talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--How The Trump Admin Sowed Mass Confusion With ‘Operation Legend’

On July 8 , the mayor of Kansas City , Missouri found out in a tweet that his city was the focus of a major new federal law enforcement initiative .
In fact , just a day before Kansas City was named the first participant in the federal-local effort dubbed “ Operation Legend , ” the U.S. Attorney for Missouri ’ s Western District had reached out to the mayor ’ s general counsel , Jane Brown , and asked whether the city was interested in additional federal resources to help fight violent crime .
Within a few hours , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a text that the mayor was “ supportive.
” Brown ’ s office followed up with a letter to Garrison later that day , the Kansas City Star reported .
At that point , no one had even uttered the name “ Operation Legend ” publicly .
Typically , experts told TPM , several months of planning and meetings would follow , in which federal and local officials would hash out details and determine a precise mission for the federal personnel landing in Kansas City .
Instead , things went straight to prime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the day after Garrison ’ s message to Brown — and a mention by the White House press secretary at a press briefing .
On its website , the Justice Department called the operation a “ sustained , systematic and coordinated law enforcement initiative across all federal law enforcement agencies.
” Mayor Quinton Lucas , who later said he hadn ’ t reviewed the letter , was caught off-guard .
“ Certainly none of us expected that a verbal proposal first presented to us on a Tuesday would be announced at a presidential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ TPM .
The Star first reported the behind-the-scenes drama .
Garrison told the paper that he , too , was surprised by the White House announcement .
But Mayor Lucas wouldn ’ t be alone for long .
The White House appeared dead set on sowing confusion .
Two weeks after the clumsy Kansas City roll-out , on Wednesday last week , the President and Attorney General Bill Barr announced a new roster of “ Operation Legend ” cities at a White House event .
And city leaders across the country , yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for example , the city released a statement asserting that it had “ not been made aware of any additional federal law enforcement resources coming to the city.
” In Albuquerque , a spokesperson for the city ’ s police department said that it had not signed onto the initiative — even though the county sheriff with jurisdiction over the city had attended the White House event Wednesday announcing it .
In Milwaukee , the Journal Sentinel reported that city officials hadn ’ t been consulted about the plan .
In fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ d first heard that the city might be involved in some new federal initiative when White House chief of staff Mark Meadows had hinted at it in an interview the previous Sunday on Fox Business Network .
The crossed wires , spanning the hometowns of millions of Americans , left some observers wondering if the Operation Legend expansion was merely a political stunt .
The first rule of federal-local crime fighting partnerships , after all , is just that : They ’ re partnerships .
“ When the department wants to increase its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first thing you always do is coordinate with local officials , ” Matthew Miller , a spokesperson for the Justice Department during the Obama administration , told TPM .
Especially when it comes to crime-fighting operations like Legend , “ local police are really the ones on the street and the front lines , ” said Barbara McQuade , the former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan .
McQuade raised concerns of duplicative investigations or “ blue-on-blue ” incidents — in which undercover officers unknowingly interact with each other — if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ synced up .
“ The idea that locals didn ’ t even know they were coming — how could they possibly be effective ?
” she wondered .
At the White House event on Operation Legend , Barr distinguished it from the federal presence in Portland , dubbed “ Diligent Valor.
” The former was “ classic crime fighting , ” he said , while the Portland situation was about confronting “ mob violence.
” But around the country , the poor communication and fuzzy details clashed with city leaders ’ — and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ House was planning on turning their city into another chaotic , camo-clad mess .
In Portland , after all , Mayor ( and Police Commissioner ) Ted Wheeler has said of the federal agents , “ We had heard about it first when they were already here.
” And in Seattle , which recently got its own DHS deployment , Mayor Jenny Durkan said that “ neither myself nor [ Police Chief Carmen ] Best were updated regarding the presence of these federal agents.
” “ The danger of engaging in an operation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , it creates this impression in the public that all federal agents do that , ” McQuade told TPM .
“ It creates this aversion to all federal agents.
” In Chicago , where early reports indicated that dozens of DHS agents were on their way to the city , Mayor Lori Lightfoot tweeted that “ Under no circumstances will I allow Donald Trump ’ s troops to come to Chicago and terrorize our residents.
” But after conversations with Chicago ’ s U.S. Attorney and the President , Lighthouse ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he plans to send federal resources to Chicago to supplement ongoing federal investigations pertaining to violent crime.
” The DHS agents , the Justice Department said in its own statement on the operation , were simply being “ committed ” to the operation — they were “ already stationed in Chicago.
” The seemingly hurried roll-out of Operation Legend has led some local officials to conclude that the Trump initiative is not so much a new federal initiative as a new name .
Except for Chicago , all of the cities in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in an earlier DOJ crime fighting initiative announced in December that shares its name with a television show about bow hunting : “ Relentless Pursuit.
” “ It is our understanding that there are no additional personnel coming to Cleveland , ” Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson said Friday .
“ It is just a renaming of what we were already doing.
” “ Operation Relentless Pursuit has since been renamed to Operation Legend , ” Milwaukee Police Chief Alfonso Morales said the same day .
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr on the similarities of the two programs — what he called “ a repackaging.
” “ So why all the drama ?
Why join the President at the White House to announce a bold new operation that appears to be neither bold nor new ?
” Nadler asked .
“ We did reboot the program , ” Barr said , before asserting that “ these police departments and mayors have been asking us for help.
” “ It looks to me like the type of thing where the White House wanted to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ called over to DOJ , and said , ‘ We need a law enforcement announcement tomorrow , or this afternoon , cobble something together , ” he observed .
“ And DOJ came up with this slapdash approach .
”

On July 8, the mayor of Kansas City, Missouri found out in a tweet that his city was the focus of a major new federal law enforcement initiative.
In fact, just a day before Kansas City was named the first participant in the federal-local effort dubbed “Operation Legend,” the U.S. Attorney for Missouri’s Western District had reached out to the mayor’s general counsel, Jane Brown, and asked whether the city was interested in additional federal resources to help fight violent crime.
Within a few hours, Brown told U.S. Attorney Tim Garrison in a text that the mayor was “supportive.” Brown’s office followed up with a letter to Garrison later that day, the Kansas City Star reported.
At that point, no one had even uttered the name “Operation Legend” publicly.
Typically, experts told TPM, several months of planning and meetings would follow, in which federal and local officials would hash out details and determine a precise mission for the federal personnel landing in Kansas City.
Instead, things went straight to prime time, with a nationwide DOJ announcement the day after Garrison’s message to Brown — and a mention by the White House press secretary at a press briefing. On its website, the Justice Department called the operation a “sustained, systematic and coordinated law enforcement initiative across all federal law enforcement agencies.”
Mayor Quinton Lucas, who later said he hadn’t reviewed the letter, was caught off-guard.
“Certainly none of us expected that a verbal proposal first presented to us on a Tuesday would be announced at a presidential podium on Wednesday,” Brown told TPM.
The Star first reported the behind-the-scenes drama. Garrison told the paper that he, too, was surprised by the White House announcement.
But Mayor Lucas wouldn’t be alone for long. The White House appeared dead set on sowing confusion.
‘Operation Legend’
Two weeks after the clumsy Kansas City roll-out, on Wednesday last week, the President and Attorney General Bill Barr announced a new roster of “Operation Legend” cities at a White House event. And city leaders across the country, yet again, were blindsided.
In Cleveland, for example, the city released a statement asserting that it had “not been made aware of any additional federal law enforcement resources coming to the city.”
In Albuquerque, a spokesperson for the city’s police department said that it had not signed onto the initiative — even though the county sheriff with jurisdiction over the city had attended the White House event Wednesday announcing it.
In Milwaukee, the Journal Sentinel reported that city officials hadn’t been consulted about the plan.
In fact, the paper reported, they’d first heard that the city might be involved in some new federal initiative when White House chief of staff Mark Meadows had hinted at it in an interview the previous Sunday on Fox Business Network.
The crossed wires, spanning the hometowns of millions of Americans, left some observers wondering if the Operation Legend expansion was merely a political stunt. The first rule of federal-local crime fighting partnerships, after all, is just that: They’re partnerships.
“When the department wants to increase its focus in any given area, the first thing you always do is coordinate with local officials,” Matthew Miller, a spokesperson for the Justice Department during the Obama administration, told TPM.
Especially when it comes to crime-fighting operations like Legend, “local police are really the ones on the street and the front lines,” said Barbara McQuade, the former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.
McQuade raised concerns of duplicative investigations or “blue-on-blue” incidents — in which undercover officers unknowingly interact with each other — if local and federal efforts weren’t synced up.
“The idea that locals didn’t even know they were coming — how could they possibly be effective?” she wondered.
Fears Of Portland
At the White House event on Operation Legend, Barr distinguished it from the federal presence in Portland, dubbed “Diligent Valor.” The former was “classic crime fighting,” he said, while the Portland situation was about confronting “mob violence.”
But around the country, the poor communication and fuzzy details clashed with city leaders’ — and citizens’ — fears that the White House was planning on turning their city into another chaotic, camo-clad mess.
The shoddy communications didn’t help.
In Portland, after all, Mayor (and Police Commissioner) Ted Wheeler has said of the federal agents, “We had heard about it first when they were already here.”
And in Seattle, which recently got its own DHS deployment, Mayor Jenny Durkan said that “neither myself nor [Police Chief Carmen] Best were updated regarding the presence of these federal agents.”
“The danger of engaging in an operation like ‘Diligent Valor’ in Portland is, it creates this impression in the public that all federal agents do that,” McQuade told TPM. “It creates this aversion to all federal agents.”
In Chicago, where early reports indicated that dozens of DHS agents were on their way to the city, Mayor Lori Lightfoot tweeted that “Under no circumstances will I allow Donald Trump’s troops to come to Chicago and terrorize our residents.”
But after conversations with Chicago’s U.S. Attorney and the President, Lighthouse’s office said that Trump had confirmed “that he plans to send federal resources to Chicago to supplement ongoing federal investigations pertaining to violent crime.”
The DHS agents, the Justice Department said in its own statement on the operation, were simply being “committed” to the operation — they were “already stationed in Chicago.”
‘It’s Just A Renaming’
The seemingly hurried roll-out of Operation Legend has led some local officials to conclude that the Trump initiative is not so much a new federal initiative as a new name.
Except for Chicago, all of the cities in Operation Legend so far were also included in an earlier DOJ crime fighting initiative announced in December that shares its name with a television show about bow hunting: “Relentless Pursuit.”
“It is our understanding that there are no additional personnel coming to Cleveland,” Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson said Friday. “It is just a renaming of what we were already doing.”
“Operation Relentless Pursuit has since been renamed to Operation Legend,” Milwaukee Police Chief Alfonso Morales said the same day.
At a House Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY) pressed Barr on the similarities of the two programs — what he called “a repackaging.”
“So why all the drama? Why join the President at the White House to announce a bold new operation that appears to be neither bold nor new?” Nadler asked.
“We did reboot the program,” Barr said, before asserting that “these police departments and mayors have been asking us for help.”
Miller, the former DOJ spokesperson, smelled politics.
“It looks to me like the type of thing where the White House wanted to have a law enforcement announcement, and called over to DOJ, and said, ‘We need a law enforcement announcement tomorrow, or this afternoon, cobble something together,” he observed. “And DOJ came up with this slapdash approach.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--McCarthy Accidentally Calls Gohmert ‘Congressman COVID’ After GOPer Gets Infected

