RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Politics
GOP Private-Police Bill Could Unleash Mercenaries on Michigan Towns Print
Saturday, 14 October 2017 08:50

Excerpt: "No. Just ... no. That's nearly all we can say in response to Senate Bill 594, legislation sponsored by state Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof that would imbue private security guards with the same authority enjoyed by public police."

A private police officer patrols a housing complex. (photo: Evelyn Hockstein/WP)
A private police officer patrols a housing complex. (photo: Evelyn Hockstein/WP)


GOP Private-Police Bill Could Unleash Mercenaries on Michigan Towns

By Detroit Free Press

14 October 17

 

o.

Just ... no.

That's nearly all we can say in response to Senate Bill 594, legislation sponsored by state Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof that would imbue private security guards with the same authority enjoyed by public police.

Meekhof's bill envisions an unlimited number of private police with minimal training contracted to local governments, school districts, businesses and nonprofits, with the authority to bear firearms and make arrests. These private cops wouldn't be subject to the same disclosure requirements as public police, but they would enjoy the same immunity from liability as real police. In other words, private cops could operate largely free of both public oversight and the private-sector threat of corrective litigation.

Make no mistake: This legislation is a nightmare. And, thankfully, it is unlikely to pass.

It is a profound misunderstanding of the purpose police serve, the role of state government and to whom the loyalty of elected officials is owed — and a breathtaking admission by Meekhof that he does not understand any of it.

Meekhof's bill creates a structure that would put the power of the state into the hands of the barely qualified.

Meekhof theorizes that private police could supplement cash-strapped municipalities unable to fully staff public police departments, working in tandem to keep communities safe. In his telling, this is  innocuous, an assist for struggling cities. 

But there's something else that would really help struggling cities provide better police services:  increased state funding by restoring cuts to state revenue-sharing made over the last decade. Cities have lost billions in state aid, and it's true that many have struggled to maintain services.

Directing funds toward a poorly trained, unaccountable private-sector police force is not the answer. Government performs services the private sector can't. They're jobs that lack a traditional bottom line. The result of good schools isn't profit, it's an educated citizenry. The result of well-run veterans homes isn't profit, it's quality care for men and women who served our country. The result of good policing isn't profit, it's safe communities. 

Plainly put, there is no reason for a private-sector operator to perform any function that does not yield a profit. And so any move to place public good in private hands should be subject to intense skepticism and scrutiny. 

"Americans love quick fixes, and they think this will be a quick fix," says Carl Taylor, a Michigan State University sociology professor and ethnographer whose dissertation compared regulation of private and public policing. "And I’m saying it won’t be. We lose our power as a public."

But who's pulling the strings?

Meekhof, R-West Olive,  is the bill's sole sponsor; he refused to tell the Detroit News who was pushing this effort, saying it was not yet public knowledge, a tacit acknowledgement that some outside interest is wielding influence to shape state policy. 

But we know who isn't in favor: The folks who do the actual work of policing. Law enforcement at every level has denounced this bill, with the Michigan State Police — tasked, in this legislation, with licensing and administering this private police program — rejecting its proposed role, saying instead that the state committee charged with licensing police officers would be the appropriate oversight body. 

"It's soldiers versus mercenaries," says Taylor, who is also the former owner of a private security company. "When you’re a mercenary, you work for the employer. Some guys can handle that and be neutral. Other guys interpret the mercenary for what it is — I’m paid to kick ass, and the only one who counts here is my client."

The requirements described by this legislation for applicants seeking a special police agency license are scant, and applicants for such a license need only demonstrate that one employee meets them. Others are lax — applicants for a special police license must have worked as a police officer, or a security guard, or as a special police officer in another state. Applicants also must provide five letters of reference from people who think they're honest, and need have only avoided felony convictions for the previous five years. Applicants who've been deemed insane by a court, he or she can show a court order saying they're sane now. 

That's a problem, Taylor says.

"A lot of the questions, in theory, could make a lot of sense, but as a practitioner, I don’t give a damn about ... background, as long as they can pass the test," he said, describing the attitudes of many private security operators. "Just give me a warm body."

