theintercept--2020-10-22--Organizers Push for Stronger Covid-19 Utility Shut-Off Protections as Winter Nears

the same time that Illinois environmental activist Georgia de la Garza was sick with the coronavirus , her water was shut off for nonpayment .
“ I had been sick for several weeks and that bill was stacked up with the mail , ” she recalled .
“ In the height of my Covid , like 102.6 fever , I was by myself , feeling delirious , [ and ] I went to get cold water from my shower , and my water was shut off.
” Mortified , de la Garza , who lives in the southern Illinois town @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s water company to take her credit card number over the phone , but they said she ’ d have to pay on their website .
She spent the next few hours unsuccessfully trying to pay online , and eventually managed to get her water turned back on by reaching out to a friend who works on her county ’ s board .
The Illinois Commerce Commission had announced in March an emergency moratorium on all utility shut-offs to protect customers during the public health crisis , but the patience of utility companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state unemployment rate hit 11.5 percent , up from 4.2 percent a year earlier .
After this experience , de la Garza joined an organizing effort led by Urbana resident Allan Axelrod , who had his own scare with a potential gas and electric shut-off in July .
He had received a letter from his utility company saying that service disconnections would be resuming within 30 days of Illinois entering “ Phase 4 ” of reopening , or September 1 , whichever came sooner .
When Axelrod tweeted out his letter , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were planning to disconnect service due to nonpayment by August 11 .
Axelrod , who had fallen behind on payments because he was trying to catch up on his credit card debt , managed to pay off his utility bill but knew others wouldn ’ t be able to so easily and was alarmed at how quickly companies were moving .
He started reaching out to other activists , and together they launched a grassroots effort to pressure Illinois ’ s Democratic Gov .
J.B. Pritzker to impose a mandatory utility shut-off during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other states and D.C. had done .
The Illinois activists , organizing under the banner of # NoAmerenShutoffs , have been calling the governor ’ s offices in Springfield and Chicago en masse , showing up to his press conferences , speaking out at Illinois Commerce Commission public meetings , pressuring local city councils to pass resolutions , and raising awareness on social media .
They say their pressure has yielded some success — namely Illinois ’ s utility shut-off moratorium has been extended until March 2021 — but unlike in some other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mandatory ban .
“ The governor has politely asked those multi-billion dollar corporations to not shut people ’ s water off but he has the power as the governor to issue a legally-binding moratorium , ” said Emiliano Vera , a coalition member who disrupted a press conference Pritzker gave last month .
State filings show that at least 16,165 Illinois households were disconnected in September alone , with the majority of shut-offs from Ameren and Commonwealth Edison .
Early on in the pandemic , as millions of people lost their jobs and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some state and local governments began offering relief in the form of moratoriums on evictions and utility shut-offs .
But it didn ’ t last long .
According to the National Energy Assistance Directors ’ Association , 33 states have either let their Covid-19 utility moratoriums expire or never passed them at all , and seven states , with a combined 20.5 million people , have moratoriums that are set to expire in early November .
Already more than 205 million people across the U.S. are at risk of having their utilities shut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What we ’ re seeing anecdotally is a real increase in utility debt , ” said John Howat , senior energy analyst at the National Consumer Law Center .
Howat said that utility shut-offs amount to de-housing people without it being counted as an eviction .
“ It ’ s a pernicious way to harm people , ” he said .
“ It ’ s one of the most subtle and least obvious threats that poses the most immediate risk to people ’ s pandemic safety.
” While utilities are largely a local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up the issue too .
A national ban on utility shut-offs was included in both versions of the House Democrats ’ HEROES Act , which passed in May and October .
In the Senate , Democratic Sens .
Jeff Merkley , Elizabeth Warren , and Kamala Harris introduced companion legislation , but it has not been voted on .
More than 830 organizations have urged Congress to act .
Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib , who is the vice chair of the House Subcommittee on Environment , in particular has been outspoken on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ October 5 , she , along with subcommittee chair Rep. Harley Rouda , sent a letter to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield urging him to use his authority under section 361 of the Public Health Services Act to issue a nationwide moratorium on drinking water shut-offs , citing the CDC ’ s issuance of an eviction moratorium in September .
“ Just as CDC acted to ensure that Americans are protected from evictions , access to water in each person ’ s home is also essential to preventing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote .
The representatives quoted Redfield ’ s own words back to him on the importance of hand-washing to contain Covid-19 .
“ Without water you can ’ t wash your hands after changing a dirty diaper , ” said Mary Grant , the Public Water for All campaign director at Food & Water Watch .
“ This is a public health crisis .
It ’ s about protecting people , their families , and their communities.
” governor , has used his executive power to prevent pandemic evictions , and has faced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to utilities .
On September 21 , when asked at a press conference about utility shut-offs , Pritzker defended his administration ’ s approach , and said while they will continue to talk with companies , “ I do want to also make sure people know that there is a limit to what the kinds of things that we can order businesses to do ” and cited the need to “ balance interests.
” Activists started chanting at Pritzker to use his executive power to prevent the shut-offs .
An attorney at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ petition with the Illinois Commerce Commission , a quasi-judicial body which has three Democratic appointees and two Republican appointees , calling on the body to extend the shut-off moratorium .
The activists have also tried to apply pressure on the ICC , and Axelrod says ICC ’ s members have listened to their concerns and pressured companies to avoid disconnections .
ICC spokesperson Victoria Crawford said while they can ’ t comment on a mandatory moratorium because it ’ s an open petition issue on their docket , the Commission “ has worked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business consumers from losing access to utility service.
” Pritzker ’ s office did not return a request for comment .
Similar actions have taken place in New Jersey , where activists achieved a major victory last week when the state ’ s Democratic Gov .
Phil Murphy signed an executive order extending a mandatory moratorium through March 15 , 2021 .
The order applies to all residential gas , electric , and water utilities , both public and private , and bars utilities from charging late fees or fees to reconnect services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state director for Food & Water Action , said the momentum in their state was bolstered by the broader national social justice movement .
“ There ’ s been a sea change in what ’ s seen as possible , ” he told The Intercept , crediting Murphy for “ stepping up and showing leadership.
” Renee Koubiadis , the executive director of the Anti-Poverty Network of New Jersey , said it took months of organizing to finally get this issue at the top of leaders ’ agenda .
“ From the start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weren ’ t getting a good response from leadership on utilities , that it was getting pushed to the backburner , ” she said .
According to data from New Jersey ’ s Board of Public Utilities , more than 440,000 residential electric and gas accounts were at least 90 days past due in August , an increase of 41 percent from 2019 .
The average overdue New Jersey utility balance was $ 600 .
The rising costs of utilities and associated debt have taken on a new level of urgency in light @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been asked to stay home , and millions of Americans are now working and attending school from their residences .
“ In this country , without a basic level of electricity and heating service , your home is inhabitable , ” said Howat .
“ And you ’ re not able to participate effectively in society at all.
” Without electricity , households lack light , refrigeration , and are unable to maintain healthy indoor temperatures .
In the time of Covid-19 , utility shut-offs can prevent children from participating in virtual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to find jobs , and make it even harder to keep hands clean and take showers .
understanding the scale of the utility shut-off crisis during the pandemic is a lack of clear data .
Most states do not require electric or gas providers to report data on how customers are accessing or retaining services , though some states , like Ohio , California , and Pennsylvania , have better requirements than others .
Utility companies have historically fought efforts by advocates , regulators , and policymakers to report comprehensive data , aware @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow .
Michael Thomas , a former journalist and founder of an energy efficiency startup Carbon Switch , leaned on his old reporting skills to compile as much information as he could from state websites on expiring utility moratoriums and what the impact might be .
“ There were a lot of stories about the states where moratoriums were expiring but most lacked context of how many people would be at risk , ” he said .
His first report , published in August , found 34.5 million households would lose shut-off protections @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million unemployed people at risk by October 1 .
In October he published a second report , finding that four states did let their moratoriums expire in September , affecting 16 million households , with 2.3 million of those households below the poverty line before the pandemic started .
Another 2 million people in those states are unemployed .
Thomas said finding the data was “ a complete mess because it ’ s so archaic in how it ’ s all stored and presented ” on public utility commission websites .
Civil rights @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for actual federal guidelines on clearly reporting utility data , but for the most part , the information remains chaotic and hard to access .
And while Thomas ’ s research helped illuminate who in a state is energy-burdened , the actual number of people who have had their utilities shut off is unknown as most companies don ’ t have to report it .
For now advocates are continuing to organize , hoping more governors flex their executive power to help struggling residents .
“ We estimate that by the election there @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a comprehensive water moratorium , ” said Grant of Food & Water Watch , referring to California , New York , Vermont , Washington and New Jersey .
“ We ’ re already seeing thousands of shut-offs happen across the country , particularly in the South and Midwest .
”

