Who's behind these controversial yard signs in front of the White House?

Vote For Them yard signs urge voters to consider the impact of their vote ahead of Election Day.

IMAGE: GOODBY SILVERSTEIN & PARTNERS / COURAGEOUS CONVERSATIONS GLOBAL FOUNDATION

BY CHASE DIBENEDETTO1

George Floyd 2020. Vote for Breonna Taylor. Stephon Clarke ‘20.

Six yard signs staked outside the White House urge people to vote this year, but not for a presidential candidate. Instead, couched in the familiar red, white, and blue imagery of political advertisements, the signs ask Americans to vote on behalf of victims of police brutality.

Advertising firm Goodby Silverstein & Partners created the yard signs in partnership with Courageous Conversation Global Foundation's latest initiative, Vote For Them, a nationwide campaign to increase voter participation. The foundation — which offers training, fellowships, and funding to organizations to promote "interracial dialogue to end racism" — wanted to increase conversations of racial inequity ahead of the November presidential election. Designers at Goodby Silverstein & Partners envisioned the yard signs as a clear way to connect the issues of police brutality and voter participation.

The campaign also created an Instagram account to educate voters about policies like mandated police de-escalation training that specifically affect Black, indigenous, and other people of color, as well as a YouTube video with audio from news coverage of the victims' deaths and this year's Black Lives Matter protests, all in a bid to get people to vote in honor of those who can't

The foundation has previously used eye-grabbing advertisements to educate viewers about police brutality. In collaboration with Goodby Silverstein & Partners earlier this year, the group released the “Not a Gun” campaign, featuring a video that intermittently switches a candy bar and a gun in the hand of a Black customer. At the end, the video informs viewers that Black people are three times more likely than white people to be killed by police, according to a study by Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. 

“It was important for us to continue the conversation about police brutality, to keep saying their names,” said Goodby Silverstein & Partners associate creative director Anthony O’Neill in an email. “Racial injustice is an issue that affects all of us, but it’s also something we can all change if we vote. It might not be immediate, but the road to change starts today, and it starts at the polls.”

Responses to the signs on social media are mixed. Some Twitter users admired the message behind the yard signs, while others expressed concern with the their appearances, worried that they exploit the victims' deaths.

I get it. This type of sign is meant to promo name recognition, not necessarily politics. Sometimes it feels like the only way to get some to recognize those names and even google them. It may seem tasteless, but it's also a desperate attempt to keep them in the minds of all.

— 🌟𝕊𝕡𝕚𝕣𝕚𝕥 𝕆𝕟 ℙ𝕒𝕣𝕠𝕝𝕖🌟 (@SpiritOnParole) October 5, 2020

Is this from white liberals thinking they're helping...

At least 2 of these deaths were pre-Trump
Oscar Grant was unjustly killed by police when Bush was president....
The exploitation 😔
— Simone (@SimoneKali) October 5, 2020

When asked about these criticisms, the team behind Vote For Them stood behind the positive impact of their signs, saying in an email that the images serve to start conversations about the power of voting. “This election year, we felt the need to call attention to the fact that we’re not just voting for one politician over the other, but we’re casting a ballot to change our society for the better by voting for officials that align with policies we believe in — specifically policies that affect Black lives the most,” said GS&P associate creative director Rony Castor. “By casting a spotlight on how votes affect real people like Breonna Taylor, we hope to enforce how much every vote counts.”

The campaign, which isn’t affiliated or endorsed by the Black Lives Matter organization, hopes to build upon this year's calls for social justice.

“This is a non-partisan issue and our campaign is simply encouraging people to vote,” said Glenn Singleton, founder and board chair of Courageous Conversation Global Foundation.

The eye-catching signs are sure to attract the eyes of critics and supporters alike. “No matter where you live in America, you've seen candidate lawn signs," Castor said. "They grab your attention. We're hoping the signs will not only be attention-grabbing but also cause a reaction, and lead people to our Instagram to read about policies that all Americans should care about."

Printable, PDF versions of the yard signs are available for download on VoteForThem2020.com.

Iconic George Floyd Mural At Cup Foods Vandalized Again, Called 'Satan's Mural'
The iconic George Floyd mural on the side of Cup Foods in south Minneapolis has again been vandalized.

By Minnesota Reformer/States Newsroom, News Partner
Oct 6, 2020 By Deena Winter




The iconic George Floyd mural on the side of Cup Foods in south Minneapolis has again been vandalized, this time with a vulgar and far more damaging defacement.

This marks the second time the mural has been vandalized since its creation after Floyd died outside the corner store at the hands of police.

Floyd died outside Cup at 38th Street and Chicago Avenue on Memorial Day after an employee called 911 to report he allegedly passed a fake $20 bill. The portrait of Floyd has since become ubiquitous.

