TO COMMENT CLICK HERE
welcome to reality trivia
reality is the state of things as they actually exist
nov 20, 2019
Real News Today
*Impeachment Hearings: Random Observations on Republicans Getting Kicked in the Taint by the rude pundit(Commentary)
*A HISTORIAN EXPLAINS WHY ROBERT E. LEE WASN’T A HERO — HE WAS A TRAITOR
(HISTORY 2)
*Dozens of Facebook lobbyists tied to members of Congress, investigation shows
(Worthless Media)
*Humans put into suspended animation for first time
(Currents)
*Fossil fuel production on track for double the safe climate limit
(Oil)
(for previous day's articles see "what's inside" below)
comment/tweet of the day
Paul Krugman✔
Given what's going down in these hearings, Republicans should be permanently disbarred from claiming to be patriots, let alone more patriotic than Democrats. Too bad we know that it won't happen 1/
Paul Krugman✔
After all, Republicans have a 100% consistent record of blowing up the budget deficit whenever they hold power. Yet they still get away with pretending to be fiscally responsible. No reason to think their betrayal of America will play any differently 2/
8:53 AM - Nov 19, 2019
---
Bernie Sanders✔
@SenSanders
The top 1% owe 70% of unpaid taxes. Collecting less than a third of those taxes can fund all of this:
🎓 Tuition-free college for all
🏡 A Green New Deal for public housing
🚰 Clean tap water for all
🍝 Universal school meals
Don't tell me we can't afford to live with dignity.
10:20 AM - Nov 19, 2019
---
Harry Truman on The GOP, something that we should all remember
Sherman A1 - demo underground
11/20/19
On 13 October 1948, President Harry Truman made an appearance in St. Paul, Minnesota, stumping on behalf of both his own re-election campaign and a bid by the mayor of Minneapolis, fellow Democrat Hubert Humphrey, to land a seat in the U.S. Senate. During that appearance in St. Paul, President Truman delivered an address at the city’s Municipal Auditorium which was carried on a nationwide radio broadcast and included the criticism of the Republican Party.
"Today the forces of liberalism face a crisis. The people of the United States must make a choice between two ways of living — a decision which will affect us the rest of our lives and our children and our grandchildren after us.
On the other side, there is the Wall Street way of life and politics. Trust the leader! Let big business take care of prices and profits! Measure all things by money! That is the philosophy of the masters of the Republican Party.
Well, I have been studying the Republican Party for over 12 years at close hand in the Capital of the United States. And by this time, I have discovered where the Republicans stand on most of the major issues.
Since they won’t tell you themselves, I am going to tell you.
They approve of the American farmer — but they are willing to help him go broke.
They stand four-square for the American home — but not for housing.
They are strong for labor — but they are stronger for restricting labor’s rights.
They favor a minimum wage — the smaller the minimum the better.
They indorse educational opportunity for all — but they won’t spend money for teachers or for schools.
They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine — for people who can afford them.
They approve of Social Security benefits — so much so that they took them away from almost a million people.
They believe in international trade — so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement.
They favor the admission of displaced persons — but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.
They consider electric power a great blessing — but only when the private power companies get their rake-off.
They say TVA is wonderful — but we ought never to try it again.
They condemn “cruelly high prices” — but fight to the death every effort to bring them down.
They think the American standard of living is a fine thing — so long as it doesn’t spread to all the people.
And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.
Now, my friends, that is the Wall Street Republican way of life. But there is another way — there is another way — the Democratic way, the way of the Democratic Party."
"Today the forces of liberalism face a crisis. The people of the United States must make a choice between two ways of living — a decision which will affect us the rest of our lives and our children and our grandchildren after us.
On the other side, there is the Wall Street way of life and politics. Trust the leader! Let big business take care of prices and profits! Measure all things by money! That is the philosophy of the masters of the Republican Party.
Well, I have been studying the Republican Party for over 12 years at close hand in the Capital of the United States. And by this time, I have discovered where the Republicans stand on most of the major issues.
Since they won’t tell you themselves, I am going to tell you.
They approve of the American farmer — but they are willing to help him go broke.
They stand four-square for the American home — but not for housing.
They are strong for labor — but they are stronger for restricting labor’s rights.
They favor a minimum wage — the smaller the minimum the better.
They indorse educational opportunity for all — but they won’t spend money for teachers or for schools.
They think modern medical care and hospitals are fine — for people who can afford them.
They approve of Social Security benefits — so much so that they took them away from almost a million people.
They believe in international trade — so much so that they crippled our reciprocal trade program, and killed our International Wheat Agreement.
They favor the admission of displaced persons — but only within shameful racial and religious limitations.
They consider electric power a great blessing — but only when the private power companies get their rake-off.
They say TVA is wonderful — but we ought never to try it again.
They condemn “cruelly high prices” — but fight to the death every effort to bring them down.
They think the American standard of living is a fine thing — so long as it doesn’t spread to all the people.
And they admire the Government of the United States so much that they would like to buy it.
Now, my friends, that is the Wall Street Republican way of life. But there is another way — there is another way — the Democratic way, the way of the Democratic Party."
Gordon Sondland Trashed Rudy in Impeachment Hearing
“We weren’t happy with the president’s directive to talk with Rudy,” he said. “We did not want to involve Mr. Giuliani.”
Betsy Swan, Erin Banco, Sam Brodey - daily beast
Updated Nov. 20, 2019 11:53AM ET
U.S. Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland told House impeachment investigators Wednesday that President Donald Trump in May directed him to speak with Rudy Giuliani about Ukraine. Giuliani was at that point in time leading an effort to pressure top Ukrainian officials to open investigations into the 2016 presidential election and the natural gas company Burisma on whose board Hunter Biden sat.
“We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine,” Sondland said. “So we followed the President’s orders.”
Sondland has been at the heart of the Trump administration’s efforts to pressure Kyiv to investigate 2020 candidate Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and the 2016 presidential elections. He faced intense questioning from House Democrats about his interactions with President Trump on Ukraine and his efforts to convince Ukraine to open the investigations Giuliani pushed for in exchange for a White House visit for President Volodymyr Zelensky. Throughout the first hour of the public hearing Sondland pointed to Giuliani as the main operator of the pressure campaign and said he, then-special envoy Kurt Volker and Energy Secretary Rick Perry, only engaged with that effort because Trump told him to do so.
“Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States,” Sondland said. “We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President’s orders.”
Sondald said he did not believe at the time that Giuliani’s involvement was improper in part because he did not understand that the pressure for an investigation into Burisma meant an investigation into the Bidens. However, Sondland said he did believe that Giuliani’s exertion of pressure on Kyiv constituted a quid pro quo.
“Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky,” Sondland’s statement says. “Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.”
Sondland said he also “shared concerns of the potential quid pro quo regarding the security aid” with Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin who had visibility into the administration’s thinking on Ukraine.
Sondland is arguably the most crucial witness in the House impeachment inquiry given his direct communication with Trump on Ukraine. In her October 14, deposition, former top Russia advisor for Trump Fiona Hill told House investigators that during a July 10 meeting with Sondland at the White House with Ukrainian officials she asked Sondland on whose authority he was operating. “He said ‘the president’s,’” Hill said.
Sondland said Wednesday that he never heard about any pre conditions for a White House meeting from President Trump directly. But several impeachment witnesses have said that the EU ambassador told his administration colleagues that he was in touch with Trump about the efforts to push Ukrainian officials to open specific investigations.
