motherjones--2020-10-09--Michigan’s Attorney General Will “Pounce” If Militias Mess with Voting

On October 1 , Michigan ’ s attorney general ’ s office announced four felony charges against Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman , two right wing conservative operatives known for flamboyant and often legally dubious schemes to drum up support for conservative causes and spread misinformation .
Wohl and Burkman ’ s charges relate to an alleged plot to manipulate voters through a vast robocall scam .
The calls reached nearly 100,000 urban residents across at least five states , and claimed that information from early voting ballots could be used by law enforcement and credit card companies to chase @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calls also said that the CDC would weaponize similar information for a regime of forced vaccines .
The charges , Attorney General Dana Nessel says , are aimed at sending a message : Don ’ t mess with Michigan .
“ I hope that in prosecuting Wohl and Burkman , that this point has been made to people in state and out of state , ” she told me in an interview this week .
“ I ’ m willing to do anything and everything I have to to protect the vote.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials working to ensure a smooth presidential election face unprecedented obstacles .
To avoid exposure to COVID-19 , many voters have turned to absentee voting over in person voting , an unprecedented shift for most states ’ election infrastructures .
Alternative forms of voting have become deeply politicized , with Republican-run state legislatures withholding badly-needed resources from that could help election systems operate effectively .
Meanwhile , the president is fueling the flames with conspiracy , with help from local allies .
On Wednesday , the office of the Michigan secretary of state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state Republican Party for promoting a pair of misleading videos asserting that ballot drop boxes were vulnerable to manipulation , asserting they were “ irresponsibly spreading misinformation likely intended to suppress voting.
” “ If the president sends the army out in order to intimidate people in the polls , then we ’ ll have an army of attorneys to fight back as quickly and aggressively as possible , ” Nessel told me .
“ Will we have imagined every possible scenario there is ?
You just can ’ t , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this week , she was understandably mum about the still-forthcoming Thursday announcement of state and federal charges targeting 13 men in conjunction with a plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer , Michigan ’ s democratic governor , and launch a coup .
But in covering a wide array of threats to the election that she and her office are working to keep from becoming reality , she made sure to mention the threat that the state ’ s substantial armed militia presence could pose to voters .
What types of voter suppression tactics are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I ’ m most concerned about really involves misinformation and disinformation that ’ s promulgated by a number of different sources .
The point of it is to confuse voters , or make voters think that their vote is not really going to count , or that the tabulations will not be accurate .
So there ’ s no point in voting because your votes won ’ t properly be reflected in the outcome .
More than anything , our office is trying to combat misinformation with accurate information .
This is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , in Michigan , the voters passed a ballot proposal that allowed for no-reason absentee voting .
It turned out to be sort of prophetic because who knew that we were going to have a global pandemic the next election ?
It ’ s great that we have no reason absentee voting , but because most people have never done it before , they don ’ t know how .
Then add a litany of lawsuits that sort of change the rules every other day .
So it ’ s hard to properly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s easy for people to get confused by misinformation , sometimes even from well-intentioned sources trying to give people information , but they don ’ t know what court ruling just came out maybe two days prior .
It ’ s been a challenge .
It ties in neatly with the charges that we issued last week against Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman because their effort , obviously , was to suppress the vote .
Since so many people have never voted absentee , and they don ’ t know what it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first information that they have and it ’ s woefully inaccurate .
What are some options to deal with that challenge ?
We have an entire website that ’ s devoted to claims of misinformation at Michigan.gov so that we can combat it .
Part of my job is to be out there and very forceful in terms of aggressively enforcing voter suppression laws .
It ’ s not just a matter of us having formed these relationships now with social media platforms—like Google , or Facebook , or Twitter , YouTube—so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down immediately or flag them .
It ’ s one thing to have these anonymous groups out there that are promulgating these lies , but we have to deal with the president and other publics officials who in previous years could be a trusted source of information .
Now they ’ re out there telling people , “ Vote twice.
” I have to come behind him and say , “ Oh my God , no , don ’ t vote twice !
I ’ m going to have to prosecute you if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people know that if people do vote twice , that there are mechanisms in the system that will automatically catch that so that nobody will actually be able to have their vote counted twice .
Beyond what you ’ ve described , what are some other examples of voter suppression efforts you ’ ve seen that fall directly under the AG ’ s purview ?
When you talk about voter suppression , a lot of it has to do with us combating litigation that we see mostly coming in—either directly from the Republican @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make it more difficult for people to vote or for their votes to count .
We are also anticipating various scenarios that could occur , and then trying to be prepared for it by having a plan in place .
We ’ re ready to get out there and take action as quickly as possible .
The president has indicated he would send in federal law enforcement , which is illegal , that he ’ d have local sheriffs go out to the polls , which is illegal , inciting poll watchers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ election by intimidating or threatening voters , which is illegal .
We ’ re working very , very hard with state and local law enforcement to make sure we ’ re prepared for militia groups and armed gunmen , who go out and try to threaten voters to the polls .
