Wednesday, June 03, 2020


Barr Promises to Sic Terror-Hunters on Protesters

ANTIFA HOOLIGAN

The nationwide network of Joint Terrorism Task Forces aren’t built to go after property crimes committed by protesters. But, veterans say, the rule of law isn’t the point here.



 Jun. 01, 2020

Doug Mills-Pool/Getty

YOU KNOW WHO ALSO CALLED ANTI-FASCISTS HOOLIGANS?
Attorney General Bill Barr told state governors on Monday that the Department of Justice was prepared to use the FBI’s regional counterterrorism hubs to share information with local law enforcement about “extremists” and “agitators” in the protests sweeping the country.

Barr said the Justice Department would tap Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs)—regional groups that ordinarily unite area FBI agents with state, local and federal law enforcement to monitor and pursue suspected terrorists—to “identify people in the crowd, pull them out and prosecute them.”

It’s an early glimpse of how the Justice Department plans to make President Trump’s legally dubious threat to treat protesters as terrorists a reality. According to a JTTF veteran, it’s a flagrant misuse of the task forces. And it’s a sign that the ever-expanding war on terror is jumping yet another guardrail.

Hours later, Barr left the White House premises and walked on to the square of Lafayette Park just to the north. He stayed roughly one block away from the gathering crowd of protesters who were stationed behind a barricade of fences and layers of armed policemen. Barr, in a suit but no tie, stood among what appeared to be advisers. He seemed to be studying the crowd ahead of him, occasionally pointing at them while talking to those beside him. He never ventured too close. And soon thereafter the police began pushing the protesters far back from the fencing.

Then they began tear gassing the protesters. Then the horses came in.

Earlier in the day, Barr told the governors, “It seems that some of the common dimensions are … we have the normal protesters. You have opportunistic people like looters. But in many places … you have this ingredient of extremists, anarchists...agitators who are driving the violence,” adding that the JTTF construction was a “a tried and true system.”

“It worked for domestic homegrown terrorists,” he said. “It already integrates your state and local people. It’s intelligence driven. We want to lean forward and charge … anyone who violates a federal law in connection with this rioting.”

Gov. Janet Millis, a Democrat from Maine, pressed Barr on who exactly was inciting violence in the protests.

“I’d be very interested in knowing the intel so we can prepare in advance for any insurgents or any professional instigators,” she said. “I would love to get the intel that you appear to have access to in regard to who these individuals are.”

‘Unhinged’ Trump Demands Mass Arrests, Flag-Burning Laws


Barr said all of the relevant intelligence would be shared through the JTTF. Before the call moved on, President Trump stepped in and suggested that governors, too, share intelligence they have gathered on violent protestors with the Department of Justice.

For the second day in a row, the FBI declined to comment. Late on Monday, it announced it was creating a tip line for people to inform on “violent instigators who are exploiting legitimate, peaceful protests and engaging in violations of federal law.” It assured in a press release, “The FBI respects the rights of individuals to peacefully exercise their First Amendment rights.” It did not specify any federal laws citizens might notice protesters violating.

JTTFs targets are designated terrorist groups – typically foreign terrorist organizations, as certified by the State and Treasury departments. There is no domestic terrorism statute, but the JTTFs can also target violent domestic groups like white-supremacist militias, but those organizations typically have a record of extreme violence, to include murder.


RELATED IN POLITICS

Trump’s America Could Be on His List of Human Rights Abusers


O’Brien: Trump Shooting Tweet Was to ‘De-Escalate Violence’


“There’s a criteria you have to fit. Breaking windows and burning cars doesn’t fit,” said Ali Soufan, a retired FBI counterterrorism agent and JTTF veteran. “This is a divisive political message in an election year, trying to create an enemy.”

Soufan said he did not know how the Justice Department would be able to reconcile the president’s tweeted desire to designate Antifa as a terrorist group with the missions of the JTTF.

John Cohen, a former senior Department of Homeland Security official, said this “interesting” use of the JTTFs “was OK as long as they are targeting actual domestic violent extremist from both the far right and far left engaged in violent activity and not simply those engaged in protected speech.”

But Soufan noted that Trump was not remotely interested in applying the JTTF’s focus equally.

“If there’s no murder, no threat to the national security of the U.S., no divisiveness in the way Atomwaffen or the Base is doing, how do you want to do this? You’re working a couple guys getting together on social media to do this? You’re having a violation for graffiti?” Soufan said. “What is [FBI Director] Christopher Wray going to do? Are there going to be structural changes in the FBI to do this kind of work?”

Antifa is not an organization, but instead an ethic of antifascist confrontation. That’s permitted right-wingers to define Antifa broadly as hated, violent political opponents – and, now, to open the aperture of permissible state violence against Americans. “Now that we clearly see Antifa as terrorists, can we hunt them down like we do those in the Middle East?” tweeted Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.) “[L]et's see how tough these Antifa terrorists are when they're facing off with the 101st Airborne Division,” added Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), an Iraq war veteran.

A Justice Department spokesperson did not respond to a question about how, for legal purposes, the department is defining Antifa.

Within that amorphousness is an authoritarian opportunity, according to Jason Stanley, a Yale philosophy professor and author of How Fascism Works.

“It’s an open-ended, undefined target, and we know from the war on terror that many people were caught up by being family members, by being connected” to terrorist targets by a spiraling web of association, Stanley said. “First they came for the Muslims and I said nothing because I was not Muslim – the Neimoller poem all over again. It never stops at just the hated minority group, it always goes to opponents. History tells you that. To use the apparatus already misused once, against domestic political opponents, it’s incredibly dangerous.”


“If there’s no murder, no threat to the national security of the U.S., how do you want to do this? You’re working a couple guys getting together on social media to do this? You’re having a violation for graffiti?”
— Ali Soufan

Stanley also noted that aiming the counterterrorism apparatus at people protesting police unites the cops with Trump. “He wants to get law enforcement responding [to the protests] in a militarized way,” Stanley said. “If you’re an authoritarian, you want law enforcement on your side.”

