democracynow--2020-02-17--How Bloomberg-Funded Center for American Progress Censored a Report on NYPD Surveillance of Muslims

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , as we continue to look at how billionaire Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg wields the power of his money in different ways .
There was a major front-page story in Sunday ’ s New York Times headlined “ In Bloomberg , Liberals See a Wallet Too Big to Offend.
” The piece lays out how Bloomberg has kept potential critics quiet by making major donations to progressive causes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Times reports , quote , “ That chilling effect was apparent in 2015 to researchers at the Center for American Progress , a liberal policy group , when they turned in a report on anti-Muslim bias in the United States .
Their draft included a chapter of more than 4,000 words about New York City police surveillance of Muslim communities ; Mr. Bloomberg was mentioned by name eight times in the chapter , which was reviewed by The Times .
… When the report was published a few weeks later , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mention of Mr. Bloomberg ’ s name.
” Well , for more , we go to Washington , D.C. , where we ’ re joined by Yasmine Taeb , one of the authors of the report .
She says they were told to make major changes to the chapter or remove it .
Other officials told The New York Times they revised the report to make it focus on right-wing groups targeting Muslims .
When the report came out , Bloomberg had already given the Center for American Progress three grants worth nearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more in 2017 .
Yasmine Taeb no longer works at the Center for American Progress , but she is now a member of the Democratic National Committee .
And still with us in Philadelphia , journalist Blake Zeff , who covered New York politics and Mayor Bloomberg ’ s three terms .
Thank you so much , both , for joining us .
Yasmine Taeb , tell us what took place when you worked for the Center for American Progress .
Tell us about this report .
YASMINE TAEB : Sure .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Fear , Inc. 2.0 , ” which was released actually exactly five years ago today , and I was on your show five years ago talking about the findings , it was a follow-up to Center for American Progress ’ s blockbuster “ Fear , Inc. ” first report , which was released in 2011 .
And the report was simply a follow-up to discuss the tightly knit network of anti-Muslim activists , politicians , organizations and funders who are , you know , fanning anti-Muslim sentiment .
And the report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policies that were being promoted .
And in particular , this is racial and religious profiling by law enforcement across the country .
AMY GOODMAN : And so , talk about your chapter on surveillance of the Muslim community during the Bloomberg administration by the NYPD police and bias against the Muslim community .
What did you say there ?
And what happened to this chapter ?
Why didn ’ t we see it ?
YASMINE TAEB : So , there was a very detailed chapter about the NYPD ’ s Demographics Unit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ established shortly after 9/11 , and it was operating for more than 10 years or so .
And the Demographics Unit was tasked with mapping the Muslim community in New York City .
And that entailed , you know , following , monitoring , surveilling Muslims , of where they prayed , shopped and ate .
The program was later ruled unconstitutional .
Mayor Bloomberg and his administration , throughout the entire period , defended this program .
This program , as you likely know , resulted actually in zero terror leads .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a chilling effect on the local Muslim community there .
And my colleagues and I , the co-authors , which included Ken Gude , Ken Sofer and Matt Duss and I , we simply detailed exactly what happened , and purpose and impact of this discriminatory program .
And , you know , while we were in the final stages of this report being released — and this is literally within a week of the program , the project being launched — we had to get approval from senior officials at the Center @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s when the chapter was flagged by a member of the executive committee who actually previously had worked for Mayor Bloomberg .
And he said that there would be a strong reaction by Bloomberg World if this report was released as it was .
And so , you know , we went back and forth multiple times with the executive committee , defending the importance of the inclusion of this chapter .
And unfortunately , the executive committee ultimately decided to remove it , because — in my view and my colleagues ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ going to be perceived by Mayor Bloomberg .
AMY GOODMAN : And so , talk about the significance of this .
And I want to bring Blake Zeff in here to talk about the pattern here that you see .
That was a report by the Center for American Progress .
We didn ’ t see that particular chapter .
In The New York Times , the Center for American Progress responds and says that they had focused on — that they disputed the account , arguing there had been substantive reasons to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surveillance .
Why did you , Yasmine Taeb , decide to remove it entirely rather than revise it ?
YASMINE TAEB : So , because it was so clear that they wanted us to produce an inaccurate portrayal of the Demographics Unit ’ s egregious actions , we absolutely did not want to whitewash what the NYPD did .
And , I mean , again , this is a program that was later ruled unconstitutional .
This is a program that infringed on the First Amendment rights of Muslims in the local community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , was disbanded by Mayor de Blasio because it was a complete failure .
Not only was it unconstitutional , a complete failure and led to zero terror leads , it — for me , it was incredibly frustrating , it was incredibly disconcerting , because of the amount of work that we had put into this report and project .
This was an ongoing report that we had worked for more than a year .
And within days of launching the project and the interactive , being told by senior officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ American Progress to remove it .
AMY GOODMAN : Blake Zeff , the issue of the pattern and practice here ?
BLAKE ZEFF : Yeah , look , if you see that New York Times article that you were referring to , Amy , there ’ s a really interesting quote in there , where former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe , who was really one of the most prodigious fundraisers for the Democratic Party over the last couple of decades , you know , first for the Clintons , then for the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his own races , he basically says that Michael Bloomberg was one of , if not the most , important fundraisers for the Democratic Party during that time .
And as a result of that , I mean , he really has been — Bloomberg — a towering , a prodigious , towering figure in Democratic circles because of his pocketbook and the fact that he has been bankrolling a lot of these groups , a lot of these causes .
And as a result , that enables him to wield a tremendous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I wanted to go to the beginning of this blockbuster New York Times piece , starts on the front page , goes to two other pages .
This is the opening paragraphs .
The New York Times writes , “ In the fall of 2018 , Emily ’ s List had a dilemma .
With congressional elections approaching and the Supreme Court confirmation battle over Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh underway , the Democratic women ’ s group was hosting a major fund-raising luncheon in New York .
Among the scheduled headline speakers was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who had donated nearly $ 6 million to Emily ’ s List over the years .
“ Days before the event , Mr. Bloomberg made blunt comments in an interview with The New York Times , expressing skepticism about the # MeToo movement and questioning sexual misconduct allegations against Charlie Rose , the disgraced news anchor .
Senior Emily ’ s List officials seriously debated withdrawing Mr. Bloomberg ’ s invitation , according to three people familiar with the deliberations , who spoke on the condition of anonymity .
“ In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not risk alienating Mr. Bloomberg .
And when he addressed the luncheon on Sept. 24 — before an audience dotted with women clad in black , to show solidarity with Christine Blasey Ford , the woman who accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault — Mr. Bloomberg demonstrated why.
” He said , “ ’ I will be putting more money into supporting women candidates this cycle than any individual ever has before , ’ he declared “ It was not an idle pledge : Mr. Bloomberg spent more than $ 100 million helping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Representatives in the midterm elections .
Of the 21 newly elected lawmakers he supported with his personal super PAC , all but six were women.
” BLAKE ZEFF : Yeah , I mean , that ’ s a perfect example of this larger pattern and trend that we ’ ve been talking about .
Also in the story , you know , just to come back to this Terry McAuliffe quote that I just mentioned , what ’ s interesting about that is , when Bloomberg first ran in 2001 and McAuliffe was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ railed against anyone who had been part of the Democratic Party but was helping Bloomberg , whether that was consultants , endorsers , groups and whatnot .
And then it shows that , 20 years later , McAuliffe is talking about him almost with a sparkle in his eyes about what a great donor he ’ s been and how important he ’ s been and how he helped fund some gun control work that he had done .
And this is something that you see , as you just mentioned , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with McAuliffe , you see with all these groups who face these big dilemmas , just like the mayors I was mentioning before , just like the members of Congress that I was mentioning before , the charities , the nonprofits .
All these groups that we ’ ve just been talking about all face the same dilemma , where they ’ re either underfunded or they need money for a good cause .
Bloomberg comes in and offers it to them .
But then , as a result , they ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s very , very difficult to criticize him .
In many cases , they ’ re being told that they need to support him .
That ’ s a really , really difficult and , frankly , unprecedented situation in American democracy .
AMY GOODMAN : Several prominent African-American lawmakers have endorsed Bloomberg in recent weeks .
This is New York Democratic Congressmember Gregory Meeks on MSNBC .
AMY GOODMAN : Now , Mayor Bloomberg has also formed Mike for Black America .
Meanwhile , New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let me plant the stake now : No black person — or Hispanic person or ally of people of color — should ever even consider voting for Michael Bloomberg in the primary .
His expansion of the notoriously racist stop-and-frisk program in New York , which swept up millions of innocent New Yorkers , primarily young black and Hispanic men , is a complete and nonnegotiable deal killer.
” Blake Zeff , what has just happened in these last few weeks ?
BLAKE ZEFF : Yeah , there ’ s been a bit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Michael Bloomberg and some of his supporters .
I mean , what we ’ ve seen Bloomberg do lately is say , “ Look , I inherited this policy .
I apologized for its excesses , and I reduced it 95 % .
” In fact , let ’ s go through each one of those claims one by one .
Yes , the policy did exist initially under Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani , and we all know who that is .
But a new mayor can come in and decide whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Not only did Bloomberg continue it , but he expanded it to record levels .
When he first came in , the number of stops per year was under 100,000 .
It then rose steadily under Bloomberg until 2011 , when it reached its apex , and almost 700,000 stops were made that year .
So , to say he inherited it factually is true , but he also greatly , greatly expanded it .
In terms of reducing it 95 % , well , as I just mentioned , it just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in 2013 , it does get rolled back considerably .
But that ’ s the year that a federal judge rules the policy unconstitutional .
And Bloomberg was the subject of a lawsuit , a class-action lawsuit .
And so , that clearly had something to do with that .
And in terms of the apology , this is really egregious , because there were so many groups that were up in arms about this policy for many , many years , and Bloomberg and his defenders remained defiant , constantly saying , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crime to go down , ” and sort of suggesting that if you opposed it , that you were basically opening the doors to the bad old days of crime , terrible crime , coming back .
Well , after the policy was really , really curtailed after Bloomberg left , New York continued to see these reductions in crime , and he was really proven wrong on that , again did not apologize .
Years go by .
The Daily News , one of his big editorial supporters , in general and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ apology a couple years after Bloomberg left , saying , “ We were wrong on stop-and-frisk.
” Bloomberg did not do that .
Then let ’ s go to 2019 .
January 2019 , he ’ s at a big event for the U.S .
Naval Academy .
He continues to defend the policy .
Finally , in November of 2019 , he talks to an audience in Brooklyn and says — it was a black audience , and he says , “ I ’ m sorry .
I was actually wrong about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declares his candidacy for president of the United States .
AMY GOODMAN : And , of course , he had said a year before , if he did run for president on the Democratic ticket , he would have to do a long apology tour .
Yasmine Taeb , I wanted to go back to you .
You ’ re no longer with the Center for American Progress , but you are on the Democratic National Committee .
You recently received a phone call from Mike Bloomberg .
Can you tell us what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sure .
So , this was at the end of December of 2019 .
This was , I think , shortly after he launched his presidential campaign .
And he said he was calling as a courtesy , to sit down with me to introduce himself , to tell me why he ’ s running , why he ’ s able to win , and what he ’ s done for the Democratic Party .
I did not call him back , simply because I wanted to kind of avoid an uncomfortable conversation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me to support him .
As you noted , I am a DNC — an elected DNC member , which means , during a brokered convention , on a second ballot , I will have a vote , you know , to decide our next nominee .
And I identify as a progressive activist .
And I hope that whoever our nominee is is able to excite the grassroots and increase voter turnout and fight for a progressive platform .
AMY GOODMAN : So , why wouldn ’ t you want to talk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I mean , if they reach out to me now , I ’ m happy to offer him the courtesy and sit down with him .
At that time , honestly , because of what happened at CAP , because of the policies he supported , because of the way he kind of entered the race and is now essentially bankrolling his campaign and buying an election , I felt very uncomfortable .
And , you know , if he or a member of his team reached out to me now , I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them that courtesy and sit down with them , but at the time I just — I didn ’ t feel comfortable doing that .
AMY GOODMAN : Now , let ’ s talk about what could happen in the future , this whole idea of a brokered convention , and then the role you would play , Yasmine Taeb , as a member of the DNC .
Explain what this would look like .
YASMINE TAEB : Sure .
So , as you may know , we passed reforms in the DNC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the first ballot .
So , at the time when we passed these reforms — and these were the most progressive reforms the DNC had passed , from my understanding , and the grassroots was incredibly excited .
These were reforms that I advocated for and lobbied for all across the commonwealth of Virginia , talking to Democrats and telling them why these reforms are needed .
At the time , unfortunately , when they passed , we were incredibly ecstatic , thinking that now the process in 2020 will become more fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be more kind of excited about this and less inclined to attack the DNC and kind of leaders in the party .
Unfortunately , because of how I do believe this nomination fight is going to move forward , I believe we ’ re still going to have at least four to five candidates that are viable heading into the convention .
I don ’ t believe we ’ ll have a single candidate that ’ s able to receive a majority of delegates .
So , in order to avoid heading into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have at least one candidate that has at least — I believe the number is about 1,990 delegates .
And honestly , I don ’ t think that ’ s going to happen .
And this is particularly important and why candidates like Mayor Bloomberg are doing their homework .
I mean , the fact that he reached out to me — this is in the very initial part , the first couple weeks that he entered the race — shows that he knows it will likely be a brokered convention , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to DNC members , trying to ensure that he has as many supporters on the DNC as possible .
AMY GOODMAN : And , Blake Zeff , this issue of superdelegates weighing in on the second vote , what do you foresee here ?
And the significance of this ?
YASMINE TAEB : Sure .
So , unfortunately , if — AMY GOODMAN : Let me put that question to Blake .
BLAKE ZEFF : Oh , I was going to say , I think this really speaks to another key point about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because if it was just that he had billions of dollars and a ton of money — you know , Tom Steyer has a lot of money .
Howard Schultz had a lot of money , right ?
That alone is not really the entire story here .
For me , it ’ s the — the story about Bloomberg and what makes his candidacy potentially very potent is that it ’ s a combination of endless resources , but also an extremely smart team that he has .
They ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what I would call their Machiavellian approach to winning .
And the fact that they ’ re calling all these members to try to see if they can get that support this early on really speaks to that .
They are going to understand — and , look , Mike Bloomberg made his fortune .
He didn ’ t inherit a fortune from like an oil family , right ?
It was from data , analytics , communications , media .
He really understands these areas .
And they are looking at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to do .
And they are starting that this far out .
That doesn ’ t surprise me at all .
AMY GOODMAN : Very quickly , Blake Zeff , the role of President Obama ?
He is in so many of these national ads that are blanketing the networks across the country for Bloomberg , though he doesn ’ t specifically endorse him .
Clearly , it seems like Bloomberg must have said , “ Can I use you talking about me in these ads ?
” What do you think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BLAKE ZEFF : I ’ m not so sure that they got permission .
You know , look , very quickly , the history between Bloomberg and Obama is not that they ’ re some great friends at all .
As everyone knows , Bloomberg was a Republican for a long time , endorsed George W. Bush in 2004 , when Obama was giving his classic speech for John Kerry that year for the Democrats .
Then , in '08 , Bloomberg does not endorse Obama .
In 2012 , he endorses Obama @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , almost halfheartedly , in which he criticizes Obama as being divisive and partisan and overly populist .
So , they worked together on some issues , like gun safety reform , the environment , things like that .
And I 'm sure that Obama , like others that we ’ ve talked about , is appreciative of the fact that Michael Bloomberg gave a lot of money for Democratic causes .
But they were not best buds who have worked together on a lot of things , so that the ad gives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And I ’ m not so sure that Obama is secretly behind the scenes pulling for Bloomberg and gave him permission to do that .
AMY GOODMAN : Finally , I wanted to go to a clip of seeing Michael Bloomberg at the U.N. climate summit in Madrid .
We caught up with him after , well , what we thought , he was holding a news conference at the U.S .
Climate Action Center , which he funds , where journalists would go to ask politicians questions .
He even shocked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ re still in ” conference room , when he , after speaking , wrapping up his comments , after he called all the press — and there are pictures of , you know , him standing at the U.N. climate summit sign — he was surrounded by his officials and security , and walked out .
So I tried to follow him to get my question to him .
AMY GOODMAN : That was his campaign manager saying , “ We ’ re only talking about climate.
” Of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interview with Christiane Amanpour , and he was talking all about the election .
But calling a news conference and then walking out before the journalists got to ask the question , but having that photo op of hundreds of journalists around him .
Blake Zeff , your last 20 seconds ?
BLAKE ZEFF : Look , that ’ s just another example of their strategy , which is to try to control every aspect of the campaign they can .
And that ’ s what the commercials enable him to do .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that ’ s how you get your message out , you don ’ t have to submit to interviews , you don ’ t have to submit to scrutiny , because you ’ re already getting all the media coverage that you want .
And that ’ s a perfect example of their desire to really control every single aspect of this .
And the money enables them , in large part , to do that .
AMY GOODMAN : Blake Zeff , I want to thank you for being with us , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Taeb , a civil rights lawyer , elected member of the Democratic National Committee .
When we come back , we talk about Yemen , where 31 people were killed in U.S.-backed Saudi-UAE airstrikes this weekend , including women and children .
The U.N. called it “ shocking.
” Stay with us .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman, as we continue to look at how billionaire Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg wields the power of his money in different ways. There was a major front-page story in Sunday’s New York Times headlined “In Bloomberg, Liberals See a Wallet Too Big to Offend.” The piece lays out how Bloomberg has kept potential critics quiet by making major donations to progressive causes and advocacy groups around the country. The Times reports, quote, “That chilling effect was apparent in 2015 to researchers at the Center for American Progress, a liberal policy group, when they turned in a report on anti-Muslim bias in the United States. Their draft included a chapter of more than 4,000 words about New York City police surveillance of Muslim communities; Mr. Bloomberg was mentioned by name eight times in the chapter, which was reviewed by The Times. … When the report was published a few weeks later, the chapter was gone. So was any mention of Mr. Bloomberg’s name.”
Well, for more, we go to Washington, D.C., where we’re joined by Yasmine Taeb, one of the authors of the report. She says they were told to make major changes to the chapter or remove it. Other officials told The New York Times they revised the report to make it focus on right-wing groups targeting Muslims. When the report came out, Bloomberg had already given the Center for American Progress three grants worth nearly $1.5 million and contributed $400,000 more in 2017. Yasmine Taeb no longer works at the Center for American Progress, but she is now a member of the Democratic National Committee. And still with us in Philadelphia, journalist Blake Zeff, who covered New York politics and Mayor Bloomberg’s three terms.
Thank you so much, both, for joining us. Yasmine Taeb, tell us what took place when you worked for the Center for American Progress. Tell us about this report.
YASMINE TAEB: Sure. So, as you likely know, Amy, “Fear, Inc. 2.0,” which was released actually exactly five years ago today, and I was on your show five years ago talking about the findings, it was a follow-up to Center for American Progress’s blockbuster “Fear, Inc.” first report, which was released in 2011. And the report was simply a follow-up to discuss the tightly knit network of anti-Muslim activists, politicians, organizations and funders who are, you know, fanning anti-Muslim sentiment. And the report additionally was to chronicle and detail anti-Muslim policies that were being promoted. And in particular, this is racial and religious profiling by law enforcement across the country.
AMY GOODMAN: And so, talk about your chapter on surveillance of the Muslim community during the Bloomberg administration by the NYPD police and bias against the Muslim community. What did you say there? And what happened to this chapter? Why didn’t we see it?
YASMINE TAEB: So, there was a very detailed chapter about the NYPD’s Demographics Unit. So, the Demographics Unit was established shortly after 9/11, and it was operating for more than 10 years or so. And the Demographics Unit was tasked with mapping the Muslim community in New York City. And that entailed, you know, following, monitoring, surveilling Muslims, of where they prayed, shopped and ate. The program was later ruled unconstitutional. Mayor Bloomberg and his administration, throughout the entire period, defended this program. This program, as you likely know, resulted actually in zero terror leads. This program was unconstitutional. It had a chilling effect on the local Muslim community there.
And my colleagues and I, the co-authors, which included Ken Gude, Ken Sofer and Matt Duss and I, we simply detailed exactly what happened, and purpose and impact of this discriminatory program. And, you know, while we were in the final stages of this report being released — and this is literally within a week of the program, the project being launched — we had to get approval from senior officials at the Center for American Progress. And that’s when the chapter was flagged by a member of the executive committee who actually previously had worked for Mayor Bloomberg. And he said that there would be a strong reaction by Bloomberg World if this report was released as it was. And so, you know, we went back and forth multiple times with the executive committee, defending the importance of the inclusion of this chapter. And unfortunately, the executive committee ultimately decided to remove it, because — in my view and my colleagues’ views, because of how it was going to be perceived by Mayor Bloomberg.
AMY GOODMAN: And so, talk about the significance of this. And I want to bring Blake Zeff in here to talk about the pattern here that you see. That was a report by the Center for American Progress. We didn’t see that particular chapter. In The New York Times, the Center for American Progress responds and says that they had focused on — that they disputed the account, arguing there had been substantive reasons to revise or remove a section on police surveillance. Why did you, Yasmine Taeb, decide to remove it entirely rather than revise it?
YASMINE TAEB: So, because it was so clear that they wanted us to produce an inaccurate portrayal of the Demographics Unit’s egregious actions, we absolutely did not want to whitewash what the NYPD did. And, I mean, again, this is a program that was later ruled unconstitutional. This is a program that infringed on the First Amendment rights of Muslims in the local community. This is a program that, again, was disbanded by Mayor de Blasio because it was a complete failure. Not only was it unconstitutional, a complete failure and led to zero terror leads, it — for me, it was incredibly frustrating, it was incredibly disconcerting, because of the amount of work that we had put into this report and project. This was an ongoing report that we had worked for more than a year. And within days of launching the project and the interactive, being told by senior officials, unfortunately, at the Center for American Progress to remove it.
AMY GOODMAN: Blake Zeff, the issue of the pattern and practice here?
BLAKE ZEFF: Yeah, look, if you see that New York Times article that you were referring to, Amy, there’s a really interesting quote in there, where former DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe, who was really one of the most prodigious fundraisers for the Democratic Party over the last couple of decades, you know, first for the Clintons, then for the Democratic Party, then, later, for his own races, he basically says that Michael Bloomberg was one of, if not the most, important fundraisers for the Democratic Party during that time. And as a result of that, I mean, he really has been — Bloomberg — a towering, a prodigious, towering figure in Democratic circles because of his pocketbook and the fact that he has been bankrolling a lot of these groups, a lot of these causes. And as a result, that enables him to wield a tremendous amount of influence.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go to the beginning of this blockbuster New York Times piece, starts on the front page, goes to two other pages. This is the opening paragraphs. The New York Times writes, “In the fall of 2018, Emily’s List had a dilemma. With congressional elections approaching and the Supreme Court confirmation battle over Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh underway, the Democratic women’s group was hosting a major fund-raising luncheon in New York. Among the scheduled headline speakers was Michael R. Bloomberg, the former mayor, who had donated nearly $6 million to Emily’s List over the years.
“Days before the event, Mr. Bloomberg made blunt comments in an interview with The New York Times, expressing skepticism about the #MeToo movement and questioning sexual misconduct allegations against Charlie Rose, the disgraced news anchor. Senior Emily’s List officials seriously debated withdrawing Mr. Bloomberg’s invitation, according to three people familiar with the deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“In the end, the group concluded it could not risk alienating Mr. Bloomberg. And when he addressed the luncheon on Sept. 24 — before an audience dotted with women clad in black, to show solidarity with Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who accused Judge Kavanaugh of sexual assault — Mr. Bloomberg demonstrated why.”
He said, “’I will be putting more money into supporting women candidates this cycle than any individual ever has before,’ he declared
“It was not an idle pledge: Mr. Bloomberg spent more than $100 million helping Democrats take control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections. Of the 21 newly elected lawmakers he supported with his personal super PAC, all but six were women.”
Blake Zeff?
BLAKE ZEFF: Yeah, I mean, that’s a perfect example of this larger pattern and trend that we’ve been talking about. Also in the story, you know, just to come back to this Terry McAuliffe quote that I just mentioned, what’s interesting about that is, when Bloomberg first ran in 2001 and McAuliffe was the head of the DNC, he railed against anyone who had been part of the Democratic Party but was helping Bloomberg, whether that was consultants, endorsers, groups and whatnot. And then it shows that, 20 years later, McAuliffe is talking about him almost with a sparkle in his eyes about what a great donor he’s been and how important he’s been and how he helped fund some gun control work that he had done.
And this is something that you see, as you just mentioned, with Emily’s List, you see with McAuliffe, you see with all these groups who face these big dilemmas, just like the mayors I was mentioning before, just like the members of Congress that I was mentioning before, the charities, the nonprofits. All these groups that we’ve just been talking about all face the same dilemma, where they’re either underfunded or they need money for a good cause. Bloomberg comes in and offers it to them. But then, as a result, they’re put in this position where it’s very, very difficult to criticize him. In many cases, they’re being told that they need to support him. That’s a really, really difficult and, frankly, unprecedented situation in American democracy.
AMY GOODMAN: Several prominent African-American lawmakers have endorsed Bloomberg in recent weeks. This is New York Democratic Congressmember Gregory Meeks on MSNBC.
REP. GREGORY MEEKS: Look, I’m from New York. Michael Bloomberg ran three times. I didn’t support him three times, primarily because of stop-and-frisk. It was a bad policy. At the same time, I also understand that Michael Bloomberg wanted to get guns out of the community so that innocent people did not get killed. … African-American voters are always — they are very sophisticated voters. You know, they vote their interests. They know that their interest is making sure that Donald Trump is defeated. That’s absolutely their interest. And so they’re going to move in the direction that they think, “Who is the best person to defeat Donald Trump?” And then, who is also going to talk about their agenda?
AMY GOODMAN: Now, Mayor Bloomberg has also formed Mike for Black America. Meanwhile, New York Times columnist Charles Blow wrote a new opinion piece, quote, “Let me plant the stake now: No black person — or Hispanic person or ally of people of color — should ever even consider voting for Michael Bloomberg in the primary. His expansion of the notoriously racist stop-and-frisk program in New York, which swept up millions of innocent New Yorkers, primarily young black and Hispanic men, is a complete and nonnegotiable deal killer.” Blake Zeff, what has just happened in these last few weeks?
BLAKE ZEFF: Yeah, there’s been a bit of a rewriting of the stop-and-frisk legacy by Michael Bloomberg and some of his supporters. I mean, what we’ve seen Bloomberg do lately is say, “Look, I inherited this policy. I apologized for its excesses, and I reduced it 95%.” In fact, let’s go through each one of those claims one by one.
Yes, the policy did exist initially under Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani, and we all know who that is. But a new mayor can come in and decide whether they want to continue that or not. Not only did Bloomberg continue it, but he expanded it to record levels. When he first came in, the number of stops per year was under 100,000. It then rose steadily under Bloomberg until 2011, when it reached its apex, and almost 700,000 stops were made that year. So, to say he inherited it factually is true, but he also greatly, greatly expanded it.
In terms of reducing it 95%, well, as I just mentioned, it just kept expanding, until, eventually, in 2013, it does get rolled back considerably. But that’s the year that a federal judge rules the policy unconstitutional. And Bloomberg was the subject of a lawsuit, a class-action lawsuit. And so, that clearly had something to do with that.
And in terms of the apology, this is really egregious, because there were so many groups that were up in arms about this policy for many, many years, and Bloomberg and his defenders remained defiant, constantly saying, “We need this in order for crime to go down,” and sort of suggesting that if you opposed it, that you were basically opening the doors to the bad old days of crime, terrible crime, coming back. Well, after the policy was really, really curtailed after Bloomberg left, New York continued to see these reductions in crime, and he was really proven wrong on that, again did not apologize. Years go by. The Daily News, one of his big editorial supporters, in general and also on stop-and-frisk, issued a big apology a couple years after Bloomberg left, saying, “We were wrong on stop-and-frisk.” Bloomberg did not do that. Then let’s go to 2019. January 2019, he’s at a big event for the U.S. Naval Academy. He continues to defend the policy. Finally, in November of 2019, he talks to an audience in Brooklyn and says — it was a black audience, and he says, “I’m sorry. I was actually wrong about that.” Seven days later, he declares his candidacy for president of the United States.
AMY GOODMAN: And, of course, he had said a year before, if he did run for president on the Democratic ticket, he would have to do a long apology tour. Yasmine Taeb, I wanted to go back to you. You’re no longer with the Center for American Progress, but you are on the Democratic National Committee. You recently received a phone call from Mike Bloomberg. Can you tell us what that was about?
YASMINE TAEB: Sure. So, this was at the end of December of 2019. This was, I think, shortly after he launched his presidential campaign. And he said he was calling as a courtesy, to sit down with me to introduce himself, to tell me why he’s running, why he’s able to win, and what he’s done for the Democratic Party. I did not call him back, simply because I wanted to kind of avoid an uncomfortable conversation where I assumed he wanted to ask me to support him. As you noted, I am a DNC — an elected DNC member, which means, during a brokered convention, on a second ballot, I will have a vote, you know, to decide our next nominee. And I identify as a progressive activist. And I hope that whoever our nominee is is able to excite the grassroots and increase voter turnout and fight for a progressive platform.
AMY GOODMAN: So, why wouldn’t you want to talk to Michael Bloomberg?
YASMINE TAEB: I mean, if they reach out to me now, I’m happy to offer him the courtesy and sit down with him. At that time, honestly, because of what happened at CAP, because of the policies he supported, because of the way he kind of entered the race and is now essentially bankrolling his campaign and buying an election, I felt very uncomfortable. And, you know, if he or a member of his team reached out to me now, I’m happy to kind of offer them that courtesy and sit down with them, but at the time I just — I didn’t feel comfortable doing that.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, let’s talk about what could happen in the future, this whole idea of a brokered convention, and then the role you would play, Yasmine Taeb, as a member of the DNC. Explain what this would look like.
YASMINE TAEB: Sure. So, as you may know, we passed reforms in the DNC that eliminated the vote of superdelegates on the first ballot. So, at the time when we passed these reforms — and these were the most progressive reforms the DNC had passed, from my understanding, and the grassroots was incredibly excited. These were reforms that I advocated for and lobbied for all across the commonwealth of Virginia, talking to Democrats and telling them why these reforms are needed. At the time, unfortunately, when they passed, we were incredibly ecstatic, thinking that now the process in 2020 will become more fair and impartial, and the grassroots would be more kind of excited about this and less inclined to attack the DNC and kind of leaders in the party.
Unfortunately, because of how I do believe this nomination fight is going to move forward, I believe we’re still going to have at least four to five candidates that are viable heading into the convention. I don’t believe we’ll have a single candidate that’s able to receive a majority of delegates. So, in order to avoid heading into a second ballot, we need to have at least one candidate that has at least — I believe the number is about 1,990 delegates. And honestly, I don’t think that’s going to happen. And this is particularly important and why candidates like Mayor Bloomberg are doing their homework. I mean, the fact that he reached out to me — this is in the very initial part, the first couple weeks that he entered the race — shows that he knows it will likely be a brokered convention, and he’s probably been reaching out to DNC members, trying to ensure that he has as many supporters on the DNC as possible.
AMY GOODMAN: And, Blake Zeff, this issue of superdelegates weighing in on the second vote, what do you foresee here? And the significance of this?
YASMINE TAEB: Sure. So, unfortunately, if —
AMY GOODMAN: Let me put that question to Blake.
BLAKE ZEFF: Oh, I was going to say, I think this really speaks to another key point about Bloomberg that’s worth getting into, because if it was just that he had billions of dollars and a ton of money — you know, Tom Steyer has a lot of money. Howard Schultz had a lot of money, right? That alone is not really the entire story here. For me, it’s the — the story about Bloomberg and what makes his candidacy potentially very potent is that it’s a combination of endless resources, but also an extremely smart team that he has. They’re very canny and clever, and also what I would call their Machiavellian approach to winning. And the fact that they’re calling all these members to try to see if they can get that support this early on really speaks to that. They are going to understand — and, look, Mike Bloomberg made his fortune. He didn’t inherit a fortune from like an oil family, right? It was from data, analytics, communications, media. He really understands these areas. And they are looking at the numbers, and they know what they need to do. And they are starting that this far out. That doesn’t surprise me at all.
AMY GOODMAN: Very quickly, Blake Zeff, the role of President Obama? He is in so many of these national ads that are blanketing the networks across the country for Bloomberg, though he doesn’t specifically endorse him. Clearly, it seems like Bloomberg must have said, “Can I use you talking about me in these ads?” What do you think Obama’s role is here?
BLAKE ZEFF: I’m not so sure that they got permission. You know, look, very quickly, the history between Bloomberg and Obama is not that they’re some great friends at all. As everyone knows, Bloomberg was a Republican for a long time, endorsed George W. Bush in 2004, when Obama was giving his classic speech for John Kerry that year for the Democrats. Then, in '08, Bloomberg does not endorse Obama. In 2012, he endorses Obama at the very second in an op-ed, almost halfheartedly, in which he criticizes Obama as being divisive and partisan and overly populist. So, they worked together on some issues, like gun safety reform, the environment, things like that. And I'm sure that Obama, like others that we’ve talked about, is appreciative of the fact that Michael Bloomberg gave a lot of money for Democratic causes. But they were not best buds who have worked together on a lot of things, so that the ad gives a little bit of a misleading impression. And I’m not so sure that Obama is secretly behind the scenes pulling for Bloomberg and gave him permission to do that.
AMY GOODMAN: Finally, I wanted to go to a clip of seeing Michael Bloomberg at the U.N. climate summit in Madrid. We caught up with him after, well, what we thought, he was holding a news conference at the U.S. Climate Action Center, which he funds, where journalists would go to ask politicians questions. He even shocked the people who worked at this “We’re still in” conference room, when he, after speaking, wrapping up his comments, after he called all the press — and there are pictures of, you know, him standing at the U.N. climate summit sign — he was surrounded by his officials and security, and walked out. So I tried to follow him to get my question to him.
AMY GOODMAN: Mayor Bloomberg, will you be taking questions from the press? … If you could just answer a question? We all packed in there to ask you questions.
MICHAEL BLOOMBERG: Careful. You’re going to trip.
AMY GOODMAN: But the U.N. has said that economic and climate inequality is driving protests around the world. You’re a billionaire running for president. You’ve spent tens of millions more dollars than the other presidential candidates. Will that be your strategy to win the presidency?
KEVIN SHEEKEY: We’re here to talk about climate this week.
AMY GOODMAN: That was his campaign manager saying, “We’re only talking about climate.” Of course, that night, he had a long interview with Christiane Amanpour, and he was talking all about the election. But calling a news conference and then walking out before the journalists got to ask the question, but having that photo op of hundreds of journalists around him. Blake Zeff, your last 20 seconds?
BLAKE ZEFF: Look, that’s just another example of their strategy, which is to try to control every aspect of the campaign they can. And that’s what the commercials enable him to do. If you run so many commercials and that’s how you get your message out, you don’t have to submit to interviews, you don’t have to submit to scrutiny, because you’re already getting all the media coverage that you want. And that’s a perfect example of their desire to really control every single aspect of this. And the money enables them, in large part, to do that.
AMY GOODMAN: Blake Zeff, I want to thank you for being with us, journalist and documentary filmmaker, and Yasmine Taeb, a civil rights lawyer, elected member of the Democratic National Committee.
When we come back, we talk about Yemen, where 31 people were killed in U.S.-backed Saudi-UAE airstrikes this weekend, including women and children. The U.N. called it “shocking.” Stay with us.


democracynow--2020-02-17--How Billionaire Michael Bloomberg's Deep Pockets Have Let Him Win Friends and Buy Influence

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : With the Nevada caucuses less than a week away , many Democratic candidates are courting voters and increasingly targeting their attacks on billionaire Michael Bloomberg , who they ’ re accusing of buying his way into the election .
This is leading Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders speaking Sunday at a rally in Carson City , Nevada .
AMY GOODMAN : In the lead-up to Super Tuesday on March 3rd , when voters in 14 states go to the polls , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million of his own $ 60 billion fortune on advertising .
He ’ s also paid meme influencers to share sponsored content on Instagram , hired thousands of on-the-ground political operatives to work in more than 125 offices around the country .
Meanwhile , The Washington Post reports multiple lawsuits have been filed over the years alleging that women were discriminated against at Bloomberg ’ s business-information company , including one case filed by a former worker who blamed Bloomberg for creating a culture of sexual harassment and degradation .
Bloomberg and his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuits .
But a major investigation in Sunday ’ s New York Times , headlined “ In Bloomberg , Liberals See a Wallet Too Big to Offend , ” lays out how Bloomberg established a foundation to silence potential critics during his presidential bid by making major donations to progressive causes and advocacy groups around the country .
The Times estimates Bloomberg has spent at least $ 10 billion on charitable pursuits related to his political ambitions .
In 2019 alone , the year he declared his presidential candidacy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bloomberg ’ s charitable giving soared to $ 3.3 billion — more than in the previous five years combined.
” Well , for more , we ’ re joined in Philadelphia by Blake Zeff , a journalist and documentary filmmaker who has covered New York politics and Michael Bloomberg ’ s terms , three terms , as mayor .
Blake Zeff , welcome to Democracy Now !
Can you — last week , you had a fascinating kind of Twitter thread about what Bloomberg ’ s strategy is .
And it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money that he is spending , but it ’ s also how he spends that money .
And this has been going on for many years .
Can you lay out Bloomberg ’ s strategy ?
BLAKE ZEFF : Absolutely .
I think there ’ s this kind of idea that he ’ s spending so much money on ads and that that enables him to get his message out a little bit more than other candidates , and that ’ s kind of where the big advantage lies .
And yes , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is a lot more to it than that .
You talked a little bit about how much he ’ s spent in recent years supporting causes and leaders and things like that , but let ’ s talk about that a bit more .
I think a lot of people might be surprised to see how many endorsements Michael Bloomberg has been racking up in his presidential campaign as kind of a former local mayor .
He ’ s got congressmembers throughout the country .
He ’ s got mayors throughout the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ $ 110 million last year — sorry , last cycle alone , in 2018 , supporting House candidates , 24 of whom won .
So you ’ ve got 24 members of Congress getting $ 110 million .
That ’ s , you know , some of them are getting $ 2 million , some of them are getting $ 4 million .
And then you have that person come to you a year later and say , “ Boy , I ’ d really love it if you could help me out.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say no , right ?
Then you ’ ve got mayors .
You might be surprised to see how many mayors he ’ s getting throughout the country .
Well , he ’ s got a philanthropy that gives out grants for urban programs .
If you ’ re a city that ’ s struggling and you want to get some sort of big grant from Bloomberg philanthropies , that puts you in a tough spot .
Then he ’ s got nonprofits and charities .
When Bloomberg ran for mayor in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get himself a third term , which was , at that time , not really allowed in New York , because the voters had had a term limits referendum .
Well , Bloomberg engineered a backroom deal , and , amazingly , a lot of the big nonprofits in the city supported him on that .
Why ?
We later found out that he had given them millions of dollars .
So , that money goes to lots of different places beyond just merely TV commercials .
AMY GOODMAN : And explain what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people outside of New York City , for people to understand , I mean , it was Mayor Mike Bloomberg himself who also supported term limits .
Explain what the policy was in the city and how he ended up flipping it and going for a third term , with , as you said , these good government groups who were absolutely opposed to a third term .
It ’ s not that he thought he could get them to say , “ We support this , ” but his strategy of neutralizing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Right .
So , two points .
On term limits , in particular , this was fascinating .
The voters of New York had said , “ We don ’ t want more than — we don ’ t want our mayors to have more than two terms or be able to even run for it.
” There was a voter referendum .
This was on the books .
Bloomberg decides , towards the very end of his second term , that he ’ d like to be mayor again .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that , you know , the city has been recovering from hard times .
You know , this was right around the time of the Great Recession , if you will , kind of the housing crash , 2009 .
And they come up with this rationale that we need his economic expertise so badly that he needs to run again .
Of course , later it ’ s revealed by some of his allies , years later , that this was just an excuse to come up with some way for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really wanted to do the job .
So , what does Bloomberg do ?
It ’ s not just that he gave money to groups to kind of not make a big fuss , although he did .
He also was able to use his status as a billionaire to go to the billionaire publishers of the big newspapers in New York City .
So , you got the Daily News , you got the New York Post , you ’ ve got The New York Times , all run by these very @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything , these newspapers , these editorial pages in particular .
But they all met with Bloomberg , decided to sign on to this plan for him to go for a third term .
All put out editorials , kind of in unison , in lockstep , saying this is a great idea for the city .
And that was a big part of that , you know , developing and sort of laying the groundwork for the support for Bloomberg to do that .
To your other point about him getting typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on stuff , he changes his Republican voter registration to being an independent in the middle of his mayoralty .
And you would think at that point , “ OK , the state Republican Party is now free to attack him for the rest of his term , because he ’ s not a Republican anymore.
” But they never did .
And people were curious : Why is that ?
Well , then we learned that he gave a record $ 1 million to the Republican state Senate fund to kind of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much .
So , the money works in all these different ways .
AMY GOODMAN : We ’ re going to break and then come back to our conversation .
We ’ re talking to Blake Zeff , journalist , documentary filmmaker , covered New York politics and Michael Bloomberg ’ s term as mayors — terms as mayor .
His forthcoming film is Loan Wolves , investigating the origins and effects of the student debt crisis in America .
We ’ ll be back with him and more in a moment .

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: With the Nevada caucuses less than a week away, many Democratic candidates are courting voters and increasingly targeting their attacks on billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who they’re accusing of buying his way into the election. This is leading Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders speaking Sunday at a rally in Carson City, Nevada.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: We will not create the energy and excitement we need to defeat Donald Trump, if that candidate pursued, advocated for and enacted racist policies like stop-and-frisk, which caused communities of color in his city to live in fear.
AMY GOODMAN: In the lead-up to Super Tuesday on March 3rd, when voters in 14 states go to the polls, Bloomberg has spent an unprecedented $417 million of his own $60 billion fortune on advertising. He’s also paid meme influencers to share sponsored content on Instagram, hired thousands of on-the-ground political operatives to work in more than 125 offices around the country.
Meanwhile, The Washington Post reports multiple lawsuits have been filed over the years alleging that women were discriminated against at Bloomberg’s business-information company, including one case filed by a former worker who blamed Bloomberg for creating a culture of sexual harassment and degradation. Bloomberg and his organizations have been defendants in almost 40 sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuits.
But a major investigation in Sunday’s New York Times, headlined “In Bloomberg, Liberals See a Wallet Too Big to Offend,” lays out how Bloomberg established a foundation to silence potential critics during his presidential bid by making major donations to progressive causes and advocacy groups around the country. The Times estimates Bloomberg has spent at least $10 billion on charitable pursuits related to his political ambitions. In 2019 alone, the year he declared his presidential candidacy, The New York Times reports “Bloomberg’s charitable giving soared to $3.3 billion — more than in the previous five years combined.”
Well, for more, we’re joined in Philadelphia by Blake Zeff, a journalist and documentary filmmaker who has covered New York politics and Michael Bloomberg’s terms, three terms, as mayor.
Blake Zeff, welcome to Democracy Now! Can you — last week, you had a fascinating kind of Twitter thread about what Bloomberg’s strategy is. And it’s not just the unprecedented massive amount of money that he is spending, but it’s also how he spends that money. And this has been going on for many years. Can you lay out Bloomberg’s strategy?
BLAKE ZEFF: Absolutely. I think there’s this kind of idea that he’s spending so much money on ads and that that enables him to get his message out a little bit more than other candidates, and that’s kind of where the big advantage lies. And yes, he’s doing that, but there is a lot more to it than that.
You talked a little bit about how much he’s spent in recent years supporting causes and leaders and things like that, but let’s talk about that a bit more. I think a lot of people might be surprised to see how many endorsements Michael Bloomberg has been racking up in his presidential campaign as kind of a former local mayor. He’s got congressmembers throughout the country. He’s got mayors throughout the country. Well, he spent about $110 million last year — sorry, last cycle alone, in 2018, supporting House candidates, 24 of whom won. So you’ve got 24 members of Congress getting $110 million. That’s, you know, some of them are getting $2 million, some of them are getting $4 million. And then you have that person come to you a year later and say, “Boy, I’d really love it if you could help me out.” It’s hard for them to say no, right? Then you’ve got mayors. You might be surprised to see how many mayors he’s getting throughout the country. Well, he’s got a philanthropy that gives out grants for urban programs. If you’re a city that’s struggling and you want to get some sort of big grant from Bloomberg philanthropies, that puts you in a tough spot.
Then he’s got nonprofits and charities. When Bloomberg ran for mayor in New York City, he tried to get himself a third term, which was, at that time, not really allowed in New York, because the voters had had a term limits referendum. Well, Bloomberg engineered a backroom deal, and, amazingly, a lot of the big nonprofits in the city supported him on that. Why? We later found out that he had given them millions of dollars. So, that money goes to lots of different places beyond just merely TV commercials.
AMY GOODMAN: And explain what you mean. For example, for people outside of New York City, for people to understand, I mean, it was Mayor Mike Bloomberg himself who also supported term limits. Explain what the policy was in the city and how he ended up flipping it and going for a third term, with, as you said, these good government groups who were absolutely opposed to a third term. It’s not that he thought he could get them to say, “We support this,” but his strategy of neutralizing critics, using money.
BLAKE ZEFF: Right. So, two points. On term limits, in particular, this was fascinating. The voters of New York had said, “We don’t want more than — we don’t want our mayors to have more than two terms or be able to even run for it.” There was a voter referendum. This was on the books. Bloomberg decides, towards the very end of his second term, that he’d like to be mayor again. They come up with a rationale, which is that, you know, the city has been recovering from hard times. You know, this was right around the time of the Great Recession, if you will, kind of the housing crash, 2009. And they come up with this rationale that we need his economic expertise so badly that he needs to run again. Of course, later it’s revealed by some of his allies, years later, that this was just an excuse to come up with some way for him to stay in office because he really wanted to do the job.
So, what does Bloomberg do? It’s not just that he gave money to groups to kind of not make a big fuss, although he did. He also was able to use his status as a billionaire to go to the billionaire publishers of the big newspapers in New York City. So, you got the Daily News, you got the New York Post, you’ve got The New York Times, all run by these very wealthy families. They rarely agree on anything, these newspapers, these editorial pages in particular. But they all met with Bloomberg, decided to sign on to this plan for him to go for a third term. All put out editorials, kind of in unison, in lockstep, saying this is a great idea for the city. And that was a big part of that, you know, developing and sort of laying the groundwork for the support for Bloomberg to do that.
To your other point about him getting typical critics or potential critics to be silent on stuff, he changes his Republican voter registration to being an independent in the middle of his mayoralty. And you would think at that point, “OK, the state Republican Party is now free to attack him for the rest of his term, because he’s not a Republican anymore.” But they never did. And people were curious: Why is that? Well, then we learned that he gave a record $1 million to the Republican state Senate fund to kind of, you know, not say too much. So, the money works in all these different ways.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to break and then come back to our conversation. We’re talking to Blake Zeff, journalist, documentary filmmaker, covered New York politics and Michael Bloomberg’s term as mayors — terms as mayor. His forthcoming film is Loan Wolves, investigating the origins and effects of the student debt crisis in America. We’ll be back with him and more in a moment.


democracynow--2020-02-17--Headlines for February 17, 2020

Headlines for February 17, 2020

In Nevada , early voters have been lining up at polling stations ahead of next Saturday ’ s caucuses .
The Nevada Democratic Party reported some 18,000 people took part in early voting on Saturday , the first of four days of early voting .
Some election volunteers have expressed concern that they have not received sufficient training or information about the Google forms that will be used to report results of the caucuses .
Meanwhile , the Iowa Democratic Party says it has started a partial recanvass of the state ’ s caucus results that was requested by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigning in Nevada and across states set to vote on Super Tuesday , March 3 .
On Sunday , Senator Bernie Sanders held a rally in Denver , Colorado , where he addressed an estimated 11,000 people .
Sen. Bernie Sanders : “ And we are going to end a corrupt political system in which billionaires buy elections .
Democracy , to me , means one person , one vote — not Bloomberg or anybody else spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to buy an election.
” Coloradans will vote on Super @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Arkansas , California , Maine , Massachusetts , Minnesota , North Carolina , Oklahoma , Tennessee , Texas , Utah , Vermont and Virginia .
In more news about the Democratic candidates , Senator Amy Klobuchar has come under fire after she did not know the name of the president of Mexico during an interview on Telemundo and was unable to speak about any of his policies .
The Mexican president is Andrés Manuel López Obrador .
Billionaire Tom Steyer also couldn ’ t name him .
And in other news about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under scrutiny for allowing certain kinds of political ads , which allow billionaire and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg to post so-called branded content for his campaign via the social media accounts of popular influencers .
Bloomberg is paying to have the accounts post memes and videos of Bloomberg to raise his profile among younger voters .

In Nevada, early voters have been lining up at polling stations ahead of next Saturday’s caucuses. The Nevada Democratic Party reported some 18,000 people took part in early voting on Saturday, the first of four days of early voting. Some election volunteers have expressed concern that they have not received sufficient training or information about the Google forms that will be used to report results of the caucuses.
Meanwhile, the Iowa Democratic Party says it has started a partial recanvass of the state’s caucus results that was requested by the Sanders and Buttigieg campaigns.
Candidates are campaigning in Nevada and across states set to vote on Super Tuesday, March 3. On Sunday, Senator Bernie Sanders held a rally in Denver, Colorado, where he addressed an estimated 11,000 people.
Sen. Bernie Sanders: “And we are going to end a corrupt political system in which billionaires buy elections. Democracy, to me, means one person, one vote — not Bloomberg or anybody else spending hundreds of millions of dollars trying to buy an election.”
Coloradans will vote on Super Tuesday, as will residents of Alabama, Arkansas, California, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont and Virginia.
In more news about the Democratic candidates, Senator Amy Klobuchar has come under fire after she did not know the name of the president of Mexico during an interview on Telemundo and was unable to speak about any of his policies. The Mexican president is Andrés Manuel López Obrador. Billionaire Tom Steyer also couldn’t name him.
And in other news about the 2020 elections, Facebook is coming under scrutiny for allowing certain kinds of political ads, which allow billionaire and former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg to post so-called branded content for his campaign via the social media accounts of popular influencers. Bloomberg is paying to have the accounts post memes and videos of Bloomberg to raise his profile among younger voters.


democracynow--2020-02-18--"Worth the Price?" New Film Shows How Biden Played Leading Role in Push for U.S. to Invade Iraq

This is a rush transcript .
Copy may not be in its final form .
AMY GOODMAN : This is Democracy Now !
, democracynow.org , The War and Peace Report .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
The Democratic presidential candidates will face off in Las Vegas Wednesday night ahead of the Nevada caucuses .
It ’ s the first debate with billionaire Michael Bloomberg on the stage .
Nevada could be a decisive state for candidates who performed poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire , including former Vice President Joe Biden .
As Biden hopes for a comeback @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on his extensive role advocating for the Iraq War — an issue that ’ s been raised repeatedly on the campaign trail .
Biden has apologized for supporting the war .
But today , in a broadcast exclusive , we ’ re going to bring you a new film , directed by the Center for Economic and Policy Research ’ s Mark Weisbrot , that exposes Biden ’ s central role in pushing for an Iraq invasion .
It ’ s called Worth the Price ?
Joe Biden and the Launch of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Danny Glover .
But before we go to it , we ’ re going to the director himself , Mark Weisbrot , to talk , as we go back in time some 16 , 17 years , Mark .
Just give us a little introduction to why you decided to make this film now about the U.S. invasion of Iraq .
MARK WEISBROT : Yes .
Well , first , you know , a lot of people think he ’ s going to lose and maybe it doesn ’ t matter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And even if he loses — and I think he probably will — he ’ s still going to — he still could very easily play a role if there ’ s a brokered convention , which you talked about on this show .
He could play a role in the decision of who the candidate is .
And I think that ’ s one of the reasons he ’ s staying in the race , trying to get through Super Tuesday and so on .
But the second thing is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really hasn ’ t been discussed on television .
And I want to thank you for having this show .
You ’ ve had his vote for the Iraq War , has been brought up .
But there ’ s never been a presentation of what he actually did , which was , he was the most important elected official in this country , after George W. Bush and Dick Cheney , in enabling and allowing and getting the authorization for the war through Congress .
That was a huge role in bringing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t just a vote for the war .
He was the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee .
And , you know , when I was going through this footage , it was amazing , all the things that he did .
He argued very strongly for the war .
He had a lot of influence .
AMY GOODMAN : And we ’ re going to hear that in just one minute and then talk to you on the other side .
Mark Weisbrot , co-director of the Center for Economic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Price ?
Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War .
We ’ ll bring it to you in 30 seconds .
AMY GOODMAN : “ Staring at the Sun ” by TV on the Radio .
I ’ m Amy Goodman , as we turn now to the new documentary short , Worth the Price ?
Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War .
It ’ s narrated by Danny Glover .
MATTHEW HOH : I was in the Iraq War twice and the Afghan War once .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars have had an impact that lasts for our whole lives .
The Iraq War , almost 4,600 American soldiers were killed there .
I think as of this — as of the first month of 2020 , I think that the total number is 4,575 .
And that ’ s just the direct number killed .
Because war has been privatized and contracted out and companies are making money off of it , the estimates are that a similar number , about 4,500 contractors , men and women who were doing jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ soldiers would have been doing , were also killed in Iraq .
So , when you look at the number killed , you have to look at , say , 9,000 , rather than almost than 4,500 .
That does not take into account the suicides .
The suicides from these wars , based upon Veterans Administration data , runs between 9,000 and 10,000 killed by suicide .
We ’ ve also had , you know , tens of thousands of men and women wounded in action .
I had marines in my @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nine , 10 times during a deployment .
This is why I think so many of us who were in these wars are so disgusted by the political system , so upset and furious that people who were responsible for these wars , who had a constitutional responsibility for oversight , just went along with the groupthink , just got rid of any intellectual honesty or moral honesty .
AMY GOODMAN : That ’ s the broadcast exclusive of Worth the Price ?
Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , directed by Mark Weisbrot with the Center for Economic and Policy Research , who is joining us from Washington , D.C .
So , in these last two minutes we have , Mark , now , again , on the campaign trail , presidential candidate Biden has said , in one form or another , he made a mistake on Iraq .
Your response ?
MARK WEISBROT : Well , I think that ’ s just too little and too late .
It ’ s not enough .
You know , this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This can ’ t be swept under the rug .
And we ’ re entering a different period right now , I think , is very crucial .
We could have another war even before the election .
You had President Trump come very close to a war with Iran when he ordered the assassination of General Soleimani just a month ago .
And this is something that also , the other part of it , on the positive side , there ’ s enormous resistance to this in Congress .
You have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the No War with Iran Act .
And he also led the fight , which was successful , to get both houses of Congress — and this is using the War Powers Resolution for the first time in 45 years .
Both houses of Congress voted to order the U.S. military to get out of this war in Yemen , which has killed hundreds of thousands of people .
So , there ’ s a real strong movement now to put an end to these endless wars .
And these wars will go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allow this to even be discussed .
We have to have this discussion .
This is somebody who ’ s running for president of the United States , and he played a major role in bringing about this war , that killed , you know , by the best estimates , a million people and thousands of U.S. — over 4,500 U.S. soldiers .
And here it is .
It hasn ’ t — his role hasn ’ t even been discussed .
At the very least , people voting in the Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ AMY GOODMAN : Interestingly , Mark Weisbrot , the Los Angeles Times recently had a piece .
Here you have Joe Biden apologizing for what he did , and you really lay out clearly how he was not only supporting the war , but leading the support .
Mayor Bloomberg , when interviewed by the Los Angeles Times , said he didn ’ t regret backing the Iraq War back then .
MARK WEISBROT : Yes , that ’ s another reason , I mean , because it ’ s Bloomberg , too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the race .
And , you know , this is even bigger than that , because for the last 50 years the peace movement has always pointed out that when you build a fighter plane , you ’ re giving up on healthcare for thousands of people .
But it ’ s even worse than that now , because now the intellectuals of the so-called national security state are — AMY GOODMAN : We have five seconds .
MARK WEISBROT : — well , they ’ re talking about an arms race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Green New Deal , Medicare for All and everything else , because their economy is already 30 % bigger than ours , and it ’ s going to be twice as big within 10 years .
So , this affects everything that anybody who cares about this presidential election wants .
AMY GOODMAN : Mark Weisbrot , I want to thank you for being with us , co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research .
That does it for our show .
I ’ ll be speaking at Purdue University @ @ @ @ @ @ @ night at 6:00 , moderating a panel with Mahatma Gandhi ’ s grandson Arun Gandhi , Archbishop Desmond Tutu ’ s daughter Rev .
Naomi Tutu , President Reagan ’ s son Ronald Reagan Jr. , Reza Aslan and more .
Check out democracynow.org .
I ’ m Amy Goodman .
This is Democracy Now !

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, democracynow.org, The War and Peace Report. I’m Amy Goodman. The Democratic presidential candidates will face off in Las Vegas Wednesday night ahead of the Nevada caucuses. It’s the first debate with billionaire Michael Bloomberg on the stage. Nevada could be a decisive state for candidates who performed poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire, including former Vice President Joe Biden. As Biden hopes for a comeback, a new short documentary sheds light on his extensive role advocating for the Iraq War — an issue that’s been raised repeatedly on the campaign trail. Biden has apologized for supporting the war.
But today, in a broadcast exclusive, we’re going to bring you a new film, directed by the Center for Economic and Policy Research’s Mark Weisbrot, that exposes Biden’s central role in pushing for an Iraq invasion. It’s called Worth the Price? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War. The documentary is narrated by Danny Glover. But before we go to it, we’re going to the director himself, Mark Weisbrot, to talk, as we go back in time some 16, 17 years, Mark. Just give us a little introduction to why you decided to make this film now about the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
MARK WEISBROT: Yes. Well, first, you know, a lot of people think he’s going to lose and maybe it doesn’t matter. But he is still in the race. And even if he loses — and I think he probably will — he’s still going to — he still could very easily play a role if there’s a brokered convention, which you talked about on this show. He could play a role in the decision of who the candidate is. And I think that’s one of the reasons he’s staying in the race, trying to get through Super Tuesday and so on.
But the second thing is, this is vitally important, and it really hasn’t been discussed on television. And I want to thank you for having this show. You’ve had his vote for the Iraq War, has been brought up. But there’s never been a presentation of what he actually did, which was, he was the most important elected official in this country, after George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, in enabling and allowing and getting the authorization for the war through Congress. That was a huge role in bringing us this war. It wasn’t just a vote for the war. He was the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And, you know, when I was going through this footage, it was amazing, all the things that he did. He argued very strongly for the war. He had a lot of influence.
AMY GOODMAN: And we’re going to hear that in just one minute and then talk to you on the other side. Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. His documentary, Worth the Price? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War. We’ll bring it to you in 30 seconds.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: “Staring at the Sun” by TV on the Radio. I’m Amy Goodman, as we turn now to the new documentary short, Worth the Price? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War. It’s narrated by Danny Glover.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Our American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.
DANNY GLOVER: The costs of the Iraq War were enormous. More than 4,500 American soldiers, as well as thousands of military contractors, were killed. Tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers were wounded. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis — and by some estimates, more than a million — were killed. And the war created massive instability, including more wars and terrorism throughout the Middle East and North Africa. Fast-forward to the 2020 presidential race. There’s only one candidate for the nomination of the Democratic Party who played a leading role in actually making the Iraq War happen.
SEN. JOE BIDEN: In my judgment, President Bush is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein’s relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and the possibility that he may use them or share them with terrorists. Other regimes hostile to the United States and our allies already have or seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
DANNY GLOVER: This was Joe Biden in 2002 speaking as chair of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. A few months later, when the Senate was debating whether to give President George W. Bush the authority to start a war with Iraq, Biden argued strongly in favor of granting this authority.
SEN. JOE BIDEN: The objective is to compel Iraq to destroy its illegal weapons of mass destruction and its program to develop and produce missiles and more of those weapons. Saddam is dangerous. The world would be a better place without him. But the reason he poses a growing danger to the United States and its allies is that he possesses chemical and biological weapons and is seeking nuclear weapons. And unlike my colleagues from West Virginia and Maryland, I do not believe this is a rush to war. I believe it’s a march to peace and security. I believe that failure to overwhelmingly support this resolution is likely to enhance the prospects the war will occur.
BARBARA RANSBY: Joe Biden did so much more than vote for the war. He was the chair of the powerful Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and he really used his control over that committee to make sure that a majority of the U.S. Senate voted to authorize the war. And that’s a very serious thing. It’s questionable whether the authorization to start the war could have even passed Congress without all that Biden did to get it approved. So, he really did play a major role in bringing us into the Iraq War, a terrible, terrible war. And this was much more responsibility — he bears much more responsibility than many other senators who simply voted for it. Of course, the statement about chemical, biological and nuclear weapons were false. And many experts already concluded this at the time of the Senate hearings, but Biden didn’t allow these experts to testify. That’s really significant. As chair of the Foreign Relations Committee, Biden was able to control the Senate debate on the war, and therefore much of the information that most senators received and that major media outlets reported was really distorted.
DANNY GLOVER: There were other Democrats in the Senate who wanted to put limits on Bush’s ability to start a war in Iraq. For example, if there was no imminent threat to the United States and the United Nations did not authorize a war, then President Bush would have to come back to Congress for another resolution. But Biden shot this down.
SEN. JOE BIDEN: So, the reason why I oppose the amendment of my friend from Michigan is because the basic premise upon which I began is consistent with where my friend from Connecticut begins, and that is that the threat need not be imminent for us to take action. That’s authority we’re about to delegate to the president.
STEPHEN ZUNES: So, the fact that he would take such a stridently pro-war position, that he would use that role to limit the debate the way he did, played a major factor in getting enough defections from the Democratic majority to join with almost-unanimous Republican support to make the war resolution pass. As a result, I don’t think it would be unfair to say that Biden played a more important role than probably anybody in Congress in making the Iraq War possible. The idea that Iraq, which had been rid of its nonconventional weapons and weapons programs and weapons systems, that was under the strictest sanctions of any nation has ever experienced, was somehow a threat to the United States on the far side of the world is totally absurd. I mean, totally ridiculous. I mean, the fact that an educated person like Joe Biden, with foreign policy experience, would believe that really defies the imagination.
DANNY GLOVER: But the witnesses mostly reinforced the pro-war arguments.
CASPAR WEINBERGER: The question before us really is: Should the United States depose Saddam Hussein? And my answer is clearly yes.
KHIDIR HAMZA: My suggestion, as I stated earlier, is that regime change as the stated U.S. policy would be the correct way to deal with this problem.
CHARLES DUELFER: In my opinion, weapons inspections are not the answer to the real problem, which is the regime.
THOMAS McINERNEY: And the people want a regime change. Let’s help them to make this change and liberate Iraq from this oppressor.
KHIDIR HAMZA: Iraq has enough to generate the needed bomb-grade uranium for three nuclear weapons by 2005. It is too difficult to see how any measure short of a regime change will be effective.
SAMUEL BERGER: A nuclear-armed Saddam sometime in this decade is a risk we cannot choose to ignore.
RICHARD BUTLER: It is essential to recognize that the claim made by Saddam’s representatives that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction is false.
CASPAR WEINBERGER: We know that Iraq permits known al-Qaeda members to live and move freely about in Iraq. I am told that that is — that that is the case, that the al-Qaeda groups are welcome and that they’re being supported, their families are being supported.
REND AL-RAHIM FRANCKE: I have to tell you, Iraqis desperately want to be freed of Saddam Hussein, and they also know that the only country that can help them with this is the United States. And they are ready to welcome the U.S. as liberators.
DANNY GLOVER: Senator Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island pushed back against the witnesses being stacked. But Biden cut him off.
SEN. LINCOLN CHAFEE: And I do think that it would have been good to have that perspective on this panel, that for better balance. I think we’ve got, from this panel, a perspective that the threat is very real, very immediate. And I maybe would ask you to comment on some of these senior military officials, including, according to the article, members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in their view —
SEN. JOE BIDEN: Senator will yield just for a moment. I apologize, but —
SEN. LINCOLN CHAFEE: Excuse me.
SEN. JOE BIDEN: The senator from Florida is going to chair the hearing. I have to leave for a few minutes. And after this panel is over, we’ll recess for — how much time for lunch? — 45 minutes for lunch, when this panel — I’m not suggesting we finish now. When the panel is finished, we’ll recess for 45 minutes. And I assure you, Senator, there are other witnesses coming along who think the policy of containment is just fine, so I hope you’ll find this is extremely balanced, when we finish the whole two days of hearings. But I thank you for letting me interrupt. And I’m turning the gavel over to…
DANNY GLOVER: Biden never returned to the problem that Senator Chafee raised about the bias of the witnesses that were allowed to testify.
MATTHEW HOH: I was in the Iraq War twice and the Afghan War once. You know, for veterans, these wars have had an impact that lasts for our whole lives. The Iraq War, almost 4,600 American soldiers were killed there. I think as of this — as of the first month of 2020, I think that the total number is 4,575. And that’s just the direct number killed. Because war has been privatized and contracted out and companies are making money off of it, the estimates are that a similar number, about 4,500 contractors, men and women who were doing jobs in the military that in past wars soldiers would have been doing, were also killed in Iraq. So, when you look at the number killed, you have to look at, say, 9,000, rather than almost than 4,500. That does not take into account the suicides. The suicides from these wars, based upon Veterans Administration data, runs between 9,000 and 10,000 killed by suicide. We’ve also had, you know, tens of thousands of men and women wounded in action. I had marines in my command who were hit by roadside bombs nine, 10 times during a deployment. This is why I think so many of us who were in these wars are so disgusted by the political system, so upset and furious that people who were responsible for these wars, who had a constitutional responsibility for oversight, just went along with the groupthink, just got rid of any intellectual honesty or moral honesty.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: ISIL is a direct outgrowth of al-Qaeda in Iraq, that grew out of our invasion, which is an example of unintended consequences, which is why we should generally aim before we shoot.
STEPHEN KINZER: We decapitated the government there, left no indigenous leadership. And that not only allowed all sorts of groups within Iraq to revolt against what they saw as an illegitimate occupier, but it attracted jihadist fanatics from around the world. They looked at Iraq and saw: “Here’s a place where we can go kill American soldiers.” And they poured in. They are there gaining experience for future wars. So, without the sin of the Iraq invasion, we wouldn’t be dealing with ISIS today.
VINCENT CANNISTRARO: First time in my 27 years in intelligence, the first time I have ever heard of a vice president of the United States going out to CIA and sitting down with desk-level analysts, sitting down and debating with junior-level analysts and pushing them to find support for something he personally believes, that Saddam was trying to acquire uranium. That, to me, is pressure, and that’s intimidation. And they’re not going to say, “Well, Mr. Vice President, you’re full of it.”
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: They were manufacturing the case in the bowels of the CIA for Saddam Hussein’s possession of weapons of mass destruction.
DANNY GLOVER: And in the United States Congress. One of the false stories that the Bush administration used to promote the War with Iraq was that Saddam Hussein was actually connected with al-Qaeda, the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Well, the reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaeda, because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda.
DANNY GLOVER: Al-Qaeda was included in the resolution that Biden pushed through the Senate, which gave Bush the authority to go to war.
STEPHEN KINZER: Anybody who had the slightest knowledge about that region would realize the absurdity of the connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, who actually were bitter enemies. I was in Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power. Saddam did not tolerate any form of religious extremism. If you were sitting in a cafe and you said to the person next to you, “Our government really isn’t religious enough,” or “We should have more piety from our leaders and in our policies,” you’d probably be arrested within an hour. There was no chance of al-Qaeda or any kind of religious extremist group from getting a foothold in Iraq while Saddam Hussein was in power.
DANNY GLOVER: After Bush invaded, Biden continued to support the war for years.
SEN. JOE BIDEN: Some in my own party have said that it was a mistake to go to Iraq in the first place, and believe that it’s not worth the cost, whatever benefit may flow from our engagement in Iraq. But the cost of not acting against Saddam, I think, would have been much greater. And so is the cost, and so will be the cost, of not finishing this job. The president of the United States is a bold leader, and he is popular. The stakes are high, and the need for leadership is great. I wish he’d use some of his stored-up popularity to make what I admit is not a very popular case, but I and many others will support him. Nine months ago, I voted with my colleagues to give the president of the United States of America the authority to use force. And I would vote that way again today. It was the right vote then, and it’d be a correct vote today.
LAWRENCE WILKERSON: And President Obama, in the Roosevelt Room, essentially told me this, September the 10th, 2015. He started off the conversation with these words: “There’s a bias in this town toward war.” I almost fell off my seat. And then he told us, for the next 20, 25 minutes, that he didn’t know what to do about it. “There’s a bias in this town toward war,” said the president of the United States. We have a machine in Washington. It consists of predatory capitalists, like Lockheed Martin and ExxonMobil, and all they represent. ExxonMobil sells more fossil fuel to DOD than any other entity in the world. Lockheed Martin, the biggest weapons merchant in the world, makes a fortune off war. So does Raytheon, Grumman and Boeing. As long as you have these dollars rolling in, you’re going have constant, endless war.
ADOM GETACHEW: I think, in the United States, Biden represents a kind of long-standing, bipartisan commitment to U.S. preeminence on the global stage, in which the U.S. acts as the policeman of the world. I think a lot of Americans are frustrated by this position. They want to have a different kind of relationship to the world. And they want a leader, a president, and a Congress, that can present a vision of prosperity for all Americans. I think that only happens when we break with the cycle of endless wars. It is going to be very difficult, I think, for a Democratic Party candidate who basically reiterates the status quo of endless military interventions, endless wars in the Middle East, to win against Donald Trump.
SEN. DICK DURBIN: At the time of this debate, I was a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. And I would read the headlines in the paper in the morning, and I’d watch the television newscasts, and I’d shake my head, because, you see, just a few hundred feet away from here, in a closed room, carefully guarded, the Intelligence Committee was meeting on a daily basis for top-secret briefings about the information we were receiving, and the information we had in the Intelligence Committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn’t believe it.
PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun, that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
SEN. DICK DURBIN: So, what happened? We invaded, turned loose hundreds, if not thousands, of people scouring Iraq for these weapons of mass destruction. Never found one of them. Looked for nuclear weapons. No evidence whatsoever. Went into our intelligence files and said, “OK, Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda, let’s get this linkage put together once and for all.” No evidence at all of a linkage. The American people were deceived into this war.
MATTHEW HOH: I tell you what, I don’t understand how any of these politicians who claim to support the troops and support their families — I don’t understand how anyone could hold a mother at the funeral of her son, who just turned 20, who was killed either in the wars or because of suicide — and I’ve done both, and there’s no difference for the mother — and act as if somehow there’s some benefit to these wars, when it’s demonstrably not. You know, and then you’re over there, and you’re fighting in it, and you’re taking part in it. And as an officer, I was responsible for my marines and for my sailors and for — I had their lives, and I was responsible to their families for that. And you do. You think, “Can I go home and say to the families that it was worth it, that their son was killed, their husband was killed, their brother was killed, for something that was good or something that was beneficial?”
SEN. JOE BIDEN: As I said at the outset, if we can make the case, which I think — well, I won’t say what I think yet; the hearings aren’t finished — but if we can make the case that the threat is real and dire, that a free and democratic Iraq, if it could be accomplished, could have a cleansing impact on that part of the world and make our life easier significantly down the road, which I think could be made in an ideal circumstance — not even an ideal, if we do things right — that it is worth the price.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s the broadcast exclusive of Worth the Price? Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War. It’s narrated by Danny Glover, directed by Mark Weisbrot with the Center for Economic and Policy Research, who is joining us from Washington, D.C. So, in these last two minutes we have, Mark, now, again, on the campaign trail, presidential candidate Biden has said, in one form or another, he made a mistake on Iraq. Your response?
MARK WEISBROT: Well, I think that’s just too little and too late. It’s not enough. You know, this really has to be an issue. This can’t be swept under the rug. And we’re entering a different period right now, I think, is very crucial. We could have another war even before the election. You had President Trump come very close to a war with Iran when he ordered the assassination of General Soleimani just a month ago.
And this is something that also, the other part of it, on the positive side, there’s enormous resistance to this in Congress. You have Bernie Sanders, for instance, introduced the No War with Iran Act. And he also led the fight, which was successful, to get both houses of Congress — and this is using the War Powers Resolution for the first time in 45 years. Both houses of Congress voted to order the U.S. military to get out of this war in Yemen, which has killed hundreds of thousands of people. So, there’s a real strong movement now to put an end to these endless wars.
And these wars will go on forever if we don’t allow this to even be discussed. We have to have this discussion. This is somebody who’s running for president of the United States, and he played a major role in bringing about this war, that killed, you know, by the best estimates, a million people and thousands of U.S. — over 4,500 U.S. soldiers. And here it is. It hasn’t — his role hasn’t even been discussed. At the very least, people voting in the Democratic primary should know what he did.
AMY GOODMAN: Interestingly, Mark Weisbrot, the Los Angeles Times recently had a piece. Here you have Joe Biden apologizing for what he did, and you really lay out clearly how he was not only supporting the war, but leading the support. Mayor Bloomberg, when interviewed by the Los Angeles Times, said he didn’t regret backing the Iraq War back then.
MARK WEISBROT: Yes, that’s another reason, I mean, because it’s Bloomberg, too. So, this is an issue in the race. And, you know, this is even bigger than that, because for the last 50 years the peace movement has always pointed out that when you build a fighter plane, you’re giving up on healthcare for thousands of people. But it’s even worse than that now, because now the intellectuals of the so-called national security state are —
AMY GOODMAN: We have five seconds.
MARK WEISBROT: — well, they’re talking about an arms race with China. You could forget about the Green New Deal, Medicare for All and everything else, because their economy is already 30% bigger than ours, and it’s going to be twice as big within 10 years. So, this affects everything that anybody who cares about this presidential election wants.
AMY GOODMAN: Mark Weisbrot, I want to thank you for being with us, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. That does it for our show.
I’ll be speaking at Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, Wednesday night at 6:00, moderating a panel with Mahatma Gandhi’s grandson Arun Gandhi, Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s daughter Rev. Naomi Tutu, President Reagan’s son Ronald Reagan Jr., Reza Aslan and more. Check out democracynow.org. I’m Amy Goodman. This is Democracy Now!