Toxic Trump


Human manifestation of a flaming dumpster Donald Trump will be lucky if he can find himself a running mate, even if his vetting process really is constituted of nothing more than a willingness to stand beside him. Because over the course of the past two days, he's had two contenders, and both of them have withdrawn themselves from consideration.

1. "Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), the chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee who has recently emerged as a finalist in the search for Donald Trump's running mate, told The Washington Post in an interview Wednesday that he has taken himself out of consideration for the position."

2. "Sen. Joni Ernst all but removed herself from Donald Trump's vice presidential search, telling POLITICO in an interview that she wants to help Trump become president but that she's focused on Iowa and the Senate, where the freshman senator said she's 'just getting started.'"

Hahahahahahahahahaha whoooooooooooooops!

At this point, Trump's left with Newt Gingrich, Chris Christie, and Mike Pence, none of whom add anything to his ticket, in terms of broadening his base of support.

And all of whom are smart enough to know that Trump ain't gonna win, but are willing to take the free publicity ahead of their own presidential runs in 2020.

Willing for now, anyway. One more moment of waxing rhapsodic about a dictator, and he may lose even these opportunistic fuckos.

Welp, I'm sure one of his kids will agree to be on his ticket.

Open Wide...

Sounds Legit

[Content Note: Anti-semitism; racism.]

Yesterday, I mentioned that Dana Schwartz, a Jewish employee of the Observer, owned by Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, had written an open letter to her boss asking how he can abet his father-in-law's anti-Semitism and white supremacy.

Kushner wrote a cool response which begins thus: "My father-in-law is not an anti-Semite. It's that simple, really. Donald Trump is not anti-Semitic and he's not a racist."

CASE CLOSED, YOUR HONOR.

The rest of the piece is exactly as terrific as you'd expect.

Open Wide...

And Again

[Content Note: Police brutality; racism; guns; death.]

Yesterday, one day after the police killing of Alton Sterling, a Black woman named Lavish Reynolds began broadcasting live on Facebook moments after her boyfriend, a Black man named Philando Castile, had been shot multiple times by police in suburban St. Paul, Minnesota.

At the Washington Post, Michael E. Miller and Wesley Lowery have compiled everything we know so far about the shooting. The link includes the video of the aftermath of the shooting, which I strongly urge caution in viewing and even more so in sharing. Again: It's important the video exists; it is not required for anyone to watch it nor to share it, especially if you are sharing it in a place where it might be triggering for people who are reeling from another deadly incident of police brutality against a Black citizen.

The shooting happened following a traffic stop for a broken tail light. The officer ordered Castile out of the car and, as recounted by Reynolds, was shot when he went to retrieve his ID, as requested by the officer.

In the video, Reynolds says Castile was legally licensed to carry a firearm and was reaching for his identification when the officer opened fire.

"He let the officer know that he had a firearm and he was reaching for his wallet and the officer just shot him in his arm," she says.

As Castile moans and appears to lose consciousness, the officer can be heard in the background shouting expletives in apparent frustration.

"Mam, keep your hands where they are," the officer shouts at Reynolds. "I told him not to reach for it! I told him to get his hands up."

"You told him to get his ID, sir, his driver's license," Reynolds responds. "Oh my god. Please don't tell me he's dead. Please don't tell me my boyfriend just went like that."
Castile sits bleeding and catastrophically wounded in the car as officers order Reynolds out of the car, handcuff her, and put her in police cruiser. Eventually, Castile is brought to the hospital, where he died.

My condolences to Reynolds' family, friends, and immediate community—and to Black people in the broader community who may once again be left feeling unsafe and devalued by their communities and their country. I take up space in solidarity with people who are angry and people who are grieving. I am angry and grieving with you.

A few jumbled thoughts I am having in this moment:

1. Again, we are reminded that the Second Amendment only applies to white people. And it's important to understand that this is by design: The very origins of the Second Amendment are racist.

2. Again, this started with a municipal violation. Over-policing by way of municipal violations is a dynamic from which the vast majority of white USians are insulated, because white supremacy, racial privilege, and segregation explicitly act in service to insulate us from precisely this reality: The brutal policing of black USians for municipal violations, using minor infractions to generate fines and police records that have lasting impact on black lives and communities. I will again recommend [CN: video autoplays at link] this segment by John Oliver on municipal violations.

3. Again, I will recommend this August 2015 piece by Charles M. Blow: "Police Abuse Is a Form of Terror: The very ubiquity of police officers and the power they possess means that the questionable killing in which they are involved creates a terror that rolls in like a fog, filling every low place. It produces ambient, radiant fear. It is the lurking unpredictability of it. It is the any- and everywhere-ness of it."

4. I want to recognize the grace and presence of mind and bravery of Lavish Reynolds, who thought to turn on her camera and live broadcast the murder of Philando Castile. She should never have been obliged to be graceful under the most violent circumstances, never have been obliged to have such presence of mind in a moment of unfathomable fear, never have been obliged to be brave when she was just living her life, with her boyfriend and child, until a violent agent of the state intervened. It is not lost on me that her composure was necessitated to safe her own life, and I am incandescently angry that she was put in such a position.

This is my 260th entry in the police brutality label. I am outraged and I am grief-stricken. #BlackLivesMatter is a statement of fact, but it is also, by necessity of violent white supremacy, a plea.

To my fellow white people, I beg you: This is a moment to listen to Black people. And it is a moment in which we are obliged to speak to one another. To challenge each other. To communicate, unequivocally, that we have a zero tolerance policy on racism and white supremacy and state-sanctioned violence against Black citizens. To take the time, when we see opportunities and openings, to educate other white people, or at least give it a good goddamn try. To step up.

This is not the time (it never is) to be a bully under the guise of being an ally. To tone police Black people. To mount bitter complaints about #BlackLivesMatter because "all lives matter." To distance ourselves from white privilege, or to pretend that saying, "I would never behave that way" is a statement of solidarity and not a selfish petition to be recognized as "one of the Good Ones."

To paraphrase an old post, this is the time to stop obliging Black people to reassure you that you're one of the Good Ones, and just start being one of them.

This is the time for white people who agree that #BlackLivesMatter to make sure it is not just a statement of fact, but an action we take every day. Please.

Open Wide...

Hillary Did Not Lie

Peter Daou and I wrote this piece for BNR debunking the pervasive idea that FBI Director James Comey's statement supports the claims that Hillary Clinton lied about her emails: "CONFIRMED: James Comey Statement on Clinton Emails Proves Hillary DID NOT LIE."

There is a whole lot of information there, much of which hasn't been reported with careful scrutiny elsewhere, no less all pulled together in one place.

Here's an excerpt:

According to Comey, the year-long investigation of 55,000 Hillary emails did not reveal a single email clearly marked classified. Only two — just two — of Hillary's emails "bore markings indicating the presence of classified information." "Bore markings" is not the same thing as "marked classified." Furthermore, those two emails are now known to have been mismarked as a result of "human error." They did not contain classified information.

...Absent that pair of emails, Hillary's opponents are left with this, from Comey's statement: "110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received."

Let's break that down. 110 out of 55,000 emails are said to have contained classified information. That's just 0.2 percent of her emails. Crucially, these emails were not marked classified. And there is absolutely no indication or accusation that classified markings were concealed or removed.

Therefore, we can unequivocally say that out of 55,000 emails, Hillary never received or sent a single email that was marked classified and actually contained classified information.

...A very simple analogy is useful here. If a vegetarian ordered and consumed a vegetable dumpling off a menu and said they did not eat meat, they would be telling the truth. If a forensic investigation by the department of health later showed that the restaurant contaminated their vegetable dumplings with meat, it doesn't retroactively make the vegetarian a liar. They were telling the truth as far they knew it.

Extending the analogy further, saying Hillary "should have known" that 0.2 percent of her emails contained classified material when the material was unmarked, is akin to saying the vegetarian should have tasted the meat.

Put differently, why would classification markings even exist if the Secretary of State was required to divine the contents of all her emails? If everyone who has access to classified information "should know that the subject matter is classified," then why do we even have a system that marks classified information?

The U.S. Secretary of State is one of the busiest people on the planet. It is unreasonable to expect that part of her job is to magically divine what is and is not classified — when it is unmarked. Especially considering she is working within an infrastructure where there exists a standard for marking classified information, and thus she is entitled to a reasonable expectation of not receiving classified information unmarked.

There is a system in place on which people are meant to rely. "You should have known the system was failing you and that this information was really classified" is not, actually, a reasonable standard. Not at all.

Hillary used an entirely different protocol for information she knew to be classified; clearly, if she'd known these email chains were classified, she would have handled them the way all other classified information was handled.
Head on over to read the whole thing. And I hope it serves as a useful rebuttal to those of you fighting battles on social media with the people screaming about how she's a liar, because, truly, that cannot be substantiated.

To the contrary, Comey's statement actually undercuts the argument that she lied. If you bother to read it carefully. Which we did.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of green and blue cubes

Hosted by cubes.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker particolored: "Who inspires you?"

I mean, I think we all know my obvious answer to that question, lol!

But lots and lots of people inspire me. I try to take inspiration of some sort from everyone, even if it's inspiration to never behave like that. But, honestly, I find it easy to find positive inspiration from lots of people. If humans didn't delight and inspire me as frequently as they do, I probably wouldn't be the optimist and expecter of more that I am.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

[Content Note: There are some flickery graphics in this video.]



Luther Vandross: "Here and Now"

Open Wide...

No Kidding


Which is not surprising at all, since Attorney General Loretta Lynch already said "that she would accept whatever recommendations career prosecutors and the FBI director made about whether to bring charges in the case," and FBI Director James Comey did not recommend criminal charges—since "no reasonable prosecutor would bring" a case in which there was no evidence of "clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice."


I mean, you don't think the President said that casually, do you?

Open Wide...

The Wednesday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by carrots.

Recommended Reading:

Media Diversified: [Content Note: Racism; racist imagery] Open Letter: The BBC Must Stop Uncritical Coverage of Fascists

Princess Harmony: [CN: Body, gender, and choice policing] Tattoos, Piercings, and Pumping: How Body Modification Can Be Revolutionary

Sameer: Jennifer Lopez and Lin-Manuel Miranda Team Up for Song to Benefit Pulse Massacre Victims

Maddie: Juno Had a Glorious View During Its Final Approach to Jupiter

BNR Team: Ahem, You Can Endorse Her Now Bernie

THV: Tom Hardy on Speaking Up

Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!

Open Wide...

Developing Email Story

Today, at a State Department press briefing, State Department spokesperson John Kirby said two emails marked classified were the result of "human error." This is really important, because:

Comey had said in his statement: "Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information." The New York Times nailed down that "very small number" to two.
So, if there were only two emails marked classified, and two emails were marked classified erroneously, well, I think we can all do the math.

Now all that is left is FBI Director James Comey's contention that "even if information is not marked 'classified' in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

So let us note that if Hillary is being held to a standard where she was expected to identify every unmarked piece of information as classified, then surely it should work the other way, too—and she shouldn't be held at fault for recognizing that a piece of information erroneously marked classified did not, in fact, contain classified information.

Her critics don't get to have it both ways: Either she was competent enough to correctly assess every piece of information irrespective of its security marking, or she wasn't.

But that's really getting in the weeds of this thing. Really, this is the crux of it:
Ultimately, this entire email story comes down to the conclusion, from the New York Times, that Comey "did not claim that Mrs. Clinton's behavior had compromised any program or operation." The Times quotes Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, as saying, "There was no assertion of damage to national security because of this episode."

No assertion of damage and no evidence of damage. Most importantly, no bad intent on Hillary's part. None whatsoever. Simply a mistake she regrets making. And a lot of bluster over something that could have happened—but didn't.
Maybe that's why Democrats don't really give a shit about the email "scandal." Because they/we know it's a partisan fishing expedition into the criminal intent of a woman who loves her country so desperately that she's willing to be its president even though we hate her enough to do this to her. Over and over.

UPDATE: Read this, too: "Here's Why Hillary Clinton Isn't a Liar and James Comey Needs to Shut the Entire F*ck Up."

Open Wide...

Facts

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Dudley the Greyhound and Zelda the Black and Tan Mutt sitting in the sunroom and looking at me plaintively
"Give us things!"

Open Wide...

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Terrorism; torture; death; video may autoplay at link] ICYMI: Donald Trump praised Saddam Hussein yesterday: "While acknowledging that Saddam Hussein 'was a bad guy,' Trump praised the former Iraqi dictator's efficient killing of 'terrorists'—despite the fact that Iraq was listed as a state sponsor of terrorism during Hussein's time in power. ...'He was a bad guy—really bad guy. But you know what? He did well? He killed terrorists. He did that so good. They didn't read them the rights. They didn't talk. They were terrorists. Over. Today, Iraq is Harvard for terrorism,' Trump said." This was, in fact, a reiteration of something he said on Sunday, telling Jake Tapper that the world would be better if dictators like Hussein and Moammar Gadhafi were still in power. Let us understand with both clarity and horror that this is essentially just another self-endorsement.

[CN: Anti-semitism] The above, of course, follows days of Trump engaging in anti-semitism, including tweeting an anti-semitic graphic about Hillary Clinton and his spokesperson giving an incredible statement to Fortune magazine: "[W]hen Fortune asked campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks about the vetting of the accounts Donald retweets, she replied by saying they 'are not vetted, known or of interest to the candidate or the campaign.' Perhaps they should be of interest, unless Donald is fine with being associated with white supremacists. Which is uncertain, given Hicks' incredible response when Fortune further asked 'whether or not Trump believes that white genocide is a legitimate concern.' Hicks simply refused to answer. That should have been a softball—an easy disavowal. But not for the Trump campaign."

[CN: Anti-semitism] Dana Schwartz, a Jewish employee of the Observer, owned by Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, writes a powerful open letter to her boss: "Please do not condescend to me and pretend you don't understand the imagery of a six-sided star when juxtaposed with money and accusations of financial dishonesty. I'm asking you, not as a 'gotcha' journalist or as a liberal but as a human being: how do you allow this? Because, Mr. Kushner, you are allowing this."

[CN: Misogyny] This is just a real headline in the New York Times about President Obama campaigning with Hillary Clinton yesterday: "How Obama Stole the Show at Hillary Clinton's Campaign Rally." Clinton cannot campaign with any other human (see also: Elizabeth Warren) and not get crappy headlines about how she was upstaged. And it's particularly shitty to tell this lie about Obama upstaging her when central to the day was their mutual respect for each other. A man and a woman, a white person and a person of color, praising each other as equals, peers, colleagues, friends. And you're gonna make shit up about upstaging? JFC. Does the media even consider the cost and consequences of their hatred of Hillary Clinton? Ever? (That's rhetorical.)

Damn: "House Democrats [strongly disagreed with] Sen. Bernie Sanders in a closed-door session Wednesday after he deflected questions about when he would formally back Hillary Clinton for president, with a group of members booing him at one point, according to three Democrats who attended the meeting. ...Many Democrats have been reluctant to publicly criticize Sanders for continuing his campaign because they want to ensure that the supporters he activated through the long primary contest will come out and vote for the Democratic ticket in November. But some members let out their frustration with the Vermont senator Wednesday morning, with one member calling Sanders' appearance before the caucus a 'total display of self-obsession.'"

[CN: Rape culture; sexual abuse; patient abuse] Fucking hell: "More than 2,400 U.S. doctors have been sanctioned for sexually abusing their patients, according to a new report that, for the first time, surveyed records from all 50 states and reveals the nationwide scope of a problem that may be almost as far-reaching as the scandal involving Catholic priests. State medical boards, which oversee physicians, allowed more than half the sanctioned doctors to keep their licenses even after the accusations of sexual abuse were determined to be true, according to a yearlong investigation by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 'We found a culture of secrecy,' said Carrie Teegardin, a reporter on the paper's investigative team for the project. 'It's treated with a sort of secrecy that we don't see in other arenas when we're talking about allegations this serious,' she told ABC News."

[CN: Sexual harassment; coercion] Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson alleges that she complained to Fox News chief Roger Ailes about discriminatory treatment by her co-host Steve Doocy, and, in response, Ailes essentially tried to sexually blackmail her, then refused to renew her contract when his ploy didn't work. "According to the complaint, 'When Carlson met with Ailes to discuss the discriminatory treatment to which she was being subjected, Ailes stated: 'I think you and I should have had a sexual relationship a long time ago and then you'd be good and better and I'd be good and better,' adding that 'sometimes problems are easier to solve' that way. Carlson rebuffed Ailes' sexual demands at that meeting, and nine months later, Ailes ended her career at Fox News.'" Seethe. I have more on this at BNR.

[CN: Murder; domestic violence; video may autoplay at link] Oscar Pistorius has been sentenced to six years for murdering Reeva Steenkamp. The sentence was "less than half the 15 year minimum term sought by prosecutors," but is significantly more than his original sentence for manslaughter carried, before the conviction was revised and elevated to murder, following public outcry.

[CN: War on agency] "With the new U.S. Supreme Court abortion ruling, some Pennsylvania lawmakers want to roll back provisions similar to those struck down in Texas—and to head off any new restrictions in a bill debated on the house floor in late June. Several legislators have called for repeal of Act 122, which was enacted in 2012 and mandates that Pennsylvania abortion clinics meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centers." Glad to see Pennsylvania Dems being proactive on this one.

"Activists from around the world, including U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, gathered at the White House last week for a discussion on global LGBT rights. ...At last week's 'dialogue,' reports the Washington Blade, Power and [U.S. Agency for International Development Administrator Gayle Smith] spoke about the White House's efforts to promote LGBT rights abroad in the wake of President Obama's 2011 directive to agencies that carry out American foreign policy. 'This presidential memorandum sets out to end the 'no-go zones' and to expand enjoyment of rights in a deep, deep way,' said Power."

[CN: Choice policing; homophobia] All the mirthless laughter: "Catholics in Philadelphia who are divorced and civilly remarried will be welcome to accept Holy Communion—as long as they abstain from sex and live out their relationships like 'brother and sister.'" Okay. And of course that was paired with continued homophobia: "New guidelines published by the conservative archbishop of Philadelphia this month also called on priests within the archdiocese to help Catholics who are attracted to people of the same sex and 'find chastity very difficult,' saying such individuals should be advised to frequently seek penance." Just stop. Stop.

Cool: "There has been growing excitement in the hallways and offices at Cern in Geneva over a so-called 'bump' in the data from the Large Hadron Collider's particle collisions. The LHC smashes two beams of proton particles together about 100m beneath the French-Swiss border. Scientists then scour the debris of these smash-ups for hints of previously undiscovered particles. Last year, out of trillions of such collisions, scientists detected more photon (light) particles being produced than expected—the aforementioned 'bump.' More precisely, they saw an excess of photon pairs with a combined mass of 750 Gigaelectronvolts (GeV). This could be the tell-tale sign of a new, heavy particle that's about six times more massive than the famed Higgs boson—discovered at Cern in 2012. The discovery of a new particle would be so exciting because the most widely accepted theory of particle physics, the Standard Model, can't explain everything we observe about the world around us."

[CN: Video may autoplay at link] Paul Feig on Ghostbusters and funny women, again: "Working with funny women does make every genre you look at take a different turn, because they just haven't been done with women. And selfishly I love working with funny women." And then this omgggg: "Aside from Ghostbusters, if Feig could reboot any movie, what would it would be? 'Logan's Run. Just because it's such a great story.' In fact, a remake of the 1967 sci-fi thriller has been in the works for years, and Feig has a message for whoever ends up producing it. 'Do it well,' he laughs. 'Don't ruin my childhood!'" LOLOLOL BOOM.

And finally! "Guy Leaves Fake Animal Facts All Over Los Angeles Zoo." Okay, the koala one absolutely ended me. LOL!

Open Wide...

Can We Talk About This Garbage?

[Content Note: Misogyny; classism.]

So, the Guardian published an anonymously authored letter from a dude titled "A letter to my wife, who won't get a job while I work myself to death."

It was subtitled: "The letter you always wanted to write." Sure.

Anyway. This dude is real mad that his wife won't get a job. By which he means a paid job. Because if you already guessed that they have kids for whom she's the primary caregiver, give yourself a gold star!

But obviously this lady is a reeeeeeeal bitch, because she refuses to take on a second job while this guy works himself to death (!!!) in a mine. Just kidding. At a lawfirm. Because, in his own words, "I want you to work so I can get a different position and we can still maintain a similar standard of living."

Does his ungrateful wife want to maintain the same standard of living? Who knows! Who cares, amirite? The point is that this guy does, and it's his wife's duty, if she loves him, to share that goal. Or support it, even if she doesn't.

The best, bar none, response I read to this was Prof. Tressie McMillan Cottom's, on Facebook, which I'm sharing with her permission.


It's such a beautiful deconstruction, in every way, but this part is especially terrific:
Part of that "lifestyle" he's so hot to maintain are children that reflect his economic and social investment in them. Therefore, it would have to be a good school for good careers that his peers would recognize as such. Those things don't just happen. They have to be managed. As he admits to working an ungodly amount of hours and only nods minimally at "helping out" at home, it's reasonable to assume that managing that process is his wife's responsibility. And that doesn't include the transportation, networking, relationship building, scheduling required to get and keep two middle class status-striving kids in music lessons, sports teams, language lessons, tutoring, community service, orthodontist appointments, healthy eating (to maintain physical appearance of middle class, high status), and so on.

All of that sounds like a job. A job that requires his wife hang out with those friends he dismisses as ladies who lunch. Because who knows the word on the new school, new teacher, new requirements for entry into the good life if not the social circle of other parents who manage these things full time? One man's lunching lady is another man's status manager.
YES.

The dude's letter ends thus: "But mostly I want you to get a job because I want to feel loved."

If, indeed, this dude doesn't feel loved, then I wonder why it is that he's staying in this marriage. Could it be, perhaps, that he's getting something else out of it? Like someone who is managing his entire home life while he works to maintain a lifestyle he cannot abide to abandon?

In which case, maybe it should be as obvious to him—as it is to the rest of us—that his wife already has a job.

Open Wide...

Terrible Islamic State Attack in Baghdad

[Content Note: Terrorism; bombing; death; injury.]

In the early hours Sunday morning, as hundreds of Iraqis gathered at a shopping mall in the Karrada shopping district during the holy month of Ramadan, many of them shopping for gifts for the festival of Eid, a car bomb exploded, killing hundreds of people. The latest report from Reuters says that Iraq's Health Ministry puts the death toll at 250.

My sincerest condolences to those who were injured and/or traumatized, and to the families and friends of the people who were killed.

The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the attack. At the Washington Post, Ishaan Tharoor details that it was the latest, and worst, in a series of deadly attacks over days—and yet has gotten comparatively little media attention:

First, they came for Istanbul. On Tuesday night, three suspected Islamic State militants launched a brazen assault on Turkey's main airport, exploding their suicide vests after gunning down numerous passengers and airport staff. At least 45 people were killed. The world panicked; Istanbul Ataturk Airport is one of the busiest hubs in Europe and the Middle East, and it is among the most fortified. Are our airports safe, wondered American TV anchors. Could this happen here on the Fourth of July?

Next, they came for Dhaka. Gunmen whom many have linked to the Islamic State raided a popular cafe in an upscale neighborhood in Bangladesh's teeming capital. After a 10-hour standoff, authorities stormed the establishment; at least 20 hostages, mostly Italian and Japanese nationals, died at the militants' hands. U.S. college students also were among the dead. The Islamic State's reach is growing far from the Middle East, security experts fretted. Foreigners are at risk all over the Muslim world.

Then, they attacked Baghdad. ...The area is predominantly Shiite, making it a choice target for the Sunni extremist group.
Two-hundred and fifty people killed by IS, and yet "we have become almost numb to the violence in Baghdad: Deadly car bombings there conjure up no hashtags, no Facebook profile pictures with the Iraqi flag, and no Western newspaper front pages of the victims' names and life stories, and they attract only muted global sympathy."

I don't know what to say other than that I care. This matters to me. It makes me angry and it fills me with grief.

And again I find myself unable to do anything but bear witness. Which isn't enough, but it is all I can do. We all must do at least that.

Open Wide...

Of Course

[Content Note: Guns; misogyny.]

Yesterday, House Republicans delayed a vote on an "anti-terrorism" package that included some gun reform proposals because they don't want to "reward" Democrats for doing their fucking jobs. No, seriously:

House GOP leaders have decided to postpone a vote on an "anti-terrorism" package amid Republican objections over amendments and concerns about rewarding Democrats for their daylong gun control "sit-in" on the House floor.

...Republicans members have offered at least 10 gun-related amendments to the package. But leadership was hoping to keep amendments — particularly Democratic amendments — to a minimum so as to avoid giving the left the vote on the gun measures they've been seeking all along.

Republicans worry that giving Democrats votes on their gun provisions, which could be offered as amendments, would only reward their behavior on the floor during the daylong protest. Republicans said the sit-in was an affront to the institution, and they want to be careful not to appear to be caving in response.
Emphasis mine.

What is there even to say anymore? Party above country. Party above decency. Party above all. The Republicans literally do not give a single fuck about saving people's lives from gun violence. Especially not if they have to concede that the Democrats are doing exactly what a majority of voters in both parties are asking Congress to do.

And in case that wasn't evidence enough: "Ryan: GOP will hold hearings on Clinton probe."
Republicans will hold hearings to learn more about the FBI's decision to not recommend criminal charges for presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said Tuesday night.

"People have been convicted for far less," Ryan said during an interview with Megyn Kelly on Fox News's "The Kelly File," saying that he thought FBI director James Comey "was going to recommend prosecution" based on the FBI director's opening remarks in a press conference Tuesday.

..."We're going to have hearings," Ryan said on Fox, mentioning House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah). Chaffetz indicated hours earlier on Fox that he was considering calling Comey to Capitol Hill to testify about the FBI's probe and conclusion not to recommend charges.
Because the spectacle of a woman repeatedly acknowledging the mistakes she'd made and apologizing for something that essentially comes down to a fairly routine bureaucratic matter (no matter much her opponents try to elevate it to something more) and being summarily subjected to a public chastening that no man in the same position (*cough* Colin Powell *cough*) isn't enough for Republicans. Now they need to make a (literal) federal case out it, just to try humiliate her.

Which they evidently believe is way more important than doing anything of actual practical value for the people they purport to represent.

Open Wide...

And Again

[Content Note: Police brutality; racism; guns; death.]

Yesterday, a video surfaced of two Baton Rouge police officers physically restraining a Black man named Alton Sterling, who was selling CDs outside a convenience store. They tased him, forced him to the ground, and shot him at point-blank range. He died at the scene. The New Orleans Advocate reports that the local coroner said a preliminary autopsy indicated Sterling died due to a homicide caused by multiple gunshot wounds to the chest and back.

The officers claim that Sterling had a gun, but, if indeed he did, it appears to have remained in his pocket while he was killed. As we have now seen dozens of times before, witnesses to the shooting fundamentally contradict the immediate police account of the killing. The two officers involved "have been put on paid administrative leave, though it's believed that only one fired his weapon. ...The officers were wearing body cameras, but they came loose during the incident and were dangling from their uniforms."

At the Washington Post, Travis M. Andrews and Michael E. Miller have compiled everything we know so far about the shooting, and they talk to Sterling's family about who he was and what they're going through.

The piece was written before the family held a heartbreaking press conference this morning. It also includes the video of the killing, which I strongly urge caution in viewing and even more so in sharing. It's important the video exists; it is not required for anyone to watch it nor to share it, especially if you are sharing it in a place where it might be triggering for people who are reeling from another deadly incident of police brutality against a Black citizen.

My condolences to Sterling's family, friends, and immediate community—and to Black people in the broader community who may once again be left feeling unsafe and devalued by their communities and their country. I take up space in solidarity with people who are angry and people who are grieving. I am angry and grieving, too, but it is not the same. It is not the same to be angry and grieving from the distance afforded and maintained by privilege.

I will certainly have more to say about this as additional information becomes available. For right now, I just want to say this: Alton Sterling was a human being who did not deserve to be killed by police. No matter what anyone else tries to say about him, or about the cop(s) who killed him, that will always be true.

Open Wide...

Big News Tues

So, yesterday was a big news day, which meant I ended up working for most of the day after all. In case you were trapped under something heavy and missed all the news, FBI Director James Comey disclosed the results of the FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton's emails, and I'm sure you'll all be shocked to hear that no criminal intent or activity was uncovered, and no charges are being recommended to prosecutors.

In other news: President Obama hit the campaign trail for the first time in support of candidate Hillary Clinton. Now, you know I was waiting for that business with max levels of excitement! And even with my ridiculously high expectations of how awesome it would be, those two campaigning together managed to exceed my highest of hopes. It was just tremendous to watch them, and, with all seriousness, I feel grateful to be alive during these (fingers crossed) presidencies.

President Obama: There has never been any man or woman more qualified for this office than Hillary Clinton. Ever! And that's the truth.
Love. Lovelovelovelovelove. LOVE.

Anyway! In case you missed any of my coverage yesterday, here's a round-up:

Shakesville: On Hillary's Emails.

BNR: A Dark Day for Hillary's Opponents: FBI Says 'NO CHARGES' on Her Emails.

BNR: America Just Took One Huge Step Closer to a Woman President.

Shakesville: These Two!

Twitter, via Storify: Clinton & Obama on the Campaign Trail Again.

BNR: Hillary and Obama, Democratic Superduo.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a chess board

Hosted by chess.

Open Wide...

These Two!

As I've mentioned once or twice or a million times, I'm pretty excited about Hillary Clinton and President Obama campaigning together! And today is finally the day!

They flew down to North Carolina together on Air Force One, and they will be appearing together momentarily.

If you need a livestream of the campaign event, here you go!

UPDATE: 1. Storify of my live-tweeting; and 2. My review of their dual addresses for BNR. Enjoy!

Open Wide...