Problem cops welcome?

Meekhof's bill would allow any private-police license applicant who has held a public police license in the last two years to forgo any kind of background check. That means this legislation offers a route for problem cops to stay on the streets, in private service to cities that should refuse to hire them outright.

A Free Press investigation earlier this year found that public police departments, wary of mediation and scandal, are too willing to let troubled cops slide, often choosing to cut a deal that sees the bad cop gone over prosecution or revocation of license. Because this system isn't transparent, other cities' departments may hire such officers, unaware of, or missing key details about, the officer's prior employment. 

The state Legislature approved legislation, now awaiting presentation to Gov. Rick Snyder, that would strengthen disclosure among police departments. But if departments continue to offer problem cops an exit that includes retaining that professional license, disclosure won't help much — and this legislation clears a path for such officers to obtain special police licensing easily. 

At least a handful of other states allow special police; the Washington Post wrote in 2015 that those ranks are growing.

In North Carolina — where special police licensing process is far more rigorous than the steps Meekhof's proposes —  the proprietor of one private police firm pleaded guilty last year to charges that included illegally detaining and assaulting four men. While awaiting trial on those charges, the man pleaded guilty to an unauthorized use of the law enforcement database, to run a set of license plates after a neighborhood dispute. 

Politicians like Meekhof often behave as though their jobs are not to construct and maintain good government, but to weaken it, if not dismantle it outright. Unfortunately, some voters have fallen sway to the seductive notion, shouted on the right for decades, that government can only cause, not solve, problems. 

It's a promise this legislation could only make good on. 


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Abandoning Puerto Rico Would Be an Impeachable Offense Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=8625"><span class="small">Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post</span></a>   
Friday, 13 October 2017 14:07

Robinson writes: "More than 80 percent of Puerto Rico is still in the dark, more than a third of its residents still have no clean drinking water, much of the island's infrastructure still lies in ruins - and President Trump cruelly threatens to cut off federal aid. Doing so would be government by spite and should be considered an impeachable offense."

President Trump tosses paper towels into a crowd of Puerto Rico residents. (photo: Evan Vucci/AP)
President Trump tosses paper towels into a crowd of Puerto Rico residents. (photo: Evan Vucci/AP)


Abandoning Puerto Rico Would Be an Impeachable Offense

By Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post

13 October 17

 

ore than 80 percent of Puerto Rico is still in the dark, more than a third of its residents still have no clean drinking water, much of the island’s infrastructure still lies in ruins — and President Trump cruelly threatens to cut off federal aid. Doing so would be government by spite and should be considered an impeachable offense.

Puerto Rico, as any fifth-grader knows, is part of the America that Trump promises to make great again. But the mayor of San Juan had the temerity to criticize the Trump administration’s response to the calamity of Hurricane Maria as slow and inadequate. For Trump, everything is always all about Trump. He desperately craves adulation.

The president complained Sunday on Twitter, “Nobody could have done what I’ve done for #PuertoRico with so little appreciation. So much work!” Note the use of “I” instead of “we” or even “my administration.” For the record, what Trump has done personally for the people of Puerto Rico is playfully toss rolls of paper towels into a crowd.

The administration has done much more, of course. But desperate people — still facing critical shortages of food and water three weeks after the storm — are demanding more action. This makes them “ingrates” in Trump’s eyes.

Sadly, those are the kinds of words we’ve come to expect from this president. But on Thursday he went beyond his usual self-pitying, self-justifying blather to make an outrageous threat: “We cannot keep FEMA, the Military & the First Responders, who have been amazing (under the most difficult circumstances) in P.R. forever!”

That culminated a series of blame-the-victim tweets about how Puerto Ricans face “a financial crisis .?.?. largely of their own making” and how “electric and all infrastructure was [a] disaster before hurricanes.” The need to solve the island’s debt problem and update its infrastructure is worthy of serious discussion, but not while people are having to collect unpurified water in buckets from mountain springs — and not as some kind of justification for cutting off relief aid.