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy ( R-CA ) made an unfortunate verbal slip-up on Wednesday in wake of Rep. Louie @ @ @ @ @ positive for COVID-19 .
In a video posted by the Recount , McCarthy discusses how @ @ @ @ @ able to trace ” the virus .
“ Just as Congressman COVID- ” the GOP @ @ @ @ @ .
“ …Congressman Louie Gohmert says that he doesn ’ t have any symptoms , @ @ @ @ @ like that.
” Gohmert , who has frequently paraded around Capitol Hill without a mask @ @ @ @ @ about COVID-19 , confirmed earlier on Wednesday that he had contracted the coronavirus and was @ @ @ @ @ ’ s announcement came after he repeatedly disregarded health experts ’ recommendations on wearing masks @ @ @ @ @ asymptomatic people like Gohmert from unknowingly passing on the virus to others .
However , @ @ @ @ @ down from his aversion to masks after his diagnosis and even suggested that wearing a @ @ @ @ @

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) made an unfortunate verbal slip-up on Wednesday in wake of Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) testing positive for COVID-19.
In a video posted by the Recount, McCarthy discusses how “you want to be able to trace” the virus.
“Just as Congressman COVID-” the GOP leader says before correcting himself. “…Congressman Louie Gohmert says that he doesn’t have any symptoms, there could be other people like that.”
Gohmert, who has frequently paraded around Capitol Hill without a mask while peddling decidedly unscientific comments about COVID-19, confirmed earlier on Wednesday that he had contracted the coronavirus and was asymptomatic.
The Republican lawmaker’s announcement came after he repeatedly disregarded health experts’ recommendations on wearing masks, which aim to prevent asymptomatic people like Gohmert from unknowingly passing on the virus to others. However, Gohmert still refused to back down from his aversion to masks after his diagnosis and even suggested that wearing a mask caused the infection.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Trump, With Racial Foghorn, Blows Up Elaborate Right-Wing Rationale For Rescinding Fair Housing Poli

Trump, With Racial Foghorn, Blows Up Elaborate Right-Wing Rationale For Rescinding Fair Housing Policy

For years , the right ’ s best think tanks and commentators have criticized an Obama-era anti-segregation policy by changing the subject .
Conservative scholars and officials have argued that the policy — aimed at giving the feds more authority to fight segregation in housing — was “ federal overreach on steroids , ” and that it could bankrupt poor communities in need of help .
Finally , on Wednesday , President Trump did what they have been asking for .
He ended the policy .
But he also , as he so often does , screamed the quiet part @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for tossing the Obama rule out : suburbanites would “ no longer be bothered.
” What , then , posed this supposedly existential threat to the Suburban Lifestyle Dream ?
What was it that was so bothersome ?
The Obama-era policy was intended to add some muscle to the 1968 Fair Housing Act ’ s mandate that the federal government work to prevent racial discrimination in housing .
The Obama administration issued the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ( AFFH ) rule in 2015 , bolstering the Fair Housing Act by requiring cities and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ investigate housing bias in their communities and put an end to it .
The policy was , in part , meant to hasten the end of racial segregation — a fact that its critics studiously avoided .
Until Trump brought it up .
“ To say that a rule that requires cities to analyze segregation would ‘ destroy the suburbs ’ is as close as you can get to an endorsement of racial segregation without actually saying the words , ” Shamus Roller , executive director of the National Housing Law Project , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump , nearly everyone on the right who discussed the rule has found a way to make it about something other than a policy designed to limit racial segregation .
Take Secretary for Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson , who rescinded the rule .
In so doing , he used language that carefully portrayed minorities as the victims of the Obama policy .
“ We found it to be unworkable and ultimately a waste of time for localities to comply with , too often resulting in funds being steered away from communities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said in a July 23 statement .
“ Washington has no business dictating what is best to meet your local community ’ s unique needs.
” That followed on years of commentary which framed the rule as an assault on the economic rights of freedom-loving suburbanites .
During a May 2016 Senate showdown over the rule , conservative pundit Stanley Kurtz wrote a column that effusively praised the underlying 1968 law as “ a great achievement , rightly prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing , ” while lashing out at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overreach on steroids.
” “ Yet now , the Obama administration has promulgated a rule that effectively adds the radical new principle of government-imposed economic integration to law , when nothing of the sort appeared in the original FHA , and the public to this day overwhelmingly opposes the idea , ” Kurtz wrote .
Sen. Mike Lee ( R-UT ) framed the issue in a 2016 op-ed in terms of house pricing , saying that the real issue with the policy was that it would make housing more expensive .
“ Instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ housing costs , the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule would only add yet another layer of bureaucratic red tape on developers , making it less likely — not more — that they will find it worthwhile to build more housing units , ” Lee wrote .
And the Wall Street Journal editorial board described it on Sunday as an example of “ restrictive zoning , ” saying that the real issue at play was “ school choice.
” There ’ s an irony in the decision to outright rescind the rule : it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an earlier proposal to amend it , which was supported by fiscal conservatives .
That plan would have seen the Trump administration rewrite the Obama rule to take the focus away from anti-discrimination enforcement and put the focus on developing more housing .
Ryan Streeter , director of domestic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute , called the administration proposal “ sensible ” in a piece that attacked the Obama-era rule as allowing the feds “ to penalize localities if they were not diverse enough.
” But to Thomas Sugrue , Director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ York University , Trump ’ s language in rescinding the rule reveals what interests the President about the debate : the opportunity to stoke the flames of the culture war and weaponize race as an election approaches .
“ It ’ s meant to signal to his base that he is on their side in wanting , in pledging , to preserve the socioeconomic and racial homogeneity of white suburban America , ” Sugrue told TPM .

For years, the right’s best think tanks and commentators have criticized an Obama-era anti-segregation policy by changing the subject.
Conservative scholars and officials have argued that the policy — aimed at giving the feds more authority to fight segregation in housing — was “federal overreach on steroids,” and that it could bankrupt poor communities in need of help.
Finally, on Wednesday, President Trump did what they have been asking for. He ended the policy.
But he also, as he so often does, screamed the quiet part loud, using an incredibly racist explanation for tossing the Obama rule out: suburbanites would “no longer be bothered.”
…Your housing prices will go up based on the market, and crime will go down. I have rescinded the Obama-Biden AFFH Rule. Enjoy! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 29, 2020
What, then, posed this supposedly existential threat to the Suburban Lifestyle Dream? What was it that was so bothersome?
The Obama-era policy was intended to add some muscle to the 1968 Fair Housing Act’s mandate that the federal government work to prevent racial discrimination in housing. The Obama administration issued the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) rule in 2015, bolstering the Fair Housing Act by requiring cities and towns that receive federal housing grants to investigate housing bias in their communities and put an end to it.
The policy was, in part, meant to hasten the end of racial segregation — a fact that its critics studiously avoided. Until Trump brought it up.
“To say that a rule that requires cities to analyze segregation would ‘destroy the suburbs’ is as close as you can get to an endorsement of racial segregation without actually saying the words,” Shamus Roller, executive director of the National Housing Law Project, said in a statement.
Apart from Trump, nearly everyone on the right who discussed the rule has found a way to make it about something other than a policy designed to limit racial segregation.
Take Secretary for Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson, who rescinded the rule. In so doing, he used language that carefully portrayed minorities as the victims of the Obama policy.
“We found it to be unworkable and ultimately a waste of time for localities to comply with, too often resulting in funds being steered away from communities that need them most,” Carson said in a July 23 statement. “Washington has no business dictating what is best to meet your local community’s unique needs.”
That followed on years of commentary which framed the rule as an assault on the economic rights of freedom-loving suburbanites.
During a May 2016 Senate showdown over the rule, conservative pundit Stanley Kurtz wrote a column that effusively praised the underlying 1968 law as “a great achievement, rightly prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing,” while lashing out at Obama’s rule as “federal overreach on steroids.”
“Yet now, the Obama administration has promulgated a rule that effectively adds the radical new principle of government-imposed economic integration to law, when nothing of the sort appeared in the original FHA, and the public to this day overwhelmingly opposes the idea,” Kurtz wrote.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) framed the issue in a 2016 op-ed in terms of house pricing, saying that the real issue with the policy was that it would make housing more expensive.
“Instead of helping all American families by lowering housing costs, the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule would only add yet another layer of bureaucratic red tape on developers, making it less likely — not more — that they will find it worthwhile to build more housing units,” Lee wrote.
And the Wall Street Journal editorial board described it on Sunday as an example of “restrictive zoning,” saying that the real issue at play was “school choice.”
There’s an irony in the decision to outright rescind the rule: it actually came after the Trump administration dropped an earlier proposal to amend it, which was supported by fiscal conservatives.
That plan would have seen the Trump administration rewrite the Obama rule to take the focus away from anti-discrimination enforcement and put the focus on developing more housing.
Ryan Streeter, director of domestic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, called the administration proposal “sensible” in a piece that attacked the Obama-era rule as allowing the feds “to penalize localities if they were not diverse enough.”
But to Thomas Sugrue, Director of the Metropolitan Studies Program at New York University, Trump’s language in rescinding the rule reveals what interests the President about the debate: the opportunity to stoke the flames of the culture war and weaponize race as an election approaches.
“It’s meant to signal to his base that he is on their side in wanting, in pledging, to preserve the socioeconomic and racial homogeneity of white suburban America,” Sugrue told TPM.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Tech Hearing Goes Off The Rails As Jim Jordan Flies Off Topic

