trump did not hear his supporter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the post he originally promoted , as it happened within the first 10 seconds of the video .
As NBC News also pointed out in its reporting , Trump has suggested in the past that he vets his social media posts before sharing them .
When he shared a tweet that included the hashtag “ # FireFauci ” , for example , he was asked if he had seen that tag being promoted before retweeting it .

The inability of the White House to reach Trump over the tweet brought about national security concerns from critics.
After President Donald Trump shared a video on Twitter this past weekend, showcasing one of his supporters shouting out “white power” toward others protesting against the president, the White House scrambled to get him to take the tweet down, as it had generated a great amount of condemnation online for the racist remark.
Aides were unable to reach Trump, however, because the president was golfing and had set his phone down, according to their account of the matter.
Trump on Sunday shared the video, praising the individuals showing their support of him. “Thank you to the great people of The Villages,” he wrote in a tweet, referencing the Florida retirement community where the incident had taken place.
Trump deleted the tweet several hours later that same day. White House spokesman Judd Deere explained to reporters that Trump hadn’t heard the racist statement made by the man in the video. The White House wouldn’t comment further, however, on whether it condemned those remarks.
According to a report from NBC News on Tuesday morning, however, aides were scrambling during those few hours to get Trump to remove the tweet, describing the situation as a “five-alarm fire” because they were unable to reach him to do so.
Trump was golfing at his club in Virginia when efforts to reach him were made. The White House also tried to reach deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, who helps the president manage his Twitter account.
Once Trump was reached, he agreed with staff that the tweet should be deleted, especially after condemnations from Sen. Tim Scott, the only Black Republican in the Senate, were brought to his attention.
While aides told NBC News about these frantic attempts to reach the president to get him to delete the tweet, others were more skeptical about the tale. Joyce Alene, a professor of law at the University of Alabama and a former federal prosecutor, expressed doubts about the story.
“I don’t buy this,” Alene wrote in a tweet. “If the President’s top aides can’t reach him for 3 hours while he’s playing golf, this WH is even more dangerously dysfunctional than we’ve been led to believe.”
Democratic congressional aide Dan Riffle also expressed being surprised by the fact Trump was unreachable.
“It’s Trump, so the ‘white power’ video honestly, sadly didn’t shock me,” Riffle said on Twitter. “It is shocking though that the president can be unreachable for three hours while golfing. Somewhere there is an assistant regional manager of a Staples who has to always be on call.”
Stephen Schwartz, a nonresident senior fellow at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, an organization dedicated to informing the public about human-made existential threats, expressed relief that it was nothing more serious that required the president’s attention.
“Good thing it wasn’t a national emergency then,” Schwartz wrote. “Did no one try to reach Trump via the Secret Service or the White House Military Office? Or just call the club and track him down?”
There are also doubts over whether Trump did not hear his supporter shout out “white power” in the post he originally promoted, as it happened within the first 10 seconds of the video.
As NBC News also pointed out in its reporting, Trump has suggested in the past that he vets his social media posts before sharing them. When he shared a tweet that included the hashtag “#FireFauci”, for example, he was asked if he had seen that tag being promoted before retweeting it.
“Yeah, I notice everything,” Trump said in response.
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--2020-06-30--Trump to Black Americans: “You Have to Learn” About “Your History”

President Donald Trump told Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade in a Sunday evening special that his message to Black Americans demanding the removal of monuments honoring slave owners is this : “ You have to learn ” about “ your history.
” “ If you don ’ t understand your history , ” Trump added , “ you will go back to it again.
” The president made the remarks during a discussion about growing calls to take down statues commemorating Confederate heroes and other prominent Americans who owned slaves .
Kilmeade pointed to “ brilliant ” leaders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James Madison , who were problematic because they owned slaves .
“ So how do we grow as a country and yet not forget our past ?
” he asked .
“ You have to understand history , and you have to understand the culture , ” Trump responded .
The president said it would be foolish to remove statues of George Washington , because “ half of our country is named after Washington.
” “ We have to remember the heritage and the culture of our country , ” he continued .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ these people don ’ t even know what they are taking down.
” “ I see what ’ s happening on television , and they are ripping down things , ” he said .
“ They have no idea what they are ripping down , but they started off with the Confederates and now go to Ulysses Grant .
So what is that all about ?
