Friday, April 30, 2021

'Vote no, take the dough': Pelosi calls the GOP's bluff on helping their constituents

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 29: U.S. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaks during a news conference at the U.S. Capitol on April 29, 2021 in Washington, DC. Pelosi announced that the House of Representatives would take up the Anti-Asian Hate Crimes bill, which recently passed the Senate, when they return from their district work week. (Photo by Stefani Reynolds/Getty Images)

Congressional Republicans are doing an epic job of talking out of both sides of their mouths right now. On one side, they're beside themselves over the price tag of the investments President Biden wants to make in the national economy. On the other side, they're all too happy to tout the relief funds that Democrats—and Democrats alone—made available to their constituents.

Taken together it's just one giant ice cream sundae complete with whipped cream, nuts, and a cherry to boot.

Even before Biden delivered his first address to a joint session of Congress, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was digging in on the GOP hypocrisy. Remember when Republicans passed that 2017 tax gift to the wealthy that they said would pay for itself but actually added some $2 trillion to the deficit? So does Pelosi.

“All of a sudden they are deficit hawks when they were giving away money to wealthy people under President Trump,” Pelosi said of the 2017 law Wednesday on CBS This Morning.

Pelosi went on to liken the GOP initiative to a "scam," while Democrats are proposing "investments" that will pay off for the whole country. 

“What we’re talking about here are investments. Nothing brings more to the Treasury than the investment in education we make,” Pelosi said. Biden's American Families Plan includes money for universal preschool, two years of free community college, and expanded Pell Grants, among other initiatives to boost education rates in the country. 

But Pelosi's morning salvo to Republicans on Wednesday wasn't to be outdone by the sentiments she shared Thursday after a string of House Republicans gleefully told their constituents that new relief funding provided by the American Rescue Plan they voted against would soon be available to them.

“A number of them are trying to take credit for something they didn't vote for—that's not unusual," she said. "Vote no, take the dough—that's what the Republicans do."

Nancy dons her shades because the Republican's taking credit for Biden's American Rescue Plan is so GLARINGLY hypocritical.

 

Thursday, April 29, 2021

Giuliani's home searched, phone seized, as investigators get past roadblocks laid by Trump

UNITED STATES - NOVEMBER 19: Rudolph Giuliani, attorney for President Donald Trump, conducts a news conference at the Republican National Committee, on lawsuits regarding the outcome of the 2020 presidential election on Thursday, November 19, 2020. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images) 
Rudy, Rudy, Rudy!

Multiple sources are reporting that federal investigators executed a search warrant at a Manhattan apartment owned by former mayor, current Trump surrogate, and leader of the effort to overturn the 2020 election, Rudy Giuliani. According to The New York Times, that search is directly connected to an investigation of Giuliani’s actions in Ukraine.

For literally years, Giuliani has been pushing false stories about President Joe Biden, his son Hunter, and actions that were taken in Ukraine during the Obama administration. The stories that Giuliani brought back from Ukraine led directly to the dismissal of a talented ambassador, generated a whole series of congressional investigations, and encouraged Donald Trump to make a phone call to the Ukrainian president that led directly to Trump’s first impeachment

Wednesday, Apr 28, 2021 · 1:08:34 PM MDT · Mark Sumner

The New York Times is now reporting that investigators have extended their search to Giuliani’s office, and to the home of Guiliani associate Victoria Toensing, who also worked with Giuliani on several of his efforts to convince former Ukrainian officials to create false charges against Joe Biden or Huntet Biden. Toensing is closely associated with Russian organized crime figure Dmytro Firtash, who was also connected to Parnas and Fruman.

Despite multiple denials, Trump eventually admitted that he sent Giuliani to Ukraine specifically for the purposes of finding—or creating—dirt Trump could use against Biden. In the process, Giuliani worked worked with a pair of scam artists who were arrested trying to leave the country and charged with bribery, conspiracy, and funneling foreign funds into U.S. elections. Considering all this, it’s not surprising that as far back as October of 2019, Giuliani was known to be the subject of a criminal investigation.