This may be the most un-American thing Trump has ever said or done. I am serious that if he actually withdraws emergency assistance while Puerto Rico is still in such condition, Congress should begin impeachment proceedings.

Presidents do not get to pick and choose which Americans to help at times of disaster. We are one country, and we do what we must to help fellow citizens in need. We saw it during this long, terrible hurricane season, in Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Texas, Florida — strangers helping strangers, regardless of race, income, political views. We are seeing it now as firefighters from around the country converge on Northern California to attack the deadly blazes that are still burning out of control.

It is wrong to describe Trump as any kind of nationalist if he fails to grasp the most fundamental of nationalistic precepts: We leave none of our own on the battlefield.

The responsibility of the federal government is to keep FEMA workers, military personnel and other first responders in Puerto Rico as long as necessary. It is important to do so because their presence will save lives. It is also important because doing anything else would violate the American compact. If Trump really were to turn his back on Puerto Rico, he would be guilty of a “high crime” and disqualified to continue in office.

I know that Trump delights in violating political norms and causing the commentariat to run around with its hair on fire. I know that he sometimes says provocative things on Twitter to distract from his administration’s failures, to rally his base, to provoke his enemies or even just to blow off steam. I know that it’s impossible to take any one tweet too seriously, because it may be directly contradicted by the next tweet.

But Trump actually went to Puerto Rico, and while he did not see the worst of the devastation, he saw more than enough. He knows that recovery is going to be a long, massive and largely thankless job. But that is the job he signed up for when he took the oath of office. Congress must not allow him to shirk his duty.

To divide the country with rhetoric, as Trump so often does, is one thing. But to actually abandon 3.4 million Americans in their hour of need not only would be an unprecedented and shameful act. It would also be grounds for removing an unfit man from the high office he dishonors.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
Distorting the MS-13 Threat Print
Friday, 13 October 2017 13:49

Wolf writes: "The Trump administration's depiction of Central American gang members conveniently overlooks the United States' role in perpetuating gang violence at home and abroad."

Police photos of supposed MS-13 members arrested. (photo: AP)
Police photos of supposed MS-13 members arrested. (photo: AP)


Distorting the MS-13 Threat

By Sonja Wolf, NACLA

13 October 17


The Trump administration’s depiction of Central American gang members conveniently overlooks the United States’ role in perpetuating gang violence at home and abroad.

n September 18 and 19, 2017, the Southwest Gang Information Center organized a “National MS-13 Summit” in Dallas, Texas, in the name of addressing the gang’s purportedly unique causes and proliferation patterns across the United States, Mexico, and Central America. Attended by law enforcement officers and officials from across the United States, the event aimed to share strategies for identifying and suppressing gang members. 

In his videotaped opening statement, Attorney General Jeff Sessions declared that “[c]ombating and dismantling MS-13 is a top priority for the President. Our goal is to go after every member of MS-13” with every resource available “to seize their money, disrupt their illegal enterprises, and incarcerate them. Their extortion schemes, intimidation tactics, and violence are not exceeded by any other criminal organization. They are transnational [and] El Salvador [is] MS-13’s nerve center.”

The conference’s main themes revolved around the identification of gang symbols; gang bragging and recruitment on social media; gang enforcement and prosecution; and the nexus between an apparently lax U.S. immigration policy and gang infiltration of immigrant and refugee programs. Presentations were strong on visual images—attire, tattoos, and hand signs—and featured gruesome videos of gang-related killings.

While violence plays an important role in gang life, it is only part of that reality. The talks were mostly based on the assumption that MS-13 is a fast-spreading criminal enterprise— that its members display psychopathic behavior and commit unusually brutal violence, and is composed of and preys on immigrants. Absent was recognition that youths do not join gangs to commit crime and violence, but in search of respect and status, and that levels of criminal involvement vary. There appears to be no empirical evidence that MS-13 members in the United States are overwhelmingly foreign-born nationals.

The official portrait of MS-13 depicts the gang as a malignant cancer that expands through undocumented immigration and criminal intent and can be eliminated through incarceration and deportation.