” The president threatened last week to sign an executive order punishing “ anarchists ” who destroy statues with jail time , which called for 10-year sentences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kilmeade then asked Trump what his message was for Black Americans , specifically , whose ancestors were enslaved .
“ Since you have done a lot for the African-American community , what is your message to them when their ancestors were enslaved because of [ past leaders honored on monuments today ] ?
” the Fox News host asked the president .
Trump replied that Black Americans need to learn about the country ’ s history , lest they “ go back to it.
” His comments suggested that slavery could reoccur if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ message is that we have a great country : We have the greatest country on Earth .
We have a heritage .
We have a history and we should learn from the history .
And if you don ’ t understand your history , you will go back to it again .
You will go right back to it .
You have to learn .
Think of it : You take away that whole era , and you ’ re going to go back to it sometime .
People won ’ t know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to forget about it .
It ’ s OK. Now , what I do like ?
I like the idea of building new statues to people — to great people .
People that have done something .
And I think that ’ s OK .
The president went on to moon over the aesthetic beauty of some of the disputed statues , a great many of which feature a prominent uniformed Confederate war figure bearing a sword astride a horse .
But you don ’ t want to take away our heritage , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many cases , the beauty — the artistic beauty .
Some of the sculptures and some of this work is some of the great — you can go to France .
You can go anywhere in the world , and you will never see more magnificent work .
And that ’ s a factor .
It ’ s not the biggest factor , but it ’ s a factor .
During an appearance last week on Fox News , Sean Hannity asked Trump what his priorities would be if he were re-elected to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not name one .
Instead , he spoke briefly about the handful of visits he made to Washington earlier in his life before pivoting to blast his former national security adviser John Bolton , whose new White House memoir documents the president ’ s pathological proclivity to commit impeachable offenses , as “ an idiot.
” “ Now , I know everybody , and I have great people in the administration , ” Trump said .
“ You make some mistakes , like — you know , an idiot like Bolton .
All @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on everybody .
You don ’ t have to drop bombs on everybody .
You don ’ t have to kill people .
”

The president threatened last week to sign an executive order punishing “anarchists” who destroy statues with jail time.
President Donald Trump told Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade in a Sunday evening special that his message to Black Americans demanding the removal of monuments honoring slave owners is this: “You have to learn” about “your history.”
“If you don’t understand your history,” Trump added, “you will go back to it again.”
The president made the remarks during a discussion about growing calls to take down statues commemorating Confederate heroes and other prominent Americans who owned slaves.
Kilmeade pointed to “brilliant” leaders, such as former presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who were problematic because they owned slaves.
“So how do we grow as a country and yet not forget our past?” he asked.
“You have to understand history, and you have to understand the culture,” Trump responded.
The president said it would be foolish to remove statues of George Washington, because “half of our country is named after Washington.”
“We have to remember the heritage and the culture of our country,” he continued.
Trump added that “a lot of these people don’t even know what they are taking down.”
“I see what’s happening on television, and they are ripping down things,” he said. “They have no idea what they are ripping down, but they started off with the Confederates and now go to Ulysses Grant. So what is that all about?”
The president threatened last week to sign an executive order punishing “anarchists” who destroy statues with jail time, which called for 10-year sentences for anyone convicted of the crime.
Kilmeade then asked Trump what his message was for Black Americans, specifically, whose ancestors were enslaved.
“Since you have done a lot for the African-American community, what is your message to them when their ancestors were enslaved because of [past leaders honored on monuments today]?” the Fox News host asked the president.
Trump replied that Black Americans need to learn about the country’s history, lest they “go back to it.” His comments suggested that slavery could reoccur if monuments to slave-owners were removed.
My message is that we have a great country: We have the greatest country on Earth. We have a heritage. We have a history and we should learn from the history. And if you don’t understand your history, you will go back to it again. You will go right back to it. You have to learn. Think of it: You take away that whole era, and you’re going to go back to it sometime. People won’t know about it. They’re going to forget about it. It’s OK. Now, what I do like? I like the idea of building new statues to people — to great people. People that have done something. And I think that’s OK.
The president went on to moon over the aesthetic beauty of some of the disputed statues, a great many of which feature a prominent uniformed Confederate war figure bearing a sword astride a horse.