What’s amazing is that it’s taken this long for investigators to get around to searching Giuliani’s East Side apartment. But then, as people say, elections matter.

There’s an irony in The New York Times breaking the news that Giuliani is being investigated for his actions in connections with Ukraine, because it was the Times which provided Giuliani with breathless reporting in which they pasted pages of unverified charges made against the Biden family. Some actual investigation by Bloomberg in May of 2019 showed that there really was a scandal, but it didn’t involve Biden. It involved Giuliani and a cohort of pro-Russia Ukrainians working to create a deceptive image of what had happened that was exactly backward from actual events.

Somehow, despite what seemed to be heaps of evidence that ensnared Giuliani into the schemes for which his associates Igor Fruman and Lev Parnas were indicted, Giuliani was left free to wander about the country, spreading lies about the election and heading up the team that generated the second Trump impeachment.

For a guy who once said he was worried about becoming a “laughingstock,” it’s really hard to see how Giuliani could have done much better.

According to reporting both the Times and at CNBC, investigators have been trying to get a search warrant for Giuliani’s residence “for months.” However, those attempts were repeatedly blocked. Now that Trump and former Attorney General Bill Barr aren’t in place to keep the wheels of justice stuck in the mud, it seems that investigators have finally gotten around to not only searching Giuliani’s apartment, but seizing all his electronic devices.

The Wall Street Journal reports that investigators arrived at Giuliani’s place at 6 AM before beginning their search. So expect Fox News to be filled with the same umbrage that greeted a search of Roger Stone’s home before his arrest, and the offices of Michael Cohen, before his arrest. 

The investigation into Giuliani is, as might be expected, directly connected to the cases against Parnas and Fruman. Both of those indictments featured false names to cover what was clearly Giuliani’s involvement. The investigation is expected to extend from illegal lobbying for Ukrainian officials in the United States, to Giuliani’s business dealings in Ukraine, and his involvement in the removal of experienced ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

The story of Giuliani’s attempt to manufacture dirt on Biden, assist a collection of foreign criminals, and thwart the will of American voters isn’t over. But the lawyer who helped get Trump impeached—twice—may finally be getting his real day in court.


"Now that Trump and former Attorney General Bill Barr aren’t in place to keep the wheels of justice stuck in the mud..."

Cartoon: Hoaxes

The same people keep getting it wrong over and over again and the stakes just keep getting higher and higher. Consider supporting my work on Patreon or on Ko-Fi so I can continue creating it.

Also, please sign up for my free editorial cartooning newsletter.

Wednesday, April 28, 2021

Nicolle Wallace on Republicans: Fear of Trump was the excuse. We were wrong. They are Trump.

It's been clear for some time that Donald Trump gave the Republican Party permission to be who they are. Nicolle Wallace got it.

Nicolle Wallace gets it.

See full episodes here.

I really love how Nicolle Wallace can be pretty tough on herself, the media, and others to make her point. Today she told an unfortunate truth. It is one where too many in the media are hard-pressed to articulate vociferously.

After discussing Minority leader Kevin McCarthy sucking up to Donald Trump, Wallace made a few prescient statements.

"This is the conversation that needs to be had." Nicolle Wallace said. "We covered this incorrectly. Fear of Trump was the excuse. For all of Mitch McConnell and Rob Portman and Kevin McCarthy and all these weenies who looked the other way when Casey Hunt and Leanne Caldwell and Garrett Haake were there with a camera saying, 'Do you believe with this outrageous thing that Donald Trump tweeted today and our frame was they must be afraid of our cameras because they're scared of Trump."

Nicolle was not done.

"We were wrong," Nicolle said. "They are Trump. And you are right. This story is no longer about Trump. It's what they, it's what Trump revealed the Republicans to be."

While Wallace has been bold as she gets these epiphanies, too often mainstream media journalists are stuck in their ways providing the cover for those whom the status quo is most effective.

This guy just may be exhibit number one when it comes to explaining how Trump revealed what lying scoundrels comprise the Republican Party.