On one occasion Sondland called Trump in front of embassy staffers in Kyiv. The call took place at a restaurant following a meeting the ambassador attended with Zelensky aide Andri Yermak. In that call, Sondland told Trump that Zelensky “loves your ass” and that he would commit to the investigations. Sondland told House investigators during his deposition in October that he remembers talking to Trump on the phone just once and that it was short and non-substantive.
Throughout his testimony Sondland stressed the fact that he kept senior State Department leadership “apprised” of what he was doing. Leadership there supported his work, he said, and knew that he and others were pursuing “a commitment to investigations.”
“Our efforts were reported and approved,” he said. “Not once do I recall encountering objection.”
As part of those efforts, Sondland came to believe the Ukrainians needed to announce the investigations Trump wanted in order to receive military aid.
“By the end of the August, my belief was that if Ukraine did something to demonstrate a serious intention to fight corruption, specifically addressing Burisma and 2016 server, then the hold on military aid would be lifted,” he said.
The “2016 server” refers to a debunked conspiracy about the Democratic National Committee hack which claims that the Russians didn’t actually break into the Democratic Party’s servers. When Trump alluded to the conspiracy theory on his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukrainian officials listening in were perplexed and had no idea what he was talking about.
Sondlandalso told House investigators that he met with Yermak Sept. 1 in Warsaw and that he told the Zelenszy aide that Kyiv needed to release a statement about investigating the Bidens and the server if it wanted military aid the U.S. had already promised.
“I really regret that the Ukrainians were placed in that predicament, but I do not regret doing what I could to try to break the logjam and to solve the problem,” he said.
Sondland complained the State Department and the White House had made preparing for his testimony “less than fair” by prohibiting access to his own documents to prepare for his testimony, and that he could not work with his staff at the U.S. embassy in Brussels to prepare. He added that he asked the State Department and the White House for his materials multiple times, but they refused to let him see them.
“Having access to the State Department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom I spoke and met, when, and what was said,” he said.
If Twitter was any indication, Republicans struggled to formulate a real-time counter to Sondland’s testimony. The congressional GOP accounts that have been aggressively providing impeachment pushback were largely silent during the first two hours of the hearing; only the account for the Oversight Committee ventured a reminder that the Ukrainian foreign minister once said Sondland never mentioned anything about a connection between investigations and aid.
“The President did nothing wrong,” the Oversight account declared. “Republicans are united. Democrats are divided and can't keep their narrative straight.”
But Republican members appeared to plot in real time their reaction to Sondland’s testimony. As the ambassador plowed through his lengthy opening statement, members on both sides seemed to be engrossed in their copies. Republicans flipped through it at their desks; Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), a staunch Trump defender who participated in the deposition phase of the inquiry, was taking longhand notes on the back of a copy of Sondland’s statement. During Schiff’s questioning, Nunes and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) huddled with GOP counsel Steve Castor, with Castor holding up a piece of paper.
RELATED: Sondland hotels are facing backlash over Trump ties: ‘Do you want to support him?
Sondland founded and formerly served as chairman of Provenance Hotels, which owns and manages 14 boutique hotels across the U.S. — but his service under Trump has badly dented the brand.
RELATED: ‘Swear in Pence’: Bush ethics czar says Sondland testimony is ‘game over’ for Trump as president
“We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine,” Sondland said. “So we followed the President’s orders.”
Sondland has been at the heart of the Trump administration’s efforts to pressure Kyiv to investigate 2020 candidate Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and the 2016 presidential elections. He faced intense questioning from House Democrats about his interactions with President Trump on Ukraine and his efforts to convince Ukraine to open the investigations Giuliani pushed for in exchange for a White House visit for President Volodymyr Zelensky. Throughout the first hour of the public hearing Sondland pointed to Giuliani as the main operator of the pressure campaign and said he, then-special envoy Kurt Volker and Energy Secretary Rick Perry, only engaged with that effort because Trump told him to do so.
“Secretary Perry, Ambassador Volker and I worked with Mr. Rudy Giuliani on Ukraine matters at the express direction of the President of the United States,” Sondland said. “We did not want to work with Mr. Giuliani. Simply put, we played the hand we were dealt. We all understood that if we refused to work with Mr. Giuliani, we would lose an important opportunity to cement relations between the United States and Ukraine. So we followed the President’s orders.”
Sondald said he did not believe at the time that Giuliani’s involvement was improper in part because he did not understand that the pressure for an investigation into Burisma meant an investigation into the Bidens. However, Sondland said he did believe that Giuliani’s exertion of pressure on Kyiv constituted a quid pro quo.
“Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky,” Sondland’s statement says. “Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.”
Sondland said he also “shared concerns of the potential quid pro quo regarding the security aid” with Sen. Ron Johnson, a Republican from Wisconsin who had visibility into the administration’s thinking on Ukraine.
Sondland is arguably the most crucial witness in the House impeachment inquiry given his direct communication with Trump on Ukraine. In her October 14, deposition, former top Russia advisor for Trump Fiona Hill told House investigators that during a July 10 meeting with Sondland at the White House with Ukrainian officials she asked Sondland on whose authority he was operating. “He said ‘the president’s,’” Hill said.
Sondland said Wednesday that he never heard about any pre conditions for a White House meeting from President Trump directly. But several impeachment witnesses have said that the EU ambassador told his administration colleagues that he was in touch with Trump about the efforts to push Ukrainian officials to open specific investigations.
On one occasion Sondland called Trump in front of embassy staffers in Kyiv. The call took place at a restaurant following a meeting the ambassador attended with Zelensky aide Andri Yermak. In that call, Sondland told Trump that Zelensky “loves your ass” and that he would commit to the investigations. Sondland told House investigators during his deposition in October that he remembers talking to Trump on the phone just once and that it was short and non-substantive.
Throughout his testimony Sondland stressed the fact that he kept senior State Department leadership “apprised” of what he was doing. Leadership there supported his work, he said, and knew that he and others were pursuing “a commitment to investigations.”
“Our efforts were reported and approved,” he said. “Not once do I recall encountering objection.”
As part of those efforts, Sondland came to believe the Ukrainians needed to announce the investigations Trump wanted in order to receive military aid.
“By the end of the August, my belief was that if Ukraine did something to demonstrate a serious intention to fight corruption, specifically addressing Burisma and 2016 server, then the hold on military aid would be lifted,” he said.
The “2016 server” refers to a debunked conspiracy about the Democratic National Committee hack which claims that the Russians didn’t actually break into the Democratic Party’s servers. When Trump alluded to the conspiracy theory on his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukrainian officials listening in were perplexed and had no idea what he was talking about.
Sondlandalso told House investigators that he met with Yermak Sept. 1 in Warsaw and that he told the Zelenszy aide that Kyiv needed to release a statement about investigating the Bidens and the server if it wanted military aid the U.S. had already promised.
“I really regret that the Ukrainians were placed in that predicament, but I do not regret doing what I could to try to break the logjam and to solve the problem,” he said.
Sondland complained the State Department and the White House had made preparing for his testimony “less than fair” by prohibiting access to his own documents to prepare for his testimony, and that he could not work with his staff at the U.S. embassy in Brussels to prepare. He added that he asked the State Department and the White House for his materials multiple times, but they refused to let him see them.
“Having access to the State Department materials would have been very helpful to me in trying to reconstruct with whom I spoke and met, when, and what was said,” he said.