But you don’t want to take away our heritage, and history and the beauty. In many cases, the beauty — the artistic beauty. Some of the sculptures and some of this work is some of the great — you can go to France. You can go anywhere in the world, and you will never see more magnificent work. And that’s a factor. It’s not the biggest factor, but it’s a factor.
During an appearance last week on Fox News, Sean Hannity asked Trump what his priorities would be if he were re-elected to a second term. The president did not name one.
Instead, he spoke briefly about the handful of visits he made to Washington earlier in his life before pivoting to blast his former national security adviser John Bolton, whose new White House memoir documents the president’s pathological proclivity to commit impeachable offenses, as “an idiot.”
“Now, I know everybody, and I have great people in the administration,” Trump said. “You make some mistakes, like — you know, an idiot like Bolton. All he wanted to do is drop bombs on everybody. You don’t have to drop bombs on everybody. You don’t have to kill people.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-07-01--Texas Lt. Governor Says “No, Thank You” to Fauci’s Advice as COVID Cases Spike

Appearing in an interview on Fox News with host Laura Ingraham on Tuesday evening , Texas Lt. Gov .
Dan Patrick lambasted Anthony Fauci , a member of the White House ’ s coronavirus task force and one of the nation ’ s top experts on infectious diseases .
Fauci , who is also the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases , is consistently viewed as one of the most trusted voices on COVID-19 in the country .
Earlier on Tuesday , he testified to a Senate panel on the disease , opining that several states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had skipped “ over some of the checkpoints ” necessary to reopening in a safer way .
“ I ’ m very concerned about what ’ s going on right now , particularly in the four states that are accounting for about 50 percent of the new infections , ” Fauci said .
Texas is among the four states Fauci was alluding to , which apparently caused Patrick to lash out at him on Tuesday night .
The lieutenant governor , who once suggested it was acceptable to “ exchange ” the lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy , claimed Fauci was “ wrong every time on every issue ” related to coronavirus , but wouldn ’ t elaborate on what he was wrong about .
He further suggested that Fauci was ignorant of what was happening in Texas .
“ He doesn ’ t know what he ’ s talking about , ” Patrick said of Fauci during his interview with Ingraham .
“ We haven ’ t skipped over anything .
The only thing I ’ m skipping over is listening to him.
” Despite Texas being among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country to end stay-at-home orders and reopen its economy , Patrick insisted that he and other state leaders , including Gov .
Greg Abbott , would “ listen to a lot of science ” going forward — but as far as the top scientist in the field of infectious diseases goes , Patrick said in the interview , “ no thank you , Dr. Fauci.
” Patrick recognized , however , that closing bars in Texas , a move that was recently made in response to rising COVID-19 numbers , was the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also seemed to pass blame for the spread of the disease away from himself and the governor , placing it instead on younger people by saying they need to help “ bring the cases down.
” On the same day that Patrick spoke on Fox News , Texas announced it had identified close to 7,000 new coronavirus cases within a single day — a record-high for the state in a daily period of time .
While Patrick was reticent to recognize Fauci ’ s warnings on what states like Texas had done in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have at least acknowledged some mistakes were made .
In a recent radio interview on the topic , the governor expressed remorse over allowing certain industries to open up the way that they did .
“ If I could go back and redo anything , it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars , now seeing in the aftermath of how quickly the coronavirus spread in the bar setting , ” Abbott said .

Early in the pandemic, Dan Patrick suggested it was acceptable to “exchange” the lives of seniors to save the economy.
Appearing in an interview on Fox News with host Laura Ingraham on Tuesday evening, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick lambasted Anthony Fauci, a member of the White House’s coronavirus task force and one of the nation’s top experts on infectious diseases.
Fauci, who is also the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is consistently viewed as one of the most trusted voices on COVID-19 in the country. Earlier on Tuesday, he testified to a Senate panel on the disease, opining that several states had reopened their economies too quickly and had skipped “over some of the checkpoints” necessary to reopening in a safer way.
“I’m very concerned about what’s going on right now, particularly in the four states that are accounting for about 50 percent of the new infections,” Fauci said.
Texas is among the four states Fauci was alluding to, which apparently caused Patrick to lash out at him on Tuesday night.
The lieutenant governor, who once suggested it was acceptable to “exchange” the lives of seniors in order to save the economy, claimed Fauci was “wrong every time on every issue” related to coronavirus, but wouldn’t elaborate on what he was wrong about. He further suggested that Fauci was ignorant of what was happening in Texas.
