truthout--2020-07-22--Trump’s Reelection Strategy Involves Terrorizing Us With Secret Stormtroopers

Donald Trump and his cohort of propagandists at Fox News would have us believe the major cities of the United States have been turned to ashes and rubble by mobs of racial justice and antifa activists .
But after weeks of sustained protests in the aftermath of the police murder of George Floyd , the only thing actually in ashes is Trump ’ s credibility .
The image of rampaging activist hordes , however , is key to the all-encompassing fiction the right has been spoon-feeding to itself for decades .
Believing in that fiction translates into the belief that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on its face .
Enter the faceless , anonymous , heavily armed federal officers snatching protesters off the streets of Portland , Oregon .
One would think that people on the right , who have spent years warning of “ jack-booted government thugs ” coming to take our rights by force , would be horrified by what we are seeing in Portland .
It is their grim prophecy made flesh , and yet they are responding either with silence or active support , apparently because they saw it on Fox .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I can tell you , ” Trump said of the uprising during his erratic Fox News interview last Sunday .
“ Because we ’ re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit and Baltimore and all of these — Oakland is a mess.
” And then , the penny dropped .
“ We ’ re not going to let this happen in our country , ” Trump continued .
“ All run by liberal Democrats .
Look at what ’ s going on — all run by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democrats .
All run , really , by radical left .
If Biden got in , that would be true for the country .
The whole country would go to hell .
And we ’ re not going to let it go to hell.
” Deploying federal forces to Portland — and to Chicago , Detroit , Philadelphia and other cities , according to reports — is the unmistakable shriek of authoritarianism .
Governors of the potentially affected states are gearing up to fight the administration .
Their mood was best captured by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Ridge , the former Republican governor of Pennsylvania who served as George W. Bush ’ s director of Homeland Security , minced no words regarding Trump ’ s flagrant abuse of power .
“ Had I been governor , even now , I would welcome the opportunity to work with any federal agency to reduce crime or lawlessness in the cities , ” Ridge told the Pennsylvania Capital-Star .
“ But I would tell you , it would be a cold day in hell before I would consent to an uninvited , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Trump ’ s actions in Portland are terrifying by any standard , but are also as crass and grasping as everything else he has done since he first polluted the White House .
By openly stapling these actions to “ Biden ” and “ very liberal Democrats , ” Trump made it clear that as far as he is concerned , this is all about politics and the upcoming election .
In poker , this is what they call a “ tell.
” According to every reputable poll taken over the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden by wide margins .
Trump himself appears to have finally accepted this , which may explain the absence of bombastic nonsense at his newly reborn COVID-19 briefings .
Of course , as far as those briefings go , we ’ ve all heard “ responsible-sounding Trump ” before .
Trump can not campaign on his successful fight against COVID , because he has failed that challenge with spectacular vigor .
He can not campaign on the economy , because it has been all but obliterated by his COVID @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on brazen racism , but it has not turned the polls in his favor .
What , then , is left to campaign on ?
Specifically , the vile , truthless caricature of the left Trump and his people have been conjuring for his base in an effort to justify the use of anonymous federal gendarmes against us .
More to the point , one gets the definite sense that Trump desperately wants an on-camera street fight with these protesters .
Deploying those federal officers is a massively antagonizing move , and Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some protesters take the bait .
There would be more blood in the streets , Trump would have his fight , and he could point and say , “ Look !
This is the America Biden and the liberals want !
Only I can save us !
” Indeed , new Trump campaign commercials are making that specific argument .
Ads are one thing ; live footage of street violence is something else altogether .
If Trump really doesn ’ t want this , he ’ s damn close to getting it by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protests will continue as citizens demand a long-sought redress of glaring racial and social injustices .
In Portland , the protests have produced surreal and beautiful displays of strength from vulnerable protesters in the face of federal violence .
Some days ago , at the intersection of Third Avenue and Taylor Street , a group of protesters were being corralled by law enforcement officials , including some of these anonymous protest-snatchers .
Out of the crowd emerged a naked woman wearing only a mask and a cloth hat .
She performed some ballet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sitting down and exposing herself to their potential violence .
The police fired pepper balls at her feet , but she did not budge .
A protester ran to her with a shield to protect her , but she waved him off .
She sat , as bereft of protection as the police were armored , until the police — seemingly demoralized and confused — backed off .
The woman disappeared back into the crowd , and no one knows her name , but some have come to call her “ Naked Athena.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the streets of our cities are a manifest campaign move by Donald Trump .
They also represent a deeply dangerous power grab that seemed inconceivable before Trump .
He has successfully normalized the unthinkable , and in places like Portland , he clearly appears to be doing so to get votes .

Trump has successfully normalized the unthinkable, and in places like Portland, he appears to be doing it to get votes.
Donald Trump and his cohort of propagandists at Fox News would have us believe the major cities of the United States have been turned to ashes and rubble by mobs of racial justice and antifa activists. But after weeks of sustained protests in the aftermath of the police murder of George Floyd, the only thing actually in ashes is Trump’s credibility.
The image of rampaging activist hordes, however, is key to the all-encompassing fiction the right has been spoon-feeding to itself for decades. Believing in that fiction translates into the belief that anything done to stop it is positive on its face.
Enter the faceless, anonymous, heavily armed federal officers snatching protesters off the streets of Portland, Oregon. One would think that people on the right, who have spent years warning of “jack-booted government thugs” coming to take our rights by force, would be horrified by what we are seeing in Portland. It is their grim prophecy made flesh, and yet they are responding either with silence or active support, apparently because they saw it on Fox.
“I’m going to do something, that I can tell you,” Trump said of the uprising during his erratic Fox News interview last Sunday. “Because we’re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit and Baltimore and all of these — Oakland is a mess.”
And then, the penny dropped.
“We’re not going to let this happen in our country,” Trump continued. “All run by liberal Democrats. Look at what’s going on — all run by Democrats, all run by very liberal Democrats. All run, really, by radical left. If Biden got in, that would be true for the country. The whole country would go to hell. And we’re not going to let it go to hell.”
Deploying federal forces to Portland — and to Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia and other cities, according to reports — is the unmistakable shriek of authoritarianism. Governors of the potentially affected states are gearing up to fight the administration. Their mood was best captured by, of all people, Tom Ridge. Ridge, the former Republican governor of Pennsylvania who served as George W. Bush’s director of Homeland Security, minced no words regarding Trump’s flagrant abuse of power.
Trump’s actions in Portland are terrifying by any standard.
“Had I been governor, even now, I would welcome the opportunity to work with any federal agency to reduce crime or lawlessness in the cities,” Ridge told the Pennsylvania Capital-Star. “But I would tell you, it would be a cold day in hell before I would consent to an uninvited, unilateral intervention into one of my cities.”
Trump’s actions in Portland are terrifying by any standard, but are also as crass and grasping as everything else he has done since he first polluted the White House. By openly stapling these actions to “Biden” and “very liberal Democrats,” Trump made it clear that as far as he is concerned, this is all about politics and the upcoming election. In poker, this is what they call a “tell.”
According to every reputable poll taken over the last several months, Donald Trump is trailing presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden by wide margins. Trump himself appears to have finally accepted this, which may explain the absence of bombastic nonsense at his newly reborn COVID-19 briefings. Of course, as far as those briefings go, we’ve all heard “responsible-sounding Trump” before.
Trump cannot campaign on his successful fight against COVID, because he has failed that challenge with spectacular vigor. He cannot campaign on the economy, because it has been all but obliterated by his COVID failures. He has tried to campaign on brazen racism, but it has not turned the polls in his favor.
What, then, is left to campaign on?
Why, the left!
