motherjones--2020-05-10--“This Was a Lynching”: Atlanta Mayor Holds Trump’s America Accountable for the Ahmaud Arbery Shootin

“This Was a Lynching”: Atlanta Mayor Holds Trump’s America Accountable for the Ahmaud Arbery Shooting

In an interview on CNN ’ s State of the Union Sunday , Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms described the shooting of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery as a “ lynching.
” “ It ’ s heartbreaking that it ’ s 2020 and this was a lynching of an African American man , ” she said , adding , “ It ’ s part of a bigger issue that we ’ re having in this country.
” “ With the rhetoric that we hear coming out of the White House , in so many ways , I think many who are prone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do it in an overt way that we otherwise would not see in 2020.
” Two white men , Gregory McMichael and his son Travis , allegedly shot and killed Arbery on February 23 while Arbery was jogging through their neighborhood .
But the father and son weren ’ t arrested and charged with murder until Thursday , after a video of the incident went viral .
As my colleague Nathalie Baptiste writes , the killing—and subsequent outrage—is part of a disturbing pattern in the United States .
“ By treating every single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incident , every attack on Black people , every example of the disproportionate vulnerability of people of color to economic and now coronavirus devastation as some aberration , ” she argues , “ America is given a kind of absolution .
Our racist society is off the hook.
” Baptiste continues : “ Is there anything new to be said about the killing of young Black men who are engaged in everyday activities until they attract the attention of white people who feel threatened and decide to kill them ?
How many times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be seen as fully human ?
” Bottoms ’ characterization of the event echoes that of former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams , who , in an interview with Mother Jones just hours before the McMichaels were charged , called for justice for Arbery .
“ What we saw happen in that video , what I read about in those stories , is a violation of every notion of decency and justice , ” Abrams said .
“ It was murder.
” If it weren ’ t for the footage of the event @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t think that Gregory and Travis McMichael would ever have been charged .
As Slate ’ s Daniel Politi reports , the man who recorded the video is receiving threats : The attorney of the man who recorded the video of Arbery ’ s killing said Saturday that his client is receiving threats that coincide with authorities announcing that he is also under investigation .
William “ Roddie ” Bryan shared the 36-second video with police that was later described as a key piece of evidence .
“ Mr .
Bryan videotaped what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , there is a prosecution , ” Kevin Gough said .
“ If he had not videotaped that incident , the only person who really could speak to what happened is dead and we ’ ll never have that opportunity .
That video is the prosecution.
” Bottoms also said her own family is scared .
“ I have four kids , three of whom are African-American boys , ” she said .
“ They are afraid , they are angry .
”

In an interview on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms described the shooting of 25-year-old Ahmaud Arbery as a “lynching.” “It’s heartbreaking that it’s 2020 and this was a lynching of an African American man,” she said, adding, “It’s part of a bigger issue that we’re having in this country.”
“With the rhetoric that we hear coming out of the White House, in so many ways, I think many who are prone to being racist are given permission to do it in an overt way that we otherwise would not see in 2020.”
Two white men, Gregory McMichael and his son Travis, allegedly shot and killed Arbery on February 23 while Arbery was jogging through their neighborhood. But the father and son weren’t arrested and charged with murder until Thursday, after a video of the incident went viral.
As my colleague Nathalie Baptiste writes, the killing—and subsequent outrage—is part of a disturbing pattern in the United States. “By treating every single senseless death, every single racial profiling incident, every attack on Black people, every example of the disproportionate vulnerability of people of color to economic and now coronavirus devastation as some aberration,” she argues, “America is given a kind of absolution. Our racist society is off the hook.”
Baptiste continues: “Is there anything new to be said about the killing of young Black men who are engaged in everyday activities until they attract the attention of white people who feel threatened and decide to kill them? How many times can we decry racism and beg to be seen as fully human?”
“It’s heartbreaking that it’s 2020 and this was a lynching of an African American man,” Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms says about the shooting of Ahmaud Arbery. https://t.co/GGX09XO2Ra #CNNSOTU pic.twitter.com/GiEUoqozF0 — CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) May 10, 2020
Bottoms’ characterization of the event echoes that of former Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, who, in an interview with Mother Jones just hours before the McMichaels were charged, called for justice for Arbery. “What we saw happen in that video, what I read about in those stories, is a violation of every notion of decency and justice,” Abrams said. “It was murder.”
EXCLUSIVE: @staceyabrams calls the killing of Ahmaud Arbery "murder." "What we saw happen in that video, what I read about in those stories, is a violation of ever notion of decency and justice. It was murder." Arbery was killed ten weeks ago by two white men while jogging. pic.twitter.com/4gBZfa09mx — Mother Jones (@MotherJones) May 7, 2020
If it weren’t for the footage of the event, Bottoms said, she didn’t think that Gregory and Travis McMichael would ever have been charged. As Slate’s Daniel Politi reports, the man who recorded the video is receiving threats:
The attorney of the man who recorded the video of Arbery’s killing said Saturday that his client is receiving threats that coincide with authorities announcing that he is also under investigation. William “Roddie” Bryan shared the 36-second video with police that was later described as a key piece of evidence. “Mr. Bryan videotaped what was going on and because he did that, there is a prosecution,” Kevin Gough said. “If he had not videotaped that incident, the only person who really could speak to what happened is dead and we’ll never have that opportunity. That video is the prosecution.”
Bottoms also said her own family is scared. “I have four kids, three of whom are African-American boys,” she said. “They are afraid, they are angry.”


motherjones--2020-05-10--Trump Officials Have Bad News About the Economy

When Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin joined news anchor Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday this morning , he shared a grim picture of the state of America ’ s economy .
“ Mr .
Secretary , what is the real unemployment rate in the United States as we talk today ?
” Wallace asked , referencing a Friday report from the Department of Labor that estimated the unemployment rate at 14.7 percent as of April 18 , not including the people who aren ’ t actively looking for work due to the current pandemic .
Mnuchin dodged the question at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The Bureau of Labor Statistics says what they call the ‘ real unemployment number ’ for April ” which includes people who are not looking for work , “ is 22.8 percent , ” Wallace said .
But that does not include “ the 7 million people who have lost their jobs since [ April 18 ] .
Aren ’ t we talking close to 25 percent at this point , which is Great Depression neighborhood ?
” “ Chris , we could be , ” Mnuchin answered .
And it will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Depression , he said , the unemployment rate is a result of artificially shutting the economy down because of the coronavirus .
“ It wouldn ’ t be a surprise if you close down the economy that half the workforce didn ’ t work.
” Mnuchin ’ s outlook was very much in line with appearances by other Trump officials on the Sunday morning news shows .
White House Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett told CBS ’ Margaret Brennan that he expects unemployment to bottom out in May or June at “ rates north @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He added , “ We understand why the economy is slowing down , and we expect that we can reverse it.
” Meanwhile , White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow told ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos , “ I don ’ t want to sugarcoat it because I think the numbers for May are going to be also very difficult numbers .
It ’ s going to take a while for the reopening to have an impact.
” While it ’ s unclear how many Americans will get their jobs back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offered viewers a “ glimmer of hope ” in the new unemployment numbers : “ Eighty percent of it was furloughs and temporary layoffs .
That , by the way , doesn ’ t assure that you will go back to a job , but it says strongly that the cord between the worker and the business is still intact .
”

When Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin joined news anchor Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday this morning, he shared a grim picture of the state of America’s economy.
“Mr. Secretary, what is the real unemployment rate in the United States as we talk today?” Wallace asked, referencing a Friday report from the Department of Labor that estimated the unemployment rate at 14.7 percent as of April 18, not including the people who aren’t actively looking for work due to the current pandemic.
Mnuchin dodged the question at first, but Wallace pressed on. “The Bureau of Labor Statistics says what they call the ‘real unemployment number’ for April” which includes people who are not looking for work, “is 22.8 percent,” Wallace said. But that does not include “the 7 million people who have lost their jobs since [April 18]. Aren’t we talking close to 25 percent at this point, which is Great Depression neighborhood?”
“Chris, we could be,” Mnuchin answered. And it will likely get worse. Unlike the Great Depression, he said, the unemployment rate is a result of artificially shutting the economy down because of the coronavirus. “It wouldn’t be a surprise if you close down the economy that half the workforce didn’t work.” Watch the latest video at foxnews.com
Mnuchin’s outlook was very much in line with appearances by other Trump officials on the Sunday morning news shows.
White House Economic Adviser Kevin Hassett told CBS’ Margaret Brennan that he expects unemployment to bottom out in May or June at “rates north of 20 [percent].” He added, “We understand why the economy is slowing down, and we expect that we can reverse it.”
NEWS: @WhiteHouse Economic Adviser projects #unemployment rate could climb to “north” of 20% by next month due to #COVID19 See more of Hassett's interview on @facethenation at 10:30 EST pic.twitter.com/6Qv4DeedEn — Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) May 10, 2020
Meanwhile, White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow told ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos, “I don’t want to sugarcoat it because I think the numbers for May are going to be also very difficult numbers. It’s going to take a while for the reopening to have an impact.”
While it’s unclear how many Americans will get their jobs back when the pandemic is over, Kudlow offered viewers a “glimmer of hope” in the new unemployment numbers: “Eighty percent of it was furloughs and temporary layoffs. That, by the way, doesn’t assure that you will go back to a job, but it says strongly that the cord between the worker and the business is still intact.”


motherjones--2020-05-10--Donald Trump Is Going to Hate SNL’s Season Finale

Even in an episode produced in isolation , Saturday Night Live ’ s season finale opener delivered .
The cast joined a virtual commencement ceremony in which Donald Trump , played by Alec Baldwin , is the only speaker that was available to the class of high school seniors .
“ I asked you to vote today on who should be the keynote speaker , ” Kate McKinnon ’ s Principal O ’ Grady tells the class , via Zoom .
“ Unfortunately , Barack and Michelle Obama said ‘ no , ’ as did your next five choices , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frontman Axl Rose , the murder hornets , Liberty Mutual ’ s LiMu Emu , “ that dude from 90-Day Fiance who looked like a hedgehog , ” and the Elon Musk/Grimes baby .
“ So I moved on to your eighth choice , receiving one vote , President Donald Trump.
” Baldwin ’ s Trump congratulates the class of “ COVID-19 , ” and jumps into a lecture in which he claims he ’ s been treated “ even worse than they treated Lincoln , ” praises his online college for ranking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US News , and sips from a Clorox bleach container , which he refers to as “ invincibility juice.
” He leaves the students with an inspirational quote : “ Reach for the stars because if you ’ re a star , they ’ ll let you do it .
”

“A VOICE OF REASON.” “A DAILY DOSE OF SANITY.”
“A daily dose of sanity.” “Like chatting with a friend who actually knows what they’re talking about.” That’s how readers describe our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. See why: Sign up today to get reporting that helps you cut through the noise, plus deep dives on underreported topics.
“Like chatting with a friend who actually knows what they’re talking about.” That’s how readers describe our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. See why: Sign up today to get reporting that helps you cut through the noise, plus deep dives on underreported topics.
Close Thank you for subscribing!
By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners.


motherjones--2020-05-11--For Some “Facebook Empathy Moms,” Joe Biden Is Just Another Compromise

In the Before Times , Jody Kanikula and a half dozen fellow Democratic women activists would gather for drinks each Thursday after the weekly Kane County Democrats meeting in Geneva , Illinois .
These days , they settle for Saturday morning Zoom calls to reimagine what their political organizing looks like now that their preferred tools of the trade—door knocking and mail drops—are off the table .
I met Kanikula and her friends in October 2018 , a high season of political activity .
The group was trying to elect Democrat Lauren Underwood , then a 32-year-old nurse who ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Care Act , to Congress .
The women were mostly new to politics , having dipped their toes into activism in the wake of Donald Trump ’ s election.They spent the 2018 cycle rebuilding Democratic infrastructure in their cluster of exurbs 50 miles west of Chicago , an area where Republicans had long ruled by default .
That year , they focused their energies on ginning up excitement for a small slate of Democratic candidates .
This time around , a Democrat is challenging a GOP officeholder in the county for every elected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Tara Reade ’ s sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden have rippled through the group , setting off a flurry of notifications in their text chain with each new development .
Reade ’ s claims are “ disheartening , ” Kanikula tells me .
But like the 10 other “ resistance women ” I spoke with , she ’ s sticking with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee regardless .
“ If it was a different kind of election , I ’ d give it more weight , ” she says .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get Trump out of there.
” Kanikula and her friends seem yanked from research conducted by Harvard sociologist Theda Skopcol and University of Pittsburgh historian Lara Putnam in the wake of the 2016 election .
The scholars had identified a new brand of Democratic activist : white , college-educated women who live in suburban and exurban communities where “ country club Republicans ” had long reigned .
In the wake of Trump ’ s victory , these women flocked to their nearest city for the Women ’ s March , formed Indivisible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with their local Democratic parties to unseat Republicans at every level of government .
This is not the usual picture of the resurgent activist left .
Many accounts of the suburban woman ’ s political awakening are fond of anathematizing these activists as “ wine moms ” or “ MSNBC moms ” or the “ yoga vote.
” The Resistance was the new brunch , the new book club .
For proof this was wrong one need only look at the 2018 midterms , when suburban women around the country— “ retired teachers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some businesswomen , ” as Skocpol put it—helped power the Blue Wave that swept Democrats into control of the House .
Health care was at the heart of their organizing efforts , a big reason it ’ s at the heart of the Democratic agenda today .
This cycle , Biden not only needs these women to vote—he ’ s relying on them to keep Democratic enthusiasm alive in their communities through November .
The campaign ’ s online strategy is shaped around appealing to what its digital director recently called , not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Facebook empathy moms.
” These activists had been forged in no small part by Trump ’ s chronic degradation of women ; as it stands , roughly two dozen have accused him of sexual assault .
But as an allegation concerning their party ’ s presidential candidate captures national headlines , the women I spoke with remain committed to their political activism .
That ’ s not because they believe Biden—though many do .
It ’ s because their ultimate goal is limiting Trump to one term .
If that requires some compromises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Do they think that sexual assault is okay ?
No , ” Putnam says .
“ Do they think that being a woman involved in politics , where there are still lots of male politicians , means a lot of compromises all the time in order to get things done ?
Yes.
” Reade ’ s claims against Biden have taken a muddled route to the national spotlight .
In April 2019 , Reade came forward to claim the former vice president had touched her neck and shoulders inappropriately when she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ office in the early 1990s ; that claim had been corroborated by several of her contemporaries and more than half a dozen women who ’ d made similar allegations .
But this spring , Reade leveled a more serious accusation at the former vice president : that he had shoved her against the wall of a Senate office building , reached under her skirt , and digitally penetrated her.Biden outright denies these claims .
Reporters , lacking the copious documentation or clear pattern of predation on which much of # MeToo reporting is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to move the story onto the sturdier footing .
The circumstances are best summarized by Vox ’ s Laura McGann , who spent more than a year investigating Reade ’ s allegations : “ None of this means Reade is lying , but it leaves us in a limbo of Me Too : a story that may be true but that we can ’ t prove.
” A new Monmouth poll found that only 20 percent of Democrats think Reade is telling the truth , a sentiment mirrored by the activists I spoke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the allegations .
“ I don ’ t think anyone ’ s rushing to judgment now , ” Kierstyn Zolfo , the Pennsylvania statewide legislative chair for Indivisible , tells me .
Barb Kaplan , who leads an Indivisible group in the Cleveland suburbs , says fellow activists she ’ s spoken with “ want to see some hard evidence , ” adding that “ most see it as a distraction.
” But Putnam suggests another force is at work , and she points to the presidential primary as evidence .
Biden had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of them preferred Elizabeth Warren or one of the other two dozen Democrats who sought the presidency this cycle .
But these women got into politics , Putnam explains , with a vision of building Democratic political power above all else .
Just as choosing one candidate over another is antithetical to their mission , so too would be calling for the removal of a candidate who most Democrats think did nothing wrong .
“ They have put a lot of energy into making politics be about more than just a single savior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they really loved or really disliked , ” Putnam says .
“ They have been girding themselves for living with an outcome they knew they were not going to be personally excited about at the top of the ticket.
” “ Coming out of 2016 , most people have been unified in driving Trump out of the White House , ” Kaplan says .
“ It ’ s going to be really hard to dissuade them from that position.
” This shouldn ’ t be mistaken for blind party loyalty—indeed , a number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ former Republicans , identify as independents .
Nor are these women turning a blind eye to the claims .
In fact , quite the opposite : For many , Biden ’ s history of behavior toward women has already been factored into their dim view of the candidate .
Besides the allegations raised last spring , many activists—in particular , the older , professional women who make of up the bulk of the cohort—haven ’ t forgiven Biden for the way he treated Anita Hill , the law professor who accused Supreme Court @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee , Biden presided over Thomas ’ confirmation hearing and failed to seriously investigate Hill ’ s accusations or call corroborating witnesses to testify against Thomas .
Last year , Hill accused Biden of having “ set the stage ” for Brett Kavanaugh ’ s Supreme Court confirmation in 2018 , when claims of sexual misconduct made against the judge were also poorly handled .
Such realpolitik can seem at odds with the revulsion that pushed many of the activists into politics in the first place .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that moral energy hasn ’ t dissipated ; it was merely channeled elsewhere once the women ’ s preferred candidates began to exit the presidential race .
“ When you lose your grand motivation , you ’ re finding other races and things to focus on , ” says Cowart , a member of the Kane County group .
“ I ’ ll pour my energies behind the women who are running.
” Michelle Rodriguez , who runs an Indivisible group near Dayton , Ohio , said her members had come to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominee .
“ If you want to spend your energy on a local race or voter registration , go for it , ” she recalls saying .
“ We ’ re just pushing toward a great Democratic turnout.
” The suburbs helped deliver the Democratic nomination to Biden , and he ’ ll rely on them to unseat Trump come November .
His nascent digital operation has set its sights on those “ empathy moms ” whom the campaign believes can be won over with appeals to human decency—the premise of much of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In the midst of the pandemic , paid family leave , health care , and related domestic issues are top of mind for swing voters .
As for sexual assault , “ it ’ s way down the list , ” says Tresa Undem , a pollster who specializes in surveys on gender issues .
Undem is keeping a close eye on independent women voters .
They ’ re less likely to view the allegations through a politicized lens—and in general they tend toward nihilistic doubts about their ability to change anything .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the parties on issues related to women could be an indicator of their apathy , Undem says .
“ Could this dampen their vote ?
Yes.
” And a lot of voter opinion , she says , will hinge on how much airtime the allegations receive in the coming weeks and months .
That doesn ’ t just mean news stories with new information—attack ads , Undem says , could play that role , something the Trump campaign already seems to have realized .
“ Ultimately , ” she says , “ it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and neither party , is good .
”