“He doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” Patrick said of Fauci during his interview with Ingraham. “We haven’t skipped over anything. The only thing I’m skipping over is listening to him.”
Despite Texas being among the “fastest” states in the country to end stay-at-home orders and reopen its economy, Patrick insisted that he and other state leaders, including Gov. Greg Abbott, would “listen to a lot of science” going forward — but as far as the top scientist in the field of infectious diseases goes, Patrick said in the interview, “no thank you, Dr. Fauci.”
Patrick recognized, however, that closing bars in Texas, a move that was recently made in response to rising COVID-19 numbers, was the right decision to make. However, he also seemed to pass blame for the spread of the disease away from himself and the governor, placing it instead on younger people by saying they need to help “bring the cases down.”
On the same day that Patrick spoke on Fox News, Texas announced it had identified close to 7,000 new coronavirus cases within a single day — a record-high for the state in a daily period of time.
While Patrick was reticent to recognize Fauci’s warnings on what states like Texas had done in reopening too early, Abbott seemed to have at least acknowledged some mistakes were made. In a recent radio interview on the topic, the governor expressed remorse over allowing certain industries to open up the way that they did.
“If I could go back and redo anything, it probably would have been to slow down the opening of bars, now seeing in the aftermath of how quickly the coronavirus spread in the bar setting,” Abbott said.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-01--As COVID Burns Through the South and West, Trump Fans the Flames

Donald Trump has labored since March to imagine himself into a world where COVID-19 will go away in time to save his re-election campaign .
Sure , people were getting sick and dying by the thousands in places like New York City , Boston , Los Angeles , San Francisco , Chicago and Detroit , but those weren ’ t “ his voters , ” so Trump decided they weren ’ t his problem .
“ Red State America ” had barely been touched by the pandemic during that agonizing spring , and a majority of those voters were stoutly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the point , those Trump voters watch the same “ news ” networks as he does , and they all joined each other in a soothing feedback loop that proclaimed this was no big deal , COVID only affects Democrats and people of color , so please reopen the gun stores and hair salons so we can get a Glock and a trim , as promised by the Constitution .
No national testing regimen set by the Trump administration .
No significant contact tracing .
No bully-pulpit push to wear protective masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizens erupted after Trump declared an emergency far too late , a single and utterly insufficient stimulus bill was passed through the eye of Mitch ’ s McConnell ’ s ideological needle as Trump crowed about reopening the country by Easter .
Hearing this , a number of Republican governors , Trump toadies all , were happy to oblige .
“ What happens , ” I asked all the way back in the middle of April , “ when this thing really and truly burns through rural America ?
It has already begun @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters standing shoulder to shoulder at capitols and churches to shout their defiance of science and the ‘ Deep State ’ into the virus-polluted air , it will get worse .
It begs the deadly , wretched question : How many Trump voters are going to die between now and November ?
” We are in the process of finding out .
“ States that President Trump won in the 2016 election account for about 75 percent of the new cases , ” reports the Associated Press , “ a trend that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Counties that voted for Trump in 2016 have seen cases and deaths rising — now seeing an impact nearly even with counties that voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton.
” White House hostage Anthony Fauci , the country ’ s top expert on infectious disease , informed a Senate committee yesterday that COVID-19 is out of control in many such places now , and we could be looking at 100,000 new infections per day very soon , especially if the July Fourth holiday sees similar crowds flouting basic safety measures in the manner of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ More than 47,000 coronavirus cases were announced across the United States on Tuesday , ” reports The New York Times , “ the most of any day of the pandemic .
Officials in eight states — Alaska , Arizona , California , Georgia , Idaho , Oklahoma , South Carolina and Texas — also announced single-day highs .
Tuesday was the fourth time in a week that the United States posted a new single-day case record.
” Twelve states — many with significant rural and exurban populations — are seeing spikes in hospitalizations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or rolling back plans to reopen their economies .
Workers newly returned to their jobs are being whiplashed out of them again as the federal government ’ s muddled , staggering reaction to the pandemic sows uncertainty and fear .
Of the most affected states , only Arizona appears willing to fully face the reality that many “ blue states ” have already endured .
Gov .