Specifically, the vile, truthless caricature of the left Trump and his people have been conjuring for his base in an effort to justify the use of anonymous federal gendarmes against us.
More to the point, one gets the definite sense that Trump desperately wants an on-camera street fight with these protesters. Deploying those federal officers is a massively antagonizing move, and Trump would love nothing more than to have some protesters take the bait.
There would be more blood in the streets, Trump would have his fight, and he could point and say, “Look! This is the America Biden and the liberals want! Only I can save us!” Indeed, new Trump campaign commercials are making that specific argument. Ads are one thing; live footage of street violence is something else altogether.
If Trump really doesn’t want this, he’s damn close to getting it by accident. In the meantime, the protests will continue as citizens demand a long-sought redress of glaring racial and social injustices.
In Portland, the protests have produced surreal and beautiful displays of strength from vulnerable protesters in the face of federal violence. Some days ago, at the intersection of Third Avenue and Taylor Street, a group of protesters were being corralled by law enforcement officials, including some of these anonymous protest-snatchers.
Out of the crowd emerged a naked woman wearing only a mask and a cloth hat. She performed some ballet moves in front of the police before sitting down and exposing herself to their potential violence.
The police fired pepper balls at her feet, but she did not budge. A protester ran to her with a shield to protect her, but she waved him off. She sat, as bereft of protection as the police were armored, until the police — seemingly demoralized and confused — backed off. The woman disappeared back into the crowd, and no one knows her name, but some have come to call her “Naked Athena.”
The secret, rights-crushing cops in the streets of our cities are a manifest campaign move by Donald Trump. They also represent a deeply dangerous power grab that seemed inconceivable before Trump. He has successfully normalized the unthinkable, and in places like Portland, he clearly appears to be doing so to get votes.
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--2020-07-22--USPS Needs Financial Aid to Continue Providing Essential Services

The U.S .
Postal Service is playing a more vital role than ever in our country ’ s public health and economy during the Covid-19 pandemic .
Postal workers have performed extraordinarily well in handling the skyrocketing demand for home deliveries of essentials , from medicine to food .
This unprecedented package boom has reduced but not eliminated USPS financial losses caused by crisis-related reductions in mail volume and increased costs .
It has also put additional strain on an outdated USPS postal delivery fleet .
There is growing bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress for a postal relief bill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a postal shutdown and ensure that USPS can continue offering critical services during the crisis and into the future .
While economic forecasting is extremely difficult in this uncertain period , USPS recently responded to a Congressional request to update its financial projections .
Based on new data , they maintain that a liquidity crisis is “ inevitable ” in the next 18 months and could strike the agency as soon as March 2021 , depending on the pace of recovery .
USPS estimated losses based on two scenarios for package volume .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , USPS estimates it will see $ 17 billion in pandemic-related losses during the 2020-2021 period and $ 50 billion over the next decade .
If package volume remains at 15 percent above pre-coronavirus levels , the pandemic-related loss is expected to be $ 7 billion for 2020-21 and $ 17.3 billion over the next decade .
Why the Package Boom Is a Mixed Blessing • Revenue from shipping and package services rose by 38.0 percent in April and an astounding 57.6 percent in May , compared to the same monthly periods in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ability of USPS workers to adapt quickly to changing needs — more than many for-profit businesses .
• At the same time , the package spike is temporarily obscuring a potential sinkhole in USPS finances .
Due to the economic slowdown , revenue from first class mail , the most profitable USPS product , dropped by 8.1 percent in April and 12.0 percent in May , compared to the same periods in 2019 .
Marketing mail revenue dropped even more steeply , by 45.7 percent in April and 41.0 percent in May .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ severe if package volumes decline .
This is very likely , as the recession rages on while extended unemployment benefits are about to expire and Americans are spending more of their limited shopping dollars at re-opened brick and mortar stores .
• The package boom has also increased labor costs and put additional wear and tear on a delivery fleet that is past due for replacement .
Because mail trucks have limited capacity for packages , USPS carriers frequently have to return empty to be reloaded and make multiple trips to complete their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ labor , fuel , and maintenance costs .
• Because of increased work hours , total salary and benefit costs were up 3.4 percent in April and 2.8 percent in May , compared to the same period last year .
Package deliveries are labor-intensive and extra staffing was needed to continue serving every U.S. address while many employees were out for health reasons .
As of mid-May , the pandemic had caused 17,000 postal workers to be quarantined and thousands had tested positive .
As of June 26 , Covid-19 had claimed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Expenses related to workers ’ compensation and pension funding increased by $ 2.2 billion and $ 348 million respectively between January 1 and March 31 ( most recent available ) .
USPS attributes this to the crisis-related decline in interest rates .
USPS , like all federal agencies , is required to invest pension funds in special bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury .
Crisis Aid for USPS Would Benefits All Americans Prior to the pandemic , the Postal Service had not sought taxpayer support because it has managed to pay for its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services .
But in this time of unprecedented crisis , Congress should come through with financial aid for USPS , as it has for many other industries and companies .
While this policy brief analyzes factors affecting the USPS financial bottom line , it is important to stress that USPS is not a for-profit corporation .
It is a public service with a broad social mission to connect the nation — including those living in remote areas — with dependable and affordable postal services .
Even in a pandemic , it has fulfilled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every community and every address in the nation , regardless of profitability .
No for-profit corporation would take on that obligation .
The social mission of USPS is more important than ever as our country faces a health and economic crisis that is tearing apart families and communities .
We all have an interest in ensuring the Postal Service can survive the pandemic and continue to serve Americans for generations to come .
Postal Service Emergency Assistance Act ( S. 4174 ) , introduced on July 2 by Senators Susan Collins and Dianne @ @ @ @ @ @ @ USPS with up to $ 25 billion to cover revenue losses or operational expenses resulting from Covid-19 and ensure that USPS has access to a line of credit under the same terms as a 2018 deal .
HEROES Act ( H.R .
6800 ) , a broad crisis relief bill , would provide similar assistance to USPS as the bipartisan Senate bill .
It includes $ 25 billion in direct aid and ensures access to a line of credit .
The House of Representatives passed the bill on May 15 .
A stand-alone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Act ( H.R .
6425 ) , would also provide $ 25 billion in emergency relief .
In April , the bipartisan postal Board of Governors requested a $ 75 billion package , including $ 25 billion to modernize the agency ’ s aging vehicle fleet and facilities .

The U.S. Postal Service is playing a more vital role than ever in our country’s public health and economy during the Covid-19 pandemic. Postal workers have performed extraordinarily well in handling the skyrocketing demand for home deliveries of essentials, from medicine to food.
This unprecedented package boom has reduced but not eliminated USPS financial losses caused by crisis-related reductions in mail volume and increased costs. It has also put additional strain on an outdated USPS postal delivery fleet.
There is growing bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress for a postal relief bill, which is urgently needed to prevent a postal shutdown and ensure that USPS can continue offering critical services during the crisis and into the future.
Under Revised Forecast, USPS Pandemic-Related Losses Remain Severe
While economic forecasting is extremely difficult in this uncertain period, USPS recently responded to a Congressional request to update its financial projections. Based on new data, they maintain that a liquidity crisis is “inevitable” in the next 18 months and could strike the agency as soon as March 2021, depending on the pace of recovery.
USPS estimated losses based on two scenarios for package volume. If that volume returns to pre-Covid-19 levels, USPS estimates it will see $17 billion in pandemic-related losses during the 2020-2021 period and $50 billion over the next decade.
If package volume remains at 15 percent above pre-coronavirus levels, the pandemic-related loss is expected to be $7 billion for 2020-21 and $17.3 billion over the next decade.