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
In the Before Times, Jody Kanikula and a half dozen fellow Democratic women activists would gather for drinks each Thursday after the weekly Kane County Democrats meeting in Geneva, Illinois. These days, they settle for Saturday morning Zoom calls to reimagine what their political organizing looks like now that their preferred tools of the trade—door knocking and mail drops—are off the table.
I met Kanikula and her friends in October 2018, a high season of political activity. The group was trying to elect Democrat Lauren Underwood, then a 32-year-old nurse who’d guided the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, to Congress. The women were mostly new to politics, having dipped their toes into activism in the wake of Donald Trump’s election. They spent the 2018 cycle rebuilding Democratic infrastructure in their cluster of exurbs 50 miles west of Chicago, an area where Republicans had long ruled by default. That year, they focused their energies on ginning up excitement for a small slate of Democratic candidates. This time around, a Democrat is challenging a GOP officeholder in the county for every elected position but coroner.
In recent weeks, Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden have rippled through the group, setting off a flurry of notifications in their text chain with each new development. Reade’s claims are “disheartening,” Kanikula tells me. But like the 10 other “resistance women” I spoke with, she’s sticking with the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee regardless. “If it was a different kind of election, I’d give it more weight,” she says. “But the No. 1 goal is to get Trump out of there.”
“They have put a lot of energy into making politics be about more than just a single savior candidate.”
Kanikula and her friends seem yanked from research conducted by Harvard sociologist Theda Skopcol and University of Pittsburgh historian Lara Putnam in the wake of the 2016 election. The scholars had identified a new brand of Democratic activist: white, college-educated women who live in suburban and exurban communities where “country club Republicans” had long reigned. In the wake of Trump’s victory, these women flocked to their nearest city for the Women’s March, formed Indivisible groups, and, eventually, worked with their local Democratic parties to unseat Republicans at every level of government.
This is not the usual picture of the resurgent activist left. Many accounts of the suburban woman’s political awakening are fond of anathematizing these activists as “wine moms” or “MSNBC moms” or the “yoga vote.” The Resistance was the new brunch, the new book club. For proof this was wrong one need only look at the 2018 midterms, when suburban women around the country— “retired teachers, librarians, health care people, some businesswomen,” as Skocpol put it—helped power the Blue Wave that swept Democrats into control of the House. Health care was at the heart of their organizing efforts, a big reason it’s at the heart of the Democratic agenda today. This cycle, Biden not only needs these women to vote—he’s relying on them to keep Democratic enthusiasm alive in their communities through November. The campaign’s online strategy is shaped around appealing to what its digital director recently called, not a little cringingly, the “suburban Facebook empathy moms.”
These activists had been forged in no small part by Trump’s chronic degradation of women; as it stands, roughly two dozen have accused him of sexual assault. But as an allegation concerning their party’s presidential candidate captures national headlines, the women I spoke with remain committed to their political activism. That’s not because they believe Biden—though many do. It’s because their ultimate goal is limiting Trump to one term. If that requires some compromises along the way, so be it.
“Do they think that sexual assault is okay? No,” Putnam says. “Do they think that being a woman involved in politics, where there are still lots of male politicians, means a lot of compromises all the time in order to get things done? Yes.”
Reade’s claims against Biden have taken a muddled route to the national spotlight. In April 2019, Reade came forward to claim the former vice president had touched her neck and shoulders inappropriately when she had been an aide in his Senate office in the early 1990s; that claim had been corroborated by several of her contemporaries and more than half a dozen women who’d made similar allegations.
But this spring, Reade leveled a more serious accusation at the former vice president: that he had shoved her against the wall of a Senate office building, reached under her skirt, and digitally penetrated her.Biden outright denies these claims. Reporters, lacking the copious documentation or clear pattern of predation on which much of #MeToo reporting is built, have thus far been unable to move the story onto the sturdier footing. The circumstances are best summarized by Vox’s Laura McGann, who spent more than a year investigating Reade’s allegations: “None of this means Reade is lying, but it leaves us in a limbo of Me Too: a story that may be true but that we can’t prove.”
A new Monmouth poll found that only 20 percent of Democrats think Reade is telling the truth, a sentiment mirrored by the activists I spoke with who say many are still processing the allegations. “I don’t think anyone’s rushing to judgment now,” Kierstyn Zolfo, the Pennsylvania statewide legislative chair for Indivisible, tells me. Barb Kaplan, who leads an Indivisible group in the Cleveland suburbs, says fellow activists she’s spoken with “want to see some hard evidence,” adding that “most see it as a distraction.”
But Putnam suggests another force is at work, and she points to the presidential primary as evidence. Biden had never been these activists’ favorite candidate—most of them preferred Elizabeth Warren or one of the other two dozen Democrats who sought the presidency this cycle. But these women got into politics, Putnam explains, with a vision of building Democratic political power above all else. Just as choosing one candidate over another is antithetical to their mission, so too would be calling for the removal of a candidate who most Democrats think did nothing wrong.
“They have put a lot of energy into making politics be about more than just a single savior candidate—whether that’s a candidate who they really loved or really disliked,” Putnam says. “They have been girding themselves for living with an outcome they knew they were not going to be personally excited about at the top of the ticket.”
“Coming out of 2016, most people have been unified in driving Trump out of the White House,” Kaplan says. “It’s going to be really hard to dissuade them from that position.”
This shouldn’t be mistaken for blind party loyalty—indeed, a number of these activists, some of them former Republicans, identify as independents. Nor are these women turning a blind eye to the claims. In fact, quite the opposite: For many, Biden’s history of behavior toward women has already been factored into their dim view of the candidate. Besides the allegations raised last spring, many activists—in particular, the older, professional women who make of up the bulk of the cohort—haven’t forgiven Biden for the way he treated Anita Hill, the law professor who accused Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. As chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Biden presided over Thomas’ confirmation hearing and failed to seriously investigate Hill’s accusations or call corroborating witnesses to testify against Thomas. Last year, Hill accused Biden of having “set the stage” for Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation in 2018, when claims of sexual misconduct made against the judge were also poorly handled.
Such realpolitik can seem at odds with the revulsion that pushed many of the activists into politics in the first place. But to hear Lark Cowart tell it, that moral energy hasn’t dissipated; it was merely channeled elsewhere once the women’s preferred candidates began to exit the presidential race. “When you lose your grand motivation, you’re finding other races and things to focus on,” says Cowart, a member of the Kane County group. “I’ll pour my energies behind the women who are running.”
Melissa Rodriguez, who runs an Indivisible group near Dayton, Ohio, said her members had come to a similar agreement when Biden became the nominee. “If you want to spend your energy on a local race or voter registration, go for it,” she recalls saying. “We’re just pushing toward a great Democratic turnout.”
The suburbs helped deliver the Democratic nomination to Biden, and he’ll rely on them to unseat Trump come November. His nascent digital operation has set its sights on those “empathy moms” whom the campaign believes can be won over with appeals to human decency—the premise of much of Biden’s relatively non-ideological campaign. In the midst of the pandemic, paid family leave, health care, and related domestic issues are top of mind for swing voters. As for sexual assault, “it’s way down the list,” says Tresa Undem, a pollster who specializes in surveys on gender issues.
Undem is keeping a close eye on independent women voters. They’re less likely to view the allegations through a politicized lens—and in general they tend toward nihilistic doubts about their ability to change anything. Whether these voters see a difference between the parties on issues related to women could be an indicator of their apathy, Undem says. “Could this dampen their vote? Yes.”
And a lot of voter opinion, she says, will hinge on how much airtime the allegations receive in the coming weeks and months. That doesn’t just mean news stories with new information—attack ads, Undem says, could play that role, something the Trump campaign already seems to have realized. “Ultimately,” she says, “it could create the impression that neither candidate, and neither party, is good.”


motherjones--2020-05-11--Newly Released Transcript Shows Jared Kushner Misled Congress About a Contact Involving Russia