I don ’ t say this to scare people , but to help people feel more secure , to know that we ’ re on top of it .
And we hope that this doesn ’ t really happen , but if @ @ @ @ @ @ @ na be ready to pounce on it immediately .
From your perspective what is the worst case scenario going into November 3 ?
I hate when I hear talk of somehow disloyal electors coming in and certifying the election in a way that would not reflect the popular vote .
I don ’ t think that can happen in Michigan .
We ’ ve looked at this issue over and over again .
We have a Republican majority legislature and both our majority leader in the senate and our speaker are very , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have a Democratic governor whose job is to certify the election , and we have a Democratic Secretary of State .
I have great faith in both of them that , irrespective of who wins , that Michigan ’ s 16 electoral votes will go towards whoever got the most votes in the state of Michigan .
The President has also worked hard to push out this false narrative that you can ’ t trust absentee voting .
We know that we have an incredibly low number of incidences of fraud when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s why challenges to voting , whether it ’ s in our state or in states around the country , invariably always lose , because they don ’ t have any historical examples of voter fraud .
It seems a lot of his supporters will vote on Election Day , where most of Biden ’ s supporters will vote absentee .
The concern is that Trump will suddenly declare victory the evening of the election when millions and millions of votes are outstanding , and they try to rush to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the counting of the absentee ballots , which might all but guarantee a victory for him , when truly it could be another 500,000 to a million votes for Biden .
What ’ s in the tool belt of the AG ’ s office to confront these threats ?
I think what people don ’ t necessarily know is that we have a litany of laws on the books as it pertains to voter suppression , voter intimidation , threats against voters , and I truly believe that the reason why Jack Burkman @ @ @ @ @ @ @ name themselves in their robocalls is because they ’ re not used to any enforcement of these laws , even though they ’ ve been on the books for many years .
We have many laws that permit us to go after those bad actors that want to interfere with a person ’ s constitutional right to vote .
Is your job affected by the current makeup of William Barr ’ s Department of Justice ?
If , for some reason , the AG Office of Michigan needs reinforcements how much federal support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at this point , I ’ m not counting on the DOJ to be of any assistance at all .
The US Attorney General has become nothing but a hatchet man and a lap dog for the president .
You can ’ t expect people to have any confidence that the DOJ will actually involve real justice at all .
Michigan ’ s voting system is pretty decentralized and overseen at the municipal level .
How would you prioritize multiple problems flaring up across multiple localities at once ?
Have we imagined every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t , but we try .
We ’ re also meeting continually with social media platforms , which have created a porthole .
As soon as we see misinformation that goes out , boom .
We can send it to [ the social media platform ] right away and ask them to at least flag it , or hopefully to take it down .
YouTube just said they ’ ll take it down and that they ’ d actually preserve [ misinformation posts ] for us for criminal prosecution in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
We ’ ve had some disappointments when it ’ s come to some of those social media platforms .
In the past , maybe they ’ ve failed , but I hope that they ’ ve learned those lessons , and that they really are sincere and well-intentioned and wanting to assist us to ensure that we don ’ t have elections issues based on things that get put up that wrongly assert disinformation .
Is everyone sort of on the same page here ?
I think so .
I guess because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 25 , there are social media platforms that I haven ’ t personally talked to .
But the major ones , I will say .
Could you name them ?
I personally haven ’ t talked to Snapchat , or TikTok .
I think my office has talked to Instagram , Facebook .
Reddit is one , right ?
So at this point , the AG ’ s office has reached out to Facebook ?
We ’ ve had actually a number of really productive conversations with them .
I hope they ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking points are fantastic .
They ’ ve been very clear that they ’ re going to have this open line of communication .
When we point out something that ’ s out there that involves voter suppression or voter intimidation or voter misinformation , that they ’ ll immediately take it down .
And I hope that ’ s true .
The other thing we ’ re worried about is we know that Facebook is a tool that ’ s used to mobilize insurgents , right ?
So the last thing they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you might know we have a problem with militias in Michigan—and we don ’ t want to see it used as an organizing tool , where somebody can say , “ Hey everybody grab your guns , let ’ s get down to the 26th precinct in Detroit and we ’ ll meet down there.
” If that ’ s a way that ’ s utilized to convene in order to perform an illegal act , we want to be able to say , “ Okay , somebody picked this up , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing and take it down.
” They pledged to do that , they have said that in no uncertain terms , that they ’ re going to work with the state in order to do that .
I hope their commitment is sincere .
We ’ re gon na continue through the election .
People are voting now .
This morning , [ October 5 ] I spoke to our Secretary of State : 400,000 people in Michigan had already voted .
It sounds like the 2018 rule reform is working .
Another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem in Michigan is that while it was so great that we changed the law in 2018 , unfortunately the Republican legislature has not been great in terms of allowing us to do early counting .
The most we can do at this point is basically unseal the envelope .
And that ’ s just the day before [ Election Day ] .
Processing each ballot takes a certain amount of time , it ’ d be great if we could have started that process earlier , and at least stack them all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at least a few days before .
Our Secretary of State has gone to great lengths to recruit tens of thousands of new poll workers just for this purpose .
She ’ s been saying publicly that she expects to be done no later than Friday after the election .
A lot of this has to be communication on her part , on my part , and of other officials in our state , letting people know that just because we don ’ t have the results back on Tuesday evening , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it ’ s not about the quickest possible and fastest possible count , it ’ s about the most accurate count .
We ’ re a little afraid that somebody will go to court and say , “ Stop counting the ballots.
” We ’ re expecting over 5 million people to vote this election .
It ’ s possible half of those votes can come through absentee ballot voting , and it ’ s going to take a while to count them .
This election has highlighted so many of our system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ structural changes that would resolve a lot of these problems ?
Yeah , I think so .
Allowing absentee ballots to be counted earlier , and have the counting process begin earlier—obviously not released to the public because we don ’ t want it to influence people ’ s voting—would help by allowing additional types of processing of ballots .
Take them out of the envelope , straighten them up , ready to go .
We also need to ensure we have the appropriate amount of poll workers .
We have to have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow for public officials to be making intentional misstatements for the purpose of disenfranchising the vote or undermining the integrity of our elections .
Without free and fair elections that people can have confidence in , we don ’ t really have a democratic society .
It ’ s so destructive to our society and our democracy .
There ’ s no way to overstate that .
This interview has been edited for clarity and length .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
On October 1, Michigan’s attorney general’s office announced four felony charges against Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman, two right wing conservative operatives known for flamboyant and often legally dubious schemes to drum up support for conservative causes and spread misinformation. Wohl and Burkman’s charges relate to an alleged plot to manipulate voters through a vast robocall scam. The calls reached nearly 100,000 urban residents across at least five states, and claimed that information from early voting ballots could be used by law enforcement and credit card companies to chase down outstanding warrants and debt. The calls also said that the CDC would weaponize similar information for a regime of forced vaccines.
The charges, Attorney General Dana Nessel says, are aimed at sending a message: Don’t mess with Michigan. “I hope that in prosecuting Wohl and Burkman, that this point has been made to people in state and out of state,” she told me in an interview this week. “I’m willing to do anything and everything I have to to protect the vote.”
“We hope that this doesn’t really happen, but if it does, we’re gonna be ready.”
This year, Nessel and other state officials working to ensure a smooth presidential election face unprecedented obstacles. To avoid exposure to COVID-19, many voters have turned to absentee voting over in person voting, an unprecedented shift for most states’ election infrastructures. Alternative forms of voting have become deeply politicized, with Republican-run state legislatures withholding badly-needed resources that could help election systems operate effectively. Meanwhile, the president is fueling the flames with conspiracy, with help from local allies. On Wednesday, the office of the Michigan secretary of state asked Nessel to open an investigation into the state Republican Party for promoting a pair of misleading videos asserting that ballot drop boxes were vulnerable to manipulation, asserting they were “irresponsibly spreading misinformation likely intended to suppress voting.”
“If the president sends the army out in order to intimidate people in the polls, then we’ll have an army of attorneys to fight back as quickly and aggressively as possible,” Nessel told me. “Will we have imagined every possible scenario there is? You just can’t, but we try.”
When we spoke earlier this week, she was understandably mum about the still-forthcoming Thursday announcement of state and federal charges targeting 13 men in conjunction with a plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer, Michigan’s democratic governor, and launch a coup. But in covering a wide array of threats to the election that she and her office are working to keep from becoming reality, she made sure to mention the threat that the state’s substantial armed militia presence could pose to voters.
What types of voter suppression tactics are you most concerned about?
The one that I’m most concerned about really involves misinformation and disinformation that’s promulgated by a number of different sources. The point of it is to confuse voters, or make voters think that their vote is not really going to count, or that the tabulations will not be accurate. So there’s no point in voting because your votes won’t properly be reflected in the outcome.
More than anything, our office is trying to combat misinformation with accurate information. This is particularly important this year because in 2018, in Michigan, the voters passed a ballot proposal that allowed for no-reason absentee voting. It turned out to be sort of prophetic because who knew that we were going to have a global pandemic the next election?
It’s great that we have no reason absentee voting, but because most people have never done it before, they don’t know how. Then add a litany of lawsuits that sort of change the rules every other day. So it’s hard to properly communicate what the rules are. It’s easy for people to get confused by misinformation, sometimes even from well-intentioned sources trying to give people information, but they don’t know what court ruling just came out maybe two days prior. It’s been a challenge. It ties in neatly with the charges that we issued last week against Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman because their effort, obviously, was to suppress the vote. Since so many people have never voted absentee, and they don’t know what it entails, this might be some of the first information that they have and it’s woefully inaccurate.
What are some options to deal with that challenge?