If Twitter was any indication, Republicans struggled to formulate a real-time counter to Sondland’s testimony. The congressional GOP accounts that have been aggressively providing impeachment pushback were largely silent during the first two hours of the hearing; only the account for the Oversight Committee ventured a reminder that the Ukrainian foreign minister once said Sondland never mentioned anything about a connection between investigations and aid.
“The President did nothing wrong,” the Oversight account declared. “Republicans are united. Democrats are divided and can't keep their narrative straight.”
But Republican members appeared to plot in real time their reaction to Sondland’s testimony. As the ambassador plowed through his lengthy opening statement, members on both sides seemed to be engrossed in their copies. Republicans flipped through it at their desks; Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-N.Y.), a staunch Trump defender who participated in the deposition phase of the inquiry, was taking longhand notes on the back of a copy of Sondland’s statement. During Schiff’s questioning, Nunes and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) huddled with GOP counsel Steve Castor, with Castor holding up a piece of paper.
RELATED: Sondland hotels are facing backlash over Trump ties: ‘Do you want to support him?
Sondland founded and formerly served as chairman of Provenance Hotels, which owns and manages 14 boutique hotels across the U.S. — but his service under Trump has badly dented the brand.
RELATED: ‘Swear in Pence’: Bush ethics czar says Sondland testimony is ‘game over’ for Trump as president
EXPLAINING TRUMP’S RACISM
Racism means a lot more than using slurs or feeling hatred. Yet even in these narrow terms, Trump fits the bill.
By Jill Richardson | other words
November 20, 2019
“Is Trump a racist?” I have two answers to that question.
First, most white Americans misunderstand racism solely as intentional beliefs held by individual racists who hate people on the basis of race. For example, at times the media has focused on whether or not they could prove Trump had ever used the N-word, as if that alone would be the measure of whether or not he is a racist.
Sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva says that this “misses the fact” that racism is “a part of the social structure of society. Hence, we all participate in it — and we participate in it whether we like it or not, in conscious and unconscious ways, and in passive as well as active ways.”
This latter definition, the one accepted by sociologists and race scholars, takes a bit of getting used to, particularly if you are a white person who abhors racism.
I try to frame it for my students as follows: This nation was founded by people of European descent who stole land from — and committed a genocidal campaign against — the indigenous people on this continent. Then they enslaved Africans and their descendants for more than 200 years.
Segregation only became fully illegal in 1968. Anyone over the age of 51 was alive while segregation was still legal. We as a nation are still grappling with the legacy of our past, working toward justice for all — and we aren’t there yet.
None of us alive today asked to be born into a racist society — and yet, here we all are. It’s impossible to grow up in that society without participating in the status quo and absorbing at least some prejudices, even if they are only subconscious ones.
In short, learning about race means getting comfortable with the idea that our society itself is effectively racist, even for white folks who don’t actively feel that hatred themselves.
My second answer about whether or not Trump is a racist is: yes. And not just in the “everyone’s a racist” sense of the word.
For example, during the run up to the 2016 election, white nationalists supported Donald Trump because they felt like he would represent their interests and values best. Former Klan leader David Duke openly supported Trump, and still does.
Now, a trove of leaked emails show that Trump’s senior adviser Stephen Miller is “clearly immersed in white nationalist ideology.”
If Trump appeals to white nationalists and appoints white nationalists to senior positions in his administration, does that mean he holds racist views himself? Probably — but does it even matter? Whatever he privately believes, he’s allowed white nationalists to infiltrate senior levels of government, and they are influencing national policy.
In a more recent talk at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Bonilla-Silva analyzed Trump’s use of language to show how he speaks in terms of “us” and “them,” in which “us” refers to white Americans and “them” refers to people of color. And he routinely refers to immigrant “infestations,” using language most people reserve for insects and rodents they intend to exterminate. (Yet he’s not against all immigrants: he likes to marry the white ones.)
Although Trump often defends his immigration policies in terms of national security or economic concerns, the facts show that immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than native born citizens and, as one study put it, “immigration has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S.”
In short, Trump’s language, his choice of senior officials in his administration, and his popularity among white nationalists show that he holds racist views. It’s those views — and not national security or economic factors — that are behind his policies.
First, most white Americans misunderstand racism solely as intentional beliefs held by individual racists who hate people on the basis of race. For example, at times the media has focused on whether or not they could prove Trump had ever used the N-word, as if that alone would be the measure of whether or not he is a racist.
Sociologist Eduardo Bonilla-Silva says that this “misses the fact” that racism is “a part of the social structure of society. Hence, we all participate in it — and we participate in it whether we like it or not, in conscious and unconscious ways, and in passive as well as active ways.”
This latter definition, the one accepted by sociologists and race scholars, takes a bit of getting used to, particularly if you are a white person who abhors racism.
I try to frame it for my students as follows: This nation was founded by people of European descent who stole land from — and committed a genocidal campaign against — the indigenous people on this continent. Then they enslaved Africans and their descendants for more than 200 years.
Segregation only became fully illegal in 1968. Anyone over the age of 51 was alive while segregation was still legal. We as a nation are still grappling with the legacy of our past, working toward justice for all — and we aren’t there yet.
None of us alive today asked to be born into a racist society — and yet, here we all are. It’s impossible to grow up in that society without participating in the status quo and absorbing at least some prejudices, even if they are only subconscious ones.
In short, learning about race means getting comfortable with the idea that our society itself is effectively racist, even for white folks who don’t actively feel that hatred themselves.
My second answer about whether or not Trump is a racist is: yes. And not just in the “everyone’s a racist” sense of the word.
For example, during the run up to the 2016 election, white nationalists supported Donald Trump because they felt like he would represent their interests and values best. Former Klan leader David Duke openly supported Trump, and still does.
Now, a trove of leaked emails show that Trump’s senior adviser Stephen Miller is “clearly immersed in white nationalist ideology.”
If Trump appeals to white nationalists and appoints white nationalists to senior positions in his administration, does that mean he holds racist views himself? Probably — but does it even matter? Whatever he privately believes, he’s allowed white nationalists to infiltrate senior levels of government, and they are influencing national policy.
In a more recent talk at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Bonilla-Silva analyzed Trump’s use of language to show how he speaks in terms of “us” and “them,” in which “us” refers to white Americans and “them” refers to people of color. And he routinely refers to immigrant “infestations,” using language most people reserve for insects and rodents they intend to exterminate. (Yet he’s not against all immigrants: he likes to marry the white ones.)
Although Trump often defends his immigration policies in terms of national security or economic concerns, the facts show that immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than native born citizens and, as one study put it, “immigration has an overall positive impact on the long-run economic growth in the U.S.”
In short, Trump’s language, his choice of senior officials in his administration, and his popularity among white nationalists show that he holds racist views. It’s those views — and not national security or economic factors — that are behind his policies.
State supreme court judge rules Trump to be deposed in defamation case – third loss for president
November 19, 2019
By David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement - raw story
A New York State Supreme Court judge has ruled a defamation case against President Donald Trump can move forward, and that the President will be deposed by January 31, 2020. The case is being brought by former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos.
The is the President’s third attempt to block the requirement for him to be deposed, and his third loss.
“Zervos has accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2007. She claims Trump kissed her twice on the lips during a lunch meeting in his New York City office, and on a separate occasion in Beverly Hills, she alleges he kissed her aggressively and touched her breast,” CNN reports. “Trump has denied the allegations.”
