If all printers were determined not to print anything till they were sure it would offend nobody, there would be very little printed. -- Benjamin Franklin
Hey Andrew Marcum we've got your room ready... pic.twitter.com/iYkANLD9hZ
— Richard K. Jones (@butlersheriff) March 3, 2015
The Justice Department has released a scathing report based on its investigation of the Ferguson, Missouri, police department, in which it says the police department engaged in broad pattern of conduct that routinely violated the constitutional rights of African-Americans.
The DOJ findings include a pattern and practice of disproportionate stops and arrests of blacks without probable cause, unreasonable force, racially bias handling of warrants by municipal courts and a pattern of focusing on revenue over public safety that violated the rights of poor, black residents.
As part of the investigation, federal investigators also uncovered evidence of further racial bias and stereotyping by members of the Ferguson police department and municipal court officials in multiple emails sent from official city email accounts.
The email evidence includes racist jokes that referenced President Barack Obama and another that referred to a refund a black woman received for an abortion as a credit from “Crimestoppers.”
The report comes six months after a white Ferguson police officer shot and killed unarmed black teenager Michael Brown Jr. The police shooting death drew widespread scrutiny and allegations of a long history of abuses committed by the overwhelmingly white police force against the city’s majority black population.
According to the report, blacks made up 67% of the population between 2012 and 2014 but were 85% of those subject to a vehicle stop, 90% of those who received a citation from police and 93% of those arrested.
And while blacks were more than twice as likely as whites to be stopped while driving, they were 26% less likely to be found with illegal contraband.
In 88% of documented incidents in which police used of force against someone, that person was black. Blacks were even bitten by police dogs disproportionately. Each of the 14 cases involving someone being bitten by a police dog, that person was black.
The poor treatment didn’t end on the street. Blacks in Ferguson were 68% less likely than others to have their cases dismissed by the Municipal Judge and were disproportionately likely to have a warrant issued against them, according to the report. As recently as 2013, 96% of the people who were arrested on an outstanding warrant were black.
But even more than the treatment they received once stopped, the Justice Department’s report found that blacks were used in the criminal justice system to buoy the city’s economy and balance its budget. The practices uncovered by federal investigators have violated residents’ Constitutional Rights of due process and equal protection under the law.
In a major victory for President Barack Obama, the Republican-led House relented on Tuesday and will back legislation to fund the Homeland Security Department through the end of the budget year, without restrictions on immigration.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, outlined the dwindling options for his deeply divided GOP caucus on Tuesday morning after the Senate left the House with little choice. Boehner pointed out that the issue is now in the hands of the courts.
"I am as outraged and frustrated as you at the lawless and unconstitutional actions of this president," Boehner told his caucus, according to aides. "I believe this decision — considering where we are — is the right one for this team, and the right one for this country."
A vote was expected later Tuesday to send the bill to Obama for his signature. Short-term funding for the department expires on Friday at midnight.
Conservatives had demanded that the funding bill roll back Obama's immigration directives from last fall that spared millions of immigrants from deportation. Democrats had insisted on legislation to fund the department, which shares responsibility for anti-terrorism operations, without any conditions.
The GOP leadership's decision to bow to Democratic demands angered several conservatives.
"This is the signal of capitulation," said Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa. "The mood of this thing is such that to bring it back from the abyss is very difficult."
But more pragmatic Republicans welcomed Boehner's move.
"Sanity is prevailing. I do give John Boehner credit," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.
Mr. Petraeus will plead guilty to one count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material, which carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison. Mr. Petraeus has signed the agreement, said Marc Raimondi, a Justice Department spokesman.
The plea deal completes a spectacular fall for Mr. Petraeus, a retired four-star general who was once discussed as a possible candidate for vice president or even president. He led the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and was the architect of a counterinsurgency strategy that at one time seemed a model for future warfare.
The mistress, Paula Broadwell, is a former Army Reserve officer who had an affair with Mr. Petraeus in 2011, when she was interviewing him for a biography, “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.”
Mr. Petraeus resigned as the director of the C.I.A. in 2012, three days after President Obama was re-elected. At the time, Mr. Petraeus acknowledged the affair. He has since denied any criminal wrongdoing.
The plea deal spares Mr. Petraeus a high-profile trial where embarrassing details about the affair would have been presented to the jury and made public. Mr. Petraeus is still married to Holly Petraeus.
Mr. Petraeus has also made a significant amount of money since leaving the C.I.A. He is a partner at one of the world’s largest private-equity firms, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, and he has taught at some of the nation’s most prestigious universities, including Harvard.
