theintercept--2020-02-13--Senate Acquittal Gave Trump a Blank Check. With Roger Stone’s Sentencing, the President’s Crime Synd

Senate Acquittal Gave Trump a Blank Check. With Roger Stone’s Sentencing, the President’s Crime Syndicate Is Cashing In.

finally found his new Roy Cohn .
That crooked fixer ’ s name is William Barr .
Attorney General Barr , who claims to work for the Justice Department , is in fact the personal lawyer for the Trump family criminal organization .
He has taken the place of Michael Cohen , a two-bit crook now in prison , who never quite lived up to the standards of criminality and viciousness set by Cohn .
Cohn , of course , was Sen. Joseph McCarthy ’ s top lieutenant at the height of the witch-hunting anti-communist paranoia of the 1950s .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s personal lawyer and mentor , helping him become a shameless , loudmouthed bully who fought off countless lawsuits and investigations into his shambolic real estate business .
In 2018 , in the midst of special counsel Robert Mueller ’ s Trump-Russia investigation , the New York Times reported that an angry and frustrated Trump asked : “ Where ’ s my Roy Cohn ?
” The president was lamenting the fact that he had yet to find any government lawyer sufficiently willing to help him lie , obstruct justice , and abuse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was certain Cohn would have done if he were still alive .
( Cohn was eventually disbarred ; his death from AIDS in 1986 is at the heart of Tony Kushner ’ s play “ Angels in America.
” ) Since he took office , Trump has fired almost everyone who has shown any tendency to stand up to him and is now remaking his administration as a governmental version of the Trump Organization , where he only tolerates sycophants .
Two figures have clambered to the top of that pile : Mike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ State Pompeo , secretary of state and the only senior member of Trump ’ s original national security team to survive the president ’ s purges , has personally wrested control over all matters related to national security , intelligence , and foreign policy .
He has flourished because he has been willing to do Trump ’ s bidding at every turn , including murder a top official of a foreign government in an airstrike .
Barr , meanwhile , has gained control over the federal government ’ s law enforcement powers and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s personal legal standing .
Maybe Pompeo and Barr see a path to wealth and power through a willingness to perform unethical or illegal acts at Trump ’ s behest .
But they are no longer men of moral standing , only the avaricious lieutenants of a cult leader .
Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in November 2018 because he dared to recuse himself from the Trump-Russia investigation , as required by Justice Department ethics rules , and allowed the Mueller investigation to proceed .
When Trump nominated Barr to succeed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thought Barr ’ s previous stint as attorney general under George H.W .
Bush meant that he was a mainstream conservative who would respect the rule of law .
But Barr has turned out to be a sort of reincarnation of Roy Cohn .
Like Cohn , Barr seems determined to protect Trump by covering up his crimes .
In the process , Barr is quickly destroying any credibility the Department of Justice ever had .
This week , Barr intervened in the Justice Department ’ s recommended sentencing in the case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who lied to Congress and intimidated a witness in connection with the Trump-Russia case .
Stone was convicted in November of obstructing Congress and witness tampering , and prosecutors had recommended that he be sentenced to seven to nine years in prison .
But hours after Trump tweeted his outrage over the length of Stone ’ s potential sentence , calling it “ a miscarriage of justice , ” Barr intervened .
On Tuesday afternoon , the four prosecutors who had been handling the case withdrew from it , and one of them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The Justice Department wrote in a new filing that the previous sentence “ could be considered excessive and unwarranted under the circumstances ” and said it “ defers to the Court as to what specific sentence is appropriate.
” Trump also withdrew the nomination to a Treasury post of the former U.S. attorney who had earlier handled the Stone case and on Wednesday launched a Twitter assault against U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson , who is presiding over the Stone case .
The scuffle over the Stone sentencing is just the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to politicize the Justice Department to protect Trump .
Last April , Barr misled the nation about the findings of the Mueller report , purposefully downplaying how damaging it was to Trump before it had been publicly released .
It was the spin job of a political hack , an act unworthy of an attorney general .
Barr has also aided and abetted Trump ’ s lying and scheming in the Ukraine scandal .
When a whistleblower came forward to report Trump ’ s efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to fraudulently investigate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to damage Biden ’ s presidential campaign , Barr ’ s Justice Department quietly decided that Trump had not broken any laws , and so there was no reason to launch an investigation of any sort .
Barr kept that decision secret , and it wasn ’ t until news of the whistleblower ’ s complaint leaked to the press that the House of Representatives began to investigate and launched impeachment proceedings .
The criticism Barr took for his efforts to cover up the Ukraine scandal hasn ’ t stopped him from continuing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump and his loyalists — far from it .
Just last month , Barr ’ s department reduced its sentencing recommendation in the case of Michael Flynn , Trump ’ s former national security adviser , who lied to the FBI about his contacts with Russian officials .
Prosecutors had sought prison time for Flynn , but Barr ’ s department now says that probation is reasonable .
Earlier this week , Barr again intervened to help Trump ’ s illegal efforts to get Ukrainian officials to help him win reelection , telling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ intake process in the field ” for the Justice Department to collect information on Biden from Rudy Giuliani , Trump ’ s personal lawyer , who is still trying to get Ukrainian officials to falsify information about the former vice president .
the Stone case brought the conversation about Trump ’ s disdain for the rule of law full circle , right back to his 2018 comment about Cohn .
It was reportedly Cohn who introduced Trump to Stone , a longtime dirty trickster who got his political start working for Richard @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Trump ’ s impeachment and the Senate ’ s acquittal , the president has set off on a rampage of vengeance against the career professionals who told the truth about his illegal pressure campaign against Ukraine .
Both Barr and Pompeo are standing by ready to enable Trump ’ s rage .
Pompeo has refused to defend the career State Department officials assaulted by Trump , while Barr is supporting Trump and Giuliani ’ s ongoing efforts to get Ukraine to intervene in the election .
On Wednesday , Democrats on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Barr has agreed to testify before them on March 31 .
The attorney general has “ engaged in a pattern of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee , ” the letter said .
“ In the past week alone , you have taken steps that raise grave questions about your leadership of the Department of Justice.
” The letter referred specifically to the Flynn and Stone cases , as well as to Giuliani ’ s efforts to “ feed the Department of Justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President ’ s political rivals.
” But a stern letter and an oversight hearing will not be enough to stop Barr .
The only thing that will make him respond will be the use of the House ’ s power of the purse .
In order to stop the entire U.S. government from being transformed into a corrupt criminal organization by Trump and Barr , House Democrats must take the nuclear option : They must use their power to stop all funding to the Department of Justice until Barr resigns .
“ Congress @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lawless Attorney General , ” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a Twitter post on Wednesday .
“ [ A ] busing official power to protect political friends and attack opponents is common in authoritarian regimes like Putin ’ s Russia .
Trump and Barr ’ s conduct has no place in our democracy.
” Shutting off funding to the Justice Department would be politically risky for Democrats .
But Trump and Barr are bulldozing the norms of government and daring Democrats to do something about it .
The House ’ s constitutional power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to stop these criminals .

Photo: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Donald Trump has finally found his new Roy Cohn. That crooked fixer’s name is William Barr.
Attorney General Barr, who claims to work for the Justice Department, is in fact the personal lawyer for the Trump family criminal organization. He has taken the place of Michael Cohen, a two-bit crook now in prison, who never quite lived up to the standards of criminality and viciousness set by Cohn.
Cohn, of course, was Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s top lieutenant at the height of the witch-hunting anti-communist paranoia of the 1950s. He went on to become Trump’s personal lawyer and mentor, helping him become a shameless, loudmouthed bully who fought off countless lawsuits and investigations into his shambolic real estate business.
Barr has turned out to be a sort of reincarnation of Roy Cohn.
In 2018, in the midst of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Trump-Russia investigation, the New York Times reported that an angry and frustrated Trump asked: “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” The president was lamenting the fact that he had yet to find any government lawyer sufficiently willing to help him lie, obstruct justice, and abuse his power in the ways that he was certain Cohn would have done if he were still alive. (Cohn was eventually disbarred; his death from AIDS in 1986 is at the heart of Tony Kushner’s play “Angels in America.”)
Since he took office, Trump has fired almost everyone who has shown any tendency to stand up to him and is now remaking his administration as a governmental version of the Trump Organization, where he only tolerates sycophants.
Two figures have clambered to the top of that pile: Mike Pompeo and William Barr. Secretary of State Pompeo, secretary of state and the only senior member of Trump’s original national security team to survive the president’s purges, has personally wrested control over all matters related to national security, intelligence, and foreign policy. He has flourished because he has been willing to do Trump’s bidding at every turn, including murder a top official of a foreign government in an airstrike. Barr, meanwhile, has gained control over the federal government’s law enforcement powers and is using them to secure Trump’s personal legal standing.
Maybe Pompeo and Barr see a path to wealth and power through a willingness to perform unethical or illegal acts at Trump’s behest. But they are no longer men of moral standing, only the avaricious lieutenants of a cult leader.
Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in November 2018 because he dared to recuse himself from the Trump-Russia investigation, as required by Justice Department ethics rules, and allowed the Mueller investigation to proceed. When Trump nominated Barr to succeed him, few Democrats balked. They thought Barr’s previous stint as attorney general under George H.W. Bush meant that he was a mainstream conservative who would respect the rule of law.
But Barr has turned out to be a sort of reincarnation of Roy Cohn. Like Cohn, Barr seems determined to protect Trump by covering up his crimes. In the process, Barr is quickly destroying any credibility the Department of Justice ever had.
This week, Barr intervened in the Justice Department’s recommended sentencing in the case of Roger Stone, a longtime Trump acolyte who lied to Congress and intimidated a witness in connection with the Trump-Russia case. Stone was convicted in November of obstructing Congress and witness tampering, and prosecutors had recommended that he be sentenced to seven to nine years in prison.
But hours after Trump tweeted his outrage over the length of Stone’s potential sentence, calling it “a miscarriage of justice,” Barr intervened. On Tuesday afternoon, the four prosecutors who had been handling the case withdrew from it, and one of them resigned from the Justice Department in protest. The Justice Department wrote in a new filing that the previous sentence “could be considered excessive and unwarranted under the circumstances” and said it “defers to the Court as to what specific sentence is appropriate.”
Trump also withdrew the nomination to a Treasury post of the former U.S. attorney who had earlier handled the Stone case and on Wednesday launched a Twitter assault against U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who is presiding over the Stone case.
Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images
The scuffle over the Stone sentencing is just the latest example of Barr’s eagerness to politicize the Justice Department to protect Trump. Last April, Barr misled the nation about the findings of the Mueller report, purposefully downplaying how damaging it was to Trump before it had been publicly released. It was the spin job of a political hack, an act unworthy of an attorney general.
Barr has also aided and abetted Trump’s lying and scheming in the Ukraine scandal. When a whistleblower came forward to report Trump’s efforts to pressure the Ukrainian government to fraudulently investigate former Vice President Joe Biden in order to damage Biden’s presidential campaign, Barr’s Justice Department quietly decided that Trump had not broken any laws, and so there was no reason to launch an investigation of any sort. Barr kept that decision secret, and it wasn’t until news of the whistleblower’s complaint leaked to the press that the House of Representatives began to investigate and launched impeachment proceedings.
The criticism Barr took for his efforts to cover up the Ukraine scandal hasn’t stopped him from continuing to intervene in legal matters related to Trump and his loyalists — far from it. Just last month, Barr’s department reduced its sentencing recommendation in the case of Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser, who lied to the FBI about his contacts with Russian officials. Prosecutors had sought prison time for Flynn, but Barr’s department now says that probation is reasonable.
Earlier this week, Barr again intervened to help Trump’s illegal efforts to get Ukrainian officials to help him win reelection, telling reporters that he had set up an “intake process in the field” for the Justice Department to collect information on Biden from Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer, who is still trying to get Ukrainian officials to falsify information about the former vice president.
Barr’s intervention in the Stone case brought the conversation about Trump’s disdain for the rule of law full circle, right back to his 2018 comment about Cohn. It was reportedly Cohn who introduced Trump to Stone, a longtime dirty trickster who got his political start working for Richard Nixon.
Now, in the wake of Trump’s impeachment and the Senate’s acquittal, the president has set off on a rampage of vengeance against the career professionals who told the truth about his illegal pressure campaign against Ukraine. Both Barr and Pompeo are standing by ready to enable Trump’s rage. Pompeo has refused to defend the career State Department officials assaulted by Trump, while Barr is supporting Trump and Giuliani’s ongoing efforts to get Ukraine to intervene in the election.
In order to stop the U.S. government from being transformed into a corrupt criminal organization, House Democrats must take the nuclear option: stop all funding to the Department of Justice until Barr resigns.
On Wednesday, Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee released a letter confirming that Barr has agreed to testify before them on March 31. The attorney general has “engaged in a pattern of conduct in legal matters relating to the President that raises significant concerns for this Committee,” the letter said. “In the past week alone, you have taken steps that raise grave questions about your leadership of the Department of Justice.” The letter referred specifically to the Flynn and Stone cases, as well as to Giuliani’s efforts to “feed the Department of Justice information, through you, about the President’s political rivals.”
But a stern letter and an oversight hearing will not be enough to stop Barr. The only thing that will make him respond will be the use of the House’s power of the purse. In order to stop the entire U.S. government from being transformed into a corrupt criminal organization by Trump and Barr, House Democrats must take the nuclear option: They must use their power to stop all funding to the Department of Justice until Barr resigns.
“Congress must act immediately to rein in our lawless Attorney General,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren said in a Twitter post on Wednesday. “[A]busing official power to protect political friends and attack opponents is common in authoritarian regimes like Putin’s Russia. Trump and Barr’s conduct has no place in our democracy.”
Shutting off funding to the Justice Department would be politically risky for Democrats. But Trump and Barr are bulldozing the norms of government and daring Democrats to do something about it. The House’s constitutional power over funding may be the only way to stop these criminals.


theintercept--2020-02-13--New York Schools Gang Unit Pushes the Criminalization of Children

The guidelines , which youth advocates warn put students ’ rights and potentially lives at risk , were compiled in a handbook by the Gang Prevention & Intervention Unit , a division of the DOE ’ s Office of Safety and Youth Development , which relies heavily on schools ’ formal relationship with the New York City Police Department .
The 14-page handbook is an alarmist compilation of dubious and often absurd claims , listing “ personality changes ” and “ alcohol/drug use ” as warning signs of gang involvement and cautions that “ females ” joining gangs are at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The handbook also repeats sensationalistic folklore about gangs , like the idea that initiations require the murder of “ an innocent victim , rival gang member , or even a police officer.
” An obscure unit of the New York City Department of Education tasked with addressing “ gang and youth violence ” in the city ’ s public schools has been promoting a set of guidelines that reveal serious ignorance of adolescent behavior and perpetuate false and racist stereotypes .
Most individuals in the database are young — and a recent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Project at Brooklyn College noted that as many as 30 percent were children when they were added to the database .
That has raised questions about the role of 5,500 “ school safety officers ” employed by the NYPD and stationed inside schools , who can also designate students as gang members .
While the extent of the cooperation between school-based officers and the GPIU is not clear , the latter also relies on a series of “ identifiers ” of gang association , including clothing , colors , language , and hand @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for clues of gang affiliation on students ’ backpacks , hats , and notebooks .
As The Intercept has reported , in recent years the NYPD has massively expanded a secretive “ gang database ” that lists tens of thousands of New Yorkers , mostly black and Latino men , even as gang-related incidents make up a fraction of crime in the city .
Police can add individuals to the database based on a set of broad and arbitrary criteria that include the people they associate with and locations they frequent — criteria @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You don ’ t even have to commit any crimes to be added to the database , and there is no clear way for people to learn whether they are listed on it or why .
The “ GPIU Gang Awareness Information ” handbook is part of a set of documents that were obtained through a public records request by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and shared exclusively with The Intercept .
It ’ s not clear how long the guidelines have been in place or how widely they have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ schools .
Little is known about the GPIU , a unit that dates back to the 1990s but remains largely unknown to the public .
While the GPIU technically operates under the DOE , the documents appear to have been compiled at least in part by police officers and repeatedly encourage educators to reach out to law enforcement , raising questions about the collaboration between schools and police at a time when the city has ramped up the targeting of gangs .
A spokesperson for the NYPD did not answer questions about how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gang members , instead referring to a recent press conference highlighting the new initiative .
“ Our schools are safe havens and our student safety work is grounded in the belief that students must be supported through academic and social interventions , ” the spokesperson wrote .
A spokesperson for the DOE wrote in a statement to The Intercept that the Gang Prevention and Intervention Unit is a “ resource for schools to provide awareness training to schools that identify potential influences and risk factors , or support a student who has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These criteria fit into a long pattern of criminalizing students of color , ” he added .
“ You are essentially priming teachers who are otherwise supposed to be interacting with their students and teaching them to now have to identify alleged gang or crew activity.
” “ The documents show how the DOE is using gang identifiers and indicators that have the same very subjective and arbitrary criteria that the NYPD relies on , ” John Cusick , a litigation fellow at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund , told The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ same type of surveillance apparatus.
” The police department , under the leadership of new commissioner Dermot Shea , is also finding new ways to target young New Yorkers .
Last month Shea announced a “ new youth strategy ” aimed at identifying “ opportunities for intervention with young people early in the progression that risks turning them into criminals.
” The initiative designates 300 police officers as Youth Coordination Officers and taps into the existing School Safety Division to “ enhance information sharing ” with police outside schools .
Hailing the initiative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week that it would “ [ stop ] crime before it even happens.
” But youth advocates fear that effectively placing children and teenagers under police surveillance both inside and outside school will only funnel more of them into the gang database and the criminal justice system more broadly .
And they warn that if guidelines like those outlined by the GPIU are any indication , police are fundamentally ill-equipped to deal with youth-related issues or to train educators on gang interventions .
“ The question that needs to be posed is , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on these broad and subjective criteria , and if not , who else is involved ?
Who is conducting all this ?
There ’ s not a lot of transparency , ” said Cusick .
“ You would assume that these criteria and other factors would be publicly available , especially when you ’ re subjecting students to certain disciplinary infractions that are specifically tagged as gang-related.
” In fact , from its definition of a gang to a list of recommended strategies to fight them , the handbook paints a picture of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement lingo and appears to have been written by police rather than educators .
That raises questions about the sometimes muddled relationship between police and schools .
During a 2018 City Council hearing about the gang database , Shea , who before being appointed commissioner led the NYPD ’ s anti-gang efforts , testified that teachers can serve as sources for the identification of gang members .
And the DOE itself has been tracking gang-related disciplinary infractions : a spreadsheet obtained by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund shows that the DOE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and “ violence — gang related ” as categories for disciplinary incidents .
It ’ s not clear what criteria the department uses to make those determinations .
The DOE did not answer questions about its protocol for accusing someone of gang involvement .
The department ’ s spokesperson wrote that “ the DOE does not track or share a database of information regarding students involved in alleged gang-related behavior.
” In addition to the guidelines , the set of documents reviewed by The Intercept also includes two lists that name several dozen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merely indicate street addresses or public housing developments .
One of those documents notes that the “ GPIU is not responsible for this list of crews which has been compiled by other law enforcement agencies , ” even though , as a unit within the education department , the GPIU itself is not supposed to be a law enforcement agency .
The Gang Prevention and Intervention Unit has operated in the city ’ s schools since 1994 .
At one point , the unit was run directly by the NYPD , which under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the city ’ s public schools in 1998 — a widely criticized arrangement that remains in place to this day despite a recent effort to limit police ’ s role in schools .
According to the little information about the GPIU available on the DOE ’ s website , the unit aims to take a “ proactive approach to gang activity.
” Other material distributed by the DOE notes that the unit assists “ schools and community organizations in recognizing the early warning signs of gang involvement.
” The work of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , gang and bullying prevention programs , and initiatives in collaboration with “ local , state , and federal agencies , ” the GPIU guidelines suggest .
According to the DOE , the unit has two staff members and the handbook “ has not been used under this administration.
” The DOE spokesperson said that the unit was meant to be “ preventative ” and that schools reach out to the GPIU “ to help better understand how to support students.
” Norbert Davidson , a former school safety officer in charge of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that he visited dozens of schools each month and had trained hundreds of school administrators .
Davidson did not respond to a request for comment .
The GPIU guidelines are filled with platitudes and sensationalism .
The document at times reads as if it were written in a different era , revealing a fixation with “ vandalism ” and “ graffiti ” that is reminiscent of the Ed Koch administration .
It also sounds like it was written by someone who never interacted with a teenager , warning parents and educators to look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and dress , as well as use of alcohol , drugs , and social media , while at the same time advising that gang “ initiation ” may include drive-by shootings , rape , and murder .
In a section about “ female gangs , ” the document cautions that “ most female gangs are either African-American or Latina ” and proceeds to list a series of “ Do ’ s and Don ’ ts for working with female gangs ” that are almost comically sexist .
“ This GPIU document on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ myths , ” said Babe Howell , a professor at CUNY School of Law who specializes in gang policing and prosecutions .
“ A lot of what it says are warning signs of gangs is typical adolescence : staying away from home , personality changes , isolation , alcohol .
It ’ s ridiculous.
” “ This is a problem because it encourages educators to look at typical signs of adolescent experimentation and see not just potential criminality but gang criminality , ” she added .
“ So instead of being concerned about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ re thinking of him or her as a gang member.
” Throughout the document , the authors call on educators to share information with police .
They invite them to “ read , record , report , remove ” graffiti , and to work with “ members of the Building Response Team.
” The document also refers to a “ gang assessment survey ” used by schools and to an “ intelligence update ” training for staff and students .
The DOE did not respond to a request for clarification .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ much everything gets back to collaborating with local law enforcement , ” said Howell .
“ It ’ s bringing law enforcement into this space and saying , ‘ If you perceive kids doing what most kids do , changing their clothes , or having cliques — that ’ s something to call the police about , that ’ s a law enforcement problem.
’ ” The GPIU gang guidelines are particularly problematic because the unit operates under an agency — the Department of Education — whose understanding of youth-related issues should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ document implies .
But the unit is just one of several ways in which the public school system has embraced a law enforcement mentality or directly delegated to law enforcement the handling of school-based problems .
After advocates spent years denouncing the role of New York ’ s schools in the criminalization of youth , the city recently introduced reforms to suspensions and invested in social workers and restorative justice practices .
Overall , the number of arrests , restraints , and police interventions in schools has been declining , though not equally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear that the progress may be short-lived .
The budget for school-based police has steadily increased over the years .
In 2018 , the city piloted a program to have what it called school coordination agents “ wander the halls ” in some Bronx schools .
And the youth initiative recently announced by the NYPD effectively adds more youth-focused police outside schools to do what school safety officers already do inside .
The initiative , which is modeled after an existing neighborhood policing program , invites community organizations to partner with police much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to partner with school safety officers .
“ They are trying to further entrench the NYPD in our schools , ” said Kate McDonough , director of the New York chapter of the Dignity in Schools Campaign , which aims to end the so-called school to prison pipeline .
“ You can ’ t have restorative justice while also having police in schools , and you can ’ t truly be restorative if you ’ re still committing to criminalizing practices like making people go through metal detectors.
” City officials have pitched @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ protect and serve all kids.
” In a press release announcing the program , the police department wrote that “ by fostering meaningful connections with teenagers ” police would prevent “ young New Yorkers from being led on a downward trajectory of crime.
” At his State of the City address last week , Mayor de Blasio congratulated police on the initiative .
“ Our young people do not need to be policed , they need to be reached , ” he said .
“ This is about getting to that young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crime.
” De Blasio , who has long sought to take credit for a decline in discriminatory police stops that coincided with his election ( although those stops are once again on the rise ) , praised the new NYPD initiative as “ the polar opposite ” of stop and frisk .
“ For years in the time of stop and frisk , our young people were treated like they were the problem , ” the mayor said .
Instead , through the new initiative , police would work on “ healing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never even think of a life of crime.
” How they would do that was not immediately clear .
A police spokesperson told The Intercept that more details about the initiative would be released when it starts in the spring .
And de Blasio himself acknowledged an inherent contradiction in the program when he noted that the 300 youth coordination officers “ have that uniform on , they have that badge , they have that gun , that ’ s true.
” The only apparent difference , he seemed to imply , would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they thinking about every day ?
” the mayor said .
“ They ’ re thinking about how to reach young people who might be teetering on that edge.
” Youth and civil rights advocates criticized the new initiative , arguing that it is not the police ’ s job to “ connect with teenagers.
” The announcement also stoked fears that police would use these connections to coax information from the youth they interact with and add more people to the gang database — as one of the current criteria for inclusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gang member by “ two independent sources.
” “ From a youth advocacy perspective , we don ’ t want kids talking to law enforcement without their guardian or legal representation .
Children don ’ t always know that sharing something with law enforcement , even in a casual conversation , can expose them to scrutiny , ” said Katrina Feldkamp , an attorney with the Education Rights Project at Bronx Legal Services .
“ The whole point of the new youth coordination officer program is to create more of these casual conversations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of young people.
” Feldkamp , who represents students facing suspension , including some whom schools have accused of gang affiliation , warned that the new initiative would lead to the “ type of surveillance and speculation that leads to students being placed in the NYPD gang database.
” “ It also creates more pathways for a law enforcement response to incidents that can and should be dealt with at school and in a non-punitive manner that doesn ’ t criminalize students , ” she added .
To students in heavily policed neighborhoods @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news .
Dekaila Wilson , a 19-year-old recent high school graduate and organizer with the school equity group IntegrateNYC , said school safety agents and police were a staple of her high school experience from school hallways to the park , shops , and train station where she went after class .
“ When you leave school , you see two school safety cars right by the school , then you walk down to the park , and there are two or three of those big vans , and even more cop cars @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Students are so used to being criminalized that it ’ s normal for them.
” Wilson said that in 2017 her Bronx school expelled more than a dozen students who were accused of being in gangs — which she believes administrators determined based on “ who was hanging out near the school , ” she said .
“ They lumped them all together and just kicked them all out , ” she added .
“ Some of the students that they kicked out were criminalized so much on a daily basis that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anymore.
” Andrea Colon , an organizer with the Rockaway Youth Task Force who also recently graduated from high school , said that for young people who already feel targeted by police in their neighborhoods , the realization that they could be labeled “ gang members ” in school “ goes to a different level.
” “ School is a place to learn and a place where you should feel safe , ” said Colon .
“ But when you go into schools , not only are you seeing police officers , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ youth behavior can put you on a database that there ’ s no official process to be taken out of , and there is no way for you to find out that you ’ re even on it , and a database that is overall racist and shouldn ’ t even exist in the first place .
”

An obscure unit of the New York City Department of Education tasked with addressing “gang and youth violence” in the city’s public schools has been promoting a set of guidelines that reveal serious ignorance of adolescent behavior and perpetuate false and racist stereotypes.
The guidelines, which youth advocates warn put students’ rights and potentially lives at risk, were compiled in a handbook by the Gang Prevention & Intervention Unit, a division of the DOE’s Office of Safety and Youth Development, which relies heavily on schools’ formal relationship with the New York City Police Department. The 14-page handbook is an alarmist compilation of dubious and often absurd claims, listing “personality changes” and “alcohol/drug use” as warning signs of gang involvement and cautions that “females” joining gangs are at higher risk of pregnancy and sexual diseases. The handbook also repeats sensationalistic folklore about gangs, like the idea that initiations require the murder of “an innocent victim, rival gang member, or even a police officer.”
The “GPIU Gang Awareness Information” handbook is part of a set of documents that were obtained through a public records request by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund and shared exclusively with The Intercept. It’s not clear how long the guidelines have been in place or how widely they have been used within the city’s schools. Little is known about the GPIU, a unit that dates back to the 1990s but remains largely unknown to the public. While the GPIU technically operates under the DOE, the documents appear to have been compiled at least in part by police officers and repeatedly encourage educators to reach out to law enforcement, raising questions about the collaboration between schools and police at a time when the city has ramped up the targeting of gangs.
As The Intercept has reported, in recent years the NYPD has massively expanded a secretive “gang database” that lists tens of thousands of New Yorkers, mostly black and Latino men, even as gang-related incidents make up a fraction of crime in the city. Police can add individuals to the database based on a set of broad and arbitrary criteria that include the people they associate with and locations they frequent — criteria that critics say effectively punish entire communities. You don’t even have to commit any crimes to be added to the database, and there is no clear way for people to learn whether they are listed on it or why.
Most individuals in the database are young — and a recent report by the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College noted that as many as 30 percent were children when they were added to the database. That has raised questions about the role of 5,500 “school safety officers” employed by the NYPD and stationed inside schools, who can also designate students as gang members. While the extent of the cooperation between school-based officers and the GPIU is not clear, the latter also relies on a series of “identifiers” of gang association, including clothing, colors, language, and hand signs, and encourages educators to watch for clues of gang affiliation on students’ backpacks, hats, and notebooks.
The police department, under the leadership of new commissioner Dermot Shea, is also finding new ways to target young New Yorkers. Last month Shea announced a “new youth strategy” aimed at identifying “opportunities for intervention with young people early in the progression that risks turning them into criminals.” The initiative designates 300 police officers as Youth Coordination Officers and taps into the existing School Safety Division to “enhance information sharing” with police outside schools. Hailing the initiative, Mayor Bill de Blasio said last week that it would “[stop] crime before it even happens.” But youth advocates fear that effectively placing children and teenagers under police surveillance both inside and outside school will only funnel more of them into the gang database and the criminal justice system more broadly. And they warn that if guidelines like those outlined by the GPIU are any indication, police are fundamentally ill-equipped to deal with youth-related issues or to train educators on gang interventions.
“The documents show how the DOE is using gang identifiers and indicators that have the same very subjective and arbitrary criteria that the NYPD relies on,” John Cusick, a litigation fellow at the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, told The Intercept. “It’s the same type of surveillance apparatus.”
“These criteria fit into a long pattern of criminalizing students of color,” he added. “You are essentially priming teachers who are otherwise supposed to be interacting with their students and teaching them to now have to identify alleged gang or crew activity.”
A spokesperson for the DOE wrote in a statement to The Intercept that the Gang Prevention and Intervention Unit is a “resource for schools to provide awareness training to schools that identify potential influences and risk factors, or support a student who has been a victim of gang violence.”
“Our schools are safe havens and our student safety work is grounded in the belief that students must be supported through academic and social interventions,” the spokesperson wrote.
A spokesperson for the NYPD did not answer questions about how police work with schools in identifying alleged gang members, instead referring to a recent press conference highlighting the new initiative.
Source: NYC Department of Education via the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Screenshot: The Intercept
A Mashup of Myths
The Gang Prevention and Intervention Unit has operated in the city’s schools since 1994. At one point, the unit was run directly by the NYPD, which under Mayor Rudolph Giuliani took over security operations in the city’s public schools in 1998 — a widely criticized arrangement that remains in place to this day despite a recent effort to limit police’s role in schools. According to the little information about the GPIU available on the DOE’s website, the unit aims to take a “proactive approach to gang activity.” Other material distributed by the DOE notes that the unit assists “schools and community organizations in recognizing the early warning signs of gang involvement.” The work of the unit consists primarily of professional development trainings, gang and bullying prevention programs, and initiatives in collaboration with “local, state, and federal agencies,” the GPIU guidelines suggest. According to the DOE, the unit has two staff members and the handbook “has not been used under this administration.” The DOE spokesperson said that the unit was meant to be “preventative” and that schools reach out to the GPIU “to help better understand how to support students.” Norbert Davidson, a former school safety officer in charge of the unit, told WNYC in 2011 that he visited dozens of schools each month and had trained hundreds of school administrators. Davidson did not respond to a request for comment.
In addition to the guidelines, the set of documents reviewed by The Intercept also includes two lists that name several dozen “crews” — many of which merely indicate street addresses or public housing developments. One of those documents notes that the “GPIU is not responsible for this list of crews which has been compiled by other law enforcement agencies,” even though, as a unit within the education department, the GPIU itself is not supposed to be a law enforcement agency.
In fact, from its definition of a gang to a list of recommended strategies to fight them, the handbook paints a picture of youth criminality that is steeped in law enforcement lingo and appears to have been written by police rather than educators. That raises questions about the sometimes muddled relationship between police and schools. During a 2018 City Council hearing about the gang database, Shea, who before being appointed commissioner led the NYPD’s anti-gang efforts, testified that teachers can serve as sources for the identification of gang members. And the DOE itself has been tracking gang-related disciplinary infractions: a spreadsheet obtained by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund shows that the DOE lists both “gang related behavior” and “violence — gang related” as categories for disciplinary incidents. It’s not clear what criteria the department uses to make those determinations. The DOE did not answer questions about its protocol for accusing someone of gang involvement. The department’s spokesperson wrote that “the DOE does not track or share a database of information regarding students involved in alleged gang-related behavior.”
“The question that needs to be posed is, either schools are conducting these assessments based on these broad and subjective criteria, and if not, who else is involved? Who is conducting all this? There’s not a lot of transparency,” said Cusick. “You would assume that these criteria and other factors would be publicly available, especially when you’re subjecting students to certain disciplinary infractions that are specifically tagged as gang-related.”
Source: NYC Department of Education via the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund; Screenshot: The Intercept
The GPIU guidelines are filled with platitudes and sensationalism. The document at times reads as if it were written in a different era, revealing a fixation with “vandalism” and “graffiti” that is reminiscent of the Ed Koch administration. It also sounds like it was written by someone who never interacted with a teenager, warning parents and educators to look out for changes in friends, vocabulary, and dress, as well as use of alcohol, drugs, and social media, while at the same time advising that gang “initiation” may include drive-by shootings, rape, and murder. In a section about “female gangs,” the document cautions that “most female gangs are either African-American or Latina” and proceeds to list a series of “Do’s and Don’ts for working with female gangs” that are almost comically sexist.
“This GPIU document on gang culture is just a mashup of myths,” said Babe Howell, a professor at CUNY School of Law who specializes in gang policing and prosecutions. “A lot of what it says are warning signs of gangs is typical adolescence: staying away from home, personality changes, isolation, alcohol. It’s ridiculous.”
“This is a problem because it encourages educators to look at typical signs of adolescent experimentation and see not just potential criminality but gang criminality,” she added. “So instead of being concerned about a kid being badly behaved, now we’re thinking of him or her as a gang member.”
Throughout the document, the authors call on educators to share information with police. They invite them to “read, record, report, remove” graffiti, and to work with “members of the Building Response Team.” The document also refers to a “gang assessment survey” used by schools and to an “intelligence update” training for staff and students. The DOE did not respond to a request for clarification.
“It’s very worrisome how much everything gets back to collaborating with local law enforcement,” said Howell. “It’s bringing law enforcement into this space and saying, ‘If you perceive kids doing what most kids do, changing their clothes, or having cliques — that’s something to call the police about, that’s a law enforcement problem.’”
A Law Enforcement Response
The GPIU gang guidelines are particularly problematic because the unit operates under an agency — the Department of Education — whose understanding of youth-related issues should be far more sophisticated and measured than the document implies. But the unit is just one of several ways in which the public school system has embraced a law enforcement mentality or directly delegated to law enforcement the handling of school-based problems.
After advocates spent years denouncing the role of New York’s schools in the criminalization of youth, the city recently introduced reforms to suspensions and invested in social workers and restorative justice practices. Overall, the number of arrests, restraints, and police interventions in schools has been declining, though not equally across the city.
But youth advocates fear that the progress may be short-lived. The budget for school-based police has steadily increased over the years. In 2018, the city piloted a program to have what it called school coordination agents “wander the halls” in some Bronx schools. And the youth initiative recently announced by the NYPD effectively adds more youth-focused police outside schools to do what school safety officers already do inside. The initiative, which is modeled after an existing neighborhood policing program, invites community organizations to partner with police much like teachers and school staff are asked to partner with school safety officers.
“They are trying to further entrench the NYPD in our schools,” said Kate McDonough, director of the New York chapter of the Dignity in Schools Campaign, which aims to end the so-called school to prison pipeline. “You can’t have restorative justice while also having police in schools, and you can’t truly be restorative if you’re still committing to criminalizing practices like making people go through metal detectors.”
City officials have pitched the new initiative as one that will “protect and serve all kids.” In a press release announcing the program, the police department wrote that “by fostering meaningful connections with teenagers” police would prevent “young New Yorkers from being led on a downward trajectory of crime.”
At his State of the City address last week, Mayor de Blasio congratulated police on the initiative. “Our young people do not need to be policed, they need to be reached,” he said. “This is about getting to that young person before they ever might commit a crime.”
De Blasio, who has long sought to take credit for a decline in discriminatory police stops that coincided with his election (although those stops are once again on the rise), praised the new NYPD initiative as “the polar opposite” of stop and frisk. “For years in the time of stop and frisk, our young people were treated like they were the problem,” the mayor said. Instead, through the new initiative, police would work on “healing, communicating, inspiring our young people to never even think of a life of crime.”
How they would do that was not immediately clear. A police spokesperson told The Intercept that more details about the initiative would be released when it starts in the spring. And de Blasio himself acknowledged an inherent contradiction in the program when he noted that the 300 youth coordination officers “have that uniform on, they have that badge, they have that gun, that’s true.” The only apparent difference, he seemed to imply, would be their approach. “What are they thinking about every day?” the mayor said. “They’re thinking about how to reach young people who might be teetering on that edge.”
Youth and civil rights advocates criticized the new initiative, arguing that it is not the police’s job to “connect with teenagers.” The announcement also stoked fears that police would use these connections to coax information from the youth they interact with and add more people to the gang database — as one of the current criteria for inclusion is that someone is identified as a gang member by “two independent sources.”
“From a youth advocacy perspective, we don’t want kids talking to law enforcement without their guardian or legal representation. Children don’t always know that sharing something with law enforcement, even in a casual conversation, can expose them to scrutiny,” said Katrina Feldkamp, an attorney with the Education Rights Project at Bronx Legal Services. “The whole point of the new youth coordination officer program is to create more of these casual conversations and increase law enforcement’s surveillance of young people.”
Feldkamp, who represents students facing suspension, including some whom schools have accused of gang affiliation, warned that the new initiative would lead to the “type of surveillance and speculation that leads to students being placed in the NYPD gang database.”
“It also creates more pathways for a law enforcement response to incidents that can and should be dealt with at school and in a non-punitive manner that doesn’t criminalize students,” she added.
To students in heavily policed neighborhoods, the new initiative sounds like old news.
Dekaila Wilson, a 19-year-old recent high school graduate and organizer with the school equity group IntegrateNYC, said school safety agents and police were a staple of her high school experience from school hallways to the park, shops, and train station where she went after class. “When you leave school, you see two school safety cars right by the school, then you walk down to the park, and there are two or three of those big vans, and even more cop cars,” Wilson told me. “Students are so used to being criminalized that it’s normal for them.”
Wilson said that in 2017 her Bronx school expelled more than a dozen students who were accused of being in gangs — which she believes administrators determined based on “who was hanging out near the school,” she said. “They lumped them all together and just kicked them all out,” she added. “Some of the students that they kicked out were criminalized so much on a daily basis that they wouldn’t even come to school anymore.”
Andrea Colon, an organizer with the Rockaway Youth Task Force who also recently graduated from high school, said that for young people who already feel targeted by police in their neighborhoods, the realization that they could be labeled “gang members” in school “goes to a different level.”
“School is a place to learn and a place where you should feel safe,” said Colon. “But when you go into schools, not only are you seeing police officers, you also know that you engaging in normal youth behavior can put you on a database that there’s no official process to be taken out of, and there is no way for you to find out that you’re even on it, and a database that is overall racist and shouldn’t even exist in the first place.”


theintercept--2020-02-13--Mike Bloomberg Is Hiring So Many Operatives, Local and State Campaigns Are Starving for Help

on her last night of maternity leave with her second boy when Donald Trump was declared winner of the 2016 presidential election .
When she recovered from shock , like millions of women across the nation , she decided she had to stop sitting on the political sidelines .
She ran for a seat on the local Board of Education in Fairfield , Connecticut , and won .
In 2018 , Leeper threw herself into the 2018 midterms , helping a Democratic state Senate campaign .
Last November , a Connecticut state House seat opened up when the Republican incumbent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was the kind of suburban district Democrats had been flipping across the country , and Leeper decided to take a shot at the special election , set for January 14 , 2020 .
She had the backing of the area ’ s former congressman and current senator , Chris Murphy , and a team of volunteers out knocking doors .
Her campaign manager had just run a successful reelection campaign for the mayor of Bridgeport .
He posted on Facebook in mid-November that Leeper ’ s race had real meaning for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lived in the district since 1962 .
“ Nowhere is more ‘ home ’ to me than my story and this district .
It ’ s personal , ” he wrote .
“ And that ’ s why I believe in Jennifer Leeper and her vision for this place that we both love so much.
” With just three weeks until the election , however , he was back with a new status update .
“ I ’ m taking my talents to Madison , Wisconsin , ” he posted on December 26 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billionaire Mike Bloomberg ’ s newly launched presidential campaign , which was offering lucrative salaries , as a deputy organizing director , it would later emerge .
Without a captain in the final weeks , Leeper ’ s campaign flagged .
On Election Day , Leeper lost to her challenger by just 79 votes , and Republicans held on to the seat .
Bloomberg entered the presidential race in November , and has since spent more than $ 300 million of his own money in his effort to secure the Democratic nomination .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s historic spending spree has been on the TV ads he ’ s running in at least 29 states , helping boost him into the top tier in polls and driving up the price of air time for other candidates .
Beyond pushing out his competitors , though , Bloomberg ’ s spending is having a shockingly disruptive effect on Democratic politics throughout the country : He is hiring armies of staffers and canvassers in nearly every state in the country at eye-popping salaries , poaching talent from other campaigns and progressive organizations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In just three months , the Bloomberg campaign has hired thousands of people to staff more than 125 offices around the country , the New York Times reported Thursday .
The former New York City mayor , who has committed to directing his money in support of whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is , claims that his billions of dollars will save the party .
Neither Leeper nor her campaign managers responded to requests for comment , but hers is a story that is unfolding in local , state , and federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Bloomberg ’ s campaign — “ Mike Will Get it Done ” — is meant to assure anxious Democrats that he and his money will rescue a moribund party .
For staffers , working for Bloomberg means guaranteed employment through November , something campaigns that are competing in primaries can ’ t promise to their employees .
The billionaire is now opening an office in New Hampshire , just as other presidential campaigns are packing up and leaving after Tuesday ’ s primary .
For a swath of voters , there ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s willing to spend .
But for candidates across the country — the type needed to hold majorities in Congress and in state legislatures , and to boost turnout for the presidential election — the billions in spending means quite the opposite .
Progressive groups , local campaigns , and presidential operations are either losing staff to the Bloomberg campaign , or are struggling to hire people because the former mayor has picked so many political operatives and canvassers up , according to interviews , emails , and messages from dozens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them spoke to The Intercept on condition of anonymity , either not to offend the biggest spender in political history , or not to expose publicly that they are having a hard time finding staff , which the public could perceive as suggestive of weakness .
running for Milwaukee County Executive and said he has watched Bloomberg siphoning talent , including from his own campaign .
“ We have a bad case of the Bloombergs here , ” he said .
“ It ’ s been a big part of the story no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Larson said he lost one junior staffer , who Bloomberg is “ running … ragged for $ 6k/month .
Other campaigns for county exec lost a field coordinator and another lost his campaign manager .
There ’ s a ton of other politicos pulled over from other campaigns and government jobs.
” John Rocco Calabrese is running for State Assembly in Wisconsin .
“ I ’ ve heard from friends across the state who are affected by Bloomberg sweeping up managers and staff .
It ’ s a tsunami of Bloomberg .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County Dem meeting Thursday and even at a small County Board Spring Election fundraising event next Monday , ” Calabrese said , adding that the campaign reached out directly to him for help with information on his district , but he “ politely refused and never heard back.
” During an interview this week on The Hill TV ’ s show “ The Rising , ” a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders , Chuck Rocha , said the campaign recently lost a staffer in South Carolina to Bloomberg .
“ I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve been in , ” said Rocha of the Bloomberg effect , adding that one staffer recently came to him and said , “ ‘ Hey Chuck , I ’ m with Bernie , I ’ m gon na vote for Bernie , but I ’ m gon na go get this money , cuz he ’ s gon na double my salary and pay me till November and I ’ ve got ta pay my bills when this thing is over.
’ And I was like , ‘ Look brother , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ta do .
Out of respect , we ’ d still like your vote , and ask your mommy and daddy if they ’ ll vote for Bernie as well , ’ and he goes , ‘ Oh , no problem.
’ That ’ s a real thing.
” The salaries being paid to Bloomberg staffers are well above market rates , and often come with housing included , as well as a laptop and an iPhone .
One operative lured to Bloomberg ’ s office in New York said she observed a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bricks as far as she could see .
Another said that Bloomberg offered a job to one operative who didn ’ t take it , but still received a laptop and iPhone from the campaign in the mail anyway , presumably by sheer dint of onboarding momentum .
One progressive consultant in Arizona has lost multiple hires to Bloomberg and is having a hard time finding workers .
“ I have heard of new organizers being hired by Bloomberg and then saying they are secretly still knocking for Bernie , ” the consultant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ field organizers , or FOs ) $ 6,000 per month and guaranteed pay through November , and many have realized that if they demand more , they will likely get it , according to hiring managers .
A typical salary for that position at the state or federal level might be $ 3,000 to $ 4,000 , and multiple operatives in charge of hiring FOs say they ’ ve never had a harder time recruiting , and applicants are making extreme demands .
Regional organizing directors are being offered $ 8,000 a month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigns .
Elijah Manley , a 20-year-old activist running for Florida state House , was offered $ 6,500 a month to be an adviser on Social Justice & Black Youth Policy on the Bloomberg campaign , he said .
He told the campaign he was a Sanders supporter but that didn ’ t seem to sway them , he told The Intercept .
Asked how temping the offer was on a scale of 1-10 , he said that it was a 10 , citing the poor health of his mother and grandmother .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The money would have been a plus financially , ” he said .
“ But hell , I ’ d rather be broke than a sellout.
” After audio of racist comments Bloomberg made about New York ’ s stop and frisk program , which he oversaw and expanded as mayor , surfaced , Manley offered him some free advice .
“ This is not enough , ” he said of Bloomberg ’ s semi-apology .
“ If I were advising you on this , I would tell you that impact matters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drop out.
” Bloomberg ’ s network is even trying to recruit the children of big donors .
As one donor messaged a friend : “ Saw Nancy Pelosi yesterday at a fundraiser .
Very inspiring .
Lots of folks are starting to agree with [ us ] about Bloomberg .
I know [ your daughter ] is a progressive but we have to win this time .
One of the sons of our group is now on Bloomberg ’ s staff and he said they ’ re hiring young people with no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any way we can talk [ your daughter ] into getting paid for real on the campaign ?
” ( A Sanders supporter , the daughter declined and forwarded the message to The Intercept .
It is edited to conceal identifying information , so as to avoid an unpleasant conversation with mom . )
Rob Quan , a political operative in Los Angeles , is currently consulting for a local city council candidate .
“ This is hands down the toughest time I ’ ve ever had finding field staff , ” he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for canvassers , paying $ 18 an hour , and is “ getting crickets.
” Courage California , a major progressive coalition in the state , lost its top digital staffer ahead of the March 3 California primary , “ hobbling their political program , ” said one operative the organization approached to try to fill the gap quickly .
Regardless of whether Bloomberg wins the nomination or not , the Bloomberg effect will continue through the end of the election cycle .
His operation in support of whomever becomes the Democratic nominee @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is on their own .

Jennifer Leeper was on her last night of maternity leave with her second boy when Donald Trump was declared winner of the 2016 presidential election. When she recovered from shock, like millions of women across the nation, she decided she had to stop sitting on the political sidelines. She ran for a seat on the local Board of Education in Fairfield, Connecticut, and won. In 2018, Leeper threw herself into the 2018 midterms, helping a Democratic state Senate campaign.
Last November, a Connecticut state House seat opened up when the Republican incumbent announced her run for a new office. It was the kind of suburban district Democrats had been flipping across the country, and Leeper decided to take a shot at the special election, set for January 14, 2020.
She had the backing of a former Connecticut congressman and current senator, Chris Murphy, and a team of volunteers out knocking doors. Her campaign manager had just run a successful reelection campaign for the mayor of Bridgeport. He posted on Facebook in mid-November that Leeper’s race had real meaning for him, explaining that his family had lived in the district since 1962. “Nowhere is more ‘home’ to me than my story and this district. It’s personal,” he wrote. “And that’s why I believe in Jennifer Leeper and her vision for this place that we both love so much.”
With just three weeks until the election, however, he was back with a new status update. “I’m taking my talents to Madison, Wisconsin,” he posted on December 26. He had taken a job with billionaire Mike Bloomberg’s newly launched presidential campaign, which was offering lucrative salaries, as a deputy organizing director, it would later emerge.
Without a captain in the final weeks, Leeper’s campaign flagged. On Election Day, Leeper lost to her challenger by just 79 votes, and Republicans held on to the seat.
Bloomberg entered the presidential race in November, and has since spent more than $300 million of his own money in his effort to secure the Democratic nomination. Much of the focus on Bloomberg’s historic spending spree has been on the TV ads he’s running in at least 29 states, helping boost him into the top tier in polls and driving up the price of air time for other candidates. Beyond pushing out his competitors, though, Bloomberg’s spending is having a shockingly disruptive effect on Democratic politics throughout the country: He is hiring armies of staffers and canvassers in nearly every state in the country at eye-popping salaries, poaching talent from other campaigns and progressive organizations that are now struggling to fill jobs. In just three months, the Bloomberg campaign has hired thousands of people to staff more than 125 offices around the country, the New York Times reported Thursday.
For a swath of voters, there’s something comforting about the money he’s willing to spend. But for candidates across the country, the billions in spending means quite the opposite.
The former New York City mayor, who has committed to directing his money in support of whoever the eventual Democratic nominee is, claims that his billions of dollars will save the party. Neither Leeper nor her campaign managers responded to requests for comment, but hers is a story that is unfolding in local, state, and federal races across the country. The promise of Bloomberg’s campaign — “Mike Will Get it Done” — is meant to assure anxious Democrats that he and his money will rescue a moribund party. For staffers, working for Bloomberg means guaranteed employment through November, something campaigns that are competing in primaries can’t promise to their employees. The billionaire is now opening an office in New Hampshire, just as other presidential campaigns are packing up and leaving after Tuesday’s primary. For a swath of voters, there’s something comforting about the money he’s willing to spend. But for candidates across the country — the type needed to hold majorities in Congress and in state legislatures, and to boost turnout for the presidential election — the billions in spending means quite the opposite.
Progressive groups, local campaigns, and presidential operations are either losing staff to the Bloomberg campaign, or are struggling to hire people because the former mayor has picked so many political operatives and canvassers up, according to interviews, emails, and messages from dozens of people involved in hiring. Several of them spoke to The Intercept on condition of anonymity, either not to offend the biggest spender in political history, or not to expose publicly that they are having a hard time finding staff, which the public could perceive as suggestive of weakness.
Chris Larson is running for Milwaukee County Executive and said he has watched Bloomberg siphoning talent, including from his own campaign. “We have a bad case of the Bloombergs here,” he said. “It’s been a big part of the story no one is talking about in Wisconsin.”
Larson said he lost one junior staffer, who Bloomberg is “running … ragged for $6k/month. Other campaigns for county exec lost a field coordinator and another lost his campaign manager. There’s a ton of other politicos pulled over from other campaigns and government jobs.”
John Rocco Calabrese is running for State Assembly in Wisconsin. “I’ve heard from friends across the state who are affected by Bloomberg sweeping up managers and staff. It’s a tsunami of Bloomberg. He’ll have a rep at our County Dem meeting Thursday and even at a small County Board Spring Election fundraising event next Monday,” Calabrese said, adding that the campaign reached out directly to him for help with information on his district, but he “politely refused and never heard back.”
“I’ve heard from friends across the state who are affected by Bloomberg sweeping up managers and staff. It’s a tsunami of Bloomberg.”
During an interview this week on The Hill TV’s show “The Rising,” a senior adviser to Bernie Sanders, Chuck Rocha, said the campaign recently lost a staffer in South Carolina to Bloomberg.
“I’ve heard it in every state that we’ve been in,” said Rocha of the Bloomberg effect, adding that one staffer recently came to him and said, “‘Hey Chuck, I’m with Bernie, I’m gonna vote for Bernie, but I’m gonna go get this money, cuz he’s gonna double my salary and pay me till November and I’ve gotta pay my bills when this thing is over.’ And I was like, ‘Look brother, go do what you’ve gotta do. Out of respect, we’d still like your vote, and ask your mommy and daddy if they’ll vote for Bernie as well,’ and he goes, ‘Oh, no problem.’ That’s a real thing.”
The salaries being paid to Bloomberg staffers are well above market rates, and often come with housing included, as well as a laptop and an iPhone. One operative lured to Bloomberg’s office in New York said she observed a seemingly endless wall of iPhones stacked like bricks as far as she could see. Another said that Bloomberg offered a job to one operative who didn’t take it, but still received a laptop and iPhone from the campaign in the mail anyway, presumably by sheer dint of onboarding momentum. One progressive consultant in Arizona has lost multiple hires to Bloomberg and is having a hard time finding workers. “I have heard of new organizers being hired by Bloomberg and then saying they are secretly still knocking for Bernie,” the consultant said.
The Bloomberg campaign is offering field organizers, or FOs) $6,000 per month and guaranteed pay through November, and many have realized that if they demand more, they will likely get it, according to hiring managers. A typical salary for that position at the state or federal level might be $3,000 to $4,000, and multiple operatives in charge of hiring FOs say they’ve never had a harder time recruiting, and applicants are making extreme demands. Regional organizing directors are being offered $8,000 a month to start, significantly more than typical campaigns.
Elijah Manley, a 20-year-old activist running for Florida state House, was offered $6,500 a month to be an adviser on Social Justice & Black Youth Policy on the Bloomberg campaign, he said. He told the campaign he was a Sanders supporter but that didn’t seem to sway them, he told The Intercept. Asked how temping the offer was on a scale of 1-10, he said that it was a 10, citing the poor health of his mother and grandmother. “We’re barely above water. The money would have been a plus financially,” he said. “But hell, I’d rather be broke than a sellout.”
After audio of racist comments Bloomberg made about New York’s stop and frisk program, which he oversaw and expanded as mayor, surfaced, Manley offered him some free advice. “This is not enough,” he said of Bloomberg’s semi-apology. “If I were advising you on this, I would tell you that impact matters more than intention. Also, to drop out.”
Bloomberg’s network is even trying to recruit the children of big donors. As one donor messaged a friend: “Saw Nancy Pelosi yesterday at a fundraiser. Very inspiring. Lots of folks are starting to agree with [us] about Bloomberg. I know [your daughter] is a progressive but we have to win this time. One of the sons of our group is now on Bloomberg’s staff and he said they’re hiring young people with no experience at $8k a month. Any way we can talk [your daughter] into getting paid for real on the campaign?” (A Sanders supporter, the daughter declined and forwarded the message to The Intercept. It is edited to conceal identifying information, so as to avoid an unpleasant conversation with mom.)
Rob Quan, a political operative in Los Angeles, is currently consulting for a local city council candidate. “This is hands down the toughest time I’ve ever had finding field staff,” he said. He’s posting jobs for canvassers, paying $18 an hour, and is “getting crickets.” Courage California, a major progressive coalition in the state, lost its top digital staffer ahead of the March 3 California primary.
Regardless of whether Bloomberg wins the nomination or not, the Bloomberg effect will continue through the end of the election cycle. His operation in support of whomever becomes the Democratic nominee will be well staffed. Everybody else is on their own.
Correction: Feb. 14, 2020
A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that Connecticut Sen. Chris Murphy once represented the district in which Leeper ran for office. In fact, he represented a neighboring district.


theintercept--2020-02-13--Report: U.S. Military Rarely Visits Bomb Sites or Talks to Survivors When Investigating Civilian Dea

Report: U.S. Military Rarely Visits Bomb Sites or Talks to Survivors When Investigating Civilian Deaths

It was the midpoint of a 10-month battle to dislodge the Islamic State from the Iraqi city of Mosul .
Two ISIS snipers were holed up in a “ defensive fighting position built into the second story of the structure ” in the al-Resala district of Mosul ’ s al-Jadidah neighborhood .
Iraqi troops were taking casualties and asked their American allies for help .
“ At 0824 on 17 March , 2017 , in accordance with the applicable rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict , a coalition U.S. aircraft delivered a single GBU-38 precision guided munition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Air Force Brig .
Gen. Matthew Isler said in the wake of the strike .
Everything was done by the book .
The target was an enemy stronghold and the strike seemed precise and flawless — except that it wasn ’ t .
Col. Mohammad Shumari , an Iraqi official working in the area , later told CNN that 141 bodies had been removed from the attack site after the American smart bomb detonated explosives stored by ISIS inside the building .
The dead included between 137 and 140 civilians , including women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After the attack , a U.S. team conducted two inspections of the strike location .
While such site visits might seem an obvious prerequisite for any legitimate investigation into civilian casualties , they ’ re surprisingly rare .
Most U.S. investigations of alleged civilian casualty incidents never include even one such visit , according to a new analysis of 228 official U.S. military investigations conducted in Afghanistan , Iraq , and Syria between 2002 and 2015 .
The military conducted site inspections in only 16 percent of the casualty investigations reviewed for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Civilians in Conflict , or CIVIC , and the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute , or HRI .
“ Site visits are important opportunities for investigators to review physical evidence , including weapons remnants , impact sites , and forensic evidence .
They help investigators understand the extent of harm an attack has caused and what exactly was damaged , ” Priyanka Motaparthy of the Human Rights Institute and a co-author of the report , told The Intercept .
“ Investigations that don ’ t take into account this type of information @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or failing to understand what exactly was hit .
”

It was the midpoint of a 10-month battle to dislodge the Islamic State from the Iraqi city of Mosul. Two ISIS snipers were holed up in a “defensive fighting position built into the second story of the structure” in the al-Resala district of Mosul’s al-Jadidah neighborhood. Iraqi troops were taking casualties and asked their American allies for help. “At 0824 on 17 March, 2017, in accordance with the applicable rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict, a coalition U.S. aircraft delivered a single GBU-38 precision guided munition against two ISIS snipers,” U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Matthew Isler said in the wake of the strike.
Everything was done by the book. The target was an enemy stronghold and the strike seemed precise and flawless — except that it wasn’t. Col. Mohammad Shumari, an Iraqi official working in the area, later told CNN that 141 bodies had been removed from the attack site after the American smart bomb detonated explosives stored by ISIS inside the building. The dead included between 137 and 140 civilians, including women and children, according to Isler.
After the attack, a U.S. team conducted two inspections of the strike location. While such site visits might seem an obvious prerequisite for any legitimate investigation into civilian casualties, they’re surprisingly rare.
Most U.S. investigations of alleged civilian casualty incidents never include even one such visit, according to a new analysis of 228 official U.S. military investigations conducted in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria between 2002 and 2015. The military conducted site inspections in only 16 percent of the casualty investigations reviewed for the study by researchers from the Center for Civilians in Conflict, or CIVIC, and the Columbia Law School Human Rights Institute, or HRI.
“Site visits are important opportunities for investigators to review physical evidence, including weapons remnants, impact sites, and forensic evidence. They help investigators understand the extent of harm an attack has caused and what exactly was damaged,” Priyanka Motaparthy of the Human Rights Institute and a co-author of the report, told The Intercept. “Investigations that don’t take into account this type of information risk underestimating the impact of an attack or failing to understand what exactly was hit.”
“In Search of Answers: U.S. Military Investigations and Civilian Harm” examines U.S. efforts to track, assess, and investigate reports of civilian casualties caused by its forces. The researchers found that while the U.S. military can effectively investigate civilian casualty allegations, its inquiries are often perfunctory and marred by serious deficiencies, if they’re carried out at all.
“Civilians injured in U.S. military attacks, and the families of those who are killed, have endured long and painful struggles trying to find out why they or their loved ones were harmed and whether their communities are still at risk,” said Motaparthy. “They have a right to learn what steps the military has taken to investigate these often devastating losses.”
U.S. standard practice when it comes to collecting testimony may be even more troubling. While U.S. investigators regularly interview military witnesses, they almost totally ignore civilians — victims, survivors, family members, and bystanders — “severely compromising the effectiveness of investigations,” according to the study. U.S. military personnel interviewed civilian witnesses in just 21.5 percent of the investigations covered in the report.
Despite close surveillance of the structure bombed in Mosul in March 2017, Iraqi and U.S. forces said they were unaware that civilians were sheltering there. It took a site visit to find the corpses in the bottom floors of the building and conversations with relatives to identify the dead. An unpublished internal Defense Department study reinforced the importance of such “ground truth,” finding that in 90 percent of the cases analyzed, initial aerial bomb damage assessments in Afghanistan missed civilian casualties that were later identified through investigations by ground forces, according to the CIVIC and HRI report.
The U.S. military ultimately took responsibility for the strike that led to the bloodbath in Mosul. This, too, has been rare. A 2017 New York Times Magazine investigation of nearly 150 U.S.-led coalition airstrikes targeting ISIS in Iraq found that 1 in 5 of the coalition strikes resulted in civilian death, a rate more than 31 times that acknowledged by the coalition. “Our reporting, moreover, revealed a consistent failure by the coalition to investigate claims properly or to keep records that make it possible to investigate the claims at all,” journalists Azmat Khan and Anand Gopal wrote.
The CIVIC-HRI team also noted that lessons learned from U.S. civilian casualty investigations are not systematically disseminated or implemented across the military, limiting the chances of avoiding similar incidents in future operations.
“While we found some examples of good practice in our review, these examples were overshadowed by the inconsistency — and, too often, inadequacy — of the overall record of military investigations,” said CIVIC’s Dan Mahanty, another report co-author. “From what we can tell, the military may even be shortchanging itself by not getting the total value out of its investigations.”