The President’s legal team “said that Trump’s frequent denials of accusations made by Zervos and others were protected political speech as statements of opinion.”
Trump’s legal team has claimed there are “novel and important Constitutional issues involved,” and that he should be given “special considerations” since he has requested the case be dismissed.
New York state Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter disagreed.
The is the President’s third attempt to block the requirement for him to be deposed, and his third loss.
“Zervos has accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in 2007. She claims Trump kissed her twice on the lips during a lunch meeting in his New York City office, and on a separate occasion in Beverly Hills, she alleges he kissed her aggressively and touched her breast,” CNN reports. “Trump has denied the allegations.”
The President’s legal team “said that Trump’s frequent denials of accusations made by Zervos and others were protected political speech as statements of opinion.”
Trump’s legal team has claimed there are “novel and important Constitutional issues involved,” and that he should be given “special considerations” since he has requested the case be dismissed.
New York state Supreme Court Justice Jennifer Schecter disagreed.
Improved IRS enforcement could raise $1 trillion in 10 years — even without raising taxes: study
November 19, 2019
By Matthew Chapman - raw story
According to Markets Insider, a new National Bureau of Economic Research study by economists Larry Summers and Natasha Sarin suggests that the Internal Revenue Service could boost tax collection by $1 trillion over the next 10 years without any tax increase — just by increasing audits, improving their information technology and reporting requirements, and therefore collecting unpaid taxes that people already owe.
Such an overhaul would require around a $100 billion boost to the IRS budget, they estimated — meaning it would more than pay for itself.
“Almost everyone involved in public-policy debates agrees that it would be good if the federal government could collect more revenue without raising tax rates or reducing tax deductions or credits,” wrote Summers and Sarin in an overview in the Washington Post. “It should be indisputable that investment to make sure all citizens meet their tax obligations is desirable.”
One of their most notable findings is that under the current system, around $7.5 trillion in taxes will go uncollected by 2029 — and that 70 percent of it will be taxes owed by the top 1 percent of earners.
Despite the top 1 percent’s overwhelming share of uncollected taxes, an investigation in May by ProPublica found that the IRS audits these earners at a rate of just 1.56 percent — which is just slightly more than the rate at which the IRS audits claims of the earned income tax credit (EITC), a program used mainly by people who make less than $20,000 a year.
Such an overhaul would require around a $100 billion boost to the IRS budget, they estimated — meaning it would more than pay for itself.
“Almost everyone involved in public-policy debates agrees that it would be good if the federal government could collect more revenue without raising tax rates or reducing tax deductions or credits,” wrote Summers and Sarin in an overview in the Washington Post. “It should be indisputable that investment to make sure all citizens meet their tax obligations is desirable.”
One of their most notable findings is that under the current system, around $7.5 trillion in taxes will go uncollected by 2029 — and that 70 percent of it will be taxes owed by the top 1 percent of earners.
Despite the top 1 percent’s overwhelming share of uncollected taxes, an investigation in May by ProPublica found that the IRS audits these earners at a rate of just 1.56 percent — which is just slightly more than the rate at which the IRS audits claims of the earned income tax credit (EITC), a program used mainly by people who make less than $20,000 a year.
Black Nursing Home Executive Wins $6M Settlement Thanks to Her Former Boss Complaining She Couldn’t Stomach ‘Black Person Walking Around Here in a Suit’
By Lauren Floyd - atlanta black star
November 20, 2019
Care One executive Alison Fitzpatrick-Durski (right) allegedly reversed the promotion of Rebecca McCarthy (left) due to her race. (Photos from left to right by: rmccarthynurseconsulting.com | Alison Fitzpatrick LNHA on LinkedIn)
A Black former nursing home executive won more than $6 million in a New Jersey discrimination suit after her boss allegedly halted her promotion because of her race.
“I am very happy that justice was served,” Rebecca McCarthy told Atlanta Black Star in an email Wednesday.
The woman earlier said in a civil complaint that Care One executive Alison Fitzpatrick-Durski told her, “I don’t want a black person walking around here in a suit as VP. I want you in scrubs, flats and a lab coat.”
McCarthy said she was fired the next day at the Bound Brook facility and replaced by a white woman.
“A black person just like any other hardworking qualified person deserves to hold a VP title and wear a suit without discrimination,” McCarthy said. “Ms. Fitzpatrick-Durski made it clear to me on her first day on the job that she didn’t want to see a black person in the VP position.”
McCarthy was originally offered a promotion to vice president when she informed the company she was accepting another position in 2016, according to the Daily Mail.
She instead stayed and worked as vice president a few months until a recently hired senior vice president asked her to return to her former position, McCarthy stated in the lawsuit.
“It is a shame that CareOne continues to defend such disgusting behavior,” McCarthy told Atlanta Black Star. “I hope that this never happens to anyone else.”
Fitzpatrick-Durski denied referencing race when she spoke to McCarthy and claimed she was trying to get the woman to prioritize hands-on patient care, the Daily Mail reported.
Attorneys for the company said McCarthy was fired due to her performance, and they backed up Fitzpatrick-Durski’s claim that she wasn’t racist as evidenced by her direct reports being minorities, according to the Daily Mail.
Attorneys also highlighted Fitzpatrick-Durski’s former marriage to a Black man and said she ‘is the mother of three children who partake of African American heritage,’ the Daily Mail reported.
A judge is scheduled to rule on the defense’s motion to dismiss the verdict on Nov. 22, the newspaper reported.
McCarthy’s lawyers contend race was the only reason their client was fired and that Fitzpatrick-Durski allegedly referred to another black employee as a slave.
A jury siding with McCarthy awarded the woman $4.1 million in punitive damages and about $1.8 million in compensatory damages, the New Jersey Law Journal reported.
McCarthy’s case isn’t the first legal matter Care One has faced regarding how its employees are treated.
Amid a federal appeals court ruling in 2016 that the business violated fair labor practices at its Morristown facility when workers were trying to unionize, Care One organized a mandatory meeting to prove it was “a family,” Nj.com reported.
During the meeting, the business played a slideshow of images from a Valentine’s Day party and played Sister Sledge’s “We Are Family” in the background.
Care One has not yet responded to an Atlanta Black Star request for comment.
“I am very happy that justice was served,” Rebecca McCarthy told Atlanta Black Star in an email Wednesday.
The woman earlier said in a civil complaint that Care One executive Alison Fitzpatrick-Durski told her, “I don’t want a black person walking around here in a suit as VP. I want you in scrubs, flats and a lab coat.”
McCarthy said she was fired the next day at the Bound Brook facility and replaced by a white woman.
“A black person just like any other hardworking qualified person deserves to hold a VP title and wear a suit without discrimination,” McCarthy said. “Ms. Fitzpatrick-Durski made it clear to me on her first day on the job that she didn’t want to see a black person in the VP position.”
McCarthy was originally offered a promotion to vice president when she informed the company she was accepting another position in 2016, according to the Daily Mail.
She instead stayed and worked as vice president a few months until a recently hired senior vice president asked her to return to her former position, McCarthy stated in the lawsuit.
“It is a shame that CareOne continues to defend such disgusting behavior,” McCarthy told Atlanta Black Star. “I hope that this never happens to anyone else.”
Fitzpatrick-Durski denied referencing race when she spoke to McCarthy and claimed she was trying to get the woman to prioritize hands-on patient care, the Daily Mail reported.