Police were called to an Oregon landfill on Feb. 20 after the state's former Gov. John Kitzhaber (D) and his fiancee were spotted there dumping trash amid a federal investigation surrounding his time in office, The Oregonian newspaper reported on Friday.
Kitzhaber and his fiancee, Cylvia Hayes, had rarely been seen in public since his resignation on Feb. 18 when the couple left Salem, Ore., the paper reported.
Both Kitzhaber and Hayes have been the subjects of a federal investigation, the Oregonian reported.
On Feb. 20, the couple was seen at the Knott Landfill near Bend, Ore. throwing away trash, the director of the Deschutes County Solid Waste Department told the Oregonian.
Due to a credit card processing error, the landfill's system was reportedly locked and a supervisor was forced to reset it. However, during the incident, law enforcement officials were alerted and deputies from the Deschutes County Sheriff's Office arrived at the landfill, the paper reported.
Some day — not tomorrow, not next year, but probably sometime before runaway climate change forces us to seek a new life in outer-space colonies — there is going to be a collapse of the legal and political order and its replacement by something else. If we're lucky, it won't be violent. If we're very lucky, it will lead us to tackle the underlying problems and result in a better, more robust, political system. If we're less lucky, well, then, something worse will happen.
Very few people agree with me about this, of course. When I say it, people generally think that I'm kidding. America is the richest, most successful country on earth. The basic structure of its government has survived contested elections and Great Depressions and civil rights movements and world wars and terrorist attacks and global pandemics. People figure that whatever political problems it might have will prove transient — just as happened before.
But voiced in another register, my outlandish thesis is actually the conventional wisdom in the United States. Back when George W. Bush was president and I was working at a liberal magazine, there was a very serious discussion in an editorial meeting about the fact that the United States was now exhibiting 11 of the 13 telltale signs of a fascist dictatorship. The idea that Bush was shredding the Constitution and trampling on congressional prerogatives was commonplace. When Obama took office, the partisan valence of the complaints shifted, but their basic tenor didn't. Conservative pundits — not the craziest, zaniest ones on talk radio, but the most serious and well-regarded —compare Obama's immigration moves to the actions of a Latin-American military dictator.
In the center, of course, it's an article of faith that when right and left talk like this they're simply both wrong. These are nothing but the overheated squeals of partisans and ideologues.
At the same time, when the center isn't complaining about the excessively vociferous complaints of the out-party of the day, it tends to be in full-blown panic about the state of American politics. And yet despite the popularity of alarmist rhetoric, few people act like they're actually alarmed. Accusations that Barack Obama or John Boehner or any other individual politician is failing as a leader are flung, and then abandoned when the next issue arises. In practice, the feeling seems to be that salvation is just one election away. Hillary Clinton even told Kara Swisher recently that her agenda if she runs for president is to end partisan gridlock.
It's not going to work.
The breakdown of American constitutional democracy is a contrarian view. But it's nothing more than the view that rather than everyone being wrong about the state of American politics, maybe everyone is right. Maybe Bush and Obama are dangerously exceeding norms of executive authority. Maybe legislative compromise really has broken down in an alarming way. And maybe the reason these complaints persist across different administrations and congresses led by members of different parties is that American politics is breaking down.
The idea that America's constitutional system might be fundamentally flawed cuts deeply against the grain of our political culture. But the reality is that despite its durability, it has rarely functioned well by the standards of a modern democracy. The party system of the Gilded Age operated through systematic corruption. The less polarized era that followed was built on the systematic disenfranchisement of African-Americans. The newer system of more ideological politics has solved those problems and seems in many ways more attractive. But over the past 25 years, it's set America on a course of paralysis and crisis — government shutdowns, impeachment, debt ceiling crises, and constitutional hardball. Voters, understandably, are increasingly dissatisfied with the results and confidence in American institutions has been generally low and falling. But rather than leading to change, the dissatisfaction has tended to yield wild electoral swings that exacerbate the sense of permanent crisis.
The best we can hope for is that when the crisis does come, Americans will have the wisdom to do for ourselves what we did in the past for Germany and Japan and put a better system in place.
The leadership of the most powerful pro-Israel lobby in the U.S. publicly broke Sunday from the White House over the issue of Iran policy during the first of a three-day policy conference in Washington attended by 16,000 of its members.
Leaders of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or Aipac, outlined a strategy moving forward of working through Congress to disrupt any nuclear agreement with Tehran that is deemed too weak in denying the country a nuclear weapons capability.
This would be achieved, they said, both by seeking to impose new sanctions on Iran and to block the White House’s ability to lift standing U.S. sanctions, which would be required as part of any comprehensive agreement.