Tuesday, April 27, 2021

Oh look, a new hoax: Fox News and Republicans warn of the Joe Biden Meat Police

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 22: U.S. President Joe Biden listens during a virtual Leaders Summit on Climate with 40 world leaders in the East Room of the White House April 22, 2021 in Washington, DC. President Biden pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by half by 2030. (Photo by Al Drago-Pool/Getty Images)
Yes, yes, my diabolical plans are all coming together. Soon I shall have all the meats, and they shall have no meats at all.

Over the weekend, you may have missed a maaaajor conservative brouhaha over the news that Joe Biden, history's greatest monster, was going to take all your hamburgers away. A new climate plan will be limiting you to just four pounds of red meat a year! Violators will be taken to meat jail! Take heed, America! Your meat is in danger!

Anyway, it's all fake. Fake, fake, fake. I mean, duh.

Monday, Apr 26, 2021 · 3:27:16 PM MDT · Hunter

We now bring you this Emily Litella news update:

The claim appears to have started out in British rag The Daily Mail, but it was Fox News (of course) that turned the hoax into a Major News Event, complete with Every Conservative You've Ever Heard Of bubbling over with greasy outrage at the thought that Joe Biden, history's greatest monster, was going to be imprisoning hamburger eaters, or what the hell ever. Nobody at Fox News appears to have given a moment's thought to actually fact-checking the claim before catapulting it to the top of Mount Bullshit, because promoting fake claims is what Fox News hosts do on a daily basis. And it's fake.

CNN's Daniel Dale does the fact-checking, yet again, and to be honest the takeaway here is not so much that the Daily Mail (no link) goofed, but that this was an intentional attempt to produce a hoax. The Mail, having no "firm details" of Biden's climate plan to attack, instead went hunting for "recent studies" on what sorts of things could make climate impacts and put the scary-sounding ones in nice big graphics with scary captions, all of it implying that these must be the things Joe Biden is talking about because Look, so scary. Fox News quickly ran with it because—again—they're fascist propagandists and hoax promoters, and it took no more than that for every last damn fencepost lining Team Trump's golf-and-grievance compound to immediately freak the entire hell out. The smell of burning meat and short-circuiting neurons wafted through the Twitter air—a smell vaguely akin to what would happen if you stuffed a dead cow into a live electrical transformer—and we were off.

It’s only a matter of time before the "eat your entire supposed allotment of four pounds of beef in a single sitting, do it now, hurry up or you're with antifa" challenge lands a series of would-be American patriots in emergency rooms, but this is the price we pay for freedom. Even, or especially, imaginary freedom.

Now, there is no possible way the United States government will be forcibly invading your kitchen to measure your meats. You know this because you are not a quivering ball of nationalist grievance who has latched on to every conservative conspiracy theory from the John Birch days to "the United Nations is coming for your golf" to "globalists are being global at me" to "Pizzagate" to here. Donald Trump Jr. and a full colonload of Republican governors and House members and hangers-on do not know this, possibly because they are still too preoccupied with defending their advocacy for hoaxes that fomented violent insurrection. Also, if Rep. Matt Gaetz is representative of his party (and it seems he might be), there may be drugs involved.

It truly feels like there ought to be a way to weaponize Republican gullibility for good, rather than evil. This has been something of a minor subtext to the whole current pandemic, in fact, this notion that if only we could craft the right inane, ridiculous, objectively brain-puddling hoaxes and fire them into the Republican base of fascist-minded rubes, we ought to be able to spur genuinely useful Pavlovian responses.

To wit: Oh no! It turns out that the COVID-19 infections are not caused by a virus, but by airborne microchips developed by the United Nations and spread over the world by the contrails of passenger jets! But Moderna and Pfizer discovered the chips, and developed a "vaccine" that contains blood cells from especially delicious cows, which turn out to short-circuit the microchips and will prevent the United Nations from controlling you!

