Georgetown Students Voted to Pay a Fee for Slavery Reparations. America, Take Note.
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50628"><span class="small">Courtland Milloy, The Washington Post</span></a>
Sunday, 21 April 2019 13:22
Milloy writes: "While many are confounded by the subject of reparations for slavery, students at Georgetown University have acted on the courage of their convictions."
The Liturgy of Remembrance, Contrition and Hope on April 18, 2017, drew over 100 descendants of people enslaved by Georgetown University. (photo: Allison Shelley/WP)
Georgetown Students Voted to Pay a Fee for Slavery Reparations. America, Take Note.
By Courtland Milloy, The Washington Post
21 April 19
hile many are confounded by the subject of reparations for slavery, students at Georgetown University have acted on the courage of their convictions.
America, take note.
These students have seen how the legacy of slavery manifests itself in racial disparities — in health, wealth, housing and employment. And they know that the outcomes are no accident. They are the intended results of an economic system rooted in racism and designed to maintain itself in perpetuity.
Maurice Jackson, who teaches courses about slavery, racism, reparations and the Reconstruction era at Georgetown, says many of his students are no longer willing to ignore the problems. They are closing the gaps between the sugarcoated historical myths of their childhoods and the brutal reality of a nation birthed in genocide and bondage.
“They are seeing how ignorance about the past threatens their future. And they are in a hurry to do something about it,” Jackson said.
What they did was modest, yet unprecedented.
A referendum proposing that undergraduates pay a “reconciliation fee,” in effect reparations, was put to a vote on April 11 — and passed. The beneficiaries would be the descendants of a particular group of 272 enslaved people. They were working around Prince George’s County when, in 1838, the Maryland Province of the Society of Jesus decided to sell them to raise money for a financially strapped Georgetown University.
Students learned of the school’s ties to slavery after a human thigh bone was unearthed during construction of a residence hall in 2014. It was a cemetery site, where the remains of slaves and free blacks had been buried. Subsequent discoveries led the university to make a formal apology in 2017 “for our participation in the evil of slavery,” Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia wrote in an open letter to the campus a day after the student vote.
He said the university would take other steps toward fostering dialogue. “We are pursuing work that is uncharted,” he wrote.
With this month’s vote for paying restitution, the students had charted a path of their own.
The amount of the reconciliation fee, to be paid each semester, was a symbolic $27.20. The fees were expected to generate an estimated $400,000 a year. More than 8,000 descendants of the 272 have been identified so far.
Some students complained that the amount was too low, “just an Uber ride,” as one wrote in a post on social media.
Others said the fee increase was unfair, especially to poor students.
Some black students questioned why they should pay reparations when, if anything, they should be receiving them. For others, the answer was clear.
“No problem helping my less fortunate brothers and sisters,” a black student posted on social media. “I’m here because somebody helped me.”
In an op-ed for the Hoya in February, two students, Samuel Dubke and Hayley Grande, made their case for opposing the fee.
“Supporters of the referendum will claim that we, by attending classes, living in dorms and accepting our degrees, owe an intrinsic debt to the descendants of those enslaved people who paid for Georgetown’s existence with their lives,” they wrote. “While we agree that the Georgetown of today would not exist if not for the sale of 272 slaves in 1838, current students are not to blame for the past sins of the institution, and a financial contribution cannot reconcile this past debt on behalf of the university. .?.?. Georgetown University alone, not the student body, has the obligation to pay for its past transgressions.”
And yet, the measure was approved, overwhelmingly, garnering 66 percent of the 3,845 votes cast. The spring elections, which included candidates for the school senate, drew the largest voter turnout in Georgetown’s electoral history, according to the Hoya.
“The measures advanced in this referendum would put Georgetown on the right side of history and constitute the first reparations policy in the nation,” Georgetown University Student Association President Norman Francis Jr. and Vice President Aleida Olvera wrote in an op-ed for the newspaper.
In an open letter to the university following the vote, DeGioia praised students for “bringing attention to deeply held convictions that we take very seriously.” But he also noted that requiring students to pay such a fee “raises complex issues” that won’t be resolved “immediately or easily.”
The referendum was nonbinding; school officials would still have the last word.