In August, at the same time that Illinois environmental activist Georgia de la Garza was sick with the coronavirus, her water was shut off for nonpayment. “I had been sick for several weeks and that bill was stacked up with the mail,” she recalled. “In the height of my Covid, like 102.6 fever, I was by myself, feeling delirious, [and] I went to get cold water from my shower, and my water was shut off.” Mortified, de la Garza, who lives in the southern Illinois town of Carbondale, begged her city’s water company to take her credit card number over the phone, but they said she’d have to pay on their website. She spent the next few hours unsuccessfully trying to pay online, and eventually managed to get her water turned back on by reaching out to a friend who works on her county’s board.
The Illinois Commerce Commission had announced in March an emergency moratorium on all utility shut-offs to protect customers during the public health crisis, but the patience of utility companies was wearing thin, even as the state unemployment rate hit 11.5 percent, up from 4.2 percent a year earlier.
After this experience, de la Garza joined an organizing effort led by Urbana resident Allan Axelrod, who had his own scare with a potential gas and electric shut-off in July. He had received a letter from his utility company saying that service disconnections would be resuming within 30 days of Illinois entering “Phase 4” of reopening, or September 1, whichever came sooner. When Axelrod tweeted out his letter, his utility provider Ameren promptly replied that they were planning to disconnect service due to nonpayment by August 11.
Axelrod, who had fallen behind on payments because he was trying to catch up on his credit card debt, managed to pay off his utility bill but knew others wouldn’t be able to so easily and was alarmed at how quickly companies were moving. He started reaching out to other activists, and together they launched a grassroots effort to pressure Illinois’s Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker to impose a mandatory moratorium on utility shut-offs during the pandemic, as at least 17 other states and D.C. had done.
The Illinois activists, organizing under the banner of #NoAmerenShutoffs, have been calling the governor’s offices in Springfield and Chicago en masse, showing up to his press conferences, speaking out at Illinois Commerce Commission public meetings, pressuring local city councils to pass resolutions, and raising awareness on social media. They say their pressure has yielded some success — namely Illinois’s utility shut-off moratorium has been extended until March 2021 — but unlike in some other states, it’s not a mandatory ban. “The governor has politely asked those multi-billion dollar corporations to not shut people’s water off but he has the power as the governor to issue a legally-binding moratorium,” said Emiliano Vera, a coalition member who disrupted a press conference Pritzker gave last month. State filings show that at least 16,165 Illinois households were disconnected in September alone, with the majority of shut-offs from Ameren and Commonwealth Edison.
Early on in the pandemic, as millions of people lost their jobs and became unable to pay their bills, some state and local governments began offering relief in the form of moratoriums on evictions and utility shut-offs. But it didn’t last long. According to the National Energy Assistance Directors’ Association, 33 states have either let their Covid-19 utility moratoriums expire or never passed them at all, and seven states, with a combined 20.5 million people, have moratoriums that are set to expire in early November. Already more than 205 million people across the U.S. are at risk of having their utilities shut off, according to NEADA.
“What we’re seeing anecdotally is a real increase in utility debt,” said John Howat, senior energy analyst at the National Consumer Law Center. Howat said that utility shut-offs amount to de-housing people without it being counted as an eviction. “It’s a pernicious way to harm people,” he said. “It’s one of the most subtle and least obvious threats that poses the most immediate risk to people’s pandemic safety.”
Utility shut-offs amount to de-housing people without it being counted as an eviction.
While utilities are largely a local matter, some federal lawmakers have taken up the issue too. A national ban on utility shut-offs was included in both versions of the House Democrats’ HEROES Act, which passed in May and October. In the Senate, Democratic Sens. Jeff Merkley, Elizabeth Warren, and Kamala Harris introduced companion legislation, but it has not been voted on. More than 830 organizations have urged Congress to act.
Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib, who is the vice chair of the House Subcommittee on Environment, in particular has been outspoken on the issue. Most recently, on October 5, she, along with subcommittee chair Rep. Harley Rouda, sent a letter to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Robert Redfield urging him to use his authority under section 361 of the Public Health Services Act to issue a nationwide moratorium on drinking water shut-offs, citing the CDC’s issuance of an eviction moratorium in September. “Just as CDC acted to ensure that Americans are protected from evictions, access to water in each person’s home is also essential to preventing the spread of the coronavirus,” they wrote. The representatives quoted Redfield’s own words back to him on the importance of hand-washing to contain Covid-19.
“Without water you can’t wash your hands after changing a dirty diaper,” said Mary Grant, the Public Water for All campaign director at Food & Water Watch. “This is a public health crisis. It’s about protecting people, their families, and their communities.”
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker at a news conference at the University of Chicago’s Harper Center on July 23, 2020. Photo: Antonio Perez/Chicago Tribune/Tribune News Service via Getty Images
Pritzker, the Illinois governor, has used his executive power to prevent pandemic evictions, and has faced heat to do the same with regard to utilities. On September 21, when asked at a press conference about utility shut-offs, Pritzker defended his administration’s approach, and said while they will continue to talk with companies, “I do want to also make sure people know that there is a limit to what the kinds of things that we can order businesses to do” and cited the need to “balance interests.” Activists started chanting at Pritzker to use his executive power to prevent the shut-offs.
An attorney at the National Consumer Law Center has filed a petition with the Illinois Commerce Commission, a quasi-judicial body which has three Democratic appointees and two Republican appointees, calling on the body to extend the shut-off moratorium. The activists have also tried to apply pressure on the ICC, and Axelrod says ICC’s members have listened to their concerns and pressured companies to avoid disconnections. ICC spokesperson Victoria Crawford said while they can’t comment on a mandatory moratorium because it’s an open petition issue on their docket, the Commission “has worked vigorously to protect all residential and small business consumers from losing access to utility service.” Pritzker’s office did not return a request for comment.
Similar actions have taken place in New Jersey, where activists achieved a major victory last week when the state’s Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy signed an executive order extending a mandatory moratorium through March 15, 2021. The order applies to all residential gas, electric, and water utilities, both public and private, and bars utilities from charging late fees or fees to reconnect services.
Do you have a coronavirus story you want to share? Email us at coronavirus@theintercept.com or use one of these secure methods to contact a reporter.
Matt Smith, the New Jersey state director for Food & Water Action, said the momentum in their state was bolstered by the broader national social justice movement. “There’s been a sea change in what’s seen as possible,” he told The Intercept, crediting Murphy for “stepping up and showing leadership.”
Renee Koubiadis, the executive director of the Anti-Poverty Network of New Jersey, said it took months of organizing to finally get this issue at the top of leaders’ agenda. “From the start of the pandemic we felt like we weren’t getting a good response from leadership on utilities, that it was getting pushed to the backburner,” she said. According to data from New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities, more than 440,000 residential electric and gas accounts were at least 90 days past due in August, an increase of 41 percent from 2019. The average overdue New Jersey utility balance was $600.
The rising costs of utilities and associated debt have taken on a new level of urgency in light of the Covid-19 pandemic, as people have been asked to stay home, and millions of Americans are now working and attending school from their residences.
“In this country, without a basic level of electricity and heating service, your home is inhabitable,” said Howat. “And you’re not able to participate effectively in society at all.” Without electricity, households lack light, refrigeration, and are unable to maintain healthy indoor temperatures. In the time of Covid-19, utility shut-offs can prevent children from participating in virtual learning, make it difficult for adults to find jobs, and make it even harder to keep hands clean and take showers.
One challenge for understanding the scale of the utility shut-off crisis during the pandemic is a lack of clear data. Most states do not require electric or gas providers to report data on how customers are accessing or retaining services, though some states, like Ohio, California, and Pennsylvania, have better requirements than others. Utility companies have historically fought efforts by advocates, regulators, and policymakers to report comprehensive data, aware of the public relations nightmare that could follow.
Michael Thomas, a former journalist and founder of an energy efficiency startup Carbon Switch, leaned on his old reporting skills to compile as much information as he could from state websites on expiring utility moratoriums and what the impact might be.
“There were a lot of stories about the states where moratoriums were expiring but most lacked context of how many people would be at risk,” he said. His first report, published in August, found 34.5 million households would lose shut-off protections in the next month, leaving 9.5 million unemployed people at risk by October 1. In October he published a second report, finding that four states did let their moratoriums expire in September, affecting 16 million households, with 2.3 million of those households below the poverty line before the pandemic started. Another 2 million people in those states are unemployed.
Thomas said finding the data was “a complete mess because it’s so archaic in how it’s all stored and presented” on public utility commission websites. Civil rights groups like the NAACP have long called for actual federal guidelines on clearly reporting utility data, but for the most part, the information remains chaotic and hard to access. And while Thomas’s research helped illuminate who in a state is energy-burdened, the actual number of people who have had their utilities shut off is unknown as most companies don’t have to report it.
For now advocates are continuing to organize, hoping more governors flex their executive power to help struggling residents. “We estimate that by the election there will only be five states that have a comprehensive water moratorium,” said Grant of Food & Water Watch, referring to California, New York, Vermont, Washington and New Jersey. “We’re already seeing thousands of shut-offs happen across the country, particularly in the South and Midwest.”


theintercept--2020-10-22--Cindy Hyde-Smith Wants to Destroy the ACA. In the '90s, Her Organization Lobbied for a Public Option

Cindy Hyde-Smith Wants to Destroy the ACA. In the '90s, Her Organization Lobbied for a Public Option.