Doug Ducey , a Republican who isn ’ t listening to Trump anymore for a refreshing change of pace , has ordered all gyms , water @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bars to close for 30 days , banned gatherings of 50 people or more , and told school districts to pause on restarting classes .
In contrast to Arizona , the governments of Florida and Texas appear all too ready to go down with Trump ’ s ship , and appear more than willing to take significant chunks of their populations with them .
Both states are currently enduring horrific spikes in infections , and their hospitals are on the verge of a lethal and all too familiar crisis as they struggle to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We ’ re not going back , closing things , ” Gov .
Ron DeSantis told reporters on Tuesday .
“ I don ’ t think that that ’ s really what ’ s driving it , people going to a business is not what ’ s driving it .
I think when you see the younger folks , I think a lot of it is more just social interactions , so that ’ s natural.
” Lt. Gov .
Dan Patrick of Texas was even more emphatic than his Floridian colleague @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work , ” he roared on Fox News .
“ If it did , those two states would be doing better than Texas .
Fauci said today that he ’ s concerned about states like Texas that have skipped over certain things .
He doesn ’ t know what he ’ s talking about .
We haven ’ t skipped over anything .
The only thing I ’ m skipping over is listening to him.
” Of note : “ Fox News Channel was the most-watched network in prime-time television last week , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nielsen company said .
It was the second week in a row that happened , and the third time in June , ” the AP reports .
“ Before this month , that had never happened before .
Ever.
” DeSantis and Patrick remain loyal soldiers who can reach Trump devotees via the megaphone of Fox News , but back in Washington , D.C. , Trump himself is experiencing a hemorrhaging of Republican support that is , at the barest minimum , very much welcome and half a damn year too late .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence , Senators Mitch McConnell and Lamar Alexander , Rep. Liz Cheney and her execrable father Dick , Rep. Kevin McCarthy , Fox News lickspittle Steve Doocy , former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney , and even Failson-in-Chief Donald Trump Jr. , have all finally summoned the courage to telegraph a message to the president : WEAR A DAMN MASK .
This is where we are today , more than four months and nearly 128,000 deaths later : Gaping in awe at Republicans who actually dare to tell Trump something he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so simple a toddler can do it yet so vital that thousands of lives can be saved if the president of the United States decides to model responsible behavior for his people to emulate .
Will it happen ?
Is something so fundamentally basic to public health actually possible in the Trump White House ?
Depends on whom you ask .
A tussle has broken out in the administration over how to react to this latest iteration of the COVID crisis .
I ’ m so old , I remember when Trump put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pence , at least , wants to keep the country informed on a daily basis regarding the status of the pandemic .
White House chief of staff Mark Meadows , senior adviser Jared Kushner , press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and Trump counselor Hope Hicks , however , are firmly in the fingers-in-ears-la-la-la corner when it comes to informing the public , a corner Trump has called home since this debacle first unfolded .
Care to wager on where that debate ultimately lands ?
Like as not , it ’ s a bet that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What was said by legions of experts months ago — this is only just beginning — remains just as true today , and for no better reason than because Donald Trump would step on the dead faces of his own supporters in the street if he believed doing so would carry him closer to victory in November .
As those same people all across the land burn on the pyre of his creation , he remains in furiously obdurate denial .
I pray more and more of them , at long last @ @ @ @ @ @ @

As his voters burn on a pyre of his creation, Trump remains in denial, even as Pence urges him to wear a damn mask.
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
Donald Trump has labored since March to imagine himself into a world where COVID-19 will go away in time to save his re-election campaign. Sure, people were getting sick and dying by the thousands in places like New York City, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago and Detroit, but those weren’t “his voters,” so Trump decided they weren’t his problem.
“Red State America” had barely been touched by the pandemic during that agonizing spring, and a majority of those voters were stoutly in Trump’s corner. More to the point, those Trump voters watch the same “news” networks as he does, and they all joined each other in a soothing feedback loop that proclaimed this was no big deal, COVID only affects Democrats and people of color, so please reopen the gun stores and hair salons so we can get a Glock and a trim, as promised by the Constitution.
No national testing regimen set by the Trump administration. No significant contact tracing. No bully-pulpit push to wear protective masks. As the number of newly unemployed citizens erupted after Trump declared an emergency far too late, a single and utterly insufficient stimulus bill was passed through the eye of Mitch’s McConnell’s ideological needle as Trump crowed about reopening the country by Easter. Hearing this, a number of Republican governors, Trump toadies all, were happy to oblige.
