Ahern also made reference to Lightfoot arriving at the “midway point” in her mayoral term, which Fox News said apparently signals that Ahern tried and failed to land an interview with Lightfoot.
Paris Schultz — “Chicago Tonight” co-anchor and political correspondent for WTTW-TV — reacted to Ahern’s news regarding Lightfoot granting interviews only to reporters of color by tweeting that he “was told the same thing.”
When George Cardenas, the city’s 12th Ward alderman, piped in as well and remarked “how is that even true, be serious,” Ahern tweeted back saying indeed it’s true, and Heather Cherone — Chicago politics reporter for WTTW — added that “I can confirm, alderman.”
With that, Cardenas remarked, “This should be corrected.”
Fox News said Lightfoot’s office did not immediately respond to its request for comment.
How did other folks react?
As you might imagine, an outcry ensued on social media charging Lightfoot with racism and discrimination:
“Can you imagine if a white mayor did this???” one commenter asked.
“That is only slightly racist!! But to be expected,” another user said. “She is judging people based on the color of their skin and not the content of their character. What a wonderful role model! NOT! She needs to be removed immediately.”
“So condoning the murders of the people of Chicago wasn’t enough, now she admits she is racist,” another commenter wrote. “What’s next? Will she admit she is a terrorist Hamas supporter, too? I guess being a failed politician wasn’t enough.”
But not everyone agreed:
“So, she’s doing what white majors [sic] have always done, but in reverse,” one user observed. “Where’s the lie/problem?”
“Y’all know that white people can read those interviews, too, right?” another commenter asked. “I don’t understand what the issue is.”
“Thank you Mayor Lightfoot,” another user said. “Black and Brown journalist[s] will not distort you[r] words. Our communities have been underrepresented too long. I applaud your efforts for bringing equity, fairness, and celebrating the rich culture in Chicago neighborhoods.”
Fox News noted that it’s unclear when Lightfoot began limiting one-on-one interviews to journalists of color — and if the policy applies only to local reporters, given that MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle interviewed the mayor Monday.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) fired back at MSNBC host Joy Reid after she said Tuesday that Cruz was betraying his race by opposing the “For the People Act,” a sweeping piece of legislation supported by Democrats that would radically transform state and federal elections laws.
Earlier this week, Cruz flipped the script on Democrats by claiming the “For the People Act” would weaken election security and implement “Jim Crow 2.0” to “steal voting rights from the American people.” His use of the phrase “Jim Crow 2.0” was cheeky — it’s the same phrase Democrats have used to describe new Republican-supported election integrity laws in Georgia, Florida, Texas, and elsewhere.
On a panel discussing the legislation with Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and NAACP attorney Janai Nelson, Reid and the others agreed that Cruz’s opposition to the bill and his use of the term “Jim Crow” was “beyond offensive.”
She called Cruz “Stephen from Django Unchained,” referring to the character Stephen from the 2012 Quentin Tarantino film who is a house slave in antebellum Mississippi that supports his cruel master’s oppression of the other black slaves.
“Ted Cruz says a lot of stupid things. He does a lot of stupid things. But I personally, as a person of color, as a black person, am beyond offended that he would dare use the word ‘Jim Crow’ when his party is literally a ‘Jim Crow’ party at this point trying to suppress the votes of people, including in his home state,” Reid said.
Continuing, Reid said Cruz “could give a damn about Jim Crow” and claimed without evidence that he “never raised once concern ever in his entire life … about Jim Crow or racism or discrimination.” She accused Republicans of wanting to prevent non-white people from voting and claimed that without the “For the People Act” overturning election security measures, the United States “may never get another free and fair election again.”
“I think what you see here on your screen is what Republicans fear in the voting booth,” Reid said, gesturing to guests Padilla and Nelson and referring to their skin color. “And they’re going to do everything they can to make sure it doesn’t happen, including Stephen from Django Unchained, AKA Ted Cruz, who is working to stop fellow people of color from voting, which is amazing.”
Cruz responded to Reid’s racist remarks Wednesday, accusing Reid of using a racial slur.
I appreciate MSNBC lecturing me on how people of “my race” are supposed to vote. This arrogant condescension is a b… https://t.co/xU3Y09w6ut
“I appreciate MSNBC lecturing me on how people of “my race” are supposed to vote. This arrogant condescension is a big reason Hispanic voters are moving right in large numbers,” Cruz tweeted. “Also, why is MSNBC ok with their hosts using overt racial slurs (‘Stephen from Django’)?”
The Walt Disney Company is asking employees to complete a white privilege check list, and it insists in the company’s documents that America was founded on systemic racism.
Disney recently introduced a diversity and inclusion program called “Reimagine Tomorrow.” The program is described as an anti-racism discussion guide. The program asks “What can I do about racism?”
“Finally. Thank you,” Pat said sarcastically.
Pat got fired up about this “garbage” and said he was about to snap.
“Is it time employ the tactics of the Left and start boycotting companies like this?” Pat asked. “I think it is.”
Watch the video to hear more from Monday’s show. Can’t watch? Download the podcast here.
Want more from Pat Gray?
To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Two small states have long prided themselves on their quadrennial first-in-the-nation presidential caucus and primary statuses.
Iowans love to brag about their “Hawkeye Cauci” — the first votes cast in the nomination process. The state’s spot on the election calendar gets nearly every Democratic and Republican candidate to make an appearance in the state and brings Iowa outsized media love during bleak winter months. Political and government leaders revel in the extra attention the caucuses bring (well, most years — 2020 was a notorious disaster).
New Hampshire loves to brag about being the first primary in the nation — and even has a law requiring that the secretary of state move the election to be at least a week before any other state holds a similar election (Iowa’s caucuses don’t count).
Now their claims to fame are at risk — all because the Democratic Party believes the states’ populations are too white.
What’s going on?
The Boston Globe reported that, though Republicans are continuing to give traditional deference to Iowa and New Hampshire — potential 2024 GOP hopefuls have already made trips there — Democrats are debating whether the majority-white small states are worthy of holding the first votes.
According to the Globe, the Democratic National Committee is currently holding behind-the-scenes discussions about what to do about these states. Many Democrats are reportedly saying Iowa and New Hampshire should not get to have the first primary contests because their white populations do not reflect the party’s electorate.
Getting in on the action are former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who are both pushing to get their states higher up on the schedule list.
Yadira Sanchez, co-executive director of the advocacy group Poder Latinx, echoed those concerns to the Globe: “We definitely see a need for more diversity in states that are scheduled at the beginning of the election, to properly reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of our country, but also [because] it impacts the issues that are being discussed.”
“Our diversity,” she added, “demands that we see ourselves reflected in the primary process — and not at the end, when decisions have already been made.”
Many New Hampshirites — including several Democrats — are pushing back against the idea of race-based voting.
Bill Shaheen, a New Hampshire Democratic national committeeman and husband of Democratic U.S. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, is one of those who argues against using skin color to determine the primary schedule.
New Hampshire does a “great job” with its primary, he told the Globe. “We create a level playing field. It doesn’t matter what the color of your skin is. We judge people by the content of their character.”