Attorneys for the company said McCarthy was fired due to her performance, and they backed up Fitzpatrick-Durski’s claim that she wasn’t racist as evidenced by her direct reports being minorities, according to the Daily Mail.
Attorneys also highlighted Fitzpatrick-Durski’s former marriage to a Black man and said she ‘is the mother of three children who partake of African American heritage,’ the Daily Mail reported.
A judge is scheduled to rule on the defense’s motion to dismiss the verdict on Nov. 22, the newspaper reported.
McCarthy’s lawyers contend race was the only reason their client was fired and that Fitzpatrick-Durski allegedly referred to another black employee as a slave.
A jury siding with McCarthy awarded the woman $4.1 million in punitive damages and about $1.8 million in compensatory damages, the New Jersey Law Journal reported.
McCarthy’s case isn’t the first legal matter Care One has faced regarding how its employees are treated.
Amid a federal appeals court ruling in 2016 that the business violated fair labor practices at its Morristown facility when workers were trying to unionize, Care One organized a mandatory meeting to prove it was “a family,” Nj.com reported.
During the meeting, the business played a slideshow of images from a Valentine’s Day party and played Sister Sledge’s “We Are Family” in the background.
Care One has not yet responded to an Atlanta Black Star request for comment.
For Texas Governor Greg Abbott protecting ‘religious liberty’ appears to apply only to anti-LGBTQ hate
November 19, 2019
By David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement- Commentary - raw story
Governor Greg Abbott is a strong proponent of religious liberty. The Texas Republican in May signed a bill protecting religious liberty, announcing, “I will always fight to preserve our religious liberty as Americans, and as Texans.”
Over the summer when the local government of San Antonio wanted to ban the Christian chicken chain Chick-fil-A from its airport food court over the company’s long history of supporting anti-LGBTQ charities, Gov. Abbott signed into law the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill. Twice.
“Texas protects religious liberty,” Gov. Abbott declared. “No business should be discriminated against simply because its owners donate to a church, the Salvation Army, or other religious organization.”
“The Save Chick-fil-A legislation that I’m about to sign is a victory for religious freedom in Texas,” he claimed.
But for Governor Abbott that religious liberty is effectively a one-way street.
On Monday Chick-fil-A announced it would narrow the number of recipients its charity donates to, to focus on hunger, homelessness, and education. As a result it will no longer donate to anti-LGBTQ non-profits including the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Abbott isn’t having it, and made clear he apparently will boycott Chick-fil-A as a result.
Retweeting the news of Chick-fil-A’s decision to help reduce hunger and homelessness and help improve education, the Texas governor posted a tweet Monday night announcing he would be dining at a Texas barbecue restaurant Bill Miller’s,
Abbott was willing to go all out to support and protect Chick-fil-A when the company was supporting anti-LGBTQ hate. When they stopped, he pulled his support – in a very public way.
In other words, Abbott’s desire to protect “religious liberty” only applies if that “liberty” is being used to attack LGBTQ people.
Over the summer when the local government of San Antonio wanted to ban the Christian chicken chain Chick-fil-A from its airport food court over the company’s long history of supporting anti-LGBTQ charities, Gov. Abbott signed into law the “Save Chick-fil-A” bill. Twice.
“Texas protects religious liberty,” Gov. Abbott declared. “No business should be discriminated against simply because its owners donate to a church, the Salvation Army, or other religious organization.”
“The Save Chick-fil-A legislation that I’m about to sign is a victory for religious freedom in Texas,” he claimed.
But for Governor Abbott that religious liberty is effectively a one-way street.
On Monday Chick-fil-A announced it would narrow the number of recipients its charity donates to, to focus on hunger, homelessness, and education. As a result it will no longer donate to anti-LGBTQ non-profits including the Salvation Army and the Fellowship of Christian Athletes.
Abbott isn’t having it, and made clear he apparently will boycott Chick-fil-A as a result.
Retweeting the news of Chick-fil-A’s decision to help reduce hunger and homelessness and help improve education, the Texas governor posted a tweet Monday night announcing he would be dining at a Texas barbecue restaurant Bill Miller’s,
Abbott was willing to go all out to support and protect Chick-fil-A when the company was supporting anti-LGBTQ hate. When they stopped, he pulled his support – in a very public way.
In other words, Abbott’s desire to protect “religious liberty” only applies if that “liberty” is being used to attack LGBTQ people.
Bites from Real News
*11/20/2019*
*Pence's office denies he spoke with Sondland about investigations
Vice President Mike Pence's office pushed back on Sondland's testimony Wednesday that he raised concerns that aid for Ukraine had become tied to Trump's desire for investigations. “The Vice President never had a conversation with Gordon Sondland abo ... (The Hill)
*what reputation: Mike Pompeo planning to resign because Trump 'hurting his reputation', report claims Donald Trump’s secretary of state has reportedly told three prominent Republicans that he is planning to resign from the White House to run for a Senate seat. Mike Pompeo had planned to stay at the State Department un ... (Yahoo news)
*Humans Aren’t Inherently Destroying the Planet — Capitalism Is
It’s this oft-forgotten history that compelled Raj Patel and Jason W. Moore to write History of the World in Seven Cheap Things: A Guide to Capitalism, Nature, and the Future of the Planet. The book unpacks our modern capitalist world by tracing the fraught history of how seven elements — nature, money, work, care, food, energy and lives — were transformed and reshaped during the emergence of capitalism and up through to the modern day.
*The Quiet Rooms
Children are being locked away, alone and terrified, in schools across Illinois. Often, it’s against the law.
*The Federal Government Collects Data on How Often Schools Seclude Children. The Numbers Don’t Add Up.
Even though school districts are required to report their use of seclusion and restraint to the U.S. Department of Education, it can be difficult for parents to see the full picture.
*Don’t Count on Big Tech to Fix the Bay Area’s Housing Crisis
Philanthropy isn’t a real affordable housing fix.
*What America Lost When It Lost the Bison
By migrating in huge herds, bison behave like a force of nature, engineering and intensifying waves of spring greenery that other grazers rely on.
*POLLUTER’S PARADISE: What Could Happen if a $9.4 Billion Chemical Plant Comes to “Cancer Alley”
In St. James Parish, Louisiana, a Taiwanese industrial giant seems likely to be granted a permit to build a billion-dollar plastics plant. Its proposed emissions could triple levels of cancer-causing chemicals in one of the most toxic areas of the U.S.
*How rich people like Gordon Sondland buy their way to being US ambassadors – 5 questions answered
In every other developed democratic country, the role of ambassador, with only very rare exceptions, is given to career diplomats who have spent decades learning the art of international relations.
In the U.S., however, many ambassadors are untrained in diplomacy, and have simply bought their way into a prestigious post.
*The Electoral College’s Racist Origins
More than two centuries after it was designed to empower southern white voters, the system continues to do just that.
*OPINION: THE PERNICIOUS MYTH OF A CAUCASIAN RACE
(TALKERS)
Pentagon: President Trump's order to withdraw troops from Syria allows ISIS to rebuild
Tom Vanden Brook, USA TODAY
November 19, 2019
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's order to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria in October provided the Islamic State an opening to rebuild itself, giving the terrorist group "time and space" to target the West, according to a Pentagon report released Tuesday.
The Defense Intelligence Agency told the Pentagon's inspector general that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, has taken advantage of the U.S. withdrawal and Turkey's subsequent incursion into Syria. Trump's decision prompted strong bipartisan criticism for removing military pressure on the Islamic State and leaving Kurdish forces that had worked with U.S. troops to roll back gains made by the terrorists.
