Search This Blog

Showing posts with label NLRB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NLRB. Show all posts

Saturday, February 5, 2022

RSN: Garrison Keillor | In Georgia, Taking Shelter From the Storm

 

 

Reader Supported News
05 February 22

February Is Short, a Quick Start Will Be Essential

February is an uphill struggle right out of the gate. We have to find a way to accomplish in 28 days what normally takes us 30 or 31 days. Urgency matters!

The next few days will set the tone for the entire month. 500,000 people vill visit RSN this month. If “500” donate we’ll be fine.

You, not someone else.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

 

If you would prefer to send a check:
Reader Supported News
PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation



 

Reader Supported News
04 February 22

Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News

 

Radio host and writer Garrison Keillor. (photo: MPR)
Garrison Keillor | In Georgia, Taking Shelter From the Storm
Garrison Keillor, Garrison Keillor's Website
Keillor writes: "I am now officially done with looking down on the South."

I am now officially done with looking down on the South, which I did for years as a good Northerner but I’ve now spent three days in the town of Carrollton, Georgia (pop. 26,738), enjoying the cheesy grits and pulled pork, collard greens and cornbread, and the waiters who when I say, “Thank you,” say, “My pleasure.” And when I pay the bill, they say, “Preciate y’all.” You don’t hear that up north. I holed up here to avoid getting stuck in the Atlanta airport during the blizzard in New York and Carrollton turns out to be a hotbed of amiability, where if you make eye contact people say, “Good morning” and maybe “How you all doing?” though there’s only one of me but all of me is doing just fine, thank you very much, and this easily leads into small talk.

I got up from breakfast at the hotel and passed a table with two couples eating breakfast and one man said, “How you all doing?” and I said, “Never better,” and I commented on the fact I’d seen a number of extremely tall young men coming into the hotel and he told me there was a college basketball tournament over at the University of Western Georgia a few blocks away. We discussed what it must be like to be six-eight or six-ten and on the court you need to be aggressive and rangy, but walking around indoors you feel constrained and you keep bumping your head and the bed is too short. One of the women said, “You see one of those giants trying to fold himself up and get into a car, it makes me grateful to be short and fat.” Up north, I all wouldn’t have been asked that question, and this small friendly exchange wouldn’t happen.

Carrollton is a comfortable place with a handsome old downtown around a square and stately churches and an arts center and the cooking at the Brown Dog café reminded me of my mother’s, but it was the ease of striking up conversation that touched my heart. I come from Minnesota, the land of stoical Scandinavians, men of few words, and if you go to a Lutheran church, the hand-shaking is highly selective and a visitor may leave unshaken and unspoken to.

Sunday I walked into the Brown Dog and passed a table and a man reached out and took my arm and stood up and said, “I got to tell you that your pants are unzipped.” I fixed the problem and thanked him and he noted my accent and one thing led to another and his wife invited me to join them for lunch so I did. He was my age, she was younger, she grew up in Chicago, and he grew up in Georgia.

I ordered ham and grits and collard greens. “Ham is a good choice,” he said. “They can’t hurt ham, no matter what they do.” She was an English teacher and he was retired, formerly in the construction business. He was the son of a sharecropper: “Worst way to earn a living that there ever was.” He picked cotton as a child. “I had to be someplace so they figured I might as well be in the field.” They sent him to the house to see what time it was and he couldn’t read a clock but he told them where the hands were pointing. The family ate squirrel and rabbit with grits and gravy. His best friend was a boy so black they called him Blue. “We’d go to a café for a Coke and he had to go in the back door if they’d let him in at all. I knew it wasn’t right.” He was ten when his family moved to California, his dad got a regular job, and they got a house with indoor plumbing.

I’d known him for all of forty-five minutes and I got a whole story, which goes to show that in the right town, which Carrollton is, it may be worthwhile to let your pants be unzipped. “You can’t erase history,” he said, “but we are all brothers under the skin,” and I certainly felt brotherly toward him and the others I had met, even the seven-footers. And I am done looking down on the South. We have our history up north too and it’s not all shiny. And I do believe in the beauty of small talk. Thanks for reading this, I do appreciate you, all of you.

READ MORE


Body Camera Video Shows Minneapolis Officers Shooting Black Man During No-Knock Warrant. Attorneys Say He Wasn't the TargetMinneapolis police killed 22-year-old Amir Locke, who was sleeping on the couch, in a no-knock raid. (photo: Minneapolis PD)

Body Camera Video Shows Minneapolis Officers Shooting Black Man During No-Knock Warrant. Attorneys Say He Wasn't the Target
Omar Jimenez, Brad Parks and Ray Sanchez, CNN
Excerpt: "In the early morning hours Wednesday, Minneapolis police officers gently placed a key in a city apartment door before bursting through the doorway yelling 'Police! Search warrant!,' according to body camera footage released by city officials Thursday night."

ALSO SEE: Minnesota Mulls Criminal Charges Against SWAT Officer
Who Killed Amir Locke

In the early morning hours Wednesday, Minneapolis police officers gently placed a key in a city apartment door before bursting through the doorway yelling "Police! Search warrant!," according to body camera footage released by city officials Thursday night.

In the seconds that followed, a Black man apparently asleep and shown to be holding a gun upon awakening was shot and killed. Police say he was not named in any search warrants before the entry, and attorneys for the man's family say he was in legal possession of his firearm.

Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman announced Friday that he asked Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison to join in his review of the shooting. Ellison's office has agreed, according to Freeman's office.

"We will be working with the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to ensure a thorough and complete evaluation," Freeman said in a statement. "Thereafter we will decide together, based on the law and evidence, whether criminal charges should be brought."

The fatal shooting brings further scrutiny to the use of no-knock warrants and shines a spotlight on a police department that has faced criticism before.

In May 2020, Minneapolis Police Department officers were involved in the killing of George Floyd before later being fired and charged in his death. The subsequent national outrage over the killings of Floyd and Breonna Taylor -- who was shot by police in Kentucky as they performed a no-knock warrant entry -- led to sustained protests and calls for policing reform.

That summer, Minneapolis announced a new policy on no-knock entries, aimed at limiting the "likelihood of bad outcomes." Officials said that officers would be required to announce their presence and purpose before entering, except in certain circumstances like hostage situations.

Taylor's death also prompted other cities across the country to move to ban or rein in no-knock, forcible-entry raids.

Family attorneys and the city have identified the man who was shot Wednesday and later died as Amir Locke. He was not named in the original search warrant, police said.

Jeff Storms, one of the Locke family attorneys, echoed those findings to CNN.

"To the best of my knowledge, he was not named in any of the search warrants," he said. "He was not even a target."

Storms added, "The City of Minneapolis told the public that it was limiting the use of no-knock warrants to 'limit the likelihood of bad outcomes.' Less than two years later, Amir Locke and his family needlessly suffered the worst possible outcome. Our City has to do better."

Minneapolis officers were executing the warrant tied to a homicide investigation in nearby St. Paul, according to Minneapolis police.

"At this point, it's unclear if or how he (Locke) is connected to St. Paul's investigation," said Interim Minneapolis Police Chief Amelia Huffman during a press conference late Thursday.

"These events unfold in seconds but the trauma is long-lasting. A young man lost his life, and his friends and family are in mourning," said Huffman, describing it as a sobering moment.

Body camera video shows shooting

After police entered the apartment, officers quickly identified a man inside, body camera footage shows.

"Hands! Hands! Hands!" one officer yells while others yell "Get on the fu**ing ground!" as they make their way toward the back of a couch where a man is seen wrapped in blankets at 6:48 a.m., according to the footage. One officer kicks the back of the couch, appearing to wake up the man, who looks up to see the officers all around him.

He begins to try and stand up, still wrapped in blankets, and is seen holding a gun. Three gunshots are then heard from officers.

A screenshot provided by the police department from the body camera video shows the weapon more clearly.

"The involved officer was just outside the frame in the direction the barrel is emerging from the blanket," said Huffman.

Based on the short video and image provided, CNN is not able to independently confirm where the gun was pointing, but has requested body camera video from the other responding officers.

The video was released at multiple speeds -- one version in real time, the other two edited by the city to be slowed down. In total, 14 seconds elapse in real time.

"As they got close, you can see, along with an individual emerging from under the blanket, the barrel of a gun, which comes out from the blanket," said Huffman. "The officer had to make a split-second decision to assess the circumstances and to determine whether he felt like there was an articulable threat, that the threat was of imminent harm, great bodily harm or death, and that he needed to take action right then to protect himself and his partners."

The initial release from authorities said "officers encountered a male who was armed with a handgun pointed in the direction of officers."

Officer Mark Hanneman, as identified by the City of Minneapolis, then shot at and hit Locke. The police department says aid was immediately provided as the officers carried him down to the lobby to meet paramedics.

Locke was taken to the Hennepin County Medical Center where he died, according to the police.

Hanneman has been placed on administrative leave, as is policy, pending the ongoing investigation, a spokesperson for the City of Minneapolis said. CNN has attempted to reach Hanneman and has reached out to the Minneapolis Police Federation for comment but has not gotten a response.

"The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension was notified immediately and is heading up the criminal investigation," Huffman said Wednesday.

A spokesperson for the St. Paul Police Department confirmed to CNN the homicide investigation that was the source of the original warrant is still active.

A gun was also recovered from the apartment, police said.

Benjamin Crump, another of the Locke family attorneys, said in a statement, "Locke, who has several family members in law enforcement and no past criminal history, legally possessed a firearm at the time of his death.

"Like the case of Breonna Taylor, the tragic killing of Amir Locke shows a pattern of no-knock warrants having deadly consequences for Black Americans," Crump said.

Taylor, a 26-year-old ER medical technician, was shot and killed by Louisville officers in her home during a botched police raid in March 2020.

A grand jury failed to indict any officers in her death. One officer, Brett Hankison, was indicted for blindly firing into a neighbor's apartment during the shooting. He has pleaded not guilty and trial proceedings are ongoing.

A virtual press conference with the Locke family and their attorneys is planned for Friday morning.


READ MORE


How a Court Ruling in Alabama Could Boost Black Political Power Throughout the SouthJudges gave the Alabama Legislature until Feb. 11 to draw a new map that "includes two districts in which Black voters comprise a voting-age majority." (photo: Shutterstock)

How a Court Ruling in Alabama Could Boost Black Political Power Throughout the South
Nathaniel Rakich, FiveThirtyEight
Rakich writes: "On January 24, Alabama became the second state to have its new congressional map struck down in court."

On Jan. 24, Alabama became the second state (after Ohio) to have its new congressional map struck down in court. But while Ohio’s map was thrown out by the state Supreme Court for violating the state constitution, Alabama’s was overturned by three federal judges who determined the map short-changed Black voters of representation in Congress. That’s a significant difference because it will require the Supreme Court to weigh in, potentially reshaping federal law in the process. As a result, the ruling could reverberate far beyond Alabama. It could open the door for increased nonwhite representation in other states, too — if it holds up on appeal.

As a refresher, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that partisan gerrymandering was a political question that federal courts should not adjudicate. However, they can still hear cases relating to racial gerrymandering — i.e., whether a map discriminates against voters of a certain race. Alabama poses just such a question. Back in November 2021, Alabama’s Republican-controlled legislature passed a new congressional map that created six majority-white districts and just one majority-Black district. Civil-rights advocates sued, arguing that Black voters in the state were entitled to a second district under the Voting Rights Act, the landmark law that prohibits racial discrimination in voting.

Under Section 2 of the VRA, it’s illegal to deny members of a racial minority equal opportunity to elect representatives of their choice. This has been widely interpreted to mean that, when possible, states must draw congressional districts where nonwhite voters are the dominant voting bloc, so as to reasonably ensure they can elect their preferred candidate.

And as maps proposed by the plaintiffs demonstrated, it is readily possible to draw two predominantly Black congressional districts in Alabama. For example, in the plaintiffs’ illustrative plan A, the 2nd District’s voting-age population (VAP) is 50.0 percent Black, and the 7th District’s VAP is 50.3 percent Black.

While the VRA explicitly states that racial minorities are not automatically entitled to a number of seats proportional to their share of the population, Black people constitute more than 25 percent of Alabama’s VAP, much larger than the share of congressional districts they predominate in (14 percent). And many Black votes would have been wasted under the overturned map, with the majority-white 1st, 2nd and 3rd districts all having at least a 24 percent Black VAP.

As a result, the judges gave the Alabama Legislature until Feb. 11 to draw a new map that “include[s] two districts in which Black voters either comprise a voting-age majority or something quite close to it.” But by then, it’s possible that the judges’ decision will have been overturned anyway. Alabama has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Court, arguing that the map should be reinstated because a new one would disrupt preparations for the state’s upcoming primary and improperly prioritize race in redistricting.

The high court has yet to signal what it will do with the appeal. But the possibilities run a wide gamut: The case could lead to a very favorable outcome for liberals, a very favorable outcome for conservatives or anything in between.

On one end of the spectrum, the Supreme Court could let the lower court’s ruling stand, which would have the immediate impact of adding a new Black-opportunity congressional seat in Alabama. (In practice, this would also add one Democrat and subtract one Republican from Alabama’s congressional delegation.) It would also have ripple effects throughout the Deep South. If this ruling stands, it could inspire courts to create additional Black-opportunity districts in Louisiana and maybe South Carolina as well.

Currently, only one of Louisiana’s six congressional districts is predominantly Black, despite the state having one of the country’s largest Black population shares: more than 30 percent of the VAP. With the state’s redistricting process just getting underway this week, Democrats have already proposed multiple congressional maps that would add a majority-Black seat along the Mississippi River north of Baton Rouge. For example, under Senate Bill 4, the 2nd District would have a VAP that’s 51.5 percent Black and the 5th District would have a VAP that’s 50.5 percent Black.

Because Republicans control the Louisiana Legislature (and these maps would eliminate a Republican member of Congress), they may not be inclined to pass any of these maps. But Gov. John Bel Edwards is a Democrat, and he’s already come out in favor of a second predominantly Black district. Republicans also lack the numbers in the state House to override a potential veto (although they’d only need to convince two independents or conservative Democrats to side with them to do so). That means Louisiana redistricting will probably be decided by the local courts, which would likely follow the Supreme Court’s lead and greenlight a second Black-opportunity district — if that’s what the high court decides to do in Alabama.

Meanwhile, South Carolina has already enacted a new congressional map with only one predominantly Black district out of seven, despite the fact that the Palmetto State is almost one-quarter Black by VAP. However, simple geography may make it harder to convince a court to order a redraw here. While it’s possible to draw two congressional districts for South Carolina with VAPs that are around 40 percent Black, it’s difficult to draw two majority-Black districts without some serious contortions.

According to Supreme Court precedent, plaintiffs in a VRA redistricting case must show that the minority group is “sufficiently large and geographically compact to constitute a majority in a single-member district.” (Confusingly, a district doesn’t have to be majority-minority in order to comply with the VRA, but it has to be possible to draw one in order for a non-majority-minority district to violate it.) South Carolina may not satisfy this test in a court’s eyes — though, in the event of a favorable outcome at the Supreme Court, liberals may very well try their luck just in case.

With or without South Carolina, though, the Supreme Court letting the Alabama ruling stand would be a significant boon to Black representation in Congress — and from a region that has historically suppressed Black voters to boot. It could potentially lead to two, maybe three, new Black members of Congress from the Deep South. As a result, as many as 18 percent of U.S. representatives from states that constituted the former Confederacy could be Black — the most in U.S. history.

Again, though, that’s the best-case scenario for minority representation. Given the conservative ideology of the Supreme Court, the justices could instead overturn the lower court’s ruling and restore Alabama’s 6-1 map. It’s even possible that, in so doing, they will actually weaken the VRA’s protections of minority districts. Under Chief Justice John Roberts, the court has already neutered Section 5 of the act and watered down other protections under Section 2; in an extreme scenario, it could reinterpret Section 2 in a way that makes it even easier for states to draw discriminatory maps.

However, there is still a lot of uncertainty about what the court will do, and as we said earlier, the decision could fall anywhere in between the two extremes we’ve laid out in this article. We’ll just have to wait and see; a decision could come down any day now.


READ MORE


Amazon Warehouse Workers in Alabama Vote for Second Time in Union EffortA retail union representative holds a sign by the Amazon warehouse in Bessemer, Alabama, during the first union election in March 2021. (photo: Elijah Nouvelage/Getty)

Amazon Warehouse Workers in Alabama Vote for Second Time in Union Effort
Alina Selyukh, NPR
Selyukh writes: "Workers at an Amazon warehouse in Alabama are set to vote for a second time on whether to unionize. A yes vote would be groundbreaking, creating the company's first unionized warehouse in the United States."

ALSO SEE: Amazon Chews Through the Average Worker in Eight Months.
They Need a Union.

Workers at an Amazon warehouse in Alabama are set to vote for a second time on whether to unionize. A yes vote would be groundbreaking, creating the company's first unionized warehouse in the United States.

Ballots will go out on Friday to more than 6,100 workers at the warehouse in Bessemer, outside Birmingham. They will vote by mail due to the pandemic, and the count is scheduled to start March 28.

The re-vote is a dramatic new chapter in one of the biggest union efforts at Amazon, which has grown into the country's second-largest private employer. It is the second attempt by Bessemer workers, who last spring decisively rejected unionization. They now get to try again after a federal ruling found Amazon unfairly influenced the first election.

"That loss is making us motivated to win even more," Bessemer worker Kristina Bell told reporters on a call organized by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, which vies to represent Amazon workers.

A few things have changed since last year's election.

Nationwide, the Great Resignation wave swept the economy, punctuated by high-profile strikes and labor campaigns. Among them, Starbucks workers unionized at two locations in New York, prompting union petitions from over 50 other stores across 19 states.

At Amazon, workers at two more warehouses in New York are petitioning for a union. Organizers at one of them have already gathered enough signatures to get a union vote. The push is led by a fledgling labor group of current and former employees, unaffiliated with any professional union.

At the Bessemer warehouse, high turnover means nearly half of the workers will be voting on unionization for the first time. Pro-union workers hope this means a new outcome after last year's landslide loss, in which 71% of voters opposed unionization. Hundreds of employees did not vote in the original election.

Union supporters at the Bessemer warehouse say they now have a much bigger organizing effort, wearing union T-shirts at work, knocking on doors, speaking out more at Amazon's mandatory "information sessions" about unions and staging counter-sessions.

Amazon has fought the union, arguing it isn't necessary.

The company now employs 1.1 million people in the U.S., most of them sorting, picking and packing in the company's vast warehouses. Amazon's minimum wage remains $15 an hour, but during last year's big hiring push, Amazon said its average starting wage topped $18 an hour. The company touts its health and education benefits.

"Our employees have always had the choice of whether or not to join a union, and our focus remains on working directly with our team to make Amazon a great place to work," Amazon spokesperson Barbara Agrait said in a statement.

Under mounting scrutiny for its worker policies, Amazon in December reached a settlement with the National Labor Relations Board aimed at making it easier for employees to organize. The deal required Amazon to notify hundreds of thousands of workers about their labor rights.

The company faces several charges of unfair labor practices, which the company rejects. Most recently, a pro-union worker in Bessemer has accused Amazon of surveilling him and giving him a warning over his organizing work. At the Staten Island warehouse, the NLRB itself has accused Amazon of illegally threatening, interrogating and surveilling workers.

The Bessemer union push has garnered nationwide attention.

At first, the labor organizing appeared to take Amazon by surprise. Historically, unions are a tough sell in Southern states such as Alabama.

Only months after Amazon's warehouse opened in Bessemer, some workers quietly reached out to the retail union. The pandemic was fast spreading and shoppers increasingly turned to Amazon. Workers described grueling productivity quotas and wanted more say in how employees at the company work, get disciplined or get fired.

The Bessemer union vote became Amazon's first since 2014, when a small group of Delaware workers voted against unionizing. At a time when the U.S. union membership is at historic lows, the high-profile campaign at a booming major employer drew big-name supporters: President Biden, Sen. Marco Rubio, actor Danny Glover and other politicians and celebrities.

But a unionization effort targeting thousands of workers in a workplace with rapid turnover run by one of the world's most valuable and staunchly anti-union corporations could take years and multiple elections, labor experts said.

"To win an NLRB election is kind of like a marathon in a minefield for union supporters," said John Logan, director of labor and employment studies at San Francisco State University. "It takes an incredible length of time."

One unexpected controversy has been about a mailbox.

When the NLRB ordered a re-do of the Bessemer union election, the officials ruled that Amazon's anti-union campaign tainted the results. One key reason had to do with a mailbox that the U.S. Postal Service installed in the warehouse parking lot at Amazon's request.

By doing that, Amazon "essentially highjacked" the election, the NLRB's order said. Though the company argued its intent was to make voting convenient, workers testified that a mailbox inside an Amazon tent next to their highly surveilled workplace made them feel that their employer was monitoring the vote.

The NLRB directed the USPS to move the mailbox to "a neutral location" on Amazon's property, and it got placed farther from the building in a different parking area. Last week, the union asked the NLRB to remove the mailbox altogether, arguing no Amazon property could be neutral.


READ MORE



The GOP Is Now Officially Pushing January 6 Conspiracy TheoriesRep. Liz Cheney, vice-chair of the select committee investigating the January 6th attack on the Capitol, and Rep. Adam Kinzinger. (photo: Tom Williams/Roll Call)

The GOP Is Now Officially Pushing January 6 Conspiracy Theories
Cameron Joseph, VICE
Joseph writes: "The Republican National Committee plans to formally declare that the House investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot amounts to 'persecution of ordinary citizens' on Friday."

The RNC is about to label the Jan. 6 investigation a “persecution of ordinary citizens” as it censures Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

The Republican National Committee plans to formally declare that the House investigation of the Jan. 6 Capitol riot amounts to “persecution of ordinary citizens” on Friday.

The RNC has a planned vote to censure Wyoming GOP Rep. Liz Cheney and Illinois GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, the two Republicans who bucked their party and joined the House Select Committee investigating the causes of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on Congress.

“Representatives Cheney and Kinzinger are participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse,” the resolution reads.

That can’t be much more explicit: The GOP’s official position is now that any investigation into how former President Donald Trump and his allies attempted to overturn the 2020 election, and the connection between that and the violent riot of Trump supporters who overran the Capitol and injured more than 140 policemen, is simply an attempt to “sabotage” Republicans’ chances in the midterm election. And anyone who supports those efforts will be punished.

The resolution comes just days after Trump declared that he would consider pardoning those convicted of crimes on Jan. 6 if he becomes president again.

It’s also telling who wrote the resolution: Citizens United President David Bossie—a top adviser to Trump who the former president initially put in charge of disputing his loss after the 2020 elections.

Bossie ended up stepping aside for a time because he got COVID, giving Rudy Giuliani and his crew free rein, but was reportedly still involved in the plot to try to overturn Trump’s election loss. He was at a Jan. 5 meeting at the Willard Hotel focused on “how to put pressure on more members of Congress to object to the Electoral College results,” as one attendee told the New York Times. Others at that meeting included Giuliani, Mike Lindell, and Michael Flynn.

The RNC also changed its rules this week to allow it to fund Cheney’s primary challenger, former RNC Committeewoman Harriett Hageman—ending a longstanding policy of supporting GOP incumbents. Bossie’s original resolution called for Cheney and Kinzinger to be kicked out of the GOP, but that was watered down to a censure resolution by an RNC subcommittee before it unanimously passed this resolution on Thursday evening. The full RNC membership is expected to approve the resolution on Friday.

This shouldn’t come as a shock: As VICE News previously reported, a large number of Republican state party chairs and RNC committee members have publicly supported Trump’s election lies and other even wilder conspiracy theories. The party apparatus has been mostly seized by pro-Trump activists, and this vote reflects that.

Cheney fired back at the resolution.

“The leaders of the Republican Party have made themselves willing hostages to a man who admits he tried to overturn a presidential election and suggests he would pardon Jan. 6 defendants, some of whom have been charged with seditious conspiracy,” Cheney said in a Thursday statement. “I’m a constitutional conservative and I do not recognize those in my party who have abandoned the Constitution to embrace Donald Trump. History will be their judge. I will never stop fighting for our constitutional republic. No matter what.”

Cheney has already lost her leadership position and is facing a tough primary challenge. Kinzinger opted to retire rather than face a steep uphill fight for reelection.

But this resolution shows that many in the GOP don’t think they’ve been punished enough. And it’s a strong signal of exactly how much control Trump and his allies have over the Republican Party.


READ MORE


Killing of ISIS Leader Shows That US Forever Wars Will Never EndA Special Operations raid killed Islamic State leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Quraishi in northern Syria. (photo: Getty)

Killing of ISIS Leader Shows That US Forever Wars Will Never End
Murtaza Hussain, The Intercept
Hussain writes: "Biden’s claim that the world has been made safer by the killing of yet another terrorist leader is hard to credit."

Biden’s claim that the world has been made safer by the killing of yet another terrorist leader is hard to credit.


In a national address delivered this morning, President Joe Biden performed what has now become a familiar ritual for U.S. politicians: announcing the death of a terrorist leader. The latest enemy figure whose death has been presented to Americans as a victory was the head of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Quraishi, who was reportedly killed alongside his family during a U.S. special forces raid in northern Syria last night. In brief remarks, Biden characterized the raid as a victory that had made the world more secure, and without cost to Americans.

“Last night at my direction, U.S. military forces in northwest Syria successfully undertook a counterterrorism operation to protect the American people and our Allies, and make the world a safer place,” Biden said in a statement early Thursday morning. “Thanks to the skill and bravery of our Armed Forces, we have taken off the battlefield Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi—the leader of ISIS. All Americans have returned safely from the operation.”

The raid on a home where al-Quraishi was staying killed a total of 13 people, including a number of women and children. Images on social media of mangled corpses immediately began circulating in the aftermath, broadcast from the scene by local journalists. The attack came after weeks of violence in northern Syria, where ISIS fighters staged an uprising against members of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces that killed hundreds. Initial claims by Biden and other U.S. officials have suggested that the civilians killed in the raid on al-Quraishi’s house died when the ISIS leader chose to detonate his own suicide vest rather than be captured by U.S. forces. Syrian journalists also shared images online of wreckage from a crashed U.S. helicopter, though U.S. officials have echoed Biden’s statement that no Americans were harmed in the operation.

Although al-Quraishi, alongside his family, does appear to be dead, Biden’s claim in his public address that the world has been made safer by the killing of yet another terrorist leader is hard to credit. Since the outset of the Global War on Terrorism over two decades ago, the periodic killings of commanders from groups like the Taliban, Al Qaeda, al-Shabab, and, most recently, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria have been touted as significant victories and even turning points in America’s so-called war on terror. Despite these repeated tactical victories, from which U.S. presidents have extracted much political capital over the years, the underlying wars themselves have continued and even worsened.

An article in the national security publication War on the Rocks last year highlighted the limits of killing terrorist leaders as a means of strategic victory. “Too often, leadership decapitation is viewed as a panacea, as policymakers tout the removal of high-value targets to suggest a ‘turning point’ that fails to materialize,” noted Colin Clarke, the director of policy and research at the Soufan Group, a security consulting firm. “It is correct to seek to decapitate terrorist organizations, but these are tactical actions, not strategic ones.”

Not much is known about al-Quraishi in comparison with his more notorious predecessor, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. An investigation last year by the national security publication New Lines Magazine drew upon Iraqi intelligence files and interviews with individuals who had previously been incarcerated with him to paint a picture of the man who had been quietly holding the reins of ISIS over the past several years. That investigation managed to get some context about his past from personal documentation and also a photo of him while incarcerated by U.S. forces in 2008 at Camp Bucca, a military prison in Iraq. But it is unclear how much power al-Quraishi actually wielded and how important he was to an organization that has been severely diminished by years of brutal fighting. There is little reason to assume that the killing of al-Quraishi will result in anything more than a tactical reorganization of the Islamic State, or even its splintering into other, new extremist groups amid the ongoing misery and chaos of the Syrian civil war. His death is also unlikely to mean an end to the U.S. “forever wars” in the region, which have switched to a permanent mode of militarized policing in which the U.S. reserves the right to carry out bombings and assassinations at will but does not refer to these actions as “war,” even when civilians are killed in the process.

After a long list of failures and defeats, the U.S. public has clearly tired of its conflicts in the Middle East. But despite rhetoric from American leaders about ending the forever wars, they look likely to continue under new definitions and with new tactics. In his remarks announcing the death of al-Quraishi, even Biden refrained from promising a forthcoming end to the conflicts or even a radically transformed security situation for Americans. Though al-Quraishi, a man whom most Americans would likely have been unable to name, is now dead, along with several civilians, the two-decade-long conflict that led to his emergence still continues ­— with no horizon in sight.

READ MORE


Satellites Find That Oil and Gas Companies Are Routinely Venting Huge Amounts of Methane Into the AirFlared natural gas is burned off at a natural gas plant. Methane, the main ingredient in natural gas, can leak from natural gas plants and pipelines. (photo: Spencer Platt/Getty)

Satellites Find That Oil and Gas Companies Are Routinely Venting Huge Amounts of Methane Into the Air
Dan Charles, NPR
Charles writes: "There's new evidence, collected from orbiting satellites, that oil and gas companies are routinely venting huge amounts of methane into the air."

There's new evidence, collected from orbiting satellites, that oil and gas companies are routinely venting huge amounts of methane into the air.

Methane is the main ingredient in natural gas, the fuel. It's also a powerful greenhouse gas, second only to carbon dioxide in its warming impact. And Thomas Lauvaux, a researcher with the Laboratory of Climate and Environmental Sciences in France, says there's been a persistent discrepancy between official estimates of methane emissions and field observations.

"For years, every time we had data [on methane emissions] — we were flying over an area, we were driving around — we always found more emissions than we were supposed to see," he says.

Researchers turned to satellites in an effort to get more clarity. The European Space Agency launched an instrument three years ago called the TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) that can measure the methane in any 12-square-mile block of the atmosphere, day by day.

Lauvaux says that TROPOMI detected methane releases that the official estimates did not foresee. "No one expects that pipelines are sometimes wide open, pouring gas into the atmosphere," he says.

Yet they were. Over the course of two years, during 2019 and 2020, the researchers counted more than 1,800 large bursts of methane, often releasing several tons of methane per hour. Lauvaux and his colleagues published their findings this week in the journal Science.

The researchers consulted with gas companies, trying to understand the source of these "ultra-emitting events." They found that some releases resulted from accidents. More often, though, they were deliberate. Gas companies simply vented gas from pipelines or other equipment before carrying out repairs or maintenance operations.

Lauvaux says these releases could be avoided. There's equipment that allows gas to be removed and captured before repairs. "It can totally be done," he says. "It takes time, for sure, resources and staff. But it's doable. Absolutely."

The countries where bursts of methane happened most frequently included the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan, Russia, the United States, Iran, Kazakhstan and Algeria. Lauvaux says they found relatively few such releases in some other countries with big gas industries, such as Saudi Arabia.

According to the researchers, the large releases of methane that they detected accounted for 8-12% of global methane emissions from oil and gas infrastructure during that time.

Steven Hamburg, chief scientist for the Environmental Defense Fund, which has focused on the problem of methane emissions, says these massive releases are dramatic. But it's also important to remember the "ordinary" leaks that make up the other 90% of emissions from oil and gas facilities. "They really matter," he says.

EDF is planning to launch its own methane-detecting satellite in about a year, which will take much sharper pictures, showing smaller leaks. Other organizations are developing their own methane detectors.

That new monitoring network will transform the conversation about methane emissions, Hamburg says. Historically, no one could tell where methane was coming from, "and that's part of the reason we haven't taken, globally, the action that we should. It was just out of sight, out of mind," Hamburg says. "Well, it no longer will be. It will be totally visible."

He thinks that will translate into more pressure on oil and gas companies to fix those leaks.


READ MORE

 

Contribute to RSN

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation

PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611







Friday, January 28, 2022

RSN: Nick Turse | Another US-Trained Soldier Stages a Coup in West Africa

 

 

Reader Supported News
28 January 22

Live on the homepage now!
Reader Supported News

321 DONORS KEEPING RSN AFLOAT: 321 donors are what is keeping RSN alive this month. 321 donors, out of nearly half a million visitors, have stepped up and made a contribution. That’s it, that’s what’s keeping the process going. Who will join them now?
Marc Ash • Founder, Reader Supported News

Sure, I'll make a donation!

 

Demonstrators gathering in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, to show support to the military hold a picture of Lt. Col. Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba, Jan. 25, 2022. (photo: Olympia de Maismont/Getty)
Nick Turse | Another US-Trained Soldier Stages a Coup in West Africa
Nick Turse, The Intercept
Turse writes: "The leader of a coup in Burkina Faso is the latest in a line of U.S.-trained soldiers who overturned civilian leaders."

The leader of a coup in Burkina Faso is the latest in a line of U.S.-trained soldiers who overturned civilian leaders.


Earlier this week, the military seized power in Burkina Faso, ousting the country’s democratically elected president, Roch Marc Christian Kaboré.

The coup was announced on state television Monday by a young officer who said the military had suspended the constitution and dissolved the government. Beside him sat a camouflage-clad man whom he introduced as Burkina Faso’s new leader: Lt. Col. Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba, the commander of one of the country’s three military regions.

Damiba is a highly trained soldier, thanks in no small part to the U.S. military, which has a long record of training soldiers in Africa who go on to stage coups. Damiba, it turns out, participated in at least a half-dozen U.S. training exercises, according to U.S. Africa Command, or AFRICOM.

In 2010 and 2020, he participated in an annual special operations training program known as the Flintlock exercise. In 2013, Damiba was accepted into an Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance course, which is a State Department-funded peacekeeping training program. In 2013 and 2014, Damiba attended the U.S.-sponsored Military Intelligence Basic Officer Course-Africa. And in 2018 and 2019, he participated in engagements with a U.S. Defense Department Civil Military Support Element in Burkina Faso.

Damiba is just the latest in a carousel of coup leaders in West Africa trained by the U.S. military as the U.S. has pumped in more than $1 billion in security assistance to promote “stability” in the region. Since 2008, U.S.-trained officers have attempted at least nine coups (and succeeded in at least eight) across five West African countries, including Burkina Faso (three times), Guinea, Mali (three times), Mauritania, and the Gambia.

Since the 2000s, the United States has regularly deployed small teams of commandos to advise, assist, and accompany local forces, even into battle; provided weapons, equipment, and aircraft; offered many forms of training, including Flintlock, which is conducted by Special Operations Command Africa and focused on enhancing the counterterrorism capabilities of nations in West Africa, including Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Nigeria, and Senegal.

“When the U.S. prioritizes tactical training, we overlook longer-term goals that could create more stable governments,” said Lauren Woods, director of the Security Assistance Monitor, which is a program of the nonprofit Center for International Policy. “We need more transparency and public debate on the foreign military training that we provide. And we need to do a much better job thinking about the long-term risks — including coups and abuses by forces we train.”

AFRICOM emphasizes that its security cooperation and “capacity-building activities” foster the “development of professional militaries,” which are disciplined and committed to the well-being of their citizens. “U.S. military training regularly includes modules on the law of armed conflict, subjugation to civilian control, and respect for human rights,” AFRICOM spokesperson Kelly Cahalan told The Intercept. “Military seizures of power are inconsistent with U.S. military training and education.”

But coups d’état by U.S.-trained officers have become an increasingly common occurrence in Burkina Faso and elsewhere in the region.

Last summer, for example, American Green Berets arrived in Guinea to train a special forces unit led by Col. Mamady Doumbouya, a charismatic young officer who had also served in the French Foreign Legion. In September, members of Doumbouya’s unit took time out from their ongoing instruction — in small unit tactics, tactical combat casualty care, and the law of armed conflict — to storm the presidential palace and depose the country’s 83-year-old president, Alpha Condé. Doumbouya soon declared himself Guinea’s new leader and the U.S. ended the training.

In 2020, Col. Assimi Goïta, who worked with U.S. Special Operations forces for years, participating in Flintlock training exercises and attending a Joint Special Operations University seminar at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, headed the junta that overthrew Mali’s government.

“The act of mutiny in Mali is strongly condemned and inconsistent with U.S. military training and education,” Marine Corps Lt. Col. Anton T. Semelroth, a Pentagon spokesperson, said at the time.

After staging the coup, Goïta stepped down and took the job of vice president in a transitional government tasked with returning Mali to civilian rule. But nine months later, he seized power again in his second coup.

Goïta wasn’t even the first U.S.-trained Malian officer to overthrow the country’s government. In 2011, when a U.S.-backed uprising in Libya toppled autocrat Muammar Gaddafi, Tuareg fighters in his service looted the regime’s weapons caches, traveled to their native Mali and began to take over the northern part of that country. Angered by the ineffective response of his government, Amadou Sanogo — an officer who learned English in Texas, received intelligence training in Arizona, and underwent Army infantry-officer basic training in Georgia — took matters into his own hands and overthrew his country’s democratically elected government.

“America is a great country with a fantastic army,” he said after the 2012 coup. “I tried to put all the things I learned there into practice here.”

In 2014, another U.S.-trained officer, Lt. Col. Isaac Zida, seized power in Burkina Faso amid popular protests. Two years earlier, when he was a major, Zida attended a counterterrorism training course at MacDill Air Force Base that was sponsored by Joint Special Operations University and attended a military intelligence course in Botswana that was financed by the U.S. government.

The next year, another coup in Burkina Faso installed Gen. Gilbert Diendéré. Diendéré had not only taken part in a U.S.-led Flintlock counterterrorism exercise, but he also served as a literal advertisement for it, appearing in an AFRICOM photo addressing Burkinabe soldiers before their deployment to Mali in support of the 2010 Flintlock exercise.

In 2014, two generations of U.S.-educated officers faced off in the Gambia as a group of American-trained would-be coup-makers attempted (but failed) to overthrow another U.S.-trained coup-maker, Yahya Jammeh who had seized power back in 1994. The unsuccessful rebellion claimed the life of Lamin Sanneh, the purported ringleader, who had earned a master’s degree at National Defense University in Washington, D.C.

“I can’t shake the feeling that his education in the United States somehow influenced his actions,” wrote Sanneh’s former NDU mentor Jeffrey Meiser. “I can’t help but wonder if simply imprinting our foreign students with the ‘American program’ is counterproductive and unethical.”

In 2008, Stars and Stripes reported that Gen. Mohamed Ould Abdel Aziz, the leader of a coup against Mauritania’s elected president, “has worked with U.S. forces that train in the African country.” Arrested and charged with corruption after a decadelong rule, Aziz was recently released on bail due to ill health.

U.S.-trained coup-plotters aren’t strictly confined to West Africa. Before Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi deposed Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Mohammed Morsi, he underwent basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia, (in 1981) and advanced instruction at the U.S. Army War College (in 2006).

A 2018 study by the military’s go-to think tank, the Rand Corporation, cast doubt on the notion that U.S. military training breeds coup-makers.

“[T]here is little evidence that overall [security sector assistance] (measured in dollar terms) associates with coup propensity in Africa,” according to the study, which was written for the Office of the Secretary of Defense and did note that there was a “marginally significant” association in the post-Cold War period.

A year before, however, a study by Jonathan Caverley of the U.S. Naval War College and Jesse Savage of Trinity College Dublin in the Journal of Peace Research, analyzing data from 1970 to 2009, found “a robust relationship between U.S. training of foreign militaries and military-backed coup attempts” despite the authors limiting their analysis to the International Military Education and Training program — “which explicitly focuses on promoting norms of civilian control.”

READ MORE


Federal Court Revokes Oil and Gas Leases, Citing Climate ChangeAn oil drilling platform seen from Port Aransas, Texas. (photo: Eric Gay/AP)

Federal Court Revokes Oil and Gas Leases, Citing Climate Change
Lisa Friedman, The New York Times
Friedman writes: "A federal judge on Thursday canceled oil and gas leases of more than 80 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico, ruling that the Biden administration did not sufficiently take climate change into account when it auctioned the leases late last year."

A federal judge on Thursday canceled oil and gas leases of more than 80 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico, ruling that the Biden administration did not sufficiently take climate change into account when it auctioned the leases late last year.

The decision by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia is a major victory for environmental groups that criticized the Biden administration for holding the sale after promising to move the country away from fossil fuels. It had been the largest lease sale in United States history.

Now the Interior Department must conduct a new environmental analysis that accounts for the greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the eventual development and production of the leases. After that, the agency will have to decide whether it will hold a new auction.

“This is huge,” said Brettny Hardy, a senior attorney for Earthjustice, one of several environmental groups that brought the lawsuit.

“This requires the bureau to go back to the drawing board and actually consider the climate costs before it offers these leases for sale, and that’s really significant,” Ms. Hardy said, adding, “Once these leases are issued, there’s development that’s potentially locked in for decades to come that is going to hurt our global climate.”

Melissa Schwartz, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, said the agency was reviewing the decision.

As a candidate, Mr. Biden promised to stop issuing new leases for drilling on public lands and in federal waters. “And by the way, no more drilling on federal lands, period. Period, period, period,” Mr. Biden told voters in New Hampshire in February 2020. Shortly after taking office, he signed an executive order to pause the issuing of new leases.

But a federal judge in Louisiana blocked that order, and also ruled that the administration must hold lease sales in the Gulf that had already been scheduled.

Biden administration officials have said Interior Secretary Deb Haaland risked being held in contempt of court if the auction was not held. Environmental groups, however, argued that the administration had other options, including doing a new analysis to examine the ways that the burning of oil extracted from the Gulf would contribute to climate change.

The lawsuit alleged that the Interior Department relied on an outdated environmental analysis conducted by the Trump administration that concluded additional drilling in the Gulf would not increase greenhouse gas emissions. The environmental groups said that analysis did not consider new information about the impact of offshore drilling on rising global temperatures.

Hitting a wall. With the Build Back Better Act hitting a wall in Congress, some Democrats want to forge ahead with a stand-alone climate bill. But their solution could mean abandoning other parts of President Biden’s agenda.

Scott Lauermann, a spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, which represents oil and gas companies, said in a statement, “We are reviewing this disappointing decision and considering our options. Offshore energy development plays a critical role in strengthening our nation’s economy and energy security.”

Companies had argued to the court that vacating the lease sale would compromise the confidential bids that were submitted for the tracts, making their competitors aware of who was bidding on what, and for how much.

Shell, BP, Chevron and Exxon Mobil offered $192 million for the rights to drill in the area offered by the government. Though the sale occurred on Nov. 17, the leases have not yet been issued.

Judge Rudolph Contreras said in his ruling that the Interior Department “acted arbitrarily and capriciously in excluding foreign consumption from their greenhouse gas emissions” and that it was required to do so under the 1970 National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, which says the government must consider ecological damage when deciding whether to permit drilling and construction projects.

Any disruption that revoking the lease sales might cause, he wrote, “do not outweigh the seriousness of the NEPA error in this case and the need for the agency to get it right.”


READ MORE


NLRB Accuses Amazon of 'Threatening, Surveilling' Warehouse Workers on Staten IslandAn employee pulls a cart at Amazon's JFK8 distribution center in Staten Island, New York, U.S., November 25, 2020. (photo: AP)

NLRB Accuses Amazon of 'Threatening, Surveilling' Warehouse Workers on Staten Island
Aaron Gregg, The Washington Post
Gregg writes: "Federal labor regulators on Thursday accused Amazon of illegally surveilling and threatening workers who are trying to unionize a Staten Island, N.Y., warehouse."

ALSO SEE: Amazon Is Addicted to Union-Busting

Federal labor regulators on Thursday accused Amazon of illegally surveilling and threatening workers who are trying to unionize a Staten Island, N.Y., warehouse.

The complaint, first reported by Bloomberg News, marks the National Labor Relations Board’s latest brush with the e-commerce giant over questions about its tactics. The NLRB wants to compel Amazon to take certain actions to inform workers of their right to organize, according to Kathy Drew King, a regional director for the agency.

Amazon “repeatedly broke the law by threatening, surveilling, and interrogating their Staten Island warehouse workers who are engaged in a union organizing campaign,” King said in a statement.

Amazon spokeswoman Kelly Nantel said the allegations were false, adding without elaboration that “we look forward to showing that through this process.”

(Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post.)

The complaint comes as a separate, high-stakes unionization effort is playing out in Alabama, where Amazon workers in Bessemer are poised to vote. Workers there overwhelmingly rejected a union last year, but the NLRB called for a revote after finding that Amazon improperly interfered in that election. An NLRB official specifically cited Amazon’s efforts to place an unmarked U.S. Postal Service mailbox in front of the warehouse just after voting started, writing that Amazon “essentially [hijacked] the process and gave a strong impression that it controlled the process.”

It also coincides with a surge in labor activism across the country; dozens of strikes and strike authorizations have flared up in recent months — including at Kellogg’s and John Deere.

The Amazon Labor Union, an independent group of workers that isn’t connected to a major national union, recently collected the required signatures to hold a vote on Staten Island, an NLRB spokesperson said Wednesday. A hearing on the vote is scheduled for Feb. 16.

The NLRB complaint stems from four recent cases, the earliest of which was filed in May 2021, according to a legal document obtained by The Washington Post. It alleges the company threatened workers against unionizing, surveilled them in their activities and tried to solicit grievances in exchange for voting against the union. It names two human resources managers, one operations manager, two security guards and a consultant of acting on Amazon’s behalf to violate workers’ rights.

According to the complaint, the consultant “interrogated” employees about their organizing activities, called union organizers “thugs” and allegedly threatened employees by telling them it would be futile to select the union as their bargaining representative. The consultant also is accused of soliciting unspecified grievances from employees with the promise to remedy them if they reject the union.

Regulators also describe attempts to confiscate “union literature” and prevent employees from distributing it in break rooms. One of the security guards is alleged to have taken union literature and told employees not to distribute it, while a human resource assistant is accused of ordering employees to remove it from the break room.

The complaint contends Amazon has been “interfering with, restraining and coercing employees” who are exercising their rights under the law.

It seeks to require Amazon supervisors to undergo mandatory training describing employees’ rights under the National Labor Relations Act. It also seeks to require the company to post notices describing workers rights on social media, in its electronic applications for workers, and in all employee bathrooms including in the stalls.

The NLRB has set a hearing on the matter for April 5 and has given Amazon until Feb. 10 to respond to the complaint.



READ MORE


Biden to Nominate First Black Woman to Sit on Supreme Court by End of FebruaryPresident Joe Biden delivers remarks with Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer as they announce Breyer will retire at the end of the court's current term, at the White House in Washington, D.C., Jan. 26, 2022. (photo: Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)

Biden to Nominate First Black Woman to Sit on Supreme Court by End of February
Ed Pilkington, Guardian UK
Pilkington writes: "Joe Biden intends to announce his nominee to become the first Black woman to sit on the US supreme court by the end of February, the president said on Thursday at a formal White House event to mark the retirement of the liberal-leaning justice Stephen Breyer."

US president announced plans for court at White House event marking retirement of Justice Stephen Breyer

Joe Biden intends to announce his nominee to become the first Black woman to sit on the US supreme court by the end of February, the president said on Thursday at a formal White House event to mark the retirement of the liberal-leaning justice Stephen Breyer.

Lauding the retiring justice as a “beacon of wisdom” and a “model public servant at a time of great division in this country”, Biden pledged to replace him with someone worthy of Breyer’s “legacy of excellence and decency”. He said the nominee would have “extraordinary qualifications, character, experience and integrity, and that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States supreme court.”

He added: “It is long overdue in my view.”

Biden’s confirmation that he is still studying the résumés of candidates and has yet to make his pick will do little to settle nerves among progressives still smarting from Donald Trump’s three supreme court appointments. Many Democrats want the president to emulate the warp speed with which the Trump administration drove through the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett in less than six weeks following Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death in September 2020.

The Washington Post, citing an anonymous source, said that the majority leader in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, is aiming for a similar timeline.

Replacing Breyer with a like-minded justice is seen by many Democrats as critical in preserving the already beleaguered rump of liberals on the bench. The retiring justice is one of only three such individuals on the nine-justice court, and they are so outnumbered that the country now faces drastic changes in several key areas from abortion to guns and affirmative action.

Despite the pressure for haste among his party’s members, Biden insisted that he would be “rigorous” in choosing the nominee. He would listen to advice from senators and meet candidates, indicating a selection process that is likely to take weeks not days.

For his part, Justice Breyer is hoping that his successor can be confirmed and in place within the next six months. In his formal retirement letter to Biden, he said he would step down at the start of the court’s summer recess in June or July, “assuming that by then my successor has been nominated and confirmed”.

Speaking in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, Breyer made a lyrical paean to American unity. Recalling a speech he likes to deliver to school students, he said that the US was an experiment that is still going on.

“My children and grandchildren will determine whether the experiment will last, and as an optimist I’m pretty sure that it will,” he said.

Biden first committed himself to promoting a Black woman to the nation’s highest court at a presidential debate against Trump during the 2020 presidential campaign. The promise was reportedly made after intense prodding by the prominent South Carolina Democrat Jim Clyburn, who endorsed Biden the following day in a move that helped propel him into the White House.

Though the race is now on to confirm Breyer’s replacement before the court’s term reaches its summer recess, there are large hurdles ahead. Looming over the proceedings is the evenly divided 50-50 split in the US Senate, the chamber that will preside over the confirmation hearings of whomsoever Biden picks.

The Democrats hold the casting vote with Vice-President Kamala Harris, but they will need to keep all 50 senators on board during the process. That is a challenge that has eluded the Biden administration in recent months with the high-profile defections of Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema over vital issues ranging from the president’s Build Back Better legislation to overcoming the filibuster to secure essential voting rights reforms.

To reduce any risk of Democratic splits, Schumer will also be looking to lure Republican moderates such as Susan Collins from Maine and Lisa Murkowski from Alaska to their side.

Then there are the nationwide midterm elections in November which will inevitably place a partisan political pall over the confirmation process. Republicans have already begun to test out lines of attack, predicting that Biden’s nominee will be, in the words of the senator from Florida Rick Scott, “a radical liberal with extremist views”.

Rightwing Twitter feeds have also lit up with claims that Biden’s choice of a Black woman would constitute unlawful sex and race discrimination. Those playing the affirmative-action card were forgetting that in 1980 Ronald Reagan pledged to pick the first woman to sit on the nation’s highest court, appointing Sandra Day O’Connor the following year.

Republican leaders will be hoping that by portraying Biden’s choice as a culture wars threat to American values they will help to drive out the party’s base to the polling booths on 8 November.

Similar calculations will be at play on the Democratic side. Party strategists will want to leverage the nomination of a Black woman as an energizing factor at the polls for important elements of its electorate who include African Americans, women and progressive voters.


READ MORE


Eighty-Three Democrats Call for Biden to Immediately Cancel $50,000 in Student LoansSenate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (center) speaking at a press conference about student debt outside the Capitol on February 4 in Washington, D.C. (photo: Drew Angerer/Getty)

Eighty-Three Democrats Call for Biden to Immediately Cancel 50,000 in Student Loans
Ayelet Sheffey, Business Insider
Sheffey writes: "It's been eight months since White House officials saw a memo detailing whether President Joe Biden could legally cancel student debt broadly. And dozens of Democratic lawmakers are tired of waiting for its results."

It's been eight months since White House officials saw a memo detailing whether President Joe Biden could legally cancel student debt broadly. And dozens of Democratic lawmakers are tired of waiting for its results.

On Wednesday, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer, along with Reps. Pramila Jayapal, Ayanna Pressley, Ilhan Omar, and Katie Porter, led 79 of their Democratic colleagues in demanding that Biden release the memo outlining his legal ability to cancel federal student debt broadly and "immediately" cancel up to $50,000 in student debt per borrower.

"Publicly releasing the memo outlining your existing authority on cancelling student debt and broadly doing so is crucial to making a meaningful difference in the lives of current students, borrowers, and families," the lawmakers wrote. "It has been widely reported that the Department of Education has had this memo since April 5, 2020 after being directed to draft it."

Ron Klain, the White House chief of staff, told Politico last April that Biden had asked Education Secretary Miguel Cardona to create a memo on the president's legal authority to forgive $50,000 in student loans per person. As Insider reported in November, redacted documents obtained by the Debt Collective, the nation's first debtors union, indicated that the memo has existed since April 5, and White House officials have seen its contents but haven't made them public.

But even before those documents were disclosed, Democrats were calling for the release of the memo to give 43 million federal student-loan borrowers needed relief. In October, Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar gave the Education Department two weeks to release the memo, but that deadline came and went with no response.

"Millions of borrowers across the country are desperately asking for student-debt relief," Omar told Insider at the time. "We know the president can do it with the stroke of a pen. We were told over six months ago that they were just waiting on a memo to determine whether they would give relief, and weeks since we sent a letter asking them to do so. Release the memo. Cancel student debt."

New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez said during a roundtable on Wednesday that "it would be good to be publicly known" whether Biden has the legal authority to cancel student debt.

"I have not read the memo, but it is my view that the memo should ultimately certify that the president has the authority to do exactly what we're advocating for," Menendez said.

Beyond the release of the memo, the push for broad student-loan forgiveness continues to amplify. As Warren previously told Insider, her proposal to cancel $50,000 in student loans per borrower would completely eliminate debt for 36 million people, or 84% of all federal borrowers.

"This is the single most effective executive action President Biden could take to jump-start our economy and begin to narrow the racial wealth gap," she said.

While Biden promised during his campaign to approve $10,000 in student-loan forgiveness per borrower, he has remained largely silent on that promise since taking office. Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, recently said Biden would sign a bill passed by Congress to cancel student debt, but his promise to do so "immediately" remains unfulfilled. He even ignored a question on that promise during his first solo press conference of the year.

Still, while Biden extended the pause on student-loan payments through May 1, giving borrowers an additional 90 days of relief, lawmakers want to ensure that millions of Americans won't be stuck with monthly bills they can't afford.

They wrote that "eliminating debt before the pause ends is a commonsense step so that millions of borrowers have more breathing room in their family budgets and our national economy is not further held back."

READ MORE


Defense Secretary Orders 'Action Plan' on Preventing Civilian Deaths in US StrikesA U.S. drone strike that was supposed to target ISIS-K suicide bombers instead killed 10 civilians in Kabul, Afghanistan, in August. (photo: Marcus Yam/Getty)

Defense Secretary Orders 'Action Plan' on Preventing Civilian Deaths in US Strikes
Courtney Kube, Mosheh Gains and Daniel Arkin, NBC News
Excerpt: "Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Thursday directed the U.S. military to step up efforts to prevent and respond to civilian casualties caused by American airstrikes, calling the protection of civilians 'a strategic and a moral imperative.'"

Lloyd Austin issued the directive months after the Pentagon admitted that a U.S. drone attack in Afghanistan in August had mistakenly killed 10 civilians, including 7 children.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Thursday directed the U.S. military to step up efforts to prevent and respond to civilian casualties caused by American airstrikes, calling the protection of civilians "a strategic and a moral imperative."

In a two-page memo, Austin ordered senior civilian and military officials to send an "action plan" to his desk within 90 days.

"The protection of civilians is fundamentally consistent with the effective, efficient, and decisive use of force in pursuit of U.S. national interests, and our efforts to mitigate and respond to civilian harm are a direct reflection of U.S. values," Austin wrote in the directive.

Austin issued the order after intense criticism of a U.S. airstrike in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Aug. 29. The drone strike, meant to target terrorists, mistakenly killed 10 civilians, including seven children, Pentagon officials admitted in September.

"We now assess it is unlikely that the vehicle and those who died were associated with ISIS-K," Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, the head of U.S. Central Command, said in September, referring to the Islamic State terrorist groups' affiliate in Afghanistan. "It was a mistake."

Austin's directive came the same day the Rand Corp., a federally funded think tank, released a report that found "considerable weaknesses" in the process the Pentagon uses to assess the deaths and injuries of innocent people.

The military's internal reporting on civilian casualties is not always reliable or complete, and reports of civilian deaths often appear to be dismissed, the Rand report found.

"Civilian casualties were alleged to have occurred, the military indeed attacked the alleged location, and available military information neither confirmed nor ruled out civilian casualties. Thus, these cases were determined to be not credible."

The report also found that U.S. intelligence efforts focus too heavily on enemy combatants, limiting the resources available to "understand the broader civilian picture."

"Without reliable operational data that are easily accessible to commanders, the military will be limited in its ability to understand the root causes of civilian casualties, characterize patterns of harm, and identify specific measures to mitigate civilian harm while preserving mission-effectiveness and force protection,” the report said.

Defense Department spokesman John F. Kirby told reporters Thursday that Austin is familiar with the issue of civilian deaths from his time as a ground commander in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that the steps he outlined in the memo were “informed by recent studies, independent as well as department reviews,” including the Rand assessment.

Kirby added that Austin’s goals were also shaped by “recent press reporting” on civilian casualties.


READ MORE


California Redwood Forest Returned to Native Tribal GroupMembers of the Wiyot Tribe paddle a dugout redwood canoe from Indian Island. (photo: AP)


California Redwood Forest Returned to Native Tribal Group
Brian Melley, Associated Press
Melley writes: "The most vulnerable members of the Wiyot Tribe were asleep the morning of Feb. 26, 1860, when a band of white men slipped into their Northern California villages under darkness and slaughtered them."

ALSO SEE: California Museum Returns Massacre Remains
to Wiyot Tribe

The descendants of Native American tribes on the Northern California coast are reclaiming a bit of their heritage that includes ancient redwoods that have stood since their ancestors walked the land.

Save the Redwoods League planned to announce Tuesday that it is transferring more than 500 acres (202 hectares) on the Lost Coast to the InterTribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council.

The group of 10 tribes that have inhabited the area for thousands of years will be responsible for protecting the land dubbed Tc’ih-Léh-Dûñ, or “Fish Run Place,” in the Sinkyone language.

Priscilla Hunter, chairwoman of the Sinkyone Council, said it’s fitting they will be caretakers of the land where her people were removed or forced to flee before the forest was largely stripped for timber.

“It’s a real blessing,” said Hunter, of the Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians. “It’s like a healing for our ancestors. I know our ancestors are happy. This was given to us to protect.”

The transfer marks a step in the growing Land Back movement to return Indigenous homelands to the descendants of those who lived there for millennia before European settlers arrived.

The league first worked with the Sinkyone council when it transferred a 164-acre (66-hectare) plot nearby to the group in 2012.

The league recently paid $37 million for a scenic 5-mile (8-kilometer) stretch of the rugged and forbidding Lost Coast from a lumber company to protect it from logging and eventually open it up to the public.

Opening access to the public is not a priority on the property being transferred to the tribal group because it is so remote, said Sam Hodder, president and CEO of the league. But it serves an important puzzle piece wedged between other protected areas.

Steep hills rise and fall to a tributary of the Eel River that has steelhead trout and Coho salmon. The property was last logged about 30 years ago and still has a large number of old-growth redwoods, as well as second-growth trees.

“This is a property where you can almost tangibly feel that it is healing, that it is recovering,” Hodder said. “You walk through the forest and, even as you see the kind of ghostly stumps of ancient trees that were harvested, you could also in the foggy landscape see the monsters that were left behind as well as the young redwoods that are sprouting from those stumps.”

The league purchased the land two years ago for $3.5 million funded by Pacific Gas … Electric Co. to provide habitat for endangered northern spotted owl and marbled murrelet to mitigate other environmental damage by the utility.

PG…E was set to emerge Tuesday from five years of criminal probation for a 2010 explosion triggered by its natural gas lines that blew up a San Bruno neighborhood and killed eight people. It's been blamed since 2017 for sparking more than 30 wildfires that wiped out more than 23,000 homes and businesses and killed more than 100 people.

In an effort to reduce its liability and the chance of vegetation contacting power lines and sparking fires, PG…E has been criticized for destroying many large and old trees.

“Thanks to Save the Redwoods League for seizing on any opportunity to protect lands on the Lost Coast that are vital to its conservation,” said Michael Evenson, vice president of the Lost Coast League, which advocates for protecting water and wildlife in the area. “But PG…E getting a green merit badge after all the destruction they’re doing ... is not palatable.”

Hawk Rosales, former executive director of the council, said the new property adds a significant holding to the 4,000 acres (1,618.7 hectares) the group protects for cultural and ecological purposes.

More importantly, it recognizes the tribal group’s importance in caring for lands.

“For so many decades tribal voices have been marginalized in the mainstream conservation movement,” Rosales said. “It’s only until very recently that they have been invited to participate meaningfully and to take a leadership role.”

Hodder said the league was trying to remove barriers and increase the scale of land managed by tribal communities and return Indigenous knowledge and practices, such as setting small controlled fires to clear out undergrowth that lead to healthier forests.

“These communities have been stewarding these lands across thousands of years," Hodder said. “It was the exclusion of that stewardship in many ways that’s gotten us into the mess that we’re in.”

READ MORE

 

Contribute to RSN

Follow us on facebook and twitter!

Update My Monthly Donation

PO Box 2043 / Citrus Heights, CA 95611








"Look Me In The Eye" | Lucas Kunce for Missouri

  Help Lucas Kunce defeat Josh Hawley in November: https://LucasKunce.com/chip-in/ Josh Hawley has been a proud leader in the fight to ...