Still, some Democrats are willing to attack their own state’s white privilege in a fight over primary scheduling. Arnie Arnesen, a New Hampshire radio host and onetime Democratic gubernatorial candidate, told the Globe, “New Hampshire is a white state, it is a rich state, it is an old state, it is a privileged state.”
Law versus party
What about that New Hampshire law that the secretary of state must move the election to a date that makes it the first in the nation? The Democrats will have to determine whether it’s worth the fight, according to the Globe:
New Hampshire state law dictates that it must hold the nation’s first primary, but the national parties set the primary calendar for states. More than a decade ago, when Florida and Michigan did not follow the Democratic Party’s calendar, they were penalized at the convention by having the voting power of their delegates limited.
If New Hampshire rejected a later spot in the calendar, and the national party stripped its delegates’ power, presidential candidates would have to decide whether it was worth coming to the state just for a symbolic victory and some maple syrup.
“New Hampshire has never been about the delegates,” said Dante Scala, a political science professor at the University of New Hampshire. “It’s been about the publicity that winning here means for a candidate. Would candidates be willing to give that up? That becomes the question.”
North Carolina Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson has made history and waves recently.
Robinson — a Republican — became the state’s first black lieutenant governor when he was sworn in Jan. 9 after winning his election last November. In his elected role, he had the duty of presiding over Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper’s State of the State address last week — making him the first black elected official to do so in the history of the Tar Heel State.
With such a powerful moment going on around him, one would think the governor would consider it worth mentioning during his annual address, the Rev. March Creech wrote in an op-ed for the Christian Post on Monday.
But anyone unfamiliar with Robinson’s accomplishments would have learned nothing about them if Cooper’s address was their source of information, state Senate Leader Phil Berger noted on Twitter.
“An indication of how far North Carolina has come is @markrobinsonNC, our first black Lt. Governor presiding over tonight’s State of the State,” Berger said. “An indication of how far the NC Democratic Party has to go is the Democratic Gov’s failure to recognize him during the speech.”
An indication of how far North Carolina has come is @markrobinsonNC, our first black Lt. Governor presiding over to… https://t.co/RlOYnGjGaQ
Creech pointed out that the offense was particularly hypocritical considering Cooper’s past rhetoric and actions regarding Black Lives Matter and other race-related issues, not to mention the Democratic Party’s ongoing claim to be all about supporting and celebrating black Americans’ accomplishments:
The omission was egregious when you think about it, especially since Cooper removed Confederate monuments on the Capitol lawn, marched alongside protestors after the death of George Floyd, made statements in support of Black Lives Matter, and even brought up the issue of racism in his State of the State speech. Moreover, Cooper is a Democrat, supposedly the Party that genuinely cares about the black race. Yet, nothing in North Carolina history has ever occurred like what happened on that Monday evening – a duly elected black man presided over an entire branch of our State’s government – to hear the Governor’s State of the State speech – and there was not the first acknowledgment of Robinson’s achievement for himself or the race he honorably represents.
Naturally, the mainstream media couldn’t be bothered to bring up Cooper’s blatant snub.
Creech is pretty sure he knows why: “Robinson doesn’t fit the liberal narrative.”
The lieutenant governor is an outspoken social conservative Republican who is not shy about sharing his Christian faith, which means he is “not the kind of minority that helps [the left’s] cause.”
Being the wrong kind of black man “won’t even get you honorable mention in the halls of power with Leftists like Gov. Cooper, even if you are the first black Lt. Governor in the State’s history,” Creech wrote.
“Race, race, race. It’s seemingly almost all we hear about from the Left these days. But when Democratic politicians, like Cooper, overlook, ignore, and diminish great men such as Mark Robinson, it seems to confirm the suspicion that race is being wielded as a political weapon.”
Robinson made waves in DC
On April 22, Robinson was invited to testify at a hearing in the House of Representatives on the Voting Rights Act. Democrats conducted the hearing to criticize the new Georgia voting law that the left has been caught lying about and has purposefully mischaracterized as a return to the Jim Crow era.
During his opening remarks, Robinson called it “insane” and “insulting” to compare the voter ID laws passed in Georgia and other states to Jim Crow laws that were used to tyrannize black Americans and keep them from voting.
After elaborating on how and why it is “preposterous” to compare the Georgia law to Jim Crow laws, he launched into a history lesson, explaining that it was the Republican Party that backed voting rights for black people while the Democratic Party supported voter suppression and Jim Crow.
“That history is clear who stood on which side at every turn in history,” Robinson said. “It is clear; it’s not even in dispute.”
Amanda Gorman wowed the world Jan. 20 when she delivered her original poem for President Joe Biden’s Inauguration. With her growing fame, international demand for her works has steadily grown.
With that in mind, Dutch publisher Meulenhoff tapped Marieke Lucas Rijneveld to translate Gorman’s collection, “The Hill We Climb,” the New York Post reported.
In fact, Gorman, 22, hand-picked Rijneveld — who won the 2020 International Booker Prize at the age of 29, making her the youngest recipient of the award — to translate her work because they had a similar experience of coming to fame early, the Guardian said.
But there was a problem for the woke crowd: Rijneveld is not black.
Which, of course, means that, despite Gorman’s wishes, Rijneveld will no longer serve as the poet’s translator.
Rijneveld announced Feb. 23 that she would translate Gorman’s work, then just a few days later announced she was pulling out of the deal, CNN reported. Her announcement followed blowback the publisher suffered when the left declared that she was not the right race for the job.
Janice Deul, a Dutch cultural activist, the Guardian said, called out the move to hire Rijneveld in an op-ed for De Volkskrant in late February.
“An incomprehensible choice, in my view and that of many others who expressed their pain, frustration, anger and disappointment via social media,” Deul wrote, according to the Guardian. “Isn’t it — to say the least — a missed opportunity to [have hired] Marieke Lucas Rijneveld for this job? They are white, nonbinary, have no experience in this field, but according to Meulenhoff are still the ‘dream translator’?”
Deul’s efforts were successful. Rijneveld resigned the opportunity to work with the young up-and-coming poet.
“I am shocked by the uproar around my involvement in the spread of the Amanda Gorman’s message, and I understand the people who feel hurt by Meulenhoff’s decision to ask me,” Rijneveld wrote, the Guardian reported. “I had happily devoted myself to translating Amanda’s work, seeing it as the greatest task to keep her strength, tone and style. However, I realise that I am in a position to think and feel that way, where many are not. I still wish that her ideas reach as many readers as possible and open hearts.”
Meulenhoff insisted that it was Rijneveld’s decision to back out of the project, the Post said.
“We want to learn from this by talking and we will walk a different path with the new insights,” Meulenhoff’s general director Maaike le Noble said in a statement translated by the Post. “We will be looking for a team to work with to bring Amanda’s words and message of hope and inspiration into translation as well as possible and in her spirit.”
Gorman has yet to comment on the controversy, the Post said.
In a strange move last week, the Ohio Department of Health scheduled a series of virtual town halls aimed at dispelling “dangerous misinformation” about COVID-19 vaccines curiously segregating the events along predominantly racial and ethnic lines.
What are the details?
In a post published on its website, the health department announced that four separate town halls were set to take place beginning Monday, during which health experts would seek to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the coronavirus vaccines.
“Whether you hear myths on social media, at work, or from friends or family, there is a lot of dangerous misinformation out there about COVID-19 vaccines,” the post stated. “The truth is that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and rigorously tested. Ohio’s COVID-19 Vaccine Town Halls are designed to help you sift through the myths and learn where you can find reliable, trustworthy information about COVID-19 vaccines.”
As a part of a statewide vaccination program initiative, any Ohioans with questions about the vaccines were prompted to join the town halls where they could “hear from medical experts, community leaders, and public health professionals,” the post indicated.
The department then listed off four options for residents to choose from:
Monday, Feb. 22, 6:30 p.m. – African American Ohioans
Monday, March 1, 6:30 p.m. – Asian American and Pacific Islander Ohioans
Tuesday, March 2, 6:30 p.m. – Rural Ohioans
TheBlaze reached out to ODH for more information about the town halls and clarification as to why the department chose to segregate the groups by race and ethnicity, but did not receive a reply in time for publication.
Interestingly, there did not appear to be a town hall option for white Ohioans — or at least not white Ohioans who live in cities.
A flier for the “rural” town hall linked on the website depicts three obviously white males and one female whose ethnicity is a little more difficult to determine.
Image Source: Ohio Department of Health
Neither were there town hall options for individuals from a range of other races and ethnicities which undoubtedly call Ohio home.
The insinuation from the department seems pretty clear: The demographics most prone to believe misinformation about coronavirus vaccines hail from the four categories outlined in the post. White city dwellers don’t need a town hall, it would seem.
The series is sponsored by the Ohio Department of Health, the American Chemical Society, and Republican Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine’s Office of Faith-Based and Community initiatives.
The race is now on to convert body heat into battery power. Just like the action/sci-fi movie The Matrix.
In The Matrix, it was revealed to Neo (Keanu Reeves) that humans are flesh batteries powering artificial intelligence machines that have taken control of Earth.
Researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder have come one step closer to harness the human bodies’ thermoelectric energy to power low-cost wearable devices.
“In the future, we want to be able to power your wearable electronics without having to include a battery,” said Jianliang Xiao, senior author of the new paper and an associate professor in the Paul M. Rady Department of Mechanical Engineering at CU Boulder.
As we noted above, the human-powered battery to power machines is straight out of The Matrix film. Xiao said the battery could generate about 1 volt of energy for every square centimeter of skin – allowing it to power wearable devices, such as fitness trackers.
In a short informational video, CU Boulder explains how the new battery works.
“Whenever you use a battery, you’re depleting that battery and will, eventually, need to replace it,” Xiao said. “The nice thing about our thermoelectric device is that you can wear it, and it provides you with constant power.”
Though the technology is still in its infancy, he said it generates less voltage per area than a conventional battery.
While more research is needed to increase the amount of power produced before it can be commercialized. He figured it would take about a decade before the new battery is introduced for the retail market.
“Just don’t tell the robots. We don’t want them getting any ideas,” Xiao concluded.
December has officially begun and this month is short because of the holidays, so politicians only have a few short days to fight over nothing, agree to disagree, screw over the little guy, and head back to their respective states to gossip about everything they didn’t get done this month. In short, this will get interesting!
Here are some important events to keep an eye out for:
A. 2021 budget: Congress must agree on a spending bill, often called “Omnibus,” since it condenses 12 different bills into one package.
If they can’t, one million jobs are at risk, because of a government shutdown. The street isn’t pricing in the probability of such an event, so any delays or last-minute rocking of the boat will not be taken with ease by traders.
Basically, this needs to be wrapped in a nice bow by the 11th, or we’re in trouble.
B. Stimulus Plan: Many programs, which have kept the piper from getting paid, expire this month. Yesterday, I spoke with a fund manager who is a top executive in one of the world’s largest real estate funds, one that I personally invest in. He straight up told me that landlords are paying bad tenants to leave, so that they can fill those vacancies with better-screened tenants, who have steady jobs or more savings.
We believe that Congress is too out of touch with the survival mentality and struggles of the average American family to understand the urgency of the eviction crisis. Some six million renters are behind and won’t be able to pay without rental relief. We anticipate a “kick the can down the road” approach, where the moratorium is extended to February, perhaps even March, instead of providing aid.
Secondly, we put the odds of a stimulus check getting passed in the month of December at less than 20%, according to today’s situation. Both parties have so much riding on the January 5th, 2021 Senate race in Georgia, that conceding now to the other party’s stimulus demands would show weakness to their base.
The HEROES Act is too large and the Skinny Bill is too conservative. This is why we don’t think a compromise is coming before the winner of Georgia emerges.
C. Covid-19 Restrictions: There’s been an interesting shift in how the government is “marketing” the best way to behave, going forward. Washington’s Task Force is realizing that the people just don’t listen to them, so they’re spinning the responsibility back to the individual level.
Dr. Fauci, and to a larger extent, Dr. Deborah Birx, are both acknowledging that with Thanksgiving and Christmas, families will congregate, so stopping that will be a futile waste of time.
The government is now telling each and every American something to the effect of: “You know what Coronavirus is. You pretty much know if you’re at risk or not, and you know family members who are to be kept from getting exposed, since they might die, so use your judgment, when living your life. We don’t want to enact stay-at-home orders, close schools, malls, and restaurants. We don’t want to announce lockdowns, curfews, or other restrictions, but if you can’t follow some basic rules, such as (1) wearing a mask, (2) washing hands frequently, and (3) keeping distant from others, whenever possible, we’ll be forced to, since hospitalizations and fatalities are rising sharply.”
This new approach is a twist since it puts the blame on society, not on the administration if they announce Covid-19 restrictions. It’s like a parent telling a child not to put his fingers near the fireplace, but the kid won’t listen. The parent lets the child get close enough to feel the heat, but stops him from getting burned badly.
I can’t stress this enough; I’m taking profits where it makes sense and waiting patiently. November was a record month for stocks; a pullback is so very imminent and unavoidable.
BlazeTV’s Stu Burguiere welcomed renowned sportswriter and TV personality Jason Whitlock for an extended interview on race, identity politics, free speech, and meeting President Trump.
In this clip, Whitlock said he believes anything is possible in America. After growing up in a 400-square foot, one-bedroom apartment with his father, 36 years later, Whitlock found himself sitting and sharing his life story with the president of the United States.
Whitlock explained that his conservatism is based on personal values, a Christian upbringing, and his involvement in sports. Later, Whitlock gave a stunning overview of how far he believes the African American community fell from a historically Christian system of values and replaced faith with liberalism.
Watch the clip for more.
Use promo code STU to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.
Want more from Stu?
To enjoy more of Stu’s lethal wit, wisdom, and mockery, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.
Democrat Cal Cunningham has conceded in his race to unseat Republican Sen. Thom Tillis in North Carolina, placing the GOP one step closer to maintaining control of the upper chamber.
What are the details?
Cunningham, 47, released a statement Tuesday saying that he had called Tillis “to congratulate him on winning re-election to a second term in the U.S. Senate and wished him and his family the best in their continued service in the months and years ahead.”
“The voters have spoken and I respect their decision,” he continued. “While the results of this election suggest there remain deep political divisions in our state and nation, the more complete story of our country lies in what unites us: our faith and sense of confidence in our democracy, our civic values and common humanity, our shared aspiration to care for one another, and our belief that we live in a country that does exceptional things.”
My statement on the results of this race: https://t.co/dWo5gipxw8
Polls showed Tillis trailing behind Cunningham leading up to the election, but the race tightened in October after Cunningham admitted to exchanging sexually charged texts with a woman who is not his wife. The married father of two children was also hit with allegations of engaging in separate physical affairs with the alleged mistress and another unnamed woman.
Fox News reported that, according to elections policy analyst Andy Jackson of the conservative Civitas Institute, Tillis “had the odds stacked against him,” noting that “North Carolina voters are ‘brutal’ to their incumbent senators, rejecting nearly all modern senators after just one term.”
The Associated Press reported that Tillis led Cunningham by more than 95,000 votes in the race, and with it decided, “all eyes turned to Georgia, where two U.S. Senate runoff races in January are likely to determine the balance of the upper chamber.”
The outlet pointed out:
With votes still uncounted and the races in North Carolina and Alaska still too early to call Tuesday, the Senate remained tied 48-48. Alaska GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan is favored for another term against Al Gross, an independent running as a Democrat. If the Senate ended up tied 50-50, Democratic Vice President-elect Kamala Harris would wield the tiebreaking vote.
Now that Tillis has kept his seat, Republicans now hold 49 seats in the Senate to the Democrats’ 48.
Also, North Carolina’s presidential race and several other statewide races have not been called. President Trump leads former Vice President Joe Biden by more than 73,000 votes.
Proposition 16 — which aimed to repeal Proposition 209, a 1996 ban on considering race and gender in public hiring, college admissions, and contracting — was soundly defeated: It was failing 56% to 44% as votes were still being counted, the paper said.
Proposition 209 barred the state from discriminating against or granting preferential treatment to any person or group based on race, sex, ethnicity, or nationality, the Bee noted.
And it isn’t as though the “Yes on 16” campaign was short on cash. The paper — citing campaign finance records — said the campaign raised more than $16 million between January and October while the “Californians for Equal Rights, No on Proposition 16” campaign raised a comparatively paltry $1.5 million.
Arnold Steinberg, a strategist with the “No” campaign, declared victory Tuesday night, the Bee said.
“We faced a daunting uphill battle against an initiative put on the ballot at the last minute by the state Legislature,” Steinberg, who worked as a Proposition 209 strategist, told the paper. “In a state hardly seen as conservative, voters rejected a repeal of the state constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment by race.”
Why did Proposition 16 fail?
Lawmakers and advocates told the Bee public opinion groundwork was insufficient to win over hearts and minds for Proposition 16, particularly on a ballot dominated by the presidential election.
The U.S. presidential election between President Donald Trump and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden continues to keep Americans waiting, as the country awaits vote tallies in a race that could come down to states in the upper Midwest.
What are the details?
As early morning approached 1 a.m. EST Wednesday, Biden led with 238 electoral votes to Trump’s 213, but several critical battlegrounds states remained in play, according to Fox News projections.
Biden appeared to secure nearly the entire Northeast region of the country, along with Virginia, Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, New Mexico, and the blue state of California, which carries with it 55 coveted electoral votes.
The former vice president was also projected by Fox News to win Arizona — a state Trump won in 2016 — but the Trump campaign ridiculed Fox News for calling the state before more votes had been counted. As of this writing, Biden was leading Arizona with 53% of the vote compared to President Trump’s 45.8%, with 76% of precincts reporting.
President Trump was projected to win the major prizes of Texas and Florida, which carry 38 and 29 electoral votes, respectively. He also won the key battleground state of Iowa, along with deep red Southern states Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.
South Carolina was called for Trump, along with Kentucky, Tennessee, Indiana, Ohio, West Virginia, Nebraska, Missouri, Kansas, Wyoming, Utah, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arkansas, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The president also picked up Montana, which was considered up for grabs.
But Alaska, Nevada, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Georgia remained without a winner, as were the key upper Midwestern states of Wisconsin and Michigan.
According to forecasting from the New York Times, Biden held a 57% chance of winning Georgia with 85% of precincts reporting, while Trump held an 86% chance of winning North Carolina.
While Trump appeared to be up in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Nevada, the vote tallies were too early for projections.
The campaigns remain confident
Meanwhile, both campaigns expressed confidence in their chances for victory.
Several Biden advocates declared early that he would win the White House, and urged supporters to remember that mail-in votes would continue to roll in. Ben Rhodes, former deputy national security adviser to President Obama, tweeted, “Biden is going to win this thing people.”
He added, “Trump will lose if the ballots are counted. The next few days are do or die for American democracy. This is always how it was going to end – the peoples’ will must prevail.”
President Donald Trump declared on Twitter, “We are up BIG, but they are trying to STEAL the Election. We will never let them do it. Votes cannot be cast after the Poles are closed!” The president’s tweet was later deleted. It is unclear whether he deleted it himself.
It is by now not a surprise to find the media deliberately mischaracterizing the judicial opinions of conservative nominees to the Supreme Court. One particular claim that has been leveled against current nominee Amy Coney Barrett, however, deserves further examination.
The claim, as advanced by the Associated Press and amplified by liberal legal figures in the media like Jill Filipovic, is that Barrett once ruled that being called the N-word by your supervisor does not constitute a hostile work environment, which is obviously a position that no reasonable American would espouse.
The first clue that Barrett’s opinion is being grossly mischaracterized can be found in the fact that none of the other judges who reviewed the case dissented from it in the slightest. Indeed, Barrett’s opinion merely affirmed the decision reached by district judge Edmond Chang, who was appointed to the bench by former president Barack Obama. Neither of the other judges on the three-judge appellate panel uttered a peep even in concurrence. The idea that four separate federal judges signed off on an facially racist position without a word of dissent ought to be so obviously laughable that no reasonable person would reprint it.
Yet here we are.
The actual facts of the case indicate that the plaintiff had no real shot of proving his case of racial discrimination. As detailed at length in Judge Barrett’s opinion, the plaintiff was deemed to be an unsatisfactory employee virtually from his first day on the job, invoking the ire of almost all his supervisors with unsatisfactory performance — and worse, a number of incidents in which the health and safety of his coworkers were threatened due to his negligence. His performance was so obviously unsatisfactory that he did not make it through his employment’s probationary period.
The incident involving the use of the N-word, in fact, occurred after the Illinois Department of Transportation had already decided to fire him. According to the uncontested facts in the opinion, the department began proceedings to terminate the plaintiff’s employment on Jan. 4, 2013. Almost two weeks later, when those proceedings were nearly concluded, one of Smith’s supervisors (who was also black — a perhaps salient fact that was omitted by the Associated Press) learned for the first time that Smith was contesting his termination by alleging that he was the subject of racial discrimination.
This supervisor, who was understandably irked by this transparent last-ditch diversionary tactic (and was, as a reminder, also black) called the plaintiff a “stupid-ass n*****.”
The case did not examine the question of whether this was a good choice of words or even whether it was racial harassment for a black supervisor to use it against one of his black employees. Indeed, Barrett wrote in her opinion that the supervisor’s use of the word “plainly constitutes race-based harassment.” Rather, the issue in the case centered on whether the use of the epithet “altered the conditions of his employment and created a hostile or abusive working environment.”
Under binding Seventh Circuit precedent, in order to satisfy this test, a plaintiff had to show “not only that a reasonable person would find the workplace hostile or abusive as a result of Colbert’s slur, but also that he himself perceived it that way.” The plaintiff’s case was dismissed because he failed to offer any testimony that would have even suggested that he was bothered by his black supervisor’s use of the N-word, separate and distinct from the fact that he was generally bothered by the fact that his supervisors always seemed to be yelling at him.
As Barrett noted (again without dissent), “Smith did not even try to make that showing — he points to no evidence that Colbert’s slur caused him either additional or different distress. Without evidence that Colbert’s outburst changed Smith’s subjective experience during his last two weeks at the Department, a reasonable jury could not resolve the hostile work environment claim in Smith’s favor.”
The case, then, did not turn on whether it was OK or legal for a supervisor to use the N-word against one of his employees, but rather whether the plaintiff had offered sufficient testimony to meet a legal test that was imposed by binding Seventh Circuit precedent. Not only had the plaintiff not submitted sufficient testimony on that score, he had submitted none at all. Therefore, multiple federal judges ruled that his case should be dismissed.
The implication that Barrett, as a judge, condoned or passed over the use of the word in the workplace is simply false.
A black motorist was captured on video chewing out a large group of Black Lives Matter protesters who were blocking a street Thursday in Tacoma, Washington.
The clip initially shows the motorist — wearing a red shirt, jeans, and dark baseball cap — standing next to the driver-side door of a blue pickup truck at an intersection that the protesters appear to have blocked. The protesters are yelling at him — and he’s yelling right back.
Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KittyLists
Much of what’s said isn’t clear, but it appears the furious motorist is telling protesters that their militancy is having a negative impact on the black lives they supposedly care about.
“I’m blacker than you!” the motorist hollers at the group. “I’m blacker than you!”
Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KittyLists
One of the protesters is heard on the clip hilariously pleading several times to “de-escalate!” before she apparently starts fearing for her comrades’ safety and yells at the motorist to “stop, man!” and “just get in your f***ing truck and go!”
As the video continues, things heat up even more as other black people appear to take the motorist’s side and confront the Black Lives Matter group.
Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @KittyLists
Here’s the clip. (Content warning: Language):
A black man gets out of his truck to confront Black Lives Matter protesters in Tacoma who are blocking the roads. https://t.co/JTj1JaKdgQ
A police spokeswoman told the paper that members moved onto I-5 sometime after 7 p.m.
Indeed, the below clip shows many of the same members of the Black Lives Matter group who were arguing with the motorist at the intersection now standing in the freeway lanes and chanting “Hands up! Don’t shoot!” and “No justice, no peace!”
Content warning: Language:
Tacoma Washington Antifa Blocks Entire HIGHWAY #Antifa #TacomaProtest #WA
Jason Whitlock is a rarity in sports journalism: He’s willing to take on the sports business and challenge progressive groupthink. For example, just 10 days ago he came out to declare that “white liberals” are the “true racists” and that liberalism is “the new KKK hood.”
Now he’s sending the left into fits with a recent Outkick column calling the Black Lives Matter movement the “Criminal$ Justice Movement” that is nothing more than a “cash grab” by professional athletes, celebrities, the media, and Democrats.
The left, he wrote, “created the Criminals Justice Movement. Or better yet, the Criminal$ Justice Movement.”
“The intense fight for the rights of criminal suspects resisting arrest is really just a cash grab by Democratic politicians, Nike and athletes, celebrities and journalists seeking social media influence,” Whitlock said.
As evidence, he pointed to two examples:
Nike: The company’s $150 “Icon Jersey 2.0” celebrating Kaepernick, reportedly sold out in seconds last week.
Attorney Ben Crump: The man who has represented the families of Breonna Taylor, George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery, and Jacob Blake, “bragged to reporters about the $12 million settlement the city of Louisville will pay Breonna Taylor’s family. It was good advertising. You’ve heard of ambulance-chasing lawyers. Crump chases hearses,” Whitlock said. He added:
He’s built a multi-million-dollar law practice around securing cash settlements for the families of victims of alleged police misconduct. On September 8th, Crump tweeted out a “powerful” message from Jacob Blake that summarizes the Criminal$ Justice Movement.
“Change y’all’s lives out there,” Blake said from his hospital bed, “stick together, make some money, make things easier for our people out here.”
“Make some money” best explains the Criminal$ Justice Movement.
Whitlock’s concern, he said, is that all of the “awareness raising” will actually promote a climate that’s more dangerous, not less.
“The Criminal$ Justice Movement and its primary policy push — defund the police — have predictably emboldened criminals,” he wrote. “Violent crime is elevating in high-crime neighborhoods and police are reluctant to aggressively police those areas.”
According to Whitlock, this is not about seeking justice — it’s about seeking money and power:
All while Kaepernick and Nike cash in and financial donations pour down on Democratic voter drives. Everybody is using George Floyd’s death to make it rain. His memory is used to hype NFL and NBA games, power ad campaigns for podcasts and YouTube shows, leverage media members for promotions and, most importantly, fuel left-wing political funding.
And the people being used by the left to push this cause, Whitlock said, are uninformed, easily influenced young people who can’t be bothered to examine the details of what the movement is claiming:
Most athletes have a cursory knowledge of the Criminal$ Justice Movement. They’re young, rich and easily influenced by social media. They don’t have the time or an interest in researching the details of the movement.
Instead, Whitlock said, these athletes just look for the “best way to avoid public criticism and not be accused of selling out or being a racist” and, therefore, just echo support for whomever the movement tells them to support.
He concluded that the “Criminal$ Justice Movement” does not improve the lives of minorities but only “the lives of Kaepernick, Nike shareholders, hearse-chasing lawyers, black elites using the movement to advance their careers and white Marxist anarchists determined to overthrow capitalism, democracy, freedom and God.”
CV Vitolo-Haddad, a white University of Wisconsin-Madison graduate student, has resigned from a teaching assistant position after being caught pretending to be a black person, according to reports.
Following allegations, Vitolo-Haddad admitted she is not black or Latino. She is in fact, a white Italian American. After the revelation of racial misrepresentation, Vitolo-Haddad stepped down from her teaching assistant position. She also resigned as co-president of UW-Madison’s chapter Teaching Assistants’ Association.
A Medium post from an anonymous person made allegations that Vitolo-Haddad pretended to be a person of color. The motivation for the post came from the recent news about Jessica A. Krug, a white history professor at George Washington University specializing in African studies who “canceled” herself earlier this month after admitting that she lied about being black. The school is now offering counseling to students impacted by Krug’s racial dishonesty.
“When the Jessica A. Krug story came out yesterday I was shocked, but not by the extent of her deception. What caught my attention, instead, were the parallels between her story and that of someone I know,” the Medium post said. “I have long suspected CV Vitolo, a PhD student at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, of engaging in the same kind of race-shifting and copious lying that now has people enraged with Krug (and which distracts from the important work and struggles of actual Black thinkers, both in and outside of the academy).”
“I first met CV around four years ago, when they joined the Department of Communication Arts at UW Madison where I, as an affiliate of the university, had many friends,” the anonymous claim reads. “They were quick to call themselves a ‘person of color,’ intimating that perhaps we even shared some heritage.”
The Medium entry shared social media posts from Vitolo-Haddad, claiming that she “heavily implied that they were Latinx” and was a victim of racism.
“Though their claim to a POC identity was vague, the one consistency was their insistence that they were a constant target of acts of racism and that they came from some kind of nonwhite background,” the post said.
“According to the post, Vitolo-Haddad’s last name, Haddad, was ‘appropriated’ from a previous marriage, and Vitolo-Haddad grew up in a wealthy Italian family in Florida,” the Badger Herald reported.
There is also an 11-page document “compiled and researched by a collective of Madison academics and activists who have had a variety of personal experience with CV.” The document detailed Vitolo-Haddad’s actions while at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, including her alleged “racial misrepresentation.”
Vitolo-Haddad wrote an apology in a Medium post on Sept. 6, the New York Post reported.
“I am so deeply sorry for the ways you are hurting right now because of me,” Vitolo-Haddad wrote in the post. “You have expressed confusion, shock, betrayal, anger, and mistrust. All of those things are a consequence of how I have navigated our relationships and the spaces we share.”
“I have let guesses about my ancestry become answers I wanted but couldn’t prove,” Vitolo-Haddad wrote. “I have let people make assumptions when I should have corrected them.”
“The first step towards that, however, is to resign my position as co-president of the Teaching Assistants’ Association (TAA),” Vitolo-Haddad continued. “Second, I have resigned from my teaching position at UW-Madison.”
“Education is build on a foundation of trust and accountability, and until I repair that I should not be teaching,” said Vitolo-Haddad, who worked at UW-Madison’s School of Journalism and Mass Communication.
Vitolo-Haddad penned a second apology on Medium on Sept. 8 where she claimed that her “parents have conflicting stories” about their ancestry.
“First, I am deeply sorry and regretful to the people I deceived by inserting myself into Black organizing spaces I didn’t belong in,” the post stated. “That deception was parasitic and harmful.”
“What I know is that I am Southern Italian/Sicilian,” Vitolo-Haddad stated. “In trying to make sense of my experiences with race, I grossly misstepped. I went along with however people saw me. I over-identified with unreliable and unproven family history and latched onto anything I remembered growing up.”
“When asked if I identify as Black, my answer should have always been ‘No,'” Vitolo-Haddad said. “I should have never entered Black organizing spaces. They are not my place. Once realizing this, it wasn’t sufficient to just leave; I should have explained that directly to the people who invited me and clarified my identity.”
“I want to apologize for ever taking lies about Cuban roots at face value, and for subsequently attaching myself to people’s perceptions of me as though it would provide answers where there are none,” Vitolo-Haddad added. “Additionally, I want to apologize for how my failure to own up to these harmful decisions publicly made every conversation on social media about the varied ways I’ve been racialized a source of confusion and deception.”
“What I know now is that perception is not reality. Race is not flat, it is a social construct rife with contradictions,” Vitolo-Haddad wrote. “Fighting racism never required dissociating myself from whiteness. In fact, it derailed the cause by centering my experience.”
The TAA condemned Vitolo-Haddad in a statement. “We condemn CV Vitolo-Haddad’s appropriation of Black and Brown identities in no uncertain terms … we recognize that our union is the product of a labor movement infused with white supremacy and anti-Blackness,” the TAA said.
The TAA accused Vitolo-Haddad of “manipulating and gaslighting Black and Brown community members who tried holding them accountable.” The TAA apologized for “unknowingly rewarded the toxic opportunism of performing Blackness.”
In light of recent allegations, CV Vitolo-Haddad has officially stepped down from their position as TAA co-presiden… https://t.co/FzvnKWLysq
UW-Madison spokeswoman Meredith McGlone confirmed that Vitolo-Haddad no longer works at the university.
“UW-Madison expects that people represent themselves authentically and accurately in all aspects of their academic work,” McGlone told the The Daily Cardinal.
California State University, Fresno, recently offered a tenure-track job to Vitolo-Haddad for the fall 2021 semester, but is reconsidering after the recent allegations of racial fraud.
“The Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs is aware of the concerns regarding CV Vitolo-Haddad that have been appearing online,” the school said in a statement released on Sept. 14. “Please know that this matter is currently under review. The University will always uphold its core values of discovery, diversity and distinction. We are taking this matter seriously and acknowledge the pain and confusion this situation has caused members of our campus and external community.”
The public-private partnership will give $1,000 per month during a woman’s pregnancy and for the first six months after the baby is born.
But the city is limiting the monies to only 150 black and Pacific Islander women who, the city said, have been on the wrong side of a “longstanding racial gap in birthing outcomes,” the Herald said.
The mayor said hopes that so-called “basic income supplement” will be much bigger in the long term for the women who are able to secure it. She does not want them limited to just six months of post-birth help. The mayor has much more in mind: Two years of giving money to a group of moms selected by race.
Breed declared the program had “a goal of eventually providing a supplement for up to two years post-pregnancy.”
“Providing guaranteed income support to mothers during pregnancy is an innovative and equitable approach that will ease some of the financial stress that all too often keeps women from being able to put their health first,” Breed said in a statement, the Herald reported.
Noting the health aspects touted by the mayor’s office, the paper reported:
Black women have the highest rate of preterm birth, which is when a baby is born too early — before 37 weeks of pregnancy, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Preterm babies have higher rates of disability and death.
Black women had a preterm birth rate of 14% in 2018, which is around 50% higher than white women, who had a rate of 9%, according to the CDC.
The infant mortality rate is also highest for Black women at 10.8 deaths for every 1,000 births in 2018, more than double the rate for white women at 4.6, the CDC said. Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander women had the second-highest infant mortality rate at 9.4 deaths for every 1,000 births.
However, the mayor made it clear that health concerns were not the only reason for the program being available to only select races.
“The Abundant Birth Project is rooted in racial justice and recognizes that Black and Pacific Islander mothers suffer disparate health impacts, in part because of the persistent wealth and income gap,” she said.
Jayvon Hatchett — the 19-year-old black man who allegedly stabbed a white AutoZone worker at random late last month because he “felt compelled” to after watching videos of police shootings online — is now suspected of beating his white cellmate to death.
What are the details?
According to WRBL-TV, Muscogee County Jail inmate Eddie Nelson Jr., 39, was found dead in his cell early Saturday morning from an apparent beating.
Assistant coroner Charles Newton concluded that his death was the result of “an apparent beating by another inmate” after noting Nelson “had blunt force trauma around the head and neck.”
Nelson was reportedly in jail for violating probation and failing to register as sex offender.
Sheriff Donna Tompkins told the news outlet that Hatchett, who was in jail without bond for aggravated assault and possession of a weapon during the commission of a crime, was a suspect in the beating but would not release any further details.
The incident is still under investigation by the sheriff’s office.
In a video interview on WLTZ-TV, Nelson’s mother said: “I have a question for the Sheriff. Why? Why did you put my son and that other man in there together? Why? Can you answer me that? I lost a son because of ya’ll’s negligence.”
The family’s attorney, Craig Jones, added that “if this mentally imbalanced individual had been a member of the Ku Klux Klan, they would not have put him in a cell with a black person.”
“If he was a rapist, they wouldn’t have put him in a cell with a woman. If he had bombed a synagogue they wouldn’t have put him in a cell with a Jewish person. If he had been that white kid up in Wisconsin that shot those demonstrators they would not have put him in a cell with demonstrators,” he continued. “I mean this is either sheer stupidity or meanness that’s the only way I can explain it.”
What’s the background?
Hatchett was allegedly involved in a racially motivated attack on August 25, when he walked into an AutoZone near his house and proceeded to stab a 51-year-old white employee in the neck and torso seven times.
Police noted that the victim, whose name was not released, had no apparent connection to Hatchett. The victim was transported to a hospital to receive treatment and is expected to recover.
During court proceedings, Columbus Police Sgt. Ray Mills allegedly told a judge that Hatchett greeted him with a smile and readily confessed to the crime when officers came to arrest him.
“Mr. Hatchett told me that he had been watching Facebook videos of police shootings in other parts of the country and that he felt compelled to go stab a white male,” Mills reportedly testified at the time.
Rome Smith, who works for Cumberland County, was commenting on Facebook about Hinnant’s Aug. 9 execution-style shooting reportedly carried out by 25-year-old neighbor Darius N. Sessoms, the outlet said.
Smith, who is black, wrote that Cannon “should’ve ducked” and put responsibility for the killing on the boy’s parents, NJ.com said, citing screenshots of Smith’s post.
“Y’all always trying to sneak diss and discredit a black person being killed innocently by police,” Smith also allegedly wrote, according to NBC News. “Blame Cannon’s parents for not watching him!!! F Y’ALL.”
What’s the background?
Cannon was riding his bicycle in front of his father’s house when Sessoms, who is black, allegedly shot the 5-year-old. Cannon’s 7-year-old and 8-year-old sisters reportedly witnessed the shooting. First responders transported Cannon to a hospital where he was pronounced dead.
Sessoms drove off but was arrested by the U.S. Marshals Service Carolinas Regional Task Force and he was charged with first-degree murder. Sessoms has a lengthy criminal record that includes multiple felony drug charges, multiple felony probation violations, and charges for possessing stolen firearms.
What did officials have to say about Smith’s post?
A spokeswoman for the county, Jody Hirata, confirmed to NBC News that Smith is a county employee and was suspended over the post.
Cumberland County officials — in a statement that did not identify Smith by name — condemned the post as “shockingly insensitive and racist in tone,” NJ.com reported.
“We will not tolerate County employees using social media to broadcast hateful messages,” County Freeholder Director Joseph Derella told the outlet. “This is not who we are, and we intend to pursue the strongest action available to us.”
Records indicate Smith has been enrolled in the state pension system for 26 years and his salary is $56,678, NJ.com said.
Smith’s Facebook account and other social media outlets appear to have been disabled, the outlet noted, adding that attempts to reach him for comment Tuesday morning were unsuccessful.
Cannon’s parents denied that his killing had anything to do with race. Sessoms’ parents said they believe their son was on drugs and having hallucinations, the Associated Press reported.
The night before the killing, Cannon’s father, Austin Hinnant, said he and Sessoms shared a beer on the front porch.
“I have no idea why he would kill my son in front of his two sisters and his cousin,” Hinnant told WRAL-TV. “There was never anything between me and him, any bad blood whatsoever for him to have a reason to do this.”
Racial minorities will be among those prioritized when Illinois School District 65 determines who can attend classes in-person with capacity limited by COVID-19 precautions, according to the Evanston RoundTable.
Schools in the district, which includes Evanston and Skokie, will be using about 60% of their square footage and ensuring that students have the space to maintain 6 feet of space between them as much as possible. Teachers will not be forced to work from the schools, so some of them may not be available to provide in-person instruction.
That means student capacity will be limited, and if too many parents choose to send their students to school in-person instead of online, the schools will have to make decisions on who to accept and who to deny. Superintendent Devon Horton said priority will be given to “dependent learners” and “students that are marginalized.”
“We are in a pandemic,” Horton told the RoundTable. “And we also know that everyone is affected by this differently. But there was a pandemic before this. That was inequity and racism, and classism and all of these other things. And so I just want to make sure that as we’re making a decision — no decision is going to make everyone happy — we understand that. We’re trying to support every single child to the best of our ability, and we can’t allow a political cash train to take over our decision-making regarding how we return our students to school.
“We have to make sure that students who’ve been oppressed, that we don’t continue to oppress them and that we give them opportunity,” Horton continued. “I’ve heard for quite some time that this is a community that’s about equity for Black and Brown students, for special education students, for LGBTQ students. We know that this is important work, and we’re going to prioritize that.”
Other prioritized groups, according to Deputy Superintendent Latarsha Green, include “students receiving free or reduced lunch, Black and Brown students, students who received an [incomplete] or less than 50% on their report cards, emerging bilinguals, and students with [individualized education programs]” as well as “students who are not performing according to reading or math grade-level expectations, and students with no comorbidity factors.”
School District 65 will begin its year fully online beginning Aug. 27, with plans to launch in-person classes on Sept. 29 if conditions allow. In-person classes will be Tuesday through Friday, with Monday set aside for the buildings to be thoroughly cleaned.
Vernon Jones has made a bit of a name for himself since he endorsed President Donald Trump for re-election in April.
Jones is something of a rare bird: He’s a black Democratic lawmaker from Georgia who praises the president’s policies that help the black community.
His support for Trump has made him a pariah on the left, where black voters are considered a reliable voting bloc for the Democratic Party, and he has made no bones about how he feels about his critics.
Which is why when an MSNBC host asked him if he was being paid by the Trump campaign, Jones lit into the interviewer and called out his and his network’s agenda regarding black Trump supporters.
What’s the background?
In April, Rep. Jones told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that he was backing Trump because of his “handling of the economy, his support for historically black colleges and his criminal justice initiatives.”
He not only voiced support for the president, he also took shots at presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, saying the former vice president has “betrayed black Americans throughout his career in Washington.” He also blasted Democrats like Biden for showing support for the black community only when the party needs their votes.
“We cannot be tricked again,” he wrote in a July 7 op-ed. “Democrats like Biden will conveniently appear in our neighborhoods and pander to us from now until November. Why? Because they only care about black people during election years.”
Days after Jones announced his endorsement, he said he was resigning from the state Legislature, citing attacks from fellow Democrats. However, a day later he declared he wasn’t going anywhere and said he was not going to allow “the Democrats to bully me into submission,” adding, “I will not let them win. I will NOT resign.”
What did the MSNBC host do?
During a heated interview Wednesday, MSNBC’s Craig Melvin responded to Jones’ litany of reasons for supporting Trump by asking the lawmaker if he was being paid to back the president — apparently rather than being able to form his own opinions.
After accusing Jones of saying things that were “patently false” about the president’s record, Melvin asked, “Are you a paid campaign surrogate? Are you being compensated?”
But Jones was ready to fight back.
“Let me be clear,” he began. “You get paid to shape a liberal narrative. You get paid to attack this president. I don’t get a dime from this president. I don’t get a dime from the campaign. Everything I’ve done has been me and based on my principles.”
He wasn’t done: “See, that’s the problem. When an African American—”
But Melvin interrupted so say, “Sir, I did not raise your race,” and added, “You’re not going to imply that I asked that question because you’re black.”
Jones was not to be deterred. He let Melvin, MSNBC, and the left have it: “You only ask me that because I don’t fit your narrative.”
“No, this president hasn’t offered me anything,” he continued. “I don’t want anything from this president.
“It’s what I can do for my country, and you need to accept that many other African Americans and others support this president because of his policies,” Jones said. “And to insult me to say, ‘Am I getting paid?’ — that is disgraceful, that is horrible, and that’s representative of MSNBC and their narrative to keep blacks silent who happen to support this president.
“Why can’t I be like white liberals or other whites? Nobody questions if they’re getting paid,” Jones wondered. “So I have to get paid? Do you ask Democrats do they get paid? Are you getting paid by Joe Biden?”
Melvin told Jones that he has asked liberals if they’ve been paid by the Biden campaign, but Jones quickly noted, “I haven’t heard it.”
Watch: Craig Melvin Fires Back At Georgia Democrat Who Supports Trump | Craig Melvin | MSNBC
As The Hill noted, this isn’t the first time MSNBC has been called out for asking a black Trump supporter if he’s being compensated for supporting the president.
On July 25, MSNBC host Tiffany Cross asked Trump adviser and Republican activist Bruce LeVell is he has a financial incentive for backing Trump.
“When I see folks like you support this president — has Donald Trump ever promised you anything financially in exchange for your blind support of this administration or helping his campaign?” Cross asked. “On the record, can you tell us if he’s ever promised you anything financially or otherwise?”
LeVell noted that he’s known Trump since 2015 and that the president wanted to help “people like me.”
July 25: Tiffany Cross asked @Bruce_LeVell:
“When I see folks like you support this President, has Donald Trump e… https://t.co/609DYhJDeI
John Daniszewski, the AP’s vice president for Standards, noted in a blog post that the news outlet “consulted with a wide group of people internally and externally around the globe and considered a variety of commentary in making these decisions.”
“There was clear desire and reason to capitalize Black,” Daniszewski continued. “Most notably, people who are Black have strong historical and cultural commonalities, even if they are from different parts of the world, and even if they now live in different parts of the world. That includes the shared experience of discrimination due solely to the color of one’s skin.”
He added, however, that at the moment there’s “less support for capitalizing white.”
The reason? “White people generally do not share the same history and culture, or the experience of being discriminated against because of skin color,” Daniszewski noted. “In addition, we are a global news organization, and in much of the world there is considerable disagreement, ambiguity, and confusion about whom the term includes.”
While the AP acknowledges that “white people’s skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to robustly explore those problems,” Daniszewski said “capitalizing the term white, as is done by white supremacists, risks subtly conveying legitimacy to such beliefs.”
More from the outlet:
Some have expressed the belief that if we don’t capitalize white, we are being inconsistent and discriminating against white people or, conversely, that we are implying that white is the default. We also recognize the argument that capitalizing the term could pull white people more fully into issues and discussions of race and equality. We will closely watch how usage and thought evolves, and will periodically review our decision.
How did folks react?
Commentary has been coming in fast from the AP’s Twitter post about its decision to keep “white” lowercase while capitalizing “Black” — and as you can imagine, not everybody views it as a helpful or fair-minded move:
“They should both be lowercase, as that is the grammatically correct way,” one commenter noted. “This doesn’t make any sense.”
“Wow, that’s not racist at all, except for the racist part,” another commenter said.
“Capitalizing things to show some sort of respect is gratuitous,” yet another individual opined. “Proper nouns are capitalized and adjectives derived thereof are capitalized. Common nouns and adjectives derived thereof are not. Period. Paragraph.”
“Total and complete racism, bigotry, and just flat out idiocy,” another person said.
“The woke mob cannot be satiated, @AP,” one commenter added. “This does nothing other than signal your irrationality, intellectual weakness, and dishonesty. Congrats!”
Oh, and if you want an idea of what support for the AP’s decision looks like, one commenter in the thread offered frequent defenses. Here’s one of them: “My love, this is not what racism is. Uppercasing ‘Black’ is a symbol to make up for all of the history, culture, and knowledge that the world robbed from them when we enslaved them. We don’t do it for white people because we don’t need to. We are celebrated already.”
A city official in South Carolina is accused of using racist language toward a police officer over a $10 parking ticket.
What are the details?
According to a Darlington Police Department report obtained by WBTW-TV reported, an officer was enforcing parking laws last month when he reported a vehicle parked on the wrong side of the road. The officer then placed a parking ticket on the windshield of the vehicle, the station said.
The report indicates that Councilwoman Sheila Baccus moments later asked the officer what was going on, and the officer replied that he had just issued a ticket and that he’d previously given a verbal warning for the same violation, WBTW noted.
The report added that another woman emerged that the officer recognized as the individual previously warned about parking on the wrong side of the road, the station said.
‘Why are you harassing us?’
The report adds that Baccus then asked the officer, “Why are you harassing us? You don’t have anything better to do than write parking tickets?” WBTW reported.
The officer replied that it was his job and to contact Chief Kelvin Washington if she had a problem, the station said.
The report says Baccus then made a phone call and afterward said, “The chief said he will take care of this ticket,” WBTW noted.
The she offered her alleged coup de grace, according to the station, citing the report: “Take your white self back to the white neighborhood … you’re probably the kind that would shoot us in the back.”
The officer said he did not respond to Baccus’ comment and instead returned to his patrol car, WBTW said, according to the report.
What did the police chief have to say about the alleged incident?
Police Chief Kelvin Washington on Friday provided the following statement, according to the station:
“On June 17, 2020, an unattended white SUV was improperly parked on Oak Street. An officer approached the vehicle and placed a parking ticket on the vehicle for being improperly parked. It was later discovered that the vehicle was being operated by Councilwoman Sheila Baccus. The officer handled this interaction with Councilwoman Baccus with the highest level of professionalism, and he has my complete support. He did nothing wrong and said nothing wrong. He was simply just doing his job. Any questions about Councilwoman Baccus’ actions or comments that day would be best answered by her. The parking ticket was paid two days after the incident.”
WBTW said Darlington Mayor Curtis Boyd also referred all questions about the incident to Baccus.
What did the councilwoman have to say?
The station said it reached out to Baccus for comment Thursday night and Friday morning. WBTW added that it reached out twice by phone Friday afternoon and that the station hadn’t received a response from her as of Friday night.