RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
My Indigenous Culture Is an Act of Resistance Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51724"><span class="small">Siku Allooloo, YES! Magazine</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 September 2019 13:11

Allooloo writes: "People often speak of the North as a place of extremes and harsh realities: long and frozen winters, endless summer daylight, constant winter darkness, vast and all but uninhabited wilderness."

Melaw Nakehk'o, a Dene Nahjo co-founding member, fleshes a moose hide with a moose leg bone at the urban hide tanning camp organized in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, on September 9, 2017. (photo: Melinda Trochu/AFP/Getty Images)
Melaw Nakehk'o, a Dene Nahjo co-founding member, fleshes a moose hide with a moose leg bone at the urban hide tanning camp organized in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, on September 9, 2017. (photo: Melinda Trochu/AFP/Getty Images)


My Indigenous Culture Is an Act of Resistance

By Siku Allooloo, YES! Magazine

29 September 19


Two generations saw our Inuit and Dine homelands in Northern Canada nearly destroyed. Now my way of life is one of cultural repair.

eople often speak of the North as a place of extremes and harsh realities: long and frozen winters, endless summer daylight, constant winter darkness, vast and all but uninhabited wilderness. As a Northerner rooted in both Inuit and Dene cultures, the harshest extreme to me is how rapidly and far-reaching colonialism has set into our world.

Within the span of two lifetimes, my parents’ and grandparents’ generations have seen drastic changes both in our ways of life and our homelands. My Inuit grandparents went from freely traveling the land as our ancestors had always done to living in a permanent community. The RCMP [the Canadian national police] forced Inuit into settlements in the 1950s to bring us under government control. They slaughtered our sled dogs so we were immobile and also split entire family groups apart, scattering us across different communities.

My father was born in a sod house in 1949 and was raised to travel the land and provide for his family from a young age. He can navigate using constellations and landmarks, make traditional tools, build shelter in any season, attend to injuries, and his intimate knowledge of our world makes him a very skilled hunter on both the land and the sea. At the age of 8, he was able to go out for the day alone and come back with a seal to feed the family. Also at 8, he was taken from his parents and sent to residential school thousands of kilometers away, which he was lucky to have survived.

He was one of tens of thousands of children stolen from every Indigenous nation across the country by the Canadian government and forced into assimilation schools. They knew our entire societies stem from the land, which meant we would never give it up and that we would always protect it. So for 150 years, Canada stole all of our children—our heart, indeed our future—and sought to break them of our ways and collapse our societies in the process. Many of these children suffered unthinkable atrocities during their time at these schools, and thousands never made it home to our families. It is a devastating and recent history, with the last schools finally closing in 1996, and Indigenous peoples throughout the country are still working through the debilitating repercussions that persist in our lives.

The desire to dominate and exploit peoples and lands to create wealth—this is the driving force of colonialism and also the lifeblood of this country. If there is any hope of recuperating a sense of humanity, or of surviving the climate crisis that is rapidly intensifying throughout the world, we need to engage the reality of everything we are up against. The stakes are too high.

It is no exaggeration to say that Canada is built on racism, genocide, violence, and theft. The founding and daily maintenance of this colony depends expressly on the domination of Indigenous peoples through the illegal seizure and occupation of our territories, colonial laws and policies, police brutality, excessive incarceration, economic marginalization, gender violence, child apprehension, and the suppression of our governance systems, spiritual practices, and ancestral ways of life—all of which remain deeply rooted in our lands.

Canada is sustained by a resource-based economy—if there is any doubt as to the racism and brutality this necessitates every day, just consider: Where do the resources come from and how are they obtained—are they not violently torn from the earth? And are those sites of extraction not integral parts of Indigenous homelands or crucial to animal and plant life? Why is it that most Indigenous peoples are living in extremely impoverished conditions on reserves, in remote communities, and in urban centers, whereas the resources stripped from our lands generate massive amounts of wealth for governments and corporations? Is this country not home to one of the biggest and most destructive industrial operations on the planet? (See Environmental Defence’s report, “Canada’s Toxic Tar Sands: The Most Destructive Project on Earth,” February 2008.)

How many of our territories and water systems have been contaminated by hydroelectric dams, oil, gas, and toxic waste, and how many lives are being lost to new cancers as a result every year? How many community members have been harmed or arrested for protecting their homelands from pipelines and mining operations? What recourse do we have to the distinct rise in gender violence and narcotics abuse that come with intensified mining in our communities?

Treaties 8 and 11 grant permission for settlers to coexist on our lands and were contingent upon certain terms, including mutual autonomy, self-governance, and the provision of health care—but how many of our men, women, elders, and youth continually suffer violence at the hands of police officers or are denied adequate care by health providers?

These treaties were also meant to ensure that Indigenous ways of life would continue despite the presence of settlers—meaning that all of the elements that sustain life on the land would remain protected—so that our people could continue to live according to our ancestral ways forever.

Because of ongoing colonial policies, industrial exploitation, and now climate change, places where we used to be able to harvest food or medicines, drink the water, and inhabit alongside other forms of life are being turned into wastelands.

My hometown of Yellowknife was built for gold mining in 1934 and became home to one of the richest gold mines in Canadian history. Giant Mine sits on the shore of Great Slave Lake, one of the largest freshwater sources on the planet. Though the mine closed in 2004, its toxic repercussions will last forever. The deteriorating site rests upon 237,000 metric tons of arsenic trioxide, a lethal byproduct of gold mining that is impossible to remediate or prevent from leaking into the surrounding lakes and atmosphere, which it is doing at a disturbing rate. (See Clark Ferguson’s interactive web documentary, Shadow of a Giant.) A study released in April 2016 showed mercury and arsenic levels to be dangerously high in lakes within a 25-kilometer radius of Giant Mine; in some cases, over 13 times the limit for drinking water and 27 times the level deemed adequate for aquatic life (Ivan Semeniuk, “Lakes Near Yellowknife Contaminated with Arsenic, Mercury after Mine Closing,” Globe and Mail, April 6, 2016).

Canadians tend to romanticize the Northern town for its remnants of a frontier history forged by sweat and gold as well as for its supposed “untouched, pristine wilderness”—but the truth is we can no longer drink the water or eat the fish in that area and now have to travel long distances to harvest foods and medicines. They say Giant Mine rests upon enough arsenic to kill the entire planet twice over—and although there have been several attempts over the years to contain the toxic waste, there has never been an adequate plan to protect the environment from contamination. For me, this is the clearest indication of Western society’s single-minded focus on obtaining wealth at any expense. There is no contingency plan or thought of the future or respect for any form of life. The only drive is money—and this is true of any mining operation in the country, whether diamonds or oil and gas or gold.

Today, the beautiful, vast, wild landscape of Denendeh is riddled with large-scale mining operations that have destroyed numerous lakes and river ecosystems, as well as the migration and calving grounds of caribou—an essential source of sustenance for both Inuit and Dene alike since time immemorial. We are caribou people, and the widespread decline of this ancestral relation is a source of deepening loss across the North.

There are many stories of the generosity and benevolence of caribou, how they offer themselves in times of need. Dene and Inuit peoples would not exist without the caribou: its hide has given us warmth and protection from the cold, its meat our main source of nourishment, its bones and antlers our tools, its skin stretched on drums that carry our songs and spiritual connection. It was the caribou who taught us how to honor our kinship and practice ways that sustain us both. A growing anxiety throughout our communities is, What happens when there are no more caribou? Are we still caribou people? If we can no longer practice our culture in all of the ways that depend on the caribou, are we still Dene or Inuit?

Protecting the caribou was once a major rallying point for Northerners. It’s what galvanized us to stand strong against the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline and assimilative government policies in the 1970s and also work toward self-determination. Since then both the caribou population and our anticolonial nerve have been in steep decline. We have veered quite far from the unified vision we once fought hard for to ensure that our homelands would remain grounded in Indigenous principles, values, and ways of life well into the future.

Last spring I spent some time with a very knowledgeable and beloved elder, Ethel Lamothe. We were at Dechinta Bush University—a Northern organization based outside of Yellowknife that delivers Indigenous education on the land and one of the saving graces in my own educational journey. I was helping her scrape a moose hide in preparation for tanning, and as our hands worked we talked about womanhood, spirituality, and bush medicines. She told me about the work she and others did in previous decades to advance decolonization, social transformation, and healing in Denendeh and also shared insight about the challenges. I had been troubled lately about the gap between elders and young people, the cultural inheritance being lost, the growing alienation I see in current generations, and the complexity of overcoming all these challenges when we are starting from such fragmentation. At one point Ethel stopped and said: “Our society is full of holes now, like the ones in this hide. So we have to sew them up. Where there’s a hole there instead of a mother or a father, an aunty or grandparent steps in to raise the kids. We have holes in our spirituality and culture, how we relate to each other and deal with things, so we have to find ways to relearn that. You know, we lost some of our own ceremonies and ways of praying, but we can learn from other cultures who still have it. You don’t have any grandmothers to teach what you need to know as a woman, so you adopt a new grandmother who can teach you. So we do it like that. We sew it up.”