As if by reflex alone , Rep. Jim Jordan ( R-OH ) on Wednesday managed to divert a long-awaited congressional antitrust hearing featuring the CEOs of four major tech companies with a sideshow about “ unmasking.
” The Ohio congressman took things off the rails a few minutes after 3 p.m.
He ’ d just finished asking Google CEO Sundar Pichai about a nearly four-year-old email in which a then-Google employee referred to the company ’ s support for a get-out-the-vote program as a “ silent donation.
” Speaking after Jordan , Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon ( D-PA ) said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ witnesses ’ attention away from “ fringe conspiracy theories.
” Jordan blew up .
“ We have the email !
” he shouted , at which point Rep. David Cicilline ( D-RI ) , chair of the antitrust subcommittee holding the hearing , gaveled him down and pointed out that Scanlon “ has the time.
” Rep. Jamie Raskin ( D-MD ) yelled at Jordan to “ put your mask on !
” — a committee rule when a member is not speaking — and Jordan veered into a nonsequitor for the ages @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about masks , why would the deputy secretary of the secretary of the treasury unmask Michael Flynn ’ s name , Mr. Raskin ?
” he said .
No one had an answer for the congressman , presumably because they were in the middle of a major antitrust hearing , the culmination of a year-long investigation , and he was speaking out of turn .
Scanlon got things back on track , pressing Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos on the company undercutting its main competitor in the diaper market , diapers.com , then buying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t the first time for Jordan .
Two hours earlier , Cicilline stopped in the middle of his introductions of the witnesses to chide Jordan for breaking the same mask rule .
In his first round of questioning , Jordan announced that “ Big Tech is out to get conservatives ” before ticking off various conservative outlets who ’ d suffered under Google ’ s thumb .
And Jordan ’ s episode , if perhaps a bit angrier than the others , was hardly the only off-key moment of the day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ R-WI ) , for example , asked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg why his website had just suspended Donald Trump Jr. — even though Twitter had suspended the President ’ s son , not Facebook .
And Rep. Greg Steube ( R-FL ) thought he ’ d take his time to “ illustrate my question with a factual incident ” — specifically , that he was looking for an article on the fringe website Gateway Pundit a few months ago and couldn ’ t find it on Google .
When he tried again in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was able to find the article on Google .
What ’ s up with that ?
the congressman asked Google ’ s CEO , in more words .
Pichai said he would look into it .
Then , Steube asked why his parents and other supporters were receiving his campaign emails in the spam folder .
“ This appears to only be happening to conservative Republicans , ” Steube said , citing as evidence that he hadn ’ t heard anything to the contrary .
Pichai said it sounded like the campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tab , such as those for promotional emails , rather than the primary tab meant for personal messages .
“ Well , it was my father who is not receiving , now , my campaign emails , ” Steube shot back .
“ So clearly that familial thing that you ’ re talking about didn ’ t apply to my emails.
” “ Our systems probably are not able to understand that it ’ s your father , ” Pichai said .
“ At least if you don ’ t have that context @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , speaking next , briefly noted that she ’ d received complaints about campaign emails ending up in the spam folder as well , “ unfortunately .
”

As if by reflex alone, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) on Wednesday managed to divert a long-awaited congressional antitrust hearing featuring the CEOs of four major tech companies with a sideshow about “unmasking.”
The Ohio congressman took things off the rails a few minutes after 3 p.m. He’d just finished asking Google CEO Sundar Pichai about a nearly four-year-old email in which a then-Google employee referred to the company’s support for a get-out-the-vote program as a “silent donation.”
(Google denied that its “products or actions” were politically biased in 2018, when the story first broke, and Pichai said Wednesday that he’d “clearly communicated to our employees” that political activity should happen on personal time.)
Speaking after Jordan, Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA) said she’d like to redirect the witnesses’ attention away from “fringe conspiracy theories.” Jordan blew up.
“We have the email!” he shouted, at which point Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), chair of the antitrust subcommittee holding the hearing, gaveled him down and pointed out that Scanlon “has the time.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) yelled at Jordan to “put your mask on!” — a committee rule when a member is not speaking — and Jordan veered into a nonsequitor for the ages.
“If you want to talk about masks, why would the deputy secretary of the secretary of the treasury unmask Michael Flynn’s name, Mr. Raskin?” he said.
No one had an answer for the congressman, presumably because they were in the middle of a major antitrust hearing, the culmination of a year-long investigation, and he was speaking out of turn.
Scanlon got things back on track, pressing Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos on the company undercutting its main competitor in the diaper market, diapers.com, then buying the website and raising prices.
I had the opportunity to question Jeff Bezos on Amazon’s questionable acquisition of smaller businesses to quash competition during a @HouseJudiciary hearing today. Americans deserve to know the truth about anti-competitive practices that hurt consumers. pic.twitter.com/zDRy1wEgej — Congresswoman Mary Gay Scanlon (@RepMGS) July 29, 2020
It wasn’t the first time for Jordan. Two hours earlier, Cicilline stopped in the middle of his introductions of the witnesses to chide Jordan for breaking the same mask rule.
In his first round of questioning, Jordan announced that “Big Tech is out to get conservatives” before ticking off various conservative outlets who’d suffered under Google’s thumb.
And Jordan’s episode, if perhaps a bit angrier than the others, was hardly the only off-key moment of the day.
Subcommittee Ranking Member Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), for example, asked Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg why his website had just suspended Donald Trump Jr. — even though Twitter had suspended the President’s son, not Facebook.
And Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) thought he’d take his time to “illustrate my question with a factual incident” — specifically, that he was looking for an article on the fringe website Gateway Pundit a few months ago and couldn’t find it on Google. When he tried again in his D.C. office, Steube said, he was able to find the article on Google.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Florida Man) is out here self-owning pic.twitter.com/GqBLbtALrJ — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) July 29, 2020
What’s up with that? the congressman asked Google’s CEO, in more words. Pichai said he would look into it.
Then, Steube asked why his parents and other supporters were receiving his campaign emails in the spam folder.
“This appears to only be happening to conservative Republicans,” Steube said, citing as evidence that he hadn’t heard anything to the contrary.
Pichai said it sounded like the campaign emails were going into a separate Gmail tab, such as those for promotional emails, rather than the primary tab meant for personal messages.
“Well, it was my father who is not receiving, now, my campaign emails,” Steube shot back. “So clearly that familial thing that you’re talking about didn’t apply to my emails.”
“Our systems probably are not able to understand that it’s your father,” Pichai said. “At least if you don’t have that context there.”
Rep. Val Demmings (D-FL), speaking next, briefly noted that she’d received complaints about campaign emails ending up in the spam folder as well, “unfortunately.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Trump Has A Back-Up Plan For Rigging The Census To Screw Over Immigrant-Rich States