Or: Oh no! It turns out that Joe Biden does not actually want to raise taxes on rich people! Quick, let's raise taxes on rich people just to spite him! (To be fair, Republicans have been inching towards that one all on their own. It turns out rich people don’t like overt racism because it hurts their money, which is putting the only two remaining Republican constituencies in direct conflict with each other.)

No. Instead we get an actual former economic adviser to the last Republican administration having a legitimate televised fit over the notion of Joe Biden restricting Americans to "plant-based beers."

This is going to become conservative canon, by the way. There will be Fox News watchers who will go to their grave believing that Joe Biden was just days away from announcing the creation of the Federal Meat Police. They will not be able to explain why the plan never came to fruition; that, too, will be its own conspiracy. But they will believe it. They will email you pictures of what the Meat Force uniforms were supposed to look like, and diagrams of what the Meat Force strike aircraft would be kitted out with. Your weird relatives will believe it, and burp out bizarre arguments condemning you for supporting anticarnivorism, or antica, and will believe in their cholesterol-clogged hearts that antica activists burned down the city of Cleveland back when nobody was looking, but all the news outlets are in cahoots to not mention it. The city of Charlotte is now a “no-go zone,” they will grumble. Its downtown has been lost in a pale green sea of broccoli.

The only prerequisite for a new conspiracy theory to take hold in the Fox News base and, subsequently, among Republican members of Congress is that it be engaging. Nobody cares whether it’s true. Imagining themselves to be freedom fighters in imminent danger of being oppressed by armed and militant vegans is the smothering gravy that makes the rest of their lives seem still worth living. Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Louie Gohmert: These people wake up in cold sweats at night after dreams in which they are pursued by uniformed vegan shock troops carrying squirt guns of plant-based beer. Let's revisit this story in a year—I can almost promise you, every low-watt bulb who boosted these claims in the first hours of their spread will still, to a person, believe them to be true.


Monday, April 26, 2021

It's 2021 but we have a 19th-century Supreme Court

There needs to be a lot more of them and they need to not think like Trump.

Since 1869, the Supreme Court has had nine justices. In that time, the population of the U.S. has grown from 38.5 million to 332 million. Thirteen states were admitted to the union in that intervening 152 years. Women have gained the vote. The American population has become vastly more diverse, society far more pluralistic, and daily life far more complex thanks to innovation, technology, and a global environment.

Looked at through that lens, it's absolutely insane that anyone is clinging to the notion that there should not be a fundamental shift in how the highest court in the nation operates, since it has to deal with all of those vast changes in America every session. Since the Republican Party of 2021 would just as soon it was the 1860s (pre-Civil War, if they had their druthers), it's not too shocking that they're fighting fang and claw to keep the court as it's been for a century-and-a-half. Particularly since they've finally managed to get a reactionary majority established there.

The last time the idea of court expansion came up, it was 1937 and Franklin Delano Roosevelt—who had won a landslide victory in 1936—was dealing with a conservative court that was striking down critical initiatives in his New Deal agenda, hampering his ability to get the country out of the Great Depression. The court then, as now, had a majority of regressive reactionaries, making increasingly out-of-step and unpopular rulings. One case in particular helped tip the balance of public opinion, a case that has uncomfortable echoes in 2021: "[I]n June 1936, the court, by 5 to 4, struck down a New York state law providing a minimum wage for women and child workers. Laundry owner Joe Tipaldo, said the court, could continue to exploit female workers in his Brooklyn sweatshop; the state was powerless to stop him."

One historian, Alpheus T. Mason, wrote that this decision "convinced even the most reverent that five stubborn old men had planted themselves squarely in the path of progress." Sounds familiar, huh? At that point, FDR came up with a pretty ingenious plan: a new member of the court for every sitting justice age 70 or older, and a new appointment whenever a justice turned 70 and did not retire. That would leave not a set number of justices, but a flexible one. Of course, FDR's plan failed in one sense—he didn't get congressional support to enact it. However, the Supreme Court also began to support his New Deal legislation and even reversed itself, upholding the constitutionality of a minimum wage law in a case from Washington state in a 5-4 decision. Justice Owen Roberts was the swing vote in that case, and went on to protect FDRs New Deal policies in subsequent cases.

