text stringlengths 237 126k | date_download stringdate 2022-01-01 00:32:20 2023-01-01 00:02:37 ⌀ | source_domain stringclasses 60
values | title stringlengths 4 31.5k ⌀ | url stringlengths 24 617 ⌀ | id stringlengths 24 617 ⌀ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
How ‘willful blindness’ could loom over Trump’s legal jeopardy
Former president Donald Trump speaks to his supporters at a rally in Florence, Ariz., in January. (Melina Mara/The Washington Post)
It’s a question about as old as Donald Trump’s political career itself: Does he, somehow, believe his own hype? Is the president of 30,000 false and misleading claims an inveterate liar or a man so deluded that he simply doesn’t know better? Or, if he is some combination of the two, which weighs more heavily?
This question makes Trump’s opponents angry; they feel it lets him off the hook for lying. I’m on record as arguing that the latter isn’t any better, at least politically and governmentally speaking. What would it say about a man — a president! — if he was incapable of parsing even such basic facts? At least a liar would have a grasp of reality when they choose to depart from it.
But while this question has been somewhat academic for a long time, it now bears significantly on Trump’s legal situation. The Jan. 6 committee in its hearings has zeroed in on proving that Trump committed a crime in trying to overturn the collection because he acted corruptly — specifically, that he knew better.
To do so, they’ve emphasized that he was told that many of his big voter-fraud claims were false and that the people spearheading his plot knew it was illegal. While ignorance often isn’t a valid legal defense, it could be when it comes to the law the Jan. 6 committee has spotlighted: obstruction of an official proceeding. That’s because the statute requires acting “corruptly.”
That said, there is another option on the table when it comes to proving corrupt intent — if not for the Jan. 6 committee, then for federal prosecutors who could bring a case against Trump. And it’s one that a couple of witnesses last week drove home: Even if you can’t prove Trump knew better, he did appear willfully blind to the facts.
As recently as 2011, the Supreme Court has reiterated that people who choose to remain willfully blind “are just as culpable as those who have actual knowledge.”
“Willful blindness is a more general concept that is used to establish that somebody knew something that they are pretending they didn’t know,” former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade said. “A jury would be instructed that a person cannot ignore a high probability that a fact is true simply by turning a blind eye to it.”
At the June 14 hearing, the committee played key testimony from former attorney general William P. Barr and former deputy attorney general Richard Donoghue. Both, importantly, detailed a number of instances in which they personally told Trump that his fraud claims were bogus — in broad strokes and concerning multiple specific claims. The thrust of their testimony was clear: Trump must have known better, because he was told the facts by extremely smart lawyers who worked for him. There is also evidence that Trump’s lawyers knew the Jan. 6 plot to have Vice President Mike Pence overturn the election was illegal, because they themselves admitted it — and would conceivably have shared that information with Trump.
But proving that Trump internalized this advice and agreed with it is more difficult. Trump showed true devotion to the “big lie,” and it remains to be seen whether the committee can prove he knew better. What if he was given conflicting advice from the likes of Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, for instance, and believed them? (Former White House aide Alyssa Farah Griffin has said that Trump at one point conceded he lost to Joe Biden, but the context of this concession is not clear.)
Both Barr and Donoghue seemed to nod to the idea that Trump had been willfully blind.
Donoghue testified that he ran through a litany of fraud claims with Trump, detailing why they were false, but that “when you gave him a very direct answer on one of them, he wouldn’t fight us on it, but he would move to another allegation.”
Barr lamented that he grew disillusioned with Trump because he couldn’t understand how the former president would believe this stuff. He said that “when I went into this and would, you know, tell them how crazy some of these allegations were, there was never an indication of interest in what the actual facts were.”
Such comments could be used to argue in court that Trump chose to remain willfully blind — that the truth was right there for him to understand, but he didn’t care about the details of his fraud claims being debunked.
Could prosecutors prove willful blindness? Columbia University law school professor Daniel Richman delved into that question Tuesday, over at Lawfare:
This substitute for actual knowledge should never be confused with a “should have known” standard (an objective inquiry that looks to what a reasonable person should have known under the circumstances). To prove “willful blindness,” the prosecution must show that the defendant subjectively believed that there was a high probability that the relevant fact was true and that the defendant took deliberate actions to avoid learning that fact. A trip through the defendant’ mind still cannot be avoided. But the goal post has been moved a bit, with active rejection filling up the difference between “subjective belief in a high probability” and actual knowledge.
When instructing jurors on “willful blindness,” courts will often make clear that it can’t be found if the defendant “actually believed” that the relevant fact was not true. Delusional pigheadedness is indeed a defense.
So willful blindness would be a bit of a fallback for prosecutors — and proving it poses plenty of difficulties. And indeed, if at all possible, it’s best to prove the defendant knew better, which is what the Jan. 6 committee is focused on. Committee member Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), for one, has said flatly, “I think we can prove to any reasonable, open-minded person that Donald Trump absolutely knew.”
Whether prosecutors agree is another matter. University of Missouri law professor Frank O. Bowman said that, if he were the prosecutor, he wouldn’t try to use the willful blindness standard, because he thinks the facts are compelling that Trump knew better.
“Indeed, introduction of such an instruction into a trial of Mr. Trump would in some ways favor the defense, suggesting that there is some legitimacy to the claim that he didn’t actually know the undeniable facts,” Bowman said.
But Bowman also said that Trump’s track record looms large in making this determination.
“Given the evidence, it is only because this case involves Trump — as to whom there has always been concern that he has a tenuous grasp on reality — that willful blindness even comes up,” Bowman said. “In a case involving virtually any other defendant with this evidence available, the doctrine wouldn’t even be mentioned.
“And consider the sad/terrifying implications of that for a moment.”
Bowers reads passage from 2020 journal: ‘I do not want to be a winner by cheating’
6:20 PMAnalysis: The committee mentions another Republican lawmaker by name
6:00 PMAnalysis: The first panel is all Republicans. That’s becoming a trend. | 2022-06-21T18:51:49Z | www.washingtonpost.com | How ‘willful blindness’ could loom over Trump’s legal jeopardy - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/21/trump-willful-blindness-january-6/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/21/trump-willful-blindness-january-6/ |
Kellogg will split into 3 companies as it leans into snacks
The cereal and plant-based food units will become two companies, leaving the brand’s most profitable arm focused on selling snacks like Pop-Tarts and Pringles
Kellogg is splitting itself into three companies to “better position each business to unlock its full potential.” (Gene J. Puskar/AP)
None of the new, publicly traded companies has been named, but the breakup is expected to be completed by the end of 2023.
Some of the world’s biggest companies are breaking apart. Here’s why.
Kellogg derives 80 percent of its revenue from international snacks, noodles, frozen breakfasts and other foods that will make up what’s been dubbed the “Global Snacking Co.” The next largest entity, dubbed the “North America Cereal Co.,” will become the leading cereal business in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean. The smallest entity will exclusively produce plant-based foods, such as MorningStar Farms products, aiming to capitalize on the prospects of long-term growth in the United States and abroad for vegan and vegetarian foods.
“Put simply, each of these businesses have different priorities and splitting up allows the respective management teams to focus solely on accomplishing the long-term goals, with the potential of delivering more value to its shareholders,” said Michael Farr of the investment firm Farr, Miller & Washington.
In prior years, some investors and management teams tended to favor sprawling conglomerates, touting the benefits of combined operations and teams. But the promised corporate “synergies” — now often derided as a boardroom buzzword — often fell short of expectations.
What’s more, Farr said that since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, the importance of supply chains has been heavily scrutinized, forcing executives to reconsider how they can operate in the most efficient way. That can lead to separating business lines.
Meanwhile, the cereal and plant-based operations are at different stages of growth: stable sales with the goal of improving profit margins, and an emerging food category with huge prospects.
“These businesses all have significant stand-alone potential, and an enhanced focus will enable them to better direct their resources toward their distinct strategic priorities,” Steve Cahillane, Kellogg’s chair and chief executive, said in a statement Tuesday.
The company’s board of directors has signed off on the plan. Once the companies are broken up, existing shareholders will be given pieces of the cereal and plant-based food entities based on the proportion of their Kellogg holdings.
The two smaller businesses will remain based in Battle Creek, Mich., the company said. The larger global snacking operation will maintain its corporate headquarters in Chicago.
Kellogg is the latest legacy company to opt for a breakup, following announcements from Johnson & Johnson, General Electric and Toshiba late last year.
The wave of carve-outs marks a departure from an era of corporate empire-building — perhaps best exemplified by General Electric’s Jack Welch — that took flight in the 1960s and accelerated in the 1980s. But management teams no longer believe that the whole is worth more than the sum of its parts. And by standing up the most lucrative or fast-growing segments of a business, their goal is to unlock better returns over time.
While consumers may not notice much difference in how the new companies operate, investors will take note. As with the other recent corporate spinoffs, the new Kellogg entities will provide a test case of financial performance. If they can generate better returns, it’s likely that other conglomerates will pursue a similar course.
Investors appeared to celebrate the decision, driving shares upward almost 4 percent in afternoon trading Tuesday.
Investors were in a good mood Tuesday, the first day of trading coming off a brutal week. Wall Street posted its worst five-day run since March 2020 after the Federal Reserve pushed through its biggest interest rate increase since 1994 to try to control inflation. | 2022-06-21T18:55:52Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Kellogg will split into 3 companies as it leans into snacks - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/21/kellogg-split-three-companies/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/21/kellogg-split-three-companies/ |
How Chip Neutrality Scuppered Nvidia Deal to Buy Arm: QuickTake
Analysis by Ian King | Bloomberg
STMicroelectronics STM32F205 integrated circuit microchips (IC’s), designed by ARM Ltd., in a storage tray at CSI Electronic Manufacturing Services Ltd. in Witham, U.K., on Wednesday, April 28, 2021. The global chip shortage is going from bad to worse with automakers on three continents joining tech giants Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. in flagging production cuts and lost revenue from the crisis. Photographer: Chris Ratcliffe/Bloomberg (Bloomberg)
One of the most influential businesses in the tech industry is unknown to most consumers: Arm Ltd. The UK-based company designs key parts of the chips that power almost every smartphone on the planet. Its strategic importance is so great that when owner SoftBank Group Corp. decided to sell the company to US chipmaker Nvidia Corp., it sparked an outcry from Arm’s customers that killed the $40 billion deal. SoftBank’s Plan B is to sell Arm shares in what could be the chip industry’s biggest-ever initial public offering.
1. What does Arm do?
Arm doesn’t own factories or produce its own chips. The company designs core semiconductor components and licenses the blueprints to other firms in exchange for a fee based on how many are produced. The arrangement brings in about $700 million in revenue every quarter, making Arm one of the UK’s largest tech businesses. That’s still a fraction of the sales that tech giants like Nvidia and Intel Corp. generate, and Arm has a relatively small workforce of 6,000. Yet few companies reach so far across the tech ecosystem: Arm estimates that 70% of the world’s population uses its products on a daily basis, and more than 200 billion chips have been made with its technology.
2. Where would I find Arm’s products?
They’re used in everything from the tiniest sensor to the most powerful data center. Amazon.com Inc., Samsung Electronics Co. and Apple Inc. are among Arm’s most important customers. Arm’s instruction set -- the basic code used by software to communicate with semiconductors -- is in billions of devices, and the effort required to switch to another company’s code would be enormous. Devices that work on batteries need chips that can get by with relatively little power; Arm’s designs prioritized that from the outset. When smartphones came along and demanded more processing horsepower, the technology evolved into more computer-like chips. There are about 1.4 billion of these pocket computers sold every year, with more than 90% using Arm. More recently, major tech names such as Apple and Amazon have been seeking to supply their own chips. Many of those new components rely on Arm too, and that’s beginning to threaten Intel’s lucrative hold on high-end computing processors. Intel owns the so-called X86 instruction set, the basis for a type of processor that’s the most widely used in computers. Advanced Micro Devices Inc. is the other major user of that technology.
3. Why did Nvidia want to buy it?
So it could build on its success in graphics processors and push faster into data centers, artificial intelligence and new areas such as automotive chips. But critics said a takeover would threaten a cornerstone of Arm’s success: its neutrality. Arm has been used across the $550 billion semiconductor industry on the understanding that no one would get privileged access to its technology. SoftBank announced the sale to Nvidia in September 2020. The transaction began to unravel after the US Federal Trade Commission sued to block it in December, and Nvidia walked away in February.
4. So what about Plan B?
SoftBank is expected to sell a minority stake in Arm by the end of March 2023. It initially leaned toward a US IPO until agreeing to also consider a partial listing on the London Stock Exchange after British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Chancellor Rishi Sunak reportedly lobbied SoftBank Chief Executive Officer Masayoshi Son in person. A homecoming for Arm could boost London’s standing as a financial center post-Brexit, though a shrinking UK economy, roaring inflation and poor performances from 2021 IPO stocks have weighed on investor appetite.
5. What’s Arm really worth?
Shortly after SoftBank announced the IPO plan, it was targeting a valuation of at least $60 billion for Arm -- almost double the amount it paid for the business in 2016. However, tech valuations have plunged since then, forcing companies to cancel listings or cut stock prices to get sales over the line. SoftBank decided in April to sell a smaller portion of Arm than previously planned and retain a controlling stake in the hope of obtaining a higher valuation for the remainder later. Supply-chain problems and concerns that the industry is making too many chips in a slowing global economy have made it hard to put reliable valuations on semiconductor companies. As of February, Arm would have been worth about $24 billion if investors valued it at the average market capitalization-to-revenue ratio of the Philadelphia Stock Exchange Semiconductor Index. But that benchmark has lost more than a quarter of its value since then.
6. Does an IPO solve the neutrality problem?
The wide and diverse investor base typically secured via an IPO could help to ensure Arm doesn’t fall under the sway of any single industry player. That may still not be enough to reassure some of its most important customers. Qualcomm Inc. CEO Cristiano Amon has said that his company wanted to buy a stake in the business alongside its rivals and create a consortium that would maintain Arm’s neutrality. | 2022-06-21T18:56:04Z | www.washingtonpost.com | How Chip Neutrality Scuppered Nvidia Deal to Buy Arm: QuickTake - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/how-chip-neutrality-scuppered-nvidia-deal-to-buy-arm-quicktake/2022/06/21/2e452a58-f18e-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/how-chip-neutrality-scuppered-nvidia-deal-to-buy-arm-quicktake/2022/06/21/2e452a58-f18e-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
The framers’ conception of the two religion clauses of the First Amendment had two parts that fit together. The establishment clause meant the government couldn’t make you perform a religious act or spend taxpayer dollars on religion. The free exercise clause said the government couldn’t stop you from performing a religious act, understood as prayer or preaching or teaching or belief.(1)
But until today, the Supreme Court didn’t go the next step, which has been sought by advocates of religious education ever since. It had never held that if the state pays for private secular education, it must — not may — also pay for religious education. The key case holding the line was a 2004 decision, Locke v. Davey. In that ruling, the court said that the state of Washington did not have to allow a student to use a state scholarship to pay for religious training in a religious institution.
If the answer to Breyer’s question were to be yes, Carson v. Makin would be a sea change in how education is financed in the US. It would mean that states would have to fund Catholic schools, yeshivas and madrasas so long as the state pays for public schools.
More From Noah Feldman on the Supreme Court in Bloomberg Opinion:
• Threat to Kavanaugh Will Irrevocably Change Justices’ Lives: Noah Feldman
(In the second-to-last paragraph, corrects the quote from Justice Sotomayor to read: “... a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation.”)
(1) I wrote a book and several articles supporting this understanding of the history. | 2022-06-21T18:56:10Z | www.washingtonpost.com | The Supreme Court Has Just Eroded First Amendment Law - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-supreme-court-has-just-eroded-first-amendment-law/2022/06/21/7f51493e-f186-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-supreme-court-has-just-eroded-first-amendment-law/2022/06/21/7f51493e-f186-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
Admitting more refugees from Latin America is a responsible step forward
Latin American migrants taking part in a caravan toward the U.S. on June 7. (Afp Contributor#afp/AFP/Getty Images)
Even in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, there were more admissions to the United States through its main refugee program than there have been in the past three years under the Trump and Biden administrations. The former, as part of its xenophobic project, slashed refugee entries to their lowest levels since the program began 40 years ago. The latter, faced with a gutted resettlement program, adverse court settlements and political headwinds, has done little better to live up to this country’s traditional role as a beacon to victims of the world’s man-made and natural disasters.
Granted, President Biden did airlift more than 75,000 desperate U.S.-allied Afghans to the United States following the chaotic fall of Kabul last year — though not as part of the official refugee admissions program, whose bureaucratic wheels turn slowly. And this year, the administration has opened its doors to thousands of Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s blood-soaked war. In both instances, however, there is no commitment to grant many of the new arrivals status as legal permanent residents; unlike official refugees, their stays in this country are intended to be temporary.
In that grim context, Mr. Biden’s announcement this month that the United States will admit 20,000 refugees from the Americas over the next two years — about three times more than the number expected in the current fiscal year — is a step forward, albeit a relatively modest one. During the decade ending in 2020, just 4 percent of overall refugee admissions were from Latin America or the Caribbean, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Mr. Biden’s agreement with Latin American leaders committing the United States to do better is a recognition of this country’s responsibilities in its own hemisphere. It is also an apparent effort to blunt, if only slightly, surging levels of undocumented border-crossing by providing an additional means for people from the Americas to enter the country legally. In that same vein, the president also said the United States would grant an additional 11,500 seasonal worker visas for Central Americans and Haitians.
Those are among the relatively few moves to increase annual legal admissions the administration can take on its own, without congressional action. They are smart economically, providing employees to a job market where businesses in many sectors are struggling to find workers. And they are smart diplomatically, couched as they were in a regional package in which key Latin American countries, including Mexico, agreed in return to admit migrants from the region — a move that might also divert some illegal immigration at the southern U.S. border. In addition, Canada said it would open its doors to Latin American refugees over the next few years and Spain pledged to take more migrants from the area.
The agreement is, as Mr. Biden said, “just a start,” and will not divert the Republican political assault on his immigration policies, to say nothing of the torrent of apprehensions of illegal crossers at the southern border. Nonetheless, it advances the principle that providing refuge to desperate migrants is a regional responsibility that must be met equally by the United States and its hemispheric partners.
The Editorial Board on immigration
U.S. wavering on Guatemala’s graft feeds illegal immigration
Title 42 is indefensible. So is Congress’s failure to pass immigration reform.
Don’t forget the Afghan refugees who need America’s support | 2022-06-21T18:56:35Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Admitting more refugees from Latin America is a responsible step forward - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/biden-latin-america-refugee-migrant-increase/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/biden-latin-america-refugee-migrant-increase/ |
From ‘pariah’ to ‘move past it’: How Biden set aside press freedom
Participants display placards after unveiling a new street sign for Jamal Khashoggi Way outside the Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Washington on June 15. (Gemunu Amarasinghe/San Francisco Chronicle via AP)
Here is one thing we should all be able to agree on: Journalists deserve protection and freedom, not bonesaws and bullets. On his upcoming trip to the Middle East, will President Biden push our allies to respect press freedom? I’m not holding my breath.
At 1:14 p.m. last Wednesday, the street in front of the Saudi Embassy in Washington was officially renamed Jamal Khashoggi Way. It was 1:14 p.m. on Oct. 2, 2018, that Khashoggi entered the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, never to emerge again.
Khashoggi, a Washington Post Global Opinions columnist and permanent U.S. resident, used to give this advice to young writers and activists — that it was better for a writer to stay out of jail, to stay alive and to write. He would much rather have had his name on a column in today’s edition of The Post than on a street sign opposite the embassy of the country he loved. Such was Khashoggi’s belief in the power of the press even in a constrained environment such as Saudi Arabia’s, and that’s why the street name matters. It’s a monument that serves as a permanent, public bloodstain on Saudi Arabia’s reputation — and a testament that here, in the United States, the press can do its vital work.
What about our allies in the Middle East? U.S. officials have confirmed that Biden’s July trip to the region will include stops in Saudi Arabia and Israel. Plans involve a meeting with Saudi officials that will include Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who is believed to have authorized the operation that ended in Khashoggi’s killing and dismemberment with the bonesaw brought by a member of the team that ambushed him. Meanwhile, in Israel, new information continues to emerge about last month’s shooting of Palestinian American Shireen Abu Akleh, a veteran journalist working for Al Jazeera. Despite the government’s initially blaming Palestinian gunmen, eyewitness accounts and investigations by CNN, the Associated Press, the New York Times and The Post suggest that an Israeli soldier most likely fired the shot that took her life.
Biden could use this trip to forcefully stand up for press freedom and harsher consequences for attacks on journalists. Doing so would also serve as a clear statement that the U.S. government will demand answers when residents such as Khashoggi and citizens such as Abu Akleh come to harm.
During his presidential campaign, Biden promised he would make Saudi Arabia a “pariah” after Khashoggi’s killing. Now a U.S. official is quoted by CNN saying: “Both sides have decided that for the sake of achieving peace and stability in the Middle East, we need to move past it.” U.S. officials reportedly say they don’t want the U.S.-Saudi relationship to be held “hostage” to Khashoggi’s murder.
The message to those who have fought for accountability for Jamal is clear: Time to get over it.
Abu Akleh’s killing came a year after Israel bombed a Gaza building housing the offices of the Associated Press and 17 other outlets. Israeli forces claimed the building was being used by Hamas but did not provide public evidence of that. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has called for an independent investigation into Abu Akleh’s killing, and 57 members of Congress have requested that the State Department and the FBI investigate. So far, Israel and the Palestinian authorities have embarked on separate investigations, and the United States has not intervened.
Already Abu Akleh’s killing has largely faded from the U.S. news cycle. The message here, too, is clear: A Palestinian journalist and U.S. citizen killed? Nothing to see here, folks.
Ultimately, if Biden fails to press Saudi Arabia and Israel for accountability in these deaths, it will send a message to the world that killing Arab journalists and American citizens and residents is okay, as long as (1) you’re a country that helps achieve American geopolitical interests; and (2) you can withstand an international outcry until it fades.
The assumption that peace, stability and security are separate from press freedom and other human rights in the Middle East — and are matters to be balanced against realism — is, at best, a dusty relic of unimaginative policymaking. At worst, the “peace” being advanced is the quiet that comes when Arab voices and journalists are silenced. This is not stability, it is American-enabled repression.
Al Jazeera has vowed to take Abu Akleh’s case to the International Criminal Court. Many of us will continue to keep Jamal’s case and memory alive in whatever ways we can. But if Biden fails to call our allies to the carpet on the safety of journalists, it will be a hard blow to the cause of press freedom everywhere. | 2022-06-21T18:56:41Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | From ‘pariah’ to ‘move past it’: How Biden set aside press freedom - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/biden-saudi-arabia-israel-journalists-death/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/biden-saudi-arabia-israel-journalists-death/ |
Former Missouri governor Eric Greitens in Branson, Mo., on April 17, 2021. (Nathan Papes/AP)
Over the past two weeks, the Jan. 6 committee has replayed the scenes of violence when a mob of Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol last year in a bid to overturn Joe Biden’s election as president. One would think that the reminders of the horror of that day — how close our elected leaders came to bodily danger — would be taken to heart, particularly by anyone seeking a seat in that chamber. Instead, a leading contender for the Republican Senate nomination in Missouri has taken a page from the Donald Trump playbook of incitement, doubling down on political violence as a means to an end.
“I’m Eric Greitens, Navy SEAL, and today we’re going RINO hunting,” the former Missouri governor vying for the Senate says, gun in hand, in an ad released Monday. There is, as The Post’s Philip Bump wrote, “nothing subtle” about the ad. It hits you over the head, featuring Mr. Greitens and armed, camouflage-clad men breaking into a house, throwing what look like stun grenades, in search of Republicans who don’t sufficiently support the former president. “Join the MAGA crew,” Mr. Greitens says. “Get a RINO-hunting permit. There’s no bagging limit, no tagging limit, and it doesn’t expire until we save our country.”
Not 24 hours before the ad was released, Illinois Republican Rep. Adam Kinzinger talked about a threat mailed to his home promising to execute him, his wife and their 5-month-old son. “We’ve never seen or had anything like that,” he told ABC News’s “This Week.” Mr. Kinzinger, an outspoken critic of Mr. Trump who voted to impeach him and now sits on the committee investigating the Capitol attack, has become a target of Trump supporters, labeled as one of the RINOs Mr. Greitens would make fair game. That Mr. Kinzinger recognized his dim prospects in a GOP primary and is not seeking reelection but Mr. Greitens, forced out as governor after he was credibly accused of tying up and forcing a woman to perform oral sex on him, actually has a chance to become his party’s Senate nominee speaks volumes about today’s Republican Party and how very low it has sunk. (Mr. Greitens has denied the accusations of abuse.)
Party leaders have refused to confront and condemn fanatical MAGA supporters, instead enabling and emboldening them. Little wonder, then, that the use of violent, disturbing rhetoric is on the unimpeded rise in Republican circles. Witness how Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Tex.) was accosted — berated as “Eyepatch McCain” — at the Texas Republican Party convention for his support of Ukraine. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) was booed and given a rebuke for having the temerity to negotiate with Democrats about gun safety.
“There is violence in the future, I’m going to tell you,” Mr. Kinzinger told ABC. “And until we get a grip on telling people the truth, we can’t expect any differently.” That sober warning came as the Texas GOP made a part of its official party platform the lie that Mr. Biden was not legitimately elected. It is long past time for senior Republican leaders to start telling the truth about Mr. Trump’s and make clear that they do not condone the violence so grotesquely promoted by Mr. Greitens. | 2022-06-21T18:56:53Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Eric Greitens hits new low with RINO-hunting ad - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/eric-greitens-missouri-rino-hunting-advertisement/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/eric-greitens-missouri-rino-hunting-advertisement/ |
A man holds a cigarette on June 9. (Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images)
The Food and Drug Administration is poised to make a decision of rare importance, concerning not a pandemic illness but the country’s leading cause of preventable death: smoking. It is crucial the White House stick up for what would be the FDA’s most assertive antismoking policy ever — one that will inevitably meet severe resistance.
The agency is preparing a rule that would mandate that tobacco companies cut dramatically the amount of nicotine in cigarettes sold in the United States, rendering their deadly products minimally or not-at-all addictive. This move has long been anticipated: Congress in 2009 gave the FDA broad powers to regulate tobacco products. The agency started exploring this policy in 2017, and it should have used its authorities fully before now. It must move quickly. About half a million Americans a year die of smoking-related illnesses; any further delay would mean more unnecessary suffering and death.
Critics object that smokers would simply smoke a lot more cigarettes or inhale more deeply. But an FDA study published in the New England Journal of Medicine rebutted that concern, estimating that the smoking rate would plummet from 12.8 percent to 1.4 percent by 2060. Some of this would come from product switching, some from people quitting, and some from people not starting at all. By the end of the century, the number of new smokers would be reduced by 33.1 million, 8.5 million tobacco-related deaths would be averted, and 134.4 million life years would be gained. | 2022-06-21T18:56:59Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | FDA cutting nicotine in cigarettes is overdue - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/fda-cigarette-nicotine-change-overdue/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/fda-cigarette-nicotine-change-overdue/ |
The GOP must make it clear: Eric Greitens’s ad is out of bounds
Republican Eric Greitens, a Senate candidate from Missouri, speaks at the Taney County Lincoln Day event in Branson, Mo., on April 17. (Nathan Papes/AP)
The new campaign ad from Republican Senate candidate Eric Greitens is beyond reprehensible. It’s a test for whether anything is out of bounds in today’s GOP.
Greitens’ spot is a tacit call to violence. In it, the disgraced former Missouri governor cocks a shotgun and says, “We’re going RINO hunting” (RINO, of course, refers to “Republicans in name only”). He then joins a group of men dressed in tactical gear storming a house, weapons ready to fire. Greitens enters the house and tells the viewer to “join the MAGA crew. Get a RINO-hunting permit. There’s no bagging limit, no tagging limit and it doesn’t expire until we save our country.”
This would be a disgusting, tasteless ad at any moment. Whatever you think of your political opponents, it is never acceptable to implicitly threaten violence against them. But in the current political environment, it’s positively vile.
Political tensions are rising on all sides. The Jan. 6 Capitol riot was at best a terrible protest gone wrong; at worst, it was a serious attempt to undo an election. Abortion rights fanatics are firebombing or disfiguring pregnancy clinics run by pro-life organizations. A man was recently arrested with a gun near Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s home and said he wanted to kill the justice. Throw in the mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, Tex., and any reasonable person would see that it’s best to cool passions, not inflame them.
But Greitens is no reasonable man. He was forced to resign as governor in 2018 after being accused of having an affair and then blackmailing his mistress with nude photos. His ex-wife also says he abused her and his children. (Greitens has repeatedly denied both the blackmail allegations and the accusations of abuse.) Rather than step back and rebuild his life, Greitens is doubling down on his political ambitions. He clearly does not deserve to hold any public office.
The question now is what Republicans will do about it. Even before Greitens’ ad emerged, establishment leaders were worried that his past would place an otherwise safe seat up for grabs if he won the party’s nomination.
This isn’t a case of someone who says something off the cuff that damages him, as was the case for 2012 GOP Senate candidates Todd Akin of Missouri and Richard Mourdock of Indiana. Greitens is someone who recklessly courts controversy rather than stumbles into it with inarticulate expressions. If he is willing to run an ad like this to win a primary, who knows what he’ll do to win the general election.
Responsible Republicans need to be clear and consistent: Anyone but Greitens will do. The Eagle Forum, a venerable conservative women’s group founded by Phyllis Schlafly, has stepped up and called on Greitens to drop out of the race. But the call has to come from higher up to have any chance at succeeding.
There’s no one higher in the GOP food chain than former president Donald Trump, and it falls to him to exert the leadership befitting his stature. Trump has not yet endorsed anyone in the race, but he doesn’t have to. He should instead show his power by calling on Greitens to step aside or, if he won’t do that, explicitly campaign against him.
Doing this is a better way for Trump to exert influence than endorsing one of Greitens’s competitors. Backing one horse in a race is risky, especially when all the candidates can credibly claim to be rock-solid conservatives. Trump has discovered the hard way that his endorsees can lose. If he supports someone running against Greitens, he could find that person beset by scandal, as was the case for Chuck Herbster, his endorsed candidate in the Nebraska gubernatorial primary. That would only fuel the growing narrative that Trump’s influence is weakening.
Opposing Greitens and otherwise staying neutral, by contrast, means Trump has a strong chance of winning. Greitens leads by a narrow margin in most polls and cannot afford any loss of support. A recent Emerson College poll also shows Greitens is winning 32 percent of the vote among people who say that they are more likely to vote for someone Trump endorses. It follows that if Trump disavowed Greitens, they would look for someone else. If Greitens loses after Trump took a stand against him, Trump could deservedly claim much of the credit.
Anti-Communist crusader Sen. Joseph McCarthy finally lost his considerable influence when a man shredded him with the phrase, “Have you no sense of decency?” That’s what Republicans from Trump on down need to tell Greitens now. | 2022-06-21T18:57:05Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | The GOP must make it clear: Eric Greitens’s ad is out of bounds - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/gop-republican-missouri-senate-race-eric-greitens-rino-hunting-ad-is-out-bounds/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/gop-republican-missouri-senate-race-eric-greitens-rino-hunting-ad-is-out-bounds/ |
We should not promote criminal violence as a viable form of protest
The Planned Parenthood Reproductive Health Services Center in St. Louis on March 8. (Neeta Satam for The Washington Post)
As a provider of reproductive health care, as well as a supporter of gun safety, I was shocked and disappointed to read David S. Meyer’s June 12 Outlook essay, “Gun-control activists can learn from Roe opponents.”
In a piece listing tactics that gun-violence opponents might consider, Mr. Meyer casually includes the criminal acts of violence and intimidation, several of which included firearms, employed by antiabortion extremists over the past several decades that continue today. This campaign of terror has included murder, assault, arson, kidnapping, trespassing, vandalism, blockades — the list goes on and on. Mr. Meyer argues these actions “raised the costs and difficulties” for abortion providers.
To be clear, these are reprehensible acts of violence. With the goal of creating a climate of fear and intimidation around reproductive health care, people have been killed, wounded and maimed for providing abortion care. Mr. Meyer also suggests that the harassment of patients outside of health centers is a valid strategy for achieving a policy goal.
I can’t think of anything more antithetical to combating the epidemic of gun carnage that threatens our children and plagues our country. I hope The Post and Mr. Meyer take more care in the future.
Jamila Perritt, Washington
The writer is a physician and the president of Physicians for Reproductive Health. | 2022-06-21T18:57:18Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | We should not promote criminal violence as a viable form of protest - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/we-should-not-be-promoting-criminal-violence-viable-form-protest/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/we-should-not-be-promoting-criminal-violence-viable-form-protest/ |
What the court’s ‘originalists’ can do about guns
Supporters of gun control rally outside the Supreme Court building in Washington in December 2019. (Andrew Chung/Reuters)
Regarding Ruth Marcus’s June 12 Sunday Opinion column, “This is the exact wrong time for the court to loosen gun laws”:
“Originalists” on the Supreme Court read out of the Second Amendment the clause “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State …” in 2008′s District of Columbia v. Heller.
What happened in Uvalde, Tex., is a call to all of us to, finally, call out the court’s “originalists” for their fraud. True “originalism” recognizes that when the Second Amendment was written, the “arms” that people received the right to bear were single-shot muskets and pistols. Pointed bullets and revolver pistols were not invented until the 1830s; the Spencer repeating rifle, the technological edge that helped the Union win the Civil War, was not designed until 1860.
True “originalists” can constitutionally ban some types of weapons (especially those designed primarily to kill people) and restrict the number of rounds in a magazine (perhaps to five or six). Even these measures stretch “originalism” to apply to weapons and ammunition not envisioned by the authors of the Constitution, and they should mark absolutely as far as we are willing to go beyond original intent.
One final thought: States restrict the types of weapons used during hunting season, for example, providing for bow hunting — in part, at least, out of fairness to the prey. We need to tighten regulations regarding arms and ammunition out of fairness to our fellow Americans, perhaps including ourselves, for when humans are the prey.
John Seip, Washington
It is time for leadership from Republicans on guns | 2022-06-21T18:57:24Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | What the court’s ‘originalists’ can do about guns - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/what-courts-originalists-can-do-about-guns/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/what-courts-originalists-can-do-about-guns/ |
What the U.S. can do to mitigate global air pollution
High voltage electricity transmission pylons are positioned alongside the a coal-fired power station in Mpumalanga, South Africa, on March 21. (Waldo Swiegers/Bloomberg News)
The June 16 news article “Study: Air pollution reduces global life expectancy by more than two years” made the startling point that breathing dirty air has more of an impact on global life span than alcohol, cigarettes, terrorism or conflict. Think this is just a problem for the more crowded and less-developed parts of the world? A study conducted at the University of Wisconsin at Madison showed that eliminating air pollution caused by burning fossil fuels would prevent 50,000 premature deaths and provide more than $600 billion in health benefits each year in the United States.
We hear a lot about the costs of fighting climate change, but much less attention is paid to the benefits. Drastically reducing the use of fossil fuels will not only prevent — or at least mitigate — the global catastrophe of climate change. It also will give everyone cleaner air, cleaner water and improved health — and maybe even a few more years of life.
To stop climate change, regulate carbon as a toxic substance | 2022-06-21T18:57:30Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | What the U.S. can do to mitigate global air pollution - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/what-us-can-do-mitigate-global-air-pollution/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/what-us-can-do-mitigate-global-air-pollution/ |
USMNT will play final World Cup tune-ups against Japan and Saudi Arabia
Midfielder Tyler Adams and Coach Gregg Berhalter have two more friendlies before they arrive in Qatar in November for the World Cup. (Jeff Dean/Associated Press)
In its final tests before the World Cup, the U.S. men’s national soccer team this fall will play two Qatar-bound teams, Japan and Saudi Arabia, at European venues, the U.S. Soccer Federation announced Tuesday.
The Americans, ranked No. 15 by FIFA, will play No. 23 Japan on Sept. 23 and No. 49 Saudi Arabia four days later. The first match is expected to take place in Germany, where the U.S. team would conduct the bulk of its time before traveling to Murcia on Spain’s southeastern coast ahead of the Sept. 27 game.
The venue for the Japan match has not been finalized.
After years of games primarily against teams from the Concacaf region (North and Central America and the Caribbean), the USSF has sought World Cup teams to prepare the young U.S. squad for the tournament in November and December. This month, the Americans defeated Morocco, 3-0, in Cincinnati and tied Uruguay, 0-0, in Kansas City, Kan. (They also played mandatory Concacaf Nations League games against Grenada and El Salvador.)
Barring injuries, U.S. Coach Gregg Berhalter plans to have most, if not all, of his World Cup players at the September camp. He does not, however, need to finalize the tournament roster until mid-November.
Ideally, the USSF would have liked to arrange games against European World Cup opponents this fall. However, European soccer is preoccupied with its own Nations League schedule in September, the last official window for international matches before the World Cup.
The federation also looked into playing two home matches in September, but potential foes were hesitant about both travel and needing to arrange a second game at a U.S. venue.
The U.S. squad last played in Europe in May 2021 against Switzerland. Its previous neutral-site match overseas was in March 2021 against Jamaica in Austria.
Although both September events are at neutral venues, Japan and Saudi Arabia are the game organizers and home teams. They are in charge of stadium selection, ticketing and other facets. The USSF negotiated such things as appearance fees and transportation, and it will have access to tickets to sell to its traveling supporters.
Saudi Arabia played in Murcia this month, losing to Colombia and Venezuela, and will return for two September matches: against Ecuador on Sept. 23, followed by the U.S. clash.
Playing in Europe will ease transportation logistics for the core of the U.S. squad, which is employed by European clubs.
Roster candidates from MLS teams would fly to Europe after their respective league matches Sept. 17-18.
Japan, which qualified for its seventh consecutive World Cup, completed Asian qualifying with a 15-2-1 record, including 8-0-0 with 46 goals scored and only two conceded in the second-round group. It has not played the United States since a 2006 friendly in San Francisco.
The Americans and Saudis will meet for the seventh time but first since the 1999 FIFA Confederations Cup in Mexico. Four years earlier, in a friendly at RFK Stadium, the United States recovered from a three-goal deficit to win, 4-3.
“Together with the two games in June against Morocco and Uruguay, we will have experienced a great diversity of styles and quality opponents to help us prepare for what lies ahead at the World Cup,” Berhalter said in a statement. | 2022-06-21T18:57:54Z | www.washingtonpost.com | USMNT to face Japan and Saudi Arabia in final World Cup tune-ups - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/usmnt-world-cup-friendlies-japan-saudi-arabia/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/usmnt-world-cup-friendlies-japan-saudi-arabia/ |
Transcript: ‘Capehart’ with Katy Tur
MR. CAPEHART: Good morning, and welcome to the “Capehart” podcast on Washington Post Live. I am Jonathan Capehart, associate editor at The Washington Post.
Journalism is in the blood of Katy Tur. Her parents pioneered breaking‑news chopper reporting, chopper reporting with her father flying the helicopter and her mother holding the camera, even dangling out of the copter to get the shot. They were household names. But, in her new book, "Rough Draft: A Memoir," Tur writes unflinchingly about the pain that enveloped her family, particularly her father's violence, his transition from Bob to Zoey, and their ongoing estrangement.
And joining me now is Katy Tur. Welcome. Welcome to "Capehart" and Washington Post Live.
MS. TUR: Thanks so much for having me, Jonathan. I need to up my background game, very clearly, considering yours.
[Laughter.]
MR. CAPEHART: Oh. And I can tell you're in the office. You are at 30 Rock right now. I can tell by the radiator behind you, and as folks know, you and I are MSNBC colleagues.
So let's jump into this. I think part of the reason you wrote this book was to spotlight the amazing career of your mom and dad, Marika and Bob Tur. With their Los Angeles News Service, they broke the biggest stories of the '90s, the Los Angeles riots, the slow‑speed chase of O.J. Simpson, among countless others. Talk about their storied career.
MS. TUR: They were amazing parents in a lot of ways, and they were incredible journalists. And I knew that I wanted to get this story down, because in so many ways, it was completely unbelievable. I mean, my parents had nothing.
My dad and my mom met when my dad was 18, my mom was 23. She was working as a ticket person at a movie theater counter, and my dad stalked her and asked her out a thousand times. Their first few dates were trying to find the Skid Row Stabber in the late 1970s because, apparently, they thought it would be romantic to try to break some news, I guess.
And from there, they created together this company called "Los Angeles News Service" from nothing again. My dad walked into a helicopter company and said, "Please let me lease a helicopter," and they said, "Do you have any cash?" and he said no. They laughed him out of the office. He walked into another one, had a business plan, and managed to convince the person there to hand him over a multimillion‑dollar helicopter that he had no money for, and from there, they started covering news in Los Angeles in a way that nobody else was doing. And they really revolutionized the news business. They were able to capture real‑time images from the air in a city that, frankly, it's hard to get to anywhere in a timely manner, and there might be a fire, but by the time you drive there, the fire is usually out. So they were able to capture things happening, stories breaking in real time, and they did it with much success. Pretty much, every police pursuit you saw in Los Angeles in the late '80s and '90s was my parents, Malibu fires, you name it.
MR. CAPEHART: Mm‑hmm. And, in fact, you write that you rode along. You were in the copter, particularly in one fire where you were‑‑the copter was so close, you could feel the fire, the heat on your shins or on your legs.
MS. TUR: Yes. It was incredible. We went along for a lot of the stories. I mean, it was just‑‑the helicopter was like another sibling. I mean, it was part of my family. I spent more time in the helicopter than I did my own bed. I felt more comfortable there than I did in my own bed, and you, again, could feel the heat from the flames covering the Malibu fires on your shins.
We would cover the Rose Parade, which was my favorite thing to cover growing up because it was like a storybook come to life.
I got a unique vantage point of Los Angeles. I became weirdly obsessed with backyard pools. Everyone in L.A. has a backyard pool, and I didn't have one. I really wanted one. But I also got to witness the city changing, sometimes for the worse, sometimes for the better, right before my very eyes, and I felt like I was getting a real‑life lesson in how the world worked, even at a really young age.
MR. CAPEHART: Mm‑hmm. And you caught me earlier looking down because I have the book right here, and I was trying to find this‑‑and I found it‑‑this passage to sort of amplify what you were saying about your parents pioneering the breaking news from the sky and always being first, and this story really got me. "My dad got a call from a fire department source saying there was a story in the parking lot of KABC."
MS. TUR: [Laughs]
MR. CAPEHART: "'I can't tell you what it is,' the source said, 'but you'll definitely want to get there fast.' He was right. Turns out KABC's own 11 p.m. anchor, an institution in L.A., had been shot in a botched robbery just outside of the station. My parents got there so fast, they scooped ABC on the story and then sold the tape back to them, back to KABC." That in a nutshell‑‑and I love that because that was Los Angeles News Service right there in a nutshell.
MS. TUR: Just to be clear. The anchor ended up being fine, so don't worry about him. That was also, Jonathan, the night I was born. My mom was‑‑
MR. CAPEHART: Oh, that's right. That's right.
MS. TUR: ‑‑nine months‑plus pregnant with me. She was 10 days past her due date with me, and she's carrying‑‑and back in those days, you know, you had a giant Betacam, and it was 40, 50 pounds, but you didn't get to roll tape on it. It wasn't even a Betacam. You had to hold‑‑there was a wire that went from‑‑the cable that went from the camera to the deck, and the deck is where you recorded the tape. And my mom was carrying this deck while she was 10 days overdue with me capturing that breaking news story, just waiting, waiting, I guess, to give birth.
MR. CAPEHART: You know, your parents had unbelievable success, a hangar, I think, at the Santa Monica Airport, two Porsches. You didn't get the pool, but you got a Jacuzzi. Nice house, got a Jacuzzi, private schools for you and your brother, but for all their success, you write, "The business tore them apart. Their relationship was a mess. My dad clearly took on all of that stress and didn't deal with it well," and he took all of that stress and took it out on your mom and you.
MS. TUR: Yeah.
MR. CAPEHART: I mean, he threw things, and he threw fists, didn't he?
MS. TUR: Yeah. Listen‑‑and just a note about pronouns because I'm looking backwards, the memories of my childhood. I use "he" here. I use "she" for my dad‑‑and we can get into this‑‑every time after 2013 when my dad told me that she was not Bob Tur at all but Zoey Tur. But since we're looking in the past, allow me to use "he."
Yeah. My dad had a really tough childhood of his own. His dad was violent and abusive. He was an alcoholic. He was a gambler. He would gamble all the family's money away. They would have to move in the middle of the night, evicted, or they'd just run because they couldn't pay the bills. He would take my dad to the racetrack and say, "Hold on to the rent money. Don't give it to me, no matter what," and then when he would lose the money that he brought to use and look at my dad for the rest of the money, when my dad refused, he would beat my dad up. You know, he cut part of his ear off. He had a terrible, terrible, terrible childhood.
And he had me, my dad, when he was so young. He was 23. They started this business. I think the weight of the world was really on his shoulders, and he never really dealt with the trauma of his own upbringing, the trauma of his grandfather, and it carried on. That cycle continued in our household. While not at all as awful as what he went through, there were still some pretty rough moments. I mean, there were holes in all of the walls, and the one I most specifically remember was one of my first childhood homes. I know it kind of carried on throughout, but my first childhood home, I felt like every other day, we were plastering up a hole in the wall because he would punch the walls. He'd get so, so angry, and he would throw things at my mother. My brother and I bore the brunt of it here and there, but more than anything, it was just emotionally wretched at times because he would yell and yell and yell and yell.
And, ultimately, Jonathan, even though we had all these fancy things‑‑we had these Porsches, a helicopter, a Jacuzzi, I went to private school‑‑it all‑‑we lost it all, including our health insurance, lost everything, because my dad just couldn't control his rage, and it just ended up being toxic for the business and for the people who were looking to employ him, even though my parents broke news and were unbeatable.
MR. CAPEHART: You know, you write about an instance where because they were hooked into all of these‑‑all of these news stations, they could hear everything that was happening in the helicopter, and you write about how at one station, they put together like a Bob Tur's greatest hits that was more than an hour long and sent it to you‑‑sent it to your home where‑‑
MS. TUR: It was him berating my mother or sometimes throwing things. Yeah. That stuff is on tape, and it's hard. It's really hard. Everybody would hear what was happening in the helicopter.
My mom said that when they were covering big breaking stories that were important, everything was calm. It was great. It was those in‑between times that got really bad, my dad got stressed, and he would lash out.
But it's an interesting commentary, Jonathan, on the world, on not just the news business but the world at that time, because everybody heard it. They heard the abuse.
MS. TUR: Yet no one said anything about it. They sent the tape to the house eventually, but no one ever, you know, called HR that I know of at least. No one called the cops that I know of.
I mean, my mom and I discussed calling the cops. I discussed with her calling the cops and saying, you know, "This has got to stop. We've got to send a message." But we didn't. I didn't because, you know, if my dad's name was in a police blotter, there goes the whole business. There goes the way we make money.
And looking back on it now as an adult myself, as, you know, a grown woman in the Me Too era, I realize that that's‑‑you know, I realize very personally that that's the way this just continues. That's the way that people get caught in these cycles and can't escape because their whole lives are tied to it.
MR. CAPEHART: You write that you tried to bury that part of your past, but you gave that up after hearing disturbing audio from a scene in a documentary about your parents. What did you hear?
MS. TUR: My dad saying‑‑and I'm paraphrasing, but something along the lines of "I don't know how to communicate you except through violence," and he was really frustrated with her in the helicopter.
There's another scene in that documentary where it's the last flight in the helicopter, and it's really a gut‑wrenching moment. Even I cry when I watch it because the business is falling apart, and the helicopter is going back to the company, the leasing company, and they lose‑‑have lost their contracts. My grandmother who is a member of the business but also like the glue that held the family together is dead, and my dad is trying to‑‑my mom is taping my dad, trying to wrap intros and outros for all the footage that they shot over the years so they could repackage it and sell it. And he's yelling at her, and my mom says, you know, "I think I'm holding it straight. I'm doing it my best, the camera," and she says, "Don't hit me." And it's awful. It's an awful thing to hear.
And I found that I‑‑this was in the middle of the pandemic when I‑‑the very beginning of the pandemic, right before everything went to hell, when I saw this documentary, and then in the middle of the pandemic, my mom sent me the server that contained all of the news footage they shot over the years, every single piece of it, thousands of hours, also all of our home videotapes, the stuff that the documentary was based on, the video the documentary used. And in the middle of the pandemic, I felt really isolated. I was broadcasting from my basement. I was starting to wonder what I was doing with my life. Was journalism the career for me? Were we making things worse or were we making things better as journalists? Do I need to quit? You know, I got‑‑it got really dark in my head.
And so when my mom sent me this hard drive, I realized that in order to answer the question of where I'm going, I had to go back and confront the things that I had been running away from.
MR. CAPEHART: All of this brings me to your father's transition from Bob to Zoey. In retrospect, do you think your father's anger was driven by his dealing with or not dealing with his gender identity at the time?
MS. TUR: You know, I'm not a psychiatrist, and so I'm not going to venture to say where the root of everything was with any‑‑you know, that's for my dad to answer definitively.
I think, though, not being your true self is a difficult thing, and I empathize with my dad for that. It must really have sucked trying to hide the person you were for as long as she did. I mean, she was in her 50s when she decided to transition, and I hate that it took so long for her to be comfortable to announce who she was and to take that step. And I wish that it was the move that made everything all better between us, but unfortunately, it didn't and not because of the transition but because of her desire to wipe away everything before then to say Bob Tur is dead and my desire to say hold on, the things Bob Tur did are not dead to me. Bob Tur was my dad, and, you know, let's deal with it. It's tough. It was a pivotal moment in my life. It was hard.
MR. CAPEHART: Yeah. And Bob Tur called you to tell you that he was transitioning when you were covering the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013. Folks can read how that call went, but I want to keep going on your father's lack of willingness to take responsibility for what happened during your childhood.
You tried to talk about your childhood with Zoey, but you write, quote, "It felt like my dad was using a Get Out of Gender‑Free card I didn't know existed." Why do you think Zoey Tur won't take responsibility for what Bob Tur did?
MS. TUR: I think because she's ashamed, and she said as much. She said so in the documentary about her life at the end of it. She's ashamed for what she did, and she regrets it. And I think it's hard to confront the bad things that any‑‑I mean, if I‑‑if it were me, it would be hard for me to confront it, and I empathize with that. But I also know that, you know, as a mother myself, you have to confront the things that are hard and uncomfortable in order to move past them, to gain an understanding of them, and to break that cycle.
I mean, it's the same for our country. We've got to confront the ugly parts of our past. We can't just bury them or pretend they didn't happen. We have to confront them to move on and be a better country. Same thing with relationships.
And, you know, while that was a real pivotal moment in my life, what I was finding‑‑and this is part of what started to click for me over the pandemic‑‑was that we're also faced in a really pivotal moment in the world and a pivotal moment for journalism in general, the way that we are able to speak to people, what we are able to tell people, how we are able to educate people. It's broken right now, Jonathan. I know you know this.
And I think the January 6th insurrection and all that we are witnessing now during these hearings is exemplifying an astounding failure of this country to come together on basic facts, an astounding failure of one man who happened to be president to accept the truth. But, also, I wonder if we're going to look at ourselves as journalists. Isn't it also an astounding failure of our ability to communicate?
MR. CAPEHART: Yes. [Laughs] I think the answer to that question is yes.
You know, when you spoke with CBS "Sunday Morning," you said you decided to share your story, including your family's dirty laundry, because it is a great story to share. What can people learn from your story?
MS. TUR: You know, I have been surprised. I didn't write this with any intention of‑‑or any thought that I would find anybody else who had been through something similar. I know everyone has a more complicated childhood than maybe it appears from the surface. For instance, my husband had a wild childhood where his dad was a drug smuggler and went to jail and disappeared from his life, which is probably why we are together because we're two crazy people with crazy upbringings.
But I have been surprised, Jonathan, at how many people have reached out to say that they had, while not similar in the details, similar in the broad strokes, experiences in their childhood. Estrangement is a big thing. I think one in four Americans are estranged to a close family member, and it's tough, you know, and it's a complicated thing to talk about, if somebody asks you, "Where's your dad?" "Where's your mom?" "Where's your sister?" And I think that most people don't really know how to have that conversation, don't really know how to say it without feeling judged or feeling like they've done something wrong, and I certainly felt that way for a lot of time when I would have to talk about my childhood or anybody would ask me about, you know, how is grandpa doing with the grandkids.
And I think that for me, writing this book was a release just to say this is the story and it's complicated, and, you know, I'd love to tell you the sugarcoated version, but the sugarcoated version is not the truth. Here it all is. Lay all your cards out on the table.
MR. CAPEHART: We got to talk about your career. You rose up‑‑well, one, you didn't want‑‑initially didn't want to go into journalism. You wanted to run as far away from it as possible, and yet here we are. You rose up through the ranks of local news and covered tons of crazy stories, but nothing, I don't think, probably compares to your covering the Trump campaign in 2015 and 2016, does it?
MS. TUR: How could anything compare to that? I mean, that was‑‑
MR. CAPEHART: [Laughs]
MS. TUR: I mean, honestly, how could anything compare to it? Yeah. I covered‑‑I chased tornadoes. I covered crane collapses. I covered plane crashes. I covered all manner of tragedy, breaking news, everything falling apart around me, but nothing could prepare me for‑‑other than maybe my childhood‑‑for the Trump campaign.
And, you know, it was‑‑it was interesting because, like, I got assigned to it not because I was a politics reporter or not because anybody thought that the campaign would last, but because I happened to be in town. Donald Trump was making noises, and they weren't going to put somebody on it that they thought would be here, you know, for the next 510 days.
I lived in London at the time, spending the summer here.
MR. CAPEHART: Right. That's where you were living, in London then.
MS. TUR: I lived in London. I mean, I literally‑‑I was here for a few days. I left milk in my refrigerator. I left clothes in the laundry, and I came back, and after that, I only spent the night in my bed in London, I think, like eight more times for a year. And then by the time I was done with the Trump campaign, I had moved out my flat in London.
MS. TUR: My life had totally changed, but yeah, I mean, I get asked a lot about, you know, why did you stick with the campaign. Donald Trump would go after you. There were death threats against you. He singled you out in a way he didn't single anybody else out. Why didn't you just say, hey, listen, I'm going to go back to London and live the life I was living, go back to the French boyfriend I had and the European lifestyle where I had wine at lunch? I mean, nobody would begrudge you that if you did it, but I found myself riveted. And that's not to say that I thought it was an amazing, great campaign, but it was the country changing in front of our eyes. And I wanted to try to understand what was going on.
And, I mean, listen, I've still been trying to understand what's going on six years later, seven years later.
MS. TUR: It's remarkable how this‑‑how this country has changed. I mean, when I was here in 2015, when I got assigned Trump, that was when it was the weekend or the week that‑‑the day that gay marriage or same‑sex marriage was upheld in the Supreme Court. It was a celebratory day, and I thought to myself, wow, this country has come so far. Love really does win.
And then yesterday I find out that in the Texas GOP, the new platform, is that being gay is an abnormal lifestyle choice. Going from there to there in seven short years is‑‑it's weird to me. What's going on?
MR. CAPEHART: Yeah. It's frightening.
You know, you are anchoring MSNBC's January 6th hearing coverage with Andrea Mitchell and Hallie Jackson. Has there been anything out of the hearings that have surprised you‑‑that surprised you?
MS. TUR: I think what has surprised me is how many people behind the scenes were saying this is not right, this is corrupt, this is potentially criminal, how many people were telling him that he had lost. He lost. He lost. There was no fraud. He lost. You can't pressure Mike Pence. That is corrupt. He doesn't have the legal authority. You can't do it; he did it, anyways.
We're going to hear today about how he pressured Georgia officials. I'm imagining we're going to get a lot more information surrounding‑‑and Arizona officials‑‑surrounding the calls, the call that he made to Brad Raffensperger asking him to find those 11,000‑plus votes.
I'm surprised at how widely accepted it was among his administration and how there were so many people that didn't come out and say that publicly.
MR. CAPEHART: Mm‑hmm.
MS. TUR: I mean, I guess that's not that surprising. It's depressing.
MR. CAPEHART: That's the word. It's depressing, and I'm still reeling from the hearing where we learn about the pressure on then Vice President Mike Pence and how close he came to, quite literally, being assassinated.
You and I could talk all day long, and we only have five minutes left, but I'm just going to give a warning. We're going to try to stretch this just a little bit longer because there are two things I need to ask you about.
MS. TUR: Okay.
MR. CAPEHART: One is talk about being a woman in this business and the things you had to‑‑you had to put up with as you rose through the ranks by dint of your determination and skill.
MS. TUR: [Laughs] I think any woman coming up in any business will recognize some version of this, and, you know, it's nice to have it out there. You get treated differently, and you get treated in a nonserious way. I hope it's changing.
But when I was coming up in the business, I had a‑‑you know, I had a meeting with my first news director, one of my first news directors, my first one where I was a reporter, and the meeting was "We love you. We think you're so great. We're happy to hire you, but you can't be on my station unless you change the way you look." He told me my boobs were too big for my clothes in so many words. He handed me a quite literal binder full of women, Jonathan, that contains a bunch of glossy images of haircuts that he wanted me to get, short, severe bob cuts with streaky highlights, the kind of things you would see in front of a mall salon in 1989. And it was‑‑the message that was given to me was it very much matters, very much matters the way you look.
And then later on when I was climbing the ladder, I was at a local station here in New York, and‑‑WPIX, and the assignment editor, you know, sent me on a story about pole dancing as exercise, and it was kind of a fad at the time. But he didn't just send me to cover it. He said, "Hey, do you have these stripper shoes you can wear while you're doing this story? You can get on the pole and do some, you know, examples of the routine," and I remember thinking you'd never ask any of my male colleagues to do this. And it just exemplified that in order to be taken seriously, I had to suck it up and just smile and pretend like I wasn't hearing those things and then try to move on to get the harder news, the more serious story. I had to fight for it, prove myself in a way that some of my male colleagues did not have to. And it's frustrating, and I don't like it. I don't like that you automatically assume that the girl on the‑‑or the woman, the young woman on your staff is the person that should go cover gossip girl. Like, we're doing gossip girl segments to try to keep people into the news. Let's have her do it because she's the youngest woman on staff, just assuming that it was, you know, a genre that I would naturally love to talk about as a news reporter. It felt really‑‑it felt really dumb and minimizing.
MR. CAPEHART: And that's one aspect. The other aspect, which you write about forthrightly in the book, is that when you moved‑‑you moved to New York, and you were dating Keith Olbermann, who at the time was--
MS. TUR: Oh, yeah.
MR. CAPEHART: ‑‑a giant at MSNBC, "Countdown with Keith Olbermann." And you had to deal with the chatter behind the scenes of people saying, well, you're getting where you're‑‑you're rising because of who you're dating.
MS. TUR: So there was a big age difference, and I think I kind of knew that there would be chatter going into it. I couldn't have been too blind to it, but I was surprised at the way that it was people really grabbed onto it. I was in the New York Post a lot. I had, you know, Fox News' PR team going after me trying to get to Keith by taking down somebody that was close to him. So I was the easiest target. They dug up old photos of me from college where I was dancing with people, insinuating that I was, you know, a drunk slut or some version of that. And then I also felt like the people in my life that I‑‑my colleagues in the jobs that I held were whispering behind my back, and some were. Some were definitely, like calling me, you know, all sorts of names, saying that I only got to where I was because of who I was dating, and I'm sure they used more colorful language than that.
And even now today, if somebody is trying to take me down a notch or try to diminish me, they'll bring up Keith, and you can just look at my Twitter feed and the comments on it. You get a ton of those, "Well, she dated Keith Olbermann. That's the only reason she's in the job that she's in." It's‑‑you know, it's part and parcel with this career, but it shouldn't be.
MR. CAPEHART: Mm‑hmm. And It's also‑‑it's minimizing, to use the word that you used to talk about the other aspects of your career. So that was then.
And so now‑‑you mentioned your husband before, Tony Dokoupil. He is anchor at CBS, at CBS "Mornings." I saw‑‑I think it was the interview you did with Nicolle Wallace where you said, with all the gushing that you could possibly muster, "I love my husband."