"ISIS exploited the Turkish incursion and subsequent drawdown of U.S. troops to reconstitute capabilities and resources within Syria and strengthen its ability to plan attacks abroad," the Pentagon's inspector general said in the report.
The report details the fallout from Trump's decision. His order Oct. 6 allowed Turkish forces and paramilitary groups to occupy parts of Syria that had been jointly patrolled by American forces and the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces. Turkey considers the Kurdish fighters terrorists. Russian troops also moved into the region.
The Islamic State, which has mounted or inspired terrorist attacks throughout the world, will have a chance to grow again, the report says.
The Defense Intelligence Agency determined that the Islamic State is "postured to withstand" the death of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who was killed in a U.S. raid Oct. 25. Baghdadi's death was a "significant blow to ISIS but would likely not end the ISIS threat," according to the report.
Glenn Fine, the inspector general, warned that "ISIS will likely have the 'time and space' to target the West and provide support to its global branches and networks, and in the longer term, ISIS will probably seek to regain control of some Syrian population centers and expand its global footprint."
The Defense Intelligence Agency said Islamic State operatives are likely to attempt to free prisoners detained in Kurdish-run detainee camps in Syria, according to Fine.
The Defense Intelligence Agency told the Pentagon's inspector general that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, has taken advantage of the U.S. withdrawal and Turkey's subsequent incursion into Syria. Trump's decision prompted strong bipartisan criticism for removing military pressure on the Islamic State and leaving Kurdish forces that had worked with U.S. troops to roll back gains made by the terrorists.
"ISIS exploited the Turkish incursion and subsequent drawdown of U.S. troops to reconstitute capabilities and resources within Syria and strengthen its ability to plan attacks abroad," the Pentagon's inspector general said in the report.
The report details the fallout from Trump's decision. His order Oct. 6 allowed Turkish forces and paramilitary groups to occupy parts of Syria that had been jointly patrolled by American forces and the Kurdish-dominated Syrian Democratic Forces. Turkey considers the Kurdish fighters terrorists. Russian troops also moved into the region.
The Islamic State, which has mounted or inspired terrorist attacks throughout the world, will have a chance to grow again, the report says.
The Defense Intelligence Agency determined that the Islamic State is "postured to withstand" the death of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who was killed in a U.S. raid Oct. 25. Baghdadi's death was a "significant blow to ISIS but would likely not end the ISIS threat," according to the report.
Glenn Fine, the inspector general, warned that "ISIS will likely have the 'time and space' to target the West and provide support to its global branches and networks, and in the longer term, ISIS will probably seek to regain control of some Syrian population centers and expand its global footprint."
The Defense Intelligence Agency said Islamic State operatives are likely to attempt to free prisoners detained in Kurdish-run detainee camps in Syria, according to Fine.
Syracuse University has suspended all fraternity activities for the rest of the semester after a black student said a group of students accosted her and called
her a racial slur
yahoo news
November 18, 2019
- Syracuse University's fraternities had their social activities canceled for the rest of the semester after a black student said members of the Alpha Chi Rho fraternity called her the N-word.
- It was the latest in a series of reported racist and anti-Semitic incidents to sweep the upstate New York campus since November 7.
Syracuse University has canceled all fraternity social activities for the rest of the semester after a black student reported a racist attack.
According to student newspaper The Daily Orange, members and guests of the Alpha Chi Rho fraternity started yelling at a black female student as she walked by them Saturday night on campus, including calling her the N-word.
Just after 6 a.m. the following day, Chancellor Kent Syverud announced in an email to students that the fraternity in question had been suspended and the individuals implicated "will be held appropriately accountable to the Code of Student Conduct and to the full extent of the law."
He also said that he had ordered the suspension of "all social activities of fraternities on this campus for the remainder of the semester."
"While only one fraternity may have been involved in this particular incident, given recent history, all fraternities must come together with the University community to reflect upon how to prevent recurrence of such seriously troubling behavior," Syverud said.
The national office of Alpha Chi Rho issued a statement to the Daily Orange on Sunday, saying it was "disgusted" by the alleged incident and will be working with the university to investigate.
"Such loathsome behavior is contrary to Alpha Chi Rho Fraternity principles that aim to cultivate men of word and deed based on character, honor and integrity," the statement read.
The incident on Saturday is part of a recent rash of disturbing racist and anti-Semitic acts reported at the upstate New York campus, which the school's newspaper has labeled the "November Hate Crimes." At least 10 hate crimes have been reported on campus since November 7, starting with the discovery of slurs against black and Asian people posted on a freshman dorm's bulletin board, according to The New York Times.
The incidents have caused upheaval on the campus, where black students have formed the #NotAgainSU movement, and staged a sit-in of a campus building until their demands are met. They are asking for the expulsion of students involved in racist incidents, the hiring of more diverse counselors, and diversity training for tenured staff.
Racial Discrimination Adapts Over Time, But It Always Produces the Same Results
A Newsday report on the world of Long Island real estate is revelatory.
BY CHARLES P. PIERCE - esquire
NOV 18, 2019
This a story that is not About Race, because nothing ever is About Race.
One of the first people I met when I began working at the Boston Globe in 2002 was a guy named Bill Dedman, who was described to me as the newspaper’s "data reporter." I had no idea what that was, having left daily newspapering behind in 1989. I just assumed a lot of things had changed since then, and I’d figure out what they were directly. Eventually, Bill’s gifts at building solid empirical foundations for big stories became clear. He has moved on to Newsday and, a couple of weeks ago, he gave me a heads-up on a massive project that publication had put together concerning ongoing racial discrimination in the housing market on Long Island. The project popped this past weekend, and it is gobsmacking.
The three-year probe strongly indicates that house hunting in one of the nation’s most segregated suburbs poses substantial risks of discrimination, with black buyers chancing disadvantages almost half the time they enlist brokers. Additionally, the investigation reveals that Long Island’s dominant residential brokering firms help solidify racial separations. They frequently directed white customers toward areas with the highest white representations and minority buyers to more integrated neighborhoods. They also avoided business in communities with overwhelmingly minority populations.
The Newsday team put three years of work into the project. They used every possible technique available to investigative journalism, including sending reporters out undercover to expose how the culture of discrimination worked first-hand.
Two undercover testers – for example, one black and one white – separately solicit an agent’s assistance in buying houses. They present similar financial profiles and request identical terms for houses in the same areas. The agent’s actions are then reviewed for evidence that the agent provided disparate service. Newsday conducted 86 matching tests in areas stretching from the New York City line to the Hamptons and from Long Island Sound to the South Shore. Thirty-nine of the tests paired black and white testers, 31 matched Hispanic and white testers and 16 linked Asian and white testers.
Newsday confirmed that agents had houses to sell when meeting with testers based on analyses provided by Zillow, the online home search site. Zillow draws an inventory of available homes daily from the Multiple Listing Service of Long Island, the computerized system used by agents to select possible houses for buyers. MLSLI said that it does not maintain its own database of past daily inventories, as Zillow does, and so could not provide the same type of tallies. As permitted by law, all tests were recorded on hidden cameras to ensure accuracy in describing interactions between agents and customers.
These results come from one of the most affluent, most liberal areas in the country. As one of the expert consultants called on by Newsday to analyze the results said, "This is something that didn’t happen in the deep South."
