French Interior Minister Retailleau charts new hardline immigration strategy

EXPLAINER

The newly formed French government plans to adopt another, tougher immigration bill next year, and leading the charge is hardline Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau. It is the latest in a series of moves under French President Emmanuel Macron to tackle immigration, a favourite talking point of the far right.


Issued on: 26/10/2024 - 
By: Sonya CIESNIK

France's Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau visits an Immigration Detention Centre east of Paris, on October 11, 2024. © Julien de Rosa, AFP

Shortly after Bruno Retailleau took over as interior minister he made it clear he had a “law-and-order” agenda, vowing among other things to crack down on illegal immigration.

“The French people want more order order in the streets, order at the borders,” he said upon taking up his new role in late September after more than two months of political impasse in France.

Retailleau has denounced “mass immigration”, suggesting that France could be overwhelmed by migratory flows in a rhetorical shift that echoes the long-time refrains of the far right.

While immigration has seen a steady rise in France over the past decade, it pales in comparison to rates seen in other European nations. Some 5.8 million immigrants lived in France at the start of 2013, equal to 8.8 percent of the population, according to official statistics.

By 2023, France was home to 7 million immigrants, or some 10.7 percent of the population. In comparison, immigrants made up around 19 percent of the population in Germany, 16 percent in Spain and 14 percent in the United Kingdom in 2022, according to official and OECD statistics.

06:56

france int min © agences

The issue was catapulted to the forefront once again in the wake of the grisly rape and murder of a 19-year-old student known only as Philippine in September. The main suspect was a young Moroccan man previously convicted of rape who had been ordered to leave France.

After having served a five-year sentence, he was released in September on the condition that he regularly report to the authorities after Moroccan authorities failed to deliver the travel documents necessary to expel him.

In response to this “abominable crime”, Retailleau called for laws making it easier to deport foreigners convicted of criminal acts.

"It is up to us, as public leaders, to refuse to accept the inevitable and to develop our legal arsenal to protect the French," he said.

"If we have to change the rules, let's change them."

The French parliament had already adopted a tougher immigration law that was backed by the far right back in December, prompting the left to once again accuse Macron’s government of caving to extremes. France’s highest court later struck down parts of the law, deeming them unconstitutional.

Other EU governments are also cracking down on migration, with Germany tightening its borders for a six-month period starting in September and Italy controversially transferring migrants intercepted in the Mediterranean to processing centres in Albania.

Retailleau’s proposals range from restricting access to medical care to expanding the use of detention centres while also pressuring origin and transit countries to accept more migrants.
Re-writing the rule book

A 2012 plan that came into effect under former interior minister Manuel Valls allowed for up to 30,000 undocumented migrants to be legalised every year. Individuals can request asylum based on family links (a process known as chain migration) or based on their status as a “temporary worker”.

Retailleau plans to replace the law with a new, more restrictive one. Being granted legal status would be attributed more slowly, he said, and “based on the reality of a job and the possibility of integration”.

Retailleau has also made clear he wants to extend the maximum period that immigrants can remain in detention centres from the current 90-day limit. He has proposed increasing this period to 210 days for the perpetrators of sexual crimes “in line with the rules for terrorists”, he says.
Past the point of no return

The Philippine case has sparked a new round of debate over expulsions, notably when a prior criminal conviction is at question. The “obligation to leave French territory” (OQTF) is a judicial order for a foreign national to leave France either immediately or within 30 days. Today only 7 percent of OQTFs are executed, mainly because origin countries are often reluctant.

Retailleau has floated offering visas and development aid in exchange, or threatening to impose tariffs, to pressure countries to take back their nationals. The interior minister also wants transit countries to be more willing to take back people who cannot be returned to their country of origin, for example Afghanistan.

He promised to nominate a special envoy in the weeks to come who would oversee concluding migration agreements with transit countries.
Access denied

Among one of the most controversial measures proposed by Retailleau is reducing State Medical Aid (AME), which provides free healthcare to undocumented migrants.

“France is one of the European countries that gives the most advantages and I don’t want France to be a singular case, or for it to be the most attractive country in Europe for a certain number of social services, or access to healthcare,” he said.

A similar proposal last year prompted medical workers to vow to disobey the new rules, pledging to “continue to treat undocumented patients free of charge and based on their needs, in accordance with the Hippocratic Oath”.

The proposal has led to divisions even within the government.

“There is no way we can touch State Medical Aid. AME also insures the health of the French by limiting certain contagions,” warned Health Minister Geneviève Darrieussecq.

Seven charged for cyberbullying campaign against Paris Olympics' artistic director


French authorities say they have charged seven individuals for allegedly harassing Thomas Jolly, the artistic director for the 2024 Summer Olympics. The suspects must appear at a hearing in March 2025, where they will face charges of making death threats, aggravated insults, and cyberbullying, with potential prison sentences and fines.


Issued on: 25/10/2024 - 
By: NEWS WIRES

Thomas Jolly poses on July 19, 2024 in Paris. © Tom Nouvian, AP

French authorities said Friday they have charged seven individuals in connection with a cyberbullying campaign targeting Thomas Jolly, the artistic director behind the Paris Olympics’ opening and closing ceremonies.

Jolly became the target of an online hate campaign filled with homophobic and antisemitic abuse following his acclaimed but controversial queer-inclusive opening show in July. He filed a complaint on July 31.

The Paris prosecutor’s office, which launched an investigation, reported Friday that the arrests mark only the “first wave” of detentions, with more expected as authorities expand their probe.

The seven defendants, who are 22 to 79 years old, face charges of making death threats, aggravated insults, and cyberbullying, with potential prison sentences and significant fines.

Jolly’s opening ceremony was a daring blend of French tradition and LGBTQ+ expression, featuring drag performers, flamboyant runway sequences, and a scene that some have drawn parallels with Da Vinci's “The Last Supper.”

Watch Paris 2024 Olympics: Decoding the opening ceremony

The event, held along the Seine and featuring stars like Celine Dion and Lady Gaga, was meant to be a celebration of freedom and inclusivity. But it became a flashpoint for criticism, with far-right politicians and religious figures condemning some scenes as provocative.

Hungary’s ambassador to the Vatican criticized what became known as the “Last Supper” scene for allegedly mocking Christian iconography. Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump also weighed in, calling the scene “a disgrace."

Jolly afterward drew attention away from “The Last Supper” references, saying that hadn’t been his intention.

Among the performers, Hugo Bardin, known as the drag queen Paloma, expressed pride in the event’s bold message of inclusion and called it “a really important moment for the French people and the representation of France around the world.”

Le Filip, the winner of Drag Race France, also expressed shock at the backlash against Jolly's event, describing the ceremony as “a crowning moment” for the LGBTQ+ community.

The prosecutor’s office Friday emphasized the seriousness of the charges, noting that the case reflects a troubling pattern of cyberbullying and hate speech directed at prominent figures.

It said the suspects sought to “intimidate and silence expressions of inclusivity” and diversity in a highly public and symbolic event.

The arrests are seen as a first step in France’s fight against cyberbullying, which authorities note has become increasingly sophisticated. In Jolly’s case, prosecutors pointed to the disturbing “pack behavior” of attackers acting independently to escalate the harassment, a pattern seen in other online hate campaigns.

The seven accused are set to appear in court on March 5.

PSG refuse order to pay Mbappé €55 million in unpaid salary

The French football league ordered the Paris club to pay its former star the sum, which Mbappé says he is owed for final three months of his salary and various bonuses. PSG say Mbappé previously agreed to waive the payment.

Issued on: 25/10/2024 - 
By: NEWS WIRES

Kylian Mbappe reacts during a UEFA Champions League football match at the Parc des Princes stadium in Paris on May 7, 2024. © Odd Andersen, AFP

Paris Saint-Germain will refuse to comply with an order by the league to pay Kylian Mbappé 55 million euros ($59.5 million) in back pay, a source close to the case told AFP on Friday.

A French league committee has attempted to mediate in the increasingly bitter row between Real Madrid forward Mbappe and the club he left this year.

Mbappe has demanded the figure which he says is made up of the final three months of his salary plus several bonuses.

But Qatar-owned PSG argue that the 25-year-old had agreed to waive the sum in August 2023.

AFP has contacted Mbappe's spokespeople for comment.

(AFP)

Striking workers cut power across all of French territory Guadeloupe

Electricity on the entire French territory of Guadeloupe was cut off on Friday after workers on strike turned off the motors in the main EDF power station. Police stepped in to secure the site and the local prefect said that some workers would be requisitioned to bring normal electricity service back to the archipelago.

Issued on: 25/10/2024 - 

A photo taken on April 10, 2024 shows a street in a neighborhood of the city of Point-a-Pitre on the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe. © Cedrick-Isham Calvados, AFP


France's overseas territory of Guadeloupe was entirely without power on Friday, with authorities blaming striking workers for the outage.

Workers at the territory's thermal power station in the industrial zone of Jarry entered the command room "and caused an emergency shutdown of all the engines", the Guadeloupe prefecture said in a statement.

Restored electricity supply for the 230,000 affected households was expected at 3.00 PM (1900 GMT) at best.

Police intervened and the archipelago's prefect had "requisitioned" staff to bring the station back up to speed, it said.

The French government has mobilised "services and operators" to bring power back as soon as possible, said Energy Minister Olga Givernet.

A labour dispute over pay has pitted the energy branch of the hard-left CGT union against the EDF utility since September 15.

Power outages have affected daily life in Jarry, the economic powerhouse of the French territory of close to 380,000 inhabitants, over the past week.

Some businesses have closed, an AFP correpondent said, and emergency services suffered.

Leon Prosper Jimmy, an ambulance driver in Pointe-a-Pitre, said that taking charge of patients in apartment buildings had become difficult because of non-functioning lifts.

"We have to carry them," he said, saying he often called the fire brigade or other services for backup. "We manage as best we can," said the 41-year old.

The CHUG hospital centre said it had activated backup power generators which would keep "critical operations" going for 72 hours.

In a supermarket near the capital, inhabitants were stacking up with bottled water as the territory's water supply began to be affected.

Many store shelves were empty as supplies were disrupted.

Guadeloupe looks after its own electricity needs, having no interconnection agreements with other countries.

Its power production is 70 percent thermal, stemming from burning fuel oil or wood pellets.

(AFP)

AOC slams New York's 'whole damn Republican machine' amid local scandals

Matt Laslo
October 26, 2024

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (Shutterstock)

This article was paid for by Raw Story subscribers.

CARMEL, NY — All politics feel nationalized this election cycle, but many embattled congressional incumbents here in New York are bucking that trend by running on local scandals. These days, in the Empire State, the foibles are bountiful and bipartisan.

Why remind voters of Washington gridlock and dysfunction when you can highlight, seemingly, walking dead Democrats, like recently indicted New York CIty Mayor Eric Adams? Why remind voters their rent’s too high when the specter of former Rep. George Santos (R-NY), now a convicted felon, still haunts the local GOP?

With seven seats in the U.S. House of Representatives at play here in New York — and Democrats needing to flip only four seats from red to blue nationally to recapture the House majority — these scandal-soaked dynamics have members of both parties pointing fingers as they try to turn to change the subject into victory on Nov. 5th.

“Republicans in the state are on their back heel for sure, especially with some of the scandals we've seen pour out,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) told Raw Story. “It's not just even what we've seen from any one individual member, as has kind of come out in the reporting, it's the whole damn thing. It's the whole damn Republican machine in New York state.”

While there was no national red wave in 2022, in New York, Republicans wrested four seats from Democrats in those midterms. But Democrats feel the tides turning and have already recaptured one of those seats.

Scandals engulf three New York Republicans

In February, now-Rep. Tom Suozzi (D-NY) won the special election to replace George Santos — who has since pleaded guilty to wire fraud and identity theft — after he made history by becoming only the sixth member to be expelled from the House of Representatives in its 235 year history.

That northern Long Island district — which includes parts of Nassau County — is expected to remain in Democrat’s hands after the dust settles in November. But political watchers say it’s still in play after Santos’ inglorious downfall, which astounds Democrats like Ocasio-Cortez.

“Nassau County is full of this kind of self-dealing, and there's a reason why George Santos got there, and it wasn't just because of him. It's because the local, the New York Republican Party generates tons of George Santoses,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Just south on Long Island, in southern Nassau Count,y another one of those midterm GOP pickups is in trouble.

Just six weeks out from the election, the New York Times dropped a bombshell when it reported former detective Rep. Anthony D’Esposito (R-NY) put his mistress and fiancée’s daughter on the taxpayer-funded payroll of his district office.

Now locked in a heated, multi-million dollar 2022 rematch with former Hempstead Town Supervisor Laura Gillen, D’Esposito has attempted to flip the script.

"The latest political tabloid garbage being peddled by The New York Times is nothing more than a slimy, partisan 'hit piece' designed to distract Long Islanders from Democrats’ failing record on border security, the economy, and foreign policy," D'Esposito released in a statement after the story dropped. “My personal life has never interfered with my ability to deliver results for New York’s 4th district, and I have upheld the highest ethical standards of personal conduct.”

Then there’s blackface in the Hudson Valley. Earlier this month, the New York Times released photos it obtained of Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY) donning blackface — which he claims was paying homage to Michael Jackson — at a Halloween party in his college days.


While Lawler apologized and wishes the story would go away, it reared its head, once again, in his debate against former Rep. Mondaire Jones (D-NY) last week.

“I recognized why people were upset,” Lawler told voters. “Would I do this today? Absolutely not.”

That’s not good enough for Jones, a former Congressional Black Caucus member, who told the audience the episode was “deeply offensive” and “part of a pattern” from Lawler.


“Democrats control everything”

That episode may be why Lawler’s eager to discuss New York City scandals and disarray in Albany these days.

“In New York, Democrats control everything. Democrats own the mess in New York state,” Lawler told Raw Story after addressing a stadium full of high schoolers recently. “So most voters in the suburbs here are going, ‘Yeah, I don't want this.’”


Those ‘suburbs’ are the sprawling, all-important burbs of New York City, where Mayor Eric Adams has also been making history. In September, he was indicted in a federal corruption investigation — “We were persecuted, Eric,” former President Donald Trump told him recently. “I was persecuted, and so are you, Eric” — making him the first-ever sitting NYC mayor to be federally indicted.

“He's just a disaster. I mean, he is viewed so negatively because of crime, the migrant crisis and now, obviously, his own corruption scandal,” Lawler said.

Then there’s Gov. Kathy Hochul. In 2021, the Democrat was crowned governor when Andrew Cuomo was forced to resign after 11 women credibly accused him of sexual harassment.


While Hochul made history in 2022 — the first woman elected to lead the Empire State in its 400-year history — it was her first time atop the ballot and was New York’s tightest gubernatorial contest in 30 years. Many blame her for four of the state’s blue congressional districts flipping Republican red that year.

That’s why these days, New York Republicans like Lawler don’t skip a beat when berating the state’s beleaguered Democratic machine.

“But Hochul is even worse,” Lawler said. “So when you look at what's going on in the state and in my district — I mean, this is a district Biden won by 10 points — Trump's basically tied.”


Even some Democrats, like Lawler’s opponent, Mondaire Jones, agree the party's being weighed down by Albany.

“I want my Democratic governor of New York to be a political animal — I want them to maximize Democratic power,” Jones told The New Yorker last month. “I want my Democratic governor of New York to be Nancy Pelosi, O.K.? And not some, like, little b— who is afraid to stick his or her neck out.”

“By the way, I’m not talking about any specific person,” Jones told the magazine.

Few in the state bought Jones’ attempt to catch himself, and he quickly apologized to Hochul. Still, the comment has hung over the governor and his own campaign, like when Lawler highlighted it while discussing women’s rights in their debate.

“You’re the only one who called the first female governor the little “B-word” that rhymes with witch,” Lawler reminded viewers.

The nationalization of local politics

While members of both parties in these crucial battleground districts try to distance themselves from the national debate by focusing on local corruption and ineptitude, they find it nearly impossible to avoid.

Even though New York is considered safe territory for Democrats at the presidential level, this year’s must-see-tv of a White House contest has become inescapable for down-ballot candidates as their political opponents drop millions of dollars reminding voters who are atop their respective tickets.

“That's politics. When you have somebody debating the issue where they're gonna say, you know, their side of the story. It doesn't have to be true. You know hearsay,” New York tavern owner Al Roberts told Raw Story. “They might have heard that from somebody else, and it just spreads.”

That has Roberts and others expecting a huge wave of voters this year, in spite of all the local scandals marring members of both parties.

“It's gonna be a huge turnout. I think it's the presidential race that's going to drive people out. I think it’s strong on both sides,” Roberts said. “More people will come out because of that.”

The presidential contest is attention-grabbing, but New York politicians are trying to keep their contests local. Because local New York issues — which now include federal indictments and felonious imposters alike — could decide who controls the House of Representatives next year.

“The majority runs through a very small number of seats, and, you know, flipping the New York seats alone could potentially flip the entire House,” Ocasio-Cortez told Raw Story. “So it's enormously consequential.”

Matt Laslo has covered Congress since 2006, bringing Raw Story readers the personalities behind the politics and policy straight from Capitol Hill. Based in Washington, D.C., Matt has been a long-time contributor to NPR, WIRED, VICE News, The Daily Beast, Rolling Stone, and Playboy. More about Matt Laslo.

'Concerning': NASA head thinks Elon Musk should be investigated after explosive report

Erik De La Garza
October 25, 2024 

Elon Musk participates in a SpaceX Demonstration Mission 2 Launch Briefing in 2020. (NASA/Bill Ingalls)


Calling reports of ongoing conversations between tech billionaire Elon Musk and Russian President Vladimir Putin “concerning,” the head of NASA on Thursday called for an investigation into the bombshell accounts "if the story is true."

The comments came a day after the Wall Street Journal reported that Musk, a vocal Trump supporter, and Putin had been in regular communication for at least two years. The report also revealed that the world's richest man and the Russian leader discussed issues ranging from “personal topics, business and geopolitical tensions.”

“I don’t know that that story is true. I think it should be investigated,” NASA Administrator Bill Nelson said Friday at a Semafor conference. “If the story is true that there have been multiple conversations between Elon Musk and the president of Russia then I think that would be concerning, particularly for NASA, for the Department of Defense, for some of the intelligence agencies.”

White House officials have said they were aware of the Journal story, but a spokesman for the National Security Council, John Kirby, said he was “not in a position to corroborate the veracity of those reports, and we would refer you to Mr. Musk to speak to his private communications,” according to the Journal

The publication notes that Musk’s security clearance gives him access to certain classified information and that he has “deep business ties with U.S. military and intelligence agencies. SpaceX, which operates the Starlink service, works on classified government programs and is also the primary rocket launcher for the Pentagon and NASA.”

“Knowledge of Musk’s Kremlin contacts appears to be a closely held secret in government. Several White House officials said they weren’t aware of them. The topic is highly sensitive, given Musk’s increasing involvement in the Trump campaign and the approaching U.S. presidential election, less than two weeks away,” the Journal reported.

Musk has enthusiastically endorsed Trump and dumped millions of dollars into GOP-aligned campaigns.

Kremlin denies WSJ report that Elon Musk holds regular talks with Putin

Billionaire Elon Musk, the world's richest man and an avid supporter of Donald Trump, was the object of new controversy on Friday after the Wall Street Journal published a report that he is in regular contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Kremlin's spokesman rejected the report, saying "it's all untrue, absolutely false information".


Issued on: 25/10/2024 - 
By: NEWS WIRES

Elon Musk speaks at Life Center Church in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania on October 19, 2024. © Sean Simmers, AP


Elon Musk, the world's richest man and an avid supporter of Donald Trump, was plunged into new controversy on Friday after a report that he is in regular contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The Wall Street Journal story, which has been denied by the Kremlin, comes days after the US Justice Department sent a letter to Musk's America PAC warning that its $1 million giveaways to registered voters may violate federal law.

Musk, 53, the chief executive of SpaceX and Tesla and the owner of X, formerly Twitter, has thrown his millions, time and considerable influence into sending the former Republican president back to the White House since endorsing him in July.

Musk has reportedly donated $118 million to his personal pro-Trump political action committee, an organization which collects funds for elections.

He's also appeared on stage with Trump at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania and hosted a series of town halls on his own in the battleground state seen as critical in the November election.

Musk, who supported Barack Obama but has become increasingly conservative in recent years, peppers his 202 million followers on X daily with messages championing Trump and denigrating his opponent, Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.

Many of the X posts by the South African-born billionaire decry the number of migrants crossing into the United States from Mexico or echo discredited conspiracy theories.

Democratic vice presidential candidate Tim Walz has accused Musk of spending millions to help Trump "buy an election" and jokingly suggested that the billionaire -- not J.D. Vance -- is Trump's real running mate.

Trump has pledged if he wins the election to tap Musk to head a "government efficiency commission" tasked with slashing bureaucracy and waste.

Musk already holds a top secret clearance because of SpaceX, which launches rockets for NASA and the Pentagon, and the Wall Street Journal said his contacts with Putin have raised "potential national security concerns" among some members of the Biden administration although there is no evidence of any "possible security breaches."

NASA administrator Bill Nelson said Friday the report "should be investigated."

"If the story is true that there have been multiple conversations between Elon Musk and the president of Russia, then I think that would be concerning, particularly for NASA and the Department of Defense and for some of the intelligence agencies," Nelson said at an event hosted by online news outlet Semafor.
'One contact'

The Journal said the Musk-Putin conversations touched on "personal topics, business and geopolitical tensions," although at one point the Russian leader asked the US billionaire to avoid activating his Starlink satellite internet service over Taiwan as a favor to Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov rejected the report, saying "it's all untrue, absolutely false information."

Putin had one contact with Musk before 2022, Peskov said, when they spoke on the phone.

"It was a fact-finding conversation," he said. "They talked about more visionary technology, about technology for the future."

SpaceX's Starlink has been a vital communications tool for Ukrainian forces battling Russian troops and Musk "categorically" denied earlier this year that any terminals had been sold to Russia.

"My companies have probably done more to undermine Russia than anything," Musk said during a streamed event on X.

SpaceX has taken away two-thirds of Russia's space launch business and "Starlink has overwhelmingly helped Ukraine," he said.

While Musk's alleged conversations with Putin are drawing scrutiny, so are his daily $1 million giveaways to registered voters -- from the Justice Department and election watchdog groups.

Federal law prohibits paying people to register to vote and the department's public integrity unit reportedly warned Musk's America PAC in a letter this week that the sweepstakes may be illegal.

Adav Noti, executive director of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, denounced the giveaways as "egregious."

"It is extremely problematic that the world's richest man can throw his money around in an attempt to directly influence the outcome of this election," Noti said. "This is not how our democracy should work."

(AFP)

Maybe Americans 'don't understand what fascism is': Political expert baffled by CNN poll

Daniel Hampton
October 25, 2024

A political expert warned on CNN on Friday that America could become an "oligarchy" with "crony capitalism" — and said what's at stake in the election is, "Do we want an American [Vladimir] Putin?" (Screengrab via CNN)

A political expert warned on CNN on Friday that America could become an "oligarchy" with "crony capitalism" — and said what's at stake in the election is, "Do we want an American [Vladimir] Putin?"

Jonathan Alter, author of "American Reckoning," joined Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room" on Friday to discuss a new poll showing nearly half of Americans think former President Donald Trump is a "fascist" — with the race essentially tied in the polls.

Alter called the report "tough" and said it's why the "stakes are so high."

"Do we want to become an oligarchy full of crony capitalism? 'Do we want an American Putin?' is really what's on offer in this election," he said.

Trump is manipulated by the Russian president, and Alter warned that explosive new reporting that Elon Musk has also been having regular talks with Putin is "seriously disturbing."

He said he's "glad" fascism is being debated — and it should've been debated "quite a while ago."

"Maybe some people don't understand what fascism is," he said. "But all they have to do is read a little history about a guy named Adolf Hitler and they might get a better sense of what we have in store if we elect this entirely unfit man as president of the United States."

Alter noted that fascists and dictators have a "thirst for power" and try to accumulate as much power as possible. He also pointed out that Trump plans to use his power to go after political enemies.

"That is a violation of what we stand for in this country," he said. "Part of this election is about who we are as a people. What do we represent? Do we represent the ideals of the founders, of democracy and freedom? Or do we want to go the strongman route?"

Alter warned dictators will telegraph what they plan to do — "Mein Kampf is the most truthful thing that Adolf Hitler ever wrote," he said. Trump is doing the same.

"I'm hoping — I'm praying, actually, that people wake up and smell the coffee and understand the stakes. Concentrate less on the horse race in the media and concentrate on what's at stake for our country."

Watch the clip below or at this link.

Electing 'fascist' Trump is 'worst possible outcome': Swing state Muslims endorse Harris

Carl Gibson, AlterNet
October 25, 2024 

Kamala Harris (Photo: Gage Skidmore/Flick)

A coalition of Islamic leaders in a must-win battleground state is now urging their respective communities to get behind Vice President Kamala Harris in November.

The New Republic reported that more than 100 progressive Democratic Palestinian, Arab and Muslim leaders in Arizona have now co-signed a letter in support of Harris' candidacy. The letter, which was posted to X by Arizona-based progressive activist Kai Newkirk, acknowledges that while many Muslim voters are understandably upset about how President Joe Biden's administration has handled Israel's ongoing assault on Gaza, affected communities cannot afford to have former President Donald Trump return to power.

"In our view, it is crystal clear that allowing the fascist Donald Trump to become President again would be the worst possible outcome for the Palestinian people," the letter read. "A Trump win would be an extreme danger to Muslims in our country, all immigrants, and the American pro-Palestine movement."

In the wake of the October 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel — which killed approximately 1,200 people — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched an unprecedented attack on the Gaza Strip, which has been controlled by Hamas since 2006. The United Nations (UN) estimates that more than 42,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since Netanyahu's retaliation campaign began last fall with 97,000 more wounded. And the UN's Permanent Observer of the State of Palestine has said that Israel's military campaign, which it has referred to as a "genocide," has killed 16,000 children while orphaning 17,000 more with the help of American-made weaponry.

"Israel continues receiving an unlimited supply of weaponry from its allies, despite the growing calls for an arms embargo, including by the General Assembly in its resolution ES-10/24 of 18 September 2024 in follow-up to the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice of 19 July 2024, in which the Court determined, inter alia, that Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, is unlawful and must end as rapidly as possible," the Permanent Observer to the State of Palestine wrote earlier this month.

The letter from Arizona's progressive Muslim leaders acknowledged that the 2024 election is an "awful situation where only flawed choices are available," and that they "respect those who feel they simply can’t vote for a member of the administration that sent the bombs that may have killed their loved ones." Still, the signatories insisted that "voting for Kamala Harris is the best option for the Palestinian cause and all of our communities."

Signatories cited multiple examples to make the case that Trump would be far worse for Palestinians. In May, for example, the former president told a roomful of wealthy donors that he would "set that movement back by 25 or 30 years," in reference to the pro-Palestine protests sweeping college campuses. He's also admitted to having personal calls with Netanyahu, even though the Logan Act prohibits private citizens from talking to foreign leaders without prior approval from the sitting administration.

READ MORE: 'Treason': Trump may have committed a 'massive crime' in call to foreign leader

The Washington Post further reported that Trump has vowed to deport foreign-born students who participate in anti-Israel demonstrations on college campuses.

"One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country," he told donors in May. "You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave."

Additionally, Trump has sought support for his 2024 campaign from Israeli billionaire Miriam Adelson, who is the widow of the late GOP megadonor Sheldon Adelson. Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported earlier this year that Adelson insisted that Trump promise that if elected, he would allow Israel to fully annex the Palestinian-controlled West Bank in exchange for a $100 million infusion of funds to a pro-Trump super PAC.


Click here to read the New Republic's report in full, and click here to read the full letter from Arizona's progressive Muslim leaders.

WASHINGTON POST ENDORSES TRUMP

'Smash his toy': Commentator says Bezos 'capitulated' to fascism and urges WaPo boycott

Kathleen Culliton
October 25, 2024 

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. (AFP/File / Jim WATSON)

Political commentator Elie Mystal on Friday called on Washington Post readers to cancel their subscriptions after news broke that the editorial board would not endorse a presidential candidate in the upcoming election.

Mystal expressed outrage after the Post announced it would return to a 1960 policy of not issuing endorsements — and legendary former editor Marty Baron argued the reason was fear of former President Donald Trump.

"I'm getting sick of people saying 'cancelling subscriptions hurts the writers not the owners,'" Mystal wrote on X. "If we're being real ... NOTHING *hurts* billionaires. Being a billionaire literally buys you out of consequences."

Sir William Lewis, the knighted British executive who serves as publisher and CEO of the Post, argued in an editorial Friday the decision was not based on the characters of either Trump or Vice President Kamala Harris, but on American values.

"We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility," wrote Lewis.

"We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects."

Baron disagreed.

"This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty," he replied. "[Trump] will see this as an invitation to further intimidate owner [Bezos] (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."

Amid this debate, Mystal called on readers to hit Bezos where he argued it might hurt him the most — despite the impact it might have on the paper's journalists.

"Cancelling a subscription to a publication is pretty much the only way to register DISPLEASURE with the publication's offerings," he wrote.

"The writers cannot be expected to resign en masse (newsflash, writers are generally poorly paid and having any kind of actually paying journalism job is something most people need to hold onto). But if the WaPo loses stature and reach, some will find better places to work."

Mystal made his callout plain in a concluding X post:

"So, yes, you should cancel your WaPo subscription based on the owner's pathetic, punk decision to capitulate to fascism," he wrote. "If Bezos is going to use the WaPo as his personal plaything, the least we can do is smash his toy."

A NON-ENDORSEMENT IS AN ENDORSEMENT

Washington Post becomes second major US newspaper not to endorse a presidential candidate


America's influential Washington Post newspaper announced Friday – less than two weeks before Election Day – that it would not endorse a candidate for US president in the tightly contested race. The Post's move comes days after the Los Angeles Times announced a similar decision, triggering the resignation of its editorial page editor.

Issued on: 25/10/2024 - 
By: NEWS WIRES

People walk by the One Franklin Square Building, home of The Washington Post newspaper, downtown Washington, DC, February 21, 2019. © Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP

Less than two weeks before Election Day, The Washington Post said Friday it would not endorse a candidate for president in this year's tightly contested race and would avoid doing so in the future — a decision immediately condemned by a former executive editor and one that the current publisher insisted was “consistent with the values the Post has always stood for.”

In an article posted on the front of its website, the Post — reporting on its own inner workings — also quoted anonymous sources within the publication as saying that an endorsement of Kamala Harris over Donald Trump had been written but not published. Those sources told the Post reporters that the company's owner, billionaire Jeff Bezos, made the decision.

The publisher of the Post, Will Lewis, wrote in a column that the decision was actually a return to a tradition the paper had years ago of not endorsing candidates. He said it reflected the paper's faith in “our readers' ability to make up their own minds.”

“We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable,” Lewis wrote. “We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.”

There was no immediate reaction from either campaign.

Watch moreIn Pennsylvania, local officials are fighting the spread of misinformation about the voting process

Lewis cited the Post's history in writing about the decision. According to him, the Post only started regularly endorsing candidates for president when it backed Jimmy Carter in 1976.

The Post said the decision had “roiled" many on the opinion staff, which operates independently from the Post's newsroom staff — what is known commonly in the industry as a “church-state separation" between those who report the news and those who write opinion.

The Post's move comes the same week that the Los Angeles Times announced a similar decision, which triggered the resignations of its editorial page editor and two other members of the editorial board. In that instance, the Times' owner, Patrick Soon-Shiong, insisted he had not censored the editorial board, which had planned to endorse Harris.

“As an owner, I’m on the editorial board and I shared with our editors that maybe this year we have a column, a page, two pages, if we want, of all the pros and all the cons and let the readers decide,” Soon-Shiong said in an interview Thursday with Spectrum News. He said he feared endorsing a candidate would add to the country’s division.

Many American newspapers have been dropping editorial endorsements in recent years. That is in large part because at a time readership has been dwindling, they don’t want to give remaining subscribers and news consumers a reason to get mad and cancel their subscriptions.

Martin Baron, the Post's executive editor for 2012 to 2021, immediately condemned the decision on X, saying it empowers Trump to further intimidate Bezos and others. "This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty," he wrote. “Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.”

The decisions come at a fraught time for American media, newspapers in particular. Local news is drying up in many places. And after being upended by the economics of the internet and drastically evolving reader habits, the top “legacy media” — including the Post, The New York Times and others — have been struggling to keep up with a changing landscape.

Nowhere is this more true, perhaps, than in the political arena. The candidates this year have been rejecting some mainstream interviews in favor of podcasts and other niche programming, and many news organizations are vigorously ramping up to combat misinformation in near-real time on Election Day, Nov. 5.

Trump, who for years called the media covering him “the enemy of the people,” has returned to such rhetoric in recent days. His vitriol in particular is aimed at CBS, whose broadcast license he has threatened to revoke.

On Thursday, at a rally in Arizona, he returned to the language explicitly once more.

“They’re the enemy of the people. They are,” Trump said to a jeering crowd. “I’ve been asked not to say that. I don’t want to say it. And some day they’re not going to be the enemy of the people, I hope.”

For the Post, the decision is certain to generate debate beyond the news cycle. It seemed to acknowledge this with a note from the paper's letters and community editor at the top of the comments section on the publisher’s column: "I know many of you will have strong feelings about this note from Mr. Lewis."

Indeed, by midafternoon, the column had elicited more than 7,000 comments, many critical. Said one, riffing off the Post's slogan, “Democracy Dies in Darkness": “Time to change your slogan to `Democracy dies in broad daylight.'”

(AP)

'Plain old cowardice': WaPo publisher facing wave of outrage over endorsement snub

Tom Boggioni

RAW STORY
October 25, 2024 

William Lewis, Washington Post’s CEO and publisher. Photo: Andy Rain/Shutterstock

A Friday decision by the top management of the Washington Post to not make a 2024 presidential endorsement resulted in a flood of complaints, criticism and outrage on the media company's website after controversial publisher William Lewis issued an official statement.

On the heels of the LA Times following a similar path and not endorsing either Vice President Kamala Harris or ex-president Donald Trump at the direction of billionaire owner Patrick Soon-Shiong who overruled his editorial board which led to a flood of resignations, Lewis announced a parallel move.

In his letter to readers, Lewis, who has been under fire multiple times for spiking unflattering stories about himself, wrote, "The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election," and reached back to a 1960 decision to not endorse presidential candidates as a justification.

He later wrote, "We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility. That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way," before adding, "We also see it as a statement in support of our readers’ ability to make up their own minds on this, the most consequential of American decisions — whom to vote for as the next president."

Lewis' announcement also drew a harsh rebuke from legendary former WaPo editor Marty Baron.

Subscribers to the paper that adopted "Democracy dies in darkness" as its slogan immediately flooded the comment section condemning the decision, announcing they would be canceling their subscriptions and calling out Lewis and Amazon billionaire owner Jeff Bezos for "cowardice" in the face of Donald Trump's possible wrath.

In one cutting comment, a reader wrote, "Democracy dies in kowtowing to fascists."

Wyatt Merrit wrote, "Just cancelled my subscription, like so many others. Unfortunately my renewal date is in September; I wish I could get that money back. The extra 11 months of access is certainly worthless. There is no reason to read a media source which has discredited and debased itself to this extent. Surely there’s a critical mass of journalists with integrity out there, and I hope they find a way to create a responsible news outlet soon. "

Another reader wrote, "This is plain old cowardice," while another added, "Despicable, and this gaslighting as to the 'reason' is an absolute insult. At least tell the truth. As it is, another cancelled subscription."

"I have been a subscriber to your paper for over 20 years. I am shocked by your cowardly move to not endorse Kamala Harris. You are no longer a credible news organization. I guess Democracy truly does die in the darkness. You should be embarrassed by your disgraceful management of what used to be an outstanding media outlet," law877 contributed and then announced, "I just officially canceled my subscription, and you will never get my business again."

On X, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) wrote, "The first step towards fascism is when the free press cowers in fear."

Under the "DemocracyDiesInDarkness" hashtag, former Barack Obama adviser Tommy Vietor suggested, "The WaPo endorsing Harris would move exactly zero voters her way, but still lol at this cowardly shit from the crew that brought us 'democracy dies in darkness.'"

Former editor Baron wrote, "This is cowardice, with democracy as its casualty. [Trump] will see this as an invitation to further intimidate owner [Bezos] (and others). Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."

Democratic strategist Simon Rosenberg warned, "What’s happening at the WaPo and LATimes is not about the editorials. It’s a warning to editors and writers to not do anything 'foolish' in the closing days. It’s a clear call for self-censorship."

‘Reprehensible’: Big names screenshot their unsubscriptions from Washington Post

Erik De La Garza
October 25, 2024 

The Washington Post (AFP)

A drumbeat of disapproval over the Washington Post’s refusal to endorse a presidential candidate took over social media Friday with numerous users posting screenshots of their canceled subscriptions to protest the publication’s decision.

“I have subscribed to the Washington Post since 1993, but I just canceled my subscription today because of the paper’s abdication of duty to endorse a candidate in the most consequential election of my lifetime. Good riddance,” author and former Clinton White House aide Keith Boykin wrote on X.

“The Washington Post editorial board is a disgrace,” actor Rob Reiner declared to his 2.3 million X followers. “For the newspaper that exposed the Pentagon Papers and the Watergate scandal to not take a position and endorse a candidate in the most consequential Presidential election in 165 years is reprehensible.”

Author Stephen King also took to social media Friday to tell his 7 million followers that he had canceled his WaPo subscription after five years, while conservative lawyer George Conway simply posted a screenshot of an email confirming that his subscription had also been canceled.

“We’re sorry to see you go,” the email read.

But not all were in favor of the move, with some like former Tommy Vietor, a former Obama staffer, pointing out potential unintended consequences by the expression of displeasure.

“I understand the anger at Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post for its endorsement decision, but cancelling your subscription means less revenue to pay all the Post's reporters. Do what you gotta do but Bezos won't feel it in his pocket while some great journalists might,” he wrote.

WaPo reporter Carol Leonning also urged her followers against canceling their subscriptions, warning: “It will only hurt the independent newsgathering my colleagues and I strive to do for you every day.”

But the controversy still continued to flare up online.

“Hey @washingtonpost, you can't make a decision, so I had to... #Unsubscribe,” musician Rich Feinstein posted to X.

“If you need a script for your letter to the editor after you unsubscribe to the Washington Post, you can use mine if you want,” X user Nicole James offered her followers above a screenshot of a letter that, in part, says the WaPo’s decision “further buoyed each and every one of Donald Trump’s lies.”

'Terrible mistake': WaPo columnists fire back at paper's leadership over nixed endorsement

Daniel Hampton
October 25, 2024

More than a dozen Washington Post columnists signed on to a scathing response to their own leadership's decision not to endorse a presidential candidate, calling the choice a "terrible mistake" and an "abandonment" of its "fundamental editorial convictions." (Photo credit: Dennis Diatel / Shutterstock)

More than a dozen Washington Post columnists signed on to a scathing response to their own leadership's decision not to endorse a presidential candidate, calling the choice a "terrible mistake" and an "abandonment" of its "fundamental editorial convictions."

For the first time in more than three decades, the Post, which is owned by billionaire Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, said it would not endorse a candidate in the presidential race. The move led to widespread backlash — and even a flurry of subscription cancelations from big names — as critics pointed to the newspaper's slogan: "Democracy dies in darkness."

The Washington Post reported, citing four people briefed on the decision, that Bezos made the decision.

Fourteen columnists signed onto a letter posted to the Post's website that called the decision "a terrible mistake."

"It represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love," the columnists wrote. "This is a moment for the institution to be making clear its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law and international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them — the precise points The Post made in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020."

The columnists said there is "no contradiction" between the paper's role as an independent newspaper and its political endorsements, "both as a matter of guidance to readers and as a statement of core beliefs."

"That has never been more true than in the current campaign," they said. "An independent newspaper might someday choose to back away from making presidential endorsements. But this isn’t the right moment, when one candidate is advocating positions that directly threaten freedom of the press and the values of the Constitution."

Signing onto the column: Karen Attiah, Perry Bacon Jr., Matt Bai, E.J. Dionne Jr., Lee Hockstader, David Ignatius, Heather Long, Ruth Marcus, Dana Milbank, Alexandra Petri, Catherine Rampell, Eugene Robinson, Jennifer Rubin and Karen Tumulty.

Jeff Bezos just taught American businessmen a 'lesson': Bulwark editor

Erik De La Garza
October 25, 2024 

Amazon chief executive and new Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos, pictured on Sept. 6, 2013. [AFP]

Billionaire CEO Jeff Bezos’ decision to scrap the Washington Post's 36-year tradition of endorsing a presidential candidate is a lesson for business leaders around the world seeing him “getting in line” with the former president, a columnist wrote Friday

The editorial referred to it as “signaling his submission” to Donald Trump,

While critics immediately pounced on the non-endorsement by the Washington Post, which is owned by Bezos and reported that he made the decision, The Bulwark's Jonathan Last wrote that the development is more a story about business than it is about journalism.

“It’s a situation analogous to what we saw in Russia in the early 2000s: We are witnessing the surrender of the American business community to Donald Trump,” Last wrote.

He noted that following Trump’s 2016 victory, Bezos found himself on the receiving end of Trump’s threats due to the paper’s aggressive reporting of the former president’s administration.

“And that’s what this story is about: It’s about the most consequential American entrepreneur of his generation signaling his submission to Trump — and the message that sends to every other corporation and business leader in the country. In the world,” according to the editorial.

Last argued that the situation is reminiscent of Vladimir Putin’s rise in Russia after jailing the country's wealthiest man – Mikhail Khodorkovsky – who “had the kind of wealth and power that made him untouchable” and floated the idea of one day running for office.

“And so the oligarchs fell in line and ceased to be a source of concern to Putin. Instead of alternative power centers, they became vassals. Which is exactly what Jeff Bezos has just taught Jamie Dimon and every other important American businessman,” the editorial said.

It added: “Just the fact that he has an even-money chance to become president was threat enough” for Bezos “to secure his compliance” to Trump.

Last concluded by warning readers that the guardrails are already collapsing “before a single state has been called.”

TRUMP RENEWS THE DREAM AT MSG

1934 -1939

Nazis in Madison Square Garden

The Third Reich on Eighth Avenue

by Alex Q. Arbuckle



May 17, 1934

A mass meeting of members of the Friends of New Germany.

Image: Bettmann/Getty Images


Shortly after Adolf Hitler’s appointment as Chancellor of Germany in January 1933, the Nazis consolidated control over the country. Looking to cultivate power beyond the borders of Germany, Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess charged German-American immigrant Heinz Spanknobel with forming a strong Nazi organization in the United States.

Combining two small extant groups, Spanknobel formed Friends of New Germany in July 1933. Counting both German nationals and Americans of German descent among its membership, the Friends loudly advocated for the Nazi cause, storming the offices of New York’s largest German-language paper, countering Jewish boycotts of German businesses and holding swastika-strewn rallies in black-and-white uniforms.


Spanknobel was deported in October 1933 for failing to register as a foreign agent, and two years later Hess called for the leaders of Friends to return to Germany and for all German citizens to leave the organization.



May 17, 1934



Image: Bettmann/Getty Images



May 17, 1934



Image: Hank Olen/NY Daily News Archive via Getty Images



May 18, 1934



Image: Larry Froeber/NY Daily News Archive via Getty Images



May 18, 1934



Image: Anthony Potter Collection/Getty Images



Oct. 6, 1935

"German Day" celebrations commemorate the arrival of the first German settlers on U.S. territory.

Image: Heinrich Hoffmann/ullstein bild via Getty Images



Oct. 5, 1936

Boys in uniform salute during a pro-Nazi rally.

Image: Anthony Potter Collection/Getty Images


After the dissolution of the Friends, a successive group, officially unconnected to the German government, was formed — the German American Bund. The Bund continued the campaigns of anti-Semitism, anti-Communism and violent rhetoric, but wrapped them in patriotic, pro-American symbolism, holding up portraits of George Washington as “the first Fascist.”


The Bund reached the height of its prominence on February 20, 1939, when some 20,000 members held a “Pro-America Rally” in Madison Square Garden.

Inside, jackbooted Nazi supporters filled the aisles while speakers ranted against President “Frank D. Rosenfeld” and his “Jew Deal.”

Outside, some 80,000 anti-Nazi demonstrators furiously protested the event, clashing with police and attempting to gain entry to the arena and shut it down.

The Bund was finally dissolved at the end of 1941 with the United States’ declaration of war against Nazi Germany.

Feb. 20, 1939

Twenty-thousand attend a meeting of the German American Bund, which included banners such as "Stop Jewish Domination of Christian Americans."

Image: FPG/Archive Photos/Getty Images



Feb. 20, 1939

The principal speakers arrive to open the German American Bund "Americanization" rally.

Image: Bettmann/Getty Images



Feb. 20, 1939

Fritz Kuhn, leader of the German American Bund, addresses the Nazi rally as protesters clash with police outside.

Image: Bettmann/Getty Images



Feb. 20, 1939

Supporters salute the banner of the German American Bund.

Image: Bettmann/Getty Images



Feb. 20, 1939



Image: Larry Froeber/NY Daily News Archive via Getty Images



Feb. 20, 1939

A Nazi color guard stands before a massive portrait of George Washington.

Bettmann/Getty Images


Curation:

Wolfgang Wild


Text:

Alex Q. Arbuckle