The legal battle over President Trump ’ s new census power grab has only begun .
But the Trump administration may be on the cusp of winning a larger war to create a skewed 2020 count that will boost the electoral advantages of whiter parts of the country , to the detriment of more diverse , urban and lower-income populations .
Democrats and former Census leaders laid out their concerns over the scheme during a House Oversight Committee hearing on Wednesday .
At the hearing , Democrats accused the Trump administration of seeking to rush the 2020 census count so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy that will punish immigrant-rich states .
The Bureau ’ s director , Steven Dillingham , tried his best to distance himself from the ways in which the White House appears to be hijacking the count .
The hearing was called in response to a policy President Trump unveiled last week instructing the Census Bureau to change the way it assembles the data that determines how many House seats and Electoral College votes each state gets .
Specifically , Trump directed the Census Bureau to exclude undocumented immigrants from the count — an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of practice and broadly held views about the Constitution .
If allowed to be implemented , it will shift congressional representation away from immigrant-rich states and towards those with whiter populations .
What has become clear since that policy was announced is that last week ’ s directive was only one aspect of the gambit the administration is now pushing .
The White House has also sought to keep the Census Bureau on a timeline to deliver its data for congressional apportionment by the end of this year — a timeline the Census @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is no longer workable , given the pandemic .
Secretary Ross himself requested in April a four-month extension from Congress on those data delivery deadlines , but now it appears the administration is walking away from that request to ensure that Trump will still be in office when the data is delivered .
The Senate GOP seems to be on board with plan , but it presents a potential flashpoint with Democrats as they negotiate the next round of COVID-19 legislation .
The other upshot is that a rushed count stands to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ color and low-income people , who , according to experts , are more likely to go uncounted if the Census Bureau ’ s operational plans are condensed .
“ When you know where the African Americans and Hispanics live in the cities , the pattern is very clear , ” Kim Brace , a redistricting expert , told TPM , while pointing to the Bureau ’ s information about who has responded to the census so far .
That means that even if courts block the apportionment policy Trump announced , he will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ count that diminishes the political representation given to more diverse , urban and thus-Democratic leaning parts of the country .
“ I am concerned that the administration is seeking to rush the process and sacrifice the accuracy of the census for political gain , ” Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney ( D-NY ) said at Wednesday ’ s hearing .
At Wednesday ’ s hearing , Dillingham did not endorse this plot .
But it doesn ’ t seem like he ’ s doing much to stand in the way of it either .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ new anti-immigrant apportionment policy was in the works when he read about it in the news media .
Asked if he or anyone from the Bureau had offered any input on it , he said , “ I certainly did not and I am not aware of others in the Census Bureau that did.
’ He also said he had not been involved in the negotiations with Congress over moving back the timeline , so the Census Bureau would have the time it needed to finish the count .
But , notably , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one of the Bureau ’ s own experts had made about the need for an extension .
The expert , who is leading the field operations for the 2020 count , had said in May that because of the pandemic , the Bureau had already “ passed the point where we could even meet the ” requirement that it deliver the data by the end of the year .
“ I can ’ t agree with [ him ] , ” Dillingham said Wednesday , as the Bureau was “ doing continuing assessments.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have much patience for Dillingham ’ s efforts to keep his hands clean of the White House ’ s machinations .
“ You know your name will go down in history if this is the worst census ever conducted by the United States government , ” Rep. Jimmy Gomez ( D-CA ) told Dillingham .
“ You ’ re not going to run away and say that , ‘ This was only because of the Trump administration , ’ later on .
You will be responsible .
Your name will be associated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testified earlier in the hearing put in stark relief the stakes of this current wrangling and the consequences of a hasty census .
“ I was extremely disappointed when it turned out that they were not going to get the four month extension going on into 2021 , ” said Kenneth Prewitt , who led the Bureau between 1998-2001 , said .
“ In my sense , the chance of having a census accurate enough to use is unclear — very , very unclear whether we ’ ll even have a census .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ illegals or the undocumented is besides the point , if we ’ re not even going to have a census that we can take to the American people .
”

The legal battle over President Trump’s new census power grab has only begun.
But the Trump administration may be on the cusp of winning a larger war to create a skewed 2020 count that will boost the electoral advantages of whiter parts of the country, to the detriment of more diverse, urban and lower-income populations.
Democrats and former Census leaders laid out their concerns over the scheme during a House Oversight Committee hearing on Wednesday.
At the hearing, Democrats accused the Trump administration of seeking to rush the 2020 census count so that it can enact a newly announced policy that will punish immigrant-rich states. The Bureau’s director, Steven Dillingham, tried his best to distance himself from the ways in which the White House appears to be hijacking the count.
The hearing was called in response to a policy President Trump unveiled last week instructing the Census Bureau to change the way it assembles the data that determines how many House seats and Electoral College votes each state gets.
Specifically, Trump directed the Census Bureau to exclude undocumented immigrants from the count — an approach that runs afoul of 200 years of practice and broadly held views about the Constitution. If allowed to be implemented, it will shift congressional representation away from immigrant-rich states and towards those with whiter populations.
What has become clear since that policy was announced is that last week’s directive was only one aspect of the gambit the administration is now pushing.
The White House has also sought to keep the Census Bureau on a timeline to deliver its data for congressional apportionment by the end of this year — a timeline the Census Bureau’s own experts have said is no longer workable, given the pandemic. Secretary Ross himself requested in April a four-month extension from Congress on those data delivery deadlines, but now it appears the administration is walking away from that request to ensure that Trump will still be in office when the data is delivered.
The Senate GOP seems to be on board with plan, but it presents a potential flashpoint with Democrats as they negotiate the next round of COVID-19 legislation.
The other upshot is that a rushed count stands to have a biggest negative impact on communities of color and low-income people, who, according to experts, are more likely to go uncounted if the Census Bureau’s operational plans are condensed.
“When you know where the African Americans and Hispanics live in the cities, the pattern is very clear,” Kim Brace, a redistricting expert, told TPM, while pointing to the Bureau’s information about who has responded to the census so far.
That means that even if courts block the apportionment policy Trump announced, he will reap some similar benefits from a rushed count that diminishes the political representation given to more diverse, urban and thus-Democratic leaning parts of the country.
“I am concerned that the administration is seeking to rush the process and sacrifice the accuracy of the census for political gain,” Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) said at Wednesday’s hearing.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Dillingham did not endorse this plot. But it doesn’t seem like he’s doing much to stand in the way of it either.
He testified that he found out the new anti-immigrant apportionment policy was in the works when he read about it in the news media. Asked if he or anyone from the Bureau had offered any input on it, he said, “I certainly did not and I am not aware of others in the Census Bureau that did.’
He also said he had not been involved in the negotiations with Congress over moving back the timeline, so the Census Bureau would have the time it needed to finish the count.
But, notably, Dillingham also refused to back a comment one of the Bureau’s own experts had made about the need for an extension. The expert, who is leading the field operations for the 2020 count, had said in May that because of the pandemic, the Bureau had already “passed the point where we could even meet the” requirement that it deliver the data by the end of the year.
“I can’t agree with [him],” Dillingham said Wednesday, as the Bureau was “doing continuing assessments.”
The committee’s Democrats did not have much patience for Dillingham’s efforts to keep his hands clean of the White House’s machinations.
“You know your name will go down in history if this is the worst census ever conducted by the United States government,” Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA) told Dillingham. “You’re not going to run away and say that, ‘This was only because of the Trump administration,’ later on. You will be responsible. Your name will be associated with it.”
Former Census directors who testified earlier in the hearing put in stark relief the stakes of this current wrangling and the consequences of a hasty census.
“I was extremely disappointed when it turned out that they were not going to get the four month extension going on into 2021,” said Kenneth Prewitt, who led the Bureau between 1998-2001, said. “In my sense, the chance of having a census accurate enough to use is unclear — very, very unclear whether we’ll even have a census. That is why a debate about the illegals or the undocumented is besides the point, if we’re not even going to have a census that we can take to the American people.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--A Shameless Gohmert Tries To Blame Masks For Getting COVID-19

Rep. Louie Gohmert ( R-TX ) , who tested positive for COVID-19 on Wednesday after long dismissing the necessity of wearing masks , has cooked up a truly bold spin on his predicament .
“ I can ’ t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place that if I might have put some germs , some of the virus , onto the mask and breathed it in , ” Gohmert told KETK News in a Skype interview several hours after news of his diagnosis broke .
Gohmert said he ’ s worn a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two ” ( he did not wear a mask on Tuesday while interacting with Attorney General Bill Barr , who also was not wearing a mask ) .
The Texas lawmaker also stated that he didn ’ t have any symptoms of the virus .
“ I ’ m asymptomatic , ” Gohmert said in a video he posted on Twitter .
The revelation is particularly striking given that the express purpose of wearing a mask , which Gohmert has largely refused to do , is to prevent those with COVID-19 who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
And yet Gohmert remains opposed to mask mandates .
“ If somebody feels strongly about everybody should wear a mask , then they shouldn ’ t be around people that don ’ t wear masks , ” he said during the KETK News interview .
However , that standard doesn ’ t exactly apply to Gohmert ’ s own aides , one of whom told Politico that the congressman requires all staffers to be in the office to “ be an example to America on how to open up safely ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ berated .
”

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), who tested positive for COVID-19 on Wednesday after long dismissing the necessity of wearing masks, has cooked up a truly bold spin on his predicament.
“I can’t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place that if I might have put some germs, some of the virus, onto the mask and breathed it in,” Gohmert told KETK News in a Skype interview several hours after news of his diagnosis broke. Gohmert said he’s worn a mask “in the last week or two” (he did not wear a mask on Tuesday while interacting with Attorney General Bill Barr, who also was not wearing a mask).
The Texas lawmaker also stated that he didn’t have any symptoms of the virus.
“I’m asymptomatic,” Gohmert said in a video he posted on Twitter.
The revelation is particularly striking given that the express purpose of wearing a mask, which Gohmert has largely refused to do, is to prevent those with COVID-19 who are asymptomatic from unwittingly transmitting the virus to others.
And yet Gohmert remains opposed to mask mandates.
“If somebody feels strongly about everybody should wear a mask, then they shouldn’t be around people that don’t wear masks,” he said during the KETK News interview.
However, that standard doesn’t exactly apply to Gohmert’s own aides, one of whom told Politico that the congressman requires all staffers to be in the office to “be an example to America on how to open up safely” and that those who wore masks were “berated.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Racist In Chief: Trump Says Suburbanites Will ‘No Longer Be Bothered’ By Low-Income Housing

President Donald Trump turned his Twitter account into a racist bullhorn on Wednesday , nonchalantly posting that “ people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream ” would no longer have to bother or deal with low income housing in their neighborhood .
The tweet follows an announcement from the White House last Wednesday that it will repeal and replace an Obama-era rule intended to combat historic racial discrimination in housing .
The move has been widely seen as a campaign tactic for Trump , who is hoping to bolster diminishing support among white suburban voters amid failures to curb the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in the United States — by stoking racial division .
Trump has leaned heavily on a bid for suburban voters and falsely claimed in a July 16 speech that former Democratic nominee Joe Biden wants to “ abolish the suburbs , ” and that a vote for Biden would ensure a spike in crime rates in suburban neighborhoods .
The White House said last week that the rule would be rolled back as part of a broader deregulation push , creating a much lower bar that would allow local governments more freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fair housing.
” The announcement last week came weeks after the President tweeted in June that he would be rolling back the regulation , known as the “ Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing ” rule , at the request of “ many great Americans who live in the Suburbs.
” The President said in a tweet at that time that the rule has had a “ devastating impact on these once thriving Suburban areas.
” The June 30 tweet followed a video that Trump posted to Twitter a day before showing the gun-touting Missouri @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointing an assault rifle and pistol toward a group of anti-racism protesters walking past their St. Louis home .
The couple has come to symbolize a conservative narrative of a kind of victimization of unwitting white homeowners who stand their ground amid a flood of threatening and angry supporters of Black lives .
Without evidence , Trump has also leveraged his repeal of the housing rule as part of a wider effort to smear Biden .
In tweets and speeches , Trump has repeatedly said that the former Vice President would make housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies that are “ not fair to homeowners.
” Biden has denied that charge .
The former Vice President ’ s campaign has called Trump ’ s attempts at painting Biden as a danger and an enemy to the suburbs a campaign to smear the Democratic nominee .