This is a brazen reversal from her stance on health care not too long ago .
Before getting elected to the Mississippi state Senate in 1999 , Hyde-Smith spent five years as a lobbyist in Washington , D.C. For at least part of that time , she served as state director for Mississippi , Louisiana , and Tennessee for the National Coalition on Health Care , which spent the 1990s calling for universal health care coverage .
Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith , a Republican from Mississippi and close ally of President Donald Trump , wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the “ worst thing that ’ s happened to us ” and the “ Democratic Party ’ s first step toward a full government takeover of healthcare .
” As a senator , she voted to undermine protections for preexisting conditions multiple times .
Hyde-Smith initially entered the state legislature as a Democrat before joining a wave of other local lawmakers in switching to the Republican Party in 2010 .
Even as a Republican lawmaker , Hyde-Smith produced a report in the legislature recommending that Mississippi do more to ask the government for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ available , The Intercept previously reported .
In Mississippi , the ACA provides health care coverage to about 100,000 residents and provides protection for preexisting conditions to about 600,000 .
Hyde-Smith ’ s campaign declined to comment on her previous work , but pointed The Intercept to a statement reiterating her commitment to repealing Obamacare .
Shortly after Hyde-Smith left the coalition , the group ’ s senior policy analyst said it was a “ national embarrassment ” that the U.S. was the “ only developed country besides South Africa that doesn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ Under the plan , every American would be guaranteed access to a defined , comprehensive package of health benefits , ” the coalition wrote in a 1992 outline of their proposal .
“ People who are not otherwise insured would receive their insurance coverage and the same package of benefits through a mechanism that we call Pro-Health , which would incorporate the acute care portion of Medicaid.
” The National Coalition on Health Care was founded in 1990 by Dr. Henry Simmons to “ help achieve comprehensive health system change.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ currently represents more than 80 unions , businesses , nonprofits , and pensions and health funds .
In the 1990s , the coalition called for the creation of a public option to achieve universal health care coverage .
While other vulnerable Republican senators have sought to distance themselves from the Trump administration ’ s efforts to repeal the ACA , Hyde-Smith is not wavering in her hostility to the health law .
Hyde-Smith is currently locked in a competitive race against Democrat Mike Espy , a former congressman and U.S. secretary of agriculture @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top issue .
“ Mississippi ranks last in the nation for health care outcomes , ” Espy tweeted .
“ The solution is obvious : Expand Medicaid .
As your Health Care Senator , that is what I plan to do.
” Hyde-Smith is also actively campaigning on the issue , dedicating her second campaign ad to health care .
In the 30-second ad , she said she has brought more support to rural hospitals and worked to combat the coronavirus pandemic with additional funding for testing .
( A 2019 report found @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk of closing than any other state . )
She ’ s also among the GOP incumbents refusing to debate their opponents , which Espy slammed as “ disrespecting the voters.
” On November 10 , a week after the election , the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments over whether the ACA should be dismantled .
Hyde-Smith hopes the court sides with the president .
Her Democratic opponent , meanwhile , wants to expand the ACA .
Espy ’ s long-shot campaign saw a massive surge in fundraising and national support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ginsburg last month , which instantly stoked fears over the future of the ACA .
Now , with two weeks to go , he is virtually tied with the GOP incumbent .
But while other vulnerable Republican senators have sought to distance themselves from the Trump administration ’ s efforts to repeal the ACA , Hyde-Smith is not wavering in her hostility to the health law .
Republican senators facing tough reelections — including Martha McSally of Arizona , Joni Ernst of Iowa , Cory Gardner of Colorado , Dan Sullivan of Alaska @ @ @ @ @ @ @ broke with the party earlier this month , joining Democrats in voting for a largely symbolic measure to protect the ACA and those with preexisting conditions from a Trump administration lawsuit .
Hyde-Smith was not one of them .
touted her work with the National Coalition on Health Care in campaign ads throughout her 1999 state Senate bid .
“ As a Congressional Lobbyist in Washington D.C. Cindy has successfully led a national effort to address the problems of the health care system in America , ” read one ad , which was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her leadership with the National Coalition on Healthcare she was able to identify crucial deficiencies in the health care system and obtain practical goals and objectives to address those very serious issues.
” Another one of Hyde-Smith ’ s campaign ads , published in August 1999 , declared that she “ has already taken a stand and been the voice for many patients ” and “ will work to provide quality medical care and facilities to everyone.
” The ad included an endorsement from a local doctor : “ I encourage all healthcare @ @ @ @ @ @ @ families to support Cindy Hyde-Smith , ” Dr. Braxter Irby said .
In a statement announcing the launch of her campaign , Hyde-Smith highlighted specific health care issues her work addressed , including “ affordable insurance , access to medical care and the financial burden of prescription medications and medical bills our senior citizens face.
” But since she was first appointed to the U.S. Senate seat in early 2018 when longtime Sen. Thad Cochran retired because of health concerns , she has advocated for policies that would increase the number of uninsured @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And when it comes to universal health care , she rails against Medicare for All using the predictable GOP talking points , saying it ’ s a “ government-run ” health care program and a way to “ make insurance illegal.
” Espy , who would be the state ’ s first Black senator since Reconstruction , ran a competitive campaign against Hyde-Smith last cycle but ultimately fell short , losing by about 8 percentage points in the runoff election .
He ’ s using the recent influx of campaign cash , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million last quarter , to massively outspend Hyde-Smith on political ads , dropping $ 1.01 million on television and radio ads compared to her $ 147,000 .
Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden endorsed Espy last month , and national groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have also ramped up their support in recent weeks .

Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith , a Republican from Mississippi and close ally of President Donald Trump, wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act. She has called the health reform the “worst thing that’s happened to us” and the “Democratic Party’s first step toward a full government takeover of healthcare.” As a senator, she voted to undermine protections for preexisting conditions multiple times.
This is a brazen reversal from her stance on health care not too long ago. Before getting elected to the Mississippi state Senate in 1999, Hyde-Smith spent five years as a lobbyist in Washington, D.C. For at least part of that time, she served as state director for Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee for the National Coalition on Health Care, which spent the 1990s calling for universal health care coverage.
The National Coalition on Health Care was founded in 1990 by Dr. Henry Simmons to “help achieve comprehensive health system change.” According to its website, the group currently represents more than 80 unions, businesses, nonprofits, and pensions and health funds. In the 1990s, the coalition called for the creation of a public option to achieve universal health care coverage.
“Under the plan, every American would be guaranteed access to a defined, comprehensive package of health benefits,” the coalition wrote in a 1992 outline of their proposal. “People who are not otherwise insured would receive their insurance coverage and the same package of benefits through a mechanism that we call Pro-Health, which would incorporate the acute care portion of Medicaid.”
Shortly after Hyde-Smith left the coalition, the group’s senior policy analyst said it was a “national embarrassment” that the U.S. was the “only developed country besides South Africa that doesn’t have a national health insurance program.”
Hyde-Smith initially entered the state legislature as a Democrat before joining a wave of other local lawmakers in switching to the Republican Party in 2010. Even as a Republican lawmaker, Hyde-Smith produced a report in the legislature recommending that Mississippi do more to ask the government for the public money that the ACA made available, The Intercept previously reported. In Mississippi, the ACA provides health care coverage to about 100,000 residents and provides protection for preexisting conditions to about 600,000. Hyde-Smith’s campaign declined to comment on her previous work, but pointed The Intercept to a statement reiterating her commitment to repealing Obamacare.
While other vulnerable Republican senators have sought to distance themselves from the Trump administration’s efforts to repeal the ACA, Hyde-Smith is not wavering in her hostility to the health law.
Hyde-Smith is currently locked in a competitive race against Democrat Mike Espy, a former congressman and U.S. secretary of agriculture who’s made expanding Medicaid his top issue. “Mississippi ranks last in the nation for health care outcomes,” Espy tweeted. “The solution is obvious: Expand Medicaid. As your Health Care Senator, that is what I plan to do.” Hyde-Smith is also actively campaigning on the issue, dedicating her second campaign ad to health care. In the 30-second ad, she said she has brought more support to rural hospitals and worked to combat the coronavirus pandemic with additional funding for testing. (A 2019 report found that Mississippi has more rural hospitals at risk of closing than any other state.) She’s also among the GOP incumbents refusing to debate their opponents, which Espy slammed as “disrespecting the voters.”
On November 10, a week after the election, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments over whether the ACA should be dismantled. Hyde-Smith hopes the court sides with the president. Her Democratic opponent, meanwhile, wants to expand the ACA. Espy’s long-shot campaign saw a massive surge in fundraising and national support following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg last month, which instantly stoked fears over the future of the ACA. Now, with two weeks to go, he is virtually tied with the GOP incumbent.
But while other vulnerable Republican senators have sought to distance themselves from the Trump administration’s efforts to repeal the ACA, Hyde-Smith is not wavering in her hostility to the health law. Republican senators facing tough reelections — including Martha McSally of Arizona, Joni Ernst of Iowa, Cory Gardner of Colorado, Dan Sullivan of Alaska, and Susan Collins of Maine — broke with the party earlier this month, joining Democrats in voting for a largely symbolic measure to protect the ACA and those with preexisting conditions from a Trump administration lawsuit. Hyde-Smith was not one of them.
Hyde-Smith touted her work with the National Coalition on Health Care in campaign ads throughout her 1999 state Senate bid. “As a Congressional Lobbyist in Washington D.C. Cindy has successfully led a national effort to address the problems of the health care system in America,” read one ad, which was published in the Enterprise-Journal. “Through her leadership with the National Coalition on Healthcare she was able to identify crucial deficiencies in the health care system and obtain practical goals and objectives to address those very serious issues.”
Another one of Hyde-Smith’s campaign ads, published in August 1999, declared that she “has already taken a stand and been the voice for many patients” and “will work to provide quality medical care and facilities to everyone.” The ad included an endorsement from a local doctor: “I encourage all healthcare professionals as well as patients and their families to support Cindy Hyde-Smith,” Dr. Braxter Irby said.
In a statement announcing the launch of her campaign, Hyde-Smith highlighted specific health care issues her work addressed, including “affordable insurance, access to medical care and the financial burden of prescription medications and medical bills our senior citizens face.”
But since she was first appointed to the U.S. Senate seat in early 2018 when longtime Sen. Thad Cochran retired because of health concerns, she has advocated for policies that would increase the number of uninsured people and undermine protections for preexisting conditions. And when it comes to universal health care, she rails against Medicare for All using the predictable GOP talking points, saying it’s a “government-run” health care program and a way to “make insurance illegal.”
Espy, who would be the state’s first Black senator since Reconstruction, ran a competitive campaign against Hyde-Smith last cycle but ultimately fell short, losing by about 8 percentage points in the runoff election.
He’s using the recent influx of campaign cash, a haul of more than $4 million last quarter, to massively outspend Hyde-Smith on political ads, dropping $1.01 million on television and radio ads compared to her $147,000. Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden endorsed Espy last month, and national groups like the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee have also ramped up their support in recent weeks.


theintercept--2020-10-23--The Final Debate: Hunter Becomes the Hunted

Wait !
Before you go on about your day , ask yourself : How likely is it that the story @ @ @ @ @ been produced by a different news outlet if The Intercept hadn ’ t done it @ @ @ @ @ of media would look like without The Intercept .
Who would hold party elites accountable @ @ @ @ @ to have ?
How many covert wars , miscarriages of justice , and dystopian technologies @ @ @ @ @ reporters weren ’ t on the beat ?
The kind of reporting we do is @ @ @ @ @ it is not easy , cheap , or profitable .
The Intercept is an independent @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t have ads , so we depend on our members — 35,000 and @ @ @ @ @ hold the powerful to account .
Joining is simple and doesn ’ t need to @ @ @ @ @ can become a sustaining member for as little as $ 3 or $ 5 a @ @ @ @ @ all it takes to support the journalism you rely on .

