theintercept--2020-05-14--Federal Whistleblower Rick Bright Tells Congress How Trump Officials Bungled Coronavirus Preparation

Federal Whistleblower Rick Bright Tells Congress How Trump Officials Bungled Coronavirus Preparations

Rick Bright testified before a House subcommittee on Thursday about the Trump administration ’ s mismanagement of the coronavirus crisis .
Speaking for almost four hours , Bright , who was ousted as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority in April , provided a stinging , detailed account of President Donald Trump and Department of Health and Human Services officials ’ failures to respond to the looming pandemic in January and February Just hours after the president smeared him on Twitter as a disgruntled employee who “ should no longer be working for our government , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce about numerous occasions in which higher-ups had failed to heed his urgent calls for personal protective equipment , medical supplies , and samples of the virus necessary for beginning work on vaccines and therapeutics .
Those delays cost lives , said Bright , who offered the grim warning that , without better planning , “ 2020 will be darkest winter in modern history.
” In a heated hearing , Bright , who filed a whistleblower complaint earlier this month , also provided new details @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would have made an unproven coronavirus treatment available without medical supervision .
On March 23 , he said , he received a directive from the office of the Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar to create an expanded access program that would have provided broad access to the drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine .
The program would have used an app to give people access to the potentially dangerous drugs — even those without confirmed coronavirus infections , Bright testified .
He said his insistence that the regimen to be scientifically evaluated before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ superiors and led him to be “ involuntarily transferred ” to a job at the National Institutes of Health .
Bright said , “ That , I believe , was the straw that broke the camel ’ s back and escalated my removal.
” The testimony underscored Bright ’ s claim that his direct boss , the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Robert Kadlec and others at Health and Human Services resisted his attempts to address the imminent shortage of N95 masks in January and February , as coronavirus infections were spreading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bright received a series of increasingly desperate emails from Mike Bowen , co-owner of Prestige Ameritech , the country ’ s biggest manufacturer of the masks that are used to protect health care workers from infectious diseases .
“ I ’ ll never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our N95 supply was completely decimated , ” Bright testified .
“ He said , ‘ We ’ re in deep shit .
The world is .
And we need to act.
’ And I pushed that forward to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got no response .
From that moment , I knew that we were going to have a crisis.
” “ We should have been doing everything possible , placing orders early , ramping up supply .
It should have been a high priority , ” Bright went on .
Instead , “ I was met with indifference , people saying they were either too busy , or they didn ’ t have a plan , or they didn ’ t know who was responsible.
” Bright added , “ There were a number @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bright testified that , rather than responding , his superiors told him that his urgent pleas “ were causing a commotion and I was removed from those meetings.
” Azar , as well as Kadlec and Peter Navarro , a White House official who Bright said helped him call attention to the coronavirus crisis , were invited to testify at the hearing but declined .
the inadequate supply of surgical masks has already cost lives , he warned that many more health care workers still face an increased risk of Covid-19 infection because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on lower quality masks .
“ Our doctors and nurses in the hospital today are wearing N95 masks from other countries that are not providing the sufficient protection , ” Bright said .
After Bright described the flawed supply chain that led to the N95 fiasco , Rep. Frank Pallone , D-N.J. , expressed fear that similar problems might befall other critical products .
“ I ’ m afraid the same thing is going to happen with vaccines , ” said Pallone .
“ Should I be concerned ?
” Bright , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ served in disaster preparedness for decades , also alerted the lawmakers to other shortages of supplies critical for dealing with the ongoing emergency , including swabs , testing reagents , and syringes .
Although Bright began raising the alarm about the lack of syringes back in January , he told lawmakers that they weren ’ t ordered until May 1 and that another order “ was placed today.
” In his whistleblower report , Bright made the case that Kadlec had been pressuring him to award contracts to politically connected companies , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner .
Among the drugs that Bright said Kadlec and a pharmaceutical industry consultant were pushing BARDA to purchase was one that had not undergone safety testing in humans .
Bright argued that his removal from the agency was retaliation for his resistance both to the widespread cronyism and the pressures around chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine .
Democrats on the committee lavishly praised Bright for speaking out about the government ineptitude and corruption , thanking him for his courage and calling him the “ finest ambassador in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ subcommittee chair Rep. Anna Eshoo , D-Calif. , put it .
For his part , Bright embraced the role .
He said , “ Americans need to be told the truth.
” Yet several Republicans dismissed Bright as politically motivated and questioned the timing of the hearing , which was held before the Office of Special Counsel completed its investigation of Bright ’ s complaint .
Rep. Richard Hudson , R-N.C. , accused him of “ undermining the administration during a national and global crisis.
” In his own testimony , Prestige Ameritech @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bright and others at BARDA didn ’ t act years earlier to address the preventable crisis , which Bowen said his company had identified in 2006 .
While Bowen confirmed that he sent the emails to Bright about the diversion of foreign-made masks from the U.S. and the immediate need to ramp up domestic production during January and February , he described the missives as “ merely the latest of 13 years of emails I sent to BARDA in my effort to get HHS to understand that the U.S. mask supply was destined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been alerting staff at BARDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to problems with the nation ’ s mask supply since at least 2007 .
Bright , who took medical leave because of hypertension following his whistleblower complaint , has worked at BARDA since 2010 and served as its director since 2016 .
According to Bowen , the production of surgical masks largely shifted abroad in 2004 , leaving the domestic mask supply “ subject to diversion by foreign governments.
” Prestige Ameritech alerted BARDA to the problem in 2007 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outbreak in 2009 , bought an abandoned factory and tripled its workforce so it could increase its production of N95 masks .
But , after the crisis subsided , hospitals returned to buying cheaper , foreign-made masks , and the company was forced to reduce its production and lay off 150 workers , Bowen said .
In January , Bowen offered to once again use that factory to produce masks .
“ Reactivating these machines would be very difficult and very expensive but could be achieved in a dire situation and with government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on January 22 , just after the first confirmed case of Covid-19 in the U.S. was announced .
In 2014 , his company joined with other mask manufacturers to form the Secure Mask Supply Association , which attempted to warn about the dangers of not producing enough surgical masks in the U.S .
The group worked with Bright and two of his agency colleagues at the time , who , according to Bowen , offered to help get the word out about the lack of domestic N95 production capacity — with certain limitations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ express their concerns about the mask supply to anyone that I could get to call them — anyone except reporters , ” Bowen wrote .
Bright ’ s future is unclear .
While the Office of Special Counsel , which is investigating his complaint , recommended that he remain at BARDA , Bright said that he was in discussion with NIH about starting work there .
In a statement to The Intercept , Bright ’ s lawyers said , “ Rather than investigating Dr.
Bright ’ s serious allegations of wrongdoing , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a preliminary matter have merit , HHS leadership has decided to lodge baseless allegations against him in an effort to distract attention from the important issues that should be addressed to save American lives .
”

Federal whistleblower Rick Bright testified before a House subcommittee on Thursday about the Trump administration’s mismanagement of the coronavirus crisis. Speaking for almost four hours, Bright, who was ousted as director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority in April, provided a stinging, detailed account of President Donald Trump and Department of Health and Human Services officials’ failures to respond to the looming pandemic in January and February
Just hours after the president smeared him on Twitter as a disgruntled employee who “should no longer be working for our government,” Bright told the members of the health subcommittee of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce about numerous occasions in which higher-ups had failed to heed his urgent calls for personal protective equipment, medical supplies, and samples of the virus necessary for beginning work on vaccines and therapeutics.
Those delays cost lives, said Bright, who offered the grim warning that, without better planning, “2020 will be darkest winter in modern history.”
In a heated hearing, Bright, who filed a whistleblower complaint earlier this month, also provided new details about a planned Trump administration program that would have made an unproven coronavirus treatment available without medical supervision. On March 23, he said, he received a directive from the office of the Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar to create an expanded access program that would have provided broad access to the drugs chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.
The program would have used an app to give people access to the potentially dangerous drugs — even those without confirmed coronavirus infections, Bright testified. He said his insistence that the regimen to be scientifically evaluated before it was made widely available angered his superiors and led him to be “involuntarily transferred” to a job at the National Institutes of Health.
Bright said, “That, I believe, was the straw that broke the camel’s back and escalated my removal.”
The testimony underscored Bright’s claim that his direct boss, the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Robert Kadlec and others at Health and Human Services resisted his attempts to address the imminent shortage of N95 masks in January and February, as coronavirus infections were spreading throughout the U.S.
“We should have been doing everything possible, placing orders early, ramping up supply. It should have been a high priority.”
During that period, Bright received a series of increasingly desperate emails from Mike Bowen, co-owner of Prestige Ameritech, the country’s biggest manufacturer of the masks that are used to protect health care workers from infectious diseases.
“I’ll never forget the emails I received from Mike Bowen indicating that our N95 supply was completely decimated,” Bright testified. “He said, ‘We’re in deep shit. The world is. And we need to act.’ And I pushed that forward to the highest levels I could at HHS and got no response. From that moment, I knew that we were going to have a crisis.”
“We should have been doing everything possible, placing orders early, ramping up supply. It should have been a high priority,” Bright went on. Instead, “I was met with indifference, people saying they were either too busy, or they didn’t have a plan, or they didn’t know who was responsible.” Bright added, “There were a number of excuses but never any action.”
Bright testified that, rather than responding, his superiors told him that his urgent pleas “were causing a commotion and I was removed from those meetings.”
Azar, as well as Kadlec and Peter Navarro, a White House official who Bright said helped him call attention to the coronavirus crisis, were invited to testify at the hearing but declined.
While Bright said the inadequate supply of surgical masks has already cost lives, he warned that many more health care workers still face an increased risk of Covid-19 infection because of ongoing shortages and the resulting reliance on lower quality masks. “Our doctors and nurses in the hospital today are wearing N95 masks from other countries that are not providing the sufficient protection,” Bright said.
After Bright described the flawed supply chain that led to the N95 fiasco, Rep. Frank Pallone, D-N.J., expressed fear that similar problems might befall other critical products.
“I’m afraid the same thing is going to happen with vaccines,” said Pallone. “Should I be concerned?”
“Absolutely, sir,” Bright responded.
Bright, who has a Ph.D. in virology and has served in disaster preparedness for decades, also alerted the lawmakers to other shortages of supplies critical for dealing with the ongoing emergency, including swabs, testing reagents, and syringes. Although Bright began raising the alarm about the lack of syringes back in January, he told lawmakers that they weren’t ordered until May 1 and that another order “was placed today.”
In his whistleblower report, Bright made the case that Kadlec had been pressuring him to award contracts to politically connected companies, including one with ties to Trump’s son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner. Among the drugs that Bright said Kadlec and a pharmaceutical industry consultant were pushing BARDA to purchase was one that had not undergone safety testing in humans. Bright argued that his removal from the agency was retaliation for his resistance both to the widespread cronyism and the pressures around chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine.
Democrats on the committee lavishly praised Bright for speaking out about the government ineptitude and corruption, thanking him for his courage and calling him the “finest ambassador in our country for scientists,” as subcommittee chair Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., put it.
For his part, Bright embraced the role. He said, “Americans need to be told the truth.”
Yet several Republicans dismissed Bright as politically motivated and questioned the timing of the hearing, which was held before the Office of Special Counsel completed its investigation of Bright’s complaint. Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., accused him of “undermining the administration during a national and global crisis.”
In his own testimony, Prestige Ameritech’s Bowen raised questions about why Bright and others at BARDA didn’t act years earlier to address the preventable crisis, which Bowen said his company had identified in 2006.
While Bowen confirmed that he sent the emails to Bright about the diversion of foreign-made masks from the U.S. and the immediate need to ramp up domestic production during January and February, he described the missives as “merely the latest of 13 years of emails I sent to BARDA in my effort to get HHS to understand that the U.S. mask supply was destined for failure.”
Bowen testified that he had been alerting staff at BARDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to problems with the nation’s mask supply since at least 2007. Bright, who took medical leave because of hypertension following his whistleblower complaint, has worked at BARDA since 2010 and served as its director since 2016.
Read Our Complete Coverage The Coronavirus Crisis
According to Bowen, the production of surgical masks largely shifted abroad in 2004, leaving the domestic mask supply “subject to diversion by foreign governments.” Prestige Ameritech alerted BARDA to the problem in 2007 and, in response to the H1N1 outbreak in 2009, bought an abandoned factory and tripled its workforce so it could increase its production of N95 masks. But, after the crisis subsided, hospitals returned to buying cheaper, foreign-made masks, and the company was forced to reduce its production and lay off 150 workers, Bowen said.
In January, Bowen offered to once again use that factory to produce masks. “Reactivating these machines would be very difficult and very expensive but could be achieved in a dire situation and with government help,” he wrote to Bright on January 22, just after the first confirmed case of Covid-19 in the U.S. was announced.
“They said that they would express their concerns about the mask supply to anyone that I could get to call them – anyone except reporters.”
In 2014, his company joined with other mask manufacturers to form the Secure Mask Supply Association, which attempted to warn about the dangers of not producing enough surgical masks in the U.S. The group worked with Bright and two of his agency colleagues at the time, who, according to Bowen, offered to help get the word out about the lack of domestic N95 production capacity — with certain limitations.
“They said that they would express their concerns about the mask supply to anyone that I could get to call them — anyone except reporters,” Bowen wrote.
Bright’s future is unclear. While the Office of Special Counsel, which is investigating his complaint, recommended that he remain at BARDA, Bright said that he was in discussion with NIH about starting work there.
In a statement to The Intercept, Bright’s lawyers said, “Rather than investigating Dr. Bright’s serious allegations of wrongdoing, which the Office of Special Counsel has determined as a preliminary matter have merit, HHS leadership has decided to lodge baseless allegations against him in an effort to distract attention from the important issues that should be addressed to save American lives.”


theintercept--2020-05-14--The Troubling History of the Georgia Bureau Now Investigating the Ahmaud Arbery Cover-Up

Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced last week that it would be probing the Glynn County Police Department ’ s dismissal of the killing of Ahmaud Arbery , some people breathed a sigh of relief .
It was a welcome development after the lynching of a 25-year-old black man , whose white killers had been walking free for 74 days — even though the entire incident was caught on tape .
But those familiar with the GBI responded with warranted skepticism .
Sure , it was a step in the right direction .
But at that point , almost anything would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ officials for over two months had found reasons not to arrest either of the men — Gregory and Travis McMichael — who chased and killed Arbery while he was jogging .
After all , one was their former colleague .
The other , his son .
Hinesville District Attorney Tom Durden , the third prosecutor to take on the case , formally requested the GBI ’ s assistance on May 5 .
It was a critical moment : The disturbing graphic video of Arbery ’ s death had been broadcast on national television @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revelations that the Glynn County Police Department , where Gregory McMichael once worked , and local district attorneys had gone to great lengths to smear Arbery ’ s name and protect his killers .
The public outcry that followed is the reason the McMichaels were arrested at all .
The GBI — which is generally revered throughout the state and is often brought in to investigate police-involved shootings of current or former officers , like Gregory McMichael , to get around conflicts of interest — has repeatedly been accused of mishandling such investigations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agency has botched cases in which the investigating officers appeared to be motivated by racism , leading to wrongful convictions .
The agency has also repeatedly failed to hold accountable and break up powerful networks of officers who broke laws in the course of their work — causing and covering up overwhelming violence .
In Georgia , where the Klu Klux Klan once infiltrated every level of law enforcement , racism can play a role in violent crimes and the way they are investigated .
Arbery ’ s case is no different : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mobs that routinely chased , tortured , and murdered black Americans from the time of slavery through the 1960s .
Between 1877 and 1950 , more than 4,000 black people in the U.S. — including 589 people in Georgia — were killed in lynchings .
The KKK ’ s stranglehold over Georgia ’ s law enforcement apparatus decades ago laid the groundwork for a historically deadly relationship between the cops , white people , and black people .
The white supremacist underpinnings of U.S. law enforcement continue to echo throughout the country , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shootings and others murders that have taken place since Arbery was killed — and are being covered up and drowned out during the ongoing pandemic .
Some lawyers in the state are optimistic that the GBI ’ s new director , former Cobb County DA and Chief Magistrate Judge Vic Reynolds , will give the case the attention it deserves .
Still , a closer look at the agency ’ s record raises questions about whether it can be trusted to do so .
“ There are communities that absolutely are skeptical about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement agency is going to adequately investigate its law enforcement brethren , ” Jon Rapping , a professor and director of the criminal justice certificate program at Atlanta ’ s John Marshall Law School , told The Intercept .
“ That suspicion undoubtedly is going to create a lot of skepticism about whether the GBI is going to do justice in this case.
” The history of the GBI , established in 1937 , is interwoven with the history of the Ku Klux Klan , which was a terrorizing force in Georgia in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earliest directors of the GBI , who later served as an Atlanta police officer , Sam Roper , was a local Klan leader when he took over the GBI after former Georgia Gov .
Gene Talmadge won another reelection in 1946 .
Roper , whose links to the agency have been all but wiped from public records , later recruited Klan members into his police department , Frederick Allen wrote in the 1996 book , “ Atlanta Rising.
” Roper campaigned in support of Talmadge ’ s 1946 reelection and planned to install @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and pay him $ 125 a month to ‘ assist ’ the local sheriff ” after Talmadge won , Allen wrote .
Roper left the GBI shortly afterward and became an Imperial Wizard of the KKK in 1949 .
Stetson Kennedy , a human rights activist famous for infiltrating the Klan in the 1940s , wrote in his 1990 book that when Klan leader David Duke asked him who was “ running the Klan now , ” he told Duke that it was the GBI ’ s former director , Roper .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Duke said .
Over the years , including in one unsolved 1946 lynching case currently under plans for appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court , the GBI and other Georgia law enforcement agencies have been accused of improperly handling investigations , including those related to Klan-linked killings .
In more recent history , the agency has failed to hold police accountable for deadly violence — or for detaining , arresting , and extrajudicially killing people , many of whom were bystanders .
( Just last year , the GBI investigated 84 cases of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The agency does not track officers who were disciplined or charged in those cases . )
In two recent cases that cost local governments over $ 3 million in settlements , the GBI failed to adequately investigate a narcotics task force that conducted a violent 2014 raid that put an infant in a burn unit under a medically induced coma , and killed a reverend in 2009 .
In both cases , the GBI cleared agents of wrongdoing , even blaming the reverend for his own killing .
In the case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the time denied that the local task force had approved — the agency , a former district attorney , and a grand jury failed to find “ what the feds found — that this entire raid was based on a series of lies , ” wrote Washington Post columnist Radley Balko .
In the case of the reverend , in which the GBI investigated and cleared agents of wrongdoing and said they followed appropriate procedures , his family eventually won a $ 2.3 million settlement against the officer who shot him .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusion : “ The Georgia Bureau of Investigation probably shouldn ’ t be trusted to conduct unbiased , thorough investigations of other law enforcement officers.
” The GBI has a mixed record in cases involving wrongful convictions , sometimes failing to pursue obvious leads or otherwise mishandling an investigation .
In 1979 , testimony from a GBI agent helped send John White to prison for a rape , burglary , and robbery that he did not commit .
Later , GBI helped with White ’ s exoneration ; he was released in 2007 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a life sentence .
In the case of Kerry Robinson , who was released in January on a wrongful conviction after serving close to 18 years of a 20-year sentence , a GBI DNA analyst provided “ inaccurate and overstated testimony , ” according to the Georgia Innocence Project .
Perhaps the most troubling of recent examples is the 1999 wrongful indictment of Devonia Inman , whose case is the subject of a podcast and a series of articles by The Intercept ’ s Liliana Segura and Jordan Smith .
Inman has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 23rd birthday for the murder of Donna Brown , even though the GBI has matched DNA found at the scene of the crime to another man .
The person whose DNA the GBI identified went on to kill at least two other people and is currently serving a federal life sentence without parole .
Like with Arbery , the GBI ’ s involvement in Inman ’ s case was initially seen as a step in the right direction .
In the early 2000s , the GBI was ahead of local police regarding access @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” took over cases in South Georgia ’ s rural towns , The Intercept reported .
Inman ’ s is “ a story about racism , bad policing , and people who looked the other way , ” Segura and Smith say in the “ Murderville ” podcast .
Much of the same can be said of Arbery ’ s .
The GBI entered Arbery ’ s case after Brunswick-area police dismissed it , and one prosecutor deemed the killing “ perfectly legal.
” Having reviewed the tape , Waycross Judicial Circuit District @ @ @ @ @ @ @ killing told the first prosecuting attorney ’ s office that he thought it was justified , AJC reported .
The two district attorneys , including Brunswick DA Jackie Johnson , recused themselves from the case — McMichael had worked under Johnson ’ s direction with Barnhill ’ s son to prosecute Arbery two years ago .
In a widely circulated letter from April 1 to the Glynn County police captain , Barnhill said he saw no grounds to arrest the McMichaels , that Arbery was “ aggressive ” and capable of the crime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not strangers to the local criminal justice system , ” using the deceased ’ s mental health and a previous conviction to paint that picture .
Michael Mears , an associate professor at Atlanta ’ s John Marshall Law School , said more scrutiny should be put on both prosecutors , particularly Johnson , who has protected violent police officers in other cases .
The attempts to smear Arbery continued after the video of his killing was released .
When one video showed Arbery at a home under construction in the neighborhood , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it in an attempt to support the McMichaels ’ s claim that they believed Arbery was a suspect in a string of burglaries .
Those looking to justify his killing used the opportunity to try to poke holes in the shooting video .
Georgia criminal defense attorneys are approaching the GBI ’ s involvement in the Arbery case with cautious optimism , drawing contrasts to its controversial past and pointing to Vic Reynolds , the agency ’ s new director , who has made public assurances that the investigation , and the organization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When asked why people should trust the GBI to hold its own accountable in this case , and what the agency has done recently to combat suspicion given its record in cases detailed above , Nelly Miles , a GBI spokesperson , pointed to Reynolds ’ s May 9 press conference , where he recounted how the agency moved swiftly to arrest the McMichaels and said he understood concerns from the community and across the country as to whether others would be charged .
“ I will tell you that this case @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Reynolds said .
Another factor differentiating the Arbery case from GBI ’ s usual docket , two lawyers told The Intercept , is that the agency is tasked with holding accountable the network of people who covered up and dismissed Arbery ’ s killing , not just those who actually carried it out .
“ I think everyone was relieved to see the GBI get involved , ” said criminal defense attorney Page Pate , “ just because they didn ’ t have direct relationships with the potential suspects in the case.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Arbery ’ s killing comes against the backdrop of a long and dark history violence against black people in Georgia — including decades-old lynchings that remain unsolved .
A 1946 case involving a summer ambush and murder of two black couples , Mae and George Dorsey , and Roger and Dorothy Malcom , who were shot more than 60 times , their bodies further mutilated after being left at an unsecured crime scene , is one example .
No one was ever prosecuted for the lynching , which the GBI and FBI @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who was 10 years old at the time said a Georgia police officer participated in the killing , and that he saw a police patrol car at the bridge when it happened , the AJC reported in 2017 .
Investigators never verified his claim — even as the FBI convened a 16-day grand jury and conducted 2,790 interviews .
Journalist Anthony Pitch in 2016 wrote an exhaustive book on the case , “ The Last Lynching : How a Gruesome Mass Murder Rocked a Small Georgia Town , ” replete with examples of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who testified before them .
( 1946 was also the first year that black people could vote in Georgia ’ s Democratic gubernatorial primary .
Maceo Snipes was the only black person to vote that day in his district , and the first ever in Taylor County .
The next day , men thought to be members of the Klu Klux Klan found him at his grandfather ’ s farmhouse and shot him .
His shooter was acquitted on claims of self-defense , and the federal investigation was closed in 2010 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a federal court ruled that the records in the case must remain under seal .
The attorney on the case , who took it up at Pitch ’ s request , is planning to appeal it to the U.S. Supreme Court .
The legal system at the time made it fairly easy for lynchings to continue unpunished .
In 1938 , eight years before the lynching that Pitch would later describe as Georgia ’ s last , the state ’ s two Democratic senators successfully tanked a federal anti-lynching bill that , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sen. Richard Russell , a former governor who had also stymied an earlier version of the bill , said the proposal was a top priority of the Communist agenda , lynching was on its way out , and that the law would portray an image to the world that Southerners were “ a clan of barbarians , ” Pitch wrote in his book .
More than 80 years later , even as public consciousness has grown around state-sanctioned anti-black violence , Congress continues to debate anti-lynching measures .
Largely symbolic , the bills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rights violation and subsequent penalties for lynching .
One passed the Senate on a voice vote early last year , and another passed the House in February .
Still , little has been done to hold perpetrators of racist violence accountable .
Even in highly publicized cases of killings of black people in recent years , few people have been held responsible .
“ I don ’ t think what happened in the Arbery case is necessarily that unusual .
I think a light was shined on it , and it was exposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ And I think bringing the GBI in was an attempt to put a lid on a pot that was bubbling over .
”

When the Georgia Bureau of Investigation announced last week that it would be probing the Glynn County Police Department’s dismissal of the killing of Ahmaud Arbery, some people breathed a sigh of relief. It was a welcome development after the lynching of a 25-year-old black man, whose white killers had been walking free for 74 days — even though the entire incident was caught on tape.
But those familiar with the GBI responded with warranted skepticism. Sure, it was a step in the right direction. But at that point, almost anything would have been. Local police and elected officials for over two months had found reasons not to arrest either of the men — Gregory and Travis McMichael — who chased and killed Arbery while he was jogging. After all, one was their former colleague. The other, his son.
Hinesville District Attorney Tom Durden, the third prosecutor to take on the case, formally requested the GBI’s assistance on May 5. It was a critical moment: The disturbing graphic video of Arbery’s death had been broadcast on national television and shared thousands of times, following revelations that the Glynn County Police Department, where Gregory McMichael once worked, and local district attorneys had gone to great lengths to smear Arbery’s name and protect his killers. The public outcry that followed is the reason the McMichaels were arrested at all.
The GBI — which is generally revered throughout the state and is often brought in to investigate police-involved shootings of current or former officers, like Gregory McMichael, to get around conflicts of interest — has repeatedly been accused of mishandling such investigations — in some cases intentionally. The agency has botched cases in which the investigating officers appeared to be motivated by racism, leading to wrongful convictions. The agency has also repeatedly failed to hold accountable and break up powerful networks of officers who broke laws in the course of their work — causing and covering up overwhelming violence.
In Georgia, where the Ku Klux Klan once infiltrated every level of law enforcement, racism can play a role in violent crimes and the way they are investigated. Arbery’s case is no different: There are clear parallels to the lynch mobs that routinely chased, tortured, and murdered black Americans from the time of slavery through the 1960s. Between 1877 and 1950, more than 4,000 black people in the U.S. — including 589 people in Georgia — were killed in lynchings. The KKK’s stranglehold over Georgia’s law enforcement apparatus decades ago laid the groundwork for a historically deadly relationship between the cops, white people, and black people. The white supremacist underpinnings of U.S. law enforcement continue to echo throughout the country, as shown by the multiple other police-involved shootings and others murders that have taken place since Arbery was killed — and are being covered up and drowned out during the ongoing pandemic.
Some lawyers in the state are optimistic that the GBI’s new director, former Cobb County DA and Chief Magistrate Judge Vic Reynolds, will give the case the attention it deserves. Still, a closer look at the agency’s record raises questions about whether it can be trusted to do so.
“There are communities that absolutely are skeptical about whether the GBI or whether any law enforcement agency is going to adequately investigate its law enforcement brethren,” Jon Rapping, a professor and director of the criminal justice certificate program at Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School, told The Intercept. “That suspicion undoubtedly is going to create a lot of skepticism about whether the GBI is going to do justice in this case.”
The KKK and Georgia Cops
The history of the GBI, established in 1937, is interwoven with the history of the Ku Klux Klan, which was a terrorizing force in Georgia in the mid-20th century. One of the earliest directors of the GBI, who later served as an Atlanta police officer, Sam Roper, was a local Klan leader when he took over the GBI after former Georgia Gov. Gene Talmadge won another reelection in 1946. Roper, whose links to the agency have been all but wiped from public records, later recruited Klan members into his police department, Frederick Allen wrote in the 1996 book, “Atlanta Rising.” Roper campaigned in support of Talmadge’s 1946 reelection and planned to install Klan members in “every Georgia County and pay him $125 a month to ‘assist’ the local sheriff” after Talmadge won, Allen wrote. Roper left the GBI shortly afterward and became an Imperial Wizard of the KKK in 1949.
Photo: Ed Clark/The LIFE Picture Collection/Getty Images
Stetson Kennedy, a human rights activist famous for infiltrating the Klan in the 1940s, wrote in his 1990 book that when Klan leader David Duke asked him who was “running the Klan now,” he told Duke that it was the GBI’s former director, Roper. “I know Roper all right!” Duke said.
Over the years, including in one unsolved 1946 lynching case currently under plans for appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the GBI and other Georgia law enforcement agencies have been accused of improperly handling investigations, including those related to Klan-linked killings. In more recent history, the agency has failed to hold police accountable for deadly violence — or for detaining, arresting, and extrajudicially killing people, many of whom were bystanders. (Just last year, the GBI investigated 84 cases of officer-involved shootings, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. The agency does not track officers who were disciplined or charged in those cases.)
In two recent cases that cost local governments over $3 million in settlements, the GBI failed to adequately investigate a narcotics task force that conducted a violent 2014 raid that put an infant in a burn unit under a medically induced coma, and killed a reverend in 2009. In both cases, the GBI cleared agents of wrongdoing, even blaming the reverend for his own killing. In the case of the 2014 raid, which the GBI at the time denied that the local task force had approved — the agency, a former district attorney, and a grand jury failed to find “what the feds found — that this entire raid was based on a series of lies,” wrote Washington Post columnist Radley Balko. In the case of the reverend, in which the GBI investigated and cleared agents of wrongdoing and said they followed appropriate procedures, his family eventually won a $2.3 million settlement against the officer who shot him. These cases left Balko with the following conclusion: “The Georgia Bureau of Investigation probably shouldn’t be trusted to conduct unbiased, thorough investigations of other law enforcement officers.”
The GBI and Wrongful Convictions
The GBI has a mixed record in cases involving wrongful convictions, sometimes failing to pursue obvious leads or otherwise mishandling an investigation. In 1979, testimony from a GBI agent helped send John White to prison for a rape, burglary, and robbery that he did not commit. Later, GBI helped with White’s exoneration; he was released in 2007 after serving more than 20 years of a life sentence.
In the case of Kerry Robinson, who was released in January on a wrongful conviction after serving close to 18 years of a 20-year sentence, a GBI DNA analyst provided “inaccurate and overstated testimony,” according to the Georgia Innocence Project.
Perhaps the most troubling of recent examples is the 1999 wrongful indictment of Devonia Inman, whose case is the subject of a podcast and a series of articles by The Intercept’s Liliana Segura and Jordan Smith. Inman has been in prison since the day before his 23rd birthday for the murder of Donna Brown, even though the GBI has matched DNA found at the scene of the crime to another man. The person whose DNA the GBI identified went on to kill at least two other people and is currently serving a federal life sentence without parole.
Like with Arbery, the GBI’s involvement in Inman’s case was initially seen as a step in the right direction. In the early 2000s, the GBI was ahead of local police regarding access to new DNA technology and “routinely” took over cases in South Georgia’s rural towns, The Intercept reported.
Inman’s is “a story about racism, bad policing, and people who looked the other way,” Segura and Smith say in the “Murderville” podcast. Much of the same can be said of Arbery’s.
The Arbery Case
The GBI entered Arbery’s case after Brunswick-area police dismissed it, and one prosecutor deemed the killing “perfectly legal.”
Having reviewed the tape, Waycross Judicial Circuit District Attorney George Barnhill the day after the killing told the first prosecuting attorney’s office that he thought it was justified, AJC reported. The two district attorneys, including Brunswick DA Jackie Johnson, recused themselves from the case — McMichael had worked under Johnson’s direction with Barnhill’s son to prosecute Arbery two years ago.
In a widely circulated letter from April 1 to the Glynn County police captain, Barnhill said he saw no grounds to arrest the McMichaels, that Arbery was “aggressive” and capable of the crime, and that his family was “not strangers to the local criminal justice system,” using the deceased’s mental health and a previous conviction to paint that picture. Michael Mears, an associate professor at Atlanta’s John Marshall Law School, said more scrutiny should be put on both prosecutors, particularly Johnson, who has protected violent police officers in other cases.
The attempts to smear Arbery continued after the video of his killing was released. When one video showed Arbery at a home under construction in the neighborhood, right-wing and even some mainstream outlets used it in an attempt to support the McMichaels’s claim that they believed Arbery was a suspect in a string of burglaries. Those looking to justify his killing used the opportunity to try to poke holes in the shooting video.
Georgia criminal defense attorneys are approaching the GBI’s involvement in the Arbery case with cautious optimism .
Georgia criminal defense attorneys are approaching the GBI’s involvement in the Arbery case with cautious optimism, drawing contrasts to its controversial past and pointing to Vic Reynolds, the agency’s new director, who has made public assurances that the investigation, and the organization as a whole, would operate professionally.
When asked why people should trust the GBI to hold its own accountable in this case, and what the agency has done recently to combat suspicion given its record in cases detailed above, Nelly Miles, a GBI spokesperson, pointed to Reynolds’s May 9 press conference, where he recounted how the agency moved swiftly to arrest the McMichaels and said he understood concerns from the community and across the country as to whether others would be charged. “I will tell you that this case is an active, ongoing investigation,” Reynolds said.
Photo: Sean Rayford/Getty Images
Another factor differentiating the Arbery case from GBI’s usual docket, two lawyers told The Intercept, is that the agency is tasked with holding accountable the network of people who covered up and dismissed Arbery’s killing, not just those who actually carried it out.
“I think everyone was relieved to see the GBI get involved,” said criminal defense attorney Page Pate, “just because they didn’t have direct relationships with the potential suspects in the case.”
The Long Road to Justice
Georgia’s need to grapple with Arbery’s killing comes against the backdrop of a long and dark history violence against black people in Georgia — including decades-old lynchings that remain unsolved.
A 1946 case involving a summer ambush and murder of two black couples, Mae and George Dorsey, and Roger and Dorothy Malcom, who were shot more than 60 times, their bodies further mutilated after being left at an unsecured crime scene, is one example. No one was ever prosecuted for the lynching, which the GBI and FBI deemed a cold case. An eyewitness who was 10 years old at the time said a Georgia police officer participated in the killing, and that he saw a police patrol car at the bridge when it happened, the AJC reported in 2017. Investigators never verified his claim — even as the FBI convened a 16-day grand jury and conducted 2,790 interviews.
Journalist Anthony Pitch in 2016 wrote an exhaustive book on the case, “The Last Lynching: How a Gruesome Mass Murder Rocked a Small Georgia Town,” replete with examples of relationships between the 1946 grand jurors and people who testified before them. (1946 was also the first year that black people could vote in Georgia’s Democratic gubernatorial primary. Maceo Snipes was the only black person to vote that day in his district, and the first ever in Taylor County. The next day, men thought to be members of the Klu Klux Klan found him at his grandfather’s farmhouse and shot him. His shooter was acquitted on claims of self-defense, and the federal investigation was closed in 2010.)
In March of this year, a federal court ruled that the records in the case must remain under seal. The attorney on the case, who took it up at Pitch’s request, is planning to appeal it to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The legal system at the time made it fairly easy for lynchings to continue unpunished. In 1938, eight years before the lynching that Pitch would later describe as Georgia’s last, the state’s two Democratic senators successfully tanked a federal anti-lynching bill that, with 70 sponsors, had some potential. Sen. Richard Russell, a former governor who had also stymied an earlier version of the bill, said the proposal was a top priority of the Communist agenda, lynching was on its way out, and that the law would portray an image to the world that Southerners were “a clan of barbarians,” Pitch wrote in his book.
More than 80 years later, even as public consciousness has grown around state-sanctioned anti-black violence, Congress continues to debate anti-lynching measures. Largely symbolic, the bills would establish a new federal criminal civil rights violation and subsequent penalties for lynching. One passed the Senate on a voice vote early last year, and another passed the House in February.
Still, little has been done to hold perpetrators of racist violence accountable. Even in highly publicized cases of killings of black people in recent years, few people have been held responsible.
“I don’t think what happened in the Arbery case is necessarily that unusual. I think a light was shined on it, and it was exposed,” said Rapping of John Marshall. “And I think bringing the GBI in was an attempt to put a lid on a pot that was bubbling over.”


theintercept--2020-05-14--Biden Taps AOC and Jayapal To Help Shape Party Policy. Isn't This A Win for Progressives?

If you were to draw up a list of the most plain-spoken , passionate , and progressive women in American public life , you would have to include Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Rep. Pramila Jayapal , and Sara Nelson somewhere near the top .
All of them , of course , were loud and ardent advocates for Bernie Sanders during the Democratic presidential primaries .
Imagine my surprise then — or was it disbelief ?
— to discover on Wednesday morning that they had been appointed as co-chairs of three of the six “ joint task forces ” that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ policy in the run-up to November .
Jayapal , sponsor of the Medicare for All bill in the House , is co-chair of the health care task force .
Ocasio-Cortez , sponsor of the Green New Deal bill in the House , is co-chair of the climate change task force .
Nelson , president of the Association of Flight Attendants and a champion of organized labor , is co-chair of the economy task force .
To be clear : These three co-chairs will be representing Sanders and his vision for the party .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ them for these positions , and pushed to have them included .
Remarkably , though , it was Joe Biden , Mr .
Status Quo himself , who signed off on them .
“ We ’ ve set up joint committees together to deal with how we would deal with everything from the virus all the way down to education , the criminal justice system , the new green deal , etc.
, ” the former vice-president told a Las Vegas TV news outlet .
“ I ’ m working with Bernie and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ve made some changes and listened to Bernie supporters .
And for example , we have , you know , Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez .
She is on one of the panels as well.
” This is all , to borrow an old line of Biden ’ s , “ a big fucking deal.
” It isn ’ t only the impressive trio of AOC , Jayapal , and Nelson who feature on these panels .
Also on the health care task force is Abdul El-Sayed , who ran an insurgent campaign for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the co-author of a book on Medicare for All .
Also on the economy task force is Stephanie Kelton , a pioneer of Modern Monetary Theory and author of a forthcoming book on deficit hysteria .
Also on the climate change task force is Varshini Prakash , executive director and co-founder of the Sunrise Movement — the progressive group behind the Green New Deal that gave Biden ’ s presidential climate plan an “ F ” rating in 2019 .
Meanwhile , Heather Gautney , an activist-scholar and top Sanders adviser , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kudos to Sanders for suggesting such outside-the-Beltway names but — and some on the left might not want to hear me say this — kudos also to Biden and his team for accepting them .
Above all else , kudos to grassroots organizations and activists on the left who demanded the presumptive Democratic nominee reach out to them .
“ Biden ’ s announcement demonstrates the progressive movement ’ s growing power as a key constituency within the party , ” Waleed Shahid , of Justice Democrats , told me .
“ As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gore , Kerry , Obama , and Hillary Clinton did not make a major effort to appoint progressives.
” Yet Biden has .
And his own appointments to the six committees aren ’ t all bad , either .
Rep. Karen Bass , who has one of the most liberal voting records in the House , is his choice for co-chair of the economy task force , while neoliberal ideologues like Larry Summers and Erskine Bowles are , thankfully , nowhere to be seen .
AOC ’ s fellow co-chair is former Secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Paris climate accords on behalf of the United States .
If personnel is policy , as the old saying goes , then this should be seen as a clear victory for progressives .
These six committees , according to the Biden campaign , “ will meet in advance of the Democratic National Convention to make recommendations to the DNC Platform Committee ” and to Biden directly .
The task forces , the former vice president has said , “ will be essential to identifying ways to build on our progress and not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ time before Donald Trump , but transform our country.
” This , incidentally , is a welcome change in tone and rhetoric from the Biden of 2019 , who pledged to a group of wealthy donors that “ nothing would fundamentally change.
” A source close to Sanders tells me the current pandemic has had a major impact on Team Biden : “ They realized they messed it up last time , when it came to the Great Recession .
This is the time when ideas matter most.
” The former vice president @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a few weeks ago : “ The blinders have been taken off because of this Covid crisis.
” Cynics on the left might see this new language , and these new appointments , as merely progressive window-dressing what will be a business-as-usual presidency .
I can ’ t honestly blame them .
Biden is an untrustworthy figure .
He is obsessed with cutting deals with Republicans .
And he has a long history of doing the bidding of corporate interests — from Big Finance to Big Pharma to Big Oil .
But he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , an “ empty vessel.
” “ With a Biden presidency , the activism of a popular movement will make a big difference , ” Chomsky told me last month .
“ Trump ’ s probably immune , but Biden will be open to it.
” So far , he seems to be .
Those progressives who agreed to join these joint task forces may have made a similar calculation .
In a Twitter thread , Sunrise Movement ’ s Prakash said “ the decision wasn ’ t easy to make .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t the favorite candidate of our movement or of young ppl broadly.
” Nevertheless , she wrote , “ I feel a responsibility to win whatever we can from this platform.
” El-Sayed borrowed an analogy from football to explain his own reasoning : “ Drive for the touchdown–but a field goal is still 3 pts on the board.
” Still , the cynics may be proven right .
Perhaps Biden will ignore the recommendations from these task forces .
Or perhaps he ’ ll embrace them — and then ignore them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But I ’ m not so sure .
Why would he appoint former presidential candidate John Kerry — doyen of the Democratic Party establishment and a close personal friend of his — as a task force co-chair , only to ignore Kerry ’ s recommendations ?
And why would he take the risk of including progressive firebrands such as Ocasio-Cortez and Nelson , who could quit and denounce him at any time ?
“ He ’ d be playing with fire ” if he ignores them , a top ally of Bernie Sanders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s not gon na burn you ?
” Still , there is no room for complacency .
The grassroots left must keep up the pressure on the Biden campaign — and keep up its demands .
Membership on these joint task forces is nowhere near enough .
How about — as even former Obama staffers Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer have suggested — calling for a prominent Sanders-aligned progressive ( Rep. Ro Khanna ? )
to be made a co-chair of the Biden campaign ?
Why not also insist on the appointment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ camp to any presidential transition team ?
And , above all else : Why not push for Sen. Elizabeth Warren as VP ?
Remember : Personnel is policy .
Those who have agreed to work with Biden and company are not stooges or sellouts .
The outsiders haven ’ t morphed into insiders .
Believe it or not , there is an actual strategy here .
Ocasio-Cortez summed it up in a tweet defending her decision to co-chair the climate change task force : “ Inside pressure .
Outside organizing .
”

Photo: Scott Olson/Getty Images
If you were to draw up a list of the most plain-spoken, passionate, and progressive women in American public life, you would have to include Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, and Sara Nelson somewhere near the top. All of them, of course, were loud and ardent advocates for Bernie Sanders during the Democratic presidential primaries.
Imagine my surprise then — or was it disbelief? — to discover on Wednesday morning that they had been appointed as co-chairs of three of the six “joint task forces” that are meant to unify the Democratic Party on policy in the run-up to November.
NEW this morning: Biden and Sanders roll out the members of the 6 Unity Task Forces that will offer recommendations to the DNC platform cmte and to Biden. Includes @johnkerry, @EricHolder, @vivek_murthy, @aoc, @RepJayapal, @rweingarten, @econjared, @StephanieKelton. pic.twitter.com/fGHHFJcUVE — Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) May 13, 2020
Jayapal, sponsor of the Medicare for All bill in the House, is co-chair of the health care task force. Ocasio-Cortez, sponsor of the Green New Deal bill in the House, is co-chair of the climate change task force. Nelson, president of the Association of Flight Attendants and a champion of organized labor, is co-chair of the economy task force.
To be clear: These three co-chairs will be representing Sanders and his vision for the party. It was the Vermont senator who recommended them for these positions, and pushed to have them included. Remarkably, though, it was Joe Biden, Mr. Status Quo himself, who signed off on them.
“We’ve set up joint committees together to deal with how we would deal with everything from the virus all the way down to education, the criminal justice system, the new green deal, etc.,” the former vice-president told a Las Vegas TV news outlet. “I’m working with Bernie and his people and, so, we’ve made some changes and listened to Bernie supporters. And for example, we have, you know, Congresswoman Ocasio-Cortez. She is on one of the panels as well.”
This is all, to borrow an old line of Biden’s, “a big fucking deal.” It isn’t only the impressive trio of AOC, Jayapal, and Nelson who feature on these panels. Also on the health care task force is Abdul El-Sayed, who ran an insurgent campaign for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Michigan and is the co-author of a book on Medicare for All. Also on the economy task force is Stephanie Kelton, a pioneer of Modern Monetary Theory and author of a forthcoming book on deficit hysteria. Also on the climate change task force is Varshini Prakash, executive director and co-founder of the Sunrise Movement — the progressive group behind the Green New Deal that gave Biden’s presidential climate plan an “F” rating in 2019. Meanwhile, Heather Gautney, an activist-scholar and top Sanders adviser, is co-chair of the education task force.
Kudos to Sanders for suggesting such outside-the-Beltway names but — and some on the left might not want to hear me say this — kudos also to Biden and his team for accepting them.
Above all else, kudos to grassroots organizations and activists on the left who demanded the presumptive Democratic nominee reach out to them. “Biden’s announcement demonstrates the progressive movement’s growing power as a key constituency within the party,” Waleed Shahid, of Justice Democrats, told me. “As the Democratic nominees, Bill Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama, and Hillary Clinton did not make a major effort to appoint progressives.”
Yet Biden has. And his own appointments to the six committees aren’t all bad, either. Rep. Karen Bass, who has one of the most liberal voting records in the House, is his choice for co-chair of the economy task force, while neoliberal ideologues like Larry Summers and Erskine Bowles are, thankfully, nowhere to be seen. AOC’s fellow co-chair is former Secretary of State John Kerry, who signed the Paris climate accords on behalf of the United States.
If personnel is policy, as the old saying goes, then this should be seen as a clear victory for progressives. These six committees, according to the Biden campaign, “will meet in advance of the Democratic National Convention to make recommendations to the DNC Platform Committee” and to Biden directly. The task forces, the former vice president has said, “will be essential to identifying ways to build on our progress and not simply turn the clock back to a time before Donald Trump, but transform our country.”
If personnel is policy, as the old saying goes, then this should be seen as a clear victory for progressives.
This, incidentally, is a welcome change in tone and rhetoric from the Biden of 2019, who pledged to a group of wealthy donors that “nothing would fundamentally change.” A source close to Sanders tells me the current pandemic has had a major impact on Team Biden: “They realized they messed it up last time, when it came to the Great Recession. This is the time when ideas matter most.” The former vice president himself conceded to an audience on Zoom a few weeks ago: “The blinders have been taken off because of this Covid crisis.”
Cynics on the left might see this new language, and these new appointments, as merely progressive window-dressing what will be a business-as-usual presidency. I can’t honestly blame them. Biden is an untrustworthy figure. He is obsessed with cutting deals with Republicans. And he has a long history of doing the bidding of corporate interests — from Big Finance to Big Pharma to Big Oil.
But he is also, to quote Noam Chomsky, an “empty vessel.” “With a Biden presidency, the activism of a popular movement will make a big difference,” Chomsky told me last month. “Trump’s probably immune, but Biden will be open to it.”
So far, he seems to be. Those progressives who agreed to join these joint task forces may have made a similar calculation. In a Twitter thread, Sunrise Movement’s Prakash said “the decision wasn’t easy to make. It’s no secret that Biden wasn’t the favorite candidate of our movement or of young ppl broadly.” Nevertheless, she wrote, “I feel a responsibility to win whatever we can from this platform.” El-Sayed borrowed an analogy from football to explain his own reasoning: “Drive for the touchdown–but a field goal is still 3 pts on the board.”
Still, the cynics may be proven right. Perhaps Biden will ignore the recommendations from these task forces. Or perhaps he’ll embrace them — and then ignore them once he’s sworn in.
But I’m not so sure. Why would he appoint former presidential candidate John Kerry — doyen of the Democratic Party establishment and a close personal friend of his — as a task force co-chair, only to ignore Kerry’s recommendations? And why would he take the risk of including progressive firebrands such as Ocasio-Cortez and Nelson, who could quit and denounce him at any time? “He’d be playing with fire” if he ignores them, a top ally of Bernie Sanders tells me. “You think AOC’s not gonna burn you?”
Still, there is no room for complacency. The grassroots left must keep up the pressure on the Biden campaign — and keep up its demands. Membership on these joint task forces is nowhere near enough. How about — as even former Obama staffers Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer have suggested — calling for a prominent Sanders-aligned progressive (Rep. Ro Khanna?) to be made a co-chair of the Biden campaign? Why not also insist on the appointment of a senior member of the Sanders camp to any presidential transition team? And, above all else: Why not push for Sen. Elizabeth Warren as VP?
Remember: Personnel is policy. Those who have agreed to work with Biden and company are not stooges or sellouts. The outsiders haven’t morphed into insiders. Believe it or not, there is an actual strategy here. Ocasio-Cortez summed it up in a tweet defending her decision to co-chair the climate change task force: “Inside pressure. Outside organizing.”


theintercept--2020-05-14--Reopening Missouri Amid the Pandemic Means Executing a Possibly Innocent Man

he spent living under a death sentence in Missouri , Mark Gill occasionally chatted with Walter Barton about what they would do if they ever got out of prison .
“ His thing was , he wanted to go fishing , ” Gill remembered .
“ He wanted to watch the sun come up and go fishing all day.
” Barton was from Arkansas , so that ’ s what everyone called him : “ Arkansas , ” or “ Arkie ” for short .
Gill met him shortly after being sentenced to die in 2002 ; he struck Gill @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mean in a good way , it ain ’ t nothing bad , ” Gill said .
“ He couldn ’ t sit still .
He always had to be moving.
” Much of that energy was directed at working on his case , Gill said .
Barton had been tried five times and ultimately sentenced to die for a crime he swore he didn ’ t commit .
The 1991 murder occurred not long after Missouri ’ s condemned population was moved from Jefferson City to the Potosi Correctional Center in Mineral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conditions on death row .
At Potosi , they were granted more freedom of movement , including access to the law library .
“ He was always in there , ” Gill recalled .
“ He would always say he didn ’ t do it.
” Gill believed him .
“ You wouldn ’ t fight that hard if you did do it.
” Gill ’ s own death sentence was eventually overturned .
In 2017 , he was resentenced to life without parole .
By that time , he had seen a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
To most of the outside world , they were simply murderers , but to him , they were his neighbors : guys who joined him for meals or games of chess .
The first execution carried out during his time at Potosi was his cellmate , Stanley Hall , executed in 2005 .
A captain came to the door and started reading the death order , Gill recalled , and Hall got up and said , “ ‘ Hey , I ’ ll see you later.
’ And I said , ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re fixing to kill you.
’ ” Hall ’ s execution “ messed me up a little bit , ” Gill said .
But then there were more .
His friend Dennis Skillicorn was killed in 2009 , followed by Skillicorn ’ s co-defendant Allen Nicklasson in 2013 .
John Winfield was executed in 2014 , then Richard Strong the next year .
“ I had survivor ’ s guilt for a while , ” Gill said .
“ I still do.
” On February 18 , 2020 , Missouri set an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the news during a legal visit at the Jefferson City Correctional Center , where he is now serving a life sentence .
Soon afterward , the coronavirus turned the world upside down .
For a moment , it looked like the pandemic would force the state to grant Barton a temporary reprieve .
But on April 27 , the Missouri Supreme Court denied a stay of execution .
A few days later , Gill wrote an email to Elyse Max , the head of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” he wrote .
He urged Max to try to meet Missouri Gov .
Mike Parson in person , to ask him to intervene .
But on May 5 , a spokesperson said the governor planned to let the execution proceed .
Gill saw it on the news the next morning .
If nothing changes , Barton will be the 48th person to be executed in Missouri since Gill was sentenced to die .
“ I wish I could have taken a bunch of the guys with me when I got on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Five Trials and a Trail of Misdeeds If Missouri kills Barton on May 19 , it will be the first execution to move forward amid a global pandemic that until now has forced the country ’ s death machinery to a halt .
Texas has delayed six executions amid Covid-19 .
Tennessee has also put an execution on hold .
But as states start to reopen , Missouri appears determined to be the first to break the short pause on state-sanctioned killing .
Prison officials point to a number of planned precautions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We plan to limit the number of witnesses in each room and space them out within each room , ” a spokesperson told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch last week .
“ We have ample access to hand sanitizer , fabric face masks and other supplies , as needed.
” But beyond the problems that come with carrying out an execution in the midst of a deadly pandemic , there are also serious questions about Barton ’ s case that have never been resolved .
Among them is his innocence claim .
Almost no @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and a number of key witnesses have recanted their testimony .
One Missouri Supreme Court judge decried the state ’ s maneuvering in the case , writing in 2007 that “ Barton has gone to trial five separate times for the same offense , and prosecutorial misconduct has plagued the trials from the outset and has allowed the state opportunities to bolster its evidence.
” On October 9 , 1991 , 81-year-old Gladys Kuehler was found murdered in her home at the Riverview Trailer Park in Ozark , Missouri .
It was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had been stabbed more than 50 times and partially eviscerated .
She bled out on her bedroom floor .
It wouldn ’ t be long before police arrested Walter Barton and charged him with murder .
He had lived at the park and was friends with Kuehler , who was the park ’ s manager .
In fact , he ’ d been at her trailer that afternoon — he ’ d asked to borrow $ 20 — and he ’ d answered her phone around 3 p.m. , when the park ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new tenant moving in , which also happened to be around the time that investigators surmised that Kuehler had been killed .
And there was forensic evidence : A small blood spot found on Barton ’ s shirt was a biological match to Kuehler .
Barton had an explanation for that .
He , Kuehler ’ s granddaughter Debbie Selvidge , and a neighbor had found the body .
When they discovered Kuehler , lying naked and bloody next to the bed , Selvidge had rushed forward and Barton had pulled her back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have transferred in the process .
Selvidge confirmed the account to police .
But later , when Barton went on trial , she changed her story , saying that Barton had never even entered Kuehler ’ s bedroom .
A blood-pattern expert said the drop came from “ high velocity ” spatter — meaning as Kuehler was assaulted — and it could not have been picked up casually , as Barton described .
Barton was convicted and sentenced to death .
Of course , it wasn ’ t that straightforward .
Barton would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would stick .
The first trial , in April 1993 , was over before it began ; the state failed to provide the defense with a list of the witnesses it would call at trial , so the judge declared a mistrial .
Six months later , Barton was tried a second time and again it ended in a mistrial , this time after the jury deadlocked on a verdict .
In each of the next two trials , jurors convicted Barton and he was sentenced to die , but those convictions were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Most notably , the prosecution failed to disclose to the defense important information about its star witness , Katherine Allen , a jailhouse snitch who said Barton confessed to her .
According to Allen , who was in jail with Barton as he awaited trial , Barton twice threatened to kill her , “ like he killed that old lady.
” Allen testified that she had been convicted before — six times , she said — but denied that she got any deal for testifying against Barton .
Neither of those claims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Allen had been convicted 29 times , for things like forgery and credit card fraud , and that prosecutors had dismissed a pending case in exchange for her testimony , information the state had withheld .
In 2004 , Barton ’ s fourth conviction was set aside .
At his fifth trial , the state used Allen again , and again she testified that she ’ d been convicted just six times and hadn ’ t received any deal in exchange for her testimony .
The defense confronted her , but asked about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and then failed to challenge her with evidence that additional charges had been dropped in consideration for her testimony .
This time around , the Missouri Supreme Court upheld Barton ’ s conviction by a 4-3 majority .
In his dissent , Judge Michael Wolff was skeptical .
“ From the first mistrial in 1993 through three completed trials , post-conviction proceedings , multiple appeals , there is a trail of mishaps and misdeeds that , taken together , reflect poorly on the criminal justice system , ” he wrote in 2007 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crime is not particularly compelling.
” There were “ glaring inadequacies ” in that evidence , Wolff wrote , particularly where the blood stain was concerned , which was the only physical evidence tying Barton to the crime .
The murder was uniquely bloody , and yet there was just a small spot on his shirt .
Barton hadn ’ t changed clothes that afternoon , and witnesses who saw him did not report there being any blood on him .
He ’ d washed his hands at a neighbor ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ found in the sink .
It would be reasonable to expect that Kuehler ’ s killer would be covered in blood , Wolff wrote .
“ How could Burton have perpetrated the kind of violent , forceful attack that killed Ms. Kuehler and walked away quite unstained by the effort ?
” And there is evidence that has never been explained — including a hair found on Kuehler ’ s stomach and blood under her nails , neither of which match Barton .
“ In order to reach its result , the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the evidence is better than it is , ” Wolff wrote .
“ I can imagine why the court would affirm the conviction of Walter Barton .
After all , at least 36 of the 48 jurors who have heard the evidence — tainted though it may be — have voted to convict .
If this were not a criminal trial , that would be a landslide .
I can not imagine , however , why the court would approve the death sentence on this sorry record.
” The First Execution of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s lawyers have tried to draw the court ’ s attention to many of the flaws that so bothered Wolff — the inconclusive blood evidence , the lying jailhouse snitch — but without success .
In its April 27 opinion , the current state Supreme Court rejected their latest attempt to prove Barton ’ s innocence , clearing the way for his execution to go forward .
Barton ’ s evidence “ is simply additional evidence that might have been used to impeach a jailhouse informant and provide competing expert testimony to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” the court wrote .
“ While this might have been helpful , it does not show actual innocence.
” Sean O ’ Brien , a law professor at the University of Missouri , Kansas City , who has represented innocent clients facing the death penalty , says that longtime inadequacies in Missouri ’ s criminal justice system hinder the ability of defendants like Barton to mount a good defense , let alone prove their innocence .
Barton ’ s situation is particularly troubling , he said .
“ Five trials should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is fundamentally wrong with the case .
In a clemency application , Barton ’ s current lawyer , Frederick Duchardt , argues that the necessary scrutiny into his client ’ s wrongful conviction has been hamstrung by the coronavirus crisis .
An investigation preceding the pandemic revealed that at least one juror from the fifth trial “ had serious questions about Mr. Barton ’ s guilt , ” Duchardt wrote .
Defense investigators have since spoken to additional jurors who have echoed these concerns , but the pandemic has made it impossible to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care and detail the process demands .
“ We had to talk to those jurors in a parking lot with the wind blowing , ” Duchardt told The Intercept .
“ Socially distanced.
” Although they have gathered crucial information , he said , “ we have just scratched the surface.
” Without a reprieve , further investigation will never happen .
“ The decision whether to execute Barton now lies solely in the hands of Gov .
Parson , ” says Max of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ group has gathered thousands of signatures on a petition urging the governor to change his mind and intervene .
Should the execution move forward , a virtual vigil will take place on May 19 .
Max is not optimistic that the governor will show compassion .
He has granted clemency only once during his term and “ has publicly stated he does not plan to release any vulnerable prisoners during the pandemic , ” she said .
“ Executing Barton at this time would be a display of the extreme faults in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Missouri .
”

In the years he spent living under a death sentence in Missouri, Mark Gill occasionally chatted with Walter Barton about what they would do if they ever got out of prison. “His thing was, he wanted to go fishing,” Gill remembered. “He wanted to watch the sun come up and go fishing all day.”
Barton was from Arkansas, so that’s what everyone called him: “Arkansas,” or “Arkie” for short. Gill met him shortly after being sentenced to die in 2004; he struck Gill as hyper and high-strung. “I mean in a good way, it ain’t nothing bad,” Gill said. “He couldn’t sit still. He always had to be moving.”
Much of that energy was directed at working on his case, Gill said. Barton had been tried five times and ultimately sentenced to die for a crime he swore he didn’t commit. The 1991 murder occurred not long after Missouri’s condemned population was moved from Jefferson City to the Potosi Correctional Center in Mineral Point, following a lawsuit challenging the conditions on death row. At Potosi, they were granted more freedom of movement, including access to the law library. “He was always in there,” Gill recalled. “He would always say he didn’t do it.” Gill believed him. “You wouldn’t fight that hard if you did do it.”
Gill’s own death sentence was eventually overturned. In 2017, he was resentenced to life without parole. By that time, he had seen a lot of men taken to their deaths. To most of the outside world, they were simply murderers, but to him, they were his neighbors: guys who joined him for meals or games of chess. The first execution carried out during his time at Potosi was his cellmate, Stanley Hall, executed in 2005. A captain came to the door and started reading the death order, Gill recalled, and Hall got up and said, “‘Hey, I’ll see you later.’ And I said, ‘No you won’t, they’re fixing to kill you.’”
Hall’s execution “messed me up a little bit,” Gill said. But then there were more. His friend Dennis Skillicorn was killed in 2009, followed by Skillicorn’s co-defendant Allen Nicklasson in 2013. John Winfield was executed in 2014, then Richard Strong the next year. “I had survivor’s guilt for a while,” Gill said. “I still do.”
On February 18, 2020, Missouri set an execution date for Barton. Gill got the news during a legal visit at the Jefferson City Correctional Center, where he is now serving a life sentence. Soon afterward, the coronavirus turned the world upside down. For a moment, it looked like the pandemic would force the state to grant Barton a temporary reprieve. But on April 27, the Missouri Supreme Court denied a stay of execution.
A few days later, Gill wrote an email to Elyse Max, the head of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. “I think of Arkie every day,” he wrote. He urged Max to try to meet Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in person, to ask him to intervene. But on May 5, a spokesperson said the governor planned to let the execution proceed. Gill saw it on the news the next morning. If nothing changes, Barton will be the 48th person to be executed in Missouri since Gill was sentenced to die. “I wish I could have taken a bunch of the guys with me when I got on the bus and left,” he said.
Five Trials and a Trail of Misdeeds
If Missouri kills Barton on May 19, it will be the first execution to move forward amid a global pandemic that until now has forced the country’s death machinery to a halt. Texas has delayed six executions amid Covid-19. Tennessee has also put an execution on hold. But as states start to reopen, Missouri appears determined to be the first to break the short pause on state-sanctioned killing.
Prison officials point to a number of planned precautions for Barton’s execution. “We plan to limit the number of witnesses in each room and space them out within each room,” a spokesperson told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch last week. “We have ample access to hand sanitizer, fabric face masks and other supplies, as needed.”
But beyond the problems that come with carrying out an execution in the midst of a deadly pandemic, there are also serious questions about Barton’s case that have never been resolved. Among them is his innocence claim. Almost no physical evidence linked him to the crime, and a number of key witnesses have recanted their testimony. One Missouri Supreme Court judge decried the state’s maneuvering in the case, writing in 2007 that “Barton has gone to trial five separate times for the same offense, and prosecutorial misconduct has plagued the trials from the outset and has allowed the state opportunities to bolster its evidence.”
“Prosecutorial misconduct has plagued the trials from the outset.”
On October 9, 1991, 81-year-old Gladys Kuehler was found murdered in her home at the Riverview Trailer Park in Ozark, Missouri. It was a brutal and bloody crime. She had been stabbed more than 50 times and partially eviscerated. She bled out on her bedroom floor.
It wouldn’t be long before police arrested Walter Barton and charged him with murder. He had lived at the park and was friends with Kuehler, who was the park’s manager. In fact, he’d been at her trailer that afternoon — he’d asked to borrow $20 — and he’d answered her phone around 3 p.m., when the park’s owners called to talk about a new tenant moving in, which also happened to be around the time that investigators surmised that Kuehler had been killed.
And there was forensic evidence: A small blood spot found on Barton’s shirt was a biological match to Kuehler.
Barton had an explanation for that. He, Kuehler’s granddaughter Debbie Selvidge, and a neighbor had found the body. When they discovered Kuehler, lying naked and bloody next to the bed, Selvidge had rushed forward and Barton had pulled her back, he said. The blood must have transferred in the process. Selvidge confirmed the account to police. But later, when Barton went on trial, she changed her story, saying that Barton had never even entered Kuehler’s bedroom. A blood-pattern expert said the drop came from “high velocity” spatter — meaning as Kuehler was assaulted — and it could not have been picked up casually, as Barton described. Barton was convicted and sentenced to death.
Of course, it wasn’t that straightforward. Barton would be tried five times before the conviction would stick. The first trial, in April 1993, was over before it began; the state failed to provide the defense with a list of the witnesses it would call at trial, so the judge declared a mistrial. Six months later, Barton was tried a second time and again it ended in a mistrial, this time after the jury deadlocked on a verdict.
Photo: Courtesy of Elyse Max
In each of the next two trials, jurors convicted Barton and he was sentenced to die, but those convictions were ultimately overturned because of errors or misconduct. Most notably, the prosecution failed to disclose to the defense important information about its star witness, Katherine Allen, a jailhouse snitch who said Barton confessed to her. According to Allen, who was in jail with Barton as he awaited trial, Barton twice threatened to kill her, “like he killed that old lady.”
Allen testified that she had been convicted before — six times, she said — but denied that she got any deal for testifying against Barton. Neither of those claims was true. It turns out that Allen had been convicted 29 times, for things like forgery and credit card fraud, and that prosecutors had dismissed a pending case in exchange for her testimony, information the state had withheld. In 2004, Barton’s fourth conviction was set aside.
At his fifth trial, the state used Allen again, and again she testified that she’d been convicted just six times and hadn’t received any deal in exchange for her testimony. The defense confronted her, but asked about just 12 of her 29 convictions, and then failed to challenge her with evidence that additional charges had been dropped in consideration for her testimony.
“Five trials should be a huge red flag.”
This time around, the Missouri Supreme Court upheld Barton’s conviction by a 4-3 majority. In his dissent, Judge Michael Wolff was skeptical. “From the first mistrial in 1993 through three completed trials, post-conviction proceedings, multiple appeals, there is a trail of mishaps and misdeeds that, taken together, reflect poorly on the criminal justice system,” he wrote in 2007. “The evidence that links Barton to the crime is not particularly compelling.”
There were “glaring inadequacies” in that evidence, Wolff wrote, particularly where the blood stain was concerned, which was the only physical evidence tying Barton to the crime. The murder was uniquely bloody, and yet there was just a small spot on his shirt. Barton hadn’t changed clothes that afternoon, and witnesses who saw him did not report there being any blood on him. He’d washed his hands at a neighbor’s mobile home, but no blood was found in the sink. It would be reasonable to expect that Kuehler’s killer would be covered in blood, Wolff wrote. “How could Burton have perpetrated the kind of violent, forceful attack that killed Ms. Kuehler and walked away quite unstained by the effort?”
And there is evidence that has never been explained — including a hair found on Kuehler’s stomach and blood under her nails, neither of which match Barton. “In order to reach its result, the majority of the court … must imagine that the evidence is better than it is,” Wolff wrote. “I can imagine why the court would affirm the conviction of Walter Barton. After all, at least 36 of the 48 jurors who have heard the evidence — tainted though it may be — have voted to convict. If this were not a criminal trial, that would be a landslide. I cannot imagine, however, why the court would approve the death sentence on this sorry record.”
The First Execution of the Pandemic
In the intervening years, Barton’s lawyers have tried to draw the court’s attention to many of the flaws that so bothered Wolff — the inconclusive blood evidence, the lying jailhouse snitch — but without success. In its April 27 opinion, the current state Supreme Court rejected their latest attempt to prove Barton’s innocence, clearing the way for his execution to go forward. Barton’s evidence “is simply additional evidence that might have been used to impeach a jailhouse informant and provide competing expert testimony to explain the presence on his clothes,” the court wrote. “While this might have been helpful, it does not show actual innocence.”
Sean O’Brien, a law professor at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, who has represented innocent clients facing the death penalty, says that longtime inadequacies in Missouri’s criminal justice system hinder the ability of defendants like Barton to mount a good defense, let alone prove their innocence. Barton’s situation is particularly troubling, he said. “Five trials should be a huge red flag” that something is fundamentally wrong with the case.
“We had to talk to those jurors in a parking lot with the wind blowing.”
In a clemency application, Barton’s current lawyer, Frederick Duchardt, argues that the necessary scrutiny into his client’s wrongful conviction has been hamstrung by the coronavirus crisis. An investigation preceding the pandemic revealed that at least one juror from the fifth trial “had serious questions about Mr. Barton’s guilt,” Duchardt wrote. Defense investigators have since spoken to additional jurors who have echoed these concerns, but the pandemic has made it impossible to discuss the case with the level of care and detail the process demands. “We had to talk to those jurors in a parking lot with the wind blowing,” Duchardt told The Intercept. “Socially distanced.” Although they have gathered crucial information, he said, “we have just scratched the surface.”
Without a reprieve, further investigation will never happen. “The decision whether to execute Barton now lies solely in the hands of Gov. Parson,” says Max of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty. In conjunction with Death Penalty Action, the group has gathered thousands of signatures on a petition urging the governor to change his mind and intervene. Should the execution move forward, a virtual vigil will take place on May 19.
Max is not optimistic that the governor will show compassion. He has granted clemency only once during his term and “has publicly stated he does not plan to release any vulnerable prisoners during the pandemic,” she said. “Executing Barton at this time would be a display of the extreme faults in the priorities of the criminal justice system in Missouri.”