While President Trump uses Attorney General William Barr to try to erase the story of his 2016 campaign ’ s contacts with Russia , information showing that Trump insiders stonewalled or misled investigators probing the Trump-Russia scandal continues to emerge .
Last week , the House Intelligence Committee released a transcript of a once behind-closed-doors interview with Jared Kushner in which Trump ’ s son-in-law evaded a question about his relationship with Rick Gerson , a New York hedge-fund manager and a longtime friend of Kushner .
In a curious move , Kushner downplayed his link to Gerson , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to his connection to Kushner , was mixed up in secretive contacts between the incoming Trump administration , the United Arab Emirates , and Russia—a weird series of actions that were investigated by special counsel Robert Mueller .
Here ’ s what happened .
On July 25 , 2017 , Kushner had a private interview with the House Intelligence Committee , which then was controlled by Republicans and running a less-than-vigorous investigation of the Trump-Russia scandal .
During the three hours session , Rep. Adam Schiff ( D-Calif. ) , the panel @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a December 2016 meeting he attended in Manhattan ’ s Four Season ’ s hotel with the effective ruler of the United Arab Emirates , Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed , known as MBZ .
This meeting , also , attended Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn , later drew notice because the Emiratis attempted to meet with the Trump crew without alerting the Obama administration .
And investigators were interested in the UAE contacts because in January 2017 the UAE arranged a secret meeting in the Seychelles between a Russian sovereign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an informal Trump campaign adviser and the founder of the controversial Blackwater security firm .
Prince is the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos .
Regarding the Four Seasons ’ meeting , Schiff asked Kushner , “ Were there any other parties at the meeting other than the representatives from the UAE , yourself , Mr. Bannon , Mr. Flynn ?
” “ I can recall one person , yes , ” Kushner said : “ A guy Rick Gerson.
” “ And what was his status ?
” Schiff asked .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ I think he ’ s a friend of Sheikh Muhammad , ” Kushner said , referring to MBZ .
Kushner added that Gerson came to the meeting as part of the UAE delegation .
Kushner ’ s description of Gerson was misleading at best .
He was far more than merely “ a guy.
” According to Mueller ’ s final report , Gerson was a longtime pal of Kushner and an informal Trump campaign adviser who worked during the presidential transition “ arranging meetings ” for Kushner .
This included @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the Emirati delegation .
By calling Gerson just a “ guy ” Kushner held back a crucial piece of information : Gerson was essentially a Kushner operative who was also working for the UAE .
As the New York Times explained back in 2018 , “ Mr .
Kushner has been friends for more than a decade with Mr. Gerson ’ s brother Mark , a founder of the specialized research company Gerson Lehrman Group .
Mark Gerson was also an early investor in Cadre , a real estate technology company founded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Josh.
” Why would Kushner want to distance himself from Gerson and not acknowledge his close tie to him ?
Kushner ’ s lawyer , Abbe Lowell , did not respond to a request for comment .
But soon after the meeting between Kushner and the UAE , Gerson became involved in an odd episode .
In January 2017 , he traveled to the Seychelles , and , according to the Mueller report , Gerson was there “ around the time ” that Prince flew to the island nation to meet secretly with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hedge fund manager who was tasked by President Vladimir Putin to reach out to Trump insiders .
Last year , the House Intelligence Committee asked the Justice Department to prosecute Prince for making false statements to the committee about his meeting with Dmitriev .
The Seychelles meeting has never been fully explained .
Was the Trump campaign , through Prince , trying to set up a private back channel to Moscow ?
The Mueller report offered no definitive conclusion about the meeting .
But it noted that in December and January of 2017 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposal for reconciliation between the United States and Russia .
Gerson gave a document outlining a plan to bolster US-Russia relations—which Dmitriev , according to the Mueller report , “ implied ” Putin had cleared—to Kushner .
Kushner passed on copies to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and to Bannon , the report says .
Why would Kushner say that Gerson , his friend and adviser who seemingly served an important role as an private emissary for Kushner to Russia and the UAE , was just “ a guy ” who attended the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was “ a friend of the Sheikh ?
” This answer raises the question of whether Kushner was attempting to avoid revealing his tie to a go-between connecting the Trump camp and a Putin operative .
A House Intelligence Committee spokesman declined to comment .
Gerson did not respond to a request for comment .
The transcript is the latest development that raises questions about Kushner ’ s foreign contacts during the campaign .
In a November 2017 letter , the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee said that Kushner knew of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Trump campaign in 2016 but failed to disclose it to the committee when responding to questions and a request for documents they sent him .
In 2018 , Mother Jones reported that Kushner had told congressional investigators that he did not know of any contacts between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign , despite evidence that showed Kushner knew of contact during the campaign between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks .
In testimony last year before the House Judiciary Committee , Hope Hicks , a Trump campaign spokesperson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public statement about interactions between the Trump campaign and Russians in part due to information she received from Kushner .
In November 2016 , days after the election , Hicks , when asked by the Associated Press whether there had been contacts between the campaign and Russia , said “ there was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.
” Mueller and media reports later revealed more than 100 contacts between the campaign and Russia alone .
Hicks told the committee that she made her strikingly false claim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the president ’ s son-in-law .
Kushner , who personally attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 between Trump campaign advisers and a Russian emissary offering dirt on Hillary Clinton , knew that there had been a contact between the campaign and a Russian go-between .
More than three years later , as Trump tries to erase these lies and omissions from history , they are more important than ever .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
While President Trump uses Attorney General William Barr to try to erase the story of his 2016 campaign’s contacts with Russia, information showing that Trump insiders stonewalled or misled investigators probing the Trump-Russia scandal continues to emerge.
Last week, the House Intelligence Committee released a transcript of a once behind-closed-doors interview with Jared Kushner in which Trump’s son-in-law evaded a question about his relationship with Rick Gerson, a New York hedge-fund manager and a longtime friend of Kushner. In a curious move, Kushner downplayed his link to Gerson, who in late 2016 and early 2017, due to his connection to Kushner, was mixed up in secretive contacts between the incoming Trump administration, the United Arab Emirates, and Russia—a weird series of actions that were investigated by special counsel Robert Mueller.
Here’s what happened. On July 25, 2017, Kushner had a private interview with the House Intelligence Committee, which then was controlled by Republicans and running a less-than-vigorous investigation of the Trump-Russia scandal. During the three hours session, Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), the panel’s top Democrat, asked Kushner about a December 2016 meeting he attended in Manhattan’s Four Seasons hotel with the effective ruler of the United Arab Emirates, Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, known as MBZ. This meeting, also, attended by Trump advisers Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn, later drew notice because the Emiratis attempted to meet with the Trump crew without alerting the Obama administration. And investigators were interested in the UAE contacts because in January 2017 the UAE arranged a secret meeting in the Seychelles between a Russian sovereign wealth fund manager and Erik Prince, an informal Trump campaign adviser and the founder of the controversial Blackwater security firm. Prince is the brother of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.
Regarding the Manhattan meeting, Schiff asked Kushner, “Were there any other parties at the meeting other than the representatives from the UAE, yourself, Mr. Bannon, Mr. Flynn?”
“I can recall one person, yes,” Kushner said: “A guy Rick Gerson.”
“And what was his status?” Schiff asked. “Why was he at the meeting?”
“I think he’s a friend of Sheikh Muhammad,” Kushner said, referring to MBZ. Kushner added that Gerson came to the meeting as part of the UAE delegation.
Kushner’s description of Gerson was misleading at best. He was far more than merely “a guy.” According to Mueller’s final report, Gerson was a longtime pal of Kushner and an informal Trump campaign adviser who worked during the presidential transition “arranging meetings” for Kushner. This included the including the December meeting with MBZ and the Emirati delegation. By calling Gerson just a “guy” Kushner held back a crucial piece of information: Gerson was essentially a Kushner operative who was also working for the UAE.
As the New York Times explained back in 2018, “Mr. Kushner has been friends for more than a decade with Mr. Gerson’s brother Mark, a founder of the specialized research company Gerson Lehrman Group. Mark Gerson was also an early investor in Cadre, a real estate technology company founded by Mr. Kushner and his brother, Josh.”
Why would Kushner want to distance himself from Gerson and not acknowledge his close tie to him? Kushner’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, did not respond to a request for comment.
But soon after the meeting between Kushner and the UAE, Gerson became involved in an odd episode. In January 2017, he traveled to the Seychelles, and, according to the Mueller report, Gerson was there “around the time” that Prince flew to the island nation to meet secretly with MBZ and Kirill Dmitriev, a Russian hedge fund manager who was tasked by President Vladimir Putin to reach out to Trump insiders. Last year, the House Intelligence Committee asked the Justice Department to prosecute Prince for making false statements to the committee about his meeting with Dmitriev.
The Seychelles meeting has never been fully explained. Was the Trump campaign, through Prince, trying to set up a private back channel to Moscow? The Mueller report offered no definitive conclusion about the meeting. But it noted that in December and January of 2017, Gerson worked with Dmitriev on a proposal for reconciliation between the United States and Russia. Gerson gave a document outlining a plan to bolster US-Russia relations—which Dmitriev, according to the Mueller report, “implied” Putin had cleared—to Kushner. Kushner passed on copies to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and to Bannon, the report says.
Why would Kushner say that Gerson, his friend and adviser who seemingly served an important role as an private emissary for Kushner to Russia and the UAE, was just “a guy” who attended the secret meeting with the Emirati delegation because he was “a friend of the Sheikh?” This answer raises the question of whether Kushner was attempting to avoid revealing his tie to a go-between connecting the Trump camp and a Putin operative.
A House Intelligence Committee spokesperson declined to comment. Gerson did not respond to a request for comment.
The transcript is the latest development that raises questions about Kushner’s foreign contacts during the campaign. In a November 2017 letter, the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee said that Kushner knew of a “Russian backdoor overture” to the Trump campaign in 2016 but failed to disclose it to the committee when responding to questions and a request for documents they sent him. In 2018, Mother Jones reported that Kushner had told congressional investigators that he did not know of any contacts between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks during the 2016 presidential campaign, despite evidence that showed Kushner knew of contact during the campaign between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks.
In testimony last year before the House Judiciary Committee, Hope Hicks, a Trump campaign spokesperson, said she had made a false public statement about interactions between the Trump campaign and Russians in part due to information she received from Kushner. In November 2016, days after the election, Hicks, when asked by the Associated Press whether there had been contacts between the campaign and Russia, said “there was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.” Mueller and media reports later revealed more than 100 contacts between the campaign and Russia alone. Hicks told the committee that she made her strikingly false claim after checking with campaign officials, including the president’s son-in-law. Kushner, who personally attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting in June 2016 between Trump campaign advisers and a Russian emissary offering dirt on Hillary Clinton, knew that there had been a contact between the campaign and a Russian go-between.
More than three years later, as Trump tries to erase these lies and omissions from history, they are more important than ever.


motherjones--2020-05-12--Debt Collectors Get a Bailout in Democrats’ New Pandemic Relief Bill

House Democrats ’ second emergency relief bill offers a welcome soft landing for the millions of Americans struggling to pay their bills in the face of a pandemic-induced recession .
But that relief is a two-way street : Debt collectors , too , will received federal fundings to make up for lost revenue .
On Tuesday , the Democratic leadership in the US House released a $ 3 trillion , 1,815 page bill to help boost the economy as the nation remains under pandemic lockdown .
The new bill would , if it became law , grant people experiencing financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with no additional documentation required other than the borrower ’ s attestation to a financial hardship caused by COVID-19.
” The provision reduces the bureaucratic burden of proving their circumstances—something banks and lenders likely have little time or energy for , now that 33 million Americans are out of work .
But the cushion doesn ’ t just benefit out-of-work Americans .
The Democrats ’ legislation also establishes “ a facility ” within the Federal Reserve to make “ long-term , low-cost loans ” to debt collectors to “ temporarily compensate ” them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other words : The companies that make a profit hounding poor Americans—especially Americans of color—for unpaid debts will be prepared to resume business once the pandemic subsides .
To be sure , the debt collection trade is facing trying times .
Nearly a third of Americans didn ’ t pay their April rent , and that was a mere three weeks into the coronavirus crisis .
Since then , more than 20 million Americans have lost their jobs .
A number of banks are waiving overdraft fees for customers facing hardship , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the likelihood that they won ’ t get paid until people are back to work .
It could be worse : After Americans started to receive their stimulus checks of up to $ 1,200—a provision of the first emergency relief bill in mid-March—banks began to garnish those payments to pay off existing debts .
Democrats included a ban of garnishment in their latest proposals .

House Democrats’ second emergency relief bill offers a welcome soft landing for the millions of Americans struggling to pay their bills in the face of a pandemic-induced recession. But that relief is a two-way street: Debt collectors, too, will received federal fundings to make up for lost revenue.
On Tuesday, the Democratic leadership in the US House released a $3 trillion, 1,815 page bill to help boost the economy as the nation remains under pandemic lockdown. The new bill would, if it became law, grant people experiencing financial hardship a forbearance on their debts—”with no additional documentation required other than the borrower’s attestation to a financial hardship caused by COVID-19.” The provision reduces the bureaucratic burden of proving their circumstances—something banks and lenders likely have little time or energy for, now that 33 million Americans are out of work.
But the cushion doesn’t just benefit out-of-work Americans. The Democrats’ legislation also establishes “a facility” within the Federal Reserve to make “long-term, low-cost loans” to debt collectors to “temporarily compensate” them until consumers’ payments resume. While this compensation would be extended to all creditors such as utilities and local government agencies, it also extends to companies that make a profit hounding poor Americans—especially Americans of color—for unpaid debts will be prepared to resume business once the pandemic subsides.*
To be sure, the debt collection trade is facing trying times. Nearly a third of Americans didn’t pay their April rent, and that was a mere three weeks into the coronavirus crisis. Since then, more than 20 million Americans have lost their jobs. A number of banks are waiving overdraft fees for customers facing hardship, and credit card lenders have braced themselves for the likelihood that they won’t get paid until people are back to work.
It could be worse: After Americans started to receive their stimulus checks of up to $1,200—a provision of the first emergency relief bill in mid-March—banks began to garnish those payments to pay off existing debts. Democrats included a ban of garnishment in their latest proposals.
*Clarification, May 12, 2020, 9:30pm: This post has been updated to clarify that the provision in the bill would benefit all creditors.


motherjones--2020-05-12--Donald Trump’s Lawyer Tries to Convince the Supreme Court That Presidents Are Above the Law

On Tuesday , the Supreme Court heard more than four hours of arguments over whether two banks and an accounting firm should obey subpoenas , issued by Congress and New York prosecutors , for Donald Trump ’ s financial records .
Trump ’ s attorney Jay Sekulow was blunt about why ( at least ) prosecutors shouldn ’ t be allowed to pursue those documents .
“ The president is not to be treated as an ordinary citizen , ” Sekulow told the justices in a rare Supreme Court hearing , conducted by phone and livestreamed to the public , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an ordinary citizen .
“ He ’ s the president of the United States , he ’ s a branch of the government.
” The court heard arguments in two closely related cases .
The first involves subpoenas issued by three Democratic-controlled House committees investigating a variety of issues involving the president , including the IRS ’ s handling of his tax returns and allegations of foreign interference in the 2016 election .
The second case concerns subpoenas issued by a grand jury convened by New York attorney general Cyrus Vance , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to women Trump conducted affairs with prior to becoming president .
The subpoenas are nearly identical .
They seek bank records from Capital One and Deutsche Bank , the president ’ s largest lender , including internal bank communications discussing concerns about potentially suspicious transaction activity related to Trump Organization accounts .
Both New York prosecutors and the House committees are also requesting that accounting firm Mazars turn over copies of Trump ’ s tax returns .
Trump sued to block the subpoenas , and the cases have wound their way to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firm have indicated they will comply with the subpoenas if the court permits them to release the records .
In the case of the New York grand jury , Sekulow argued that responding to a subpoena would just be too distracting for a president .
He suggested that any grand jury subpoenas involving the president should be delayed until he leaves office .
Many of the justices—even some of the court ’ s conservative members—seemed skeptical that a subpoena would interfere with a president doing his or her job .
Chief Justice John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vance ’ s grand jury investigation was proper , but the subpoena for information it needed for the probe should be off limits .
“ In other words , it ’ s okay for the grand jury to investigate , but it can ’ t use the usual and most typical device ?
” Roberts asked .
Several justices indicated they saw a wide gulf between determining if a prosecutor really needed documents in a case involving the president , and stating that the president ( or his banks and accountant ) are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ went after the notion that Trump ’ s presidential status meant he should not have to provide evidence , like any other citizen , if a grand jury asked .
“ The president shouldn ’ t be treated like an ordinary citizen , but it ’ s also a fundamental precept that the president isn ’ t above the law , ” she said .
“ Why isn ’ t the way to deal with these two things that the president is special , but the president is like an ordinary citizen in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” If the president feels it is too onerous to meet a subpoena ’ s demands , he can—like anyone else—go to a judge and ask for some flexibility , she noted .
“ The courts in reviewing those of course should take seriously the president ’ s objections and treat those with a certain kind of sensitivity and respect due to someone who is a branch of government , ” she said .
The specter of Paula Jones ’ 1998 lawsuit against Bill Clinton hung over the arguments .
In that case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the matter should be deferred , but the Supreme Court unanimously determined that Jones had the right to pursue her lawsuit against the president—he was not above that—but that he was given some special dispensation for when and where he must respond to demands for a deposition or other information .
“ How is this more burdensome than Paula Jones v. Clinton ?
” asked Justice Neil Gorsuch , one of Trump ’ s appointees .
“ There they sought the deposition of the president while he was serving ; here they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Sekulow also argued that allowing Vance ’ s investigation would open the floodgates to as many as 2,300 local prosecutors launching politically motivated probes against a president—another argument that received pushback from justices .
Carey Dunne , who represented the Manhattan district attorney ’ s office , also dismissed that idea , noting that not only did the Supreme Court permit the Jones lawsuit to move forward , it allowed the Watergate investigation to proceed against Richard Nixon in the 1970s .
“ There ’ s no empirical basis in history for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The same claim was made and rejected in Nixon and Clinton , those were decades ago , and there has been no flood of prosecutions or investigations.
” In between Trump ’ s attorneys and Vance ’ s office , the Department of Justice argued for the implementation of some standard for subpoenas involving the president , stopping well short of advocating that such requests should be banned until he or she leaves office .
The justices generally seemed more skeptical of the case presented by the House in its pursuit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Although none seemed to accept the idea that Congress couldn ’ t investigate a sitting president , Douglas Letter , general counsel to the House of Representatives , seemed unprepared to tell the justices where that investigative power should stop .
Each of the committees has advanced arguments over why the documents they ’ re seeking are needed for legislative purposes .
But when pressed by justices Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh , Letter was unable to say whether , for example , a president ’ s personal medical records were fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to rule on the cases in late June or early July .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard more than four hours of arguments over whether two banks and an accounting firm should obey subpoenas, issued by Congress and New York prosecutors, for Donald Trump’s financial records. Trump’s attorney Jay Sekulow was blunt about why (at least) prosecutors shouldn’t be allowed to pursue those documents.
“The president is not to be treated as an ordinary citizen,” Sekulow told the justices in a rare Supreme Court hearing, conducted by phone and livestreamed to the public, adding later that Trump is far from an ordinary citizen. “He’s the president of the United States, he’s a branch of the government.”
The court heard arguments in two closely related cases. The first involves subpoenas issued by three Democratic-controlled House committees investigating a variety of issues involving the president, including the IRS’s handling of his tax returns and allegations of foreign interference in the 2016 election. The second case concerns subpoenas issued by a grand jury convened by New York attorney general Cyrus Vance, who is probing hush money payments allegedly made to women Trump conducted affairs with prior to becoming president. The subpoenas are nearly identical. They seek bank records from Capital One and Deutsche Bank, the president’s largest lender, including internal bank communications discussing concerns about potentially suspicious transaction activity related to Trump Organization accounts. Both New York prosecutors and the House committees are also requesting that accounting firm Mazars turn over copies of Trump’s tax returns. Trump sued to block the subpoenas, and the cases have wound their way to the Supreme Court. The banks and accounting firm have indicated they will comply with the subpoenas if the court permits them to release the records.
In the case of the New York grand jury, Sekulow argued that responding to a subpoena would just be too distracting for a president. He suggested that any grand jury subpoenas involving the president should be delayed until he leaves office.
Many of the justices—even some of the court’s conservative members—seemed skeptical that a subpoena would interfere with a president doing his or her job. Chief Justice John Roberts questioned Sekulow’s argument that Vance’s grand jury investigation was proper, but the subpoena for information it needed for the probe should be off limits.
“In other words, it’s okay for the grand jury to investigate, but it can’t use the usual and most typical device?” Roberts asked.
Several justices indicated they saw a wide gulf between determining if a prosecutor really needed documents in a case involving the president, and stating that the president (or his banks and accountant) are immune from subpoenas.
Justice Elena Kagan went after the notion that Trump’s presidential status meant he should not have to provide evidence, like any other citizen, if a grand jury asked. “The president shouldn’t be treated like an ordinary citizen, but it’s also a fundamental precept that the president isn’t above the law,” she said. “Why isn’t the way to deal with these two things that the president is special, but the president is like an ordinary citizen in that he is subject to law?”
If the president feels it is too onerous to meet a subpoena’s demands, he can—like anyone else—go to a judge and ask for some flexibility, she noted.
“The courts in reviewing those of course should take seriously the president’s objections and treat those with a certain kind of sensitivity and respect due to someone who is a branch of government,” she said.
The specter of Paula Jones’ 1998 lawsuit against Bill Clinton hung over the arguments. In that case, Clinton had advanced a similar argument that the matter should be deferred, but the Supreme Court unanimously determined that Jones had the right to pursue her lawsuit against the president—he was not above that—but that he was given some special dispensation for when and where he must respond to demands for a deposition or other information.
“How is this more burdensome than Paula Jones v. Clinton?” asked Justice Neil Gorsuch, one of Trump’s appointees. “There they sought the deposition of the president while he was serving; here they’re seeking records from third parties.”
Sekulow also argued that allowing Vance’s investigation would open the floodgates to as many as 2,300 local prosecutors launching politically motivated probes against a president—another argument that received pushback from justices.
Carey Dunne, who represented the Manhattan district attorney’s office, also dismissed that idea, noting that not only did the Supreme Court permit the Jones lawsuit to move forward, it allowed the Watergate investigation to proceed against Richard Nixon in the 1970s.
“There’s no empirical basis in history for this apocalyptic prediction,” he contended. “The same claim was made and rejected in Nixon and Clinton, those were decades ago, and there has been no flood of prosecutions or investigations.”
In between Trump’s attorneys and Vance’s office, the Department of Justice argued for the implementation of some standard for subpoenas involving the president, stopping well short of advocating that such requests should be banned until he or she leaves office.
The justices generally seemed more skeptical of the case presented by the House in its pursuit of the president’s financial records. Although none seemed to accept the idea that Congress couldn’t investigate a sitting president, Douglas Letter, general counsel to the House of Representatives, seemed unprepared to tell the justices where that investigative power should stop. Each of the committees has advanced arguments over why the documents they’re seeking are needed for legislative purposes. But when pressed by justices Sonia Sotomayor and Brett Kavanaugh, Letter was unable to say whether, for example, a president’s personal medical records were fair game.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the cases in late June or early July.


motherjones--2020-05-12--Mitt Romney Goes After Trump’s Absurd Coronavirus Claims

Sen. Mitt Romney on Tuesday decried the Trump administration ’ s ongoing claims that the US leads the world in coronavirus testing , saying that the country ’ s record in uncovering and tracking the virus is “ nothing to celebrate whatsoever.
” “ I understand that politicians are going to frame data in a way that ’ s most positive politically , ” Romney said during a much-anticipated Senate hearing with top health officials helping lead the country ’ s coronavirus response .
“ But yesterday you celebrated that we had done more tests and more tests per capita @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ignore the fact that they accomplished theirs at the beginning of the outbreak , while we treaded water during February and March.
” “ By March 6 , the US had completed just 2,000 tests , ” he continued , “ whereas South Korea had conducted more than 140,000 tests .
So partially as a result of that , they have 256 deaths and we have almost 80,000 deaths.
” The scathing rebuke came just one day after the White House staged a press conference to try to take a victory lap amid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ growing number of cumulative tests , even while the tests available per day remain far below what experts say is necessary to safely monitor a more mobile population .
And the Utah senator didn ’ t stop there .
With the limited time he had left , Romney asked Dr. Anthony Fauci , the country ’ s leading expert on infectious diseases , if there was any truth to Trump ’ s accusations that former President Barack Obama is to blame for the lack of a coronavirus vaccine .
“ No , no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a straight-faced Fauci responded .
“ Certainly President Obama nor President Trump are responsible for our not having a vaccine.
” It was a stunning thing to witness : A former GOP presidential candidate coming to the defense of the Democrat who defeated him in order to knock the current leader of his party .
But perhaps even more extraordinary was the fact that Romney was the only Republican Senator willing to use the hearing to do more than air some polite strain over the president ’ s disastrous pandemic response .

Sen. Mitt Romney on Tuesday decried the Trump administration’s ongoing claims that the US leads the world in coronavirus testing, saying that the country’s record in uncovering and tracking the virus is “nothing to celebrate whatsoever.”
“I understand that politicians are going to frame data in a way that’s most positive politically,” Romney said during a much-anticipated Senate hearing with top health officials helping lead the country’s coronavirus response. “But yesterday you celebrated that we had done more tests and more tests per capita even than South Korea. But you ignore the fact that they accomplished theirs at the beginning of the outbreak, while we treaded water during February and March.”
“By March 6, the US had completed just 2,000 tests,” he continued, “whereas South Korea had conducted more than 140,000 tests. So partially as a result of that, they have 256 deaths and we have almost 80,000 deaths.”
The scathing rebuke came just one day after the White House staged a press conference to try to take a victory lap amid the rising death count by celebrating the growing number of cumulative tests, even while the tests available per day remain far below what experts say is necessary to safely monitor a more mobile population. And the Utah senator didn’t stop there.
With the limited time he had left, Romney asked Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s leading expert on infectious diseases, if there was any truth to Trump’s accusations that former President Barack Obama is to blame for the lack of a coronavirus vaccine. “No, no senator, not at all,” a straight-faced Fauci responded. “Certainly President Obama nor President Trump are responsible for our not having a vaccine.”
.@SenatorRomney just wiped the floor with the Republican's talking points: "I understand that politicians are going to frame data in a way that's most positive politically… I find our testing record nothing to celebrate whatsoever." pic.twitter.com/iCxrdZ06sW — Mother Jones (@MotherJones) May 12, 2020
It was a stunning thing to witness: A former GOP presidential candidate coming to the defense of the Democrat who defeated him in order to knock the current leader of his party. But perhaps even more extraordinary was the fact that Romney was the only Republican Senator willing to use the hearing to do more than air some polite strain over the president’s disastrous pandemic response.


motherjones--2020-05-12--Anti-Vaxxers Have a Dangerous Theory Called “Natural Immunity.” Now It’s Going Mainstream

On April 26 , two California physicians posted a video on YouTube about what they said was a potentially deadly side effect of social distancing : Our immune systems will get weaker because of lack of exposure to germs .
They weren ’ t the only ones to make this argument .
In a May 4 video , a controversial and outspoken Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai—an engineer who claims to have invented email—also embraces this idea .
In a May 3 YouTube video , he announced , “ Viruses do not harm or kill us.
” Instead , he argues , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knows how to take care of itself , and that ’ s how we get immune health .
But these politicians , the CDC and the NIH—they ’ re not talking about any of this .
Shame on them , it ’ s criminal.
” An article from the Minnesota-based conservative think tank the Charlemagne Institute titled “ COVID-19 Lockdowns May Destroy Our Immune Systems ” is currently making the rounds , too .
It ’ s not hard to see why this content took off .
The idea—or the basic contours of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ truth .
Immunologists have shown that , in general , we strengthen our immune systems by exposing them to pathogens .
In the last few decades , researchers have amassed evidence to suggest that some chronic conditions that are common in the developed world but rare in poorer countries—including asthma , allergies , and autoimmune illnesses like Crohn ’ s disease—could be the result of an environment that doesn ’ t have enough germs , causing the immune system to go haywire .
But the coronavirus is not a chronic immune condition ; @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks the body ’ s systems in ways not yet completely understood .
Experts roundly reject the idea that social distancing will dangerously weaken the immune system .
“ A broad-based immunity weakening because of social distancing ?
Definitely not , ” said Saad Omer , a Yale University epidemiologist and infectious disease specialist .
Jennifer Reich , a sociologist who studies the spread of misinformation about health , agreed .
“ In order for our immune systems to be harmed by social distancing , we would have to live in sterile settings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bacteria or germs could affect us , ” she wrote to me in an email .
But the experts I talked to weren ’ t at all surprised to see these discredited ideas making the rounds ; they ’ ve seen them before in the anti-vaccination and extreme holistic medicine communities .
This is the coronavirus edition of their pervasive belief in “ natural immunity.
” Rupali Limaye , a Johns Hopkins epidemiologist who has studied the movement against mandatory vaccines , told me , “ We have heard from those that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prefer to allow their immune system to be naturally exposed to a specific pathogen to gain immunity , ” she wrote to me in an email .
“ It ’ s a spinoff of previous theories we ’ ve seen , ” concurred Omer , who has written extensively about anti-vaccination groups .
“ This is all the usual stuff.
” Indeed , anti-vaccination groups on Facebook have referenced the idea constantly in recent posts .
One widely shared meme lists , “ Things that suppress our immune systems : Masks , gloves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , washing hands with synthetic soaps.
” In response to an article about the decline in childhood vaccination rates as a result of coronavirus , one member of the group Michigan for Vaccine Choice commented , “ God , I would love for my kids to catch chicken pox , my body could use a little exposure to keep the shingles away lol plus you know them developing actual immunity would be nice.
” In recent weeks , in response to calls for social distancing , several of the groups posted a 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We Need to Stop Sanitizing Everything and Let Bacteria Back Into Our Lives.
” Meanwhile , alternative medicine groups promote the idea that eating the right foods or taking certain vitamins and supplements will strengthen the immune system so that it can successfully fight off coronavirus .
“ Like any virus , coronavirus is no match for someone with a strong immune system , ” writes Sally Fallon Morell on a blog affiliated with the holistic nutrition group the Weston A .
Price Foundation .
Coconut oil , bone broth , and raw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to bolster the immune system against coronavirus .
Just to be clear : This idea is patently false ; humanity has never seen the virus before , therefore our immune systems have no natural defenses against it .
Given the holistic community and anti-vaccination groups ’ fixations on “ natural immunity , ” it ’ s not surprising that the belief that we can end the pandemic through “ herd immunity ” —deliberately exposing everyone to the virus until we develop enough immunity that it dies out on its own—has gained traction .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ get back to work , the sooner natural immunity will occur and we will have a fighting chance against the virus , ” reads one post on Indiana Coalition for Vaccine Choice .
An April 22 post on VaxChoiceNH says , “ We know from decades of medical science that infection itself allows people to generate an immune response—antibodies—so that the infection is controlled throughout the population by ‘ herd immunity.
’ ” Infectious disease experts all agree that the “ herd immunity ” approach would be catastrophic—millions of Americans would die in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing if it were just fringe groups promoting this dangerous idea .
But there are signs that this dangerous and flawed line of thinking is making its way into the mainstream .
Over the past few months , Omer has watched in horror as the musings from armchair epidemiologists have gone viral on social media .
He pointed to several influential op-eds—some of them by physicians in fields having nothing to do with infectious disease or epidemiology—promoting the herd immunity approach .
In a sprawling March 20 New York Times op-ed , David @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who focuses on diet , wrote that this approach could allow us to “ return to life as usual and perhaps prevent vast segments of the economy from collapsing .
Healthy children could return to school and healthy adults go back to their jobs.
” When Omer read the piece , he was appalled .
“ These people are putting forth these theories without checking with people whose job this is , who specialize in it , ” he told me .
“ This is not a debate society—there are actual consequences here @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Omer isn ’ t the only expert concerned that misguided ideas about the immune system will flow from the fringe into the popular imagination .
Devin Burghart , vice president of the anti-white-nationalism think tank the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights , has been studying the nascent co-mingling between the anti-vaccination community and groups that stage coronavirus shutdown protests .
He has noticed that the protest groups have begun to repeat the “ natural immunity ” talking points , and that both groups have embraced the herd immunity approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of traction , and that is worrisome , ” he says .
“ We worry about these ideas making it into the mainstream.
” Omer cautions that if these ideas take hold , they could persist even after the coronavirus pandemic dies down , noting , “ Those of us in this field will be cleaning up these messes for years to come .
”

On April 26, two California physicians posted a video on YouTube about what they said was a potentially deadly side effect of social distancing: Our immune systems will get weaker because of lack of exposure to germs. They weren’t the only ones to make this argument. In a May 4 video, a controversial and outspoken Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai—an engineer who claims to have invented email—also embraces this idea. In a May 3 YouTube video, he announced, “Viruses do not harm or kill us.” Instead, he argues, “Your body is an amazing being—it knows how to take care of itself, and that’s how we get immune health. But these politicians, the CDC and the NIH—they’re not talking about any of this. Shame on them, it’s criminal.” An article from the Minnesota-based conservative think tank the Charlemagne Institute titled “COVID-19 Lockdowns May Destroy Our Immune Systems” is currently making the rounds, too.
“In order for our immune systems to be harmed by social distancing, we would have to live in sterile settings for a long time in which no bacteria or germs could affect us.”
It’s not hard to see why this content took off. The idea—or the basic contours of it, at least—has some elements of truth. Immunologists have shown that, in general, we strengthen our immune systems by exposing them to pathogens. In the last few decades, researchers have amassed evidence to suggest that some chronic conditions that are common in the developed world but rare in poorer countries—including asthma, allergies, and autoimmune illnesses like Crohn’s disease—could be the result of an environment that doesn’t have enough germs, causing the immune system to go haywire.
But the coronavirus is not a chronic immune condition; it’s a novel virus that attacks the body’s systems in ways not yet completely understood. Experts roundly reject the idea that social distancing will dangerously weaken the immune system. “A broad-based immunity weakening because of social distancing? Definitely not,” said Saad Omer, a Yale University epidemiologist and infectious disease specialist. Jennifer Reich, a sociologist who studies the spread of misinformation about health, agreed. “In order for our immune systems to be harmed by social distancing, we would have to live in sterile settings for a long time in which no bacteria or germs could affect us,” she wrote to me in an email.
But the experts I talked to weren’t at all surprised to see these discredited ideas making the rounds; they’ve seen them before in the anti-vaccination and extreme holistic medicine communities. This is the coronavirus edition of their pervasive belief in “natural immunity.” Rupali Limaye, a Johns Hopkins epidemiologist who has studied the movement against mandatory vaccines, told me, “We have heard from those that are concerned about vaccines the argument that they prefer to allow their immune system to be naturally exposed to a specific pathogen to gain immunity,” she wrote to me in an email. “It’s a spinoff of previous theories we’ve seen,” concurred Omer, who has written extensively about anti-vaccination groups. “This is all the usual stuff.”
Indeed, anti-vaccination groups on Facebook have referenced the idea constantly in recent posts. One widely shared meme lists, “Things that suppress our immune systems: Masks, gloves, no sun, fear, vaccines, washing hands with synthetic soaps.” In response to an article about the decline in childhood vaccination rates as a result of coronavirus, one member of the group Michigan for Vaccine Choice commented, “God, I would love for my kids to catch chicken pox, my body could use a little exposure to keep the shingles away lol plus you know them developing actual immunity would be nice.” In recent weeks, in response to calls for social distancing, several of the groups posted a 2016 New York Post article titled, “We Need to Stop Sanitizing Everything and Let Bacteria Back Into Our Lives.”
Meanwhile, alternative medicine groups promote the idea that eating the right foods or taking certain vitamins and supplements will strengthen the immune system so that it can successfully fight off coronavirus. “Like any virus, coronavirus is no match for someone with a strong immune system,” writes Sally Fallon Morell on a blog affiliated with the holistic nutrition group the Weston A. Price Foundation. Coconut oil, bone broth, and raw milk are among the foods she recommends to bolster the immune system against coronavirus. Just to be clear: This idea is patently false; humanity has never seen the virus before, therefore our immune systems have no natural defenses against it.
“This is not a debate society—there are actual consequences here. People are dying in hospitals alone.”
Given the holistic community and anti-vaccination groups’ fixations on “natural immunity,” it’s not surprising that the belief that we can end the pandemic through “herd immunity”—deliberately exposing everyone to the virus until we develop enough immunity that it dies out on its own—has gained traction. “The sooner well, able-bodied people get back to work, the sooner natural immunity will occur and we will have a fighting chance against the virus,” reads one post on Indiana Coalition for Vaccine Choice. An April 22 post on VaxChoiceNH says, “We know from decades of medical science that infection itself allows people to generate an immune response—antibodies—so that the infection is controlled throughout the population by ‘herd immunity.’”
Infectious disease experts all agree that the “herd immunity” approach would be catastrophic—millions of Americans would die in the process. It would be one thing if it were just fringe groups promoting this dangerous idea. But there are signs that this dangerous and flawed line of thinking is making its way into the mainstream. Over the past few months, Omer has watched in horror as the musings from armchair epidemiologists have gone viral on social media. He pointed to several influential op-eds—some of them by physicians in fields having nothing to do with infectious disease or epidemiology—promoting the herd immunity approach. In a sprawling March 20 New York Times op-ed, David Katz, a Yale preventive medicine specialist who focuses on diet, wrote that this approach could allow us to “return to life as usual and perhaps prevent vast segments of the economy from collapsing. Healthy children could return to school and healthy adults go back to their jobs.” When Omer read the piece, he was appalled. “These people are putting forth these theories without checking with people whose job this is, who specialize in it,” he told me. “This is not a debate society—there are actual consequences here. People are dying in hospitals alone.”
Omer isn’t the only expert concerned that misguided ideas about the immune system will flow from the fringe into the popular imagination. Devin Burghart, vice president of the anti-white-nationalism think tank the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights, has been studying the nascent co-mingling between the anti-vaccination community and groups that stage coronavirus shutdown protests. He has noticed that the protest groups have begun to repeat the “natural immunity” talking points, and that both groups have embraced the herd immunity approach. “These people are really gaining a lot of traction, and that is worrisome,” he says. “We worry about these ideas making it into the mainstream.”
Omer cautions that if these ideas take hold, they could persist even after the coronavirus pandemic dies down, noting, “Those of us in this field will be cleaning up these messes for years to come.”


motherjones--2020-05-13--“Obamagate” Is Trump’s Latest Lie to Smear Joe Biden

The Trump White House has released a list of officials in President Barack Obama ’ s administration who “ may have received ” access to National Security Agency reports from electronic surveillance in which Michael Flynn , who later became Trump ’ s national security adviser , was identified by name .
NSA electronic surveillance of Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak had picked up secret conversations he had with Flynn in which Flynn attempted to influence Russia ’ s reaction to sanctions just imposed by Obama in response to Russia ’ s interference in the 2016 election .
The list , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of National Intelligence Richard Grenell , was made public Wednesday by Sen. Charles Grassley ( R-Iowa ) .
It includes a note explaining that is not a list of people who asked that Flynn ’ s name be unredacted , or “ unmasked , ” in a report in which the identify of an American citizen would normally be hidden.
” “ Each individual was an authorized recipient of the original report , ” it says , while noting it is not clear who actually saw the “ unmasked information.
” The note @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unmaskings for different NSA intelligence reports for select identified principals.
” The report doesn ’ t include who those 16 people were , but does name 39 officials who then may or may not have seen the report that included Flynn ’ s identity .
That list included FBI Director James Comey , Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew , Director of National Intelligence James Clapper , CIA Director John Brennan , White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough , and Vice President Joe Biden .
A memo to Grenell , signed by National Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ named person was “ an authorized recipient ” of the information and that the unmasking was approved through the agency ’ s normal protocol .
Translation : Officials with regular access to classified information were authorized to hear about Flynn ’ s suspect activities .
But the list has already been seized on by promoters of President ’ s Trump “ Obamagate ” claim .
This is a false claim that Obama was involved during the presidential transition in an effort to unfairly smear Flynn .
Flynn pleaded guilty in late 2017 to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Kislyak .
But after public attacks on the case by Trump , the Justice Department , at the behest of Attorney General William Barr , is trying to drop the case .
And Trump boosters are already misrepresenting the new information to bolster their phony claim .
“ List of Officials Who Sought to ‘ Unmask ’ Flynn Released : Biden Comey , Obama Chief of Staff Among Them , ” a Fox News headline says , falsely .
Sen. Rand Paul ( R-Ky. ) quickly misrepresented the list to smear Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the authorized list of people who may have seen Flynn ’ s name , so far there is no evidence that Biden personally ordered Flynn ’ s “ unmasking.
” But even if he did , it would hardly controversial that Biden and other officials would ask to review reports referencing an American involved in clandestine high level contacts with foreign governments .
Flynn was no innocent actor as this was all unfolding .
As the Justice Department noted in a court filing last week seeking to drop charges against him , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to suspicions that he was a Russian asset .
In early 2017 , the FBI was ready to drop that investigation , but agents continued investigating him after they learned he may have broken a law against private citizens interfering in foreign policy through his conversations with Kislyak , and other foreign officials .
It ’ s safe to say no past incoming National Security advisers had the sort of red flags that Flynn did .
In 2016 , he had also secretly agreed to lobby for Turkey , even while he advised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ DOJ about this as part of his guilty plea .
( He was also involved with a complicated plan through which a group of former military officials hoped to transfer sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia . )
Flynn had potentially compromising ties to foreign states including Turkey as well as Russia .
That may explain why the Obama officials given access to information by NSA on Flynn included the US Ambassadors to Turkey and to Russia .

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.
The Trump White House has released a list of officials in President Barack Obama’s administration who “may have received” access to National Security Agency reports from electronic surveillance in which Michael Flynn, who later became Trump’s national security adviser, was identified by name. NSA electronic surveillance of Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak had picked up secret conversations he had with Flynn in which Flynn attempted to influence Russia’s reaction to sanctions just imposed by Obama in response to Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
The list, declassified at the request of acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell, was made public Wednesday by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa). It includes a note explaining that is not a list of people who asked that Flynn’s name be unredacted, or “unmasked,” in a report in which the identify of an American citizen would normally be hidden.” “Each individual was an authorized recipient of the original report,” it says, while noting it is not clear who actually saw the “unmasked information.”
The note explains that 16 Obama officials requested “unmaskings for different NSA intelligence reports for select identified principals.” The report doesn’t include who those 16 people were, but does name 39 officials who then may or may not have seen the report that included Flynn’s identity. That list included FBI Director James Comey, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, and Vice President Joe Biden. A memo to Grenell, signed by National Security Agency Director Paul Nakasone, says each named person was “an authorized recipient” of the information and that the unmasking was approved through the agency’s normal protocol. Translation: Officials with regular access to classified information were authorized to hear about Flynn’s suspect activities.
But the list has already been seized on by promoters of President’s Trump “Obamagate” claim. This is a false claim that Obama was involved during the presidential transition in an effort to unfairly smear Flynn. Flynn pleaded guilty in late 2017 to lying to FBI agents about his conversations with Kislyak. But after public attacks on the case by Trump, the Justice Department, at the behest of Attorney General William Barr, is trying to drop the case. And Trump boosters are already misrepresenting the new information to bolster their phony claim.
“List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them,” a Fox News headline says, falsely. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) quickly misrepresented the list to smear Biden in a tweet.
Declassified documents reveal V.P. Biden ordered the unmasking of General Flynn’s private conversation.
Anyone think that Biden might have abused his power to go after a political opponent… — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) May 13, 2020
While Biden was on the authorized list of people who may have seen Flynn’s name, so far there is no evidence that Biden personally ordered Flynn’s “unmasking.” But even if he did, it would hardly controversial that Biden and other officials would ask to review reports referencing an American involved in clandestine high level contacts with foreign governments.
Flynn was no innocent actor as this was all unfolding. As the Justice Department noted in a court filing last week seeking to drop charges against him, the FBI investigated Flynn in 2016 due to suspicions that he was a Russian asset. In early 2017, the FBI was ready to drop that investigation, but agents continued investigating him after they learned he may have broken a law against private citizens interfering in foreign policy through his conversations with Kislyak, and other foreign officials.
It’s safe to say no past incoming National Security advisers had the sort of red flags that Flynn did. In 2016, he had also secretly agreed to lobby for Turkey, even while he advised Trump. He also admitted lying to DOJ about this as part of his guilty plea. (He was also involved with a complicated plan through which a group of former military officials hoped to transfer sensitive nuclear technology to Saudi Arabia.) Flynn had potentially compromising ties to foreign states including Turkey as well as Russia. That may explain why the Obama officials given access to information by NSA on Flynn included the US Ambassadors to Turkey and to Russia.