And on April 15, two students filed a lawsuit with the Georgetown University Student Association’s Constitutional Council, seeking to nullify the vote. They contended that the GUSA can hold referendums only on constitutional issues and that the GUSA had violated its own bylaws by holding a vote on raising fees.
The election did not mark the end of the student campaign for reparations. More like a new start.
A remarkable one at that, with most students pushing aside arguments that have doomed reparations proposals in the past.
William Darity Jr., a professor of public policy at Duke University and a scholar on the economics of reparations, told Politico that he was “admiring” what the students at Georgetown were doing. But he also urged them to work on a nationwide effort instead of going only for “piecemeal” solutions.
“We do need to move away from viewing this as a matter of individual guilt or individual responsibility that can be offset by individual payments, towards the recognition that this is a national responsibility,” Darity said.
And yet, a large majority of students had voted to, in essence, begin atoning for the sins of their school.
At Georgetown, where symbols of hate and violence have appeared in recent years — swastikas carved into elevator walls, racist graffiti scrawled in hallways, menorahs defaced — students had created one that could be trumped by none.
It was a vote — the voice of a free people — symbolizing compassion, reconciliation, justice, mercy and collective responsibility.
Lee Baker, a descendant of the 272, was impressed.
“Regardless of what happens,” he told the Hoya, “we will know that Georgetown University students practiced solidarity and decided to ensure that such an historic injustice has a permanent lens for awareness, analysis and action.”
Take note, America. This is what the future looks like.
7 Things We've Learned About Earth Since the Last Earth Day
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=50222"><span class="small">Umair Irfan, Vox</span></a>
Sunday, 21 April 2019 13:19
Irfan writes: "This year's Earth Day, April 22, will arrive at a sobering moment in human history. The world is warming faster than ever."
A rally against climate denial. (photo: Nasief Manie/AP)
7 Things We've Learned About Earth Since the Last Earth Day
By Umair Irfan, Vox
21 April 19
We continue to shape life on Earth, and threaten our survival, in unexpected ways.
his year’s Earth Day, April 22, will arrive at a sobering moment in human history. The world is warming faster than ever. The oceans are rising. Thousands of migrants are fleeing environmental disasters. Taxpayers are paying billions to rebuild communities after climate-linked wildfires and hurricanes destroyed them. The Trump administration is unraveling policies designed to protect our health and environment at a stunning pace. And global emissions keep rising.
At the same time, new voices are helping us see and understand the urgency of the crisis before us, focusing us on what we need to do (get off fossil fuels, for one). A fresh wave of young environmental activists are taking to the streets to strike for a safe climate. From classrooms to courtrooms to Congress members pushing the Green New Deal, an ambitious new suite of tactics are being deployed to defend the environment.
This Earth Day, it’s worth taking stock of what we keep learning about the spinning world we inhabit and how we’re responding to crises at hand. In keeping with the Vox tradition started by former Vox writers Brad Plumer and Joseph Stromberg, here are seven of the coolest, most intriguing, and most alarming things we’ve learned about the Earth since the last Earth Day.
1) Kids today face a truly frightening climate future — and they’re mad as hell at adults for neglecting the problem
Many people under the age of 18 right now may be around to see the end of the century. And a growing number of them are not pleased with the climate they’re inheriting. Our current trajectory puts the planet on course to warm by 4 degrees Celsius by 2100, creating a world that will be devastated by disasters, droughts, disease, and food shortages.
In March of this year, students in more than 120 countries went on strike from school to demand action on climate change. These climate strikes are part of a youth-led climate activism movement, with another global strike planned for May 24. Here’s Irene Kananura of Kampala, Uganda who was striking this past Friday in the heat:
The #FridaysForFuture strike movement began when Greta Thunberg, a 16-year-old from Sweden, began skipping school and picketing outside the Swedish parliament to protest her government’s inaction on climate change in August.
She has since become something of a global ambassador for youth anxieties about climate change, and has pressured European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker to commit 1 trillion Euros to fight climate change. “Our house is on fire,” she said in a January speech at Davos. “I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act.” She and other young people show no signs of letting up the pressure.