President Donald Trump turned his Twitter account into a racist bullhorn on Wednesday, nonchalantly posting that “people living their Suburban Lifestyle Dream” would no longer have to bother or deal with low income housing in their neighborhood.
…Your housing prices will go up based on the market, and crime will go down. I have rescinded the Obama-Biden AFFH Rule. Enjoy! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 29, 2020
The tweet follows an announcement from the White House last Wednesday that it will repeal and replace an Obama-era rule intended to combat historic racial discrimination in housing.
The move has been widely seen as a campaign tactic for Trump, who is hoping to bolster diminishing support among white suburban voters amid failures to curb the coronavirus pandemic — which has killed roughly 150,000 people in the United States — by stoking racial division.
Trump has leaned heavily on a bid for suburban voters and falsely claimed in a July 16 speech that former Democratic nominee Joe Biden wants to “abolish the suburbs,” and that a vote for Biden would ensure a spike in crime rates in suburban neighborhoods.
The White House said last week that the rule would be rolled back as part of a broader deregulation push, creating a much lower bar that would allow local governments more freedom to self-certify that they are “furthering fair housing.”
The announcement last week came weeks after the President tweeted in June that he would be rolling back the regulation, known as the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” rule, at the request of “many great Americans who live in the Suburbs.” The President said in a tweet at that time that the rule has had a “devastating impact on these once thriving Suburban areas.”
The June 30 tweet followed a video that Trump posted to Twitter a day before showing the gun-touting Missouri couple that appear in a viral video pointing an assault rifle and pistol toward a group of anti-racism protesters walking past their St. Louis home. The couple has come to symbolize a conservative narrative of a kind of victimization of unwitting white homeowners who stand their ground amid a flood of threatening and angry supporters of Black lives.
Without evidence, Trump has also leveraged his repeal of the housing rule as part of a wider effort to smear Biden. In tweets and speeches, Trump has repeatedly said that the former Vice President would make housing rules “MUCH WORSE” by enacting policies that are “not fair to homeowners.”
Biden has denied that charge. The former Vice President’s campaign has called Trump’s attempts at painting Biden as a danger and an enemy to the suburbs a campaign to smear the Democratic nominee.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Census Director: Bureau Had Nothing To Do With Trump’s New Anti-Immigrant Policy

The Census Bureau was not involved in the creation of a new Trump policy that will allow the 2020 count to be used to boost the electoral advantage of white rural voters , according to the Wednesday testimony of its top official .
Asked at a House hearing whether he or other Census Bureau officials provided input on the policy , Director Steve Dillingham said he “ certainly ” did not , nor was he aware of anyone else at the bureau contributing to it .
That answer , however , included a caveat .
In June the White House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bureau — an extraordinary move given that there are usually only only four or five political appointees at the bureau total .
Dillingham said he couldn ’ t speak to their actions prior to them joining the bureau .
The two appointees , Nathaniel Cogley and Adam Korzeniewski , who were at the Commerce Department prior to the shift , have questionable backgrounds for their current senior bureau roles that included very partisan activity .
President Trump last week ordered the bureau to remove undocumented immigrants from the count from the 2020 census @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many House seats each state gets .
That will decrease the amount of congressional representation in diverse , immigrant-rich states get and increase the representation for the whiter , more rural parts of the country .
The policy faces an uphill battle in the courts .
There are also many questions about its feasibility , as the Census Bureau will have to use existing government records to determine the number of undocumented immigrants in each state .
Earlier in the hearing , former Census Bureau directors testified they were concerned that the extra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jeopardizing the accuracy of the count , particularly as the bureau also faces major challenges with the pandemic .
Dillingham said that was not “ formally ” made aware of the new policy until Trump issued that memo .
He only initially found out that the plan was in the works when it was publicly reported a few days prior to that announcement .
“ I was waiting to learn more , ” Dillingham said , recalling when he learned from the media that the Trump administration was working on the policy .

The Census Bureau was not involved in the creation of a new Trump policy that will allow the 2020 count to be used to boost the electoral advantage of white rural voters, according to the Wednesday testimony of its top official.
Asked at a House hearing whether he or other Census Bureau officials provided input on the policy, Director Steve Dillingham said he “certainly” did not, nor was he aware of anyone else at the bureau contributing to it.
That answer, however, included a caveat. In June the White House installed two new political appointees at the bureau — an extraordinary move given that there are usually only only four or five political appointees at the bureau total.
Dillingham said he couldn’t speak to their actions prior to them joining the bureau.
The two appointees, Nathaniel Cogley and Adam Korzeniewski, who were at the Commerce Department prior to the shift, have questionable backgrounds for their current senior bureau roles that included very partisan activity.
President Trump last week ordered the bureau to remove undocumented immigrants from the count from the 2020 census that will be used to determine how many House seats each state gets. That will decrease the amount of congressional representation in diverse, immigrant-rich states get and increase the representation for the whiter, more rural parts of the country.
The policy faces an uphill battle in the courts. There are also many questions about its feasibility, as the Census Bureau will have to use existing government records to determine the number of undocumented immigrants in each state.
Earlier in the hearing, former Census Bureau directors testified they were concerned that the extra work being imposed on the bureau was jeopardizing the accuracy of the count, particularly as the bureau also faces major challenges with the pandemic.
Dillingham said that was not “formally” made aware of the new policy until Trump issued that memo. He only initially found out that the plan was in the works when it was publicly reported a few days prior to that announcement.
“I was waiting to learn more,” Dillingham said, recalling when he learned from the media that the Trump administration was working on the policy.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--MSNBC Host Throws Down With Pro-Trump Democrat: ‘I Like To Traffic In Facts’

MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin brawled with Georgia state Rep. Vernon Jones ( D ) , an outspoken pro-Trump Democrat , on Wednesday in an interview that flew completely off the handle .
The throwdown began when Melvin slammed Jones ’ arguments as to why President Donald Trump was better for the Black community than former President Barack Obama .
“ I like to traffic in facts , and much of what you just said is patently false , ” Melvin snapped as the Georgia Democrat tried to speak over him .
“ Representative Jones , this is my show , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jones exploded when the MSNBC host asked him if he was being paid by the Trump campaign .
“ Let me be clear : You get paid to shape a liberal narrative .
You get paid to attack this president , ” the Democrat retorted .
“ I don ’ t get a dime from this president .
I don ’ t get a dime from the campaign .
Everything I ’ ve done has been me and based on my principles.
” “ See , that ’ s the problem , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Melvin cut him off sharply : “ Sir , I did not raise your race .
You ’ re not going to imply I asked that question because you ’ re black.
” “ So don ’ t ask me that , ” Jones fired back .
“ You only ask me that because I don ’ t fit your narrative.
” He went on to accuse MSNBC of trying to “ keep Blacks silent who happen to support this president ” in a rant against the network .
Soon Melvin had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representative Jones , thank you .
Do come back , an open invitation , ” he told the lawmaker before moving on to a new segment .
The thunderous interview came several months after Jones announced in April that he was resigning from office , claiming that he had been “ attacked and harassed ” by the Democratic Party over his support for Trump .
24 hours later , the Georgia lawmaker walked back his decision and declared that he “ will not allow the Democrats to bully me into submission .
”

MSNBC anchor Craig Melvin brawled with Georgia state Rep. Vernon Jones (D), an outspoken pro-Trump Democrat, on Wednesday in an interview that flew completely off the handle.
The throwdown began when Melvin slammed Jones’ arguments as to why President Donald Trump was better for the Black community than former President Barack Obama.
“I like to traffic in facts, and much of what you just said is patently false,” Melvin snapped as the Georgia Democrat tried to speak over him. “Representative Jones, this is my show, I’ll ask questions.”
Then Jones exploded when the MSNBC host asked him if he was being paid by the Trump campaign.
“Let me be clear: You get paid to shape a liberal narrative. You get paid to attack this president,” the Democrat retorted. “I don’t get a dime from this president. I don’t get a dime from the campaign. Everything I’ve done has been me and based on my principles.”
“See, that’s the problem,” he added. “When an African-American-”
Melvin cut him off sharply: “Sir, I did not raise your race. You’re not going to imply I asked that question because you’re black.”
“So don’t ask me that,” Jones fired back. “You only ask me that because I don’t fit your narrative.”
He went on to accuse MSNBC of trying to “keep Blacks silent who happen to support this president” in a rant against the network.
Soon Melvin had enough of Jones’ tirade.
“Representative Jones, thank you. Do come back, an open invitation,” he told the lawmaker before moving on to a new segment.
The thunderous interview came several months after Jones announced in April that he was resigning from office, claiming that he had been “attacked and harassed” by the Democratic Party over his support for Trump.
24 hours later, the Georgia lawmaker walked back his decision and declared that he “will not allow the Democrats to bully me into submission.”
Watch Melvin and Jones’ exchange below:


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--From Masking Naysayer to COVID Victim: The Louie Gohmert Story