“What happens,” I asked all the way back in the middle of April, “when this thing really and truly burns through rural America? It has already begun, and because of all those Trump supporters standing shoulder to shoulder at capitols and churches to shout their defiance of science and the ‘Deep State’ into the virus-polluted air, it will get worse. It begs the deadly, wretched question: How many Trump voters are going to die between now and November?”
We are in the process of finding out.
“States that President Trump won in the 2016 election account for about 75 percent of the new cases,” reports the Associated Press, “a trend that has accelerated since the end of May. Counties that voted for Trump in 2016 have seen cases and deaths rising — now seeing an impact nearly even with counties that voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton.”
White House hostage Anthony Fauci, the country’s top expert on infectious disease, informed a Senate committee yesterday that COVID-19 is out of control in many such places now, and we could be looking at 100,000 new infections per day very soon, especially if the July Fourth holiday sees similar crowds flouting basic safety measures in the manner of the super-spreader Memorial Day weekend.
“More than 47,000 coronavirus cases were announced across the United States on Tuesday,” reports The New York Times, “the most of any day of the pandemic. Officials in eight states — Alaska, Arizona, California, Georgia, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas — also announced single-day highs. Tuesday was the fourth time in a week that the United States posted a new single-day case record.”
Twelve states — many with significant rural and exurban populations — are seeing spikes in hospitalizations, and 17 states are now pausing or rolling back plans to reopen their economies. Workers newly returned to their jobs are being whiplashed out of them again as the federal government’s muddled, staggering reaction to the pandemic sows uncertainty and fear.
Of the most affected states, only Arizona appears willing to fully face the reality that many “blue states” have already endured. Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who isn’t listening to Trump anymore for a refreshing change of pace, has ordered all gyms, water parks, movie theaters, nightclubs and bars to close for 30 days, banned gatherings of 50 people or more, and told school districts to pause on restarting classes.
In contrast to Arizona, the governments of Florida and Texas appear all too ready to go down with Trump’s ship, and appear more than willing to take significant chunks of their populations with them. Both states are currently enduring horrific spikes in infections, and their hospitals are on the verge of a lethal and all too familiar crisis as they struggle to treat the flood of new patients.
“We’re not going back, closing things,” Gov. Ron DeSantis told reporters on Tuesday. “I don’t think that that’s really what’s driving it, people going to a business is not what’s driving it. I think when you see the younger folks, I think a lot of it is more just social interactions, so that’s natural.”
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick of Texas was even more emphatic than his Floridian colleague. “Locking down doesn’t work,” he roared on Fox News. “If it did, those two states would be doing better than Texas. Fauci said today that he’s concerned about states like Texas that have skipped over certain things. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about. We haven’t skipped over anything. The only thing I’m skipping over is listening to him.”
Of note: “Fox News Channel was the most-watched network in prime-time television last week, counting both broadcast and cable, the Nielsen company said. It was the second week in a row that happened, and the third time in June,” the AP reports. “Before this month, that had never happened before. Ever.”
DeSantis and Patrick remain loyal soldiers who can reach Trump devotees via the megaphone of Fox News, but back in Washington, D.C., Trump himself is experiencing a hemorrhaging of Republican support that is, at the barest minimum, very much welcome and half a damn year too late.
No lesser lights than Vice President Mike Pence, Senators Mitch McConnell and Lamar Alexander, Rep. Liz Cheney and her execrable father Dick, Rep. Kevin McCarthy, Fox News lickspittle Steve Doocy, former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, and even Failson-in-Chief Donald Trump Jr., have all finally summoned the courage to telegraph a message to the president: WEAR A DAMN MASK.
This is where we are today, more than four months and nearly 128,000 deaths later: Gaping in awe at Republicans who actually dare to tell Trump something he does not wish to hear, something so simple a toddler can do it yet so vital that thousands of lives can be saved if the president of the United States decides to model responsible behavior for his people to emulate.
Will it happen? Is something so fundamentally basic to public health actually possible in the Trump White House? Depends on whom you ask.