Why the Package Boom Is a Mixed Blessing
Revenue from shipping and package services rose by 38.0 percent in April and an astounding 57.6 percent in May, compared to the same monthly periods in 2019. This incredible achievement demonstrates the ability of USPS workers to adapt quickly to changing needs — more than many for-profit businesses.
At the same time, the package spike is temporarily obscuring a potential sinkhole in USPS finances. Due to the economic slowdown, revenue from first class mail, the most profitable USPS product, dropped by 8.1 percent in April and 12.0 percent in May, compared to the same periods in 2019. Marketing mail revenue dropped even more steeply, by 45.7 percent in April and 41.0 percent in May. These underlying crisis-related problems will become more severe if package volumes decline. This is very likely, as the recession rages on while extended unemployment benefits are about to expire and Americans are spending more of their limited shopping dollars at re-opened brick and mortar stores.
The package boom has also increased labor costs and put additional wear and tear on a delivery fleet that is past due for replacement. Because mail trucks have limited capacity for packages, USPS carriers frequently have to return empty to be reloaded and make multiple trips to complete their delivery route. This adds significantly to labor, fuel, and maintenance costs.
Additional Cost Increases Due to the Pandemic
Because of increased work hours, total salary and benefit costs were up 3.4 percent in April and 2.8 percent in May, compared to the same period last year. Package deliveries are labor-intensive and extra staffing was needed to continue serving every U.S. address while many employees were out for health reasons. As of mid-May, the pandemic had caused 17,000 postal workers to be quarantined and thousands had tested positive. As of June 26, Covid-19 had claimed the lives of 69 postal workers.
Expenses related to workers’ compensation and pension funding increased by $2.2 billion and $348 million respectively between January 1 and March 31 (most recent available). USPS attributes this to the crisis-related decline in interest rates. USPS, like all federal agencies, is required to invest pension funds in special bonds issued by the U.S. Treasury.
Crisis Aid for USPS Would Benefits All Americans
Prior to the pandemic, the Postal Service had not sought taxpayer support because it has managed to pay for its operations through sales of stamps and other services. But in this time of unprecedented crisis, Congress should come through with financial aid for USPS, as it has for many other industries and companies.
While this policy brief analyzes factors affecting the USPS financial bottom line, it is important to stress that USPS is not a for-profit corporation. It is a public service with a broad social mission to connect the nation — including those living in remote areas — with dependable and affordable postal services. Even in a pandemic, it has fulfilled this mission by providing universal service to every community and every address in the nation, regardless of profitability. No for-profit corporation would take on that obligation.
The social mission of USPS is more important than ever as our country faces a health and economic crisis that is tearing apart families and communities. We all have an interest in ensuring the Postal Service can survive the pandemic and continue to serve Americans for generations to come.
USPS Financial Aid Bills
Postal Service Emergency Assistance Act (S. 4174), introduced on July 2 by Senators Susan Collins and Dianne Feinstein with bipartisan support, would provide USPS with up to $25 billion to cover revenue losses or operational expenses resulting from Covid-19 and ensure that USPS has access to a line of credit under the same terms as a 2018 deal.
HEROES Act (H.R. 6800), a broad crisis relief bill, would provide similar assistance to USPS as the bipartisan Senate bill. It includes $25 billion in direct aid and ensures access to a line of credit. The House of Representatives passed the bill on May 15. A stand-alone bill, the Protect Our Post Offices Act (H.R. 6425), would also provide $25 billion in emergency relief.
In April, the bipartisan postal Board of Governors requested a $75 billion package, including $25 billion to modernize the agency’s aging vehicle fleet and facilities.
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--2020-07-22--We Must Not Exchange One Cage for Another — Let’s Abolish All Forms of Prisons

As millions of people ponder a future without police and prisons , and as authorities try to dream up ways of derailing the momentum of popular insurrection , Maya Schenwar and Victoria Law ’ s new book , Prison By Any Other Name : The Harmful Consequences of Popular Reforms , provides a guide to staying on the path to transformation .
In the book , Schenwar ( Truthout ’ s editor-in-chief ) and Law ( an investigative reporter who has been covering prison issues for Truthout and other outlets for years ) balance two critical needs .
First , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and rebranding that authorities will use to keep “ reproducing oppression on a mass scale.
” Second , they help us shape our imagining of a different society to “ view abolition not like a monumental goal we have no hope of ever reaching , but something we practice every day.
” In this interview , Schenwar and Law discuss how they came to write the book , why “ reform ” movements can often co-opt the push for abolition , and why working toward abolition is not simply a distant vision but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James Kilgore : How did you come to write this book and why do you think it is relevant at this moment ?
Victoria Law : We started writing this book in 2015 .
We could never have predicted this moment of demands to defund the police , increasing calls for abolition and people wanting to know what a world without police ( and prisons ) might look like .
But here we are — and our book examines the pitfalls of popularly proposed reforms that come up repeatedly as alternatives to mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that policing and imprisonment are built on bedrocks of white supremacy , colonialism and patriarchy .
They also ignore the underlying causes of why people commit harm ( or engage in acts that are criminalized ) .
Instead , these alternatives pose seemingly more “ humane ” measures than locking people in physical buildings , called jails , prisons or immigrant detention centers .
But they ’ re still forms of coercive control .
One “ wrong ” step — like going to the store without permission — could mean incarceration .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are creating new ways to address and prevent violence and harm .
Like everyone , I have engaged in and been personally impacted by violence and harm .
Punitive policies do nothing to prevent or address harm , nor help people heal from harm .
Maya Schenwar : Yes — Vikki and I were both wary of how sinister new forms of confinement and policing and surveillance were gaining traction in the name of reform .
Part of this wariness emerged from witnessing my sister go back and forth between jails , prisons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ years , mainly due to her addiction to heroin .
When she wasn ’ t in jail or prison — when she was “ free ” — she wasn ’ t actually free .
She was bound to an electronic monitor , under harsh probation restrictions , or confined in a mandated drug treatment facility she couldn ’ t leave .
This took a toll on her .
She would always say her main desire was to be entirely free from institutions , but it felt impossible .
None of these “ alternatives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ beyond addiction ; study after study has shown us that in general , you can not mandate people into lasting recovery .
Meanwhile , I ’ d been researching incarceration and editing stories about prisons for many years for Truthout .
When I started writing about prisons in 2005 , few people wanted to read about that issue .
By 2015 , there was so much energy fueling the prison reform train .
And there was a massive and long-overdue national focus on police violence , anti-Blackness and racial injustice , in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and related struggles .
Although there was momentum behind shrinking the system among grassroots activists and powerful organizing happening , politicians were putting energy into reforms that would not change the carceral system at all .
We saw a need for a book that would address the limits of — and the harm caused by — many popular reforms that were being accepted as improvements .
What do you mean by your title : “ Prison By Any Other Name ?
” Schenwar : Our title shows how the common reforms we describe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Electronic monitoring is a good example ; it ’ s basically a form of house arrest , as you note in your work , James , terming it “ e-carceration.
” We also write a lot about the use of psychiatric hospitals and locked-down drug treatment centers as places to put people as “ alternatives ” to prison .
These reforms are popular , including among many liberals , because they seem kinder and gentler but they still involve keeping people who ’ ve been criminalized out of the larger society .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deeming people “ criminal , ” a label which is overwhelmingly applied to Black and Indigenous people and other people of color , trans people , disabled people , drug users and other marginalized groups .
These things are not the same as prison : Most people would rather be confined and surveilled in their home than behind bars .
But the only options should not be a bad cage or a worse cage .
We need to imagine a society with no cages at all .
Can you talk about one or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encounters you had with people you interviewed in researching this work ?
Law : One of my early and most memorable interviews was with Elliott Fukui .
Starting from the age of 12 , Elliott had been placed in involuntary psychiatric confinement 20 times in seven years .
He described how psychiatric confinement , which is often seen as something helpful or protective for those who are experiencing suicidal ideation or mental health crises , actually mimic the punitive structures of imprisonment — including solitary confinement , physical violence , lack of human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ role of systemic racism and oppressions or underlying traumas leading to mental health issues .
By the time I interviewed Elliott , he was in his thirties , had built a strong support system and developed a safety plan among his friends and community to support him when he was verging on crisis .
He ’ s now an organizer who gives trainings about disability justice — training which includes both examining the political history behind the ideas of “ madness ” and confinement and building a wellness and safety support system so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ones ) can avoid being entangled in a system that might end with involuntarily confinement , under medication or other controls .
His experience challenges the idea that people who are most impacted must look to outside experts to determine what is best for them and instead can create their own paths to safety and wellness .
Schenwar : Patricia , a mother of five , wrote me about being confined to an electronic monitor .
She ’ d been charged with “ burglary ” for entering the home of a friend , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to retrieve her own medicine .
When she got in touch , she had been on house arrest with a monitor for two years .
She ’ d expected to be done in six months .
Her sentence dragged on and on — largely because she could not pay the weekly fees of $ 115 to be on the monitor .
She cut corners .
Her family went a winter without heat , their car was repossessed , they stopped going to the doctor , but still fell behind .
Meanwhile , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ couldn ’ t even take her children to the park .
Her case worker told her that her sentence would continue until she caught up on fees .
Meanwhile , she was charged for every week that her sentence was extended .
Here she was , trapped in her home due to poverty .
In our first conversation she had told me , “ If I had just done time , I would ’ ve been done by now .
My whole family is on house arrest and my kids can ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s made us want to show how these “ alternatives ” that are assumed to be “ better than prison ” are still harsh , punitive , oppressive , harmful , and that if we support them , we ’ re supporting deep harm inflicted upon human beings , families and communities .
Many actors in these new forms of incarceration pose as guardians of social welfare and protectors of the poor .
Can you talk a little about who these people are , how they function and why they pose a danger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : So many people are being deputized as police .
Teachers are enlisted to call in the police about a whole range of “ discipline ” problems , fueling the school-to-prison pipeline .
Doctors , nurses , social workers , child care providers and many others are mandated reporters to Child Protective Services .
In 18 states , everyone is a mandated reporter , meaning we ’ re all being called upon to police our neighbors ’ parenting .
Psychiatrists perpetuate institutions of coercive control in the name of “ mental health.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services and ultimately police their clients .
Some policing practices involve recruiting community members to serve as the “ eyes and ears ” of the police , surveilling their neighbors and calling the police whenever they sense danger — a determination often grounded in racism , classism , transphobia and ableism .
People didn ’ t get into these professions to be police , but it ’ s what they ’ ve become .
It ’ s not just people with badges and guns .
What makes it so insidious is the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be enforced by all of us .
That ’ s why Vikki and I and other abolitionists are calling for an end to policing , not just the official police .
Obviously , you both think deeply about how racial oppression is intertwined both historically and in these processes of reform .
Many people are familiar with the disproportionate incarceration of Black people , but have you found new dimensions to racial oppression in these reforms that you write about ?
Law : Racism , colonialism and white supremacy show up in all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we examine the child welfare system , which some have dubbed the “ New Jane Crow ” because of how it targets Black women and women of color .
People often think this is designed to help parents and children .
In reality , the system surveils , controls and punishes .
Mariame Kaba calls it the “ child kidnapping system.
” A parent doesn ’ t have to be accused of abuse or violence to become entangled in the child welfare system ; child welfare intervenes because a family is living @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complaint — not having heat in their building or letting their children go to the nearby playground while they ’ re at work .
Many of these types of complaints — and the system ’ s reaction — draw on cultural assumptions about Black women as mothers — vestiges from the times of slavery when slave owners justified breaking apart families and selling children by telling themselves that Black women did not love and care for their children .
When we were writing this book , a series of events occurred where people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their children were left asleep in a car .
At the same time , white parents were writing about raising “ free-range children , ” where they allowed their 7-year-old children to roam the city , including taking the subway , without any parental or adult supervision .
Public reaction to “ free-range ” parenting was mixed , but the child welfare system did not become involved .
In the cases of Black mothers who could not afford daycare , children were taken away and placed in foster care .
Schenwar : By @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the majority of Black children have experienced a child “ protective ” services investigation .
As the child “ welfare ” system increasingly targeted Black and Indigenous families in the 1960s and 1970s , it became more punitive .
And punitive meant tearing children from their families .
Racial oppression is pervasive in the “ helping ” institutions we discuss in our book .
Many people love the idea of mandating mental health treatment instead of prison , but these treatments are coercive and inherently oppressive if they ’ re mandated by a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five times as likely as white people to be handed a schizophrenia diagnosis — one of the “ serious ” categories is most likely to result in court-mandated treatment .
In the 1960s and ‘ 70s , some doctors called schizophrenia “ protest psychosis ” and insisted on strong sedatives to address it : trying to literally suppress people ’ s drive to participate in Black liberation movements .
In the late 19th century , some Southern towns labeled Black residents “ insane ” by census-takers .
Throughout history we ’ ve seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vulnerability to measures like sterilization and institutionalization .
We can ’ t separate this country ’ s systems of “ care ” from its explicitly punitive institutions , pretending the former are free of racial oppression .
You obviously place a heavy emphasis on gender analysis .
In what ways do you think the gender dynamics of “ reform ” are different than what happens when mass incarceration is done with steel and concrete cages ?
Law : There are both similarities and differences .
For instance , when a father goes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partner or family member to take care of his children .
Women , on the other hand , are more likely to be primary or sole caregivers to their children .
Incarceration removes a mother from that role , making it more likely that her children will land in foster care and be legally terminated from her custody .
In 1997 , Congress passed ( and Clinton signed into law ) the Adoption and Safe Families ACT ( ASFA ) , which mandates that , if a child has been in foster care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the state needs to begin proceedings to terminate parental rights .
Popular alternatives to incarceration , such as mandatory drug treatment or involuntary psychiatric confinement , might have the same effect .
If a mother ( or other caregiver ) has no one to care for her children while she is confined Somewhere Else , she risks having her children placed in the foster care system .
In response , in New York State , advocates , including formerly incarcerated women , fought for the ASFA Expanded Discretion Act to allow judges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parents in prison and those whose children are in foster care while they are in residential drug treatment .
Can you describe how you became abolitionists and why it is particularly useful today during the mass uprising ?
Law : We live in a society [ obsessed with ] punishment and punitive policies .
This hasn ’ t stopped violence and harm from happening .
If it did , we should be living in one of the safest eras in human history .
We need to recognize that , everyone in this world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or toddler ) has both engaged in harm and been impacted by harm .
Mass incarceration — and the popular alternatives to mass incarceration — do not address the underlying reasons behind why harm and violence happen .
They don ’ t challenge or change structural conditions ( such as racism , misogyny or poverty ) or individual reasoning and behavior .
We ’ re in a momentous time when increasing numbers of people are recognizing police do not keep us safe and are often purveyors of violence .
Locking up people ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ) has not kept us safe , either .
We need to put more resources into structures that have proven to meet people ’ s basic needs and to keep us safe .
These include affordable housing , access to medical and mental health care , food , living-waged employment ( if not a universal basic income ) .
When we interviewed Ruth Wilson Gilmore , she encouraged us to think “ about abolition not as an aspirational adventure but as already-accumulated encounters , awarenesses and activities.