We have an entire website that’s devoted to claims of misinformation at Michigan.gov so that we can combat it. Part of my job is to be out there and very forceful in terms of aggressively enforcing voter suppression laws. It’s not just a matter of us having formed these relationships now with social media platforms—like Google, or Facebook, or Twitter, YouTube—so that they can either take those statements down immediately or flag them. It’s one thing to have these anonymous groups out there that are promulgating these lies, but we have to deal with the president and other publics officials who in previous years could be a trusted source of information. Now they’re out there telling people, “Vote twice.” I have to come behind him and say, “Oh my God, no, don’t vote twice! I’m going to have to prosecute you if you do that.” And also letting people know that if people do vote twice, that there are mechanisms in the system that will automatically catch that so that nobody will actually be able to have their vote counted twice.
Beyond what you’ve described, what are some other examples of voter suppression efforts you’ve seen that fall directly under the AG’s purview?
When you talk about voter suppression, a lot of it has to do with us combating litigation that we see mostly coming in—either directly from the Republican Party or from Republican representatives who try to make it more difficult for people to vote or for their votes to count.
“God, no, don’t vote twice!”
We are also anticipating various scenarios that could occur, and then trying to be prepared for it by having a plan in place. We’re ready to get out there and take action as quickly as possible. The president has indicated he would send in federal law enforcement, which is illegal, that he’d have local sheriffs go out to the polls, which is illegal, inciting poll watchers or poll challengers to interfere in the election by intimidating or threatening voters, which is illegal.
We’re working very, very hard with state and local law enforcement to make sure we’re prepared for militia groups and armed gunmen, who go out and try to threaten voters to the polls. I don’t say this to scare people, but to help people feel more secure, to know that we’re on top of it. And we hope that this doesn’t really happen, but if it does, we’re gonna be ready to pounce on it immediately.
From your perspective what is the worst case scenario going into November 3?
I hate when I hear talk of somehow disloyal electors coming in and certifying the election in a way that would not reflect the popular vote. I don’t think that can happen in Michigan. We’ve looked at this issue over and over again. We have a Republican majority legislature and both our majority leader in the senate and our speaker are very, very loyal Trump supporters. However, we have a Democratic governor whose job is to certify the election, and we have a Democratic Secretary of State. I have great faith in both of them that, irrespective of who wins, that Michigan’s 16 electoral votes will go towards whoever got the most votes in the state of Michigan.
The President has also worked hard to push out this false narrative that you can’t trust absentee voting. We know that we have an incredibly low number of incidences of fraud when it comes to absentee ballots. And that’s why challenges to voting, whether it’s in our state or in states around the country, invariably always lose, because they don’t have any historical examples of voter fraud.
It seems a lot of his supporters will vote on Election Day, where most of Biden’s supporters will vote absentee. The concern is that Trump will suddenly declare victory the evening of the election when millions and millions of votes are outstanding, and they try to rush to the court in an effort to stop of the counting of the absentee ballots, which might all but guarantee a victory for him, when truly it could be another 500,000 to a million votes for Biden.
What’s in the tool belt of the AG’s office to confront these threats?
I think what people don’t necessarily know is that we have a litany of laws on the books as it pertains to voter suppression, voter intimidation, threats against voters, and I truly believe that the reason why Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl were so willing to name themselves in their robocalls is because they’re not used to any enforcement of these laws, even though they’ve been on the books for many years. We have many laws that permit us to go after those bad actors that want to interfere with a person’s constitutional right to vote.
Is your job affected by the current makeup of William Barr’s Department of Justice? If, for some reason, the AG Office of Michigan needs reinforcements how much federal support can you count on?
Honestly, at this point, I’m not counting on the DOJ to be of any assistance at all. The US Attorney General has become nothing but a hatchet man and a lap dog for the president. You can’t expect people to have any confidence that the DOJ will actually involve real justice at all.
Michigan’s voting system is pretty decentralized and overseen at the municipal level. How would you prioritize multiple problems flaring up across multiple localities at once?
Have we imagined every possible scenario there is? You just can’t, but we try. We’re also meeting continually with social media platforms, which have created a porthole. As soon as we see misinformation that goes out, boom. We can send it to [the social media platform] right away and ask them to at least flag it, or hopefully to take it down. YouTube just said they’ll take it down and that they’d actually preserve [misinformation posts] for us for criminal prosecution in the event that it delves in criminal statutes. We’ve had some disappointments when it’s come to some of those social media platforms. In the past, maybe they’ve failed, but I hope that they’ve learned those lessons, and that they really are sincere and well-intentioned and wanting to assist us to ensure that we don’t have elections issues based on things that get put up that wrongly assert disinformation.
Is everyone sort of on the same page here?
I think so. I guess because I’m over the age of 25, there are social media platforms that I haven’t personally talked to. But the major ones, I will say.
Could you name them?
I personally haven’t talked to Snapchat, or TikTok. I think my office has talked to Instagram, Facebook. Reddit is one, right?
So at this point, the AG’s office has reached out to Facebook?