And not only them. On the call, Secretary of Defense Mark Esper encouraged governors to increase their use of the National Guard to “dominate the battlespace.” His casual reference to American cities with a term used to describe theaters for military operations shocked the former commander of the Joint Special Operations Command, retired Gen. Tony Thomas. “Not what America needs to hear… ever, unless we are invaded by an adversary or experience a constitutional failure...ie a Civil War,” Thomas tweeted. Trump also told the governors that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley – who, by statute, is not in the chain of command – was “in charge” of the response to the protests. A spokesperson for Milley did not immediately return a call seeking clarification.

When asked about the president’s comments Monday evening, one senior Department of Defense official told The Daily Beast: “I have no idea what is going on.”

As DC police tear-gassed peaceful protesters outside the White House late Monday afternoon, the president promised to stop “acts of domestic terror.” It was unclear if Trump had invoked the 19th century Insurrection Act, which empowers the president, in cases of “unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States” to use the military “to suppress the rebellion.” But he said if the governors “refuse to take action” for that suppression “then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them.”

Trump introduced Barr on the call with governors Monday by saying he would “activate” his attorney general. “And we will activate him strongly,” he said. “We are strongly for arrests. We do have to get much tougher. You have to arrest people and you have to try people. And they need to go to jail for long periods of time.” Trump called individuals involved in the protests who were stealing goods from stores and lighting cars on fire as “terrorists”, adding that “they are Antifa and they are the radical left.”

Barr hinted at the beginning of the call that the Department of Justice would begin to move forward with working with states to arrest and prosecute individuals who were involved in spreading violence during the protests.

“Two of the most common are anyone who crosses state lines …. to incite, participate in or encourage riots or anyone who is using any interstate facilities including telecommunications or whatever…in connection with participating in or encouraging riots,” Barr said. “But there are many others … conspiracies or any other things like that."

Barr appears to be referencing Title 18, section 2101 of the U.S. Code, which references “riots.”

But there do appear to be exceptions, including “for the purpose of pursuing the legitimate objectives of organized labor, through orderly and lawful means,” the law notes.

It’s unclear how the Department of Justice or the JTTF would go about identifying individuals who crossed state lines and then proceeded to incite violence. It’s also unclear whether there are such individuals participating in the current unrest.

Regardless, Barr said, states need to do a better job at controlling the protestors if only so the police can arrest and prosecute.

Trump Fears the Minnesota Chaos Makes Him Look Weak



“We have to control the crowds. And that requires a strong presence. In many places … it will require the national guard. The key is you have to have adequate force… to be more dynamic and go after the agitators,” he said. “The police are pinned back ….they are just standing in line watching the events. And when they disperse the crowds people are running off in different directions.

The reason we have to control the streets is not just to bring peace to that town but it is to catch the bad actors.”

However much Barr seeks to turn the JTTFs against “Antifa,” Soufan considered it a cynical distraction from the nationwide discontent on display over the past week.

“We forget about this grassroots movement fed up with the injustice and the racism in this society,” he said.

But by Monday night, U.S. Attorneys were beginning to respond to Barr’s call to deploy the JTTFs. “The criminals who have caused havoc in neighborhoods across Southern California appear to be exploiting a situation in which other citizens are exercising their First Amendment rights to assemble and express their viewpoints,” Nicola Hanna, the U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California, said in a statement. “We are confronting this outlaw behavior by providing federal resources and working closely with local police to identify cases in which federal charges could be appropriately filed.”

Erin Banco

National Security Reporter

Trump is talking about using tanks to quell the George Floyd protests, but the Pentagon is getting cold feet



‘Uncomfortable Mission’: Pentagon Tries to Retreat From Trump’s Call to ‘Dominate’ Protests

AWKWARD

Pentagon officials say it was the White House, not the Defense Department, pushing for military might in the streets—with Trump seeking details on “tanks” that could be used.


Erin Banco

Spencer Ackerman

Asawin Suebsaeng

Updated Jun. 03, 2020 DAILY BEAST

EXCLUSIVE
Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty

Less than 24 hours after President Trump said he was prepared to send troops into cities across America, senior officials in the Pentagon began to try to distance themselves from those words and from the idea itself, underscoring that not one governor had requested additional military assistance from Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

Trump has for days pushed state leaders to take a tougher stance against “antifa” protesters, saying on a call with governors Monday that if they did not mass arrest protesters they would end up looking like “a bunch of jerks.” Then, Monday evening, the president took it a step further.

Police surrounding Lafayette Park in D.C. cleared protesters with tear gas as the president walked through to St. John’s Episcopal Church to pose for a photo op, with the Bible. He declared himself the “president of law and order” and said he would take all the necessary steps to suppress the unrest sweeping the country.

“I have strongly recommended to every governor to deploy the national guard in sufficient numbers. If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem,” he added.

Protesters Tear-Gassed for Trump ‘Law and Order’ Photo Op
WARZONE



Esper, along with other cabinet secretaries, stood next to the president during the remarks in the park after participating in an hour-long call with governors in which he said they needed to “dominate the battlespace” to quell the protests.

But three senior Pentagon officials who spoke with The Daily Beast said they viewed the secretary’s comments on the call as a way to publicly show support for the president. They did not expect the department to actually implement a plan that would reflect the president’s rhetoric and force additional troops upon the states. (More than 20,000 national guard troops already have been deployed to assist local law enforcement during protests.)

These Pentagon officials added that it was the White House, not the Defense Department, that was pushing for active military might in the streets. A senior DOD official said it was the White House that requested military helicopters fly low over protesters in D.C. and that it was part of a broader request from the Trump team that the national guard ramp up its presence in the city. The Associated Press was the first to report about the military flyover being connected to a request from President Trump.

Additionally, the president has pressed aides and Pentagon officials for graphic details on the kind of armored vehicles, military units, aircraft, and even “tanks” that they could potentially send to maintain order in U.S. areas rocked by protests and rioting, according to two people familiar with recent discussions.

