democracynow--2020-10-16--Preserving Roe: West Virginia Mom Tells Abortion Story in Heartfelt Speech Against Amy Coney Barrett

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : I wanted to turn to another issue that has so deeply concerned people all over this country , and that is the issue of reproductive rights , whether we ’ re are talking about IVF for infertile couples or whether we ’ re talking about the issue of abortion .
Crystal Good testified about her experience having an abortion , expressing concerns that Barrett ’ s confirmation would limit access to safe , affordable care .
During three days of hearings , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about her views on abortion and the future of Roe v. Wade , despite her public record opposing reproductive rights .
This is Good ’ s opening statement .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s Crystal Good , a West Virginia mother , testifying Thursday against Judge Amy Coney Barrett , who once signed a newspaper advertisement that stated , “ It ’ s time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore laws that protect the lives of unborn children.
” Kristen Clarke , I want @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in light of what Judge Barrett said in 2006 at a commencement address at Notre Dame .
She said , “ Keep in mind that your legal career is but a means to an end , and as Father Jenkins told you this morning , that end is building the kingdom of God.
” Kristen ?
KRISTEN CLARKE : If confirmed , Judge Barrett will be a fifth vote to eviscerate the important protections that have been afforded by Roe v. Wade .
I thought that Crystal Good ’ s testimony yesterday was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her to share her personal testimony .
And it ’ s an experience shared by so many women across our country who rely on the court ’ s precedent in Roe to ensure their dignity , to ensure their ability and freedom to make their own personal choices about their bodies .
I believe that Senator Graham freely described Judge Barrett as pro-life .
We looked at her record .
And in addition to that petition that you reference , Amy , she wrote an article in 2013 in the — or , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2013 in the Notre Dame magazine that referenced a speech that she gave called “ Roe at 40.
” And they described her as speaking of Roe as a case that created through judicial fiat a framework of abortion on demand and a political environment that was already liberalizing abortion regulations state by state , igniting a national controversy .
There were moments where she was asked whether she deemed Roe v. Wade a superprecedent .
She refused to subscribe that label to the decision .
And some of the cases that have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have made clear that she has deep skepticism about Roe .
I believe that , if confirmed , she will prove to be that fifth vote that chips away , if not guts , and rolls back the important protections long afforded by Roe v. Wade .
AMY GOODMAN : Kristen Clarke , in your testimony yesterday , you talked about issues of racial justice , particularly the case of Smith v. Illinois Department of Transportation , a worker there and the N-word .
Describe why you felt this was so critical .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that it was important to bring these cases up because they show a pattern , a pattern in which she has tended to put the interests of corporations and employers over the interests of vulnerable employees .
Smith v. Illinois Department of Transportation involved a Black traffic patrol driver who alleged that he was subjected to a hostile work environment .
And among the various pieces of evidence presented in that case was the fact that he was subjected to use of the N-word in the workspace repeatedly .
And Judge Barrett did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ an egregious racial epithet , ” but ultimately concluded that this was not enough to prove that he was subjected to the sort of racial hostility that was enough to prove discrimination under Title VII in this case .
And then there was another case that we ’ ve heard about during the week , EEOC v. AutoZone .
This is a case involving AutoZone ’ s decision to assign workers to different sites based on their race .
They would assign Black workers to a particular store based on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the predominant race of employees served , and they did the same with Latinos .
And here , the client who was at the center of this case was a Black worker assigned to the South Side of Chicago .
Ultimately , the court found that employees were still paid the same and received the same benefits and had the same job responsibilities , and so Judge Barrett refused to rehear that case .
But I think that that ’ s very dangerous .
I mean , this is AutoZone essentially putting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doctrine in the workplace .
I think that the sum total of these two cases makes clear that she will likely look at cases involving allegations of discrimination with great skepticism and will likely always , you know , if not the majority of time , side with corporations and employers .
And that ’ s unfortunate .
As a civil rights lawyer , we bring cases on behalf of vulnerable communities to the court , and do so hoping that egregious facts like this — racial policies , racial segregation in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I mean , these are the kind of smoking-gun cases that we seek to bring to the courts to vindicate the rights of those most vulnerable in our society .
AMY GOODMAN : Well , Kristen Clarke , we want to ask if you ’ ll stay with us .
You ’ re talking about corporate power .
And in our next segment , we ’ re going to play an excerpt of the Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse , who takes us on a journey following the dark money trail and how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s judiciary .
And then we want to get your final comments .
Kristen Clarke is the executive director of the Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law .
Stay with us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to another issue that has so deeply concerned people all over this country, and that is the issue of reproductive rights, whether we’re are talking about IVF for infertile couples or whether we’re talking about the issue of abortion.
Crystal Good testified about her experience having an abortion, expressing concerns that Barrett’s confirmation would limit access to safe, affordable care. During three days of hearings, Judge Barrett repeatedly refused to answer questions about her views on abortion and the future of Roe v. Wade, despite her public record opposing reproductive rights. This is Good’s opening statement.
CRYSTAL GOOD: My name is Crystal Good. And I’m a sixth-generation West Virginian, a writer-poet, a small business owner, a graduate student at West Virginia University and an advocate for survivors of sexual abuse. I’m the daughter of a white mother and a Black father, and I’m the proud mother of three brilliant children. These identities are all parts of me, but not all of me. Who I am today is only possible because at 16 years old I had access to an abortion.
As a minor in a state with a parental consent requirement, that access was dependent on a judge, because, without a shadow of a doubt, I could not trust the adults closest to me. From the ages of 5 until I was 15, I was sexually abused by my white stepfather. He wasn’t convicted until 2012, more than 30 years after the abuse began. When I told the grown folks in my life, they didn’t believe me at first, and then refused to hold my abuser accountable once the truth was out.
Later, at 16, while in a relationship that brought me joy and made me feel safe, I, like 2.7 million Americans a year, had an unintended pregnancy. Immediately, I knew I wanted an abortion, a very safe medical procedure that one in four U.S. women will have in their lifetimes.
For many reasons, including the decade of abuse she did not protect me from, I couldn’t tell my mother. Instead, I sought a judicial bypass. I had to navigate not only how to get to the judge, but how to do so on a school day. I had no idea what I should wear or what information he would want. I thought I was going to court like on TV. But instead, I was ushered into his chambers. It felt very intimidating.
I told him I was a good student. I was a leader in my school. I had opportunities that many young women from West Virginia didn’t. I wanted to go to college to be a writer. I said, “Your Honor, I have a future. I choose an abortion.”
It felt like a miracle: An adult believed me. An authority figure deemed me to be in charge of my own body and my own future.
I still think what might have happened if I didn’t have a list of accomplishments or if the judge didn’t think I was competent enough to decide when to start my family, or if he believed the harmful stereotype I was raised to believe, that Black girls were fast and promiscuous. Access to an abortion should not depend on our GPA, the color of our skin, where we live, or the luck of the draw. It should not depend, in any shape, form or fashion, who your governor is or who is sitting on the Supreme Court.
My entire childhood, every adult in my life had failed me. None of them deserved to make a decision about my body. I needed compassion and trust from my government. All I got was another barrier.
There are thousands like me who are sexually abused by parents, guardians and grown-ups who are supposed to support them. Today, 37 states require parental consent or notification for a minor to access abortion. Most young people do involve their parents in their decision. But for those like me who cannot, these kinds of restrictions make abortion hard to get, because we have to travel, miss work or school, save up for weeks and pay out of pocket. The average per capita income in West Virginia is $25,479. That’s one-seventh of your Senate salaries. In Central Appalachia, Black and low-income white people struggle to access healthcare, including abortion, and to have our decisions respected.
The Supreme Court has made historic decisions that uphold our rights and freedoms: my right to an abortion, the integration of my public schools, the Affordable Healthcare Act that ensures that I have health insurance, and workplace protections for my transgender daughter. I have put my faith in the Supreme Court. And with this nomination, I am losing faith.
Although the way I have chosen to create my family is demonized by some politicians, the reality is that we’re like most families across the nation. I had an abortion. I have two sons and a daughter who is trans. I love my children. We are a proud Afrolachian family — that’s African American Appalachian. My story is my own, but represents so many people left out from the Supreme Court nominee hearings — an entire caste of people. That’s C-A-S-T-E, caste.
President Trump has been clear that he would only appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately, through learning about Judge Barrett’s record, I understand why the president believes she passes the test. Please, listen to people who have had abortions. Hear us when we ask you: Do not confirm this nominee. Our futures, our families, our lives depend on it. We, too, are America.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Crystal Good, a West Virginia mother, testifying Thursday against Judge Amy Coney Barrett, who once signed a newspaper advertisement that stated, “It’s time to put an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade and restore laws that protect the lives of unborn children.” Kristen Clarke, I want to ask you about this, particularly in light of what Judge Barrett said in 2006 at a commencement address at Notre Dame. She said, “Keep in mind that your legal career is but a means to an end, and as Father Jenkins told you this morning, that end is building the kingdom of God.” Kristen?
KRISTEN CLARKE: If confirmed, Judge Barrett will be a fifth vote to eviscerate the important protections that have been afforded by Roe v. Wade.
I thought that Crystal Good’s testimony yesterday was incredibly powerful. It was courageous of her to share her personal testimony. And it’s an experience shared by so many women across our country who rely on the court’s precedent in Roe to ensure their dignity, to ensure their ability and freedom to make their own personal choices about their bodies.
I believe that Senator Graham freely described Judge Barrett as pro-life. We looked at her record. And in addition to that petition that you reference, Amy, she wrote an article in 2013 in the — or, there was an article that appeared in 2013 in the Notre Dame magazine that referenced a speech that she gave called “Roe at 40.” And they described her as speaking of Roe as a case that created through judicial fiat a framework of abortion on demand and a political environment that was already liberalizing abortion regulations state by state, igniting a national controversy.
There were moments where she was asked whether she deemed Roe v. Wade a superprecedent. She refused to subscribe that label to the decision. And some of the cases that have come before her on the 7th Circuit have made clear that she has deep skepticism about Roe. I believe that, if confirmed, she will prove to be that fifth vote that chips away, if not guts, and rolls back the important protections long afforded by Roe v. Wade.
AMY GOODMAN: Kristen Clarke, in your testimony yesterday, you talked about issues of racial justice, particularly the case of Smith v. Illinois Department of Transportation, a worker there and the N-word. Describe why you felt this was so critical.
KRISTEN CLARKE: Well, I thought that it was important to bring these cases up because they show a pattern, a pattern in which she has tended to put the interests of corporations and employers over the interests of vulnerable employees.
Smith v. Illinois Department of Transportation involved a Black traffic patrol driver who alleged that he was subjected to a hostile work environment. And among the various pieces of evidence presented in that case was the fact that he was subjected to use of the N-word in the workspace repeatedly. And Judge Barrett did concede that the N-word is, quote, “an egregious racial epithet,” but ultimately concluded that this was not enough to prove that he was subjected to the sort of racial hostility that was enough to prove discrimination under Title VII in this case.
And then there was another case that we’ve heard about during the week, EEOC v. AutoZone. This is a case involving AutoZone’s decision to assign workers to different sites based on their race. They would assign Black workers to a particular store based on the race of the employee and based on the predominant race of employees served, and they did the same with Latinos. And here, the client who was at the center of this case was a Black worker assigned to the South Side of Chicago. Ultimately, the court found that employees were still paid the same and received the same benefits and had the same job responsibilities, and so Judge Barrett refused to rehear that case. But I think that that’s very dangerous. I mean, this is AutoZone essentially putting in a “separate but equal” racial doctrine in the workplace.
I think that the sum total of these two cases makes clear that she will likely look at cases involving allegations of discrimination with great skepticism and will likely always, you know, if not the majority of time, side with corporations and employers. And that’s unfortunate. As a civil rights lawyer, we bring cases on behalf of vulnerable communities to the court, and do so hoping that egregious facts like this — racial policies, racial segregation in the workplace, use of the N-word — I mean, these are the kind of smoking-gun cases that we seek to bring to the courts to vindicate the rights of those most vulnerable in our society.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Kristen Clarke, we want to ask if you’ll stay with us. You’re talking about corporate power. And in our next segment, we’re going to play an excerpt of the Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who takes us on a journey following the dark money trail and how it’s reshaped the nation’s judiciary. And then we want to get your final comments. Kristen Clarke is the executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. Stay with us.


democracynow--2020-10-16--Deeply Troubling: Kristen Clarke on How Rush to Confirm Barrett Endangers Voting & Civil Rights

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
The Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett ended Thursday with the right-wing judge ’ s confirmation looking all but assured , after four rushed days of questioning in which Barrett refused to state her position on abortion rights , on same-sex marriage , on the Affordable Care Act , on voting rights , climate change , and even if President Trump could delay the election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives a 6-to-3 majority on the high court .
The hearings ’ final day kicked off with Senate Republicans in the Judiciary Committee voting to schedule a vote on Barrett ’ s Supreme Court confirmation for October 22nd .
Republican Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham called for a vote before the hearing had even finished and without enough Democrats present in the room .
Senator Dick Durbin , the sole Democrat present , attempted to adjourn the meeting in response .
AMY GOODMAN : Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this sham process , ” unquote .
If the Senate Judiciary Committee approves Judge Barrett ’ s confirmation on October 22nd , the full Senate could vote on whether or not to confirm her as early as October 26 — just about a week before Election Day .
This has never happened before .
Senate Majority Leader Republican Mitch McConnell said Thursday Republicans have the votes needed to confirm her .
On Thursday , Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut moved to suspend the hearing indefinitely .
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL : — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States Supreme Court .
I believe that this rushed sham process is a disservice to our committee .
She has been rushed in a way that is historically unprecedented .
There ’ s never been a nomination in an election year after the month of July .
And the purpose of doing it is simply to have a justice on the Supreme Court , as the president said , to decide the election and to strike down the Affordable Care Act .
We ’ ve had inadequate time to review this nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a CNN report that there are seven more speeches or talks that she has given that have not been disclosed to this committee .
The consequence of this rushed process is that we ’ ve given inadequate scrutiny to this nominee .
I move to delay these proceedings so that we can do our job .
AMY GOODMAN : Senator Blumenthal was referencing a CNN report that revealed Judge Barrett did not disclose seven talks recorded on the University of Notre Dame Law School ’ s public calendar , including one with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncovered evidence she gave two talks in 2013 to anti-choice groups at the school .
Under Senate rules , Barrett is required to provide a list of all public talks she ’ s given in her professional career .
Blumenthal ’ s motion to suspend the hearing indefinitely was denied along party lines .
Despite outcry from Democrats about the rushed nomination process and how Judge Barrett ’ s role on the court could end healthcare for millions and threaten Roe v. Wade , California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein ended the hearing thanking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leadership .
AMY GOODMAN : The 87-year-old ranking Democrat then hugged Graham , who has refused to be tested for the coronavirus .
Neither of them wore masks .
Well , for more , we go to Washington , D.C. , where we ’ re joined by Kristen Clarke , president and executive director of the Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law .
She testified at Judge Barrett ’ s confirmation hearing on Thursday .
Kristen , welcome back to Democracy Now !
It ’ s great to have you with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ start off — this is just after you yourself have testified , remotely because of COVID , at this hearing — start off by talking about the significance of what you heard this week and also what has actually taken place here , the unprecedented nature of this taking place as people are voting all over the country for the next president of the United States ?
KRISTEN CLARKE : Well , thank you for having me .
This is a historic nomination because this has never happened before .
We have never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and commence confirmation hearings in the middle of an ongoing presidential election .
According to Michael McDonald , who runs the Elections Project , as of yesterday , about 20 million Americans have cast their ballots .
And for many of those Americans , those may be people for whom the Supreme Court is top of mind .
Those are people who are exercising their right to determine who will be president and who will sit in those senatorial seats to carry out the constitutional role of filling a Supreme Court vacancy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidents have respected the fact that the voters deserve voice in this process , which is why we have never seen a nomination take place at this moment .
There are two instances that Senator Graham talked about in which vacancies were filled late in the year .
Those were vacancies filled by presidents who were actually reelected , one of whom was reelected and that president ’ s party also gained a deeper majority in the Senate .
So , I want to just underscore how unprecedented this moment is , because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangerous ways , in ways that may undermine the public ’ s confidence and faith in the court .
We also can not ignore President Trump ’ s prerogative — President Trump ’ s objective here .
He has made very clear that he wants a full nine-member court to decide any disputes which he anticipates may or may not arise from this election .
He wants a nine-member court in place by November 10th to hear the Affordable Care Act case .
So , that loomed heavy this week throughout the hearings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ morning was incredibly important .
Senator Blumenthal put forth a motion to suspend the process .
They raced forward this week in the middle of a pandemic .
They started the process on a federal holiday .
They did so while the Senate actually was in recess .
They ’ ve turned attention away from the emergency needs that the public faces in the middle of the pandemic to turn attention to this .
And as you noted , it ’ s continuing to surface that there are aspects of her record that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s motion ultimately failed , and the hearing went forward , but I thought that it was important that we had an opportunity to shine a light on what a broken process this is , what a rushed process this is .
We ’ re talking about a lifetime seat on our nation ’ s highest court , and that should be a seat filled after the Senate is able to carefully — carefully — carry out its duty to provide advice and consent by thoroughly looking at and examining every aspect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unturned .
That said , Amy , my organization , the Lawyers ’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law , conducted a thorough examination of her record , at least the record that has been made public .
We looked at her speeches during her time of Notre Dame , her writings , and her opinions during her short tenure on the 7th Circuit .
We found that she failed the second prong of our standard , which looks to determine whether or not the nominee is someone who will bring an exceptional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights laws and the Constitution .
And what was really striking this week was to see Judge Barrett go to great lengths to distance herself from the reality of voting discrimination that we face in our country .
She was asked basic questions : Is voter intimidation illegal ?
And she would not agree to this proposition .
And voter intimidation is plainly illegal under Section 11 ( b ) of the Voting Rights Act .
It violates federal criminal laws .
She was asked whether voting discrimination is ongoing .
This was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she refused to answer that question , as well .
AMY GOODMAN : I want to go to her questioning on this issue by Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s Judge Barrett .
The significance of this response , Kristen Clarke ?
KRISTEN CLARKE : Well , there is nothing hypothetical about voter intimidation .
We are in the middle of an election season where we know voter suppression is alive and well .
We ’ ve heard the reports about intimidating poll watchers showing up at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter intimidation , sadly , has been a stain on our democracy throughout our nation ’ s history .
So it was deeply troubling that Judge Barrett was unwilling to acknowledge basic aspects about American life , that the right to vote is central , but that the right to vote has been under attack for Black people , for Latinos and for communities of color , that voter intimidation is real .
I could accept aspects of her response , that , you know , I ’ d need to actually look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ determine whether or not it violates the Constitution or federal law , but to not tell the American public that she would come to the bench with a basic understanding that voting discrimination is real , that voter intimidation does happen , is deeply , deeply troubling .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman.
The Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett ended Thursday with the right-wing judge’s confirmation looking all but assured, after four rushed days of questioning in which Barrett refused to state her position on abortion rights, on same-sex marriage, on the Affordable Care Act, on voting rights, climate change, and even if President Trump could delay the election. If confirmed, Barrett will give conservatives a 6-to-3 majority on the high court.
The hearings’ final day kicked off with Senate Republicans in the Judiciary Committee voting to schedule a vote on Barrett’s Supreme Court confirmation for October 22nd. Republican Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Lindsey Graham called for a vote before the hearing had even finished and without enough Democrats present in the room. Senator Dick Durbin, the sole Democrat present, attempted to adjourn the meeting in response.
SEN. DICK DURBIN: Mr. Chairman?
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Yes.
SEN. DICK DURBIN: You cannot conduct that business without another minority member present. And so, at this point, I’m going to make a motion to adjourn this meeting until we have completed the hearing on Amy Coney Barrett. We still have a panel before us. This is unprecedented. We have never done this before as a committee. And if we are going to honor the rules and show mutual respect, the fact is, we cannot move forward. …
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: Senator Durbin, with all due respect, we’ve had this problem in the past. We’re dealing with it the way we are today. If we create this problem for you in the future, you’re going to do what I’m going to do, which is move forward on the business of the committee. On the motion, the clerk will call the roll.
AMY GOODMAN: Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said the move solidified, quote, “the illegitimacy of this sham process,” unquote. If the Senate Judiciary Committee approves Judge Barrett’s confirmation on October 22nd, the full Senate could vote on whether or not to confirm her as early as October 26 — just about a week before Election Day. This has never happened before. Senate Majority Leader Republican Mitch McConnell said Thursday Republicans have the votes needed to confirm her. On Thursday, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut moved to suspend the hearing indefinitely.
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: I move to indefinitely postpone the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett —
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM: No, we’re not.
SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL: — to be an associate justice of the United States Supreme Court. I believe that this rushed sham process is a disservice to our committee. She has been rushed in a way that is historically unprecedented. There’s never been a nomination in an election year after the month of July. And the purpose of doing it is simply to have a justice on the Supreme Court, as the president said, to decide the election and to strike down the Affordable Care Act. We’ve had inadequate time to review this nomination — as indicated most recently yesterday, a CNN report that there are seven more speeches or talks that she has given that have not been disclosed to this committee. The consequence of this rushed process is that we’ve given inadequate scrutiny to this nominee. I move to delay these proceedings so that we can do our job.
AMY GOODMAN: Senator Blumenthal was referencing a CNN report that revealed Judge Barrett did not disclose seven talks recorded on the University of Notre Dame Law School’s public calendar, including one with an anti-choice group in 2007. CNN also uncovered evidence she gave two talks in 2013 to anti-choice groups at the school. Under Senate rules, Barrett is required to provide a list of all public talks she’s given in her professional career.
Blumenthal’s motion to suspend the hearing indefinitely was denied along party lines. Despite outcry from Democrats about the rushed nomination process and how Judge Barrett’s role on the court could end healthcare for millions and threaten Roe v. Wade, California Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein ended the hearing thanking Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham for his leadership.
SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank you. This has been one of the best set of hearings that I’ve participated in, and I want to thank you for your fairness.
AMY GOODMAN: The 87-year-old ranking Democrat then hugged Graham, who has refused to be tested for the coronavirus. Neither of them wore masks.
Well, for more, we go to Washington, D.C., where we’re joined by Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. She testified at Judge Barrett’s confirmation hearing on Thursday.
Kristen, welcome back to Democracy Now! It’s great to have you with us. Why don’t you start off — this is just after you yourself have testified, remotely because of COVID, at this hearing — start off by talking about the significance of what you heard this week and also what has actually taken place here, the unprecedented nature of this taking place as people are voting all over the country for the next president of the United States?
KRISTEN CLARKE: Well, thank you for having me.
This is a historic nomination because this has never happened before. We have never had a president put forth a nomination and commence confirmation hearings in the middle of an ongoing presidential election. According to Michael McDonald, who runs the Elections Project, as of yesterday, about 20 million Americans have cast their ballots. And for many of those Americans, those may be people for whom the Supreme Court is top of mind. Those are people who are exercising their right to determine who will be president and who will sit in those senatorial seats to carry out the constitutional role of filling a Supreme Court vacancy. Throughout our nation’s history, presidents have respected the fact that the voters deserve voice in this process, which is why we have never seen a nomination take place at this moment. There are two instances that Senator Graham talked about in which vacancies were filled late in the year. Those were vacancies filled by presidents who were actually reelected, one of whom was reelected and that president’s party also gained a deeper majority in the Senate. So, I want to just underscore how unprecedented this moment is, because it truly politicizes the Supreme Court in dangerous ways, in ways that may undermine the public’s confidence and faith in the court.
We also cannot ignore President Trump’s prerogative — President Trump’s objective here. He has made very clear that he wants a full nine-member court to decide any disputes which he anticipates may or may not arise from this election. He wants a nine-member court in place by November 10th to hear the Affordable Care Act case. So, that loomed heavy this week throughout the hearings.
I thought that what happened yesterday morning was incredibly important. Senator Blumenthal put forth a motion to suspend the process. They raced forward this week in the middle of a pandemic. They started the process on a federal holiday. They did so while the Senate actually was in recess. They’ve turned attention away from the emergency needs that the public faces in the middle of the pandemic to turn attention to this. And as you noted, it’s continuing to surface that there are aspects of her record that have not yet surfaced. The senator’s motion ultimately failed, and the hearing went forward, but I thought that it was important that we had an opportunity to shine a light on what a broken process this is, what a rushed process this is. We’re talking about a lifetime seat on our nation’s highest court, and that should be a seat filled after the Senate is able to carefully — carefully — carry out its duty to provide advice and consent by thoroughly looking at and examining every aspect of her record, leaving no stone unturned.
That said, Amy, my organization, the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, conducted a thorough examination of her record, at least the record that has been made public. We looked at her speeches during her time of Notre Dame, her writings, and her opinions during her short tenure on the 7th Circuit. We found that she failed the second prong of our standard, which looks to determine whether or not the nominee is someone who will bring an exceptional commitment to enforcement of our federal civil rights laws and the Constitution.
And what was really striking this week was to see Judge Barrett go to great lengths to distance herself from the reality of voting discrimination that we face in our country. She was asked basic questions: Is voter intimidation illegal? And she would not agree to this proposition. And voter intimidation is plainly illegal under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act. It violates federal criminal laws. She was asked whether voting discrimination is ongoing. This was during questioning with Senator Harris. And she refused to answer that question, as well.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to her questioning on this issue by Minnesota Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR: Last week, a contractor from outside of my state of Minnesota started recruiting “poll watchers” with Special Forces experience, mm-hmm, to protect polling locations in my state. This was clear voter intimidation. Similar efforts are going on around the country, solicited by President Trump’s false claims of massive voter fraud. … So, as a result of his claims, people are trying to get “poll watchers,” Special Forces people, to go to the polls. Judge Barrett, under federal law, is it illegal to intimidate voters at the polls?
JUDGE AMY CONEY BARRETT: Senator Klobuchar, I can’t characterize the facts in a hypothetical situation, and I can’t apply the law to a hypothetical set of facts. I can only decide cases as they come to me litigated by parties, on a full record, after fully engaging precedent, talking to colleagues, writing an opinion. And so, I can’t answer questions like that.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Judge Barrett. The significance of this response, Kristen Clarke?
KRISTEN CLARKE: Well, there is nothing hypothetical about voter intimidation. We are in the middle of an election season where we know voter suppression is alive and well. We’ve heard the reports about intimidating poll watchers showing up at satellite voting centers in Philadelphia. And voter intimidation, sadly, has been a stain on our democracy throughout our nation’s history. So it was deeply troubling that Judge Barrett was unwilling to acknowledge basic aspects about American life, that the right to vote is central, but that the right to vote has been under attack for Black people, for Latinos and for communities of color, that voter intimidation is real. I could accept aspects of her response, that, you know, I’d need to actually look at a particular scenario in order to determine whether or not it violates the Constitution or federal law, but to not tell the American public that she would come to the bench with a basic understanding that voting discrimination is real, that voter intimidation does happen, is deeply, deeply troubling.


democracynow--2020-10-16--Headlines for October 16, 2020

Headlines for October 16, 2020

The United States is approaching 8 million confirmed coronavirus infections , surpassing 64,000 new cases Thursday for the first time @ @ @ @ @ 1,000 COVID-19 deaths were reported over the last 24 hours , with every region of @ @ @ @ @ .
Wisconsin set another statewide record for infections , with more than 3,700 new coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ has one of the world ’ s highest test positivity rates — now over 20 @ @ @ @ @ President Trump is planning to hold a packed campaign rally in Janesville , Wisconsin , @ @ @ @ @ as The Wall Street Journal reports that throughout the pandemic , White House officials have @ @ @ @ @ health guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , altering language written by @ @ @ @ @ rolling back CDC limits on in-person gatherings like church choirs .

The United States is approaching 8 million confirmed coronavirus infections, surpassing 64,000 new cases Thursday for the first time since July. More than 1,000 COVID-19 deaths were reported over the last 24 hours, with every region of the U.S. reporting increased hospitalizations.
Wisconsin set another statewide record for infections, with more than 3,700 new coronavirus cases reported Thursday. Wisconsin has one of the world’s highest test positivity rates — now over 20%. Despite that, President Trump is planning to hold a packed campaign rally in Janesville, Wisconsin, on Saturday.
This comes as The Wall Street Journal reports that throughout the pandemic, White House officials have made line-by-line edits to official health guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, altering language written by scientists on social distancing and rolling back CDC limits on in-person gatherings like church choirs.


democracynow--2020-10-19--Jeremy Scahill on Trump's "Homicidal" Pandemic Response & What's at Stake in November Election

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : You talk about the number of people who have died .
There ’ s a different kind of battleground now in the United States and around the world , and it ’ s an ICU .
It ’ s a hospital bed .
It is right now what ?
Something like close to 220,000 people in the United States , a fifth of the death toll of coronavirus in the world right here in the most powerful country on Earth , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like 8 million , when we surpassed the 40 million mark for infections around the world .
Jeremy , your parents are both nurses in Wisconsin , a crucial swing state , that ’ s recorded its highest number of new coronavirus cases on Friday .
According to an internal government report , many of Wisconsin ’ s 72 counties are now considered sustained COVID-19 hot spots .
On Saturday , Trump rallied in Janesville , Wisconsin , said it was time to open up the state for business as usual .
Your @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus , with his handpicked adviser , coronavirus adviser , Dr. Scott Atlas — he has pushed aside Dr. Fauci — tweeting this weekend , which Twitter deleted , “ Masks [ work ] ?
NO.
” JEREMY SCAHILL : Yeah .
I mean , I don ’ t know how else to describe what Trump has done except “ homicidal.
” And it could be even on a literal level , with Trump having — you know , he said he was diagnosed with coronavirus .
He was at Walter Reed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , claims he ’ s not infectious .
I mean , how do we know ?
How do we know when Donald Trump ’ s last actual negative test was ?
And has he just been running around spreading this ?
I mean , is the president of the United States — we talk about presidents being murderers on a policy level , but this president may actually be killing people .
And I think that that is really a metaphor for how this entire thing has unfolded .
Trump believes that as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the good medical care and that they can weather this , it doesn ’ t really matter who dies , because at the end of the day the point is to stick it to the Democrats and maintain power .
And this is also a very racist response .
If this was just wiping out the kind of Trump family or his inner circle , instead of disproportionately affecting Black and Brown and poor people in this country , I think we would see even a greater level of outrage at this administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a very serious lung condition .
And she , I think rightly , blames President Trump , because she can ’ t set foot outside of her house .
She can ’ t see her grandchildren .
And I think that that ’ s a big motivating factor for people , particularly older people , who are now increasingly saying that they support Joe Biden , is that they recognize that it didn ’ t have to be this way .
And to me , it ’ s really an indication of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It ’ s all been one huge grift .
It ’ s all been one huge scam .
And I think that perhaps the most long-term danger — the short-term crisis is unconscionable , the number of people that have been killed and made sick because of incompetence .
But on a long-term level , if Joe Biden wins and becomes president and we don ’ t reckon with how we got here , with how Donald Trump was created , nurtured in this system and able to seize power , then @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this country , because this is the tip of the iceberg , seeing someone like Trump take power and bring all of this to the fore .
I think if we don ’ t reckon with history , we are in deep , deep trouble as a country , no matter what happens during these elections .
AMY GOODMAN : You talked about Black Lives Matter , the movements of immigration rights .
I wanted to end with the Catholic Workers , the Catholic peace activists in Georgia , Catholic peace activist Patrick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in jail Friday for breaking into the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia to protest nuclear weapons policy .
He ’ s part of the Kings Bay Plowshares 7 group of Catholic peace activists who entered the base on the anniversary of the assassination of Dr. King .
Can you talk about the significance of this , in the last 20 seconds we have ?
JEREMY SCAHILL : I ’ ve said for a long time the greatest danger that the world has faced from Donald Trump is the possible threat of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a result of some tweet that Trump doesn ’ t like from a foreign leader .
These Catholic peace activists , during the Trump administration , tried to confront that nuclear threat , and there was a total media blackout on the action that they did .
And , you know , if we lived in a just society , the Kings Bay Plowshares activists ’ trial would have been reported on as one of the most brave confrontations of the most dangerous aspect of this government , and particularly this administration .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it there , Jeremy Scahill , co-founder of The Intercept .
We ’ ll link to your American Mythology series , podcast , Intercepted .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
Thanks for joining us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: You talk about the number of people who have died. There’s a different kind of battleground now in the United States and around the world, and it’s an ICU. It’s a hospital bed. It is right now what? Something like close to 220,000 people in the United States, a fifth of the death toll of coronavirus in the world right here in the most powerful country on Earth, and a fifth of the infections at something like 8 million, when we surpassed the 40 million mark for infections around the world. Jeremy, your parents are both nurses in Wisconsin, a crucial swing state, that’s recorded its highest number of new coronavirus cases on Friday. According to an internal government report, many of Wisconsin’s 72 counties are now considered sustained COVID-19 hot spots. On Saturday, Trump rallied in Janesville, Wisconsin, said it was time to open up the state for business as usual. Your response to what Trump has done around the coronavirus, with his handpicked adviser, coronavirus adviser, Dr. Scott Atlas — he has pushed aside Dr. Fauci — tweeting this weekend, which Twitter deleted, “Masks [work]? NO.”
JEREMY SCAHILL: Yeah. I mean, I don’t know how else to describe what Trump has done except “homicidal.” And it could be even on a literal level, with Trump having — you know, he said he was diagnosed with coronavirus. He was at Walter Reed. Now he’s running around, claims he’s not infectious. I mean, how do we know? How do we know when Donald Trump’s last actual negative test was? And has he just been running around spreading this? I mean, is the president of the United States — we talk about presidents being murderers on a policy level, but this president may actually be killing people. And I think that that is really a metaphor for how this entire thing has unfolded. Trump believes that as long as he and his people have the good medical care and that they can weather this, it doesn’t really matter who dies, because at the end of the day the point is to stick it to the Democrats and maintain power. And this is also a very racist response. If this was just wiping out the kind of Trump family or his inner circle, instead of disproportionately affecting Black and Brown and poor people in this country, I think we would see even a greater level of outrage at this administration.
You know, my mom has a very serious lung condition. And she, I think rightly, blames President Trump, because she can’t set foot outside of her house. She can’t see her grandchildren. And I think that that’s a big motivating factor for people, particularly older people, who are now increasingly saying that they support Joe Biden, is that they recognize that it didn’t have to be this way.
And to me, it’s really an indication of the kind of presidency that this has been. It’s all been one huge grift. It’s all been one huge scam. And I think that perhaps the most long-term danger — the short-term crisis is unconscionable, the number of people that have been killed and made sick because of incompetence. But on a long-term level, if Joe Biden wins and becomes president and we don’t reckon with how we got here, with how Donald Trump was created, nurtured in this system and able to seize power, then I really fear for the future of this country, because this is the tip of the iceberg, seeing someone like Trump take power and bring all of this to the fore. I think if we don’t reckon with history, we are in deep, deep trouble as a country, no matter what happens during these elections.
AMY GOODMAN: You talked about Black Lives Matter, the movements of immigration rights. I wanted to end with the Catholic Workers, the Catholic peace activists in Georgia, Catholic peace activist Patrick O’Neill sentenced to 14 months in jail Friday for breaking into the Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base in Georgia to protest nuclear weapons policy. He’s part of the Kings Bay Plowshares 7 group of Catholic peace activists who entered the base on the anniversary of the assassination of Dr. King. Can you talk about the significance of this, in the last 20 seconds we have?
JEREMY SCAHILL: I’ve said for a long time the greatest danger that the world has faced from Donald Trump is the possible threat of a first-strike nuclear weapon that happens as a result of some tweet that Trump doesn’t like from a foreign leader. These Catholic peace activists, during the Trump administration, tried to confront that nuclear threat, and there was a total media blackout on the action that they did. And, you know, if we lived in a just society, the Kings Bay Plowshares activists’ trial would have been reported on as one of the most brave confrontations of the most dangerous aspect of this government, and particularly this administration.
AMY GOODMAN: We have to leave it there, Jeremy Scahill, co-founder of The Intercept. We’ll link to your American Mythology series, podcast, Intercepted. I’m Amy Goodman. Thanks for joining us.


democracynow--2020-10-19--Jeremy Scahill: "Trump Is Not the Root of the Problem, He Is a Product of American Imperial History"

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
The Quarantine Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
We ’ re spending the hour with Intercept co-founder Jeremy Scahill .
His podcast Intercepted has just released the fourth chapter in a seven-part audio documentary series titled American Mythology : The Presidency of Donald Trump .
This latest installment focuses on war and looks at how Donald Trump ran for president in 2016 with a mixed message of attacking the legacy of the Iraq War and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to commit war crimes and promote imperialism .
This is Trump denouncing the Iraqi War , and used it to attack his Republican opponents during a presidential debate in the lead-up to the 2016 election .
DONALD TRUMP : Obviously , the War in Iraq was a big , fat mistake .
All right ?
Now , you can take it any way you want .
And it took Jeb — it took Jeb Bush — if you remember , at the beginning of his announcement , when he announced for president , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back : “ It was a mistake .
It wasn ’ t a mistake.
” Took him five days before his people told him what to say .
And he ultimately said it was a mistake .
The War in Iraq , we spent $ 2 trillion , thousands of lives .
We don ’ t even have it .
Iran is taking over Iraq , with the second-largest oil reserves in the world .
Obviously it was a mistake .
George Bush made a mistake .
We can make mistakes .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have never been in Iraq .
We have destabilized the Middle East .
AMY GOODMAN : In that case , he was debating , among others , Jeb Bush , President George W. Bush ’ s brother .
But even as he attacked the Iraq War , Donald Trump repeatedly called — said the U.S. should kill the families of terrorists .
This is what he said during a 2015 interview on Fox News .
AMY GOODMAN : So , by April 2017 , just three months into his presidency , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians .
Jeremy , you say in your series , “ Like Pavlov ’ s dogs , the bipartisan war machine responded accordingly.
” Let ’ s go to some of the media coverage of Trump ’ s attack on Syria .
This is MSNBC anchor Brian Williams referring to a Pentagon video of U.S. missiles fired at Syria as “ beautiful ” three times in 30 seconds .
AMY GOODMAN : That was MSNBC ’ s Brian Williams .
And this is CNN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : So , that is CNN ’ s Fareed Zakaria , from “ Trump became president ” that night to the beauty of the weapons , the bombs falling on Syria .
Jeremy Scahill ?
JEREMY SCAHILL : Well , Amy , I ’ ll just point to , at the end of 2019 , you had more than 180 House Democrats vote for a record-shattering military budget for Donald Trump .
Only 40-something Democrats opposed it .
And that record-shattering , more than $ 22 billion , greater than any Obama-era military @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brings the Democrats and the Republicans together more than a cruise missile strike or policy on — U.S. policy on Israel .
And so , on foreign policy , the most sort of intense attacks , when it comes to war or national security , on Donald Trump from the Democrats have come when he ’ s tried to move away from war .
You know , when Trump was trying to actually end the Korean War — and yes , he was doing it in an insane way , and I don @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s rhetoric , but wouldn ’ t it be — as Allan Nairn points out in our documentary , wouldn ’ t it be a great thing for the Korean people if the Korean War ended ?
And yet you had Democrats goading Trump and essentially trying to push him into doing something really insane .
You know , on the one hand , Trump wanted to broker this deal with Kim Jong-un and North Korea .
On the other hand , he would threaten to wipe North Korea off the map entirely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fire , particularly when Trump said , “ Let ’ s get out of these foreign wars.
” You know , Donald Trump — by all indications , it seems like one of the reasons why John Bolton was ousted as the national security adviser was because he was too belligerent even for Donald Trump .
And Trump said that if he hadn ’ t gotten rid of John Bolton , that we would be in World War VI by now .
But , Amy , I think it ’ s important to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this in the bigger picture .
Donald Trump is the kind of guy who says , “ We need to murder the families of terrorists.
” Barack Obama actually did kill family members of suspected terrorists , including American citizens who were children .
They repeatedly double-tap drone striked , where they would bomb funerals .
They hit weddings .
So , you know , yes , it ’ s shocking to hear an American president say the things that Donald Trump says , but let ’ s not pretend here like the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the longest sustained bombing since Vietnam in Iraq , bombing Iraq on average once every three days at times .
Barack Obama engaged in regime change , deadly economic sanctions , dramatically expanded drone strike operations , surged troops around the world .
I sort of — in really carefully analyzing Donald Trump ’ s war policy , I would say that he , thus far , has proven less murderous than George W. Bush and more of a war criminal than Jimmy Carter .
AMY GOODMAN : So , explain .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , what you feel a possible Biden win could mean .
And what would it mean if Trump remains as president ?
JEREMY SCAHILL : You know , when it comes to sort of the current and ongoing wars , Joe Biden — what we know about his time as vice president and as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee , Biden and Trump actually have some similar ideas about how U.S. war should be waged .
Joe Biden was against — reportedly against the troop surge that Obama did early on in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CIA operators and Special Forces teams to do so-called targeted strikes , the kind of anti-terrorist operations where you ’ re going in and taking out high-value targets , or you ’ re working with local forces on the ground , but with special operations forces going in and then getting out .
So , I would say that there are some overlaps between the way that Trump has approached his Afghanistan strategy , for instance , which has been to essentially pull out conventional forces and escalate the mass murder , escalate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , is much more of a kind of global — globally oriented neoliberal , who is a major fan of using very , very brutal economic sanctions mixed with covert operations .
Joe Biden is a very hawkish political figure .
And I think he and Donald Trump , on a foreign policy level , when it comes to war strategy , tactics , I think they have much more in common than the press will let on .
You know , Donald Trump has not been an exceptional president when it comes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ act that people have sort of gasped , “ Oh my god , Trump did that !
” you can point to historical analogs .
He assassinates General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad in an airstrike .
Multiple U.S. presidents have attempted to assassinate foreign leaders .
Bill Clinton repeatedly struck presidential palaces in Iraq .
Ronald Reagan attempted to kill Muammar Gaddafi .
And , you know , on and on .
You can go back through history , through the coups and CIA .
So , the reason that I bring all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear is , if we defeat Donald Trump and he ’ s no longer the president and we pretend that all of these bad things happened as a result of Donald Trump , then we really haven ’ t moved forward .
Yes , we ’ ve stanched the bleeding .
This is a horrifying administration .
But unless we ’ re willing to take on the fact that our electoral system is bought and paid for by corporations , that the United States is constantly ceding its politics to despotic regimes like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the belief that we have the right to kill anyone anywhere on the flimsiest of justifications , if we pretend that it was just lawlessness began with Donald Trump , it ’ s sort of like when Obama said we need to look forward , not backward , and refused to hold any CIA torturers accountable .
It ’ s the number one way to ensure that torture will happen again .
It ’ s the number one way to ensure that U.S. militarism and the killing of civilians will continue , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ root of the problem .
Donald Trump is not the root of the problem .
Donald Trump is a product of American imperial history .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! The Quarantine Report. I’m Amy Goodman. We’re spending the hour with Intercept co-founder Jeremy Scahill. His podcast Intercepted has just released the fourth chapter in a seven-part audio documentary series titled American Mythology: The Presidency of Donald Trump. This latest installment focuses on war and looks at how Donald Trump ran for president in 2016 with a mixed message of attacking the legacy of the Iraq War and U.S. military adventurism, while simultaneously pledging to commit war crimes and promote imperialism. This is Trump denouncing the Iraqi War, and used it to attack his Republican opponents during a presidential debate in the lead-up to the 2016 election.
DONALD TRUMP: Obviously, the War in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. All right? Now, you can take it any way you want. And it took Jeb — it took Jeb Bush — if you remember, at the beginning of his announcement, when he announced for president, took him five days. He went back: “It was a mistake. It wasn’t a mistake.” Took him five days before his people told him what to say. And he ultimately said it was a mistake. The War in Iraq, we spent $2 trillion, thousands of lives. We don’t even have it. Iran is taking over Iraq, with the second-largest oil reserves in the world. Obviously it was a mistake. George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East.
AMY GOODMAN: In that case, he was debating, among others, Jeb Bush, President George W. Bush’s brother. But even as he attacked the Iraq War, Donald Trump repeatedly called — said the U.S. should kill the families of terrorists. This is what he said during a 2015 interview on Fox News.
DONALD TRUMP: One of the problems that we have and one of the reasons we’re so ineffective is, you know, they’re trying to — they’re using them as shields.
AINSLEY EARHARDT: Yes.
DONALD TRUMP: It’s a horrible thing. They’re using them as shields.
STEVE DOOCY: Unfortunately.
DONALD TRUMP: But we’re fighting a very politically correct war.
STEVE DOOCY: Yeah.
AINSLEY EARHARDT: Well, we see that happening in Ramadi.
DONALD TRUMP: And the other thing is, with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don’t kid yourself.
AINSLEY EARHARDT: Mr. Trump —
DONALD TRUMP: But they say they don’t care about their lives. You have to take out their families.
AMY GOODMAN: So, by April 2017, just three months into his presidency, Trump launched a Tomahawk missile attack on Syria in retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians. Jeremy, you say in your series, “Like Pavlov’s dogs, the bipartisan war machine responded accordingly.” Let’s go to some of the media coverage of Trump’s attack on Syria. This is MSNBC anchor Brian Williams referring to a Pentagon video of U.S. missiles fired at Syria as “beautiful” three times in 30 seconds.
BRIAN WILLIAMS: Go into greater detail. We see these beautiful pictures at night from the decks of these two U.S. Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean. I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen: “I’m guided by the beauty of our weapons.” And they are beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments making what is for them a brief flight over to this airfield. What did they hit?
AMY GOODMAN: That was MSNBC’s Brian Williams. And this is CNN’s Fareed Zakaria.
FAREED ZAKARIA: I think Donald Trump became president of the United States. I think this was actually a big moment, because candidate Trump had said that he would never get involved in the Syrian civil war. He told President Obama, “You cannot do this without the authorization of Congress.” He seemed unconcerned with global norms. President Trump recognized that the president of the United States does have to act to enforce international norms, does have to have this broader moral and political purpose.
AMY GOODMAN: So, that is CNN’s Fareed Zakaria, from “Trump became president” that night to the beauty of the weapons, the bombs falling on Syria. Jeremy Scahill?
JEREMY SCAHILL: Well, Amy, I’ll just point to, at the end of 2019, you had more than 180 House Democrats vote for a record-shattering military budget for Donald Trump. Only 40-something Democrats opposed it. And that record-shattering, more than $22 billion, greater than any Obama-era military budget was a bipartisan product. Nothing brings the Democrats and the Republicans together more than a cruise missile strike or policy on — U.S. policy on Israel.
And so, on foreign policy, the most sort of intense attacks, when it comes to war or national security, on Donald Trump from the Democrats have come when he’s tried to move away from war. You know, when Trump was trying to actually end the Korean War — and yes, he was doing it in an insane way, and I don’t co-sign any of Trump’s rhetoric, but wouldn’t it be — as Allan Nairn points out in our documentary, wouldn’t it be a great thing for the Korean people if the Korean War ended? And yet you had Democrats goading Trump and essentially trying to push him into doing something really insane. You know, on the one hand, Trump wanted to broker this deal with Kim Jong-un and North Korea. On the other hand, he would threaten to wipe North Korea off the map entirely.
And the Democrats repeatedly played with fire, particularly when Trump said, “Let’s get out of these foreign wars.” You know, Donald Trump — by all indications, it seems like one of the reasons why John Bolton was ousted as the national security adviser was because he was too belligerent even for Donald Trump. And Trump said that if he hadn’t gotten rid of John Bolton, that we would be in World War VI by now.
But, Amy, I think it’s important to sort of back up and look at this in the bigger picture. Donald Trump is the kind of guy who says, “We need to murder the families of terrorists.” Barack Obama actually did kill family members of suspected terrorists, including American citizens who were children. They repeatedly double-tap drone striked, where they would bomb funerals. They hit weddings. So, you know, yes, it’s shocking to hear an American president say the things that Donald Trump says, but let’s not pretend here like the Democrats are doves. Bill Clinton initiated the longest sustained bombing since Vietnam in Iraq, bombing Iraq on average once every three days at times. Barack Obama engaged in regime change, deadly economic sanctions, dramatically expanded drone strike operations, surged troops around the world. I sort of — in really carefully analyzing Donald Trump’s war policy, I would say that he, thus far, has proven less murderous than George W. Bush and more of a war criminal than Jimmy Carter.
AMY GOODMAN: So, explain. And explain what this portends for the future, what you feel a possible Biden win could mean. And what would it mean if Trump remains as president?
JEREMY SCAHILL: You know, when it comes to sort of the current and ongoing wars, Joe Biden — what we know about his time as vice president and as chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, Biden and Trump actually have some similar ideas about how U.S. war should be waged. Joe Biden was against — reportedly against the troop surge that Obama did early on in his presidency, and Biden favored using CIA operators and Special Forces teams to do so-called targeted strikes, the kind of anti-terrorist operations where you’re going in and taking out high-value targets, or you’re working with local forces on the ground, but with special operations forces going in and then getting out. So, I would say that there are some overlaps between the way that Trump has approached his Afghanistan strategy, for instance, which has been to essentially pull out conventional forces and escalate the mass murder, escalate the killing. Joe Biden, though, is much more of a kind of global — globally oriented neoliberal, who is a major fan of using very, very brutal economic sanctions mixed with covert operations. Joe Biden is a very hawkish political figure. And I think he and Donald Trump, on a foreign policy level, when it comes to war strategy, tactics, I think they have much more in common than the press will let on.
You know, Donald Trump has not been an exceptional president when it comes to war policy. Almost every single act that people have sort of gasped, “Oh my god, Trump did that!” you can point to historical analogs. He assassinates General Qassem Soleimani in Baghdad in an airstrike. Multiple U.S. presidents have attempted to assassinate foreign leaders. Bill Clinton repeatedly struck presidential palaces in Iraq. Ronald Reagan attempted to kill Muammar Gaddafi. And, you know, on and on. You can go back through history, through the coups and CIA.
So, the reason that I bring all of this up is that my great fear is, if we defeat Donald Trump and he’s no longer the president and we pretend that all of these bad things happened as a result of Donald Trump, then we really haven’t moved forward. Yes, we’ve stanched the bleeding. This is a horrifying administration. But unless we’re willing to take on the fact that our electoral system is bought and paid for by corporations, that the United States is constantly ceding its politics to despotic regimes like Saudi Arabia, unquestioning support of Israel, the belief that we have the right to kill anyone anywhere on the flimsiest of justifications, if we pretend that it was just lawlessness began with Donald Trump, it’s sort of like when Obama said we need to look forward, not backward, and refused to hold any CIA torturers accountable. It’s the number one way to ensure that torture will happen again. It’s the number one way to ensure that U.S. militarism and the killing of civilians will continue, if you don’t recognize the root of the problem. Donald Trump is not the root of the problem. Donald Trump is a product of American imperial history.


democracynow--2020-10-19--Jeremy Scahill: Trump's Xenophobia Is Horrific, But U.S. Immigration Policy Has Always Been Racist

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : Which takes us from racism to xenophobia , part two of your audio documentary series American Mythology called “ Administration of Xenophobia.
” This clip begins with you , Jeremy Scahill .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s Democracy Now !
co-host Juan González in Jeremy Scahill ’ s series America Mythology .
Jeremy , take it from there .
The Trump administration has succeeded in essentially ending asylum in America .
JEREMY SCAHILL : Yeah , and virtually shut down the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And what I think is important to remember is that Trump also — as we just heard , his administration has tinkered with more than 400 different aspects of immigration policy .
And in the sort of most overt or tangible way , you ’ re citing the rules on asylum , but also making it much more difficult , much more expensive just for run-of-the-mill , normal immigration procedures .
And what we ’ ve seen is this sort of methodical , surgical operation to go through and make life as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immigrants who are already here , but also prospective immigrants , including children , who are fleeing legitimate violence .
And by the way , we should mention that many of the countries in Central America where people are fleeing from , the violence in those countries is largely a product of U.S. dirty wars that were waged throughout the '80s and ’ 90s and the U.S. support for death squads and civil wars and dictators .
And that 's almost never discussed when we talk about the broader so-called crackdown on immigration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ architecture of one of the most vile people to serve in government in modern times , and that is Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller .
You know , this was a kind of pathetic , angry white guy in college who felt that the Black people and the immigrants were all ruining his opportunities in the world .
And you sort of unleash this unstable , nasty , angry , hateful man with the levers of power to write immigration policy .
And what we ’ re seeing is this very overt racism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Amy , also to the way that Donald Trump talks about Ilhan Omar , the Democratic congresswoman from Minneapolis , who herself was a refugee from Somalia .
You know , Trump has used , on the one hand , Chicago as a placeholder to attack Black America as sort of violent people who need to be put in their place , and he uses Ilhan Omar to attack immigrants writ large , but specifically to say , “ Black immigrants are the problem .
You know , these people from Somalia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government where she ’ s from .
And then she comes here.
” Ilhan Omar is a U.S. citizen .
Ilhan Omar was a refugee , who fled a country where — you know , many people probably have seen the film Black Hawk Down .
The United States was deeply involved with the horrid destabilization of the country that she fled .
And her story is a classic American one .
She left a violent place where she didn ’ t have freedom , and came to the United States seeking a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and became a member of the United States House of Representatives , democratically elected .
So , you know , when you look at the broader immigration picture in this country , on the one hand , there ’ s the policy .
On the other hand , this is a classic authoritarian tactic to tell the , quote-unquote , “ real citizens ” of the country that the problem is the dirty , filthy vermin that come in the form of the outsider .
And that ’ s what Trump is doing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have done throughout history .
But Trump is only the frontman for this , Amy .
Bipartisan Democratic-Republican immigration policy for decades has targeted immigrants in a merciless way .
Bill Clinton started this business with expanding the border wall and building fences and propping up paramilitary law enforcement .
George Bush doubled down on it .
Barack Obama also was — he earned the moniker of the “ deporter-in-chief ” from immigrant rights activists because he deported record numbers of people .
Three million people were deported under Barack Obama .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a candidate , and Joe Biden represents some of the absolute most right-wing aspects of the history of the modern Democratic Party , including on immigration .
Now he ’ s saying that he ’ s shifting some of that .
And I do think there are very , very clear , tangible ways that Joe Biden would take away some of the imminent threat to immigrants , but let ’ s not pretend that Donald Trump just popped up , and all of a sudden we have a racist immigration policy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy for a very long time , and it ’ s bipartisan , with the Republicans being much more vicious , but it ’ s been bipartisan .
AMY GOODMAN : And as you look back over these last four years , let ’ s not forget the word he used as he talked about — and I won ’ t say the word , but “ S—hole countries , ” that include African countries , as well as Haiti , in Trump ’ s book .
And in a notification sent by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the administration proposed denying most refugees from Somalia , Syria and Yemen .
And just this past weekend , in the last days , the Trump administration put out a press release saying they had arrested 170 , quote , “ aliens ” — of course , we don ’ t use that word — said they arrested 170 people , targeting sanctuary cities .
Jeremy Scahill , we have break .
When we come back , we want to look at your — the America Mythology documentary that you dropped today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war .
Stay with us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: Which takes us from racism to xenophobia, part two of your audio documentary series American Mythology called “Administration of Xenophobia.” This clip begins with you, Jeremy Scahill.
JEREMY SCAHILL: From the beginning, Trump’s approach to upending immigration in the country has been met with legal challenges, including on DACA and family separation. While those challenges wind their way through the courts, the Trump administration has also developed a sophisticated strategy of implementing interlocking changes that will be difficult to undo. Recent analysis from the Migration Policy Institute finds that the administration has adopted more than 400 changes to immigration rules and regulations. Journalist Juan González has written several books dealing with the history of U.S. immigration policy.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: The fascist trend, represented by President Trump, wants to totally reverse immigration policy to, instead of saying, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free,” “Give me your best-educated people, who have the most money, who can buy — essentially, buy their way into the United States.”
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Democracy Now! co-host Juan González in Jeremy Scahill’s series America Mythology. Jeremy, take it from there. The Trump administration has succeeded in essentially ending asylum in America.
JEREMY SCAHILL: Yeah, and virtually shut down the southern border, for all practical purposes. And what I think is important to remember is that Trump also — as we just heard, his administration has tinkered with more than 400 different aspects of immigration policy. And in the sort of most overt or tangible way, you’re citing the rules on asylum, but also making it much more difficult, much more expensive just for run-of-the-mill, normal immigration procedures.
And what we’ve seen is this sort of methodical, surgical operation to go through and make life as miserable and difficult as possible for current immigrants who are already here, but also prospective immigrants, including children, who are fleeing legitimate violence. And by the way, we should mention that many of the countries in Central America where people are fleeing from, the violence in those countries is largely a product of U.S. dirty wars that were waged throughout the '80s and ’90s and the U.S. support for death squads and civil wars and dictators. And that's almost never discussed when we talk about the broader so-called crackdown on immigration.
But all of this is the architecture of one of the most vile people to serve in government in modern times, and that is Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller. You know, this was a kind of pathetic, angry white guy in college who felt that the Black people and the immigrants were all ruining his opportunities in the world. And you sort of unleash this unstable, nasty, angry, hateful man with the levers of power to write immigration policy. And what we’re seeing is this very overt racism.
And I would link this, Amy, also to the way that Donald Trump talks about Ilhan Omar, the Democratic congresswoman from Minneapolis, who herself was a refugee from Somalia. You know, Trump has used, on the one hand, Chicago as a placeholder to attack Black America as sort of violent people who need to be put in their place, and he uses Ilhan Omar to attack immigrants writ large, but specifically to say, “Black immigrants are the problem. You know, these people from Somalia, they don’t even have a government where she’s from. And then she comes here.” Ilhan Omar is a U.S. citizen. Ilhan Omar was a refugee, who fled a country where — you know, many people probably have seen the film Black Hawk Down. The United States was deeply involved with the horrid destabilization of the country that she fled. And her story is a classic American one. She left a violent place where she didn’t have freedom, and came to the United States seeking a better life, mobilized and organized herself and became a member of the United States House of Representatives, democratically elected.
So, you know, when you look at the broader immigration picture in this country, on the one hand, there’s the policy. On the other hand, this is a classic authoritarian tactic to tell the, quote-unquote, “real citizens” of the country that the problem is the dirty, filthy vermin that come in the form of the outsider. And that’s what Trump is doing. And it’s what despots have done throughout history.
But Trump is only the frontman for this, Amy. Bipartisan Democratic-Republican immigration policy for decades has targeted immigrants in a merciless way. Bill Clinton started this business with expanding the border wall and building fences and propping up paramilitary law enforcement. George Bush doubled down on it. Barack Obama also was — he earned the moniker of the “deporter-in-chief” from immigrant rights activists because he deported record numbers of people. Three million people were deported under Barack Obama. And the Democrats are running Joe Biden as a candidate, and Joe Biden represents some of the absolute most right-wing aspects of the history of the modern Democratic Party, including on immigration. Now he’s saying that he’s shifting some of that. And I do think there are very, very clear, tangible ways that Joe Biden would take away some of the imminent threat to immigrants, but let’s not pretend that Donald Trump just popped up, and all of a sudden we have a racist immigration policy. This country has had a racist immigration policy for a very long time, and it’s bipartisan, with the Republicans being much more vicious, but it’s been bipartisan.
AMY GOODMAN: And as you look back over these last four years, let’s not forget the word he used as he talked about — and I won’t say the word, but “S—hole countries,” that include African countries, as well as Haiti, in Trump’s book. And in a notification sent by Trump administration to Congress late last month, the administration proposed denying most refugees from Somalia, Syria and Yemen. And just this past weekend, in the last days, the Trump administration put out a press release saying they had arrested 170, quote, “aliens” — of course, we don’t use that word — said they arrested 170 people, targeting sanctuary cities.
Jeremy Scahill, we have break. When we come back, we want to look at your — the America Mythology documentary that you dropped today, that you released today, on war. Stay with us.