The situation in 2021 isn't all that different. We're in another crisis: the global pandemic. Republicans are as reactionary now as they were in 1937, and as out of touch with the needs of the people. There's another Roberts on the bench who might just be exerting a moderating influence on the court. Dalia Lithwick takes note of the "many unexplained mysteries of the current Supreme Court term," including "the court’s failures to take up major gun rights appeals or a long-simmering 15-week Mississippi abortion ban that might be the perfect vehicle for a challenge to Roe v. Wade." She points out that Chief Justice John Roberts "went from being the essential fulcrum on a court split between four liberal and four very conservative jurists, to a choice between being the sixth conservative on a far-right court or a dissenter" since Amy Coney Barrett was shoved onto the court by the former guy and Mitch McConnell.

Roberts might be eyeing the growing support for court expansion—including among scholars and influencers and, yeah, that Biden commission that may or may not be useless—and thinking that he needs to do something to slow the momentum behind that. He could be thinking about his own legacy and might sincerely not want to be the guy that plummets the country back to the gilded age. Or he might just be waiting for the next case that hands the reins completely over to corporate America.

Roberts was the deciding vote, after all, in gutting the Voting Rights Act in 2013, unleashing a torrent of voter suppression laws throughout the country. Roberts was one of the six who decided this week that children can be incarcerated for life without the hope of parole.

He handed that decision to Brett Kavanaugh to write—the same Brett Kavanaugh who has credibly been accused of attempted rape of a classmate as a juvenile, the Brett Kavanaugh who told the Senate Judiciary Committee that his activities as a teen shouldn't be held against him. "If we want to sit here and talk about whether a Supreme Court nomination should be based on a high school yearbook page, I think that's taken us to a new level of absurdity," he said. He can't be held accountable for his actions as a minor, but is fine condemning others to life in prison from his seat on the most powerful court in the nation. As is Roberts.

At the same time, the country is a vastly different one from what it was in 1937. Starting with the part where a president—who was elected with the assistance of a foreign adversary and attempted to coerce yet another foreign leader into finding dirt on his political opponent—tried to overturn the results of an election and sicced an armed mob to ransack the Capitol and intimidate the Congress. And the part where there are Republicans still serving in Congress who endorsed that action.

One of the two major ruling parties of the United State will do anything—ANYTHING—to regain political power and hold it forever. That's the party that created this Supreme Court, the court that just rubber-stamped the barbarity of keeping a juvenile incarcerated for life. The Supreme Court that in 2020 allowed the resumption of the federal government killing people in the name of "justice," keeping the U.S. in a death penalty league with China, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

So, yes, it's time for the Supreme Court to join the 21st century and be modernized. It's time for 20th-century politicians like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Joe Biden to recognize that. Considering where we are in 2021 and where the Republican Party is, balancing the court with the addition of four qualified and experienced judges is the most reasonable and modest reform imaginable.


 Remember those halcyon days when Supreme Court justices had brains and compassion?

Sunday, April 25, 2021

You Have the Right to Film Police. Here's How to Do It Effectively - and Safely

Cellphone video shows police officers trying to apprehend a suspect inside a downtown Chicago train station in 2020. After a struggle with police, the suspect was shot as he fled up the escalator with the officers in pursuit. (photo: AP)
Cellphone video shows police officers trying to apprehend a suspect inside a downtown Chicago train station in 2020. After a struggle with police, the suspect was shot as he fled up the escalator with the officers in pursuit. (photo: AP)

By Geoffrey A. Fowler, The Washington Post

23 April 21

readersupportednews.org

There is much to learn from how Darnella Frazier recorded George Floyd's arrest on her smartphone

arnella Frazier changed the course of history by tapping record on her smartphone. We can learn a lot from her about what to do when facing down badges, guns and a potentially dangerous situation.

On the way to the convenience store last May, Frazier came upon George Floyd being arrested by former police officer Derek Chauvin. Then 17, Frazier recorded ten minutes and nine seconds during which Floyd was murdered.

She kept a distance so her phone was not confiscated.

She used a steady hand.

And she posted her video on Facebook so the world could see the raw evidence.

“It was a master class,” says Allissa Richardson, a journalism professor at the University of Southern California and the author of “Bearing Witness While Black.” “She played an outsized role in the guilty verdict for Chauvin.”

Cameras are transforming the conversation about police violence, but they’re not all equally effective. Officer-worn body cameras have become increasingly common in the U.S., yet can both illuminate and obscure the truth. Smartphones now allow citizens to film and even live-stream their own police encounters, yet the act of recording can put people at risk in highly charged situations. Many Black Americans are tired of having to document each time a cop kills a Black person to prove it happened. And while the surge in smartphone evidence has fueled calls for reform, one reason Frazier’s video stands out is because it was so rare in actually leading to the conviction of an officer.

So how can and should you use your phone to bear witness? I spoke with lawyers, police, activists, photojournalists and technologists to get their advice on how to best record the police, both legally and technologically.

“The smartphone has become the eyes of our nation,” says Charmine Davis, a Black psychotherapist and mother in Los Angeles. She made an app called Just Us that lets people stopped by police instantly start live-streaming while letting trusted contacts know about their whereabouts. The idea, she says, is to help people remain calm during encounters because they know their loved ones have been alerted.

The American Civil Liberties Union, too, offers an app called Mobile Justice that offers guidance specific to many states and lets you share video recordings with the organization’s lawyers.

“Knowing your rights is a different thing from knowing how to keep yourself fully safe,” says Daniel Kahn Gillmor, senior staff technologist with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project.

Choices you make in the moment about how to use your phone could shape the outcome of the encounter. The experts largely agreed that Frazier’s video was so effective because it told Floyd’s story, rather than became part of it.

Here are five things you should know about how to most effectively - and safely - bear witness with your smartphone.

1. You have the right to film police

Recording officers performing their duties is generally lawful, though details about the circumstances can vary from state to state. Most police departments have a policy on this. Cops, who may be wearing body cameras themselves, should be neutral to why you are recording and may even be glad to have more proof of how everyone acted.

But you may put yourself at risk of arrest or having your phone seized if you encounter an officer who isn’t aware of your rights . . . or doesn’t care.

“A good rule of thumb is if you have a legal right to be present - such as on a public sidewalk or even on private property where you have permission of the owner - then you can be there with your camera,” says Mickey Osterreicher, the general counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, who runs training programs for both journalists and police.

Know there are some limits. You can’t disrupt police doing their jobs. “The time, place and manner are important,” says Mike Parker, a retired Los Angeles County Sheriff’s commander who now trains police. If you cross yellow tape, or get so close that you are putting law enforcement or yourself in danger, an officer can ask you to step back.

How far back is a matter of interpretation. If a cop tells you to scram, “you can say, ‘It is my understanding I have every right to record this. If you would like to direct me where to stand, I will move,’” says Osterreicher. But in general, police cannot legallytell you to stop recording entirely or destroy what you’ve saved.

Practically speaking, the best way to keep from having a cop try to shut you down as a witness is just to maintain your distance, like Frazier did during the Floyd arrest. She used the zoom function on her phone, and her microphone was still able to pick up Floyd’s pleas that he couldn’t breathe.

2. Do it in an obvious way

Don’t try to record covertly or hide away your camera, say the experts.

There’s some evidence that being clear that you’re filming can actually help de-escalate a situation, which should be everyone’s goal.

Being sneaky could run afoul of local laws, or put you in danger if officers misinterpret your moves. In a tense situation, police are going to be concerned for their own safety - and it’s possible they could mistake your phone for a gun. “The more citizens make officers feel uncomfortable, the more likely the situation will become unstable,” says attorney and police practices and procedures consultant Eric Daigle.

In the Floyd arrest, other cameras showed Frazier was holding her smartphone out in front of her body. “She had it very high and obvious so that the officers would know that she wasn’t doing anything to threaten their safety,” says Richardson. You can even see officer Chauvin looking directly into the camera.

Police may be particularly concerned about the location and visibility of your hands. That’s why some of the more advanced tools, including the Just Us app, can activate recording simply with a voice command.

There’s even an iPhone Siri voice shortcut - “I’m getting pulled over” - that can activate your phone’s camera without you touching it. (You can download it here, but will need to adjust your Siri Shortcut settings to install it.)

3. Record like a journalist

When you’re a witness, your job is to be a tripod. The more your video looks like a true audiovisual version of what happened, the more useful it will be as evidence.

Many professional journalists recommend filming horizontally because it captures more of what’s happening on the ground (and looks better on TVs). But if you do capture vertical video, which is common in social media apps, try to fill up the frame with the important action like Frazier did. Hold as still as possible, and if you have to move, try to do so very slowly like you’re making a movie.

The more you film, the better. Part of the power of Frazier’s video is that it went on for so long.

When it comes to picking which app to use to record, the best bet is the one that you’re comfortable operating even in a stressful situation.

It can be very difficult to remain silent while something terrible is happening in front of you, but it can also be useful to think of yourself more as a detached observer than an advocate.

“When you look at successful citizen recordings, what do they have in common? They didn’t interfere,” says Parker. “I have seen so many videos that otherwise would have been quite compelling but the video became about the argument between the officer and the citizen.”

4. Lock down your phone

If you film evidence of a crime, the police can ask you for a copy of it. In certain circumstances, an officer might even temporarily seize your phone and get a search warrant to go through it.

In a worst-case scenario, Osterreicher says, cops could try to delete your video. They don’t have a right to do that because of the First Amendment - not to mention ethical policing standards - but some digital security steps you take in advance could help protect your footage.

First, modern iPhones and Android phones offer encryption, but the locks only work if you’ve got a passcode set up. A secure one has more than four numbers in it. And since your face or fingerprint could be used to unlock the phone, you might consider turning off those functions if you know you’re heading toward a protest or another situation you know will be tense, says the ACLU’s Gillmor.

There are also ways to make a copy of what you film online in case your phone gets taken or lost. The simplest is cloud backup: If you turn on a service such as iCloud Photos or Google Photos, smartphones can automatically upload a copy of whatever you film (though it may wait until you’re in the range of WiFi for a big file).

Streaming apps such as Facebook, which has a function called live, both instantly broadcast what you record and keep a copy of it for later. “Just remember, if you do that then you don’t have control over the footage going forward,” says Gilmor. First, someone who sees it can copy it. And second, if you decide to later delete or hide your video, police could push any Internet company that had access to it for a copy.

5. Think before you share

What helped Frazier’s video reignite a worldwide reckoning on race is that she posted it on Facebook. It provided a completely different version of what had happened to Floyd than what the Minneapolis police had initially reported.

But before you post, the experts suggest thinking through how you - and the person you’re trying to help - can stay in control of the narrative.

For starters, Facebook is notoriously inconsistent about what kinds of content it allows to stay up, or gets yanked for violating its content standards.

And if you’re not a lawyer, you may not be able to see how your video could be used to build a case against the person you were trying to help.

“I would try to get in touch with the family first,” says Richardson. Survivors, lawyers or a community organization will have a read of the big picture and when and how it makes sense to release the video - just like police already do in deciding when and how to release bodycam footage.

It’s also about respect for the privacy of the people involved. For survivors, video of someone being hurt or murdered can be traumatizing. The family might be thankful for having the video to use in court, but not want it on the open Internet as the final memory of a loved one.

“Allow them to remain in control of the humanity of that person’s final moments,” says Richardson.

No matter how big you paint "Black Lives Matter," a video is still worth 1,000 words.  And by knowing how, you can help shape history.

Saturday, April 24, 2021

Republicans are extremely upset that our economy hasn't collapsed under Biden

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 15: U.S. President Joe Biden meets with members of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus Executive Committee in the Oval Office at the White House on April 15, 2021 in Washington, DC. Biden, Harris and members of the caucus discussed the recent spike in anti-Asian violence, including the shooting deaths of six women of Asian descent in Atlanta last month. (Photo by Doug Mills-Pool/Getty Images) 
And there's more to come: Raising the capital gains tax on millionaires and voiding Trump's tax cuts for the rich will  pay for Biden’s American Families Plan, establishing national paid leave, cutting child care costs for most families, and establishing free prekindergarten and community college

Republicans keep dropping hints about what they want to see happen to the economy under President Joe Biden’s leadership, but the economy doesn’t seem to be listening. Despite all their dire predictions, things are looking up, driven by continuing government COVID-19 relief and the prospect of widespread vaccinations changing the course of the pandemic.

Donald Trump’s big reelection pitch on the economy was that a Biden win would mean a major crash. “If he gets in, you will have a depression the likes of which you’ve never seen. Your 401(k)s will go to hell and it’ll be a very, very sad day for this country,” Trump said in an October debate. Republican voters responded, with their optimism about the economy crashing after Trump lost.

As Democrats pushed the American Rescue Plan, Republicans warned that it was too big and would lead to problems. “There are a lot of warning signs that have not been worrisome in the past but now are certainly blinking yellow,” Sen. Pat Toomey said on Feb. 23, cautioning against “too much liquidity going into the system.”

Now, American Rescue Plan money is flowing out into the economy, things are still going well, and Republicans are … issuing the same kind of dire warnings about Biden’s next set of plans. Spending too much could set off inflation, they say, though Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell (a Trump pick) says those concerns are overblown. “We’ve averaged less than 2 percent inflation for more than the last 25 years,” Powell told the Senate Banking Committee in February. “Inflation dynamics do change over time, but they don’t change on a dime.”

Republicans are also howling about the prospect of a corporate tax increase. “Why, as this country begins to reopen and recover economically, would the Biden administration be proposing tax policy which would in the end hurt the American family and millions of struggling small businesses?” Rep. Ann Wagner asked Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen during a recent House Financial Services Committee hearing, based on the theory that raising the corporate tax rate would cause prices to go up. Except that none of the Republican claims about how the Trump-era corporate tax cut would lead to increased household income panned out, so why would anyone believe the dire warnings of what would happen if less than half of the corporate income tax break was rolled back?

That corporate tax increase back to less than the rate in 2017 is planned to fund Biden’s American Jobs Plan, focused on infrastructure. Expect another round of Republican howling as Biden proposes raising the capital gains tax on people earning more than $1 million a year and returning the top marginal income tax rate to what it was before the Trump tax cuts for the rich. These moves would pay for Biden’s American Families Plan, establishing national paid leave, cutting child care costs for most families, and establishing free prekindergarten and community college. Cutting child care costs alone would help parents—mostly mothers—enter the paid workforce.

All of Biden’s moves are aimed at strengthening the working people’s economy and bringing U.S. infrastructure into the 21st century, and all Republicans want to do is predict doom because corporations and the very wealthiest individuals would have to pay a little more, money they’d be paying to invest in schools and roads and bridges and transit and drinkable water, as well as a workforce that was healthy and educated and not overburdened by trying to care for children and elders with no support. These are investments in the future of the U.S., but Republicans can’t see it because they think corporations will be able indefinitely to squeeze just a little more, just a little more out of a workforce already stretched to the breaking point and beyond. And most of all, Republicans want Biden and Democrats to fail, so that a weak economy will propel Republican wins in 2022 and 2024. They’re rooting against the United States’ economy for partisan gain, and all their predictions of economic doom are reminders of that.

It what's working for America isn't working for Republicans, then screw America.

3 TALES OF PRESIDENT MUSK: Trump slips into "Yes Man VP" role as Elon takes the wheel

Oh, you thought that old, demented, doddering fool Trump was going to be president? By Player  Community  Daily Kos Thu...