MS-13, also known as Mara Salvatrucha, is often associated with El Salvador. But the group emerged in United States, which had played a major role in El Salvador’s civil war in the 1980s and early 1990s by providing billions of dollars in military and economic aid in order to defeat a perceived communist insurgency. The twelve-year armed conflict, brought to a conclusion through the 1992 Peace Accords, had triggered large-scale murder and displacement. Refugees sought shelter in the United States, but due to its support for the Salvadoran regime were denied political asylum. Many settled in Los Angeles, compelled to live in poverty and overcrowding. Alienation and the need for protection from other gangs led some youths to join existing gangs, such as the 18th Street Gang, or form their own crews, including what later became Mara Salvatrucha.

In the early 1990s, when the political violence began to recede in Central America, the United States stepped up its deportation of offending non-citizen gang members. The Northern Triangle countries—Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras—were busy rebuilding institutions and infrastructure and underestimated that the incipient gang situation might turn into a major social problem. In 2002, after years of neoliberal restructuring and indifference to the growing insecurity in impoverished communities, the conservative governments began cracking down on gangs with a mano dura, or iron fist strategy. Murder rates spiraled, and the gangs adapted to the offensive by adopting a more conventional appearance, consolidating their structures, and intensifying their criminal activities, especially extortion. Since the initial launch of the mano dura approach, the “maras”—particularly MS-13—have been a highly visible media and policy issue in El Salvador particularly, although they maintain a confirmed or reported presence in a growing number of countries.

Myths and Truths of the MS-13

Interpretations of where MS-13 is and is not and what it does and does not do continue to be debated and contested. The two most controversial aspects relate to its alleged transnational nature and ties to organized crime if not terrorism. The first is generally inferred from real or suspected sightings of MS-13 members in the United States, Central America, Mexico, Canada, and elsewhere. According to the National Gang Intelligence Center’s National Gang Threat Assessment, the gang has a reported presence in 31 U.S. states. The FBI, for its part, believes that up to 10,000 MS-13 members are currently in the United States, primarily immigrants from Central America, and locates the group’s leadership in El Salvador and Honduras. Judicial cases adjudicated in the mid-Atlantic region have at times corroborated a transnational connection between MS-13 “chapters” in different countries. It remains unclear, however, whether this apparent gang growth responds to a criminally purposeful expansion strategy or whether it is, at least in some locations, a copycat problem with no organic ties to the actual gang.

The second notion, MS-13’s purported links to organized crime if not terrorism, is equally contentious but has proved even harder to dispel. Some of its members and cliques collaborate with drug trafficking networks, but the gang as such does not. Unlike organized crime, it has shifting leadership and lacks a strong cadre of mature, professional members with solid organizational skills. In El Salvador, the gangs have committed occasional acts of terrorism, such as an attack on a microbus in Mejicanos that left 17 people dead in 2010 and, five years later, the detonation of a car bomb outside the Finance Ministry, which did not result in any deaths. In August 2015, the country’s Constitutional Court went as far as to declare the street gangs terrorist groups. But unlike the definition of terrorist organizations, the gangs do not make systematic use of violence, or the threat thereof, in pursuit of political aims.

The dominant approach to MS-13, both in the United States and in Central America, has been law enforcement, rather than prevention and intervention. Despite civil liberties concerns, policing gangs in the United States relies heavily on the use of gang databases, injunctions, and sentencing enhancements. Since 2006 federal law enforcement has employed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, traditionally a legal tool against organized crime, to prosecute both the intellectual and the material authors of gang crimes. This strategy, if successful, permits the imprisonment of more gang members, and for a longer time, than would ordinarily be the case.

The fierce, and often highly public nature, of gang suppression has helped create the image of MS-13 as public enemy number one. The murder of Brenda Paz, a federal informant killed by her own gang in 2005, or the wrongful indictment of Alex Sánchez, Executive Director of Homies Unidos, for conspiracy to murder, are just two of the more notable cases. The media’s sensationalization of MS-13 gang violence, and the U.S. Treasury Department’s 2012 designation of MS-13 as a transnational criminal organization has also contributed to the worldwide notoriety of MS-13. Meanwhile, the Trump Administration’s skewed statements on gangs and immigrants only serve to pour gasoline on fire.

