Sunday, October 18, 2020

Crowds gather for Women's March to protest Trump and Supreme Court nominee

Demonstrators wore pink knit pussyhats and black face masks honoring the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Saturday for the second Women's March of the year.

© Jose Luis Magana/AP With the U.S Capitol in the back ground, demonstrators march on Pennsylvania Avenue during the Women's March in Washington, Saturday, Oct. 17, 2020. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)

Women and allies gathered in Washington, DC, and several other cities around the country to protest President Donald Trump's nomination of Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court and urge women to vote in the upcoming election.

"I want my country back," Barbara Moore of Arlington told CNN affiliate WJLA.

The crowd marched from Freedom Plaza to the National Mall, some carrying signs with messages like "Hell no, Amy must go!" and "You call us nasty because you are afraid of what strong women can do."

Karen Ehrgott said she traveled from the Philadelphia area to attend the march to protest Barrett's nomination and the push to confirm her before the November 3 election.

"It's a mess. It's really, really a mess. I am very, very fearful of our democracy," Ehrgott told CNN. "I thought it was thriving and nothing could ever happen, but clearly it's a lot more fragile than we understood it to be."

Trump has pointed to the November 3 election as a reason for seeking swift Senate confirmation of Barrett, a federal appeals court judge who would be his third appointee to the nine-member bench. The President has said he believes the Supreme Court could ultimately decide whether he or his Democratic opponent, former Vice President Joe Biden, is the winner of the election.

Saturday's event is the second Women's March this year. Partially due to the pandemic, the crowd was much smaller than the January 18 event and even more than the first-ever Women's March in 2017, which may have been the largest single-day protest in US history.

Simultaneous marches were held in other cities including Denver, New York and Nashville.

The Women's March organization has suffered from growing pains since its first show of force in 2017.

Controversy and allegations of anti-Semitism surrounding its founders eventually led to three of them stepping down from the board last year. They had denied the allegations. The Women's March then appointed 17 new leaders to the board.

Women Marchers Led By ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ Protesters Voice Opposition On Trump Ticket, Amy Coney Barrett Nomination
By Bruce Haring

People march during the Women's March in downtown Chicago, Saturday, Oct. 17, 2020. Dozens of Women's March rallies were planned from New York to San Francisco to signal opposition to President Donald Trump and his policies, including the push to fill the seat of late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg before Election Day. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh)AP

A nationwide protest against the Donald Trump-Mike Pence presidential ticket and the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett was coordinated Saturday by the Women’s March organization. More than 400 events were planned throughout the country.
Leading the battle in many cities were the women dressed in the red habits borrowed from “The Handmaid’s Tale” television adaptation of Margaret Atwood’s dystopian novel. The Washington, DC main event was permitted for 10,000 attendees.

Los Angeles, Pasadena, Long Beach, Torrance and Laguna Niguel were the sites for local protests on the main themes.

Some women wore white lace collars and black robes to honor the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Marchers were faced with counter-protesters at the Supreme Court, but the marches were generally peaceful. The densely packed crowds did not observe social distancing, and a number of participants did not wear masks.

The marches come days before the Senate holds its first vote to confirm Barrett to replace Ginsburg, a move that would cement a conservative majority.

Women’s Marches have been held regularly since the day after President Donald Trump was sworn into office, but many have diminished in size since the inaugural rallies

Three of the four original founders – Bob Bland, Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour – stepped down from the organization after reports of of infighting, money mismanagement, and other issues.

Photos: 4th annual Women's March draws protesters across the country

Thousands of protesters took part in women’s marches on Saturday, with a main event in Washington, D.C., and sister marches taking place across the country.

© Jose Luis Magana/AP With the U.S Capitol in the background, demonstrators march on Pennsylvania Av. during the Women's March in Washington, Oct. 17, 2020.

Organizers had anticipated 116,000 in-person and virtual participants. They said tens of thousands showed up at what turned out to be 438 #CountonUs marches across all 50 states.

Actions were planned in key swing states including “a march for Black lives lost in Milwaukee, Wisconsin,” a “Feminist Icon Costume Party in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania,” and a “golf cart parade at The Villages, Florida,” according to organizers.

Women's march protests have taken place every year since the first drew more than a million to various locations the day after the inauguration of President Donald Trump.

This year’s goal was to ensure that the 1.25 million women on the organization’s list vote and bring three friends.

“Women showed up in force on day 1 of Trump’s presidency for the first Women’s March, and now we’re mobilizing to finish what we started,” Rachel O’Leary Carmona, the executive director of Women’s March said in a statement. “Trump’s presidency began with women taking to the streets, and that’s how it’s going to end.”MORE: Women's March 2019: Everything you need to know

© Eduardo Munoz/Reuters A woman wears a face mask with images of late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as people take part in the 2020 Women's March at Washington Square park in New York City, Oct. 17, 2020

© GAMAL DIAB/EPA via Shutterstock People gather for the Women's March in Freedom Plaza, in Washington, Oct. 17, 2020.

Video:

Protesters gather at Freedom Plaza for Washington's women's march

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/photos-4th-annual-women-s-march-draws-protesters-across-the-country/ar-BB1a8odn?ocid=msedgntp

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/us/crowds-gather-for-women-s-march-to-protest-trump-and-supreme-court-nominee/ar-BB1a8isN?ocid=msedgntp

BYE BYE FEINSTEIN
Dianne Feinstein Was Harder on Preteen Climate Activists Than She Was on Amy Coney Barrett

The contrast makes it clear that Feinstein prioritizes an outdated model of bipartisanship over engaging a passionate, young, left-leaning voter base.

by Mariah Kreutter
Saturday, October 17, 2020
Los Angeles Times

26 Comments

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., speaks as the Senate Judiciary Committee hears from legal experts on the final day of the confirmation hearing for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, on October 15, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Susan Walsh-Pool/Getty Images)

When Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) eroded political norms by refusing to hold a vote on Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court in March of 2016, he set a precedent. The precedent was not, “A Supreme Court justice shouldn’t be appointed in the last year of a president’s term.” The precedent was, “Republicans can do whatever they want.”

That fact was made obvious by the GOP’s rush to fill the seat left empty by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death a mere 46 days before the 2020 election. The hypocrisy was clear, but that hardly mattered. Republicans control the Senate now, just as they did when President Obama nominated Garland. Few of them are likely to defect. Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Trump’s nominee to replace Ginsburg, will almost certainly be confirmed.

But did Democrats — and Sen. Dianne Feinstein in particular — really need to give in so easily?

Feinstein, California’s senior senator and the highest-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, questioned Barrett on abortion access, the Affordable Care Act and gun control during this week’s Senate hearings. But her questions weren’t particularly tough, and she didn’t say anything that invoked the single biggest issue with Barrett’s nomination: that it’s a blatant Republican power grab threatening to hopelessly politicize and destabilize the Supreme Court, and it shouldn’t be happening in the first place.

Instead, Feinstein thanked Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey “I want you to use my words against me” Graham (R-S.C.) for his leadership during the hearing. “This has been one of the best set of hearings that I’ve participated in, and I want to thank you for your fairness and the opportunity of going back and forth,” she said.

There’s bipartisanship, and then there’s bringing a pillow to a gun fight. The Republican Party has gotten very good at playing constitutional hardball. If Democrats can’t or won’t match that energy, there won’t be a prize for maintaining the moral high ground. There will just be a lot of predictable political impotence.