Cup Foods spokesman Jamar Nelson confirmed the mural was vandalized at about 4 a.m. Saturday. The mural was spray painted with red paint that says "(Expletive) Walz Commies & Satan."

Nelson said Cup Foods got video of a suspect in black clothes casing the mural and suddenly vandalizing it within a few seconds, and will turn it over to police in the hope the vandal will be caught. The video shows what appears to be a thin male, wearing black from head to toe and a white mask, spray on the mural and then step back and take photos.

"This shouldn't be tolerated in our nation where beautiful memorials are defaced by people with hate… and so the store will continue to stand for the community," he said. "There's no room for any type of hate like this."

Marcia Howard, one of the local people who patrols the four-block area around Cup Foods, wrote on Facebook Monday that the people in charge of George Floyd Square "got ahead" of the vandal's plans to deface the mural.

"We saw him, he scampered away on his bike, and he bragged about his getaway as if he'd escaped the maw of death itself," Howard wrote.

The volunteer security force in the square does not call the police, and puts "people over property," according to Howard. When a previous vandal spray-painted Xs over Floyd's eyes, the volunteers caught him but didn't call police and ultimately let the vandal go. He was later outed as a medical student at the University of Minnesota Medical School and admitted the vandalism in a Reformer interview.

Howard posted what appears to be a cryptic, rambling screed by the vandal, who speaks of a "day of reckoning," in which he will "thrust my blade through the beast's eyes" until "Satan's idol lays silent."

Howard wrote that "This man came armed, ready to fight to the death and seemed incredibly disappointed that he wasn't engaged beyond being spooked away."

Howard did not respond to a request for comment, but wrote on Facebook that the "community (is) still united against systemic racism. We good."

The Minnesota Reformer is an independent, nonprofit news organization dedicated to keeping Minnesotans informed and unearthing stories other outlets can't or won't tell..

Donald Trump's launches explosive tirade in response to Michelle Obama
8 Oct, 2020 

Play Video Michelle Obama's 'closing argument' endorsing Joe Biden. Video / Michelle Obama via Twitter
news.com.au

Donald Trump has taken a swipe at former first lady Michelle Obama after she labelled him a racist and a liar in an explosive plea to voters.

With the US Presidential election just weeks away, Obama appeared in a 26-minute video for Joe Biden's campaign, which has been described as her "closing argument" to the American people before they head to the ballot box.

She attacked Trump's coronavirus response and said he was unfairly "stoking fears" about African-Americans.

She added that Trump is "morally wrong" for taking actions that intimidate voters and for "lying" about how minorities will ruin US suburbs.

Overnight, the President hit back with a stream of anti-Obama tweets and re-tweets on his Twitter page.

One of the more personal attacks was a re-tweet from a prominent Trump supporter, which made the case that the former first lady was a hypocrite for attacking the President.

"Don't you love it when someone lectures you on ethics & morals, while at the same time being married to one of the most corrupt Presidents in history?" the tweet, recirculated by Trump, read.

Don’t you love it when someone lectures you on ethics & morals, while at the same time being married to one of the most corrupt Presidents in history?— Heather (@hrenee80) October 7, 2020

Trump then went on a more general attack of the Obama administration.

He continued with accusations that his predecessor was involved in a wide-reaching conspiracy to derail his early presidency, which has been referred to over the years as Obamagate.

"When the truth about #Obamagate is revealed, every scandal in American history will look mild in comparison," one re-tweet read.

Read More
Covid 19 coronavirus: Trump stays out of sight, few details about his recovery - NZ Herald
Covid 19 coronavirus: Donald Trump spreads lies about lethality of virus compared to the flu, c...
'Racism, fear, division': Michelle Obama slams Donald Trump in pre-election plea - NZ Herald
Covid 19 coronavirus: Ethicists say Trump special treatment raises fairness issues - NZ Herald

Grand Jury Hits St. Louis Attorneys Mark and Patricia McCloskey with New Evidence Tampering Charges

MATT NAHAM Oct 6th, 2020 

Patricia and Mark McCloskey

St. Louis attorneys Mark McCloskey, 63, and Patricia McCloskey, 61, have been hit with new felony charges several weeks after making a virtual appearance during the 2020 Republican National Convention. A grand jury indicted the couple on two counts each for exhibiting a weapon and tampering with evidence.

It is not clear at this time what evidence was presented to the grand jury that resulted in the evidence tampering charges, but KSDK focused heavily in its report Patricia McCloskey’s handgun, which she previously claimed was inoperable.

The couple was initially charged with unlawful use of a weapon stemming from an incident in which they stood outside their mansion in Portland Place—a private, gated community—and pointed a rifle and a handgun at protesters.

“It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner at those participating in nonviolent protest, and while we are fortunate this situation did not escalate into deadly force, this type of conduct is unacceptable in St. Louis,” St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner, a Democrat, said in a statement back in July. She described the protesters, who were demonstrating against Mayor Lyda Krewson, as “peaceful” and “unarmed.”


1/ Statement from Circuit Attorney Kimberly M. Gardner – Today my office filed charges against Mark and Patricia McCloskey following an incident involving peaceful, unarmed protesters on June 28th. Full statement below: pic.twitter.com/zPucQ3MHs5

— Circuit Attorney (@stlcao) July 20, 2020



Mark McCloskey told conservative radio host Todd Starnes in July that he was “surprised” when investigators executed a search warrant and took his rifle. He asserted to KMOV-TV in a June 29 report that protesters threatened to burn down his home and kill his dog. The McCloskeys made similar remarks on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show.

The McCloskeys have received widespread support from Republican elected officials and Second Amendment advocates for their actions on June 28. Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt (R) promised to fight the “political prosecution” on behalf of the McCloskeys. Missouri Sen. Josh Hawley (R) asked the Department of Justice to look into whether Gardner violated the McCloskeys’ civil rights by initiating a prosecution. Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) said he would “without a doubt” pardon the McCloskeys. More recently, Rudy Giuliani said the couple was very close to being “murdered” and “raped.”

Notably, Giuliani had the couple on his podcast in early September to discuss “tampered evidence.” They said Kim Gardner and her team were the ones doing the tampering. Giuliani called Gardner a “SOROS prosecutor.”

Mark McCloskey made a number of media appearances, including on Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s show, and spoke about the incident. McCloskey said that he and his wife were “literally afraid that within seconds they would surmount the wall and come into the house, kill us, burn the house down and everything that I had worked for and struggled for for the last 32 years.”

During a CNN interview, McCloskey said he was a person who was scared for his life and the “victim of a mob that came through the gate.”

He said he was in “imminent fear” that he and his wife would be run over and killed. McCloskey said that the important context to understand this fear was that, as recently as June 2, he saw St. Louis burning. McCloskey cited the murder of 77-year-old retired police captain David Dorn.

McCloskey said the “mob” was threatening and committing acts of “terrorism” and “social intimidation.” He said they smashed down the gate to the private gated community and were trespassing. He also said that he got death threats that night.

“One fellow standing right in front of me pulled out two pistol magazines, clicked them together and said you’re next. That was the first death threat we got that night,” McCloskey said. Mark McCloskey further said that the protesters were not walking the correct way to Mayor Krewson’s home, where they were believed to be heading. The mayor faced calls for her resignation over the weekend after she doxxed Black Lives Matter protesters on Facebook Live. Krewson later apologized.

While the McCloskeys maintained they were lawfully defending themselves and their home against angry trespassers, Kim Gardner charged the married couple for unlawful use of a weapon.

Notably, St. Louis prosecutors declined to charge nine protesters who were initially issued trespassing tickets following the events of June 28. According to KSDK, Portland Place trustees, who have quite a history with the McCloskeys, said they did not want to press charges against the protesters. Joel Schwartz, an attorney for the attorneys, said that the McCloskeys “absolutely would have liked to press charges.”

“Once all the facts are out, it will be clear the McCloskeys committed no crime whatsoever,” Schwartz added. “Frankly because the grand jury is not an adversarial process and defense counsel are not allowed in there and I have no idea what was stated to the grand jury and what law was given to the grand jury.”

Mark McCloskey was outraged that he and his wife were charged while the protesters weren’t. He said that Gardner was protecting “criminals” but going after “honest citizens.”

“Every single human being that was in front of my house was a criminal trespasser,” he said. “They broke down our gate. They trespassed on our property. Not a single one of those people is now charged with anything. We’re charged with felonies that could cost us four years of our lives and our law licenses.”

“What you are witnessing here is just an opportunity for the government, the leftist, democrat government of the City of St. Louis to persecute us for doing no more than exercising our Second Amendment rights,” McCloskey continued.

[Image via Daniel Shular @xshularx]

St Louis couple who aimed guns at BLM protesters indicted on weapons charge

McCloskeys were initially charged in July

Matt Mathers@MattEm90

A St Louis couple who pointed their guns at protesters during a Black Lives Matter demonstration have been indicted on a weapons charge, their lawyer has said.

Al Watkins, an attorney for Mark McCloskey, 63, and Patricia McCloskey, 61, confirmed the indictment to the Associated Press. He said his clients had been served with an additional charge of tampering with evidence.

He could not confirm why the additional charge was added. A spokesperson for St Louis circuit attorney Kim Gardner did not immediately repsond to a request for comment.

The McCloskey's, a white couple, came to national attention in June this year when they were filmed waving firearms at a group of mostly black and unarmed protesters.

Amid a wave of demonstrations sweeping the US following the killing of George Floyd, the protesters had been heading towards the home of St Louis mayor Lyda Krewson to demand an end to police brutality and greater racial equality.
Watch more

Gun-brandishing St Louis couple speak at RNC despite charges

Couple who pointed guns at BLM protesters to appear at GOP event

St Louis gun couple almost always in conflict with others, report says

The McCloskey's, both personal injury lawyers, say the protesters broke down their gate and trespassed on private property.

Attorney Gardner, a Democrat, charged the couple with felony unlawful use of a weapon. She said the display of guns risked bloodshed at what she called an otherwise peaceful protest.

Following the incident, the McCloskey's have become heroes to some conservatives and spoke at this year's Republican National Convention (RNC) where they spoke about Americans' rights to bear arms.

They baselessly accused Democrats of “protecting criminals from honest citizens” and trying to “abolish the suburbs”.

In a pre-recorded address to the RNC, the couple also claimed that a vote for presidential candidate Joe Biden would result in lawlness across the US.

Nine people involved in the protest were charged with misdemeanor trespassing, but the city counselor’s office later dropped those charges. The city counselor’s office handles lesser crimes and is not affiliated with the circuit attorney’s office.

Mr McCloskey, after a brief court hearing earlier Tuesday, expressed anger that he and his wife faced criminal charges while those who trespassed on his property did not.

“Every single human being that was in front of my house was a criminal trespasser,” Mr McCloskey said. “They broke down our gate. They trespassed on our property. Not a single one of those people is now charged with anything. We’re charged with felonies that could cost us four years of our lives and our law licenses.”

Additional reporting by Associated Press

 

Laying 'Tens of Thousands of Preventable Deaths' at the Foot of Trump Failures, Top US Health Official Resigns in Protest

"Nine months into the pandemic, the United States continues to grapple with failed White House leadership," writes whistleblower Dr. Rick Bright in public resignation letter.

by

Jon Queally, staff writer

Dr. Rick Bright listens during a House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing on March 8, 2018. (Photo: Bloomberg/ via Getty Images)

In a direct and outspoken protest over President Donald Trump's deadly and failed response to the Covid-19 pandemic over the last nine months, government whistleblower Dr. Rick Bright on Wednesday publicly announced his resignation from the National Institute of Health as he chastized a White House that "suffers from widespread internal chaos" and warned the United States, due to lack of leadership, is now "flying blind into what could be the darkest winter in modern history."

Bright, who until April of 2020 served as the director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, first came forward to denounce the administration in May after he says he was removed from his post over voiced objections to how Trump and other political officials within HHS were mishandling the pandemic in the early weeks and months of the outbreak.

"Public health and safety have been jeopardized by the administration's hostility to the truth and by its politicization of the pandemic response, undoubtedly leading to tens of thousands of preventable deaths," Bright wrote in a statement published Wednesday afternoon by the Washington Post. "For that reason, and because the administration has in effect barred me from working to fight the pandemic, I resigned on Tuesday from the National Institutes of Health."

Despite best efforts by some, he continued, "there is still no coordinated national strategy to end the pandemic. Federal agencies, staffed with some of the best scientists in the world, continue to be politicized, manipulated and ignored."

As the Guardian reports:

Bright's departure comes as it was revealed that the head of the Centers for Disease Control, Robert Redfield, had been encouraged to expose the "slaughter" resulting from the Trump administration's "political interference" in the coronavirus response by William Foege—the US epidemiologist who devised the global strategy to eradicate smallpox and is also a former director of the CDC.

In his letter to Redfield, Foege wrote that despite "White House spin attempts, this will go down as a colossal failure of the public health system of this country." He further called the pandemic "the biggest challenge in a century," but said it was clear that the CDC "let the country down."

While Bright's criticism of the administration, the Guardian noted, has been well-documented for months "and discounted by the White House as sour grapes, Foege is regarded in US public health circles as a towering figure."

The federal scientist Rick Bright has quit the NIH.

"The work of scientists is ignored or denigrated to meet political goals and to advance President Trump's re-election aspirations," his lawyers said in an addendum to his May whistleblower complaint.https://t.co/HkWao1Ne0L

— NPR (@NPR) October 7, 2020

Taken together, the now public criticism from such high-level experts like Bright and Foege within the national public health establishment serve as the latest indictment of Trump's mishandling of the crisis—even as the president battles his own Covid-19 infection—just weeks before the November election.

Read Dr. Bright's full statement, as published at the Post, below:

Of all the tools required for an effective U.S. response to the coronavirus pandemic, one that is sorely missing is the truth. Public health guidance on the pandemic response, drafted by career scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been repeatedly overruled by political staff appointed by the Trump administration. Career scientists throughout the Department of Health and Human Services hesitate to push back when science runs counter to the administration’s unrealistically optimistic pronouncements.

Public health and safety have been jeopardized by the administration’s hostility to the truth and by its politicization of the pandemic response, undoubtedly leading to tens of thousands of preventable deaths. For that reason, and because the administration has in effect barred me from working to fight the pandemic, I resigned on Tuesday from the National Institutes of Health.

Until April, I had for almost four years been director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority. When I strongly objected this past spring to the Trump administration’s insistence that BARDA support widespread access to chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, two potentially dangerous drugs recklessly promoted by President Trump as a covid-19 cure, I was shunted to the NIH and assigned a more limited role in the pandemic response.

My task at the NIH was to help launch a program expanding national covid-19 testing capacity. The program is well underway, and should reach nearly 1 million daily tests by the end of the year. Since early September, though, I was given no work; my services apparently were no longer needed.

I fear the benefits of dramatically improved testing capacity will be wasted unless it is a part of a coordinated national testing strategy. My recommendations to support a national plan were met with a tepid response. In an administration that suffers from widespread internal chaos, such coordination may be impossible — especially when the White House has seemed determined to slow down testing and not test people who might have asymptomatic infections.

From the beginning of the coronavirus outbreak, the administration’s failure to respond with a coordinated strategy only heightened the danger. Now the nation, and the world, are in the worst public health crisis in over a century. More than 1 million people worldwide have died from the pandemic; more than 211,000 Americans are dead. More than half of the states in this country are reporting rising covid-19 cases. Nine months into the pandemic, the United States continues to grapple with failed White House leadership. Instead, we get the recent spectacle of the president exploiting his own illness for political purposes and advising the nation, “Don’t be afraid of Covid.” Ironically, he was only able to leave the hospital after receiving two treatments that I had pushed for in January.

Meanwhile, there is still no coordinated national strategy to end the pandemic. Federal agencies, staffed with some of the best scientists in the world, continue to be politicized, manipulated and ignored.

The country is flying blind into what could be the darkest winter in modern history. Undoubtedly, millions more Americans will be infected with the coronavirus and influenza; many thousands will die. Now, more than ever before, the public needs to be able to rely on honest, non-politicized and unmanipulated public health guidance from career scientists.

IRS Reportedly Investigating NRA Boss for Criminal Tax Fraud as NY AG Seeks to Destroy Gun Rights Organization

MATT NAHAM Oct 5th, 2020


It looks like the federal government is turning up the heat on National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre, 70. The NRA boss’s organization has been under threat of dissolution since New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) filed a civil lawsuit in early August, but LaPierre also reportedly faces potential criminal legal peril.

The Wall Street Journal, citing two unnamed sources familiar with the matter, reported on Monday that the IRS is investigating LaPierre for potential criminal tax fraud.

James’s lawsuit accused LaPierre of using a “poison pill contract” to ensure he would receive an income for life from the NRA worth more than $17 million and of consolidating power within the organization by nefarious means. He used his position to “intimidate, punish, and expel anyone at a senior level who raised concerns about his conduct,” resulting in the diverting of “millions of dollars away from the charitable mission, imposing substantial reductions in its expenditures for core program services, including gun safety, education, training, member services and public affairs.”

LaPierre’s personal expenditures while serving as the head of a nonprofit organization were allegedly lavish.

Among the dozens of alleged examples of spending for which LaPierre was reimbursed included: “private jet travel for purely personal reasons; trips to the Bahamas to vacation on a yacht owned by the principal of numerous NRA vendors; use of a travel consultant for costly black car services; gifts for favored friends and vendors; lucrative consulting contracts for ex-employees and board members; and excessive security costs.”

LaPierre was accused of traveling with his family to the Bahamas by private plane at least eight times in an approximate three-year period, costing the organization more than $500,000. On many of those trips, LaPierre and his family were gifted the use of a 107-foot yacht owned by an NRA vendor. He and his wife also traveled to Africa for all-expense paid safaris, gifted by an NRA vendor.

Additionally, LaPierre allegedly received than “$1.2 million in expense reimbursements in just a four-year period for expenditures that included gifts for favored friends and vendors; travel expenses for himself and his family; and membership fees at golf clubs, hotels, and other member clubs.”

As the Wall Street Journal noted, James said at the press conference announcing the lawsuit that she was, indeed, referring the case to the IRS. P. Kent Correll, a LaPierre lawyer, and William A. Brewer III, an outside attorney for the NRA, both told the newspaper that they were not aware of an IRS inquiry. Correll said comment would be “premature”; Brewer said that the NRA would cooperate with “any appropriate requests for assistance.”

There was no information about what stage the reported IRS probe is in and it is not clear if there actually will be charges. But according to the Journal, the investigation is likely focusing on whether or not LaPierre intentionally underreported his income on his W-2 forms to evade taxes.

Jerry Lambe contributed to this report.

[Image via Alex Wong/Getty Images]

Lawyers Call for Congressional Investigations of Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions’s ‘Cold-Blooded Mass Human Rights Violation’

JERRY LAMBE Oct 7th, 2020


A pair of former top officials at the U.S. Department of Justice who publicly distanced themselves from the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy that separated thousands of migrant children from their families actually helped spearhead the effort to utilize the practice as a means of deterring illegal immigration, the New York Times reported on Wednesday night. Attorneys—including several DOJ alumni—were shocked and appalled by the revelations. Many of them called for an immediate congressional investigation.

According to a draft report from DOJ Inspector General (IG) Michael Horowitz obtained by the Times, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein were a “driving force” behind the policy that resulted in the separation of 2,814 children from their parents or guardians, approximately 1,033 of whom were under the age of 10.

“We need to take away children,” Sessions told DOJ prosecutors in a conference call, according to participants’ notes reviewed by the Times. “If care about kids, don’t bring them in. Won’t give amnesty to people with kids,” one participant on the call wrote in their notes.

In a second call the following week, Rosenstein reportedly took Sessions’ decree a step further, telling five DOJ prosecutors that the age of migrant children should be of no concern, specifically highlighting two cases to say that the government should not have declined prosecutions “simply because the children were barely more than infants.”

The policy lasted only six weeks, from April 2018 to June 2018, before harsh domestic and international backlash led President Donald Trump to end the policy via executive order.

“The department’s single-minded focus on increasing prosecutions came at the expense of careful and effective implementation of the policy, especially with regard to prosecution of family-unit adults and the resulting child separations,” read Horowitz’s draft IG report.

While family separations occurred under the Obama administration, the policy was not used to deter illegal immigration.

Under the Obama administration, the vast majority of families caught unlawfully crossing the border were detained together or released pending trial. Children were only separated from guardians if authorities determined the children were in danger.

“There must be accountability for this,” wrote Sherrilyn Ifill, the president and director of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. “Sessions. And Rod Rosenstein, who told prosecutors, ‘it did not matter how young the children were.’ A deliberate and cold-blooded mass human rights violation.”

There must be accountability for this. Sessions. And Rod Rosenstein, who told prosecutors, “it did not matter how young the children were.” A deliberate and cold-blooded mass human rights violation. https://t.co/i0AR3twQew
— Sherrilyn Ifill (@Sifill_LDF) October 6, 2020

Ifill was not alone in her assessment, which was echoed by former federal prosecutors Harry Sandick, Renato Mariotti, Elie Honig, and Jennifer Rodgers (the latter three are CNN legal analysts).

“This needs to be investigated by Congress and future Department of Justice,” wrote Sandick.

This needs to be investigated by Congress and a future Department of Justice. https://t.co/V3RNg5Vd5f
— HarrySandick (@HarrySandick) October 7, 2020

“[Jeff Sessions] and [Rod Rosenstein] need to answer for their role in the separation of children from their families. Congress should subpoena them to testify,” Mariotti added.

“We need to take away children.” – ⁦then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions

⁦@jeffsessions⁩ and ⁦@RodRosenstein⁩ need to answer for their role in the separation of children from their families. Congress should subpoena them to testify. https://t.co/5vXyRc5E7E
— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) October 6, 2020

Honig said both men should “never live this down,” calling their alleged conduct “an ugly, vindictive, cruel abuse of prosecutorial power.”

Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein should never live this down.
An ugly, vindictive, cruel abuse of prosecutorial power. https://t.co/RXakLzNwdM
— Elie Honig (@eliehonig) October 7, 2020

“A stunning abuse of power from Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein, apparently more than happy to use DOJ to enact Trump’s cruel family separation policy. Shame on them,” wrote Rodgers.

A stunning abuse of power from Jeff Sessions and Rod Rosenstein, apparently more than happy to use DOJ to enact Trump’s cruel family separation policy. Shame on them. https://t.co/iAWWK2McTO
— Jennifer Rodgers (@JenGRodgers) October 7, 2020

Eric Holder, the former attorney general under President Barack Obama, said both Sessions and Rosenstein should have refused to enforce the policy.

“Sessions and Rosenstein brought great shame to DOJ-and themselves-for actively participating in the separation of children from parents as a matter of policy to deter border crossings. Conscience should have outweighed their desire for job retention,” he tweeted.

Sessions and Rosenstein brought great shame to DOJ-and themselves-for actively participating in the separation of children from parents as a matter of policy to deter border crossings. Conscience should have outweighed their desire for job retention. https://t.co/fiFYXi6xB5
— Eric Holder (@EricHolder) October 7, 2020

Several other attorneys, law professors and legal reporters also denounced the former DOJ officials.

There needs to be some serious soul searching in the legal profession over this & the fact that Rosenstein continues to be treated like a respected former DOJ official by many. https://t.co/zY7PwZMLug
— Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1) October 7, 2020


Remember when people were cheering Rosenstein at events when he entered rooms. He is now a partner at a white shoe DC law firm.
There will need to be a reckoning of all of this. We can’t sweep it away. And we need to vote to avoid more of this and much worse.
— Vanita Gupta (@vanitaguptaCR) October 7, 2020

Our country depends on prosecutorial discretion. That means we have to make sure that our prosecutors are decent human beings. https://t.co/1SawIs6ZKm
— Carissa Byrne Hessick (@CBHessick) October 7, 2020

No quarter for the child torturers. Ever! Anywhere! Round them up and prosecute every last one all the way up to Rosenstein and Sessions and all the way down to the border agents who kidnapped babies and the staff attorneys who argued in court for withholding toothpaste and soap.
— Walter Shaub (@waltshaub) October 7, 2020

I hope everyone named in this believes in Hell. https://t.co/zQ3Qa9fujv
— Matt Ford (@fordm) October 7, 2020

I don't believe in hell, but I hope Rod Rosenstein finds his hell right here on earth. Both he and Sessions should be pariahs everywhere they try to go. https://t.co/TRKmggB6vh
— Elizabeth de la Vega (@Delavegalaw) October 6, 2020

Remember when people thought Rod freaking Rosenstein had a moral center? https://t.co/ac2gECgSFl
— Elie Mystal (@ElieNYC) October 6, 2020

"Senior Justice Department officials viewed the welfare of the children as the responsibility of other agencies and their duty as tracking the parents. 'I just don’t see that as a D.O.J. equity,' Mr. Rosenstein told the inspector general."
Sick and cruel. https://t.co/Cbaoly3luV
— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) October 7, 2020

[Image via the U.S. Department of Justice.]

 

Supreme Court Allows 5Pointz Graffiti Artists’ $6.7M Victory Over NYC Developer to Stand: ‘Huge Win for Street Art…’

JERRY LAMBEOct 5th, 2020,

 

 

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected the petition to rehear a case brought by a New York City real estate developer who tore down the iconic graffiti-covered 5Pointz warehouse in Long Island City, Queens. The high court’s denial means that $6.7 million in monetary damages that was awarded to a group of contributing street artists will officially stand.

The case stems from developers Gerald Wolkoff and David Wolkoff who, in 2002, reached an agreement with local graffiti artists allowing them to use their 5Pointz warehouse as an exhibition space for street art. The location quickly grew into a mecca for graffiti artists.

After the Wolkoffs decided to tear the building down in 2013, the artists sued under the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), a 1990 federal copyright law that grants artists certain “moral rights” giving them a degree of control over their work even if it is owned by someone else. The Wolkoffs immediately violated a court order by proceeding to whitewash the property, painting over all of the artwork.

A federal district judge in 2018 reasoned that, under VARA, modifications of works that are considered to be of “recognized stature” are prohibited, and such modifications require at least 90-day notice to the original creators of the art work. The judge ordered the Wolkoffs to pay $150,000 for each of the 36 destroyed graffiti murals, totally $6.7 million.

Attorneys for the Wolkoffs appealed the district court ruling, particularly the decision that the street art at 5Pointz merited consideration under the “recognized stature” clause of VARA, but the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in February.

Donyale Reavis, an intellectual property attorney and adjunct professor at Penn Law School, said the Supreme Court’s denial of certification was a huge victory for artists.

“Sometimes the little guy is actually Goliath. Huge win for street art. Huge win for hip-hop. 45 artists will receive $150K/each due to developers willful whitewash,” she tweeted. “One step closer to athletes and artists who design their tattoos to use VAWA to get that video game.”

Sometimes the little guy is actually Goliath. Huge win for street art. Huge win for hip-hop. 45 artists will receive $150K/each due to developers willful whitewash. One step closer to athletes and artists who design their tattoos to use VAWA to get that video game🧀. #5pointz https://t.co/ScRE7xEDFw

— Donyale Reavis (@donyale) October 5, 2020

[image via YouTube screengrab]

Political Appointees Conducted ‘Confidential’ Investigation into Top Voice of America Journalist Over Alleged Anti-Trump Bias

JERRY LAMBE Oct 5th, 2020

VOA White House Bureau Chief Steve Herman

A pair of conservative political appointees at the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) conducted a “confidential” investigation into one of the most respected journalists at the state-controlled international news organization Voice of America (VOA), NPR reported on Monday.

Collectively, the mission of the USAGM networks is to promote the free flow of news, combat censorship, and counter disinformation, particularly in authoritarian countries with objective facts. A “firewall” embodied in statutes, regulations, and contract provisions, serves to prevent the organizations from devolving into promoting a partisan agenda.

According to NPR, the appointees created “an extensive report” arguing that VOA’s White House bureau chief Steve Herman had been consistently biased against the Trump administration in his reporting and Twitter use. The two political appointees who opened the investigation and compiled the report, Samuel Dewey and Frank Wuco, are well-known GOP operatives who were hand-picked for their roles by USAGM’s presidentially-appointed CEO Michael Pack.

Dewey is a Republican attorney with no background in news hired specifically to investigate anti-Donald Trump bias within the agency. He is currently subject to a court order requiring him to stay away from his father and surrender all firearms after allegedly making a series of death threats. Wuco is a former naval intelligence officer and right-wing talk radio host known for promoting baseless conspiracy theories. According to an August report from CNN, Wuco regularly claimed that President Barack Obama was not born in the U.S., that former CIA director John Brennan had converted to Islam, and that former Attorney General Eric Holder was a member of the Black Panthers.

While Dewey and Wuco’s claims reportedly cite to Herman’s alleged “conflict of interest” several times to support their conclusion that he’d violated the broadcaster’s standards for objectivity, it appears the investigation itself may have been unlawful.

“In so doing, the two men appear to have violated laws and regulations intended to protect the federally funded news outlet from political interference or influence,” the NPR report stated. “That has set off alarms within the VOA newsroom, already unnerved by investigations of coverage of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden by VOA’s Urdu language service and the tenor of language used to describe his wife, Jill Biden, to introduce a segment on VOA’s French to Africa language service.”

The politicization of USAGM has been an issue since Pack took over the agency.

Pack was confirmed by Senate Republicans in June despite being under an active criminal investigation by D.C.’s Attorney General Karl Racine, a Democrat. He was a conservative filmmaker and documentarian with close ties to former presidential advisor Steve Bannon. Upon taking over the agency, Pack proceeded to terminate nearly all of the organization’s top leaders in what became known as the “Wednesday Night Massacre“—though a federal court later reversed many of those firings, holding that the CEO did not have the authority to make such changes.

An agency spokesperson told NPR that USAGM would not comment on the Herman investigation because “it involves the leak of privileged information.”

“The U.S. Agency for Global Media and the Voice of America (VOA) have long had policies on the books governing journalist’s conflicts of interest and use of social media,” the spokesperson said. “These policies were developed and promulgated by CEO Pack’s predecessors, and the CEO has made clear they will be enforced.”

Less than an hour after being contacted by NPR about the story, Pack issued a new memo entitled “Guidance on Conflicts of Interest,” which stated that bias against Trump could “only be remedied by recusal.” One such example of bias provided was a “ journalist who on Facebook ‘likes’ a comment or political cartoon that aggressively attacks or disparages the President must recuse themselves from covering the President.”

[image via YouTube screengrab]

Former GOP-Appointed Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Excoriates Trump in Her First Political Endorsement in More Than 40 Years

JERRY LAMBE Oct 7th, 2020 

Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janine P. Geske

Former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janine P. Geske publicly endorsed a presidential candidate for the first time in more than four decades, declaring her support for Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden in an op-ed published on Wednesday in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. When endorsing the former vice president, Geske made it “crystal clear” that the real reason she felt compelled to break her political silence was her belief that President Donald Trump, if re-elected, poses an existential threat to America’s constitutional democracy.

Geske, who was appointed to the state’s Supreme Court by Republican governor Tommy Thompson and to the state’s circuit court by Republican governor Lee Sherman Dreyfus, focused on her non-partisan nature, then said she could no longer “stand by silently and watch” as President Trump “shred the Constitution and undermine[d] the rule of law.”

“Donald Trump has no respect for our constitutional values and has mocked our democratic institutions. He is rude and an obnoxious bully who does not respect anyone who disagrees with him,” the former justice wrote. “I’ve watched in horror as President Trump lied and downplayed the coronavirus to the American people, and now, he still does not have a plan to protect families and beat the virus as it surges across Wisconsin. Even as Wisconsinites are being infected and hospitalized at record rates, Donald Trump is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to strike down the Affordable Care Act and protections for pre-existing conditions. It’s truly unconscionable.”

While the majority of the op-ed was focused on the criticizing the president and his current administration, Geske also praised Biden, saying that “unlike our current president, he’s honest and he’s a man of integrity.”

But she quickly returned to denouncing Trump, saying she believed the office of the president should be held by someone that will set an example for a younger generation.

“I want a president our children and grandchildren can look up to. A president who is an ethical and respectful role model and leader — not a bully like President Trump. I want a president who respects the rule of law. A leader with empathy who cares about the people he serves,” she wrote, before closing with a call to action. “The future of our republic — and our democratic institutions — is at stake in this election. It’s up to all of us to turn out and vote accordingly.”

Geske is currently a member of the Board of Trustees for Marquette University where she previously worked as a professor and was the Association of Marquette University Women’s Chair in Humanistic Studies.

Earlier this year, Geske was selected by Gov. Tony Evers (D) to sit on a non-partisan commission that will be tasked with helping the state draw new legislative maps.

[image via YouTube screengrab]