A tussle has broken out in the administration over how to react to this latest iteration of the COVID crisis. I’m so old, I remember when Trump put Pence in charge of this fiasco… but Pence, at least, wants to keep the country informed on a daily basis regarding the status of the pandemic.
White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, senior adviser Jared Kushner, press secretary Kayleigh McEnany and Trump counselor Hope Hicks, however, are firmly in the fingers-in-ears-la-la-la corner when it comes to informing the public, a corner Trump has called home since this debacle first unfolded.
Care to wager on where that debate ultimately lands? Like as not, it’s a bet that will pay out in blood and tears.
What was said by legions of experts months ago — this is only just beginning — remains just as true today, and for no better reason than because Donald Trump would step on the dead faces of his own supporters in the street if he believed doing so would carry him closer to victory in November. As those same people all across the land burn on the pyre of his creation, he remains in furiously obdurate denial. I pray more and more of them, at long last, will finally see the light.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-07-01--SCOTUS Ruling on Religious Schools Threatens Church-State Separation

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a ruling civil liberties advocates warned could make taxpayers “ underwrite religious education ” — opening a massive crack in the bedrock principle of church and state separation .
The decision in the case , Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , was 5-4 , with the court ’ s conservatives in the majority .
As NBC News put it , the ruling “ further lowered the wall of separation between church and state and will likely affect laws or constitutional provisions in more than two-thirds of the nation that bar public funding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case concerned a scholarship program enacted in Montana in 2015 , which provided individuals and businesses with up to $ 150 in tax credits to match donations to private , nonprofit scholarship organizations .
Shortly after the program was enacted , the Montana Department of Revenue put in place a rule that barred scholarship recipients from using funds from the program to pay for religious schools .
Three mothers who sent their children to a Christian school and relied upon the funds sued .
The state Supreme Court struck down the program , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A State need not subsidize private education .
But once a State decides to do so , it can not disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious , ” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority .
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in a dissent , in which Justice Elena Kagan joined , “ The majority ’ s approach and its conclusion in this case , I fear , risk the kind of entanglement and conflict that the Religion Clauses are intended to prevent.
” “ Today ’ s ruling is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a separate dissent .
She wrote , in part : Without any need or power to do so , the Court appears to require a State to reinstate a tax-credit program that the Constitution did not demand in the first place .
We once recognized that “ [ w ] hile the Free Exercise Clause clearly prohibits the use of state action to deny the rights of free exercise to anyone , it has never meant that a majority could use the machinery of the State to practice its beliefs .
Today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejects the Religion Clauses ’ balanced values in favor of a new theory of free exercise , and it does so only by setting aside well-established judicial constraints .
The decision drew outrage from groups including the American Federation of Teachers .
AFT president Randi Weingarten said the ruling represents “ a seismic shock that threatens both public education and religious liberty ” and called it “ a radical departure from our Constitution , American history , and our values.
” “ Never in more than two centuries of American history has the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been wielded as a weapon to defund and dismantle public education , ” she said .
“ It will hurt both the 90 percent of students who attend neighborhood public schools , by siphoning off needed funds , and , in the long term , those who attend religious schools by curtailing their freedom with the accountability that comes with tax dollars.
” “ The court ’ s narrow conservative majority joined with Donald Trump , [ Education Secretary and “ school choice ” proponent ] Betsy DeVos , and other wealthy donors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and turn the First Amendment on its head , ” Weingarten added , warning that “ financial backers of this case will now use it to open the floodgates to litigation across the country.
” According to Daniel Mach , director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief , the ruling “ undermines true religious freedom and is the latest in a disturbing line of Supreme Court cases attacking the very foundations of the separation of church and state.
” “ In the past , the court used to guard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Today , the court has not only allowed , but actually required taxpayers to underwrite religious education.
” Rachel Laser , president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State President , blasted the ruling .
“ Forcing taxpayers to pay for private religious education — as Montana ’ s tax-credit voucher program does — is a fundamental violation of their religious freedom , ” she said .
Another possible effect of the ruling , Laser warned , is that public dollars will go towards amplifying discrimination .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil rights for women and LGBTQ people , and promulgate religiously based interpretations of science , civics , and history , ” she said .
Laser further accused “ 10 of the 12 religious schools in Montana ’ s voucher program ” of having “ discriminatory policies , including permitting expulsion of students who identify as LGBTQ and refusing admission to students with disabilities.