” She pointed out that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ step toward abolition ; organizing for environmental justice is a step toward abolition ; anything that gets us closer toward meeting people ’ s actual needs and transforming conditions that are likely to produce harm is a step toward abolition .
This helps us view abolition not like a monumental goal we have no hope of ever reaching , but something we practice every day .
Schenwar : Getting to abolition was a journey .
My first real , deep personal interactions with the system involved a friend who was incarcerated prior to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incarceration in juvenile jail and friends who were incarcerated for acts of civil disobedience .
In all of these cases , I could tell myself , “ Ok , we could get rid of juvenile jail and stop incarcerating people for immigration and end the drug war and free political prisoners , but we ’ d still need prisons to address real problems.
” Of course , incarceration doesn ’ t solve problems , it entrenches and deepens problems , but — this is the mindset that ’ s pervasive in our society @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Several things pushed me fully toward abolition .
One was reading and re-reading Angela Davis , Ruth Wilson Gilmore and Beth Richie ’ s work , as well as my mentor Kathy Kelly ’ s writings from prison .
They encourage us to think beyond incarceration .
My friend and pen pal , Lacino Hamilton , who remains in prison in Michigan after more than 20 years inside , has also been one of my primary mentors .
Lacino has a deep analysis of how the system ’ s groundings in anti-Blackness and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in prison — that you can ’ t just take those things away from prison ; but must uproot those groundings .
And witnessing the brutality of my sister ’ s repeated incarcerations , and how they never addressed any of her issues but made them worse , caused me to question the entire system more deeply .
It is very significant that calls to abolish police and prisons are now infusing mainstream public discourse .
This call to uproot the entire system is being emphasized again and again .
Even if some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact they are even hearing abolition is a thing , that policing is a manifestation of white supremacy and capitalism and should be vanquished — is significant .
It plants a seed .
Police , prisons and the “ alternative ” prisons we describe in our book grew out of a foundation of oppression , and they continue to reproduce oppression on a mass scale .
Once someone fully comprehends that , it ’ s hard to argue that these institutions have any place in the life-affirming and liberatory society we want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lightly edited for clarity .

Part of the Series The Road to Abolition
As millions of people ponder a future without police and prisons, and as authorities try to dream up ways of derailing the momentum of popular insurrection, Maya Schenwar and Victoria Law’s new book, Prison By Any Other Name: The Harmful Consequences of Popular Reforms, provides a guide to staying on the path to transformation. In the book, Schenwar (Truthout’s editor-in-chief) and Law (an investigative reporter who has been covering prison issues for Truthout and other outlets for years) balance two critical needs. First, they alert us to reformist policy tricks and rebranding that authorities will use to keep “reproducing oppression on a mass scale.” Second, they help us shape our imagining of a different society to “view abolition not like a monumental goal we have no hope of ever reaching, but something we practice every day.” In this interview, Schenwar and Law discuss how they came to write the book, why “reform” movements can often co-opt the push for abolition, and why working toward abolition is not simply a distant vision but something we must practice every day.
James Kilgore: How did you come to write this book and why do you think it is relevant at this moment?
Victoria Law: We started writing this book in 2015. We could never have predicted this moment of demands to defund the police, increasing calls for abolition and people wanting to know what a world without police (and prisons) might look like. But here we are — and our book examines the pitfalls of popularly proposed reforms that come up repeatedly as alternatives to mass incarceration. These alternatives fail to recognize that policing and imprisonment are built on bedrocks of white supremacy, colonialism and patriarchy. They also ignore the underlying causes of why people commit harm (or engage in acts that are criminalized). Instead, these alternatives pose seemingly more “humane” measures than locking people in physical buildings, called jails, prisons or immigrant detention centers. But they’re still forms of coercive control. One “wrong” step — like going to the store without permission — could mean incarceration. We challenge these reforms and highlight how people are creating new ways to address and prevent violence and harm. Like everyone, I have engaged in and been personally impacted by violence and harm. Punitive policies do nothing to prevent or address harm, nor help people heal from harm.
Maya Schenwar: Yes — Vikki and I were both wary of how sinister new forms of confinement and policing and surveillance were gaining traction in the name of reform.
Part of this wariness emerged from witnessing my sister go back and forth between jails, prisons and other forms of confinement for 15 years, mainly due to her addiction to heroin. When she wasn’t in jail or prison — when she was “free” — she wasn’t actually free. She was bound to an electronic monitor, under harsh probation restrictions, or confined in a mandated drug treatment facility she couldn’t leave. This took a toll on her. She would always say her main desire was to be entirely free from institutions, but it felt impossible. None of these “alternatives” did anything to help her move beyond addiction; study after study has shown us that in general, you cannot mandate people into lasting recovery.
Meanwhile, I’d been researching incarceration and editing stories about prisons for many years for Truthout. When I started writing about prisons in 2005, few people wanted to read about that issue. By 2015, there was so much energy fueling the prison reform train. And there was a massive and long-overdue national focus on police violence, anti-Blackness and racial injustice, in the midst of the Black Lives Matter movement and related struggles.
The only options should not be a bad cage or a worse cage. We need to imagine a society with no cages at all.
Although there was momentum behind shrinking the system among grassroots activists and powerful organizing happening, politicians were putting energy into reforms that would not change the carceral system at all. We saw a need for a book that would address the limits of — and the harm caused by — many popular reforms that were being accepted as improvements.
What do you mean by your title: “Prison By Any Other Name?”
Schenwar: Our title shows how the common reforms we describe are often new forms of imprisonment. Electronic monitoring is a good example; it’s basically a form of house arrest, as you note in your work, James, terming it “e-carceration.” We also write a lot about the use of psychiatric hospitals and locked-down drug treatment centers as places to put people as “alternatives” to prison. These reforms are popular, including among many liberals, because they seem kinder and gentler but they still involve keeping people who’ve been criminalized out of the larger society. They don’t challenge the process of deeming people “criminal,” a label which is overwhelmingly applied to Black and Indigenous people and other people of color, trans people, disabled people, drug users and other marginalized groups.
These things are not the same as prison: Most people would rather be confined and surveilled in their home than behind bars. But the only options should not be a bad cage or a worse cage. We need to imagine a society with no cages at all.
Can you talk about one or two of the most memorable or surprising encounters you had with people you interviewed in researching this work?
Law: One of my early and most memorable interviews was with Elliott Fukui. Starting from the age of 12, Elliott had been placed in involuntary psychiatric confinement 20 times in seven years. He described how psychiatric confinement, which is often seen as something helpful or protective for those who are experiencing suicidal ideation or mental health crises, actually mimic the punitive structures of imprisonment — including solitary confinement, physical violence, lack of human contact, and failures to acknowledge the role of systemic racism and oppressions or underlying traumas leading to mental health issues.
In 18 states, everyone is a mandated reporter, meaning we’re all being called upon to police our neighbors’ parenting.
By the time I interviewed Elliott, he was in his thirties, had built a strong support system and developed a safety plan among his friends and community to support him when he was verging on crisis. He’s now an organizer who gives trainings about disability justice — training which includes both examining the political history behind the ideas of “madness” and confinement and building a wellness and safety support system so that a person (and their loved ones) can avoid being entangled in a system that might end with involuntarily confinement, under medication or other controls. His experience challenges the idea that people who are most impacted must look to outside experts to determine what is best for them and instead can create their own paths to safety and wellness.
Schenwar: Patricia, a mother of five, wrote me about being confined to an electronic monitor. She’d been charged with “burglary” for entering the home of a friend, with whom she had an open-door policy, to retrieve her own medicine. When she got in touch, she had been on house arrest with a monitor for two years. She’d expected to be done in six months. Her sentence dragged on and on — largely because she could not pay the weekly fees of $115 to be on the monitor. She cut corners. Her family went a winter without heat, their car was repossessed, they stopped going to the doctor, but still fell behind. Meanwhile, the restrictions of house arrest meant she couldn’t even take her children to the park. Her case worker told her that her sentence would continue until she caught up on fees. Meanwhile, she was charged for every week that her sentence was extended.
Here she was, trapped in her home due to poverty. In our first conversation she had told me, “If I had just done time, I would’ve been done by now. My whole family is on house arrest and my kids can’t understand why.”
Stories like Patricia’s made us want to show how these “alternatives” that are assumed to be “better than prison” are still harsh, punitive, oppressive, harmful, and that if we support them, we’re supporting deep harm inflicted upon human beings, families and communities.
Many actors in these new forms of incarceration pose as guardians of social welfare and protectors of the poor. Can you talk a little about who these people are, how they function and why they pose a danger to an agenda of transformation?
Schenwar: So many people are being deputized as police. Teachers are enlisted to call in the police about a whole range of “discipline” problems, fueling the school-to-prison pipeline. Doctors, nurses, social workers, child care providers and many others are mandated reporters to Child Protective Services. In 18 states, everyone is a mandated reporter, meaning we’re all being called upon to police our neighbors’ parenting. Psychiatrists perpetuate institutions of coercive control in the name of “mental health.” Case workers serve as gatekeepers to social services and ultimately police their clients. Some policing practices involve recruiting community members to serve as the “eyes and ears” of the police, surveilling their neighbors and calling the police whenever they sense danger — a determination often grounded in racism, classism, transphobia and ableism.
By the time they’re 18, the majority of Black children have experienced a child “protective” services investigation.
People didn’t get into these professions to be police, but it’s what they’ve become. It’s not just people with badges and guns. What makes it so insidious is the way in which it’s supposed to be enforced by all of us. That’s why Vikki and I and other abolitionists are calling for an end to policing, not just the official police.
Obviously, you both think deeply about how racial oppression is intertwined both historically and in these processes of reform. Many people are familiar with the disproportionate incarceration of Black people, but have you found new dimensions to racial oppression in these reforms that you write about?
Law: Racism, colonialism and white supremacy show up in all the popularly proposed alternatives. For instance, we examine the child welfare system, which some have dubbed the “New Jane Crow” because of how it targets Black women and women of color. People often think this is designed to help parents and children. In reality, the system surveils, controls and punishes. Mariame Kaba calls it the “child kidnapping system.” A parent doesn’t have to be accused of abuse or violence to become entangled in the child welfare system; child welfare intervenes because a family is living in poverty and someone calls in a complaint — not having heat in their building or letting their children go to the nearby playground while they’re at work. Many of these types of complaints — and the system’s reaction — draw on cultural assumptions about Black women as mothers — vestiges from the times of slavery when slave owners justified breaking apart families and selling children by telling themselves that Black women did not love and care for their children. When we were writing this book, a series of events occurred where people called child welfare on Black mothers because their children were left asleep in a car. At the same time, white parents were writing about raising “free-range children,” where they allowed their 7-year-old children to roam the city, including taking the subway, without any parental or adult supervision. Public reaction to “free-range” parenting was mixed, but the child welfare system did not become involved. In the cases of Black mothers who could not afford daycare, children were taken away and placed in foster care.
Schenwar: By the time they’re 18, the majority of Black children have experienced a child “protective” services investigation. As the child “welfare” system increasingly targeted Black and Indigenous families in the 1960s and 1970s, it became more punitive. And punitive meant tearing children from their families.
Racial oppression is pervasive in the “helping” institutions we discuss in our book. Many people love the idea of mandating mental health treatment instead of prison, but these treatments are coercive and inherently oppressive if they’re mandated by a court. Black people are three to five times as likely as white people to be handed a schizophrenia diagnosis — one of the “serious” categories is most likely to result in court-mandated treatment. In the 1960s and ‘70s, some doctors called schizophrenia “protest psychosis” and insisted on strong sedatives to address it: trying to literally suppress people’s drive to participate in Black liberation movements. In the late 19th century, some Southern towns labeled Black residents “insane” by census-takers. Throughout history we’ve seen how these labels increase people’s vulnerability to measures like sterilization and institutionalization.
We can’t separate this country’s systems of “care” from its explicitly punitive institutions, pretending the former are free of racial oppression.
You obviously place a heavy emphasis on gender analysis. In what ways do you think the gender dynamics of “reform” are different than what happens when mass incarceration is done with steel and concrete cages?
Law: There are both similarities and differences. For instance, when a father goes to prison, he often has a female partner or family member to take care of his children. Women, on the other hand, are more likely to be primary or sole caregivers to their children. Incarceration removes a mother from that role, making it more likely that her children will land in foster care and be legally terminated from her custody. In 1997, Congress passed (and Clinton signed into law) the Adoption and Safe Families ACT (ASFA), which mandates that, if a child has been in foster care for 15 of the past 22 months, the state needs to begin proceedings to terminate parental rights.
Mass incarceration — and the popular alternatives to mass incarceration — do not address the underlying reasons behind why harm and violence happen.
Popular alternatives to incarceration, such as mandatory drug treatment or involuntary psychiatric confinement, might have the same effect. If a mother (or other caregiver) has no one to care for her children while she is confined Somewhere Else, she risks having her children placed in the foster care system. In response, in New York State, advocates, including formerly incarcerated women, fought for the ASFA Expanded Discretion Act to allow judges to pause ASFA’s timeline for parents in prison and those whose children are in foster care while they are in residential drug treatment.
Can you describe how you became abolitionists and why it is particularly useful today during the mass uprising?
Law: We live in a society [obsessed with] punishment and punitive policies. This hasn’t stopped violence and harm from happening. If it did, we should be living in one of the safest eras in human history.
We need to recognize that, everyone in this world (who is older than a baby or toddler) has both engaged in harm and been impacted by harm. Mass incarceration — and the popular alternatives to mass incarceration — do not address the underlying reasons behind why harm and violence happen. They don’t challenge or change structural conditions (such as racism, misogyny or poverty) or individual reasoning and behavior.
We’re in a momentous time when increasing numbers of people are recognizing police do not keep us safe and are often purveyors of violence. Locking up people (mostly Black, Brown and other marginalized people) has not kept us safe, either. We need to put more resources into structures that have proven to meet people’s basic needs and to keep us safe. These include affordable housing, access to medical and mental health care, food, living-waged employment (if not a universal basic income).
When we interviewed Ruth Wilson Gilmore, she encouraged us to think “about abolition not as an aspirational adventure but as already-accumulated encounters, awarenesses and activities.” She pointed out that organizing for workers’ rights is a step toward abolition; organizing for environmental justice is a step toward abolition; anything that gets us closer toward meeting people’s actual needs and transforming conditions that are likely to produce harm is a step toward abolition. This helps us view abolition not like a monumental goal we have no hope of ever reaching, but something we practice every day.
Schenwar: Getting to abolition was a journey. My first real, deep personal interactions with the system involved a friend who was incarcerated prior to his deportation, my sister’s incarceration in juvenile jail and friends who were incarcerated for acts of civil disobedience. In all of these cases, I could tell myself, “Ok, we could get rid of juvenile jail and stop incarcerating people for immigration and end the drug war and free political prisoners, but we’d still need prisons to address real problems.” Of course, incarceration doesn’t solve problems, it entrenches and deepens problems, but — this is the mindset that’s pervasive in our society, that we somehow need prisons.
Several things pushed me fully toward abolition. One was reading and re-reading Angela Davis, Ruth Wilson Gilmore and Beth Richie’s work, as well as my mentor Kathy Kelly’s writings from prison. They encourage us to think beyond incarceration. My friend and pen pal, Lacino Hamilton, who remains in prison in Michigan after more than 20 years inside, has also been one of my primary mentors. Lacino has a deep analysis of how the system’s groundings in anti-Blackness and capitalism translate to how everyday life unfolds in prison — that you can’t just take those things away from prison; but must uproot those groundings. And witnessing the brutality of my sister’s repeated incarcerations, and how they never addressed any of her issues but made them worse, caused me to question the entire system more deeply.
It is very significant that calls to abolish police and prisons are now infusing mainstream public discourse. This call to uproot the entire system is being emphasized again and again. Even if some people do not immediately agree, the fact they are even hearing abolition is a thing, that policing is a manifestation of white supremacy and capitalism and should be vanquished — is significant. It plants a seed.
Police, prisons and the “alternative” prisons we describe in our book grew out of a foundation of oppression, and they continue to reproduce oppression on a mass scale. Once someone fully comprehends that, it’s hard to argue that these institutions have any place in the life-affirming and liberatory society we want to live in.
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--2020-07-22--Former Presidents of Bar Association Urge “Disciplinary Proceeding” Against Barr

A letter to the District of Columbia Bar Association is asking the organization to take the serious step of investigating Attorney General William Barr ’ s conduct on at least four important matters , a move that could lead to the group taking disciplinary steps against him in the future .
The letter contains nearly 30 signatures from members of the bar , including four former presidents .
Andrea Ferster , Philip Allen Lacovara , Marna S. Tucker and Melvin White , all former presidents of the D.C. Bar Association , also added their names to the complaint .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the strong misgivings among the signers of the note are those of a political nature and involve Barr ’ s dealing with matters related to President Donald Trump .
“ Mr .
Barr ’ s client is the United States , and not the president , ” the letter stated .
“ Yet , Mr. Barr has consistently made decisions and taken action to serve the personal and political self-interests of President Donald Trump , rather than the interest of the United States.
” The letter lists four reasons why a probe into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ First , upon receiving the Mueller report in 2019 , which investigated whether Trump ’ s 2016 presidential campaign had coordinated with Russia or engaged in acts of obstruction of justice during the investigation , Barr “ engaged in dishonest and deceitful conduct ” in announcing his opinion on the matter .
At the time , Barr had publicly announced , without allowing public inspection of Robert Mueller ’ s investigation , that “ the evidence developed during the Special Counsel ’ s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mueller wrote a letter to Barr , stating that the attorney general ’ s statement “ did not fully capture the context , nature , and substance of this Office ’ s work and conclusions.
” Indeed , later on that spring , Mueller made public comments about the possible criminal behavior that the president himself may have engaged in .
“ If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime , we would have said so , ” Mueller said in late May .
The letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Barr abandoned “ all precedent by attacking an inspector general ’ s report ” that later came out , looking into allegations from Trump that the initial investigations into his campaign were biased .
Barr “ acted in alignment with the president ’ s narrative that the FBI ’ s investigation into his campaign was illegitimate , ” the letter-writers stated , in spite of the fact that the actual report , though finding some things problematic with the investigation , found no biases against Trump in how the investigation was conducted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bar association took issue with how Barr conducted himself in television interviews related to that probe .
Barr “ publicly malign [ ed ] the conduct of FBI personnel who [ were ] the subject of a criminal investigation , ” the letter stated .
In doing so , he also “ undermined the fairness of future criminal proceedings involving those individuals … using language that no ethical prosecutor would use ” when discussing such matters.
” Finally , the complaint against Barr noted his role in the tear gassing of peaceful protesters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was done in order to allow Trump to have an unimpeded walkway to a nearby church for a photo-op .
“ In overseeing and ordering the unconstitutional attack on citizens peacefully protesting in Lafayette Square , the attorney general violated his lawyer ’ s oath , ” the letter stated .
“ With the whole world watching , he demonstrated the starkest , anti-constitutional harm that a conflict of interest can cause.
” Investigating how Barr has conducted himself as attorney general , and looking into how the D.C. Bar Association @ @ @ @ @ @ @ matter , the letter goes on to say , because Barr is “ no ordinary lawyer.
” He “ is the highest law enforcement officer in the nation , ” and his “ violations of professional responsibility bring more damage to the reputation of our profession and its integrity than violations by any other attorney in the country.
” “ The grounds described above call out for a disciplinary proceeding to be initiated , ” the letter added .
Whether the bar association determines action is warranted or not , any action taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t likely come about for some time , as such procedures tend to take years to complete .
The bar association ’ s actions won ’ t be transparent , either , as its investigations are done in a private way .

A letter to the District of Columbia Bar Association is asking the organization to take the serious step of investigating Attorney General William Barr’s conduct on at least four important matters, a move that could lead to the group taking disciplinary steps against him in the future.
The letter contains nearly 30 signatures from members of the bar, including four former presidents. Andrea Ferster, Philip Allen Lacovara, Marna S. Tucker and Melvin White, all former presidents of the D.C. Bar Association, also added their names to the complaint.
The actions taken by Barr that have raised the strong misgivings among the signers of the note are those of a political nature and involve Barr’s dealing with matters related to President Donald Trump.
“Mr. Barr’s client is the United States, and not the president,” the letter stated. “Yet, Mr. Barr has consistently made decisions and taken action to serve the personal and political self-interests of President Donald Trump, rather than the interest of the United States.”
The letter lists four reasons why a probe into Barr’s actions is necessary. First, upon receiving the Mueller report in 2019, which investigated whether Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign had coordinated with Russia or engaged in acts of obstruction of justice during the investigation, Barr “engaged in dishonest and deceitful conduct” in announcing his opinion on the matter.
At the time, Barr had publicly announced, without allowing public inspection of Robert Mueller’s investigation, that “the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.” Yet days later, Mueller wrote a letter to Barr, stating that the attorney general’s statement “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions.”
Indeed, later on that spring, Mueller made public comments about the possible criminal behavior that the president himself may have engaged in. “If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mueller said in late May.
The letter to the D.C. Bar Association next suggested that Barr abandoned “all precedent by attacking an inspector general’s report” that later came out, looking into allegations from Trump that the initial investigations into his campaign were biased. Barr “acted in alignment with the president’s narrative that the FBI’s investigation into his campaign was illegitimate,” the letter-writers stated, in spite of the fact that the actual report, though finding some things problematic with the investigation, found no biases against Trump in how the investigation was conducted.
Third, the complaint to the bar association took issue with how Barr conducted himself in television interviews related to that probe. Barr “publicly malign[ed] the conduct of FBI personnel who [were] the subject of a criminal investigation,” the letter stated. In doing so, he also “undermined the fairness of future criminal proceedings involving those individuals … using language that no ethical prosecutor would use” when discussing such matters.”
Finally, the complaint against Barr noted his role in the tear gassing of peaceful protesters outside the White House in Lafayette Square, which was done in order to allow Trump to have an unimpeded walkway to a nearby church for a photo-op.
“In overseeing and ordering the unconstitutional attack on citizens peacefully protesting in Lafayette Square, the attorney general violated his lawyer’s oath,” the letter stated. “With the whole world watching, he demonstrated the starkest, anti-constitutional harm that a conflict of interest can cause.”
Investigating how Barr has conducted himself as attorney general, and looking into how the D.C. Bar Association can discipline him, is an important matter, the letter goes on to say, because Barr is “no ordinary lawyer.” He “is the highest law enforcement officer in the nation,” and his “violations of professional responsibility bring more damage to the reputation of our profession and its integrity than violations by any other attorney in the country.”
“The grounds described above call out for a disciplinary proceeding to be initiated,” the letter added.
Whether the bar association determines action is warranted or not, any action taken on its behalf against Barr won’t likely come about for some time, as such procedures tend to take years to complete. The bar association’s actions won’t be transparent, either, as its investigations are done in a private way.
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--2020-07-22--McConnell Laughs When Asked If COVID Relief Bill Will Pass by End of Next Week

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell laughed Tuesday when asked whether he expects Congress to pass coronavirus relief legislation by the end of next week , when enhanced unemployment benefits are set to expire for around 30 million Americans who were thrown out of work by the pandemic-induced economic crisis .
“ No , ” McConnell said after letting out what Politico reporter Jake Sherman , who posed the question , described as a “ big laugh.
” The $ 600-per-week increase in unemployment benefits provided under the CARES Act have served as both a lifeline for tens of millions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the U.S. economy .
For weeks , economists and lawmakers have warned that letting the benefits lapse , even for a short period of time , could have devastating effects on those close to the brink of financial ruin .
According to Census Bureau data , more than 13 million Americans who live in rental housing were behind on rent payments as of July 7 .
“ I have a bill to renew supercharged unemployment benefits until this crisis is over so families can continue to pay rent and buy groceries , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tuesday .
“ Senate Republicans have had every opportunity to pass it and have refused to do so.
” While the enhanced unemployment benefits officially expire on July 31 — a Friday — in effect the $ 600 weekly payments are set to end on either Saturday , July 25 or Sunday , July 26 , the days states will send out the last boosted checks .
“ Thirty million workers won ’ t be able to pay rent on August 1st and McConnell is laughing , ” said Wyden spokesperson Ashley Schapitl @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Senate Budget Committee , tweeted that “ there is no excuse ” for allowing the enhanced benefits expire .
“ We had months to get this done , and the House passed its bill back in May , ” wrote Kogan .
“ Tens of millions of people will be harmed because of the cavalier inaction of Senate Republicans.
” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi ( D-Calif. ) laughed Tuesday when a CNN reporter asked whether Congress would be able to reach a deal on coronavirus relief legislation by the end of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than the one put to McConnell given the deep divisions roiling Senate Republicans and the White House , not to mention fundamental disagreements between the GOP and their Democratic counterparts .
“ The end of the week ?
You mean the month , ” Pelosi responded .
“ I ’ m hoping for the end of the month.
” In May , the Democrat-controlled House passed legislation that proposes extending the $ 600-per-week boost in unemployment insurance ( UI ) through January of next year .
In an interview Tuesday evening with CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republicans “ have had plenty of time to be thinking about this and this delay is unnecessary because , by the end of July , unemployment benefits will expire… a moratorium on evictions will expire — many things will expire that are addressed in our legislation.
” The Washington Post reported Tuesday that negotiations over the relief bill are “ likely to spill into August , ” leaving both chambers with little time to pass legislation before summer recess .
Pelosi said last week that she would “ absolutely ” be willing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ McConnell has not said the same .
“ Republicans do appear to be gravitating toward a proposal on what to do about the expiring unemployment benefits , ” the Post reported .
“ Democrats have proposed extending those benefits through January , but the White House and some Republicans now want to cut the extra benefits to about $ 200 per week .
Democrats haven ’ t agreed to this , however.
” During a private meeting on Monday , according to the Post , “ Trump criticized the enhanced unemployment benefit , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to in the first place.
” Trump administration officials and Republican lawmakers have repeatedly characterized the boosted unemployment payments as “ disincentives ” to work .
Ernie Tedeschi , a former Treasury Department economist , noted in a series of tweets Tuesday that contrary to the narrative pushed by the GOP and the White House , “ there ’ s no evidence in the data that emergency UI has been a net drag on the labor market so far.
” Allowing the benefits to expire , warned Tedeschi , “ would be devastating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to regional economies in aggregate .
”

Benefits are set to expire next week for around 30 million Americans thrown out of work by the pandemic.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell laughed Tuesday when asked whether he expects Congress to pass coronavirus relief legislation by the end of next week, when enhanced unemployment benefits are set to expire for around 30 million Americans who were thrown out of work by the pandemic-induced economic crisis.
“No,” McConnell said after letting out what Politico reporter Jake Sherman, who posed the question, described as a “big laugh.”
The $600-per-week increase in unemployment benefits provided under the CARES Act have served as both a lifeline for tens of millions of laid-off Americans and a significant cushion for the U.S. economy.
For weeks, economists and lawmakers have warned that letting the benefits lapse, even for a short period of time, could have devastating effects on those close to the brink of financial ruin. According to Census Bureau data, more than 13 million Americans who live in rental housing were behind on rent payments as of July 7.
“I have a bill to renew supercharged unemployment benefits until this crisis is over so families can continue to pay rent and buy groceries,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) tweeted Tuesday. “Senate Republicans have had every opportunity to pass it and have refused to do so.”
While the enhanced unemployment benefits officially expire on July 31 — a Friday — in effect the $600 weekly payments are set to end on either Saturday, July 25 or Sunday, July 26, the days states will send out the last boosted checks.
“Thirty million workers won’t be able to pay rent on August 1st and McConnell is laughing,” said Wyden spokesperson Ashley Schapitl.
Bobby Kogan, a mathematician for the Senate Budget Committee, tweeted that “there is no excuse” for allowing the enhanced benefits expire.
“We had months to get this done, and the House passed its bill back in May,” wrote Kogan. “Tens of millions of people will be harmed because of the cavalier inaction of Senate Republicans.”
Ha ha ha so funny that millions of Americans are going to lose the only lifeline they have, the bottom from our economy will fall out, and Congress can't get its shit together to do anything about it. Get to work. https://t.co/RulHBzWOlh — Saikat Chakrabarti (@saikatc) July 21, 2020
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) laughed Tuesday when a CNN reporter asked whether Congress would be able to reach a deal on coronavirus relief legislation by the end of this week — an even more daunting timeline than the one put to McConnell given the deep divisions roiling Senate Republicans and the White House, not to mention fundamental disagreements between the GOP and their Democratic counterparts.
“The end of the week? You mean the month,” Pelosi responded. “I’m hoping for the end of the month.”
In May, the Democrat-controlled House passed legislation that proposes extending the $600-per-week boost in unemployment insurance (UI) through January of next year.
In an interview Tuesday evening with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Pelosi said Republicans “have had plenty of time to be thinking about this and this delay is unnecessary because, by the end of July, unemployment benefits will expire… a moratorium on evictions will expire — many things will expire that are addressed in our legislation.”
The Washington Post reported Tuesday that negotiations over the relief bill are “likely to spill into August,” leaving both chambers with little time to pass legislation before summer recess. Pelosi said last week that she would “absolutely” be willing to cancel recess to pass relief legislation; McConnell has not said the same.
“Republicans do appear to be gravitating toward a proposal on what to do about the expiring unemployment benefits,” the Post reported. “Democrats have proposed extending those benefits through January, but the White House and some Republicans now want to cut the extra benefits to about $200 per week. Democrats haven’t agreed to this, however.”
During a private meeting on Monday, according to the Post, “Trump criticized the enhanced unemployment benefit, saying it never should have been agreed to in the first place.” Trump administration officials and Republican lawmakers have repeatedly characterized the boosted unemployment payments as “disincentives” to work.
Ernie Tedeschi, a former Treasury Department economist, noted in a series of tweets Tuesday that contrary to the narrative pushed by the GOP and the White House, “there’s no evidence in the data that emergency UI has been a net drag on the labor market so far.”
Allowing the benefits to expire, warned Tedeschi, “would be devastating to individual families, as well as to regional economies in aggregate.”
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.