We’ve had actually a number of really productive conversations with them. I hope they’re sincere, because all of their talking points are fantastic. They’ve been very clear that they’re going to have this open line of communication. When we point out something that’s out there that involves voter suppression or voter intimidation or voter misinformation, that they’ll immediately take it down. And I hope that’s true.
You might know we have a problem with militias in Michigan.
The other thing we’re worried about is we know that Facebook is a tool that’s used to mobilize insurgents, right? So the last thing they want to see is a militia organization—and you might know we have a problem with militias in Michigan—and we don’t want to see it used as an organizing tool, where somebody can say, “Hey everybody grab your guns, let’s get down to the 26th precinct in Detroit and we’ll meet down there.” If that’s a way that’s utilized to convene in order to perform an illegal act, we want to be able to say, “Okay, somebody picked this up, they reported it. Facebook, do your thing and take it down.” They pledged to do that, they have said that in no uncertain terms, that they’re going to work with the state in order to do that. I hope their commitment is sincere.
We’re gonna continue through the election. People are voting now. This morning, [October 5] I spoke to our Secretary of State: 400,000 people in Michigan had already voted.
It sounds like the 2018 rule reform is working.
Another issue that’s been a big problem in Michigan is that while it was so great that we changed the law in 2018, unfortunately the Republican legislature has not been great in terms of allowing us to do early counting. The most we can do at this point is basically unseal the envelope. And that’s just the day before [Election Day]. Processing each ballot takes a certain amount of time, it’d be great if we could have started that process earlier, and at least stack them all up, if not outright count them, at least a few days before.
Our Secretary of State has gone to great lengths to recruit tens of thousands of new poll workers just for this purpose. She’s been saying publicly that she expects to be done no later than Friday after the election. A lot of this has to be communication on her part, on my part, and of other officials in our state, letting people know that just because we don’t have the results back on Tuesday evening, or Wednesday, or even Thursday, it’s not about the quickest possible and fastest possible count, it’s about the most accurate count. We’re a little afraid that somebody will go to court and say, “Stop counting the ballots.” We’re expecting over 5 million people to vote this election. It’s possible half of those votes can come through absentee ballot voting, and it’s going to take a while to count them.
This election has highlighted so many of our system’s vulnerabilities. Are there any structural changes that would resolve a lot of these problems?
Yeah, I think so. Allowing absentee ballots to be counted earlier, and have the counting process begin earlier—obviously not released to the public because we don’t want it to influence people’s voting—would help by allowing additional types of processing of ballots. Take them out of the envelope, straighten them up, ready to go. We also need to ensure we have the appropriate amount of poll workers.
We have to have laws in place that don’t allow for public officials to be making intentional misstatements for the purpose of disenfranchising the vote or undermining the integrity of our elections. Without free and fair elections that people can have confidence in, we don’t really have a democratic society. It’s so destructive to our society and our democracy. There’s no way to overstate that.
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.


motherjones--2020-10-09--There’s a 350-Foot Statue of Columbus in Puerto Rico. Indigenous People Want It Gone.

If all the sculptures in North America got together for a party , only one would stand taller than Lady Liberty ’ s torch : Christopher Columbus on a three-sailed ship , wrought in bronze .
Clocking in at 6,500 tons with a height of 350 feet , the “ Birth of the New World ” has 45 feet on the Statue of Liberty , and like her , presides over a kind of port of entry : the shores of Puerto Rico , one of the first places Columbus and other Spaniards made landfall in their conquest of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s an unlikely place for the giant sculpture .
Though 76 percent of the island ’ s residents identify as “ white , ” studies show that most Puerto Ricans have varying degrees of Taíno ancestry , meaning they are descended from the Native people Columbus and his men enslaved and killed .
And on the eve of Indigenous People ’ s Day , in a year when monuments to colonizers have fallen left and right , some Puerto Ricans are renewing their call for this one to be dismantled .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , colonialism , religious intolerance , racism , gender violence , and white supremacy , ” says R. Múkaro Borrero , president of the United Confederation of Taíno People ( UCTP ) .
“ There are mixed feelings among locals , but Taíno and other Indigenous peoples of Borikén [ an Indigenous name for the island ] would like to see it gone , as it is looked upon as an embarrassment.
” Tania Gonzales , a University of Puerto Rico medical student of mixed European , African , and Indigenous descent , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ monument “ ugly and unnecessary.
” She used to see it regularly from the highway when visiting her dad in Arecibo .
“ It was an eyesore , ” she says .
“ I think it ’ s sad that people in a colony are educated to idolize colonizers , to the point where they ’ re inspired to erect a statue to honor one.
” The hulking bronze Columbus and his ship landed in Arecibo after six US cities chose to give it a wide berth.The sculpture was created by Russian artist @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reviled monument to Peter the Great has reportedly only stayed standing in Moscow thanks to Tsereteli ’ s coziness with Russian elites .
He intended to gift the Columbus monument to the US mainland , but in the 90s , New York , Miami , Fort Lauderdale , Baltimore , Columbus , and St. Petersburg all rejected offers to host it .
( The sculptor also created a 150-foot-tall egg-shaped Columbus statue that stands in Seville , Spain . )
Tsereteli ’ s hopes of erecting “ Birth of the New World ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 1997 , when Donald Trump sought a deal to secure it for his West Side Yards development .
“ This man is major and legit , ” Trump said of Tsereteli , but then-mayor Rudy Giuliani and other city leaders nixed plans to accept the sculpture .
In 1998 , Tsereteli began talks to erect it in the Puerto Rican city of Cataño , 50 miles down the coast from Arecibo .
Alongside other Indigenous groups like El Movimiento Indígena Jíbaro Boricua , the UCTP has been fighting “ Birth of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ petitions , writing letters , and meeting with local politicians who have proven unsympathetic to their pleas .
Borrero adds that the continued suffering from Hurricane Maria , recent earthquakes , and the COVID-19 crisis didn ’ t stop his community from marching through San Juan , the island ’ s capital , to protest colonial monuments ( including plaza and street names ) during the nationwide uprisings back in July .
Building on that momentum , the UCTP recently launched a community survey to poll Puerto Ricans on their support for removing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” to “ Indigenous People ’ s Day.
” They ’ re also working to build more statues of Indigenous people , such as those which already exist in cities like Cataño and Isabela .
City leaders say that since its installation in 2017 , “ Birth of the New World ” has boosted tourism .
Arecibo Mayor Carlos Molina credits it with attracting enough visitors to open 100 local businesses that have created 1,000 jobs as of 2020 , and last year , the Senate of Puerto Rico passed a measure ordering @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a highway rest area overlooking the monument .
But local opponents of the statue say no amount of money can justify its continued existence on their shores .
“ I hate that statue , ” says Santiago Reyes Acosta , who lives in Río Piedras , Puerto Rico and hails from Ecuador .
“ It ’ s an absolute insult to any culture of any territory that was at some moment under Spanish imperial rule.
” Gonzales , the medical student , thinks there are better options for promoting tourism on an island @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Funding local art projects and natural resource conservation “ could ’ ve provided a more accurate representation of us , ” she says .
“ Our caverns , rivers , beaches , and mountains are much more necessary to uphold than a 400-foot hunk of metal.
” Borrero ’ s vision is strikingly similar .
The Columbus in Arecibo , he says , would be better for Puerto Rican tourism if it were sunk off the coast to create an artificial reef .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
If all the sculptures in North America got together for a party, only one would stand taller than Lady Liberty’s torch: Christopher Columbus on a three-sailed ship, wrought in bronze. Clocking in at 6,500 tons with a height of 350 feet, the “Birth of the New World” has 45 feet on the Statue of Liberty, and like her, presides over a kind of port of entry: the shores of Puerto Rico, one of the first places Columbus and other Spaniards made landfall in their conquest of the so-called “New World.”
It’s an unlikely place for the giant sculpture. Though 76 percent of the island’s residents identify as “white,” studies show that most Puerto Ricans have varying degrees of Taíno ancestry, meaning they are descended from the Native people Columbus and his men enslaved and killed. And on the eve of Indigenous People’s Day, in a year when monuments to colonizers have fallen left and right, some Puerto Ricans are renewing their call for this one to be dismantled.
When all the Columbus statues have been torn down, you meet the final Columbus statue boss in Arecibo, Puerto Rico. This thing is an absolute unit. 360 feet tall. pic.twitter.com/CLfbh7Ztag — H. José Bosch 🇵🇷 (@HJBosch21) June 10, 2020
“The statue is really a tribute to genocide, colonialism, religious intolerance, racism, gender violence, and white supremacy,” says R. Múkaro Borrero, president of the United Confederation of Taíno People (UCTP). “There are mixed feelings among locals, but Taíno and other Indigenous peoples of Borikén [an Indigenous name for the island] would like to see it gone, as it is looked upon as an embarrassment.”
Tania Gonzalez, a University of Puerto Rico medical student of mixed European, African, and Indigenous descent, says she and her friends find the monument “ugly and unnecessary.” She used to see it regularly from the highway when visiting her dad in Arecibo. “It was an eyesore,” she says. “I think it’s sad that people in a colony are educated to idolize colonizers, to the point where they’re inspired to erect a statue to honor one.”
The hulking bronze Columbus and his ship landed in Arecibo after six US cities chose to give it a wide berth.The sculpture was created by Russian artist Zurab Tsereteli, whose similar and widely reviled monument to Peter the Great has reportedly only stayed standing in Moscow thanks to Tsereteli’s coziness with Russian elites. He intended to gift the Columbus monument to the US mainland, but in the 90s,New York, Miami, Fort Lauderdale, Baltimore, Columbus, and St. Petersburg all rejected offers to host it. (The sculptor also created a 150-foot-tall egg-shaped Columbus statue that stands in Seville, Spain.)
Tsereteli’s hopes of erecting “Birth of the New World” in New York City were briefly revived in 1997, when Donald Trump sought a deal to secure it for his West Side Yards development. “This man is major and legit,” Trump said of Tsereteli, but then-mayor Rudy Giuliani and other city leaders nixed plans to accept the sculpture.
In 1998, Tsereteli began talks to erect it in the Puerto Rican city of Cataño, 50 miles down the coast from Arecibo. Alongside other Indigenous groups like El Movimiento Indígena Jíbaro Boricua, the UCTP has been fighting “Birth of the New World” ever since, filing petitions, writing letters, and meeting with local politicians who have proven unsympathetic to their pleas.
Borrero adds that the continued suffering from Hurricane Maria, recent earthquakes, and the COVID-19 crisis didn’t stop his community from marching through San Juan, the island’s capital, to protest colonial monuments (including plaza and street names) during the nationwide uprisings back in July. Building on that momentum, the UCTP recently launched a community survey to poll Puerto Ricans on their support for removing Columbus statues and changing “Columbus Day” to “Indigenous People’s Day.” They’re also working to build more statues of Indigenous people, such as those which already exist in cities like Cataño and Isabela.
City leaders say that since its installation in 2017, “Birth of the New World” has boosted tourism. Arecibo Mayor Carlos Molina credits it with attracting enough visitors to open 100 local businesses that have created 1,000 jobs as of 2020, and last year, the Senate of Puerto Rico passed a measure ordering island transit authorities to look into creating a highway rest area overlooking the monument.
But local opponents of the statue say no amount of money can justify its continued existence on their shores. “I hate that statue,” says Santiago Reyes Acosta, who lives in Río Piedras, Puerto Rico and hails from Ecuador. “It’s an absolute insult to any culture of any territory that was at some moment under Spanish imperial rule.”
Gonzalez, the medical student, thinks there are better options for promoting tourism on an island as beautiful and diverse as Puerto Rico. Funding local art projects and natural resource conservation “could’ve provided a more accurate representation of us,” she says. “Our caverns, rivers, beaches, and mountains are much more necessary to uphold than a 400-foot hunk of metal.”
Borrero’s vision is strikingly similar. The Columbus in Arecibo, he says, would be better for Puerto Rican tourism if it were sunk off the coast to create an artificial reef.


motherjones--2020-10-09--The “Great Barrington” Plan for  Reopening Is Championed as Good for the Poor. It’s Not.

In the last few weeks , you may have heard mention of a document called the Great Barrington Declaration , which lays out a plan for a return to normal life amidst the pandemic .
Written by three prominent physicians and signed by dozens of doctors , scientists , and researchers , the document seems sensible enough : The authors ’ strategy , which they call “ focused protection , ” advocates for protecting the elderly and people with conditions that make them more likely to have a severe case of COVID-19—while allowing the young and healthy to return to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sports events , and other large gatherings .
The authors make a social justice case for their idea : “ Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19 , ” they write .
The declaration has been shared widely in liberal circles : The ultra-left magazine Jacobin , for example , endorsed the idea in a Q & A with one of the authors , Martin Kulldorf .
“ Poor households have borne a disproportionate share of the pandemic ’ s hardship , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We need to urgently fight for a more just society.
” Sounds great , right ?
Just one problem : The vast majority of infectious disease physicians , virologists , and epidemiologists don ’ t support it—and in fact , most of the scientific community believes that this approach will actively hurt vulnerable people rather than protecting them .
“ The authors are well known people in public health , but they don ’ t represent anything like a consensus view about how to approach COVID , ” Yale University epidemiologist Gregg Gonsalves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the people in their field are looking at them aghast.
” Indeed , the public health community has swarmed to point out the many problems with the Great Barrington plan , and many have also called out Jacobin for promoting it .
Gonsalves , who wrote a critique of the document in The Nation , noted that the document starts with a flawed premise—that we ’ d only need to isolate a select few elderly and at-risk members of society .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 40 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at risk for severe COVID-19 .
“ We haven ’ t even been able to protect people in nursing homes , ” says Gonsalves .
“ Now these people are saying let ’ s open up and we ’ ll somehow shield the vulnerable ?
It ’ s a recipe for disaster.
” At its core , the approach that the Great Barrington Declaration recommends is a gussied-up version of herd immunity , the epidemiological concept that once enough people in a population develop antibodies to a disease , it fades away because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to sustain it .
It may seem like an appealing idea , but as epidemiologist and dean of the Rutgers University School of Public Health Perry Halkitis told me , the herd immunity approach demands that we sacrifice lives in order to get to our goal of jumpstarting the economy .
Most likely , he said , the lives that we ’ d sacrifice would be the very ones that the document claims to protect .
The authors claim that they ’ re protecting vulnerable people “ feels disingenuous to me , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t account for the fact that the more you engage people in auditoriums or stadiums—well people work there , and they ’ re working class people , and those people are vulnerable.
” The Great Barrington Declaration ’ s market-first philosophy makes sense when you consider its source : The document was created at a meeting of the American Institution for Economic Research , a libertarian-leaning think tank .
The group ’ s mission statement says it “ envisions a world in which societies are organized according to the principles of pure freedom—in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confined to the provision of public goods and individuals can flourish within a truly free market and a free society.
” Over the last few weeks , the creators of the document have met with White House coronavirus advisor Scott Atlas , Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar , and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis , all of whom have vociferously advocated against social distancing measures during the pandemic .
We ’ re close to a turning point in the virus : Vaccines will arrive sometime in the next year , and when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us on a much safer course toward ending the pandemic .
“ We ’ ll get herd immunity , but let ’ s do that with a vaccine , not by sacrificing people , ” said Halkitis .
“ It ’ s not 1918 , for God ’ s sake.
” In the meantime , both Halkitis and Gonsalves agreed that it would be dangerously unwise to follow the Great Barrington Declaration ’ s advice .
“ The idea that you can keep outbreaks among the young away from the elderly is ridiculous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can spin it however they like , but they don ’ t really have a plan—it ’ s grotesque , and it borders on eugenics .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
In the last few weeks, you may have heard mention of a document called the Great Barrington Declaration, which lays out a plan for a return to normal life amidst the pandemic. Written by three prominent physicians and signed by dozens of doctors, scientists, and researchers, the document seems sensible enough: The authors’ strategy, which they call “focused protection,” advocates for protecting the elderly and people with conditions that make them more likely to have a severe case of COVID-19—while allowing the young and healthy to return to business as usual, including concerts, sports events, and other large gatherings. The authors make a social justice case for their idea: “Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19,” they write.
“The rest of the people in their field are looking at them aghast.”
The declaration has been shared widely in liberal circles: The ultra-left magazine Jacobin, for example, endorsed the idea in a Q&A with one of the authors, Martin Kulldorf. “Poor households have borne a disproportionate share of the pandemic’s hardship,” Jacobin’s introduction says. “We need to urgently fight for a more just society.”
Sounds great, right? Just one problem: The vast majority of infectious disease physicians, virologists, and epidemiologists don’t support it—and in fact, most of the scientific community believes that this approach will actively hurt vulnerable people rather than protecting them. “The authors are well known people in public health, but they don’t represent anything like a consensus view about how to approach COVID,” Yale University epidemiologist Gregg Gonsalves told me. “The rest of the people in their field are looking at them aghast.” Indeed, the public health community has swarmed to point out the many problems with the Great Barrington plan, and many have also called out Jacobin for promoting it.
Gonsalves, who wrote a critique of the document in The Nation, noted that the document starts with a flawed premise—that we’d only need to isolate a select few elderly and at-risk members of society. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that 40 percent of Americans have a condition that puts them at risk for severe COVID-19. “We haven’t even been able to protect people in nursing homes,” says Gonsalves. “Now these people are saying let’s open up and we’ll somehow shield the vulnerable? It’s a recipe for disaster.”
At its core, the approach that the Great Barrington Declaration recommends is a gussied-up version of herd immunity, the epidemiological concept that once enough people in a population develop antibodies to a disease, it fades away because there aren’t enough hosts left to sustain it. It may seem like an appealing idea, but as epidemiologist and dean of the Rutgers University School of Public Health Perry Halkitis told me, the herd immunity approach demands that we sacrifice lives in order to get to our goal of jumpstarting the economy. Most likely, he said, the lives that we’d sacrifice would be the very ones that the document claims to protect. The authors claim that they’re protecting vulnerable people “feels disingenuous to me,” he said. “It doesn’t account for the fact that the more you engage people in auditoriums or stadiums—well people work there, and they’re working class people, and those people are vulnerable.”
The Great Barrington Declaration’s market-first philosophy makes sense when you consider its source: The document was created at a meeting of the American Institution for Economic Research, a libertarian-leaning think tank. The group’s mission statement says it “envisions a world in which societies are organized according to the principles of pure freedom—in which the role of government is sharply confined to the provision of public goods and individuals can flourish within a truly free market and a free society.” Over the last few weeks, the creators of the document have met with White House coronavirus advisor Scott Atlas, Health and Human Services secretary Alex Azar, and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, all of whom have vociferously advocated against social distancing measures during the pandemic.
These Scientists Have A Controversial Plan For “Herd Immunity” — And The White House Is Listening https://t.co/7raqvSSTgJ via @stephaniemlee — Mat Honan (@mat) October 9, 2020
We’re close to a turning point in the virus: Vaccines will arrive sometime in the next year, and when they do, they’ll put us on a much safer course toward ending the pandemic. “We’ll get herd immunity, but let’s do that with a vaccine, not by sacrificing people,” said Halkitis. “It’s not 1918, for God’s sake.” In the meantime, both Halkitis and Gonsalves agreed that it would be dangerously unwise to follow the Great Barrington Declaration’s advice. “The idea that you can keep outbreaks among the young away from the elderly is ridiculous,” says Gonsalves. “They can spin it however they like, but they don’t really have a plan—it’s grotesque, and it borders on eugenics.”