President Donald Trump and Democratic candidate Joe Biden met for their final debate before the 2020 election on Thursday night. Trump continued his recent attacks on Biden’s son Hunter and his foreign business dealings, while Biden went after Trump’s mismanagement of the Covid-19 pandemic. Who got the best of the encounter? Rising host Krystal Ball and former Deconstructed host Mehdi Hasan join the show to break down the debate.
Ryan Grim: I’m Ryan Grim. Welcome to Deconstructed.
President Donald J. Trump: This is going to be bigger than four years ago. There’s more enthusiasm. The crowds are bigger.
RG: Donald Trump has spent the 2020 campaign —and arguably his entire presidency — trying to recreate the conditions that brought him his improbable victory 4 years ago. He stills rails against ‘Crooked Hillary’:
DJT: You should lock her up, I’ll tell ya.
RG: And clings to the hope that once again, a laptop and its salacious contents will swing things his way.
DJT: They found the laptop. You know what they call that? The laptop from hell. So a giant trove of emails show Hunter Biden making deals, setting up meetings with his father Joe.
RG: But there’s a problem with that plan. Trump is running against Joe Biden, not Hillary Clinton. Trump’s major advantage against Clinton came down to perceptions of their respective integrity. By the fall of 2016, Trump was even outpacing Clinton on the question of who was more “honest and trustworthy,” a startling data point given Trump’s olympian penchant for dishonesty.
Trump doesn’t have that edge against Biden, and it helps explain why attacks that stuck to Clinton slide off Biden’s back. For his approach to work, Trump really needs a major corruption scandal to erode Biden’s image — deserved or not — as a trustworthy and honest man.
Where Gallup found 33 percent of voters believed Clinton was “honest and trustworthy” in 2016, this year, that number is 52 for Biden. In that gap lies Biden’s decisive electoral edge. In a world where voters aren’t enthusiastic about either candidate, they side with the one they find less objectionable. Right now, that’s Joe Biden.
The Trump campaign’s hope is that two weeks of conversation about Hunter Biden’s influence peddling, ginned up by Rudy Giuliani, can narrow that gap enough to eek out a win. That’s probably a fool’s errand for any number of reasons.
One major problem for Trump is that even with emails and text messages showing Hunter and his business partners clearly intent on leveraging the Biden name for financial gain, nothing definitively sticks to Joe Biden, partly because the sources are suspect. Whatever Hunter and his cronies are saying in those emails is just that — talk. Without evidence of Joe Biden’s actual involvement, it could all be bluster, since they had every incentive to claim to potential business partners to have a tight relationship with Joe.
The mainstream media, over-correcting from its shameful handling of Clinton’s email scandal, hasn’t gone anywhere near this story.
Remember in 2016 how Trump brought a room full of women who accused President Clinton of sexual assault to a debate against Hillary Clinton?
Newscaster: Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathy Shelton, Paula Jones — this sets the stage for what could be a really ugly and contentious debate, tonight.
RG: He played a similar card Thursday night, bringing a former business partner of Hunter’s to the debate. Here’s Tony Bobulinski at a press event:
Tony Bobulinski: I was introduced to Joe Biden by Jim Biden and Hunter Biden.
That night, we discussed Biden’s history, the Biden’s family business plan, with the Chinese.
RG: And here’s Don Jr., trying to explain the scandal to Fox News host Sean Hannity.
Donald Trump, Jr.: There’s literally zero evidence that there’s Russian disinformation. The Director of National Intelligence, and, by the way, more importantly, the FBI said, “I say that because it’s pretty clear that the FBI has done whatever they possibly could to hurt Donald Trump.” So if they’re even coming out and saying this — that doesn’t prevent Adam Schiff, and MS-DNC, from being out there and peddling this thing as if it’s real Russian disinformation! It got corroborated.
Sean Hannity: You’ve got phones, emails.
DT: Joe Biden is corrupted and compromised, and America has to know it. In that hopped up tirade from Trump’s son, you can see another political problem with leaning into Hunter Biden as a campaign strategy. Nobody can really tell what it’s about.
RG: The short version is this: newly published emails and text messages show Hunter Biden and his business partners talking about using Hunter’s last name and his influence with the White House to drum up business, with suggestions that Joe Biden himself would be involved, whether it’s with monied partners in Ukraine or China.
Trump telegraphed that he’d come after Biden over the allegations of corruption during Thursday night’s debate, but interestingly it was Biden who baited Trump into bringing it up. Trump did his best to implicate Joe himself, insinuating that he was the mysterious “Big Man” mentioned in the leaked emails, as Bobulinski has said that he is.
DJT: I don’t make money from China. You do. I don’t make money from Ukraine. You do. I don’t make money from Russia. You made $3.5 million Joe, and your son gave you — they even have a statement that we have to give 10 percent to the “Big Man.” You’re the “Big Man,” I think. I don’t know, maybe you’re not. But you’re the “Big Man” I think. Your son said: “We have to give 10 percent to the Big Man.” Joe. What’s that all about? It’s terrible.
RG: Biden responded by hitting Trump on his own corruption
Vice President Joe Biden: I have released all of my tax returns for 22 years. Go look at them. You have not released a single solitary year of your tax return. What are you hiding? The foreign countries are paying you a lot.
RG: And he accused Trump of peddling Russian disinformation.
JB: There are 50 former National Intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant. They have said that this — five former heads of the CIA, both parties say what he’s saying is a bunch of garbage.
RG: Yet Biden has not actually claimed that the emails themselves are fake. And seeing Biden rely on Russia as a defense led Trump into a rabbit hole of Russian payments and sweeping charges of corruption, a discussion that was likely impenetrable to most viewers.
By all accounts, Trump is trailing badly in the election. He needed something big to turn it around, and he didn’t get it.
[Musical Interlude.]
RG: We are joined now on Deconstructed by Krystal Ball, who is a co-host of the morning show Rising. Krystal, thanks so much for joining us.
KB: My pleasure. Thank you for having me. The tables have turned, my friend. Normally I get to ask you the questions
RG: They have indeed, I’ve been appearing on Krystal’s show for a very long time.
So what happened tonight? Who won?
KB: Well, I would say overall, it was a much less stressful debate as a viewer to consume certainly then the first one where Trump just decided to be like the most obnoxious person ever.
This time, you could tell, almost visibly, that he was trying really, really, really, really hard to be on his best behavior. And, in fact, I think that affect worked for him a lot better than what we’ve been seeing on the trail of late. Now, that doesn’t mean that he was perfect. He went down these right-wing rabbit holes about different accusations that even me, as a person who follows the stuff pretty closely, couldn’t even follow where exactly he was going. So it wasn’t perfect.
But overall, if he had had this affect, and importantly, if he had leveled some of the critique of Joe Biden about having been in Washington for a long time and never getting anything done, he might be in a better place right now. He also had a more sort of serious tone around Coronavirus.
But ultimately, I thought Biden was, especially for the front half of the debate, very strong, very clear, had a number of lines that landed I thought very effectively. And because he is the leader in the race, I would say that he decisively won this debate — both on, I think I would give it to him on the merits, but also because there was no quote-unquote, game-changing moment and so the status quo overwhelmingly benefits Joe Biden at this point.
RG: Right.
Trump on the stimulus was a bit of a mess, you know, started out talking about how he had gotten it done three times how you got to push Democrats to, you know, give when they don’t want to, when it’s against their interest.
And then, at the very end, he pivots to say that well, you know, the reason I’m against that Hero’s Act that the House passed because it gives a bunch of money to Democratic cities where they just let immigrants run loose, and they’re crime ridden, and terribly run. It seemed like he really blew an opportunity there. What was your take on that exchange?
KB: Well, it gave Biden a wide open opportunity that he took to say: Look, I don’t look at it this way. I don’t look at as blue states and red states. I look at us all as Americans, and we’re all in this together. I’m paraphrasing — but he leveled that target two times.
And this is standard-issue political rhetoric. It’s a little hokey. It’s a little cliché. But when you’re running against someone like Donald Trump it, I think it feels really refreshing to a lot of people to just have this like, standard-issue, American unifying leadership message. So yeah, Trump ends up looking weak on the stimulus because he’s supposed to be the guy that can get it done.
And there was another moment, Ryan, that really stood out to me, which is just a dramatic contrast to me from the way that Trump positioned himself back in 2016. They were getting — both of them — questions about the minimum wage, and Trump put himself on the side of arguing against a federal minimum wage, which is not the position he held in 2016, and not consistent even with things that he said in the past.
Now, of course, we know as a matter of practical fact, he didn’t try to lift the minimum wage while he’s been president so you know where he actually stood on those things. But from just a political positioning, this is such a clear example of where last time when he ran in 2016, there were a series of economic issues where he positioned himself to the left certainly of the Republican Party, and also, in certain cases, to Hillary Clinton and it was very effective. Voters saw him as moderate — he would say things at times like, “Oh, I’m not that Republican on this issue.” And now he has just mainlined all of the Fox News, rhetoric and ideological positioning and it’s been a disaster for him.
RG: He really seemed to think he had a winner with that oil industry back and forth. Oh, look at Joe, he’s gonna destroy the oil industry.
Moderator: We have one final question.
DJT: And that’s maybe the biggest statement in terms of business. That’s the biggest.
Moderator: We have one final question, Mr. President.
DJT: Because basically what he’s saying is he is going to destroy the oil industry.
RG: And he even called out Texas.
DJT: Will you remember that, Texas? Will you remember that Pennsylvania, Oklahoma.
Moderator: Vice President.
RG: I don’t know why he called out Oklahoma. I think that’s in the bag for him, Pennsylvania. I hope you’re watching.
KB: It’s not. There’s bigger problems.
RG: So, what do you think? How does that exchange play back in Texas or in Pennsylvania?
KB: Well, I don’t think the polling is what a lot of people think it is on these issues, even in states like Texas and Pennsylvania.
I know you and I both covered Mike Siegel, as a progressive running for Congress in Texas, running affirmatively on the Green New Deal; great new ad up from Sunrise Movement of a union worker and organizer talking about organizing union workers around the Green New Deal.
In Pennsylvania, I looked really closely at the polling, and it’s basically — even in the state of Pennsylvania, where fracking is supposedly the thing — the polling is really split. It’s a 50/50 issue on banning fracking — which, we should be clear, is not Biden’s position. I wish it was his position. It’s what of course Trump tries to make his position into.
So even if people believe the charge, I’m not sure how effective it is. And, by the way, they don’t believe the charge. I mean, what we’ve seen is, voters view Joe Biden as moderate. And to the extent that these attacks of like: Oh, he’s gonna be a handmaiden for Bernie and AOC have landed, it’s actually I think, improved his favorability ratings, because people are like, oh, maybe he’s gonna actually do more than we thought he was going to.
Because a lot of the issues that — you know, health care, there’s a whole exchange about like scary, socialized medicine — well, Medicare for All is a 63 percent issue. These are popular issues. And so in an absolutely, I think, unprecedented fashion, Trump’s attacks on Joe Biden, which have largely focused on this socialism angle, have improved Biden’s favorability over the course of this race —
RG: Right.
KB: — which, you know, does not happen for any candidate just by the nature of political campaigns, the rough and tumble, the negative ads, all of that. So it’s kind of an incredible dynamic that Trump’s attacks have been so bad, they have actually helped Joe Biden.
RG: I was surprised to see Joe Biden come out and say that he would put 11 million undocumented immigrants on a pathway to citizenship very quickly. He’s not the kind of person to really make any specific types of promises. And certainly not to make a bold promise when he doesn’t have to. You know, he usually only, you know, commits to something if he’s been backed into a corner by activists.
What did you make of that commitment? Do you think that his advisors are looking at weak numbers among Hispanic voters and giving him the reflexive: Oh, well, then you should do something bold on immigration reform, which isn’t actually, you know, as we know the best way to reach Hispanic voters broadly. But that is often what advisors will tell you. What did you make of that, of that moment and that exchange?
KB: Yeah, that’s actually interesting. And I hadn’t thought of it quite that way. But you’re probably exactly right. One of the great ironies of this campaign that I think a lot of people are quite surprised at is that the reason that Biden is in such a strong position right now is because he’s outperforming with white voters versus 2016, in the group, where he’s underperforming the most, versus 2016, at this point is Latinos.
So I could definitely see that having been a sort of, you know, intentional play and an intentional commitment that his advisors thought he should make to win over that population. As you point out, look, obviously, it’s an incredibly diverse electorate with a wide variety of interests. But if you ask, you know, their issue set, that it looks like everybody else’s: it’s like COVID, and the economy, and jobs, and, yes, immigration is important there as well.
Neither of these candidates has really, you know, super clean hands on the issue of immigration. Trump couldn’t come close to the number — he may have wanted to, but he’s just like not organizationally competent enough to achieve the level of mass deportations that occurred under Obama.
But then under Trump, obviously, you had the institutionalized cruelty that was laid very bare, and I thought that Biden had an extraordinarily strong response on the children who have been orphaned by our government as an intentional act of cruelty and then the best that Trump can say is: well, they’re being very well taken care of. I mean, I don’t think that anyone is going to find that remotely sufficient.
So, you know, overall, I thought the immigration exchange went to Biden, because it’s just an unconscionable act of cruelty, unnecessary cruelty, to separate innocent children, potentially for life from their parents.
RG: Right, especially as you said, Biden is doing extremely well among women in the suburbs. And Trump is clearly sensitive to that. He talks about that a lot. You know, he whines about the fact that he’s not getting more support in the suburbs, despite as he says it, you know, having saved the suburbs, and that’s probably an issue that plays terribly for Trump. You know, a lot of lows, a lot of women in the suburbs that was the kind of last straw when it came to Trump, when they saw him, you know, separating families down at the border.
You know, I thought it was kind of interesting that Joe Biden baited Trump into talking about Hunter. Like, Trump didn’t go there, for the beginning of the debate until Biden brought it up himself, which suggests that Joe Biden really, really sees Trump focusing on Hunter as disadvantageous to Trump. Is that your read on it?