This excerpt is from “Caribou People” by Siku Allooloo, an essay in Shapes of Narrative Nonfiction (2019), edited by Elissa Washuta and Theresa Warburton. It appears by permission of University of Washington Press.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS | Ukraine investigation: Donald Trump's Defense Only Makes Him Look Worse Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51723"><span class="small">Barbara McQuade, USA TODAY</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 September 2019 10:48

McQuade writes: "The latest scandal to embroil President Donald Trump feels different from the Mueller investigation. The alleged misconduct regarding Ukraine does not require a 400-page report to understand."

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. (photo: AP)
Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky. (photo: AP)


Ukraine investigation: Donald Trump's Defense Only Makes Him Look Worse

By Barbara McQuade, USA Today

29 September 19


In his call with the Ukrainian president, Donald Trump undermined the credibility of the United States by conditioning military aid on personal favors.

he latest scandal to embroil President Donald Trump feels different from the Mueller investigation. The alleged misconduct regarding Ukraine does not require a 400-page report to understand. That’s because the harm to the public is readily apparent — Trump is trading our national security for his own reelection.

On Wednesday, Trump spoke at a news conference after disclosing a rough transcript of his July 25 telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. His performance was reminiscent of former Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta after the Jeffrey Epstein indictment. He really just made things worse.

The transcript was bad enough. It reveals that when Zelensky mentioned his desire to buy more U.S. military weapons, Trump’s immediate response was, “I would like you to do us a favor, though.” He then asked Zelensky to “get to the bottom of” the origins of the Mueller investigation, perpetuating his quest to show that it was a witch hunt. He then asked Zelensky to probe former Vice President Joe Biden’s alleged efforts to stop an investigation into Biden’s son. Trump urged Zelensky to work with Attorney General William Barr and Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, a private citizen with no accountability to the public.

And this request turned out to be no idle threat. Trump withheld nearly $400 million in military aid from Ukraine for months, releasing the money only after reports about a whistleblower’s complaint about Trump’s conduct became public. While further facts are needed, the delay tends to corroborate the theory that Trump was leveraging military aid for his requested “favor.”

'Quid pro quo' was clear

During his news conference, Trump tried to defend his comments in the phone call and failed in a number of ways. First, he claimed that their conversation contained no “quid pro quo.” Quid pro quo is a legal term that means “this for that.” It is often used when explaining bribery, as when a public official gives an official act in exchange for money or some other thing of value. We know that the whistleblower’s complaint comprises a “series” of acts, so the absence of a quid pro quo in any one conversation would not be surprising or dispositive.

Moreover, no quid pro quo is needed to show an impeachable abuse of power by a president. But, in fact, the call did contain a quid pro quo. As soon as Zelensky brought up his desire to obtain weapons, Trump immediately demanded a favor. That’s a quid pro quo. As a prosecutor, I would have been very optimistic about my chances for a conviction with the strength of such evidence.

Second, Trump also claimed that Zelensky was never “pushed.” Bribery can be, and often is, committed without pushing anyone to do something they don’t want to do. A bribe payer is often quite happy with the official action that he can secure with his bribe. Anyone who has ever slipped some cash to a restaurant maitre d' in hopes of being seated at a good table knows that sometimes paying for a favor brings satisfaction. You don’t have to be pushed to be solicited for a bribe.

Acting in his own interest, not ours

Third, Trump tried to equate what he had done with the conduct of several senators, who Trump claims “threatened the president of Ukraine that if he doesn’t do things right, they won’t have Democrat support in Congress.” 

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., issued a statement later, explaining that he has told Zelensky to stay out of the 2020 election, and to “communicate with the State Department, not the president’s campaign.”

The difference between the statements to Zelensky should be obvious — Murphy’s message was intended to benefit the country, and Trump’s request for a favor was intended is to benefit himself.

In the end, Trump’s defense was utterly unconvincing. What makes this episode more compelling than the Mueller investigation is its readily apparent harm to the American people. Trump withheld military aid from Ukraine, a country that has been invaded by Russia, which still occupies part of its land. The aid was approved by Congress because it believed that it is in the national security interest of the United States to empower Ukraine to deter Russia from further military action. The reputation and credibility of the United States as a negotiating partner is eroded when we fail to fulfill our promises, or when we condition them on performing a personal favor for the president. By using military aid as leverage to help his own political campaign, Trump has harmed our country.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Trump Can Do More Damage Than Nixon. His Impeachment Is Imperative Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9643"><span class="small">Robert Reich, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 September 2019 08:20

Reich writes: "Amid the impeachment furor, don't lose sight of the renewed importance of protecting the integrity of the 2020 election."

Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)
Former Clinton Labor Secretary Robert Reich. (photo: Steve Russell/Toronto Star)


Trump Can Do More Damage Than Nixon. His Impeachment Is Imperative

By Robert Reich, Guardian UK

29 September 19


Watergate brought down a second-term president. If Trump survives and wins the White House again, all bets are off

mid the impeachment furor, don’t lose sight of the renewed importance of protecting the integrity of the 2020 election.

The difference between Richard Nixon’s abuse of power (trying to get dirt on political opponents to help with his 1972 re-election, and then covering it up) and Donald Trump’s abuse (trying to get Ukraine’s president to get dirt on a political opponent to help with his 2020 reelection, and then covering it up) isn’t just that Nixon’s involved a botched robbery at the Watergate while Trump’s involves a foreign nation.

It’s that Nixon’s abuse of power was discovered during his second term, after he was re-elected. He was still a dangerous crook, but by that time he had no reason to inflict still more damage on American democracy.

Trump’s abuse has been uncovered 14 months before the 2020 election, at a time when he still has every incentive to do whatever he can to win.

If special counsel Robert Mueller had found concrete evidence that Trump asked Vladimir Putin for help in digging up dirt on Hillary Clinton in 2016, that would have been the “smoking gun” that could have ended the Trump presidency.

Now Trump is revealed to have asked Volodymyr Zelenskiy, the president of Ukraine, for dirt on Joe Biden in the 2020 election, who’s to say he isn’t also soliciting Vladimir Putin’s help this time around?

The Washington Post reports that Trump told two Russian officials in a 2017 meeting in the Oval Office he was unconcerned about Moscow’s interference in the US election because the US did the same in other countries. This prompted White House officials to limit access to Trump’s remarks.

Trump is in a better position to make such deals than he was in 2016 because as president he’s got a pile of US military aid and international loans and grants that could make a foreign rulers’ life very comfortable, or, if withheld, exceedingly difficult.

As we’ve learned, Trump uses whatever leverage he can get, for personal gain. That’s the art of the deal.

Who can we count on to protect our election process in 2020?

Certainly not William Barr. We’ve seen the transcript of Trump’s phone call where he urges Zelenskiy to work with the attorney general to investigate Biden – even telling Zelenskiy Barr will follow up with his own call.

We also know Barr’s justice department decided Trump had not acted illegally, and told the acting director of national intelligence to keep the whistleblower complaint from Congress.

This is the same attorney general, not incidentally, who said Mueller’s report had cleared the Trump campaign of conspiring with Russia when in fact Mueller had found that the campaign welcomed Russia’s help, and who said Mueller had absolved Trump of obstructing justice when Mueller specifically declined to decide the matter.

Barr is not working for the United States. He’s working for Trump, just like Rudy Giuliani and all the other lapdogs, toadies and sycophants.

Fortunately, some government appointees still understand their responsibilities. We’re indebted to the anonymous intelligence officer who complained about Trump’s calls to the president of Ukraine, and to Michael Atkinson, inspector general of the intelligence community, who deemed the complaint of “urgent concern”.

But if the 2020 election is going to be – and to be seen as – legitimate, the nation will need many more whistleblowers and officials with integrity.

All of us will need to be vigilant.

Over the last two and a half years, Trump has shown himself willing to trample any aspect of our democracy that gets in his way – attacking the media, using the presidency for personal profit, packing the federal courts, verbally attacking judges, blasting the head of the Federal Reserve, spending money in ways Congress did not authorize, and subverting the separation of powers.

He believes he’s invincible. He’s now daring our entire constitutional and political system to stop him.

The real value of the formal impeachment now under way is to put Trump on notice that he can’t necessarily get away with abusing his presidential power to win re-election. He will still try, of course. But at least a line has been drawn. And now everyone is watching.

Regardless of how the impeachment turns out, Trump’s predation can be constrained as long as his presidency can be ended with the 2020 election. If that election is distorted, and if this man is re-elected, all bets are off.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Defending Immigrants When Their Landlords Use ICE Against Them Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=51721"><span class="small">Elizabeth King, In These Times</span></a>   
Sunday, 29 September 2019 08:14

King writes: "While the Trump administration has orchestrated a brutal crackdown on immigrant rights, Democratic politicians have passed laws that provide some manner of protection to undocumented immigrants."

Here's how Illinois tenants are fighting back. (photo: Mr Doomits/Shutterstock)
Here's how Illinois tenants are fighting back. (photo: Mr Doomits/Shutterstock)


Defending Immigrants When Their Landlords Use ICE Against Them

By Elizabeth King, In These Times

29 September 19

 

hile the Trump administration has orchestrated a brutal crackdown on immigrant rights, Democratic politicians have passed laws that provide some manner of protection to undocumented immigrants. In Illinois, Governor J.B. Pritzker recently signed the Immigrant Tenant Protection Act (ITPA), which makes it illegal for landlords to retaliate against tenants on the basis of their immigration status and allows tenants to sue if landlords discriminate against them on those grounds. The law, passed in late August, went into effect immediately, making Illinois the second state after California to pass a law protecting undocumented renters.

The law states that “the immigration or citizenship status of any person is irrelevant to any issue of liability or remedy in a civil action involving a tenant’s housing rights.” If a tenant makes a complaint about their housing in good faith, the law says landlords may not use a tenant’s immigration status to evict the tenant or carry out any backlash against them. The law also allows tenants to sue landlords if they violate the ITPA.

The law is an acknowledgement of the ways that some landlords see immigrant tenants, especially those who are undocumented, as easily exploitable because of how vulnerable they are to state violence.

Many immigrants in Chicago have reported that their landlords have harassed or otherwise discriminated against them over their immigration status. Rocio Velazquez Kato is the senior immigration policy analyst for the Latino Policy Forum (LPF), one of the organizations that advocated for the Illinois ITPA, along with the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund and the Shriver Center on Poverty Law. She says that she has heard of numerous cases of discrimination against immigrant tenants in her work. Most of these incidents involve the landlord blackmailing tenants while alluding to their immigration status, or the status of their family members, according to Velazquez Kato.

“A lot of people think it's because the Trump admin has stirred things up and emboldened people in general and landlords would be susceptible to being emboldened about their dislike of immigrants,” says Velazquez Kato. “But the truth is what we've seen is this has been happening for years and years well before the Trump admin.”

In one case, Velazquez Kato says a woman called the LPF’s hotline to report that her landlord effectively threatened to call immigration agents on her family after the woman requested to add her teenage daughter to her lease. After the tenant asked to amend the lease to include her child, who was coming from the family’s home country to live in the apartment, “The landlord asked for a lot more money per month,” Velazquez Kato says. “And [the landlord] alluded to calling immigration officials, and brought up a suspicion that some of the family members may be undocumented.”

Velazquez Kato calls this behavior “blackmail,” and says that it is the “sort of harassment we've seen happen a lot.”

Velazquez Kato adds that, generally speaking, undocumented immigrants who contact the LPF because they need help with issues of housing discrimination do not want many details of the incidents shared publicly. This is because they fear that any additional attention that is brought to the fact that they are living in the U.S. without documents may bring about government reprisal, which could lead to deportation. Fear of repercussion for speaking out publicly regarding injustices is a common fear for undocumented immigrants that adds further barriers to seeking justice.

Landlord neglect makes tenants vulnerable

Antonio Gutiérrez, a co-founder of the Autonomous Tenants Union (ATU), an all-volunteer Chicago collective that organizes tenants largely in the Albany Park neighborhood, says that undocumented community members in the neighborhood can be more vulnerable to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests in their apartments due to landlord neglect. The organizer says that there have been multiple occasions when ICE agents have gained access to buildings where undocumented immigrants live because landlords have failed to put proper locks on outside gates or front doors.

This is a serious concern in Albany Park, which is home to one of the largest populations of undocumented immigrants in the city and has historically been the site of apartment raids. For example, between late 2013 and early 2014, ICE agents raided one Albany Park building “at least four times,” according to a 2014 press release from Organized Communities Against Deportations (OCAD), an anti-deportation organization in Chicago. Once inside on one occasion, the agents approached a number of apartments, leading to the detention of one man from Guatemala, a father named Anibal Fuentes Aguilar. Gutiérrez, who is also a member of OCAD, says that neither the doors nor the outer gate for the apartment complex where Aguilar lived at the time actually locked. Neither the name of the landlord or building manager for the apartment complex nor the specific address of the complex were never made public, and OCAD could not share that information­.

Scenarios such as this one are potentially easier for ICE agents to accomplish if main entrances to apartment buildings lack adequate locks because they can gain access to the buildings without being let in by residents.

As such, main entrance locks are a practical issue that the ATU is organizing around. Gutiérrez says that the ATU is currently working with immigrant tenants in an Albany Park building where there have been major security breaches, including robberies due to inadequate locks, According to Gutiérrez, the landlord has been unresponsive to the tenants’ requests for security improvements, likely because the tenants are immigrants.

The tenant’s burden to fight discrimination

The ATU welcomed the news of the ITPA’s passage in Illinois. But Gutiérrez says that while the ITPA allows undocumented tenants to take action against discriminatory landlords, the burden of correcting the discrimination still falls entirely on the tenants.

“If you’re undocumented and low-income, how are you going to get the money to sue your landlord?” Gutiérrez says. “We need to have a dialogue around how [these policies] get implemented and how tenants can make those grievances.”

The fact that many undocumented people do not want to call any additional attention to themselves for fear of being detained and deported could be a barrier to pursuing legal action against a landlord under the ITPA. Velazquez Kato says that, hopefully, the ITPA will act as a deterrent that discourages landlords from discriminating against undocumented renters in the first place.

In terms of further policy, ATU organizers advocate for a “just cause” law for the city of Chicago. Presently, Chicago landlords are legally permitted to evict tenants for any reason—or no reason at all. This presents obvious issues for many tenants, and for immigrant tenants, it means they would only be able to demonstrate the type of discrimination that would be suable under the ITPA if the landlord is explicit about their bias. Under a just cause law, landlords would be required to prove that their tenants are in violation of their lease agreement in order to evict them.

While the ATU works with tenants to build and leverage their collective power, some progressive local politicians are working on policies that would make undocumented tenants safer in their homes.

Democratic Socialist alderman for the 35th Ward, Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, says that undocumented community members in his ward have reported discrimination on the part of landlords. In particular, Ramirez-Rosa tells In These Times that he’s heard from undocumented immigrants that potential landlords have requested a social security number on apartment applications, and some have said that landlords have refused to rent apartments to them on the basis of their immigration status.

To help remedy issues of safety in apartment buildings where immigrants live, Ramirez-Rosa says that he wants to pass an ordinance that would require landlords to install self-locking doors at the entrances to apartment buildings. He further says that his office wants to “build a deep working relationship with members of the undocumented community” so that undocumented immigrants in the ward feel safe coming to his office for help regarding housing discrimination.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Obama to Produce Netflix Series About Trump's Impeachment Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=9160"><span class="small">Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker</span></a>   
Saturday, 28 September 2019 13:18

Borowitz writes: "Former President Barack Obama has inked a ninety-million-dollar deal to produce a Netflix series about Donald J. Trump's impeachment, Netflix confirmed on Friday."

Barack Obama. (photo: Jochen Zick/Action Press/Shutterstock)
Barack Obama. (photo: Jochen Zick/Action Press/Shutterstock)


Obama to Produce Netflix Series About Trump's Impeachment

By Andy Borowitz, The New Yorker

28 September 19


The article below is satire. Andy Borowitz is an American comedian and New York Times-bestselling author who satirizes the news for his column, "The Borowitz Report."


ormer President Barack Obama has inked a ninety-million-dollar deal to produce a Netflix series about Donald J. Trump’s impeachment, Netflix confirmed on Friday.

Production on the series could begin as early as October, in Washington and Kiev, Obama told reporters.

“We’ve already hit the ground running on the script,” Obama said. “Rudy Giuliani has given us a lot to work from.”

Obama said that casting for the roles of Trump and Mike Pence had already begun. “Pence has a much bigger role in this than you might think,” he added.

The former President acknowledged, however, that dramatizing the story of the Trump impeachment was not without challenges. “Right now, the main character reveals the smoking gun himself in the first episode,” he said. “There’s virtually no mystery.”

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 Next > End >>

Page 744 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