Adding insult to injury for progressives is the fact that Feinstein can be ferocious with political opponents. She just saves it for the real threats to our democracy — like, say, 11-year-old climate activists.

A video of Feinstein speaking dismissively to a group of tweenaged Sunrise Movement activists who asked her to support the Green New Deal went viral in February 2019, and it resurfaced this week as many liberals heavily criticized the senator. The contrast between the Feinstein of the Barrett hearings and the Feinstein of the Sunrise Movement encounter is jarring.

Compare friendly questions like “You don’t have a magic formula for how you do it and handle all the children and your job and your work and your thought process, which is obviously excellent, do you?” with curt remarks like “You come in here, and you say it has to be my way or the highway. I don’t respond to that.” Or “I was elected by almost a million-vote plurality. And I know what I’m doing. So maybe people should listen a little bit.” Who does Feinstein seem to hold in more disdain: a judge whose nomination is an affront, or a bunch of kids who are afraid of dying in a climate apocalypse?

Of course Feinstein’s (very, very, very) long political career can’t be adequately summed up by a handful of quotes from two events. But for young progressives, it’s deeply disappointing for one of the most senior Democrats in Congress to treat the Republicans rushing Barrett’s confirmation with kid gloves — after treating young Californians concerned about climate change with open contempt.

The contrast makes it clear that Feinstein prioritizes an outdated model of bipartisanship over engaging a passionate, young, left-leaning voter base. Reaching across the aisle might once have been a noble impulse. But when the Republican Party has more or less unanimously sworn fealty to a demagogic Republican president and the entire West Coast has caught fire, it’s past time for long-serving senators like Feinstein to either adjust their sense of what’s important or step aside.

Mariah Kreutter is a 2020 summer intern with the Opinion and Editorial pages. She is a graduate of Yale University, where she studied English.
© 2019 Los Angeles Times

Major abortion rights group calls for Democrats to replace Feinstein on Judiciary Committee

Jessie Hellmann

NOTE THEY ARE VIOLATING COVID RULES SHAKING HANDS AND NOT WEARING MASKS

"Americans--whose lives hang in the balance--deserve leadership that underscores how unprecedented, shameful and wrong this process is," NARAL President Ilyse Hogue said in a statement Friday. "The Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Dianne Feinstein, failed to make this clear and in fact offered an appearance of credibility to the proceedings that is wildly out of step with the American people. As such, we believe the committee needs new leadership."

Many Democrats and progressive groups argue that Barrett's nomination and confirmation hearings are "illegitimate" because the election is just weeks away and millions of people have already voted.

Demand Justice, a progressive group that often challenges the Democratic establishment, called for Feinstein to step down earlier this week. But Friday's calls from NARAL were a surprise from an organization that typically aligns itself with Democratic leaders.

NARAL and other abortion rights groups have been the fiercest opponents of Barrett's nomination, arguing her confirmation to the court would endanger Roe v. Wade, the landmark ruling that established a woman's right to abortion. They also worry about how Barrett would rule on a pending case that could result in the overturning of the 2010 Affordable Care Act.

Feinstein, 87, has been a target of progressives who demand new Democratic leadership, especially as it appears more likely that Democrats could win back the Senate majority in November.

Feinstein has signaled opposition to nixing the legislative filibuster, and she has been criticized for her handling of Justice Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings in 2018.

After Barrett's hearings concluded on Thursday, Feinstein was spotted hugging Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who is in a tough reelection battle.

"Thank you for your fairness and opportunity of going back and forth. It leaves one with a lot of hopes," Feinstein said.

Feinstein has said she will vote against Barrett's confirmation.

Jordain Carney contributed.

Payday lenders have been raking it in during the pandemic by preying on vulnerable Americans. It's time Congress did something to stop them.

Jonathan Schleifer, Opinion Contributor

FILE PHOTO: A pedestrian walks past a payday lending shop in London Reuters

Payday lenders have preyed upon vulnerable Americans during the pandemic and benefited from the Paycheck Protection Program.

The payday lending industry has a known history of buying off politicians to fend off regulation.

It's time to eliminate the corrupt influence of the predatory lending industry on our political system.

Jonathan Schleifer is the Executive Director of The Fairness Project, a non-partisan nonprofit focused on ballot initiative campaigns.

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author.

Since the pandemic hit, the US government has fallen woefully short of providing the public with the resources they need to survive this health and economic crisis. Across the country, people are facing cuts to unemployment benefits, mass evictions, and loss of healthcare coverage, but lawmakers continue catering to corrupt industries like predatory payday lenders.

Congress is currently deliberating on a fifth COVID-19 funding package. While predatory lenders received interest-free loans in past bailouts, this time lawmakers must make sure not a penny of government aid gets into the hands of the payday lending industry.

This pandemic has highlighted what isn't working in our economy and political system, and one big problem is payday lenders who turn their profit by preying on those who are most vulnerable at their moment of greatest need. Despite being wildly unpopular, the Wall Street-backed industry continues to thrive because of its ability to exert incredible power over lawmakers.

It's time for our government to stop propping up predatory lenders preying on the most vulnerable, and focus on ensuring everyone has the financial resources they need to survive this crisis.

Short-term predatory lenders most disproportionately target low-income workers, people of color, and women. The lack of banks in largely Black and minority neighborhoods combined with discriminatory credit practices, make it hard for people of color to take out traditional loans or open credit accounts. Payday lenders have seized upon this disparity and are three times more likely to operate in Black neighborhoods than white neighborhoods.

Such lenders advertise their loans as a short-term credit option to be paid off within a few weeks, however, the typical borrower is indebted for five months. The business model of payday lenders is to bait people into short-term loans that they cannot repay with average interest rates as high as 661%.

Our current economic crisis is ripe for the predatory lending industry to sweep in and prey upon vulnerable people who have no other option to access cash, and lawmakers are doing little to stop them. While the pandemic and resulting economic crash have left millions of people in desperate need of financial support to pay bills, healthcare, and rent, payday lenders are using their political influence to increase their profit.
Lawmakers are doing little to stop predatory lenders

The Obama Administration required these lenders to ensure their customers had a proven ability to repay their loans, saving consumers from significant debt, and protecting them from predatory lenders. But these restrictions cost the payday lending industry $7 billion per year, and they have fought hard to eliminate it since Obama was in office.

Recently, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau revised that crucial rule, freeing predatory lenders to profit as they wish. Now with these restrictions removed in the middle of an economic crisis, the agency that exists to protect consumers is making it easier for predatory lenders to trap families in a cycle of never-ending debt.

The payday lending industry has a known history of buying off politicians to fend off regulation. They are backed by hedge funds and private equity firms that make huge profits from loans that intentionally sink people into endless debt. As a result, payday and other predatory lenders have colossal financial resources to forge powerful political alliances inside Capitol Hill and block anything that threatens the industry's profits.

Open Secrets data shows that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been bought off by the industry. The corruption runs all the way to the top of the Trump administration.
Since the pandemic began, lawmakers have protected the payday lending industry

In April, a group of House Republicans and Democrats asked the Treasury Department and Small Business Administration to open up Paycheck Protection Program loan applications to predatory payday lenders. According to recently released data from The Treasury Department, payday lenders brought in millions of dollars from the PPP program.

This means taxpayer-funded government aid was taken away from small businesses and nonprofits that desperately need it and handed over to an exploitative industry that hands out loans they know people cannot repay.  It comes as little surprise that the lawmakers who supported the distribution of PPP loans to predatory lenders are among the top recipients of lobbying money from the payday lending industry.

Lawmakers should be seeking every avenue to protect the most vulnerable, not freeing up an exploitative industry to prey upon those in desperate need of financial support during a crisis. With another stimulus bill being negotiated in Congress, it is imperative that lawmakers include provisions that prevent the payday lending industry from profiting even more.

Payday lenders will continue to exert their influence over lawmakers and prey upon people unless we continue to call out their shady practices and the craven politicians who keep serving their interests.

Though politicians can be bought off and will look the other way, voters know better. In November, Nebraskans have the opportunity to approve a payday lender interest rate cap by ballot initiative, just as Colorado did in 2018. Voters have the power to curb the power of payday lenders, and other states should follow the lead of Nebraska and Colorado.

It's time to eliminate the corrupt influence of Wall Street and the predatory lending industry on our political system. We cannot let these corrupt and predatory practices continue to fly under the radar.  

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author(s).Read the original article on Opinion Contributor. Copyright 2020.

Saturday, October 17, 2020

An 'entirely untapped' generation of new voters are on TikTok, but both Trump and Biden have ignored them

Connor Perrett
Oct 5, 2020, 12:06 PM

Despite its potential to reach a generation of voters, Trump and Biden have steered clear of TikTok. Olivier Douliery/AFP via Getty Images; Drew Angerer/Getty Images; Shayanne Gal/Business Insider

As a possible ban still looms over TikTok’s growing user base, discussions about politics exist on nearly every corner of the video-based app.

But absent from these political discussions often are the candidates themselves, like President Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden, whose campaigns have avoided the controversial platform.

One political scientist told Business Insider candidates will likely regret not joining the platform, while a digital strategist said it makes less sense for candidates to use TikTok because the app requires more authenticity than others.

For months, TikTok users have been confronted with US politics as the November election draws near and President Donald Trump continues to take aim at the popular app over security concerns related to China.

At the center of the controversy is TikTok's parent company, ByteDance. The China-based company has raised the eyebrows of US officials who argue it could collect the data of US users and turn it over to the Chinese government. TikTok has repeatedly denied the allegations, which have been leveled by both Democrats and Republicans.

Most recently, a federal judge sided with TikTok and against the Trump administration, issuing a preliminary injunction on Sunday that halted a download ban on the app just hours before it was slated to go into effect. A week prior, the Commerce Department delayed the ban by one week, citing progress around selling the app so US-based companies Oracle and Walmart would have a stake in the company.

Unsurprisingly, the Trump campaign has steered clear of TikTok, having no official presence on the app. The president and his son, Donald Trump Jr., however, have posted videos to Triller, a competing vertical-video app.

Meanwhile, Trump's rival, Democratic nominee Joe Biden, recently called TikTok "a matter of genuine concern," and his campaign has opted out of using the app.

In July, the Biden campaign asked its staff to remove the TikTok app from their personal and campaign-issued devices, citing security and privacy concerns. While the Biden campaign declined to further comment on internal policies around using TikTok, they have embraced other platforms, including Reels, Facebook's TikTok competitor that launched in August.
But even without top political players, TikTok remains a political platform

While TikTok's most well-known stars, like Charli D'Amelio and Addison Rae, have made the TikTok brand synonymous with snappy dances to popular songs, other creators have used the platform to discuss politics.

Most notably, the 15-year-old daughter of Trump's former senior counselor, Kellyanne Conway, made headlines when she joined TikTok and posted anti-Trump content as well as openly criticized her parents.

"I think TikTok is a huge platform especially for Gen Z kids," Conway told Insider earlier this year, adding she was using the growing platform to make "cute little videos" to express her opinions.

Similar to Conway, other Gen Z users — sans politically famous parents —regularly talk politics on TikTok.

Olivia Julianna, a 17-year-old Texan who is known to her over 55,000 followers as "The Gen Z Political Analyst," told Business Insider she didn't intend on using TikTok for politics.

"When I started TikTok, I made stupid videos like most teenagers do," said Olivia, who asked that Business Insider not publish her last name due to safety concerns about users finding out where she attends school. "The real shift in my political beliefs came after everything happened with the Black Lives Matter movement and George Floyd."

"I saw how much anger, hatred, and exhaustion there was in the world and how fed up and frustrated Gen Z was and how there was so much misinformation being spread," Olivia said. "I felt like there really needed to be someone who could talk about politics where it could be educational but also being able to criticize your own party."

Since turning political, more than 5.2 million people have since liked her videos. Her first TikTok video to gain traction speculated that Biden would choose his former rival, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, as his running mate.

"It reached over one million views in two weeks, which was crazy because I never got that many views before," Olivia said. "Then I started posting more and more. People would ask me questions and I would post. And I really enjoyed it because I felt I was helping people learn about politics."

While she won't be able to vote this year — she turns 18 two weeks after the November election — Olivia has encouraged eligible Gen Z followers to register to vote alongside a cohort of TikTok creators. Their campaign, which part of the recently formed "Tok the Vote," has been spearheaded by Colton Hess, a recent Princeton graduate who earlier this year left his job as a product manager at Amazon to start the organization.

"We've reached this point in the last few months where there's been a change in people's willingness to post on social and political issues," Hess said. "Everyone is looking for ways to help and use their platform and power and position of privilege to get the word out about these things and to help others."

A page for Tok the Vote has amassed more than 22,000 followers while videos tagged with #TokTheVote have received over five million views and garnered more than one million likes.

"TikTok presents an incredible tool and an opportunity for activism, and it's really entirely untapped right now," Hess said. "We've seen young people finding it as a way to express themselves politically even if they're new to this and they're not really sure how — they're trying, and they're trying in unique, creative, new ways, and we think we're going to continue to see this."

President Donald Trump uses a mobile phone during a roundtable discussion in the State Dining Room at the White House in Washington, US, June 18, 2020. Reuters/Leah Millis

TikTok announced last week it would launch an in-app election guide, connecting its userbase to reliable sources for information about the upcoming US election.

In the meantime, political TikTok videos thrive on the app as they range in diversity and reach. Some feature creators passionately talking to their phone cameras, educating TikTok users about issues that range from cultural appropriation to climate change. Other creators have relied on popular meme formats and the TikTok sound library to poke fun at or criticize politicians, like Trump or Biden.

"Red Kingdom," a hype song used by the Kansas City Chiefs, has been used more than 123,000 times on the app, especially for pro-Trump memes and parody videos created by TikTok users with opposing political views. Similarly, "Real Women Vote for Trump," a song by the pro-Trump group known as The Deplorable Choir went viral on TikTok with more than 31,000 videos on one version of the sound.

Videos using the hashtag "settleforbiden," in which users explore their decision to rally behind Biden after supporting other candidates in the primary race, have racked up more than 176 million views.

Videos on #Trump2020, which feature an assortment of pro and anti-Trump content, have raked in more than 11.1 billion views. The hashtag Biden2020 consists of videos that have received a total of 2.4 billion views.

A handful of elected officials and candidates have braved TikTok

Few candidates have taken the plunge into TikTok, and those who have joined the app have yielded varying degrees of success.

Sen. Ed Markey, of Massachusetts, earlier in September won the primary race against his challenger, Rep. Joe Kennedy. During the primary race, Markey's campaign utilized TikTok to reach voters, making him the highest-profile politician to use the platform thus far.

"Ed Markey is 74-years-old and popular on a platform that is largely composed of teenagers and young people," said Paul Bologna, the campaign's digital communications director, in a statement to Business Insider. "Even before our campaign was on TikTok, TikTok found Ed Markey. Our use of this platform is part of our strategy to organize everywhere and to tap into online grassroots enthusiasm to engage with and turn out young voters during this election."

While the Markey campaign has an official presence on the app, Bologna noted the vast majority of the 2.9 million TikTok views on videos using the "edmarkey" hashtag came from users unaffiliated with the campaign, who posted about the progressive senator on their own accord.

In August, The Verge's Makena Kelly reported about the social media users who made up Markey's "stan army," a group of about 100 people who used platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok to create viral moments that helped garner support for Markey in the heated primary campaign. The digital outreach strategy was not just about getting votes, either. The campaign used the platforms to solicit donations or to encourage people to phone bank for Markey.

"Ed Markey recognizes that TikTok as a platform is far from perfect when it comes to privacy and he has called for the Federal Trade Commission to increase its attention to the dangers that minors encounter online, including the use of their personal data for advertising dollars," Bologna said of the bipartisan concerns stemming from the app's Chinese ownership.

Matt Little, a 35-year-old member of the Minnesota Senate, has also embraced TikTok during his reelection campaign. Known on the platform as the "Little Senator," he has amassed some 150,000 TikTok followers since he joined in February.

"The reason we started was the same reason we are using all sorts of different platforms, which is I try to talk to people where they are," Little told Business Insider. "Right now, if you want to talk to Gen Z or the younger generation, you've kinda got to be on TikTok or Instagram."

Little said the security risks associated with TikTok, which have been amplified by prominent Democrats like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, were about the same as those associated with other mobile apps, adding that Congress should work toward passing consumer protections that target more than one app.

"TikTok has become a political talking point," Little said. "If you're concerned about TikTok, you should probably delete just about every app you've got on your phone, including Google Maps, Facebook, and maybe even Instagram."

As Business Insider's Isobel Asher Hamilton previously reported, there is still no proof that TikTok is spying on users for China, and experts say the app poses similar data-harvesting risks to Facebook and Google.

While his substantive TikTok videos about policies are less popular than content featuring self-deprecating humor, Little said his presence on TikTok has still reached his community and helps introduce him to voters.

"We were going through the McDonald's drive-thru, and the person working there was like 'I like your videos, Mr. Little.' The same thing happened at Taco Bell a couple of weeks later," he told Business Insider.

Occasionally, Little uses TikTok to discuss issues that matter to him. Otherwise, he said he used the platform to fundraise, and as the election nears, he plans to use the app to get voters to register and help them figure out how to cast their ballot.

Still, a following on TikTok doesn't directly translate to support at the polls. Joshua Collins, a 26-year-old in Seattle who ran a campaign to become the youngest member of Congress, had a significant following on TikTok earlier this year.

Central to Collins' campaign were his social-media accounts, including his TikTok profile, where he shared his Democratic Socialist ideology and his support of other progressive lawmakers, namely Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Despite his hearty TikTok following, Collins earned less than 1% of the vote in his primary race and came in 15th place among the 20 candidates vying for a seat currently occupied by outgoing Democratic Rep. Denny Heck, according to The Post Millennial.
Despite its political nature, the biggest names in politics are nowhere to be found

It's not just Biden and Trump who have avoided using TikTok — most elected officials in the US have steered clear from the platform which has drawn criticism and concern from Democrats and Republicans alike.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the New York Democrat known for her Instagram Live chats and her fiery tweets, has similarly bypassed TikTok. The lawmaker in July posted a video to Instagram that she called a "bootleg TikTok," confirming in a tweet that she didn't use the app.

"Social media has always been a major player" in politics, Vincent Raynauld, an associate professor at Emerson College who researches the impact of social media on politics, told Business Insider.

Democratic nominee and former Vice President Joe Biden takes a selfie with a voter after speaking at the East Las Vegas Community Center on September 27, 2019 in Las Vegas, Nevada. Ethan Miller/Getty Images

Political candidates would likely regret their decision to steer clear of TikTok taking into account the platform is where young people have decided to get political, Raynauld said. He pointing to the TikTok campaign credited with tanking attendance at Trump's June rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

The Trump campaign did not immediately return Business Insider's request for comment.

Politicians "should definitely be on there because there's a lot of politics being discussed on that platform," Raynauld said. "There's a lot of energy, there's a lot of excitement, and people are willing to talk about politics and spread messages based on issues and candidates."

"However there's a lot of risk of being on these platforms because they could certainly lose control or see their message hijacked," he told Business Insider, noting that it's likely more difficult for candidates and politicians to keep control of their own message on TikTok.

"Campaigns are closely watching what's happening on TikTok, but they're still trying to figure out how the platform works and how they can use the energy of the platform to their advantage," Raynauld added.

In addition to this lack of control, Little said lawmakers might avoid TikTok because the app is more complicated to use.

"It requires a level of complexity that's not on other social media apps," Little said. "Everything else is a picture and some words. There are so many moving parts on TikTok that it's logically more difficult."

TikTok is also largely personality-based — so if candidates weren't funny enough or are perceived as "lame," they're more likely to get "roasted" than they would on other platforms, he said.

Annie Levene, a partner at the DC-based digital marketing agency Rising Tide Interactive, said she was unsure it made sense for candidates like Biden or Trump to use TikTok as a campaign tool. More than other platforms, TikTok requires a certain authenticity that makes it harder to crack.

"What I would spend my energy on, as a campaign, is instead of building up your own TikTok — especially because we don't have a great sense of how the algorithm works, and what videos tend to get to the forefront — would be to forge some sort of partnership with people on TikTok who already have an existing following," Levene said.

She called this strategy cross-pollinating: the practice where campaigns leverage other popular social media accounts or celebrities to spread their message rather than using their own accounts. It's one of the ways campaigning has evolved — even since 2016, as social media continues to become more important in reaching voters. It's also one of the ways campaigns have connected with voters as COVID-19 has, in many cases, thrown a wrench in typical canvassing, Levene said.

The Biden campaign, for example, began an initiative called #TeamJoeTalks in July, where members of Biden's campaigns were interviewed on Instagram Live by various celebrities. For the September issue of Elle, Biden was interviewed by rapper Cardi B.

"They can speak to why it's important to vote, or why it's important to register, or why they're supporting a certain candidate in a way that feels really authentic to their viewers," Levene said. "It's one thing to just get on (social media) and create content, but it's another thing for people to really consume it, and respect, and be persuaded by it."

Oracle founder Larry Ellison donated $250,000 to pro-Lindsey Graham super PAC the day the TikTok deal was announced

Connor Perrett

Reuters/Robert Galbraith

Larry Ellison, the founder of Oracle, donated $250,000 to a pro-Lindsey Graham super PAC as his company's deal to partner with TikTok was in the final stages, according to a report from The Verge.

According to documents from the Federal Election Commission, Ellison made the donation to the pro-Graham PAC Security is Strength on September 14.

As The Verge noted that the donation came just hours after Oracle announced it had edged out Microsoft to become TikTok's US technology partner amid the ongoing political drama surrounding its Chinese owner.

Larry Ellison, the founder, board chairman, and chief technology officer of Oracle, donated $250,000 to a pro-Lindsey Graham super PAC in September as the deal for the company to become the US technology partner of TikTok closed, The Verge reported.

The donation was made to The Security is Strength PAC, which has exclusively supported Graham's political ambitions, according to The Verge report Saturday.

According to filings from the Federal Election Commission, Ellison made the donation on September 14 — the same day Oracle confirmed it had won a bid to become the US "technology partner" of TikTok, beating out Microsoft, which had been believed to be the front runner.

A spokesperson for Oracle did not immediately return Business Insider's request for comment on Saturday. A spokesperson for Graham's campaign told The Verge on Saturday it — by law — had "no affiliation" with the super PAC.

TikTok has garnered bipartisan concern as a result of its ownership by the Chinese company ByteDance. US officials have feared the company may share users' data with the Chinese government. TikTok has long denied the allegations.

The app over the summer came under the crosshairs of President Donald Trump, who in August issued two executive orders targeting the app, aiming to force a sale to a US company or to shut the app down in the US. A download ban on TikTok, announced by the Commerce Department in September, was halted late last month by a federal judge just hours before it was set to take effect.

As The Verge noted, Graham, who is currently in a heated race for reelection, was reportedly instrumental to the deal. However, it's not clear whether he was specifically involved in choosing which company was chosen to acquire a stake in the popular video-based app, according to the report.

"If TikTok is saved, you can thank me," the South Carolina Republican said in an August interview with Vanity Fair.

Following the announcement of the deal with Oracle, Trump said he gave the deal his "blessing," although the specifics of the deal have been muddled in confusion since it was first announced last month. Following its announcement, Graham tweeted his support for the deal.

"Great decision by President Trump to approve the sale of TikTok to Oracle and Walmart," he said. "Great for American consumers who are being protected from the Chinese Communist Party. Well done, Mr. President."

Amphibious assault vehicles that sink are 'death traps' for the troops inside, Marine veterans say after fatal accident

ACCIDENTS ARE PREVENTABLE INCIDENTS

Ryan Pickrell

Assault amphibious vehicles are rough rides in choppy seas, especially for the troops riding in the back. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Adam Dublinske

Nine service members died this summer when a Marine Corps amphibious assault vehicle sank off the coast of California during a training exercise. It was the deadliest training accident in the vehicle's decades-long history.

The Corps is investigating why the AAV sank and why so many troops lost their lives when it did. Though the investigation is still ongoing, the commanding officer of the unit involved has been relieved of his command.

Marine veterans told Insider that it can be extremely difficult to get everyone out of a rapidly sinking vehicle because the vehicles are sometimes overcrowded and the escape routes are not always reliable.

When the vehicle goes under, Marines in full gear brace themselves as the AAV fills with water. When the vehicle steadies, they open the hatches and swim to the surface on only the air in their lungs, shedding their gear when they can, a current Marine involved in egress training explained.

Any hitch in that process, such as an escape hatch that won't open or a stuck Marine, could be disastrous. One Marine veteran said that the heavy tracked amphibious vehicles are "death traps."

The Corps has suspended all AAV waterborne operations until the investigation concludes and declined to comment on whether it believes AAVs are currently safe.

A sinking Marine Corps amphibious assault vehicle is a "death trap" because of how hard it can be to get everyone out alive, Marine veterans told Insider after a deadly incident this summer.

Several former Marines said that the ways the aging AAVs are designed and operated make it "tough" to get a full load of Marines out in a crisis. If it sinks, troops in heavy combat gear have to hold their breath and climb out of a flooded vehicle through narrow, hard-to-open hatches. The escape plans for the often overcrowded vehicles appear problematic at best and at worst, disasters waiting to happen.

AAVs rarely sink and fatal mishaps are uncommon for the 26-ton tracked vehicles made to move Marines from warships at sea to shore under fire, but tragedy struck in late July when an amphibious vehicle sank rapidly to a depth of 385 feet off the coast of southern California during a training exercise.

The Marine Corps says that its AAVs can hold roughly two dozen troops, but they look like they could only reasonably hold about half that. The vehicle that sank in July was pretty packed, carrying 16 service members at the time of the accident.

Eight Marines and a Navy sailor died. Most appear to have never made it out of the drowning vehicle. The incident was the deadliest training accident in the history of the Corps' amphibious assault vehicles.

The tragedy shook the Corp's confidence in its AAVs, with the commandant suspending waterborne operations pending the outcome of an ongoing investigation. The Corps also fired the commander of the unit involved in the accident.

"Until the investigation is complete, we don't know if the causal factors were related to the vehicle, the procedures, the training, the environment, or some combination of these," the Corps told Insider, declining to comment on whether or not it believes its AAVs are safe.

What exactly happened to the AAV that sank this summer is still unclear, but what is clear is that a sinking AAV is dangerous, and in some cases, deadly.

Marines board an amphibious assault vehicle. US Army National Guard photo by Cpl. Katharine Silent Water

'Torture chamber'

AAVs, sometimes called "tracks" or "amtracs," are rough rides even when they aren't filling up with water and sinking, current and former Marines told Insider.

The Marines, who enter through a large ramp that lets down in the back, are tightly packed inside the 26-foot-long armored vehicle like sardines. It's loud, it's tough to breathe, it smells of exhaust and diesel fumes, and it is not uncommon to see infantrymen vomit from motion sickness or panic from claustrophobia as the windowless hull rocks in the water.

"I've had my fair share of people freaking out in the back of an amtrac," Sgt. Juan Torres, an AAV section leader, told Insider during a visit to Camp Pendleton earlier this year. "They don't even know they're claustrophobic, and next thing you know, they're freaking out, screaming, 'I need air, I need air.'"

Nate Eckman, a Marine infantryman who left the Corps a few years ago, told Insider that riding inside an AAV is "one of the worst memories" he has from his time in the service.

"It was awful being cramped, sucking in diesel fuel, and feeling claustrophobia I didn't even know I had," Eckman recalled. "People fight. They get nauseous and puke in the back. You're enclosed inside the whole time, and you have no idea where you are or if you have ten more minutes or five more hours."

Eckman acknowledged that AAVs are effective for making Marines amphibious, but he also said that an AAV is a "torture chamber" for troops riding inside. "I watched guys break," Eckman said, explaining that disdain for the AAV was fairly common among the Marine infantry.

Marines aboard a lightly-outfitted amphibious assault vehicle prepare for an amphibious assault. US Army National Guard photo by Spc. Emily Eppens

'Brace yourself'

The Corps has been relying on AAVs since the 1970s. They require a lot of work to maintain and operate, and sometimes, things go wrong inexplicably. "You can do everything perfectly, and then, the moment you roll out, something goes wrong," Torres said. "If everything is going smoothly, you should be worried."

The fully-armed ship-to-shore troop transports deploy from amphibious warships and are propelled by jets and spinning tracks. In the water, AAVs maintain a very low profile, with most of the vehicle already below the waterline.

The AAV that sank in late July is believed to have hit rough seas and taken on more water than the pumps could handle, possibly causing the vehicle to sink.

Marines who conduct amphibious operations with AAVs have to go through some variation of the submerged vehicle egress training to prepare for the possibility that their vehicle will sink at sea. The training involves sitting Marines in a simulated AAV hull and dropping it into a pool.

"The infantry training was like a four-hour day at a pool," Eckman said. "You get in this plexiglass container that represents the body of a track. You sit in it, you float three feet above the water, and then they drop it in."

He said that he did not feel the training adequately prepared him for an actual emergency. For example, "you're not carrying the normal amount of equipment you normally would," he said. "You're in a very light state." It is less gear, less people, less of the things that make egress a challenge.

The former Marine said that "there are almost no elements that I think would be present in a real drowning scenario," explaining that he remembers going through the training and thinking that it "feels very ineffective."

As a Marine, Eckman actually had to bail out of a sinking AAV. Fortunately, the vehicle sank slowly in calm waters, so everyone was able to get out. While a slow-sinking track is easier to escape, it is still a danger because of how quickly and unexpectedly the situation can change.

If an AAV sinks rapidly, the egress "procedure is to brace yourself when the vehicle goes underwater and wait until the violent motion stops" before exiting the vehicle, explained Gunnery Sgt. Michael Pena, a curriculum chief at the Assault Amphibian School.

Basically, the Marines, who have access to neither seatbelts nor supplemental breathing devices, cling to their bench seats and hold their positions until the vehicle fills with water and steadies.

"You have to brace yourself and know where you are in the vehicle," Pena said, emphasizing that "you do not want to disorient yourself when the vehicle goes under."

Underwater, "there are no commands coming from any of the vehicle crew or anyone else," Pena explained. "Marines are expected to do what they need to do to exit the vehicle." In that moment, Marines must fend for themselves in the chaos.

Undoubtedly stressed and holding their breath in the bright green glow of the emergency egress lighting system, the troops, in full gear but supported by a life preserver, must try to escape the sunken AAV by way of a handful of hatches, assuming they open as intended. They then swim to the surface with only the air in their lungs, shedding their gear when they can.

"Getting out of the vehicle is your primary goal," Pena said, explaining that the next step is for troops to get to the surface as quickly and efficiently as possible. "The more motion you are doing in the water while not breathing is just going to burn oxygen," he said.

The escape plan was simple, Eckman recalled. "Hold, stay calm, and try to hold your breath long enough to get out and come up."

But, as their vehicle sinks, Marines are unlikely to be calm, and the increased adrenaline will increase oxygen demand, reducing the amount of time they can hold their breath.

There is also the issue of the hatches through which troops are expected to escape. Marine veterans say they can be difficult to deal with normally and become even more challenging underwater. And, even if they do open, getting out is still anything but easy.

Jacob Aronen, a Marine veteran familiar with AAVs, told Marine Corps Times that the top hatches, the primary egress points, "often have handles that are so stiff you need to beat them with a hammer to open."

Aronen further explained that it would be tougher to open the heavy hatches on a sinking vehicle because of the water pressure. Marine veterans that talked to Insider raised similar concerns.

Open, the hatches are not very wide, so "if you have your gear on, it is very difficult to get out of them in a rush," Tagen Schmidt, a Marine veteran who was badly burned when his amtrac caught fire, told Insider. Schmidt was one of 15 service members who were injured when his AAV burst into flames.

Were a service member in full gear with an inflated life preserver to get stuck exiting the vehicle, he would block the way for those behind him. An injured Marine could have the same effect.

There are procedures to get Marines out of the vehicles, but a single hitch in the process could mean the difference between a safe egress and a deadly catastrophe.

A Marine amphibious assault vehicle charges through the surf. Thomson Reuters

'Design flaws'

"If [an AAV] is designed to allow for the egress of a dozen plus combat-loaded Marines in an extreme scenario, that is not obvious to me at all," Eckman said, adding that he believes the Corps is overcrowding its vehicles.

Thinking about the deadly incident in July, he asked, "How many Marines had to be on that AAV for it not to be a fatal accident? Do we have policies that essentially cause overcrowding? Was the actual cause of death overcrowding because there were just too many people on there?"

"The space is tight," Eckman said. "You are literally piling people on top of each other."

Bud Colby, a former Marine amtracker, told Insider that the challenge of getting everyone out of a fast-sinking AAV is "one of those known design flaws."

"Twenty-six tons are going to sink quick," he said, explaining that "you physically can't get the people out in time, and that ties back to the design of the vehicle."

Altogether, an AAV has six hatches. There are two cargo hatches, a rear hatch, and three forward crew hatches. For the troops in the back, the forward hatches are not particularly accessible. But, were there to be a problem with the back hatches, those may be the only options.

"It is a tight fit in there," Colby said. "Being realistic, it is going to be tough to get a lot of people out of a vehicle in any short period of time." He said that many military vehicles come with inherent risks though.

Of the Marine veterans that spoke to Insider, Schmidt was the most critical of the AAVs. "For the most part, and mainly because of my experience, they are death traps and need to be updated if not completely eradicated from the Marine Corps," he said.

"We're already the most unstoppable force in the world. If we were to get new gear and equipment, not a country in the world would be able to touch us," he argued.

The Marines have been trying to replace the AAV for two decades, but until recently, efforts to replace the aging vehicles were unsuccessful.

One replacement attempt was the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, originally known as the Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle.

The vehicle was expected to be faster, more heavily armored, equipped with more firepower, and more reliable than the AAV, but the project was canceled in 2011 due to rising costs, among other issues. That same year, an AAV carrying six Marines sank off the coast of California. One service member died in the accident.

The Marine Corps is currently in the process of phasing out the AAV, which is being replaced by the new Amphibious Combat Vehicle. The service said in late September that new vehicle deliveries would start the following month.

The Corps told Insider that the new ACV provides "increased lethality and protected mobility and supports the survivability and safety of the crew and embarked Marines." The service said the new vehicle "requirements and design address safety in the water to include emergency egress through the hatches." The service did not, however, say how it does that.

TRUMP DEFUNDS POLICE
Donald Trump's campaign is refusing to pay cities' police bills despite its pledge to 'back the blue' and support 'law and order'
Dave Levinthal Aug 6, 2020

President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting with law enforcement officials from around the country as Vice President Mike Pence looks on in the diplomatic reception room at the White House in Washington, D.C., on February 11, 2019. Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

Vice President Mike Pence is headlining a 'Cops for Trump' reelection rally in Tucson, Arizona, as city officials say the Trump campaign has refused to pay a police bill it sent in 2016.

Tucson officials accused the Trump campaign of violating a license agreement associated with a March 2016 campaign rally. The Trump campaign said Tucson police 'refused to do anything to control protesters or otherwise protect attendees.'

Trump's campaign has refused to pay at least $1.82 million worth of bills sent to it by numerous municipal governments in connection with political rallies. The campaign says it's under no legal obligation to pay.

Trump regularly presents himself as the president of 'law and order' and a strong supporter of police.

Democrat Joe Biden's campaign has refused to say whether it will pay police bills if it begins conducting in-person campaign events between now and Election Day.

Vice President Mike Pence is scheduled to conduct a "Cops for Trump" rally Tuesday morning in Tucson, Arizona, where he'll "highlight the Trump Administration's strong actions to support law enforcement."

But Tucson officials say President Donald Trump still hasn't paid an $81,837 police services invoice they asked his campaign to pay following a rally there in March 2016.

Tucson is one of 14 cities across the nation — many in critical swing states — that say the Trump campaign has stiffed them on police and public safety bills following campaign events. Total tab: nearly $2 million.

Also among them: Mesa, Arizona, which billed the Trump campaign $64,467 in October 2018. Pence is slated to participate in a "Latter-day Saints for Trump" coalition launch Tuesday afternoon in Mesa.

Trump's 4-year-old police billing dispute with Tucson is particularly messy.

In a September 2016 demand letter, Tucson City Attorney Mike Rankin accused the Trump campaign of violating a license agreement that specified the campaign would cover "costs incurred for all services, equipment and personnel provided by the City of Tucson for security and for crowd and traffic control."

But Don McGahn, Trump's future White House counsel and then the Trump campaign's general counsel, shot back in his own letter — disputing the bill and blasting the Tucson Police Department's performance.

"The Campaign has had numerous reports from people who attended the event that the on site police officers refused to do anything to control protesters or otherwise protect attendees of the event," McGahn wrote. "To the contrary, police officers told those who requested assistance that their orders were to stand down and not engage."

Tucson spokesperson Lane Mandle said she expected the Pima County Sheriff's Department to staff Pence's event next week. Earlier this year, Mandle said the Trump campaign's police bill payment would help it grapple with a municipal budget ravaged by a recession and coronavirus-related costs.

"What the City of Tucson needs, like every major municipality, is a direct infusion of cash from the federal government that can be put toward our general fund to offset the millions currently being lost in sales tax revenue," Mandle added.

The Arizona Police Association is expected to endorse Trump at Tuesday's rally in Tucson, according to a Trump campaign advisory. The association did not respond to several messages Thursday,

Felecia Rotellini, chairwoman of the Arizona Democratic Party, on Thursday blasted the Trump campaign for not paying police bills from Tucson and Mesa.

"Donald Trump has repeatedly shown us who he really is: a corrupt con man who puts his own interests ahead of the working people he regularly stiffs," Rotellini said.

A 'Cops for Trump' tour

Pence's Arizona events come 12 days after the vice president conducted a "Cops for Trump" event in the small city of Greensburg, Pennsylvania, where he stood in solidarity with local law enforcement and dismissed liberals' calls to "defund the police."

Trump's campaign has so far refused to pay a combined $1.82 million in police and public safety bills sent to it by 14 local governments, including Spokane, Washington and Wildwood, New Jersey, according to the Center for Public Integrity and Insider. Trump's excuse is that his campaign isn't legally required to pay.

"I fully expect them to stiff Greensburg and Westmoreland County taxpayers with the bill for this rally," Pennsylvania state Rep. Austin Davis, an area Democrat, said of the Trump campaign.

Lately, some city governments haven't bothered trying to recoup costs for Trump events, presuming his campaign won't pay. Trump campaign events are often scheduled on short notice and require cash-strapped municipalities to spend money they can barely spare.

Trump rally protests and counter protests routinely necessitate significant host city resources at the behest of the US Secret Service, which says it won't reimburse municipal governments because Congress hasn't appropriated money for such a purpose. Widespread demonstrations and civil unrest following the killing of George Floyd by a Minneapolis police officer have exacerbated tensions surrounding Trump reelection events.

Local officials closed streets and monitored protesters in Greensburg, which has a population of about 14,000 and an annual city budget of about $12 million. But because Pence's campaign event was designed to be a relatively small affair, Greensburg City Councilman Donnie Zappone, a Republican, says he expected local expenses are minimal. Audience members were numbered in the hundreds, not thousands.

Greensburg's municipal government recently laid off some city employees as it, like cities across the nation, struggles to plug budget holes amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

"Mainly, we just want to keep everyone here safe. If we do incur a cost, it would be nice if they would pay back," Zappone said.

He added that the local economy has at least received a modest boost from Secret Service officials and Trump campaign staffers spending at hotels and restaurants.

Republican state Sen. Kim Ward said that the vice president's visit will "put a spotlight" on a part of Pennsylvania often overlooked nationally and highlight the work of local law enforcement who are "true professionals."

U.S. President Donald Trump and U.S. Vice President Mike Pence (R) gesture during a campaign rally on Dec. 10, 2019 at Giant Center in Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States. Photo by Lev Radin/Ana dolu Agency via Getty Images

Trump campaign 'took advantage' of Wisconsin city

Don't expect any Pence campaign visit to be worth it, said Mayor Theodore Grant of Ripon, Wisconsin, which advertises itself as the "birthplace of the Republican Party."

Grant estimates his city government spent an unexpected $5,000 to $10,000 on labor costs when Pence spoke in Ripon on July 17. That's as much as two-thirds of the city's $15,000 emergency fund, which it tapped for Pence's visit.

Grant added that he was initially inclined to invoice Trump's campaign, but other city officials advised him that Trump probably wouldn't pay. Many cities that have hosted Trump rallies since 2015 have likewise opted against billing or simply consider protecting campaign events within the normal scope of their work.

"Any committee, any campaign of any party would be welcome in town if they're willing to pay for costs, but the Trump campaign took advantage of all our police and firefighters here," said Grant, whose office is nonpartisan. "We're just going to have to run a little lean."

In January, two Wisconsin state legislators proposed legislation that would have required presidential candidates to pre-pay municipal costs when making in-state campaign visits, but it failed to pass. (The Wisconsin cities of Green Bay and Eau Claire have previously billed the Trump campaign for public safety costs.)

Trump, who earlier this month won the National Association of Police Organization's endorsement, consistently touts his support for police.

"My Administration remains committed to ensuring our Nation's Federal, State, local, and tribal law enforcement officers have the resources and support they need to perform their duties safely and effectively," Trump wrote May 8 during Police Week.

More colloquially, Trump tweeted in June: "Sleepy Joe Biden and the Radical Left Democrats want to "DEFUND THE POLICE". I want great and well paid LAW ENFORCEMENT. I want LAW & ORDER!"

At the Greensburg rally, which was delayed a few minutes because of two minor motorcade traffic accidents en route, Pence told revelers that Trump has "stood without apology for the men and women of law enforcement" and that "law enforcement isn't the problem, law enforcement is the solution."

Calls to "defund the police" have been a rallying cry among many young liberals in the aftermath of the death of Floyd and other Black people in the hands of law enforcement. While the term does not call for abolishing the police but rather redirecting some of its funds to social services and other government functions, it has emboldened Trump and conservatives' stance on law enforcement officials.

"Many Democrats want to Defund and Abolish Police Departments. HOW CRAZY!" Trump said in another tweet.

The Trump campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In April, it said in a statement that it's "the U.S. Secret Service, not the campaign, which coordinates with local law enforcement. The campaign itself does not contract with local governments for police involvement. All billing inquiries should go to the Secret Service."

Among the cities that want the Trump campaign to pay public safety costs: El Paso, Texas ($569,204); Minneapolis ($542,733); Albuquerque, New Mexico ($211,175); Battle Creek, Michigan ($93,338).

Will Joe Biden pay police bills?

Presidential candidates' records on voluntarily paying police bills vary.

Throughout the 2020 campaign, some presidential candidates, including Democratic Sens. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker, promptly paid cities' public safety bills from their campaign rallies. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a Republican, made it a point of pride that his 2016 presidential campaign paid every police invoice it received.

President Barack Obama and 2016 Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton paid some police bills, but not others. The 2016 presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont disputed numerous cities' public safety bills — only to begin quietly paying them months later as he prepared for his 2020 presidential run.

What will Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, do?

Federal spending records indicate his campaign, which generally conducted small political events prior to the COVID-19 outbreak in March, paid several municipal governments and school districts for "event security."

Still, Biden's campaign has consistently refused this year to answer questions about whether it will honor cities' police bills should the former vice president resume staging rallies before Election Day on November 3. The Biden campaign, which has ceased most in-person campaign events since the COVID-19 pandemic struck the US, did not respond to Insider's questions.

Federal election law requires all candidates to disclose their campaign debts on their periodic reports to the Federal Election Commission — even debts the candidates dispute. But Trump's campaign does not publicly list any of the police bills it's received from city governments.

In October, Democratic Rep. Bill Pascrell of New Jersey in October filed a complaint with the FEC that accused the Trump campaign of violating this debt disclosure requirement.

But the FEC has yet to address the complaint because it hasn't had enough commissioners to investigate such matters, or enforce federal campaign finance law in general, for most of the past year.

Boeing is using a 'scorched earth' strategy to keep evidence away from lawyers representing 737 Max crash victims,

lawyer says

Sinéad Baker

The crash scene of the Ethiopian Airlines 737 Max plane in March 2019. Associated Press
THERE WERE CANADIANS ON THAT FLIGHT

Boeing is pushing back on requests for evidence in cases brought by relatives of victims in the 737 Max crashes, according to a lawyer representing some of them.

Attorney Steve Marks accused Boeing of using a "scorched earth approach," trying to limit the provision of documents and witnesses that he said are relevant to the cases.

189 people were killed in the first 737 Max crash, off Indonesia in October 2018, and 157 people were in the second one in Ethiopia in March 2019.

Marks — who was involved in cases from both crashes — said that Boeing is being far less cooperative over the Ethiopia crash.
Boeing defended its approach, saying that it has produced almost 2 million pages of documents and is committed to working with the families.

Boeing is using a "scorched earth" strategy to try and keep evidence away from lawyers representing the victims of one of the fatal 737 Max crashes, one of the lawyers said.

Steven Marks, an aviation lawyer with Miami-based firm Podhurst Orseck, said Boeing has hardened its approach when dealing with the legal fallout of the second of the two crashes, which happened in Ethiopia in 2019.

Boeing is currently seeking to settle cases brought by the families of those killed when the Ethiopian Airlines plane crashed into the ground with 157 people on board.

It has largely settled cases from the earlier October 2018 crash of a 737 Max operated by Indonesia's Lion Air, where 189 people died.

Families of the victims of Lion Air flight JT 610, visit an operations centre to look for personal items of their relatives in October 2018. Ulet Ifansasti/Getty Images

The two crashes led to the planes being grounded around the world, and the greatest crisis in Boeing's history.

They led to a string of lawsuits from grieving families, as well as Boeing shareholders. Airlines which had bought the planes sought compensation, others canceled future orders, and Boeing faced intense scrutiny from Congress. Its former CEO was fired in the fallout.

In an interview with Business Insider, Marks said that Boeing's approach differed starkly between the Lion Air and Ethiopian cases. In the latter, he said, the company's lawyers were refusing to provide evidence that the victims' representatives want to see.

Undelivered Boeing 737 Max planes parked near Boeing Field, Washington, in September 2019. They were not delivered yet due to the plane's grounding. David Ryder/Getty Images

He called Boeing's approach in the Ethiopian Airlines "the complete polar opposite of what happened in Lion Air."

In the Ethiopian Airlines cases, he said, "Boeing took a very different scorched earth approach."

In a statement to Business Insider, Boeing defended its approach and argued that it had taken its obligations to provide evidence "seriously." A spokesman said the company had turned over close to 2 million pages so far.

Marks represents seven of the families in that crash, none of which have been settled. He has settled 37 cases from the Lion Air crash.

The coffins of a woman and three children who died in the Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max crash, photographed in October 2019. SULEIMAN MBATIAH/AFP via Getty Images

Marks is also one of the leaders of the committee of lawyers from different legal firms that all represent the families of those killed, which was formed by the judge overseeing the cases.

Marks described the provision of evidence as "the main point of pressure" that these lawyers have had with Boeing.

He said he and others had been "fighting with Boeing for more than a year" on what kind of information is relevant to the cases, including documents and witnesses.

"It's been a real dog fight every step of the way. There's almost never an agreement. It's the complete polar opposite of what happened in Lion Air."

Ethiopian Federal policemen stand at the scene of the Ethiopian Airlines Boeing 737 Max crash near the town of Bishoftu, Ethiopia, in March 2019. Reuters

"They're trying very hard to limit to production of documents, limit witnesses that are available for deposition and everything has been a dogfight."

He said: "Every little step of the way has been a fight and it's been difficult to get anything."

Marks said that his team of lawyers asked for documents that Boeing had produced in litigation with shareholders, including minutes of directors' meetings and "email exchanges as to how much the board knew."

One of the key questions surrounding the crash legal cases is the extent to which Boeing was aware of issues with the Ethiopian plane before it flew.

But he said Boeing objected to supplying the minutes and emails on the grounds that they are not relevant. The lawyers are putting forward a motion that could compel Boeing to provide them.

Family members of those who died aboard Ethiopian Airlines plane sit with pictures of their loved ones during a Senate Commerce Committee hearing in October 2019. Win McNamee/Getty Images

Marks said that Boeing had also refused to make documents available that it had given to Congress to help lawmakers' investigations of crashes.

In a statement to Business Insider, Boeing spokesman Bradley Akuburio said that Boeing is taking providing evidence "seriously" and that it will continue working with the lawyers.

"We extend our deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of all those onboard Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302," he said.

"We are committed to continuing to engage with the families in an effort to resolve their claims. We take our discovery obligations seriously and have produced close to 2 million pages of documents to date."

"We will continue working with the counsel for the families and the court to address their outstanding requests for information."

Boeing has made updates to the system that malfunctioned both crashes, and the plane is expected to soon be approved to fly again.

Boeing also previously committed to making the plane one of the safest ever to fly when it is back in the sky.

Marks said that his team of lawyers recently filed a motion that would compel Boeing to provide some more evidence, like getting access to employees' personal devices and laptops: "The issue is now before the court."

Marks argued that he and other lawyers already "have enough discovery to establish Boeing's liability."

"But the families and the flying public deserve to know the full extent of the malfeasance which Boeing is continuing to hide."

Unpainted Boeing 737 Max aircraft parked at Renton Municipal Airport in Renton in July 2019. Reuters

Marks noted that Boeing is using different legal firms for each crash, which could lead to the varying approaches.

He also noted that the Lion Air cases were legally "a little easier to deal with" than the Ethiopian Airlines cases because the victims were mostly of one nationality, unlike in the Ethiopian crash.

He said the cases were also more straightforward US law applied since the crash took place over international water. The Ethiopian crash was on land.

The Ethiopian Airlines cases are currently before Judge Jorge L Alonso of the Federal Northern District Court of Illinois.

Rescuers work at the scene of an Ethiopian Airlines plane crash in March 2019. Associated Press

How much evidence Boeing would have to provide has been a central question in how the cases would play out since they were first brought against Boeing.

Boeing had earlier explored moving the Lion Air cases from the US to Indonesia, where the crash occurred.

It's a move that is common in aviation litigation but one that both experts and lawyers for victims told Business Insider would have ended in Boeing being required to provide much less evidence, and likely leave families with much smaller settlements.

Read more about the Boeing 737 Max crashes:
The Boeing 737 Max crashes have revived decades-old fears about what happens when airplane computers become more powerful than pilots

The Boeing 737 Max is likely just weeks away from being cleared to fly again. Here are the few steps remaining before the FAA lifts its 2019 grounding order.

A blistering House report slams Boeing and the FAA over 'serious flaws and missteps' that led to two deadly 737 Max crashes

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment