motherjones--2020-06-19--Trump Has a Half Billion in Loans Coming Due. They May Be His Biggest Conflict of Interest Yet.

Win or lose in November , one thing won ’ t change for Donald Trump : Over the next few years , his company must settle a series of whopping debts .
Before the end of a theoretical second term , his company will have to refinance—or , in a far less likely scenario , pay off—nearly a half-billion dollars in loans linked to some of his most prized assets , including Trump Tower .
These debts are maturing at a perilous moment for Trump , whose hotels and resorts have been plagued by declining revenues .
And that was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ industry in general and the Trump Organization in particular , forcing the full or partial closure of most of its hotel and resort properties .
On financial disclosure forms , Trump has reported holding 14 loans on 12 properties .
At least six of those loans , representing about $ 479 million in debt , are due over the next four years .
Some are guaranteed by Trump himself , meaning a creditor could come after his personal—not corporate—assets if he defaults .
If he holds onto the White House , the refinancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of interest to absurd new heights .
How will the public know if these deals are on the up and up or whether Trump is receiving sweetheart terms from a bank that wants an in with the president ?
And what might a lender desire in return for helping Trump out of a financial jam ?
Trump ’ s biggest creditor is Deutsche Bank , which in the late 1990s took a gamble on the real estate developer whose history of corporate bankruptcies made him untouchable by most other lenders .
Although Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profitable deals , eventually Deutsche ’ s commercial lending division learned the hard way one reason why other banks considered him persona non grata : If pushed by his creditors on payments , Trump shoves back .
In 2008 , after he defaulted on a loan for his Chicago hotel and condo development , he filed a multibillion-dollar suit accusing Deutsche Bank and others of contributing to the recent financial meltdown , which he blamed for his inability to repay the loan .
Nevertheless , Deutsche ’ s private banking division , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lend to Trump , giving him $ 125 million , spread over two loans , to finance the purchase and renovation of his Doral golf resort in 2012 .
Both are floating rate loans , meaning the interest rate fluctuates based on market conditions , which lending experts say usually indicates they are interest-only loans .
If so , Trump probably hasn ’ t paid down much if any of the principal and will owe something close to the whole $ 125 million when the loans come due in 2023 .
In 2014 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loan from Deutsche ’ s private bank to bankroll the development of his luxury hotel in Washington , DC .
The balance of this $ 170 million debt is payable in 2024 .
That year , Trump will also owe Deutsche between $ 25 million and $ 50 million in connection with his Chicago hotel and complex .
Trump has received additional loans from a company named Ladder Capital , a financial firm that specializes in bundling commercial debt into mortgage-backed securities .
Companies like Ladder are often lenders of last resort for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason or another , have difficulty obtaining money from traditional banks ( ahem , Trump ) .
Such firms are willing to take risky bets because they securitize the debt and pass the responsibility for it on to investors .
Trump has two Ladder loans due over the next several years : a $ 100 million interest-only mortgage on Trump Tower and a roughly $ 13 million loan against Trump Plaza .
The Trump Tower loan is up in September 2022 .
Trump ’ s large , interest-only loans are not unusual for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unlike your typical homeowner , are not seeking to pay off the mortgage on their properties .
It is common for developers to take out new interest-only loans as the old ones come due , in some cases using a property ’ s rising value to extract more cash .
Trump , for example , has long had a mortgage on Trump Tower , never paying it off and periodically increasing the loan ’ s size when he refinances .
But under present circumstances—with Trump a lightning rod for controversy , the economy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well—it may not be easy for Trump to convince either Deutsche or Ladder to refinance .
Suffering from its own shaky finances and a series of scandals—involving interest-rate rigging , money laundering , and other unsavory practices—Deutsche has experienced a rocky few years .
Its ties to Trump have compounded its woes , making it a magnet for subpoenas from congressional committees , as well as a New York City grand jury , seeking Trump ’ s financial records .
Even before Trump was elected , Deutsche executives soured on the relationship , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a $ 10 million-plus loan in early 2016 , the New York Times reported .
They worried , among other things , how it would look if Trump defaulted and the bank had to pursue the assets of the US president .
His most recent financial disclosure no longer lists brokerage and savings accounts at Deutsche ’ s private bank , suggesting he ’ s no longer a client .
Nancy Wallace , a real estate finance professor at University of California , Berkeley ’ s Haas School of Business , says the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scare off other banks .
“ I think any bank I can think of in the United States would have exactly the same response : He is toxic .
Exposing yourself to that kind of oversight under the current regulatory reality , for lenders who are large enough to provide capital to him , is just a nonstarter.
” Mike Offit , a former Deutsche Bank executive who was one of Trump ’ s bankers in the 1990s , predicts that if Trump remains in office , Deutsche will give him short-term extensions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But it won ’ t do so happily .
“ They just have to do the easy thing , which is extend it , ” Offit says .
“ It ’ s even more trouble if they try to foreclose on the president .
Good luck with that .
That ’ s the way they ’ re going to put themselves back in the news every day.
” ( Deutsche Bank declined to comment on whether it would extend or refinance Trump ’ s loans . )
Commercial lending experts say a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a more cold-blooded financial calculus , might be more amenable to lending to Trump again .
But with his business taking a sharp hit to its revenues for possibly years to come due to the pandemic , Trump might not like the terms , which could be less favorable than those of his original loans .
( Ladder did not respond to questions from Mother Jones .
Neither did the Trump Organization , the company ’ s outside ethics adviser , or the White House . )
Kevin Riordan , a longtime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rutgers University ’ s Center for Real Estate , says that Ladder prospered in its previous dealings with Trump—but he notes that the economics have changed .
Ladder and its competitors in the commercial mortgage-backed securities ( cmbs ) industry can only lend if there ’ s a market for real estate bonds , which could dry up during a financial crisis .
“ This is a whole different ballgame today , ” he says .
He adds that in recent years the cmbs industry largely ceased financing golf courses—because they are seasonal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe bet .
“ The world has changed a lot since 2012 , and I think the Trump Organization is ill-suited for this new world , ” Wallace says .
“ That ’ s not to say there ’ s not some private equity firm out there that would be very tempted if he was willing to pay a very high coupon.
” Private equity firms specialize in taking advantage of bad situations—buying properties and debt that most Wall Street firms won ’ t touch .
It ’ s not that they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of the deals they strike are often designed to ensure they get their money back , one way or another .
And they will not hesitate to come after a delinquent borrower—perhaps even a president .
“ There are so many opportunistic lenders out there .
All of them would do this stuff , ” Offit says , noting that hedge funds might also do business with Trump .
“ They would lend to Ted Bundy .
They don ’ t care.
” In any scenario , Trump ’ s soon-to-be-due loans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with potential conflicts of interest and the possibility of corruption .
“ It ’ s highly disconcerting , ” says Virginia Canter , chief ethics counsel at the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and a former ethics lawyer at the Treasury Department and Securities and Exchange Commission .
“ I ’ m sure in some ways the best thing that could happen is that he not win reelection .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
Win or lose in November, one thing won’t change for Donald Trump: Over the next few years, his company must settle a series of whopping debts. Before the end of a theoretical second term, his company will have to refinance—or, in a far less likely scenario, pay off—nearly a half-billion dollars in loans linked to some of his most prized assets, including Trump Tower. These debts are maturing at a perilous moment for Trump, whose hotels and resorts have been plagued by declining revenues. And that was before the coronavirus pandemic pummeled the hospitality industry in general and the Trump Organization in particular, forcing the full or partial closure of most of its hotel and resort properties.
On financial disclosure forms, Trump has reported holding 14 loans on 12 properties. At least six of those loans, representing about $479 million in debt, are due over the next four years. Some are guaranteed by Trump himself, meaning a creditor could come after his personal—not corporate—assets if he defaults. If he holds onto the White House, the refinancing of these debts could take his conflicts of interest to absurd new heights. How will the public know if these deals are on the up and up or whether Trump is receiving sweetheart terms from a bank that wants an in with the president? And what might a lender desire in return for helping Trump out of a financial jam?
Trump’s biggest creditor is Deutsche Bank, which in the late 1990s took a gamble on the real estate developer whose history of corporate bankruptcies made him untouchable by most other lenders. Although Trump and the Frankfurt-based bank pulled off several profitable deals, eventually Deutsche’s commercial lending division learned the hard way one reason why other banks considered him persona non grata: If pushed by his creditors on payments, Trump shoves back. In 2008, after he defaulted on a loan for his Chicago hotel and condo development, he filed a multibillion-dollar suit accusing Deutsche Bank and others of contributing to the recent financial meltdown, which he blamed for his inability to repay the loan.
Nevertheless, Deutsche’s private banking division, which caters to wealthy clientele, continued to lend to Trump, giving him $125 million, spread over two loans, to finance the purchase and renovation of his Doral golf resort in 2012. Both are floating rate loans, meaning the interest rate fluctuates based on market conditions, which lending experts say usually indicates they are interest-only loans. If so, Trump probably hasn’t paid down much if any of the principal and will owe something close to the whole $125 million when the loans come due in 2023.
In 2014, Trump took out a separate floating loan from Deutsche’s private bank to bankroll the development of his luxury hotel in Washington, DC. The balance of this $170 million debt is payable in 2024. That year, Trump will also owe Deutsche between $25 million and $50 million in connection with his Chicago hotel and complex.
Trump has received additional loans from a company named Ladder Capital, a financial firm that specializes in bundling commercial debt into mortgage-backed securities. Companies like Ladder are often lenders of last resort for people and companies that, for one reason or another, have difficulty obtaining money from traditional banks (ahem, Trump). Such firms are willing to take risky bets because they securitize the debt and pass the responsibility for it on to investors. Trump has two Ladder loans due over the next several years: a $100 million interest-only mortgage on Trump Tower and a roughly $13 million loan against Trump Plaza. The Trump Tower loan is up in September 2022.
Trump’s large, interest-only loans are not unusual for big real estate developers, who, unlike your typical homeowner, are not seeking to pay off the mortgage on their properties. It is common for developers to take out new interest-only loans as the old ones come due, in some cases using a property’s rising value to extract more cash. Trump, for example, has long had a mortgage on Trump Tower, never paying it off and periodically increasing the loan’s size when he refinances.
“I think any bank I can think of in the United States would have exactly the same response: He is toxic.”
But under present circumstances—with Trump a lightning rod for controversy, the economy faltering, and his company not faring well—it may not be easy for Trump to convince either Deutsche or Ladder to refinance.
Suffering from its own shaky finances and a series of scandals—involving interest-rate rigging, money laundering, and other unsavory practices—Deutsche has experienced a rocky few years. Its ties to Trump have compounded its woes, making it a magnet for subpoenas from congressional committees, as well as a New York City grand jury, seeking Trump’s financial records.
Even before Trump was elected, Deutsche executives soured on the relationship, turning down Trump’s request for a $10 million-plus loan in early 2016, the New York Times reported. They worried, among other things, how it would look if Trump defaulted and the bank had to pursue the assets of the US president. His most recent financial disclosure no longer lists brokerage and savings accounts at Deutsche’s private bank, suggesting he’s no longer a client.
Nancy Wallace, a real estate finance professor at University of California, Berkeley’s Haas School of Business, says the scrutiny that Deutsche Bank has faced may scare off other banks. “I think any bank I can think of in the United States would have exactly the same response: He is toxic. Exposing yourself to that kind of oversight under the current regulatory reality, for lenders who are large enough to provide capital to him, is just a nonstarter.”
Mike Offit, a former Deutsche Bank executive who was one of Trump’s bankers in the 1990s, predicts that if Trump remains in office, Deutsche will give him short-term extensions until he’s out of office. But it won’t do so happily.
“They just have to do the easy thing, which is extend it,” Offit says. “It’s even more trouble if they try to foreclose on the president. Good luck with that. That’s the way they’re going to put themselves back in the news every day.” (Deutsche Bank declined to comment on whether it would extend or refinance Trump’s loans.)