MS. TUR: I do. I do.
MR. CAPEHART: And to hear you say that‑‑I don't know if you remember. You and I talked when you and Tony first started dating, and it has never‑‑I have never forgotten the look on your face and the fervor with which you talked about Tony and how you love that man and you were hoping that you would get married.
MR. CAPEHART: And so to see that it went from the initial spark to see that it's still there is wonderful to see.
And I want to close by asking. You wrote in the book that there were things in the book that Tony didn't even know. How did he react to those things, and how has he reacted to everything you've put in this book?
MS. TUR: You know, there were some nights where I looked at him and I worried that he thought that he had made a mistake. I was like, "Oh, no. Do you love me less because of all of this?" and that's what I was afraid of. I mean, are you going to love me less if I tell you all of my deepest, darkest secrets? And, you know, I would tell him a story, and he'd get a look on his face like, oh, my God, that's horrible. And I'd start seeing it in a new light and realize that, oh, God, you know, maybe I'm‑‑maybe I've been sugarcoating a lot of this to myself. It was hard. It was hard to reveal it even to the person who was closest to me, but he is‑‑he's the most wonderful person I have ever met, and he is such a strong ally and supporter and lover of all things Katy Tur that I don't think I could have revealed any of this to anyone else had he not been by my side. I just frankly could not have done this book. I could not have finished it. I would have stayed, huddled in a corner, with my blanket over my head crying, or I just would have never confronted any of this, and I would have been, you know, threating to repeat the cycle all over again. Tony is the best.
MR. CAPEHART: Having seen the two of you together recently, I can‑‑I can confirm that Tony Dokoupil is a lover of all things Katy Tur. Katy Tur‑‑
MS. TUR: And I'm a lover of all things Tony Dokoupil.
MR. CAPEHART: Katy Tur, Mrs. Tony Dokoupil, MSNBC anchor, and author of the raw but really well‑done "Rough Draft: A Memoir." Thank you so much for coming to 'Capehart' on Washington Post Live.
MS. TUR: Thank you so much, Jonathan. It's great to be here.
MR. CAPEHART: And thank you for joining us. To check out interviews we have coming up, head to WashingtonPostLive.com.
Once again, I'm Jonathan Capehart, associate editor at The Washington Post. Thank you for watching "Capehart" on Washington Post Live. | 2022-06-21T18:58:26Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Transcript: ‘Capehart’ with Katy Tur - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2022/06/21/transcript-capehart-with-katy-tur/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2022/06/21/transcript-capehart-with-katy-tur/ |
Amazon workers in Maryland say they were fired for union organizing
Amazonians United, which has eschewed traditional union tactics, is bringing the labor movement to an Amazon facility in Prince George’s
An Amazon facility in New York City. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)
An independent labor group is alleging that Amazon illegally fired two employees at a Prince George’s County facility for “standing up for the rights” of their co-workers, the group said in charges filed with the National Labor Relations Board last week.
Amazonians United — a rank-and-file organization that has also organized at warehouses in Sacramento, Chicago and New York — said that the workers at the DMD9 delivery station in Upper Marlboro were terminated for their roles in collecting signatures for two petitions and encouraging others to participate in a walkout in March.
Kelly Nantel, a spokeswoman for the company, said in a statement to The Washington Post that those allegations were without merit. “Whether an employee supports a certain cause or group doesn’t factor into the difficult decision of whether or not to let someone go,” she added.
The group’s charges are nonetheless the latest evidence of a growing labor movement at Amazon facilities nationwide, fueled by a historic unionization vote at one of the company’s warehouses in Staten Island. Amazon — whose founder, Jeff Bezos, owns The Post — is fighting to overturn the results of that election.
The struggle in Prince George’s is playing out about 20 miles away from the Virginia site where Amazon is building its second corporate headquarters, and that push has at times followed an unorthodox playbook. While the Staten Island, N.Y., vote was the result of a traditional union campaign — organizers sought to collect union cards to trigger an election — Amazonians United has instead sought to pressure the company with petitions and walkouts in Maryland and elsewhere.
It’s a strategy that could accelerate change inside the company, given that no union vote — or months-long bureaucratic fight with Amazon over that vote — stands in Amazonians United’s way. But now, the group is alleging that Amazon, the second-largest private employer in the country, is violating labor law by firing some of the key leaders behind its protests.
“They want to break us apart. They want us to be scared. They don’t want workers coming together, talking about how they feel some things are wrong,” said Jackie Davis, one of employees fired in Prince George’s, who is seeking to be rehired with back pay. “If they divide us, there’s no more unity.”
Nantel, the Amazon spokeswoman, said the company will show “through the appropriate process” that Amazonians United’s allegations are unfounded. “Just like every company we have basic expectations of employees at all levels and in these cases, those expectations were not met,” she added.
Davis, 22, said she was first hired to sort packages in June 2021 at the DMD9 delivery station, which employs about 120 people and serves as the final stop for Amazon deliveries before they are dropped at front doors around the D.C. region. All entry-level employees work an early-morning shift, from 1:20 a.m. to 11:50 a.m.
She soon got involved with the Amazonians United effort and quickly became one of the group’s most effective canvassers in Maryland. Although she was excited by Amazon programs that would teach her to code and move up in the company, she was also frustrated by issues at the facility, she said, such as managers being inaccessible and no one from HR being able to answer her questions.
Big organizing campaigns by established unions, like the one in Bessemer, Ala., have drawn attention for their efforts to get Amazon workers to sign union cards. In Staten Island, an independent group, the Amazon Labor Union, launched a similar drive for an official union election, winning an upset victory in April.
Amazonians United has expressed its support for both of those campaigns. But rather than adopting the same tactics, Davis and other organizers have focused on building relationships and amassing support on the shop floor, sometimes in coordination with other warehouses around the country. She would get to work early to pass out union fliers outside the delivery station, she said, or call co-workers during her free time.
Davis and the group submitted a petition with 50 signatures to the management of the Maryland delivery station last August, calling for healthier food options in the break room at least a day’s notice for schedule changes, and safety demands such as greater flexibility to take bathroom breaks. “We Are Humans, Not Robots!” they declared in the petition.
An ensuing meeting with the facility’s managers resulted in a number of concrete changes: Besides healthier food, employees won a looser bathroom break policy, ergonomic mats at some workstations and free shuttles from the Metro station in Largo, organizers said.
The petition is an example of how Amazonians United’s strategy had enabled it to win material gains. In another instance, it won access to paid sick leave for temporary workers in California.
By December, the group came forward with additional demands. Amazon had granted hourly pay raises of about $2 to $3 during the company’s busiest months in some other facilities, but not at DMD9. And though the company had extended breaks from 15 to 20 minutes during the coronavirus pandemic, managers at the delivery station reversed that move ahead of the holiday rush, known as “peak season.”
Amazonians United again delivered a petition to local management, at the same time as five other warehouses in or around New York did. When the company would not budge, they all staged coordinated walkouts in March: Dozens of workers left the facility during their predawn lunch break, leaving managers to cover for them.
Davis was fired a few weeks later. Although she maintains her managers gave her no clear or justifiable explanation, Nantel, the Amazon spokeswoman, said Davis “was terminated due to time theft and not being onsite despite clocking in.”
Her petition to the NLRB, which was filed on June 14 and shared with The Post, contends that Amazon “retaliated” against her by “firing her for engaging in protected concerted activity and standing up for the rights of her coworkers.”
“Amazon is fully aware that their actions are in violation of our right to organize at work, so the company has turned to false accusations and shady excuses to justify firing walkout leaders,” Amazonians United said in statement.
The labor group has also filed “unfair labor practice” charges for workers at the New York-area warehouses who had been fired after they participated in walkouts. The NLRB will review all charges to determine whether they have merit.
In Maryland, Davis said her case strikes a particularly potent contrast with the white-collar corporate managers who are starting to fill jobs at the new offices in Arlington County, on the other end of Metro’s Blue Line.
“I feel real sorry for them,” she said, “that they’re so selfish, not working together with the employees.”
Caroline O’Donovan in San Francisco contributed to this report. | 2022-06-21T23:17:04Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Amazonians United says Amazon fired Maryland workers for union activity - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/amazon-maryland-workers-fired-union/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/amazon-maryland-workers-fired-union/ |
D.C. Public Defender Service names veteran lawyer as its new director
Heather Pinckney, who tried cases as a public defender for eight years with the office before starting her own firm, is returning as director
The District’s Public Defender Service has selected a veteran D.C. defense attorney and former member of the office as its new director, the office said Tuesday.
Heather Pinckney, 45, succeeds Avis E. Buchanan, who announced last fall that she would be retiring as director after 18 years.
Pinckney, who for eight years was trial lawyer in the office, handled various felony cases, including homicides, sexual assaults, and gun and drug possession offenses. In 2008, Pinckney left the office and started her own firm, Pinckney & Harden, where she represented defendants in both D.C. Superior Court and U.S. District Court. In assuming her new role, Pinckney will also step down as executive director of the national Black Public Defender Association, a position to which she was recently named.
Pinckney takes over the District’s largest federally funded office of defense attorneys at a challenging time for the litigators. Criminal cases in D.C. Superior Court have increased due to an uptick in violent crime in the city. At the same time, hundreds of cases have been put on hold or drastically slowed for two years because of the pandemic.
In addition to Buchanan, Pinckney also follows former Public Defender Service directors including former Anita Hill adviser and Harvard law professor Charles J. Ogletree Jr. and American University Washington law professor and author Angela J. Davis. | 2022-06-21T23:17:10Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Heather Pinckney named director of D.C. Public Defender Service - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/pinckney-director-public-defender-service/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/pinckney-director-public-defender-service/ |
Lawyers fear a legal iceberg lurking in the committee’s thousands of pages of witness interviews
Former Proud Boys leader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio poses for a portrait during a rally on Sept. 26, 2020, in Portland, Ore. (Joshua Lott/The Washington Post)
A federal judge will hear arguments Wednesday on whether to delay one of the Justice Department’s signature Jan. 6 criminal trials out of concern that a high-profile congressional investigation into the Capitol breach may have generated key evidence that prosecutors and defense lawyers have not seen.
Five alleged members of the extremist group the Proud Boys, including their former leader Henry “Enrique” Tarrio, are due to go on trial Aug. 8 on charges of seditious conspiracy. The trial, expected to last more than a month, represents one of the two most important criminal cases to arise so far out of the Justice Department investigation into the planning and execution of the attack on Congress that delayed for hours the ceremonial counting of votes affirming Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential victory.
Prosecutors and defense lawyers in the Proud Boys case and other Jan. 6 criminal cases have grown increasingly frustrated over the past two weeks, as a House select committee holds a series of closely watched, nationally televised hearings about the attack and the events that preceded it.
The committee has highlighted witness testimony and video evidence about what lawmakers say is potentially criminal behavior on the part of former president Donald Trump and others who falsely claimed the 2020 election was stolen. The hearings do not include rebuttal arguments or questions. One defense lawyer, John Hull, wrote in a court filing last week that the hearings are tainting the potential jury pool of “lovably dorky, wonky, media-attentive Washingtonians.”
Six video clips to catch up on the Jan. 6 committee hearings so far
Experts say there is a larger legal problem lurking, too: the possibility that buried in the transcripts of more than 1,000 witness interviews the committee plans to release with a public report in September are pieces of evidence that might help the Proud Boys defendants.
The committee has said it will share those transcripts with the Justice Department when they are done holding hearings. Prosecutors have said that timetable is not good enough because they need to see any such evidence well before the trial begins.
In a letter last week to the committee, senior Justice Department officials wrote “it is critical that the Department be able to evaluate the credibility of witnesses who have provided statements to multiple governmental entities in assessing the strength of any potential criminal prosecutions and to ensure that all relevant evidence is considered during the criminal investigations.”
In response, the chairman of the panel, Rep. Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) said that the committee will cooperate with the Justice Department but has to finish its hearing work first. At various times, the nine lawmakers on the panel have suggested they have uncovered evidence of crimes committed in the run-up to Jan. 6 and prodded the Justice Department to get more aggressive.
Some legal experts, however, say the more important question is whether the committee has amassed at least some evidence that could favor the defense. Under a long-established court precedent called Brady, federal prosecutors are obligated to share with the defense any exculpatory material the government has. When prosecutors fail to share that information, charges or convictions can be thrown out of court.
“As a separation of powers issue, this is a brain twister,” said Stanley Brand, a former counsel for the House of Representatives who has recently represented some Jan. 6 witnesses and defendants. “But it was also totally inevitable — you have the largest criminal investigation in Justice Department history, and you plunk down in the middle of that, a highly publicized set of congressional hearings with 1,000 depositions. That’s a monstrous problem in terms of meeting your Brady obligations under the law. My guess is [prosecutors] don’t really know most of what’s in those depositions. We’ve only seen a smidgen.”
It is not enough for prosecutors to say that they can’t turn over material that they don’t have because Congress won’t give it to them. In 2015, a federal judge tossed out an obstruction charge against a former BP executive charged with misleading lawmakers about the severity of an oil spill, ruling that since Congress would not provide some witness testimony, he could not get a fair trial. The executive was later acquitted at trial of a related false-statements accusation.
Analysis: All the Jan. 6 evidence that Trump and Co. knew their plot was corrupt
The House committee plans at least one hearing in September, which could overlap with the end of an August Proud Boys trial or with jury deliberations. And September will also feature heated congressional races, in which the importance or danger of Jan. 6 is likely to be debated frequently.
But if the judge grants the requests for a delay in the trial, that could have a cascading effect on the Justice Department’s work on other Jan. 6 cases, pushing back prosecutors’ timetable for potential further investigative or charging decisions.
Most of the defendants in the upcoming trial have asked for a delay until December — after both the hearings and the congressional elections. Federal prosecutors have also asked the judge for a delay, citing their need to review committee transcripts before trial.
Hull, the defense lawyer representing Proud Boy leader Joseph Biggs, filed court papers charging lawmakers had turned their Jan. 6 investigation into a circus, using “misrepresentations, outright lies and high tabloid noise of the first order” to describe Biggs.
Cowboys for Trump founder sentenced on Jan. 6 trespassing charge
Lawyers for another defendant in the case, Ethan Nordean, on Monday agreed that delaying a trial until the committee hearings end “would help ameliorate if not eliminate the unfair prejudice,” but argued that their client should also be released on bond if there is a delay.
“Compelling Nordean to choose between his constitutional rights to liberty, a trial by an impartial jury and a speedy trial would not just be ‘intolerable,’ but would feed the suspicion that he is being held in pretrial confinement not on the rule-of-law basis of public safety but in order to punish him before conviction or to squeeze him into waiving his right to a trial,” lawyers David B. Smith and Nicholas D. Smith wrote.
Nordean, also known as “Rufio” and “Panman,” was one of the alleged Proud Boys ringleaders on the ground that day with Biggs, leading a group of as many as 200 people from the Washington Monument to the Capitol before Trump’s speech and marching around the building.
Videos from that day show members of the group carried out several of the earliest and most aggressive efforts to confront police, breach barricades and break into the Capitol.
Prosecutors also say Nordean and Biggs led efforts to organize and recruit Proud Boys followers to come to Washington and raised funds for their protective gear and radios. | 2022-06-21T23:17:16Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Proud Boys trial delay requested over House Jan. 6 hearings - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/proud-boys-trial-hearing-trump/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/proud-boys-trial-hearing-trump/ |
U.N. places travel curbs
on education ministers
Two Afghan education ministers are no longer allowed to travel abroad for any peace and stability talks after the United Nations Security Council removed them from a sanctions exemption list, diplomats said Tuesday.
The move, unanimously agreed to by the Security Council’s Taliban sanctions committee, comes after the Taliban backtracked in March on its pledge to open high schools for girls, saying they would remain closed until a plan was drawn up in accordance with Islamic law for them to reopen.
Dozens of Taliban members have long been subjected to targeted U.N. sanctions — a travel ban, asset freeze and arms embargo. But an exemption to the travel ban was granted to some to allow them to join peace talks.
The sanctions committee this week agreed to extend the travel ban exemption for 13 Taliban leaders but removed the deputy minister of education and the minister of higher education from the list, diplomats said.
The Security Council last month called on the Taliban to “swiftly reverse” policies and practices restricting the rights and freedoms of women and girls.
2 Canadians stabbed to death in Mexican resort: Two Canadians were found dead of knife wounds in Mexico's Caribbean coast resort town of Playa del Carmen, the state prosecutor's office said. Prosecutors in Quintana Roo state said that the man and the woman were found dead at a hotel or condominium in the troubled resort and that a third person was reported injured. Prosecutors confirmed the male victim was on an Interpol wanted list over fraud charges. Playa del Carmen has been the scene of several instances of violence involving foreigners.
Belgium repatriates mothers, children from Syria: Belgium's judicial authorities said they have repatriated six women with Belgian citizenship who were held in a Syrian detention camp for foreigners affiliated with Islamic State extremists, along with 16 children. The federal prosecutor's office said it was the second repatriation operation of this kind after one in July 2021, when Belgian authorities brought back six mothers and 10 children. The transfer was made possible after a decision last year by Belgium to allow the return of mothers who have clearly expressed such a wish and have distanced themselves from extremist ideology.
Lebanon, Syria and Egypt sign deal to supply Beirut with gas: Lebanon, Egypt and Syria signed an agreement to import Egyptian gas to a power plant in northern Lebanon through Syria. The deal would increase the electricity supply in Lebanon, which is suffering under a severe energy crisis and chronic outages. The agreement needs to be signed off on by the World Bank, which is supposed to finance the process. Also, U.S. assurances are needed that the countries involved will not be penalized under American sanctions imposed on Syria, Lebanon's energy minister said.
Palestinian stabbed to death by Israeli settler: The Palestinian Health Ministry said a man died after being stabbed by an Israeli settler in the occupied West Bank. Israeli police said they responded to a report of "friction" between Palestinians and Israelis near the settlement of Ariel, in the northern West Bank, where the stabbing occurred. They said they were investigating. | 2022-06-21T23:21:25Z | www.washingtonpost.com | World Digest: June 21, 2022 - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/world-digest-june-21-2022/2022/06/21/6585db62-f16f-11ec-a9c7-cbc274649d15_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/world-digest-june-21-2022/2022/06/21/6585db62-f16f-11ec-a9c7-cbc274649d15_story.html |
Kellogg will split into three companies; Facebook to change housing ad algorithms
Kellogg will split into 3 companies
None of the new publicly traded companies has been named, but the breakup is expected to be completed by the end of 2023.
Kellogg derives 80 percent of its revenue from international snacks, noodles, frozen breakfasts and other foods that will make up what’s been dubbed the “Global Snacking Co.” The next largest entity, dubbed the “North America Cereal Co.,” will become the leading cereal business in the United States, Canada and the Caribbean. The smallest entity will exclusively produce plant-based foods such as MorningStar Farms products, aiming to capitalize on the prospects of long-term growth in the United States and abroad for vegan and vegetarian foods.
“Put simply, each of these businesses have different priorities, and splitting up allows the respective management teams to focus solely on accomplishing the long-term goals, with the potential of delivering more value to its shareholders,” said Michael Farr of the investment firm Farr, Miller & Washington.
In previous years, some investors and management teams tended to favor sprawling conglomerates, touting the benefits of combined operations and teams. But the promised corporate “synergies” — now often derided as a boardroom buzzword — often fell short of expectations.
What’s more, Farr said that since the onset of the pandemic, the importance of supply chains has been heavily scrutinized, forcing executives to reconsider how they can operate in the most efficient way. That can lead to separating business lines.
Meanwhile, the cereal and plant-based operations are at different stages of growth: stable sales with the goal of improving profit margins and an emerging food category with huge prospects.
— Hamza Shaban
Facebook to change housing ad algorithms
In a release, U.S. government officials said it had reached agreement with Meta Platforms, formerly known as Facebook, to settle the lawsuit filed simultaneously in Manhattan federal court.
U.S. Attorney Damian Williams called the lawsuit “groundbreaking.”
She said the company would extend its new method for ads related to employment and credit in the United States.
Microsoft will stop selling artificial intelligence-based facial-analysis software tools that infer a subject's emotional state, gender, age, mood and other personal attributes after the algorithms were shown to exhibit problematic bias and inaccuracies. Existing customers of the tools can keep using them for a year before they expire. The company is also limiting the use of other facial recognition programs to ensure the technologies meet Microsoft's ethical AI guidelines. | 2022-06-21T23:30:08Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Kellogg will split into three companies; Facebook to change housing ad algorithms - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/kellogg-will-split-into-three-companies-facebook-to-change-housing-ad-algorithms/2022/06/21/58828346-f162-11ec-99d3-cbe6aa9af168_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/kellogg-will-split-into-three-companies-facebook-to-change-housing-ad-algorithms/2022/06/21/58828346-f162-11ec-99d3-cbe6aa9af168_story.html |
A new report lays out the agency’s actions in a planned burn that exploded into New Mexico’s largest wildfire in history.
A firefighter works to keep a burning log from rolling down a slope on May 23, as he and his co-workers work on hot spots from the Calf Canyon/Hermits Peak Fire in the Carson National Forest west of Chacon, N.M. (Eddie Moore/The Albuquerque Journal via AP)
When the U.S. Forest Service started an intentional fire in the Santa Fe National Forest in early April, the aim was to reduce the risk of a destructive blaze. But the agency relied on poor weather data and failed to understand how climate change had dried out the landscape, ultimately setting a fire that would explode into the largest wildfire in New Mexico’s history, the Forest Service said in a new report published on Tuesday.
The Calf Canyon/Hermit’s Creek fire, which began as two blazes and combined to burn more than 341,000 acres and torch hundreds of homes as of Tuesday afternoon, has become the latest flash point in the debate over whether authorities should use prescribed burns — intentional fires meant to thin out flammable vegetation to lower the risk of more damaging blazes.
Wildfires need fuel to burn. A key way to get rid of that fuel is to set it ablaze, very carefully.
The review found the planning and analysis for the April 6 prescribed burn was done according to the Forest Service’s current standards and policies, and was carried out in an approved way. But the fire was being set “under much drier conditions than were recognized.”
“Persistent drought, limited overwinter precipitation, less than average snowpack” and fuel accumulation “all contributed to increasing the risk of fire escape,” the report said.
The report also found that numerous details about weather conditions were “overlooked or misrepresented,” and noted some automated weather stations nearby weren’t functioning. Those setting the fire also “did not cease ignitions or suppress the prescribed fire after clear indications of high fire intensity and receptive fuels.”
On May 20, Moore halted all prescribed burns on National Forest lands for 90 days as a safety precaution due to ongoing extreme weather. But he and others insist that such intentional burning is necessary to avoid disastrous wildfires, and that the vast majority of them do not cause problems.
“Wildfires are threatening more communities than they ever have. Prescribed fire must remain a tool in our toolbox to combat them,” Moore said. “Unfortunately, the effects of climate change are narrowing the windows where this tool can be used safely.”
Timothy Ingalsbee, executive director with Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology, said authorities “can no longer manage fire according to the calendar date” and should incorporate climate data more thoroughly into their models. He also said firefighters need to intensify prescribed burns when weather conditions are favorable. He warned that halting prescribed burns for three months could have consequences later this summer.
“Areas that should have burned under controlled conditions will burn under extreme conditions,” he said.
One month in, New Mexico’s largest-ever fire fuels anger and despair
In New Mexico, many have been outraged that authorities set the fire that ultimately displaced thousands of people from their homes.
Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez (D-N.M.) said the report pointed out numerous errors by the Forest Service.
“Forest Service failures destroyed many rich and proud New Mexico communities,” she said in a statement, according to the Associated Press. “The rains may cause a second flood disaster. As the report notes, the Forest Service put numerous homes, communities, lives, historic sites, and watersheds at risk.” | 2022-06-21T23:30:33Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Forest Service failed to account for climate change before prescribed burn in New Mexico - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/06/21/forest-service-report-fire-new-mexico/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/06/21/forest-service-report-fire-new-mexico/ |
High court opens the door to more public funding of religious schools
The Supreme Court ruled that Maine could not exclude Christian schools from its voucher program
The case of Carson v. Makin, in which the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday, concerns an unusual school voucher program with about 5,000 students in parts of Maine so rural that there are no public high schools. But the consequences of the decision are likely to be broader, offering more legal support for religious institutions, including schools, seeking public funds.
Two Maine families had sued after the state said they could not use public tuition assistance to send their teenagers to Christian schools. The high court ruled in their favor, telling Maine it could not exclude religious institutions from the program because it was discriminatory, violating the Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause.
Despite its limited impact, the decision marks a victory for proponents of school privatization and school choice. In the last year, they have successfully lobbied state lawmakers to create or expand programs that send taxpayer dollars to private schools. These come in a variety of forms — and put taxpayer dollars directly in the hands of parents, who can choose what kind of education they want for their children.
“This ruling affirms that parents should be able to choose a school that is compatible with their values or that honor and respect their values,” Leslie Hiner, vice president of legal affairs for EdChoice, said in a statement. “By shutting out parents with certain values, that’s discrimination run rampant.”
“Faith-based are really critical to their success because they have a very proven track record of educating disadvantaged kids.”
Legal scholars and advocates say the case itself will have little immediate impact, but they worried the case signals that the court will continue to open the door for religious institutions, including schools, to access public funds.
“Overall this is a deeply disappointing decision that further erodes the separation of church and state,” said Daniel Mach, who heads the American Civil Liberties Union’s program on freedom of religion and belief.
The decision follows a string of rulings that have favored religious institutions seeking public dollars. Two decades ago, the court ruled that tuition voucher programs could be used to help students attend religious schools, partly because it was the parent, not the state, making the decision to send them there.
Then, in 2017, the court ruled in favor of Trinity Lutheran Church, which sought a state grant from Missouri to repave the playground at its day care. And last year, the court sided with parents in Montana who wanted to use the state’s tuition voucher program to send their children to Christian schools.
Public school advocates worry that funding for school choice programs cuts in to budgets for traditional public schools.
“If this means that states will now be encouraged to put into place voucher schemes, then that could be a challenge in the future, and the issue of course would be the price tag for voucher schemes,” said Francisco Negron of the National School Boards Association.
There are also concerns over whether the civil rights laws that apply to public schools extend to private schools that receive public funds. In the Maine case, for example, one of the of the Christian schools bars gay and transgender students and teachers, a practice that would violate federal law if enacted in a public school.
Legal scholars anticipate that, at some point, the court will have to decide whether religious charter schools are permissible. Charter schools are publicly funded but privately managed, including by religious organizations that deliver nonsectarian instruction during the day but provide religious after-school programs.
Courts continue to grapple with whether charter schools are truly public schools and subject to the same civil rights laws, which would preclude the creation of religious charter schools.
A recent ruling spoke to that question: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit recently held that a charter school’s gender-based dress code, requiring girls to wear skirts, was unconstitutional — just as it would have been at a mainstream public school.
In the 2017 Trinity Lutheran case about religious schools that score state funds, Justice Sonia Sotomayor had worried that the majority was leading Americans “to a place where separation of church and state is a constitutional slogan, not a constitutional commitment.” On Tuesday, in a lone dissent, she wrote that now “the Court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation.” | 2022-06-21T23:30:39Z | www.washingtonpost.com | High court opens the door to more public funding of religious schools - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/religious-school-supreme-court-carson/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/religious-school-supreme-court-carson/ |
Virginia budget to move funding from DACA students to state’s HBCUs
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin in Arlington. (Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)
A measure in Virginia’s new two-year budget is drawing criticism for redirecting funding for undocumented college students to students at historically Black colleges and universities in the state.
The money — $10 million over two years — had been earmarked for state financial aid for undocumented immigrants, who are barred from receiving federal student loans and grants. Instead, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) asked the General Assembly to give the money to students at Virginia’s five private and public HBCUs — Virginia University of Lynchburg, along with Hampton, Virginia Union, Norfolk State and Virginia State universities.
“Shame on the governor for weaponizing state financial aid as a cheap political ploy to divide communities of color,” said Sookyung Oh, director of Hamkae Center, a civil rights organization in Virginia. “If education was important to this governor, as he claimed throughout his campaign, he could have easily allocated funding to ensure every young Virginian who wants to pursue higher education in the Commonwealth has the resources to do so.”
Critics of the measure say it perpetuates a false scarcity problem at a time when Virginia has a budget surplus, and it demands that lawmakers sacrifice one needy group of students for another.
“I understand and agree that we need to do something for HBCUs. This is not the way to do it. This is messy,” Del. Lamont Bagby (D-Henrico), head of the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus, told the House before a vote on the amendment Friday. “We have more than enough resources to help.”
Some critics also accused the governor of “pitting” the groups against each other, a charge Youngkin spokesperson Macaulay Porter on Tuesday disputed.
“This is a typical divisive Democrat talking point to claim that one group was ‘pitted’ against another,” Porter said. “The reality is, Governor Youngkin committed to providing necessary funding to HBCUs and with this budget, he’s delivering on that commitment.”
University leaders at Virginia’s five HBCUs did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Youngkin’s amendment. The schools have for years petitioned lawmakers for fiscal support on par with predominantly White institutions in the state.
Financial need is high at HBCUs, where many students come from low-income households. Generations of meager state appropriations, paltry donations and inequitable federal funding have left the universities without institutional resources to fund robust scholarships, making every additional dollar crucial.
‘We’re still behind’: Public HBCUs see record investments, but still contend with legacy of state-sponsored discrimination
Financial need is also high among undocumented immigrants, who have limited resources to finance their education. Although some colleges set aside funds to help the population, scholarships are still scarce. Undocumented students, including those shielded from deportation under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, often struggle to pay out of pocket.
During Friday’s budget session, Del. Alfonso H. Lopez (D-Arlington) asked the chairman of the budget-writing House Appropriations Committee, Del. Barry D. Knight (R-Virginia Beach), to explain the rationale for what he called a “zero-sum game.”
Knight said he assumed “the governor decided it was just a choice of his, that he thought, if he’s going to preference someone, he would rather preference historical Black colleges and universities as opposed to DACA.”
“I’m flabbergasted by what was just said,” Lopez responded. “What the governor is doing is pitting two high-need student groups against each other, and the chairman just admitted it.”
Del. A.C. Cordoza (R-Hampton) defended Youngkin’s request. “HBCUs have been historically underfunded — we’ve heard that from both sides — and the governor is trying to do something about it, and all we are hearing are complaints,” Cordoza told the House on Friday.
Youngkin proposed that half of the $10 million be used to supplement in-state student aid at Norfolk State and Virginia State universities, which are public institutions. The rest of the money will increase Virginia Tuition Assistance Grants, a form of aid for residents attending private colleges and universities, to $7,500 from $5,000 a year for students enrolled in historically Black institutions.
The Republican-controlled House passed the budget amendment on a party-line vote. The measure narrowly cleared the Senate with support from two Democrats — Sens. Joseph D. Morrissey (Richmond) and Lionell Spruill Sr. (Chesapeake). Spruill did not respond to requests for comment, but Morrissey’s office deferred to his floor speech on the amendment.
“By voting for this bill we are supporting students at HBCUs. That’s the bottom line. That’s why I’m going to support it,” Morrissey told lawmakers Friday. “I’ve been to Virginia State … and personally spoken to students who would not be there but for grants that were given to them.”
The measure is among three dozen amendments Youngkin proposed after House and Senate negotiators reached a deal on a $165 billion two-year budget plan this month.
Kamala Harris, BLM protests put a new spotlight on HBCUs. Many now hope for a financial reckoning.
Before leaving the governor’s office in 2021, Ralph Northam (D) signed legislation allowing undocumented and DACA students to receive in-state tuition and apply for financial assistance.
However, Lopez is concerned that there are no clear assurances from Youngkin that his administration will uphold the law as written and guarantee undocumented students equal access to state financial aid.
Cordoza argued that the governor would not use “some loose interpretation to hurt a community.” He called accusations that Youngkin was pitting groups against each other “ridiculous.” | 2022-06-21T23:30:45Z | www.washingtonpost.com | DACA college students to lose money to Virginia HBCUs - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/virginia-hbcus-undocumented-students-budget/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/virginia-hbcus-undocumented-students-budget/ |
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick poses for photos with supporters during the first day of the Republican Party of Texas convention on June 15 in Houston. (Elizabeth Conley/Houston Chronicle via AP)
Although Texas Republicans have flirted with secession before, this year’s platform is next-level reprehensible because its justification is attached to the “big lie” that Donald Trump really won the 2020 presidential election. This is absurd, even if a significant percentage of the Trump base believes it. Several centuries ago, most people on the planet believed the Earth was flat. Facts eventually forced (most) flat-earthers to accept reality. Not so for Trump’s true believers, who only trust facts that affirm their beliefs. Such excessive credulity is otherwise known as superstition.
Perry Bacon Jr.: How the GOP is making national policy one state at a time
As my Post colleague Perry Bacon Jr. pointed out in a deeply researched column Monday, a huge swath of middle America is turning bright red, state by state. This is thanks to strategic efforts by the Republican Party to fund and install Republican governors, attorneys general and legislators to take total control of state governments across the country.
Dana Milbank: Texas Republicans want to secede? Good riddance.
In Red America, Republicans have created a conservative legal infrastructure across all branches of state government that insulates them from the (currently) Democratic federal government. A secessionist’s dream come true! In the past year, Republican-governed states have passed laws on such hot-button issues as guns, the teaching of race and identity, and school voucher programs. If Roe v. Wade is reversed this month, many are poised to ban or severely limit abortion access.
I’d note: Not everything Republicans propose is objectionable — vouchers tend to benefit disadvantaged children, for instance. And the advent of Trump and the ceaseless rightward direction of the GOP couldn’t have happened without Democrats’ help. Liberals simply have failed to understand that tens of millions of Americans aren’t interested in a woke reinvention of the country. They don’t think that abortion on demand is tolerable. They don’t want to see women’s sports tip inexorably toward athletes advantaged by having gone through male puberty.
With this boundary-pushing platform, the Texas GOP appears intent on hammering a splitter into our red-blue divide. Unfounded “beliefs” that become law can become unpleasantly consequential, to say the least, and so the distance between us widens. More violence is almost a certainty in the absence of shared purpose.
I’d like to think that our divisions can be bridged through constructive debate and the electoral process, but I’m not optimistic. In light of recent attacks on pregnancy counseling centers and churches, combined with the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol, my fear is that our country is girding for battle. | 2022-06-21T23:31:47Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Texas drives our red-blue divide even wider - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/texas-republican-platform-deepens-divide/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/texas-republican-platform-deepens-divide/ |
By Dan Hurley
All soft objects, including pillows, quilts, pillowlike toys, comforters, and even blankets pose a risk of SIDS, suffocation, entrapment or strangulation, the guidelines note.
No, that study didn’t find ‘the cause of SIDS.’ Experts explain.
For parents who do nevertheless choose to co-sleep with their infant, the guidelines note that three practices in particular increase an infant’s risk of death by more than ten times: bed-sharing when the parent’s alertness is impaired due to fatigue or medications; if the parent is a smoker; or if they are sleeping on a soft surface, such as a couch or water bed. Only slightly less hazardous is bed-sharing with an infant less than four months old; with an infant who was born prematurely or with a low birth weight; or with anyone who is not the infant’s parent.
“The AAP has a fairly impossible job, to take a world literature of studies on infant sleep deaths and make a set of recommendations that parents can follow,” said Richard Goldstein, associate professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School and director of Robert's Program on Sudden Unexpected Death at Boston Children's Hospital. “If you want a straightforward message, you end up having to say things like bed-sharing in all situations is absolutely dangerous.”
The guidelines noted that persistent racial and ethnic disparities exist for infants’ risk of death. “The rate of sudden unexpected infant deaths (SUIDS) among Black and American Indian/Alaska Native infants was more than double and almost triple, respectively, that of white infants (85 per 100,000 live births) in 2010-2013,” the AAP said in a statement.
Infants should not routinely sleep in car seats, stroller, swings, infant carriers or infant slings, especially when younger than four months.
Breastfeeding reduces the risk of infants dying during sleep.
Parents should supervise “tummy time” with their infant for short periods, increasing to about 15 to 30 minutes a day by 7 weeks of age.
Use of a pacifier is associated with reduced risk.
Avoid devices that claim to reduce the risk of SIDS. “There is no evidence that any of these devices reduce the risk of these deaths,” the guidelines state. “The use of products claiming to increase sleep safety may provide a false sense of security and complacency for caregivers.”
No evidence supports the use of swaddling to reduce the risk of SIDS. | 2022-06-21T23:31:53Z | www.washingtonpost.com | New safe sleep for babies guidelines recommend flat beds, no co-sleeping - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/parenting/2022/06/21/aap-safe-sleep-for-babies-guidelines/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/parenting/2022/06/21/aap-safe-sleep-for-babies-guidelines/ |
By Will Hobson
Washington Commanders owner Daniel Snyder denied a former employee's allegation of sexual harassment and assault. (John McDonnell/The Washington Post)
An employee of Washington’s NFL team accused owner Daniel Snyder of sexually harassing and assaulting her in April 2009, three months before the team agreed to pay the woman $1.6 million as part of a confidential settlement, according to legal correspondence obtained by The Washington Post.
The woman accused Snyder of asking her for sex, groping her and attempting to remove her clothes, according to a letter sent by an attorney for the team to the woman’s lawyer in 2009. The woman alleged the assault occurred in a private, partitioned area at the back of one of the team’s private planes during a return flight from a work trip to Las Vegas.
Snyder denied the woman’s allegations, the letter states, and a team investigation accused her of fabricating her claims as part of an extortion attempt. But Snyder and the team eventually agreed to pay her a seven-figure sum as part of a settlement in which she agreed not to sue or publicly disclose her allegations.
The existence of a $1.6 million settlement was first reported by The Post in 2020. Details of her allegations have not been previously reported. They emerge as the NFL investigates a separate accusation of sexual harassment against Snyder and as members of Congress press the team and the NFL for information about the league’s year-long investigation of sexual harassment at the franchise, which concluded in 2021 with no public report or investigative findings.
Snyder, through his attorneys, declined an interview request, and his attorneys declined to comment. Snyder called the woman’s claims “meritless” in a court filing in 2020, saying the team only settled at the request of an insurance company. His accuser and her attorney, Brendan Sullivan, declined to comment. The Post typically does not name alleged victims of sexual assault without their consent.
The letter obtained by The Post was written by Howard Shapiro, an attorney at WilmerHale law firm, which had assisted in investigating the woman’s allegations. In his letter, written in response to the woman’s legal threats, Shapiro argued forcefully that her claims were “knowingly false,” made numerous allegations in attempts to undermine her credibility and said Snyder and the team would “seek damages” from her. Shapiro and WilmerHale did not respond to requests for comment.
The letter makes no mention of NFL involvement in the team investigation. The league’s personal conduct policy in 2009 required investigations of sexual assault allegations to be overseen by the league office, with Commissioner Roger Goodell determining any discipline. The team’s investigation in 2009, according to the letter, was overseen by then-general counsel David Donovan, who reported to Snyder.
In concluding the woman fabricated the assault, the letter says, Donovan cited the plane’s tight configuration and quiet engine, as well as interviews with passengers who said they didn’t notice signs of an assault or distress during the flight.
He also accused her of lying during the investigation, the letter states, by claiming she maintained an “impeccable personal and professional reputation.” To undermine that claim, Donovan cited allegations about the woman’s personal conduct, including that she wore revealing clothing and flirted with other men on the trip to Las Vegas.
The Post described the team investigation, as summarized in the letter, to three experts in sexual assault investigations, who said the team may have been justified in concluding that the woman’s claim was unsubstantiated. But these experts said the evidence cited in the letter does not prove the woman fabricated her claims, and they criticized the inclusion of potentially damaging allegations about the woman’s personal life, regardless of Donovan’s rationale.
“This is exactly the type of stuff we’ve worked hard since the 1970s to abolish from how sex crimes are investigated,” said Joanne Archambault, a retired sergeant with the San Diego Police Department who oversaw sex crimes investigations and the founder of End Violence Against Women International.
D.C. attorney Beth Wilkinson, who led the NFL’s investigation of Washington’s workplace, interviewed Snyder’s 2009 accuser in 2020, The Post previously reported. But she did so amid what she later described as efforts by Snyder’s lawyers to “silence” the woman, including by offering her more money to not speak with the NFL investigator. An attorney for Snyder has denied these allegations.
As Wilkinson investigated in 2020, she also fended off a lawsuit by Donovan, who asked a federal judge to prohibit Wilkinson from disclosing anything about the 2009 investigation or settlement in her final report to the NFL. The Post attempted to intervene in the case, to advocate for the unsealing of records, but a judge denied the request.
Donovan dropped his lawsuit, but whatever Wilkinson concluded about the 2009 allegations against Snyder remains confidential because of Goodell’s refusal to release any public report or findings from her investigation. Wilkinson declined to comment.
Goodell’s handling of Wilkinson’s investigation led Democrats on the House Oversight Committee to launch their own inquiry last fall. That probe surfaced the new allegation of sexual harassment against Snyder, by former employee Tiffani Johnston. Appearing before the committee in February, Johnston, a former cheerleader and marketing manager for the team, accused the owner of putting his hand on her leg under the table at a team dinner and trying to force her into his limousine.
Snyder has denied Johnston’s allegations. The NFL hired Mary Jo White, a former U.S. attorney and chairwoman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, to investigate her claims as well as accusations of financial improprieties raised by a former vice president of sales, which the team also has denied.
On Wednesday, Goodell is scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee to discuss the NFL’s handling of its investigation of Washington’s workplace culture. Snyder declined a request to appear at the same hearing, saying he had a team-related business meeting in another country the same day.
‘A higher standard’
In one of Goodell’s first significant acts as NFL commissioner, he strengthened the league’s personal conduct policy in 2007 after a string of off-the-field scandals involving players accused of criminal activity.
The new policy applied to everyone associated with the NFL, including owners, and prohibited any “conduct detrimental to the integrity” of the league. The policy went beyond barring just criminal activity, the league announced, and neither a conviction nor an arrest was required for the NFL to investigate and impose discipline.
“It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime,” the updated policy said in April 2007. “As an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard.” Upon learning of an alleged violation of the policy, the league office would direct an investigation, and Goodell would determine whether any punishment was warranted.
Two years later, the woman who worked for the NFL’s Washington franchise, now known as the Commanders, returned from a weekend work trip to Las Vegas with a startling accusation. On the return flight, the woman alleged, Snyder sexually assaulted her.
According to the letter, the woman alleged that Snyder asked her to sit with him in a private area at the back of the plane, away from the other passengers. At one point during the flight, she alleged, Snyder asked her for sex, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothing before she stopped the assault and pushed him away.
Snyder and the woman were joined on the plane by six other passengers, two pilots and two flight attendants, according to the letter, which does not identify any of the other people on board. The group had attended the previous night’s Academy of Country Music Awards, a show put on by Dick Clark Productions, which Snyder owned at the time.
Efforts by The Post to identify the other passengers and the crew on board have been unsuccessful. Multiple former longtime pilots for Snyder did not respond to requests for comment, and several other former members of the team’s senior management, who might have had knowledge of the woman’s allegations, declined to comment or did not respond to interview requests.
On Capitol Hill, ex-Washington NFL employees levy new harassment claims against Daniel Snyder
“You can’t have the person leading your investigation concerned they might get fired if they come to the wrong conclusion,” said Herskowitz, now a consultant. “That’s a huge problem. This whole investigation didn’t have enough independence and neutrality.”
While Donovan did hire an outside firm to assist, his involvement with the investigation was still problematic, according to Herskowitz, as was the involvement of another team executive who reported to Snyder: then-chief operating officer Mitch Gershman. When Donovan concluded his investigation, according to the letter, he reported his finding that the woman had lied for the purpose of extorting the team to Gershman, who fired the woman for making “fictitious statements” about Snyder. Gershman did not reply to requests for comment.
Three former minority shareholders who were members of the team’s board of directors in 2009 — FedEx founder Frederick W. Smith, real estate developer Dwight Schar and investor Robert Rothman — declined to comment or did not reply to requests for comment.
In the letter, Shapiro, the attorney for the team, claimed Donovan’s investigation uncovered “uncontroverted evidence disproving” the woman’s allegations against Snyder. The letter then details some of that evidence.
None of the other passengers on the flight supported the woman’s account, according to the letter. Snyder didn’t direct anyone on where to sit, these people said, and one person claimed the woman pushed her way to the back of the plane and wasn’t invited there by Snyder.
Others said that the door to the back area was open for most of the flight, with other passengers and flight attendants making frequent, unannounced visits, and that they didn’t hear any noises consistent with an assault. And after Snyder’s accuser returned from sitting with Snyder, these people said, she acted amiably, making conversation while giving no indication she had just been assaulted.
Donovan also claimed the woman offered a shifting account of her assault. In the woman’s first meeting with Donovan, he alleged, she claimed Snyder “f---ed” her. A few days later, she stated Snyder “put his hands down my pants.” On a third occasion, she stated Snyder “groped” her.
In the letter, the team asserted that the woman was lying as part of an extortion attempt. The woman mentioned personal financial distress in her first meeting with Donovan, he alleged, and asked for a settlement. Donovan also cited an email he uncovered in which the woman complained to her husband about a credit card balance of more than $35,000, as well as the fact the woman had recently learned she wouldn’t be receiving an expected bonus from the team.
Donovan also included in his investigation, according to the letter, allegations about the woman’s personal conduct in the days and months before she accused Snyder, saying they undermined her claim of professionalism.
Among these allegations, according to the letter: The woman dressed in a “sexually provocative manner” and wore a revealing halter top one evening during the trip to Las Vegas. Another person alleged that the woman was flirtatious with another man that weekend and engaged in “dirty dancing.” The woman denied the allegations, the letter states.
“This goes against everything that is best practice in sex assault investigations,” said Elizabeth Donegan, a retired sergeant with the Austin Police Department who led the sex crimes unit. “Allegations about how a woman dresses, if she flirts with other men … this stuff has absolutely nothing to do with whether an assault occurred."
The experts in sex assault investigations said they could understand a finding that the woman’s claim was unsubstantiated, because there were no witnesses and because the letter makes no mention of the woman providing supporting evidence of an assault beyond her account.
The letter does not dispute the woman was alone with Snyder in a private area of the plane for a time but cites claims by other passengers that they didn’t hear or see anything suggesting an assault occurred.
“Just because no one else saw or heard anything doesn’t mean it’s definitely false,” said Archambault, the former San Diego sex crimes sergeant.
And just because the woman didn’t appear disheveled or traumatized after she returned to the cabin with the other passengers, experts said, doesn’t mean she lied about being assaulted.
“There’s no set way that victims always behave immediately after being assaulted,” said Justin Boardman, a retired detective who investigated sex crimes for the West Valley City police in Utah.
In exchange for $1.6 million, according to a draft of the settlement previously reported by The Post, the woman agreed not to speak publicly about her allegations. The team, Snyder and Donovan also agreed to never speak publicly about the team’s allegations about the woman. The team agreed to change her personnel file to state that she was not fired but resigned and to offer a letter of recommendation that described the woman as “well-respected by her colleagues."
For the next 11 years, the settlement remained a closely held secret, known only to those directly involved and a few close advisers to Snyder, until the team’s workplace culture came under public scrutiny in 2020.
When Wilkinson began investigating that July, Goodell initially permitted Snyder and the team to oversee her work. There were no direct allegations about Snyder’s conduct in The Post report that prompted the team to hire Wilkinson, and Snyder publicly pledged Wilkinson’s investigation would be “full” and “unbiased.”
Hostility quickly developed between Wilkinson and lawyers for Snyder, however, over her efforts to interview the 2009 accuser. While the team publicly released former employees from nondisclosure agreements to speak, Snyder’s lawyers argued to Wilkinson this release did not apply to the 2009 accuser, The Post previously reported.
The NFL eventually assumed oversight of Wilkinson’s investigation, and she interviewed Snyder’s accuser at some point in late 2020. As she was preparing to interview Snyder in November 2020, however, Donovan sued Wilkinson in federal court, seeking an injunction that would prohibit her from discussing anything connected to the 2009 settlement with the NFL. He dropped the suit within weeks.
When the NFL announced the conclusions of Wilkinson’s investigation, in July 2021, the league fined the team $10 million for having an abusive workplace culture but released no public report. That kept any conclusions Wilkinson made about the 2009 allegations against Snyder confidential, but it also, in effect, triggered another investigation of the team’s front office. This investigation, overseen by White, will produce public findings, the NFL has said.
White is investigating several allegations produced during the House Oversight Committee’s inquiry, including the harassment allegation levied against Snyder by Johnston, the former cheerleading manager and marketing director.
Johnston is represented by Lisa Banks, an attorney who also represents more than 40 other former employees who participated in Wilkinson’s investigation. In a statement, Banks expressed optimism White would examine the 2009 settlement.
“I hope and expect that Mary Jo White will include in her investigation the facts underlying the 2009 settlement,” Banks said. “Such information would be directly relevant to the allegations of my client, and therefore squarely within the scope of Ms. White’s investigation."
The day Johnston went public with her allegations, Snyder publicly denounced them as “outright lies.” A few days later, the Commanders announced they had hired a law firm to investigate. Hours later, the NFL publicly overruled the team by announcing it would hire its own investigator.
During a news conference that day, Goodell explained the league’s reasoning for not allowing the Commanders to oversee an investigation into accusations against the team and its owner.
“I do not see any way,” Goodell said, “a team can do its own investigation of itself.”
Liz Clarke and Beth Reinhard contributed to this report.
More on investigations into Washington's NFL team
15 women accuse former Redskins employees of sexual harassment and verbal abuse
Lewd cheerleader videos, sexist rules: Ex-employees decry Washington’s NFL team workplace | 2022-06-21T23:32:18Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Daniel Snyder faced sexual assault allegation in 2009, document shows - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/dan-snyder-sexual-assault-allegation/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/dan-snyder-sexual-assault-allegation/ |
Lexi Thompson tucks grief away, remains fan favorite at Women’s PGA
American Lexi Thompson enters this week's Women's PGA Championship at Congressional ranked No. 6 in the world, yet hasn't won since 2019. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)
Lexi Thompson sank a putt for birdie on her final hole of the U.S. Women’s Open earlier this month, walked into the scoring facility adjacent to the 18th green at Pine Needles golf club in Southern Pines, N.C., and received the distressing update for which she had been bracing.
Her ailing Grandma Mimi had passed away earlier that Sunday, but Thompson’s team withheld the information until she arrived in a setting that offered at least a modicum of privacy. When told, Thompson began sobbing, even as she had made peace with the inevitable while sitting bedside during her beloved grandmother’s final days.
After an extended emotional release and plenty of consoling from those closest to her, the sixth-ranked player in the world made her way back outside to fulfill every last autograph request and pose for dozens of photographs.
Brooks Koepka reportedly will be the latest PGA star to leave for LIV Golf
“It was very difficult, but I know she would want me out there killing it,” Thompson, 27, said Tuesday at Congressional Country Club in Bethesda, Md., site of this week’s Women’s PGA Championship. “It’s important to give back to the fans. I mean they took time out of their lives to support me, good or bad. The least I can do is give them some of my time.”
In several instances Thompson choked back tears before speaking with young fans overjoyed at spending even a few seconds in her company. Still, she pressed on, not wanting to deny star-struck girls their moment with a golfing role model who has become perhaps the most recognizable face in the women’s game of her generation.
Her supporters didn’t care that Thompson had posted a 5-over 76 in the final round or that she finished tied for 20th in her quest for her first U.S. Women’s Open title. What mattered was Thompson, grieving inside, still gave of herself despite the circumstances.
“She’s a remarkable player but even a more remarkable person,” LPGA Tour Commissioner Mollie Marcoux Samaan said. “She’s amazing with the girls and the fans who come to watch her, and she’s just a wonderful representative. I love watching her play because she’s just a killer athlete, but when you know the personal side it makes it even better.”
'This one stings': Will Zalatoris keeps faith after latest close call
The demand for Thompson’s attention at Congressional, where the 11-time LPGA winner is among the favorites at the third major on the women’s golf calendar, was much the same after she wrapped up her morning pro-am on the blue course.
Thompson paused to sign and pose with children and adults alike by the clubhouse, thanking every volunteer accompanying her group and acknowledging applause and words of encouragement almost anywhere she went.
The quest for Thompson’s first Women’s PGA Championship victory begins Thursday with a 1:23 p.m. tee time in the first professional major contested in the national capital market since the 2011 U.S. Open. It also marks the first women’s major at storied Congressional.
Thompson is seeking her second win at a major and first since 2014, when she outlasted Michelle Wie West by three shots at the Kraft Nabisco Championship at Mission Hills Country Club in Rancho Mirage, Calif.
“Lexi, she doesn’t need a last name, right?” said Stacy Lewis, a two-time major champion and the 2023 U.S. Solheim Cup captain who finished third behind Thompson at the Kraft Nabisco in 2014. “She’s the one person that probably doesn’t need a last name. Everybody knows who she is.”
Thompson ranks first in Solheim Cup points, making her a virtual lock for a sixth consecutive appearance and adding to a decorated international résumé that includes representing the United States in the 2016 and ’20 Olympics. Next year’s Solheim Cup is set to take place in Andalucia, Spain.
Thompson initially gained acclaim in golf circles in 2011 by becoming the youngest player in history to win an LPGA Tour event, posting three straight rounds in the 60s on the way to a five-stroke victory at the Navistar LPGA Classic at The Senator Course in Prattville, Ala.
She was just 16 years 7 months 8 days, a record New Zealand’s Lydia Ko since has broken.
Lately though Thompson has been mired in relative slump, having last won at the 2019 ShopRite Classic. It’s the longest drought of her career. Her game, however, remains pristine, at least statistically, providing Thompson, in her own words, little reason to panic.
She ranks first in greens in regulation (76.5 percent), third in strokes gained total (2.26 per round) and sixth in driving distance (274.68 yards). She’s also coming off a tie for fifth at last week’s Meijer LPGA Classic, missing out on a three-way playoff by two strokes.
“Just the way she plays and her ability to hit the golf ball in itself is so impressive,” Lewis said. “You watch her walk around and the way she treats the fans and the little kids, you know, it’s something that I think a lot of young players could a lot from.” | 2022-06-21T23:32:24Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Lexi Thompson tucks grief away, remains fan favorite at Women’s PGA - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/lpga-championship-lexi-thompson/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/lpga-championship-lexi-thompson/ |
Mystics continue to search for consistency during tough road trip
The Washington Mystics are starting a three-game road trip out West. (Katherine Frey/The Washington Post)
LOS ANGELES — Coach Mike Thibault made it sound simple, though he knows it isn’t, as he sat courtside inside Crypto.com Arena, hours before his Washington Mystics were set to open a three-game road trip out West against the Los Angeles Sparks. His team has looked like one of the best in the league at times, with victories against the top three clubs in the standings. The group has also had disastrous moments, including Thursday’s loss to a New York Liberty team that started the season 1-7.
Consistency has been an ever-present issue for these 2022 Mystics.
“Well, it’s interesting. It helps when you have your whole lineup,” Thibault said. “Which is what we had on Sunday. We had the whole lineup. We had a day to fully prepare. It was the only full day we’ve had to prepare in the previous eight or nine days, whatever was. … I think consistency comes with consistency of your lineup, consistency of some preparation time. And then if you shoot the ball better [you look] consistent, too.
“I don't have any simple answers for that right now other than you try to prepare the same and we had a very thorough preparation from a film standpoint for this. But we don't have the same lineup today.”
With expansion coming, WNBA players want owners willing to spend
There’s no surprise that the Mystics do, and should, look different when Elena Delle Donne doesn’t play. The team is taking a cautious approach with her back and is diligent in managing her load. She didn’t make the trip to Los Angeles due to a scheduled rest day. Delle Donne has missed seven games entering Tuesday’s contest and the team is 3-4 in her absence, though it did beat the defending champion Sky despite her leaving after playing just over seven minutes when her back tightened up. The two-time MVP leads the team in points and blocks per game and is second in rebounds per game. When she’s not available, the team naturally misses her.
The inconsistency of the lineup, however, goes beyond just Delle Donne. Ariel Atkins, Myisha Hines-Allen and Shakira Austin are the only players who have appeared in every game for the Mystics. Heading into Sunday’s win over the Sun, the starting lineup of Delle Donne, Shakira Austin, Atkins, Alysha Clark and Natasha Cloud had played together for a total of 35 minutes. Injury, covid and overseas commitments have also kept players out of the lineup.
“I think we’re learning how to deal with it,” Atkins said. “It’s not something you really want to get used to. But at the end of the day, it just kind of is what it is. … You’ve just got to deal with it.
“Like [Clark] said, if we lock it in on the defensive end, the offensive end will come.”
Clark, a two-time all-defense selection, preaching defense as a way to gain some consistency is no shock either. She wants the Mystics to be the best defensive team in the league. They lead the WNBA in defensive rating (94.9) and points allowed per game (74.6). The points are the fewest the team has allowed since the 2015 season.
That’s what made recent losses to the Liberty and Mercury particularly frustrating — too many defensive lapses.
Brittney Griner’s wife says U.S. Embassy failed to facilitate phone call
“I think just understanding that defense is what fuels us,” Clark said. “Regardless of who’s in the lineup, as long as everybody hangs on to that and buys into that, I think you can start to see a little more consistency.”
That consistency will be much needed this week as there won’t be time for real practices during a the trip to Los Angeles, Seattle and Las Vegas. The games are every other day and the team will mostly watch video and try to recuperate as much as possible during travel days. Not only is the schedule brutal, but the group will also be tested by the Aces (13-2), who have the WNBA’s best record, and a Storm team (10-6) with the fourth-best record in the league.
The Sparks, however, represent a chance for two wins — in a way. The Mystics have the right to swap first-round picks with the Atlanta Dream after trading the No. 1 overall pick to the 2022 draft. The Dream selected Rhyne Howard while the Mystics moved back to No. 3 and took Austin. That first-round pick will come from the Sparks (5-9), so Washington is rooting for them to lose games for the chance to get a higher pick in 2023. The Mystics can affect that Tuesday night.
League growth strategy: As the WNBA looks to expand, players are hoping for owners who want to spend. The league added $75 million to its coffers through a capital raise. However, the lack of roster spots is an expanding problem. | 2022-06-21T23:32:30Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Mystics open tough road trip searching for consistency - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/mystics-road-trip-consistency/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/mystics-road-trip-consistency/ |
Bill Cosby sexually abused 16-year-old in 1975, jury in civil trial finds
Attorney Gloria Allred speaks at a news conference after a jury in Santa Monica, Calif., found that Bill Cosby had sexually assaulted Judy Huth, background, at the Playboy Mansion in 1975. (Richard Taber/AP)
A California jury on Tuesday found that Bill Cosby sexually assaulted Judy Huth at the Playboy Mansion in 1975, when she was 16 years old.
The decision in the civil case is another legal defeat for the 84-year-old comedian, who was freed from prison after his sexual assault conviction was overturned. Cosby’s spokesperson said Tuesday that he plans to appeal the latest decision.
Huth was “elated” after the verdict, she told reporters.
“Seriously, it’s been so many years, so many tears, just a long time coming.”
Cosby spent nearly three years in prison and was released last year after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that he should not have been convicted of three sexual assault counts in 2018. Dozens of women have accused him of sexual assault.
“I have never changed my stance nor my story. I have always maintained my innocence,” Cosby tweeted in August, shortly after his release. | 2022-06-22T00:09:18Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Bill Cosby sexually assaulted Judy Huth at the Playboy mansion, jury finds - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/06/21/bill-cosby-trial-judy-huth/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/06/21/bill-cosby-trial-judy-huth/ |
Largest N.J. wildfire since 2007 mostly contained
Largest wildfire since 2007 mostly contained
The largest New Jersey wildfire since 2007, which has for days burned through the state’s southern pine lands, is now almost entirely contained, officials said Tuesday.
The Mullica River Fire, which began Sunday, has grown to 13,500 acres and is 95 percent contained as of Tuesday evening, according to the New Jersey Forest Fire Service (NJFFS). No injuries were reported, but the blaze threatened at least 18 structures in the Wharton State Forest area, including the Batsto Village historic site. Wharton State Forest sits amid an ecosystem known as the Pine Barrens, about 20 miles northwest of Atlantic City.
Officials ruled out natural causes, and New Jersey Environmental Protection Commissioner Shawn M. LaTourette said the fire could have been avoided.
By Monday, fire crews were fighting the blaze in four townships — Washington, Shamong, Hammonton and Mullica — after dry and breezy conditions helped the fire spread, according to the NJFFS.
Authorities said wind was hindering efforts to drop water from helicopters while areas along the Mullica River — which the fire jumped twice — were too wet for equipment to get in but not wet enough for fire to be stopped.
Fire crews are focusing their efforts on protecting structures in the Wharton State Forest campgrounds and the Batsto Village, a historic site in Washington Township, according to Larry Hajna, a spokesperson for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. The wildfire forced two road closures, including portions of U.S. Route 206, a north-south thoroughfare. As of Tuesday, both routes had reopened.
— Kim Bellware
Court: Statute allows partisan redistricting
Kansas’s top court declared Tuesday that the state constitution doesn’t prohibit partisan gerrymandering, prompting one dissenting justice to accuse the majority of ignoring a “full-scale assault on democracy” from a Republican congressional redistricting law.
The state Supreme Court issued the opinion explaining its 4-to-3 decision last month to approve the new congressional map. It previously issued only a brief opinion that did not explain the majority’s reasons.
In the Supreme Court’s majority opinion Tuesday, Justice Caleb Stegall said the state constitution’s guarantee of equal legal protection for all citizens does not prohibit the legislature from considering partisan factors when redrawing lines each decade to make districts as equal in population as possible. The legislature has Republican supermajorities and traditionally has been controlled by the GOP.
Gonzalez said that about two to three hours after the mother went into the house, she began looking for her son and went to the car. She found him unresponsive, still buckled in, and called 911. The sheriff’s office said the child was pronounced dead at the scene.
The mother told the sheriff that her son had gotten out of his car seat by himself before but that the family was using a rental vehicle that may have been unfamiliar to him. | 2022-06-22T00:09:24Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Largest N.J. wildfire since 2007 mostly contained - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/largest-nj-wildfire-since-2007-mostly-contained/2022/06/21/e2ee25ba-eead-11ec-84c8-8690f7970e1d_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/largest-nj-wildfire-since-2007-mostly-contained/2022/06/21/e2ee25ba-eead-11ec-84c8-8690f7970e1d_story.html |
Maryland product Ashley Grier gears up for Women’s PGA Championship
Ashley Grier, who has worked as an assistant pro at Columbia, will have something of a homecoming this week at the Women's PGA Championship at Congressional. “It definitely makes it feel more special,” Grier said. “It feels like it's my hometown. I'm back in my area.” (Katherine Frey/The Washington Post)
The last time Ashley Grier won a tournament at Congressional Country Club, she leaned on her short game.
A tricky approach shot and stunning birdie putt on the first playoff hole of the 2014 Maryland Women’s Open left Grier atop the leader board at the hallowed Bethesda course — the site she returns to this week for the Women’s PGA Championship.
Drive 60 miles northwest of Congressional, and you’d happen upon the place where Grier honed that short game: Yinglings Golf Center, a par-3 course on the outskirts of Hagerstown, Md., with no hole longer than about 110 yards.
David and Judy Grier bought Yinglings in 1990, when Ashley was 5. It wasn’t long before she was traversing the course with her mother, father or her grandfather — and it wasn’t long before her two younger sisters were old enough to play, too.
Lexi Thompson tucks grief away, remains fan favorite at Women's PGA
“A playground,” David calls it. A playground regularly at his daughters’ disposal — during the days while David, a PGA professional, was giving lessons and in the evenings after the course was closed.
“The next thing you know, they weren't bad at it,” David said.
That’s a knowing understatement by a father who would later watch his three daughters grow up to forge something of a dynasty at Smithsburg High School. With no girls’ golf team at the school, Ashley and her two younger sisters played on the boys’ team, earning the nickname of the “golfing Grier girls.”
Grier won a Maryland state championship in 2000 and went on to play college golf at the University of Central Florida. Then, while her sisters forged their own collegiate golf careers, the eldest Grier sister turned professional in 2006, making an appearance in the 2007 U.S. Women’s Open. She spent five years as an assistant professional at Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Md., just a few miles from Congressional. After five years at Overbrook Golf Club in Villanova, Pa., Grier came home to Yinglings.
She continued to teach — and play, competing in the 2018, 2019 and 2021 Women’s PGA Championships. She was named the 2020 National Women’s PGA Player of the Year and earned her way into this event with a top-eight finish last summer at the LPGA Professionals National Championship at Kingsmill in Williamsburg, Va.
But while Grier, 38, has competed in four major championships, returning to Congressional has a slightly different feel to it.
“It definitely makes it feel more special,” Grier said. “It feels like it's my hometown. I'm back in my area.”
Her career has taken her to some of the country’s top courses, but the short-game wisdom gleaned from Yinglings has become an integral part of her game. Her father said Grier equates tournament situations to those she might encounter in Hagerstown.
Grier’s short game is her strength, but Congressional’s distance doesn’t faze her.
“The older you get, the more you figure out the smart play,” she said. “You don’t have to always attack the pins.”
Managing her workload became increasingly important for Grier after a car accident on Super Bowl Sunday four years ago left her with lingering back pain. She played the front nine Tuesday and will practice the back nine Wednesday before her 7 a.m. tee time Thursday.
At Congressional to follow her round will be her parents and other assorted family members, as well as friends from local courses, including Columbia. David laughed when he pictured the swarm of people — about 75, by his estimation — that is likely to watch his daughter at the first tee Thursday.
Teeing off after Grier will be the world’s best: Nelly Korda, Jin Young Ko, Minjee Lee, Lydia Ko and Lexi Thompson, among others. For Grier, this week requires a balance of confidence and measured expectations. Her goal is to make the cut, which she has yet to accomplish in a major championship.
“They’re the best players in the world,” Grier said. “So they do this all day, every day for a living, and I try to cram about a month out and get ready to go. But just sticking to my game and enjoying the experience, that’s my ultimate goal.”
Players participating in the Women’s PGA Championship received an unexpected email Tuesday afternoon from LPGA Tour Commissioner Mollie Marcoux Samaan informing them the total purse this week would be increased to $9 million, doubling the total payout from last year’s event.
It’s the second-highest total purse in LPGA Tour history behind the U.S. Women’s Open earlier this month at Pine Needles in Southern Pines, N.C.
“I haven’t had a chance to go through all my emails,” Marcoux Samaan said. “But I’ve looked at a few of them, and they have been hysterical. They’ve been some, ‘Holy s---,’ you know, and, ‘Oh my God.’ ”
Star-studded grouping
By far the most followed group at Tuesday’s pro-am included two familiar faces in the D.C. sports scene. Ryan Zimmerman, the former Washington Nationals star whose No. 11 was retired this past weekend, and Washington Capitals defenseman John Carlson played together with Megan Khang.
Zimmerman’s brother Shawn rounded out the foursome.
“This is fun,” said Ryan Zimmerman, who plays to a 4 handicap. “I was telling Johnny I’ve never been able to do this stuff in the summer. A whole new world has opened up to me.” | 2022-06-22T00:13:39Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Maryland product Ashley Grier gears up for Women’s PGA Championship - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/womens-pga-ashley-grier-hagerstown/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/womens-pga-ashley-grier-hagerstown/ |
Class of ’22 lauded for perseverance through pandemic, gun violence
Members of Roosevelt High School's Class of 2022 attend their graduation ceremony June 21 in D.C. (Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post)
As Roosevelt High School’s Class of 2022 walked through the Entertainment and Sports Arena in the District, hundreds of family members and friends cheered Tuesday to celebrate a class that has weathered a pandemic, seen a rise in school violence and faced mental health challenges.
Like the thousands across the country receiving their diplomas this graduation season, Roosevelt’s roughly 150 graduates had an unusual time in high school. As sophomores, the coronavirus pandemic forced them to learn at home. They thought they’d be back in two weeks, but they ended up not seeing one another for in-person instruction until their senior year, Roosevelt Principal Justin Ralston said in his graduation address. A majority of D.C. Public Schools students learned at home, virtually, during the 2020-21 academic year.
But unlike previous classes who missed out on traditions like prom and in-person graduation ceremonies, this one was able to celebrate.
While still dealing with covid’s impacts, Roosevelt’s graduates also dealt with a city struggling with everyday gun violence. A freshman at the school, Malachi Jackson, was killed in April. At the time, he was the third teen under the age of 18 to be killed by gunfire in the District this year. When school resumed after spring break, mental health specialists were there to help students.
In schools across the country, administrators and teachers say violence has increased since students returned to in-person classes. And in addition to those incidents, a mass shooting last month at a Texas elementary school that left 19 students dead led to many schools — including those in the D.C. area — tightening their safety protocols as students demonstrated in support of stronger gun laws. Less than 24 hours after the Texas shooting, a man was shot outside Roosevelt’s campus. Police were stationed outside the school the next day as students arrived.
“Class of 2022, you never lost sight of the bigger picture and you never let obstacles stand in your way,” Ralston said.
Across the city, hundreds of students from D.C. Public Schools’ 21 high schools were scheduled to graduate this week. Most of the ceremonies took place at the Entertainment and Sports Arena, and D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) was scheduled to make an appearance at some of the events.
At Roosevelt’s ceremony Tuesday, class salutatorian Winston Page said that while each graduating class has had its own struggles, he doubted any other class had struggles “quite as unique as ours.” Still, the class persevered, he said.
“The class of 2022 came to Roosevelt ready to display our talents, whether those talents were academic, artistic, musical or social,” Page said. “Unfortunately, 2020 had other plans ... But we stepped up to the challenge and rose to the occasion.”
In the bleachers, Page’s mother, his former third-grade teacher, great-aunts and two siblings cheered him on. His mother, Danielle Boxley, wiped tears from her eyes. Page’s older brother didn’t get to have an in-person ceremony when he graduated with the Class of 2021, Boxley said, so seeing her youngest son walk across the stage was wonderful.
“I was so happy when I heard his name,” Boxley, 42, said. “I was overjoyed.”
Le’Greg Harrison, a marketing executive and lifelong Washingtonian, spoke to the graduates about the challenges ahead. He told them they would encounter barriers that could hinder their growth, and some barriers that could even destroy them.
“We witness it every day. We’re losing family and friends at a rapid pace, young people. I encourage you to stay focused,” Harrison said. “I encourage you to get serious, because at the next level, you don’t have an administrator or parent holding you by your own hand. You will be responsible for yourselves.”
Tawana Alston, Roosevelt’s 12th-grade assistant principal, noted the class was dubbed “extraordinary 2022″ in her graduation speech.
“Through it all, we’ve done masks, social distancing, hand sanitizing ... to move through the school year and still have a little fun along the way,” Alston said. “It has truly been a pleasure for myself as well as the senior institute to just be by your side and support you.”
Ralston spoke last before diplomas were handed out. He held a moment of silence in recognition of all the family members and friends who have died since the coronavirus started spreading in the United States.
“We wish your families and you a lifetime of safety, good health, and we wish you all the best in your future endeavors,” Ralston said.
Page, the salutatorian, hugged his family as they met him outside the arena. His mom wore a custom T-shirt that had a photo of him printed on the front and his name on the back of it. Page will head to Fairmont State University, where he received a football scholarship.
“It feels surreal,” Page, 17, said of being done with high school. “It still hasn’t hit me yet.” | 2022-06-22T00:22:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Class of ’22 lauded for perseverance through pandemic, gun violence - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/class-of-2022-graduation-pandemic-violence/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/class-of-2022-graduation-pandemic-violence/ |
In refusing to help overturn the 2020 election, the Republican lawmaker was harassed and ostracized
By Yvonne Wingett Sanchez
Arizona House Speaker Russell “Rusty” Bowers (R) arrives for a hearing of the Jan. 6 committee. (Oliver Contreras/For The Washington Post)
Hours before Arizona House Speaker Russell “Rusty” Bowers (R) testified about how he refused to help Donald Trump overturn the 2020 election results, he sat alone in his Capitol Hill hotel room, reading quotes about courage from John F. Kennedy and watching a church elder’s video about being a peacemaker.
Bowers, 69, dressed in a new white shirt and a suit he bought years ago, one he saves for special occasions, like visiting a temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Though formal, it makes him feel comfortable.
The lifelong Republican had packed a red tie but it felt too bold, so he put on a blue one instead. He then walked alone to the U.S. Capitol grounds and slowly found his way to the hearing room that would become the setting of the highest-profile moment of his decades-long political career.
Bowers was subpoenaed by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection to testify about the events that followed Trump’s 10,457-vote loss in Arizona. Bowers had voted for Trump, campaigned for Trump, but would not violate the law for him — and, as a result, his political future was jeopardized, his character was questioned and his family was harassed as his daughter was dying.
He awoke early Tuesday to read some of the notes he kept during that time, written in cursive in personal notebooks.
“Am I overprepared?” Bowers said in an interview. “I have no idea. We’ll find out when I walk in that room.”
As he walked in, his goal was to bring a measure of conciliation, not conflict, to this moment.
“I would like to, for whatever small part I had, reduce conflict and work toward a more ongoing reconciliation of people,” he said. “I don’t need to win anything.”
Shortly before the hearing began, he fielded a call from an attorney for the Arizona House who relayed that Trump had put out a statement asserting that Bowers “told me the election was rigged and that I won Arizona.” Bowers chuckled at the absurdity.
In the hearing room, Bowers sat alongside Georgia election officials Brad Raffensperger and Gabe Sterling, who faced similar pressure by Trump and his allies to reverse his loss there. Later in the day, the committee heard testimony from former Georgia election worker Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, whose life was threatened after Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for Trump, claimed she participated in a fake ballot scheme. Bowers and Moss both received the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award this year for their efforts to protect democracy.
Bowers went first and began his testimony by rebutting Trump’s statement.
“I did have a conversation with the president,” he said carefully and deliberately, his glasses perched on the end of his nose. “That certainly isn’t it. Anywhere anyone, anytime, has said that I said the election was rigged — that would not be true.”
Bowers — a professional artist known for his storytelling — then recounted his first conversation with Trump and Giuliani, which came after a church service in the weeks after the 2020 election. Bowers recalled them asking him to convene the legislature to investigate their unsubstantiated allegations of voter fraud and set in motion a strategy to replace chosen electors with another group more favorable to Trump. Bowers repeatedly asked them for evidence beyond hearsay and innuendo that the election was stolen. Giuliani said he would deliver such evidence, but it never came. Bowers said he told them their legal theory was foreign to him and that he needed to consult with his attorneys.
“I said, ‘Look, you are asking me to do something that is counter to my oath,’ ” Bowers testified. He told the men he would not break his oath and would uphold the Constitution.
Over several weeks, Giuliani and other Trump allies failed to produce the promised paperwork, and Bowers refused to authorize an official legislative hearing to review the allegations of widespread fraud. A “circus had been brewing” around these allegations, and Bowers said he didn’t want it brought into the Arizona House.
Instead, another GOP House member and vocal election denier held a meeting featuring claims of improprieties at a downtown Phoenix hotel. That same day, Gov. Doug Ducey (R) certified Arizona’s election results.
The next day, Dec. 1, 2020, Bowers attended an in-person meeting with Giuliani, attorney Jenna Ellis, Arizona GOP state lawmakers and others, where he was again pressed to help overturn the election results.
He remembered something Giuliani said: “He said, ‘We’ve got lots of theories — we just don’t have the evidence.’ ”
At the time, Bowers wrote in a journal page that he told Giuliani and the group, “The US Constit. does not say I can reverse the laws I work to uphold which color this very issue.”
In the absence of proof from Giuliani and others, the Arizona speaker felt he was being asked to violate his oath to the Constitution.
“I will not do that, and,” Bowers testified, pausing to control his emotions. “On more than one — on more than one occasion throughout all this it has been brought up. And it is a tenet of my faith that the Constitution is divinely inspired — of my most basic foundational beliefs. And so for me to do that because somebody just asked me to is foreign to my very being.
“I will not do it.”
On Jan. 3, 2021, an Arizona House attorney spoke with pro-Trump lawyer John Eastman, who previewed a legal theory for decertifying Arizona’s electors. The next day, Eastman laid out his theory during a call with Bowers, who asked him if his strategy had ever been tested. Eastman encouraged him to just give it a try and let the courts sort it out. Bowers declined.
A final attempt to persuade Bowers came the morning of Jan. 6, shortly before the Capitol riot.
It came from his own congressman, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), a loyal Trump ally, former Arizona Senate president and former chairman of the House Freedom Caucus who loudly sowed doubt about the 2020 election results. He asked Bowers to support decertifying the electors.
“I said I would not,” Bowers recalled.
That firm stance made him the target of protests and nasty accusations. In early December, “Stop the Steal” supporters gathered inside the lobby of the state House. Bowers was out of town at the time, but some in the crowd shouted his name. On Tuesday the committee unveiled video featuring these protesters, including Jake Angeli, the “QAnon shaman” who wore a fur hat, horns and face paint as he entered the Capitol on Jan. 6. It was an ominous sign of the violence that would come.
In the weeks that followed, Bowers’s neighborhood in Mesa, a suburb east of Phoenix, was practically occupied at times by caravans of Trump supporters.
They screamed at Bowers through bullhorns, filmed his home and led parades to ridicule him that featured a civilian military-style truck. At one point, a man showed up with a gun and was threatening Bowers’s neighbor.
“When I saw the gun, I knew I had to get close,” he testified.
Enraged pro-Trump voters unsuccessfully sought to recall Bowers, and Bowers said they distributed fliers accusing him of corruption and pedophilia.
As the drama unfolded outside his home, his daughter, Kacey, was dying inside it.
She was “upset by what was happening outside, and my wife is a valiant person. Very, very strong. Quiet. Very strong woman,” Bowers said, his chin quivering. “So, it was disturbing. It was disturbing.”
Kacey Bowers died Jan. 28, 2021, as efforts by some Republicans to deepen doubts about Trump’s loss accelerated and plunged her father deeper into the debate over the 2020 election. He has tried to convince his fellow Republicans that he is doing the right thing, but with little luck. He faces challengers in Arizona’s Aug. 2 Republican primary.
It’s a position he’s willing to live with. He thinks that judgment by voters is trivial compared to eventual judgment from his maker. At the end of his testimony, Bowers read a journal entry from December 2020.
“I may, in the eyes of men, not hold correct opinions or act according to their vision or convictions, but I do not take this current situation in a light manner, a fearful manner or a vengeful manner,” he said. “I do not want to be a winner by cheating. I will not play with laws I swore allegiance to. With any contrived desire toward deflection of my deep, foundational desire to follow God’s will as I believe he led my conscience to embrace. How else will I ever approach him in the wilderness of life knowing that I ask this guidance only to show myself a coward in defending the course … he led me to take.”
After testifying, Bowers made his way to the airport, heading home to finish the core duties of the state legislature: To pass a budget before the end of the fiscal year. A heavier task awaits him this weekend: Picking up his daughter’s tombstone.
As he ate a salad alone, he realized that he forgot to tell the panel that he will not be coerced out of public service.
“They can beat me,” he said of the upcoming election, “but they’re not going to bully me.” | 2022-06-22T00:22:28Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Alone in Washington, Rusty Bowers tells world what happened in Arizona - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/rusty-bowers-jan-6/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/rusty-bowers-jan-6/ |
Trump’s pressure drew violence, threats to local officials, committee shows
In its fourth public hearing, the committee shared new evidence of Trump’s personal involvement in organizing the false elector strategy
Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, a former Georgia election worker, testifies June 21 at the fourth public hearing of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
In the weeks after the 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump engaged in an unrelenting campaign targeting state and local officials — many of them fellow Republicans — riling up his supporters and putting in physical danger officials who refused to help overturn his election loss, according to new information outlined Tuesday by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
At its fourth public hearing, the committee laid out how out menace and violence trailed Trump’s election falsehoods, afflicting everyone who resisted, from high-level elected officials to ordinary election workers. And they showed how a several ominous episodes foreshadowed the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, as Trump’s supporters invaded a state legislative building in Arizona, barged into the home of an election worker’s grandmother in Georgia to make a “citizen’s arrest,” and sent thousands of threatening text messages to officials around the country.
The committee Tuesday disclosed new evidence of Trump’s personal involvement in one element of the effort to overturn the election: Ronna McDaniel, the chairwoman of the Republican National Committee, testified that Trump himself called to ask for the party’s help organizing the false elector strategy.
This scheme, orchestrated by Trump’s outside advisers, convened Trump’s electors in December 2020 in key swing states won by Biden, even though the White House Counsel’s Office and his own campaign’s top lawyers agreed they had no legal standing. McDaniel’s testimony offered the first evidence of Trump’s direct ties to the fake electors plot.
The hearing also included new details about Republican lawmakers of interest to the Jan. 6 investigation. Text messages provided to the committee showed that, as Congress prepared to meet, a staffer to Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) tried to arrange for Johnson to personally hand Vice President Mike Pence the certificates signed by the fake Trump electors in Wisconsin and Michigan, presumably making it more difficult for the vice president to recognize only Biden’s votes.
“Do not give that to him,” an aide to Pence responded. (A Johnson staffer tweeted after the hearing that the Wisconsin senator “had no involvement in the creation of an alternate slate of electors and had no foreknowledge that it was going to be delivered to our office.”)
This hearing included some of the most emotional testimony so far. Mother-and-daughter election workers in Georgia, Ruby Freeman and Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, described how their lives were upended after Trump falsely accused them of engaging in fraud while counting votes on election night at an arena in Atlanta. Moss became tearful as she testified, as did Freeman, who was seated in the hearing room immediately behind her daughter.
“Do you know how it feels to have the president of the United States target you?” asked Freeman, whom Trump named 18 times during a Jan. 2, 2021, phone call to Georgia’s secretary of state. “The president of the United States is supposed to represent every American, not to target one. But he targeted me.”
The hearing also included the story of Arizona House Speaker Russell “Rusty” Bowers, a Republican, who told the committee how he resisted personal entreaties from Trump to take actions that he believed would violate his conscience, his religious faith and his allegiance to the U.S. Constitution.
“You’re asking me to do something against my oath, and I’m not going to break my oath,” Bowers testified that he told the president during one of the several calls and meetings in which Trump and his allies pressured him to overturn Biden’s win in Arizona.
Trump campaign documents show advisers knew fake-elector plan was baseless
Sitting ramrod straight, his voice at times breaking, Bowers detailed how Trump first called him as he and his wife were arriving home from church on a Sunday in late November. As Bowers sat in the car in his driveway, he explained that he could not replace Biden’s electors without proof of fraud. Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani, who was also on the line, promised to provide it.
It was the start of a pattern, Bowers said. In phone calls and a meeting in Phoenix, Bowers repeatedly told Trump, Giuliani and attorney John Eastman that they were asking him to violate the Constitution but providing no proof of the fraud they claimed took place. During one meeting, he said, Giuliani told him, “We’ve got lots of theories — we just don’t have the evidence.”
“No one provided me — ever — such evidence,” Bowers added.
Bowers said Eastman counseled him, “Just do it and let the courts sort it out.”
He later riveted the hearing room by reading aloud from a journal he kept at the time.
“It is painful to have friends who have been such a help to me turn on me with such rancor,” the passage read. “I do not want to be a winner by cheating. I will not play with laws I swore allegiance to with any contrived desire toward deflection of my deep, foundational desire to follow God’s will as I believe he led my conscience to embrace.”
The committee played footage that had not been public before, demonstrating how some of Trump’s supporters responded to Bowers’s resistance. In the security footage, a group of protesters can be seen flooding into a House legislative building in Phoenix, led by Jacob Chansley, the “QAnon Shaman,” who was later sentenced to serve 41 months in prison for invading the floor of the U.S. Senate on Jan. 6. Bowers said the group was crying out his name during the episode.
He also testified that protesters mobbed his neighborhood on a weekly basis, once accompanied by a truck playing videos calling him a pedophile. One man, he said, carried a pistol and wore “three bars on his chest” — apparently a reference to the Three Percenters, a far-right group involved with the Jan. 6 attack. Bowers broke up as he described how the protests distressed his wife, whom he described as “a valiant person,” and his daughter, who was gravely ill at the time. She died at age 42, a few weeks after Jan. 6.
Indeed, the bulk of the hearing was devoted to the dramatic human toll visited on the officials whom Trump, his allies and his supporters cajoled and harassed — without remorse — in an effort to line up allies willing to undo Biden’s win in swing states. When Trump tweeted the personal cellphone number of a Republican state senator in Michigan, the lawmaker quickly received 4,000 text messages, many of them nasty, he told the committee. A leading Republican lawmaker in Pennsylvania gave the committee voice mails showing that members of Trump’s legal team called him every day in the last week of November 2020, even after he requested they stop. “I just want to bring some facts to your attention and talk to you as a fellow Republican,” Giuliani said in one voice mail.
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, one of the other two Republican officials to testify in person on Tuesday, told the committee he was inundated with nasty text messages after refusing to “find” votes to help Trump overtake Biden in the state, as Trump requested in the Jan. 2 call. Then, he said, his wife began receiving messages as well, many of them horrific and sexualized. Trump supporters also broke into the home of his son’s widow, he testified.
“The numbers are the numbers. The numbers don’t lie. We had many allegations and we investigated every single one of them,” Raffensperger said, recounting how his team determined how claims cited by Trump in the call were not accurate.
Among those claims was a false story circulated by Trump and Giuliani that a video taken at an arena in Atlanta where votes were counted showed election workers repeatedly scanning fraudulent Biden ballots that had been smuggled into the building in suitcases. Trump’s attorney general at the time, William P. Barr, told the committee that the Justice Department investigated the claim and found it had “no merit.” So too did Georgia officials.
But Trump and Giuliani continued to echo the claim, including at a legislative hearing in Georgia where Giuliani urged that the two workers, Freeman and Moss, be criminally charged.
Freeman told the committee that after being named by Giuliani and Trump, she had to leave her home for two months after the FBI said it was not safe.
“I’ve lost my name and I’ve lost my reputation. I’ve lost my sense of security all because a group of people starting with number 45″ — a reference to Trump — “and his ally Rudy Giuliani decided to scapegoat me and my daughter,” she said, in taped testimony played by the committee.
Moss, who testified live, explained to the committee that she had worked as an elections official for 10 years, taking satisfaction in helping elderly and disabled people vote. She had learned from her grandmother to treasure the right to vote, particularly since it had been withheld from many Black voters.
“It’s turned my life upside down,” said Moss, adding, “I don’t want anyone knowing my name. I don’t want to go anywhere with my mom because she might yell my name out over the grocery aisle or something. I don’t go to the grocery store at all. I haven’t been anywhere at all. … I second-guess everything I do. It’s affected my life in a major way — in every way. All because of lies, for me doing my job, the same thing I’ve been doing forever.”
Moss and Freeman filed defamation lawsuits last year against Giuliani, as well as pro-Trump media outlets One America News and the Gateway Pundit. They settled with OAN in May for undisclosed terms. As part of the settlement, OAN aired a segment reporting that Georgia officials had concluded there was “no widespread voter fraud by election workers” at the State Farm Arena and that neither Moss nor Freeman engaged in ballot fraud or criminal misconduct.
Committee members praised the witnesses for standing up for democracy after the 2020 election — and for willingly testifying about their experiences. Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) contrasted their cooperation with that of other Trump aides, such as advisers Peter Navarro and Stephen K. Bannon, who have refused. And she urged others, like White House counsel Pat Cipollone, apparently still in negotiations with the committee, to follow their lead.
Tuesday’s group, she said, provided “an example of what truly makes America great.” | 2022-06-22T00:22:34Z | www.washingtonpost.com | House Jan. 6 committee witnesses tell of threats from Trump supporters - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/trumps-pressure-drew-violence-threats-local-officials-committee-shows/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/06/21/trumps-pressure-drew-violence-threats-local-officials-committee-shows/ |
Top executives quit Pornhub’s parent company amid more controversy
MindGeek, the parent company of Pornhub, confirmed the departures of CEO Feras Antoon and COO David Tassillo on Tuesday. (Lionel Bonaventure/AFP/Getty Images)
Two top executives at MindGeek, the parent company of Pornhub, have resigned amid allegations that the site does not immediately or sufficiently remove content involving nonconsensual and underage sex.
MindGeek confirmed the departures of CEO Feras Antoon and COO David Tassillo in a statement Tuesday.
“Antoon and Tassillo leave MindGeek’s day-to-day operations after more than a decade in leadership positions with the company,” the company told The Washington Post. “MindGeek’s executive leadership team will run day-to-day operations on an interim basis, with a search underway for replacements.”
News of the departures come about a week after a New Yorker article detailed people’s attempts to get Porhhub to remove sexuality explicit content that involved underage and nonconsensual participants. Announcement of the departures is not related to the piece, MindGeek told The Post.
The company said in a statement that it had enacted the most extensive safeguards “in the history of the internet” and that data proves its policies have been effective. The statement cited a National Center for Missing and Exploited Children report showing that Pornhub had few instances of child sexual abuse and that it removed cases of such material “in the shortest amount of time after being notified among all major platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and more.”
Alana Evans, president of the Adult Performance Artists Guild, a union for adult performers, said entertainers are stunned by the news of the departures because such resignations typically come as a result of bad press or a scandal.
“The timing is kind of out of the blue,” Evans told The Post, but added that she didn’t think the resignations were tied to the New Yorker piece. MindGeek has fought lawsuits and negative articles in the past, she said.
In December 2020, Mastercard, Visa and Discover blocked customers from using their credit cards on Pornhub’s website after the New York Times published an opinion piece accusing Pornhub of being rife with nonconsensual and child abuse material.
The New Yorker piece, which Evans called “a hit job,” quotes multiple organizations, such as the National Center on Sexual Exploitation and Exodus Cry, that have been at the forefront of pushing legislation and corporate decisions that make it hard for sex workers to earn a living.
Sex workers fear OnlyFans decision to ban explicit content will push them further into the shadows
Evans said she is stunned by the exits of the top executives, but noted that their resignations probably will not affect the day-to-day life of performers because people in those positions are already so far removed from the routine of the average performer.
“MindGeek is corporate porn,” she said, naming smaller outlets. “Other owners and CEOs are far more involved in porn and the product.”
What’s mainly on the mind of people in the industry is what is next for MindGeek, especially for Pornhub. Evans noted that the company has an opportunity to place a woman in charge.
MindGeek said it is at the beginning of investing in its “creator-first offerings and additional opportunities for content monetization, with a plan to use resources to make headway in this burgeoning business as the company continues to be a force in digital video and tube sites.”
Mastercard severs ties with Pornhub, citing illegal content
Moving to models where it can compete with subscriber-based and creator-driven platforms such as Patreon and OnlyFans makes good business sense, according to Evans.
“That’s what’s hot. That’s what people want,” she said, adding that limiting free content is always good for performers because most platforms make money from advertising. “The more free content that is pulled, the more money that we make.” | 2022-06-22T01:01:32Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Pornhub parent MindGeek's leaders Feras Antoon and David Tassillo quit - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/21/pornhub-mindgeek-leaders-resign/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/21/pornhub-mindgeek-leaders-resign/ |
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's former prime minister, speaks to the media in Jerusalem on June 20. (Oren Ben Hakoon/AFP/Getty Images)
Oops, the Israeli government fell. It just slipped out of Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s hands and broke apart.
For just over a year, an abnormal, unexpected normalcy pervaded Israeli politics. After last year’s election, a government was actually formed. It passed a budget. The prime minister did not constantly attack the media or try to control it. He was not under criminal investigation or indictment. He did not trumpet his relations with a Republican leader in the United States or fight publicly with the Democratic president.
This is the way things are supposed to work, and often did in the past. But after 12 straight years of Benjamin Netanyahu’s rule, it seemed peculiar, almost quaint, like phonograph records.
So much for that. On Monday night, Bennett announced that he’d ask parliament to approve a new election — the fifth since 2019. Bennett will immediately step aside as prime minister in favor of current Foreign Minister Yair Lapid.
In reality, the months without Netanyahu in power were an illusion. He was the force that created Bennett’s government; his parliamentary ploy brought it down. He will, again, be the main issue in the election.
It was Lapid who managed to put together the ruling coalition last year. It stretched from Bennett’s Yamina (Rightward!) party across to the left. The only common denominators between its disparate factions were the desires to avoid another election and to end Netanyahu’s rule.
Perhaps the coalition’s greatest accomplishment was that it included a party — the United Arab List — representing Israel’s Arab minority. This should be unremarkable, but it was a breakthrough. Netanyahu and his minions regularly claimed that the government rested on “supporters of terror,” a falsehood intended wholly to exploit racism against Arabs.
Bennett’s coalition can also be credited for governing without such rhetoric — indeed, for governing more quietly. Netanyahu had put himself at the center of the fight against the pandemic — exploiting panic during the first wave, then prematurely declaring victory, then playing up his role in bringing vaccines to Israel. Bennett’s government sought to control subsequent waves of covid-19 with less drama.
The outgoing government has a long list of missed chances and failures. It has yet to pass a law barring a person under indictment from forming a government. That’s an essential reform, given Netanyahu’s refusal to honor unwritten rules of the past. At this stage, with elections looming, the move would be too late.
Most conspicuously, Bennett’s coalition of ideological opponents evaded addressing the Palestinian issue. Bennett explicitly ruled out a Palestinian state during his term. Defense Minister Benny Gantz appears unable to curb settler violence in the West Bank.
In the end, disagreement about the occupation was the government’s undoing. The regulations that allow West Bank settlers to live under Israeli laws expire at the end of this month. In the past, they’ve been renewed periodically with little fuss. Two weeks ago, the government tried to extend them again. But several Arab members of the coalition refused to legitimize the occupation by voting in favor. Netanyahu’s opposition bloc voted against, despite its support of settlement.
Bennett could have waited to see if Netanyahu caved in before the regulations expired. Or he could dissolve the Knesset, which would leave the regulations in force for the time being. In the political game of chicken, Bennett blinked first.
In the next election, like the past four, the main issue will be Netanyahu. A court hearing earlier this month provided a flashback to how surreal his reign became by the final years. Netanyahu, his wife, Sara, and their elder son Yair are suing another former prime minister, Ehud Olmert, for libel. In two television interviews, Olmert said that the three of them were “mentally ill.” They say his words were “harsh, ugly falsehoods.”
Two of Olmert’s witnesses described the irrational influence that Netanyahu let his wife and son have over his decisions. Uzi Arad, a former national security adviser, claimed that Netanyahu gave Sara influence over senior government appointments. On a flight to Washington, Arad said, Netanyahu refused to leave his wife’s side for a briefing. He then came unprepared to a meeting with Robert Gates, the then-defense secretary, leading to a major blowup.
A former Netanyahu spokesman, Nir Hefetz, described Yair barging into a meeting between his father and top advisers. According to his testimony, the younger Netanyahu got down on all fours, stuck out his tongue and crudely mocked the then-prime minister for his attitude toward a particular cabinet minister. (On Facebook, Benjamin Netanyahu dismissed these accounts as “blood libels” against him and his family.)
Such testimony may or may not convince the court that Olmert was justified. The more important question is whether it will help remind enough Israeli voters of why Netanyahu lost power, and why it would be a mistake to return him to office. | 2022-06-22T01:01:51Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Israel’s election will once again be all about Netanyahu - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/israel-election-netanyahu-bennett-lapid/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/21/israel-election-netanyahu-bennett-lapid/ |
CORRECTS DATE - This photo provided by the North Korean government shows North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, center, attends a meeting with his senior military officials at undisclosed location, North Korea, Tuesday, June 21, 2022. Independent journalists were not given access to cover the event depicted in this image distributed by the North Korean government. The content of this image is as provided and cannot be independently verified. Korean language watermark on image as provided by source reads: “KCNA” which is the abbreviation for Korean Central News Agency. (Korean Central News Agency/Korea News Service via AP) (Uncredited/KCNA via KNS) | 2022-06-22T01:02:09Z | www.washingtonpost.com | North Korean leader convenes military meeting amid tensions - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/north-korean-leader-convenes-military-meeting-amid-tensions/2022/06/21/6bc4e99c-f1c3-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/north-korean-leader-convenes-military-meeting-amid-tensions/2022/06/21/6bc4e99c-f1c3-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will testify remotely during Wednesday's hearing. (Rebecca Blackwell/AP)
Washington Commanders owner Daniel Snyder will be in France, after refusing to participate. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell will testify under oath, remotely.
And the primary audience will watch via a live stream Wednesday as the House Committee on Oversight and Reform presents the preliminary findings of its eight-month investigation into allegations of misconduct within the Commanders workplace and the NFL’s handling of them.
The probe has included a review of more than 450,000 pages of documents related to a league-sponsored investigation into many of the allegations and multiple interviews with former employees and others who detailed their experiences.
The stated rationale behind the Committee’s investigation is twofold: to shine a light on a highly visible NFL team as an example of how businesses can fail employees and to craft legislative reforms to benefit all working Americans.
“For more than two decades, Dan Snyder refused to protect the women who worked for him from the toxic culture he created,” Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.), chairwoman of the committee, stated in an excerpt of her opening statement. “The NFL has also failed to protect these women. Now, I believe it is up to Congress to protect them, and millions more like them.”
The evidence presented during Wednesday’s hearing at the Capitol is expected to address:
⋅ The Commanders’ alleged use of nondisclosure agreements to shield bad workplace behavior.
· Team executives’ alleged use of employees’ photos without their approval for private, prurient purposes.
· Snyder’s alleged efforts to intimidate former employees and perceived enemies via private investigators and the courts.
· The NFL’s role in setting and enforcing standards of conduct across the league.
· The NFL’s refusal to make public the findings of its 11-month investigation into the team, led by attorney Beth Wilkinson, which led to a $10 million fine against the team and Snyder stepping back from running its day-to-day affairs for an undetermined amount of time.
In a departure from most congressional hearings, this will feature only one witness: Goodell, who works on behalf of the owners of the 32 NFL franchises and, as such, often absorbs criticism from fans and media members in their stead.
In February, committee Democrats raised concerns about the existence of a “common interest agreement” they uncovered between the NFL and the Commanders, which suggested to some that the NFL could not conduct an independent investigation of the team.
But if such common interests exist between the team and the league, there have been signs of the relationship fraying in recent months.
When Snyder announced the team would investigate a new claim of sexual harassment against him, which was raised during a Feb. 3 congressional roundtable, Goodell quickly countered that the NFL would conduct the probe, appointed attorney Mary Jo White to lead it, and pledged to make the findings public.
Also in February, when the committee issued an ultimatum for the production of documents related to the league’s first investigation of the team, the NFL informed the committee that the Commanders, not the league, were blocking access to many documents.
And Wednesday, Goodell will testify while Snyder will not.
Snyder has repeatedly refused the committee’s invitation, stating through his lawyer that he has a “long-standing business conflict” overseas on the only date proposed and has concerns about due process and fundamental fairness after the panel declined to provide him with information and assurances he sought. His conditions included a guarantee that all questions to him be restricted to the team’s “historic culture”; disclosure of the identities of all who spoke to the committee about him or the team; and the substance of their interviews.
While Maloney granted one accommodation — promising to share in advance any documents on which the panel would base questions — she rejected his other requests for special treatment as “highly unusual and inappropriate.”
Maloney urged Snyder to reconsider his refusal to testify in a six-page letter to his lawyer last week, stating that she found no valid reason he could not.
On Monday, 48 hours before the hearing, Snyder’s lawyer reiterated his rationale for refusing yet left open the possibility of addressing the panel if his concerns were addressed.
According to a person with knowledge of the committee’s thinking, Snyder will not have the final word. The committee deems his testimony essential and is determined to secure it, ideally via compromise rather than subpoena, which Maloney has the authority to issue.
Wednesday’s hearing is not the first time a congressional committee has held a public hearing on matters of concern in sports.
In March 2005, the House Oversight Committee held a series of hearings on steroid use in Major League Baseball that included testimony from executives and players, including Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro.
In September 2021, the Senate Judiciary held a hearing on the FBI’s role in investigating the serial sexual abuse of hundreds of young gymnasts by former team doctor Larry Nassar, in which Simone Biles and several teammates offered wrenching testimony about being failed by the bureau, USA Gymnastics and the U.S. Olympic Committee.
While those congressional inquiries were marked by bipartisan support, the current investigation of the Commanders and NFL is riven by partisan divide.
In his opening statement Wednesday, Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), the panel’s ranking member, is expected to renew his criticism of the committee’s Democratic leaders for undertaking an investigation he argues is outside its mission of protecting taxpayers from government fraud, waste, and mismanagement.
“I urge the Chairwoman to get back to the core mission of the Oversight Committee and do what the American people elected us to do — conduct oversight over the federal government and the Biden administration, which is on a path to destroy America,” Comer stated in an excerpt from his prepared remarks.
Maloney has argued that the probe is in the public interest. To that end, she introduced two bills last week — one to rein in the abuse of nondisclosure and nondisparagement agreements and another to create new protections for employees in all workplaces. | 2022-06-22T01:02:22Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Roger Goodell to testify in House oversight committee hearing - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/roger-goodell-house-oversight-committee-hearing/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/21/roger-goodell-house-oversight-committee-hearing/ |
Plane catches fire after landing in Miami; 3 minor injuries reported
The National Transportation Safety Board said a team of investigators will arrive in Miami on Wednesday
The Red Air plane that arrived from the Dominican Republic sits off the runway after landing gear in its nose caught on fire at Miami International Airport. (Cristobal Herrera-Ulashkevich/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
A plane caught fire Tuesday after landing at Miami International Airport, authorities said. No serious injuries were reported.
The landing gear in the nose of Red Air Flight 203 from Santo Domingo in the Dominican Republic collapsed, Miami airport officials said. Three people were taken to hospitals with minor injuries, said Miami-Dade County Mayor Daniella Levine Cava.
The MD-82 jetliner left the runway and was evacuated as the fire was extinguished. The plane was carrying 126 passengers, the Associated Press reported.
The National Transportation Safety Board said on Twitter that a team of investigators will arrive in Miami on Wednesday.
Officials from the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department said crews also worked to mitigate a fuel spill.
Video on social media showed the plane came to rest near the runway. | 2022-06-22T01:02:41Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Plane catches fire at Miami International Airport; 3 minor injuries - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/06/21/miami-airplane-fire-airport/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2022/06/21/miami-airplane-fire-airport/ |
How Supreme Court ruling lays groundwork for religious charter schools
Police officers stand in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington on Tuesday, June 21, 2022. The court ruled that the state of Maine cannot deny tuition aid to religious schools. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Less than a month ago, attorney and education policy scholar Kevin Welner wrote on this blog that the Supreme Court would likely further erode the separation of church and state in a case known as Carson v. Makin, which was brought to expand voucher policies that provide public money for private and religious education. It did just that on Tuesday, ruling that the state of Maine cannot deny tuition aid to religious schools. (You can read the full ruling below.)
The case is centered on a Maine program that allows the state to pay for tuition at private schools in areas where there is no public school so long as that private institution is “nonsectarian in accordance with the First Amendment.” Two families, along with a libertarian institute, brought a suit asking that courts require the state to include sectarian religious schools in the program.
As my colleague Robert Barnes reported here, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down that program with a 6-3 vote, saying that it must allow tuition given by the state to go to religious schools as well as nonsectarian private schools. The ruling was the latest by the court in recent years that have been eroding the constitutional separation of church and state, including a 2020 5-4 decision that a Montana tax incentive program that indirectly helps private religious schools is constitutional.
The reaction was what you would expect: Those who support the privatization of public education were thrilled, and those who don’t were appalled.
The nonprofit Center for Education Reform said it was “a victory for students across the nation” and a validation of “parents’ constitutionally protected right to direct the education of their children. Richard Kahlenberg, a senior fellow and leading K-12 education expert at the nonprofit Century Foundation, echoed others saying the court “further divided Americans by requiring Maine’s state tuition program to fund private religious schools that openly discriminate against LGBT people and non-Christians” — and said it “undercuts the venerable goal of promoting e pluribus unum.”
In this post, Welner, director of the National Education Policy Center at the University of Colorado at Boulder’s School of Education, writes about the impact of the Carson v. Makin decision.
By Kevin Welner
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday took the nation closer to converting its charter school laws into voucher laws, including for “the outsourcing of discrimination.” As I explained in a piece on The Answer Sheet last month, the Carson v. Makin case presented the court with the possibility of taking two major steps: (1) whether to do away with something called the “status-use distinction,” and (2) whether to require strict scrutiny for any state action that imposes a substantial burden on religious exercise. The court did the first, but it saved the second question for a later case — one that will likely present itself sometime in the near future.
Below, I again consider those two steps and then re-evaluate where we stand – particularly as regards religious charter schools. In this regard, I also revisit the application of the crucial “state action doctrine” (explained below) to charter schools in light of another significant decision that was handed down last week.
The Maine “town tuitioning” law that was challenged in Carson v. Makin helps pay the private school tuition of some students who live in sparsely populated rural areas without a public secondary school. The state’s intent was to bring some private schools within the public system, but with the caveat that the private school must be nonsectarian. While the private school can be run by a religious organization, the education provided must be religiously neutral, without teaching through the lens of any particular faith and without proselytizing or inculcating children with a religious faith. That is, the school can have a religious status, the public money could not be put to religious use.
This status-use distinction framed the key legal dispute before the court in Carson v. Makin. Two recent decisions from this court had held that a law would be subject to strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause if it excludes religious entities or persons from otherwise available public benefits. But both of those cases had declined to decide whether that strict scrutiny extended to laws that merely refuse to fund religious practices with otherwise available public money.
The majority opinion in Carson (written by Chief Justice Roberts, in a 6-3 decision) decided, for the first time, that there could be no sensible status-use distinction: “any status-use distinction lacks a meaningful application not only in theory, but in practice as well” (p. 17 of the slip opinion). That is, a law would be subject to strict scrutiny under the Free Exercise Clause if it places restrictions on religious uses of public money. Accordingly, the court held that “Maine’s ‘nonsectarian’ requirement for its otherwise generally available tuition assistance payments violates the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment” (p. 18).
The Carson decision has an immediate effect only on Maine and similar town-tuitioning programs in Vermont and New Hampshire. These programs serve only a handful of students. Moreover, Roberts points out that Maine, if it does not want to fund the religious private schools, “retains a number of options: it could expand the reach of its public school system, increase the availability of transportation, provide some combination of tutoring, remote learning, and partial attendance, or even operate boarding schools of its own.” Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent suggests the additional option of public schools contracting directly with private schools that agree to provide a public (nonsectarian) education, rather than setting up a school-choice program — thereby distinguishing the process from the Zelman (2002) precedent that relies on independent parental choice to remove Establishment Clause concerns.
This suggestion from Sotomayor, however, points to a conundrum created by the court’s recent decisions. Once the state sets up a program, it must be open to all — without regard to religious status. So the direct-contracting approach puts the state in the position of picking winners from among the universe of private schools — and excluding religious schools from the eligible pool. For that reason, I don’t share the justice’s confidence that this approach would survive the current court’s scrutiny.
Which brings us to charter schools, which are privately operated but publicly funded. Pursuant to the court’s recent decisions (all authored by Roberts) in Trinity Lutheran, Espinoza, and now Carson, states will likely be forced to let churches and other religious institutions apply for charters and operate charter schools. That is, religious status likely cannot be penalized in the process of opening up new charter schools. Would a law be subject to strict scrutiny if it then requires this charter applicant to set aside its religiously motivated beliefs in running the charter school?
Put another way, must this hypothetical church run the charter school as a public school, or can it be run as a religious private school? To a large extent, the answer to the question depends on something called the state-actor doctrine.
Last week, an en banc (meaning all judges within the circuit) decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit announced a decision that may provide a lifeline for charter school supporters who want to avoid the slippery slope of charter laws effectively becoming voucher laws. The decision was issued in a case out of North Carolina, called Peltier v. Charter Day School. Parents had challenged sexist policies at Charter Day School (CDS) that required female students to wear skirts, since girls are “fragile vessels” worthy of “gentle” treatment by boys — a code characterized by the school as “chivalry.” The main legal argument put forward by CDS was that the 14th Amendment (and its protections against sex discrimination) do not apply to charter schools.
This argument required the judges to apply the state actor doctrine, which is applied by courts to each instance separately — since whether a private person or organization is engaging in state action depends on many factors. Here’s how I recently described the application of the doctrine in charter school cases:
Briefly, courts making a state-actor determination in litigation concerning charter schools will consider — in addition the public funding itself — the following: Whether the private entity is fulfilling (or even replacing) a function that has been understood as public, the legal designation of the private entity as public or nonpublic, the degree to which the private entity is being regulated by the state, and the nature of the contractual relationship between the state and the private entity. Also, in the context of religious teaching, Saiger (2013) points to the core question of whether the specific agent (the charter-school teacher) is employed by or controlled by the state — with the answer generally being “no.” [internal endnote citations omitted]
As I’d noted, there are exceptions to the general rule that charter-school teachers are not public employees, and North Carolina is one of those exceptions. Section 115C-218.90(a) (4) of the state’s statutory code provides, in part, that “the employees of charter schools are public school employees.” The Peltier court held that CDS is a state actor subject to the Equal Protection Clause.
While this provision making charter employees public employees was not the only factor weighing in favor of the court’s ultimate determination regarding state action, it may have been determinative. That is, a similar case in a state without such a provision may have been decided differently. Other states may, therefore, be wise to adopt language similar to that in North Carolina, legally specifying that charter school employees are government employees (even if hired and paid by a private management organization). Such states may be able to keep their charter schools subjected to anti-discrimination laws and prohibited from religious proselytizing.
If charter schools are state actors, then they cannot engage in religious teaching or discrimination. The Peltier v. Charter Day School litigation did not, however, involve any claim by the school that its sexist dress code arose out of protected religious beliefs. If religious-liberty claims were to be asserted around a comparable policy adopted by a charter school run by a religious organization, the state-action inquiry should be very similar if not identical, and the charter school should be prohibited from engaging in discrimination.
But as today’s Carson v. Makin decision illustrates, the introduction of free-exercise protections could greatly complicate the overall analysis. And if courts side with a church-run charter school, finding that state attempts to restrict religiously infused teachings and practices at the school are an infringement on the church’s free-exercise rights, then the circle is complete: charter school laws have become voucher laws.
Contemplating such a future, Justice Sotomayor’s dissent warns: “If a state cannot offer subsidies to its citizens without being required to fund religious exercise, any state that values its historic anti-establishment interests more than this court does will have to curtail the support it offers to its citizens.”
Similarly, Justice Stephen G. Breyer considers the court’s elevation of the Free Exercise Clause over the Establishment Clause — its requirement that states cannot use discretion to separate church and state. He wrote in a dissent:
Does that transformation mean that a school district that pays for public schools must pay equivalent funds to parents who wish to send their children to religious schools? Does it mean that school districts that give vouchers for use at charter schools must pay equivalent funds to parents who wish to give their children a religious education? What other social benefits are there the State’s provision of which means — under the majority’s interpretation of the Free Exercise Clause — that the State must pay parents for the religious equivalent of the secular benefit provided?”
Sotomayor added, “Today, the court leads us to a place where separation of church and state becomes a constitutional violation.” The result, Breyer warns, is a further splintering of society, with winners and losers. For instance, “Members of minority religions, with too few adherents to establish schools, may see injustice in the fact that only those belonging to more popular religions can use state money for religious education.”
The dissenting justices also pointed out that the Maine parents were seeking to send their children to private Christian schools with clearly discriminatory policies (with the discrimination aimed at the LGBTQ+ community). Sotomayor wrote about the irony of the court protecting the plaintiffs against alleged discrimination while ignoring these practices: “The majority, while purporting to protect against discrimination of one kind requires Maine to fund what many of its citizens believe to be discrimination of other kinds.” Maine, then, is put in the untenable position of being forced to fund religious teaching and discriminatory practices if it wants to continue helping its most rural residents.
Importantly, the court’s majority expressly declined to resolve issues around these school policies. In a footnote, the chief justice wrote: “Both dissents articulate a number of other reasons not to extend the tuition assistance program to BCS and Temple Academy [the two private schools], based on the schools’ particular policies and practices. … Maine rightly does not attempt to defend its law on such grounds, however, because the law rigidly excludes any and all sectarian schools regardless of particular characteristics.”
This means that we will have to wait until the court revisits its 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which I discussed in my earlier analysis of the (then-pending) Carson decision. In Smith, the court held that the Free Exercise Clause does not prevent enforcement of a neutrally applicable law (such as a nondiscrimination law) that only incidentally hinders a religious practice. The majority of justices on the current court seem interested in changing that rule. But they did not engage with the issue in the Carson decision. No court has yet decided whether a voucher-receiving private school can successfully assert a free-exercise right to religiously motivated discrimination — but that sort of challenge seems inevitable.
We are left, then, with a situation where we can expect litigation involving whether charters can be granted to churches, and we can expect to see such charters in the near future. We can then expect to see litigation around whether those church-run charters can successfully assert their Free Exercise rights in an attempt to run the school without restrictions on proselytizing and religiously motivated discrimination.
Must these churches run their charters as public schools or are they free to run them as private schools, with religious teaching and even religion-motivated discrimination? If states can require them to run the charter schools as public, adhering to existing rules prohibiting the infusion of religion, then the state is arguably infringing on religious practices; if allowed to run them as private schools, then states’ charter-school laws have effectively been converted into voucher laws. As Breyer’s dissent points out, the Supreme Court has created its own conundrum.
This is, of course, not the only overreach of the current Supreme Court. Pollsters sprang into action after the leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion in Dobb v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — overturning the historic Roe v. Wade abortion ruling. The main conclusion from these polls was that Americans disapprove of the court’s presumed decision. But a secondary conclusion is worth noting here, as I write about today’s voucher decision in Carson v. Makin: A drop in Americans’ approval of the Supreme Court.
The Marquette Law School has asked Americans whether they “approve or disapprove of the way the Supreme Court is handling its job” in seven polls since September of 2020. This poll found the court to now be underwater by 11 points — by far its worst showing. Less than two years earlier, when their polling started, the public approval of the high court was 2:1 positive (66 percent versus 33 percent). Similar trends are seen in the Gallup polls, with the court now at or near historic lows.
The Supreme Court has historically been relatively trusted by Americans, who have generally seen it as rising above the partisan politics of the other two federal branches. As we stare now at the threatening “age of instability” in electoral politics and civic cohesion, a trusted court system would be enormously helpful. While he’s a staunch conservative, Chief Justice Roberts presents himself as an institutionalist and gradualist (at least relative to his conservative colleagues). But this activist, right-wing Supreme Court has used Carson v. Makin to once again toss aside precedent it found ideologically displeasing.
The earliest of the Gallup public opinion polls mentioned above (from May of 1972) captured a time when the Supreme Court was still requiring school desegregation. President Richard Nixon’s campaign attacked the court’s decisions, and he was rewarded with a lopsided victory that November. Earlier, Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy had controversially federalized state national guard troops (in Arkansas and Mississippi) to enforce the high court’s desegregation orders. Yet the public retained much more confidence in the court than it does today. It is one thing to disagree with the court; it’s another to see the court as using the law as simply a veneer for political decisions — what Laurence Tribe calls “politicians in robes.”
So now might be a good time to ask how far the Supreme Court can go without losing so much legitimacy that it can no longer be an effective arbiter of key disputes.
Here’s the ruling:
Supreme Court Ruling by Valerie Strauss on Scribd | 2022-06-22T02:33:09Z | www.washingtonpost.com | How Supreme Court ruling lays groundwork for religious charter schools - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/supreme-court-ruling-religious-charter-schools/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/21/supreme-court-ruling-religious-charter-schools/ |
Brian Schwalb leading in D.C. attorney general primary
Brian Schwalb (Schwalb campaign).
Brian Schwalb, who was endorsed by the outgoing D.C. attorney general, was leading a three-way race for the Democratic nomination for the office late Tuesday, outpacing Bruce V. Spiva and Ryan Jones.
As of 10:40 p.m., the race had not been called, and it is possible the results could shift.
The D.C. attorney general, whose office includes more than 700 attorneys and staffers, is responsible for enforcing the District’s laws through civil and criminal work and providing legal advice to city agencies. The attorney general’s office prosecutes juvenile offenses and adult misdemeanor cases. The more serious crimes committed by adults — or juveniles 16 or over who are charged as adults — are handled by federal prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in the District.
One of the biggest challenges for the candidates was distinguishing themselves from the others, particularly because of the standard, narrow responsibilities of the office.
Schwalb, partner in charge of Venable’s D.C. office, often spoke of his legal experience and his desire to reduce crime with the limited tools of the office. Spiva, a former Perkins Coie managing partner, spoke of his years as a civil rights attorney and working as an advocate for criminal justice reform. In addition to touting his experience in civil and criminal cases, Jones, a solo practitioner, tried to appeal to native Washingtonians by describing how he grew up in the city and witnessed firsthand how the criminal justice system often unfairly affected residents, particularly Black residents.
The office is being vacated by Karl A. Racine, the District’s first elected attorney general, who announced in October he would not be seeking a third term. Racine (D), who was first elected in 2015, sought to transform the scope and personality of a job that for decades was considered an important yet low-profile position appointed by the city’s mayor.
Racine had endorsed Schwalb, a Harvard Law-trained attorney from Venable, Racine’s former firm. In announcing his endorsement, Racine cited Schwalb’s experience defending a diverse portfolio of clients, his legal judgment and his interest in wage theft issues and uplifting city youth.
Schwalb’s win would come after an unusual turn of events that shifted the course of the race: In April, one of the leading candidates was ruled ineligible to run.
Kenyan R. McDuffie (D-Ward 5), a former prosecutor and one of the longest-serving members of the D.C. Council, initially emerged as a front-runner when he launched his attorney general campaign last fall. But in March, Spiva challenged McDuffie’s qualifications with the D.C. Board of Elections, arguing that District law required a person in the attorney general’s job to have been “actively engaged” in the city as a practicing attorney, judge or law school professor for at least five of the 10 years before taking office.
He asserted McDuffie ceased practicing law when he was elected to the council in 2012. The Board of Elections sided with Spiva and determined McDuffie — who had been the top fundraiser in the race — was ineligible to run.
Although Spiva’s challenge eliminated one of his top opponents, it also ignited some criticism from voters. After McDuffie chose not to endorse anyone, some said they planned on writing his name in as their vote in protest.
McDuffie had chosen not to seek reelection for his Ward 5 seat when he began running for attorney general, and his political future is now in question.
Racine, too, seems to have uncertain political prospects. The conclusion of Racine’s second term in the early days of 2023 will cap off an eight-year run largely defined by work on consumer protection, tenants rights and finding alternatives to incarceration for juveniles involved in crimes. He made the office a particularly visible fighter for District residents who claimed harm by corporations, and he pursued civil cases against Facebook, Grubhub, Dynamic Construction, the Trump Organization and Trump Inaugural Committee.
Racine’s office filed lawsuits against people associated with the far-right Oath Keepers and Proud Boys groups who were accused of being involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection. He also regularly joined in lawsuits with states across the country to seek restitution on behalf of residents.
The 59-year-old Haitian immigrant, who grew up in the District, entered politics full-time eight years ago when he beat out four competitors for the attorney general job. Previously, he had served as a public defender and associate counsel to President Bill Clinton, and was the first Black managing partner at Venable.
D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) and police officials had at times criticized what they deemed Racine’s softer approach in dealing with juvenile crime, especially youths involved in car jackings and armed robberies. His prosecutors often routed such youths to diversion programs, where they received treatment for behavior issues, stress and unrecognized trauma.
“There has to be some balance. For youth where this is their first time they are involved in crime, yes, diversion programs are warranted,” D.C. Police Chief Robert J. Contee III said in an interview. “But some juveniles are using theses crimes to graduate into more violent crime. Juveniles are showing up and committing crimes like never before and they need to be held accountable. The residents of the District should be getting the accountability they expect.”
Joe Heim and Nazmul Ahasan contributed to this report. | 2022-06-22T03:25:11Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Brian Schwalb leading in D.C. attorney general primary - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/dc-attorney-general-results/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/dc-attorney-general-results/ |
Mayor Muriel E. Bowser greets supporters as she arrives at Franklin Hall on election night in D.C. on June 21. (Craig Hudson for The Washington Post)
More than two decades after he was D.C.'s mayor, Marion Barry is still remembered for helping generations of youngsters get summer jobs. Anthony Williams is known for rescuing the city from near bankruptcy and bringing baseball back to Washington. Adrian Fenty’s tempestuous one term in office was defined by his takeover of the city’s public school system.
With her victory in Tuesday’s Democratic primary, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) is on her way to becoming the city’s first chief executive since Barry to win a third term, an achievement that will no doubt help to define her legacy, along with steering the city through a pandemic and the volatility of President Donald Trump’s four years in Washington.
Bowser is within reach of that milestone not by connecting with voters on a deeply personal level, as was the case with Barry, but by projecting the image of a measured, centrist manager.
While her opponents, council members Robert C. White Jr. (D-At Large) and Trayon White Sr. (D-Ward 8), sought to cast her as ineffectual and out-of-touch, Bowser, who has never lost an election, pushed back by citing her crisis-tested experience.
“She was selling stability,” said Ravi Perry, a Howard University political science professor. “During nationally turbulent times, she has done what in many peoples’ estimation is a steady job. It doesn’t mean they voted for her enthusiastically. But they were satisfied enough given the extraordinary conditions that they thought it was important for her to continue.”
2022 D.C. Primary results
A third term has proved treacherous for mayors far and wide.
In New York, for example, a wide-ranging corruption scandal, as well as two racially tinged killings, led voters to reject Mayor Edward I. Koch when he sought a fourth term in 1989. In Washington, Barry’s arrest for smoking crack in 1990 tainted his third term (a setback he overcame when voters in 1994 reelected him to a fourth term).
But a third term can also provide new opportunities to advance an ambitious agenda, as William Donald Schaefer demonstrated as Baltimore’s mayor for 16 years, a tenure during which he presided over the overhaul of the city’s Inner Harbor.
By 10 p.m. Tuesday, as ballots were still being counted, the mayor had captured just over 50 percent of the vote. As has been the case in the past, she showed particular strength in wards 2 and 3, areas that are predominantly White and the city’s most prosperous. Her weakest showing, at least according to the preliminary results, was in predominantly Black neighborhoods east of the Anacostia River.
Richard Bradley, the former head of the DowntownDC Business Improvement District, said Bowser’s tenure has largely been defined by her capacity to govern during a period when the coronavirus shut down public schools and offices across the city.
A third term, he said, gives the mayor a chance to “reimagine the city” and tackle deeper challenges such as creating affordable housing, reforming the tax system, and remaking a post-pandemic downtown.
“What I think has been missing most is a greater capacity to be more visionary,” Bradley said. “I think she has a mandate to dream big and differently. The issue is, as you go into a third term, do you have the energy to do that?”
The mayor’s path to another term was not nearly as easy as her 2018 reelection campaign when she faced minimal opposition. This time she faced two challengers who criticized her for being too close to developers and for poor oversight of the school system.
But voters found enough to like in the mayor’s tenure to deliver her another victory. Even if they disagreed with her approach to homeless encampments, say, or policing issues, she got credit for making vaccinations and at-home coronavirus tests available with relative ease.
The mayor also staked out safe terrain during a period of escalating violence by calling for the hiring of hundreds of additional police officers, a push that “inoculated her against attacks about rising crime,” said Ron Lester, a veteran pollster. “Voters are willing to see what happens if you have a credible approach.”
“People don’t want to take chances,” Lester said. “They know Bowser, they know what kind of mayor she’s going to be. They may not agree with everything she does, but they know her decisions are going to be thought through. They didn’t know what they were going to get from these challengers.”
Tom Lindenfeld, a former Bowser strategist who also advised Williams and Fenty, said the mayor benefited from facing two opponents, who divided the opposition and failed to exploit the mayor’s vulnerabilities.
“Elections are about a contrast between candidates,” Lindenfeld said. “In neither case did Robert or Trayon White Sr. make the comparison compelling enough to change the outcome of the election. She conveys a degree of competence and stability that’s attractive to people right now.”
Chuck Thies, a strategist whose past client, former mayor Vincent C. Gray, lost to Bowser in 2014, said Bowser’s consistency gave voters confidence that the city was being well-managed. On problems such as managing the pandemic and issues such as education reform, he said, “She stuck with her plan; she didn’t bend with the wind.”
“She commanded the stage as a leader in a very difficult time,” Thies said. “She didn’t unravel.”
Looking forward, Thies said, Bowser’s greatest opportunity to shape her legacy is to dramatically reduce the city’s homicide rate. “Take the rhetoric of the far left and the rhetoric of the centrists and amalgamate it into a program that improves public safety,” Thies said. “That’s a huge opportunity.” | 2022-06-22T03:25:17Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Muriel E. Bowser's primary win could cement her legacy - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/muriel-e-bowser-primary-win-in-dc-cement-legacy/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/21/muriel-e-bowser-primary-win-in-dc-cement-legacy/ |
The man who saved Final Fantasy is forging its future with ‘FFXVI’
‘We want to create something that everyone feels is epic,’ producer Naoki Yoshida told The Washington Post.
By Jhaan Elker
The Final Fantasy series is a staple in RPG culture that helped standardize tropes that have defined the genre for decades. Though narratively unconnected, each game’s turn-based combat, fantastical worlds and colorful, quirky characters struck similar chords. You could always tell when you were playing a Final Fantasy game.
This brings us to “Final Fantasy XVI.” While the Sony State of Play game trailer showed familiar summons that have become icons in the franchise, it showed little else that felt like players were about to enter a Final Fantasy game. The slower, more methodical turned-based combat system is gone in favor of something that looks ripped straight from Devil May Cry. The fantastical setting is gone too, in favor of a more realistic medieval setting with dark undertones akin to a Souls game.
Working on the project is Naoki Yoshida, a producer first brought on to salvage developer Square Enix’s critically panned venture into the MMORPG genre, “Final Fantasy XIV,” and who is often cited as saving not just “FFXIV,” but potentially the entire franchise. With this latest series entry, he said he’s had to balance fan expectations with innovation.
“When you’re thinking about the future of the Final Fantasy franchise, you have to aim at that generation of players that have never touched a Final Fantasy before,” Yoshida said in an interview with The Washington Post. “Maybe they think the series is too old, too classic. [So you] create something that shows them that this could be an exciting game.
“But I don’t want you to think that I’m abandoning those veterans players and fans of the series, because we’re definitely not. We want to create something that everyone feels is epic.”
Square Enix has been struggling with an identity crisis with the series for more than a decade. A tumultuous production cycle plagued 2006′s “Final Fantasy XII,” “Final Fantasy XIII’s” pivot to a more action-based combat system polarized fans, and “Final Fantasy XV,” which strayed even further from turn-based combat, featured a convoluted narrative that unfolded across several DLCs, a spinoff beat-em-up style game, an anime miniseries and a movie.
When “FFXIV” initially released in 2010, it was heavily criticized for its lack of content, numerous bugs and server failures. Yoshida, an avid MMORPG fan himself, was brought on to lead a team that would essentially rebuild the game entirely. The result was “FFXIV: A Realm Reborn” in 2013, a much more streamlined experience that fixed bugs and provided rich content that not only spoke to newcomers but longtime fans desperately seeking signs of the franchise they once knew.
Yoshida, now the producer of “FFXVI,” which is set to release in 2023, is incorporating the lessons he’s taken away from “FFXIV” into “FFXVI’s” design philosophy. The combat system of “FFXVI” is a prime example of this: It’s action-oriented, emphasizing flashy combos and read-and-react combat that the Final Fantasy series has been trending toward since “FFXII,” but attempts to incorporate elements longtime fans will recognize.
Fighting won’t be a solo experience, contrary to how it appears in the trailer. The main character, Clive, will be accompanied by several AI-controlled party members who will banter and connect throughout the game, similar to past Final Fantasy games. Yoshida also teases that there will be a “faithful buddy” that Clive can give specific commands to during the combat, despite the majority of player control focusing on Clive.
While specific details of the combat will be revealed at a later date, Yoshida is confident in the direction the system is taking. He believes that Square Enix, now with titles like “Final Fantasy XV,” “Final Fantasy VII Remake” and the Kingdom Hearts series under its belt, finally has the expertise to create a compelling action combat system that players, regardless of their familiarity with the series, will enjoy.
“The Kingdom Hearts team at Square Enix has been especially helpful in contributing to those real-time combat and boss battles,” Yoshida said. “It can be said that the battles in ‘FFXVI’ are in some ways a culmination of the company’s past experiences.”
The team, led by Battle Director Ryota Suzuki, formerly of Capcom, who helped design “Marvel vs. Capcom 2,” “Devil May Cry 5” and “Dragon’s Dogma,” feels similarly confident, according to Yoshida. Issues that plagued previous games in the franchise — around battle animations, combat fluidity and messy UIs — have all been streamlined thanks to Suzuki’s guidance.
Review: ‘Fire Emblem Warriors: Three Hopes’ is a grind series fans will enjoy
Yoshida also believes that the game’s story — which he says is not going to be a happy tale, and includes a setting, Valisthea, that is much darker than previous entries — will have overarching themes reminiscent of what fans of the series have come to expect.
“One of the main themes that’s explored in ‘Final Fantasy XVI’s’ narrative deals with a clash of ideals. What is right and wrong? Should the people live the life that was chosen for them, or should they have the right to choose the path that they walk?” Yoshida said.
Square Enix made sure that one of the first screens that loads up when playing “Final Fantasy XV” was a message that said the game was “A Final Fantasy for Fans and First-Timers.” Yoshida believes that “Final Fantasy XVI” will also capitalize on that message.
“Personally, I think all games should be like that,” he said. “You can see the same thing in ‘Final Fantasy XIV.’ So our foundation [for ‘Final Fantasy XVI’] is to build something that’s going to be enjoyable for veteran fans as well as new players.”
Gene Park contributed to this report. | 2022-06-22T03:33:53Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Final Fantasy XVI producer Naoki Yoshida innovates series in new entry - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2022/06/21/final-fantasy-16-naoki-yoshida-square-enix/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/video-games/2022/06/21/final-fantasy-16-naoki-yoshida-square-enix/ |
How a British Passport Offers Escape for Hong Kongers: QuickTake
Analysis by Kari Lindberg | Bloomberg
A copy of the British National (Overseas) passport arranged in Hong Kong, China, on Saturday, Jan. 30, 2021. Prime Minister Boris Johnson estimates about 300,000 Hong Kong citizens will take advantage of a new visa route to leave the former British colony and settle in the U.K., despite nearly three million people being eligible. (Bloomberg)
As China has tightened its control over Hong Kong with a national security law introduced in June 2020, the UK has offered some residents of its former colony a potential route out: a proposal to allow longer stays in Britain and even a pathway to future citizenship. Tough Covid quarantine regulations in Hong Kong have added to the pressure to leave. While some 3 million or more could qualify under the program, so far only a fraction of that total have applied.
It has to do with giving expanded rights to Hong Kong residents with unique documents known as British National (Overseas), or BN(O), passports, and to those considered to be eligible for them. The UK created the passports before handing Hong Kong back to China in 1997. They allowed holders to visit the UK visa-free for up to six months, but didn’t automatically confer the right to live or work there. Holders also weren’t eligible to access public funds.
2. How has it changed?
Former UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab told the House of Commons in July 2020 that a new “bespoke immigration route” would allow holders of BN(O) status to come to the UK without the six-month limit. They would be allowed to stay and work in the UK for five years. After that period, they could apply for settled status and, after a further 12 months, for citizenship. Family dependents would also be allowed into the UK and there would be no ceiling on the numbers allowed to apply. Applications were opened from January 2021.
3. How successful has it been?
The number of applicants for the BN(O) program between January and March 2022 jumped 25% from the previous three months, climbing to 19,500, according to data from the UK Home Office. The increase came as the omicron variant of the coronavirus tore through the Asian city, killing thousands. Still, overall applications were down 57% from the shorter first quarter of 2021, when 34,300 people rushed to apply after the program began on Jan. 31 that year. Since then, some 123,400 people have applied. As a comparison, Hong Kong had an outflow of 89,200 residents in the year through the end of June 2021, contributing to a 1.2% drop in its total population to about 7.39 million people.
4. What does it cost?
For each adult applying to enter the UK for two-and-a-half years, an application fee and health surcharge cost £1,740 ($2,196). That figure almost doubles to £3,370 for those wanting to stay for five years. In addition, they have to prove they have enough money to support themselves and their family for at least six months. Many people with significant savings and assets bet the house on their move: Of 10 people interviewed by Bloomberg News for an article in March 2022, most sold everything before arriving in the UK, cashing in on savings that ranged from HK$500,000 to HK$5 million ($63,700 to $637,000).
5. Who is eligible?
There were already about 350,000 holders of BN(O) passports before the security law was introduced, according to the UK Home Office. Others born before the July 1, 1997 handover were eligible, however, and the Home Office said in 2020 it estimated there were “around 2.9 million BN(O)s” in Hong Kong. That’s about 40% of the population. Those born after the handover have not been eligible but the UK government intends to expand the program in October to include those young people born on or after July 1, 1997 and with at least one parent with BN(O) status. This will allow younger Hong Kongers to apply directly.
6. Why is the UK doing this?
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson said China’s imposition of the national security law was a “clear and serious breach” of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration that paved the way for Hong Kong’s return to China in 1997. Speaking in the House of Commons in July 2020 after its introduction, he said he’d made clear that if China continued down that path, Britain would introduce a new route for those with BN(O) status to enter the UK. In an interview with Sky News the previous month, Raab said the UK was prepared to sacrifice a free trade deal with China to protect Hong Kong citizens.
7. What has been China’s reaction?
The Chinese Embassy in London said in July 2020 that the UK had previously promised it would “not confer the right of abode to Chinese citizens in Hong Kong who hold BN(O) passports.” All Chinese compatriots living in Hong Kong counted as Chinese nationals, the Embassy said. “If the British side makes unilateral changes to the relevant practice, it will breach its own position and pledges as well as international law and basic norms guiding international relations.” Two days before the program launched, China said it would no longer recognize the BN(O) passport as a valid travel document and it reserved “the right to take further actions.”
8. Why didn’t Hong Kong people get regular British passports?
People born in Hong Kong after the 1997 handover, who were both Chinese citizens and permanent Hong Kong residents, became eligible for the new Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) passports. While then-Conservative Prime Minister John Major cited Britain’s “continuing responsibilities to the people of Hong Kong” in a speech in the city in March 1996, at the same time there was concern within his Tory party back home about the potential scale of arrivals from Hong Kong, according to Jonathan Dimbleby in his book “The Last Governor.” The BN(O)’s bigger legacy may actually be increased acceptance of migration from Hong Kong among the UK’s allies. Several countries including the US, Canada, and Australia followed its lead in making it easier for migrants from Hong Kong to work legally and apply for residence. | 2022-06-22T04:04:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | How a British Passport Offers Escape for Hong Kongers: QuickTake - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/how-a-british-passport-offers-escape-for-hong-kongers-quicktake/2022/06/21/face1a0c-f1da-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/how-a-british-passport-offers-escape-for-hong-kongers-quicktake/2022/06/21/face1a0c-f1da-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
Either way, we felt it best that Maggie have the information. Jane and I don’t know Maggie well, but another woman in the group, “Susan,” does.
My husband, also close with Maggie, then said that he would tell her instead. He also hasn’t followed through, citing the same reason.
Fretting: My first piece of advice is that you should all stop discussing this as a group. This has descended into the realm of personal gossip.
The obvious solution would have been for “Jane” to respond to “Jed's” swipe, saying, “Dude, I know your wife!”
Sister: In addition to the father of the bride, you have another brother who might be able to represent your side of the family.
If you want to attend, you should respond honestly: “I would really like to be there, but honestly I just cannot afford the expense. I'm really sorry.”
Liz: My mistake. These cousins as described were not only “bozos.” They were racist bozos. | 2022-06-22T04:35:09Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Ask Amy: Should I tell my friend her husband is on a dating app? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/ask-amy-husband-dating-app/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/ask-amy-husband-dating-app/ |
Your dilemma is not that you do not know how to tell your friend it is no fun vacationing with her anymore. Your dilemma is that you do not know how to get away with it — in other words, how to do it without giving offense and possibly severing the relationship.
When we talk on the phone, she very sweetly guilt-trips me (“Oh, how I wish you could be here to help me with this … ”). How should I handle this?
Voluntarily assuming some of the responsibilities of deceased loved ones is a good deed, without being required — an extra credit in life, to borrow a metaphor from education. | 2022-06-22T04:35:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Miss Manners: We vacationed with a couple who argued the whole time - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/miss-manners-vacation-argue-couple/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/miss-manners-vacation-argue-couple/ |
Machine Gun Kelly is coming to Capital One Arena. (Angela Weiss/AFP/Getty Images)
Machine Gun Kelly is the same tatted Clevelander who graced the cover of “XXL” in 2012 as part of a “freshman class” of rappers that featured Future and Macklemore, but these days, the song does not remain the same. After flirting with rap-rock on 2019 album “Hotel Diablo,” MGK took the full plunge into pop-punk nostalgia with 2020’s “Tickets to My Downfall” and this year’s “Mainstream Sellout.” The midcareer crisis isn’t unprecedented, and it hits after a wave of emo-inspired SoundCloud rappers and amid a revival of pop-punk powered by his buddy/producer Travis Barker. While the Blink-182 drummer won’t be at this stop, MGK will be joined by Hot Topic queen Avril Lavigne, who’s enjoying a victory lap two decades since breaking through with the surprisingly durable hits “Complicated” and “Sk8er Boi.” June 24 at 7:30 p.m. at Capital One Arena, 601 F St. NW. capitalonearena.com. $29.50-$149.50.
With the “Sunlight/Sunlight!” tour, Corinne Bailey Rae is making her first solo U.S. headlining run in more than five years. The tour name could be a nod to a hymn that speaks to the soul-nourishing music the Leeds-born singer-songwriter has been making for years: “Sunlight, sunlight in my soul today / Sunlight, sunlight all along the way.” That’s a motto that rings true across her albums, from her star-making debut to the gently weeping “The Sea” to the often dance-floor-ready “The Heart Speaks in Whispers.” “Those love feelings that lift you up and put you outside of time … they inform a lot of my songwriting,” she told Forbes. “That feeling of just being lost in it, outside of this moment and in the eternal.” June 25 at 8 p.m. at Lincoln Theatre, 1215 U St. NW. thelincolndc.com. Sold out.
When Purity Ring notched buzz band status a decade ago, the duo of singer Megan James and producer Corin Roddick sidestepped questions about genre by branding themselves with the intentionally vague and ambiguous tag “future pop.” The future is what you make it, and for James and Roddick, that means dreamy, twitchy electronic pop full of scintillating synthesizers, orchestral swells, dubstep-inspired drum clatter and James’s vocals, which juxtapose baby-doll tones with lyrics that focus on the corporeal and the macabre. Finally hitting the road for a twice-rescheduled tour in support of 2020’s “Womb,” the pair has been covering Deftones’ violent nu-metal anthem “Knife Prty” and Alice Deejay’s trance classic “Better Off Alone” — bringing together two points in the past to spawn a darker, weirder future. June 29-30 at 7 p.m. (doors open) at 9:30 Club, 815 V St. NW. 930.com. $36. June 29 show sold out. | 2022-06-22T11:41:19Z | www.washingtonpost.com | 3 concerts to catch in D.C.: June 24-30 - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/06/22/concerts-dc/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/06/22/concerts-dc/ |
Minnesota city to pay $3.25M in police killing of Daunte Wright, lawyers say
Daunte Wright's parents, Arbuey and Katie Wright, after the sentencing hearing of former police officer Kimberly Potter at the Hennepin County Government Center on Feb. 18. (Stephen Maturen/Getty Images)
The city of Brooklyn Center, Minn., has agreed to pay $3.25 million to settle a wrongful-death lawsuit filed last year by the family of Daunte Wright, lawyers for Wright’s family said Tuesday. The unarmed Black man was killed during a traffic stop by a police officer for the city who said she mistook her gun for a Taser.
The city will also change the way police officers are taught to handle traffic stops, the lawyers said in a statement.
However, the full settlement has not been finalized, because an agreement has not yet been reached with the city on what the lawyers called “substantial and meaningful non-monetary relief” — measures to train police officers in de-escalation and funding for a permanent memorial to Wright, for instance.
Lawyers said they believe that $3.25 million is the “third-largest civil rights wrongful death settlement of its kind in the state of Minnesota and the largest such settlement for a city in Minnesota outside Minneapolis.”
The city of Brooklyn Center did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Post early Wednesday.
“Nothing can explain or fill the emptiness in our lives without Daunte or our continued grief at the senseless way he died,” Daunte’s parents, Arbuey and Katie Wright, said in a statement shared by several news outlets.
“It was important to us that his loss be used for positive change in the community, not just for a financial settlement for our family,” they added.
Wright’s family sued the city after one of its police officers, Kimberly Potter, shot Wright during a traffic stop in April 2021. Potter resigned from the police force soon afterward. She was later convicted of first- and second-degree manslaughter and sentenced to two years in prison.
Kimberly Potter found guilty of manslaughter in fatal shooting of Daunte Wright
Brooklyn Center police say they stopped Wright in the Minneapolis suburb because he had expired car registration tags. Wright’s mother said it was because he had air fresheners on his rearview mirror.
Officers found that he had an outstanding warrant for illegally carrying a weapon, for which he was told he was being placed under arrest. Wright, who was unarmed, resisted as the officers attempted to detain him. Potter, who is White, stepped in, calling for a Taser. She said she mistakenly took out her gun instead.
Potter’s trial was one of several that year — including one in Georgia that resulted in the conviction of three men for killing Ahmaud Arbery — that set off a fierce controversy over the treatment of Black people by law enforcement in the United States. In March, Minneapolis paid the family of the late George Floyd $27 million after a police officer knelt on his neck for over nine minutes, killing him. The scene was captured on video and sparked national and global protests.
Two years after Floyd’s death, Black Minnesotans say little has changed
On Tuesday, Jeff Storms, one of the lawyers representing Wright’s family, said the financial agreement with the city struck “a balance between holding Brooklyn Center accountable, while not undermining the financial stability of the city or limiting the services it provides.”
Co-counsel Antonio M. Romanucci said the deal “will provide a meaningful measure of accountability to the family for their deep loss.”
They said the city has agreed to facilitate “changes in its policies and training related to traffic stops for equipment violations that do not interfere with the safety of the driver, passenger or members of the community.”
Kim Bellware and Paulina Villegas contributed to this report. | 2022-06-22T11:42:02Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Daunte Wright's family to get $3.25M settlement in police killing, lawyers say - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/daunte-wright-settlement-wrongful-death-lawsuit-325-million/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/daunte-wright-settlement-wrongful-death-lawsuit-325-million/ |
Ravnsborg was charged with leaving the scene after fatally hitting a man with his car in 2020.
Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg consults with his attorney, Mike Butler, before Butler responds to a senator's question during the impeachment trial of Ravnsborg on Tuesday, June 21, 2022, at the South Dakota Capitol in Pierre, S.D. (Erin Woodiel/The Argus Leader via AP)
On Tuesday, two months after the South Dakota House of Representatives voted to impeach Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg (R) for fatally running over a man and leaving the scene because he thought he had hit a deer, the state convicted him of two impeachment charges in connection with the 2020 incident.
The Senate voted to remove the attorney general from office and to ban Ravnsborg — the first South Dakota official to ever be impeached — from running for office in the state.
The first conviction was for causing the death of 55-year-old Joseph Boever on Sept. 12, 2020. The Senate also found Ravnsborg guilty of misleading investigators and using his position as the state’s top law-enforcement official in an attempt to favorably shape the course of the investigation.
“This person ran down an innocent South Dakotan,” Sen. Lee Schoenbeck, the Senate’s highest-ranking Republican, said during his remarks, the Associated Press reported.
Schoenbeck also condemned Ravnsborg for declining to testify in the Senate trial and failing to disclose “what the hell he was doing” the night of the collision.
Neither Ravnsborg’s office nor his private spokesman immediately responded to messages from The Washington Post late Tuesday. Ravnsborg and his attorney declined to speak to reporters as they exited the room following the vote, the Argus Leader reported.
Nick Nemec, Boever’s cousin, said the verdict followed two years of waiting.
“Today felt like a heavy weight was lifted off me,” Nemec, 63, told The Post in an interview. “ … When the lieutenant governor slammed the gavel on the table and he announced that the attorney general was removed from office — that gave me a measure of relief.”
Boever’s widow, Jennifer Mohr Boever, did not immediately respond to a message from The Post.
South Dakota’s attorney general said he thought he hit a deer. The next day, he found a dead man’s body in a ditch.
Ravnsborg said he was driving home from a GOP fundraiser in Redfield, S.D., around 10:30 that September night when his car hit a large figure in the dark. Ravnsborg said he believed he had hit a deer and said he searched a ditch along Highway 14 with his cellphone’s flashlight.
“All I could see were pieces of my vehicle laying on and around the roadway,” he said in a statement at the time. The sheriff arrived and surveyed the damage, but Ravnsborg said neither of them suspected that a person had been injured in the crash. Ravnsborg denied drinking the night of the incident.
The next morning, Ravnsborg and his chief of staff drove back to the scene.
“As I walked along the shoulder of the road, I discovered the body of Mr. Boever in the grass just off the roadway,” Ravnsborg said. “It was apparent that Mr. Boever was deceased.”
Soon after finding the man’s body, he added, he drove to the sheriff’s home and reported the new information.
Boever’s family has expressed doubts about Ravnsborg’s story and raised concerns that it took authorities nearly 24 hours to notify them of Boever’s death. Last September, Ravnsborg settled a wrongful-death lawsuit filed by Boever’s widow, the Argus Leader reported. The terms of the settlement remain confidential.
In August, Ravnsborg pleaded no contest to two misdemeanor traffic charges and avoided jail time.
Earlier this year, a group of lawmakers led by state Rep. Will Mortenson (R) filed two articles seeking to impeach Ravnsborg after the South Dakota Department of Public Safety released two three-hour interviews between Ravnsborg and detectives that raised questions about Ravnsborg’s behavior. Many politicians, including Gov. Kristi L. Noem (R), called for his resignation. But Ravnsborg declined to step down.
Ravnsborg, who remained suspended from office pending the outcome of the Senate trial, told The Post in a statement earlier this year that he was looking forward to the trial “where I believe I will be vindicated.”
South Dakota AG pushed by critics to resign over new evidence in fatal car incident: ‘He knew what he hit and he lied’
Twenty-four senators voted to convict Ravnsborg of the charge involving committing a crime that caused someone’s death, just barely reaching the two-thirds majority needed to do so. The malfeasance charge passed with 31 votes, while all lawmakers voted to bar Ravnsborg from holding future office.
Later on Tuesday, Noem took to social media to praise the lawmakers’ decision.
“After nearly 2 years the dark cloud over the Attorney General’s office has been lifted. It is now time to move on and begin to restore confidence in the office,” she tweeted.
Nemec said he and his brother shook hands after the “emotional” day of justice for their cousin concluded.
“[Ravnsborg] won’t be able to live his life as attorney general, but he still has his life,” Nemec told The Post. “He can live some other life. Joe is dead, and Joe will be dead for ever. That’s the cold, hard truth.”
Katie Shepherd and Julian Mark contributed to this report. | 2022-06-22T11:42:08Z | www.washingtonpost.com | South Dakota AG Jason Ravnsborg impeached by Senate, removed from seat - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/ravnsborg-south-dakota-impeached/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/ravnsborg-south-dakota-impeached/ |
Think state supreme courts will save abortion rights? Think again.
By Neal Devins
Abortion rights activists protest at the U.S. Supreme Court in D.C. on June 21. (Shawn Thew/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
Neal Devins is a professor of law at William and Mary.
If the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, don’t look to state supreme courts to step in to protect abortion rights.
State supreme courts have the power to interpret their own state constitutions to provide broader protections for individual liberty than the U.S. Supreme Court. But they rarely break from their state’s dominant political culture. Unlike life-tenured federal court judges, justices in 38 states stand for election, and their decisions are subject to voter initiatives and other democratic checks. On abortion, they probably agree with their state’s political establishment and, if not, they understand that any decision countermanding the state is subject to political override.
Witness a decision the Iowa Supreme Court handed down last week. Concluding that its 2018 ruling establishing a state constitutional right to abortion “insufficiently recognizes that future human lives are at stake,” the Iowa Supreme Court overruled that precedent. It also sent a message to other state supreme courts: Don’t buck the dominant political party.
How did the Iowa Supreme Court come to overturn its own prior decision? Following the 2018 ruling, which invalidated a 72-hour waiting period for abortions, lawmakers changed the state’s judicial selection process — a merit selection plan in which lawyers and the senior supreme court justice dominated the commission that nominates judicial candidates. Jettisoning that system in favor of one allowing the governor to appoint a majority of the commission enabled Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) to remake the court into a conservative body.
Iowa is not alone. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) took aim at a 2017 state supreme court decision blocking a 24-hour waiting period law. By replacing three retiring Democrats on the Florida Supreme Court with “appointees who will interpret the law, be willing to reverse bad precedent and not legislate from the bench,” DeSantis transformed the court and ushered in a new era of conservative judicial decision-making. The Florida Supreme Court has already reversed a 2016 ruling requiring a unanimous jury recommendation for a death sentence; on abortion, it seems poised to overturn precedent and uphold the state’s recently enacted 15-week ban.
Even in still-purple Kansas, a Democratic governor and supreme court dominated by Democratic appointments might not be enough to save state abortion rights. In 2019, the Kansas Supreme Court recognized a right to “control one’s own body” when striking down a state law banning dilation and evacuation, the most commonly used procedure for second-trimester abortions. Republican lawmakers took aim, promoting an initiative to amend the state constitution to say that it does not confer a right to abortion. Kansans will vote on that initiative in August.
While this initiative might fail, Kansas is the exception that proves the rule. The antiabortion juggernaut will not be stopped in those very states where abortion rights are most in jeopardy. There, the risks of electoral defeat, voter override or other political attack are too great. More than that, red-state justices typically embrace red-state values. There is little doubt that recently appointed justices to the Iowa and Florida supreme courts disapproved of the rights-expanding precedents they overturned.
For similar reasons, there is little prospect that a majority of justices in any of the 13 states set to outlaw abortion immediately if Roe is overturned will risk electoral defeat to set aside a U.S. Supreme Court decision they probably support. In contrast to national opinion polls backing abortion rights, voters in states that would eliminate or severely restrict abortion think that abortion should be fully or mostly illegal. Take Mississippi, the state whose abortion law is now before the U.S. Supreme Court. Almost 60 percent of adult Mississippians oppose abortion rights. In Idaho (where the state supreme court will hear arguments about a state constitutional right to abortion in August), Republicans are dominant, and two-thirds oppose abortion. There is little chance that either of these courts would find a state constitutional right to abortion.
None of this is to say that state supreme courts did not play a critical role in establishing and expanding individual rights protections. Defenders of state constitutionalism are correct when they extol state supreme courts for playing a leadership role on search and seizure, interracial marriage, same-sex marriage and more. They are also correct that there are some issues (property rights, for example) where broad bipartisan opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court creates a void that state courts can fill. In today’s polarized world, however, those issues are few and far between. Red-state supreme courts back red-state values, and blue-state courts back blue-state values. Just as Mississippi and Idaho are unlikely to back abortion rights, state supreme courts in New York and California will not find a state constitutional right to bear arms.
Correspondingly, there is a hollow ring to claims such as the one made by Brett M. Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing that people “affected” by and “upset” with the U.S. Supreme Court can seek relief by turning to “state constitutions and state constitutional law.” That might have been true when there was no sharp Republican-Democrat divide on abortion, guns and other hot-button issues; it is not true today. State supreme courts are bellwethers of state politics, not rights-protecting pathbreakers. | 2022-06-22T11:42:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Abortion rights aren't likely to be saved by state supreme courts - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/abortion-roe-state-supreme-courts/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/abortion-roe-state-supreme-courts/ |
Streamers worry the end is coming for lax password-sharing rules
A crackdown on passwords hits a nerve for long-time streamers, and muddles the future of fragmented TV
Madison Ketcham/Illustration for The Washington Post
After years of tacitly allowing password sharing, Netflix is cracking down on splitting a log-in with anyone who doesn’t live full time at the same address. For people like Wenitsky, a TV writer in Los Angeles, it’s a step too far.
“If the price to pay for having every streaming service is Netflix sending the full force of their security to my house to keep me from sharing my password with my mom, so be it,” Wenitsky says.
Netflix isn’t going door-to-door just yet, but it says it is coming after those who share passwords and is testing a program in Peru, Costa Rica and Chile to get people who borrow a password to pay for their own streaming. It’s the latest sign that the way we watch and pay for TV is at a crossroads. With inflation at a 40-year high and as global markets remain volatile and there’s talk of a recession, consumers are rethinking how much money they want to sink into subscriptions. The top eight streaming services would now cost nearly $60 a month combined if you had the most inexpensive version of each, inching close to what cable costs.
To cope, sharing passwords with friends and family has become a mainstream practice. At the same time, streaming companies are trying to compensate for their own financial struggles, with layoffs, price increases, more ad options or simply shutting down. The pandemic was a boon for the streaming companies, but now they have to compete with real-world activities again — box office hits are back, bars and parties are packed, and workers are returning to offices.
The result is an industry falling out of sync with how people use its products. It’s no longer just a cheaper, ad-free alternative to cable, but a crowded field. Netflix’s new zeal for password enforcement breaks the seal on something the streaming companies have long avoided: being clear about sharing policies and enforcement, leaving millions of TV fans confused.
“If feels like more of a structural thing these companies have to iron out, but don’t think it’s the responsibility of the consumer,” says Ned Riseley, an actor and singer in Brooklyn, N.Y., who sings a song about passwords with Wenitsky.
Subscriptions? In this economy? Free alternatives for watching, reading and listening.
“Look, everyone understands that everything costs more money these days. Server space, streaming costs, licensing; I didn’t complain when Netflix upped their prices,” Mardoll said. “But then they [Netflix] announced they’re going after sharing and I see them making the same bad assumption that companies always make: that every ‘shared’ household is a ‘lost sale.’”
Mardoll started off saving huge amounts of money by switching to streaming, but is now creeping toward having a cable-sized expense. He went from pricey satellite TV to Netflix DVDs by mail, then added in Prime Video, Disney Plus, Hulu and RiffTrax. He has been a paying Netflix customer since 2013, when a standard account cost $7.99 — now it’s $15.49. Mardoll shares the account with two other households that wouldn’t or couldn’t pay for it on their own.
Other companies have been mum about their next moves, but media industry experts predict they could follow Netflix’s lead.
“They thought there was endless growth but when everyone hits a wall, they’re going to follow the same Netflix playbook,” said Michael Nathanson, a senior research analyst at MoffettNathanson, an independent research firm based in New York. “They’re going to do the same thing.”
Sharing was OK, until it wasn’t
Last September, Hulu’s official Twitter account said: “Our love language is sharing a Hulu subscription.” Asked about the tweet, spokesperson Kristie Adler described the account as playful and said not all of the company’s social media posts are meant for literal interpretation.
Our love language is sharing a Hulu subscription.
— Hulu (@hulu) September 1, 2021
In 2015, Richard Plepler, then the CEO of HBO, said password sharing had no real effect on the business: “What we’re in the business of doing is building addicts, building video addicts.” At the CES in 2016, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings said the company “loved” that people share Netflix accounts and described it as “a positive thing, not a negative thing,” according to CNET.
The lack of enforcement has, by design, created a culture of account sharing between close friends and family. It has also led to distant sharing between friends of friends, co-workers, exes, and Airbnb guests and hosts.
Sara from New York has been using the HBO Max log-in of a man she met on a dating app and only went out with once. She declined to use her last name out of fear of him changing his password. Another borrowed a streaming log-in from a friend while recovering from surgery and kept on using it.
“At one point during the pandemic we had a friend’s Criterion password,” said Riseley, the actor, who shares some of his own accounts with family members. “We watched two French movies, then it disappeared. That was an exciting one to have for a little bit.”
Is Amazon Prime worth it for you?
It’s not the insistence on keeping a subscription in the family that gets Ariane Broome-Hopkins — it’s the companies defining what a family is based on a primary address. “They can’t assume they understand the circumstances of this person’s situation because of the metadata on their phone,” said Broome-Hopkins, a 36-year-old customer care concierge. “Families aren’t as simple as they used to be.”
Broome-Hopkins’s partner is living in Austria, and she has close relatives and chosen family members scattered across the country and the world. For now, she’ll continue to share Apple TV Plus with her sister and her partner, borrow Netflix from her best friend, and share Disney Plus with a family with two kids who can’t afford it on their own.
While other streaming services are still staying tight-lipped, Netflix has been unusually open about its strategy. For example, Netflix is using IP addresses to determine what devices are connecting to its service and from what location. This is how the company already knows that 100 million people are watching on someone else’s account.
“Netflix is the default. It’s there, it’s easy to use, it doesn’t cost that much. If you’re any less easy to use, if you’re any less there, I have other places to go,” said Adrienne Figus, a project manager in an academic library in Massachusetts, who once owned her own video rental store. “Purchase, borrow, library, pirate stuff — I could get it.” | 2022-06-22T11:43:40Z | www.washingtonpost.com | What password sharers think about a stricter streaming future - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/streaming-password-sharing/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/streaming-password-sharing/ |
Landover Hills is ‘a welcoming community’
The Prince George’s County town was one of the first suburban developments along Annapolis Road
By Anastazja Kolodziej
Landover Hills, a town in northern Prince George's County, has more than 500 single-family homes, a mix of Colonials, Cape Cods and ranchers. (Craig Hudson for The Washington Post)
Dorothy Anderson Fratturelli’s family has lived in Landover Hills, a suburban town in northern Prince George’s County, Md., for more than 70 years. Fratturelli, who grew up in Landover Hills, bought her family’s home after her parents died. She sold the house when she moved to Massachusetts and then bought it again when she returned.
“I've been around for quite a long time. This is my home,” she said. “It’s a really nice place.”
Fratturelli said she loves to sit out on her porch looking onto the street, reminiscing about her childhood.
“We used to do the hopscotch and the jump ropes and kick the cans, and everybody knew everybody,” she said.
But nowadays, she no longer sees many kids playing on the street. Instead, they play in their own yards.
“But [the town has] got to change, because people change,” Fratturelli said.
Landover Hills was incorporated as a town in March 1945 as one of the first suburban developments along Annapolis Road, according to the town’s website. The town of about 150 acres of hills contains more than 500 single-family homes, a mix of Colonials, Cape Cods and ranchers. Landover Hills is governed by a mayor, town council and town manager.
Landover Hills is close to many amenities along Annapolis Road, including grocery stores, convenience shops, banks, fast food and restaurants, gas stations, churches, a halal market and an urgent care center.
Behind Landover Hills’ town hall is a park that has a playground, tennis courts and playing fields. Additional green space can be found elsewhere in town, including a little park off Annapolis Road that has a gazebo and a memorial featuring the names of veterans from Landover Hills who fought in World War II — including Fratturelli’s father.
Marco Moore, who lives across the street from Fratturelli, has resided in Landover Hills for around 15 years. During his time there, he said, he’s noticed that the town has been making improvements.
“I’ve seen [houses] getting renovated,” he said, adding that he’s noticed the town “doing little upgrades, little things of that nature.”
Town manager Rommel Pazmino said Landover Hills received federal covid relief funds in 2021 that the town used to help residents, through senior and rental-assistance programs, and local businesses.
Two local churches, Saint Mary’s Catholic Church and Ebenezer Church of God, held food drives. Public works employees delivered boxes of food to residents without transportation.
News and events are shared through a newsletter published by the town clerk, posted on social media or broadcast on the community television station.
Despite the pandemic’s disruption, Landover Hills’ art committee is planning to paint a mural on the back wall of the town hall.
“That plan came out of our planning for our 75th anniversary,” which was in 2020, said Mayor Jeff Schomisch.
The town has four goals for the mural: to evoke a sense of the town’s community and joy, to enrich the town’s environment, to promote communal activities by making public space more engaging, and to celebrate the town’s diversity, Schomisch wrote in an email. The town will receive a grant from the county for the mural.
The mural is expected to be completed by late July or early August, said Paul Schad, a public works employee and liaison to the arts committee.
To celebrate the anniversary, the town had planned a festival and a dinner for former residents, but the ideas were abandoned because of the pandemic, Schomisch said.
But not all of the town’s plans were canceled. Some were adapted to a socially distant format.
“The last two years, Santa Claus went around town on a pickup truck … it was a Cadillac,” Schomisch said.
He said that residents of Landover Hills tend to be families but that it fluctuates.
“We bought [a house] from the original owners. So they had been there, they had raised their families, but then they had gotten older and decided it was time to move on. And that's kind of what happens,” he said “And right now, we're in another boom of families.”
Schomisch, who has been mayor for three years, also served for six years as a council member. He was persuaded by his former neighbor to join.
“He served for like 20 years, and then finally retired and decided to move out of town, and kind of told me, ‘Okay, your turn,’” Schomisch said. “And I've enjoyed living here, so I figured it was time to contribute a little bit and help out.”
Schomisch said his favorite part of living in Landover Hills is how friendly and welcoming the town is.
“It was really a welcoming community for us when we came to town,” he said. “And I think we still have that.”
Living there: For the most part, Landover Hills is bounded by Annapolis Road to the north, 72nd Avenue to the east, Parkwood Street to the south and 70th Avenue and Landover Hills Neighborhood Park to the west. A strip to the west along Annapolis Road is mostly commercial space.
Melanie Gamble, who has worked as a real estate agent in Prince George's County for more than 20 years, is president of the Prince George's County Association of Realtors.
Landover Hills is a “great place to call home” for commuters because of its “extremely convenient location” near the Beltway and other highways, she said.
Two houses are for sale in Landover Hills, Gamble said. The more expensive is a three-bedroom, two-bathroom house for $384,000. The other is a semidetached house with two bedrooms and two bathrooms listed for $349,900.
The average price of a home sold in Landover Hills in 2021 was $332,129, Gamble said. The most expensive house sold was a renovated 1,980-square-foot Federal-style home with five bedrooms and four bathrooms for $485,000. The least expensive home sold was a 789-square-foot rambler with two bedrooms and two bathrooms for $225,000.
Schools: Judge Sylvania W. Woods and Cooper Lane Elementary, Charles Carroll Middle and Parkdale and Bladensburg High. A new middle school, Glenridge, is under construction.
Transit: The Landover and New Carrollton Metro stations (Orange Line) are less than a 10-minute drive from the neighborhood, and there is a MARC train stop at the New Carrollton station. There are bus stops along Annapolis Road. Landover Hills is close to the Beltway and U.S. Route 50, and the Baltimore-Washington Parkway is accessible from Annapolis Road. | 2022-06-22T12:24:51Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Neighborhood profile: Landover Hills - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/22/where-we-live-landover-hills/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/22/where-we-live-landover-hills/ |
1 HORSE (Viking, $28). By Geraldine Brooks. A scientist and a historian bond over their shared interest in a Civil War-era racehorse and his enslaved groom.
2 THE HOTEL NANTUCKET (Little, Brown, $29). By Elin Hilderbrand. A newly-hired general manager and her staff revive a once-illustrious hotel purchased by a British billionaire.
4 THIS TIME TOMORROW (Riverhead, $28). By Emma Straub. A woman falls asleep on the eve of her 40th birthday and wakes to find herself 16 again.
7 THE LINCOLN HIGHWAY (Viking, $30). By Amor Towles. Four boys on a road trip take an unplanned journey.
9 FLYING SOLO (Ballantine, $28). By Linda Holmes. While settling her favorite aunt’s estate, a woman finds a wooden duck decoy and uncovers its storied past.
10 THE PARIS APARTMENT (Morrow, $28.99). By Lucy Foley. A woman investigating her brother’s disappearance suspects that his neighbors might have been involved.
2 RIVER OF THE GODS (Doubleday, $32.50). By Candice Millard. A chronicle of the search for the head of the Nile by two 19th-century British explorers and their African guide.
10 HOW TO RAISE AN ANTIRACIST (One World, $28). By Ibram X. Kendi. Guidance for parents on incorporating an understanding of racism into each stage of a child’s life. | 2022-06-22T12:51:19Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Washington Post hardcover bestsellers - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/washington-post-hardcover-bestsellers/2022/06/21/a1b29792-f183-11ec-99d3-cbe6aa9af168_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/washington-post-hardcover-bestsellers/2022/06/21/a1b29792-f183-11ec-99d3-cbe6aa9af168_story.html |
Mat Johnson’s latest book delivers a biting satire of American politics and class issues — from the vantage point of outer space
(University of Oregon/One World)
Back in 2011, I reviewed Mat Johnson’s “Pym,” a wildly entertaining seriocomic novel that revisits — and updates — Edgar Allan Poe’s enigmatic, racially charged fantasy, “The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket.” In it, an all-Black expedition to Antarctica unearths something seemingly impossible in the ice, and about which I will say no more. Just pick up a copy of this very funny, thought-provoking book.
Or better still, read Johnson’s latest, “Invisible Things,” again a work of cultural and political satire, but this time framed around an unsettling discovery on Jupiter’s moon Europa. Before we get to that, however, take a close look at the novel’s opening:
“After months in deep space conducting an intensive field study of social dynamics aboard the cryoship SS Delany, Nalini Jackson, NASAx Post-Doctorate Fellow of Applied Sociology, D.A. Sc., came to an uncomfortable conclusion: She didn’t really like people, on the whole. It was an embarrassing realization given that her life’s work was studying them.”
There’s a lot going on in these sentences, but pause for a moment over the S.S. Delany, which will later be joined by a second cryoship called the S.S. Ursula 50. What’s the point of these obvious genuflections to Samuel R. Delany and Ursula K. Le Guin, two of the most admired science fiction writers of our time? A small act of homage, obviously, but Johnson may also be signaling that in this future a person’s race and sexual identity — prominent concerns of Delany and Le Guin — are no longer flash points. It takes a while before the reader learns that Nalini is Black and even longer to realize that her colleague Dwayne Causwell is both gay and Black. These facts play virtually no role in the story. What’s really important are economic, theological and political systems and how they shape a society.
Though science fiction tends to be set in the future, it’s always fundamentally about the present. As Nalini observes on the novel’s second page, we need space travel as a safeguard against extinction. “If humans didn’t accomplish this goal, the only unanswered question would be which combo of consequences for humanity’s collective sins would deliver the fatal blow. Climate devastation, nuclear Armageddon, systemic xenophobia, virulent partisanship, pandemics … were all strong contenders. The range of cataclysms was dazzling but as an academic, Nalini was most impressed with humanity’s ability to embrace the delusion that everything was fine.”
All this sounds very much like Now. And yet, look again at the two passages quoted: Their casual tone, the swing of their prose, their irony are light-years away from the styles of grave Le Guin and experimental Delany. What’s more, Johnson’s knowledge of science fiction isn’t restricted to these two fashionably approved authors. Characters or events in his book call to mind Kurt Vonnegut’s “The Sirens of Titan” and “Cat’s Cradle”; Ray Bradbury’s “The Martian Chronicles,” especially the story “Mars is heaven!”; Robert A. Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land” — Dwayne somewhat resembles a blend of Jubal Harshaw and Valentine Michael Smith; various Twilight Zone episodes; and even the B-movie classic “Forbidden Planet,” especially notable for its invisible “Monsters from the Id.”
Given Johnson’s day job as a University of Oregon professor, it’s consequently tempting to employ the language of literary theory and dub “Invisible Things” an affectionate, intertextual construct, one that draws on half the tropes of modern sf. Still, awareness of echoes and borrowings merely enriches an already exciting story. During the S.S. Delany’s flyby of Europa, photography drones record an unexpected bubble shape on the moon’s surface. It can only be a bio-dome. Close-up imaging then reveals that inside there’s an actual football field. “With white lines sprayed on the grass, raised seating, and just beyond the field itself, a parking lot packed with cars.”
It turns out that the inhabitants of “New Roanoke” have all been “collected” from Earth. According to officially sanctioned dogma, each citizen was chosen by God, in effect, “raptured.” Yet within this bio-domed heaven, one finds all the shops, fast-food restaurants, class inequalities and political chicanery we know from Earth. Everything, as Nalini observes, is “creepily, nauseatingly the same,” right down to the blonde TV anchor who looks as if she’s molded out of wax.
In these gloomy, divisive times, does anyone care about books? I do.
Believing it impossible to leave the dome, most people resign themselves to making as good a life there as possible. Going full Stockholm syndrome, Bob Seaford, the ambitious former captain of the Delany, quickly embraces the policies of the Founders, a conservative, tradition-bound group which over the years has “devolved from a moderate democratic force to an all-powerful, toxic, nativist party.” To its members, New Roanoke is “the place where the American Dream's still alive.”
Or is it? Mysterious beings called the “Invisible Things” supply the population with food and supplies and, presumably, orchestrate the periodic collection of new arrivals. Johnson never explains these unseen entities, but they might well represent, metaphorically, any of the anti-democratic deities of modern society, whether tech monopolies, political dark money, or much social media, all of which seek covertly to control the world they move in, thus becoming demonic inversions of Adam Smith’s free-market “Invisible Hand.” Whatever the case, any reference to the existence of “Invisible Things” is blasphemy, liable to bring upon you their unwanted, perhaps deadly attention.
Plainly, a reader only needs to squint a little to see that Johnson is regularly pointing to the Trumpian United States. After all, members of the Founders’ Party “believe in democracy — they just don’t believe anyone who can’t afford to rig an election should be able to win one.”
Overall, though, simply quoting a few passages from “Invisible Things” hardly conveys its bounce and energy, though matters do grow a bit heavy-handed in the second half. At that point, a collateral plot line — which I haven’t even hinted at — leads to a major political and cultural crisis on “New Roanoke.” For a final act of pulp chutzpah, Johnson’s last page suddenly presents a melodramatic image that could have easily graced the cover of some 1940s issue of “Astounding” or “Thrilling Wonder Stories.”
One World. 272 pp. $27 | 2022-06-22T13:12:45Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Mat Johnson Invisible Things book review - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2022/06/22/invisible-things-book/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/books/2022/06/22/invisible-things-book/ |
WASHINGTON, DC - JUNE 21: Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and Georgia Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling testify during the fourth hearing held by the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol on June 21, 2022 in the Cannon House Office Building in Washington, DC. The bipartisan committee, which has been gathering evidence related to the January 6, 2021 attack at the U.S. Capitol for almost a year, is presenting its findings in a series of televised hearings. On January 6, 2021, supporters of President Donald Trump attacked the U.S. Capitol Building in an attempt to disrupt a congressional vote to confirm the electoral college win for Joe Biden. (Photo by Michael Reynolds-Pool/Getty Images) (Photographer: Pool/Getty Images North America) | 2022-06-22T13:12:58Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Can Trump Be Tied to His Allies’ Violent Intimidation? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/can-trump-be-tied-to-his-allies-violent-intimidation/2022/06/22/d96c5566-f227-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/can-trump-be-tied-to-his-allies-violent-intimidation/2022/06/22/d96c5566-f227-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
By Marie-Rose Sheinerman | Bloomberg
Buildings in New York, U.S., on on Monday, July 5, 2021. New York’s residential market is heating back up amid the easing of commercial restrictions and lower Covid-19 rates, although the market has yet to return to pre-pandemic levels, Forbes reports. Photographer: Jeenah Moon/Bloomberg (Bloomberg)
The Tuesday night decision by the nine-member Rent Guidelines Board of mayoral appointees reflects the political promises of Mayor Eric Adams, a landlord himself who has signaled strong support for small businesses and property owners, many of whom are facing mounting operating costs under soaring inflation.
More than 2 million New Yorkers, or as many as 1 in 3 residents, stand to be affected by the decision. The hikes are still significantly smaller than those in market-rate apartments, where the median rent increased 29.8% compared with a year prior as of May, according to a report by the real estate brokerage firm Douglas Elliman. The changes will take effect on leases that begin between Oct. 1 and Sept. 20, 2023.
“It’s pretty clear tenants are going to get slammed with unaffordable rent increases,” Michael McKee, the treasurer of Tenant PAC and a long-time tenant’s rights advocate, said ahead of the decision. “This board does the bidding of the mayor, and this mayor wants to raise rent.”
The decision is in line with what the board approved in a 5-4 preliminary vote last month. The board had previously announced an expected rent hike between 2% and 4% for one-year leases and between 4% and 6% for two-year leases -- lower increases than the 9% estimates floated earlier this year. At an event Monday, Adams lauded the drop from previous estimates, saying he hoped the the board finds a “fair way” forward.
Landlords in the city have been squeezed by the highest inflation in four decades, rising costs of water and energy, and property tax assessments, according to Joseph Strasburg, president of the Rent Stabilization Association, a group representing 25,000 property owners in the city.
But ultimately, Strasburg said, the rent stabilization system does a disservice to both owners and tenants. The answer to the housing crisis, he said, lies with new legislation such as a broad housing policy package, including a rent-voucher subsidy program and reforms to property taxes.
“The RGB vote proves that this is a broken system,” he said. “Relying solely on the RGB process is running affordable housing into the ground.”
After the vote Tuesday, Adams decried the rent increases as a “burden to tenants at this difficult time,” but also defended small landlords who he said are at risk of bankruptcy after years of no increases.
“This system is broken, and we cannot pit landlords against tenants as winners and losers every year,” Adams said in a statement. | 2022-06-22T13:13:16Z | www.washingtonpost.com | One Million Rent-Stabilized NYC Apartments Set for Biggest Increase Since 2013 - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/on-small-business/one-million-rent-stabilized-nyc-apartments-set-for-biggest-increase-since-2013/2022/06/22/31de7cfe-f220-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/on-small-business/one-million-rent-stabilized-nyc-apartments-set-for-biggest-increase-since-2013/2022/06/22/31de7cfe-f220-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
Trump’s Attempted Coup Failed, But at What Cost?
Defenders of former President Donald Trump’s attempted coup have deployed many smokescreens to distract the public and help him avoid accountability. The 2020 presidential election really was rigged, they say. Vote-counting was flawed, and most likely fraudulent. Trump’s repeated efforts to strongarm individuals and institutions to do his bidding were just responses to corruption. And so on.
Witnesses to Trump’s corruption, by contrast, have a far simpler job: They only have to recite the facts. But as the fourth day of testimony overseen by the bipartisan congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol made clear, doing so can come with enormous personal sacrifice.
A series of witnesses, most of them Republicans, testified Tuesday about why they chose to follow the law rather than disenfranchise voters. Asked to commit crimes to demonstrate their loyalty to Trump and the Republican Party, they responded by variously saying that their allegiance was to the rule of law, the US Constitution and their states. They showed in vivid and poignant detail that the fate of America’s democratic institutions hung on the integrity of individuals — and it was a slender thread.
When one of Trump’s hatchet men, Rudolph Giuliani, asked Arizona House Speaker Russell “Rusty” Bowers to find ways of replacing Joe Biden’s electors with Trump’s after the 2020 election, Bowers refused. “You are asking me to do something that is counter to my oath, when I swore to the Constitution to uphold it,” he said. He repeatedly asked Giuliani for proof of electoral fraud. “We have lots of theories,” Bowers said Giuliani responded. “We just don’t have the evidence.”
Bowers, a Republican, wanted Trump to win the election but as he noted in his journal at the time, “I do not want to be a winner by cheating.” It’s not a sentiment that the former president shares, based on his track record and evidence from the hearings that he was directly involved in some of the scheming. (“Hmm,” I can imagine Trump thinking. “I’ve always been OK with cheating.”)
Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who got a call from Trump himself, also offered testimony that demonstrated the gulf between people like him and the former president. Trump famously phoned Raffensperger days before Congress was to certify the election results on Jan. 6, 2021, begging him to manufacture the 11,779 votes he needed to surmount Biden’s victory margin in Georgia. Raffensperger, a conservative Republican, refused. And he did so with a clear conscience.
“I knew that we had followed the law and we had followed the Constitution,” Raffensperger testified on Tuesday. “And I think sometimes moments require you to stand up and just take the shots. You’re doing your job. And that’s all we did.”
Trump, meanwhile, came across as a corrupt, 19th-century ward heeler in his phone call to Raffensperger, which was recorded. “So what are we going to do here folks?” Trump asked during the one-hour call. “I only need 11,000 votes. Fellas, I need 11,000 votes.”
It’s not hard to envision how the Republican Party would have reacted if former President Barack Obama tried to corrupt a secretary of state to sabotage the results of a presidential election he had lost. Yet when confronted with the reality of Trump’s scheming and thuggery, most of the GOP’s leadership has been mute.
Public servants such as Bowers and Raffensperger, by contrast, did the right thing and paid enormous costs. Bowers testified that his office was swamped by tens of thousands of hostile phone calls, texts and e-mail messages from Trump supporters. One person accused him of being a pedophile; another approached him armed with a gun. Raffensperger said he was doxed, making it easier for Trump supporters to harass him. His wife received lewd “sexualized texts” and his daughter-in-law’s home was burglarized.
Such attacks were widespread. Egged on by the former president, Trump supporters routinely threatened local officials and electoral workers in swing states with violence, as videos and other evidence presented at the hearing showed. Trump loyalists also attacked their targets’ reputations, with Trump himself indifferent to the fallout.
Some of the most jarring testimony came from Wandrea “Shaye” Moss, a former election worker in Georgia whom Trump supporters falsely accused of engaging in electoral fraud. She, her mother and her grandmother were all victimized. Moss, who is Black, said she received racist messages “wishing death upon me, telling me that you know, I’ll be in jail with my mother, and saying things like, ‘Be glad it’s 2020 and not 1920.’”
For his part, Giuliani publicly likened Moss and her mother to drug dealers and called on Georgia’s state legislators to have the Moss’s workplaces and homes searched. Moss said the various threats she received upended her entire life, and she continues to fear for her safety. “I don’t want anyone knowing my name,” she testified. “I don’t want to go anywhere. I second-guess everything that I do…. All because of lies.”
If the president of the United States sees fit to bring the weight of his office to bear on vulnerable individuals such as Moss and her mother, asked Representative Adam Schiff, “Who among us is safe?”
The Jan. 6 hearings have to ensure that partisan animus and violence don’t compromise personal safety and democracy ever again. It would be a travesty to squander the courage of anyone who put their well-being and livelihoods at stake protecting the right to vote.
As Representative Liz Cheney, a Republican, noted at the hearing: “Our institutions do not defend themselves. Individuals do that.” | 2022-06-22T13:13:22Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Trump’s Attempted Coup Failed, But at What Cost? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/trumps-attempted-coup-failed-but-at-what-cost/2022/06/22/a735e502-f223-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/trumps-attempted-coup-failed-but-at-what-cost/2022/06/22/a735e502-f223-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
For Nikhil Rao and Bottled Up, making music is finding relief
The D.C.-born band will perform at Comet Ping Pong on June 25
Frontman Nikhil Rao, center, and Bottled Up. (Richard Francisco Howard)
Bottled Up’s band name suggests keeping feelings and emotions inside, the chemical reactions of stress and anxiety building pressure until tops pop and glass shatters. It’s a relatable image these days, with each successive national nightmare contributing to our mental carbonation. For frontman Nikhil Rao, making music is how he finds relief.
“I can’t really put it into words how I feel about a lot of this stuff, and music is the only way I can express it,” he says. “These really complex personal experiences can only be expressed with music — synthesizers and drum machines and vocals, all together — that paints a very specific image of this subversive feeling that is hiding behind everything.”
That everything-all-together, all-at-once approach is in full effect on Bottled Up’s latest album, “Grand Bizarre.” The ready-for-the-floor art-pop adventure sees the D.C.-born band and its collaborators paint liberally with jangly guitar, traveling bass lines, drum machine patter, and synths that shimmer one moment and wallop the next.
Bottled Up began as a collaboration between Rao and multi-instrumentalist Colin Kelly. Rao had moved to D.C. from Los Angeles and ended up staying, thanks to his chemistry with Kelly and a music scene in which he felt welcome.
“As a person of color in the rock and indie scene, it was always really tough for me to feel like I had a space or platform to be on, but D.C. is such an awesome, diverse city,” Rao says. “Being around a lot of Black and brown musicians was really empowering.”
The band has gone through different incarnations in the years since. For “Grand Bizarre,” Bottled Up came up with a new way to write and record, at first to deal with a band member relocation and then as necessitated by the pandemic. Rao would demo every part — guitar, bass, keyboard, vocals and drums — before handing the song off to his bandmates to do with it what they would. Song foundations became clearer and more intentional, but that wasn’t the only benefit.
“When we would write together in practice, we would argue a lot,” he says with a laugh.
The recording process behind them, the members of Bottled Up have spent about a year rehearsing and figuring out how to bring this analog-meets-digital concoction of funk, punk, pop and dance music to life. They’ve landed on a six-person setup and a variety of equipment and synthesizers, including a pedal that transforms guitar samples into digital waveforms.
“It’s interesting because this is all stuff that hasn’t been done yet, so we’re trying to pioneer how it would be done in this kind of format, which is really exciting and, honestly, what lights a fire under my butt to keep going,” Rao says.
June 25 at 10 p.m. at Comet Ping Pong, 5037 Connecticut Ave. NW. cometpingpong.com. $15. Proof of vaccination required. | 2022-06-22T13:13:35Z | www.washingtonpost.com | For Nikhil Rao and Bottled Up, making music is finding relief - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/06/22/bottled-up-niko-rao-interview/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/music/2022/06/22/bottled-up-niko-rao-interview/ |
Disrupted by SpaceX, ULA was in ‘serious trouble.’ Now it’s on the road back.
CEO Tory Bruno vowed to transform the company; he’s developing a new rocket and has won a historic launch contract
United Launch Alliance CEO Tory Bruno at the company's Decatur, Ala., facility. (Cameron Carnes/For The Washington Post)
By 2014, United Launch Alliance wasn’t the rocket industry stalwart it had been since its founding almost a decade earlier, when it had a monopoly on lucrative Pentagon contracts to lift national security satellites into orbit.
Instead, the company was under intense pressure — Elon Musk and SpaceX were on the prowl, disrupting the industry and threatening to take a large chunk of ULA’s government business. Congress was moving to ban the Russian-made engine the company used in its workhorse rocket. ULA’s parent companies, Lockheed Martin and Boeing, were growing desperate, and there were fears that they might want to cut their losses and move on from the company.
So when Tory Bruno accepted the offer to lead the faltering company, which had recently ousted its CEO, he knew what he’d be getting into.
“It was clear they were in serious trouble,” Bruno said in a recent interview. “This is a company that wasn’t supposed to survive.”
Now, about eight years later, after enduring what Bruno called a quest “to completely transform the company”— laying off hundreds of workers, including 40 percent of executives, streamlining processes, shedding surplus real estate — the company, once in a downward spiral, is experiencing a remarkable transformation.
Although SpaceX took a large chunk of its business, ULA, which is based outside Denver, maintained enough to keep going, winning another round of launch contracts to hoist satellites for the Pentagon and intelligence agencies. It was able to persuade Congress to allow it to import enough of the Russian-made engines to keep launching.
After years of delays, it says it is close to flying a next-generation rocket with a new, American-made engine built by Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin (Bezos owns The Washington Post.) Perhaps most significantly, it recently signed a contract for 38 launches to help install Amazon’s Kuiper internet satellite constellation into orbit. That was on top of nine launches it had previously won and gives ULA a new line of commercial business that could sustain it for years as Bruno seeks to give ULA a solid footing for the future.
Still, there are significant challenges ahead. Its Vulcan rocket has yet to fly, delayed in part because its engine, to be delivered by Blue Origin, is years late. And SpaceX has been developing a fully reusable rocket, known as Starship, that many space analysts say is a transformative vehicle that could upend the industry once again.
“ULA still faces, and will continue to face, significant challenges,” Matthew Weinzierl and Brendan Rosseau, who teach a space economics course at Harvard Business School, wrote in an email to The Post. “Even with ULA’s heritage, certifying a new launch vehicle is no easy feat. It is still rocket science, after all. And even if the Vulcan’s early flights go well, ULA’s competition — many of whom are nimbler and more vertically integrated — will not be standing still.”
ULA was born in an unlikely marriage in 2006 when the Pentagon allowed Lockheed and Boeing to form a joint venture that gave the newly formed company, ULA, a monopoly on all military launch contracts. At the time, the Pentagon was focused on “assured access to space,” emphasizing reliable rockets that would fly successfully, over cost. ULA essentially operated as an arm of the Pentagon, while raking in billions of dollars.
SpaceX tried to prevent the union, filing a lawsuit attempting to block the creation of ULA by arguing that it “destroyed any pretense of competition.” Even though at the time SpaceX had yet to fly a single rocket to orbit, it charged that “SpaceX poses a significant threat to Boeing and Lockheed’s dominant position.”
That suit went nowhere. But a decade later, SpaceX was back in court, and this time it had not only flown its Falcon 9 rocket to orbit, but had contracts with NASA to fly cargo and supplies to the International Space Station. If its rockets were good enough for NASA, SpaceX argued, they should also be good enough to compete for the Pentagon launches that ULA had locked up.
Musk went on the offensive, relentlessly attacking ULA’s primary weakness — the fact that it relied on an engine manufactured in Russia. “Can you imagine if you went back 40 years ago and told people that in 2014 the United States would be at the mercy of Russia for access to low Earth orbit, let alone the moon or anything else, people would have thought you were insane,” he said at the time. “It’s just incredible that we’re in this position. Something needs to be done to get us out of this.”
And he found an ally in Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the late firebrand who at the time led the Armed Services Committee. McCain echoed Musk’s sentiment, arguing that national security launches should not rely on Russian technology.
Again, SpaceX filed suit, this time arguing that it should be allowed to compete against ULA for the Pentagon launch contracts.
“Our toughest competitor on the international launch market is the Russians, and the U.S. Air Force sends them hundreds of millions of dollars every year for Russian engines,” Musk said at the time. “It’s super messed up.”
This time, SpaceX won. The Pentagon settled the suit and SpaceX gained a foothold in the national security launch market.
ULA’s board fired then-CEO Michael Gass and hired Bruno, who at the time was overseeing Lockheed’s missile defense systems. Bruno now says he gave ULA a slim chance of surviving. “From a business school point of view, companies that have that profound a disruption in their environment generally go out of business. In fact, less than 5 percent of them survive,” Bruno said. “So I looked at it and I went, ‘Wow, this is really heading in a pretty negative direction.’ ”
Still, he saw an opportunity to improve a company that had enjoyed a monopoly for years and had gotten complacent. Not having to compete, it extracted enormous sums from the Pentagon, which didn’t flinch at the exorbitant prices as long as the company kept up its launch success.
Now it had to fight, and against the most innovative and disruptive forces ever to tear through the space business. SpaceX had won contracts to fly astronauts to the space station on its Falcon 9 rocket, was showing that you could reuse the boosters, instead of throwing them away as had been done for years and was developing a another, even larger rocket, known as the Falcon Heavy.
ULA had been the dominant player for so long but now, Bruno feared, SpaceX was in a position to take over, potentially leaving the Pentagon where it was before, with a single provider. Though he is well known and respected within the somewhat insular space community, Bruno has nothing near the celebrity cachet of Musk and Bezos. Still, he has enormous influence in a fast-growing industry and is regarded as an engineer’s engineer — thoughtful, calm and deliberative.
And colorful. On weekends, he rides his horse, posting pictures of himself on social media, in the saddle and wearing his cowboy hat.
Indigo’s getting in a nice weekend ride before #OFT2. pic.twitter.com/O3KR9GYFsv
— Tory Bruno (@torybruno) May 14, 2022
He moved to remake the company with the sole purpose of battling SpaceX. He laid off 30 percent of ULA’s staff, and took steps to unite what he said were two companies — one that worked on the company’s Atlas V, the other that worked on its Delta rockets — with “separate lines in the factory, and of course separate launchpads,” he said. “But also separate teams and separate management structure and to a large extent even separate accounts.”
It was a massive overhaul, and he had to do it while maintaining ULA’s successful launch record. “Don’t break mission success,” he said. “That was number one.”
He pitted suppliers against each other, making them compete, and then giving each much more volume — but only if they would cut their prices.
He also decided that the company couldn’t just sit back while Musk and SpaceX gobbled it up. “We had to take the fight to the competitors,” Bruno said. “You can’t ignore the other guy and let that company do whatever they want and have an open playing field.”
He also knew he had to get ULA off the Russian-made RD-180 engine.
There, too, he pitted a pair of companies against each other and made them compete for the work. One, Aerojet Rocketdyne, was the industry stalwart, an engine manufacturer with a long legacy in the space business. The other was Bezos’s Blue Origin, a relative newcomer but that had been working for years in secret on a new engine.
At the time, Bezos said that the company had already been working on the engine for some time and was well positioned to partner with ULA. It was a somewhat unusual marriage — Blue Origin, then a start-up that had been secretive about its ambitions, and ULA the big defense contractor that represented the military industrial complex. But they both wanted to see the engine, which Blue plans to use in its New Glenn rocket, come to fruition.
“I think the U.S. needs to have an American-made booster engine. And, finally, I think, for humanity, we need access to space,” Bezos said when he and Bruno announced the partnership in 2014. “This will move all of those things forward. And I feel great about it.”
Bezos and Bruno hit it off, two space geeks with a deep knowledge of rockets and how they work.
“I was surprised the first time I sat with him,” Bruno said of Bezos. “I don’t think I would hurt his feelings if I said that, but I was very surprised at how well versed he was in the technology … we kind of hit it off right away. We had that mutual passion for space and for rocketry. He’s the real deal. He’s not faking it.”
In 2018, Bruno selected Blue Origin over Aerojet Rocketdyne. But the deal has not worked out as well as he had hoped.
Making a new rocket engine is difficult, and Bruno budgeted extra time into the schedule. “I planned on the BE-4 being late because I knew it was ambitious for them,” Bruno told reporters in April. “I did not plan on them being this late.”
Not only would it have an American-made engine, but ULA plans to reuse them. Unlike SpaceX, which flies its rockets back to Earth so they can be reflown, ULA is still planning to drop the engines out of the rocket’s first stage and catch them, Bruno has said. Being able to reuse the engines would help drive down costs and compete with SpaceX.
So will the launch deal with Amazon announced earlier this year. Since its inception, ULA has relied mostly on the government for revenue, flying missions for the Pentagon or NASA.
But with more than 40 launches booked to fly Amazon’s Kuiper satellite constellation to orbit, the company’s flight rate is set to significantly increase. Typically, ULA flies about 10 missions a year. The Amazon deal would increase that flight rate to 20 to 25 flights, Bruno said, and allow the company to hire “several hundred” more employees. And the more often the rocket flies, the more efficient the company will become, he said, further reducing costs and allowing it to fight for more business.
“Vulcan is much less expensive” than the Atlas V that it currently flies, Bruno said. “As the flight rate goes up there’s economies of scale, so it gets cheaper over time. And of course, you’re introducing reusability so it’s cheaper. It’s just getting more and more competitive.”
That’s the theory, anyway. But with Starship, SpaceX could disrupt the market yet again, and continue to dominate the industry. Amazon has also hired Blue Origin and Arianespace, the French rocket company, to launch batches of its satellites. And the space industry has gone through enormous change since Bruno took over at ULA.
New commercial companies are looking to enter an increasingly crowded market. Rocket Lab, which has already flown a couple dozen missions, is using a helicopter to catch its small first stage. Its next-generation rocket, known as Neutron, would land vertically, as SpaceX’s Falcon 9 does. Relativity Space 3D prints its entire rocket and is hoping to launch for the first time this year.
While Bruno may have built ULA to battle SpaceX, Weinzierl and Rosseau, of Harvard’s Business School, said, it now “will need to find its place in a dynamic and increasingly crowded field.” | 2022-06-22T13:15:00Z | www.washingtonpost.com | ULA fights back from losing Pentagon launch monopoly to SpaceX - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/ula-boeing-lockheed-martin-tory-bruno/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/ula-boeing-lockheed-martin-tory-bruno/ |
Transcript: The Entrepreneurial Boom
MS. CORATTI: Hi, good afternoon, everyone. My name is Kris Coratti. I’m chief communications officer at The Washington Post and general manager of Washington Post Live. Welcome. I’m so thrilled to have you all here. It’s afternoon; I feel like maybe I’m getting you coffee or something.
MS. CORATTI: During the pandemic, millions of workers quit their jobs. This great resignation, as it's been called, has been a driving force behind a flurry of entrepreneurial activity. This surge in business creation represents a reversal after a 40-year decline in entrepreneurship in the United States.
This afternoon, we'll discuss what's behind this trend and how small businesses can drive the economy forward. In a few moments, my colleague Cat Zakrzewski will talk with the founders of QuickHire, sisters Deborah Gladney and Angela Muhwezi-Hall. They'll discuss what inspired them to start their company, what it was like raising funds for it, and the pandemic's impact on both.
David Ignatius will then sit down with chair and CEO of Revolution Steve Case to discuss how startups have spread out geographically and the evolving role of venture capital.
Later in the program, The Washington Post's Leigh Ann Caldwell will speak with a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisers Heather Boushey. They'll discuss how today's economic conditions impact small business growth, and what the administration is doing to sustain the momentum driving new startups.
Before we get started, I want to thank our sponsor YouTube and its vice president of Americas, Tara Levy, who will join creative entrepreneurs Mimi G and Randy Lau later in the program to discuss how content creators use technology to turn their passions into successful businesses.
So, I want to thank you again for joining us. I hope you will stick around afterwards. We are having a cocktail reception, and I would love to see all of you there. And now I would like to welcome Cat Zakrzewski with our first guest right after this short video. Thank you.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: Well, good afternoon, and welcome to The Washington Post. Thank you for joining us today for this event on entrepreneurship. I'm Cat Zakrzewski, a tech policy reporter here. And I'm joined by two wonderful guests today. This is Deborah Gladney and Angela Muhwezi-Hall, and they are the founders of QuickHire, a career platform for the service economy workforce. And they're also sisters. Deborah and Angela, welcome to The Washington Post.
MS. GLADNEY: Thank you.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Thank you. Great to be here. That video was epic.
MS. GLADNEY: Yeah.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Thank you.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: Well, thank you so much for joining us. And you know, I'm so excited to hear a little bit of your story. As someone with two sisters, I can't imagine ever starting a company with them. I hope they won’t be offended to hear that. So, I am excited to hear how this came together. And so, I mean, just to kick things off, you know, Deborah, can you tell us a little bit about how the QuickHire service works and matches workers with jobs?
MS. GLADNEY: Absolutely. Again, thanks so much for having us here today. It's an honor to be here. A little bit of how it works. So, it is a service economy platform. So, what that means is we help job seekers in the service economy, primarily retail, hospitality. We help them connect to jobs and we go beyond that. So, we help them progress in their careers.
So, both Angela and I were children of immigrants. Our parents, they raised us with service economy jobs. I spent a lot of time in retail. And looking back at my experience in retail, had I known that there were pathways to mobility, such as opportunity for becoming a district manager or what have you, I perhaps would have taken a different route. But it's about creating the visibility and showing people that there is a lot of opportunity with the skills that you're acquiring today. So, that's really what our platform is aiming to do.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And, Angela, I hear that you had the idea first for QuickHire a few years ago. Can you tell me a little bit about where the idea first came from?
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Yeah. So, I have a background in education and career advisement, and I was working in inner city high schools in Los Angeles. So, at the time, I had a specific situation that happened where a student came into my office. She was looking for a local retail grocery store opportunity, and she didn't have a computer of her own. So, she came and gave me all of these paper applications asking can she help, or can I help her. And then also, she wanted to borrow my computer. The school was severely underfunded at the time.
And there was so many lengthy, tedious applications that they sent her to. And so, it struck me in that moment that while it's been quite some time since myself, Deborah, our parents have worked in the service economy, the way to get jobs are the same--and not just finding that job opportunity, but also finding opportunities for progression. So, in the schools, if you are college bound, there were so many resources that were given to those students. But if you were going straight into the workforce, it was like good luck to you. And so, I told this to Deborah, and I was like this service of the--this area of the economy is severely underserviced, and so we have to do something. And so, that was probably about 2017. And I kept telling her, hey, this would be great and hey, we should do this. And you know, but it was 2020. She actually gave me a call at 4:00 am.
MS. GLADNEY: I told her not to tell this story.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Because she woke me up in the middle of the night at 4:00 a.m. saying that now's the time, that we had to help millions of people not just find opportunities, but also those that needed to reskill and pivot in their--in their career.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And so, you said that call came in 2020, which, of course, was when we saw the onset of the global pandemic, a time of immense economic uncertainty. I mean, how did you decide to take that risk and start a new business then?
MS. GLADNEY: So, when Angie first came up with the idea back in 2017, I always thought it was a really great idea. I knew that it was new. I knew that it was fresh. And just because, you know, we were the target market, I knew that it was going to be extremely helpful. However, we also knew that, you know, HR tech is a relatively noisy space, there are a lot of players, a lot of big players. And so, we knew that timing was going to be a big thing. And so, when the pandemic happened, we saw unprecedented shifts in the labor market, and so we knew that this was going to be the time to introduce a new way of looking at talent, literally, where we're looking at talent in the service industry as people and not bodies. And so, that's really what was the catalyst for it.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And what did that look like at that time when many people were working from home, but in the service industry, these essential workers were still going into their jobs in many instances? How did you think about that, and what did that process of setting the company look like in those early days of the pandemic?
MS. GLADNEY: Yeah, well, we found that during that time, a lot of people were reevaluating their careers and what was important to them. A lot of businesses, as we all felt, just had to stop. They had to close. And we spoke to so many of our early users who were like, I have worked as a line cook for 10 years, and I haven't gotten a raise--I’ve only gotten a quarter raise in that 10 years. So, a lot of people were like, you know, home/life balance, I decided to go home, and now I'm spending time with my children, something I haven't been able to do. And so, we noticed that we didn't just have to help them find work, but also help them have opportunities to upskill, to find new career, new segues, because a lot of people during that time were reevaluating what was important.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And I want to just take a moment to open up to our audience that we will be taking questions from you, too. So, if you want to tweet questions, please use the handle @PostLive, and we'll try to get them in the conversation.
And so, just going back to that shift, you know, then we saw what's been called the great resignation, as Kris just mentioned earlier. And so, can you tell us a little bit about how QuickHire has responded to that shift and what value you bring to companies during this moment?
MS. GLADNEY: You know, we always say that we've always known how important these jobs and workers were, but it took a global pandemic for everyone else to realize.
So, when we set out to build QuickHire, we had people first in mind. We had progression in mind. And so, when we saw the great resignation, it was just a perfect timing of opportunity for us because we had already started to build a platform where the job seeker was at the center of it. And so, it wasn't so much a response. I think it was just that's when we saw a lot of traction, because the rest of the world, employers were forced to change the way that they were looking at talent. Especially when they could not find people, it was about how can I find the right--the right talent, and also how can they keep them? So, we started to see unprecedented things like sign-on bonuses and health benefits--things that should have always been offered, but never really were. And so, we always say that some of these things, they were--they started to happen before the pandemic. So, service workers, they have faced decades of neglect and unfair pay and not having fair benefits, things like that. And so, you know, the pandemic was just kind of the final straw. And so QuickHire really saw an opportunity to really help put people at the center, where they should have always been.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And obviously from the company's name, QuickHire, you think about the hiring process. But, you know, you also are helping these companies with retaining employees at a time when turnover has been high. Can you tell me a little bit more about how you do that?
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Yeah. So, when someone comes to QuickHire, they tell us their goals. So, they say, today I'm a cashier, but tomorrow I want to be a manager. So, we really match them to employers that have opportunities for internal mobility. That's a huge thing that when you find talent, you want to keep them there. And so, we have those interactions to make sure that their employees are moving up. Hey, this person said that they have a desire to become a supervisor, I see you have an opening, send them that information, so that people are continuously moving up.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And you mentioned how this has been a problem that you've recognized for some time. I wanted to ask you a little bit about the fundraising process for the company. You know, obviously, QuickHire has raised more than 1.4 million. What was that process like from raising from venture capitalists? Did those, you know, in some cases billionaire or millionaire investors understand this industry and the problem?
MS. GLADNEY: I think that there were so many layers to our fundraising process. Obviously, there was the barrier of just preconceived notions when it comes to hiring platforms and thinking that it's just another hiring platform. So, we had that barrier in a way in really trying to show that we were different. But not only that, just fundraising in general, we had no knowledge, no connections whatsoever. And it was--but it's almost like we were treated as if we should know. And so, it was extremely challenging. You go on a lot of these VC websites. Some of them don't even have contact information. So, you can already tell that it was--some of it was insider, where you had to have existing connections. And so, for us, it was just like, you know what, we may not have these connections and we may not know, so what we're going to do is just keep building, and hopefully, you know, the doors will eventually open. And so, that's really what happened for us, is that we just--we're like, we're just going to build, and eventually there was a story about us. And that is how the first investor reached out to us. But it's really an area that is, I would say, inundated with a lot of barriers for entrepreneurs.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And you know, just to put this into context for our audience, Black female startup founders received just 0.34 percent of the total venture funding invested in the first half of 2021. Thinking about those barriers, what changes need to happen in the venture capital industry to improve diversity?
MS. GLADNEY: I think first of all, its visibility in a way. You know, even just how we're creating visibility for service workers for having opportunity, it's kind of the same thing where just making connecting to investors more accessible. You know, there's--when we first started, it was such a taboo of like the cold pitch email. It was like, you need to have a warm intro through somebody, but it's like, what if I don't have the existing connections? So, even just changing the way that we're thinking about, you know, introducing people to the venture capital world. So, I think that that's part of it.
Obviously, representation is a huge thing, which I think we're starting to see a good shift in as far as who the decision makers are. Who has a seat at the table when it comes to the investment decisions that firms are making is a huge, huge, huge difference. But yeah, I think even just you're starting to see things like office hours. And I think the more that we can do that, just having office hours where founders like myself who may not know the process can book time with investors and just ask questions in a judgment-free way is extremely important. But then at the end of the day, we got to write the checks.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Yeah.
MS. GLADNEY: You can mentor all day--all day long, and I think, honestly, a lot of minorities are over-mentored but underfunded.
MS. GLADNEY: At the end of the day, we have to write the checks. And even now, where you're--we're going into, you know, what people are worried about, a recession, you're starting to see a lot of the dollars peel back because we are deemed as risky investments. So again, I think it's one of those things where writing the check matters and seeing startups that are diverse and minority-led is actually a win. You know, don't you want to have a business that has--that's run by people that have diverse experiences, who can approach a business through different lenses and seeing that as a competitive advantage versus a risk?
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: That's a great point. I remember in the wake of the murder of George Floyd, there were entrepreneurs who said to me that they were seeing these VC firms coming out with big statements.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And they would say they've got to make the hire and send the wire and really follow through there.
MS. GLADNEY: Yes.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And it sounds, yeah, like you're making the same point.
MS. GLADNEY: Absolutely.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And I wanted to ask you, too, about just being located in Kansas. I mean, I know a lot of the VC funding is really concentrated on the coast, primarily in the Bay Area. How did that affect your process of getting off the ground and making these kinds of connections?
MS. GLADNEY: It made it even harder. So much harder, because even the investments that were happening in our area, a lot of people aren't used to doing tech investments. And so, there was a little bit of even teaching people about what we're doing and how they can invest in us and all of that. And for people to--you know, we're reaching out to people outside of Kansas to check us out. And they're like, oh, there's talent in Kansas, what's in Kansas? And I'm like, excuse me.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Yeah, like, they can't build a team in Kansas.
MS. GLADNEY: Like, yes, we can. So yeah. So, I think there was extra hurdles and extra barriers. But there are a lot of great funds that are specifically investing in areas that are underfunded. And so, we were able to tap into them because they were having those efforts.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Exactly, the Rise of the Rest. I know Steve Case is about to come up. But they're a great example of funds who are really leading the way and leading the charge, and also seeing the benefit and looking at overlooked geographic regions and seeing that there's a lot of opportunity.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And I've heard, you know, sometimes for founders there's that cliff after you raise the first seed round of VC funding. Are you thinking about raising a next round right now, and what does that process look like?
MS. GLADNEY: We're always raising. But yeah, it's obviously something that, you know, we're always thinking about. You know, we really just want QuickHire to continue to be around. And it's mainly because we just want to keep helping people. We receive so many stories every day from our job seekers about, you know, jobs that they've obtained that they've never had before, being able to have higher-wage pay, folks who have been out of the workforce for a long time. And for us, that's really our why, why we're doing what we're doing. And so, when we're thinking about fundraising and all these things, it's really because we want to continue to help people. We know we're helping people and we're connected to that, and that's really why the fundraising is important.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And I want to take a moment to take a question from our audience right now. We've got a Twitter question from Rahama Wright [phonetic]. And she asks, as a small business that struggles with finding talent, what advice do you have with not only hiring but retaining the right team members?
MS. GLADNEY: That is a really, really good question. And it's--and it's honestly something that we're continuing to work through.
I think connections is everything, like always networking, always looking for talent. Even if you're not hiring at the moment, just continuing to meet people as if you're going to be hiring, I think that's a huge thing, leveraging your network as much as possible. We've found that the folks who have stayed around the longest are people that we have met before, we have like some, you know, connections with or a shared passion with. And especially as a small business, you know, people--the people who stay around are the people who are really connected to your mission. And so, I think that that's the biggest thing, is to sell, like, why you're doing what you're doing. And you're seeing more of that people really appreciating the mission-based parts of companies. And so, I think that that is really just what you can lead with. But yeah, it's tough. It's really, really tough, trying to find and retain talent. But yeah, I think rallying people behind the mission helps a lot.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Right, right. And also making sure that people are fulfilled. That was a huge thing during the pandemic, is that people had a moment to pause and really focus on what makes them happy, truly.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: And so, that's a big thing for us when it comes to QuickHire, is that people can be connected to their goals; they can connect to other people that have similar goals as them as well; so, making sure that your employees are continually being fulfilled and advancing and meeting those goals that they set for themselves.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: And so unfortunately, I have time for just one last question. And I have to ask, I mean, how has your relationship evolved as sisters since starting this company?
MS. GLADNEY: I mean, I--we say all the time that this is our first company that we've built together, but we've been building all our lives. We built a singing group. We were in sorority together. Like, we've done all these things. We've always been extremely, extremely close. And honestly, we've been through way more than QuickHire, and so no business or anything could ever tear us apart.
But as far as like how things have evolved, it is the best thing to be on this fight, because it really is. The journey of an entrepreneur is a fight.
MS. GLADNEY: And so, to be in the fight with somebody that I know truly cares about me is like, honestly, our superpower. And she can tell immediately if I'm in a meeting and I'm--if I'm struggling, she knows when I'm, like, down or off, and she could just pick--step in. It's something that I am super grateful for.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Yeah. And it's also just an honor just to see someone grow in a way that you always knew was there. Like, there was a reason why I sat on this idea until I knew Deborah was in, because she is such a doer. And I--you know, people say, oh, we have the same hours in the day as Oprah and Obama and Beyonce, then like, I had the same hours of the day as this woman right here. I mean, even starting--initially, when we started QuickHire, she was--she just had a newborn baby, and she was going through our first PowerPoint, literally in the delivery room. And I'm like, it can wait. It can wait. I promise you. But being able to see her go into like the CEO, we didn't even know where to start when we first started. And she said, you know what, I'm just going to start reaching out to VCs. If they don't have an email, I'm going to find one. You know, having that tenacity. I've always seen that in her. So being able to see someone walk in that--walk in that passion, that purpose that you know they always had in them has just been an honor to witness. And so, it's been a fantastic opportunity for us.
MS. ZAKRZEWSKI: Well, that's so incredible. I'm so sorry that we're out of time. This has been a wonderful discussion. Thank you so much for joining us today here at Washington Post Live.
MS. MUHWEZI-HALL: Thank you. Thank you.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: All right. Good afternoon. Thank you all for being here. I’m Tara Walpert Levy, and I lead the Americas business for YouTube, and I am thrilled that we can be here together in person to talk about this entrepreneurial boom, right? It’s been a while. So, it still feels very special.
And I’m excited to talk in particular about an explosive segment of this entrepreneurial boom which we know something about, which is this new creator entrepreneur. And some of you have probably heard the terms thrown around “creator ecosystem,” “creator entrepreneur.” They’re not just buzz words, and they’re not just the big household names that have made millions of dollars from the creative economy, but there are over 2 million creators on YouTube alone who make money doing what they love and that [audio drop] who are basically offering tips to audiences that don’t typically see themselves in media and in advertising. So the range is wide. And the common denominator is that these are people who are able to turn their passions into small businesses, building their brands, and again, making money doing what they love.
And so we’re incredibly lucky to have with us today two fantastic creator entrepreneurs who are willing to share their stories and build a little bit of this story for you to bring the phenomenon to life. So we have Mimi, who is a leader in the do-it-yourself fashion segment based in Atlanta, and we also have Randy, who is based in San Francisco, who has been able to launch one of the best modern day cooking shows while also preserving a lot of his family heritage. I think it’s going to be fascinating to hear a little bit about how each of you started with something you just had a passion for and transformed it into a successful career for you and your families--just like so many others. So please join me in welcoming Mimi and Randi.
MS. G: Thank you. Thank you so much.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: So, I always like to start at the beginning. Mimi, do you want to start with what prompted you to pick up the camera? And did you have any idea where this was all going to go?
MS. G: I definitely did not have any idea where this was going to go. I--when I started blogging many years ago--I'm not going to age myself--blogging was still relatively new. Like, nobody really knew what it was or where it was going. And so I spent a lot of time just sort of blogging and doing pictorials and things of that nature. And I remember I had posted a skirt that I had made for myself. And people went crazy. They were like, I want to buy the skirt. And I was like, yeah, I don't sew for hire. Like, not my thing, don’t want to do it. But we were nearing the holidays, and I was a single mom with four kids. And I said, you know what, maybe I'll just take a couple of orders for this skirt and just see how it goes. So, I put a PayPal button on my blog post, I went to bed, I priced really high, like 275. I said, who's going to pay me $275 for a skirt. I went to bed, woke up the next morning, had thousands of dollars in my PayPal account.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Amazing.
MS. G: And I was like, well, who's going to sew the skirts? So, when I tell you everyone in my household was sewing, the kids were cutting, everybody was working. I got them done, I sent them off, and I said I never want to do that again.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Understandable.
MS. G: Very. But in that conversation with myself, I thought, what if I could just teach them to do it?
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Yeah.
MS. G: And so that's where the idea to create my very first sewing tutorial started.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: I love that so much, especially because it's what--it was the heart of your idea and your creative and your business but also like has given so many other people--right?--their own, like either creative outlet or business on their own.
MS. G: Absolutely.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Super cool.
Randy, what about you?
MR. LAU: So, we started during the pandemic. My--the impetus was my dad's an amazing chef. He has 50 years of experience cooking Chinese food. And I was just spoiled as a kid, like I have the most amazing memories eating his food. So, I've always wanted to document his recipes in some shape or form. And then, yeah, during the pandemic actually, it was a pretty scary time. You know, we--our business completely shut down. My wife was three months pregnant with our first kid. We were living off savings, unemployment. So, it was pretty terrifying. But I think in that uncertainty, it gave me a lot of space to think about what I wanted to do with my life and what kind of legacy I wanted to leave. So, the more and more I thought about it, the more excited I got about the idea of marrying the experience I had in digital marketing and video with something that I wanted to do for my whole life, which is celebrate my dad's legacy and preserve his recipes. So yeah, that's really how we got started.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: That’s amazing. And I'm going to stick with you and then go back to Mimi with really the same question, which is, as it's grown--I mean, you are rapidly approaching a million subscribers, like it's a real business now--has your mentality changed about it at all? Like, have the capabilities or people you need to surround yourself with changed?
MR. LAU: I think it--as we saw really rapid success, I think it just, I--from the beginning, I treated it like a full-time job. Like, I was 100 percent all in on this business, and I knew it was going to take like several years to monetize. But it just happened a lot quicker than I thought. So, it's like, well, we've reached that goal, like what's the next goal? So, I'm just, like, constantly running through the exercise.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Do you have help? I mean, where--
MR. LAU: Yes. So, okay, in the beginning for like the first--so we're only like--we're not even two years old yet. So, we launched on September 1st, 2020. For, like, almost a year I was doing basically everything by myself. I was like 60-hour weeks, like, editing, filming, promoting the videos, like writing our blog posts, translating. My--actually my cousin helped me translate.
And then as soon as I could hire help, I did. So now we have a team of 10.
MR. LAU: We have editors, we have writers, we have people who help us with brand partnerships, social media posting, like, all sorts of things. And I'm just really grateful now, like, I think that's--for me, that's a step in the right direction, because I have two kids. You know, I want to be present with them. I want to be--you know, have breakfast with them and not stress out, have weekends and not stress out. And I think--and also, it also allows me to scale the impact that we have, as well, with a team.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Well, and it's interesting that you went so quickly to it. You know, one of the biggest pieces of advice that we offer entrepreneurs on YouTube is to hire people sooner--for all the reasons that you said--right?--to prevent burnout, to spread the impact, all of those things. That's awesome.
Mimi, what about you?
MS. G: I think it's been a very different road. Like, you guys will hear a couple more times how I've been in this for a while, going on 10 years. And I'm like the old lady at the club. So, things were very different for me, right? It wasn't sort of the way that it is now. I didn't have all the tools and the resources and the platforms that are so readily available to us now. So, for me, it was a little harder in just that I had to figure it all out. It was completely new to me. Filming was new to me. Editing was new to me. Uploading, sharing my life, all of that, you know, stuff was really different. And so I've just been able to grow and sort of change with the times. I'm always having to stay ahead. You know, to be able to be here still after 10 years and still growing I think is a testament to, you know, all the hard work that goes into it, but also all the possibilities that, you know, I now have.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Absolutely. Well, because you've sort of multiplied your business in so many different ways. How do you think about the same question of people to support the business, the balance with control versus outsourcing? How do you think about the surrounding yourself with people who can help?
MS. G: You absolutely need to surround yourself with people. You know, I hit the jackpot. When my husband and I were dating, he wanted to learn to sew. And I was like, okay, that's cool, then he quickly started editing and photographing me, and then he became a sewing instructor. And I was like, this is great, and I don’t have to pay you.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: The Post, we’re talking about contributing to the economy, but okay.
MS. G: Right, exactly. I contribute in other ways, I suppose.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: You contributed in a lot of ways.
MS. G: And but it's hard, right? And so the faster that you can find people who are just as inspired as you are and just as excited about what it is that you're doing and want to help you take the help, like start figuring it out early. Now we have a really great team, people who support us, who are always coming up with really great ideas for the next thing, right? Because we're always thinking about what's the next thing. So, yeah, please start early. It's really important to have a good team behind you.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Well, all right, so both of you, in your own ways, have had either rapid or not as rapid but frankly pretty rapid, you had the overnight success with the skirts.
MS. G: Exactly.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: But you've both had a lot of success. And it's interesting because we can see the explosion in the creator economy on YouTube alone, right? I mean, there's something like 400,000 people whose full-time job is being a creator, and that doesn't include the multiplier effect of all the people you just described who's help you’re entailing, either in a paid or not paid environment. But I know the rest of them are paid.
But what I'm curious about--and actually, here's a fun fact, fun party fact that I never thought I would quote from TurboTax as a fun party fact. But I did happen to see something that said in the last couple of years TurboTax reported that the number of people who report their primary income as being a creator or an influencer or the like has more than tripled in the past couple of years, which is just amazing--right?--given the growth that we've continued to see and that we're building off a pretty large base. Do you see that? Like, do you have friends who are in the business? Like, do you see the growth of other creators on YouTube? And what, if any, patterns do you see as you--as you look around and see those businesses growing?
MR. LAU: I think, for me, it's been like--one of the blessings I didn't anticipate of having a channel like this is just getting to meet other creators. Like, I hundred percent would not be as successful as I am now had I not met other creators, because you just--it can be kind of a lonely journey, you know? So just having that emotional support of someone who really understands what you're going through has been really helpful, and like, getting to share strategies and tips has propelled--you just grow so much faster. And I think for the channels that I've seen like really take off exponentially, I think--for me, I think it's like, I see two--maybe just one thing. So I think they really have a unique value proposition to their channel. So that can--it's very subjective, but there's some spin on how they're sharing their stories that's fresh in the ecosystem of, like, all the content that's already out there.
MR. LAU: So for us, it's like I didn't see a--like my business, I was like I don't really see, like, an old Chinese dad sharing recipes in like an English-friendly way. So that was, like, the gap in the market that I saw. And like, for recipe instruction I saw like, a lot of videos are, like, really well done and educational, but I wanted to add a layer of, like, family wholesomeness to it.
MR. LAU: So, I think for us, that was, like, part of our unique value proposition, and I think that's what helped propel our growth so fast. But yeah, I think channels that have that have some sort of, like, uniqueness to them.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Yeah, that's cool. And it's interesting that you hone right in on sort of the unique creative value proposition, because some of the other things you mentioned in terms of support or loneliness, like you can see the explosion in the creative economy of service companies around people like you who want to help--right?--either in sort of infrastructure or payments or some of these other things. But the heart of the storytelling has to be there--right?--or none of the rest of that works.
What do you see, Mimi?
MS. G: You know, for me, I have a really interesting sort of view, because so many of the people who have followed me and follow my channel or members of Sew It! Academy have gone on to create their own businesses, right? And so for me to be able to mentor some of these students and then watch them go off and create their own businesses, their own channels, and really have a very specific point of view--and above everything else, I think there's a level of authenticity that is different now, where maybe a couple of years ago being an influencer just seemed like a cool thing to do. I don't think everybody really understood the amount of work that goes on behind the scenes to produce that amount of content and that quality in that amount of time. And I think there were a lot of people who said, oh, you know, that's my favorite fashion influencer, I'm going to just mimic what she does. And the problem with that is that at a certain point, you're going to realize what it takes for that fashion influencer to be where she is. And unless you know and are willing to do those things, you're going to get to a point where you're like, oh, well, maybe this is not what I want. Whereas if you start something and do it because you truly love it and you would do it no matter what, then when things get hard--because they will get hard--just like any other business--right?--you need to be able to really like and love what you're doing, and to really be committed to continuing even when it's hard or when people aren't liking and commenting or following, you know? So I think I've been able to see that sort of shift.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: I love that. That's an incredible pay it forward message.
All right. If we're going to leave this audience with one quick thing--because they're going to hear a lot of content between now and the end of the day--when they're at home telling whomever about what they heard today, what's the--what's the one thing that you want them to remember?
Randy, we'll start with you.
MR. LAU: I think, you know, storytelling has been around for thousands of years, and it's going to continue being around for thousands and thousands of years. So, I think, in this, like, current time, it's never been easier for people--like ordinary people like me to turn, like, something they're passionate about into this, you know, exploding business. And I think this democratization of access and storytelling is really beautiful. And I think I would just love to see more support around that ecosystem and more support for creators like me.
MS. WALPERT LEVY: Love that.
MS. G: You know, I was a teen runaway. I was a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual abuse. I was a teen mom. I was homeless three times in Los Angeles. And now I'm the founder and CEO of a multimillion-dollar brand. And YouTube helped me create that, right? YouTube helped me not just grow my following, but it helped me build those businesses. But on my channels, what I do every day is I work to inspire and encourage other people that look like me, that sound like me, to be able to start their own sustainable businesses. And that's why I think it's so important for people to, you know, encourage us and support our channels.
MS. G: Thank you. Because at the end of the day, really, you know, we're just helping each other create, you know, revenues for our family. And that's really important. So please like, comment, and subscribe.
MR. LAU: Let’s go!
MS. WALPERT LEVY: And support. I couldn't add to that. These are amazing stories. Thank you so much for sharing them. Thank you for everything that you do. It is the passion that you have for your job that enables me to have passion for my job, and I'm just so grateful that everyone here got to see a little bit of that today.
MS. G: Thank you so much for having us.
MR. LAU: Thank you for having us.
MR. IGNATIUS: Good afternoon, everybody. It's nice to see everyone live and in person. That's a wonderful change for us. I'm David Ignatius. I'm a columnist here at The Post. I'm delighted to be joined this afternoon by Steve Case, chairman and chief executive of Revolution, and of course, famous to all of us, especially in this area as the co-founder of AOL. Steve, welcome to The Washington Post.
MR. CASE: Thank you, David.
MR. IGNATIUS: So before we begin, I have a quick disclosure. Revolution, Steve's company, is an investor in QuickHire, which is the company founded by our first two panelists. Just want to note that.
So, Steve, I gather that you've been spending a lot of time recently traveling around the country by bus. And I want to--that’s not a very high-tech way to travel. I want to hear a little bit about what you're seeing, why you're doing this, what your takeaways are from your--from your travels.
MR. CASE: Well, it's great to be here at The Washington Post, particularly with David who--when AOL went public 30 years ago this year, David was the business editor of The Washington Post and Kara Swisher was the new reporter working for him covering us. And so we've had a long journey together, and it's great to be together for this discussion this afternoon.
So, to answer your question, we started these bus tours called The Rise of the Rest bus tours almost a decade ago, and it was built a little bit on the video you just saw--a belief that even though most of the venture capital was going to a few places--you know, 75 percent of venture capital going to three states, which is crazy, but true--that were--there are great entrepreneurs everywhere with great ideas everywhere. And so we should figure out some way to find them, some way to back them and champion them. And the process, we believe, creates some of the great American success stories of tomorrow some--that could be kind of the big, innovative, disruptive companies of tomorrow--but also in the process help lift up some cities and some regions that have been left behind and were starting to feel a little hopeless, a little angry about being left behind.
So, it was mostly an investment strategy to back great entrepreneurs everywhere, but also had this other kind of, we thought, impact in terms of how companies starting in these places could create jobs in these places that would offset, at least in part, the jobs that were going to get lost in those places. And that's happened. And we saw good momentum over the--over the ensuing years. We've now made over 200 investments in a hundred different cities alongside 400 regional venture capitalists. And when we first started, people thought it was a little bit of a crazy idea, much as when we first started AOL and were talking about the idea of the internet most people thought it was a crazy idea. People started, you know, kind of opening their eyes to it a few years ago. And then it really accelerated during the pandemic, that there definitely was this dynamic where some people suddenly said, well, maybe I should move someplace else, at least temporarily and for some cases permanently. And when they're in those places, they found interesting things going on in those places. And venture capitalists finally on the coast said, well, if I'm going to get a pitch from an entrepreneur by Zoom, what difference does it make if they're like next door or 2,000 miles away? So I think this pandemic, although obviously has been tragic and terrible in a number of respects, may be one of the positives silver linings is an acceleration of the Rise of the Rest, an acceleration of the dispersion of talent and the dispersion of capital that can really allow this next wave of innovation to be more inclusive of more people in more places than the last wave.
The last point I'll make, building on the QuickHire you just heard, this is two founders that have three strikes against them. They're in Wichita, Kansas, which is not viewed as a major tech hub--hard to raise capital in Wichita, Kansas. They're Black, and it's harder to raise capital if you're a Black entrepreneur. There's 14 percent of our population is Black; less than 1 percent of venture capital goes to Black founders. And they’re women. And similarly, even though 50 percent of our population is women, less than 10 percent of venture capital goes to female founders. So, three strikes against them. But they said, we're going to start this company anyway and we're going to scale this company anywhere--anyway. And that's just one of many examples that we're seeing all across the country that gives me great hope.
And a plug since you’re in the book business. I have a new book coming out in September, “Rise of the Rest: How Entrepreneurs in Surprising Places Are Building the New American Dream.” And the reason I wrote it--and it is available for pre-ordering--the reason--the reason I wrote it is because these stories had to be told. You know, they're these inspirational stories that give me, having traveled around, met a lot of the people in a lot of these--and seen a lot of these places, gives me hope for America that most people don't have. And so it's partly about these stories and these companies and these founders in these cities, but it’s hopefully also a vision of a more optimistic innovation economy, you know, 10-20 years from now, that maybe can, at least in a small way, help knit together a very divided country.
MR. IGNATIUS: Steve, well, what we authors usually say when we're talking about our books is it makes a great gift. So, I want to remind--
MR. CASE: Dave, I think, has written 11 or 12 books. So he’s a pro. I’m just going--had one. You know, I have a second coming. So I have much to learn from David on books.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, let's talk about this next wave of venture capital and the dispersion of tech centers around the country. As you've looked at tech centers in unusual places like Wichita--name your place--what are the ingredients that make for success? What does that business need to have in terms of community support, educational support, that will give it some momentum?
MR. CASE: Well, of course, David, that's all in the book.
MR. IGNATIUS: Well, so give us a little tease.
MR. CASE: In all seriousness, so first a little bit of history. The first wave of the internet, companies like America Online, but many others, actually was fairly geographically dispersed. We were in the Washington, D.C. area. Hayes, the big modem company, was in Atlanta, Georgia. IBM’s PC operations were in Boca Raton, Florida. CompuServe, one of the first online services, was in Columbus, Ohio. Sprint, the communications company, was in Kansas City. Microsoft actually started in Albuquerque before moving to Seattle. So, these are just some of examples--I could give you a dozen others--several dozen others--it was actually regionally dispersed when we were standing up the internet, building the onramps to connect people to the internet. That was companies from all around, you know, the country. It was just the second wave of the internet, when it shifted from building the internet to essentially building on top of the internet--software, apps on top of the internet, Google, Facebook, you name it. That's when Silicon Valley rose to prominence, arguably dominance, because it was about software and coding, and virality.
In the third wave, where it's sort of the internet meets the real world and it disrupts healthcare, education, food and agriculture--arguably the most important aspects of our lives and the biggest industries in the world--it's going to require a different mindset than just coding an app and dropping in the app store and hoping you strike gold and it spreads. It's going to require partnerships around those--because it's systems-level change in things like healthcare. It's going to require navigating some interesting policy aspects. And a lot of the expertise, the domain expertise in those sectors are in different parts of the country, many in the middle of the country.
Take healthcare, for example. MD Anderson in Texas, Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, Johns Hopkins in Maryland, Cleveland Clinic in Ohio. Those are some of the key partners you're going to need. So as a result, there's an opportunity for this to shift.
And what the communities need, boing back to your original question, is to be more fearless, recognize entrepreneurship is risky and to reward people taking kind of shots and not saying, well, that didn't work out so well and being sort of like, I don’t really--you know, I guess it's too bad for you, invest in those startups, particularly at the seed level, because, you know, people locally should be providing that that first capital. There’s a lot of money in a lot of cities that tends to invest in real estate or things and not invest in startups, figure out a way to tell their stories so more people can understand what's happening there, connect them to the universities, either in that city or nearby to get a pool of talent. There's a bunch of plays that the cities have--need to run. And we’ve seen more of that play out in the last, you know, decade. And a good example of this was the Amazon second headquarters process; 230 cities applied for it. It ended up being in this area, in Northern Virginia, not too far from where AOL was founded, that forced a lot of cities to tell their story about why they would be the best place to put that tech hub. And what they did is drive a collaborative effort around what the university is doing, what the mayor is doing, what the governor is doing, what the big companies are doing, what the small companies are doing, to really create a more kind of collaborative, you know, kind of a network, if you will, that made it, you know, possible to get the attention to Amazon, but also possible to start and scale, you know, startups there. So that's what we're seeing more and more of.
And the data--I got onto this journey over a decade ago when I was asked to--initially to co-chair something here in Washington called the National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship. It is restarting, and the first meeting is next month. I've been asked to co-chair it again, which I'm, you know, proud to do. That got us identifying some of the challenges around, you know, startups and venture capital. And then I was asked to chair a White House initiative called Startup America, and that led to, you know, working on President Obama's Jobs Council, which led to the Jobs Act, some legislation. And in the process of doing that--and again, I should have known this; I did not know this--that most jobs in this country are created by new companies, startups, not by small business, not by big business, by new business. Small business in aggregate accounts for a lot of jobs. It's very important. Big business, Fortune 500, accounts for a lot of jobs. It's very important. But the real leverage is new companies, number one.
Number two, most of the most successful new companies raise venture capital. Some are able to bootstrap, and that's terrific. But most end up raising venture capital. So, then you go back to the data I said before. If most new jobs are created from new companies, and most of the most successful new companies need venture capital really as sort of the fuel to drive their success, yet venture capital is limited to certain places and certain people, no wonder we have a problem where there's a divide and a feeling that some people are part of the future and benefiting from all the things that we celebrate, and many, many other people are left behind.
And just from a pure investment standpoint, like wasn't that a great investment opportunity? If there's nobody investing in a place like Wichita, or very few, then the valuation of that company would be lower if that's same company was in Silicon Valley when they're new and starting up. When they're successful and go public, nobody looks at the, you know, IPO doc and says, oh, this one's in Ohio or Pennsylvania, not California, we're going to have a regional discount, but there is a regional discount at the early stage of investment. So, it makes sense as an investment strategy. It makes sense as a way to have impact in terms of driving sustainable change in these communities, and more broadly trying to do that at more of a national level. Plus, it's just fun to back great entrepreneurs with great ideas who are trying to change the world, just doing it from places that most people don't pay attention to.
MR. IGNATIUS: Steve, let me ask you about one of the interesting puzzles here. It's often said that one reason that these cosmopolitan areas, Silicon Valley, the Boston corridor, Washington, that they're successful in drawing these tech companies is that they can draw a diverse workforce, that people want to come to those places, that they can draw immigrants who want to come work for those companies and would be more comfortable going to San Jose, let's say, than Wichita, which they don't know much about. So how do you counsel the people you talk to on that issue about being friendly to the workforce that's going to make them a dynamic company?
MR. CASE: Well, first of all, you should visit Wichita. I actually used to live in Wichita, right?
MR. IGNATIUS: I don't mean Wichita per se. I just mean in general.
MR. CASE: I understand. But actually, some of the communities around the country that are most welcoming immigrants are in the middle of country, in the heartland. There are many, many examples that. And it does tie in with his broader policy imperative to make sure--which is the core of your question--to make sure the United States remains a magnet for talent, because if we lose that, we will lose our lead and lose our edge and cease to be the most innovative entrepreneurial nation in the world. The data around immigrant founders is pretty compelling that they’re job makers, not job takers, even though the politics of immigration is super tricky.
You are correct in saying communities, in order to be successful, need to figure out a way to slow the brain drain of their people leaving and create a magnet, a boomerang, if you will, people returning and have new people moving there either from different parts of the country or different parts of the world. And there's a bunch of things you need to do to make that--you know, kind of to be that magnet. Some of that is creating the opportunity. Some of it's creating the amenities, if you will, the lifestyle benefits and educational benefits that would make it attractive. Some of it is being a welcoming community to different people from different places. And there are some communities that we've talked to, that we’ve visited that are concerned that some of the issues--you know, social issues that are becoming really more challenging, do make it somewhat more difficult for some of those communities that are on the rise to continue to rise. So, it is something to watch. But I think you'd be surprised, if you wanted to join us on one of our bus tours, that how many--how diverse the populations are. In fact, the populations in some cities that we've invested in like Baltimore, Atlanta, New Orleans, are far more diverse than the population in San Francisco or other cities that are viewed as more tech hubs. And as a result, not surprisingly, our data is about 45 percent of the investments we've made through our Rise of the Rest seed fund have been in founders of color or female founders, even though the data, as I mentioned before, it's still not what it should be, but it's way better than most. That's because these communities tend to be more diverse and entrepreneurs are emerging in those communities that are building some of the most exciting companies in the country.
MR. IGNATIUS: Good answer to my question. So, I want to ask you, in this next wave that you're trying to support with venture capital in different places, what clusters are you seeing in terms of new technologies, new applications. People sometimes talk about the Web 3 being built around blockchain technology that's going to be more secure. I'm sure you're seeing other trends, and I’d just be curious what some of them are, what you think the next big things will be.
MR. CASE: Well, I think--some of them have been covered. I think the next big thing is taking the most important aspects of our lives and making them better. Healthcare is, you know, one-sixth of the economy. As we learned in the pandemic, as a system, it doesn't work that well. So how do you create better access, more affordability, better health outcomes? That's going to require a lot of innovation, including from a lot of entrepreneurs partnering with a lot of existing kind of incumbent companies and/or hospitals to make that possible. We back the company in Chicago called Tempus that’s doing some really interesting things around the diagnosis of disease, initially focused on cancer so that--and the founder Eric Lefkofsky, a very successful entrepreneur, his wife was diagnosed with breast cancer I think about six years ago, he talked to different people, everybody gave him different opinions about what to do. His wife's life was, you know, kind of hanging in balance, and he was getting all these disparate views. So, he said this is a data problem and built a very significant company that's now scaled nicely and partnering with I think it's 70 percent of the National Cancer Institute hospitals so that the data they're able to pull together really make something possible in terms of a diagnosis being more thoughtful, and therefore the intervention being much more, you know, targeted. That's an example in the healthcare space.
And in the food and agriculture space, we invest in a company called AppHarvest in Eastern Kentucky. Eastern Kentucky, essentially, is coal country in Appalachia, which for decades people have said there's no hope. And growing up there, you were kind of told by your parents you must leave; there's no opportunity for you--for you here. This company now has 600 employees. They built the largest indoor controlled agriculture system in the country. And it's important that it's in Eastern Kentucky, because that's within a 24-hour drive of 70 percent of the U.S. population. And so that's an example of something in a place that most people had given up on, they were able to start building something that's quite significant. We're also seeing that in many other sectors of the economy.
So I think this this third wave and the Rise of the Rest will kind of converge, that because of the growing number of cities that are backing entrepreneurs, the growing number of entrepreneurs that are starting companies in different parts of the country, coupled with the challenges, the opportunities as entrepreneurs is shifting from that second wave software app-centric thing which was mostly about coding to much more systems integration that does require collaboration and partnerships and so forth, that lends itself to these different kinds of...
Last point on your specific Web 3 question. Of course, as you know, because you followed it, I was--I was like, pre-Web. It's not even Web 1. It's like Web 0 something.
MR. IGNATIUS: You’ve got mail.
MR. CASE: Because when we start--that was good. That was good. Welcome. So, when we started AOL in 1985 not too far from here, only 3 percent of people were online, and those 3 percent were online an average of one hour a week. So, we said we wanted to get America online. That was a big challenge. It was almost a decade from the time we started between the time world--the world wide web was popularized. So, in those early days, we had to kind of build our own things. Web 1 essentially took some of those technologies that we'd done in more kind of a private kind of way and offered them to everybody, so it's highly decentralized, which then led to Web 2, with companies like Facebook being more centralized. And then the hope for Web 3 is it will go back to being kind of more decentralized.
Now, I would note that some of these companies, including Facebook, including Twitter, many others, start by evangelizing decentralization and have open platforms, allow apps to run on it. But somehow when they get successful, they become a little less open, a little more, you know, central. So that will probably play out again and Web 3 will be kind of deja vu all over again, where a lot of innovative things will happen. Some will succeed, many will fail, and out of that will come this next generation, the next wave of the internet. My bet is while some of that for sure will be in Silicon Valley, much of it will be all across the country. And it ties in with what we've been talking about with Rise of the Rest.
MR. IGNATIUS: Great conversation, a powerful idea, the Rise of the Rest. I thank you for a wonderful explanation.
MR. CASE: I’m going to hold the book up right now.
MR. IGNATIUS: You are going to make it as an author.
MR. IGNATIUS: So, thank you. Thank you, Steve. Come back and see us. My colleague Leigh Ann Caldwell will be out here in a minute, just after a video we’re going to show you. Thank you, Steve, for joining us.
MR. CASE: Thank you all. Help the rest rise!
MS. CALDWELL: Hello. Welcome, everyone. My name is Leigh Ann Caldwell. I am an anchor here at Washington Post Live, also co-author of the Early 202 Washington Post newsletter, and I'm here with Heather Boushey, a member of the Economic Council of Advisers to President Joe Biden. Thanks so much for being here.
MS. BOUSHEY: My pleasure. Thank you.
MS. CALDWELL: And a reminder to our audience that we do want to hear from you. If you're watching in the audience or online, tweet at us @PostLive.
So, Heather.
MS. BOUSHEY: Yes.
MS. CALDWELL: The economy is obviously the top news in most people's lives. You outlined some good things that are happening in the economy. So, what are those little nuggets that the White House and the administration thinks is good right now?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, certainly. When the president took office, his number-one goal was to get the economy back on track. And you know, the first goal was to, you know, contain the pandemic, make it possible for people to get back to work, for businesses to get back to the job of doing their business. And we've been able to see significant job creation, and we've all seen the unemployment rate come down. The unemployment rate is still at 3.6 percent. Now forecasters, you know, earlier in 2021, in 2020, were predicting that it would take years for us to get below 4 percent unemployment. So that's a very significant and important accomplishment, because most of us get most of our income from having a job. And so making it possible for the unemployment rate to come back down, for people to go out there and get jobs, that is really core to family economic security and is a good important indicator of the strength of the economy.
At the same time, we've seen that because of the steps we took to make sure that families and businesses and communities had kind of the insurance that they need to get through the pandemic and other things, household balance sheets are strong. And that means that families have been able to weather numerous crises over the past year. We didn't know what the shape of the pandemic would be. But yet, we had delta, and then we had omicron, and then we have this unprovoked war that Putin has been waging in Ukraine, all of which have had shocks to the economy. And yet, we've been able to see growth continue. We've been able to see growth in jobs to continue. So those are some--those are some of the good, strong points of the economy.
MS. CALDWELL: Are some of those strong points, though, especially the low job numbers, is that also leading to one of the toughest parts of the economy, which is inflation?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, inflation is certainly the hardest thing facing the economy right now. And the president has been very clear that it is his number-one priority to do what he can to deal with inflation. But we have to remember that we have inflation today because we had a global pandemic, and that meant that businesses not just in the United States but around the world had to shut down. And because we live in an economy characterized by global supply chains, when a factory closes halfway across the world, it means that parts can't get to another factory, which can then not get to another factory, which means that you can't make a car in Tennessee, or wherever, here in the United States, and then that can't get to the--to be sold.
So, we--and we know also that inflation isn't just a problem here in the U.S. It's a problem that our economic competitors are facing. So, I say all that to say that, yes, our strong employment numbers mean that people have income, and so they're out there buying things and, you know, they're shifting their demand a little bit now from goods, you know, over to services. But fundamentally, this is a supply side shock, and it's being exacerbated by the situation in Ukraine, which has, of course, upended oil markets globally.
MS. CALDWELL: Over the past week, we have heard that a recession is not inevitable. So why is it not inevitable?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, because family balance sheets are strong, because we've been able to get the unemployment rate down, we're starting from a relatively strong position right now. So and we--because we've seen the economy able to weather some of these storms that have come over the past year, that gives us some confidence that should oil prices continue to be high, or maybe go up, which would be horrible, but, you know, we think that that there's enough wiggle room that businesses and families will be able to make it through because they have resources to fall back on. But certainly, I mean, I and the team that I work with get up each and every day worried about the economic numbers, worried about what they mean for American families and American businesses. And as an economist, it's--you know, it's part of the job description to worry about when the next recession will happen. But you know, right now, we remain optimistic that we will not have to see something that will lead to the kinds of scarring of American families that we really don't want to see.
MS. CALDWELL: You mentioned oil, cost of gas. The president is considering a federal gas tax holiday. This is something that Democrat’s House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is very conflicted on, thinks that the savings will not be passed on to the consumer. Are you confident? Well, is the president's going, first, to invoke this?
MS. BOUSHEY: So, the president, he has said that he is thinking about it and a decision will be made soon. I mean, let's be clear. He has taken a series of very significant steps to deal with the crisis at the pump around the country. And we've seen again--because of the crisis in Ukraine, we've seen that this has up-ended global oil markets. It's affected supply. It's also affected prices. And you know, the president has done a number of things. We’re releasing a million barrels of oil a day from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. He has worked closely with allies around the world for them to also release barrels from their reserves. He's made it possible for gas stations around the country to sell gasoline that has a little bit more ethanol in it. So, it's a little bit more cheaper at some stations around the country. So that helps. And you know, of course, he sent this letter to oil refiners saying, hey, you all are making a lot of profits right now, and yet there's a--there's a gap, an historically large gap between the price that you are paying for that oil and the price that you are charging, you know, after you've refined it. And so he has asked Secretary Granholm at the Department of Energy to meet with the oil refiners and to have a conversation about what they can do to get prices down.
So, these are all the things that he has done. And the gas tax is one of the ideas. I mean, there's only so much you can do when you have to buy a commodity that is priced on a global market, and that therein is the fundamental challenge, is that because we all use gas in our cars or in all sorts of things, in oil, we have to--we are victims of these global prices. And that's also why the president has been so focused on moving away from fossil fuels towards clean energy, where if we do it the right way, we can have more control over the supply of those--of that energy over time.
MS. CALDWELL: Are you confident that if this federal gas tax is implemented--it's about 18 cents per gallon--that those savings will be transferred to consumers?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, what we've seen is that in states that have done a gas tax holiday, by and large, those savings have been passed on to consumers. Now you're asking exactly the right question. It's one that certainly as an economist I'd be very concerned about. What's--you know, just because the tax goes down doesn't mean that the gas station needs to charge less. But one of the things about when you go and buy gas at the pump, it actually is the case that gas stations are--tend to be--they tend to price their gasoline competitively. So, if I'm a gas station and I don't have to pay that tax, and I lower my price, you're going to be under pressure to lower your prices as well. So, I think there is some hope that we will see that pass through. But that's certainly, you know, one of the issues.
The other issue, of course, is that because of the energy crisis, you know, we need to make sure that as we're thinking about these policies, we don't want them to further add to any of our challenges.
MS. CALDWELL: I cover Congress, and Republicans often say that the administration wants high gas prices, that they want this because they think it is an excuse to move to renewables, to a cleaner energy. What is your reaction to that? Do you think that the short-term pain will provide long-term gain?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, I think if there's--the president has been so clear that rising gas prices is a priority for him, that that should dissuade anybody from thinking that he likes it or thinks that it is a good thing. But none of that changes the fact that for our national economic security, for our national security, we have to be thinking about all the different ways that we can transition to clean energy. And the president has been very committed to that. You know, one of the most exciting things--and there's many exciting things about the bipartisan infrastructure law, but one of them that I've been very excited about is, you know, creating a network of electric vehicle charging stations around the country so that people can not only buy EVs but that they can go out and get them charged, you know, where they need to on highways or in communities around the country. So, he's taking those steps to make it possible for us to make that transition. But he's certainly not happy that gas prices are going up. And he said that--my gosh, if he said at once, he's probably said it a hundred times.
MS. CALDWELL: I want to switch gears a little bit, but something that the administration is considering. Should the--will the president further reduce or eliminate tariffs on Chinese goods?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, so here’s another one where, you know, the president has said that he is working on this issue. You know, we know that the prices that people pay in stores, if there's a tariff on that good, then the price might be a little bit higher. But here's another one where the exact same question that you just asked about gas also applies. Will the--if you eliminate the tariff, will that--the lack of that tax be passed on to consumers? And you know, I think with gas it's a--it's a little bit easier, because everybody go--buys gas at the gas station, and they have to compete with one another. Whereas with the tariffs, it may or may not be as easy for people to see, because I'm guessing most of us here in this audience don't know exactly what has a tariff on it and what doesn't, so how you know whether or not you're getting a good deal. But certainly, the president is considering anything that he can do to lower prices.
And since you mentioned Congress, I mean, he said time and time again, there are clear things that Congress could be doing that could lower prices for families in direct ways--lower the price of prescription drugs, lower the prices of things like childcare, lower the prices of buying electric vehicles, or heat pumps and these things to make that clean energy transition and help families especially in this time of need. So, the president is focused on all of the different options and where he can work with Congress to help families.
MS. CALDWELL: Given all of the things that we just laid out, we are here to talk about entrepreneurs and small businesses, the pandemic, there was a 40-year reversal in the creation of new businesses. So, does this economic environment enable that--the new businesses that are created--enable that to continue?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, that is certainly the hope. I think one of the most exciting sets of statistics from 2021 is that the number of new business startups is higher than ever recorded, 20 percent higher than any other year. And you know, that is a signal that because the economy got, you know, back on track, because America got moving again, and because entrepreneurs saw opportunity, they filed to start new businesses and went out and, you know, took advantage of the moment to do that. And you know, interest rates were low. Maybe it made that, you know, easier for different businesses to borrow. But, you know, so much of this wasn't an accident, right? We worked really hard, the president worked very hard to make sure that we were putting the economy back on track to create that economic opportunity. And the president really did focus, was one of his first priorities when he got into office, was to support those small businesses struggling through the pandemic. You know, in the prior year, in 2020, Congress had allocated all of this money to small businesses through the Payroll Protection Program. And yet, so much of that money went to the biggest small businesses, didn't really reach the folks that needed it most. And you know, one of the first things he did, February 24th, for two weeks in 2021, the people that could apply for that program had to have fewer than 20 employees. They took another--a number of other steps to make it easier for the smallest businesses--businesses, you know, run by women, by people of color, in disadvantaged communities, rural communities, to make it easier for them to apply. So that provided, I think, a strong foundation for those small businesses now. I think that's part of what we saw in those statistics last year.
But moving forward--right?--so okay, maybe, you know, things are a little bit more challenging now, but--or maybe they will be in the future--but the president has taken a series of steps that are also going to continue to support small businesses. So, for example, the bipartisan infrastructure law, one of things we're doing right now is making sure that every American all across the country has access to broadband. This is an important service. If you run a small business, or if you have a small business where people are telecommuting, or you need to, you know, contact your suppliers, you need access to the internet, super important. There's a whole bunch of other aspects of the bipartisan infrastructure law that are going to support and provide a really welcoming climate for small businesses to be successful. So that gives me a lot of hope.
MS. CALDWELL: So, some small businesses, large and small, talk about red tape and the bureaucratic challenges of opening a business, expanding your business, doing business. So, you know, as part of this small business creation process that you'd like to get streamlined, is there anything that you can streamline, I should say, from a regulatory perspective?
MS. BOUSHEY: So, the president has laid out four goals, essentially, for small businesses. One is to increase their access to credit, which as interest rates rise will be increasingly important. Second, is a real whole of government effort to help small businesses navigate the bureaucracy to get what they need. And you saw a lot of success--I mean, I’m just going to keep pointing back to the Payroll Protection Program--primarily because we have research evidence that the steps that the administration took early in 2021 to expand access were effective. And there's been a GAO study and some academic studies that have shown that more small businesses, more businesses run by people of color were able to access it once the administration took these steps to make it more available, to make it more transparent. So that's the second prong, is to help people navigate. So, there's different programs that the Small Business Association is running, and Treasury, to help that navigation.
The--another core piece is to make sure that businesses--small businesses are--that we have a tax system that is fair for them, that rewards work and not wealth and that really does make sure that the tax burden is being borne by the businesses that can most afford it. And then finally--and the president is really focused on making sure that as we spend federal dollars--through procurement, through the bipartisan infrastructure and the like--that those benefits, where appropriate, go to small businesses. So, I actually ran into my colleague this morning in the stairs who's running this program. But, you know, thinking about how with procurement you can make sure that those small businesses know how they can supply the federal government, how they can get a contract, how they can sell to the federal government. And there's a series of steps that the administration is taking to ramp that up and to make sure that the smallest businesses, the most disadvantaged businesses do have that access. So, it's a--it's such the bread and butter of what government does.
MS. CALDWELL: The first thing you said, though, was making sure they have access to credit. As you mentioned, interest rates are rising. So how do you ensure they're still able to not only have access but also afford the credit that they do receive?
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, there's a series of programs that small businesses can apply for to get access to credit, to loans, to startup funds. And you know, there's things like the small business--the small--all of these acronyms--the Small Business Initiative Program that is making capital available to states and tribal entities and communities in around the country that's helping to create this--that economic opportunity through loans and other devices for small businesses around the country. So, there's a series of government programs that can help. You know, certainly the historically low interest rates that we've had for a while, you know, created that opportunity, and it will remain to be seen as interest rates rise up, you know, whether or not that does create problems for small businesses.
MS. CALDWELL: I want to ask about immigration. You know, unemployment is very low. But what role does immigration now, and also perhaps down the road, given the economic indicators that you see--how important is that going to play for these small businesses and these new businesses?
MS. BOUSHEY: You mean in terms of accessing workers?
MS. CALDWELL: Workers.
MS. BOUSHEY: Well, so one of the things that we've seen through the pandemic is that in the early part of the recovery from the pandemic, the return to work was somewhat slow. And so a lot of folks were sort of thinking about, well, you know, we have a lower rate of immigration, those workers are not here as they would have been in previous times, certainly that can provide that added labor supply. We've also seen in recent months especially the people coming back into the labor force, we've seen older folks who tend to cycle in and out of retirement coming back in more similar to traditional patterns. So, you do continue to see across the economy supply there--of course, there are some sectors where they are pinched. But, you know, immigration remains certainly an issue that the president is eager to work with Congress on. It was something that he talked about on day one. But, you know, it remains a challenging issue.
MS. CALDWELL: We don't have a lot of time left. But I do want to ask you, if you were someone who was going--had an idea for a small business, is now the time to do it?
MS. BOUSHEY: Oh, well, that's a great question. It all depends on what your business is, what your idea is. But certainly, it's an exciting time for a whole host of industries. You know, we've already talked a little bit about energy, clean energy. It's a very exciting time for innovation there. There's a lot of support and opportunity. It's also been a moment where we've seen a revitalization of small manufacturers as businesses are thinking about their supply chains. We've seen a lot of startups there. So that is certainly an area where there's opportunity. It's such a personal decision, what to do. But if folks have a good idea, then I think certainly this is a good--this is a good time to take advantage of it.
MS. CALDWELL: Great. Heather, thank you so much for your time today. Really appreciate it. Heather Boushey, with the president's Economic Council of Advisers.
MS. CALDWELL: And thank you all for joining us in the audience and online, and you can go to a Washington Post Live to get transcripts of this, watch this all again. And thank you. | 2022-06-22T13:15:07Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Transcript: The Entrepreneurial Boom - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2022/06/22/transcript-entrepreneurial-boom/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/washington-post-live/2022/06/22/transcript-entrepreneurial-boom/ |
Smithsonian picks four potential spots for women’s and Latino museums
The historic Arts and Industries Building and three undeveloped plots on the Mall are in contention, and two will be selected by the end of the year
The Smithsonian Arts and Industries Building is one of the potential locations for the new Latino museum or women’s history museum. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)
The Smithsonian has narrowed its search for the sites of the planned National Museum of the American Latino and Smithsonian American Women’s History Museum to four spots on the National Mall.
The historical Arts and Industries Building, on Jefferson Drive SW next to the Smithsonian administration building known as the Castle, is the sole site with a structure and the only one under the control of the Smithsonian.
The three other options are undeveloped land: the Northwest Capitol site, located on the eastern side of the Mall north of the Capitol Reflecting Pool; the South Monument site, on Jefferson Drive SW, across the Mall from the National Museum of African American History and Culture; and the Tidal Basin site, home to a rugby field and bordered by Raoul Wallenberg Place SW and Maine Avenue SW.
The U.S. Capitol has jurisdiction over the Northwest Capitol site, and the others are controlled by the National Park Service. The Arts and Industries Building was considered for the African American Museum.
Their proximity to the Mall led to their selection, Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III said.
“Thinking about the African American Museum, I understood the power of having sites on or near the Mall,” said Bunch, the museum’s founding director. “It wasn’t my endgame. The process led us to this moment, but I understand the power of that symbolism.”
In December 2020, Congress authorized the Smithsonian to create the two museums, and it set a two-year deadline for the selection of their locations. The institution hired the Baltimore design firm Ayers Saint Gross to analyze the sites based on six criteria: the symbolism of the location, existing site conditions, access to transportation, environmental factors, cost and the challenges of acquiring the site. The firm began with more than two dozen possibilities; the Smithsonian revealed at a public hearing in March that it had narrowed the options to 14.
Congress authorizes Smithsonian museums focused on American Latinos and women’s history
Officials will continue to evaluate the four finalists while consulting with members of Congress, the National Capital Planning Commission, the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the Architect of the Capitol, as required by the authorizing legislation. The Smithsonian Board of Regents is expected to meet Congress’s deadline by choosing two sites before the end of the year.
“There’s no perfect site,” Bunch said, noting that the ongoing analysis will reveal the trade-offs that each site presents. Officials will have to weigh each site’s size and design challenges and the obstacles to acquiring the land. The Arts and Industries Building will need to be studied for how it can be reimagined as a 21st-century museum, he said.
Latino Museum backers are pushing for a prime spot on the National Mall
Advocates for the museums have pushed for them to be built on the Mall, considered by many to be the nation’s front lawn. The two newest Smithsonians, the African American Museum, which opened in 2016, and the National Museum of the American Indian, which opened in 2004, sit on opposite ends of this symbolic space.
Finding a place for each new museum is more difficult now because the open space on or near the Mall is limited, Bunch said, and finding two at the same time is even more challenging.
“It’s kind of like having kids. You have two kids, it’s not just twice the work,” Bunch said. “You want to make sure each museum feels they have been given the respect, the attention, the visibility they deserve.”
The announcement from the Board of Regents comes days after the opening of the Molina Family Latino Gallery in the National Museum of American History. As the precursor to the Latino Museum, the gallery will host exhibits and programs until the museum opens.
The Smithsonian has assembled advisory boards for both museums. Jorge Zamanillo was hired as the founding director of the Latino Museum earlier this year. Officials are interviewing candidates for director of the women’s history museum.
Zamanillo said he was excited about all of the options.
“Whichever is selected, I am sure we’ll build a significant, amazing museum,” he said. “But what I’m more impressed with is how thorough and transparent the process was. We briefed everyone, met with people in the community, with national and local leaders from Latino organizations. To me, that’s the best thing that has come out of this.” | 2022-06-22T13:51:56Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Smithsonian picks four potential spots for women’s and Latino museums - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/22/latino-museum-womens-history-locations/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2022/06/22/latino-museum-womens-history-locations/ |
LeBron James and Naomi Osaka team up to launch media company
Naomi Osaka and LeBron James. (Kelly Defina; Kevin Winter/Getty Images)
Japanese tennis champion Naomi Osaka and American basketball superstar LeBron James are joining forces to launch a media production company that aims to give a bigger platform to “culturally specific” stories on “important social issues.”
Osaka, 24, said the new venture will be called Hana Kuma, which translates as “flower bear” from Japanese. Osaka was born in Japan to a Haitian father and Japanese mother and moved to the United States at age 3. She is now based in Los Angeles.
“I’ve built my career taking a different approach than those around me,” Osaka said in a post on her Instagram account. “Because my journey has been so different it’s opened my eyes to all the incredible stories out there. Stories that are global, about a variety of cultures and points of view, about important social issues,” she added.
The four-time Grand Slam champion has spoken often about her identity, mental health and pressures on athletes. The new company will make “stories that are bold and playful like me,” she said.
James, 37, a four-time NBA champion, said he was “incredibly proud” to work alongside Osaka on the new venture as part of his SpringHill Co., created with Maverick Carter.
“This incredible woman and the stories she is going to bring to life is EXACTLY what we about!!!” he tweeted.
The production company will feature television shows, documentaries and anime programs, Osaka told the New York Times, which first reported the story. She added that she could not yet say whether she would star in anything herself.
The company is part of a growing portfolio for Osaka, an off-court entrepreneur and one of the highest-paid female athletes in the world. She boasts skin care and fashion lines, and she runs a sports agency, Evolve, with agent Stuart Duguid. The agency signed fiery Australian tennis player Nick Kyrgios earlier this month.
Osaka withdrew from playing at Britain’s Wimbledon tournament earlier this month, citing a left Achilles’ tendon injury. She played through the injury with tape on her foot at the French Open in May but fell to American Amanda Anisimova, 7-5, 6-4, in the first round.
Osaka, formerly the world’s top player, is ranked 42nd by the Women’s Tennis Association after missing a significant amount of competition over the past few years. | 2022-06-22T14:18:04Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Naomi Osaka and LeBron James launch media production company Hana Kuma - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/06/22/naomi-osaka-lebron-james-media-company/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/06/22/naomi-osaka-lebron-james-media-company/ |
Zeynep Karatas
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, right, welcomes Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in Ankara on June 22. (Ozan Kose/AFP/Getty Images)
ISTANBUL — Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia traveled to Turkey on Wednesday, in his first visit since Saudi agents killed and dismembered journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in 2018.
The killing of Khashoggi, a contributor to The Washington Post who had written columns criticizing Mohammed, opened what seemed to be an untreatable rift between Turkey and Saudi Arabia. After the murder, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused the “highest levels” of the Saudi government of responsibility.
Turkey’s government mounted a global campaign to shame the kingdom’s leadership, a campaign that helped transform Mohammed, Saudi Arabia’s day-to-day leader, into a pariah, isolated and largely confined to the kingdom or travel to friendly, autocratic states.
Turkish court transfers Khashoggi murder case to Saudi Arabia
But Erdogan, who called Khashoggi a friend, reversed course over the last year, in an effort to lure investment from oil-rich Saudi Arabia during a worsening economic crisis in Turkey that has been marked by skyrocketing inflation. In early April, in a concession to the kingdom, Turkey announced that it was ending its prosecution of Khashoggi’s killers, who were being tried in absentia.
Later that month, Erdogan visited Saudi Arabia, declaring a “new era of our relations.” As the crown prince arrived at Turkey’s presidential palace in Ankara, the capital, Wednesday, everything appeared forgiven: Erdogan, standing on a blue carpet with a broad smile, greeted Mohammed with kisses on both cheeks.
Turkey’s reversal has prompted criticism by some of Erdogan’s domestic political opponents and derision from human rights activists, who said it was a particularly stark example of national interests trumping other concerns. For Mohammed, the trip to Turkey was part of a regional tour that seemed aimed at repairing his image, with stops in Jordan and Egypt.
Next month, President Biden is expected to visit Saudi Arabia and meet with the crown prince — abandoning a campaign pledge to make the kingdom a “pariah” over the killing of Khashoggi and other human rights abuses.
Turkish media said that Erdogan and Mohammed would discuss cooperation in trade, tourism, health care and security matters. An unnamed Turkish official, quoted by Reuters, said the two countries had also agreed to end mutual negative media coverage.
Increased cooperation with Saudi Arabia could be a boon to Erdogan, who is facing a tough reelection next year, principally because of his government’s economic policies, which have led to surging inflation and the steady depreciation of the local currency.
But data published Wednesday by MetroPoll, a Turkish polling firm, suggested that there was no great clamor among the Turkish public for restored relations with Saudi Arabia, with less than 30 percent of respondents saying they viewed “getting closer” with the kingdom positively. More than 50 percent said they opposed it.
Turkish police raid villa outside Istanbul in search for Khashoggi’s body
It was not clear whether Erdogan’s government had asked Saudi Arabia for any information regarding Khashoggi’s killing in return for normal relations — including the location of his remains, which have never been found. Saudi Arabia has blamed the journalist’s killing on rogue agents. The crown prince had denied he ordered the murder.
“He is unfairly killed, he is someone even without a grave,” Khashoggi’s fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, wrote on Twitter Wednesday. Referring to Mohammed, she added that “the political legitimacy he earns through the visits he makes to a different country every day doesn’t change the fact that he is a murderer.” | 2022-06-22T15:36:32Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Erdogan and Prince Mohammed meet in Turkey, ending rift - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/22/turkey-saudi-mbs-khashoggi/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/22/turkey-saudi-mbs-khashoggi/ |
Alcides Escobar was added to the active roster on Tuesday night. (Jonathan Newton/The Washington Post)
When Luis García was called up on June 1, Washington Nationals Manager Dave Martinez made it clear that García wasn’t a temporary addition — he was on the major league roster to be the club’s everyday shortstop.
That meant that even when Alcides Escobar — the man who García replaced — returned after a short rehab stint, Escobar would be relegated to a bench role. Escobar was added to the active roster before Washington’s 3-0 win over the Baltimore Orioles on Tuesday night, and he watched from the dugout as García took the field with the rest of the starters in the bottom of the first.
“I know Luis is a young player and obviously he needs that experience,” Escobar said through an interpreter. “I’m here to help him, as well as any other player on the field, with my experience. Any way I can help them, that’s what I’m here to do.”
The Nationals traded for Escobar, 35, a year ago, when the club was in dire need of middle infield help after Trea Turner and Jordy Mercer were injured in the same game. Washington’s minor league options, including García and Carter Kieboom, were injured. Escobar served as the team’s starting shortstop for most of Washington’s games at the end of the 2021 season, after playing some second base before Turner was moved at the trade deadline.
In his limited time with Washington a year ago, Escobar finished with a .288 batting average, .340 on-base percentage and .404 slugging percentage in 349 plate appearances. But this season, Escobar started slow early — his batting average was .185 by the end of April and many wondered whether García would be promoted to the majors to fill his spot for good.
Escobar improved his batting average in May, but when he went down with a strained right hamstring, the writing was on the wall.
In Tuesday’s game, García went 0-for-4, but that’s been an anomaly for him this month. García leads the team in hits (27) since his season debut in June. In 20 games this season, he’s had a hit in 15 of them, including nine multi-hit games.
Martinez said Tuesday that he has already spoken with Escobar about his role with the Nationals going forward — as a utility player off the bench. The decision, he said, was based on what’s best for the organization, given where the team is at and its desire to develop young players. Escobar understood, saying that’s part of the development process.
“Year in and year out, [García is] going to learn and grow every year a little bit,” Escobar said. “We all go through that process. It’s just a matter of being out there playing every year … we know his ability, he’s got great ability.”
García isn’t always consistent. He occasionally changes his swing and his defense remains a work in progress. He has five errors so far this season, but has been working with the coaching staff on his footwork.
“Obviously, in the moment, you get upset and frustrated because you make the error,” García said earlier this month. “But it’s just something that’s part of the game. It’s something you pick up and learn from and then keep working at it and just keep getting better and better every day.”
As a young player, Escobar grew up learning from Felipe López, a former National, and Craig Counsell, who is now the manager of the Milwaukee Brewers. He now can be that veteran for young infielders on the roster like García.
Escobar has played 1,482 of his 1,543 games at shortstop in his major league career. He’s only played a position other than shortstop in three seasons — in 2010 with the Milwaukee Brewers, in 2018 with the Kansas City Royals and last year, when he played second with Turner at shortstop.
Wherever Martinez puts him, Escobar will likely help veteran players on Washington’s roster who have earned days off, such as Maikel Franco or César Hernández.
“It’s different, but I’ve done it before,” Escobar said about possibly playing other positions. “I know I can play every position. So I’m going to embrace that role.” | 2022-06-22T16:11:16Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Nationals' Alcides Escobar set to mentor Luis García - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/22/alcides-escobar-luis-garcia-nationals/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/22/alcides-escobar-luis-garcia-nationals/ |
Members of the U-Conn. women's rowing team rallied about being cut by the university after the season in 2021. While Title IX has improved participation in women's sports, women still have fewer opportunities to play college sports. (Brad Horrigan/AP)
As the nation marks the 50th anniversary of the passage of Title IX, two-thirds of Americans say they know “not much” or “nothing at all” about the federal law that bans discrimination on the basis of sex at schools that receive federal funds, according to a Washington Post-University of Maryland poll.
Nonetheless, there is broad support for its mandate as it relates to gender equity in sports, with 85 percent saying they believe colleges and universities should be required to award the same number of athletic scholarships for women as they do men, according to the poll, which was conducted May 4 through May 17 among 1,503 people across the United States.
More than half of Americans (55 percent) “strongly” support such a policy. Title IX does not require colleges and universities to provide an equal number of athletic scholarships to men and women, but mandates that financial assistance be proportional to their participation in intercollegiate athletics.
About two-thirds of women (66 percent) “strongly” support requiring colleges and universities to provide an equal number of athletic scholarships for women and men, compared with less than half (44 percent) of men.
Elysia Mitchell, 29, of Santa Barbara, Calif., is among the women who strongly support requiring equal sports scholarships for female athletes.
“If it’s not required, I think a lot of people just do what they think is best,” Mitchell said. “As history has shown, that has usually cut a lot of women out of opportunities.”
Support also differs along party lines. More Democrats (92 percent) than Republicans (79 percent) support requiring colleges to provide an equal number of athletic scholarships to men and women, though the partisan divide is much smaller than on many political issues.
The poll was conducted as the nation marks the 50th anniversary of Title IX, which was enacted by Congress and signed into law by President Richard M. Nixon on June 23, 1972.
The law has undergone five decades of evolution since, as the courts, Congress and presidential administrations have periodically clarified its meaning and broadened and, at times, constrained its scope.
While it has significantly expanded the participation of girls and women in sports, Title IX has not been fully realized nor uniformly enforced.
Fewer than 300,000 girls played high school sports in 1971-72, before Title IX was enacted, according to a report from the National Federation of State High School Associations. That number increased more than tenfold in 2018-19, to 3.4 million. Yet surveys from 2010 to 2015 find that among 12th-graders, the percentage of girls who participate in high school sports (60 percent) still lags that of boys (75 percent), according to a report from the Women’s Sports Foundation.
Women’s participation in college sports has also soared since Title IX. Today, women account for 44 percent of NCAA athletes, compared to 15 percent pre-Title IX, according to the WSF report. Yet women are still underrepresented among college athletes as they made up 58 percent of undergraduate students in 2020, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.
The Post-UMD poll finds that more than half of Americans (54 percent) feel colleges and universities have “not gone far enough” to give female college athletes equal opportunities as male college athletes. Another 37 percent say it’s been “about right,” while fewer than 1 in 10 (8 percent) say colleges and universities have “gone too far.”
Just over three-fourths (76 percent) of Black people say colleges have not gone far enough, compared with 54 percent of Hispanic people and 51 percent of White people.
About two-thirds (65 percent) of Democrats say colleges have not gone far enough to give female athletes equal opportunities compared with 39 percent of Republicans.
One-third of Americans (33 percent) say they know “a lot” or “some” about Title IX, while two-thirds (67 percent) say they know “not much” or “nothing at all.” These findings about Americans’ lack of awareness of Title IX are barely changed from a 2011 CBS News/New York Times poll.
Among those identifying themselves as “avid sports fans,” a slim 52 percent majority say they knew at least something about Title IX. Men are more likely to say they know at least something about Title IX than women (38 percent to 27 percent).
Awareness of Title IX peaks among current or former college athletes (55 percent), people with higher incomes (53 percent of those with incomes of $100,000 or more) and those with four-year college degrees (50 percent).
As for the understanding of the law, a 57 percent majority of those who said they knew at least something about Title IX correctly said it applies to discrimination based on gender. Just over one-third (36 percent) incorrectly said it applies to both gender and race discrimination, while just 3 percent incorrectly said it applied to discrimination based on race.
Christopher Torson, 39, a former high school football player who describes himself as an avid sports fan, said he has heard of Title IX over the years but doesn’t have a clear sense of its meaning.
But as a matter of fundamental fairness, he said he believes colleges should offer women the same scholarship opportunities to compete in sports as men.
“As far as I’m concerned, women can play sports just as well as men,” Torson said. “Why shouldn’t they have that opportunity?”
One third of Americans (35 percent) say they had watched a women’s sporting event on TV or over streaming services over the past six months, including 41 percent of sports fans and 55 percent of avid fans.
The most popular women’s sports to watch include basketball (38 percent who watch women’s sports watched this), any women’s Olympic sport (38 percent), gymnastics (37 percent) and tennis (34 percent). Another 25 percent of women’s sports viewers watched volleyball, while 24 percent each watched soccer or ice skating and 23 percent watched softball.
More Black people watched women’s sports (51 percent) than Hispanic (38 percent) and White people (32 percent).
But there is hardly any gender difference, with 36 percent of men and 34 percent of women saying they had watched women’s sports in the past six months.
More former high school varsity athletes (47 percent) and college athletes (66 percent) watched women’s sports than those who didn’t play sports in high school (30 percent) or college (33 percent).
Title IX was nearly derailed soon after its adoption, with the NCAA and its allies in Congress challenging its legality. The college sports governing body, along with its allies in Congress, perceived it as a threat to the funding of football and men’s basketball.
The law weathered that challenge and subsequent challenges from advocates of men’s Olympic sports, such as wrestling, swimming and gymnastics, who argued in the early 2000s that its enforcement led schools to cut men’s sports teams, limit roster size of men’s teams, and otherwise discriminate against men.
In conjunction with the 50th anniversary of Title IX, a host of advocacy groups, such as the Women’s Sports Foundation, founded in 1974, are celebrating its passage in an effort to educate high school and college athletes, parents, coaches and administrators about the law. The goal is to prepare the next generation to press for full implementation and defend the law against future attempts to roll it back.
Currently, less than half of women’s college sports teams are coached by women. About 3 in 10 Americans say this is a problem, including just under 2 in 10 who say it is a “major” problem.
When asked whether they support or oppose allowing women to compete for sports on specific men’s college sports teams, 64 percent of Americans support women competing for spots on men’s swimming teams, 61 percent support this for baseball teams, 59 percent for men’s basketball teams and 47 percent for football teams.
Lauren Kroeger, 25, of San Francisco who competed in track and field in college, said she was “made very aware” of Title IX while an undergraduate.
“Its purpose is good; the meaning behind it is good,” Kroeger said. “You learn team building; you learn to work with each other. Sports teaches students a lot of things you can’t necessarily learn at a desk — social interactions and leadership — skills that can be applied in other circumstances.”
The poll was conducted online May 4-17, 2022, among a random national sample of 1,503 adults by The Washington Post and the University of Maryland’s Shirley Povich Center for Sports Journalism and Center for Democracy and Civic Engagement. The sample was drawn through SSRS’s Opinion Panel, an ongoing survey panel recruited through random sampling of U.S. households. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. | 2022-06-22T16:11:39Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Most Americans know not much or nothing at all about Title IX - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/22/title-ix-poll-americans-support-gender-equity/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/06/22/title-ix-poll-americans-support-gender-equity/ |
Female scientists don’t get the credit they deserve. A study proves it.
Female scientists are “significantly less likely” than men to be credited as authors on scholarly articles or named on patents that they contribute to — a systemic exclusion that probably has negative impacts on female scientists’ careers, according to a new study published in the journal Nature.
The study, published Wednesday, found that female scientists are 13 percent less likely than men to be named as authors on articles and 58 percent less likely than men to be named on patents, even while controlling for factors including job title, field, team and days worked. As the study’s authors write, the findings suggest that women’s contributions to science continue to be underestimated, 70 years after the English chemist Rosalind Franklin was denied credit for her role in the discovery of the structure of DNA.
“These are pretty big gaps, and they’re incredibly persistent,” said co-author Britta Glennon, assistant professor of management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business.
The disparities exist across various fields and at different phases of female scientists’ careers, starting at the very beginning, the study found: About 15 percent of female graduate student contributors are ever named on a document, compared with about 21 percent of male graduate students who contribute to research.
The findings — which come from an extensive data set and were confirmed by a survey and follow-up interviews — both partially explain and probably contribute to the underrepresentation of women in science, Glennon said: “If you’re seeing that you’re not getting credit for the work that you do, or even that your senior female colleagues aren’t getting credit for the work that they do, that’s pretty discouraging — so I think we would all be very surprised if there weren’t a significant impact on careers.”
Female scientists said as much in their written survey responses and interviews with the researchers, according to the study. “Being left off papers for which I was one of the two main leads has greatly damaged my career as a researcher and my chance to get promotion, jobs, and grant funding. I am still an academic but in a teaching role,” one woman said.
And the data shows that “women do occupy more junior positions than men” and that “the proportion of women in each position declines as the seniority of the position increases,” the study notes.
That may have something to do with the fact that, as the study notes, female scientists are less likely to be named on articles with more citations, which are more widely read and therefore carry more weight in the academic job market. In an article with 25 citations, for example, women are 20 percent less likely to be named as authors than men are.
“If you’re working on a project that looks like it’s going to be received really well, there’s more jockeying and competition to get on the authorship list — and basically what we find is that in those cases, it actually looks like women are less likely to end up on the authorship list,” said co-author Matthew Ross, an associate professor in the school of public policy and urban affairs and the department of economics at Northeastern University.
When women were included as authors, they reported making more contributions than men reported — carrying out tasks including conceptualization, data curation, writing the original draft, and reviewing and editing at higher rates, the survey found.
“Even just to become an author on a paper they’re doing more [than men],” Glennon said.
In addition to Ross and Glennon, researchers from Boston University, Ohio State University, and New York University co-authored the study, which they conducted using three different data sources.
The first was a data set focusing on more than 9,700 research teams composed of more than 128,800 researchers from 2013 to 2016, featuring funding and administrative data from the UMETRICS database — available through the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research — which the researchers analyzed alongside journal articles from the research engine Web of Science and patent data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Doing so allowed them to compare who was listed on grants and who was — or wasn’t — listed on the papers and patents funded by those grants.
The other two sources included a survey distributed to more than 2,400 published scientists that asked about their experiences being named or not named as co-authors, and qualitative responses from both written survey responses and several follow-up interviews. Neither the core survey questions nor the interviews asked about gender, the study notes, adding that scientists brought it up on their own.
The data set had limits: It did not collect the race of researchers, for example, Glennon and Ross said, nor did it explain the “mechanism” of the authorship disparities in any depth.
The survey suggests that “mechanism” of authorship exclusion boils down to “either discrimination or how contributions are perceived by collaborators, or both.” About 15 percent of female survey respondents cited discrimination or bias as the reason for their authorship exclusion, compared with about 7.7 percent of men. And about 17.5 percent of excluded women cited “differences in responsibilities” — due to personal/non-research reasons or leaving the lab — for the reason they were left off the author list, compared with about 12.6 percent of men.
Female scientists also pointed to other structural issues leading to authorship exclusion through their qualitative responses. They described having to advocate for themselves to be listed as an author or risk being excluded — but noted that “speaking up could backfire as well.”
And they complained of unclear and unfair rules about requirements for authorship, set mainly by male senior researchers.
While data about scientists who are women of color was missing due to the lack of intersectional data collection in UMETRICS, the researchers collected race in their survey data: 11 percent of survey respondents self-identified as Hispanic/Latin/Spanish Origin women, and fewer than 1 percent self-identified as Black women. At least one female scientist noted in her response that women of color face additional barriers to authorship: “Most of my fellow academics (especially women, and most especially women of color) have been harmed by faculty who decide to award authorship to other lab members who did not do the work,” the participant wrote.
Christen Smith, founder of Cite Black Women, an initiative dedicated to supporting Black female academics and recognizing their scholarly work, said she believes the findings would have been “even more dire” for Black female scientists had the data included race. She pointed to another example of historically overlooked Black women in science — the mathematicians who helped NASA launch its space exploration program in the 1950s and ‘60s — as proof.
“We need only look at a project like the film ‘Hidden Figures’ to know that there’s a way that Black women’s contributions to the sciences have been systematically erased over time,” said Smith, who is also an associate professor of anthropology and African and African diaspora studies at the University of Texas at Austin.
Creating more equitable systems of authorship requires everyone involved — including research teams, journals and universities — to adopt standards for how research contributors are both defined and acknowledged, the co-authors said. That could look like supplementing or replacing authorship bylines with contribution statements, or explanations of what each person contributed to the research, the co-authors said.
The power to create change, the co-authors said, also lies with the government entities that often fund scientific research — like the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation — which can standardize requirements for acknowledging contributors, and with the principal investigators in charge of research projects, who can prioritize equity in their labs.
As Glennon said: “If you have a lab where you make people comfortable bringing these issues [of exclusion] up, that would ease a lot of the issues.” | 2022-06-22T16:15:38Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Study proves female scientists don’t get authorship credit for work - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/22/women-scientists-authorship-credit-study/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/06/22/women-scientists-authorship-credit-study/ |
Asian carp threaten the Great Lakes. Will calling them ‘copi’ help?
By Peter Kendall
Tristan Wetzel, left, wrestles a net with silver Asian carp on the Illinois River in Peoria this week. (David Zalaznik for The Washington Post)
As a brand, Asian carp have two big problems: The name strikes many as both racially insensitive and decidedly unpalatable — a trash fish.
How about some “copi” instead?
In a marketing event Wednesday, Illinois officials announced the focus-group-approved name for the prolific invasive species. With the fresh consumer brand, they are seeking to gut the fish’s numbers and reduce the looming ecological threat it poses to the Great Lakes.
Soon, they hope, folks will be noshing on copi sliders and cooking up copi tacos, eating into the invader’s population.
“ ‘Copi’ rose to the top. It’s kind of fresh, maybe kind of Mediterranean,” Kevin Irons, assistant fisheries chief at the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, said of the two-year name search. “Copi sounded like a fish.”
That’s copi as in copious, which from an environmental perspective is the problem with these fish.
Introduced from Asia in the 1960s to control weeds and algae, four voracious species — silver, bighead, grass and black carp — escaped from ponds in the South and have exploded in numbers along the Mississippi River and its far-reaching tributaries.
Mighty American rivers that once teemed with a diversity of species are now roiling with millions of invasive carp, the largest of which, at 110 pounds, can outweigh a person. Videos of the big, silvery fish rocketing out of the water along the Illinois, Missouri and Ohio rivers have been going viral for years.
Collectively known as Asian carp, they are now at the doorstep of the Great Lakes, massed in significant numbers less than 50 miles from Lake Michigan.
Biologists fear that if the fish get there, they will vacuum up the plankton that form the foundation of the food web, wreaking havoc on an already invaded, disrupted Great Lakes ecosystem that nevertheless supports a $7 billion sport fishing industry.
Illinois officials are betting that consumer demand will winnow that carp supply. They tout the fish’s mild flavor, its abundance of omega-3 fatty acids and its lower levels of mercury than in most other fish, emphasizing that these species, unlike the common carp, are not bottom feeders.
“This is not your grandfather’s carp,” Irons said. “It is not the one that is rooting around down in the mud. Because they are eating high in the water column, there are lower levels of contaminants.”
Biologists estimate that the Illinois River holds 20 million to 50 million pounds of the fertile invaders just waiting to be exploited and, they hope, overfished.
Building demand for the fish would drive a resurgence of an Illinois River fishing industry that was once one of the nation’s most productive, the thinking goes. This would provide jobs to communities that need them, and tap into a protein source that could help relieve food insecurity while reducing the single greatest ecological threat to the Great Lakes, Irons said.
“It checks all the boxes,” he said.
Chicago chef Brian Jupiter, a two-time James Beard Award semifinalist and a winner of the Food Network’s “Chopped” competition, was to reveal the new name Wednesday.
In an interview days before the event, Jupiter said he planned to offer the fish at his New Orleans-influenced Ina Mae Tavern, perhaps in a po’ boy sandwich made with copi fish cake.
“It’s a flaky fish that has white flesh; the flavor is good and mild,” he said. “It does have a lot of bones, so that makes it challenging.”
Most past attempts to market the fish have run into trouble when they hit those bones. The carp’s skeleton is composed of an intricate lacework of intermuscular bones that branch off in a Y shape deep inside the flesh of the fish, creating a vexing puzzle for a fillet knife.
Those who do cut boneless pieces say a 40-pound carp produces less than four pounds of fish strips a few inches long and only about a quarter-inch thick.
Because of that, the new marketing push focuses on minced fish, produced by a washing-machine-size contraption that squeezes the white flesh from the bone. Although the result resembles ground turkey, it is technically not ground.
Persuading consumers to embrace minced fish may pose a challenge.
“There are certain communities that are more amenable to minced fish, but I think this will socialize it,” Irons said. “Maybe this will be the advantage of using this as the first fish: Not only are you introducing copi as a great dinner protein, but you also might say, ‘I never thought of using minced fish.’ ”
Jupiter said he was at first perplexed when he received samples.
“I was like, ‘What’s that?’ ” he said. “That was the last thing I was wanting to work with in terms of the cuts they sent. But I did find it very easy to use in the cake format. As kids, we ate fish sticks. It allows you a lot of versatility.”
His is one of about two dozen restaurants, stores and wholesalers lined up to begin selling copi on Wednesday. Recipes will be available at ChooseCopi.com.
A 2018 state report on the commercial potential of the top-feeding invasive carp noted that consumers consider them “trash fish,” associating them with the bottom-feeding common carp introduced to the United States in the mid-19th century.
Many in the renaming effort quip that carp is a four-letter word. They also cite precedent: orange roughy? It was once known as slimehead. Chilean sea bass? Formerly Patagonian toothfish.
Even Asian carp have undergone previous brand makeovers. Colloquially, they have been called river rabbits and Illinois bass. An attempt in 2010 aimed to call them Kentucky tuna. A new carp processing plant on the Illinois River calls its product shiruba (silver in Japanese). And Louisiana chef Philippe Parola trademarked Silverfin and has been working for more than a decade to build a business selling it.
Parola, who began cooking invasive rodents in the 1990s by developing recipes for nutria, said he welcomes the push for copi, believing it can reduce ecological harm and win consumers over to his Silverfin as well. But he warned that it will not be easy. “Many have tried,” he cautioned.
To make “copi” stick, Illinois will trademark the name and is seeking to have it adopted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. For now, fish labeled copi must be identified as carp, Irons said.
Some previous moves to change the name have focused on racial sensitivity. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stopped using the name last year to “move away from any terms that cast Asian culture and people in a negative light,” one official explained.
“There seems to be a stigma on multiple levels with this fish,” said Jayette Bolinski, spokeswoman for the Illinois Department of Natural Resources. “The primary reason we are changing the name is because research shows consumers associate Asian carp with a fish that is unappealing, unappetizing. Of course, removing the racial reference in the name is another reason why we are doing this.”
If a name change does stimulate an appetite for the fish, an industry of workers and infrastructure will be needed to satisfy it. A nascent commercial carp-fishing industry has grown around the Peoria Pool, a 73-mile stretch of the Illinois River where the fish breed prolifically.
In 2020, Sorce Feshwater Co. opened a processing plant on the shore of the pool and last year handled about 5 million pounds of invasive carp, said Roy Sorce, the company’s president.
Sorce charges $5.95 per pound for minced fish and up to $10 per pound for the strips, because they are hand cut.
A couple of dozen fishermen have banded together to form the Midwest Fish Co-Op.
All agree that the industry has not achieved critical mass and will need more people to catch the fish. Clint Carter, a fisherman whose parents also worked the Illinois, said it requires at least $170,00 to buy the boat, truck and equipment needed to enter the business.
“There are a lot of people who look at this as a free protein source, but there are a lot of economics that need to be taken care of to make this thing go,” he said.
Carter has been offering “Asian carp” at his fish shop in Springfield, Ill. — three-quarters of a pound of fried boneless strips, pickles and onions on bread for $7.99. He sold four orders on a recent Saturday.
“I have probably fed 10,000 people samples over the years, and I have had maybe two people say they don’t like it,” Carter said. “It is mostly that mental stigma of it being carp.”
Sorce opened the processing plant because he became convinced that the fish could help alleviate rising food insecurity around the world. That market has not yet adopted it, however. One major hunger relief organization likes his product but cannot take it because its rules prevent using minced fish, he said, something that he thinks must change.
For now, he reluctantly has to place some hope in the pet food market, which already uses some of the fish.
“I love my dog, but this fish could literally solve a lot of the problems with people in need, for hungry people,” Sorce said.
In the meantime, the population grows, increasing the threat to the Great Lakes.
The lakes are connected to the Mississippi River basin through canals completed in 1900 to reverse the flow of the Chicago River, which sent the city’s sewage away from its drinking water source in Lake Michigan.
To keep the fish from swimming through the channel, engineers in 2002 switched on the first of several electric underwater barriers about 37 miles from the lake.
A more ambitious barrier project is underway at Brandon Road Lock and Dam, near Joliet, Ill., identified by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as the “critical pinch point” between the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes.
The $858 million project, now in the design phase, will include yet another electric barrier but will add fish-frightening underwater acoustics and an intimidating curtain of bubbles.
Planners say their barriers have a better chance of success if the fish population is first reduced by a thriving fishery.
“With commercial fishing, what we want to do is attack the population that is coming up the Illinois River and fish those invasive species out of there and keep the population low or kept as far downstream as possible,” said Andrew Leichty, the Brandon Road project manager.
Marc Gaden, legislative liaison for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission, called the risk from the fish “grave.” Rebranding the carp to foster a fishing industry is a helpful step, he said.
“Make lemonade if you have lemons,” Gaden said, “and maybe fish them out to at least keep a lid on them.” | 2022-06-22T16:16:10Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Rebranding aims to make invasive Asian carp more palatable - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/invasive-carp/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/06/22/invasive-carp/ |
Parsing Ron Johnson’s explanation of his role in the fake-elector plot
Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) and Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) listen during a news conference about crime on Capitol Hill in February. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
The aftermath of Jan. 6, 2021, has led to some squirming when it comes to Republicans accounting for their roles in the attempt to overturn the 2020 election. Perhaps the chief example is Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) awkwardly and haltingly responding to questions about his contact with President Donald Trump that day.
But Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wis.) response to a new revelation from the House committee investigating the insurrection is up there on the list. And that response reinforces both how casual and haphazard the effort to thwart democracy was, and how much Republicans are now at pains to account for it — despite their attacks on the Jan. 6 committee and its mandate.
To recap: On Tuesday, the committee released text messages showing that Johnson’s top aide, Sean Riley, inquired with Vice President Mike Pence’s staff on Jan. 6 about having Johnson give Pence slates of Trump electors — in actuality, fake electors — for Michigan and Wisconsin. The Pence aide, Chris Hodgson, responded curtly, “Do not give that to him.”
RILEY: Alternate slates of electors for MI and WI because archivist didn’t receive them
HODGSON: Do not give that to him.
The exchange raises a host of questions, most notably: Why was Johnson’s staff trying to deliver this information? And: Could this implicate Johnson’s office or others in criminal activity, given the slates themselves might be illegal?
The dodginess of all of it was reinforced by a swift response from Johnson’s office, which assured that the senator himself had nothing to do with this. And Johnson himself later said that he did not support the effort to get the fake electors to Pence.
From his exchange with CNN’s Manu Raju and other reporters:
Q: Did you support his efforts to try to get the slates to the Vice President?
JOHNSON: No. I had no knowledge of this. I had no involvement in an alternate slate of electors. I had no idea this was even going to be delivered to us. It got delivered staff to staff. My chief of staff did the right thing – contacted the vice president’s staff. They said didn’t want it, so we didn’t deliver it. That’s the end of story.
Johnson said the he was broadly aware of the effort to deliver something to Pence, but that he wasn’t aware of the details:
Q: So did you not know what was being talked about in terms of what this document was?
JOHNSON: I was aware that we got this package and that somebody wanted us to [give it to] the vice president. We reached out. They didn’t want it. We didn’t deliver it.
Q: So you were aware of it on Jan. 6 – that morning – when your chief of staff texted the vice president’s office?
JOHNSON: I was aware that we got something they wanted to be delivered to the vice president. I mean, you guys, this took place in the span of a few minutes. The story ended. There’s nothing to this.
Raju then made the pertinent point: This wasn’t “nothing.” This was congressional staff assisting in an effort to have Pence overturn a presidential election.
Johnson reiterated: “Again, I had no involvement in that whatsoever.”
Essentially, Johnson said his office was just a go-between. He said the slates came from a House office and were transmitted “staff to staff.” But he offered no detail on which House office or staffer was involved — except to say that it was an “intern.” And he said he wasn’t even interested in finding out further information.
To accept Johnson’s version of events, it would mean that his office was happy to serve as a conduit between a House intern and Pence’s staff, offering to deliver documents from the intern to no less than the vice president’s office without really reviewing the contents or their implications. In addition, his top aide said in the texts shared by the Jan. 6 committee that Johnson himself would deliver the documents — but we are still meant to believe that Johnson wasn’t clued in on this at all.
And despite Johnson’s suggestion that Riley was casually asking about whether Pence’s office wanted the information, Riley in fact stated, “Johnson needs to hand something to VPOTUS please advise.”
That’s a pretty remarkable way of doing business, if you take Johnson’s explanation at face value.
Riley has not responded to questions about the situation.
The timing here is key. The time stamps on the text messages indicate this conversation took place at 12:37 p.m. on Jan. 6, just as Congress was set to certify Joe Biden’s electoral win.
The fake electors were a necessary part of the plot to have Pence help overturn the election; the idea was that Pence would deem the Biden electors and Trump electors to be in conflict, and either reject the Biden electors or give the states more time to review the situation.
Of course, the Trump electors weren’t legitimate — both because they weren’t duly elected as they claimed and they didn’t comply with the law in some states. And Pence had already declared he wouldn’t go along with the plot. But the fact that people were still trying to transmit this information to him at this late hour suggests they hadn’t given up — that this effort by congressional Republicans or at least their staffs persisted until the last minute, shortly before the insurrection at the Capitol.
Pence’s office saying they didn’t even want this information also reinforces how much they viewed the matter as touchy at least, and problematic at worst. What would be the harm in simply accepting some information from a senator, after all?
There’s another aspect of this that doesn’t make sense: Riley’s claim that the National Archives hadn’t received the slates. As Politico’s Kyle Cheney noted, that’s false. Documents released by the Jan. 6 committee show that the archivist had indeed received the slates from Michigan and Wisconsin. Cheney raised the possibility that perhaps they had been received by the Archives but hadn’t been shared with Pence, because they weren’t legally valid.
Which seems a pretty plausible theory. Another text shared by the committee indicated an effort was afoot as late as Jan. 4 to fly in the fake electors document.
For the Archives to not even treat the slates as worthy of transmission would certainly reinforce just how problematic and potentially illegal all of the fake electors effort was. From there, it’s worth knowing how much everyone involved knew about the Archives’ actions. Perhaps they only knew that the slates hadn’t been given to Pence and assumed the archivist somehow hadn’t received them?
But the point remains that there was this last-minute effort to get Pence legally invalid slates of electors, in hopes that he would change course. Pence’s office wanted no part of the information, and apparently Johnson wants no part of being associated with the effort — or in finding out, or sharing, more details about it.
Which kind of reinforces the utility of the Jan. 6 committee itself. | 2022-06-22T16:17:23Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Why Ron Johnson's explanation of his role in fake-elector plot doesn't add up - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/ron-johnson-fake-electors/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/ron-johnson-fake-electors/ |
Oversight Board issues annual report outlining the company’s compliance with policy recommendations
The Facebook symbol on a sign outside company headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., in 2020. (Jeff Chiu/AP)
More than a year after its creation, the Facebook Oversight Board argued in the first of what are to be annual reports that the social media company should be far more transparent about how it decides which posts and accounts to leave up and which to take down.
The board, an international panel of human rights advocates, politicians and academics that oversees Facebook’s thorniest content moderation decisions, said the company had made some progress in implementing the board’s policy recommendations but needed to share more information about content removal systems. The group took aim at the opaque nature of the company’s strikes system, which gives users who break the platform’s content guidelines a specific number of passes and a tiered system of punishments before their accounts are suspended.
Facebook, which last year renamed its parent company Meta, did not immediately reply to a request for comment.
“The Board is encouraged by first-year trends in its engagement with Meta, but the company must urgently improve its transparency,” the group said in the report. “The Board continues to have significant concerns, including around Meta’s transparency and provision of information related to certain cases and policy recommendations.”
Facebook conceived the Oversight Board as an experiment, as regulators around the world were trying to craft uniform rules governing social media platforms. The company argued that the board could chart direction for content policy and be a model for other companies’ governance structures.
But critics have asked whether a board given no formal authority and serving at the pleasure of the company has enough power to force Facebook to follow its recommendations for issues plaguing its platform, including misinformation and hate speech. While the board has offered independent supervision of the company, it is dependent on Facebook to give it information, funding and the power to make change.
The annual report sheds lights on some of the challenges facing the group as it makes critical decisions about how the company should support the free expression of its users while mitigating the harms of problematic speech. In public comments and case decisions, the board has repeatedly chastised Facebook for not giving the Oversight Board and users enough information to evaluate the company’s content moderation systems.
Since its creation, the board has ruled in an array of cases, including deciding that an Instagram user’s breast cancer awareness post violated the companies’ rules against nudity, and opining on whether Facebook should have suspended the account of then-President Donald Trump over his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The board said Wednesday that of the 20 cases the company and users referred to it in 2021, it overturned Facebook 14 times and upheld six of its decisions.
In the case of Trump, the board affirmed Facebook’s decision to suspend the former president but told the company it must clarify its policies about the penalties for rule-breaking politicians and make the final decision on whether Trump could return to the platform. Facebook eventually decided to suspend Trump for two years, opening the door for him to return to the site before the 2024 presidential election.
Under the rules, Facebook and its users are allowed to appeal to the Oversight Board cases in which the company has taken down posts for violating its community standards — rules it imposes against hate speech, harassment and other problematic types of content. The decisions the Oversight Board makes on these cases are considered binding.
Separately, the Oversight Board can issue policy recommendations for changes to the company’s content moderation systems, but those are not considered binding.
Overall, Meta committed to at least partially implementing two thirds of the board’s 86 policy recommendations, according to the report. For the remainder of the recommendations, Meta said it either already does the work suggested, would not take action or would assess the feasibility of implementing the board’s policy suggestion.
Among the most common recommendations, the board urged Facebook to give users more information about the rules they are breaking when their content is removed.
“Our recommendations have repeatedly urged Meta to follow some central tenets of transparency,” the board said in the report. “Make your rules easily accessible in your users’ languages; tell people as clearly as possible how you make and enforce your decisions; and, where people break your rules, tell them exactly what they’ve done wrong.”
Facebook is now tells English-speaking users when their content is removed for hate speech and is testing that policy for content in Arabic, Spanish and Portuguese, as well as for posts removed for bullying and harassment, the report said.
The Oversight Board also launched an implementation committee to evaluate whether the company actually is making the policy changes it says it will in response to the board’s policy recommendations, the board said.
Facebook Oversight Board sternly criticizes the company’s collaboration in first transparency reports
Tension between the Oversight Board and Facebook flared last fall when the board chastised Facebook for its lack of transparency about a program meant to exempt famous people from facing penalties over posts that break the company’s content rules. At the time, citing Facebook internal documents, the Wall Street Journal had reported that while the company told the board that the program affects only a “small number of decisions,” it actually included at least 5.8 million users in 2020. The board pounced, arguing that the company had not been “fully forthcoming.” | 2022-06-22T16:18:06Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Facebook Oversight Board says company should be more transparent in report - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/facebook-oversight-board-annual-report-transparency/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/facebook-oversight-board-annual-report-transparency/ |
Flooding rain and damaging winds possible in storms in D.C. area
A flood watch is in effect from 3 to 11 p.m. Wednesday
The blissfully dry weather of the past several days has departed and a very warm, humid pattern has taken its place. But cooler air lurks to our northeast and northwest. We’re stuck in the transition zone where these contrasting air masses meet, a ripe setting for intense thunderstorms.
Storms are most probable between about 3 and 11 p.m. and some may be severe — containing damaging winds and hail in addition to heavy downpours and dangerous lightning. Some areas could be hit by heavy storms repeatedly — increasing the risk of flooding.
The National Weather Service has issued a flood watch for much of the region, except for Southern Maryland and counties adjacent to the Chesapeake Bay, where showers and storms will probably be less numerous.
The #Flood Watch for potential flash flooding this afternoon and evening has been expanded eastward into the I-95 corridor. Heavy #rain from thunderstorms may lead to rapid rises of water in creeks, streams, and in poor drainage areas. pic.twitter.com/MtfzQDadcQ
The heaviest rain and greatest flood threat will likely focus between Interstates 95 and 81. “Rainfall amounts of 1 to 3 inches are possible within the span of a couple of hours, with locally higher amounts possible,” the Weather Service cautions.
Rain totals will be highly variable throughout the area, depending on where the heaviest storm cells track — which can’t be predicted before they start to form. Some areas could see less than a tenth of an inch while some models show maximum totals over 5 inches, which is a serious amount of rain. This amount of rain would require heavy storms forming and reforming while tracking over the same area repeatedly — a phenomenon known as training. The greatest threat of training storm cells is west of Rt. 15 which runs from roughly Frederick to Warrenton.
The Weather Service has placed the western half of our region in A level 2 out of 4 risk zone for excessive rain; our eastern areas are under A level 1 risk.
The flooding threat may be mitigated somewhat by the fact June has been dry so far — but if 2 or more inches falls in short amount of time, that could quickly cause streams to overflow and for poor drainage areas to be overwhelmed.
“Excessive runoff may result in flooding of rivers, creeks, streams, and other low-lying and flood-prone locations,” the Weather Service writes.
Remember to never attempt to drive across a flooded road as the water level is difficult to judge. Turn around, don’t drown.
In addition to the heavy rain threat, the Weather Service’s Storm Prediction Center has placed the area in A level 2 out 5 risk for severe storms that could produce “damaging winds and isolated large hail.” An isolated tornado also cannot be ruled out.
The most probable timing for severe storms would be in the late afternoon and early evening before the threat wanes some toward dark. However, the risk of heavy rainfall could continue until 10 or 11 p.m. in parts of the area.
A rather unusual pattern is coming together for the next 12 to18 hours.
As shown in the forecast surface chart (valid 8 p.m. this evening) below, we have an approaching cold front from the west. Over the Bay and I-95 corridor, another slow-moving frontal boundary is approaching from the east…an odd direction, in fact, a process that’s called retrograding. Along this boundary, a weak area of low pressure is expected to develop.
So the DMV will be positioned in a “vice” or zone in which the humid, unstable air mass in between the fronts is getting squeezed from both directions. This is called convergence of air, and the result will be a large mass of air forced to ascend.
Adding to the potency is a very high humidity content of the air. The morning weather balloon at Dulles revealed aggressive moistening of the deep atmosphere is underway, to the point where the “precipitable water” (total liquid equivalent depth of water vapor) will be between 2 to 2.5 inches — a value that is quite excessive for our region in late June — near record levels. These anomalously high values at 8 p.m. this evening are shown by the ribbon of red colors in the map below.
So we have very high moisture content, getting squeezed upward over the region between two fronts, in an atmosphere unstable enough to generate thunderstorms. These factors will intensify late this afternoon and likely be sustained until about midnight.
The deep airflow aloft is also anomalous for this time of year, from due north — so storm cells will develop in Pennsylvania and drift south into the Baltimore-Washington region.
We think the retrograding front draped along I-95 will act as a conduit along which storm cells will repeatedly fire and track from north to south. It’s difficult to say a priori the exact counties/locales impacted but this “training” effect could lead to impressive rain totals for some, upward of 2 to 3 inches. One of the high resolution forecast model simulations of radar coverage for through tonight is shown below — you can pick out the enhanced corridor of storm cells along and west of I-95.
Another area of focused, heavy rain may be near or just west of the I-81 corridor, where enhanced lifting of humid air by the mountains and the approaching cold front may wring out extra atmospheric moisture. Note, however, the above radar simulation is only a rough guide as to how storms may evolve; the actual timing and placement of storms could end up being quite different.
Locally severe storm cells may also generate damaging wind gusts, intense lightning, and perhaps even a weak tornado. We don’t expect the severe weather coverage to be as widespread as the flood threat. But the wind shear (or increase in wind speed and change in direction with altitude) is sufficient, along with local “spin” generated along the retrograding front, for the threat of an isolated tornado.
Damaging straight line winds are more likely, in the form of downbursts…in which the heavy mass of descending water in cell downdrafts drags the air down to the surface in a high-velocity impact. | 2022-06-22T16:18:19Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Flooding rain and damaging winds possible in storms in D.C. area - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2022/06/22/dc-storms-flooding-virginia-maryland/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2022/06/22/dc-storms-flooding-virginia-maryland/ |
Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) and other members of the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol meet in a private room before a Tuesday hearing to reveal its findings. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
In the past 24 hours, there has been an uptick in the number of violent threats against lawmakers on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, and all lawmakers on the committee are likely to receive a security detail, according to three people involved with the investigation.
Over the weekend, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) revealed a letter addressed to his wife that threatened to execute them and their 5-month-old baby. He warned that the political violence of Jan. 6, 2021 was not an aberration but a consequence of his party’s repeated lies.
Committee Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) has been flanked with a security detail since last year, and has been unable to hold large, publicized campaign events, in part due to security concerns, according to aides.
During Trump’s second impeachment trial, which was held shortly after the insurrection, security details were provided to all nine impeachment managers.
“For safety reasons, the USCP does not discuss potential security measures for Members,” a spokesperson for the United States Capitol Police said in a statement.
Tuesday’s hearing featured some of the most emotional testimony so far, including appearances from mother-and-daughter election workers in Georgia, Ruby Freeman and Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, who described the consequences of being targeted by the former president and his allies.
“It’s turned my life upside down,” said Moss. “I don’t want anyone knowing my name. I don’t want to go anywhere with my mom because she might yell my name out over the grocery aisle or something. I don’t go to the grocery store at all. I haven’t been anywhere at all. … I second-guess everything I do. It’s affected my life in a major way — in every way. All because of lies, for me doing my job, the same thing I’ve been doing forever.”
The remaining hearings are likely to focus even more on the culture of political violence on the right. Reps. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) and Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) are set to co-lead a hearing that explores the path to extremism that spurred insurrectionists to attack the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. | 2022-06-22T16:33:02Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Lawmakers on Jan. 6 committee ramp up security as threats increase - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/jan6-security-threats/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/jan6-security-threats/ |
Jan. 6 committee counsel leaving to explore run for U.S. Senate in Missouri
Carol D. Leonnig
John Wood, a senior investigative counsel on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection, appears at a hearing on June 16. (Susan Walsh/AP)
A senior investigative counsel on the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection is leaving the committee to explore running for Missouri’s U.S. Senate seat as an independent, according to four people familiar with his plans.
John Wood, a former federal prosecutor who has worked closely with Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), started notifying committee staff this week of his plans to explore a run for office, according to these people.
Wood ran the committee’s “gold team,” which examined former president Donald Trump’s possible involvement in the siege on the U.S. Capitol, and appeared alongside lawmakers on the panel last week to question witnesses during the hearing focused on the pressure campaign targeting then-Vice President Mike Pence. People involved with the investigation say that Wood is leaving his role with the encouragement of his team and is on good terms with committee staff.
News of his departure comes after former Missouri governor Eric Greitens released an ad for his U.S. Senate campaign showing him pretending to hunt down members of his own party.
“Today we’re goin’ RINO hunting,” Greitens announces in the video, using the derisive phrase “Republicans in Name Only.”
A campaign committee for Wood launched a website and started fundraising on Monday, triggering a 10-day window to formally file with the Federal Election Commission, consultant Steven Crim said. The committee’s treasurer is Mark Eggert, a former associate vice chancellor at Washington University in St. Louis.
The campaign decided to launch Monday because of Greitens’s “RINO hunting ad,” Crim said. He said he expected a formal decision from Wood on whether to run within a week.
The campaign has to file 10,000 signatures by Aug. 1 to get Wood on the ballot as an independent candidate, Crim said. Wood would have the support of former senator John Danforth (R-Mo.), who is raising money for a super PAC to back an independent candidate.
Danforth said his group polled Missouri voters in February and found broad dissatisfaction with both parties and political polarization.
“If John Wood enters the race, he will be head and shoulders better qualified to be a U.S. senator than anybody else,” Danforth said in an interview. “What’s happened now is politics is so, to a lot of people, disgusting that people would like to go to the polls and vote ‘none of the above.’ But that doesn’t count. The way it counts is to vote for this independent.” | 2022-06-22T17:07:53Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Jan. 6 committee counsel leaving to explore run for Senate in Missouri - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/john-wood/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/john-wood/ |
‘The Black Phone’ is a ghost story with one great twist
Ethan Hawke plays the heavy in this supernatural thriller based on a short story by Stephen King’s son Joe Hill
Brady Hepner, left, and Mason Thames in “The Black Phone.” (Fred Norris/Universal Pictures)
File “The Black Phone” under ghost stories, but not the kind you might expect.
Given the horror-movie résumé of filmmaker Scott Derrickson (“The Exorcism of Emily Rose,” “Sinister,” “Deliver Us From Evil”), what you’d expect is a touch of the supernatural — subcategory: malevolent. And believe me, you’ll get some phantasms here. But the boogeyman in this 1978-set, fiendishly shivery thriller — which Derrickson directed and co-wrote, with C. Robert Cargill, from a short story by Joe Hill, the son of Stephen King — is 100 percent flesh and blood. And the poltergeist activity? Well, a preview audience erupted in applause (yes, applause) at the contributions of this stylish, thoroughly satisfying B-movie’s spectral supporting cast.
The bad guy here is known simply as the Grabber, a child-snatching psychopath of the sort found in urban legend and, unfortunately, on the front pages of newspapers. He drives a black van filled with black balloons, calls himself a part-time magician and entices young boys into chatting with him on the sidewalk with the offer of a magic trick — before knocking them out with some sort of aerosol spray and spiriting them away. As the movie gets underway, he’s been in business for a while. There are posters of missing children all over this Denver suburb, and everyone knows their names.
But the real magic trick is what Derrickson does with the source material. “The Black Phone” — which centers on the Grabber’s latest victim, middle-schooler Finney Blake (Mason Thames), and his efforts to escape — makes us believe in the inexplicable. To wit: that Finney, while imprisoned in a soundproof bunker beneath the Grabber’s home, somehow discovers a rip, of sorts, in the veil between this world and the spirit realm, via a broken telephone whose severed wires should, at least according to the laws of electricity, not produce a dial tone. Whom Finney communicates with, and what he learns from them, are the pleasures slowly parceled out by this puzzle film.
21 summer movies to get you excited about going to the movies again
Of course, the Grabber makes for a suitable foil to Finney’s ingenuity. As played by Ethan Hawke, who collaborated with Derrickson before in “Sinister,” he’s a perfectly prosaic monster. His intentions for Finney and his previous victims are plainly nauseating, though the film wisely doesn’t dwell on the clinical details or the underlying pathology. It’s an icky premise at best, and Hawke, whose full face is almost always hidden, doesn’t really need the variety of terrifying masks he wears, which make him look like the dad-bod version of a carved demon. He’s scary enough all by himself.
This isn’t exactly “Room,” the multi-Oscar-nominated 2015 thriller that won Brie Larson an Academy Award for best actress as the victim of a similar kidnapping. Nor is it a take on the friendly-ghost theme of “Casper,” although there are parallels. It’s its own thing — and that includes a backdrop of family trauma, in which Finney’s younger sister Gwen (Madeleine McGraw) possesses clairvoyant abilities of a special sort. They’re a legacy of the children’s late mother, whose precognitive dreaming led her to a tragic end. As a result, Finney and Gwen’s father is an abusive drunk, but that minor storyline — unlike a similar one in the equally excellent horror film “Antlers” — is a narrative dead end.
“The Black Phone” nicely evokes its era, in a way that, unlike “Stranger Things,” never feels showy. This film belongs to Thames and McGraw, who ground it in authenticity.
‘Stranger Things’ is back. Here’s what you need to know to catch up.
There’s nothing unheard of here: a bad guy, a haunted house, a hero. But it’s what “The Black Phone” does with those simple parts that sparks a spooky connection.
R. At area theaters. Contains violence, bloody images, coarse language and some drug use. 102 minutes. | 2022-06-22T17:25:38Z | www.washingtonpost.com | 'The Black Phone' stars Ethan Hawke as a creepy child abductor - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/movies/2022/06/22/the-black-phone-movie-review/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/movies/2022/06/22/the-black-phone-movie-review/ |
Buzz Lightyear, voiced by Chris Evans, left, and Alisha Hawthorne, voiced by Uzo Aduba, in a scene from the animated film “Lightyear.” (Pixar/AP)
“Lightyear,” Pixar’s latest attempt to frack its “Toy Story” franchise for profit, is not a very good movie. But it is a useful barometer of the current conservative backlash against LGBTQ rights. If people are truly angered by the lesbian relationship depicted in “Lightyear,” then maybe what seemed like a huge leap into a more tolerant future was just a moment of calm in an ongoing, and intensifying, culture war.
At issue is an early sequence in the film when, space ranger Buzz Lightyear (now voiced by Chris Evans) attempts to break the light speed barrier. Each one of his test flights lasts only a few minutes for him, but years for everyone else, particularly his best friend, Alisha Hawthorne (Uzo Aduba).
Every time Buzz returns, Alisha has reached a new milestone: she’s engaged to a woman named Keiko; she’s pregnant; her son is a little boy, then a graduate in a cap and gown; she and her wife celebrate their 40th anniversary, marking the occasion with a chaste kiss so fleeting it’s barely visible. Buzz and the audience only ever glimpse the couple through the door of their podlike apartment, giving the impression that the movie’s lesbian relationship takes place entirely inside — you guessed it — a closet.
Ahead of the release of “Lightyear,” conservative commentator Ben Shapiro warned that “Disney works to push a ’not-at-all-secret gay agenda‘ and seeks to add ’queerness‘ to its programming. … Parents should keep that in mind before deciding whether to take their kids to see ‘Lightyear.’”
While Shapiro might be cynical — his company, the Daily Wire, is investing $100 million in family content in a challenge to Disney — he is technically correct. Alisha and Keiko’s conventional domesticity is exactly the image that last decade’s gay rights advocates used to fight for marriage equality, arguing that LGBTQ people wanted to join historically straight institutions, not destroy them. That effort culminated in the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision that the 14th Amendment protected the rights of same-sex couples to marry and have their marriages recognized by other states.
In the seven years since, support for marriage equality has continued to grow, reaching 71 percent in a Gallup poll released in June. Yet in recent months, broader anti-LGBTQ animus has reemerged on the national scene with real force and venom.
On June 11, 31 members of a white nationalist group were arrested and charged with conspiracy to riot at an LGBTQ pride event in Idaho. A week later, at Texas Republicans’ party convention, delegates affirmed the sentiment that “Homosexuality is an abnormal lifestyle choice” and endorsed legal and professional protections for therapists who try to rid their clients of “unwanted same-sex attraction.”
Then there’s the rise of the slur “groomer,” which has been deployed by far-right activists eager to tar LGBTQ people as child sexual abusers (and to wink at the QAnon conspiracy theory). It’s a nasty retread both of Anita Bryant’s 1970s Save Our Children campaign against a Miami anti-discrimination ordinance, and of the charge that gay people “recruit” converts, which persisted — and was rightly parodied — through the late 1990s.
The hysteria about drag queens — who may be neither gay nor transgender, and whose performances often tend toward parody rather than titillation — has been particularly intense. A Vermont parent was recently arrested after allegedly threatening to “show up and kill somebody” at his child’s school in the unlikely event that the kid met a drag performer or transgender person there. Members of the far-right Proud Boys broke up an event where a drag queen was reading stories to children at a California library.
What’s striking about these instances is how public and organized the disgust for LGBTQ people and drag performers has become. To the extent that homophobia had acquired a social stigma, that taboo seems to have fractured in recent years, if not shattered entirely. (Transphobia never really went underground.)
In the meantime, “Lightyear” is a paradox. Its representation of lesbians suggests that not much has changed since 1997, when Ellen DeGeneres and the character she played on TV both came out, yet it’s taken 25 years for even something that mild to make it into a kids’ movie. By the time such a first happens, it inevitably feels milquetoast to people who have waited decades to see their families represented — but still controversial to those who wish gay people would remain invisible, if they must exist at all.
It once seemed possible that the LGBTQ movement was powerful enough to reach infinity, and beyond. The response to “Lightyear,” and the ugly uprising it’s a part of, are a sobering reminder of how much work remains to be done on the ground. | 2022-06-22T17:34:00Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | If a ‘Lightyear’ lesbian kiss gets backlash, no LGBT victories are safe - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/lightyear-lesbian-kiss-lgbtq-backlash/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/lightyear-lesbian-kiss-lgbtq-backlash/ |
A man casts his ballot in Virginia's Republican primary election June 21 at the voting center at Walker-Grant Middle School in Fredericksburg. (Tristan Lorei/The Free Lance-Star via Associated Press)
Virginia voters went to the polls in some parts of the state on Tuesday to select congressional nominees for the November general election. A few narratives immediately emerged, setting up what should be real donnybrooks in the redrawn 2nd and 7th districts.
In the 2nd, Republicans tapped state Sen. Jen A. Kiggans (Virginia Beach) to challenge incumbent Rep. Elaine Luria (D). The 2nd has been one of Virginia’s true swing districts over the years. Now, it looks to favor Republicans, and Kiggans is serving up what the GOP craves: opposition to “radical transgender policies” and critical race theory and support for “election integrity.”
One potential flash point in this race: Luria serves on the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection on the Capitol. Luria has not shied from this service and has made it a part of her reelection effort. Kiggans is in “see no evil, speak no evil” mode, not discussing either ex-president Donald Trump or the Jan. 6 horror show.
In the heavily redrawn 7th District, GOP voters picked the Trumpiest of all the candidates running: Prince William County Supervisor Yesli Vega (Coles).
Vega will face Democratic incumbent Abigail Spanberger, who has been busy introducing herself to the voters of the reconfigured 7th while banking the campaign cash.
On paper, the 7th looks like a toss-up. But in Vega, the GOP chose a culture warrior who has no problem campaigning alongside performance artist Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Virginia’s own Rep. Bob Good.
And don’t get Vega started on the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol. In response to a question from the Star-Exponent about the events of that day, Vega said she wasn’t “going to play into [the media] narrative.”
As with the race in the 2nd District, the 7th will tell us a great deal about who truly believes in the rule of law, constitutional principles and so on, and who is in this politics game for the lulz.
Speaking of the rule of law, I caught up with Loudoun County NAACP president Michelle Thomas recently about her decision to join the new lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the 2021 House of Delegates elections.
Thomas said part of her reason for seeking to join the lawsuit was the question of “capacity.”
“No matter how good or how tuned-in you are to the district,” Thomas said, “there simply aren’t enough hands to go around. Needs will not be met.”
Thomas’s current House district, the 29th, has 50.8 percent more people than the least populous district, the 75th, making it “facially unconstitutional.”
Another big driver for Thomas: the sense that Virginia’s politicians have chosen personal convenience rather than seeking justice in this case.
“Justice is never a matter of convenience,” Thomas said.
Thomas said she “wants to remain hopeful” that the case will be quickly resolved. “But after watching the charade and the circus of the past year, I’m doubtful that anyone in office is interested in fighting for justice. They prefer to do what’s convenient.”
Maybe Thomas and others can take some heart from legal developments in Louisiana, where a federal judge is forcing the state legislature to redraw its congressional districts before the November elections. The local pols are fighting the judge every step of the way — even asking the U.S. Supreme Court for help.
Sounds a bit familiar. So does the charge Louisiana pols make that foisting new districts on unsuspecting voters and ill-prepared candidates this late in the political calendar would result in chaos come November.
Don’t buy the hype, especially when it comes to special elections in Virginia. Thomas’s complaint to the court contains a helpful reminder that the special election to replace Jerrauld C. “Jay” Jones took less than a month from Jones’s resignation announcement on Dec. 16 to Election Day on Jan. 11.
And no one was inconvenienced. | 2022-06-22T17:34:01Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Virginia’s U.S. House elections are set - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/virginias-us-house-elections-are-set/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/virginias-us-house-elections-are-set/ |
Man fatally shot in Southeast Washington
A 36-year-old man was fatally shot early Wednesday at a gas station in Southeast Washington, according to D.C. police.
The shooting occurred shortly before 1:15 a.m. in the 2800 block of Alabama Avenue SE, near a shopping center in the Naylor Gardens area.
Police identified the victim as Vernon Harrison of Northeast Washington. A police report says he had been shot multiple times.
No arrests were made, and police did not describe a possible motive.
There have been 98 homicides in the District this year, a 17 percent increase from this time in 2021. Last year, killings topped 200 for the first time in nearly two decades. | 2022-06-22T17:42:43Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Man fatally shot in Southeast Washington - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/22/shooting-homicide-dc/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/22/shooting-homicide-dc/ |
Caeleb Dressel withdraws from swimming world champs with medical issue
Caeleb Dressel looks on after competing in the 100-meter freestyle heats Tuesday. (Tom Pennington/Getty Images)
Superstar sprinter Caeleb Dressel, Team USA’s most prolific medal machine, withdrew from the world swimming championships in Budapest on Wednesday because of an unspecified medical issue, an abrupt end to his quest to become the first man to win eight golds at a single worlds.
“After conferring with Caeleb, his coaches and the medical staff, a decision has been made to withdraw him from the” meet, USA Swimming said in a statement. “Our priority is and always will be the health of our athletes, and we will continue to give Caeleb the assistance he needs to recover quickly.”
The website Swimswam.com, citing unnamed sources, reported Dressel’s withdrawal was not covid-related.
Dressel, 25, had won two golds at the meet, and had as many as six more chances remaining. But he withdrew from Tuesday night’s semifinal of the men’s 100-meter freestyle — a race in which he was the two-time defending world champion — and the final of the 4x100-meter mixed medley relay. At the time, USA Swimming said his availability for the rest of the meet would be determined later.
Dressel, a seven-time Olympic gold medalist, earned seven golds at the 2017 world championships, then six golds plus two silvers at the 2019 meet, and his meet program in Budapest was equally ambitious and grueling. Though it wasn’t out of the question Dressel could win eight golds, he was expected to face serious challenges to his supremacy in the 100 free from Romania’s David Popovici and 100-meter butterfly from Hungary’s Kristof Milak.
Dressel’s absence will leave Team USA with only one competitor in his remaining individual events and also will require some scrambling on the part of team officials to fill his spots in the 4x100 mixed free relay and the 4x100 men’s medley relay later in the meet. | 2022-06-22T17:48:48Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Caeleb Dressel withdraws from swimming world champs with medical issue - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2022/06/22/caeleb-dressel-withdraw-world-swimming-championships/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/olympics/2022/06/22/caeleb-dressel-withdraw-world-swimming-championships/ |
Proponents are racing to salvage a bipartisan measure that would provide $52 billion for domestic chip production
Semiconductor chips are printed onto silicon wafers and loaded into containers at GlobalFoundries Fab 8 in Malta, N.Y., in June 2021. (Cindy Schultz for The Washington Post))
When the Senate passed a rare bipartisan measure last summer to spend $52 billion subsidizing computer chip manufacturing and research in the United States, it seemed like an easy legislative priority for both parties.
Chips were in such short supply that auto factories were shutting down for weeks at a time, threatening jobs and driving up prices. New cars became so rare that used cars soared in price, often exceeding what they had cost when they were new. Manufacturers of seemingly everything, from smartphones to dog-washing machines and beyond, complained they couldn’t get the chips they needed. The White House called several emergency meetings, and Republicans and Democrats quickly rallied.
But one year later, the funding still isn’t signed into law. It took the House till February to agree to the subsidies. Since then the process of combining the House and Senate bills has been bogged down over disputes about elements of the legislation unrelated to chips, including climate provisions and trade with China. Myriad other issues, including military aid for Ukraine and gasoline price inflation, have also distracted lawmakers.
Proponents of the chips funding say they are now racing to salvage it before Congress breaks for its August recess, after which election season will probably stifle prospects for any big new legislative packages.
Used car market in chaos as prices soar
House and Senate leadership met Tuesday to try to hammer out an agreement. They did not emerge with a deal on what to include in the final bill, but they agreed that they must act quickly to prevent chip manufacturers from bypassing the United States and investing overseas, according to a person familiar with the talks, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive negotiations.
“We expressed our belief that there is no reason that we should not pass this bill through Congress in July,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement afterward. “Democrats have already made accommodations in the name of reaching an agreement, which we are optimistic can happen soon.” Republican leadership didn’t immediately provide comment.
The problems that sparked the legislation in the first place are still pressing. A global shortfall of computer chips continues to stall manufacturing in the United States and other industrialized countries, driving up prices for autos and other electronic goods.
Limited chip supply will continue to constrain auto manufacturing through 2024 amid pent-up vehicle demand and growing popularity of electric cars, which require more chips per vehicle, the consulting firm AlixPartners said Wednesday.
House Democrats are eager to pass the legislation because many members, including the most vulnerable representing swing districts, believe it would help them argue that the party is fighting inflation and the supply chain problems that drive it.
U.S. government subsidies were never going to provide a quick fix for the global chip shortfall. Building a chip manufacturing plant takes years. Still, as chips, also known as semiconductors, become an essential component of so much modern technology, many tech companies and lawmakers have argued that ensuring more domestic production is a matter of economic and national security.
“Everything that has an on and off switch relies on a semiconductor chip,” Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), a leading proponent of the subsidies, said in an interview. “As we see now with shortages of these chips holding up the auto industry, by not having a secure domestic supply chain, this problem is only going to get worse as we move to more and more connected devices.”
The fundamental reason for the shortage is that too few companies are willing to invest the $10 billion or more needed to build a semiconductor plant. Countries around the world have been throwing subsidies at these chipmakers, hoping to entice them to locate new facilities within their borders.
Some of these programs could leave the United States behind, Warner said. “A year ago, the Europeans didn’t have a semiconductor incentive program in place,” but Germany is now rolling out subsidies for an Intel manufacturing site, he said.
“When the German bureaucracy moves faster than the American legislative process, that’s not a good sign,” Warner said.
Intel in March announced plans to invest $20 billion in two chip factories in Ohio, pledging to begin construction this year and finish by late 2025. Other large chipmakers, including TSMC, Samsung and GlobalFoundries, also have announced plans to expand in the United States, although some have said the speed of their investments will depend on passage of the subsidies.
“The CHIPS Act makes the U.S. semiconductor industry more competitive globally. For GlobalFoundries, the passing of CHIPS funding would affect the rate and pace at which we invest in expanding our U.S. manufacturing capacity,” Steven Grasso, GlobalFoundries’ managing director of global government affairs, said in an email, referring to the company’s plans to expand a site in Malta, N.Y., where initial permitting is underway.
In both the Senate and House, the funding sits inside broader bills aimed at boosting U.S. economic competitiveness amid growing competition from China and other nations. Lawmakers say there is strong support in both chambers for the semiconductor subsidies, and for increased spending on the National Science Foundation and other research efforts, but agreement breaks down over other policies.
In a letter to Senate and House leaders last week, the chief executives of more than 100 tech companies, including Microsoft, IBM and Google parent Alphabet, urged Congress to pass the legislation, calling the semiconductor funding and other manufacturing and research measures “vital to our entire economy.”
“The rest of the world is not waiting for the U.S. to act. Our global competitors are investing in their industry, their workers, and their economies, and it is imperative that Congress act to enhance U.S. competitiveness,” they wrote in the letter, which the Semiconductor Industry Association organized.
Manufacturers have less than five days’ supply of some computer chips, Commerce Department says
Congressional aides said it is likely the final bill will more closely resemble the Senate legislation because it passed with bipartisan support, while the House bill had just one Republican supporter, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (Ill.)
House Democrats have had to make concessions along the way on trade and climate provisions that they included in their bill, said the person familiar with Tuesday’s Congressional leadership meeting.
The House bill’s expansion of the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program, which provides aid to workers who lose jobs due to offshoring and other adverse effects of foreign trade, is a particular nonstarter for Republicans, congressional aides say.
Another provision sparking debate would require the federal government to screen and at times prohibit certain U.S. investment in China. The measure, proposed by Sens. Robert P. Casey Jr. (D-Pa.) and John Cornyn (R-Tex.), has some bipartisan support in both chambers but has nonetheless “been one of the more contentious issues to reach agreement on,” said Stephen Ezell, vice president for global innovation policy at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, who has been following the congressional talks.
Todd Tucker, director of industrial policy and trade at the Roosevelt Institute think tank, said the House bill includes important provisions aimed at protecting U.S. supply chains from external shocks, such as the pandemic, which caused widespread shortages of medical goods.
Among other steps, the bill would establish an Office of Manufacturing Security and Resilience at the Commerce Department with $500 million in appropriations, tasked with tracking the availability of goods and services in real time and promoting critical manufacturing in the United States and allied nations, Tucker said. | 2022-06-22T17:49:01Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Computer chip subsidies bill faces must-pass moment in Congress - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/chips-act-funding-congress/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/06/22/chips-act-funding-congress/ |
How to use translation apps and services for travelers
Smartphone translation apps can help travelers who don't speak the local language. (iStock)
It’s a problem as old as the Tower of Babel: How do you communicate with others when you don’t speak their language? Anna-Marie Cartagena found herself in this situation on a recent visit to a spice market in Israel. The employee spoke no English, and Cartagena didn’t speak Hebrew. She didn’t have ready access to a phone with an internet connection.
Cartagena’s solution isn’t new, but it’s often overlooked. A sign language interpreter by profession, she decided to try communicating nonverbally. “I gestured and clucked like a chicken,” she says — a request for spices used to prepare chicken. Then she oinked for pork. “Then he made spice blends for all the items and drew a picture of a chicken, fish, pig, carrot and a cow on each bag,” she recalls.
“Communication needs to happen — and it will.”
Fortunately, there are easier ways to get your message across. There are a variety of translation apps and services that can help travelers overcome language barriers.
Translation apps. Google Translate, the most widely used translation app, automatically translates phrases into dozens of languages. “Google Translate can be a good resource if you don’t speak the destination language, and you need to get urgent information across, like ordering at a restaurant,” says Carolina Sánchez-Hervás, founder of CSH Translation, a translation services provider. But she recommends using it with caution: The app may not pick up on nuances such as gender agreement, jokes or metaphors. Google also offers an interpreter mode that allows you to speak into your device to get an almost real-time translation. But for most users, it’s dependent on a fast internet connection, so if you’re offline, it might not work.
Carla Bevins, who teaches business communication at Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business, also likes Microsoft Translator, a free app that offers translation into more than 100 languages and allows up to 100 participants. The app iTranslate can also offer more flexibility. “It supports gesture-based controls and can translate Chinese characters,” she says. But Bevins warns against overreliance on translation apps. There’s no substitute for learning a few key phrases and communicating face to face. “Be willing to try speaking with others,” she advises. “As you practice speaking, you’ll get better at it and make some great memories.”
Live interpreters. Several apps can connect you to a live interpreter. Alan Campbell, a former Foreign Service worker who teaches Spanish translation, likes Jeenie (iOS or Android), an app that charges one dollar a minute for real-time interpretations. “It is a great app with a respectable mission to support language accessibility and equity in other contexts besides travel,” he says. The app works through your camera, so your interpreter can also see the body-language cues of the person you’re talking to, allowing for more accuracy. Other apps, such as Stepes, charge by the word but may offer more language options. Day Translations can translate, help with pronunciation and, if necessary, connect you to an interpreter.
Translation cards. For situations when an accurate translation is a must — describing a medical condition or food allergy, for example — some travelers will buy cards or printouts to take on vacation. Companies such as Equal Eats sell cards that describe conditions including celiac disease and nut allergies ($7.99 for an instant download or $16.99 for a plastic card) in different languages. Translation software is “not accurate enough to convey life-threatening allergy information abroad,” says Kyle Dine, CEO of Equal Eats. The company uses professional translators, proofreaders and native speakers to ensure the most accurate translation. The information is also available as an app.
Travel insurance. If you have a travel insurance policy, you may be able to take advantage of translation services. For example, Allianz Travel Insurance’s assistance hotline offers real-time services for its customers in several major languages, including French, German and Italian. “Travelers who call in advance can request our help with arrangements in their destination’s language — anything from making hotel, restaurant or sightseeing tour reservations to obtaining important information needed throughout their travels,” says LaShanta Sullivan, manager of Allianz’s travel assistance department. If you have a Medjet membership, which offers medical evacuations, you can also use its medical translation benefits to distill and translate foreign medical reports into English.
Of course, the best way to communicate is to learn the language. Although you might not have the time to become proficient, even knowing a few words and phrases can be helpful. There are a host of apps that can help you learn another language. “Even a small effort goes a long way and is not only appreciated by the locals but also allows you a deeper connection with the country, away from your smartphone,” says Franziska Wirth, a sales manager for guidebook publisher Rough Guides.
But there’s not always time for that. On a recent visit to Turkey, I barely got past hello (“merhaba”). One evening, I found myself in a taxi with a driver who spoke no English. I fumbled on my phone for Google Translate and finally typed what I wanted to say. Then I pushed the button for it to play aloud. Nothing happened. So I pushed it again. The Turkish translation rendered slowly, which happens when you push the button twice, and everyone had a good laugh.
Ultimately, methods such as Cartagena’s may still be the most effective. Kelley Price, a human resources manager from Kirkland, Wash., used it recently when she visited a town just outside Izmir, on Turkey’s Aegean coast. She stopped in a restaurant where no one spoke English, and the menus were entirely in Turkish.
“So I made chicken noises,” she says. “I grew up on a farm and can do a pretty realistic chicken. And we got chicken for dinner.” | 2022-06-22T17:49:07Z | www.washingtonpost.com | How to use translation apps while traveling - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/06/22/travel-translation-apps/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/06/22/travel-translation-apps/ |
Dear Carolyn: I just divorced my husband of 33 years. So proud of myself for finally getting out of that abusive relationship. Although he never hit me or our daughters, he was verbally violent and terrifying several times a year. Most of the time, we couldn’t predict it was coming. No one outside our family knew about this.
My daughters are grown, and, after much therapy and work with Co-Dependents Anonymous, I have recovered enough to be ready to talk to the girls about it. I tried once not long ago and they were both too uncomfortable. I get it.
Also, he is in a new relationship. I know there are a hundred reasons not to contact this person (intruding in the relationship, she’s unlikely to believe me, etc.), but I wonder if his abusive tendencies are enough of a reason to try. It would be different if it was just about his narcissism, I think?
— I got out, can they?
I got out, can they?: Much respect to you for getting away from that situation! I do want to say that I feel there’s a reason you didn’t mention what your therapist and/or Co-Dependents Anonymous group advised. Possibly that reason is because you haven’t asked them? If that’s the case, is it because you understand that getting involved in his relationship is getting involved with HIM, and all of this points to a co-dependent behavior, one you’ve done a lot of work in changing? As for her … she’ll figure it out, or she won’t. It’s not worth sabotaging any of the hard work you’ve done to get where you are. I say this as someone who has been in shoes similar to yours. It likely won’t help her and it will likely hurt you. The days of putting someone else’s interests first, especially at the expense of your own, are officially over. Now, go have a cool drink on a warm beach with a good book, and try not to make this your problem. Go forth, guilt-free, and enjoy your freedom from his terrible burden. You deserve it.
— OnwardandUpward
I got out, can they?: Although it is commendable that you want to save someone the trauma you experienced, the probability of her actually heeding your advice is almost nil. If he is, in fact, a narcissist then he will have already laid the groundwork for you to not be believed (new supply vs old supply). If he is a narcissist, he will undoubtedly place the blame for the failure of your marriage at your feet and victimize himself in the narrative she has heard. If you feel compelled to warn her, don’t expect your story to be fully embraced. That being said, an early warning from you might plant a seed that makes her more ready to recognize red flags if and when they occur. Although she probably won’t leave the relationship based on your advice, she might be more prepared to leave should the need arise.
— Been there done that
I got out, can they?: Good for you for getting out! You describe yourself as a recovering codependent, so you might want to reflect on your rationale for wanting to reach out to this woman. Having just left an abusive marriage, your energy is better spent focusing on your own wellness, and continuing to keep lines of conversation open with your daughters.
Most abusers test the waters in new relationships — starting with small, harmful comments, or trying to control their partners in ways that initially seem charming, sweet or motivated by concern — before escalating to more overtly harmful behavior. There will be yellow flags, and then red flags. The new girlfriend is (I assume) an adult woman. If she is with him day-to-day, she is already gathering the information she needs to help her decide whether to stay or go. She may be choosing to ignore those initial yellow flags, but intervention from you isn’t likely to change her mind.
I got out, can they?: Abuse of any kind is a serious matter, and I personally believe a short letter or direct message may be warranted. You’re correct in thinking she may not believe you or suspect you have ulterior motives. As emotional beings we are naturally suspicious of outsiders in our relationships, especially a previous partner. I’ll give you an example I experienced second-hand from my best friend. Her ex-husband was abusive, both verbally and physically. When he started dating a younger and seemingly more vulnerable woman (they met occasionally due to sharing custody of their child), she became concerned just as you have. My friend thought it was important to be dispassionate with her statement, just give the facts, and let the young woman do what she will with the information. She put it shortly and plainly: “I was abused by him and I’m concerned he has not done the therapy or work to behave any differently toward you. I’m not telling you to leave him, but I’m telling you so that if you see warning signs you’ll be better prepared.” She didn’t really react one way or another at the time, but once she experienced his first outrage, she left him and expressed thanks to my friend. You know your ex-husband and the situation best so only you can make the final call, but I hope this has helped.
— Seen It Before | 2022-06-22T18:13:12Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Carolyn Hax: Should I warn my abusive ex's new girlfriend? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/carolyn-hax-warn-abusive-ex-new-girlfriend/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/22/carolyn-hax-warn-abusive-ex-new-girlfriend/ |
Grace Young talks with store owners Vicky and Ken Li in New York City's Chinatown in December 2021. (Jeenah Moon/for The Washington Post)
If there was an EGOT status in the food world, Grace Young would be getting there, and fast. The cookbook author and culinary historian last month was named the winner of the prestigious Julia Child award by the Julia Child Foundation for Gastronomy and the Culinary Arts. And last week, she was recognized as 2022 humanitarian of the year at the James Beard Foundation awards ceremony, which is often likened to the food world’s Oscars.
Grace Young is reminding the world why Chinatowns matter
Young, who grew up in San Francisco, is known for bringing Chinese cooking to many American kitchens, and for championing the wok (she’s known as the “Wok Therapist” and presides over a lively Facebook group dubbed “Wok Wednesdays”). Young’s pandemic pivot was a fascinating one: The financial fallout in New York’s Chinatown and the rise of anti-Asian violence prompted the self-described “quiet, reserved person” to become an unlikely activist.
She recently talked with The Washington Post about the moment she got hooked on cooking, getting Julia Child’s phone number and how a phone call from a stranger altered the course of her career. Edited excerpts of that conversation follow.
Everyone has a Julia Child story, and I know yours is special.
As a child, “The French Chef” was my favorite show on television. I just remember being mesmerized. I grew up in a traditional Cantonese family where we ate classic Chinese food like 95 percent of the time, so I had never had French food.
I somehow bought the French Chef paperback cookbook, and my mom let me cook from it. My mom was raised in Shanghai, and there was a lot of European influence there. The first thing that I made was brioche, and I remember the aroma that filled the kitchen. And when I finally opened up the oven door, the brioche were perfect. And I remember the look on my mother’s face when she took the first bite. It was like, “You did this?”
You know how comedians talk about the first time they’re in front of an audience and they hear that laugh, and they become addicted? They want to do it again. And I wanted to do it again. And so eventually my parents let me make her roast lamb, and the spinach souffle, and cream puffs.
Did you know then that food was going to be part of your life professionally?
No, no. I mean, I just loved it. But Julia got me fascinated by French cooking, and because I read the newspaper, I found out that there was a local French cooking teacher, Josephine Araldo. I told Josephine, who was in her 70s, that I could assist her in her cooking classes in exchange for free lessons. And then I convinced my father to drive me there two or three nights a week.
Lunar New Year recipes: 5 Asian cooks share dishes from their celebrations
When I was 15, I read in the San Francisco Chronicle that Julia was coming to San Francisco for a book signing. I convinced my father to take me. When we arrived, it was all Caucasian women, really elegantly dressed, all holding hard-bound copies of “Mastering the Art of French Cooking.” And I show up with my little Bantam paperback. And I remember looking around thinking, we’re the only Asians here, and I’m the only child in this room. I waited patiently in line and finally got up, and Julia and Paul were there. They both signed the book, and my father took a picture of me with Julia. Then I mailed the picture to Julia at WGBH, and she autographed it and mailed it back to me. And this is the most painful part of the story: Over the years, the picture got lost.
Oh, that is tragic!
But it was really an amazing moment. Later in life, I was completely fascinated by Joseph Campbell, back in the 1990s or so. And I remember him talking about following your bliss, and when you follow your bliss, doors will open for you, and you put yourself on track for the life that you’re meant to lead. And I always thought from the moment I heard Joseph Campbell say that, well, I was a child when I saw Julia, and that’s what did it for me.
At what point did you embrace Cantonese cooking?
Eventually, I ended up in New York working for Time Life Books as the test kitchen director and director of food photography for over 40 cookbooks. So I was exploring all these different cuisines. I was in my 30s, and I felt ashamed that I didn’t know how to do so many of the classic recipes and all the comfort foods that I grew up with, and so that’s how I ended up writing my first cookbook, “The Wisdom of the Chinese Kitchen.”
I remembered that Julia had written that what she wanted to do was to take the bugaboo out of French cooking, to make it accessible. So I thought, well, when I write my book, I’m gonna take the bugaboo out of Chinese cooking and demystify it. So Julia was really the inspiration.
After “Wisdom” was published, there was a Lunar New Year party given by the American Institute of Wine and Food in San Francisco, and I was invited to be the keynote speaker, and Julia was the guest. They seated her between my mother and me, and my father was there, and he took a picture of us together. And in the keynote speech, I was able to thank her.
I thought that my life had come full circle. After that dinner, she said to me, “Well, we must stay in touch.” She pulls out her checkbook and she gives me a deposit slip. And the upper left hand corner had her name and her address in Santa Barbara and in Cambridge and her phone number.
A month later, “The Wisdom of the Chinese Kitchen” is nominated for the Julia Child award from [the International Association of Culinary Professionals] and best international cookbook, and she sends me a typewritten postcard that says she hopes that I’m going to win. And then IACP comes to Rhode Island, and she’s there, and I win for best international cookbook, and my husband takes a photograph of the two of us right after I came off the stage. So again, I thought that that was the full circle of my Julia Child story. But now to get the Julia Child award is just unreal.
Your Julia story truly is epic.
Yeah, and now I’ve given all those items to the National Museum of American History, so they have my copy of the French Chef cookbook that was autographed. They have the deposit slip, the postcard, the two photos, and they also will be given a first-edition copy of “The Wisdom of the Chinese Kitchen.”
At the beginning of the pandemic, you almost immediately began focusing on Chinatowns and what was being lost. Take me back to when this all started dawning on you.
I’m normally in New York City’s Chinatown town once or twice a week, and in January or February of 2020, I noticed that Chinatown had emptied out. Because of misinformation and xenophobia, people were afraid to come to Chinatown because they thought that they could catch covid. And it was shocking to me — it was painful to look at the street vendors selling produce and to see that they had no business. It was painful to glance into restaurants and to see all the tables were empty and the waiters just standing around. So I started doing posts on Instagram.
Julia Knight, the director of Poster House museum, who I did not know at all, calls me on Friday, March 13, and says: “All the museums in New York City are now shut down. We know Chinatown is hurting. Do you have any ideas about what we can do to help?” And I was completely blown away by this stranger calling me. I said: “I’ve been wanting to do interviews with restaurant and shop owners and to get their stories up on my Instagram page. I’m hoping that when New Yorkers hear that these guys have lost 40 to 80 percent of their business that they will show up.”
And she said that if I did the interviews, they would post them on Poster House’s website. And that’s why we were in Chinatown on Sunday, March 15, the last day Chinatown was as we think of it, because hours after we did these interviews, [New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio] put New York City in lockdown.
It was one of Chinatown’s darkest days. And from that moment, doing those interviews and seeing up close the looks on the faces of the cooks, the owners, the waiters, everybody — it just shook me to my core and made me realize that I had to do everything in my power to try and help Chinatowns.
How did that feel, taking on such a different role?
It was like a natural shift — I had always been a preservationist, and my life’s work came into sharp focus. I realized that my background made me the perfect person to be an advocate for Chinatown. And I realized that all these people in Chinatown that were losing their jobs or were vulnerable to their businesses being shut down — they had no voice, they couldn’t get their story out there. But I could.
What does the landscape look like for America’s Chinatowns now?
Chinatowns are still hurting across the United States, and anti-Asian hate crimes are not going away, sadly. In San Francisco’s Chinatown there are 46 shuttered storefronts on Grant Avenue. In my lifetime, I don’t think I’ve ever seen three shuttered storefronts, so that just makes my heart bleed. There was a study in March showing that 75 percent of Asian seniors do not feel safe leaving their homes in New York City. That impacts businesses.
I started a #LoveAAPI social media campaign with the James Beard Foundation and the Poster House museum, and the idea is that the only way to fight the hate is to show love to the [Asian American and Pacific Islander] community by showing up. And so we ask you to post a photo or video of your favorite AAPI restaurant, market, bakery, shop or whatever, and tell us what you’re eating and what you’re buying, and why you love the business and then use the hashtag #LoveAAPI.
At the start of 2020, I thought I would be starting work on a new cookbook. So what happened to me and this work that I’ve done was so completely unexpected, but it’s the most meaningful work I’ve ever done. I never thought that the word “activist” would come after my name. I’m always the quiet, reserved person. I normally don’t participate in marches or protests. But I felt like I had to find my voice, to speak up for Chinatown. And my voice has only gotten stronger, which sort of surprises me. So it took me a long time to find my voice, but having found it, I’m not going to shut up. | 2022-06-22T18:13:15Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Grace Young on saving Chinatowns: 'I'm not going to shut up' - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/06/22/grace-young-julia-child-award-chinatowns/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/food/2022/06/22/grace-young-julia-child-award-chinatowns/ |
How travelers can stay safe during encounters with wild animals
A woman was recently gored by a bison in Yellowstone National Park after standing too close to the animal. (Matthew Brown/AP)
Wild animal attacks are rare, but dangerous encounters do happen, especially when humans ignore — or are unaware of — wildlife-viewing rules and etiquette. Over Memorial Day weekend, a bison in Yellowstone gored an Ohio woman who had stood within 10 feet of the animal, significantly short of the park’s directive to stay at least 25 yards (or 75 feet) away. The burly beast flung the visitor 10 feet in the air and inflicted a puncture wound, among other injuries.
“Domestic animals account for most animal attacks in the U.S., but if we are just talking about wildlife, snakes and rodents (rats, squirrels, etc.) make up the vast majority,” Mark Hofberg, a campaigns officer for the International Fund for Animal Welfare, a D.C.-based nonprofit, wrote in an email. “The high-profile attacks from bears, cougars and other large mammals that you hear on the news are much rarer but have a higher chance of being dangerous, so it pays to be prepared.”
With the summer outdoor season upon us, we will undoubtedly bump into animals in their natural habitats, a prospect that delights one group more than the other. “Wild animals want to be left to themselves,” said Cameron Harsh, programs director in the U.S. office of World Animal Protection, an international nonprofit group. “They don’t want to interact with humanity.”
To ensure a peaceable kingdom, we asked wildlife specialists in government agencies and nonprofit organizations for advice on how to keep all creatures — two-, four- and no-legged, with or without a tail, most with teeth — safe in the wild. Here are their guidelines:
Familiarize yourself with the fauna in the park or region you plan to visit. “The basic rule of thumb, whether you are going to Shenandoah or Yellowstone or Denali [national parks], is to know what wildlife calls that its home,” said Bart Melton, wildlife program director at the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA), a D.C.-based nonprofit. Learn to identify the local residents (grizzlies have pronounced shoulder humps, while black bears don’t) and note their schedules. For instance, ungulates, such as bison, and coyotes are generally crepuscular, or most active at dusk and dawn, whereas alligators are diurnal and nocturnal. (They basically keep the same hours as a 24-hour diner.)
You can find this information on park websites (for national parks, search under the “Nature” or “Safety” headings) and at visitor centers and tourism offices. Trailheads typically feature bulletin boards that highlight the wildlife and share best hiking practices. State wildlife management agencies are also valuable resources. For example, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s website has a page called “Living with Wildlife and Preventing Wildlife Conflicts” that includes tips on securing food and links to short bios for nearly 400 species, including the black bear, bull shark and cottonmouth/water moccasin. The Arizona Game and Fish Department’s “Living with Wildlife” section offers a primer on the state’s 13 rattlesnake species, plus guidance on how to handle a run-in with a mountain lion, bobcat, bear or javelina, among other critters.
Be extra vigilant during big annual events. During calving and mating seasons, for example, animals may behave more aggressively. In the spring, bears head out in search of food after a long winter’s fast. Around the same time, cubs will venture out of their dens for the first time, with their protective mothers nearby. “Make sure if you see cubs, you are of aware of the mother bear’s location,” Melton said. “It’s extremely important to avoid getting between a female bear and her cubs.” Elk, bison and moose also calve during this period, so give the parents and their offspring a wide berth. In the fall, bears binge-eat before hibernation, a period called hyperphagia, and elk, caribou, moose and other hoofed animals compete for mates during the weeks-long rut. “The male elk are pretty feisty,” Melton said. For this reason, never come between the swaggering males and their objects of affection.
Give animals lots of space. Although there is no official distancing figure, experts, including those at many national parks, recommend staying at least 75 feet from nonpredatory creatures and 300 feet from predators. David Lamfrom, vice president of regional programs at NPCA, recommends a 50-foot buffer around elephant seals and sea lions, whose males are territorial, and at least six feet between you and a venomous snake. “If you’re close enough to take a selfie,” said Sarah Gaines Barmeyer, senior managing director for NPCA’s conservation programs, “you’re too close.” Speaking of photography: Invest in a telephoto lens.
A guide to volunteering in the outdoors
Always stick to designated trails and viewing platforms. Avoid surprising the wildlife. “Be predictable,” said Lamfrom, adding that animals such as bears and moose are typically wise to the heavily peopled routes. At Shark Valley in Florida’s Everglades National Park, home to more than 200,000 alligators, visitors can observe the large reptiles from a tram or along a wooden boardwalk. “They’re not going to climb up and get you,” Barmeyer said. However, Meredith Budd, regional policy director with the Florida Wildlife Federation, warns against lingering at the water’s edge, especially at retention ponds and particularly if you have a small dog in tow. “If there’s a body of water in Florida,” she said, “there’s likely to be an alligator in it.”
Alligators take center stage at Florida’s Everglades National Park
Leave no trace of food behind. Clean up all your garbage and sweep up any crumbs. If you are camping, lock your edibles in a bear-proof container. “In most cases, wildlife wants to avoid you, but if you are leaving the aluminum foil out with burger drippings from your cookout last night, you are making it hard for them to ignore you,” Hofberg said. Never leave a backpack containing food lying around, even for the time it takes to snap a photo of a vista or to tie your shoe. Be mindful of odors that might smell like a medicine cabinet to you but a Las Vegas buffet to a wild animal. For instance, Melton recommends campers do not bring toothpaste inside their tent or put deodorant on before lights-out. Also, don’t sleep in your hiking clothes, especially if you grilled burgers in them.
Take preventive measures. On hiking trails in bear country, announce your presence vocally. “Let the bears know you are there,” Melton said. “Continual renditions of good singalong songs or taking turns every couple of minutes with a, ‘Hey, Bear!’ yelled loudly is a good approach.” If you notice a carcass, don’t rubberneck: Pass it as quickly as possible. In tall marsh grass or wetlands, wear knee-high boots to protect your legs from snakes. Before stepping over a log, check the other side for snakes waiting for unsuspecting prey. In stingray territory, such as Florida’s Gulf Coast, shuffle your feet in the sand as a warning signal. In waters inhabited by sharks or barracuda, leave the shiny clothes and glittery, dangling accessories for the disco. “Don’t look like a fish,” Barmeyer advised. Also, resist the urge to swim in a school of fish, which is basically a drive-through for aquatic predators.
In a dangerously close encounter, follow the proper course of action. This could vary by species. For example, with black bears, directly face the threatening animal and fight back if the situation turns grave. With grizzlies, avoid eye contact and play dead in the event of an attack. However, a few prevailing rules apply. “In general, for animals that are predators, you don’t want to act like prey,” Hofberg said. “So don’t turn your back, and don’t run away. Make yourself large, and if you are with others, gather together.” In its “Staying Safe Around Bears” section, the National Park Service suggests speaking calmly to the bear, as if you were trying to console a child, and slowly waving your arms. Carry bear spray, but use it only in an emergency. The Be Bear Aware Campaign offers free instruction on handling the deterrent. Melton reminds hikers that bear spray is not just a stronger version of mosquito repellent: “Don’t spray it on your tent.” To defend yourself against a moose, bison or elk, try to insert an object, such as a tree or boulder, between yourself and the animal. For a comprehensive guide to de-escalating conflicts with wildlife, check out the “Wildlife Safety Tips” section from outdoor retailer REI.
Show respect. It should go without saying: Never feed, taunt or harass the animals. | 2022-06-22T18:13:16Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Tips for keeping your cool around wildlife - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/06/22/safety-wild-animals-travel-vacation/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2022/06/22/safety-wild-animals-travel-vacation/ |
Former Georgia election worker Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss appears at the House Jan. 6 select committee's fourth hearing on June 21. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)
When he ran for president in 2016, Donald Trump promised to “open up our libel laws” to make it easier to sue anyone who said something mean about him. He wanted to be able to sue news organizations “so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”
Like many of Trump’s promises, he obviously wasn’t serious about accomplishing it, and he never attempted to follow through on it. But there are already some important libel lawsuits in progress, using existing laws to go after Trump and his allies for the damaging lies they have told — and there ought to be more of them.
At Tuesday’s hearing of the Jan. 6 select committee, Georgia election worker Shaye Moss and her mother, Ruby Freeman, described how their lives had been upended by calumny directed at them by Trump and lawyer Rudy Giuliani. If you watched this and asked, “Why don’t they sue?” you had the right instinct.
As it happens, Moss and Freeman have sued multiple people and organizations for repeating the lie that they were involved in a conspiracy to steal the 2020 election. Their suits allege that Giuliani and a number of news outlets, including the far-right One America News (OAN), repeatedly accused them of criminal conduct despite knowing their claims were false.
They’ve already reached a settlement with OAN, but their suits against Giuliani and the website Gateway Pundit are pending.
Many other defamation suits related to Republican election lies are still in process. The most significant may be those of Dominion Voting Systems, whose machines are at the heart of a whole complex of wild conspiracy theories, some involving Italian satellites and the ghost of Hugo Chávez.
Just last week, a judge in Delaware allowed two Dominion suits to go forward, one against the Murdoch family and Fox Corp. and one against Newsmax. The suits seek $1.6 billion from each, charging that the networks knowingly repeated lies about Dominion that damaged its business. Dominion and its competitor Smartmatic have also filed suits against Giuliani, “Kraken” lawyer Sidney Powell, unhinged pillow monger Mike Lindell, and various other right-wing outlets and personalities.
All of this might sound like an absurd free-for-all, with lawsuits flying in all directions. But our system has a way to deal with lawsuits that are genuinely frivolous. They may get thrown out of court quickly or they may go all the way to trial, but they usually lose.
Furthermore, we should be able to agree that the basic structure of libel law as established by the Supreme Court — that it’s harder for a public figure to recover damages than an ordinary citizen — is a good one. Public figures have more means to get their stories across, and when you become a celebrity or run for office, you accept that you’ll get a lot of criticism (even if Trump can’t tolerate it).
Which is why it’s particularly odious that Trump, Giuliani and their supporters went after regular people such as Moss and Freeman, knowing full well it would mean they’d be targeted for harassment, threats and perhaps even violence.
This is not to say justice is always served by the civil legal system. But when those who would seek to hold Trump or the likes of Giuliani accountable, the power dynamic can be equalized — or nearly so.
Ordinarily, the system makes it extremely difficult for those without money and power to prevail against those who have money and power. In this case, companies such as Dominion and Smartmatic may not be as big as Fox Corp., but they still have resources to fight. And when it comes to ordinary people such as Moss and Freeman, because so many liberals (and some conservatives) loathe Trump and all he represents, they can find skilled and effective representation without having to pay for it.
The two Georgia women are being represented in their suits by a well-funded nonprofit organization, which means that they can make their case even though they’re not wealthy. And though a financial settlement will never adequately compensate them for what they went through (and their willingness to bravely testify almost certainly means they’ll face more racist vitriol and death threats), a large financial penalty might make Giuliani or OAN think twice before they libel someone else.
It would be naive to argue that lawsuits could persuade Trump himself to start telling the truth. And the reason he isn’t a defendant in these particular suits is that other people and organizations made more direct and unambiguous public claims that can be litigated. But there seem to be plenty of grounds for any number of people to sue Trump, if they have the stamina to attempt it.
Which they ought to do. One of the many toxic effects of Trump’s rule is that he convinced so many on the right that there ought to be no consequences for any misdeed they might contemplate: corruption, self-dealing, encouraging violence, attacking democracy, or lying relentlessly about anyone and everything. It’s long past time those who do these things started feeling consequences. Dragging them into court to defend their lies won’t solve the problem by itself, but it’s a place to start. | 2022-06-22T18:35:04Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Opinion | Everyone should sue Trump over 2020 election lies - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/sue-trump-2020-election-lies/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/22/sue-trump-2020-election-lies/ |
A sign the Jan. 6 committee is having an effect: GOP infighting about it
Vice Chairwoman Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) at the House Jan. 6 committee hearing on June 16, 2022. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was furious at Donald Trump. He spoke with the then-president on Jan. 6, 2021, as the Capitol was being overrun with pro-Trump rioters. Trump reportedly dismissed McCarthy’s concerns with a blithe comment about McCarthy not being sufficiently concerned about the election results.
In private conversations, McCarthy called Trump’s behavior “unacceptable” and said he would push Trump to resign if he was impeached by the House. But it soon became very clear that the Republican base was not particularly interested in holding Trump to account for the riot, so McCarthy scaled back his rhetoric.
As the House debated impeachment a week after the attack, McCarthy stood in objection to the punishment.
“The president bears responsibility for Wednesday’s attack on Congress by mob rioters. He should have immediately denounced the mob when he saw what was unfolding,” McCarthy said. And congressional action was warranted — but only “a fact finding commission and a censure resolution.”
A few months later, a bipartisan group of representatives announced a framework for just such a commission: 10 members, five appointed by each party. The commission would have subpoena power, but only if the ranking members of each party agreed to issue one.
McCarthy was no longer interested. Pointing to the “duplicative and potentially counterproductive nature of this effort” (because more-limited investigations were underway in the Senate) and because the commission wouldn’t “examine interrelated forms of political violence in America” (meaning that it wouldn’t loop in violence at protests in the summer of 2020 in a neat bit of whataboutism), McCarthy opposed the idea.
So House Democrats went ahead and formed a select committee independently. It was meant to include Republican members as well as Democrats, with five of its 13 members selected by the GOP, with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) having final sign-off. McCarthy opposed this proposal, too; only Reps. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) voted for it from their party’s caucus. Both had also voted to impeach Trump for his role in stoking the riot.
McCarthy soon presented his choices to serve on the committee. Among the proposed five were Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.), two fervent allies of Trump’s. Pelosi, though, rejected those two, pointing to the committee’s “insistence on the truth” and “concern about statements made and actions taken” by Jordan and Banks. In response, McCarthy took his ball and went home, offering zero committee members. Pelosi added Kinzinger and, as vice-chair, Cheney. The committee got to work.
Over the past few weeks, the select committee has been publicly presenting what it has learned about the attack and, more broadly, how Trump sought to retain power despite losing the 2020 election. The presentations have been carefully curated and deliberately constrained; there’s some evidence that views of Trump have grown more critical since the presentations began.
This is, of course, frustrating to Trump and his allies. In recent days, Trump’s long-standing excoriations of the committee (which he calls an “unselect committee” for vague pejorative reasons) have expanded to include criticisms of McCarthy.
“It was a bad decision not to have representation on this committee,” Trump said in a radio interview over the weekend. “That was a very, very foolish decision.” Expanding on his thoughts on Tuesday, he said that “in retrospect [McCarthy should’ve put Republicans on] to just have a voice. The Republicans don’t have a voice.”
Trump pointedly added, “I wasn’t involved in it from a standpoint so I never looked at it too closely.” But in October, he was paying attention, blaming the purported imbalance of the committee not on McCarthy but on Pelosi. Democrats, he wrote, “were unable to make a deal with Kevin McCarthy to put real Republicans on the Committee” — meaning that only Cheney and Kinzinger could participate, people who, in his telling, “have no idea what our Party stands for.”
This is a telling formulation. Republicans do have a voice on the committee; two, in fact. Cheney — until last year a member of the party’s House leadership — has had her voice heard quite literally in each of the recent hearings. But this doesn’t count to Trump because the committee’s Republicans are not the sort of pliable, obsequious Republicans that he prefers. It’s not that there are no Republican voices on the committee, it’s that there are no voices of Trump loyalists on the committee. And that’s what irks Trump.
Republicans and right-wing voices more broadly have taken a slightly different (and less Trump-centric) tack, conflating the one-sidedness of the committee — which is, in fact, unified in its condemnation of the Capitol riot and Trump’s role in stoking it — with partisanship. This is a tell! It’s not that the committee is solely made up of people who share a progressive political worldview, it’s that the committee is solely made up of people who actually share a political worldview in which angering millions of Americans with false claims of election fraud and then pointing them toward the Capitol is seen as bad. The committee is admittedly not both-sides-ing that point.
Trump has argued that he deserves some sort of defense, claiming (as he did during the investigation that preceded his first impeachment) that standards dictated he have a right to cross-examine testimony. But, of course, he has no such right. This isn’t a criminal trial. Should he face criminal charges related to the Jan. 6 attack, he would then be free to mount whatever defense he sought.
That’s beside the point. Trump is mad that the committee is presenting a strong case against his actions and wishes that his party had fought harder to moderate its composition. There’s no guarantee that adding more Republicans to the select committee would have significantly changed what resulted, in part because even Trump-sympathetic members of the panel might have been more convinced of Trump’s culpability as the probe continued. But for Trump, what the committee is now is a worst-case scenario that he would like to unwind.
McCarthy could have simply replaced Jordan and Banks with other Republicans and had a full complement of representation on the committee. And then some: Pelosi had already named Cheney — who remains a Republican — to the effort. He didn’t, betting that casting the committee as biased would bear more fruit.
The speaker’s decision to reject Banks and Jordan, incidentally, was later bolstered by the committee’s work. Those two legislators have been subpoenaed for information related to the probe. As has McCarthy. | 2022-06-22T18:35:12Z | www.washingtonpost.com | A sign the Jan. 6 committee is having an effect: GOP infighting about its members - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/sign-jan-6-committee-is-having-an-effect-gop-infighting-about-it/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/sign-jan-6-committee-is-having-an-effect-gop-infighting-about-it/ |
Investors criticize federal retirement savings program over new system
By Eric Yoder
The U.S. Capitol, seen June 21, 2022. (Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
Three weeks after the retirement savings program for millions of federal workers switched to a new operating platform, lawmakers are demanding answers as investors report widespread problems.
Complaints have flooded social media, and messages have poured into congressional offices from investors describing being unable to sign into their accounts, long waits and dropped calls from customer service lines, missing information and problems with transactions such as taking out loans.
“It is a mess,” said Stacey Peckins, an Agriculture Department retiree who said she was locked out of her account and then stuck hold for four hours with customer service only to be cut off. “The lack of professionalism, lack of access and lack of information are not reassuring. As a retiree, this is a vote to move my money out of TSP.”
Federal retirement savings program to widely expand investment options
Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) raised many of those issues in a letter last week to the Thrift Savings Plan’s governing board, called the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, or FRTIB.
“Constituents have indicated they have attempted to contact the TSP ‘ThriftLine’ for assistance, only to be put on hold for several hours and then be disconnected before talking to someone,” she wrote. In some cases, account holders must now wait for a security code to be delivered by mail, “which delays account access for weeks,” she added.
The board apologized for the problems, blaming logistical difficulties and understaffing at customer service centers. It says that successful logins for new accounts have been rising in recent weeks and that wait times on customer service calls have dropped.
“We anticipated that the transition, as most are, would be bumpy,” the board wrote on Friday to Norton. “We sincerely apologize for the frustration and inconvenience some of our participants are encountering. We are working to address these issues as quickly as possible so we can help those who need it.”
The system, which launched June 1 after years in development, added features to the TSP, including allowing investors who meet certain conditions to move some of their money into outside mutual funds. The TSP, a 401(k)-type program for current and former federal and military personnel, had 6.6 million account holders with $734 billion on investment as of the end of May, making it the largest such program in the country.
The changeover required investors to update the online accounts used for managing their money by shifting between funds, changing ongoing investments or taking withdrawals.
Federal workers and retirees have described an epidemic of malfunctions with the platform, and alarmed lawmakers are pushing for fast improvement.
“I think the worst part is that previously my experience with TSP was great,” Peckins said. “It was easy, reliable and accessible.”
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) wrote to the board last week that many of his “constituents have been unable to complete the login setup process, and when they attempt to call the ThriftLine, they are placed on hold for at least an hour.” He asked for an explanation of what the TSP is planning and whether there is a “workaround for TSP participants to access their accounts while these login-setup issues persist.”
TSP’s board says data shows improvements. Since June 1, successful new logins have risen from 75 percent to 90 percent, it said, and the addition of customer service representatives has reduced call waiting times, although the board admitted that waits “remain too long.”
Norton, though, said in a statement Tuesday that the board’s response does not “address the problems my constituents are having accessing their TSP accounts. In addition, the response fails to provide information on what the FRTIB plans to do to correct the problems. I will continue to seek answers, fixes, and accountability.”
Another federal retiree, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the nature of his former job, said that he waited until last weekend to attempt to sign in “hoping they would have some of the bugs worked out” but that the system didn’t recognize identifying information he had used for years. “Trying to scan and upload my driver’s license and passport were also failures. I am now waiting on for a login code via U.S. Mail,” he wrote in an email.
The TSP has posted a list of “known issues” arising in reestablishing online accounts, including suggestions that account holders try a different browser and turn off auto-complete functions.
That page also notes that personal accounts now show balances and messages going back only to the June 1 switch-over; investors needing information from before then must call the customer service line. The message also urges account holders to make sure their designations of beneficiaries in case of death are up to date.
A federal employee who asked not to be identified because of agency policy restricting public comments said he found both of those policies troublesome. In an email, he said he was able to reestablish his personal account fairly easily, but it did not show the beneficiary election he made previously and was lacking account information he wanted to see.
“I expect more of an organization who is to administer and protect my retirement,” he said. “These two small issues put the whole organization's ability to do their mission at doubt.”
TSP spokeswoman Kim Weaver said that more than 800,000 investors have created new logins. The more recent 90 percent success rate for new logins “is not from our perspective bad customer service. It’s actually ensuring we’re protecting our participants’ accounts. … There are bots trying to do this,” she said in a phone interview.
She said that since June 1 — when the phone line received 130,000 calls, 2.5 times the previous daily high — call center staffing has increased from 485 to 805 employees. During that time, the abandonment rate on calls has dropped from 90 percent to 66 percent. The average wait time on the call line is now down to 49 minutes from two hours on June 6, TSP said.
“While our level of service at the call centers needs much improvement, it is trending in the right direction, and we will continue to add call center representatives to handle the increased volume,” she said. | 2022-06-22T18:35:14Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Investors describe problems with new Thrift Savings Plan system - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/thrift-savings-plan-investors-problems-logins/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/22/thrift-savings-plan-investors-problems-logins/ |
Former Prince George’s police officer pleads guilty to tax evasion
A highly decorated but controversial ex-lieutenant admitted he concealed private business income
A former Prince George’s County police lieutenant who ran a private security company while he was a member of the force pleaded guilty Wednesday to federal tax evasion, admitting that he created false business expenses to lower his tax liability by hundreds of thousands of dollars over a six-year span.
Edward “Scott” Finn, 48, whose history with the department included professional accolades as well as allegations of serious on-the-job misconduct, faces a sentence of up to five years in prison as part of a plea bargain, according to the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland. The deal requires him to reimburse the federal government for $367,765 in unpaid taxes for 2014 through 2019.
Finn pleaded guilty to one count of tax evasion after being indicted in September on five counts of tax evasion and one count of obstructing justice. Prosecutors said he did not disclose over $1.1 million in taxable income from his company, Edward Finn Inc., which employed off-duty police officers as security guards. He also was accused of deleting incriminating data from a cellphone when federal agents arrived at his home with a search warrant.
Before his arrest last year, Finn had been on the force for 25 years.
In a statement Wednesday, the U.S. attorney’s office said Finn concealed business proceeds by depositing them in nonbusiness bank accounts and “by writing checks to relatives and friends for purported services performed.” He also “used business funds to purchase a boat, a car, and other items for his personal use,” the U.S. attorney’s office said.
As a Prince George’s police officer, Finn was awarded the department’s medal of valor three times. He also was accused of lying and using excessive force, which was documented by The Washington Post in the early 2000s.
Finn was cleared by a panel of his peers in those cases, according to The Post’s reporting, and went on to receive raises and promotions. He was also exonerated for his role in the death of 29-year-old Elmer C. Newman Jr., who was high on cocaine when he was arrested by police. He collapsed and died in a holding cell an hour after he was detained.
The arresting officers said his injuries were self-inflicted, but a medical examiner later said police had fractured the man’s ribs and broken bones in his neck.
The New York Times said Finn also made a disparaging remark about the Black Lives Matter movement to one of its reporters in 2016.
In the tax evasion case, he is scheduled to be sentenced Oct. 7 in U.S. District Court in Maryland. His defense attorney did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. | 2022-06-23T00:58:01Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Former Prince George's Officer Edward Finn admits to tax evasion - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/22/maryland-police-officer-guilty-tax-evasion/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/06/22/maryland-police-officer-guilty-tax-evasion/ |
Former Miss Brazil dead at 27 after having tonsils removed
The columns of the Brazilian Supreme Court building in Brasilia are illuminated with the colors of the LGBTQ flag on June 21. (Evaristo Sa/AFP/Getty Images)
The surgery, in April, was routine: Gleycy Correia was having her tonsils removed.
But five days later, the former Miss Brazil suffered a hemorrhage and fell into a coma for more than two months.
Now Brazil is mourning her loss. Correia, who was crowned Miss Costa do Sol and Miss United Continents Brazil in 2018, died Monday at 27 of kidney failure. She never recovered consciousness.
“We are deeply saddened by this loss,” family pastor Lidiane Alves told The Washington Post. “She was an amazing woman and much loved by everyone. It won’t be easy to live without her smile and shine.”
The tonsils, two lymph nodes at the back of the throat, help filter out bacteria to prevent infection in the body. They are removed to treat breathing problems that interfere with sleep and sometimes recurring infections. The tonsillectomy, once common, is generally an outpatient procedure performed under general anesthesia. It’s considered a relatively safe and routine operation; estimates of mortality range from 1 death per 10,000 to 1 per 40,000.
Correia, a model, beautician and influencer with more than 56,000 followers on Instagram, was an evangelical Christian who posted often about God and her faith. Born in Macaé, a city on Brazil’s Atlantic coast 120 miles northeast of Rio de Janeiro, she worked from an early age.
“We will never know how strong we are until being strong is the only choice,” she wrote in one Instagram post, according to the Daily Mail. “I really wasn’t born in a golden cradle, I’m from a very humble family, but I’m so proud of it, really proud.”
Correia was buried Tuesday surrounded by family and friends.
“God chose this day to collect our princess,” wrote Pastor Jak Abreu, a family friend. “We know that she will be greatly missed, but she will now be brightening the sky with her smile. She fulfilled her purpose and left her legacy of love in us!”
Correia was known for working on social projects at her church, especially one focused on helping women affected by breast cancer.
“Gleycy will always be remembered for her enlightened beauty, joy and empathy shown in her work,” Brazil’s National Beauty Pageant wrote on Instagram.
“My heart is in pieces,” Alves wrote. “That smile I received every end of the service with a hug and an I love you, beautiful pastor.”
Followers have left hundreds of condolence messages on her Instagram account. The final post, by her family, shows an illustration of a smiling Correia embracing Jesus with a quote from the New Testament Book of Timothy: | 2022-06-23T01:15:26Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Former Miss Brazil Gleycy Correia dead at 27 after tonsillectomy - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/22/miss-brazil-gleycy-correia-death/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/22/miss-brazil-gleycy-correia-death/ |
By Farnoush Amiri and Mary Clare Jalonick | AP
The chairman, Rep. Bennie Thompson, told reporters Wednesday that the committee is receiving “a lot of information” — including new documentary film footage of Donald Trump's final months in office — as its yearlong inquiry intensifies with hearings into the attack on Jan. 6, 2021, and Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election that Democrat Joe Biden won.
The committee is also working on setting up an interview with Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the conservative activist and wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has responded to the panel's request to appear, the chairman said. She was asked to speak to the committee after disclosures of her communications with Trump's team in the run-up and day of the insurrection at the Capitol.
The next hearing, set for Thursday, is expected to highlight former Justice Department officials testifying about Trump’s proposals to reject the election results. It would wrap up this month's work. The committee would start up again in July, Thompson said. | 2022-06-23T01:24:14Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Ginni Thomas responds to 1/6 panel, hearings stretch to July - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/capitol-riot-hearing-to-stretch-into-july-chairman-says/2022/06/22/7354eaf0-f253-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/capitol-riot-hearing-to-stretch-into-july-chairman-says/2022/06/22/7354eaf0-f253-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
DOVER, Del. — The daughter of Delaware State Auditor Kathy McGuiness testified Wednesday at her mother’s criminal corruption trial, saying she earned her pay after being hired for a part-time job in the auditor’s office but was treated poorly by other staffers.
In earlier testimony, the owner of a consulting firm hired by Kathy McGuiness in late 2019 under a no-bid contract said staffers in the auditor’s office were incompetent and pushed back on reforms Kathy McGuiness wanted to make after her predecessor’s 30-year tenure.
Gross testified that she eventually stopped working for the auditor’s office in 2021, after having successfully bid on a second contract. She said the final straw came after she spent several late-night hours correcting numbers in a budget request to be presented to state lawmakers, only to see the old numbers put back in. After complaining to McGuiness, Gross was assured by the auditor’s chief of staff that the right numbers would be restored, only to discover by accident that they were not. | 2022-06-23T01:24:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Daughter testifies at corruption trial of Delaware auditor - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/daughter-testifies-at-corruption-trial-of-delaware-auditor/2022/06/22/a3ef793a-f287-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/daughter-testifies-at-corruption-trial-of-delaware-auditor/2022/06/22/a3ef793a-f287-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
James Rado, co-creator of 1960s Broadway sensation ‘Hair,’ dies at 90
James Rado, center, performing in the original Broadway production of “Hair” in 1968. (Dagmar)
James Rado, who gave voice to the Age of Aquarius as the co-creator of “Hair,” the long-running hit that debuted in 1968 as Broadway’s first rock musical and featured a then-shocking scene of full nudity, died June 21 at a Manhattan hospital. He was 90.
The cause was cardiorespiratory arrest, said publicist Merle Frimark, a longtime associate and friend.
Mr. Rado was an actor and singer who saw dramatic possibilities in the emerging hippie culture of the 1960s. He and his creative collaborator, Gerome Ragni, developed the idea for “Hair” as a musical extravaganza that brought together several sentiments of the time, including opposition to the Vietnam War, sexual experimentation, the growth of self-expression and a celebration of the ideals of youth.
“I was a bit older, but I was very drawn to the idealism of the hippies,” Mr. Rado told Britain’s Telegraph newspaper in 2010. “I felt it was almost spiritual, a cause. People were communicating in their own way, they were letting their hair grow, trying to form a culture, a new way of living based on this notion of love, for humanity and for each other in person.”
The sketchy plot revolves around a journey of self-discovery by a group of hippies called the Tribe. One of their number, a sensitive young man grappling with his place in the world, is drafted and sent to war. Mr. Rado and Ragni wrote the “book,” or the play’s dialogue, and the song lyrics. The music was composed by Canadian-American musician Galt MacDermot.
“Hair” opened at producer Joseph Papp’s off-Broadway Public Theater in 1967. (Papp would not allow an originally planned nude scene.) After considerable revision, the musical moved to Broadway in 1968, with Mr. Rado and Ragni acting in the two principal roles as Claude and Berger, respectively.
The play, which was subtitled “The American Tribal Love Rock Musical,” contained explicit four-letter words, same-sex kissing, a multiracial cast and a soon-to-be infamous scene at the end of Act I, in which members of the cast shed their clothes and stood facing the audience for a few seconds in subdued lighting.
The playwrights learned that there was no law in New York against nudity on stage as long as the performers were standing still. Actors were not required to appear in the scene but received a $10 bonus for doing so.
The public reaction to “Hair” ranged from laudatory to puzzled to apoplectic, but it was unquestionably a sensation. Newsweek critic Jack Kroll said the show “ignites the key images and issues of the lost-and-found generation … into a vivid uproar that has more wit, feeling and musicality than anything since `West Side Story.'”
“Hair” ran on Broadway for more than four years, then had an even longer run in London. Mr. Rado, Ragni and MacDermot won a Grammy Award for the cast album, which topped the charts in 1969 and sold more than 3 million copies.
The musical begins with actors walking through the audience, converging on stage as they break into the upbeat opening anthem, “Aquarius”:
When the moon is in the Seventh House
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
Then peace will guide the planets
And love will steer the stars.
This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius
Four songs from “Hair” reached Billboard’s Top 5, including “Aquarius/Let the Sunshine In,” which spent six weeks at No. 1 and won a Grammy Award as record of the year for the Fifth Dimension. Other hits included “Hair” by the Cowsills, “Good Morning Starshine” by the one-named singer Oliver and “Easy to Be Hard” by Three Dog Night.
“Hair” embodied the zeitgeist like nothing else of its time. It appeared before other high-concept rock musicals such as “Tommy,” “Jesus Christ Superstar,” “Godspell” and “Rent” and became a theatrical touchstone of its era, much as “Hamilton” would 50 years later.
In addition to bringing rock music to Broadway, “Hair” introduced several technical advances in lighting, smoke effects and other forms of stagecraft. The original Broadway cast included future stars Diane Keaton and Melba Moore. The show toured the world, and resident companies were formed in a dozen cities for long-running productions.
Newsweek’s Kroll called it “the greatest global cultural event of the ’60s.”
James Alexander Radomski was born Jan. 23, 1932 — he was an Aquarian — in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Venice Beach and grew up in Rochester, N.Y., and Washington. His father, a sociologist and onetime college professor, was a federal official. His mother was a homemaker who encouraged her son’s interest in theater.
Mr. Rado, who later shortened his last name, studied at Catholic University and the University of Maryland, from which he graduated in 1954. He starred in a U-Md. production of “Romeo and Juliet,” acted in other campus productions and helped write several plays as a student.
He said he harbored ambitions from childhood of writing musicals in the vein of Cole Porter or Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II.
After two years in the Navy, Mr. Rado moved to New York in 1956 to pursue a theatrical career. He studied with acting coach Lee Strasberg and, in the early 1960s, formed a singing group called James and the Argyles. (He and his male backup singers wore kilts and argyle knee socks.)
His early acting credits included a part in “Marathon ’33,” written and directed by June Havoc and starring Julie Harris. In 1966, while writing “Hair,” Mr. Rado was in the original Broadway production of “The Lion in Winter,” in the role of Richard, the son of the royal couple, played by Robert Preston and Rosemary Harris.
As a writer, Mr. Rado could never equal the success he found with “Hair.” He worked on a musical with his brother, Ted Rado, in the 1970s and later collaborated with Ragni on another project that did not made it to Broadway. In 2009, all three composers of “Hair” were named to the Songwriters Hall of Fame. (Ragni died in 1991; MacDermot died in 2018.)
Mr. Rado’s survivors include his brother.
In later productions of “Hair,” Mr. Rado returned more or less to the original Broadway version of the script. Something about the show seemed to resonate through the years, especially with young people facing social unrest and war.
“I think the reason it still works today,” Mr. Rado said in 1993, “is that it managed to capture a rare point in time when the philosophy of personal freedom was put into practice. That freedom provided the right to experiment and there were very fine things to remember about the era, to be learned. ‘Hair’ captures the best and still communicates it today.” | 2022-06-23T02:55:51Z | www.washingtonpost.com | James Rado, co-creator of "Hair," dies at 90 - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2022/06/22/hair-composer-james-rado-dies/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/obituaries/2022/06/22/hair-composer-james-rado-dies/ |
Russia’s investigative journalists are no stranger to pressure from the Kremlin. But for Andrei Soldatov, what has happened to him after the Russian invasion of Ukraine has been an alarming escalation.
At the start of June, Soldatov, a journalist who c0-founded the investigative website Agentura.ru, said he began getting text messages from his Russian bank demanding he pay huge government fines. With no explanation, Soldatov assumed it was a phishing attack — a regular hazard in his line of work. But then another bank got in contact to say that his assets were being frozen, he said.
This bank provided the number of a criminal case against Soldatov. The case had opened on March 17, though Soldatov said no one had told him. It accused the 46-year-old journalist of a felony crime: Spreading “fake news” about the Russian Army.
“I didn’t understand which law enforcement agency started the criminal case against me. I got no official warnings from the government. No messages. No calls. No emails. Just these text messages from my bank,” Soldatov told me in a phone call from London, where he has lived since 2020.
The authorities had issued fines worth $80,000 for each of his bank accounts, he told me. They were able to seize Soldatov’s remaining savings in Russia. Even his old car, an unremarkable 1999 Opel Astra, was taken. The journalist soon found out he had been added to both Russia’s domestic and international wanted lists, meaning that he would be immediately arrested if he returned to Russia. Soldatov’s lawyers advised him that he could face arrest if he travels to a country on friendly terms with Russia, such as Turkey or Hungary.
He fears the pressure the charges against him could bring on his family that remains in Russia — including his father, an early internet pioneer in Russia who has been locked in a legal battle with the Kremlin himself since 2019. “My case and his case … it means I have to think about his security more,” Soldatov said.
But as Soldatov began digging into his case, he came to believe that it showed him something important: That his reporting on the faulty intelligence that had led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine had touched a nerve. And so, while Soldatov does not think he will get a fair trial, he has instructed his lawyers to still go to court.
“It’s not only about fighting,” he said. “It’s about obtaining more information about the case.”
Fleeing Putin’s wartime crackdown, Russian journalists build media hubs in exile
For Soldatov, like many Russian journalists, the invasion of Ukraine marked a new era in their lives. Reporting in post-Soviet Russia had never been easy. Since Vladimir Putin took the presidency in 2000, it had slowly gotten worse. A number of Soldatov’s former colleagues at the independent Novaya Gazeta newspaper, including Anna Politkovskaya, had been murdered in connection with their reporting.
But Russian journalists dug into in this harsh environment, uncovering tales of malfeasance that would make Western journalists gasp. Even as the pressure grew over recent years, new outlets like Insider and Proekt published scoops about national security and Putin’s private life.
Journalism shifted the needle in Russia, even if it was hard to budge. Alexei Navalny, the most famous opposition figure in the country, used investigative journalism to find compelling evidence of enormous corruption. The founding editor of Novoya Gazeta, Dmitry Muratov, was recognized for decades of hard work in 2021 when he won the Nobel Peace Prize.
Soldatov and his partner Irina Borogan were part of the embattled industry’s success, writing extensively about Russian intelligence services, creating their own website called Agentura.ru and ultimately publishing four books on the subject. They became resources not only for Russians hoping to understand their own country, but outsiders looking in.
Soldatov and Borogan moved to London before the invasion of Ukraine, prompted by warnings from sources in Russia. But the Feb. 24 invasion soon saw many other Russian journalists follow them. Just over a week later, the Kremlin passed a strict new media law that criminalized “deliberately false” information about the military.
Foreign correspondents fled the country, as did the Russian reporters that could. The independent media stayed either shut down or self-censored. Echo of Moscow, a long-running centrist radio station, and TV Rain, a uniquely critical television station, stopped broadcasting. Even Novaya Gazeta suspended operations; Muratov raised $103.5 million for Ukrainian child refugees by auctioning off his Nobel Peace Prize medal.
In Ukraine, at least eight journalists have been killed while doing their work. Reporters Without Borders said Wednesday that it found evidence that Russian forces had tortured and killed a Ukrainian photojournalist in March.
It took Soldatov some time to work out why he was being targeted. Officially, the charge was related to comments he made during a March 11 live-stream on the YouTube channel Popular Politics, run by allies of Navalny, when Soldatov had questioned the readiness of the Russian National Guard in Ukraine.
But Soldatov said he has ascertained that the charges are related to his and Borogan’s reporting into the conduct of infighting in Russia’s FSB, a successor to the KGB intelligence service which operates under the Kremlin. While the FSB is a domestic intelligence service, Soldatov and Borogan reported that Putin had given one of its departments — known as the Fifth Service — the responsibility of keeping former Soviet republics in the Russian orbit.
The Fifth Service provided intelligence on Ukraine in the buildup to the war that led Putin to conclude the invasion of Ukraine would be a walkover, Soldatov said. After that evidence proved faulty, the pair reported a purge in FSB ranks, with one Fifth Service leader sent to a notorious prison.
Soldatov said documents in the court case had revealed that the FSB’s internal security department had started the investigation into him, with an operative from this department signing the first report against him. “It looks like they got really unhappy that we messed with their [internal] case,” he said.
The complaints about the national guard were a belated cover story, Soldatov said. “They realized that they can’t make a case against me based on this story because then they would have to talk about the problems with the FSB,” he added. The Kremlin has denied the reports of purges in the FSB.
Being in the FSB’s targets is clearly a worrying prospect. Soldatov said he had all his electronics checked by cybersecurity experts, but he remains worried about the security of his sources who remain in Russia. Physical safety is also a factor. “Of course, I need to think more about my security measures. That’s obviously a challenge now,” he said.
Soldatov is also worried about travel: He has not yet been able to find out if Russia has issued a “red notice” for him through Interpol, a common tactic now used by authoritarian governments to harass dissidents abroad.
It isn’t clear how many other Russian journalists are in the same position as Soldatov. One, Ivan Safronov, had been put on trial for treason. Two other journalists, Michael Nacke and Ruslan Leviev, are facing “fake news” charges in absentia. Soldatov noted that the serial numbers on his court documents seem to suggest hundreds of open cases.
While Borogan appears to have escaped prosecution, perhaps because she did not appear in the March 11 Popular Politics video, Soldatov said he had no way of knowing if she faces other charges.
During our conversation, Soldatov noted that the first time he was interrogated by the FSB was in 2002 after he reported on the bungled response to a hostage crisis at a Moscow theater that resulted in the deaths of at least 170 people. Now, he doubts he can go back to Russia until the political situation changes.
“To be honest, I’ve been writing about these guys for 20 years,” he said. “It’s always changed for the worse, never the better.” | 2022-06-23T04:18:14Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Andrei Soldatov: How a Russian investigative reporter found out he was a Kremlin target - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/andrei-soldatov-russia-ukraine-fsb/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/andrei-soldatov-russia-ukraine-fsb/ |
Am I wrong in agreeing that Constance may be abusing James’s generosity? Are splitting assets like this typical for unmarried couples?
Biting: You have been seeing “James” for three months. Understand that he has the right to spend his money any way he wants to, including this generosity to an ex who isn’t very nice to him.
We've been in a relationship for three years and so far I've yet to meet his siblings or mom, I can't go in his house, and we've only been intimate a few times.
I'm never invited to any family gatherings.
Wondering: I think this isn’t working for him, either.
Dear Amy: A divorced dad “Missing Friends” wrote to you about their “couple” friends siding with his ex-wife, leaving him missing their friendship.
Ex: Well said. Thank you! | 2022-06-23T04:26:57Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Ask Amy: My boyfriend should stop financially supporting his ex - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/23/ask-amy-boyfriend-ex-money/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/23/ask-amy-boyfriend-ex-money/ |
Dear Carolyn: I’ve been on two dates with a man who’s a great fit for me — we share a lot of values, the conversation is great, and I enjoy our time together. We talk and text a lot (different work schedules) and I’m always excited to see his name pop up on my phone.
But: there is no chemistry. The kiss at the end of the first date was like kissing my brother. The kiss at the end of the second date was marginally better. I’m looking forward to the third date because I like spending time with him so much — but I’m already dreading the kiss at the end.
He’s been clear that he is excited about me and seeing where this relationship goes. I feel like I’m misleading him at this point. I love spending time with him, but I’m not even sure I can stomach a third thud of a kiss. I’ve never had this problem, and I have no idea how to handle this. Any ideas?
— No Chemistry
No Chemistry: Sometimes the best chemistry is the kind you develop from 0, over time, just through really liking each other. It’s something you both need to agree to and it’s not a fun conversation, obviously. But if you can explain that you’ve really genuinely 100 percent looked forward to seeing him and want to keep making plans, you’re just not in a romantic frame of mind, then this could be the beginning of a beautiful … something to be named later. Something organic.
It would be sad to toss something great before it has a chance to figure itself out.
Re: Kiss: Great guy, had a great time, kissed at the end of the night. Nothing. Nada. We both knew it. We’re still friends, just friends.
Another guy, I was not physically attracted to him at all, but nice guy. We hung out for a few months just as friends. But he wanted more, so one night I kissed him. It was okay, good enough to start “dating,” and in a short time there was incredible physical chemistry.
I say be honest with the guy, remain friends, but leave your mind open to something more.
Dear Carolyn: I have a decades-long friendship with a person who starts looking at her watch every time she asks about me. I do not know a decent way to bring this to her attention, or to tell her how this perhaps unconscious habit on her part makes me feel. Help!
— Wow, Look at the Time!
Wow, Look at the Time!: “Am I keeping you from something? I noticed you’re checking your watch.” It’s a polite, even thoughtful thing for you to ask, because of course you don’t want to unwittingly make this friend late for something, or add to her stress if she’s concerned about the time.
Speak up each time it happens.
If you get to a third time where she professes not to be late, then you’ll be able to say, “I fear I’m boring you then. Please tell me if I’m repeating myself or complaining too much. When you check your watch while I’m speaking, I feel hurt that I can’t hold your attention.” That’s the honesty a decades-long friendship deserves. Ideally she’ll have some in return, or, even better, some manners and respect for you.
Carolyn Hax columns about boundaries
Carolyn Hax: Are secrets an adult child’s only recourse for parents’ ‘extreme worry’?
Carolyn Hax: Mom, now sober, wants closeness with grown child who ‘gave up on her’
Carolyn Hax: His girlfriend helps everyone. She just can’t help herself. | 2022-06-23T04:27:03Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Carolyn Hax: Is it wrong to date someone when there’s ‘no chemistry’? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/23/carolyn-hax-dating-no-chemistry/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/advice/2022/06/23/carolyn-hax-dating-no-chemistry/ |
What ‘Friend-Shoring’ Means for Trade in a Less-Friendly World
Shipping containers are loaded onto trucks at the Port of Boston’s Conley Terminal in Boston, Massachusetts, U.S., on Friday, Jan. 21, 2022. Massport invested $850 million in the Port of Boston Conley Terminal to become big-ship ready and better compete with larger rivals. Photographer: Allison Dinner/Bloomberg (Bloomberg)
Over the past few years, the world has experienced an escalating series of trade disruptions -- the US-China trade war, the Covid-19 pandemic and the supply-chain disruptions it caused, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the dueling sanctions and export controls that followed. Their cumulative impact has called into question the vision of a globalized economy. In response, some US officials are pushing “friend-shoring” -- a happy-sounding label for a world divided between free-market democracies and countries that align with the authoritarian regimes of China or Russia. It’s a world in which supply chains could be more robust and less subject to economic blackmail. It’s also likely a world that’s poorer and less productive.
1. What is friend-shoring?
US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has proposed friend-shoring as a means to insulate global supply chains from external disruption or economic coercion. The idea is for a group of countries with shared values to deploy policies encouraging companies to spread manufacturing within that group. The goal is to prevent less-like-minded nations from unfairly leveraging their market position in key raw materials, technologies or products to disrupt the US economy or those of its allies. It’s one of several twists of the term off-shoring -- the large-scale push by companies earlier in the century to move what operations they could to places where it was cheaper to operate. Another iteration is “re-shoring.”
2. What’s an example of something to friend-shore?
The US aims to reduce dependence on authoritarian regimes for key products like rare earths, magnets and other items that can be adapted for military purposes. The push will also seek to diversify away from Russian suppliers of critical commodities, particularly energy, food, and fertilizer. In some areas, such as semiconductors, the idea is to diversify sources among friendly nations. The US is heavily reliant on Taiwan, which faces security pressures from mainland China; the US has recently stepped up engagement on chips with South Korea.
3. Who would be the winners in friend-shoring?
Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam and other Indo-Pacific countries would likely benefit as production plants, jobs and investments move toward nations deemed to be “trustworthy” by the US and its allies. Diversifying the geographic concentration of global supply chains will also help businesses become more resilient to external shocks like wars, famine, political changes or the next pandemic.
4. Who would lose out?
The US-led effort is mainly targeted at non-market economy regimes like China that the US sees as unfairly supporting their domestic industries and at nations that violate international norms, like Russia. Such countries would see an economic hit as investments and jobs shift toward other regional trade partners. And, of course, there would be repercussions for the countries within a friend-shoring alliance.
5. What would the impact be?
A process that some are calling de-globalization and that others have called decoupling would likely lead to short-term supply shocks and higher prices -- developments not unlike those produced by the turmoil of recent years. In the long run, the outcome is likely to be lower economic growth due to lost efficiencies, higher costs and supply bottlenecks. That’s why Yellen expressed the hope that China would take Western human rights and national security concerns seriously, to “preserve the benefits of deep economic integration with China -- not going to a bipolar world.”
• A 2020 Newsweek column credited a USAID official with coining the term “allied-shoring.”
• Yellen’s speech in which she described friend-shoring.
• An article and set of charts by Bloomberg Economics laying out the prospects and costs of de-globalization.
• An article looking at what the World Trade Organization thinks Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will do to global trade. | 2022-06-23T04:27:21Z | www.washingtonpost.com | What ‘Friend-Shoring’ Means for Trade in a Less-Friendly World - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-friend-shoringmeans-for-trade-in-a-less-friendly-world/2022/06/22/5c3d4f30-f1e3-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/what-friend-shoringmeans-for-trade-in-a-less-friendly-world/2022/06/22/5c3d4f30-f1e3-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
The former president has grown increasingly irate with what he views as the lack of defense by his Capitol Hill allies.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) walks to his office after a vote on Capitol Hill on June 22. (Oliver Contreras for The Washington Post)
On the morning the House Jan. 6 committee held its second public hearing, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was across town, echoing an instruction he has repeatedly given fellow Republicans: Ignore it.
Speaking to donors gathered at the Georgetown Four Seasons, McCarthy instead recommended Republicans talk about other issues that could help them regain the majority in both chambers of Congress, according to people familiar with the meeting, such as the soaring inflation rate and record-high gas prices — all under Democrats watch.
While most rank-and-file members in the Republican House conference have heeded his direction, another influential Republican has tuned into every hearing and has grown increasingly irate — to “the point of about to scream at the TV,” according to a close adviser — with what he views as the lack of defense by his Capitol Hill allies.
Former president Donald Trump has said privately for months that McCarthy’s decision to pull pro-Trump Republicans from sitting on the Jan. 6 select committee was a mistake, one that has become clearer as Trump watches the hearings that are working to build the case that he should be criminally charged for conspiring to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
According to a close adviser, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail private conversations, Trump has made it clear to anyone who will listen that “there’s no one to defend me” on the dias before, during or after the hearings. The blame is falling squarely on McCarthy’s shoulders, according to some Republican congressional aides and advisers close to the former president.
Several Trump advisers said they were particularly frustrated they had no insight into the committee’s discussions, plans and divisions so they could better prepare for what was coming.
McCarthy’s bet to exclude the pro-Trump GOP perspective from the investigative committee could prove costly as he works to secure Trump’s support for his eventual speakership bid if the GOP regains the House majority. While most in the conference have brushed off Trump’s anger, any brash reaction from him could inflame his allies in the GOP conference who have remained noncommittal on whether they would vote for McCarthy to be the top leader — a small but significant group who could quickly jeopardize his chances.
McCarthy has acknowledged his ascension to the speakership is not assured without the support of Trump’s base. According to a person familiar with the discussions, he has approached Stephen K. Bannon in recent months to stop him from pushing the idea of Trump being speaker.
McCarthy allies argue he had no other option but to pull Republicans from the committee after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s move to bar Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Jim Banks (R-Ind.) from being seated on the panel because they could be called as witnesses by the committee. McCarthy also tapped GOP Reps. Troy E. Nehls (Tex.), Rodney Davis (Ill.), and Kelly Armstrong (N.D.) to participate, choices that Pelosi (D-Calif.) approved.
Trump has pushed allies to make it clear that he has not endorsed McCarthy for the speakership whenever they can, and he told conservative talk show host Wayne Allyn Root over the weekend that he has only backed McCarthy’s reelection campaign.
“No, I endorsed him in his race. But I haven’t endorsed anybody for speaker,” he said in the interview.
Asked Tuesday about Trump’s displeasure with the lack of Republicans on the panel, McCarthy acknowledged speaking with the former president the day before after that talk show interview. He skirted around the question and another about Trump trying to overturn the election, saying the most important issue on people’s minds is rising prices.
“We’ve watched what Nancy Pelosi has done with this political committee. One thing I know is that since Nancy has appointed to this political committee, gas has gone up $1.86,” he said at a Tuesday news conference. He added that Democrats are “focused on an issue that the public is not focused on. The public is focused on why is inflation so high, why is the border insecure, crime is rising, everything is costing more.”
McCarthy’s office did not respond to repeated requests for comment for this story.
McCarthy is no stranger to overcoming potential trouble with the former president, most recently when leaked audio revealed he was intent on asking Trump to resign after Jan. 6. While Republicans waited with bated breath about how Trump would respond, many were surprised to discover that he reveled in knowing McCarthy never actually asked him to step aside, which he saw as a source of his lasting influence over the party.
But in recent weeks, Trump allies, including Bannon, have been repeatedly telling Trump that McCarthy’s decision not to seat Republicans was a “strategic failure” that shows he could be weak in directing oversight hearings on the Biden administration if he’s chosen to be speaker, according to two people familiar with the conversations. That perception has stuck with Trump, as has the recognition that there are few options of who else could replace McCarthy as the top leader.
Once it became clear that Pelosi would not budge on allowing Jordan and Banks on the panel, all five gave McCarthy their blessing to withhold participation on the committee Shortly thereafter Pelosi announced she would seat GOP Reps. Liz Cheney (Wyo.) and Adam Kinzinger (Ill.).
Their participation, McCarthy told donors in Georgetown, has somewhat undercut the argument that the committee and its findings are “illegitimate” given that they can argue bipartisanship.
A person familiar with McCarthy’s argument said he has told Trump that had he cooperated with the committee and installed members, it would be harder to attack the committee as political and they would be responsible for more of the committee’s findings. McCarthy also argued that he could not be viewed as weak by letting Pelosi dictate his decisions. But Trump has not relented in growing angry about him, regularly asking why no one is defending him on television, this person said.
In hindsight, some of those members said they would have preferred to have participated but did not blame McCarthy for his decision, because he chose to stand up to Pelosi rather than bend to her request.
“I’m not going to sit here and question leader McCarthy’s judgment whether he should have, shouldn’t have. He made a judgment call,” Nehls said. “But boy, if I did get on that panel, I could have asked some very, very serious deep questions.”
Jordan said they were left with no option, emphasizing that Pelosi would have probably denied other Republicans from replacing him and Banks.
“The hindsight is always wonderful,” Jordan said. “It would be nice if we could cross examine witnesses, if we can see other documents, but that decision was made a year ago when Nancy Pelosi said for the first time in American history, she wasn’t going to let the minority leader put on the committee who he had selected.”
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) did not directly say whether he wished his colleagues would be on the panel to defend Trump and him. On Tuesday, Arizona Secretary of State Andy Bowers, a Republican, testified that Biggs had tried to get him to sign a letter acknowledging he would support the decertification of electors who would cast a representative ballot for Biden who won the state in 2020.
“I don’t think this was designed to, to get to truth. And as a guy who litigated a lot, you’d never get to the truth you don’t cross-examine anybody,” he said.
The scenario may have never played out had Senate Republicans approved the creation of an independent commission with five Republicans and five Democrats who would equally share subpoena powers to file a report by the end of last year. Only 35 House Republicans supported the measure, some of whom still believe an independent commission would have saved a lot of headache.
“Until he came out against it, we would’ve have at least 100 votes more in the House to support that bipartisan initiative. But they all bailed when Trump came out against it the night before,” said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), who voted to impeach Trump.
The lack of Trump-aligned Republicans participating on the panel has allowed committee members to investigate and present their findings without the distractions that have become commonplace in the House hearings regardless of which party is in the majority.
“I think McCarthy’s decision not to recommend responsible people to the select committee was another huge disaster,” said Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.), a Jan. 6 panel member who has seen his share of incendiary hearings as the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. “I think it was a strategic blunder of historic proportions. It’s been a good thing for the country because we’ve been able to operate in a nonpartisan fashion without, you know, political disruption.”
Republicans privately argue that their participation would have been limited in similar ways because the minority’s requests are often ignored in established committees, making it pointless to have them on the panel.
“In a new majority, Congress is going to have a robust duty of oversight and all kinds of things that have gone on over the last couple of years,” said Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), who the committee has accused of requesting a pardon from Trump for his role in pushing the president’s false election-fraud claims. Perry denies the allegation.
The five Republican members McCarthy originally appointed are running a “shadow committee” that will center on “the real true story about what took place on Jan. 6” largely focusing on alleged security failures under Pelosi’s watch, Nehls said. Their report is expected to be released before the August recess.
Davis has pledged to continue investigating security lapses if he survives his primary next week and becomes chairman of the House Administration Committee in a GOP majority. He recently sent a preservation request to Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) for all records currently in possession by the Jan. 6 committee to quickly launch his investigation next year if Republicans take control.
But most members are taking McCarthy’s cue of ignoring the hearing. Numerous members interviewed said they have barely watched them, if they tuned in at all. In one example of the lack of desire to speak about the Jan. 6 committee, Rep. Randy Weber (R-Tex.) smacked his forehead when a reporter asked McCarthy about his reaction to Trump’s complaint that no Republicans were coming to his defense at a news conference about Rep. Mayra Flores (R-Tex.), who scored an upset victory in the Rio Grande Valley last week.
Dan Conston, who leads the McCarthy-backed Congressional Leadership Fund, said he believes it is fundamentally the right approach for McCarthy to ignore the committee and talk about other topics. He said focus groups and surveys repeatedly show it does not register as a major issue with voters.
“It reflects that the leader and Republicans in Congress are focused on issues that are far more concerning to voters all across the spectrum,” Conston said. “You would be hard-pressed to find swing voters that are saying Jan. 6 is a decisive consideration in their vote.
Paul Kane and Leigh Ann Caldwell contributed to this report. | 2022-06-23T04:27:52Z | www.washingtonpost.com | As Jan. 6 committee targets Trump, his consternation at McCarthy grows - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/23/trump-mccarthy-jan-6-committee/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/23/trump-mccarthy-jan-6-committee/ |
The full or partial curtailing of more than 1,000 foreign companies’ operations in Russia since Vladimir Putin ordered an invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 22 has provided perhaps the most spectacular evidence of the damage the imperialist adventure has inflicted on Russia. There is, however, another side to it: It’s a potential bonanza for Russians willing to take over the assets orphaned by the Western stampede for the exits.“Potential” is the key word here.
At the start of this year, Russia had $521 billion of accumulated direct foreign investment, according to the Russian Central Bank. Much of it was into import-supporting networks such as store chains selling foreign brands, but a lot of the money also had gone into industrial and agricultural assets that are less dependent on branding. Once Putin attacked, however, many foreign companies dumped their Russian operations because retaining them could have resulted in heavier penalties from financial markets. Last month, Jeffrey Sonnenfeld of the Yale School of Management and his colleagues published a paper showing that stock market returns in late February through mid-April were, on average, positive for firms that left Russia or scaled back their presence there and negative for those that dug in or even tried to buy time.To give an example of the trade-off involved, McDonald’s Corp. had 847 restaurants in Russia at the start of the year, out of 10,785 in “operated markets” — that is, those where the corporation has a presence — outside the US. Assuming their average sales were comparable with other restaurants in these markets, their loss would mean a revenue hit of about $950 million a year, based on 2021 data. But that would be just 4% of adjusted sales; based on Sonnenfeld’s calculations, staying in Russia would have meant an average 6.8% hit to a company’s market capitalization from Feb. 23 through April 19 — in McDonalds’ case, an $11.8 billion shareholder value loss based on its Feb. 23 market cap.
The stock market is fickle, of course, but if you can count on one thing in the current crisis, it’s a constant stream of negative news involving Russia. To the Russian government, the foreign firms’ departures are a major headache, not because Russians would shed many tears for the brands but primarily because some of the companies were big employers. According to data from the companies themselves, McDonald’s had 62,000 workers, IKEA AV 12,400, and the French automaker Renault SA employed 4,400 people in its fully-owned Moscow factory alone, not counting the 32,500 people working at Russian’s biggest carmaker, AvtoVAZ, that was until recently majority-owned by Renault.
Initially, the nationalization of all the “orphaned” assets was a subject of serious discussion, with state propagandists like RT channel head Margarita Simonyan pushing it as a solution. There’s already a high-profile example: The Moscow city government took over the Renault Moscow factory, promptly restoring to it its Soviet-era brand, Moskvich. But this is not the Kremlin’s favorite option.
Neither the technocratic team in the government nor even Putin himself want to burn bridges with the Western majors quitting the market: They’re hoping for an eventual resumption of business as usual, both for economic reasons and to score propaganda points. Putin likes to mask a forced turn toward autarky with talk of international openness and entrepreneurial freedoms, as his speech to the St. Petersburg Economic Forum last week showed. As he exhorts Russian businesspeople not to “fall into the old trap” of investing in the West in search of better property protections, he wants to be able to blame Western governments for the foreign companies’ exodus — to say it was they, not he, who caused the loss of business and, potentially, Russian jobs. It’s important for him not to be seen as a confiscator as Western nations freeze oligarchs’ assets and Russian Central Bank reserves.
The Russian parliament has given its preliminary approval to a bill that would allow the authorities to put the Russian assets of foreign companies under government-appointed “external management” and eventually to sell the business if the owner shuts it down or lays off large numbers of staff. This law, however, is unlikely to be used much except as a threat. Instead, the three scenarios that have emerged since the Ukraine invasion began will be applied to an increasing number of Western firms’ Russian subsidiaries.
The first scenario — likely to be applied in exceptional cases only — involves “soft” nationalization. When the Russian Ministry of Industry and Trade took over Renault’s 68% stake in AvtoVAZ last month, the ministry granted Renault an option to buy it back within six years. This deal wasn’t exactly made in heaven, since Renault took a serious revenue hit: Even with the effect of the Ukraine war, Russia provided 894 million euros in sales in the first quarter of this year, and in 2021, it accounted for 10% of total sales. But at least the French automaker was consulted — chief financial officer Thierry Pieton mentioned the negotiations with the Russian government on the company’s latest earnings call in April — and it has not publicly rejected the option.
The second scenario involves the handover of a foreign company’s Russian business to its local management or partners. The Finnish packaging manufacturer Stora Enso Oyj, for example, has sold its business to management, giving up 3% of its sales but taking care of 1,100 Russian workers. Even though Stora Enso chief executive officer Annica Bresky stated bluntly on the company’s latest warnings call that “we do not see Russia as a business partner for the future,” such arrangements are by their nature relatively open to reversal, given that the parties worked together quite smoothly before Putin attacked Ukraine.
McDonalds’s decision to sell its restaurants to Alexander Govor, whose company ran 25 of the establishments in Siberia, fits the same pattern despite the rather unfortunate rebranding as “Tasty. Period” that the chain has received under the new owner. (Simonyan, for one, hated the new name, sarcastically suggesting “It Runs, So What the Hell” as an alternative name for the former Renault operation.) If McDonald’s ever comes back, it’ll be as easy for Govor to plaster its logo all over the restaurants as it was to scrape it off: At any rate, the US company has left all the equipment behind, and the staff using it are largely the same.
Like Govor, the Russian firms that have acquired, or are bidding for, the assets of big retail companies such as IKEA or OBI Group Holding SE are about to try running brand-dependent businesses without their household-name brands. Any losses they incur, however, may well be recouped if the infrastructure can be sold back to the companies that built it, preferably sometime soon.In such deals, the sale price likely is low enough to write off the assets’ entire value, or most of it. That’s what it takes to keep the door open for a return to the Russian market either when Russia is a normal country again in some benign version of a post-Putin future — or, as the case may be, once the world is less shocked by Russian atrocities.
The third scenario is the sale to a Russian business that won’t be likely to sell it back at any point in the future. This is what Canadian-based gold mining company Kinross Gold Corporation has done with its Russian operation, divesting it to the Russian firm Highland Gold Mining Ltd. The companies initially agreed that Highland would buy the gold mines for a deferred payment of $680 million, $670 million of which Kinross promptly announced it was writing off, given the uncertainties the Russian economy faces. But the Russian government commission on foreign investment only agreed to the deal if the price was no higher than $340 million. There was some upside to this for Kinross: The cash payment was no longer deferred.
In an interview with the daily Izvestia, Deputy Industry and Trade Minister Viktor Evtyukhov explained the ministry’s policy regarding such deals. If a foreign seller wants anything approaching the full market price for its assets, the seller should get it in rubles “and do whatever it wants with it in Russia.” But if it agrees to a 50%-60% discount, the payment can be made offshore, in other currencies.
Only in this last scenario does the Russian buyer immediately harvest some value — in the form of the discount on what the tangible assets, such as gold mines, were worth before the Ukraine invasion. Other kinds of deals are essentially caretaker arrangements that represent, for both sides, bets on normalization — and the Russian buyers hold the riskier end of these bets. While the seller can just take an impairment, and shareholders will not ask too many questions about it, given the reason for the divestment, the buyers agree, implicitly or explicitly, to maintain jobs without the marketing clout and the global supply chains that the Western brands had brought to the businesses.
The billion-dollar question for them is whether Russia will ever be normal again.
• The Weakness of Putin’s Economic Show of Force: Clara Ferreira Marques | 2022-06-23T05:58:34Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Foreign Firms’ Russian Assets Are Lousy Deals for Locals - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/foreign-firms-russian-assets-are-lousy-dealsfor-locals/2022/06/23/2906fdf8-f2b2-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/foreign-firms-russian-assets-are-lousy-dealsfor-locals/2022/06/23/2906fdf8-f2b2-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
What’s a Reverse Currency War and Who’s Fighting One?
Analysis by Amelia Pollard and Libby Cherry | Bloomberg
Currency wars flare up from time to time, usually during moments of economic tumult. They typically involve countries jockeying for a competitive export edge by driving down their currencies. What’s less common is a so-called reverse currency war. But it’s possible that one could be brewing, whether as the result of deliberate policies or as a side effect of steps central banks are taking to fight inflation. In particular, the sharp rise in the value of the dollar as the US Federal Reserve pursues its most aggressive interest-rate hikes in almost 30 years is posing challenges to currencies and central banks around the world.
1. What’s a currency war?
If a country’s currency falls in relation to other currencies, that can help its economy. Its exports become cheaper relative to competitors, boosting demand from abroad, while higher import prices spur domestic consumption of more homegrown products and services. And both of these provide support to local producers. A round of competitive devaluations is thought to have deepened the Great Depression that began in 1929, with countries leaving the then-prevalent gold standard to weaken their currencies. In the early years of this century, the US and other rich countries complained that China was depressing the value of its currency, the yuan, to increase exports. But the phrase “currency war” was only popularized around 2010, when Brazil’s then-finance minister, Guido Mantega, accused wealthier nations of devaluing their currencies to stimulate economies still reeling from the financial crisis of two years before.
2. What’s a reverse currency war?
A situation in which countries work to make their currency stronger. Rather than boosting growth, the goal of any such move is to help tame inflation, since a stronger currency means that imports are relatively cheaper. The Fed’s actions have boosted the US dollar, driving up Bloomberg’s gauge of greenback strength by close to 7% this year. On the flipside, the euro -- which is used by more than 300 million people in Europe -- has fallen to a five-year low against the greenback, while the British pound and a majority of other important currencies have slumped too.
3. Does a stronger currency really curb inflation?
Currency strength does weigh on inflation but just how much is both debatable and subject to change, depending on circumstances. The degree to which exchange rate changes affect core inflation -- which excludes volatile factors like food and energy -- is called the pass-through rate. In some previous bouts of dollar strength, that rate’s been marginal. But some, such as Citigroup Inc. chief economist Nathan Sheets, argue that it could be higher during times of elevated inflation. In 2020, when inflation was subdued, a 10% increase in the value of the dollar would have been expected to dampen increases in the consumer price index by only about half a percentage point. But at the current pace of inflation, which has been fueled in large part by higher commodity costs, the pass-through coefficients could be more than double that, approaching a full percentage point, said Sheets, who previously worked for the US Treasury and Federal Reserve.
4. What are central banks saying about this?
Most central banks seek to steer their economy through a combination of interest-rate changes and balance-sheet actions, and are usually wary of doing or saying anything that could be construed as trying to manage exchange rates directly. The US Treasury can (and has at various times) labeled some trading partners as currency manipulators if it believes they’re trying to gain an unfair advantage. The Fed, for its part, emphasizes that its goal in raising interest rates is to fight inflation by curbing demand rather than bolstering the dollar. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said that the central bank’s commitment to price stability has strengthened confidence in the dollar as a store of value. Yet while most of the Fed’s major global counterparts have historically tended to walk a similar tightrope around currency issues, some are becoming more vocal about the link between exchange rates and inflation.
5. What’s different?
One sign of how things have changed recently is that some central banks previously known for using direct foreign-exchange intervention to weaken their currencies are now doing the opposite. The Swiss National Bank, which historically has acted in currency markets to weaken the franc, has allowed its currency to strengthen this year and said in June it would consider selling foreign currency if it weakened excessively. “We let the Swiss franc appreciate,” SNB President Thomas Jordan said in March. “This is one of the reasons why in Switzerland inflation is lower than compared to the euro zone or the United States.” European Central Bank official Francois Villeroy de Galhau, meanwhile, has said that a euro which is “too weak” would go against that monetary authority’s price-stability objective, and in the UK, the Bank of England’s Catherine Mann went even further by highlighting how a faster pace of tightening could support the pound.
6. Are there winners and losers?
Consumers from the countries that successfully rally their currencies are the clear winners during a reverse currency war, with domestic prices tempered slightly due to greater buying power. But there are plenty of losers, including multinational corporations, nations that rely on exports and emerging economies. US companies ranging from Salesforce Inc. to Costco Wholesale Corp. have raised complaints about the surging dollar on recent earnings calls. That’s because a stronger greenback lessens the value of those companies’ foreign revenue when translated back into dollars. It also makes their products less competitive as prices rise in local currency terms, reducing demand. For developing economies, there’s the risk that a “currency mismatch,” which takes place when governments, corporations or financial institutions have debt in US dollars but pay in a depreciating local currency, can push them into financial jeopardy.
7. Who isn’t joining the party?
With a nose-diving currency, Japan appears to be playing by the currency war’s old rules. Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda has kept yields anchored to the floor in an effort to stimulate the economy. In the process, the yen has fallen precipitously, dropping more than 15% this year against the US dollar -- the biggest drop of any Group-of-10 currency. In mid-June, ahead of the BOJ’s most recent policy meeting, Kuroda shifted his stance slightly, signaling that the central bank was watching the currency, in a rare departure from the status quo of staying mum on the country’s exchange rate. He conceded that the yen’s abrupt slide wasn’t advantageous for the country’s economy, though the bank didn’t alter policy settings.
Reference Shelf
• Bloomberg Opinion’s John Authers on Lehman-era precedents for the current market rout and how central bank actions are different this time around.
• The Bank of England’s Catherine Mann explains how interest rates elsewhere can spill over to affect the UK economy.
• QuickTakes on why Japan’s yen is so weak and on the many risks that emerging market countries are facing.
• Bloomberg Intelligence on whether the US faces a return to 1970s stagflation, and the difficulty of nailing a soft landing.
• University of California, Berkeley economist Barry Eichengreen on old-school currency wars. | 2022-06-23T05:58:52Z | www.washingtonpost.com | What’s a Reverse Currency War and Who’s Fighting One? - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/whats-a-reverse-currency-war-and-whos-fighting-one/2022/06/23/dbea46a2-f2ab-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/whats-a-reverse-currency-war-and-whos-fighting-one/2022/06/23/dbea46a2-f2ab-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
Russia-Ukraine war live updates Dwindling resources may slow Russia, U.K. says; E.U. leaders meet on Kyiv’s candidacy
Ukrainian forces travel away from the battle-torn eastern city of Lysychansk. (Heidi Levine for The Washington Post)
The cities of Severodonetsk and Lysychansk — Ukraine’s two footholds in the eastern Luhansk region — are the sites of “hellish battles” against Russia, regional governor Serhiy Haidai said. Moscow’s forces are gathering near a village south of Lysychansk that was captured this week, he said, in a possible attempt to cut off the remaining defenses there. Russian missile attacks continued to hit the rest of Ukraine, with strikes reported near Kharkiv in the north and Mykolaiv in the south.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said U.K. intelligence believes Russia’s momentum could slow in the coming months as the Kremlin exhausts its resources, according to Reuters. The West must help “reverse" Ukraine’s battlefield losses and support Kyiv’s forces in mounting counterstrikes, he said ahead of a major NATO summit next week.
By Sammy Westfall and Karina Tsui2:01 a.m.
In a time of crisis, the international image of the United States, NATO and Russia has shifted — with views on Russia plunging and views of the United States and NATO remaining positive, even increasing, a Pew study of 18 nations found.
In Poland, the shifts have been dramatic. Views on the United States, European Union and NATO have reached all-time highs — each hovering around 90 percent — since the question was first asked in 2007. And views on Russia dropped from one-third of Poles sharing a favorable view in 2019 to a measly 2 percent in 2022.
Reis Thebault: During a Q&A with Canadian students on Wednesday, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was asked about his historical and fictional role models, the inquirer noting that he has drawn comparisons to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and hero of the wizarding world Harry Potter. Zelensky, former comedian and television star, seized on the mention of the Boy Who Lived without missing a beat: “Thank you for these kind of comparisons,” he told the crowd, smiling. “Harry Potter is better than Voldemort, and we know who is Voldemort in this war, and who is Harry Potter, so we know how the war will end.”This was also not the first time the arch-villain of J.K. Rowling’s book series has been invoked to describe Russian President Vladimir Putin. In March, Ukraine’s official Instagram page promoted murals depicting Zelensky and Putin cosplaying Potter and Voldemort.
What is genocide, and is Russia carrying it out in Ukraine?
What is NATO, and why isn’t Ukraine a member? | 2022-06-23T06:15:45Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Latest Russia-Ukraine war news: Live updates - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/russia-ukraine-war-putin-news-live-updates/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/russia-ukraine-war-putin-news-live-updates/ |
FILE - Colorado Avalanche’s Nazem Kadri in action during the third period in Game 6 of an NHL hockey Stanley Cup second-round playoff series against the St. Louis Blues Friday, May 27, 2022, in St. Louis. The National Hockey League has taken significant strides in recent years to improve diversity in a sport that has long been predominantly white. (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson, File) | 2022-06-23T07:30:23Z | www.washingtonpost.com | 'A movement not a moment': NHL focuses on racial diversity - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nhl/a-movement-not-a-moment-nhl-focuses-on-racial-diversity/2022/06/23/e600ae7e-f2bf-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/nhl/a-movement-not-a-moment-nhl-focuses-on-racial-diversity/2022/06/23/e600ae7e-f2bf-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
TAMPA, Fla. — Nazem Kadri scored at 12:02 of overtime — — perhaps with too many Colorado players on the ice — and the Avalanche beat Tampa Bay 3-2 on Wednesday night in Game 4 of the Stanley Cup Final to move within a victory of dethroning the two-time defending champion Lightning.
WASHINGTON — Washington Commanders owner Dan Snyder conducted a “shadow investigation” that sought to discredit former employees making accusations of workplace sexual harassment, hired private investigators to intimidate witnesses, and used an overseas lawsuit as a pretext to obtain phone records and emails, according to a document released by a House committee on Wednesday.
OTTAWA, Ontario — Hockey Canada’s federal funding is being frozen in the wake of the national organization’s handling of an alleged sexual assault and out-of-court settlement.
BALTIMORE — Jaylon Ferguson, who set an FBS record for career sacks while at Louisiana Tech and then played the past three seasons in the NFL with the Baltimore Ravens, has died. He was 26. | 2022-06-23T07:30:29Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Wednesday Sports in Brief - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/wednesday-sports-in-brief/2022/06/23/49ff89c6-f2c1-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html | https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/wednesday-sports-in-brief/2022/06/23/49ff89c6-f2c1-11ec-ac16-8fbf7194cd78_story.html |
Security forces stand guard outside the Sri Lankan prime minister's residence during an anti-government protest on June 22. (Chamila Karunarathne/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock)
“Collapsed.” A “serious situation.” And potentially, a “fall to rock bottom.”
Those are some of the ways Sri Lanka’s prime minister described his country’s faltering economy Wednesday as the island nation faces extreme food and fuel shortages.
The comments to Parliament from Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe come after weeks of turmoil caused by government incompetence, experts say — a dynamic exacerbated by global inflation and supply chain disarray amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the lingering impacts of the coronavirus pandemic.
“We are now facing a far more serious situation beyond the mere shortages of fuel, gas, electricity and food,” Wickremesinghe said, speaking in Sinhala. “Our economy has faced a complete collapse.”
Sri Lanka, a country of 23 million off the southeastern coast of India, has essentially had the door to fuel supplies shut in its face, as its national Ceylon Petroleum Corp. is $700 million in debt.
“No country or organization in the world is willing to provide fuel to us,” the prime minister said. “They are even reluctant to provide fuel for cash.”
The economic chaos follows an explosion of political unrest: Protests sparked by brewing economic uncertainty and anger over corruption among the ruling Rajapaska family forced Gotabaya Rajapaska, the president, to oust his brother, Mahinda Rajapaksa, from the prime minister’s office last month. Wickremesinghe was appointed shortly afterward.
Though Wickremesinghe’s proclamation was dramatic, it wasn’t necessarily overstated. “The economy is certainly on the brink of collapse,” said Nirvikar Singh, an economics professor and expert on South Asia at the University of California at Santa Cruz. The government has been “astonishingly irresponsible and incompetent,” having mismanaged the country’s monetary and economic policy since 2019, he said.
In recent days, lines for gasoline have stretched for miles. On Monday, schools and government offices in major cities were shuttered for at least a week with the fuel shortage forcing the country to a screeching halt.
Food insecurity has also plagued Sri Lanka, with data from the country’s central bank showing a sharp uptick in prices for all food items. Rice, a staple in the country, costs nearly three times as much as it did a year ago. Prices of essential produce such as tomatoes have gone up by four times from the previous year. Last week, government workers were asked to grow their food in their backyards.
Schools and government offices in Sri Lanka’s major cities were shut on June 19 for at least a week due to severe fuel shortages. (Video: Reuters)
The signs of the devastating crisis are everywhere, including medicine shortages at hospitals and businesses on the brink of closure. At the main public hospital in the capital, Colombo, essential supplies such as medicine and catheters are scarce.
“We are trying to manage somehow, but there is a dearth,” said the hospital’s spokeswoman, Pushpa De Soysa. “We just have to be judicious in using what we have.”
In the nearby, once bustling Colpetty neighborhood, restaurant owner Pradeep Vithanachchi has been forced to turn to the black market for cooking gas, which is hard to find and expensive when sporadically available.
“It is now an existential crisis for both the business and us,” he said of the restaurant — a fixture there for four decades that he inherited from his father.
Sri Lanka is waiting for loan assistance from the International Monetary Fund, which Wickremesinghe said would not only provide tangible help, but also act as a “seal of approval” so that “the world will once again trust us,” allowing the country to receive low-interest loans from other nations.
The contracting growth is a matter of grave concern, economists say. Ahilan Kadirgamar, an economist at the country’s Jaffna University, said the economy was likely to shrink by 10 percent. “People have given up on production, and there is no planning or process to address this,” he said, adding that it would take at least five years for the country to find solid footing again.
Singh said international financial help “should be able to turn things around relatively quickly, though there will be painful after-effects.” He noted that Sri Lanka is a relatively small economy, meaning the finances necessary to lift the island out of its economic implosion are “not large on a global scale.”
Should Sri Lanka emerge from the chaos, the experience would offer one upside, Singh said, as economic concerns swirl globally.
“Sri Lanka does provide a lesson to other countries about the basics of economic management,” he said. “These lessons are not new but sometimes are forgotten.”
Masih reported from New Delhi and Farisz from Colombo. | 2022-06-23T08:52:27Z | www.washingtonpost.com | Sri Lanka’s economy has 'completely collapsed,' prime minister says - The Washington Post | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/sri-lanka-economy-collapse/ | https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/06/23/sri-lanka-economy-collapse/ |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.