Most commonly in the seven cases, agents refused to provide house listings or home tours to minority testers unless they met financial qualifications that weren’t imposed on white counterparts. “I won’t do it,” Signature Premier Properties agent Anne Marie Queally Bechand said in refusing to take a black customer to tour houses unless the customer produced evidence that a lender had preapproved a mortgage loan. One month earlier, Queally Bechand had asked a white customer who had yet to secure mortgage preapproval, “When can you start looking at houses?”
The project focuses mainly on the problem of what is called “steering,” a method of sorting prospective homeowners by race that is blatantly illegal.
One example: Amid MS-13 gang murders in Brentwood, a 79 percent Hispanic and black community, Le-Ann Vicquery, at the time a Keller Williams Realty agent, told a black customer: “Every time I get a new listing in Brentwood, or a new client, I get so excited because they’re the nicest people.” She emailed the paired white customer: “please kindly do some research on the gang related events in that area for safety.”[...]
One of the first people I met when I began working at the Boston Globe in 2002 was a guy named Bill Dedman, who was described to me as the newspaper’s "data reporter." I had no idea what that was, having left daily newspapering behind in 1989. I just assumed a lot of things had changed since then, and I’d figure out what they were directly. Eventually, Bill’s gifts at building solid empirical foundations for big stories became clear. He has moved on to Newsday and, a couple of weeks ago, he gave me a heads-up on a massive project that publication had put together concerning ongoing racial discrimination in the housing market on Long Island. The project popped this past weekend, and it is gobsmacking.
The three-year probe strongly indicates that house hunting in one of the nation’s most segregated suburbs poses substantial risks of discrimination, with black buyers chancing disadvantages almost half the time they enlist brokers. Additionally, the investigation reveals that Long Island’s dominant residential brokering firms help solidify racial separations. They frequently directed white customers toward areas with the highest white representations and minority buyers to more integrated neighborhoods. They also avoided business in communities with overwhelmingly minority populations.
The Newsday team put three years of work into the project. They used every possible technique available to investigative journalism, including sending reporters out undercover to expose how the culture of discrimination worked first-hand.
Two undercover testers – for example, one black and one white – separately solicit an agent’s assistance in buying houses. They present similar financial profiles and request identical terms for houses in the same areas. The agent’s actions are then reviewed for evidence that the agent provided disparate service. Newsday conducted 86 matching tests in areas stretching from the New York City line to the Hamptons and from Long Island Sound to the South Shore. Thirty-nine of the tests paired black and white testers, 31 matched Hispanic and white testers and 16 linked Asian and white testers.
Newsday confirmed that agents had houses to sell when meeting with testers based on analyses provided by Zillow, the online home search site. Zillow draws an inventory of available homes daily from the Multiple Listing Service of Long Island, the computerized system used by agents to select possible houses for buyers. MLSLI said that it does not maintain its own database of past daily inventories, as Zillow does, and so could not provide the same type of tallies. As permitted by law, all tests were recorded on hidden cameras to ensure accuracy in describing interactions between agents and customers.
These results come from one of the most affluent, most liberal areas in the country. As one of the expert consultants called on by Newsday to analyze the results said, "This is something that didn’t happen in the deep South."
Most commonly in the seven cases, agents refused to provide house listings or home tours to minority testers unless they met financial qualifications that weren’t imposed on white counterparts. “I won’t do it,” Signature Premier Properties agent Anne Marie Queally Bechand said in refusing to take a black customer to tour houses unless the customer produced evidence that a lender had preapproved a mortgage loan. One month earlier, Queally Bechand had asked a white customer who had yet to secure mortgage preapproval, “When can you start looking at houses?”
The project focuses mainly on the problem of what is called “steering,” a method of sorting prospective homeowners by race that is blatantly illegal.
One example: Amid MS-13 gang murders in Brentwood, a 79 percent Hispanic and black community, Le-Ann Vicquery, at the time a Keller Williams Realty agent, told a black customer: “Every time I get a new listing in Brentwood, or a new client, I get so excited because they’re the nicest people.” She emailed the paired white customer: “please kindly do some research on the gang related events in that area for safety.”[...]
Trump: ‘I Don’t Know’ Sondland, but His Impeachment Testimony Proves My Innocence
Pilar Melendez - Reporter
Published Nov. 20, 2019 12:27PM ET
daily beast cheat sheet
President Donald Trump said Gordon Sondland “is not a man I know well,” as his ambassador to the European Union delivered bombshell testimony to the House impeachment panel Wednesday. “I don’t know him very well. I have not spoken to him much. This is not a man I know well,” Trump told reporters in a short statement at the White House before boarding Marine One. “He seems like a nice guy though... He worked for other candidates, too.”
The distancing came just moments after the president recounted Sondland’s impeachment hearing testimony and claimed it proves there was no quid pro quo with Ukraine for an investigation of the Biden family. Disputing his man in Brussels’ testimony, in which he said he had “a lot of conversations with the president” on several matters, Trump said he he wanted nothing from Ukraine. “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing,” Trump quoted himself saying to Sondland from hand-written notes in thick black lettering, before adding “that means it’s all over.” Before leaving for Texas, Trump also pushed back against Sondland’s characterization that he was in a “bad mood” during their phone call. “They say ‘He was not in a good mood.’ I’m always in a good mood. I don’t know what that is,” he emphasized.
The distancing came just moments after the president recounted Sondland’s impeachment hearing testimony and claimed it proves there was no quid pro quo with Ukraine for an investigation of the Biden family. Disputing his man in Brussels’ testimony, in which he said he had “a lot of conversations with the president” on several matters, Trump said he he wanted nothing from Ukraine. “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing,” Trump quoted himself saying to Sondland from hand-written notes in thick black lettering, before adding “that means it’s all over.” Before leaving for Texas, Trump also pushed back against Sondland’s characterization that he was in a “bad mood” during their phone call. “They say ‘He was not in a good mood.’ I’m always in a good mood. I don’t know what that is,” he emphasized.
Ukraine Is Still Waiting on $35 Million of U.S. Military Aid, Says Report
Jamie Ross - Reporter
Updated Nov. 20, 2019 8:14AM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
More than $35 million in U.S. military aid still hasn’t been released to Ukraine, the Los Angeles Times reports. It’s a chunk of the roughly $400 million in aid that President Trump decided to delay, in one of the key moments that led to the impeachment inquiry against him. The defense funding remains in U.S. Treasury accounts, according to documents obtained by the newspaper, and it’s not clear why it hasn’t been released. The money is reportedly planned to fund grenade launchers, secure communications, and naval combat craft. Pentagon spokeswoman Lt. Col. Carla Gleason declined to explain why the aid had been delayed, instead reiterating that it would be obligated “over the next several weeks.” The White House has downplayed Trump’s initial decision to delay the funding on the basis that it was eventually released without Ukraine caving to his demands. White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said earlier this month: “There was no quid pro quo. The Ukrainian government said they felt absolutely no pressure. Aid was eventually released to the Ukraine.”
Hitler’s Birthplace to Be Turned Into Police Station to Deter Neo-Nazis
William O’Connor - Travel Editor
Published Nov. 20, 2019 10:11AM ET
DAILY BEAST CHEAT SHEET
In a dramatic twist, the three-story building in the heart of Braunau am Inn, Austria, where Adolf Hitler was born in 1889 will now be redeveloped into a police station by the government in the hopes that it will become less of a tourist attraction for neo-Nazis. The government had seized the building in 2017 from its owner, Gerlinde Pommer, after she refused for decades to maintain the building, which made it hard to attract tenants that fit into the government’s mandate that it be used for “administrative, educational, or social services purposes.” The government announced that it will hold a design competition for the building this month and announce the winner in 2020. “The future use of the house by the police should send an unmistakable signal that the role of this building as a memorial to the Nazis been permanently revoked,” declared Wolfgang Peschorn, the interior minister of Austria.
*What's Inside*
nov 17 - NOV 19
✔‘DISQUALIFYING’: PETE BUTTIGIEG FACES BACKLASH FOR PRAISING RIGHT-WING TEA PARTY MOVEMENT IN RESURFACED 2010 VIDEO(CANDIDATES)
*IS THIS THE BEST AMERICA CAN DO?
(OPINION)
*BIG OIL NEEDS TO PAY FOR THE DAMAGE IT CAUSED
(OIL)
*‘CLOSE FRIEND OF THE PRESIDENT’: THE HILL’S OWNER LET COLUMNIST FEED TRUMP CONSPIRACY STORIES — HERE’S WHY(WORTHLESS MEDIA)
*DONALD TRUMP HAS DRAGGED AMERICA'S GLOBAL REPUTATION TO AN ALL-TIME LOW
(COMMENTARY)
✔LAND AFFECTED BY KEYSTONE PIPELINE LEAK BIGGER THAN THOUGHT
(OIL)
*GRASPING AT STRAWS BY NANCEGREGGS
(GOP POLITICS)
*LA BORINQUEÑA INSPIRES THE “RICANSTRUCTION” OF PUERTO RICO
(COLONIES)
*THE ECONOMICS OF STATEHOOD
(COLONIES)
*REPORT: YOVANOVICH’S ARE WAY BIGGER THAN TRUMP’S
(FUNNIES)
*STUDY: STATES THAT EXPANDED MEDICAID SAVED 19,000 LIVES, STATES THAT DIDN'T LOST 15,000
(PAYBACK)
*6,800-YEAR-OLD RITUAL SITE THREE TIMES BIGGER THAN STONEHENGE'S SARSEN CIRCLE DISCOVERED(ANCIENT TIMES)
*BEING MINDFUL OF PAYCHECK ABUSES
(SLAVERY 21ST CENTURY)
*SATURN MOON TITAN SHAPED BY SAME FORCES AS EARTH
(SPACE NEWS)
*BILLIONAIRES ARE PANICKING OVER THE GROWING POPULARITY OF A WEALTH TAX
(TALKERS)
*PARTS WITH PASSPORTS: HOW FREE TRADE DRIVES GM'S ENGINES
(REALITY)
*POSSIBLE PAY-TO-PLAY SCHEME FOR AMBASSADOR ROLE IN TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNCOVERED BY CBS NEWS(CORRUPTION)
✔I CAN ‘DO ANYTHING I WANT, I’M A POLICE OFFICER’: INDIANA COP FIRED AFTER RACIALLY PROFILING BLACK MEN IN MALL PARKING LOT(GESTAPO USA)
*‘I’M VERY UPSET’: FURIOUS TEXAS RANCHER SAYS TRUMP IS ‘SECRETLY’ TRYING TO STEAL LAND TO BUILD ‘THE WALL’(PAYBACK)
*'SHOW NO MERCY': LEAKED DOCUMENTS REVEAL DETAILS OF CHINA'S XINJIANG DETENTIONS
(WORLD)
*late news of interest*
eating while black!!!
Cops caught on video arresting black man for ‘illegally’ eating a sandwich at train station
November 11, 2019
By David Edwards - raw story
Video of an African-American man being detain for “illegally” eating a sandwich went viral over the weekend.
The video, which was reportedly recorded on Nov. 4, shows a black man being confronted by a white police officer at a California BART station. The clip was posted on Nov. 8 by Facebook user Bill Gluckman.
A black man holding a sandwich can be seen complaining about being detained by the officer, who is refusing to let go of the man’s bag.
“You singled me out out of all these people,” the detained man says.
“You’re eating,” the officer points out. “It’s against the law.”
The officer then informs that man that he is “going to jail.”
“For eating a f*cking sandwich,” the man protests.
Within minutes, three other officers show up to handcuff and arrest the man.
Activist on Saturday held an eat-in at the BART station to protest the arrest.
By Monday, the Facebook video had been viewed over 2.5 million times.
The video, which was reportedly recorded on Nov. 4, shows a black man being confronted by a white police officer at a California BART station. The clip was posted on Nov. 8 by Facebook user Bill Gluckman.
A black man holding a sandwich can be seen complaining about being detained by the officer, who is refusing to let go of the man’s bag.
“You singled me out out of all these people,” the detained man says.
“You’re eating,” the officer points out. “It’s against the law.”
The officer then informs that man that he is “going to jail.”
“For eating a f*cking sandwich,” the man protests.
Within minutes, three other officers show up to handcuff and arrest the man.
Activist on Saturday held an eat-in at the BART station to protest the arrest.
By Monday, the Facebook video had been viewed over 2.5 million times.
‘When will someone go to jail?’: New report shows Google secretly storing health data of millions of Americans
November 11, 2019
By Common Dreams - raw story
According to The Wall Street Journal, neither patients nor doctors have been notified of the data collection and storage.
A “bombshell” new report from The Wall Street Journal describes a secret project from Google and healthcare giant Ascension to store data on millions of Americans, a move that critics of the tech conglomerate decried as another example of overreach.
“When will someone go to jail?” wondered mathematician and musician David C. Lowery. “That would stop this shit real fast.”
According to the Journal, Google and Ascension made the decision last year to collect the data across 21 states in an initiative named “Project Nightingale.”
Google in this case is using the data, in part, to design new software, underpinned by advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning, that zeroes in on individual patients to suggest changes to their care. Staffers across Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent, have access to the patient information, documents show, including some employees of Google Brain, a research science division credited with some of the company’s biggest breakthroughs.
The Journal reported that Nightingale’s scope “pertains to lab results, doctor diagnoses and hospitalization records, among other categories, and amounts to a complete health history, including patient names and dates of birth.”
Neither patients nor doctors have been notified. At least 150 Google employees already have access to much of the data on tens of millions of patients, according to a person familiar with the matter and documents.
The project is legal under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, though some staffers at Ascension are reportedly concerned over the ethics of the collection.
A “bombshell” new report from The Wall Street Journal describes a secret project from Google and healthcare giant Ascension to store data on millions of Americans, a move that critics of the tech conglomerate decried as another example of overreach.
“When will someone go to jail?” wondered mathematician and musician David C. Lowery. “That would stop this shit real fast.”
According to the Journal, Google and Ascension made the decision last year to collect the data across 21 states in an initiative named “Project Nightingale.”
Google in this case is using the data, in part, to design new software, underpinned by advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning, that zeroes in on individual patients to suggest changes to their care. Staffers across Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent, have access to the patient information, documents show, including some employees of Google Brain, a research science division credited with some of the company’s biggest breakthroughs.
The Journal reported that Nightingale’s scope “pertains to lab results, doctor diagnoses and hospitalization records, among other categories, and amounts to a complete health history, including patient names and dates of birth.”
Neither patients nor doctors have been notified. At least 150 Google employees already have access to much of the data on tens of millions of patients, according to a person familiar with the matter and documents.
The project is legal under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, though some staffers at Ascension are reportedly concerned over the ethics of the collection.