Commercial lending experts say a firm like Ladder Capital, which relies on a more cold-blooded financial calculus, might be more amenable to lending to Trump again. But with his business taking a sharp hit to its revenues for possibly years to come due to the pandemic, Trump might not like the terms, which could be less favorable than those of his original loans. (Ladder did not respond to questions from Mother Jones. Neither did the Trump Organization, the company’s outside ethics adviser, or the White House.)
Kevin Riordan, a longtime real estate finance executive and director of Rutgers University’s Center for Real Estate, says that Ladder prospered in its previous dealings with Trump—but he notes that the economics have changed. Ladder and its competitors in the commercial mortgage-backed securities (cmbs) industry can only lend if there’s a market for real estate bonds, which could dry up during a financial crisis. “This is a whole different ballgame today,” he says. He adds that in recent years the cmbs industry largely ceased financing golf courses—because they are seasonal businesses, they are not considered a safe bet.
“The world has changed a lot since 2012, and I think the Trump Organization is ill-suited for this new world,” Wallace says. “That’s not to say there’s not some private equity firm out there that would be very tempted if he was willing to pay a very high coupon.”
Private equity firms specialize in taking advantage of bad situations—buying properties and debt that most Wall Street firms won’t touch. It’s not that they’re unaware of the risks; the terms of the deals they strike are often designed to ensure they get their money back, one way or another. And they will not hesitate to come after a delinquent borrower—perhaps even a president.
“There are so many opportunistic lenders out there. All of them would do this stuff,” Offit says, noting that hedge funds might also do business with Trump. “They would lend to Ted Bundy. They don’t care.”
In any scenario, Trump’s soon-to-be-due loans are an unprecedented ethical minefield, rife with potential conflicts of interest and the possibility of corruption. “It’s highly disconcerting,” says Virginia Canter, chief ethics counsel at the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and a former ethics lawyer at the Treasury Department and Securities and Exchange Commission. “I’m sure in some ways the best thing that could happen is that he not win reelection.”


motherjones--2020-06-19--What Happens When a Massive Racial Justice March on Washington Goes Digital?

In 1968 , Rev .
Martin Luther King Jr. had organized a massive march for racial and economic justice to take place over several weeks in Washington , DC .
He never lived to see it happen ; a month before it was scheduled to take place , he was assassinated .
But Rev .
Ralph Abernathy , who was the head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference , took over with King ’ s widow , Coretta Scott King .
Beginning on May 10 , and reaching 50,000 on June 19 , thousands of marchers from all over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Capitol for the Poor People ’ s Campaign , demanding social justice and an Economic Bill of Rights .
This Saturday , there will be another Poor People ’ s Campaign demonstration , one that was intended by its organizers to be the modern day revival of the 1968 march .
They envisioned hundreds of thousands of people would converge on Washington for a historic march for racial and economic justice .
As different as the historical moment is , there are many similarities to 1968 : public frustration with institutional violence affecting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the seemingly intractable crisis of poverty .
But because of the pandemic , the demonstration has been forced to change its plans .
Instead of a traditional march , with buses arriving from all over the country , downtown Washington filled with marchers , and speakers in front of the Capitol building , Washington Monument , or Lincoln memorial , it will be digitized and decentralized .
The novel coronavirus continues to threaten millions , and Black people have died at disproportionately higher rates than others .
Nationwide protests against the death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the hands of police , however , underscores that the original message of the Poor People ’ s Campaign has remained unchanged from the one from 52 years ago .
With these two forces at work , march organizers had to figure out what to do .
“ These issues are heightened even more , ” says Pastor Alvin Jackson , executive director of the campaign ’ s march on Washington .
“ They reveal the fissures in our society .
There were wounds there all the time—and they ’ re increased @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brought to light around police brutality .
It ’ s changed [ the message ] some , but also heightened and helped us to sharpen our focus.
” Since the 1968 march , income inequality has grown even more extreme with the gap between the richest Americans and the poorest more than doubling since 1989 .
Meanwhile , programs from the Johnson administration ’ s war on poverty , like the expansion of food stamps and public early education , have been systematically defunded .
Rev .
William J. Barber II is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Poor People ’ s Campaign and president of Repairers of the Breach—an organization that advocates for the underserved and anchors the campaign with the New York City-based social justice group Kairos Center .
They decided in 2017 to revitalize the 1968 crusade to bring attention to the tremendous voting and economic power of poor people in this country .
But the catastrophic events of this year have forced planners to reconsider their original plans .
Barber is no stranger to activism .
For more than a decade , he served as president of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2013 , he initiated Moral Mondays , a series of protests against the state ’ s general assembly—over partisan gerrymandering and the assault on voting rights , healthcare access , and environmental protection , among other things—which spread across the state , sometimes bringing tens of thousands of demonstrators .
“ This is a fight for the future and soul of our state , ” he said during a February , 2014 speech .
“ It doesn ’ t matter what the critics call us…because they can ’ t debate us on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their case on moral and constitutional grounds.
” Five years later , he brought the Poor People ’ s Campaign back to life , starting with a thousands-large DC protest in April , 2018 .
On the first day of protests , he was arrested .
“ We know that in the richest country in the world , there is no reason for children to go hungry , for the sick to be denied health care and for citizens to have their votes suppressed , ” he said at the time .
Two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supposed to be a watershed moment for the movement .
Preparations for the DC march were more than a year in the making .
The campaign had been on a 25-state tour since 2019 , during which leaders like Barber and Jackson met the underserved in their own communities and held voter registration drives and demonstrated at state capitols .
With a particular focus on the South , they began the tour in El Paso , Texas , in September , partially in response to the mass shooting there last August .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a massive march on DC this month .
“ We were making all kinds of plans with staging and infrastructure on Pennsylvania Avenue in DC and getting hotel rooms , ” Jackson says .
They estimated up to 500,000 people would attend .
But , by mid-March , it became clear that the pandemic would make such a mass gathering impossible .
Instead , there will be a two-and-a-half-hour event on Saturday morning , which will air on MSNBC and feature segments with many of the same speakers who were originally slated to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people , ” said Jackson .
“ Entertainers , influencers like Jane Fonda , Al Gore , and Killer Mike.
” The campaign focuses on five themes as key examples of injustice in modern society : systemic racism , economic inequality , ecological devastation , militarism , and religious nationalism .
The prevalence of these concerns have been further underscored by COVID-19 , George Floyd , the often overt racism of President Donald Trump , and the economic crisis .
“ It ’ s interesting that this is all coming together at this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re not surprised about it , and we ’ ve been thinking about how can we use this moment to continue to build the movement and momentum for change in this country , because that ’ s really the work—changing the narrative about building power and moving the country forward.
” Rev .
Rob Stephens , national political director at Repairers of the Breach , says organizers have emphasized the importance of local centers of power since planning began three years ago .
Over the last year , 200 partner organizations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We ’ re pooling testimony from people across the country , ” Stephens says .
“ What is powerful about Saturday is that you can see people in their own communities talking about their stories [ from ] community centers , churches , temples…In some instances , I doubt that all of them could have made it to Washington in person.
” But historically , a large element of a protest ’ s impact is tied to its physical presence , which was dramatic in 1968 .
George Washington University history professor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Poor : Black-Brown Coalition and the Fight for Economic Justice , 1960-1974 , told me the original plan was that “ an army of the poor would come to Washington in spring of 1968 and demand a rededication to the war on poverty.
” As part of the demonstrations , 3,000 marchers set up a plywood town—a place that became known as Resurrection City—on the National Mall and camped there for six weeks .
“ The president stayed away , but a number of cabinet secretaries talked with and met protesters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the fundamental economic policies designed to alleviate poverty were never passed , the campaign did lead to the expansion of food assistance by the federal government to the 1,000 poorest counties in America .
Social media and the digital age may have made this protest possible this year , but given the drama of the recent racial justice protests following the death of George Floyd , organizers appreciate that it will be difficult to offer a similar sense of urgency .
“ That ’ s a challenge with a virtual march , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ points out , given the values of the Trump administration and the Republican Senate , the fight to alleviate poverty might be more effective on the state level .
The Trump Administration is not the Johnson Administration , Mantler notes , which , for all its faults , did declare a war on poverty and was responsible for the Voting Rights Act .
While those efforts were overwhelmed by the conflict in Vietnam , the current Republican leadership , “ doesn ’ t particularly care about inequality or poverty.
” The 2020 version @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of states and coordination with dozens of smaller partners , has become a local affair .
“ The modern campaign has always been a little more diffuse in , ‘ who do we target in power ?
’ So the virtual march may achieve some success because it is not just about being in DC , ” he says .
“ It never has been.
” For more on the Poor People ’ s Campaign , listen to Mother Jones ’ podcast 2018 interview with Rev .
William Barber II below :

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
In 1968, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. had organized a massive march for racial and economic justice to take place over several weeks in Washington, DC. He never lived to see it happen; a month before it was scheduled to take place, he was assassinated. But Rev. Ralph Abernathy, who was the head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, took over with King’s widow, Coretta Scott King. Beginning on May 10, and reaching 50,000 on June 19, thousands of marchers from all over the country gathered in the Nation’s Capitol for the Poor People’s Campaign, demanding social justice and an Economic Bill of Rights.
This Saturday, there will be another Poor People’s Campaign demonstration, one that was intended by its organizers to be the modern day revival of the 1968 march. They envisioned hundreds of thousands of people would converge on Washington for a historic march for racial and economic justice. As different as the historical moment is, there are many similarities to 1968: public frustration with institutional violence affecting racial minorities, divisive political culture, and the seemingly intractable crisis of poverty.
But because of the pandemic, the demonstration has been forced to change its plans. Instead of a traditional march, with buses arriving from all over the country, downtown Washington filled with marchers, and speakers in front of the Capitol building, Washington Monument, or Lincoln memorial, it will be digitized and decentralized. The novel coronavirus continues to threaten millions, and Black people have died at disproportionately higher rates than others. Nationwide protests against the death of George Floyd and other Black people at the hands of police, however, underscores that the original message of the Poor People’s Campaign has remained unchanged from the one from 52 years ago. With these two forces at work, march organizers had to figure out what to do.
“These issues are heightened even more,” says Pastor Alvin Jackson, executive director of the campaign’s march on Washington. “They reveal the fissures in our society. There were wounds there all the time—and they’re increased and heightened with the virus and things brought to light around police brutality. It’s changed [the message] some, but also heightened and helped us to sharpen our focus.”
“There were wounds there all the time—and they’re increased and heightened with the virus and things brought to light around police brutality. It’s changed [the message] some, but also heightened and helped us to sharpen our focus.”
Since the 1968 march, income inequality has grown even more extreme with the gap between the richest Americans and the poorest more than doubling since 1989. Meanwhile, programs from the Johnson administration’s war on poverty, like the expansion of food stamps and public early education, have been systematically defunded.
Rev. William J. Barber II is the co-founder of the current iteration of the Poor People’s Campaign and president of Repairers of the Breach—an organization that advocates for the underserved and anchors the campaign with the New York City-based social justice group Kairos Center. They decided in 2017 to revitalize the 1968 crusade to bring attention to the tremendous voting and economic power of poor people in this country. But the catastrophic events of this year have forced planners to reconsider their original plans.
Barber is no stranger to activism. For more than a decade, he served as president of the NAACP of North Carolina. In 2013, he initiated Moral Mondays, a series of protests against the state’s general assembly—over partisan gerrymandering and the assault on voting rights, healthcare access, and environmental protection, among other things—which spread across the state, sometimes bringing tens of thousands of demonstrators. “This is a fight for the future and soul of our state,” he said during a February, 2014 speech. “It doesn’t matter what the critics call us…because they can’t debate us on the issue. They can’t make their case on moral and constitutional grounds.”
Five years later, he brought the Poor People’s Campaign back to life, starting with a thousands-large DC protest in April, 2018. On the first day of protests, he was arrested. “We know that in the richest country in the world, there is no reason for children to go hungry, for the sick to be denied health care and for citizens to have their votes suppressed,” he said at the time. Two years later, another DC protest was supposed to be a watershed moment for the movement.
Preparations for the DC march were more than a year in the making. The campaign had been on a 25-state tour since 2019, during which leaders like Barber and Jackson met the underserved in their own communities and held voter registration drives and demonstrated at state capitols. With a particular focus on the South, they began the tour in El Paso, Texas, in September, partially in response to the mass shooting there last August. They had planned for demonstrations to culminate in a massive march on DC this month.
“We were making all kinds of plans with staging and infrastructure on Pennsylvania Avenue in DC and getting hotel rooms,” Jackson says. They estimated up to 500,000 people would attend. But, by mid-March, it became clear that the pandemic would make such a mass gathering impossible. Instead, there will be a two-and-a-half-hour event on Saturday morning, which will air on MSNBC and feature segments with many of the same speakers who were originally slated to appear. “Poor and low wealth people,” said Jackson. “Entertainers, influencers like Jane Fonda, Al Gore, and Killer Mike.”
The campaign focuses on five themes as key examples of injustice in modern society: systemic racism, economic inequality, ecological devastation, militarism, and religious nationalism. The prevalence of these concerns have been further underscored by COVID-19, George Floyd, the often overt racism of President Donald Trump, and the economic crisis. “It’s interesting that this is all coming together at this moment,” Jackson says. “We’re not surprised about it, and we’ve been thinking about how can we use this moment to continue to build the movement and momentum for change in this country, because that’s really the work—changing the narrative about building power and moving the country forward.”
“That’s really the work—changing the narrative about building power and moving the country forward.”
Rev. Rob Stephens, national political director at Repairers of the Breach, says organizers have emphasized the importance of local centers of power since planning began three years ago. Over the last year, 200 partner organizations participated in demonstrations in 46 states. “We’re pooling testimony from people across the country,” Stephens says. “What is powerful about Saturday is that you can see people in their own communities talking about their stories [from] community centers, churches, temples…In some instances, I doubt that all of them could have made it to Washington in person.”
But historically, a large element of a protest’s impact is tied to its physical presence, which was dramatic in 1968. George Washington University history professor Gordon Mantler, the author of Power to the Poor: Black-Brown Coalition and the Fight for Economic Justice, 1960-1974, told me the original plan was that “an army of the poor would come to Washington in spring of 1968 and demand a rededication to the war on poverty.” As part of the demonstrations, 3,000 marchers set up a plywood town—a place that became known as Resurrection City—on the National Mall and camped there for six weeks. “The president stayed away, but a number of cabinet secretaries talked with and met protesters,” Mantler explains. Though some of the fundamental economic policies designed to alleviate poverty were never passed, the campaign did lead to the expansion of food assistance by the federal government to the 1,000 poorest counties in America.
Social media and the digital age may have made this protest possible this year, but given the drama of the recent racial justice protests following the death of George Floyd, organizers appreciate that it will be difficult to offer a similar sense of urgency. “That’s a challenge with a virtual march,” Mantler says. But, he points out, given the values of the Trump administration and the Republican Senate, the fight to alleviate poverty might be more effective on the state level.
The Trump Administration is not the Johnson Administration, Mantler notes, which, for all its faults, did declare a war on poverty and was responsible for the Voting Rights Act. While those efforts were overwhelmed by the conflict in Vietnam, the current Republican leadership, “doesn’t particularly care about inequality or poverty.” The 2020 version of the campaign, with its tour of states and coordination with dozens of smaller partners, has become a local affair. “The modern campaign has always been a little more diffuse in, ‘who do we target in power?’ So the virtual march may achieve some success because it is not just about being in DC,” he says. “It never has been.”
For more on the Poor People’s Campaign, listen to Mother Jones’ podcast 2018 interview with Rev. William Barber II below:


motherjones--2020-06-20--Chaos: After Manhattan Prosecutor Refuses to Step Down, Barr Says Trump Fired Him. Trump Says Otherw

Chaos: After Manhattan Prosecutor Refuses to Step Down, Barr Says Trump Fired Him. Trump Says Otherwise.

4:25 p.m .
ET : Shortly after Barr released his letter , Trump undercut his attorney general ’ s claims in remarks to reporters .
“ I ’ m not involved , ” Trump told reporters outside the White House .
This contradicts Barr ’ s claim that Trump fired Berman at Barr ’ s request .
President Donald Trump on Saturday fired the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan , who is investigating Trump allies , according to Attorney General William Barr .
Trump ’ s action came after the prosecutor , Geoffrey Berman , the US Attorney for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barr ’ s effort to quietly push him out on Friday night .
Berman arrived at his Manhattan office early Saturday , wearing a blue suit and an American flag label .
“ I ’ m just here to do my job , ” he told reporters , according to the Associated Press .
Barr announced late Friday that Berman was resigning from his post ; shortly after , Berman said he had no intention of resigning and had only learned of the news from Barr ’ s press release .
Berman also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to the unusual circumstances of his appointment .
Named in 2018 as interim US Attorney , Berman ’ s nomination was never confirmed by the Senate .
Instead , he was appointed by judges of the United States District Court through a legal provision intended to ensure the office is not left vacant .
Berman said he will step down only “ when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate .
Until then , our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption.
” Barr responded Saturday with a letter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declared that you have no intention of resigning , I have asked the President to remove you as of today , and he has done so , ” Barr said .
Barr said that Berman ’ s top deputy , Audrey Strauss , would become the acting United States Attorney , a change from Friday night , when Barr said that Craig Carpenito , the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey , would act as interim head of the Manhattan office .
Berman ’ s office is investigating whether Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , broke the law in his efforts to dig up allegations in Ukraine that he hoped would harm Trump ’ s political opponents .
The push to oust Berman also comes a few days after bombshell allegations by Trump ’ s former National Security Adviser John Bolton about Trump ’ s effort to intervene in Berman ’ s prosecution of a Turkish state-run bank , Halkbank , accused of violating US sanctions against Iran .
Bolton wrote in his memoir , publication of which Barr has tried unsucessfully to block , that Mr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Recep Tayyip Erdogan , that he would interfere in an ongoing investigation against a Turkish company accused of violating Iranian sanctions .
Bolton claims that Trump told the Erdogan in May 2018 that he would intervene to block the DOJ ’ s prosecution of Halkbank .
Trump “ told Erdogan he would take care of things , explaining that the Southern District [ of New York ] prosecutors were not his people , but were Obama people , a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Post .
CNN has reported that Attorney General William Barr , under pressure from Trump , did try to stave off Halkbank ’ s indictment by federal prosecutors in Manhattan , though they were eventually indicted last fall amid a breakdown in US-Turkish relations .
This and other efforts by Trump to intervene with DOJ to do favors for foreign dictators “ looked like obstruction of justice as a way of life , which we couldn ’ t accept , ” Bolton writes .
The Southern District of New York has been investigating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump : Berman ’ s office prosecuted and won a guilty plea from Trump ’ s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen , who says that at Trump ’ s behest he violated campaign finance laws to make hush money payments prior to the 2016 election to silence women who said they ’ d had affairs with Trump .
The prosecution led to a broader investigation into Trump ’ s private company and associates .
Prosecutors under Berman have also investigated Trump ’ s inaugural committee , examining whether it received illegal contributions from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s move to oust Berman is part of a long-running effort by Trump to impose control over the Manhattan office .
In March 2017 Trump fired Berman ’ s predecessor , Preet Bharara , after making a series of unusual efforts to establish direct communications with Bharara .
Prior to picking Berman , a former Giuliani colleague , as Bharara ’ s replacement , Trump personally interviewed him , a move Democrats ripped as unprecedented and inappropriate .
In 2018 , Trump reportedly ripped then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker over the Cohen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in .
( In February 2019 , Whitaker told the House Judiciary : “ At no time has the White House asked for nor have I provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel ’ s investigation or any other investigation.
” ) The New York Times reported Friday that “ Trump had been discussing removing Mr. Berman for some time with a small group of advisers .
The paper said that “ Trump has been upset with Mr. Berman ever since the Manhattan prosecutor ’ s office pursued a case against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Barr ’ s effort to quietly oust Berman on a Friday night has backfired .
House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler ( D-N.Y. ) said Friday night that he will ask Berman to testify Wednesday at a previously scheduled hearing on Barr ’ s efforts to intervene in criminal cases related to Trump .
And in a sign that Trump and Barr may struggle to get their way in Manhattan , Sen. Lindsey Graham , ( R-S.C. ) , the normally staunch Trump ally who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee , said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s nomination to replace Berman unless New York ’ s senators , Democrats Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand , agree .
That ’ s unlikely .
“ This late Friday night dismissal reeks of potential corruption of the legal process , ” Schumer said Friday night .
“ What is angering President Trump ?
A previous action by this U.S. Attorney or one that is ongoing ?
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
4:25 p.m. ET: Shortly after Barr released his letter, Trump undercut his attorney general’s claims in remarks to reporters. “I’m not involved,” Trump told reporters outside the White House. This contradicts Barr’s claim that Trump fired Berman at Barr’s request.
President Donald Trump on Saturday fired the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, who is investigating Trump allies, according to Attorney General William Barr. Trump’s action came after the prosecutor, Geoffrey Berman, the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, defied Barr’s effort to quietly push him out on Friday night.
Berman arrived at his Manhattan office early Saturday, wearing a blue suit and an American flag label. “I’m just here to do my job,” he told reporters, according to the Associated Press.
Barr announced late Friday that Berman was resigning from his post; shortly after, Berman said he had no intention of resigning and had only learned of the news from Barr’s press release. Berman also said he can’t be fired due to the unusual circumstances of his appointment. Named in 2018 as interim US Attorney, Berman’s nomination was never confirmed by the Senate. Instead, he was appointed by judges of the United States District Court through a legal provision intended to ensure the office is not left vacant. Berman said he will step down only “when a presidentially appointed nominee is confirmed by the Senate. Until then, our investigations will move forward without delay or interruption.”
Barr responded Saturday with a letter to Berman: “Because you have declared that you have no intention of resigning, I have asked the President to remove you as of today, and he has done so,” Barr said. Barr said that Berman’s top deputy, Audrey Strauss, would become the acting United States Attorney, a change from Friday night, when Barr said that Craig Carpenito, the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, would act as interim head of the Manhattan office.
Berman’s office is investigating whether Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, broke the law in his efforts to dig up allegations in Ukraine that he hoped would harm Trump’s political opponents. The push to oust Berman also comes a few days after bombshell allegations by Trump’s former National Security Adviser John Bolton about Trump’s effort to intervene in Berman’s prosecution of a Turkish state-run bank, Halkbank, accused of violating US sanctions against Iran.
Bolton wrote in his memoir, publication of which Barr has tried unsucessfully to block, that Mr. Trump in 2018 had promised Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, that he would interfere in an ongoing investigation against a Turkish company accused of violating Iranian sanctions. Bolton claims that Trump told the Erdogan in May 2018 that he would intervene to block the DOJ’s prosecution of Halkbank. Trump “told Erdogan he would take care of things, explaining that the Southern District [of New York] prosecutors were not his people, but were Obama people, a problem that would be fixed when they were replaced by his people,” Bolton writes, according to the Washington Post. CNN has reported that Attorney General William Barr, under pressure from Trump, did try to stave off Halkbank’s indictment by federal prosecutors in Manhattan, though they were eventually indicted last fall amid a breakdown in US-Turkish relations.
This and other efforts by Trump to intervene with DOJ to do favors for foreign dictators “looked like obstruction of justice as a way of life, which we couldn’t accept,” Bolton writes.
The Southern District of New York has been investigating a series of matters of concern for Trump: Berman’s office prosecuted and won a guilty plea from Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen, who says that at Trump’s behest he violated campaign finance laws to make hush money payments prior to the 2016 election to silence women who said they’d had affairs with Trump. The prosecution led to a broader investigation into Trump’s private company and associates. Prosecutors under Berman have also investigated Trump’s inaugural committee, examining whether it received illegal contributions from foreigners seeking favor with Trump.
Barr’s move to oust Berman is part of a long-running effort by Trump to impose control over the Manhattan office. In March 2017 Trump fired Berman’s predecessor, Preet Bharara, after making a series of unusual efforts to establish direct communications with Bharara. Prior to picking Berman, a former Giuliani colleague, as Bharara’s replacement, Trump personally interviewed him, a move Democrats ripped as unprecedented and inappropriate. In 2018, Trump reportedly ripped then-Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker over the Cohen investigation and pressed Whitaker to reign it in. (In February 2019, Whitaker told the House Judiciary: “At no time has the White House asked for nor have I provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel’s investigation or any other investigation.”)
The New York Times reported Friday that “Trump had been discussing removing Mr. Berman for some time with a small group of advisers. The paper said that “Trump has been upset with Mr. Berman ever since the Manhattan prosecutor’s office pursued a case against Mr. Cohen.”
It is already clear that Barr’s effort to quietly oust Berman on a Friday night has backfired. House Judiciary Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said Friday night that he will ask Berman to testify Wednesday at a previously scheduled hearing on Barr’s efforts to intervene in criminal cases related to Trump. And in a sign that Trump and Barr may struggle to get their way in Manhattan, Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.), the normally staunch Trump ally who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that he will not proceed with Clayton’s nomination to replace Berman unless New York’s senators, Democrats Chuck Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, agree. That’s unlikely. “This late Friday night dismissal reeks of potential corruption of the legal process,” Schumer said Friday night. “What is angering President Trump? A previous action by this U.S. Attorney or one that is ongoing?”


motherjones--2020-06-20--Judge Denies Trump’s Effort to Stop Publication of John Bolton Book

A federal judge on Saturday rejected Trump ’ s efforts to halt the publication of former national security advisor John Bolton ’ s tell-all book about his 17 months in the White House .
The judge ruled against Trump ’ s proposed restraining order of the book , The Room Where It Happened , which is set to publish on Tuesday .
Excerpts of Bolton ’ s memoir have been leaking since January , when , amid the Senate ’ s impeachment trial of Trump , the New York Times recounted a section of the book claiming Trump told Bolton @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on an investigation into the Bidens .
Earlier this week , reporting on different excerpts revealed that Trump had “ pleaded with Chinese President Xi Jinping to help Trump ’ s electoral prospects by purchasing US agricultural products—and thus improving Trump ’ s standing in rural states hurt by his trade war with China.
” Yet Bolton still has not testified under oath about what he saw transpire in the White House .
In his ruling allowing the book to move forward , US District Judge Royce C. Lamberth also criticized Bolton : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be stated , the Court will not order a nationwide seizure and destruction of a political memoir , ” Lamberth said .
“ In taking it upon himself to publish his book without securing final approval fro national intelligence authorities , Bolton may indeed have caused the country irreparable harm .
But in the internet age , even a handful of copies in circulation could irrevocably destroy confidentiality.
” Lamberth also indicated that Bolton may be wrong in his assessment that the book contains no classified information .
If that ’ s the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and may be unable to hold onto any profits from his book .
“ This was Bolton ’ s bet : If he is right and the book does not contain classified information , he keeps the upside mentioned above ; but if he is wrong he stands to lose his profits from the book deal , exposes himself to criminal liability , and imperils national security .
Bolton was wrong , ” Lamberth said .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
A federal judge on Saturday rejected Trump’s efforts to halt the publication of former national security advisor John Bolton’s tell-all book about his 17 months in the White House. The judge ruled against Trump’s proposed restraining order of the book, The Room Where It Happened, which is set to publish on Tuesday.
Excerpts of Bolton’s memoir have been leaking since January, when, amid the Senate’s impeachment trial of Trump, the New York Times recounted a section of the book claiming Trump told Bolton that military aid for Ukraine was conditioned on an investigation into the Bidens. Earlier this week, reporting on different excerpts revealed that Trump had “pleaded with Chinese President Xi Jinping to help Trump’s electoral prospects by purchasing US agricultural products—and thus improving Trump’s standing in rural states hurt by his trade war with China.”
Yet Bolton still has not testified under oath about what he saw transpire in the White House.
In his ruling allowing the book to move forward, US District Judge Royce C. Lamberth also criticized Bolton:
“For reasons that hardly need to be stated, the Court will not order a nationwide seizure and destruction of a political memoir,” Lamberth said. “In taking it upon himself to publish his book without securing final approval from national intelligence authorities, Bolton may indeed have caused the country irreparable harm. But in the internet age, even a handful of copies in circulation could irrevocably destroy confidentiality.”
Lamberth also indicated that Bolton may be wrong in his assessment that the book contains no classified information. If that’s the case, Bolton could face criminal prosecution and may be unable to hold onto any profits from his book.
“This was Bolton’s bet: If he is right and the book does not contain classified information, he keeps the upside mentioned above; but if he is wrong he stands to lose his profits from the book deal, exposes himself to criminal liability, and imperils national security. Bolton was wrong,” Lamberth said.


motherjones--2020-06-21--Kentucky Slashes Number of Polling Places Ahead of Primary—Especially Where Black Voters Live

On Tuesday , Kentucky voters will determine which Democrat will challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in November .
Recent events have tightened the primary into a competitive race : In March , eight police officers barged into Breonna Taylor ’ s apartment in Louisville with a battering ram and fatally shot her .
According to polling , voters outraged over Taylor ’ s killing and propelled by the national uprising against systemic racism have narrowed the gap between progressive Charles Booker , a Black state representative with a message about racial justice , and former Marine Amy McGrath , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the coronavirus pandemic , coupled with decisions by election officials to close thousands of polling places across Kentucky , leaves many of those newly energized voters in a bind .
After Kentucky Gov .
Andy Beshear delayed the primary from mid-May to June 23 in response to the coronavirus pandemic , he issued an executive order requiring the Board of Elections to expand voting by mail , permit early voting , and limit contact among voters and poll workers during in-person voting .
About a week later , the Board of Elections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ submit plans that included cuts to the number of polling locations in each county .
Counties across the state complied ; Louisville ’ s Jefferson County ( pop .
767,000 ) chose a single polling place , a convention and expo hall with spaced-out voting booths , while Fayette County ( pop .
319,000 ) selected the University of Kentucky ’ s football stadium .
All in all , according to the Washington Post , Kentucky officials have reduced the number of polling places in the state from 3,700 in a typical election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Meanwhile , though thousands of voters have requested mail-in ballots in an attempt to avoid in-person voting , some have yet to receive them just days before the election date of June 23 , when they must be postmarked .
The decision to cut polling places has drawn concern about the potential for voter suppression , particularly of Black voters , many of whom live in the counties where there will be a single voting location .
About 20 percent of residents in Jefferson County are African American , making the county @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black population .
In a tweet , LeBron James called out the reduction of Louisville polling sites as an example of systemic racism and oppression .
But on Thursday night , a federal judge denied a motion in a class-action lawsuit filed by Republican state Rep. Jason Nemes and voters from Kentucky ’ s Jefferson , Fayette , and Kenton counties .
The lawsuit sought a court order to add more polling places to the counties , the three most populous in the state .
“ The issue before this Court is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s upcoming primary election would benefit from additional polling locations , ” wrote Judge Charles Simpson III , denying the motion .
“ Rather , the issue is whether the challenged election procedures result in a cognizable infringement under the Constitution or an injury under the Voting Rights Act .
We conclude that it does not.
” James ’ tweet also referenced the disastrous primary election in Georgia on June 9 , where long waits and issues with voting machines appeared to have primarily affected voters in Black neighborhoods .
As my colleague @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around Atlanta reported standing in line for hours as machines malfunctioned and precincts ran out of backup ballots during Tuesday ’ s primary .
Clarke said many people were forced to go to the polls because they had not received the absentee ballots they requested .
“ Everything that could happen or go wrong has gone wrong so far , ” Robb Pitts , the chair of the board of commissioners in Atlanta ’ s Fulton County , told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution .
The problems , Pitts said , stemmed from a perfect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , nationwide protests against police brutality , fewer precincts being open , and problems with absentee ballots .
Voting and civil rights experts are watching to see if Kentucky will show the same dysfunction on Tuesday .
“ It ’ s outrageous that officials are seeking to hold in-person elections in a single location , ” Kristen Clarke , president and executive director of the Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law , told the Washington Post .
“ It ’ s as if Kentucky failed to follow the crisis that unfolded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were woefully unprepared for the turnout on Election Day .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
On Tuesday, Kentucky voters will determine which Democrat will challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in November. Recent events have tightened the primary into a competitive race: In March, eight police officers barged into Breonna Taylor’s apartment in Louisville with a battering ram and fatally shot her. According to polling, voters outraged over Taylor’s killing and propelled by the national uprising against systemic racism have narrowed the gap between progressive Charles Booker, a Black state representative with a message about racial justice, and former Marine Amy McGrath, a moderate Democrat.
But the threat of the coronavirus pandemic, coupled with decisions by election officials to close thousands of polling places across Kentucky, leaves many of those newly energized voters in a bind.
Thousands of voters have requested mail-in ballots, but some have yet to receive them just days before the election.
After Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear delayed the primary from mid-May to June 23 in response to the coronavirus pandemic, he issued an executive order requiring the Board of Elections to expand voting by mail, permit early voting, and limit contact among voters and poll workers during in-person voting. About a week later, the Board of Elections directed county clerks across the state to submit plans that included cuts to the number of polling locations in each county. Counties across the state complied; Louisville’s Jefferson County (pop. 767,000) chose a single polling place, a convention and expo hall with spaced-out voting booths, while Fayette County (pop. 319,000) selected the University of Kentucky’s football stadium.
All in all, according to the Washington Post, Kentucky officials have reduced the number of polling places in the state from 3,700 in a typical election year to fewer than 200 this month. Meanwhile, though thousands of voters have requested mail-in ballots in an attempt to avoid in-person voting, some have yet to receive them just days before the election date of June 23, when they must be postmarked.
The decision to cut polling places has drawn concern about the potential for voter suppression, particularly of Black voters, many of whom live in the counties where there will be a single voting location. About 20 percent of residents in Jefferson County are African American, making the county the center of the state’s Black population. In a tweet, LeBron James called out the reduction of Louisville polling sites as an example of systemic racism and oppression.
Said it last week about GA. This is SYSTEMIC RACISM and OPPRESSION. So angry man. 😤😤😤 #BlackLivesMatter ✊🏾 #MoreThanaVote 🖐🏾 https://t.co/o9440Ugyzv — LeBron James (@KingJames) June 20, 2020
But on Thursday night, a federal judge denied a motion in a class-action lawsuit filed by Republican state Rep. Jason Nemes and voters from Kentucky’s Jefferson, Fayette, and Kenton counties. The lawsuit sought a court order to add more polling places to the counties, the three most populous in the state. “The issue before this Court is not whether a hypothetical voter in Kentucky’s upcoming primary election would benefit from additional polling locations,” wrote Judge Charles Simpson III, denying the motion. “Rather, the issue is whether the challenged election procedures result in a cognizable infringement under the Constitution or an injury under the Voting Rights Act. We conclude that it does not.”
“It’s outrageous that officials are seeking to hold in-person elections in a single location.”
James’ tweet also referenced the disastrous primary election in Georgia on June 9, where long waits and issues with voting machines appeared to have primarily affected voters in Black neighborhoods. As my colleague Noah Lanard reported:
Voters in and around Atlanta reported standing in line for hours as machines malfunctioned and precincts ran out of backup ballots during Tuesday’s primary. Clarke said many people were forced to go to the polls because they had not received the absentee ballots they requested. “Everything that could happen or go wrong has gone wrong so far,” Robb Pitts, the chair of the board of commissioners in Atlanta’s Fulton County, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The problems, Pitts said, stemmed from a perfect storm surrounding the elections: the pandemic, nationwide protests against police brutality, fewer precincts being open, and problems with absentee ballots.
Voting and civil rights experts are watching to see if Kentucky will show the same dysfunction on Tuesday. “It’s outrageous that officials are seeking to hold in-person elections in a single location,” Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, told the Washington Post. “It’s as if Kentucky failed to follow the crisis that unfolded in Wisconsin and Georgia, where officials were woefully unprepared for the turnout on Election Day.”