2) Plastic is increasingly not fantastic
Whales washing ashore filled with plastic have become distressingly familiar sign of the immense amount of plastic we’ve allowed to wash into the ocean. A pregnant sperm whale was found with 49 pounds of plastic in her stomach along the coast of Sardinia, Italy earlier this month. In March, a Cuvier’s beaked whale was found vomiting blood off the coast of the Philippines. It died a few hours later, and 88 pounds of plastic waste were discovered in its stomach.
Every year, we let roughly the mass of the Great Pyramid of Giza in plastic to flow into the ocean, where it breaks down into small chunks or particles and accumulates in sea animals large and small.
We only recycle about 9 percent of the plastic we produce, and even that tiny fraction is under threat. China, the world’s largest recyclable plastic importer, began to slash its intake last year. The move has rippled throughout the world. It’s already forced some recycling programs in the United States to shut down entirely.
Yet addressing the plastic crisis is becoming a bigger policy priority, and more countries are now banning single-use plastics — including plastic cutlery and straws. Meanwhile, the race is on to develop new environmentally-safe materials, to repurpose existing plastics, and to harness bacteria to digest our waste.
3) Life is so much heavier than we thought
Have you ever contemplated how much every plant, fungus, bacterium, insect, bird, fish, and mammal all put together would weigh? Maybe not. But last year, scientists did just that, calculating the total mass of all life on earth as we know it.
Vox’s Javier Zarracina and Brian Resnick put together a helpful visual of the mass of all life. A key insight is that the some of the smallest creatures carry the greatest weight. The mass of bacteria is 1,100 times more than the mass of all humans put together, for example.
But despite the mind-boggling mass of every maple, elephant, cricket, worm, mackerel, dandelion, and sparrow on Earth right now, there used to be a lot more. Poaching, deforestation, and other forms of human activity have dramatically reduced the mass of life on Earth. The mass of land mammals, for example, is one-seventh what it was before modern humans walked out of the African savannah.
4) Frogs are croaking from a nasty fungus
Frogs are often sentinel species that scientists study closely because they are especially sensitive to changes in their environment, like temperature, rainfall, habitat loss, and invasive species. Sentinel species also serve critical roles as predators and prey in their habitats. Their fates are harbingers of broader shifts in the environment and they are often the first to show signs that changes are afoot.
Which is why scientists were so alarmed by the spread of a deadly amphibian fungus, Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, also known as the amphibian chytrid fungus or Bd. Scientists previously reported that this single pathogen has led to the decline or extinction of 200 frog species. But a new study out in March showed that the die off has been even worse than they realized.
Researchers reported that Bd has driven 90 frog species to extinction and forced another 124 to decline in numbers by more than 90 percent. This population crash has only been going on for about the last 50 years.
While the fungus is deadly on its own, humans have aided its spread around the world. The disease is hard to eradicate, but there is some evidence that the pace of decline is slowing down.
5) Life is disappearing, appearing, and evolving right in front of us
The World Wildlife Fund reported that vertebrate populations have declined by a jaw-dropping average of 60 percent since 1970. That includes birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians.
Yet even as species disappear, we do occasionally discover new ones. Scientists found five new frog species in Madagascar, for example. It’s a regular reminder that we still don’t fully grasp all the nuances of life on earth, even as we unwittingly extinguish it.
But perhaps even more intriguing (and disturbing) is that we are changing life too. Researchers reported this year that as climate change raises average temperatures, sea turtles are experiencing a dramatic change in their sex ratios. Temperature is a major variable in determining the sex of a reptile, and in one species, scientists found that female baby sea turtles now outnumbered males 116-to-1. It’s a development that could herald a population crash among turtles.
And as species move in response to the rapid changes we’re causing in their environments, we’re seeing new hybrids emerge.
6) We have just over a decade left before the best-case scenario for global warming passes us by
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a group of the world’s top scientists convened by the United Nations, put out a stark report last year highlighting how little time we have left to limit global warming to 1.5 degreesCelsius, the most ambitious goal under the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
The key finding is that if we want to hit this target, we have to cut global greenhouse gas emissions in half compared to where they are now by 2030. By 2050, we would have to reach net zero emissions, and after that, we would even have to start withdrawing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Otherwise, the window to 1.5 degrees Celsius closes, and we lock ourselves into more warming, which will lead to more sea level rise, more devastating extreme weather, mass migrations, and expensive declines in the global economy.
Despite these findings, we’re far off track and only getting farther. Global carbon dioxide emissions hit an all-time high in 2018. Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels crossed a record 411 parts per million, the highest levels since humans have existed. In the United States, energy use hit a record high and greenhouse gas emissions started to rise again in 2018 after years of decline.
That said, we do know what we need to do to accelerate progress in fighting climate change, from pricing carbon dioxide to eating less meat to supporting public officials who will advance critical policies. The IPCC report also provided goal posts of the Green New Deal, a far-reaching proposal for the United States to take the lead in fighting climate change.
7) A coming verdict on our right to a safe climate
A wave of lawsuits hinging on damages wrought by climate change gained momentum over the past year. Interestingly, climate science isn’t what’s up for debate in these climate lawsuits.
Rather, the key fights are over the legal rights to a safe climate and whether parties are owed damages from those that contributed to the problem.
In one set of cases, children and young people are suing the federal government for profiting off leases to fossil fuel extractors on public lands despite knowing the damages caused by rising average temperatures.
In another set of lawsuits, cities, states, and local governments are suing oil companies for posing a public nuisance. The argument is that fossil fuels produce heat-trapping gases, which in turn cause problems like sea level rise that threaten valuable shorelines.
At stake are billions of dollars in liability for some of the largest and most powerful institutions in the world. And the cases could set precedents that stand for generations. These lawsuits are now working their way through courts, in the United States and in other parts of the world. The outcomes of these cases are critical, but uncertain.
FOCUS: William Barr Misled Everyone About the Mueller Report. Now Democrats Are Calling for His Resignation.
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=47190"><span class="small">James Risen, The Intercept</span></a>
Sunday, 21 April 2019 11:45
Risen writes: "William Barr is coming under increasing fire from congressional Democrats for statements he made before the release of the Mueller report. Critics say the remarks purposefully downplayed how damaging special counsel Robert Mueller's report was for President Donald Trump."
Embattled Attorney General William P. Barr. (photo: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
William Barr Misled Everyone About the Mueller Report. Now Democrats Are Calling for His Resignation.
By James Risen, The Intercept
21 April 19
ttorney General William Barr is coming under increasing fire from congressional Democrats for statements he made before the release of the Mueller report. Critics say the remarks purposefully downplayed how damaging special counsel Robert Mueller’s report was for President Donald Trump.
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said Friday morning that his committee has issued a subpoena to the Justice Department to obtain the full, unredacted report. The subpoena demands that the Justice Department turn over the report by May 1. Nadler also asked Mueller to testify before his committee. “It is clear Congress and the American people must hear from Special Counsel Robert Mueller in person to better understand his findings,” Nadler said.
The subpoena comes in the wake of the Justice Department’s release of a redacted version of the Mueller report on Thursday. The redacted version was made public only after Barr gave a press conference early in the morning, in which he sought to claim that the report effectively exonerated Trump and those around him. That press conference followed an earlier statement Barr issued on March 24, in the form of a four-page letter that claimed to summarize Mueller’s findings. Critics said both his press conference and the four-page letter were part of Barr’s attempt to whitewash the Mueller report’s findings and spin the public narrative about the report before it was actually released.
In a joint statement Thursday after the report’s release, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., charged that Barr “deliberately distorted significant portions of Special Counsel Mueller’s report.” They added that Mueller’s report “paints a disturbing picture of a president who has been weaving a web of deceit, lies and improper behavior and acting as if the law doesn’t apply to him. But if you hadn’t read the report and listened only to Mr. Barr, you wouldn’t have known any of that because Mr. Barr has been so misleading.”
Rep. Adam Schiff, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee and a California Democrat, said Thursday that Barr “did a great disservice to the country by misrepresenting significant parts of the Mueller report, by attempting to put a positive spin for the president on the special counsel’s findings.”
In the wake of the report’s release, other Democrats have called on Barr to resign, including Rep. Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat who is now running for president. Swalwell took to Twitter to attack Barr, yet another sign that Twitter has become the battlefield of choice for political combat in the Trump era.
“Russia attacked us,” Swalwell wrote on Twitter. “The #MuellerReport details a multiplicity of contacts b/w Russia & @realDonaldTrump’s team and that Trump; his team ‘materially impaired’ the investigation. Yet, OUR Attorney General acts as Trump’s defense attorney. He can’t represent both. Barr must resign.”
The differences between Barr’s statements before the report’s release and the contents of the actual report were so striking that the New York Times did a whole story comparing, side-by-side, Barr’s statements and the report.
In particular, most observers pointed to stark differences between Barr’s statements and the section in the Mueller report concerning the possibility that Trump sought to impede the Trump-Russia inquiry and thus, might be guilty of obstruction of justice. In fact, the Mueller report makes it clear that a key reason Mueller did not seek to prosecute Trump for obstruction was a longstanding Justice Department legal opinion saying that the Justice Department can’t indict a sitting president. Barr omitted that part of Mueller’s reasoning in his statements saying that Mueller hadn’t decided whether to charge Trump.
“Now that we have seen almost the entire report of more than 400 pages, we know Barr intentionally misled the American people about Mueller’s findings and his legal reasoning,” wrote Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor and Politico columnist who unsuccessfully ran last year as a Democrat to be Illinois attorney general. “Mueller’s report detailed extraordinary efforts by Trump to abuse his power as president to undermine Mueller’s investigation,” Mariotti added. “The case is so detailed that it is hard to escape the conclusion that Mueller could have indicted and convicted Trump for obstruction of justice—if he were permitted to do so. And the reason he is not permitted to do so is very clear: Department of Justice policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president.”
Barr’s statements prior to the release of the report, however, were also misleading when it came to the issues of Trump and Russian interference in the election. Barr discussed but did not linger on the portion of the report about the Russian cyberattacks against Hillary Clinton’s campaign — attacks that were designed to help Trump win the election. And Barr was disingenuous in the way he sought to cut and parse Mueller’s report to make Trump look better on issues related to contacts and links between the Trump campaign and Russia.
The New York Times notes, among a number of examples, that in his March 24 letter, Barr lifted an exculpatory section of a sentence from the Mueller report while omitting the more damaging first part of the same sentence. Here is a paragraph from the Mueller report, with the portion of one sentence released by Barr in bold:
The [Russian] social media campaign and the [Russian intelligence] hacking operations coincided with a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government. [Mueller’s] Office investigated whether those contacts reflected or resulted in the Campaign conspiring or coordinating with Russia in its election-interference activities. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
In fact, the Mueller report’s findings on contacts between the Trump circle and Russia are extensive and damning. The report does not exonerate Trump or his campaign; instead, Mueller says he didn’t have enough evidence to bring criminal charges for conspiring with the Russians. The report states that “while the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges. Among other things, the evidence was not sufficient to charge any Campaign official as an unregistered agent of the Russian government or other Russian principal.”
“Further,” the report adds, “the evidence was not sufficient to charge that any member of the Trump Campaign conspired with representatives of the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election.” But went on to say that the “investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to [Mueller’s team] and to Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.”
Far from vindicating Trump, the Mueller report leaves plenty of troubling questions unresolved for Congress and the press to investigate. Above all, the report shows that the Russians interfered in the election to help Trump win, and Trump was happy for the help.
Perhaps the most haunting moment recounted in the report occurred late on the night of the 2016 election, just after Trump had been declared the winner. Krill Dmitriev, who runs Russia’s sovereign wealth fund and is close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, received an email from someone whose name is redacted in the report. The email to Dmitriev said, simply, “Putin has won.”
FOCUS: Ken Starr Now Thinks Impeachment Is ... Bad?
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49820"><span class="small">Peter Wade, Rolling Stone</span></a>
Sunday, 21 April 2019 10:36
Wade writes: "Like a bad, politically-themed episode of VH1's Where Are They Now? former special prosecutor Ken Starr is back on Fox News talking about impeachment. But this time, he's against it?"
Ken Starr. (photo: Mary Hudetz/AP)
Ken Starr Now Thinks Impeachment Is ... Bad?
By Peter Wade, Rolling Stone
21 April 19
He said on Fox News: “For the sake of the country, fulminate, don’t go forward with impeachment. It’s so bad for the country”
ike a bad, politically-themed episode of VH1’s Where Are They Now? former special prosecutor Ken Starr is back on Fox News talking about impeachment. But this time, he’s against it?
“For the sake of the country, fulminate, but don’t go forward with impeachment. It’s so bad for the country,” he told host Ed Henry Friday afternoon, adding, “The American people want stability.”
Ken Starr says Democrats shouldn't pursue impeachment of Trump because "it's so bad for the country" pic.twitter.com/EamjLAPK1U
Starr went on to say that President Bill Clinton “had committed crimes, he committed the crimes of perjury and obstruction of justice.” But Trump, he said, has not committed crimes. Which, isn’t exactly true. Trump certainly tried to commit crimes, Mueller concluded, but was thwarted by
In another appearance on Fox News earlier the same day, however, Starr conceded that just like Clinton, Trump instructed witnesses to lie. For example, when Trump told now former White House Counsel Don McGahn that he didn’t tell him to fire the special prosecutor even though he had done just that. “The president went to McGahn and said, ‘I never told you to fire Mueller.’ You said there’s no obstruction, but isn’t that a little bit like coaching a witness?” Henry asked Starr.
“Who knows?” Starr admitted, stumbling a bit over his words. “That’s a fair point… It can be part of obstruction of justice,” Starr said before going back to defending Trump like the bullshitting partisan he is. So, the president attempting to obstruct justice is fine just as long as the president is a Republican. Got it.
An Armed Militia Detained 300 People at the US-Mexico Border Because This Is Still the Trump Era
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=11104"><span class="small">Charles Pierce, Esquire</span></a>
Sunday, 21 April 2019 08:26
Pierce writes: "By any reasonable definition, they are armed kidnappers - which, under some interpretations of the statutes, would make them terrorists as well."
Jim Benvie, 43, from Minnesota, is a member of the United Constitutional Patriots New Mexico Border Ops militia, which detained about 300 people near the U.S.-Mexico border. New Mexico's attorney general, Hector Balderas, has [said] 'these individuals should not attempt to exercise authority reserved for law enforcement.' (photo: Paul Ratje/Getty Images)
An Armed Militia Detained 300 People at the US-Mexico Border Because This Is Still the Trump Era
By Charles Pierce, Esquire
21 April 19
It is purely a function of the times in which we live, a reminder that no matter what happens in Washington, this is still the Trump Era.
eanwhile, out in the country, the Era of Trump goes merrily on. From CNN:
"My office has been informed that this week, an armed group has detained nearly 300 people near Sunland Park, New Mexico," Attorney General Hector Balderas said in a written statement. "These individuals should not attempt to exercise authority reserved for law enforcement."
Videos posted online purportedly showing migrants held by the United Constitutional Patriots group and handed over to the US Border Patrol drew swift condemnation from the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico.
"We cannot allow racist and armed vigilantes to kidnap and detain people seeking asylum," the ACLU said in a letter to state authorities denouncing the actions and asking the government to step in. "We urge you to immediately investigate this atrocious and unlawful conduct."
A statement on the United Constitutional Patriots' Facebook page describes the group as "Americans that believe in the constitution and the rights of every American that will stand up for there rights in unity and help keep America safe."
"We're just here to support the Border Patrol and show the public the reality of the border," spokesman Jim Benvie told The New York Times, noting that his group had been camped near El Paso for the past two months. Benvie's group "plans to remain on the border until the extended wall proposed by President Trump is built or Congress changes immigration laws to make it harder for migrants to request asylum," the Times reported.
This is purely a function of the times we're in and of the political attitudes and ideological rot that is the modern conservatism that made someone like the current president* not only possible, but also inevitable.
On Friday, Senator Professor Warren threw a spanner into the 2020 presidential election, to say nothing of putting a number of people on the spot. From NBC News:
Warren, of Massachusetts, said her announcement was based on the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller. Warren tweeted, "The severity of this misconduct demands that elected officials in both parties set aside political considerations and do their constitutional duty. That means the House should initiate impeachment proceedings against the President of the United States."
Somebody had to say it.
For good or ill, this question is now an issue in the presidential race, and it's also grown teeth in Washington. For months, we've heard that the Democrats needed something more substantial than simply being anti-Trump. That's certainly not a problem for Warren, whose spent the past two months rolling out one major policy proposal after another. And it forces the issue on congressional Republicans, especially the ones who have to run for re-election with what should be by all rights a millstone around their necks. It may or may not be the best thing for Warren's campaign, but even that is something worth watching.
Lyra McKee, 29, was shot in the head in what police are treating as a "terrorist incident", amid disturbances in Derry on Thursday evening, and died later in hospital. Police Service of Northern Ireland officers were carrying out a search operation in the Creggan area of Derry aimed at disrupting dissident republicans ahead of this weekend's commemoration of Irish independence, when a situation developed during which more than 50 petrol bombs were thrown at officers and two cars were hijacked and set on fire...
Lyra McKee was a first-class journalist who did a great job covering both sides of the Irish border in the years since the Good Friday Agreement, a towering feat of diplomacy now imperiled by the blundering government of the United Kingdom and by the thuggish opportunists who are taking advantage of the chaos on the other side of the Irish Sea.
McKee is now a signature victim of people who, for whatever their twisted reasons, want the Troubles back. While the rioting was going on, Nancy Pelosi was in the Dail, explaining to the British government that, as a signatory to the GFA, the United States isn't going to let its stupidity break down that signature achievement. From Euronews:
Pelosi, who is leading a Congressional delegation to Europe, reaffirmed in Dublin a message she had delivered just two days before in London that it is vital, after Brexit, to keep a "seamless border" between the Irish Republic, an EU member state, and Northern Ireland, ruled by Britain. "I've said it before and I’ll say it again, we must ensure that nothing happens in the Brexit discussions that imperils the Good Friday accord, including, but not limited to, the seamless border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland," Pelosi told a special joint sitting of Ireland's Parliament. "As you face the challenges posed by Brexit, know that the United States Congress, Democrats and Republicans in the House and in the Senate, stand with you," she added.
...a backstop agreement included in the Withdrawal Agreement agreed by British Prime Minister Theresa May and EU leaders in November was heavily criticised by Brexiteers and Northern Ireland's Democratic Unionist Party, which props up May's minority government. It plans for Northern Ireland to remain in the bloc's customs union should another solution not be found before the end of a transition period. The Withdrawal Agreement has been rejected three times by British lawmakers. Pelosi's comments are likely to annoy members of the ruling Conservative party who insist that a hard Brexit — which include the UK leaving the bloc's single market and customs union — is necessary in order for the country to strike trade agreements with third countries.
The Brexiteers, who include the current president* of the United States, are well on their way to screwing up the world and now, there's arguably a body count. And Lyra McKee was killed on the cusp of Good Friday.
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.
hile many are confounded by the subject of reparations for slavery, students at Georgetown University have acted on the courage of their convictions.
his year’s Earth Day, April 22, will arrive at a sobering moment in human history. The world is warming faster than ever. The oceans are rising. 
ttorney General William Barr is coming under increasing fire from congressional Democrats for statements he made before the 
ike a bad, politically-themed episode of VH1’s Where Are They Now? former special prosecutor ![Jim Benvie, 43, from Minnesota, is a member of the United Constitutional Patriots New Mexico Border Ops militia, which detained about 300 people near the U.S.-Mexico border. New Mexico's attorney general, Hector Balderas, has [said] 'these individuals should not attempt to exercise authority reserved for law enforcement.' (photo: Paul Ratje/Getty Images)](/images/stories/article_imgs33/033561-militia-right-wing-042119.jpg "Jim Benvie, 43, from Minnesota, is a member of the United Constitutional Patriots New Mexico Border Ops militia, which detained about 300 people near the U.S.-Mexico border. New Mexico's attorney general, Hector Balderas, has [said] 'these individuals should not attempt to exercise authority reserved for law enforcement.' (photo: Paul Ratje/Getty Images)")
eanwhile, out in the country, the Era of Trump goes merrily on. From 