One of the sources, a senior administration official, insisted that the president wasn’t ordering tanks to roll down the streets, but was inquiring about “the kind of hardware” that could be used in military shows of force, and at one point Trump threw out the word “tanks.”

“I think that is just one of the military words he knows,” this official said.

The Pentagon did not comment on the record for this story. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.




The discomfort from inside the Pentagon shows the extent to which Trump’s own Defense Department is trying to actively avoid direct involvement in the administration’s plans to force local authorities to accept active military personnel for increased protest control. It also raises questions about how Trump plans to carry out his promises of coercing states to accept military assistance when officials inside the Pentagon are rebuking the idea, claiming it circumvents the normal process for governors formally requesting assistance. (Normally, one senior Department of Defense official said, a governor files a formal request with the Pentagon asking for active-duty troops to assist. The Defense Secretary evaluates the request and either chooses to accept it, modify it, or reject it.)

RELATED IN POLITICS

Top General Blasted as ‘Prop’ for Trump’s ‘Fascist Stunt’


Barr Promises to Sic Terror-Hunters on Protesters


Kushner Screwed Up COVID-19 Jobs—Now He’s Got a Bigger One


“That would not be something the [Defense] Secretary would be in a position to do,” one senior official said, referring to Trump’s desire for the Pentagon to pressure states to accept active military troops for help in controlling their streets.

“This would go against the norms of how we normally handle requests for assistance during civil unrest,” another senior official said.

However, if Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, he could unilaterally make the decision to send troops to states. The act empowers the president, in cases of “unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States,” to direct the military “to suppress the rebellion.”

The idea of the president using the Insurrection Act was first proposed publicly by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK), who seemed to introduce it on a whim on social media. Members of his team on Monday said he had not discussed it with the administration. Another defense official said the Defense Secretary’s team was unaware that the president would be announcing new measures to try to convince local and state officials to accept military deployments.

“There was no communication within the department that this was something we were going to be working on,” the second defense official said.

But less than eight hours later, Trump took to the podium in Lafayette Park, seemingly promising to invoke it if he felt it was necessary.

As of Tuesday afternoon, Trump had not invoked the Insurrection Act. And no states had formally requested assistance from the Defense Department.

But the threat of Trump enacting the Insurrection Act has some state officials on edge. Two officials with knowledge of the situation told The Daily Beast that at least three governors of states experiencing large-scale protests contacted the Trump administration requesting that it not push them to accept active military personnel, claiming it would only inflame tensions on the ground. In some instances, states have seen clashes between protesters and police slow. In Tennessee, for example, police put down their riot shields at the request of protesters as the group moved slowly toward them.

On Tuesday, Gov. Andrew Cuomo said he had pushed back on the president’s request that he take the step to deploy the national guard, saying there was no need for more forces on the ground when the New York City Police Department had enough officers to control the situation. And New York Attorney General Letitia James said the state was prepared to go to court to stop the administration from sending military forces to the state.

“In rare occurrences in this country has civil unrest resulted in the deployment of active duty military personnel. It has caused huge challenges because those individuals aren’t trained and equipped to deal with quelling civil disorder. And it can cause operational confusion,” said John Cohen, the former deputy under secretary for intelligence and analysis at the Department of Homeland Security. “The military also operates under very different rules of engagement than police. Their job is basically to identify an enemy, engage that enemy and potentially kill that enemy. That’s not necessarily that philosophy you want individuals operating under when they are in the situation we’re in today.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) on Tuesday said he would offer an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would bar the federal government from using the military against peaceful protests.

“The President is trying to turn the American military against American citizens who are peacefully protesting on domestic soil, which they have every right to do. I’m not going to stand for it,” Kaine said. “I never thought we would have to use the NDAA to make clear that the U.S. military shouldn’t be used as an agent of force against American citizens who are lawfully assembling. I thought that would seem obvious to everyone.”

Even without an amendment, the Pentagon on Tuesday insisted that it does not want active-duty troops out on American streets.

Trump has described Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as “in charge” of the administration’s response to the protests, but a senior Pentagon official said Tuesday that Milley merely “remains an adviser to the president.” The official downplayed Esper’s jarring description of American cities as a “battlespace”—one that earned Esper a rebuke from a former Joint Special Operations Command chief—as reflecting no more than his tendency to use military terminology.

Pentagon officials also suggested that Milley and Esper were “not aware that park police and law enforcement had made a decision to clear the square” of protesters, as one put it to reporters. Esper later reiterated that in an interview with NBC News late Tuesday: “I didn’t know where I was going,” he said. He said he believed they were going to “see some damage” caused by the protests and “talk to the troops.”

In their telling of what happened at Lafayette Park, both men arrived at the White House on Monday afternoon after a meeting of a response task force hosted by the FBI that included Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Christopher Wray. Trump made the decision to inspect the National Guardsmen deployed to the park, a senior Pentagon official said, and “once they began to walk off the White House grounds, [Milley and Esper] continued with him.”

Both Milley and Esper have been slammed for taking part in the photo op. Milley was accused of acting as a “prop.” And a former defense official accused Esper of violating his oath to defend the Constitution by going along with Trump’s photo-op. James N. Miller, the U.S. undersecretary of Defense for policy from 2012 to 2014, announced in an op-ed Tuesday that he was resigning from the Pentagon’s science board and urged the defense secretary to “consider closely” his actions in the Trump administration.

“All of us would like to stay in a National Guard capacity,” a senior defense official said.

But Pentagon officials cautioned that active-duty forces—a mix of military police and engineering units from Forts Bragg and Drum—are on “shortened alert status” outside the Washington, D.C. area, though not in any states. Late on Tuesday, the Pentagon said those forces include an infantry battalion designated Task Force 504, bringing the troop total to 1,600. Chief spokesman Jonathan Rath Hoffman said the placement of Task Force 504 was “a prudent planning measure,” as the task force is “not participating in defense support to civil authority operations.”

More than 1,200 Guardsmen, mostly from D.C., are currently deployed in the district. Pentagon officials anticipated another 1,500 arriving on Tuesday, with more to come. Additional states contributing Guardsmen to the D.C. protest response include New Jersey, Utah, South Carolina, Indiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee. Pentagon officials called the National Guard support to the police-led protest crackdown an “uncomfortable mission.”
Lawmakers Begin Bipartisan Push to Cut Off Police Access to Military-Style Gear

POLICE ARE AN OCCUPYING FORCE OF THE STATE IN OUR COMMUNITIES

Catie Edmondson,
The New York Times•June 2, 2020
Police officers confront demonstrators protesting in Santa Monica, Calif., May 31, 2020. (Bryan Denton/The New York Times)

WASHINGTON — Republicans and Democrats in Congress have begun a new push to shut down a Pentagon program that transfers military weaponry to local law enforcement departments, as bipartisan urgency builds to address the excessive use of force and the killings of unarmed black Americans by the police.

With protests turning violent across the country, lawmakers are scrutinizing the Defense Department initiative — curtailed by former President Barack Obama but revived by President Donald Trump — that furnishes police departments with equipment such as bayonets and grenade launchers. The move comes after several nights when officers wearing riot gear have been documented using pepper spray and rubber bullets on protesters, bystanders and journalists, often without warning or seemingly unprovoked.

The push stands in stark contrast to the reaction of Trump, who has often encouraged rough tactics by law enforcement and spent Monday complaining privately to governors that they were not handling protesters aggressively enough.

“Mayors and governors must establish an overwhelming presence until the violence is quelled,” Trump said in remarks from the Rose Garden on Monday evening. “If a city or state refuses to take the actions necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them.”

On Capitol Hill, however, where Republicans often take their cues from the president, most lawmakers had a different message as they focused on the immediate catalyst for the protests: George Floyd, a black man in Minneapolis who was killed after a police officer knelt on his neck for a prolonged period.

“In no world whatsoever should arresting a man for an alleged minor infraction involve a police officer putting his knee on the man’s neck for nine minutes while he cries out ‘I can’t breathe’ and then goes silent,” Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the majority leader, said Monday. “Our nation cannot deafen itself to the anger, the pain and the frustration of black Americans. Our nation needs to hear this.”

Top lawmakers in both parties and on both sides of the Capitol moved quickly last week to announce their intention to hold hearings on the use of excessive force by law enforcement and racial violence.

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, who has long pressed to limit the transfer of military-grade equipment to police departments, announced that he would move to include an amendment in the must-pass annual defense policy bill to shut down the program.

“It is clear that many police departments are being outfitted as if they are going to war, and it is not working in terms of maintaining the peace,” Schatz said in an interview. “This is not the only thing we need to do, but as our country sees these images on television that remind us of some countries far, far away, it’s time to recalibrate this program. Just because the Department of Defense has excess weaponry doesn’t mean it will be put to good use.”

Doug Stafford, Sen. Rand Paul’s chief strategist, responded on Sunday night to Schatz’s idea: “We’ve being doing this one for years. Happy to help,” he wrote on Twitter. Paul has also been a longtime proponent of the demilitarization of local police and has previously teamed with Schatz to reform the Pentagon program, known as 1033.

It is unclear how much support Schatz’s measure could receive in the Republican-controlled Senate. But in the House, Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., a former Marine, said Monday that he would introduce similar legislation, opening up the possibility that the measure could find additional traction in making its way into the final defense bill.

“As a combat veteran and proud Marine, very little of my equipment or training was relevant to policing Phoenix or other American communities,” Gallego said. “Our neighborhoods aren’t war zones.”

The program was created in the 1990s in an effort to offload surplus military equipment and aid police departments during the war on drugs. It expanded in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks but came under heavy scrutiny in the aftermath of a string of high-profile deaths of black men at the hands of the police, including the shooting of Michael Brown, an unarmed 18-year-old, by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014.

In response to stark images of heavily armed police confronting unarmed protesters in armored vehicles in Ferguson, Obama placed limits on that program in 2015, restricting the transfer of weapons, including battering rams and explosives, from the Pentagon to local police. The Pentagon reported in 2017 that 126 tracked armored vehicles, 138 grenade launchers and 1,623 bayonets had been returned since Obama prohibited their transfer.

But Trump rescinded those restrictions in 2017, opening the flow of equipment to police departments. He argued the gear was necessary for officers to protect themselves and their communities.

On his call with governors on Monday, the president appeared to applaud the National Guard’s handling of the riots in Minneapolis, pointedly remarking on their use of tear gas.

“They just walked right down the street, knocking them out with tear gas, tear gas,” Trump said. “These guys, they were running.”

Secretary of Defense Mark T. Esper used military language on the same call with governors, telling them, “we need to dominate the battle space,” and that they would have his full support.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., on Monday laid out a framework for a series of reforms he said he hoped the Senate would take up. It included creating a national police misconduct registry, incentivizing states to adopt policies banning the use of chokeholds and reforming a legal doctrine known as qualified immunity that shields police officers from being held legally liable for damages sought by citizens whose constitutional rights were violated.

“Cities are literally on fire with the pain and anguish wrought by the violence visited upon black and brown bodies,” Booker said. “There’s no one singular policy change that will fix this issue tomorrow. We need an entire set of holistic reforms to improve police training and practices, and ensure greater accountability and transparency.”

Rep. Justin Amash, I-Mich., said he would introduce a similar measure to strike down qualified immunity.

A pattern of “egregious police misconduct” has continued, Amash said in a letter to colleagues, “because police are legally, politically and culturally insulated from consequences for violating the rights of the people whom they have sworn to serve. This must change so that these incidents of brutality stop happening.”

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

© 2020 The New York Times Company
Flight attendants see a very different future for airplane travel in the age of coronavirus

Gaby Levesque Producer,Yahoo News•May 9, 2020

“Recognize that there are going to be social distancing practices at the airport. So there’s no running to the gate at the last minute,” said Sara Nelson, the international president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA in an interview with Yahoo News.

From her remote location for this interview, Nelson sat with a photo behind her. “Over my shoulder is a picture of Paul Frishkorn. He was a longtime flight attendant and he was the first one to be taken from us with coronavirus,” she said through tear-filled eyes.
“Over my shoulder is a picture of Paul Frishkorn. He was a longtime flight attendant and he was the first one to be taken from us with coronavirus,” Nelson said through tear-filled eyes. (Zoom screenshot)

JetBlue was the first airline to make masks a must for travelers taking flights during the COVID-19 pandemic just last week, and now others are joining. “We need to have everyone wearing masks and now, even though the government didn’t mandate that, our airlines did step up and require that all passengers are now required to wear masks in the airport and on planes,” said Nelson. “They’re going to have to wear one to get through the whole check-in process.”

Flight attendants are living in a world of uncertainty at the moment, and Molly Choma, an attendant based in San Francisco and a photographer, has been capturing her experience working through this pandemic as an essential employee. “Being a flight attendant has changed a lot in the last two months. At first during the pandemic, we didn’t really know how this was going to end. We didn’t know, were they going to stop all flights? Were they going to stop some flights?” said Choma.
A flight attendant on an empty flight staying safe with a mask. (Molly Choma)

And her concerns are valid. There have been recent reports of flights getting canceled and suspended until the fall, which means a loss of not only business, but also jobs. “Everything has changed so much with coronavirus. We went from completely full airplanes and airlines celebrating profits just in February and talking about hiring over 100,000 people this year alone, to the point where the airlines really would have collapsed because it was down to just 3 percent demand for air travel in March,” said Nelson.

While nearly 95 percent of Americans faced stay-at-home orders from their state governments in the past month, the federal government seemed to miss the mark on requiring comparable safety measures for airline passengers. But now that is changing. With states beginning to reopen, there has been a slight spike in air travel, but flying is not exactly how it used to be.

“Flying right now is a really different experience, but what we’re trying to do is use this time to get these safety precautions in place so hopefully by the end of summer and fall we can actually get to some kind of normalcy,” said Nelson. Right now on flights, in addition to masks, attendants are attempting to space out passengers to uphold social distancing regulations; food and beverage service has been nearly completely suspended; and travelers are advised to bring their own sanitizing wipes and hand sanitizer. “It’s really important that travelers are arming themselves with the facts before they go,” said Nelson.

Being prepared for a different flight experience in the future is going to be crucial for the time being. “If someone asks you to put on a mask, you should just do it,” said Choma. “I want to remind people that air travel is a place where people are used to doing things they don’t do in any other places,” added Nelson.

Staying positive is what Choma is focusing on. As the daughter of a flight attendant, she has been looking to her mother for inspiration through this difficult time. “I feel like this is scary, but there’s a lot of other scary things too, and you just kind of have to keep going, and ... so the only way to keep going is to just take things one day at a time,” she said.
Choma and her mother, both center, are flight attendants. (Molly Choma)

And with everything in the world changing so quickly every day, there really is no other approach. While some experts predict that flying in the future could require travelers to submit blood test results, Nelson said that new regulations of any kind take a lot of time. In the meantime, she will work on getting regulations underway that will protect flight attendants and travelers as soon as possible.

On April 23, Nelson wrote to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar: “Since flight attendant ability to practice social distancing is challenging in the aircraft cabin and on most other forms of public transportation, it is essential that we wear masks as often as possible so long as COVID-19 remains a threat to public health. In addition, passengers on all modes of public transport should be encouraged to wear masks in the short term and mandated by emergency regulation as soon as practicable.”

“The reason that we are all wearing masks is that we don’t have the virus contained and we don’t have a vaccine that’s readily available for everyone. So I think [we] can expect that masks will be here until we have a vaccine readily available. But then once we have this virus fully under control and really eradicated as a threat, I expect that this is something that will go away and we will go back to smiling at each other and buying lipstick again,” Nelson said.


A 'Me Too' moment in the struggle for racial justice

Ramcess Jean-Louis
Yahoo Contributor,
Yahoo News•June 3, 2020

COVID-19 came and I was a little amazed at how relatively quickly everyone around the world actually complied and began to shelter in place. Shortly thereafter, I was even more surprised that some African-Americans, some highly intelligent and educated, told me that black people can’t get it.

I don’t know how that myth started. Blacks in North America suffered two and a half centuries of slavery until emancipation, nearly a century of Jim Crow after the end of Reconstruction, 60 years of separate but equal until Brown v. Board of Education and decades of ongoing housing discrimination.

So it’s understandable that they hoped there would be at least one thing in the world, a virus that originated in China, that at least wouldn’t hit them harder than it did everyone else.

Blacks were disabused of that idea pretty quickly. Black people are not immune. In fact, blacks have been disproportionately affected by this virus. They are less likely to be tested and more likely to be infected and more likely to die from it.

Over the past few months, along with the rest of America, we have learned how COVID-19 attacks the lungs and makes breathing difficult. It has been described as feeling like an elephant is sitting on your chest as you are gasping for air. The images and the accounts of patients in intensive care for COVID-19 almost all involve severe shortness of breath. The local and federal governments took great measures to ensure that hospitals had ventilators. Doctors, nurses and respiratory therapists put themselves in harm’s way every day to keep patients oxygenated.

Blacks are still trying to process the overwhelming evidence that black people are dying at a faster rate. But the national discussion has moved on to lifting restrictions and going back to work without much consideration of moving resources and putting in place safeguards for the most vulnerable communities.

In my mind, that read as “black people are dying at a faster rate and I guess some of your brothers and sisters are just going to have to die.” (“Brothers and sisters” is not the term that I used in my head.) It left me feeling devalued, expendable, someone who doesn’t matter. It signaled to me that my brothers and sisters, family, mother in a nursing home, my African-American friends and community, are all just collateral damage.

As blacks continue to try to wrap their head around the data and the need for more frontline health care workers, they remember Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old African-American emergency medical technician who was fatally shot while asleep in her bedroom by police executing a no-knock warrant. They also remember Ahmaud Arbery, a 25-year old black man who was pursued and killed by armed white residents in a coastal South Georgia town.

As we came together, sheltered in place and sacrificed together to attack this common enemy that literally robs us of our breath, Memorial Day weekend was supposed to symbolize a bit of a turning point.
A COVID-19 patient using a ventilator rests while his blood goes through a kidney dialysis machine at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Brooklyn, April 21. (Robert Nickelsberg/Getty Images)

Yet in the cruelest of ironies, on the very weekend America began to lift more restrictions, and then the message was that we would be able to exhale together as a nation, COVID-19’s foot remained on the chest of black people and law enforcement had its knee on George Floyd’s neck.

Again, blacks are on the frontlines. This is already a very difficult time for everyone. There’s a little more sadness, pressure and tension in all of our lives. Although it is said that we’re all in it together, we are all experiencing it differently.

Throughout this pandemic we have attempted to define what is taking place with terms like: the new normal, the next normal and the world has changed as we know it. We’ve also referred to this as a time of reflection — when we can check in with ourselves and take inventory on who we are and who we want to be individually and collectively. It’s a time where we should learn a new skill, take up a language and work on some new projects.

Despite all the terms and euphemisms that we’re using, blacks are being reminded that they are still black in America. As the late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall once said: “A Pullman porter told me that he had been in every city in the country, he was sure. And he had never been in any city in the United States where he had to put a hand up in front of his face to find out he was a Negro.”

The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and George Floyd remind us that black people’s humanity can be put aside; they can still be viewed as different, less than, and can suffer harm or death at the hands of those who can say they are acting in the name of the law or at the knees of those who hold a police badge.

George Floyd was arrested, handcuffed, held down on the ground by the knee of a police officer on his neck as he pleaded, “Sir, I can’t breathe” and called out for his mother. The officer had his knee on George Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes. The image of George Floyd’s death is excruciatingly painful to watch, and 1,000 times worse for me when I viewed it with my 11-year-old son. I failed miserably at controlling my reactions, while trying to answer my son when he asked, “But why is he doing that?”

Toward the end of the ’90s I worked on the NYPD recruitment campaign. The NYPD was under a tremendous amount of scrutiny over the shooting of Amadou Diallo, a 22-year-old, unarmed West African immigrant who was shot 41 times, and the torture and sexual assault of Haitian immigrant Abner Louima in police custody. Over 20 years later we are still having the same conversation and asking ourselves, how can such a thing happen.

This racial inequity and systematic mistreatment of black people needs to be protested.
Protesters demonstrate outside the Barclays Center in Brooklyn on Monday in response to the police killing of George Floyd. (Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images)

Witnessing the civil unrest and the burning buildings is very upsetting and sad. But we must not ignore the intersectionality of different communities. You do not have to be a resident of Minneapolis to be outraged and want to go there to peacefully protest.

I appreciate the peaceful protesters. I am sure that there are some folks out there simply for the purpose of causing chaos. I also agree that violence and causing damage is not aligned with our values and that it’s not OK to do those things.

I still want to know what those violent protesters are trying to say and communicate. Have we given rise to a group of people who do not have the tools to articulate their disdain for the injustice and atrocities they’ve witnessed at the hands of those charged with the responsibility to protect us and keep us safe? What role have we played in creating the environment that encourages this behavior?

I know that I am upset, hurt, outraged, angry and scared. I too am a black man with a young black son. I have nieces, nephews, family and members of my community who are black. I know that our allies are also feeling upset and angry but experiencing the hurt and pain differently.

But I also have to acknowledge my privilege. I have the ability to work remotely, and I praise God that I’ve been in a position where I’m able to provide for my family these past couple of months.

We’ve moved from shelter-in-place global pandemic to melee. We need to understand all the drivers. We need to extend a certain sense of empathy for all those involved. We are currently in this place because we have lost empathy for each other. 


Protesters take part in a demonstration in response to the killing of George Floyd. (John Lamparski/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)


We must extend that empathy to everyone — including the police. Not the officers who are directly responsible, but the police officers and police organizations that have spoken out and in no way agree with these injustices. I worked very closely with the police when I was a prosecutor in New York and after my best friend was murdered in front of my home. The police apprehended the perpetrators and held them accountable. For that I will always be eternally grateful for Detective Bond and the police team at the 88th Precinct in Brooklyn.

We now need to hold ourselves accountable. As the news cycles change we must never forget this time, what we are seeing now and the physical and mental devastation that will forever scar our community. We must be relentless in our pursuit of justice as we move forward to ensure that we don’t continue to repeat the same conversations. I pray and I hope that this time is different and that this can be the “Me Too” movement for racial justice.

Ramcess Jean-Louis is Global Head for Diversity & Inclusion of Verizon Media.
Cover thumbnail photo: Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images

Scientists alarmed as Trump embraces fringe views and extreme theories amid pandemic

Oliver Milman,
The Guardian•June 3, 2020

Photograph: Andrew Harnik/AP

The early months of Donald Trump’s administration saw its approach to science routinely compared to George W Bush’s – both governments were highly sympathetic to large corporations, distrustful of anything to do with the climate crisis and enthused at the idea of delegating oversight to the states.

Trump’s version may have been more abrasive and bungling but it at least seemed a familiar extension of the last Republican administration.

More recently, however, scientists have been struck by Trump’s embrace of fringe beliefs and extreme, unsupported theories. Suddenly, it is not the profit-driven lobbyists and lawyers that are the worry, it is the quacks, cranks and conspiracy theorists.

“They have exceeded my imagination with their scientific denial,” said Gretchen Goldman, a research director at Union of Concerned Scientists. “Previous administrations at least gave the appearance of wanting scientific evidence and qualified people in positions of power. This administration clearly doesn’t care, which changes the game.”

Trump himself has a long history of defying mainstream scientific findings on the existence of climate change and the efficacy of vaccines, but his actions during the coronavirus pandemic have startled even his most vocal critics.

The president falsely claimed Covid-19 would evaporate in the April sunshine, expressed bewilderment that a vaccine wasn’t imminent and pondered the merits of injecting disinfectant as a treatment. Trump has also repeatedly touted the benefits of hydroxychloroquine, an anti-malarial drug he says he himself has taken as a precaution despite evidence it can cause heart problems in some patients. The World Health Organization recently halted trials to see if the drug could treat Covid-19, citing safety fears.

From its inception, the Trump administration has handed leadership of federal agencies to figures who have represented polluting industries. Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist, heads the Environmental Protection Agency, while David Bernhardt, another former energy lobbyist, is in charge of America’s public lands as secretary of the interior.

The deregulatory zeal of these agencies, often in the face of scientific advice, has seen droves of scientists leave the government. In a January estimate, 20% of high-level scientific positions within the government are vacant, with long-term officials complaining of being sidelined or silenced.

But the administration has also increasingly shown willingness to ally itself with groups far more fringe than the standard class of lobbyist that inhabits Washington DC.

The administration defended Trump’s use of hydroxychloroquine by pointing to supportive statements from the Association of Physicians and Surgeons, an outlier group that has questioned whether HIV causes Aids (it does), argued abortion causes breast cancer (it does not) and even alleged former president Barack Obama used hypnosis techniques to trick voters, especially Jewish people, into supporting him (there is no evidence of this).

In April, Trump unveiled advice from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that Americans should wear face masks to curb the spread of Covid-19, but has since echoed fringe rightwing views that masks are pointless or somehow unmanly. The president said on Tuesday it was “very unusual” that Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, was seen wearing a mask, calling its use “politically correct”.

“The elevation of fringe views is even more vivid with coronavirus, the impacts are more evident,” said Goldman.

Meanwhile, the Trump administration has aligned itself with an anti-abortion lobbying group called the Center for Family and Human Rights, helping spread its message to the UN, while Trump’s own spiritual adviser Paula White has said she hopes abortion laws are overturned, declaring on a video that emerged in January: “We command any satanic pregnancies to miscarry right now!”

The pandemic has obscured a determined push by the Trump administration to further roll back regulations designed to prevent pollution and protect public health, with some of these efforts jarring uncomfortably with the federal government’s own analysis.

For example, the administration is scaling back fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks, a process that has provoked a lawsuit from 23 aggrieved states and, according to a study of the EPA’s own figures, will cause an extra 18,500 deaths over the next three decades from air pollution, as well as $240bn more in extra fuel costs for Americans.

“This administration is antithetical to science, there is an ideological mandate to roll back regulations. Facts and logic doesn’t matter, even the law doesn’t matter,” said Chris Frey, a a professor of environmental engineering at NC State University.

Frey was part of an EPA clean air advisory panel that was dismantled as part of a revamp that has seen agency panels filled with industry-aligned and fringe characters – including an official who has argued air pollution is good for public health – and the process of considering science rerouted to bypass a large body of research that links pollution to harm such as asthma and heart disease.

“It will take years to undo the damage. This administration is honestly a threat to public health,” Frey said. “The past three years have hurt the US scientific community in a lot of ways. If this continues for another three years, I don’t know if it’s robust enough to take it.”

US politics’ problematic relationship with science doesn’t just hinge upon one administration, however. Until the election of a handful of people with scientific backgrounds in the 2018 midterms, Bill Foster was the only member of Congress with a scientific PhD. Foster has admitted the experience often felt lonely and frustrating.

“We’ve achieved a lot with science but I’m embedded in a culture that doesn’t value science,” said Foster, an Illinois Democrat. “The heroes we are looking for are the people who have spent their careers in science.”

Foster added that Trump’s reaction to mask wearing has cost lives.

“If he had said masks are very useful and then apologized for the fact the stockpile of masks was so low, many tens of thousands of Americans would be alive today,” he said. “That is the tragedy that bothers me more than anything.”
New Yahoo News/YouGov poll: Most Americans say Trump is a 'racist' and want him to stop tweeting

Andrew Romano
West Coast Correspondent,
Yahoo News•June 1, 2020



By a bare majority, Americans think President Trump is a racist and want him to stop tweeting, according to a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll.


The survey, conducted on May 29 and 30, found that 52 percent of Americans answered yes when asked whether they “think that President Trump is a racist.” Only 37 percent said no. Just 33 percent said the president should continue “posting messages on Twitter.” Fifty-four percent said no to the question.

A similar majority of Americans said they disapprove of Trump’s handling of race relations — among them, 41 percent of the total agreed “strongly” and 12 percent agreed “somewhat.”


The poll lands at a moment when violent protests against police brutality and the death of George Floyd continue to roil American cities, and when Trump’s leadership strategy has been called into question. Over the weekend, the president did not deliver a national address on the crisis, instead choosing to hunker down inside the White House and at one point rushing to a secret bunker as hundreds of protesters gathered outside the executive mansion. The Associated Press reported Monday morning that in a conference call with governors, the president urged them to crack down on demonstrators, telling them they were “weak.”

According to the Washington Post, the lack of a public response by the president was deliberate. “Trump and some of his advisers calculated that he should not speak to the nation because he had nothing new to say and had no tangible policy or action to announce yet, according to a senior administration official,” the Post reported. “Evidently not feeling an urgent motivation Sunday to try to bring people together, he stayed silent.”

Yet Trump continued to tweet. One tweet “attacked the Democratic mayor of Minneapolis; another announced that his administration would designate the antifa movement a terrorist organization; a third accused the media of fomenting hatred and anarchy; and in yet another, he praised himself for the deployment of the National Guard and denigrated former vice president Joe Biden,” according to the Post.

The public’s response to Trump’s tweets and racial attitudes is predictably divided along party lines. Eighty-six percent of Democrats say Trump is a racist; 56 percent of independents agree. Yet only 13 percent of Republicans characterize the president that way.

Likewise, 82 percent of Democrats say Trump shouldn’t be tweeting; 60 percent of independents concur, a jump of roughly 10 percentage points since the protests began. Yet only 21 percent of Republicans want Trump to quit Twitter.

Race plays a role as well: black Americans are far more likely than white Americans to say that Trump is a racist (74 percent vs. 43 percent) and that he should stop tweeting (76 percent vs. 48 percent).


Despite these divisions, most Americans agree that specific Trump tweets are out of bounds. Shown an image of a recent tweet in which he called MSNBC host and former Florida Rep. Joe Scarborough a “Nut Job” and baselessly insinuated that he was involved in the murder of one of his congressional staffers, 52 percent said they disapproved. Only 23 percent said they approved (though a majority of Republicans, 53 percent, found something to approve of).

Shown another recent Trump tweet in which the president quoted a phrase popularized by segregationist politician George Wallace — “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” — and asked whether they consider the message racist, Americans were torn, with 44 percent saying yes and 44 percent saying no. A majority of Democrats (71 percent) and a plurality of independents (46 percent) said the tweet was racist; only 14 percent of Republicans agreed. Three-quarters of African-Americans (76 percent) said the message was racist; 54 percent of whites said it was not.
President Trump on the South Lawn of the White House after arriving on Marine One on Saturday. (Stefani Reynolds/Bloomberg via Getty images)

There’s no indication Trump won’t keep tweeting for the remainder of his presidency (and beyond). Acknowledging that reality, Americans largely agree with Twitter’s recent decision to flag individual tweets from the president as false or dangerous. A plurality — 47 percent vs. 37 percent — say the social media platform was right to call out Trump’s looting-shooting tweet for “glorifying violence.” Overall, 56 percent think social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter should fact-check user posts, while only 28 percent say they shouldn’t.

When asked which statement “comes closest to your opinion,” a full 85 percent of Americans said that “Twitter should apply the same rules to political leaders as it does to other users.”

Just 15 percent said that “Twitter should not censor posts by political leaders, even if they are false or threatening.”

_________

The Yahoo News survey was conducted by YouGov using a nationally representative sample of 1,060 U.S. adult residents interviewed online between May 29 and 30, 2020. This sample was weighted according to gender, age, race and education, as well as 2016 presidential vote, registration status and news interest. Respondents were selected from YouGov’s opt-in panel to be representative of all U.S residents. The margin of error is approximately 4.3 percent.
Ford, VW finalize autonomous vehicle deal with Argo AI
Fnord (@fnord) | Twitter

The Ford logo is displayed at the Chicago Auto Show on February 11, 2014. Ford announced it has closed a deal with Volkswagen to work on autonomous vehicles with Argo AI. Photo by Brian Kersey/UPI | License Photo

June 2 (UPI) -- Ford and Volkswagen finalized a deal Tuesday with Pittsburgh-based Argo AI to introduce autonomous vehicle technology to the United States and Europe.

In a statement, Ford said Volkswagen would join in its investment in Argo AI in an effort to improve "cost and capital efficiencies." Ford and Volkswagen will spend more than $4 billion through 2023 in developing the self-driving service.

"At Ford, we believe self-driving technology can make people's lives easier and provide new and more efficient mobility solutions for our congested cities," Ford said in its statement. "Building a safe, scalable and trusted self-driving service, however, is no small task. It's also not a cheap one."

Argo AI's founders Bryan Salesky and Pete Rander, who worked in Google and Uber's automated driving programs, helped win an initial investment from Ford in early 2017.

Argo has been working to develop the automated driving system that Ford hopes to put into production in 2021. Earlier this year, Ford said that rollout would be delayed until 2022.

"While our companies are sharing Argo AI's technology development costs, Ford will remain independent and fiercely competitive in building its own self-driving service," Ford said. "Sharing the development costs with Volkswagen doesn't mean Ford is reducing its overall spend in the autonomous vehicle space."

Read More


Center for Democracy and Technology challenges Trump social media executive order



The Center for Democracy and Technology filed a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's executive order seeking to limit legal protections of social media companies that censure or edit user posts. Pool Photo by Doug Mills/UPI |
License Photo



June 2 (UPI) -- The Center for Democracy and Technology on Tuesday filed a lawsuit challenging an executive order by President Donald Trump seeking to limit legal protections of social media companies that censure or edit user posts.

CDT, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit, challenged the order stating that it violates the First Amendment by "curtailing and chilling" the speech of online platforms and individuals as protected by the Constitution.


"The executive order is designed to deter social media services from fighting misinformation, voter suppression and the stoking of violence on their platforms," CDT President and CEO Alexandra Givens said.

Trump signed the order on Thursday directing the Commerce Department to ask the Federal Communications Commission to reinterpret Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects Internet companies from lawsuits targeting the content of their sites.

"A small handful of social media monopolies controls the vast portion of all public and private communications in the United States," said Trump. "They've had unchecked power to censor, restrict, edit, shape, hide, alter, virtually any form of communication between private citizens and large public audiences."

The decision came two days after Twitter flagged a pair of Trump's tweets about the process of mail-in voting as potentially misleading.

CDT said the order was intended to intimidate social media companies to change how they moderate content.

"The government cannot and should not force online intermediaries into moderating speech according to the President's whims," Givens said. "Blocking this order is crucial for protecting freedom of speech and continuing important work to ensure the integrity of the 2020 election."



RELATED Twitter places fact-checking label on Trump tweets for first time
ON THIS DAY THE FIRST SELFIE IN SPACE 
 In 1965, Gemini IV astronaut Ed White made the first American "walk" in space. White, attached to a 25-foot cord, was outside the spacecraft for 23 minutes. He later s aid the order to end his spacewalk was the "saddest moment" of his life.  

RIGHT CLICK TO ENLARGE