Trump’s Central America “Problem”

On the campaign trail, Donald Trump criticized sanctuary cities for supposedly harboring immigrant offenders, promised to deport all undocumented immigrants, and announced extreme vetting of refugees. A few months after taking office, the president seemed to have realized how he might expedite his policy agenda. In April 2017, Trump tweeted: “The weak illegal immigration policies of the Obama Admin. allowed bad MS 13 gangs to form in cities across the U.S. We are removing them fast!” In a July 2017 speech to law enforcement officers on Long Island, Trump called MS-13 members “animals” who have “transformed peaceful parks and beautiful, quiet neighborhoods into bloodstained killing fields.” Administration officials, notably the Attorney General Jeff Sessions and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, then Secretary of Homeland Security, have echoed these comments. Unsurprisingly, anti-immigrant media and think-tanks have seized on these remarks and warned of MS-13 infiltration of immigrant arrivals, programs, and detention centers.

The rhetorical criminalization of immigrants has already had very real practical consequences. In January 2017, Trump signed two executive orders that step up immigration enforcement and target for deportation all undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of a criminal offense or are thought to have committed a “chargeable” criminal offense. Deportation threats are now looming over the thousands of individuals enrolled in the now rescinded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status holders.

In September 2017, Trump also indicated his intention to drastically lower the number of refugee admissions. That same month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Criminal Alien Gang Member Removal Act. If approved by the Senate, this bill would authorize the Department of Homeland Security to designate a group of five or more persons as a criminal gang and to deport any undocumented immigrant thought to have facilitated or participated in the gang’s illegal activities. Not only is the range of possible offenses very broad, but the ambiguous criteria for defining a gang and identifying its members create serious concern that many people may—perhaps deliberately—be misclassified as gang members in order to be made deportable.

Prior to the Trump Administration, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had already used gang databases to arrest undocumented immigrants. These policing tools, however, are deeply problematic, since individuals are often included for spurious reasons and have little recourse to have their entry removed. Gang databases may become a more significant instrument now that immigration arrests in the United States are increasing.

The Trump administration’s single-minded crackdown on immigrant and gang-related crime has especially insidious costs for the Central Americans fleeing from gang and police violence. Police in the U.S. fear that gang members may be exploiting vulnerabilities in U.S. immigration and refugee policy, such as inadequate vetting of asylum seekers, to enter the country and commit further bloodshed in local communities. Some have expressed particular concern that the steady arrival of unaccompanied migrant children since 2014 overwhelms the capacity of the U.S. Office of Refugee Resettlement to adequately monitor the minors that it places with sponsors, often relatives who are themselves undocumented immigrants.

The fact that some communities with Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) Program placements have seen a rise in MS-13 violence feeds a worry that more youths will either return to gang activity or get recruited into gangs. It is unclear, however, the frequency of such cases. Meanwhile, there is a risk that the negative publicity leads certain nationalities to be excluded from life-saving immigration or asylum benefits. The United States government has already responded by toughening the visa screening in places like El Salvador and signaling the end of the Central American Minors (CAM) Program, which eased the refugee resettlement process for certain vulnerable youths. Meanwhile, U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents have been found to be unlawfully rejecting asylum seekers at the southern border.

While the domestic climate is rapidly becoming more hostile towards Latinx immigrants, the United States has for more than a decade been expanding its transnational law enforcement. It provides anti-gang training in the Northern Triangle countries, chiefly through the San Salvador-based International Law Enforcement Academy, and has stationed federal agents with the local Transnational Anti-Gang (TAG) Task Forces that seek to dismantle transnational gangs by prosecuting their leadership structures. The overall aim of these efforts is to facilitate intelligence-driven investigations and minimize the impact of overseas crimes for the United States. But TAG El Salvador has been involved in torture, and police collaboration absorbs resources that might be better spent on strengthening law enforcement institutions in Central America.

Misguided Policy in El Salvador and Beyond

In El Salvador, the leftist administrations of Mauricio Funes, 2009-2014, and Salvador Sanchez Cerén, since 2014, both continued the ill-fated mano dura strategy against gangs. The collapse of a mismanaged gang truce in 2013, pursued by the Funes government to slash the homicide rate, saw a renewed escalation of violence, including gang attacks on police and soldiers. Frustrated with the deteriorating security situation, police retaliated by committing extrajudicial executions of suspected gang members. Condemned by human rights defenders yet supported by many citizens, these killings prompted the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to hold a hearing on the issue. In a September 2017 meeting, the Salvadoran government denied the existence of extralegal executions and, in an apparent sign of defiance, deployed armored vehicles in the streets of San Salvador. Despite, or because of, this show of force, the country has since experienced a sharp rise in murders.

In another disturbing yet little noticed development, El Salvador’s Legislative Assembly has passed a decree that facilitates the incarceration of deportees suspected of gang involvement. Effective as of July 14, 2017, the “Special Provisions for the Control and Follow-up of the Salvadoran Returnee Population Classified as Members of Maras, Gangs or Illicit Associations” requires the identification, registration, and application of measures to prevent deported gang members and their “collaborators” from posing a threat to public safety. Individuals deemed to constitute a risk are required to report to the police once a month, are barred from congregating in certain locations and meeting with known gang members, and are expected to seek a job and psychological treatment. In a clear erosion of civil rights, the law provides no clear criteria for determining gang membership/collaboration or a person’s degree of risk, and makes it difficult to prevent misuse of the database.

Depicting MS-13 members as vicious, irredeemable villains may be politically shrewd for a U.S. administration that considers border walls, deportation, and incarceration to be effective tools for homeland security. This “portrait of evil” is certainly bound to further inflate gang and immigration enforcement budgets. Deportation, however, does not deter people from returning to the United States if this is where they have built a life or can find safety and economic opportunities unavailable in their home countries. Mass incarceration only swells a traumatized inmate population that upon release is likely to encounter discrimination and few to no reentry programs. The current focus on deportation and arrest is misplaced and detracts from the challenges of immigration reform, sustainable security policy, and alternative economic policies.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Is Trump Unraveling? Print
Friday, 13 October 2017 12:30

Reich writes: "Is Trump really unraveling? Are Republican leaders ready to pull the plug?"

Robert Reich. (photo: Getty)
Robert Reich. (photo: Getty)


Is Trump Unraveling?

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

13 October 17

 

ast week, Senator Bob Corker, the Republican chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, charged in an interview with the New York Times that Trump was treating his office like “a reality show,” with reckless threats toward other countries that could set the nation “on the path to World War III.”

Corker said he was concerned about Trump. “He would have to concern anyone who cares about our nation,” Corker said, adding that “the vast majority of our caucus understands what we’re dealing with here … the volatility that we’re dealing with and the tremendous amount of work that it takes by people around him to keep him in the middle of the road.”

Corker’s interview was followed by a report from Gabriel Sherman of Vanity Fair, who wrote that the situation has gotten so out of control that Trump’s chief of staff, John Kelly, and Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis have discussed ways to stop Trump should he order a nuclear attack. Kelly has tried to keep Trump focused by intercepting outside phone calls to the White House and restricting access to the Oval Office. Many of Trump’s advisors believe he is “unstable” and “unravelling” quickly.

Is Trump really unraveling? Are Republican leaders ready to pull the plug? I phoned an old friend, a Republican former member of Congress who keeps up with what’s going on. I scribbled notes as he talked:

Me: So what’s up? Is Corker alone, or are others also ready to call it quits with Trump?

He: All I know is they’re simmering over there.

Me: Flake and McCain have come pretty close.

He: Yeah. Others are thinking about doing what Bob did. Sounding the alarm. They think Trump’s nuts. Unfit. Dangerous.

Me: Well, they already knew that, didn’t they?

He: But now it’s personal. It started with the Sessions stuff. Jeff was as loyal as they come. Trump’s crapping on him was like kicking your puppy. And then, you know, him beating up on Mitch for the Obamacare fiasco. And going after Flake and the others.

Me: So they’re pissed off?

He: Not just that. I mean, they have thick hides. The personal stuff got them to notice all the other things. The wild stuff, like those threats to North Korea. Tillerson would leave tomorrow if he wasn’t so worried Trump would go nuclear, literally.

Me: You think Trump is really thinking nuclear war?

He: Who knows what’s in his head? But I can tell you this. He’s not listening to anyone. Not a soul. He’s got the nuclear codes and, well, it scares the hell out of me. It’s starting to scare all of them. That’s really why Bob spoke up.

Me: So what could they do? I mean, even if the whole Republican leadership was willing to say publicly he’s unfit to serve, what then?

He: Bingo! The emperor has no clothes. It’s a signal to everyone they can bail. Have to bail to save their skins. I mean, Trump could be the end of the whole goddam Republican party.

Me: If he starts a nuclear war, that could be the end of everything.

He: Yeah, right. So when they start bailing on him, the stage is set.

Me: For what?

He: Impeachment. 25th amendment.

Me: You think Republicans would go that far?

He: Not yet. Here’s the thing. They really want to get this tax bill through. That’s all they have going for them. They don’t want to face voters in ’18 or ’20 without something to show for it. They’re just praying Trump doesn’t do something really, really stupid before the tax bill.

Me: Like a nuclear war?

He: Look, all I can tell you is many of the people I talk with are getting freaked out. It’s not as if there’s any careful strategizing going on. Not like, well, do we balance the tax bill against nuclear war? No, no. They’re worried as hell. They’re also worried about Trump crazies, all the ignoramuses he’s stirred up. I mean, Roy Moore? How many more of them do you need to destroy the party?

Me: So what’s gonna happen?

He: You got me. I’m just glad I’m not there anymore. Trump’s not just a moron. He’s a despicable human being. And he’s getting crazier. Paranoid. Unhinged. Everyone knows it. I mean, we’re in shit up to our eyeballs with this guy.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
FOCUS: Trump's Muslim Ban Is Tearing Families Apart. We Must Fight to Stop It. Print
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=35918"><span class="small">Michael Moore, Michael Moore's Facebook Page</span></a>   
Friday, 13 October 2017 10:54

Moore writes: "One week from today, Trump's LATEST version of his Muslim ban goes into effect. After mass, non-violent citizen action and dozens of legal challenges stopped it or slowed it down, the Trump administration has RELENTLESSLY been pushing new versions of the same, bigoted, cruel, anti-Muslim, un-American and unconstitutional policies. And come October 18th, those polices go into full effect."

Filmmaker Michael Moore. (photo: The New York Times)
Filmmaker Michael Moore. (photo: The New York Times)


Trump's Muslim Ban Is Tearing Families Apart. We Must Fight to Stop It.

By Michael Moore, Michael Moore's Facebook Page

13 October 17

 

ne week from today, Trump's LATEST version of his Muslim ban goes into effect. After mass, non-violent citizen action and dozens of legal challenges stopped it or slowed it down, the Trump administration has RELENTLESSLY been pushing new versions of the same, bigoted, cruel, anti-Muslim, un-American and unconstitutional policies. And come October 18th, those polices go into full effect.

To show solidarity and support for our Muslim sisters and brothers threatened by this, I put a call out to the local community inviting anyone affected by it to come as my guests to last night's show. Dozens of women, mostly from Syria and Yemen, joined me. While they were in good spirits last night, I heard awful stories of families potentially being split apart and livelihoods that might be ruined.

Next week, these women will be joined by thousands in Washington, D.C. to mobilize against the ban. If you can go to D.C., go to D.C. If you can't, organize an event in your own community. Call your representative and tell them we don't want this version of the Muslim ban or ANY version of the Muslim ban. And spread the word on social media that this is happening. While we all get easily distracted by the latest shiny object Trump puts in our faces, this new version of the Muslim ban has slowly been in the works and is now here.

Our Muslim sisters and brothers need our help. Don't sit this one out. Don't be silent: https://www.nomuslimbanever.com/

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 
<< Start < Prev 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 Next > End >>

Page 1476 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