KB: If that’s his calculus, I think he’s absolutely 100 percent correct. Because, look, there’s an alternate universe in which the corruption charges — and some of them are legitimate — about Hunter Biden. I’m not saying that it was illegal, but profiting off of his dad’s name, something that he’s essentially admitted to, there’s an alternate universe in which that stuff actually matters to people and actually lands.
But we live in a universe in which we have mass unemployment, a pandemic, mass death, and a lot of other problems heading down the pike. And so the more that Trump focuses on these Hunter Biden allegations which, at this point, only people who are really steeped in like the right-wing fever swamps, even can follow the thread of, I think the more that he seems like he’s out of touch with Americans at best, and at worst, and this is a mistake and something that Trump walked into himself, at the first debate he went after Hunter on his drug addiction and his problems with substance abuse, and Biden was able to turn that around and actually take the moral high ground there, and say: Look, my son, like many Americans has struggled with addiction.
So yeah, I think he felt like that was actually a fine place for him to go. And of course, once he did bait Trump into going there —I follow some of these allegations, because I do think that some of it has merit — even I couldn’t follow where he was like, some of the money from Russia, $3.5 million from Russia, and all these things just coming at you so fast. You’re just like, What in the world are you even talking about right now?
RG: Well, Krystal, I know you’ve got a show to put on tomorrow morning quite early. It’s Rising. Find it on Hill TV on YouTube. Krystal, thanks so much for joining us tonight.
KB: Thanks, Ryan. And congrats on the podcast.
RG: Oh, thank you for listening.
KB: My pleasure.
[Musical interlude.]
RG: Alright, well, now the hunted has become the hunter. We are joined here by the former host of Deconstructed and the new NBC Peacock host of his own television show, Mehdi Hasan who just finished taping — or airing, I guess I should say — his post-debate show and he is kind enough to join us now with his thoughts on the debate. Mehdi, first of all, how’s it been to have a nightly show?
Mehdi Hasan: It’s exhausting Ryan, and thank you for having me on the show.
It is very weird. Normally, after every debate, I would interview you. And now the roles have indeed reversed. Thank you for having me on Deconstructed. It’s a pleasure to be on such an excellent and brilliant podcast that I’ve heard so much good things about.
It is tiring doing my own show on Peacock every night, Monday to Friday. I don’t know how they do it, all these people have been doing it for years. I am absolutely knackered and we’re only three weeks in.
But it’s a lot of fun. And obviously there’s a lot of news to cover, so having an hour every night is great. We’ve had some great guests. We’re gonna have some more great guests between now and the election. And Ryan, like you, I’m just wondering what’s going to happen after election day, you know? It could be the biggest story of our lives or it might just be a nice orderly transition of power and a Biden landslide. Who knows?
RG: [Laughs.] Well, the question everybody wants to know is how does this affect the Election? How do voters take this? So what was your general read on who this helped more?
MH: I think it helps Joe Biden. I don’t see how it helps Donald Trump. Who are these people, Ryan? These undecided voters who four years in have seen the chaos, the crises, the mismanagement, the children in cages at the border, the incitement of violence, the domestic terrorism, the open racism, the crazy tweets. And then, of course, the impeachment followed by the coronavirus pandemic — 223,000 dead at the time we’re recording the show — who saw all of that, is still undecided? First of all, I’d love to meet these people who are still undecided after witnessing all that. And if they do exist, these truly undecided voters sitting on the fence. What happened tonight that made them say, you know what, after four years and everything we’ve seen, this is the final bit of evidence, this is the data point, we needed to say Donald J. Trump for another four years.
I just — what did he say or do tonight that convinced those [undecided voters]. I’m sure he said lots of stuff that impressed his base, that we in the media obsess over. But his base are 35 to 40 percent of the country. And they might get him over the finish line. But a voter suppression shenanigans, but Electoral College bias. But really, it’s no strategy for a victory.
RG: Right. You really actually put your finger on the difference between 2020 and 2016. At this time in 2016, there were still maybe 15 percent of voters who were undecided.
MH: Yes.
RG: And that enabled the Comey scandal at the very end, you know, to push a lot of people in Trump’s direction.
MH: Yeah. They broke 2-1 for Trump in that final week.
RG: And they could break 2-1 for Trump this time, and if the polls are correct, Biden would still be well ahead. Because the polls are showing something like you know, 4 to 5 percent undecided across the board. And so you asked like, those people who are undecided, how did they respond to this? I wanted to ask you about one of the key exchanges about the kids in cages.
JB: Within 100 days, I’m going to send to the United States Congress, a pathway to citizenship for over 11 million undocumented people. And all of those so-called dreamers, those DACA kids, they’re going to be immediately certified again, to be able to stay in this country and put on a path to citizenship.
Moderator: President Trump, your reaction?
DJT: He had eight years to do what he said he was going to do.
JB: We did.
DJT: And I’ve changed, without having a specific — we get rid of catch and release. We got rid of a lot of horrible things that they put in and that they lived with. But he had eight years he was vice president, he did nothing except build cages to keep children in.
RG: Who do you think got the better of that? And what point was Trump even trying to make there?
MH: I mean, it’s classic Trump. You give him a bit of information, his advisors probably gave him something, he read something on Breitbart, and he wants to use it, but he just doesn’t know how to execute it.
Because you and I know, we’ve discussed it on this show before, that Joe Biden and Barack Obama’s immigration record is not great. It is not an easily defendable record. You know? Yes, you’ve got Dreamers towards the end, reforms towards the end. But you also have over 2 million people deported.
You do have cages that were built by Barack Obama, for kids, to be fair, for unaccompanied children, not for kids taken from their parents, as a matter of policy like under Trump, but still some pretty egregious —
RG: But still abusing children. Yeah.
MH: Indeed. Abuses of power under Barack Obama, abuses of migrant children happened. And a savvier candidate would have weaponized that in a way to really kind of take the sting out of Biden’s day.
The problem is, Donald Trump is sociopathic. And therefore he doesn’t actually give a damn about any kind of kids — brown or white. And therefore, when he’s asked, you know, NBC reporting about 545 children being separated from their parents still, even today, unable to be reunited, he shows no compassion. He says they came into this country with coyotes, they were smuggled in — false. They came with their parents. That’s the whole point. They’re separated from their parents.
He lies. He shows no empathy whatsoever to an audience of tens of millions of Americans. And he has no actual explanation for what went on, what went down, he just says, “There was a photo.” Because he’s obsessed with the fact that there was that gotcha picture that turned out to be Obama.
This is how his brain works, right? He just takes a few small, you know, half-truths, and then runs with them and just obsesses over them, and ends up making them completely untruthful by the time they’ve come out of his mouth. So the immigration debate was just another reminder of how — and it’s not even about race, per se, it’s more about the president who, when it comes to something basic like that has no sense of empathy, no sense of humanity, and just tries to lie his way out of — I’ve always said this.
The reason you know he’s sociopathic is not because of what you know what leaks out about what he believes or says in private, it’s because in public he doesn’t even pretend. Like, I’m sure there are plenty of Republicans who don’t give a damn about brown kids in cages — I’m talking about Republican politicians — but they would respect me enough if they were standing in front of me to pretend to care, because they would know it doesn’t look good.
He doesn’t pretend to care. And that’s what I’ve always found so fascinating and horrifying about this candidate. And I think at this point, surely it can only hurt him. Because again, who watches that and says: Yes! That’s my guy! The guy who got Biden on the cages and avoided the fact that today, in October 2020, there are still 545 children separated from their parents.
RG: Yeah. Another place where that penchant might have heard him was in the discussion about race and racism.
Now, Joe Biden was asked about how “the talk” and he answered empathetically, as Joe Biden is wont to do. The moderator, Kristen Welker, then pushed Trump on a much tougher line.
KW: Mr. President, you’ve described the Black Lives Matter movement as a symbol of hate.
RG: What was your read on what Trump was trying to do with his response there? And did he botch it?
MH: Again, ye, he botched it. Because again, first of all, he lied. He said, Black Lives Matter — their logo, their mantra, their motto, which he heard many years ago, was pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon, referring to the police.
DJT: The first time I ever heard of Black Lives Matter, they were chanting “Pigs in a blanket” — talking about police, pigs, pigs, pigs, talking about our police — pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.
I said, that’s a horrible thing. And they were marching down the street.
MH: That was one protest, I believe that happened in 2015, in Minnesota, which was not Black Lives Matter, was not the official group, has never been used by the group on their advertising, their social media, their protest, their placards. So you know, who is he trying to again, who is he trying to impress?
His base will love it. They’ll say, yeah, take the fight to Black Lives Matter and antifa. But who is he actually winning over in this supposed five percent of undecideds that you mentioned that he needs desperately, given the gap, both nationally, and in some of these swing states?
I mean, the guy is right now tying in Texas. In Texas, right? He’s having to go to Arizona to defend himself. That’s not where he should be spending time. You know, when you turn up for debate, if that’s not at the front of your mind, like how do I deal with this, and I’m bleeding votes everywhere, even in safe red states, supposedly, what is the purpose of this kind of rhetoric?
And, you know, I mean, just a simple point. I’m not the first person to say this, but it needs to be said: anyone who has to tell you that they’re the least racist person ever, is probably one of the most racist people ever.
RG: The top issue people say is driving their vote in this election, understandably, is the pandemic. How do you think Biden did in communicating that you can actually handle this in a way that gets us at least on par with the rest of the world?
MH: Look, Biden’s has been pretty consistent on this. He said what his plan is, he’s talked about the importance of testing and tracing. He’s talked about the importance of masking — the basic stuff. I was interviewing two epidemiologists earlier today on my show, and they made the same point. This is not rocket science. We pretty much know how to fight a pandemic.
Barack Obama taunted the President last night in Philadelphia saying, “I left behind a playbook. What happened to that playbook?” Did he use it to prop up a table leg? It disappeared, they never use it. They trashed it.
You know, running against Trump it’s difficult in some ways, the crazy character he is and the way that he sucks oxygen out of the room, and the lies that he tells.
On the other hand, it’s easy in some ways, the bar is so low. We talk about the bar being low for Trump, which is true. It’s also low for his opponent. You know, Joe Biden doesn’t have to come up with some, you know, Nobel Prize-winning plan to defeat the pandemic. He just has to say: I’m not going to do dumb stuff, like take off a mask in public or have super spreader rallies at the White House, or pretend it’s all a hoax, or say that I’m immune, or pretend that children are immune even after your son gets it?
So the bar is actually that quite low. And again with Trump, no empathy, no regret. We saw Eric Bolling interview on Sinclair earlier this week, where Bolling gave him a softball one of his own supporters saying, you know if you could do a do-over what would you do differently? Nothing. Not much. No regrets! And again, tonight, no regrets —the same nonsense about China ban that wasn’t actually a China ban. No empathy for 223,000 people dead.
Joe Biden looked at the camera directly, talked about the missing people at the kitchen table as he did in the first debate. Donald Trump, it’s an important point to make it over nine months of death, I’ve not heard him once ever talk emotively, passionately, sadly, about specific people who have died because he simply can’t,
RG: Right. I’m not sure he can either. You know, if Trump by playing to his base and leaning into all of this bigotry winds up doing even worse than he did in 2016 underperforming his numbers then and losing, what do you think it says about our country and our politics?
MH: I think our politics are broken, Ryan. We’ve discussed this on the show before. I spent many years talking to this Deconstructed audience about how our politics are broken.
I mean, this debate is just the kind of small microcosm of that. You know, look at the way we cover issues: climate change, finally, making an appearance at a debate, hadn’t in many previous debates; the inability to really get stuck in and talk about the failures of the political system, voter suppression, the Electoral College, the Senate is broken in so many ways, probably the most broken institution of all, the United States Senate.
And, of course, any system, Ryan that produces a Donald Trump and allows him to win the presidency — forget, it doesn’t matter what happens next month. You know, this, this is a really depressing point for me, which is, even if Donald Trump is smashed in a landslide, a humiliating landslide — sorry about that
Even if Donald Trump is smashed in a humiliating landslide next month, the fact is, he’s still the 45th President of the United States. You’re never gonna be able to take that away from him. He will always be there in the history books, in the pictures on the wall, you’re just never going to take that.
And I just find that depressing. The fact that he was able to become the 45th President of the United States, I think is something this country will never live down. And that’s a bigger data point for me than anything that happens next month. That’s undoable and I think that’s a tragedy that the United States needs to think and reflect long and hard on. Because there will be other Donald Trump; maybe not as crazy as him, maybe not as ignorant as him. But the Republican Party are well and truly capable of producing another far-right, pseudo-populist, nativist, racist politician.
RG: Well, uplifting as always, Mehdi.
MH: [Laughs.] Uplifting! Look at the polls. If you are of the camp that wants Joe Biden to win, and I would never tell you how to vote or who you should want as your President, but if you are of that camp — he’s still doing very well.
RG: This is true. Mehdi Hasan, thank you so much for joining us here on your podcast Deconstructed.
MH: Ryan. Thanks for having me back on the podcast and you’re doing a great job hosting it. I’m enjoying it.
RG: I appreciate that.
[Musical interlude.]
RG: That was Mehdi Hasan, and that’s our show.
Deconstructed is a production of First Look Media and The Intercept. Our producer is Zach Young. Our theme music was composed by Bart Warshaw. Betsy Reed is The Intercept’s editor in chief.
And I’m Ryan Grim, D.C. Bureau Chief of the Intercept. If you’d like to support our work, go to theintercept.com/give — your donation, no matter what the amount, makes a real difference.
If you haven’t already, please subscribe to the show so you can hear it every week. If you’re subscribed already, please do leave us a rating or review — it helps people find the show. And if you want to give us feedback, email us at Podcasts@theintercept.com. Thanks so much!
See you next week.


theintercept--2020-10-23--Links Between Sen. Dan Sullivan and Pebble Mine Are Deeper Than Previously Known

One of the powerhouse lobbying firms advocating on behalf of Alaska ’ s controversial Pebble Mine project has close ties to the company RPM International , which is partially owned by Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan , and run by Sullivan ’ s brother , Frank Sullivan .
The close relationship complicates the politics of an unfolding scandal for Sullivan , which rocked the state ’ s Senate race after audio emerged of Pebble Mine executives confidently claiming that Sullivan was privately supportive of the project but staying mum publicly until the election .
Sullivan responded by declaring his opposition to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in North America .
The mine , which is staunchly opposed by environmental groups , would sit smack dab in the middle of the world ’ s largest sockeye salmon fishery .
One of the top lobbying firms for Pebble Mine , Squire Patton Boggs , has close ties to Sullivan ’ s family business .
Squire Patton Boggs has received at least $ 980,000 in lobbying payments since 2018 from Pebble Limited Partnership to advocate for permitting of the mine .
Fred Nance , a top executive at Squire Patton Boggs , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Sullivan ’ s family company , meaning he has supervisory powers over Sullivan ’ s brother Frank , who is the company ’ s CEO .
By hiring Squire Patton Boggs , the Pebble Mine ’ s owners have entangled themselves not just inside the complexities of Alaska politics , but inside the business interests of the Sullivan family .
Judd Legum ’ s newsletter Popular Information has previously reported that executives from the mine partnership and their lobbyists had contributed $ 34,000 to the senator ’ s campaigns .
In addition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Squire Patton Boggs employees have delivered $ 15,500 for Sullivan ’ s campaigns — $ 10,300 of that since the mine hired the lobbying firm in 2018 .
As a senator , Sullivan remains enmeshed in his family ’ s company as a substantial shareholder ; federal financial disclosures show that he owns between $ 1 and $ 5 million in stock , and the family and the company have donated over $ 90,000 to his campaign and PAC since he won his first election in 2014 .
Sullivan , Nance , RPM @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to requests for comment .
Sullivan ’ s connections to the mine have dogged him in the last leg of the Senate race .
Sullivan had opposed the Obama EPA ’ s efforts to shelve the project and , until the recordings were released , had declined to oppose it .
Sullivan ’ s opponent , independent Al Gross , is making his opposition to the mine a marquee issue in the race , blanketing the state with ads .
FEC disclosures show that Gross has outraised Sullivan over 6-1 in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Environmental Investigation Agency published secretly recorded calls where the now-former CEO of the mine partnership said that they were hoping Sullivan would be able to “ ride out the election ” and stay mostly silent on the mine .
This was followed by Sullivan distancing himself from the project at a Zoom debate on October 13 ; Sullivan said , “ The Pebble Mine is dead , and I ’ m going to keep it that way.
” would be the largest in North America , with substantial copper and gold deposits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rare earth mineral that is a critical component of jet engines .
The environmental group Earthworks has reported that Phase 1 of the mining project , if approved , would eliminate at least 80 miles of streams and 3,500 acres of wetlands , necessitate a toxic pit lake filled with 61 billion gallons of mine water , and lead to the construction of a natural gas pipeline over Iliamna Lake , which is the largest freshwater lake in Alaska .
Squire Patton Boggs has been working for Pebble since 2018 , lobbying the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and the White House .
Other firms lobbying on behalf of the mine include Ballard Partners , the lobbying firm closest to the Trump administration , and former aides to Sen. Lisa Murkowski through their respective lobbying firms Windward Strategies and Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney .
On July 24 , the Army Corps of Engineers released an Environmental Impact Statement that declared that there would be little to no impact on the environment from the megaproject , a report the Natural Resources Defense Council said was an “ abomination.
” A month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said that it would not be permitting the project in the present form , and gave the mine ’ s partnership 90 days to assemble a proposal that would address “ unavoidable adverse impacts ” on the Bristol Bay ecosystem.The secret recording by environmental advocates showed that executives planned to press on regardless .
The parent company of the Pebble Limited Partnership , Northern Dynasty Minerals , saw its stock soar in the aftermath of the Army Corps ’ environmental impact statement .
After the Corps paused the permitting , the stock went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two times above the pre-statement price , indicating Wall Street ’ s confidence in the mine ’ s prospects .
RPM International , a Cleveland-based manufacturing company that makes sealants , coatings , and building materials , has also had its share of legal trouble since Frank Sullivan took over as chair and CEO in 2002 .
In 2013 , the firm paid $ 61 million to settle allegations that the firm had fraudulently billed the federal government for roofing contracts , also beginning in 2002 .
The investigation came out after a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The federal contracting violations spawned a separate federal investigation in September 2016 , wherein the SEC charged the firm and its vice president and general counsel Edward Moore with misleading investors — by not disclosing facts surrounding the federal contracting investigation in a timely manner to investors , in contravention to federal securities law .
Litigation between the SEC and RPM is ongoing .
( Moore and his wife have also donated to Sullivan ’ s campaigns . )
Cindy Schipani , a professor of business law at the University of Michigan , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nance ’ s independence as a director of RPM .
“ The way the courts look at independence is whether the director can make objective decisions , ” about the company whose board they sit on , Schipani said .
“ When there ’ s money at stake in their pockets , often objectivity is impaired .
Human self-interest is to be profiting themselves .
It ’ s those conflicts of interest that we worry about .
We want to make sure they can come into it objectively , otherwise they shouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want independent directors as a watchdog .
It only works if they ’ re not self interested , ” she said .

One of the powerhouse lobbying firms advocating on behalf of Alaska’s controversial Pebble Mine project has close ties to the company RPM International, which is partially owned by Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, and run by Sullivan’s brother, Frank Sullivan.
The close relationship complicates the politics of an unfolding scandal for Sullivan, which rocked the state’s Senate race after audio emerged of Pebble Mine executives confidently claiming that Sullivan was privately supportive of the project but staying mum publicly until the election. Sullivan responded by declaring his opposition to the proposal to create the largest mine in North America. The mine, which is staunchly opposed by environmental groups, would sit smack dab in the middle of the world’s largest sockeye salmon fishery.
One of the top lobbying firms for Pebble Mine, Squire Patton Boggs, has close ties to Sullivan’s family business. Squire Patton Boggs has received at least $980,000 in lobbying payments since 2018 from Pebble Limited Partnership to advocate for permitting of the mine. Fred Nance, a top executive at Squire Patton Boggs, is an independent director on the board of Sullivan’s family company, meaning he has supervisory powers over Sullivan’s brother Frank, who is the company’s CEO. By hiring Squire Patton Boggs, the Pebble Mine’s owners have entangled themselves not just inside the complexities of Alaska politics, but inside the business interests of the Sullivan family.
Judd Legum’s newsletter Popular Information has previously reported that executives from the mine partnership and their lobbyists had contributed $34,000 to the senator’s campaigns. In addition to that, Nance and two other Squire Patton Boggs employees have delivered $15,500 for Sullivan’s campaigns — $10,300 of that since the mine hired the lobbying firm in 2018. As a senator, Sullivan remains enmeshed in his family’s company as a substantial shareholder; federal financial disclosures show that he owns between $1 and $5 million in stock, and the family and the company have donated over $90,000 to his campaign and PAC since he won his first election in 2014.
Sullivan, Nance, RPM, and Squire Patton Boggs did not respond to requests for comment.
Sullivan’s connections to the mine have dogged him in the last leg of the Senate race. Sullivan had opposed the Obama EPA’s efforts to shelve the project and, until the recordings were released, had declined to oppose it. Sullivan’s opponent, independent Al Gross, is making his opposition to the mine a marquee issue in the race, blanketing the state with ads. FEC disclosures show that Gross has outraised Sullivan over 6-1 in the most recent quarter.
In September, the Environmental Investigation Agency published secretly recorded calls where the now-former CEO of the mine partnership said that they were hoping Sullivan would be able to “ride out the election” and stay mostly silent on the mine. This was followed by Sullivan distancing himself from the project at a Zoom debate on October 13; Sullivan said, “The Pebble Mine is dead, and I’m going to keep it that way.”
The Pebble Partnership exploration camp pictured on Sept. 4, 2019, marks the proposed Pebble Mine site at the headwaters of Bristol Bay in southwest Alaska. Photo: Alex Milan Tracy/Sipa/AP
Pebble Mine would be the largest in North America, with substantial copper and gold deposits, as well as rhenium, a rare earth mineral that is a critical component of jet engines. The environmental group Earthworks has reported that Phase 1 of the mining project, if approved, would eliminate at least 80 miles of streams and 3,500 acres of wetlands, necessitate a toxic pit lake filled with 61 billion gallons of mine water, and lead to the construction of a natural gas pipeline over Iliamna Lake, which is the largest freshwater lake in Alaska.
Squire Patton Boggs has been working for Pebble since 2018, lobbying the EPA, the House, the Senate, and the White House. Other firms lobbying on behalf of the mine include Ballard Partners, the lobbying firm closest to the Trump administration, and former aides to Sen. Lisa Murkowski through their respective lobbying firms Windward Strategies and Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney.
On July 24, the Army Corps of Engineers released an Environmental Impact Statement that declared that there would be little to no impact on the environment from the megaproject, a report the Natural Resources Defense Council said was an “abomination.” A month later, the Army Corps of Engineers said that it would not be permitting the project in the present form, and gave the mine’s partnership 90 days to assemble a proposal that would address “unavoidable adverse impacts” on the Bristol Bay ecosystem.The secret recording by environmental advocates showed that executives planned to press on regardless.
The parent company of the Pebble Limited Partnership, Northern Dynasty Minerals, saw its stock soar in the aftermath of the Army Corps’ environmental impact statement. After the Corps paused the permitting, the stock went down but is still trading at about two times above the pre-statement price, indicating Wall Street’s confidence in the mine’s prospects.
RPM International, a Cleveland-based manufacturing company that makes sealants, coatings, and building materials, has also had its share of legal trouble since Frank Sullivan took over as chair and CEO in 2002. In 2013, the firm paid $61 million to settle allegations that the firm had fraudulently billed the federal government for roofing contracts, also beginning in 2002. The investigation came out after a former RPM executive became a whistleblower.
The federal contracting violations spawned a separate federal investigation in September 2016, wherein the SEC charged the firm and its vice president and general counsel Edward Moore with misleading investors — by not disclosing facts surrounding the federal contracting investigation in a timely manner to investors, in contravention to federal securities law. Litigation between the SEC and RPM is ongoing. (Moore and his wife have also donated to Sullivan’s campaigns.)
Cindy Schipani, a professor of business law at the University of Michigan, said that the arrangement raises questions about Nance’s independence as a director of RPM. “The way the courts look at independence is whether the director can make objective decisions,” about the company whose board they sit on, Schipani said.
“When there’s money at stake in their pockets, often objectivity is impaired. Human self-interest is to be profiting themselves. It’s those conflicts of interest that we worry about. We want to make sure they can come into it objectively, otherwise they shouldn’t be classified as independent. We want independent directors as a watchdog. It only works if they’re not self interested,” she said.


theintercept--2020-10-24--Trump's Pathetic Attempt to Get Netanyahu to Attack Biden Falls Flat

As the Israeli prime minister began , “ Well , Mr. President , one thing I can tell you , is , um… ” Trump looked up at the reporters in the room with expectation and a self-satisfied grin .
His expression changed , however , when Netanyahu concluded , “ we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America , and we appreciate what you ’ ve done enormously.
” But Netanyahu , well aware that he could soon be on the phone with a President Biden instead , failed to deliver the partisan hit requested of him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to announce the deal , was recorded by reporters .
“ Do you think Sleepy Joe could have made this deal , Bibi , Sleepy Joe ?
” Trump said , inviting Netanyahu to join him in insulting the former vice president he currently trails in the polls .
“ Do you think he would ’ ve made this deal ?
Somehow , I don ’ t think so , ” Trump added .
Trump ’ s failed attempt to get Netanyahu to do him a “ favor though ” came as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ convinced Sudan to move toward normalizing relations with Israel .
In return , Sudan got financial incentives and a promise that it would be removed from an American list of state sponsors of terrorism — a remarkable turnaround for the country that once harbored Osama bin Laden .
Ten months after he was impeached for secretly trying to coerce a foreign leader into opening a sham investigation of Joe Biden , President Donald Trump produced a public encore on Friday .
Trump tried and failed to get Israel ’ s prime minister , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an Oval Office conference call .
Trump : “ Do you think Sleepy Joe could have made this deal , Bibi , Sleepy Joe ?
” Israeli PM Netanyahu : `` Uh ... well ... Mr. President , one thing I can tell you is we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America . ''
pic.twitter.com/LU02tEOXtK Trump ’ s own aides appeared to be aware of how embarrassing it was for him that Netanyahu refused to take up his invitation to attack Biden , because they edited out his question when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ minister ’ s answer on the president ’ s official YouTube channel .
“ This will be registered in the book , in history books , ” Netanyahu , who shares a campaign pollster with Trump , added in an apparent effort to boost Trump ’ s ego .
“ History registers who did what , I think it does , ” he said .
Earlier in the conference call , which also included Sudan ’ s civilian and military leaders , Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an agreement “ to make peace , ” before noting that he was not really sure that they had ever fought a war .
“ They ’ ve essentially been at war with Israel for a long time , ” the president said .
“ I don ’ t know if it was fighting , I don ’ t know that — but probably there ’ s been a little bit.
” Sudan has blamed Israel for a series of air strikes carried out in its territory , against suspected arms convoys @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In 1967 , following Israel ’ s capture of the West Bank , East Jerusalem , Gaza and the Golan Heights that summer , Sudan , a majority Arab country , hosted an Arab League conference at which eight Arab nations approved a declaration of what were known as “ The Three No ’ s , ” pledging that there would be no peace with Israel , no recognition of Israel , and no negotiations .
help , Israel has sought to strike deals with Arab nations to normalize relations without agreeing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seized in 1967 , or granting full rights to the Palestinians who live there .
Palestinian and Israeli commentators observed on Friday that agreements like the one with Sudan — which remove pressure from Israel to grant independence or political rights to the captive Palestinian population it rules — were in some sense the opposite of a peace deal .
“ To be clear , ” Noura Erakat , a Palestinian-American legal scholar , observed on Twitter , “ Sudan ’ s military is normalizing relations [ with ] Israel ” despite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is the violence and anti-democratic future promised by the U.S. and Israel.
” “ Hearing people celebrate ‘ peace in the Middle East ’ just helps clarify how dangerous this moment is , ” the Israeli journalist Haggai Matar wrote on Twitter .
“ Trump and Netanyahu are peddling the myth of an end to the Israeli-Arab conflict , when in fact they ’ re cementing Israeli apartheid and the oppression of millions of Palestinians.
” He added , “ These peace deals — with UAE , Bahrain and now Sudan ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intentionally taking away some of the Palestinians ’ last bargaining chips , and the last reasons for Israelis to support an end to occupation .
These are sad times for those who support a just peace.
” As the Israeli diplomatic correspondent Barak Ravid noted , the agreement could clear the way for Israel to deport close to 20,000 Sudanese asylum seekers from Israel .
“ Until today Israel wasn ’ t able to return them to Sudan legally because of the state of belligerence between the countries and the fear they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Ravid explained .
Ravid also reported that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas described the agreement as “ another stab in the back.
” “ The path to a comprehensive and just peace must lead to an end to the Israeli occupation of the land of the State of Palestine , and the achievement of independence for the Palestinian people in their state with East Jerusalem as its capital on the 1967 borders , ” a statement from the Palestinian president ’ s office said .

Ten months after he was impeached for secretly trying to coerce a foreign leader into opening a sham investigation of Joe Biden, President Donald Trump produced a public encore on Friday. Trump tried and failed to get Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to criticize Biden during an Oval Office conference call.
Trump’s failed attempt to get Netanyahu to do him a “favor though” came as the president announced that his administration had convinced Sudan to move toward normalizing relations with Israel. In return, Sudan got financial incentives and a promise that it would be removed from an American list of state sponsors of terrorism — a remarkable turnaround for the country that once harbored Osama bin Laden.
Trump’s call with Netanyahu, to announce the deal, was recorded by reporters. “Do you think Sleepy Joe could have made this deal, Bibi, Sleepy Joe?” Trump said, inviting Netanyahu to join him in insulting the former vice president he currently trails in the polls. “Do you think he would’ve made this deal? Somehow, I don’t think so,” Trump added.
But Netanyahu, well aware that he could soon be on the phone with a President Biden instead, failed to deliver the partisan hit requested of him.
As the Israeli prime minister began, “Well, Mr. President, one thing I can tell you, is, um…” Trump looked up at the reporters in the room with expectation and a self-satisfied grin. His expression changed, however, when Netanyahu concluded, “we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America, and we appreciate what you’ve done enormously.”
Trump: “Do you think Sleepy Joe could have made this deal, Bibi, Sleepy Joe?” Israeli PM Netanyahu: "Uh … well … Mr. President, one thing I can tell you is we appreciate the help for peace from anyone in America." pic.twitter.com/LU02tEOXtK — The Recount (@therecount) October 23, 2020
“Yep,” a suddenly glum Trump responded.
“This will be registered in the book, in history books,” Netanyahu, who shares a campaign pollster with Trump, added in an apparent effort to boost Trump’s ego. “History registers who did what, I think it does,” he said.
Trump’s own aides appeared to be aware of how embarrassing it was for him that Netanyahu refused to take up his invitation to attack Biden, because they edited out his question when they posted video of the Israeli prime minister’s answer on the president’s official YouTube channel.
Earlier in the conference call, which also included Sudan’s civilian and military leaders, Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, Trump had described the deal between those nations as an agreement “to make peace,” before noting that he was not really sure that they had ever fought a war. “They’ve essentially been at war with Israel for a long time,” the president said. “I don’t know if it was fighting, I don’t know that — but probably there’s been a little bit.”
Sudan has blamed Israel for a series of air strikes carried out in its territory, against suspected arms convoys and at least one weapons factory.
In 1967, following Israel’s capture of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, Gaza and the Golan Heights that summer, Sudan, a majority Arab country, hosted an Arab League conference at which eight Arab nations approved a declaration of what were known as “The Three No’s,” pledging that there would be no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations.
With Trump’s help, Israel has sought to strike deals with Arab nations to normalize relations without agreeing to end its occupation of the territory it seized in 1967, or granting full rights to the Palestinians who live there.
Palestinian and Israeli commentators observed on Friday that agreements like the one with Sudan — which remove pressure from Israel to grant independence or political rights to the captive Palestinian population it rules — were in some sense the opposite of a peace deal.
“To be clear,” Noura Erakat, a Palestinian-American legal scholar, observed on Twitter, “Sudan’s military is normalizing relations [with] Israel” despite the opposition of its civilian government. “This is the violence and anti-democratic future promised by the U.S. and Israel.”
“Hearing people celebrate ‘peace in the Middle East’ just helps clarify how dangerous this moment is,” the Israeli journalist Haggai Matar wrote on Twitter. “Trump and Netanyahu are peddling the myth of an end to the Israeli-Arab conflict, when in fact they’re cementing Israeli apartheid and the oppression of millions of Palestinians.” He added, “These peace deals — with UAE, Bahrain and now Sudan (more likely to follow) — are intentionally taking away some of the Palestinians’ last bargaining chips, and the last reasons for Israelis to support an end to occupation. These are sad times for those who support a just peace.”
As the Israeli diplomatic correspondent Barak Ravid noted, the agreement could clear the way for Israel to deport close to 20,000 Sudanese asylum seekers from Israel. “Until today Israel wasn’t able to return them to Sudan legally because of the state of belligerence between the countries and the fear they would be sent to jail or be executed,” Ravid explained.
Ravid also reported that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas described the agreement as “another stab in the back.”
“The path to a comprehensive and just peace must lead to an end to the Israeli occupation of the land of the State of Palestine, and the achievement of independence for the Palestinian people in their state with East Jerusalem as its capital on the 1967 borders,” a statement from the Palestinian president’s office said.