” “ Let ’ s not forget that vouchers were first developed to evade integration orders and fund segregation academies specifically designed to keep Black and white students apart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private-school vouchers could worsen segregation in schools .
The White House , meanwhile , celebrated the ruling as a right-wing victory for so-called “ school choice ” and religious freedom .

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered a ruling civil liberties advocates warned could make taxpayers “underwrite religious education” — opening a massive crack in the bedrock principle of church and state separation.
The decision in the case, Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, was 5-4, with the court’s conservatives in the majority.
As NBC News put it, the ruling “further lowered the wall of separation between church and state and will likely affect laws or constitutional provisions in more than two-thirds of the nation that bar public funding for churches and religious schools.”
CNBC laid out the background:
The case concerned a scholarship program enacted in Montana in 2015, which provided individuals and businesses with up to $150 in tax credits to match donations to private, nonprofit scholarship organizations. Related Story Op-Ed | Politics & Elections Following Supreme Court Rulings, Trump Attacks the Independence of the Judiciary The administration is showing an increased willingness to find any way around a court decision that it does not like. Truthout Shortly after the program was enacted, the Montana Department of Revenue put in place a rule that barred scholarship recipients from using funds from the program to pay for religious schools.
Three mothers who sent their children to a Christian school and relied upon the funds sued. The state Supreme Court struck down the program, prompting the high court challenge.
“A State need not subsidize private education. But once a State decides to do so, it cannot disqualify some private schools solely because they are religious,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.
Justice Stephen Breyer wrote in a dissent, in which Justice Elena Kagan joined, “The majority’s approach and its conclusion in this case, I fear, risk the kind of entanglement and conflict that the Religion Clauses are intended to prevent.”
“Today’s ruling is perverse,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in a separate dissent. She wrote, in part:
Without any need or power to do so, the Court appears to require a State to reinstate a tax-credit program that the Constitution did not demand in the first place. We once recognized that “[w]hile the Free Exercise Clause clearly prohibits the use of state action to deny the rights of free exercise to anyone, it has never meant that a majority could use the machinery of the State to practice its beliefs. Today’s Court, by contrast, rejects the Religion Clauses’ balanced values in favor of a new theory of free exercise, and it does so only by setting aside well-established judicial constraints.
The decision drew outrage from groups including the American Federation of Teachers.
AFT president Randi Weingarten said the ruling represents “a seismic shock that threatens both public education and religious liberty” and called it “a radical departure from our Constitution, American history, and our values.”
“Never in more than two centuries of American history has the free exercise clause of the First Amendment been wielded as a weapon to defund and dismantle public education,” she said. “It will hurt both the 90 percent of students who attend neighborhood public schools, by siphoning off needed funds, and, in the long term, those who attend religious schools by curtailing their freedom with the accountability that comes with tax dollars.”
“The court’s narrow conservative majority joined with Donald Trump, [Education Secretary and “school choice” proponent] Betsy DeVos, and other wealthy donors and special interests to attack public education and turn the First Amendment on its head,” Weingarten added, warning that “financial backers of this case will now use it to open the floodgates to litigation across the country.”
According to Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, the ruling “undermines true religious freedom and is the latest in a disturbing line of Supreme Court cases attacking the very foundations of the separation of church and state.”
“In the past, the court used to guard against government-funded religion,” he said. “Today, the court has not only allowed, but actually required taxpayers to underwrite religious education.”
Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State President, blasted the ruling.
“Forcing taxpayers to pay for private religious education — as Montana’s tax-credit voucher program does — is a fundamental violation of their religious freedom,” she said.
Another possible effect of the ruling, Laser warned, is that public dollars will go towards amplifying discrimination.
“Too often, religious schools reject civil rights for women and LGBTQ people, and promulgate religiously based interpretations of science, civics, and history,” she said.
Laser further accused “10 of the 12 religious schools in Montana’s voucher program” of having “discriminatory policies, including permitting expulsion of students who identify as LGBTQ and refusing admission to students with disabilities.”
“Let’s not forget that vouchers were first developed to evade integration orders and fund segregation academies specifically designed to keep Black and white students apart,” she noted, warning that private-school vouchers could worsen segregation in schools.
The White House, meanwhile, celebrated the ruling as a right-wing victory for so-called “school choice” and religious freedom.
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.