With the news that Rep. Louie Gohmert ( R-TX ) has been diagnosed with COVID-19 , it ’ s worth looking back at the congressman ’ s stance on the virus in recent months .
Gohmert , who ’ s become known on Capitol Hill for often refusing to follow public health experts ’ guidance to wear a mask , said in June that he ’ d mask up in the event that he got sick .
Given that masks are meant to protect against asymptomatic people spreading the virus , the comment was just one in a long line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus from the Texas lawmaker .
Here ’ s a look back through his greatest hits .
One of the first big news stories about widespread COVID-19 exposure came in early March with the Conservative Political Action Conference .
After learning that they ’ d come in contact with a man at the conference who later tested positive for the virus , several lawmakers chose to self-quarantine .
Gohmert was not one of them .
Instead , he continued to lead tours of well more than 100 people through the Capitol Building .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he wouldn ’ t shake hands . )
This was well after CDC Director Robert Redfield and others said publicly that asymptomatic spread was “ driving transmission.
” April 7 : Gohmert claims nonexistent ‘ mist ’ can kill virus for two weeks In an interview , Gohmert claimed that German health care workers were using a “ mist ” to sanitize themselves that not only killed the virus on contact , but also killed any virus that came into contact with it for the next 14 days .
“ It is being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Gohmert said , after referring to an Arizona product he said was similar .
“ Health care workers go through a misting tent going into the hospital and it kills the coronavirus completely dead not only right then , but any time in the next 14 days that the virus touches anything that ’ s been sprayed it is killed.
” A spokesperson for a German hospital association told PolitiFact that the congressman ’ s claim was “ absolute nonsense.
” Another German , speaking for the German Society of Hospital Hygiene @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard “ about that magic powder.
” “ Thank you for your mail , ” the spokesperson added .
“ Finally , something to laugh about.
” In the same interview , Gohmert also advocated for the President ’ s favorite unproven COVID-19 treatment , hydroxychloroquine , falsely saying that “ it ’ s not been known to have side effects.
” Gohmert backed Trump ’ s move to withhold funding from the World Health Organization , accusing the organization of covering up “ the contagiousness to humans and deadliness of the disease.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Gohmert was not wearing a mask in the halls of Congress at the time . )
“ It is encouraging to see our President put the lives of Americans first throughout this crisis , instead of throwing away hundreds of millions of dollars each year on an organization that helped create a crisis by applauding lies from the source of the current pandemic , ” Gohmert said .
A supporter of the President ’ s rhetorical push to “ reopen ” society despite the coronavirus threat , Gohmert said in an interview @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social animals , we like to be around people .
And it helps avoid the coronavirus to be solitary , ” he told KETK .
“ But at the same time , it ’ s not good for mental health , according to psychologists.
” Texas began its “ reopening ” just a few days later , on May 1 , only to pause and reverse parts of it after the virus exploded in the state .
May 8 : Gohmert dismisses masks while at White House , despite recent cases During a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dozens of politicians and media were present , including the President and members of his Cabinet , Gohmert defended the lack of social distancing and mask-wearing among the Republican crowd by singling out the reporters in attendance .
“ I do want to advise our media friends before they write stories about how we didn ’ t wear masks and we didn ’ t possibly socially distance adequately , that you saw to it that we had tests , and that nobody in here had the coronavirus unless it ’ s somebody in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ So the only reason we would wear masks is if we were trying to protect ourselves from you in the media .
And we ’ re not scared of you .
So that ’ s why we can be here like this.
” Vice President Mike Pence ’ s spokesperson Katie Miller had confirmed just a few hours earlier that day that she had tested positive for coronavirus .
The day prior , one of Trump ’ s personal valets at the White House had tested positive for the virus .
According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gohmert sought signatures for a letter to have lawmakers come back to Washington , D.C. , no matter the state of the virus .
Singling out New York , the letter hammered “ poor leadership at the state level , ” Politico reported .
“ This is why we , as Republicans , must demonstrate leadership for the country by safely and responsibly coming back to work in Washington in order to minimize an impending economic calamity which could ultimately cost lives and dramatically increase misery across the United States , ” Gohmert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Politico .
In a floor speech raging against proxy voting , Gohmert described fears of dying of COVID-19 as “ wishy-washy , maybe we should be afraid that we might get something and die.
” “ They didn ’ t do that in the Spanish Flu days !
They didn ’ t do that in the Civil War !
But now we ’ re going to do it ?
!
” the congressman screamed .
June 27 : Gohmert says he ’ ll wear a mask… if he ever gets sick Asked by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lead of many of his fellow lawmakers and wearing a mask around the Capitol Building , Gohmert answered by dismissing the widespread medical advice .
“ I don ’ t have the coronavirus , turns out as of yesterday I ’ ve never had it .
But if I get it , you ’ ll never see me without a mask , ” he said .
Asked about the threat of asymptomatic spread , the congressman doubled down : “ But I keep being tested and I don ’ t have it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of you , but if I get it I ’ ll wear a mask.
” Though he ’ s worn a face covering at times , Gohmert has mostly refused to wear a mask for months .

With the news that Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) has been diagnosed with COVID-19, it’s worth looking back at the congressman’s stance on the virus in recent months.
Gohmert, who’s become known on Capitol Hill for often refusing to follow public health experts’ guidance to wear a mask, said in June that he’d mask up in the event that he got sick.
Given that masks are meant to protect against asymptomatic people spreading the virus, the comment was just one in a long line of bizarre or wrong statements about the virus from the Texas lawmaker.
Here’s a look back through his greatest hits.
March 9: Gohmert led Capitol Building tours after possible COVID exposure
One of the first big news stories about widespread COVID-19 exposure came in early March with the Conservative Political Action Conference. After learning that they’d come in contact with a man at the conference who later tested positive for the virus, several lawmakers chose to self-quarantine. Gohmert was not one of them.
Instead, he continued to lead tours of well more than 100 people through the Capitol Building. (Gohmert did tell the groups that he wouldn’t shake hands.) This was well after CDC Director Robert Redfield and others said publicly that asymptomatic spread was “driving transmission.”
Rep. Gohmert is still giving tours despite his contact with someone who tested positive for coronavirus. He explained to the group of several dozen kids and parents about his conversation with the doctor, that he didn't have any symptoms, and that he wouldn't shake hands pic.twitter.com/9WP1cnjLpm — Jeremy Herb (@jeremyherb) March 9, 2020
April 7: Gohmert claims nonexistent ‘mist’ can kill virus for two weeks
In an interview, Gohmert claimed that German health care workers were using a “mist” to sanitize themselves that not only killed the virus on contact, but also killed any virus that came into contact with it for the next 14 days.
“It is being used in Germany as a mist,” Gohmert said, after referring to an Arizona product he said was similar. “Health care workers go through a misting tent going into the hospital and it kills the coronavirus completely dead not only right then, but any time in the next 14 days that the virus touches anything that’s been sprayed it is killed.”
A spokesperson for a German hospital association told PolitiFact that the congressman’s claim was “absolute nonsense.” Another German, speaking for the German Society of Hospital Hygiene, said the group hadn’t heard “about that magic powder.”
“Thank you for your mail,” the spokesperson added. “Finally, something to laugh about.”
In the same interview, Gohmert also advocated for the President’s favorite unproven COVID-19 treatment, hydroxychloroquine, falsely saying that “it’s not been known to have side effects.”
April 15: Gohmert accuses WHO of coverup
Gohmert backed Trump’s move to withhold funding from the World Health Organization, accusing the organization of covering up “the contagiousness to humans and deadliness of the disease.” (An interesting position, given that Gohmert was not wearing a mask in the halls of Congress at the time.)
“It is encouraging to see our President put the lives of Americans first throughout this crisis, instead of throwing away hundreds of millions of dollars each year on an organization that helped create a crisis by applauding lies from the source of the current pandemic,” Gohmert said.
April 23: Gohmert pushes to ‘reopen’ because ‘we’re social animals’
A supporter of the President’s rhetorical push to “reopen” society despite the coronavirus threat, Gohmert said in an interview in April that “We’re social animals, we like to be around people. And it helps avoid the coronavirus to be solitary,” he told KETK. “But at the same time, it’s not good for mental health, according to psychologists.”
Texas began its “reopening” just a few days later, on May 1, only to pause and reverse parts of it after the virus exploded in the state.
May 8: Gohmert dismisses masks while at White House, despite recent cases
During a meeting at the White House in which dozens of politicians and media were present, including the President and members of his Cabinet, Gohmert defended the lack of social distancing and mask-wearing among the Republican crowd by singling out the reporters in attendance.
“I do want to advise our media friends before they write stories about how we didn’t wear masks and we didn’t possibly socially distance adequately, that you saw to it that we had tests, and that nobody in here had the coronavirus unless it’s somebody in the media,” he said. “So the only reason we would wear masks is if we were trying to protect ourselves from you in the media. And we’re not scared of you. So that’s why we can be here like this.”
Vice President Mike Pence’s spokesperson Katie Miller had confirmed just a few hours earlier that day that she had tested positive for coronavirus. The day prior, one of Trump’s personal valets at the White House had tested positive for the virus.
Louie Gohmert: “We had tests and nobody in here has the coronavirus unless it’s somebody in the media. So the only reason we would wear masks is if we were trying to protect ourselves from you, in the media. And we’re not scared of you." pic.twitter.com/vf7ySCYklr — JM Rieger (@RiegerReport) May 8, 2020
May 15: Gohmert insists Congress vote in person
According to a March 11 Politico report, Gohmert sought signatures for a letter to have lawmakers come back to Washington, D.C., no matter the state of the virus. Singling out New York, the letter hammered “poor leadership at the state level,” Politico reported.
“This is why we, as Republicans, must demonstrate leadership for the country by safely and responsibly coming back to work in Washington in order to minimize an impending economic calamity which could ultimately cost lives and dramatically increase misery across the United States,” Gohmert’s letter said, according to Politico.
In a floor speech raging against proxy voting, Gohmert described fears of dying of COVID-19 as “wishy-washy, maybe we should be afraid that we might get something and die.”
“They didn’t do that in the Spanish Flu days! They didn’t do that in the Civil War! But now we’re going to do it?!” the congressman screamed.
“We’ve got to preserve the Constitution; not abuse it with a House Rule.” pic.twitter.com/sb6Cp8Nb8n — Louie Gohmert (@replouiegohmert) May 15, 2020
June 27: Gohmert says he’ll wear a mask… if he ever gets sick
Asked by CNN why he wasn’t following the lead of many of his fellow lawmakers and wearing a mask around the Capitol Building, Gohmert answered by dismissing the widespread medical advice.
“I don’t have the coronavirus, turns out as of yesterday I’ve never had it. But if I get it, you’ll never see me without a mask,” he said. Asked about the threat of asymptomatic spread, the congressman doubled down: “But I keep being tested and I don’t have it. So I’m not afraid of you, but if I get it I’ll wear a mask.”
Though he’s worn a face covering at times, Gohmert has mostly refused to wear a mask for months.
Cristina Cabrera contributed reporting.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-29--Navarro Fires Back At CNN Q’s About Doctor Trump Boosted: I Won’t Be ‘Prop In This Circus’

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said Wednesday that he has “ no opinion ” of the doctor shown in a viral video retweeted by President Donald Trump who falsely claimed that an anti-malaria drug is a cure for COVID-19 .
In a series of tweets Monday night , Trump retweeted false claims , including one featuring Stella Immanuel , a woman calling herself a doctor who falsely declared that hydroxychloroquine is a cure for coronavirus .
“ I have no opinion , ” Navarro said when CNN ’ s John Berman asked him about the doctor Trump has defended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about discussions regarding hydroxycholorquine in a “ very sophisticated way ” and called the President “ the smartest guy I know.
” When pressed again by Berman to weigh in on the doctor , Navarro , who is known for his harsh critiques of those who oppose the President said , “ I ’ m not going to be your prop in this circus.
” The comments come after Navarro wrote a seething op-ed in USA Today earlier this month , slamming the nation ’ s top infectious diseases expert Dr. Anthony Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrong about everything I have interacted with him on.
” Navarro that he only heeds Fauci ’ s expertise with “ caution ” and “ skepticism.
” Fauci has said he stands with the Food and Drug Administration , who revoked the emergency use authorization for the drug as treatment for the virus .
“ The overwhelming , prevailing clinical trials that have looked at the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine have indicated that it is not effective in coronavirus disease , ” Fauci told ABC ’ s George Stephanopoulos in a Good Morning America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wednesday , Navarro said of Fauci , “ we have different points of view.
” Navarro added that he stands by the use of the drug to treat the coronavirus disease and has “ tens of millions of tablets ” at the ready .
Navarro previously argued that his credentials as a “ social scientist ” qualified him to speak on medical matters with rigor .
Earlier this week , Twitter , Facebook and others , removed a viral video showing a group of doctors who call themselves “ America ’ s Frontline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ novel coronavirus .
In the viral video , Stella Immanuel , the doctor Trump retweeted earlier this week , made the unsubstantiated claim that hydroxychloroquine is a “ cure for covid , ” the disease caused by the coronavirus .
Further digging by the Washington Post showed that Immanuel has history of making false statements — including a claim that endometriosis is caused by sex with demons in dreams .
When pressed about the doctor in a news conference on Tuesday , Trump said Immanuel ’ s was a “ very important voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Another member of the group of doctors , Simone Gold , tweeted after the press conference Tuesday that the group had met with Vice President Mike Pence after the video was removed from Twitter to request “ assistance in empowering doctors to prescribe hydroxychloroquine without political obstruction.
” Trump ’ s praise of Immanuel comes as the President and other White House staff , including Navarro , have levied attacks against Fauci , who has been the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 36 years .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post that called Fauci a “ fraud ” and claimed that he “ misled ” the American public .
Although Trump and Fauci have said in public that they have a good relationship .
In interviews , Trump , who has often sought to downplay the severity of the coronavirus , which has killed close to 150,000 people across the U.S. in just a few months , has called the doctor “ a little bit of an alarmist , ” often seeking to undermine his wisdom in order to preserve his own re-election @ @

White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said Wednesday that he has “no opinion” of the doctor shown in a viral video retweeted by President Donald Trump who falsely claimed that an anti-malaria drug is a cure for COVID-19.
In a series of tweets Monday night, Trump retweeted false claims, including one featuring Stella Immanuel, a woman calling herself a doctor who falsely declared that hydroxychloroquine is a cure for coronavirus.
“I have no opinion,” Navarro said when CNN’s John Berman asked him about the doctor Trump has defended, adding that he thought Trump went about discussions regarding hydroxycholorquine in a “very sophisticated way” and called the President “the smartest guy I know.”
When pressed again by Berman to weigh in on the doctor, Navarro, who is known for his harsh critiques of those who oppose the President said, “I’m not going to be your prop in this circus.”
The comments come after Navarro wrote a seething op-ed in USA Today earlier this month, slamming the nation’s top infectious diseases expert Dr. Anthony Fauci, who he claimed “has been wrong about everything I have interacted with him on.” Navarro that he only heeds Fauci’s expertise with “caution” and “skepticism.”
Fauci has said he stands with the Food and Drug Administration, who revoked the emergency use authorization for the drug as treatment for the virus.
“The overwhelming, prevailing clinical trials that have looked at the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine have indicated that it is not effective in coronavirus disease,” Fauci told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos in a Good Morning America interview on Tuesday morning.
On CNN Wednesday, Navarro said of Fauci, “we have different points of view.” Navarro added that he stands by the use of the drug to treat the coronavirus disease and has “tens of millions of tablets” at the ready. Navarro previously argued that his credentials as a “social scientist” qualified him to speak on medical matters with rigor.
Earlier this week, Twitter, Facebook and others, removed a viral video showing a group of doctors who call themselves “America’s Frontline Doctors” spreading unsubstantiated information about the novel coronavirus. In the viral video, Stella Immanuel, the doctor Trump retweeted earlier this week, made the unsubstantiated claim that hydroxychloroquine is a “cure for covid,” the disease caused by the coronavirus.
Further digging by the Washington Post showed that Immanuel has history of making false statements — including a claim that endometriosis is caused by sex with demons in dreams.
When pressed about the doctor in a news conference on Tuesday, Trump said Immanuel’s was a “very important voice” and called her “very impressive.”
Another member of the group of doctors, Simone Gold, tweeted after the press conference Tuesday that the group had met with Vice President Mike Pence after the video was removed from Twitter to request “assistance in empowering doctors to prescribe hydroxychloroquine without political obstruction.”
Trump’s praise of Immanuel comes as the President and other White House staff, including Navarro, have levied attacks against Fauci, who has been the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases for 36 years.
In a Monday tweet, Trump shared a post that called Fauci a “fraud” and claimed that he “misled” the American public.
Although Trump and Fauci have said in public that they have a good relationship. In interviews, Trump, who has often sought to downplay the severity of the coronavirus, which has killed close to 150,000 people across the U.S. in just a few months, has called the doctor “a little bit of an alarmist,” often seeking to undermine his wisdom in order to preserve his own re-election prospects.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-30--Federalist Society Co-Founder Calls Trump Bid To Change Election Day ‘Fascistic,’ Impeachable

The co-founder of the conservative legal organization the Federalist Society said Thursday that Trump ’ s bid to move Election Day was “ fascistic ” and worthy of impeachment .
Steven Calabresi wrote in a New York Times op-ed that he ’ d voted for Trump , protested the Mueller investigation and opposed the President ’ s impeachment over the Ukraine pressure campaign .
But , Calabresi wrote , “ I am frankly appalled by the president ’ s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election.
” “ Until recently , I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fascist , ” he said .
“ But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president ’ s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate.
” Calabrisi , who ’ s organization has been hugely influential in Trump ’ s massive record of judicial appointments , emphasized many of the same arguments that lawyers , pundits , and politicians have made Thursday in response to Trump ’ s suggestion : The decision isn ’ t his to make , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the appointed date even during the Civil War and the Great Depression .
“ President Trump needs to be told by every Republican in Congress that he can not postpone the federal election , ” Calabresi said .
“ Doing so would be illegal , unconstitutional and without precedent in American history .
Anyone who says otherwise should never be elected to Congress again .
”

The co-founder of the conservative legal organization the Federalist Society said Thursday that Trump’s bid to move Election Day was “fascistic” and worthy of impeachment.
Steven Calabresi wrote in a New York Times op-ed that he’d voted for Trump, protested the Mueller investigation and opposed the President’s impeachment over the Ukraine pressure campaign.
But, Calabresi wrote, “I am frankly appalled by the president’s recent tweet seeking to postpone the November election.”
“Until recently, I had taken as political hyperbole the Democrats’ assertion that President Trump is a fascist,” he said. “But this latest tweet is fascistic and is itself grounds for the president’s immediate impeachment again by the House of Representatives and his removal from office by the Senate.”
Calabrisi, who’s organization has been hugely influential in Trump’s massive record of judicial appointments, emphasized many of the same arguments that lawyers, pundits, and politicians have made Thursday in response to Trump’s suggestion: The decision isn’t his to make, and besides, the United States voted on the appointed date even during the Civil War and the Great Depression.
“President Trump needs to be told by every Republican in Congress that he cannot postpone the federal election,” Calabresi said. “Doing so would be illegal, unconstitutional and without precedent in American history. Anyone who says otherwise should never be elected to Congress again.”


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-30--Trump Takes A Victory Lap Over Alarm Sparked By His Push To Postpone Election Day

President Donald Trump applauded himself on Thursday afternoon after his tweet about possibly delaying the election ( which he has @ @ @ @ @ of his Twitter profile ) drew widespread concern earlier in the day .
“ Glad @ @ @ @ @ the very dishonest LameStream Media to finally start talking about the RISKS to our Democracy @ @ @ @ @ not Absentee Voting , which I totally support ! )
, ” he tweeted , @ @ @ @ @ claim that voting by mail leads to election fraud .
Trump also declared that he @ @ @ @ @ on the night of the Election , not days , months , or even years @ @ @ @ @ impossible task given the prevalence of absentee and mail-in voting , and how long the @ @ @ @ @ in large states , such as California .
The President ’ s tweets appear to @ @ @ @ @ portraying the election as illegitimate if he were to lose to his Democratic challenger , @ @ @

President Donald Trump applauded himself on Thursday afternoon after his tweet about possibly delaying the election (which he has now pinned at the top of his Twitter profile) drew widespread concern earlier in the day.
“Glad I was able to get the very dishonest LameStream Media to finally start talking about the RISKS to our Democracy from dangerous Universal Mail-In-Voting (not Absentee Voting, which I totally support!),” he tweeted, once again peddling the false claim that voting by mail leads to election fraud.
Trump also declared that he “Must know Election results on the night of the Election, not days, months, or even years later!” a virtually impossible task given the prevalence of absentee and mail-in voting, and how long the process of vote tallying takes in large states, such as California.
The President’s tweets appear to be laying the groundwork for portraying the election as illegitimate if he were to lose to his Democratic challenger, Joe Biden.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-30--Obama Eulogizes Legacy Of John Lewis In Most Pointed Call-To-Action Yet

Former President Barack Obama delivered a passionate eulogy at the memorial service for the late Rep. John Lewis , a Georgia congressman and civil rights icon who died earlier this month , that urged vigilance in the face of growing “ dark currents ” that threaten the progress of the nation ’ s democracy .
In his most politically-pointed address since leaving office , Obama waxed eloquent on Lewis ’ legacy and subtly entered the election year fray — touting voting rights reform , the First Amendment and racial justice .
“ We have to be vigilant against the darker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Obama said , noting that Lewis was aware of the fragility of human progress .
“ There are whirlpools of violence and hatred and despair that can always rise again , ” he added .
Obama seized on Lewis ’ lifelong mission as a voting rights champion to press the importance of voting reform in the U.S. as tensions swell over the upcoming November presidential election amid the coronavirus pandemic .
The former President hit on several reform policy points , suggesting that early-voting should be “ expanded ” and embracing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This comes as a sharp rebuke of President Donald Trump , who for months has railed against mail-in voting , baselessly claiming that mail-in ballots will lead to widespread election fraud .
Both blue and red states across the nation have expanded vote-by-mail initiatives as a safe early voting alternative to voting in-person on Election Day during a pandemic .
President Trump ’ s assault on mail-in voting came to a crescendo early Thursday when he floated the idea of delaying the election , bolstering his unproven claims of widespread voter fraud @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unconstitutional suggestion was juxtaposed by the publication of a post-mortem essay that Lewis had sent to The New York Times to be published on the day of his funeral .
In that essay , which ran on Thursday , Lewis emphasized the importance of voting , calling it “ the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society , ” and adding that the right to vote must be exercised because it is not guaranteed .
Obama struck a similar tone in his Thursday remarks in a sweeping call to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ honor John , ” he said that they should not stop at issuing statements to remember him .
“ Let ’ s honor him by revitalizing the law that he was willing to die for , ” the former President said , adding that voting rights should be expanded to include those who have been systematically excluded from exercising their right to vote , including ex-felons .
Obama was the third of three former presidents to speak at Atlanta ’ s Ebenezer Baptist Church , the sanctuary of the Rev .
Dr. Martin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lewis as an “ American saint ” who championed love and hope .
Obama , who followed speeches from Bush and Bill Clinton , resolutely said that Lewis carried America closer to its highest ideals , and will be remembered as a “ founding father of that fuller , better , fairer America.
” It was a rare political display for Obama , who has remained relatively hedged since Trump took office .
The speech memorialized Lewis as a person , but also pushed to advance Lewis ’ legacy .
Obama took aim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has adopted as a campaign tactic and criticized Trump ’ s deployment of federal law enforcement to American cities to “ use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.
” Obama also argued that voting was a challenge to abuses of political power .
“ We may no longer have to guess the number of jellybeans in a jar to cast a ballot but even as we sit here , there are those in power who are doing their darnedest to discourage people from voting , ” Obama said .

Former President Barack Obama delivered a passionate eulogy at the memorial service for the late Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia congressman and civil rights icon who died earlier this month, that urged vigilance in the face of growing “dark currents” that threaten the progress of the nation’s democracy.
In his most politically-pointed address since leaving office, Obama waxed eloquent on Lewis’ legacy and subtly entered the election year fray — touting voting rights reform, the First Amendment and racial justice.
“We have to be vigilant against the darker currents of this country’s history,”
Obama said, noting that Lewis was aware of the fragility of human progress. “There are whirlpools of violence and hatred and despair that can always rise again,” he added.
Obama seized on Lewis’ lifelong mission as a voting rights champion to press the importance of voting reform in the U.S. as tensions swell over the upcoming November presidential election amid the coronavirus pandemic. The former President hit on several reform policy points, suggesting that early-voting should be “expanded” and embracing the effort to nix the Senate filibuster.
This comes as a sharp rebuke of President Donald Trump, who for months has railed against mail-in voting, baselessly claiming that mail-in ballots will lead to widespread election fraud. Both blue and red states across the nation have expanded vote-by-mail initiatives as a safe early voting alternative to voting in-person on Election Day during a pandemic.
President Trump’s assault on mail-in voting came to a crescendo early Thursday when he floated the idea of delaying the election, bolstering his unproven claims of widespread voter fraud.
The timing of Trump’s unconstitutional suggestion was juxtaposed by the publication of a post-mortem essay that Lewis had sent to The New York Times to be published on the day of his funeral. In that essay, which ran on Thursday, Lewis emphasized the importance of voting, calling it “the most powerful nonviolent change agent you have in a democratic society,” and adding that the right to vote must be exercised because it is not guaranteed.
“You can lose it,” Lewis warned.
Obama struck a similar tone in his Thursday remarks in a sweeping call to action.
“If politicians want to honor John,” he said that they should not stop at issuing statements to remember him. “Let’s honor him by revitalizing the law that he was willing to die for,” the former President said, adding that voting rights should be expanded to include those who have been systematically excluded from exercising their right to vote, including ex-felons.
Obama was the third of three former presidents to speak at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, the sanctuary of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
George W. Bush remembered Lewis as an “American saint” who championed love and hope. Obama, who followed speeches from Bush and Bill Clinton, resolutely said that Lewis carried America closer to its highest ideals, and will be remembered as a “founding father of that fuller, better, fairer America.”
It was a rare political display for Obama, who has remained relatively hedged since Trump took office. The speech memorialized Lewis as a person, but also pushed to advance Lewis’ legacy. Obama took aim at the show of force that Trump has adopted as a campaign tactic and criticized Trump’s deployment of federal law enforcement to American cities to “use tear gas and batons against peaceful demonstrators.”
Obama also argued that voting was a challenge to abuses of political power.
“We may no longer have to guess the number of jellybeans in a jar to cast a ballot but even as we sit here, there are those in power who are doing their darnedest to discourage people from voting,” Obama said.


talkingpointsmemo--2020-07-30--Fox Host: Trump’s Suggested Election Delay Is A ‘Flagrant Expression Of His Current Weakness’

Fox News host and politics editor Chris Stirewalt asserted Thursday that President Donald Trump suggesting that the November elections ought to be delayed doesn ’ t bode well for his reelection prospects .
During an appearance on Fox News ’ “ America ’ s Newsroom , ” Stirewalt rejected Trump ’ s argument for postponing the election until people can “ safely ” vote amid COVID-19 , pointing out how the country has historically held elections during wars and other pandemics .
“ And the idea for an incumbent to suggest that we would delay an election now while he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out of character with all of his predecessors and it is a sort of fragrant and flagrant expression of his current weakness , ” Stirewalt said .
“ A person who is in a strong position would never , never , suggest anything like that.
” “ So Trump may be making a tactical error here by further telegraphing his weak position in the polls and his weak position for reelection , ” he added .
Earlier on Thursday , Trump tweeted that this year ’ s election “ will be the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to mail-in voting ( even though there is no evidence voting by mail leads to election fraud ) .
Multiple states — both red and blue — have taken steps to expand mail-in voting in recent months as a way to curb the spread of COVID-19 and safely hold elections in November .
“ Delay the Election until people can properly , securely and safely vote ?
?
?
” he tweeted .
Trump is currently trailing Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden in the polls as public disapproval @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protests against police brutality grows .

Fox News host and politics editor Chris Stirewalt asserted Thursday that President Donald Trump suggesting that the November elections ought to be delayed doesn’t bode well for his reelection prospects.
During an appearance on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom,” Stirewalt rejected Trump’s argument for postponing the election until people can “safely” vote amid COVID-19, pointing out how the country has historically held elections during wars and other pandemics.
“And the idea for an incumbent to suggest that we would delay an election now while he is in power is of course totally out of character with all of his predecessors and it is a sort of fragrant and flagrant expression of his current weakness,” Stirewalt said. “A person who is in a strong position would never, never, suggest anything like that.”
“So Trump may be making a tactical error here by further telegraphing his weak position in the polls and his weak position for reelection,” he added.
Earlier on Thursday, Trump tweeted that this year’s election “will be the most INACCURATE & FRAUDULENT Election in history” due to mail-in voting (even though there is no evidence voting by mail leads to election fraud). Multiple states — both red and blue — have taken steps to expand mail-in voting in recent months as a way to curb the spread of COVID-19 and safely hold elections in November.
“Delay the Election until people can properly, securely and safely vote???” he tweeted.
Trump is currently trailing Democratic presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden in the polls as public disapproval over his response to the pandemic and to protests against police brutality grows.
Watch Stirewalt below: