RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
FOCUS: Joe Biden Is Sounding Like Bernie Sanders at Just the Right Time Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=11104"><span class="small">Charles Pierce, Esquire</span></a>   
Saturday, 16 January 2021 12:36

Pierce writes: "On Thursday night, we saw President-Elect Joe Biden bow to the iron constraints of The Blog's First Law of Economics. To wit: Fck the deficit. People got no jobs. People got no money."

Joe Biden. (photo: Mike Blake/Reuters)
Joe Biden. (photo: Mike Blake/Reuters)


Joe Biden Is Sounding Like Bernie Sanders at Just the Right Time

By Charles Pierce, Esquire

16 January 21


The president-elect put economic inequality in the middle of his plan to revive the country's economy, a sign that for the first time in a long while, the federal government knows what it's there for.

n Thursday night, we saw President-Elect Joe Biden bow to the iron constraints of The Blog's First Law of Economics. To wit:

Fck the deficit. People got no jobs. People got no money.

To which we have added the codicil:

People got the 'Rona.

For decades, Biden's been a fiscal liberal, but one who was willing to cut deals that made him look less like a liberal and more like a creature of the mushy center. On Thursday, with a $1.9 trillion "American Rescue Plan," he declared himself firmly on the side of Professor Keynes.

I know what I just described does not come cheaply, but we simply can’t afford not to do what I’m proposing. If we invest now boldly, smartly and with unwavering focus on American workers and families, we will strengthen our economy, reduce inequity and put our nation’s long-term finances on the most sustainable course.

No hedging. Not even a head fake toward The Deficit. Nothing about tax cuts. We will spend, and spend big, because that's what this unprecedented double crisis demands. And there was more.

You won't see this pain if your score card is how things are going on Wall Street. But you will see it very clearly if you examine what the twin crises of a pandemic and this sinking economy have laid bare. The growing divide between those few people at the very top who are doing quite well in this economy, and the rest of America. Just since this pandemic began, the wealth of the top 1% of the nation has grown roughly $1.5 trillion since the end of last year. Four times the amount for the entire bottom 50% of American wage earners. Some 18 million Americans are still relying on unemployment insurance, some 400,000 small businesses have permanently closed their doors. It's not hard to see that we're in the middle of a once in several generations economic crisis with a once in several generations public health crisis.

To hear Joe Biden sounding like Bernie Sanders, and to hear him put economic inequality in the middle of his plan to revive the country's economy, is to hear for the first time in a long while that the federal government knows what it's there for. After four miserable years being in thrall to the whims of an incompetent president,* and a Republican Congress that repurposed itself as nothing more than the Human Resources department of the federal judiciary, the federal government is stirring again to act on its own. If nothing else, Joe Biden knows where all the levers are. That, in itself, is a cause for hope.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: American Unity is a Fantasy Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=48731"><span class="small">Jamil Smith, Rolling Stone</span></a>   
Saturday, 16 January 2021 12:04

Smith writes: "Donald Trump should be happy that he has presided over more than 390,000 deaths from Covid-19 in the United States instead of over the Flint water crisis. Otherwise, he might some day face legal consequences."

Proud Boys and other protesters gather in Washington, D.C. (photo: Getty Images)
Proud Boys and other protesters gather in Washington, D.C. (photo: Getty Images)


American Unity Is a Fantasy

By Jamil Smith, Rolling Stone

16 January 21


National harmony is impossible without true accountability, especially when a major political party enables sedition and white-supremacist terrorism

onald Trump should be happy that he has presided over more than 390,000 deaths from Covid-19 in the United States instead of over the Flint water crisis. Otherwise, he might some day face legal consequences.

Former Michigan governor Rick Snyder was finally brought up on charges Thursday, more than six years after his administration oversaw the decision to switch the water supply for the majority-black city to the corroded Flint River. Thousands of adults and children were contaminated with lead and other pollutants, and at least nine people who contracted Legionnaires’ disease died. Snyder pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanor charges of willful neglect of duty. He is one of nine total officials facing a total of 41 counts, including 34 felonies, in connection to the Flint catastrophe.

Imagine the absurdity, if you will, of saying that this – accountability for actions that took human lives – was all too divisive. That having Snyder and his cronies finally face criminal penalties would not be what Michiganders needed to heal. Poisoning Flint’s water was surely terrible, but inflaming racial and political tensions is what we truly want to avoid, yes? Moving on is really the best thing.

However, while it would clearly be ridiculous and immoral to let Snyder and his cronies escape accountability in the name of “unity,” that’s exactly the approach Republicans are demanding we take to the white-supremacist mob that attacked the Capitol – and to the white-supremacist politicians who encouraged them.

Many a Republican this past week brushed away the seditious January 6th attacks as they sought to keep their president from being impeached by the House for a second time. The word “unity” may seem newly robbed of meaning when wielded by people who have themselves been, very recently, trying to overturn an election. In our current dystopian politics, these words are now opiates for the masses, intoxicating us daily with notions of American exceptionalism even as scourges of our nation grow more dangerous.

As violent extremists retreat to the deepest recesses of the internet to plan their next eruptions of entitlement, their elected representatives tell us that “unity” is in our collective best interests. It will surely work out well for the politicians and terrorists alike, helping both escape accountability, repentance, and remedies for their actions, as well as preventing any work necessary to reverse damage wrought upon our social fabric.

If we want to stop the next wave of white-supremacist violence, and root out the people and power structures that made the current one possible, we need to hold white supremacists accountable for their actions.

What should that accountability look like? Surely, a lot of people in and out of Congress need to lose their jobs. A lot of them, including the current president, should face prosecution for what they have done. However, we should exercise some caution. Addressing the racism within the Capitol Police would be a start, and overdue. However, The Marshall Project finds that civil-liberties experts fear that due to prosecutorial bias, responding to white extremist violence like what we saw at the Capitol with some kind of new “War on Terror” will undoubtedly result in harsher penalties for the very people supremacists target. Its report detailed that hate-crime laws unfairly target black Americans while but are under-enforced against white perpetrators: black people accounted for 13% of the U.S. population in 2019, yet were accused of 24% of the hate crimes. Conversely, white people were 60% of the population and made up only 53% of the defendants, respectively.

Unifying with those seeking white supremacy, voter suppression, and government overthrow seems like the very definition of madness. If Republicans were the only ones calling for this, it would be easier to dismiss. But consider that days before he was arraigned, Snyder joined his successor, current Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer, “calling on people of goodwill across America to pray for peace, calm, and healing” after the Capitol riot and asking them to unify “to defeat our real enemy, which is the pandemic that has taken far too many of our friends, neighbors, and loved ones.” Unfortunately, both Republicans and Democrats are engaging in this vain pursuit of political unification at precisely the time when we should be focusing on reconciling the truth of Trump’s malevolent governance while at the same time putting forth policy that fully rectifies his shortcomings.

Joe Biden, the president-elect, made a speech in Wilmington on Thursday outlining a new, comprehensive $1.9 trillion “rescue and recovery plan” for the pandemic, which he called “the path forward with a seriousness of purpose, a clear plan with transparency and accountability with a call for unity that is equally necessary.” I couldn’t disagree more with that last part. How is unity as essential right now than the plan’s extended housing and nutrition aid? How is some amorphous harmony with people who have tried to deny Biden’s ascendance to the presidency with violence and death getting a $2,000 check into the accounts of Americans making $75,000 or less? (And not $1,400, as the Biden plan outlines, merely making up the difference of the Trump/Mitch McConnell $600 pittance. Give Americans what they should have had all along.)

The Washington Post reported that Congressional Republicans are already predicting widespread opposition to Biden’s sweeping plan, which includes a raise in the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour and $350 billion in state and local aid. The American economy and job market are heading, with even more precipitous speed, into the commode — yet these folks Biden wants “unity” with consider his proposal a “non-starter.”

I would ask kindly that the only party that ostensibly represents the interests of black people and other Americans of color stop trying to ally with Republicans, who could only get 10 of their 211 House members to vote to impeach a president who provoked a seditious, deadly, white-supremacist attack on the Capitol while all of Congress was inside, certifying the vote for the next President of the United States. Republicans mockingly refuse to wear masks, still — resulting, it appears, in at least three positive diagnoses for Democrats cooped up with them during the riot. Since the attack, they’ve petulantly avoided the new metal detectors. The party of Trump is an obstacle to be outmaneuvered, not a partner to be persuaded. And some of its members, frankly, should be expelled and prosecuted.

The calls for healing in the aftermath of the Capitol riot recall another egregious avoidance of accountability, one that serves as a cautionary tale. When President Lincoln in 1862 emancipated enslaved people in Washington, D.C., he paid their captors up to $300 for each human being they held in bondage. Even a passing look at what came next reveals the payments did nothing to win over enslavers to the cause of “unity.” Instead, they rewarded possibly the ugliest white entitlement there is. The United States has a long history, indeed, of ignoring the pain of its most downtrodden so that the salve of “unity” may be spread over the same festering wounds. In the wake of the Capitol riot, many are all too eager to repeat Lincoln’s mistake. As he begins his presidency, Biden should avoid doing the same.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Joe Biden's Looming War on White Supremacy Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51556"><span class="small">Ronald Brownstein, The Atlantic</span></a>   
Saturday, 16 January 2021 09:27

Brownstein writes: "For four years, Donald Trump downplayed the risk of white-supremacist violence and denied that racial bias is pervasive in law enforcement. In a single, searing day, the assault on the U.S."

Joe Biden. (photo: Frank Franklin II/AP)
Joe Biden. (photo: Frank Franklin II/AP)


Joe Biden's Looming War on White Supremacy

By Ronald Brownstein, The Atlantic

16 January 21


The insurrection could spur a federal-government crackdown on white-nationalist groups, as well as strengthen the case for systemic police reform.

or four years, Donald Trump downplayed the risk of white-supremacist violence and denied that racial bias is pervasive in law enforcement. In a single, searing day, the assault on the U.S. Capitol exposed the price of both of those choices—and may have provided Joe Biden new political momentum for reversing direction on each front.

At once, the rioters demonstrated how much the threat of white extremism has metastasized under Trump, while the restrained police response vivified a racial double standard in policing. The attack could strengthen the case for systemic police reform, both through congressional action and a revival of Justice Department oversight of local police practices that the Trump administration essentially shelved. Representative Karen Bass of California, the lead sponsor of a police-reform bill that passed the House last summer, told me she believes that the lower chamber will approve a new version “within the first quarter” of 2021. “This was yet another example in the disparity of treatment between African Americans and others,” Derrick Johnson, the president and CEO of the NAACP, told me. “This is yet another example of how police agencies viewed citizens differently.”

The attack could also make it tougher for congressional Republicans to resist the Biden administration’s expected efforts to dramatically increase enforcement against white supremacists through the Justice Department, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security. “This isn’t just a Trump thing that goes away when Trump goes away,” Elizabeth Neumann, the former DHS assistant secretary for threat prevention under Trump, told me. “And this isn’t just a bunch of really crazy Trump people. This is something darker and deeper that has been around a very long time. We have aroused the sleeping giant … and we’re now going to be dealing both with [Trump’s] radicalized supporters and this white-power movement on steroids for the foreseeable future.”

Biden signaled his intent to invert Trump’s law-enforcement priorities when he unveiled his top Justice Department nominees at a press conference the day after the Capitol assault. When Biden introduced Merrick Garland, his attorney-general nominee, the president-elect pointedly noted that the Justice Department was formed to enforce the post–Civil War constitutional amendments ending slavery and promising equal rights under the law. The department’s founding mission, Biden said, was “to stand up to the Klan, to stand up to racism, to take on domestic terrorism. This original spirit must again guide and animate its work.” When identifying their priorities, Garland and Biden’s other top DOJ nominees pointed to the same two issues: tackling the threat of violent domestic extremism and confronting systemic racial bias in law enforcement.

The nominees bring unusually relevant credentials to each side of that equation. Garland, a federal judge, helped lead the prosecution of Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, in the mid-1990s. Lisa Monaco, Biden’s nominee as deputy attorney general, served in Barack Obama’s administration as assistant attorney general for national security and his White House adviser on counterterrorism. The other two nominees Biden announced were selected from the heart of the civil-rights legal establishment: Associate-attorney-general nominee Vanita Gupta, another Obama alumnus, is the president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights; Kristen Clarke, the nominee for assistant attorney general for civil rights, is the president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.

Yet on both the white-extremist and policing fronts, the magnitude of the Biden administration’s challenge is formidable. The white-nationalist threat has been on “an upward trajectory” over the past four years, Neumann told me. Although white-supremacist organizations have always existed, and their efforts accelerated after Obama’s election as the first black president, Trump acted as a “kind of an accelerant,” she said. “There was already a fire, and he was adding fuel to it. He was expanding the number of people who were participating in the extremism.”

Greg Ehrie, a former section chief of the FBI’s domestic-terrorism operations center and now the vice president for law enforcement at the Anti-Defamation League, told me that throughout Trump’s presidency the white-nationalist movement has also felt more comfortable stepping out into public. “It is certainly growing in identified numbers, people who are coming out openly and saying ‘I believe in it,’” he said. “You are seeing people become emboldened.” At the same time, extremist groups are solidifying their organization, with more clearly identified leaders and something more akin to a chain of command. “Their structure is actually codifying itself, which is a really scary development,” Ehrie added.

While experts I spoke with agree that Trump’s rhetoric has dangerously encouraged these groups, they disagree on federal law enforcement’s response. Ehrie said federal agencies have made “some inroads” in combatting them. But others told me that the catastrophic attack on the Capitol made clear that the government has not treated the threat with sufficient gravity—either because of Trump’s own downplaying of any problem or because of cultural and racial blind spots in their own ranks.

“From what I watched, they made changes, they adjusted, but they were a little too slow, in my book,” including DHS, said Neumann, who resigned last year and publicly supported Biden during the election. “I still wonder, based on what happened on January 6, if there is kind of an unconscious bias—an assumption that a bunch of white guys like to yell at each other on the internet and play dress-up with militia [gear] but there are only a handful of them that we actually have to worry about.”

Many African American leaders see nothing to wonder about. Rashad Robinson, the president of the civil-rights advocacy group Color of Change, argues that federal law enforcement puts much more emphasis on monitoring and pressuring racial-justice advocates than white nationalists. Under Trump, federal officials “have treated NFL players who kneel as national threats and white men who are talking about overthrowing the government with guns as patriots,” Robinson told me.

“I don’t think they’ve dealt with it at all,” said Bass, referring to the Trump administration’s approach to white nationalism. “I don’t think they consider it a problem, and that’s a part of our history.”

Despite the heroism of individual officers resisting the mob, the Capitol Police’s strikingly muted response—as well as the presence of law-enforcement personnel from around the country among the rioters—raises a larger, often unspoken issue: the presence of white-nationalist sympathizers in law enforcement. The force’s reaction “brings [up] a lot of questions” related to whether there were “people internal to the [Trump] administration, within the Capitol Police, and others who were in collusion” with the attackers, Johnson, the NAACP president, told me. Adds Bass: “I think when all is said and done, you will find that [among] members of the Capitol Police, my Republican colleagues, and their staff, there was involvement at different levels and participation in what happened.” (Although no specific evidence has emerged, House Democrats have said they are investigating the possibility of collusion.)

More broadly, the lax response, as well as the decision to allow the rioters to leave the Capitol unmolested, dramatized in an unusually visceral way a key complaint from Black communities: that law enforcement treats white people differently in any kind of encounter—in this case, even an armed and violent attack on a foundation of the American government. The stark contrast between how the rioters were treated and how Black Lives Matter protests were handled last summer “further cements for people of color [that] America, for all of its good, has a long way to go in achieving its promises of equality under the law,” Sakira Cook, the Justice Reform director at the Leadership Conference, told me.

The Capitol riot could spur a new effort to overhaul police departments, including through Bass’s police-reform legislation, which the House passed in June without a single dissenting Democratic vote after the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis. (The Senate did not take the bill up for a vote.) Among other measures, that bill would have banned chokeholds and no-knock warrants at the federal level; established a national registry of police misconduct; and scaled back the “qualified immunity” legal defense for officers accused of wrongdoing. Under Gupta and Clarke, the Biden Justice Department is certain to revive its oversight of local police departments through “pattern or practice” investigations of systemic bias, which can result in judicial consent decrees.

More contentious is whether Congress needs to provide federal law enforcement with expanded legal authority to confront domestic terrorists. Neumann and some other terrorism experts say yes, while many civil-rights advocates fear that law enforcement could turn such authority against minority communities. “Addressing white supremacy does not require creating a new statute,” Becky Monroe, who heads the Leadership Conference’s hate and bias program, told me. “It requires the will and investment in existing statutes and existing authority to ensure that these insurrectionists are held accountable.”

Robinson said that truly defusing white nationalism’s rising threat will require more than prosecuting direct participants—or even pursuing sympathizers in law enforcement. Instead, the incoming administration and civil-rights advocates must look at the broader range of institutions that extremist groups rely on to grow, including social-media companies that spread their message and financial institutions that process their fundraising efforts. “Some of the biggest, most profitable institutions have also played a role in getting us here, because they have looked at so many of the people behind these groups and they have not seen them as a threat,” Robinson said. “They see people that look like them, that look like members of their families, and they don’t take the threat seriously because it’s not targeting them.”

Neumann pointed to another dimension. Because extremists are relying so heavily on Trump’s unfounded claims about the election to mobilize support, stunting them will be extremely difficult unless more Republican officials publicly refute him. “The biggest thing that could help the scope of the problem is for the bulk of Republicans to come out and say, ‘The election was not stolen, Donald Trump lied, I was complicit in that lie, and I apologize,’” she told me. An internal federal intelligence bulletin disclosed yesterday by The Washington Post also warned about more violence if the lie about the “stolen election” isn’t dispelled.

The responsibility for confronting this mounting threat now falls to Biden and his team. The president-elect has not appeared particularly enthusiastic about imposing consequences on Trump for his role in the Capitol attack through impeachment, and many legal experts believe that he will resist pursuing criminal charges against his predecessor. But throughout the campaign and the tumultuous transition period, Biden has focused on racial inequities more consistently and forcefully than even many civil-rights advocates expected.

By demonstrating both the danger of white nationalism and the bias in policing, last week’s assault has not only elevated those issues even further, but also exposed their common roots. “At its core, police brutality against people of color and white supremacy … in the way we have seen it displayed by Trump supporters are part and parcel of the same thing,” Cook told me. “What we want members of Congress to understand is that to address both of these problems, we must deal with the root causes of inequity and racial discrimination in this country.” Amid the wreckage of last week’s right-wing insurrection, and the ongoing threats of more violence looming over next week’s inauguration, that assignment looks only more urgent.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Throw the Book at Rick Snyder for Poisoning Flint's Water Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50019"><span class="small">Ben Beckett, Jacobin</span></a>   
Saturday, 16 January 2021 09:24

Beckett writes: "Former Michigan governor Rick Snyder suspended democracy for the majority of the state's black residents, then oversaw Flint residents' poisoning in the city's ongoing water crisis."

Michigan governor Rick Snyder, testifies during the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on lead contaminated drinking water in Flint, Michigan, on Thursday, March 17, 2016. (photo: Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images)
Michigan governor Rick Snyder, testifies during the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing on lead contaminated drinking water in Flint, Michigan, on Thursday, March 17, 2016. (photo: Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call/Getty Images)


Throw the Book at Rick Snyder for Poisoning Flint's Water

By Ben Beckett, Jacobin

16 January 21


Former Michigan governor Rick Snyder suspended democracy for the majority of the state’s black residents, then oversaw Flint residents’ poisoning in the city’s ongoing water crisis. As of today, he’s facing well-deserved criminal neglect charges.

ichigan’s attorney general Dana Nessel charged Republican former governor Rick Snyder with two counts of willful neglect related to the Flint water crisis today. The charge carries a maximum penalty of up to a year in prison. Snyder pleaded not guilty. Several former senior Snyder aides were also charged, and Nessel has said more indictments may be coming.

The charges are long overdue. In 2014, while under the authority of an “emergency manager,” appointed by Snyder, the City of Flint changed its municipal water source. Rather than buy water from the City of Detroit, which has a massive water plant roughly seventy miles south, Flint would now pump its own water from the Flint River (and eventually, the plan said, from Lake Huron).

This seemingly mundane infrastructure decision would have dramatic consequences for the impoverished city. In a decision approved by state regulators, Flint officials failed to properly treat the water coming from the new source. The water from the Flint River quickly corroded the city’s old lead pipes, putting dangerous amounts of lead and other chemicals into the water supply.

The water was so bad that GM stopped using Flint’s water in its nearby factories because it was permanently damaging the company’s heavy industrial equipment. Even then, city- and state-appointed officials resisted switching the water supply back to a safer source.

It is difficult to overstate the damage Snyder and his cronies did to the city of Flint, which was already impoverished as a result of decades of white flight, factory closures, and disinvestment. A dozen people died of Legionnaire’s disease and many more were sickened. Toxic chemicals known to contribute to cancer have now been in the water for years.

The New York Times reports that more than thirty thousand children were exposed to dangerous levels of lead, leading to a school system in which 28 percent of children require special education services, almost double the rate the year before the crisis began. Fertility decreased by 12 percent while fetal deaths rose by 58 percent. The city’s residents went without clean water for three years at an absolute minimum, with many residents expressing skepticism to this day that the city’s water is safe.

While the minor charges are arguably too little and too late for tens of thousands of Flint residents whose lives have been permanently altered, Snyder’s prosecution is an important step in ensuring a similar debacle never happens again. But an even more critical step is for Michigan residents to resoundingly defeat the neoliberal politics Snyder embodied.

Democracy Out, Capitalists In

For the duration of his two terms in office, Snyder was hell-bent on selling off public wealth for private profit, a reckless and deeply unpopular program that was only possible because he effectively suspended democratic government for the majority of the state’s black residents.

Specifically, he used a Michigan law allowing the governor to appoint “emergency managers” over school districts and cities. Emergency managers were legally accountable only to Snyder and had essentially dictatorial powers to overrule democratically elected officials, cancel contracts, and sell public goods to private capitalists.

Under Snyder, the cities of Benton Harbor, Pontiac, Flint, and Detroit — which together comprise the majority of the state’s black population — were all under emergency management, along with some of their school districts.

As Dianne Feeley wrote in Jacobin,

In 2011, Governor Rick Snyder signed a bill strengthening the law’s provisions and appointed emergency managers (EMs) to rule over deindustrialized cities and school districts — all of which had majority African-American populations. Flint, having lost half of its population to surrounding suburbs, was 57 percent black and had the highest poverty rate in the state. It was to have three emergency managers. The EMs sold public property, slashed public workers’ wages and pensions, and closed community centers. Any semblance of democracy was disregarded.

From the beginning residents protested the law, holding meetings, marches, press conferences, and demonstrations. They pointed out that much of the deficit had been caused by cutbacks to revenue-sharing required under the Michigan Constitution, and denounced the racist character of the law’s implementation.

In November 2012, Michiganders repealed the emergency manager law in a statewide referendum. Seventy-five of the state’s eighty-three counties voted to dump it. But legislators, in a lame-duck session, passed a nearly identical bill designed to block a future referendum, and Snyder quickly signed the legislation.

The mechanism that would help unleash a public health disaster in Flint was now firmly in place.

It’s worth dwelling for a moment on the lengths Snyder and Michigan Republicans went to in order to make sure black Michiganders had no way to stop the state from selling off their collective wealth. Even after a statewide referendum repudiated Snyder’s use of the emergency manager law and repealed his ability to wield it, Snyder and the Republican legislature simply passed an identical law weeks later. This time they included a special provision to make sure voters couldn’t strike it down.

The contempt for voters was flabbergasting. But that’s what it took to enact Snyder’s neoliberal program of attacking workers’ rights and selling as many productive public assets to private capitalists as possible, while cutting government services and benefits for public workers.

Most people don’t like those policies, and they’ll punish politicians who push them when given the chance. Snyder’s solution wasn’t to win people over, it was to make sure the people who would get screwed couldn’t do anything to stop him.

The Flint water crisis was only the most visible, and most deadly, example of a broader attack that the rich, led by Snyder, conducted on the poor and working class in Michigan, as well as civil servants in the state. It was only because the people involved had no say that he was able to get as far as he did in transferring collective goods into private hands.

In fact, Snyder and his proxies waged a prolonged campaign to undermine Detroit’s water system, wrest it from the majority-black city’s control, and push it toward privatization. It’s reasonable to ask if the whole Flint fiasco was rooted as much in an attempt to strip Detroit of a large customer as it was in the stated motive of saving Flint money.

It’s gratifying to see Snyder held accountable today. But ultimately, he is just one tool in the rich’s massive toolbox. With millions of dollars to pay for legal fees at his disposal, it is unlikely he’ll face any real consequences aside from a well-deserved hit to his reputation.

More importantly, there are hundreds of politicians like him — in both parties — in Michigan and beyond. Many of the worst things Snyder did were perfectly legal. The only way to truly defeat people like Rick Snyder is to do exactly what he feared most: organize, defeat them at the polls and on the picket line, and banish them from public life.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Liz Cheney Has a World Class Sense of Dark Humor Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=20877"><span class="small">William Boardman, Reader Supported News</span></a>   
Friday, 15 January 2021 13:59

Boardman writes: "Liz Cheney is on the right side of Trump's second impeachment. She has a long way to go to get on the right side of history. Sadly, she's closer than most of the rest of the Republican Party."

Rep. Liz Cheney speaks during a press conference at the Capitol on Dec. 17, 2019. (photo: Samuel Corum/Getty)
Rep. Liz Cheney speaks during a press conference at the Capitol on Dec. 17, 2019. (photo: Samuel Corum/Getty)


Liz Cheney Has a World Class Sense of Dark Humor

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

15 January 21

 

hen Rep. Liz Cheney, Republican of Wyoming, announced that she would vote to impeach President Trump, she framed it as a “vote of conscience,” not a political vote. Really? There’s some sort of meaningful distinction between a vote of conscience and a political vote? Trying to make that distinction is the essence of cynical manipulation.

When Cheney, the third ranking member of the House Republican leadership, announced that she would vote to impeach President Trump, she went against higher ranking Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Minority Whip Steve Scalise, who continue to hold the president above reproach. Cheney is reportedly planning to challenge McCarthy for the Minority Leader post. Other Republicans have called for her to step down from her post. She says she’s not going anywhere. This is all shuck and jive as unprincipled Republicans compete to take the party in different unprincipled directions.

Here’s the context: Wyoming has just one at-large seat in Congress, held by Liz Cheney since 2017. Her father, Dick Cheney, held the same seat from 1979 to 1989, before rising to Secretary of Defense and later Vice President.

History is hip deep on all sides these days, often invoked with annoyingly hyperbolic rhetoric from all sides. Liz Cheney’s public statement of January 12 (below in its entirety) is just one example of the overwrought prose coming at us from all political directions:

On January 6, 2021 a violent mob attacked the United States Capitol to obstruct the process of our democracy and stop the counting of presidential electoral votes. This insurrection caused injury, death and destruction in the most sacred space in our Republic.

Much more will become clear in coming days and weeks, but what we know now is enough. The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack. Everything that followed was his doing. None of this would have happened without the President. The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence. He did not. There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.

I will vote to impeach the President.

Rhetorical flourishes aside, Cheney’s description of the event comports with the available evidence so far. Her vote to impeach this president is honorable and justified. But her fundamental judgment is off the rails. To say that “There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution” is simply unsupportable unless you have a very strange hierarchy of beliefs (or an extremely dark sense of humor).

Does Cheney really believe Trump’s action is worse than President Bush (and VP Cheney) lying the US into an unjustified war on Iraq that killed more than 4,000 US soldiers, thousands more allied soldiers, and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi soldiers and civilians, promising to bring “democracy” to a country still in chaos almost twenty years later? Was destroying a modern, sovereign state (albeit a dictatorship) on bogus war claims really less of a betrayal than Trump’s feckless criminal passivity? What Trump did was worse than war crimes?

Does Cheney actually claim that Trump’s incitement of a mob on January 6 was worse than the Bush-Cheney regime’s establishment of a global program of torture, kidnapping, black sites, and the unlawful prison camp at Guantanamo? Does she seriously argue that Trump has exceeded these crimes against humanity that have gone unaddressed and unpunished?

Does Cheney seriously argue that Trump’s unleashing of his supporters on the Capitol is definitively worse than Bush-Cheney’s unleashing of the National Security Agency to spy on Americans after 9-11?

Does Cheney truly assert that Trump’s invitation to violence is even close to the program of political assassination by drone instituted under Bush-Cheney? How is violating any semblance of due process of law in order to murder mere suspects, even Americans, not a greater betrayal of the Constitution than Trump’s sedition? Official US drone murder has continued, uninterrupted, since Bush-Cheney initiated it, becoming too common to cause official concern any more.

There’s more than a little irony in Cheney’s present posturing. Less than two years ago she was suggesting that US law enforcement officials may have committed treason by investigating President Trump’s Russian connections. It “sounds an awful lot like a coup and it could well be treason,” Cheney said of the investigation that was successfully stonewalled by the White House.

Maybe Cheney is trying to position herself to take advantage of fractures in the Republican Party. Maybe she has higher office in mind. Or maybe she’s just another psychically numb traditional Republican.

“There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution,” Cheney claims – not lying the country into war, not war crimes, not a torture regime, not crimes against humanity, not assignation by drone, not even mass surveillance of Americans. Her father was a perpetrator in all of this.

Liz Cheney is on the right side of Trump’s second impeachment. She has a long way to go to get on the right side of history. Sadly, she’s closer than most of the rest of the Republican Party.



William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 Next > End >>

Page 229 of 3432

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN