US-Israeli rela­tions have sunk to new lows after Obama admin­is­tra­tion offi­cials were cit­ed call­ing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a “chick­en­shit” and “cow­ard” engag­ing in polit­i­cal pos­tur­ing, instead of efforts at Middle-Eastern de-escalation.

The com­ments were deliv­ered in a con­ver­sa­tion with The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg on con­di­tion of anonymi­ty. To many they sym­bol­ize the next step in a “full-blown cri­sis” of rela­tions between the two, pri­mar­i­ly over Netanyahu’s relent­less set­tle­ment-build­ing in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, and the Iranian nuclear issue.

“The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chick­en­shit,” said one offi­cial, refer­ring to Netanyahu by his nick­name.“The good thing about Netanyahu is that he’s scared to launch wars. The bad thing about him is that he won’t do any­thing to reach an accom­mo­da­tion with the Palestinians or with the Sunni Arab states,” he continued.

Goldberg keeps a run­ning list of all the things US offi­cials have ever called Netanyahu in inter­views, and it’s not small. “Aspergery” popped up, among oth­er things. But it is the first time high-rank­ing offi­cials have expressed their views of the Israeli leader in such a “gloves-off man­ner.
”Read more @http://rt​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​2​0​0​4​2​7​-​n​e​t​a​n​y​a​h​u​-​c​h​i​c​k​e​n​s​h​i​t​-​u​s​-​i​n​t​e​r​v​i​ew/

So poi­so­nous has par­ti­san­ship become in Washington that Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, nor­mal­ly a bea­con of rea­son, has announced that he’ll vote against con­firm­ing Brooklyn fed­er­al pros­e­cu­tor Loretta Lynch as U.S. attor­ney general.

Not because Lynch is unqual­i­fied. She’s superbly capa­ble of serv­ing as America’s top lawyer.

Not because back­ground checks have found unto­ward behav­ior by Lynch. Her pro­bity is absolute­ly unblemished.

Instead, McCain would spurn Lynch as pay­back for President Obama issu­ing an exec­u­tive action to let mil­lions of undoc­u­ment­ed immi­grants live and work in the coun­try. (A judge has stayed the President’s order.)

Appearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lynch offered no opin­ion about the legal­i­ty of Obama’s action, say­ing only that Justice Department lawyers seemed to have engaged in a “rea­son­able” dis­cus­sion about the pol­i­cy, and that any advice she offered as attor­ney gen­er­al would be “thor­ough,” “objec­tive” and “com­plete­ly independent.”

Brushing by such nuances, a McCain spokesman said, “No, he’s not vot­ing for her, because she called the Obama exec­u­tive action on immi­gra­tion ‘rea­son­able.’ ”

A senator’s duty when con­sid­er­ing a nom­i­nee is to ensure that the per­son is qual­i­fied for the post, while accept­ing that Presidents choose indi­vid­u­als who are in sync with their philoso­phies. Otherwise, Democrats and Republicans would nev­er approve the oth­er party’s nominees.

Sadly, McCain is breach­ing his oblig­a­tion to the nation. His stance is all the more dis­tress­ing because he was a mem­ber of the bipar­ti­san “Gang of Eight” that worked to pass a com­pre­hen­sive immi­gra­tion bill in 2013.

For a bit of san­i­ty, here’s what McCain’s col­league Chuck Grassley — one of just four Republicans who have expressed sup­port for Lynch — said at her hearing:

“If we can’t con­firm Loretta Lynch, then I don’t believe we can con­firm any­one. And I would like to remind my col­leagues that the President’s immi­gra­tion poli­cies are not seek­ing con­fir­ma­tion today.”

McCain may be run­ning scared because he could face a GOP pri­ma­ry chal­lenge for reelec­tion next year. That could be an expla­na­tion, but it is no excuse for imper­il­ing con­fir­ma­tion of an exem­plary pub­lic ser­vant who would become the nation’s first African-American female AG​.nydai​lynews​.com.

Minister Farrakhan speaks about Netanyahu.
Speaks about why that Charlatan Benjamin Netanyahu is so intent to use America’s wealth and mil­i­tary might to go against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
It was the same Netanyahu who pushed America into a war against Iraq under the pre­text that Iraq pos­s­esed weapons of mass destruc­tion that was­n’t only an exis­ten­tial threat to The Zionist state of Israel but to America as well.
Like goats the American Government , it;s Administration and con­gress­es launched an ille­gal, ille­git­i­mate and uncon­scionable war against the Iraqi peo­ple which killed and muti­lat­ed mil­lions of them.

No weapons were found because none exist­ed , Netanyaha and Ariel Sharon laughed at the stu­pid­i­ty of America.
As Farrakhan said, Ariel Sharon knew that America is under Israel’s con­trol ‚all of it’s politi­cians Republicans and Democrats have been bough and paid for with Zionist money.

GUNMEN yes­ter­day shot dead a police­man and left his body in an open wood­land in the com­mu­ni­ty of Hartlands, St Catherine. The Jamaica Observer was told that 26-year-old Constable Collin Raynor, who was assigned to Linstead Police Station in St Catherine, and his broth­er were in the remote area close to a fish pond when they were attacked by armed thugs about 3:30 pm. Constable Raynor died on the spot, but his broth­er, who was also shot, escaped and, accord­ing to the police, man­aged to dri­ve to the main road to call for help.

The bru­tal mur­der left sev­er­al police­men who were at a fun day in Hellshire in shock. Following the inci­dent, Raynor’s moth­er arrived on the scene and wept. Too dis­traught to speak, she was seen hold­ing her slain son’s uni­form shirt. Marlon Nesbeth, senior super­in­ten­dent in charge of the St Catherine North Police Division, has launched a probe into the shoot­ing.http://​jamaicaob​serv​er​.com

“I’m embar­rassed for them. For them to address a let­ter to the aya­tol­lah who they claim is our mor­tal ene­my, and their basic argu­ment to them is ‘don’t deal with our pres­i­dent ‘cause you can’t trust him to fol­low through on agree­ment,” Obama said in a trail­er for a Vice News inter­view sched­uled to run in full on Monday. “That’s close to unprece­dent­ed,” he said.

The let­ter, warn­ing Iranian lead­ers that any agree­ment reached in nuclear nego­ti­a­tions would mere­ly con­sti­tute an “exec­u­tive agree­ment,” gen­er­at­ed a sig­nif­i­cant back­lash in Washington and beyond.

Iran’s for­eign min­is­ter called the let­ter “unprece­dent­ed and undiplo­mat­ic,” while a mes­sage from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s Twitter account said it “is indica­tive” of an American “col­lapse in ethics.”

Germany’s for­eign min­is­ter weighed in Thursday, say­ing that to call the let­ter unhelp­ful would be “an understatement.”

“It was kind of a very rapid process. Everybody was look­ing for­ward to get­ting out of town because of the snow­storm,” said Sen. John McCain (R‑Ariz.), who also signed, in an inter­view with POLITICO ear­li­er this week. “I think we prob­a­bly should have had more dis­cus­sion about it, giv­en the blow­back that there is.”

Republican sup­port for the let­ter has extend­ed beyond the Senate, with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal sign­ing it Tuesday. Others also have backed the warn­ing to Iran’s lead­er­ship, includ­ing Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, for­mer Texas Gov. Rick Perry and for­mer Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, all of whom are prospec­tive can­di­dates for the party’s pres­i­den­tial nomination.

Read more: http://​www​.politi​co​.com/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​5​/​0​3​/​o​b​a​m​a​-​i​r​a​n​-​l​e​t​t​e​r​-​r​e​a​c​t​i​o​n​-​1​1​6​0​5​6​.​h​t​m​l​#​i​x​z​z​3​U​O​K​l​s​hzN

Univision has fired one of its most pop­u­lar talk show hosts after he said on air that Michelle Obama looked like she was part of “the cast of ‘Planet of the Apes.’ ”

The grow­ing American Spanish-lan­guage net­work ter­mi­nat­ed the employ­ment of Rodner Figueroa on Thursday after­noon, less than one day after he made the racist com­ment on his pop­u­lar “El Gorda y la Flaca” program.

In a state­ment pro­vid­ed to People en Español, the net­work said there was “no room for racism” at Univision.

“Yesterday dur­ing the enter­tain­ment pro­gram ‘El Gordo y La Flaca,’ Rodner Figueroa made some com­ments about First Lady Michelle Obama that were com­plete­ly rep­re­hen­si­ble and in no way a reflec­tion of the val­ues and opin­ions of Univision. As a result, Mr. Figueroa was fired imme­di­ate­ly,” the net­work said.

On Wednesday, dur­ing a seg­ment on his show about the use of make­up by celebri­ties, Figueroa, an Emmy award-win­ner, said that “Michelle Obama looks like she is from the cast of the ‘Planet Of The Apes.’ ”

The deroga­to­ry remarks were wide­ly cir­cu­lat­ed on social media.

TAGS:

tv ,

michelle oba­ma

Just when you thought Rudy Giuliani could­n’t get cra­zier, the for­mer NYC may­or blamed Obama for the bru­tal beat­down at a Brooklyn McDonalds —and said the pres­i­dent should be more like Bill Cosby.

Obama is ignor­ing “enor­mous amounts of crime” com­mit­ted by African-Americans, Giuliani said Thursday. And he said President Obama is to blame for the brawl inside a McDonald’s in Brooklyn as well as the shoot­ing of two cops in Ferguson because of the anti-police “tone” com­ing from the White House. The for­mer may­or, speak­ing on AM970 radio this morn­ing, was asked what he thought about a num­ber of dis­turb­ing issues in the news. Host John Gambling asked for Giuliani’s take on the vicious McDonald’s fight, the recent police shoot­ings in Ferguson and NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton get­ting booed Thursday at a City Council hear­ing by protesters.

“It all starts at the top. It’s the tone that’s set by the President,” Giuliani said. He added he just returned from a mul­ti-city trip over­seas and the United States is con­stant­ly derid­ed there as a “racist state.” “It is the oblig­a­tion of the President to explain … that our police are the best in the world,” said Giuliani. He also said Obama should have used his “bul­ly pul­pit” to stop protests in Ferguson over the sum­mer, but didn’t.

Obama is also not address­ing the “enor­mous amount of crime” that’s being com­mit­ted by African-Americans due to “his­tor­i­cal” rea­sons, Giuliani said.

“I hate to men­tion it because of what hap­pened after­wards, but (he should be say­ing) the kinds of stuff Bill Cosby used to say,” said Giuliani.

Cosby, before his pub­lic image was tar­nished with a slew of rape alle­ga­tions, had spo­ken fre­quent­ly and often in blunt terms about how African-Americans need­ed to focus more on edu­ca­tion, be bet­ter par­ents and avoid lives of crime.

Giuliani, who was round­ly crit­i­cized for say­ing Obama wasn’t patri­ot­ic, made a point of say­ing a few nice things about the President.

“I dis­agree with Barack Obama on almost every­thing, but I think he’s a good fam­i­ly man and a good man,” said Giuliani.http://​www​.nydai​lynews​.com/

The President’s speech.

It is a rare hon­or in this life to fol­low one of your heroes. And John Lewis is one of my heroes.

Now, I have to imag­ine that when a younger John Lewis woke up that morn­ing 50 years ago and made his way to Brown Chapel, hero­ics were not on his mind. A day like this was not on his mind. Young folks with bedrolls and back­packs were milling about. Veterans of the move­ment trained new­com­ers in the tac­tics of non-vio­lence; the right way to pro­tect your­self when attacked. A doc­tor described what tear gas does to the body, while marchers scrib­bled down instruc­tions for con­tact­ing their loved ones. The air was thick with doubt, antic­i­pa­tion and fear. And they com­fort­ed them­selves with the final verse of the final hymn they sung:

“No mat­ter what may be the test, God will take care of you;
Lean, weary one, upon His breast, God will take care of you.”

And then, his knap­sack stocked with an apple, a tooth­brush, and a book on gov­ern­ment — all you need for a night behind bars — John Lewis led them out of the church on a mis­sion to change America.

President and Mrs. Bush, Governor Bentley, Mayor Evans, Sewell, Reverend Strong, mem­bers of Congress, elect­ed offi­cials, foot sol­diers, friends, fel­low Americans:

As John not­ed, there are places and moments in America where this nation’s des­tiny has been decid­ed. Many are sites of war — Concord and Lexington, Appomattox, Gettysburg. Others are sites that sym­bol­ize the dar­ing of America’s char­ac­ter — Independence Hall and Seneca Falls, Kitty Hawk and Cape Canaveral.

Selma is such a place. In one after­noon 50 years ago, so much of our tur­bu­lent his­to­ry — the stain of slav­ery and anguish of civ­il war; the yoke of seg­re­ga­tion and tyran­ny of Jim Crow; the death of four lit­tle girls in Birmingham; and the dream of a Baptist preach­er — all that his­to­ry met on this bridge.

It was not a clash of armies, but a clash of wills; a con­test to deter­mine the true mean­ing of America. And because of men and women like John Lewis, Joseph Lowery, Hosea Williams, Amelia Boynton, Diane Nash, Ralph Abernathy, C.T. Vivian, Andrew Young, Fred Shuttlesworth, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and so many oth­ers, the idea of a just America and a fair America, an inclu­sive America, and a gen­er­ous America — that idea ulti­mate­ly triumphed.

As is true across the land­scape of American his­to­ry, we can­not exam­ine this moment in iso­la­tion. The march on Selma was part of a broad­er cam­paign that spanned gen­er­a­tions; the lead­ers that day part of a long line of heroes.

We gath­er here to cel­e­brate them. We gath­er here to hon­or the courage of ordi­nary Americans will­ing to endure bil­ly clubs and the chas­ten­ing rod; tear gas and the tram­pling hoof; men and women who despite the gush of blood and splin­tered bone would stay true to their North Star and keep march­ing towards justice.

They did as Scripture instruct­ed: “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribu­la­tion, be con­stant in prayer.” And in the days to come, they went back again and again. When the trum­pet call sound­ed for more to join, the peo­ple came –- black and white, young and old, Christian and Jew, wav­ing the American flag and singing the same anthems full of faith and hope. A white news­man, Bill Plante, who cov­ered the march­es then and who is with us here today, quipped that the grow­ing num­ber of white peo­ple low­ered the qual­i­ty of the singing. To those who marched, though, those old gospel songs must have nev­er sound­ed so sweet.

In time, their cho­rus would well up and reach President Johnson. And he would send them pro­tec­tion, and speak to the nation, echo­ing their call for America and the world to hear: “We shall over­come.” What enor­mous faith these men and women had. Faith in God, but also faith in America.

The Americans who crossed this bridge, they were not phys­i­cal­ly impos­ing. But they gave courage to mil­lions. They held no elect­ed office. But they led a nation. They marched as Americans who had endured hun­dreds of years of bru­tal vio­lence, count­less dai­ly indig­ni­ties –- but they didn’t seek spe­cial treat­ment, just the equal treat­ment promised to them almost a cen­tu­ry before.

What they did here will rever­ber­ate through the ages. Not because the change they won was pre­or­dained; not because their vic­to­ry was com­plete; but because they proved that non­vi­o­lent change is pos­si­ble, that love and hope can con­quer hate.

As we com­mem­o­rate their achieve­ment, we are well-served to remem­ber that at the time of the march­es, many in pow­er con­demned rather than praised them. Back then, they were called Communists, or half-breeds, or out­side agi­ta­tors, sex­u­al and moral degen­er­ates, and worse –- they were called every­thing but the name their par­ents gave them. Their faith was ques­tioned. Their lives were threat­ened. Their patri­o­tism challenged.

And yet, what could be more American than what hap­pened in this place?What could more pro­found­ly vin­di­cate the idea of America than plain and hum­ble peo­ple –- unsung, the down­trod­den, the dream­ers not of high sta­tion, not born to wealth or priv­i­lege, not of one reli­gious tra­di­tion but many, com­ing togeth­er to shape their country’s course?

What greater expres­sion of faith in the American exper­i­ment than this, what greater form of patri­o­tism is there than the belief that America is not yet fin­ished, that we are strong enough to be self-crit­i­cal, that each suc­ces­sive gen­er­a­tion can look upon our imper­fec­tions and decide that it is in our pow­er to remake this nation to more close­ly align with our high­est ideals?

That’s why Selma is not some out­lier in the American expe­ri­ence. That’s why it’s not a muse­um or a sta­t­ic mon­u­ment to behold from a dis­tance. It is instead the man­i­fes­ta­tion of a creed writ­ten into our found­ing doc­u­ments: “We the People…in order to form a more per­fect union.” “We hold these truths to be self-evi­dent, that all men are cre­at­ed equal.”

These are not just words. They’re a liv­ing thing, a call to action, a roadmap for cit­i­zen­ship and an insis­tence in the capac­i­ty of free men and women to shape our own des­tiny. For founders like Franklin and Jefferson, for lead­ers like Lincoln and FDR, the suc­cess of our exper­i­ment in self-gov­ern­ment rest­ed on engag­ing all of our cit­i­zens in this work. And that’s what we cel­e­brate here in Selma. That’s what this move­ment was all about, one leg in our long jour­ney toward freedom.

The American instinct that led these young men and women to pick up the torch and cross this bridge, that’s the same instinct that moved patri­ots to choose rev­o­lu­tion over tyran­ny. It’s the same instinct that drew immi­grants from across oceans and the Rio Grande; the same instinct that led women to reach for the bal­lot, work­ers to orga­nize against an unjust sta­tus quo; the same instinct that led us to plant a flag at Iwo Jima and on the sur­face of the Moon.

It’s the idea held by gen­er­a­tions of cit­i­zens who believed that America is a con­stant work in progress; who believed that lov­ing this coun­try requires more than singing its prais­es or avoid­ing uncom­fort­able truths. It requires the occa­sion­al dis­rup­tion, the will­ing­ness to speak out for what is right, to shake up the sta­tus quo. That’s America.

That’s what makes us unique. That’s what cements our rep­u­ta­tion as a bea­con of oppor­tu­ni­ty. Young peo­ple behind the Iron Curtain would see Selma and even­tu­al­ly tear down that wall. Young peo­ple in Soweto would hear Bobby Kennedy talk about rip­ples of hope and even­tu­al­ly ban­ish the scourge of apartheid. Young peo­ple in Burma went to prison rather than sub­mit to mil­i­tary rule. They saw what John Lewis had done. From the streets of Tunis to the Maidan in Ukraine, this gen­er­a­tion of young peo­ple can draw strength from this place, where the pow­er­less could change the world’s great­est pow­er and push their lead­ers to expand the bound­aries of freedom.

They saw that idea made real right here in Selma, Alabama. They saw that idea man­i­fest itself here in America.

Because of cam­paigns like this, a Voting Rights Act was passed. Political and eco­nom­ic and social bar­ri­ers came down. And the change these men and women wrought is vis­i­ble here today in the pres­ence of African Americans who run board­rooms, who sit on the bench, who serve in elect­ed office from small towns to big cities; from the Congressional Black Caucus all the way to the Oval Office.

Because of what they did, the doors of oppor­tu­ni­ty swung open not just for black folks, but for every American. Women marched through those doors. Latinos marched through those doors. Asian Americans, gay Americans, Americans with dis­abil­i­ties — they all came through those doors. Their endeav­ors gave the entire South the chance to rise again, not by reassert­ing the past, but by tran­scend­ing the past.

What a glo­ri­ous thing, Dr. King might say. And what a solemn debt we owe. Which leads us to ask, just how might we repay that debt?

First and fore­most, we have to rec­og­nize that one day’s com­mem­o­ra­tion, no mat­ter how spe­cial, is not enough. If Selma taught us any­thing, it’s that our work is nev­er done. The American exper­i­ment in self-gov­ern­ment gives work and pur­pose to each generation.

Selma teach­es us, as well, that action requires that we shed our cyn­i­cism. For when it comes to the pur­suit of jus­tice, we can afford nei­ther com­pla­cen­cy nor despair.

Just this week, I was asked whether I thought the Department of Justice’s Ferguson report shows that, with respect to race, lit­tle has changed in this coun­try. And I under­stood the ques­tion; the report’s nar­ra­tive was sad­ly famil­iar. It evoked the kind of abuse and dis­re­gard for cit­i­zens that spawned the Civil Rights Movement. But I reject­ed the notion that nothing’s changed. What hap­pened in Ferguson may not be unique, but it’s no longer endem­ic. It’s no longer sanc­tioned by law or by cus­tom. And before the Civil Rights Movement, it most sure­ly was.

We do a dis­ser­vice to the cause of jus­tice by inti­mat­ing that bias and dis­crim­i­na­tion are immutable, that racial divi­sion is inher­ent to America. If you think nothing’s changed in the past 50 years, ask some­body who lived through the Selma or Chicago or Los Angeles of the 1950s. Ask the female CEO who once might have been assigned to the sec­re­tar­i­al pool if nothing’s changed. Ask your gay friend if it’s eas­i­er to be out and proud in America now than it was thir­ty years ago. To deny this progress, this hard-won progress -– our progress –- would be to rob us of our own agency, our own capac­i­ty, our respon­si­bil­i­ty to do what we can to make America better.

Of course, a more com­mon mis­take is to sug­gest that Ferguson is an iso­lat­ed inci­dent; that racism is ban­ished; that the work that drew men and women to Selma is now com­plete, and that what­ev­er racial ten­sions remain are a con­se­quence of those seek­ing to play the “race card” for their own pur­pos­es. We don’t need the Ferguson report to know that’s not true. We just need to open our eyes, and our ears, and our hearts to know that this nation’s racial his­to­ry still casts its long shad­ow upon us.

We know the march is not yet over. We know the race is not yet won. We know that reach­ing that blessed des­ti­na­tion where we are judged, all of us, by the con­tent of our char­ac­ter requires admit­ting as much, fac­ing up to the truth. “We are capa­ble of bear­ing a great bur­den,” James Baldwin once wrote, “once we dis­cov­er that the bur­den is real­i­ty and arrive where real­i­ty is.”

There’s noth­ing America can’t han­dle if we actu­al­ly look square­ly at the prob­lem. And this is work for all Americans, not just some. Not just whites. Not just blacks. If we want to hon­or the courage of those who marched that day, then all of us are called to pos­sess their moral imag­i­na­tion. All of us will need to feel as they did the fierce urgency of now. All of us need to rec­og­nize as they did that change depends on our actions, on our atti­tudes, the things we teach our chil­dren. And if we make such an effort, no mat­ter how hard it may some­times seem, laws can be passed, and con­sciences can be stirred, and con­sen­sus can be built.

With such an effort, we can make sure our crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem serves all and not just some. Together, we can raise the lev­el of mutu­al trust that polic­ing is built on –- the idea that police offi­cers are mem­bers of the com­mu­ni­ty they risk their lives to pro­tect, and cit­i­zens in Ferguson and New York and Cleveland, they just want the same thing young peo­ple here marched for 50 years ago -– the pro­tec­tion of the law. Together, we can address unfair sen­tenc­ing and over­crowd­ed pris­ons, and the stunt­ed cir­cum­stances that rob too many boys of the chance to become men, and rob the nation of too many men who could be good dads, and good work­ers, and good neighbors.

With effort, we can roll back pover­ty and the road­blocks to oppor­tu­ni­ty. Americans don’t accept a free ride for any­body, nor do we believe in equal­i­ty of out­comes. But we do expect equal oppor­tu­ni­ty. And if we real­ly mean it, if we’re not just giv­ing lip ser­vice to it, but if we real­ly mean it and are will­ing to sac­ri­fice for it, then, yes, we can make sure every child gets an edu­ca­tion suit­able to this new cen­tu­ry, one that expands imag­i­na­tions and lifts sights and gives those chil­dren the skills they need. We can make sure every per­son will­ing to work has the dig­ni­ty of a job, and a fair wage, and a real voice, and stur­dier rungs on that lad­der into the mid­dle class.

And with effort, we can pro­tect the foun­da­tion stone of our democ­ra­cy for which so many marched across this bridge –- and that is the right to vote. Right now, in 2015, 50 years after Selma, there are laws across this coun­try designed to make it hard­er for peo­ple to vote. As we speak, more of such laws are being pro­posed. Meanwhile, the Voting Rights Act, the cul­mi­na­tion of so much blood, so much sweat and tears, the prod­uct of so much sac­ri­fice in the face of wan­ton vio­lence, the Voting Rights Act stands weak­ened, its future sub­ject to polit­i­cal rancor.

How can that be? The Voting Rights Act was one of the crown­ing achieve­ments of our democ­ra­cy, the result of Republican and Democratic efforts. President Reagan signed its renew­al when he was in office. President George W. Bush signed its renew­al when he was in office. One hun­dred mem­bers of Congress have come here today to hon­or peo­ple who were will­ing to die for the right to pro­tect it. If we want to hon­or this day, let that hun­dred go back to Washington and gath­er four hun­dred more, and togeth­er, pledge to make it their mis­sion to restore that law this year. That’s how we hon­or those on this bridge.

Of course, our democ­ra­cy is not the task of Congress alone, or the courts alone, or even the President alone. If every new vot­er-sup­pres­sion law was struck down today, we would still have, here in America, one of the low­est vot­ing rates among free peo­ples. Fifty years ago, reg­is­ter­ing to vote here in Selma and much of the South meant guess­ing the num­ber of jelly­beans in a jar, the num­ber of bub­bles on a bar of soap. It meant risk­ing your dig­ni­ty, and some­times, your life.

What’s our excuse today for not vot­ing? How do we so casu­al­ly dis­card the right for which so many fought? How do we so ful­ly give away our pow­er, our voice, in shap­ing America’s future? Why are we point­ing to some­body else when we could take the time just to go to the polling places? We give away our power.

Fellow marchers, so much has changed in 50 years. We have endured war and we’ve fash­ioned peace. We’ve seen tech­no­log­i­cal won­ders that touch every aspect of our lives. We take for grant­ed con­ve­niences that our par­ents could have scarce­ly imag­ined. But what has not changed is the imper­a­tive of cit­i­zen­ship; that will­ing­ness of a 26-year-old dea­con, or a Unitarian min­is­ter, or a young moth­er of five to decide they loved this coun­try so much that they’d risk every­thing to real­ize its promise.

That’s what it means to love America. That’s what it means to believe in America. That’s what it means when we say America is exceptional.

For we were born of change. We broke the old aris­toc­ra­cies, declar­ing our­selves enti­tled not by blood­line, but endowed by our Creator with cer­tain inalien­able rights. We secure our rights and respon­si­bil­i­ties through a sys­tem of self-gov­ern­ment, of and by and for the peo­ple. That’s why we argue and fight with so much pas­sion and con­vic­tion — because we know our efforts mat­ter. We know America is what we make of it.

Look at our his­to­ry. We are Lewis and Clark and Sacajawea, pio­neers who braved the unfa­mil­iar, fol­lowed by a stam­pede of farm­ers and min­ers, and entre­pre­neurs and huck­sters. That’s our spir­it. That’s who we are.

We are Sojourner Truth and Fannie Lou Hamer, women who could do as much as any man and then some. And we’re Susan B. Anthony, who shook the sys­tem until the law reflect­ed that truth. That is our character.

We’re the immi­grants who stowed away on ships to reach these shores, the hud­dled mass­es yearn­ing to breathe free –- Holocaust sur­vivors, Soviet defec­tors, the Lost Boys of Sudan. We’re the hope­ful strivers who cross the Rio Grande because we want our kids to know a bet­ter life. That’s how we came to be.

We’re the slaves who built the White House and the econ­o­my of the South. We’re the ranch hands and cow­boys who opened up the West, and count­less labor­ers who laid rail, and raised sky­scrap­ers, and orga­nized for work­ers’ rights.

We’re the fresh-faced GIs who fought to lib­er­ate a con­ti­nent. And we’re the Tuskeegee Airmen, and the Navajo code-talk­ers, and the Japanese Americans who fought for this coun­try even as their own lib­er­ty had been denied.

We’re the fire­fight­ers who rushed into those build­ings on ⁹⁄₁₁, the vol­un­teers who signed up to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq. We’re the gay Americans whose blood ran in the streets of San Francisco and New York, just as blood ran down this bridge.

We are sto­ry­tellers, writ­ers, poets, artists who abhor unfair­ness, and despise hypocrisy, and give voice to the voice­less, and tell truths that need to be told.

We’re the inven­tors of gospel and jazz and blues, blue­grass and coun­try, and hip-hop and rock and roll, and our very own sound with all the sweet sor­row and reck­less joy of freedom.

We are Jackie Robinson, endur­ing scorn and spiked cleats and pitch­es com­ing straight to his head, and steal­ing home in the World series.

https://​www​.youtube​.com/​w​a​t​c​h​?​v​=​N​V​A​Z​p​1​j​0​tKc

We are the peo­ple Langston Hughes wrote of who “build our tem­ples for tomor­row, strong as we know how.” We are the peo­ple Emerson wrote of, “who for truth and honor’s sake stand fast and suf­fer long;” who are “nev­er tired, so long as we can see far enough.”

That’s what America is. Not stock pho­tos or air­brushed his­to­ry, or fee­ble attempts to define some of us as more American than oth­ers. We respect the past, but we don’t pine for the past. We don’t fear the future; we grab for it. America is not some frag­ile thing. We are large, in the words of Whitman, con­tain­ing mul­ti­tudes. We are bois­ter­ous and diverse and full of ener­gy, per­pet­u­al­ly young in spir­it. That’s why some­one like John Lewis at the ripe old age of 25 could lead a mighty march.

And that’s what the young peo­ple here today and lis­ten­ing all across the coun­try must take away from this day. You are America. Unconstrained by habit and con­ven­tion. Unencumbered by what is, because you’re ready to seize what ought to be.

For every­where in this coun­try, there are first steps to be tak­en, there’s new ground to cov­er, there are more bridges to be crossed. And it is you, the young and fear­less at heart, the most diverse and edu­cat­ed gen­er­a­tion in our his­to­ry, who the nation is wait­ing to follow.

Because Selma shows us that America is not the project of any one per­son. Because the sin­gle-most pow­er­ful word in our democ­ra­cy is the word “We.” “We The People.” “We Shall Overcome.” “Yes We Can.” That word is owned by no one. It belongs to every­one. Oh, what a glo­ri­ous task we are giv­en, to con­tin­u­al­ly try to improve this great nation of ours.

Fifty years from Bloody Sunday, our march is not yet fin­ished, but we’re get­ting clos­er. Two hun­dred and thir­ty-nine years after this nation’s found­ing our union is not yet per­fect, but we are get­ting clos­er. Our job’s eas­i­er because some­body already got us through that first mile. Somebody already got us over that bridge. When it feels the road is too hard, when the torch we’ve been passed feels too heavy, we will remem­ber these ear­ly trav­el­ers, and draw strength from their exam­ple, and hold firm­ly the words of the prophet Isaiah: “Those who hope in the Lord will renew their strength. They will soar on [the] wings like eagles. They will run and not grow weary. They will walk and not be faint.”

We hon­or those who walked so we could run. We must run so our chil­dren soar. And we will not grow weary. For we believe in the pow­er of an awe­some God, and we believe in this country’s sacred promise.

May He bless those war­riors of jus­tice no longer with us, and bless the United States of America. Thank you, everybody.

A Madison, Wis., police offi­cer who fatal­ly shot an unarmed 19-year-old African American man Friday had been exon­er­at­ed in a pre­vi­ous fatal shoot­ing, offi­cials dis­closed Saturday.

Nineteen-year-old Tony Robinson was not armed when a Madison, Wisconsin, police offi­cer fatal­ly shot him, Police Chief Mike Koval said Saturday.
The 2007 shoot­ing involv­ing Matt Kenny, 45, was ruled a “sui­cide by cop,” said Madison Police Chief Mike Koval in a Saturday press con­fer­ence. The case was reviewed and audit­ed at the time by the dis­trict attor­ney’s office in Dane County, he said. Kenny, a 12-year depart­ment vet­er­an, was the pri­ma­ry respond­ing offi­cer in the inci­dent Friday that result­ed in the shoot­ing death of Tony Robinson.

Police said they received sev­er­al calls about a man who had “bat­tered someone“and had been “out in traf­fic” and then gone inside an apart­ment, Koval said Friday. Kenny heard a dis­tur­bance in the apart­ment, forced his way in, and after a scuf­fle with Robinson in which Kenny received a “blow to the head,” the offi­cer shot Robinson, Koval said.Robinson lat­er was pro­nounced dead of gun­shot wounds at a near­by hos­pi­tal. Koval did not dis­close how many shots were fired, say­ing the infor­ma­tion was part of the shoot­ing inves­ti­ga­tion, which will be han­dled by the state’s Division of Criminal Investigation.

Kenny was placed on admin­is­tra­tive leave with pay pend­ing results of the inves­ti­ga­tion, Koval said. He said that Kenny received a com­men­da­tion of val­or for his par­tic­i­pa­tion in the 2007 fatal shooting.
The state agency will han­dle the probe of the new shoot­ing in line with a 2014 Wisconsin law that requires all offi­cer-involved shoot­ings to be reviewed by an out­side agency. Findings will be turned over to the Dane County dis­trict attor­ney’s office, which will also review the case, Koval said.

Koval said he went to the home of Robinson’s fam­i­ly ear­ly Saturday morn­ing to express his con­do­lences and “remorse for the loss of life.” He met Robinson’s grand­par­ents in the dri­ve­way, and they spoke for about 45 min­utes and prayed togeth­er, he said. “To his fam­i­ly, and to his friends, and to this com­mu­ni­ty, that is a loss,” Koval said. “Nineteen years old is too young.”

LAtimes​.com.

LLOYD Bogle was shop­ping in Musgrave Market, Port Antonio, Portland on

Friday “about 11:30 am” when he got the phone call that he was anx­ious­ly await­ing. On the oth­er end of the line was a rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the British High

Commission who informed him that he had been grant­ed a visa. “When I heard from them that my visa was approved I just dropped every­thing and shout­ed out,” Bogle told the Jamaica Observer, his smile stretch­ing from ear to ear. Vendors in the mar­ket were left won­der­ing whether Bogle was los­ing his mind as he jumped for joy. However, the 64-year-old Jamaican-born man who had been strand­ed here since last October because of his immi­gra­tion sta­tus, said he did not care what the ven­dors thought as he knew the call meant that his ago­nis­ing wait to return to England, where he has lived for over 50 years, was now over.

“I am still strug­gling to find words to describe the moment. I just feel relieved,” he told the Sunday Observer. “When I got the call I just stopped every­thing that I was doing and rushed back to the house where I was stay­ing in Portland to col­lect my doc­u­ments.” Bogle said he then jumped in a taxi and head­ed for the British High Commission in Kingston, his heart rac­ing with excite­ment through­out the approx­i­mate­ly two-hour dri­ve. When he arrived there, he was told to wait as the author­i­ties com­plet­ed pro­cess­ing his doc­u­ments. The few min­utes on the out­side seemed like an eter­ni­ty, but it was one that the retired Bogle was will­ing to sit through. Then came the moment when he was hand­ed back his pass­port and saw, in it, a mul­ti­ple entry D‑visa, which states that he has leave to enter England out­side of the rules, requires him to reg­is­ter with the police with­in sev­en days of arrival in the UK, and has no restric­tion on employ­ment. Images of his loved ones back home in Manchester and Oldham — who he thought he would nev­er see again — flashed across his mind.

“When I got mi visa I felt like I just want­ed to shout out and cel­e­brate,” Bogle said, adding that imme­di­ate­ly he took out his cell­phone and called his friend, Gloria Thompson, who had stuck with him through the whole ordeal, giv­ing him shel­ter and who had direct­ed him to the Observer with the advice that the news­pa­per high­lights peo­ple and their issues. Thompson, who joined him lat­er in Kingston on Friday, declined to be inter­viewed. Read more @http://​www​.jamaicaob​serv​er​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​L​l​o​y​d​-​B​o​g​l​e​-​r​e​l​i​e​ved – thanks-Observer – supporters-for-help_18278111

Jerame C. Reid, 36, is seen exiting a vehicle with his hands raised at shoulder height when a Bridgeton police officer opens fire. Reid, who was convicted as a teen for shooting at New Jersey State Police troopers, was repeatedly warned not to move by the cop or ‘you’re gonna be f — ing dead.’

A new­ly released video cap­tur­ing the police shoot­ing death of a New Jersey man shows an offi­cer warn­ing the sus­pect not to move or he’ll be “f — ing dead” before the man steps out of his car .Jerame C. Reid, 36, is seen exit­ing the vehi­cle with his hands raised at shoul­der height when a Bridgeton police offi­cer, who rec­og­nizes Reid by name, fired at least six times. Reid’s vio­lent Dec. 30 death began as a rou­tine traf­fic stop before Officer Braheme Days calls to his part­ner, Roger Worley, “We’ve got a gun in this glove com­part­ment!” “Don’t you f — ing move,” Days warns to Reid and the dri­ver, Leroy Tutt. “I’m telling you I’m gonna shoot you. You’re gonna be f — ing dead.” Tutt obe­di­ent­ly holds both hands out of his open win­dow while Days express­es the con­tin­u­ing issue with Reid. “Hey Jerome, you reach for some­thing you’re going to be f — ing dead,” Days warns. “I’m telling you I’m gonna shoot you. You’re gonna be f — ing dead.”

Records show Days was involved in Reid’s arrest last year on charges of drug pos­ses­sion and obstruc­tion. Reid also spent about 13 years in prison for shoot­ing at New Jersey State Police troop­ers when he was a teen. “I ain’t got no rea­son to reach for noth­ing, bro, I ain’t got no rea­son to reach for noth­ing,” Reid is heard respond­ing as Days con­tin­ues to yell to his part­ner that Reid is reach­ing for some­thing. “I’m get­ting out and get­ting on the ground,” Days is heard telling the offi­cer before indeed open­ing the car door and step­ping out. Days, while shout­ing, takes sev­er­al steps back before open­ing fire upon Reid as he stands with two hands — appear­ing emp­ty — in the air. The dis­turb­ing video was viewed as a hor­ror flick to Reid’s wife, who watched it for the first time Tuesday after its release through open records requests, her attor­ney told NJ​.com.

“It’s trau­mat­ic,” Philadelphia-based attor­ney Conrad J. Benedetto told the paper “She is extreme­ly upset. To see some­one that close to you, it is a pow­er­ful thing. There is a lot of shock val­ue to it.” The Bridgeton Police Department released a state­ment Tuesday express­ing it was upset over the video’s release, call­ing it unpro­fes­sion­al and uncom­pas­sion­ate “out of respect for the fam­i­ly.” “Since this remains a crim­i­nal inves­ti­ga­tion being con­duct­ed by the Cumberland County Prosecutor’s Office with assis­tance from the New Jersey State Police the admin­is­tra­tion of the Bridgeton Police Dept. will refrain from any fur­ther com­ment oth­er than that it ful­ly sup­ports the offi­cers involved as well as the legal process this inci­dent is sub­ject to,” it added. Both offi­cers have been placed on leave while the Cumberland County pros­e­cu­tor’s office investigates.

Lloyd Bogle a 64-year-old Jamaican, who has been liv­ing in England for the past 54 years, is now strand­ed in the island after enjoy­ing a two-week trip — his first back home in all that time. Bogle said his ordeal start­ed on October 13, 2014 when he got to Sangster International Airport in Montego Bay to take a return flight to England, only to be told by Immigration offi­cials that they could not allow him to leave. “I got the shock of my life when I was turned back and told by author­i­ties that I would have to have a visa to leave the coun­try,” said the dis­traught-look­ing Bogle, who added that he was not aware of the trav­el requirement.

The rea­son for that is that Bogle, since leav­ing Jamaica in 1962 when he was sev­en years old and just before the coun­try achieved polit­i­cal inde­pen­dence from Britain, nev­er applied for British cit­i­zen­ship. In fact, he said he did­n’t renew his Jamaican pass­port until just before he trav­elled here on September 29, 2014. “Since I migrat­ed at age sev­en I have nev­er trav­elled and nev­er had any inten­tion to. It was after I retired I decid­ed to take a trip to Jamaica to see what the coun­try was like,” Bogle told the Jamaica Observer yes­ter­day. “I knew no one in Jamaica; it was the first time I was trav­el­ling since I was sev­en,” Bogle empha­sised on the verge of tears. He said the two-week hol­i­day in Portland was like a dream come true, but all of that changed when he got to the air­port. According to Bogle, after get­ting over the shock of being told about the visa, he was on the verge of sleep­ing on the streets, as he had nowhere to go, nei­ther did he know where he was. He said he man­aged to con­tact his moth­er in England and told her about his sit­u­a­tion. She gave him the num­ber for a Jamaican woman who once lived in England and told him to con­tact her for help. Bogle said it was through the kind­ness of this woman, who gave him a place to stay, that he has been able to survive.

Acting on the advice from the Immigration offi­cials, he made con­tact with the British High Commission in Kingston to apply for a visa and was giv­en a list of doc­u­ments he would need for the process. He said he con­tact­ed his moth­er, who brought the doc­u­ments to Jamaica. “After I got the doc­u­ments, I applied for the visa and, after wait­ing for some time, would receive anoth­er shock when I learnt that the visa was not approved,” Bogle told the Observer. He said that no rea­son was giv­en. Now strand­ed, run­ning out of mon­ey, and with no fam­i­ly in Jamaica, Bogle is des­per­ate. Bogle worked for close to 40 years in England, got mar­ried and lat­er divorced. He is the father of two sons, who are both adults. During his time there, he pur­chased a house and, after achiev­ing most of his life’s dream, decid­ed to take ear­ly retire­ment. Yesterday, when the Observer con­tact­ed Bogle’s for­mer boss, Roy Broadeent, in England, he said he was aware of Bogle’s plight. “I have heard of the sit­u­a­tion and am real­ly shocked,” said Broadeent, for­mer man­ag­er of Broadhurst Engineering, where Bogle worked before going to Manchester City Council. “It is true, I have known Lloyd for over 30 years. He has been a res­i­dent in Oldham, Royton for all that time. During that time he worked for me and would lat­er go on to work for Manchester City Council for at least 27 years,” said Broadeent. http://​www​.jamaicaob​serv​er​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​S​t​r​a​n​ded – _18242166

PUBLISHERS NOTE.

This case is beg­ging for the atten­tion of Jamaican author­i­ties at the high­est lev­el . The Jamaican Minister of Foreign Affairs should be in touch with the British home office, not British Immigration offi­cials. Jamaica and Britain are Sovereign nations with a range of mutu­al inter­ests. Respect and coöper­a­tion between them should be mutu­al not one way. This is a great oppor­tu­ni­ty for Jamaica to test whether as a nation, it is equal in the sight of it’s for­mer colonizer.

Brooklyn District Attorney Kenneth Thompson announced the investigation Thursday after he had dropped a weapons case involving Jeffrey Herring, who was accused of having a gun outside his East Flatbush apartment.

The Brooklyn dis­trict attor­ney will inves­ti­gate dis­turb­ing alle­ga­tions that NYPD cops have been plant­i­ng guns on inno­cent peo­ple. District Attorney Kenneth Thompson announced the probe Thursday after drop­ping a weapons case that raised ques­tions about offi­cers’ con­duct. The charges against Jeffrey Herring, accused of hav­ing a gun out­side his East Flatbush apart­ment in June 2013, were dis­missed the day pros­e­cu­tors were giv­en a last chance to bring forth the infor­mant who pur­port­ed­ly led to the col­lar — and couldn’t pro­duce him. That sug­gest­ed the alleged snitch was either unre­li­able or non-exis­tent. “I dreamed of this day,” said a relieved Herring, 53, who was fac­ing up to 15 years in prison. “I knew I didn’t do any­thing.” His pub­lic defend­er Debora Silberman has come up with five oth­er past cas­es that end­ed with dis­missals, acquit­tals and a plea to time served. In all of them, the same group of detec­tives from the 67^th Precinct made sim­i­lar alle­ga­tions using an infor­mant who was nev­er iden­ti­fied or tes­ti­fied and a gun that was found in a plas­tic bag or ban­dana with­out any fin­ger­prints on it. Judges slammed their accounts as “incred­i­ble” and one said she believes the cops per­jured them­selves, records show. “There could be dozens more,” Silberman said in Brooklyn Supreme Court. “Anyone who was arrest­ed by this team — their arrests should be inves­ti­gat­ed.” Thompson vowed to do so.

“We will inves­ti­gate the arrest of Mr. Herring and oth­er arrests by these offi­cers because of the seri­ous ques­tions raised by this case,” he said in a state­ment. The Internal Affairs Bureau was already look­ing into the cops’ con­duct, police have said. Prosecutors were ordered numer­ous times since last October to pro­duce the infor­mant who police said led them to Herring. They claimed a month ago that he was found, but still didn’t bring him to court. On Thursday, exec­u­tive assis­tant dis­trict attor­ney Paul Burns announced that fol­low­ing the pros­e­cu­tors’ and the defense lawyers’ inves­ti­ga­tion, “We do not believe at this time that we can prove beyond a rea­son­able doubt the charges against Mr. Herring so we move to dis­miss the indict­ment.” Justice Dineen Riviezzo ordered the case sealed and added: “I’m glad to hear there is an ongo­ing inves­ti­ga­tion into the alle­ga­tions.” Herring, who’s been out on $3,500 bail dur­ing the ordeal, gave a big hug to his lawyer and was all smiles, say­ing he was look­ing for­ward to being wor­ry free when he walks his dog, a Collie mix named Snowy. “I was fight­ing for my life,” he said. “I didn’t want to go to prison. I love my freedom.”NYdailynews.com.

The Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association was not so much on Tuesday as some cops shouted down Lynch regarding his demand that Mayor de Blasio apologize over comments related to race and police relations.9

Not exact­ly the blue­print for a more per­fect union. Members of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association near­ly came to blows on Tuesday dur­ing a meet­ing of del­e­gates in Queens. There was push­ing, shov­ing and lots of scream­ing at Patrick Lynch, pres­i­dent of the 23,000-member union. The in-house bat­tle erupt­ed over the issue of what patrol offi­cers real­ly need — an apol­o­gy from Mayor de Blasio or bet­ter equip­ment and more offi­cers to back them up on the streets. “This is what my mem­bers want!” a cop yelled near the end of the rau­cous meet­ing. “They want more cars, bet­ter vests, more manpower!”

And then the cop — one of about 350 in atten­dance — took a ver­bal jab at Lynch, who has called on de Blasio to offer a mea cul­pa for his con­tin­ued lack of sup­port for police. “They don’t want an apol­o­gy,” he said. Not exact­ly the blue­print for a more per­fect union. Members of the Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association near­ly came to blows on Tuesday dur­ing a meet­ing of del­e­gates in Queens. There was push­ing, shov­ing and lots of scream­ing at Patrick Lynch, pres­i­dent of the 23,000-member union. The in-house bat­tle erupt­ed over the issue of what patrol offi­cers real­ly need — an apol­o­gy from Mayor de Blasio or bet­ter equip­ment and more offi­cers to back them up on the streets. “This is what my mem­bers want!” a cop yelled near the end of the rau­cous meet­ing. “They want more cars, bet­ter vests, more man­pow­er!” And then the cop — one of about 350 in atten­dance — took a ver­bal jab at Lynch, who has called on de Blasio to offer a mea cul­pa for his con­tin­ued lack of sup­port for police. “They don’t want an apol­o­gy,” he said. At the peak of the clash, about 100 cops were stand­ing and scream­ing at Lynch, sources told the Daily News.

“I don’t care about an apol­o­gy!” anoth­er PBA mem­ber shout­ed. “I want to know what you’re going to do to pro­tect us!” The bat­tle lines were clear when the meet­ing took an ugly turn. The Lynch sup­port­ers were gen­er­al­ly from Manhattan and his detrac­tors were del­e­gates from Brooklyn and the Bronx, sources said. “They were scream­ing,” one of the sources said. “Lynch’s guys got up and there was shov­ing and push­ing.” There were no report­ed injuries at Antun’s, a cater­ing hall in Queens Village. The fra­cas was first report­ed by the Daily News. Some of the del­e­gates at the meet­ing blamed Lynch for order­ing a recent slow­down in arrests and sum­mons­es — a claim the PBA boss has denied. And, sources said, they accused him of buck­ling under pres­sure once NYPD brass made it clear they expect­ed police activ­i­ty to return to nor­mal. A source added that del­e­gates have been pep­per­ing the PBA lead­er­ship for answers. “They want to know if there’s a plan,” the source said, refer­ring to whether cops should make more arrests. Cops also want­ed to know what hap­pened at a Dec. 30 meet­ing of five police union heads, Police Commissioner Bill Bratton and de Blasio at the Police Academy in Queens. Sergeants Benevolent Association President Ed Mullins, right, blamed the decline of NYPD arrests and sum­mons on ‘a hes­i­tan­cy’ brought on by Eric Garner’s July 17 death in a police choke­hold. “They asked Lynch direct­ly: ‘What did you ask the may­or for?’ ” the source added. But Lynch pro­vid­ed no answers.

The yelling and scream­ing last­ed about 10 min­utes before Lynch stormed out. “He didn’t want to talk about it,” the source said. “He said, ‘Everything we say gets back to the media.’ ” Lynch wouldn’t direct­ly answer ques­tions from The News either. In a state­ment, Lynch lat­er blamed the brouha­ha on “a few agi­ta­tors bent on their own self-agen­das.” The frus­tra­tion with the mayor’s poli­cies and con­cerns for safe­ty con­tin­ues to be expressed by our mem­bers,” Lynch said. “They are right­ly angered by the lack of sup­port from City Hall, the dan­ger­ous lack of staffing, the lack of prop­er equip­ment to deal with the lethal envi­ron­ment we face and the rein­sti­tut­ed quo­ta poli­cies.” Police Commissioner Bill Bratton acknowl­edged Friday that a “slow­down” in arrests and sum­mons­es was reflect­ed in crime stats in the weeks after the Dec. 20 exe­cu­tion of Police Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos in Brooklyn. He said Monday that the num­bers were on their way back up and has insist­ed there are no quo­tas. In a relat­ed devel­op­ment on Tuesday, the Lieutenants Benevolent Association deliv­ered a three-page let­ter to the mayor’s office sug­gest­ing ways to “rem­e­dy the estrange­ment” between cops and the admin­is­tra­tion. The let­ter says that de Blasio “ini­ti­at­ed dia­logue” with orga­niz­ers of the var­i­ous protest groups as they pre­pared to dis­rupt the city after a jury decid­ed not to indict the cop who killed Eric Garner in a choke­hold on Staten Island July 17. 

“Mr. Mayor, this led to the per­cep­tion of you and your admin­is­tra­tion align­ing your­selves with the pro­test­ers,” the let­ter states. Earlier in the day, Sergeants Benevolent Association President Ed Mullins blamed the decline in arrests and sum­mons­es on “a hes­i­tan­cy” brought on by Garner’s death. “What we have is no clar­i­ty as to the posi­tion of whether we should be ful­ly enforc­ing these qual­i­ty-of-life crimes or not,” Mullins said on Geraldo Rivera’s radio show on WABC​-AM​.Nydailynews​.com

The head of the city’s pow­er­ful police union has told rank-and-file offi­cers to go back to issu­ing tick­ets, sum­mons­es and mak­ing low-lev­el arrests — but not too zeal­ous­ly, the Daily News has learned. Patrolmens Benevolent Association President Patrick Lynch told union trustees to spread the word, a source said Thursday. “He said they should go back to at least 50% of what they used to do,” the police source said. A sec­ond source said the direc­tive was in response to a promise by Chief of Department James O’Neill to start crack­ing the whip if cops con­tin­ued with the slow­down, appar­ent­ly under pres­sure from his boss, Commissioner Bill Bratton.

“Bratton has been patient,” the sec­ond source said. “His patience is wear­ing thin.” The same might be said of anoth­er top NYPD union leader who report­ed­ly asked Gov. Cuomo to help repair the rift between the cops and City Hall. Sergeants Benevolent Association President Ed Mullins reached out to Albany after a sec­ond sum­mit with Bratton — that Mayor de Blasio did not attend — end­ed in fail­ure. “The may­or is who he is,” Mullins told the Daily News on Thursday. “He’s not going to change his views toward police.” Mullins said he was moved by con­cil­ia­to­ry words Cuomo spoke Tuesday at the funer­al of his father, for­mer Gov. Mario Cuomo, and “he seemed sincere.”

“The truth of it is this is some­thing that can be fixed in 30 sec­onds with the may­or giv­ing a pub­lic state­ment, some­thing apolo­getic, fol­lowed by a ges­ture of good­will so we can begin to trust him,” Mullins said. There was no response from Cuomo, but Mullins’ appeal came short­ly after for­mer President Bill Clinton said he want­ed noth­ing to do with this mess. Clinton “is not going to get involved,” his spokesman, Matt McKenna, told The News. Earlier, both de Blasio and Bratton put the kibosh on either Clinton or Cuomo serv­ing as medi­a­tor. “The may­or has immense respect for President Clinton, but what’s need­ed real­ly here is a con­tin­ued dia­logue,” spokesman Phil Walzak said. “The may­or is going to keep talk­ing to and meet­ing with these union lead­ers.” The idea of enlist­ing Clinton’s help was raised dur­ing the Wednesday meet­ing between Bratton, Mullins, and the heads of the four oth­er police unions.

In a clear sign that feel­ings between the cops and de Blasio remain raw, Walzak struck back hard at Lynch’s recent claim that the may­or “sup­port­ed those demon­stra­tors that were call­ing for the death of cops.” “That’s just false,” Walzak said. Walzak released a tran­script of de Blasio’s remarks from Dec. 22 in which the may­or ripped the row­dies who heaped abuse on police. “There are some peo­ple who say hate­ful things,” the may­or said. “They have no place in these protests.” De Blasio made those remarks two days after a pair of Brooklyn police offi­cers were killed by a cop-hat­ing mani­ac, a tragedy Lynch laid at de Blasio’s door, say­ing he had “blood on the hands.” It sparked a work slow­down, with police appar­ent­ly refus­ing to make arrests for pet­ty offens­es that are the hall­marks of the “bro­ken win­dows” polic­ing. The num­ber of city­wide crim­i­nal sum­mons­es dropped by 94% for the week end­ing Dec. 29, and 92% for the week end­ing Jan. 4, accord­ing to crime stats obtained by The News. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/bill-clinton-staying-nypd-de-blasio-feud-article‑1.2070327

BRATTON MEETS WITH COPS UNIONS.

NYPD Police Commissioner Bill Bratton met today with the heads of the Unions rep­re­sent­ing that Agency’s cops. 
The NYdailynews​.com reports Police Commissioner Bill Bratton met with the heads of the city’s five police unions Wednesday in an attempt to put anger with de Blasio aside and con­tin­ue to keep work­ing to keep the city safe. When asked why he wasn’t at the meet­ing, the may­or said he is always will­ing to talk but ‘the vast major­i­ty of those com­mu­ni­ca­tions with those unions, of course, comes from the com­mis­sion­er, his lead­er­ship team.

NYPD COPS ENGAGING IN ILLEGAL WORK SLOW-DOWN

NYPD sources said Monday that city cops seem to be engag­ing in a work slow­down to show they’re unhap­py with Mayor de Blasio’s treat­ment of the police force. Police Commissioner Bill Bratton vowed a ‘com­pre­hen­sive review.’ The num­ber of arrests city­wide plum­met­ed by 56% for the week end­ing Sunday, from 5,448 dur­ing the same time peri­od a year ago to 2,401. The num­ber of peo­ple slapped with crim­i­nal sum­mons­es for offens­es like drink­ing in pub­lic fell 92% for the same week, from 4,077 to just 347. Just 749 motorists were hit with mov­ing vio­la­tions, com­pared with 9,349 a year ago — a 92% drop. And the num­ber of park­ing sum­mons­es issued fell by a whop­ping 90%, from 16,008 to just 1,191. In Brooklyn’s 84^th Precinct, home base for Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu, the two hero police offi­cers who were exe­cut­ed by a cop-hat­ing mani­ac, a grand total of just two tick­ets were writ­ten for mov­ing vio­la­tions. Not a sin­gle park­ing or Criminal Court sum­mons was issued. Over in the 79^th Precinct, the Brooklyn precinct in which Liu and Ramos were killed Dec. 20, just eight park­ing tick­ets and two mov­ing vio­la­tions were writ­ten. In all of Brooklyn North — encom­pass­ing 10 precincts — police wrote 216 sum­mons­es. During the same time last year, they’d writ­ten 4,076.

deBLASIO PUSHES BACK AT POLICE DEPARTMENT’S DISRESPECTFUL COPS.

‘I think it defies a lot of what we all feel is the right and decent thing to do,’ the Mayor said Monday dur­ing a press con­fer­ence in which he and police Commissioner Bratton tout­ed a 4.6% drop in crime city­wide in 2014. Ironically, the num­ber of sum­mons­es issued dur­ing the week end­ing Sunday dropped more than 90% com­pared to last year in a work slow­down as part of the rank-and-file’s con­tin­ued protest against de Blasio over per­ceived anti-cop sen­ti­ments. Mayor de Blasio gave the cops who turned their backs on him a good smack Monday. Speaking for the first time about the pub­lic diss­ing he endured at the funer­alsof hero cops Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu, de Blasio said “they were dis­re­spect­ful to the fam­i­lies involved.”

BRATTON MUST STOP THE WAR BETWEEN COPS UNDER HIS COMMAND AND THE MAYOR.

The war of words between the may­or and the police unions has led to a major slow­down of police action in the streets, with dis­as­trous con­se­quences for New York City res­i­dents, writes Daniel DiSalvo, assis­tant pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at the City College of New York. For the sec­ond week since the killings of two offi­cers in Brooklyn, cops are on the beat but aren’t doing much polic­ing. Officers wrote 90% few­er sum­mons­es and traf­fic tick­ets than in the same peri­od a year ago. Burglary arrests have dropped 40%. Arrests for all crimes have dropped by 56%. And there have been more mur­ders, rob­beries and rapes than over the equiv­a­lent week last year. The pub­lic is being held hostage to a fit of police offi­cer piqué. We know the sto­ry. Conflict between de Blasio and the police unions began dur­ing the 2013 may­oral cam­paign, when de Blasio attacked stop-and-frisk.

Oh, yeah — Happy New Year, every­body! Now let’s get back to fas­cism. When the “Corpo” régime installed by tyran­ni­cal President Buzz Windrip in “It Can’t Happen Here” strips Congress of its pow­ers, tries dis­si­dents in secret mil­i­tary courts and arms a repres­sive para­mil­i­tary force called the Minute Men, most cit­i­zens go along with it. (Yeah, some of that sounds famil­iar — we’ll get to that.) These dra­con­ian mea­sures are under­stood as nec­es­sary to Windrip’s plat­form of restor­ing American great­ness and pros­per­i­ty, and even those who feel uncom­fort­able with Corpo poli­cies reas­sure them­selves that America is a spe­cial place with a spe­cial des­tiny, and that the ter­ri­ble things that have hap­pened in Germany and Italy and Spain are not pos­si­ble here. No doubt the irony of Lewis’ title seems embar­rass­ing­ly obvi­ous now, but it was not meant to be sub­tle in 1935 either. His point stands: We still com­fort our­selves with mys­ti­cal nos­trums about American spe­cial­ness, even in an age when the secret pow­ers of the United States gov­ern­ment, and its insu­la­tion from demo­c­ra­t­ic over­sight, go far beyond any­thing Lewis ever imagined.

I’m not the first per­son to observe that the New York police unions’ cur­rent mini-rebel­lion against Mayor Bill de Blasio car­ries anti-demo­c­ra­t­ic under­tones, and even a faint odor of right-wing coup. Indeed, it feels like an ear­ly chap­ter in a con­tem­po­rary rewrite of “It Can’t Happen Here”: Police in the nation’s largest city open­ly dis­re­spect and defy an elect­ed reformist may­or, inspir­ing a nation­wide wave of sup­port from “true patri­ots” eager to take their coun­try back from the dubi­ous alien forces who have degrad­ed and des­e­crat­ed it. However you read the prox­i­mate issues between the cops and de Blasio (some of which are New York-spe­cif­ic), the police protest rests on the same philo­soph­i­cal foun­da­tion as the fas­cist move­ment in Lewis’ nov­el. Indeed, it’s a con­stant under­cur­rent in American polit­i­cal life, one that sur­faced most recent­ly in the Tea Party rebel­lion of 2010, and is close­ly relat­ed to the dis­or­der famous­ly anat­o­mized by Richard Hofstadter in his 1964 essay “The Paranoid Style in American Politics.”

There’s no doubt that the NYPD cri­sis has dis­turb­ing impli­ca­tions on var­i­ous lev­els. Amid a nation­al dis­cus­sion about police tac­tics and strat­e­gy, and the under­stand­able grief fol­low­ing the mur­ders of two NYPD offi­cers, it amounts to a vig­or­ous ide­o­log­i­cal coun­ter­at­tack. In effect, many cops (or at least their more intran­si­gent lead­ers) want to assert that law enforce­ment is a qua­si-sacred social insti­tu­tion, one that stands out­side the law and is inde­pen­dent of demo­c­ra­t­ic over­sight. Sometimes this is tak­en to ludi­crous and lit­er­al-mind­ed extremes, as in a recent col­umn by Michael Goodwin of the New York Post cel­e­brat­ing the NYPD and the United States mil­i­tary as “Our angels in a time of dan­ger and cyn­i­cism.” (Without real­iz­ing it, Goodwin was but­tress­ing the con­clu­sions of James Fallows’ must-read Atlantic arti­cle about the way American soci­ety has become dis­con­nect­ed from the mil­i­tary and sanc­ti­fied it at the same time.) As Salon colum­nist and vet­er­an New York reporter Jim Sleeper has not­ed, this ten­den­cy also makes clear how lit­tle the trib­al, insu­lar cul­ture of big-city polic­ing has changed, even in an era of far greater diversity.

We still don’t know where this con­fronta­tion between de Blasio and his cops will lead, or how it will be resolved. (So far, the city has been peace­ful – and nobody on my block got a park­ing tick­et all week! So it’s win-win.) But I’d like to strike a coun­ter­in­tu­itive posi­tion and insist that it’s impor­tant not to over­state the threat, or to give an arro­gant blowhard like Patrolmen’s Benevolent Association head Patrick Lynch more impor­tance than he mer­its. My fel­low Irish-Americans will rec­og­nize Lynch as a lat­ter-day exam­ple of the small-mind­ed big­ots and “begrudgers” too com­mon in the tribe. But set him against Joe McCarthy and Father Coughlin, and he bare­ly reg­is­ters on the his­tor­i­cal scales of infamy.

In the final analy­sis I don’t find Lynch and his min­ions espe­cial­ly ter­ri­fy­ing, for exact­ly the same rea­sons I don’t find Sen. Ted Cruz espe­cial­ly ter­ri­fy­ing. Both may dream of a Corpo America, in which dis­sent is crushed with an iron fist and our glo­ri­ous nation­al des­tiny is reclaimed from the appeasers and mul­ti­cul­tur­al­ists and panty­waists. But they lack the polit­i­cal finesse or rhetor­i­cal sub­tle­ty to make it hap­pen. Ultimately, the real dan­gers may be clos­er at hand, and more dif­fi­cult to see.

With both the dis­grun­tled NYPD lead­er­ship and the so-called intel­lec­tu­al leader of the Tea Party, the appeal to fas­cism – no, excuse me, to “patri­o­tism” and “true Americanism” – is just too bla­tant, and their rejec­tion of democ­ra­cy too obvi­ous. Many peo­ple inclined to feel sym­pa­thy for the police, and skit­tish about the street protests of recent weeks, were dis­mayed to see cops turn the funer­al of a mur­dered offi­cer into a pet­ty polit­i­cal con­fronta­tion, against the wish­es of the dead man’s fam­i­ly. It was, or should have been, a moment of mourn­ing and con­tem­pla­tion, when the city and the nation were poised to reflect on the unique­ly dif­fi­cult lives of police offi­cers, who so often bear the brunt of poli­cies they did not cre­ate and atti­tudes they can­not real­is­ti­cal­ly be expect­ed to escape.

Instead, Lynch and his fol­low­ers got buf­faloed into a polit­i­cal protest that may have served the ends of right-wing strate­gists, and gal­va­nized the Fox News audi­ence, but is exceed­ing­ly unlike­ly to improve the lives of NYPD offi­cers and their fam­i­lies. Ted Cruz is a crafti­er char­ac­ter than Lynch, no doubt, but his entire career has been self-serv­ing polit­i­cal the­ater meant to enhance his star sta­tus and thrill his zeal­ous core of fol­low­ers. He is wide­ly dis­liked with­in his own par­ty for his pat­tern of ide­o­log­i­cal over­reach and polit­i­cal blun­ders, and many con­ser­v­a­tives will nev­er vote for him. He’s not remote­ly qual­i­fied for the role of Buzz Windrip or Huey Long, who had enor­mous pop­u­lar appeal and cam­paigned on a plat­form of Mussolini-like pub­lic hand­outs. Republican appa­ratchiks will do every­thing pos­si­ble to stop Cruz from becom­ing the party’s 2016 pres­i­den­tial nom­i­nee; if he wins the nom­i­na­tion any­way, he might well lose 40 states in the gen­er­al election.

As I said ear­li­er, despite their dif­fer­ent con­texts, the NYPD’s cold war with de Blasio, the Tea Party move­ment and the not-entire­ly-fic­tion­al American fas­cism of “It Can’t Happen Here” all have the same philo­soph­i­cal roots. It’s not just about race, although America’s racial divi­sions play an inescapable and cen­tral role. (In Lewis’ nov­el, Windrip’s move­ment seeks to sup­press blacks and Jews, and revoke female suf­frage.) At root it’s also not about police-state poli­cies and tac­tics, even if those might seem to be the desired out­come. (Tea Partyers claim to oppose those things, with vary­ing degrees of sin­cer­i­ty — except when Muslims or oth­er vari­eties of dark-skinned immi­grants are involved.) Rather, these world­views rest on the idea that America is not defined by its demo­c­ra­t­ic insti­tu­tions, but by a mys­ti­cal or spir­i­tu­al essence that can­not be pre­cise­ly described — but is under­stood far bet­ter by some of its cit­i­zens than by oth­ers. If those attuned to this patri­ot­ic fre­quen­cy over­whelm­ing­ly tend to be white males, that is not evi­dence of racism (they might say) but of the clar­i­ty and self­less­ness of their polit­i­cal vision.

In this view, Lincoln’s “gov­ern­ment of the peo­ple, by the peo­ple for the peo­ple” takes a dis­tant sec­ond place to John Winthrop’s vision of America as a tran­scen­dent “city upon a hill.” This vision does not have to be specif­i­cal­ly reli­gious or Christian (though it some­times is) to be infused with a puri­tan­i­cal sense of man­i­fest des­tiny, and of the unbridge­able gulf between the elect, who per­ceive the true nature of America, and the damned, who do not. (I would argue that this kind of American excep­tion­al­ism is an inher­ent­ly reli­gious idea — but that’s a top­ic for anoth­er time.) Democracy is only val­ued inso­far as it pro­duces the “cor­rect” results, and comes to be seen as debased and per­vert­ed when it does not. So for the com­mit­ted patri­ot of the Pat Lynch/​Buzz Windrip/​Ted Cruz per­sua­sion, only some demo­c­ra­t­ic out­comes are legit­i­mate expres­sions of “America” (see Bush v. Gore, 2000), only some elect­ed lead­ers are wor­thy of respect, and only some exer­cis­es of author­i­ty require deference.

I’m no defend­er of the Democratic Party in gen­er­al or of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama in par­tic­u­lar, a pair of Wall Street flunkies and nation­al-secu­ri­ty ride­a­longs who are both to the right of Richard Nixon on most mean­ing­ful issues. But the con­cert­ed and unceas­ing cam­paign to depict both men as crim­i­nals and usurpers, whose spu­ri­ous claims to the White House could mag­i­cal­ly be undone with a stained cock­tail dress or a Kenyan birth cer­tifi­cate, pro­vides one of the clear­est man­i­fes­ta­tions of America’s pro­to-fas­cist dis­or­der. The cen­tral issue was nev­er whether Clinton should be impeached for lying about a sleazy affair, or whether Obama qual­i­fied as a “nat­ur­al-born cit­i­zen.” (Which he prob­a­bly would have, even had he been born over­seas.) Those things were head­line-grab­bing expe­di­ents, sym­bol­ic fic­tions from the Leo Strauss play­book (Benghazi!), meant to stand in for an eso­teric truth the benight­ed pub­lic was inca­pable of grasp­ing: Those guys were not real Americans. The Force was not with them; they had no right to the throne; any method used to defeat them was justified.

These have been upset­ting and dra­mat­ic weeks in New York and across the nation, and 2014 is like­ly to be remem­bered as a piv­otal year in our society’s rela­tion­ship with the police pro­fes­sion. But I sus­pect the spec­ta­cle of those cops turn­ing their backs on Bill de Blasio is best under­stood as a rear­guard action, a pathet­ic echo of the cam­paigns of vil­i­fi­ca­tion and de-Americanization con­duct­ed against Clinton and Obama. It’s fas­cist wish­ful think­ing, a nos­tal­gic appeal to a white work­ing-class, “Reagan Democrat” demo­graph­ic that is fad­ing away. It might yield some short-term polit­i­cal ben­e­fits for the Republican oper­a­tives who appar­ent­ly orches­trat­ed it, but it is not the first stage of a putsch.

If there’s an urgent les­son to be drawn from Lewis’ 1930s alle­go­ry, it might come from turn­ing its premise upside down. We don’t need an unc­tu­ous hyp­ocrite like Buzz Windrip, or a buf­foon­ish black­shirt like Pat Lynch, to end up with some­thing close to fas­cism. (Lewis was arguably not fair to the real-life Huey Long, who was an excep­tion­al­ly com­pli­cat­ed fig­ure – part Napoleon, part Occupy Wall Street. He would be viewed as a dan­ger­ous rad­i­cal today, not accept­able in either polit­i­cal par­ty.) Congress has already ren­dered itself irrel­e­vant; any pres­i­dent who stripped it of its pow­ers would be applaud­ed. We already have the secret courts and the secret police, in the form of agen­cies we do not have the right to know about. Our pres­i­dent is charm­ing and urbane, and despised by the old-school, would-be fas­cists with the Dad pants and the bad hair­cuts. So the fact that he has amassed unprece­dent­ed exec­u­tive pow­er he will hand on to his suc­ces­sor, and stands astride a vast sub­ter­ranean “deep state” no one can see or con­trol, is not some­thing to wor­ry about. This is America, and America is a spe­cial place. It can’t hap­pen here.

U.S. District Judge James Spencer on Tuesday sen­tenced for­mer Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell to two years in prison for political

cor­rup­tion, the lat­est chap­ter in the spec­tac­u­lar fall of one of the Republican Party’s for­mer ris­ing stars. In September, McDonnell was con­vict­ed on 11 counts of cor­rup­tion in a case that exposed how he and his wife, Maureen, con­spired to pro­mote a dietary sup­ple­ment mar­ket­ed by Jonnie R. Williams, Sr. in exchange for $177,000 in loans, vaca­tions, and oth­er gifts from the Richmond busi­ness­man. Maureen McDonnell, who was con­vict­ed on eight counts, will be sen­tenced on February 20. Federal sen­tenc­ing guide­lines called for a pun­ish­ment for McDonnell of between 10 years and 12 years and sev­en months in prison. Given that judges in Spencer’s dis­trict imposed the rec­om­mend­ed sen­tence more than 70 per­cent of the time in recent years, McDonnell, 60, entered the week star­ing down the pos­si­bil­i­ty of more than a decade behind bars. But pros­e­cu­tors on Tuesday low­ered their request­ed sen­tence to between 6.5 and eight years in prison, and McDonnell’s 24-month sen­tence falls well short of even that reduced rec­om­men­da­tion. Spencer ordered McDonnell to report to prison on February 9.

Elected as Virginia’s chief exec­u­tive in a 2009 land­slide, McDonnell was con­sid­ered a top prospect to serve as Mitt Romney’s vice pres­i­den­tial run­ning mate in 2012. After Romney lost the elec­tion to President Obama, many expect­ed the pop­u­lar gov­er­nor to mount a 2016 pres­i­den­tial bid, but his polit­i­cal for­tunes rapid­ly declined in 2013 as the inves­ti­ga­tion into the McDonnells’ rela­tion­ship with Williams com­menced. Shortly after McDonnell hand­ed the keys of Virginia’s guber­na­to­r­i­al man­sion to Terry McAuliffe in January 2014, he and Maureen McDonnell were indict­ed in the case. The ensu­ing tri­al laid bare the rifts in the for­mer first couple’s mar­riage, and McDonnell tes­ti­fied that he and the one­time first lady no longer lived togeth­er. On Tuesday, how­ev­er, Maureen McDonnell made a sur­prise appear­ance at her estranged husband’s sentencing.
http://​www​.salon​.com/​2​0​1​5​/​0​1​/​0​6​/​b​o​b​_​m​c​d​o​n​n​e​l​l​s​_​c​o​m​e​u​p​p​a​n​c​e​_​f​o​r​m​e​r​_​g​o​p​_​r​i​s​i​n​g​_​s​t​a​r​_​s​e​n​t​e​n​c​e​d​_​t​o​_​t​w​o​_​y​e​a​r​s​_​i​n​_​p​r​i​s​on/