“Congress has a critical role” in determining this deal, Howard Kohr, Aipac’s executive director, said in opening remarks aimed at rallying the group’s membership. “Congress’s role doesn’t end when there is a deal. Congress must review this deal.”
Mr. Kohr and other Aipac leaders believe any final agreement with Iran must involve the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, something Obama administration officials have said is no longer on the negotiating table.
Aipac also is seeking to impose new sanctions on Iran if there is no agreement by a late March deadline and to legislate an up-or-down vote in Congress. The White House is opposing both legislative actions.
Aipac’s efforts to shape the Iran deal through the Congress are being driven by what the organization believes has been President Barack Obama’s wariness of using both financial pressure and the threat of military force to challenge Tehran.
Several of the seven Maryland Democrats in Congress are expected to consider jumping into the race, including Reps. Chris Van Hollen, Elijah Cummings, Donna Edwards, John Delaney and possibly Rep. John Sarbanes, whose father also served in the Senate.
Many in Maryland and on Capitol Hill have long viewed Van Hollen, a former aide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who lives in Montgomery County, as a likely candidate for Senate once Mikulski stepped aside.
In the last six years, however, Van Hollen has become an increasingly loyal understudy of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who has at times considered retiring herself. That means a Van Hollen bid for the Senate could also upend the eventual race to replace Pelosi.
The Senate seat could also be tempting for O’Malley (D), who left office because of term limits in January and is weighing a 2016 presidential bid that has yet to get any traction.
O’Malley has been close to Mikulski for decades. He worked as the field director on her 1986 campaign, and O’Malley’s 87-year-old mother continues to serve as Mikulski’s receptionist.
Mikulski has been cool to the idea of an O’Malley presidential bid, however, announcing she intends to support Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination if the former secretary of state runs.
At the same time, O’Malley has served in an executive role for the past 15 years — a stint that includes his tenure as Baltimore mayor — and advisers have previously said that he has limited appetite for legislative service.
Other names being talked about on the Democratic side include Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake; U.S. Labor Secretary Tom Perez, a former Montgomery County Council member and state-level Cabinet secretary; and former Montgomery County delegate Heather Mizeur, who ran unexpectedly strong in last year’s Democratic primary for governor on the strength of progressive support.
Pretty sure Schock's problem is that he needs to cook his books better. But it's hard playing charte jet tag with the one percenters in Congress. He has to look like he belongs if anyone's going to take him seriously.
Rep. Aaron Schock, R-Ill., used taxpayer money to pay for a private plane to travel from Peoria to Chicago for the Bears-Vikings game on Nov. 16, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned.
And a Sun-Times examination of House disbursement records and campaign finance reports suggests that Schock used taxpayer money to help underwrite a September trip to New York, where a political action committee he controls spent $3,000 for Global Citizen Festival concert tickets.
The use of $20,855 in taxpayer money for the Chicago and New York trips will raise more legal and ethical issues for Schock.
These new Sun-Times revelations are part of a growing number of questions surrounding Schock’s use of campaign and government funds to support his extravagant jet-set lifestyle.
Schock hired two lawyers last week to conduct an internal audit of his operations. That action was triggered by the enormous scrutiny Schock is getting following his “Downton Abbey” office redecoration in Washington.
The state legislature has debated the issue for years and remains sharply divided along party lines. Now, an increasing number of Kentucky counties are acting on their own: Half a dozen have enacted local right-to-work laws, and at least a dozen more are considering them.
Kenton County held a first reading of its ordinance last week and is expected to enact it March 10. Boone County's will come up for a vote on March 17. Campbell County Judge-executive Steve Pendery said the issue could come up "relatively soon" there.
The ordinances would not affect existing labor contracts, nor public employees' unions.
All three counties are controlled by Republicans, who generally view the right-to-work issue as an economic development one. Many Democrats, however, view it as a union-busting move, and local labor unions have vowed to oppose the ordinances.
"We've heard for some time through Tri-ED that not being a right-to-work state costs us opportunities," said Boone County Judge-executive Gary Moore. "Now that there appears to be the ability for passing right-to-work on county basis, we want to take a serious look at it."
Knochelmann said he isn't sure how many Kenton Countians are unionized, but "I don't know that it really matters – if it's one or if it's 50,000, we are not getting the opportunities for businesses to locate in Northern Kentucky in particular – or the state as whole – because we're not right-to-work."
The loss of subsidies for millions of people would also put the Obama administration on the offense for the first time to protect its signature healthcare law.
A White House crusade against the GOP would mean a firestorm of accusations that the party is taking away care and endangering lives – building up for the 2016 election.
To avoid that situation, some Republicans are floating a stopgap that would keep the subsidies in place temporarily.
Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) promised this week that he would introduce legislation extending the ObamaCare subsidies for 18 months after a court decision.
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) hinted at a similar proposal earlier in the week, promising "a short-term solution” until a Republican can enter the White House.
The willingness to embrace the subsidies from two staunch ObamaCare foes is a major shift in tactics, signaling a growing sense of urgency within the party on the biggest court case of the year.
“I’m really, really shocked. We were all like, ‘whoa,’” one GOP Senate aide said of Hatch’s remarks about a short-term fix. “That is easily one of the most constructive things a Republican has said regarding King, ever.”
“There’s no reason for us to stretch out the funding for an unconstitutional extension. There’s no reason to do that. It just puts more pressure on us to adopt more ObamaCare,” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) told The Hill this week.
State lawmakers across the country, though, are seeking their own fallback plans. Nine states are in talks to keep subsidies by creating their own exchanges, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which would make the state’s ObamaCare customers eligible for subsidies under the current law.
Democrats argue that Congress should simply tweak any language in ObamaCare that the justices rule unconstitutional. And the White House maintains that it has no plans to prevent the massive disruption that would be caused by the ruling.
With just four months until the Supreme Court’s ruling, some Republicans are warning that time is running out for the party’s long-sought alternative.
Back when I was hired, First Look and The Intercept were just getting started. It seemed like it was going to be a fantastic opportunity for journalists. I was told that I could basically create my own job and write investigative stories about anything I wanted. I knew at the time little about Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire who founded and funded First Look, but he wasn’t a big part of my decision-making.
I assumed Omidyar must be a decent guy if he was going to pour $250 million into a new journalism venture, as he promised. Given that the organization had been founded in the wake of the NSA surveillance scandal that Snowden had launched, it was clear from the start that First Look Media would be a muckracking, confrontational publication with a libertarian streak—distrustful of government power and moneyed interests. To start it, Omidyar promised $50 million to get it off the ground. With resources like that, it had tremendous promise.
Plus, I figured, it couldn’t be worse than my last job.
How wrong I was—on both counts.
During the summer of 2013 I had been offered a job at Al Jazeera’s investigative unit, where I’d been promised full independence. I took the job because I was worried about the future of journalism—and especially my future in it. It hadn’t worked out as promised; I only lasted two months, quitting after I came to believe that the network’s political agenda in the Middle East compromised my ability to do journalism.
First Look couldn’t be any worse than that, right?
The selling point to those who were recruited to First Look was tremendous resources and tremendous freedom to pursue “fearless, independent journalism.” An editor I’d worked with before, Eric Bates, recruited me—asking me to write up a memo describing my dream job, an investigative position that combined long-form work with quick hit pieces oriented to the news. Then First Look hired me and told me to do exactly what I’d laid out.
That much happened—I was able to pursue all sorts of great stories. Where First Look faltered, though, was actually publishing my work and the work of the other journalists it hired.
Over the next six months, First Look became a slowly unfolding disaster, not because of editorial meddling from the top, but because of what I came to believe was epic managerial incompetence. What I observed was that the Omidyar-led management could not complete the simplest tasks—approving budgets or hires—without months of internal debate and apparent anguish. The Intercept didn’t even begin publishing until last February. (We weren’t supposed to call it “Glenn Greenwald’s The Intercept” because a lot of other people worked there, including me for a bit, but everyone knew Glenn was the anchor of the project.) After a pause ordered by editor in chief John Cook to address its internal dysfunction, the site relaunched in July with a good, complicated story about how the NSA and the FBI had been monitoring a few Muslim-Americans in the United States. Yet I saw how difficult the story was to birth for its chief editor, John Cook, and he didn’t end up lasting long—before quitting and returning to Gawker.
I was ready to start writing, too, but the day-to-day at First Look was anything but functional. I would find and begin researching stories that Eric approved, but there was no way to publish them—the organization’s editing structure was so lacking and insignificant, and on at least three occasions I saw stories that I had the inside track on get published in other outlets. (For example, this story about a New York hedge fund wrapped up with brutal African dictator Robert Mugabe. This was, as I recall, the first story approved by Eric—but we lost it many months later.) Not only did we produce virtually no work, but there was no real push to produce work from management. For all of the bean counting and expense account-approving that Omidyar’s organizational structure imposed on us, they were shockingly disinterested in the actual journalism.
Posts
