#but im a fierce advocate for and defender of them | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hellhaunt-moved · 3 years

Text

so i hashed it out last night with @lawrising (tysm alina!!!) and if henry and co. were added to season 3, here’s how things would shake out, deaths-wise! note: challenge survivors isn’t used to mark winners of a challenge necessarily, just people who have done one. also!! season 3 spoilers are below the cut.

episode 2 : same as canon ; jc and teala get picked, mat and safiya are chosen as their partners, and jc dies. surviving: colleen, teala, manny, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, roi, henry, beatrice, violet, danny challenge survivors: teala (mat, saf?)

episode 3 : danny is bitten by the snake alongside roi and teala, but he smooth talks his way out of getting voted for. roi is automatically entered in the challenge, and nikita is voted in by the group. roi dies. surviving: colleen, teala, manny, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, henry, beatrice, violet, danny challenge survivors: teala, nikita, (mat, saf?)

episode 4 : the group splits into two teams. manny’s team consists of him, nikita, joey, colleen, danny, and henry; while teala’s team consists of her, mat, safiya, ro, violet, and beatrice. henry and danny aggravate the group with their inability to work together, but despite that, manny’s team wins, putting teala’s team up for elimination. teala and violet get voted in because neither of them were able to defend why they should stay alive and both of them hadn’t been helpful during the challenge, with teala having poor leadership and violet being too uncertain and hesitant without danny around. they are voted in to prove that they can step up to the plate and actually do stuff. danny gets upset that violet is even on anyone’s mind and tries to throw rosanna under the bus, but he is generally ignored. violet ends up too shaken to concentrate on the challenge, and she dies. surviving: colleen, teala, manny, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, henry, beatrice, danny challenge survivors: teala, nikita, (mat, saf?)

episode 5 : i’m going to do the preliminary arm-wrestling breakdown and that’s it. maybe if i have more energy i’ll break down who does what in each challenge but the arm wrestling is important to me. matchups: mat/nikita, colleen/ro, manny/danny, teala/safiya, joey/safiya, and henry is on his own. second stage is... mat vs ro, manny vs teala, and joey vs henry. the third stage is um. mat vs manny, and then manny vs henry. henry might let manny win i’ll be honest. i don’t think he wants to be the winner. anyway, when the voting comes in, i think the group would really hone in on henry and danny because of how badly they work together. they’re picked for the challenge and everyone knows danny’s going to die. he does, and he begs the group not to leave as he’s dying. surviving: colleen, teala, manny, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, henry, beatrice challenge survivors: teala, nikita, henry, (mat, saf?)

episode 6 : i don’t really want to fuck with this. colleen in the betrayal challenge makes sense, so colleen dies. mat and joey get the lazarus coins. surviving: teala, manny, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, henry, beatrice challenge survivors: teala, nikita, henry, (mat, saf?)

episode 7 : danny gets revived, so he’s back out here. the people who beat the lava room are danny, mat, beatrice, and manny, so they have to decide on two people to vote in from teala, joey, nikita, saf, ro, and henry. manny fiercely advocates for nikita, and the group generally wants to protect henry and joey. this leaves teala, safiya, and rosanna, all of whom mat generally wants to protect. however, mat decides to throw saf under the bus because of episode 1’s fiasco, saying that she should go in alongside someone else. they eventually settle on voting for saf and teala to go in, since beatrice is strangely adamant that mat shouldn’t vote his two best friends in and that makes him go like oh boy i really shouldn’t, huh. however, danny secretly votes for nikita anyway, because he’s pissed that she had been like “ok bye danny!” back in episode 5. it’s an extremely close race, but safiya wins. the twist is that those who voted for the loser would die, so manny and beatrice are killed. surviving: teala, joey, nikita, mat, saf, ro, henry, danny challenge survivors: teala, nikita, henry, danny, saf

episode 8 : henry didn’t get cursed, but danny and teala did. the final death challenge is therefore being run by saf, mat, ro, joey, danny, and teala. rosanna couldn’t finish the first stage of the challenge, but danny was like right there with her having trouble. but he got the right cup eventually and managed to complete the challenge. rosanna dies. surviving: teala, joey, nikita, mat, saf, henry, danny challenge survivors: teala, nikita, henry, danny, safiya, joey, mat

episode 9 : since everyone had done a challenge, they all decide to put their own names into the pile, resulting in danny and henry getting picked. danny wins the challenge mostly by getting under henry’s skin enough for henry to lose focus. however, when he realizes he needs to shoot henry or shoot himself, he realizes that he can’t kill henry and therefore shoots himself, reminding henry to take care of his family when he gets out. surviving: teala, joey, nikita, mat, saf, henry challenge survivors: teala, nikita, henry, safiya, joey, mat

episode 10 : i was joking about how funny it would be if after all this, the group left teala to die. but im biased and i want her to survive so that’s that <3

final survivors: teala, joey, nikita, mat, saf, henry

#💢 henry : study / one for himself one for me too ; one of these days he'll make one for you .#👻 beatrice : study / i've been dead a thousand years and lived only two or three .#😎 danny : study / i’m no fucking saint but at least i’ll fucking sing about it .#🥀 violet : study / but before that you’ll be a doormat for every vicious narcissist in the world .#i want to do this for other seasons too im being honest. esp s1

2 notes · View notes

ugisfeelings · 6 years

Text

an early morning thought!

a month ago a friend told me they proudly defended me from a person (who was also her good friend no less????) claiming i was dumb and ignorant about politics and she even posted abt it on twitter and idk that rlly means a lot to me the more i think abt it?? someone proud to know me (n for my politics no less)???? and to proclaim it publicly?? hello?? it's one thing for me to brag abt how cool i think all my friends are (bc they are n i say this w/ 0 irony) and to feel a deep investment in letting others know just how amazing ppl that my friends are bc i take a lot pride in them n their progress but to be the subject of one's public respect myself? it's kinda hard for me to conceive of that ngl, partly bc i've kinda viewed this performance of affection and trust in my peers as my own unique way of giving back i suppose?? to be as supportive as much as my friends have always uniquely accommodated and specifically cared for me is how i see it! i like having the idea of specifically being The Advocate for my friends lol. ive kinda assumed that my friends dont rlly get to do this for me bc of my abrasive reputation which is bound to uhhh create trouble and when they do talk abt me, it's with this sheepish 'well u know how cc is' which is is 100% fine and understandable bc i like to think i trust my friends at least to know they do privately respect me in some bizarre way (n tbh i always feel slightly guilty abt putting my friends in that kind of position in the 1st place) but it's always nice to reminded of the fierce mutual admiration and devotion im so lucky to have like that and it's honestly such a privilege to know all these ppl regardless of how we stand w/ each other 4 yrs later n i hope i never take that for granted :)

#i said no more introspection for me for a while bc i draw things out too much n it exacerbates a lot of my irrational thinking but this was #nice to think abt in the past couple hrs tbh #i hope the happiness i feel hearing my friend positively talk abt me to others is what my friends feel when i talk abt them to others #i know i sometimes seem like i overdo it so the sentiment seems kinda dumbed out but im just an inarticulate enthusiastic mess #SPEAKING OF UNIQUE WAYS MY FRIENDS CARE ABT ME #yall ever think abt the importance of like... having the confidence to call someone ur friend first #bc in all my friendships for the longest time now #it was always them and not me to declare it n i wonder if ppl know how much that initiative means to me #and how much grief i must have given them by being vague n shit lol it's not that i like them less or anything but i dont trust myself #to claim a relationship status (including friendship) w/ someone whom i dont know feels the same way.. itd feel disrespectful on my part #i kinda assume everyone is just being polite to me unless stated explicitly otherwise ahgsdhkjashjgaks #it's smthing i imagine everyone grapples in any kind of relationship so the strength n faith ppl must have to take initiative on that... wow #i hope i can do that someday tbh bc it does make me sad i cant rlly reciprocate that kind of action for them #qq #g-d im such a sap it's embarrassing... i want to do so much for my friends! fuck depression n whatever bs that makes me act like a goblin

0 notes

thisdaynews · 4 years

Text

'I'm not going to take any sh--': Nadler girds for battle

New Post has been published on https://thebiafrastar.com/im-not-going-to-take-any-sh-nadler-girds-for-battle/

'I'm not going to take any sh--': Nadler girds for battle

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler had a blunt message as he privately addressed Democrats the day before his panel assumes a starring role in the impeachment inquiry.

“I’m not going to take any shit,” Nadler said in a closed-door prep session Tuesday morning — a rare cuss word from the lawyerly Manhattan Democrat that prompted some lawmakers to sit up in their chairs, according to multiple people in the room.

Nadler’s warning shot referred to likely GOP antics to try to undermine the first impeachment hearing in the Judiciary Committee on Wednesday. But it wasn’t lost on Democrats that Nadler’s message could also apply to those in his own party who have closely scrutinized his role in the House’s impeachment probe.

While President Donald Trump may be under investigation, Nadler will be on the hot seat.

The veteran lawmaker has at times struggled to balance the competing interests and expectations of his caucus and leadership on an impeachment push that once sharply divided the party. Those internal tensions have largely faded, with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her caucus unified around evidence that Trump abused his office by pressuring Ukrainian leaders for his own political gain.

But after a series of impeachment hearings in the Intelligence Committee that were widely praised, Democrats are eager to keep up the momentum as the Judiciary Committee takes control.

Democrats are moving quickly, with the panel likely to write the articles of impeachment in the coming weeks and leadership hoping to hold a full House vote to impeach the president by Christmas. Any missteps could undermine the party’s drive.

Nadler allies aren’t worried.

“He’s as steady as a rock,” said Rep. Val Demings (D-Fla.), who sits on the Judiciary and Intelligence panels.

The Judiciary Committee, led by Nadler and his staff, spent much of Tuesday holding a dress rehearsal in the storied Ways and Means Committee hearing room. The Intelligence Committee held all of its impeachment hearings in that room — one of the largest and grandest in the Capitol — and Judiciary is following suit, at least for its first hearing.

During the six-hour prep session, Democrats held a mock hearing during which former Capitol Hill staffers were brought in to play GOP attack dogs on the committee, including Reps. Jim Jordan of Ohio and ranking member Doug Collins of Georgia.

Around lunchtime as Judiciary Democrats noshed on tacos, the Intelligence Committee released its long-awaited final report on the Ukraine investigation. Democrats in the room immediately began pulling up the executive summary on their phones, many of them seeing the report for the first time, according to lawmakers.

Judiciary members have been eagerly awaiting the return of their committee — and their chairman — to the public stage, with more than half the nation now siding with them on impeachment according to public surveys.

Democrats on the panel insist they aren’t nervous about the first hearing, saying privately that the format has been tightly coordinated with leadership and they don’t expect a slate of constitutional experts to be combative witnesses. But Nadler’s reappearance at the center of the impeachment probe doesn’t come without risks, some lawmakers said.

The panel’s last high-profile hearing in September — featuring a defiant Corey Lewandowski — was widely panned as a disaster. And even before that, many Democrats were privately dismayed about what they saw as juvenile antics on their side, including Rep. Steve Cohen of Tennessee chowing down on a bucket of chicken at the dais after Attorney General William Barr refused to show up to a hearing.

The discord led to clashes with leadership, including Pelosi, who privately complained to her leadership team that Nadler should have punished Lewandowski on the spot.

There are also some lingering fears among rank-and-file Democrats, including vulnerable freshmen, about Nadler’s approach. These lawmakers had complained that Nadler was leaning too hard into impeachment in the wake of Robert Mueller’s report over the summer, without the support of many in his caucus.

The outcome of Wednesday’s hearing is likely to set the tone for the final phase of impeachment — at least three hearings, including a possible session next week at which lawmakers are expected to approve articles of impeachment.

Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, who sits on the Judiciary and Intelligence panels, said Democrats intend to showcase “seriousness” on Wednesday in the face of any GOP stunts.

“There’s a sense that the facts are clearly on our side, so showing people that the process is fair, I think, is important. The process has to be as persuasive as the facts,” Swalwell said, adding that one of the goals is “making clear that if [Trump] wants to be there, he can be there.”

Republicans on the panel held their own practice session Tuesday, where members could test out their lines of attack for the next day’s hearing. Several of the GOP members, including Jordan, Collins and Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona, are fierce defenders of Trump and are expected to make the hearing as difficult as possible for Democrats through various procedural shenanigans.

In the closed-door rehearsal, Nadler told his colleagues that he intended to ignore the bait and refuse to engage with GOP obstruction tactics while stressing the “solemn duty” of the panel.

He also made clear that other members should not let themselves be dragged into the crossfire, urging them to simply let the Republicans use their five-minute questioning time any way they want. Democrats want to avoid any distraction from the panel’s four witnesses — all of whom are law professors — as they lay out the historical context of presidential impeachment proceedings.

Nadler’s allies on the committee say he has practice keeping his panel in line in the politically treacherous debate on impeachment.

Some members of the Judiciary Committee were aggressively advocating impeachment after Mueller concluded his probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, even as the majority of the caucus remained unconvinced. While Nadler also had pushed for action, he never publicly broke with Pelosi and averted a total rebellion in his committee.

The dynamics on impeachment changed instantly after an anonymous whistleblower complaint surfaced in September, which claimed that Trump and his inner circle had sought to strong-arm a foreign power to interfere in the 2020 election.

As the Democratic probe into the episode unfolded, Pelosi — who is known for a top-down governing approach — further tightened her inner circle. The Judiciary panel was largely left out of the planning, according to multiple Democratic lawmakers and aides, though people close to Pelosi and Nadler said there have been ongoing talks throughout the inquiry.

After Pelosi announced the launch of an impeachment inquiry in late September, Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff became the public face of the probe and Nadler was relegated to a supporting role.

Democratic aides contend it was a natural transition for Schiff to take the lead on an issue that originated in the intelligence community. But Nadler has been even more absent than some Democrats expected.

While Schiff was appearing alongside Pelosi at news conferences in recent weeks, Nadler was tight-lipped, declining to provide reporters with details about his committee’s upcoming role in the inquiry. Members of the panel said there was little guidance given until recently, even to Nadler, as Pelosi maintained a tight grip on the process.

Nadler’s colleagues on the Judiciary panel, meanwhile, have continued to fiercely defend their chairman. And outside of Washington, progressive activists have credited Nadler and the Judiciary Committee for keeping impeachment alive when Pelosi and her leadership team were fiercely opposed.

They say his work in the Mueller investigation — with the help of blockbuster appearances from ex-Trump confidants like Michael Cohen arguing that the White House obstructed justice — has helped strengthen Democrats’ overall case against Trump.

“Tomorrow is a very important day, a very solemn day,” said Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas) during a break from the prep session. “Many of us have said it over and over again, we didn’t come here to impeach the president. But we did come here to uphold our constitutional duty and oath.”

Andrew Desiderio contributed to this report.

#battle #Foreign #girds #Politics

0 notes

trendingnewsb · 6 years

Text

The Fight for LGBT Equality in 2018 Will Be Fierce

Jay Michaelson: So, here we are at the end of a strange year for LGBTQ Americans. On the one hand, mainstream acceptance of gay people continues to spread; gays are now officially boring. On the other hand, trans people are being singled out for government persecution on the one hand and continued street violence on the other.

Meanwhile, as all three of us have written, the Trump-Pence administration is inflicting the "death of a thousand blows" against LGBTQ civil rights, severely limiting employment rights, marital rights, access to healthcare, access to safe facilities in schools, and so onwhile literally erasing LGBTQ people from government forms, proclamations, and observances.

For that reason, it's even harder than usual to look toward 2018 with any sense of certainty. What are we most hoping for in the year to come? And what do we fear?

Samantha Allen: I have written the word bathroom hundreds of times over the past two years of covering the various state-level attempts to restrict transgender peoples restroom use. I wish I never had to type it again; I didnt sign up to be a reporter to write about the human excretory system every week.

But in 2018, I am hoping to talk about bathrooms a lot less frequentlyand I have reason to believe that will be the case.

One of the most important victories for transgender people this year came in the form of something we avoided: a bathroom bill in Texas that would have effectively made birth certificates into tickets of entry for restrooms in public schools and government buildings. But that was scuttled at the last second by the business community, local law enforcement, and a sympathetic speaker of the House who said he [didnt] want the suicide of a single Texan on [his] hands.

Im confident that well see somebut fewerred-state legislatures really push for bathroom bills. Theyre political losers and money drainersand everyone in elected office knows that by now

I was in the state this summer when this thing almost got passed and I witnessed firsthand the gloriously outsized Texas rage against a bill that could have cost them billions (Tim wrote about the Texas bathroom battle at the time for the Daily Beast).

Between that and North Carolina being forced to repeal the most controversial aspects of HB 2 under pressure from the NCAA, Im confident that well see somebut fewerred-state legislatures really push for bathroom bills. Theyre political losers and money drainersand everyone in elected office knows that by now.

Tim Teeman: Id like to share your optimism, but Roy Moore supplies a harsh correctivefor me anyway. In the celebrations that followed his defeat at the hands of Doug Jones in the Alabama Senate race, some difficult questions were left hanging.

Moore was a candidate whose rampant homophobiahis actual desire to see discrimination enacted against millions of LGBT Americans, his desire to see prejudice and discrimination enshrined in lawwent mostly unchallenged and unquestioned. Only on the last day of the race did Jake Tapper of CNN ask his spokesman whether Moore believed homosexuality should be illegal (the answer: Probably).

This was a shameful and telling omission by the media. The depressing footnote to Moores loss is that extreme homophobia itself is not a disqualification for a political candidate in 2017. Active homophobia was seen as a valid mandate to hold by the modern Republican Party.

Moore was only too happy to hold it close even in defeat, as he showed by posting (on Facebook) Carson Jones, Doug Jones gay sons, post-election interview with The Advocate. It was a sly attempt to stir up anti-gay poison. Politicians like Moore are thankfully fewer and fewer in number, but homophobia and transphobia are still a major currency in this White Houseand that Trump and other of Moores high-profile Republican supporters dont see it as a disqualifying characteristic tells us something very sad and alarming indeed.

Since ordinary gays are now not so novel, Hollywood's search for novelty is causing them to explore stories of people of color, rural folks, genderqueer folks, and other people who aren't Will or Grace

Jay Michaelson: I am putting most of my hopes outside the machinery of the state. Hollywood told some beautiful queer stories in 2017; I hope this expands and continues in 2018. A decade ago, when I was a professional activist, we had it drilled into us that the number one factor in someone "evolving" on any particular LGBTQ issue was knowing someone who was L, G, B, T, or Q. And if they didn't have firsthand knowledge, media figures counted too.

So, while the Republican party caters to its Christian Right base, I hope that continued media visibility makes them pay for doing so. There's a nice irony too: since ordinary gays are now not so novel, Hollywood's search for novelty is causing them to explore stories of people of color, rural folks, genderqueer folks, and other people who aren't Will or Grace. That might not be for the best motive, but the consequences could be profound.

Tim Teeman: Then we have the 'wedding cake' case at SCOTUS, which you have written about Jay. That seems currently going in favor of the baker refusing to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. This isn't just about a wedding cake, of course, but providing a signal that discrimination based on "beliefs" is OK, which can be used against LGBT people in so many contexts.

Samantha Allen: Im afraid the Trump administrations attacks on the LGBT community will continue to be so persistent and so piecemeal that they will continue to get shuffled to the side. This past month, we were stunned when the Washington Post reported that the CDC had been discouraged from using the term transgender in preparing their annual budget, but if people had been paying closer attention to Trumps appointments in the Department of Health and Human Services and other federal agencies, this wouldnt have been a surprise.

We cant afford to pretend anymore like these are stunningly cruel attacks that come out of nowhere: leaders of anti-LGBT groups regularly walk the White House halls, they wield tremendous influence right now, and the administration is quietly giving them what they want.

Im worried that, with so many other scandals dominating the headlines, the systematic erosion of LGBT rights will continue to fly under the radar

Trumps tweets on transgender military service created a media shockwave, but that moment aside, the administrations attacks on LGBT people in 2017 have been considerably less flashy: amicus briefs filed to the Supreme Court, tinkering with executive orders, adjusting the Department of Justices approach to transgender students. All of these perniciously subtle attacks have taken place against a cultural backdrop of continuing bigotry and violence: In the last year, for example, at least 28 trans people have been killed, most of them transgender women of color.

Tim Teeman: I think one of the things the U.S. would do well to figure out (he said vainly) is the separation of Church and State. The Religious Right has such a grip on the levers of power here, in certain states and in certain administrations like President Trumps which is greatly relying on the bedrock of its support. LGBT people, activists and groups are facing a traumatic 2018, as the far right of the Republican support seeks to shore up support around Trump, and trans people especially are especially vulnerable in such an atmosphere.

Jay makes a good point: at a time when the Right seeks a ratcheting up of the LGBT culture war, LGBT people and their straight allies working in the culture at large should work to put a wide diversity of LGBT lives and characters into that culture, whether it be TV, film, literature, art, or whatever. Actual LGBT presence will be vital in 2018.

If this global backlash isn't stopped, queer people will be murdered, arrested, targeted, stigmatized, and forced to leave their countries (and then denied refugee status) in numbers we have never seen before

Samantha Allen: The death of a thousand blows of LGBT rights under Trump is only going to continue in 2018, and Im worried that, with so many other scandals dominating the headlines, the systematic erosion of LGBT rightsa phenomenon thats directly affecting at least 4 percent of the U.S. population and 7 percent of millennialswill continue to fly under the radar.

Thatd be like the Trump administration deciding one day that everyone in the state of Pennsylvania didnt deserve human rightsand it somehow not being front-page news every single day until it got fixed.

Jay Michaelson: My greatest fear for 2018 is on a somewhat macro-scale. The rise of nationalism, nativism, and right-wing populism around the world is terrifying. On one level, it's an understandable backlash against globalization, multiculturalism, and technology: people unable or unwilling to change are clinging to old identities and myths. But it's also profoundly dangerous, and queers are just one population endangered by it. It's not to be taken lightly.

Already we've seen the United States retreat from the whole concept of human rights, giving carte blanche to murderous anti-LGBTQ elements in Russia, Egypt, Chechnya, Indonesia, and elsewhere.

In 2018, the US will practically zero out its aid to vulnerable LGBT populations around the world. At the UN as elsewhere, America is now allied with Putin's Russia, in this case withdrawing protection from LGBT people and instead defending the oppression of us.

But this is just the beginning. If this global backlash isn't stopped, queer people will be murdered, arrested, targeted, stigmatized, and forced to leave their countries (and then denied refugee status) in numbers we have never seen before.

Figure out some way to help those who dont have as much, or who are especially politically and culturally vulnerable, and who could do with support. Give money, volunteer, whateverdo what you can

Tim Teeman: On that basis, LGBT people and their allies with any time, money, commitment and energy might think about involving themselves with activism and campaigning for organizations like The Trevor Project, HRC, Anti-Violence Project, National Center For Transgender Equality, GLSEN, PFLAG, OutRight Action International, and groups in their local area. If they don't want to do something overtly political, then maybe figure out a way to help those who dont have as much, or who are especially vulnerable, and who could do with supportwhether that be financial and pastoral.

If you need inspiration, look to Nathan Mathis who wasn't going to let Roy Moore winor lose at it turned outin Alabama without shaming him over his homophobia; and without remembering, in the most moving way possible, his dead lesbian daughter, Patti Sue.

Listen to, and be inspired by, the stirring stories of those from times when things were not just bleak but political progress and cultural evolution seemed alien and utterly distant. Eric Marcus has distilled, and continues to distill, amazing interviews with the likes of Sylvia Rivera and Frank Kameny, conducted for his landmark book Making Gay History: The Half-Century Fight For Lesbian and Gay Equal Rights, into a must-listen podcast.

Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fight-for-lgbt-equality-in-2018-will-be-fierce

from Viral News HQ http://ift.tt/2Eudf8o via Viral News HQ

#IFTTT #Viral News HQ

0 notes

allofbeercom · 6 years

Text

Rudy Giuliani: divisive New York past has many in fear of Trump cabinet post

He was hailed as Americas mayor after 9/11, but black residents who remember his time in New York believe his record of fueling racial tensions should disqualify him from serving as the USs top diplomat

Rudy Giuliani may soon be the first western diplomat of the modern era to have stoked a racist police riot.

The former New York mayor has shamelessly promoted himself as a key member of the Donald Trump administration first as a potential attorney general, then openly touting himself to become secretary of state.

But Giulianis one-man campaign is already facing a backlash including from a Republican senator who said several of his colleagues believe Giuliani is unsuited to a key cabinet position.

Black residents who remember his time in New York with dismay believe his divisive record should disqualify him as the USs chief diplomat.

Giulianis approach to policing created an environment of terror for communities of color, said Lumumba Bandele, a lifelong New Yorker and police reform advocate. If he takes on a national role, We should all be preparing for worst-case scenarios, he said.

His record on police abuses and freedom of expression is frightening, said Patrisse Cullors, a co-founder of Black Lives Matter.

In the wake of September 11, Giuliani was seen as a uniter, hailed as Americas mayor and a trustworthy leader for all New Yorkers. But Giuliani has a fraught history with New Yorks black and brown residents. For decades, he has defended police killings and abuse of black men and fueled racial divisions.

Giuliani set the tone for his mayoralty before his election, on a hot summer morning in September 1992. The largely white New York City police force was angry with the citys first black mayor, David Dinkins. Dinkins had proposed removing police representatives from a board that hears complaints about police brutality, a position unacceptable to the police and its powerful union.

A protest march by 10,000 off-duty police officers blocked traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge as uniformed officers stood aside. By the time it reached City Hall Park, it had taken an angry turn. Officers chanting Dinkins Must Go! pushed through the barricades and climbed the municipal steps. The New York Times described it as a beer-swilling, traffic-snarling, epithet-hurling melee. Newsday compared city hall to an embassy in some far-off hostile land under siege.

The signs the police waved labeled the mayor a washroom attendant, claimed he was on crack said his true color [was] yellow bellied and asked if he had hugged a drug dealer that day. A subsequent official NYPD report, which recommended discipline for 42 officers and called the march an embarrassment, conceded some protesters used racial slurs and said the rally was unruly, mean-spirited and perhaps criminal.

Nearby, Giuliani, the man whom Dinkins beat in the 1989 election and who was waiting for a rematch, waited to address the crowd. Channeling its momentum, Giuliani addressed Dinkins policies by chanting Bullshit! He laid the low morale of the NYPD at Dinkins feet. The police, returning the sentiment, chanted: Rudy, Rudy, Rudy.

Giuliani would later say he had attempted to calm the fury of the protesters and that he had tried to move them away from city hall. He did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday through his spokeswoman, Jo Ann Zafonte. The New York Times reported at the time that, during the city hall protest, at least one Giuliani supporter circulated through the crowd handing out voter registration cards.

A recently elected city councilwoman from Flatbush, Brooklyn, attempted to cross the barricades. I try to forget the police riot at city hall, Una Clarke told the Guardian this week.

But 24 years later, she remembers clearly what the white officers who blocked her path said to one another when she explained she was a councilwoman on her way to a meeting: One guy looked at the other and he said: This nigger is a council member, do you believe her? And I was stunned and taken off by it. Because Im a Jamaican, frankly, I decided I was not going into my pocketbook to give him an ID.

In Giulianis opinion, he was not the one playing incendiary racial politics in a confrontation with his political rival. The mayor plays the racial card when he thinks it is to his advantage and then he condemns other people when he believes theyre doing it and that is very phony, Giuliani said afterwards. He would later suggest that outrage at police officers using racial slurs against city officials was a distraction.

The real question is, has the relatively minor occurrence of racial epithets, if they occurred at all, been made the major focus of this rally for political purposes? he said in late September 1992.

Clarke remembered Giuliani telling her that she made up her encounter with police during the riot. Rudy Giuliani said I was lying, she said.

As mayor, Clarke continued, he played every ethnic group against every ethnic group. For me, racially, hes not changed.

At the time, Dinkins chief political aide compared Giuliani to the Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, accusing him of trying to flame racial tensions rather than try to bring people together, and then make excuses about it. Dinkins walked back the comparison on 23 September but kept the pressure on Giuliani, reminding the New York Times of the kinds of comments that Rudy Giuliani made out here with a mob of police, drinking beer, behaving in an unruly fashion, and then egging them on.

The city hall riot was the most dramatic episode in a long career marked by tension over police violence towards Americans of color and Giulianis fierce defense of police officers and law enforcement.Patrick Lynch, the current president of New York Citys police union, did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Giulianis record as an advocate for law enforcement.

Bandele, an activist with Communities United for Police Reform, said that the riot set the tone for Giulianis eight years as mayor, from 1994 to 2001.

In our communities, folks knew him for what he was. His nickname was Adolf Giuliani, so that gives you a sense of how people saw him. In communities of color, in LGBT communities, in immigrant communities, his presence was unwelcome and we were glad to see him go, Bandele, a lifelong New York City resident said.

The idea of Giuliani becoming the secretary of state, thats frightening and its also really clear about the direction that Trump is going in, said Cullors, the Black Lives Matter co-founder. Giuliani represents the old: an archaic system that systematically devalues black life.

Mayor Rudolph Giuliani gestures at a New York city hall news conference in 1996. Photograph: Ed Bailey/AP

From the start of his mayoralty in 1994, Giuliani signaled dismissiveness to the citys black leadership. After longtime Harlem congressman Charles Rangel claimed that year Giuliani was not reaching out to black New York, the first-year mayor suggested black New Yorkers needed to watch their mouths.

I want to reach out to all of the communities in the city. It has to be a two-way street. And theyre going to have to learn how to discipline themselves in the way in which they speak also, Giuliani said.

In the summer of 1997, after an altercation at a nightclub, four Flatbush police officers beat and sodomized a Haitian immigrant in the 70th precinct house. The broomhandle officers forced into Abner Louimas rectum tore his colon and perforated his bladder. Louima claimed, and later retracted, that the police torturing him told him: Its Giuliani time.

The invented quote became a slogan for Giulianis opposition. Taking on a life of its own, it became a shorthand to describe the brutality of the Giuliani era, from actual police violence against black New Yorkers to the dismissive tone the mayor took with his critics. As soon as Giuliani handily won re-election and Louima recanted the comment, Giuliani said his critics owe the people of the city an apology.

One of those critics was Dinkins, who retorted that Giuliani had missed the point. The problem is not what was said but what was done. The mayor continues to insist that only police officers can investigate police officers, Dinkins said.

In 1999, Bronx police officers, apparently carrying out a stop-and-frisk, shot and killed immigrant Amadou Diallo in his apartment building vestibule. The officers shot at Diallo 41 times after he reached for his wallet to show ID. The killing attracted national attention right as Giuliani was nurturing national political ambitions. He called it unfortunate but pleaded that the police should be given the benefit of the doubt.

The Rev Al Sharpton, left, shows a picture of Amadou Diallo during a press conference in Harlem in 1999. Photograph: Mitch Jacobson/AP

The officers who killed Diallo were acquitted. Giuliani told the Today show that the Diallo killing does not reflect the overall record of the New York police department. Bruce Springsteen wrote a song about Diallo and defiantly performed it at Madison Square Garden amid police protest. Giuliani criticized Springsteen for the song, as he would later criticize Beyonc for her songs and performances referencing police violence.

The next year, on Eighth Avenue in Manhattan, an undercover cop solicited a man named Patrick Dorismond for a drug sale. A fracas ensued, and a different officer shot Dorismond dead.

The mayor began by unsealing Dorismonds police record, to include his juvenile file. The formerly secret documents shed no light on what happened on Eighth Avenue that night. But Giuliani harnessed innuendo, infamously saying Dorismond isnt an altar boy.

As it happened, Dorismond literally was an altar boy. When this was pointed out to Giuliani, he said: I think thats not a correct juxtaposition of statements, nor intended for any kind of decent or useful purpose. It would take until May for Giuliani to concede he had made a mistake.

Fourteen years later, when the police killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson inspired a nationwide movement against police violence, Giuliani re-emerged as a defender of law enforcement, and a critic of black protesters, whom he deemed racist.

Giuliani used his record on fighting violence in New York City to add luster to an old conservative talking point: that black Americans were wrong to protest about state violence by police officers because a larger percentage of murders were caused by black men killing other black men.

Ninety-three percent of blacks are killed by other blacks. I would like to see the attention paid to that that you are paying to this, Giuliani said in widely criticized remarks on Meet the Press in November 2014, an exchange one New York City reporter dubbed vintage Giuliani.

White police officers wouldnt be there [in black neighborhoods] if you werent killing each other, Giuliani went on to tell Michael Eric Dyson, a black Georgetown professor on the show with him.

This is a defense mechanism of white supremacy at work in your mind, sir, Dyson told him.

Rudy Giuliani: Black Lives Matter is racist and anti-American

In 2016, he called Black Lives Matter inherently racist and said asked why activists never protested about the deaths of everyday black residents of Chicago.Where are they then? Where are they when a young black child is killed? he asked.

In fact, Black Lives Matter activists had held protests over gun violence in Chicago, including over the brutal murder of nine-year-old Tyshawn Lee. In March, Lamon Reccord, one of the most prominent and controversial young activists in protests against the police killing of Laquan McDonald, organized his own protest in honor of Tyshawn, one of many ongoing community protests and interventions led by black Chicago residents to address neighborhood gun violence.

Giuliani has frequently pushed back against potential critics by arguing, as he did on Fox and Friends in August talking about Beyonc, that I saved more black lives than any of those people and adding that maybe 4,000 or 5,000 were African American young people who are alive today because of the policies I put in effect.

New Yorks crime rate did fall dramatically, starting in Dinkins era and continuing in Giulianis: violent crimes declined 43% from 1990 to 1996. Homicides in the city dropped 66%, ahead of the national average decline of 50%, from 1990 to 1997. A narrative took shape that propelled Giulianis career: he had made New York safe. While its true that Giuliani presided over a historic decrease in violence, its less clear how much of the credit for this should go directly to the mayor and his policies.

Not a lot, said Frank Zimring, a prominent criminologist at the University of California Berkeley, and the author of The City That Became Safe: What New York Teaches About Urban Crime and Its Control.

The credit for the financial investment in increased New York City police manpower goes to Dinkins, Giulianis predecessor, and to the New York governor, Mario Cuomo, Zimring said. The credit for new police strategies goes to police commissioners Bill Bratton who Giuliani, to his credit, hired, and then, not to his credit, fired, Zimring said and Ray Kelly. (Brattons public approval ratings had been higher than Giulianis, which the mayor reportedly disliked.)

Zimring has argued that New Yorks precipitous crime decline was driven in part by changes in policing, including a more data-driven focus on crime hotspots, though he called the much-discussed zero tolerance and the broken windows strategies little more than slogans.

Unfortunately, New Yorks successes in crime control have come at a cost, he wrote. Although declines in violence benefited black New Yorkers, as Giuliani argued, Police aggressiveness is a very regressive tax: the street stops, bullying and pretext-based arrests fall disproportionately on young men of color in their own neighborhood, he wrote.

Giuliani as he announces that two more police officers were arrested over the assault on Haitian immigrant Abner Louima, in August 1997. Photograph: Gino Domenico/AP

A report by the New York state attorney general found a massively disproportionate racial impact in the NYPDs stop-and-frisk tactics after examining 175,000 of these incidents from January 1998 to March 1999. Black New Yorkers, 25.6% of the city, comprised 50.6% of stops. Hispanic New Yorkers, 23.7% of the city, comprised 33% of stops. White New Yorkers, 43.4% of the city, comprised 12.9% of stops. In the most strongly white neighborhoods in New York, the study found, the disparity between minority and white stop rates is most pronounced.

The report stopped short of calling Giulianis favored police tactic racist, something that would take a judges ruling in 2013, which concluded that the citys highest officials have turned a blind eye to the evidence that officers are conducting stops in a racially discriminatory manner.

At times, Giuliani has taken inclusive stances with regard to immigrants and Muslim New Yorkers. After 9/11, Giuliani was dubbed Americas mayor by Oprah Winfrey in his finest hour as a politician.

In a sweeping speech to the United Nations in October 2001, Giuliani praised New Yorks very strong and vibrant Muslim and Arab communities as an equally important part of the life of our city.

Ive urged New Yorkers not to engage in any form of group blame or group hatred. This is exactly the evil that were confronting with these terrorists, he said. And if were going to prevail over them, over terror, then our ideals and principles and values must transcend all forms of prejudice.

This is not a dispute between religions or ethnic groups. All religions, all decent people, are united in their desire to achieve peace.

Yet by 2010, the political winds had shifted, and Giuliani shifted with them.

Rudy Giuliani leaves the Trump Tower after meetings with President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday. Photograph: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty Images

That summer, outrage grew from the fringes of the right after a local Muslim leader had proposed building an Islamic cultural center in lower Manhattan, within walking distance of the former Twin Towers. The project, strongly defended by Giulianis successor, Michael Bloomberg, as a religious-freedom issue, became the target of a smear campaign, which dubbed it the Ground Zero Mosque or even the Victory Mosque, suggesting that the American Muslims who would go to the center for a moment of reflection were celebrating 9/11.

Giuliani joined in. Calling into a radio show in early August, he called the cultural center a desecration and falsely asserted that the imam behind the project, a man who had written a book called Whats Right With Islam Is Whats Right With America, had supported radical causes. In a later interview with the Today show, he suggested the project itself was radical: If youre a healer, you do not go forward with this project. If youre a warrior, you do.

In the years since, and particularly since joining Trumps campaign, Giuliani has intensified his stance. He has boasted of placing undercover agents in New York mosques and stated good Muslims would benefit from surveillance in their communities. On Fox & Friends, Giuliani implied that only mosques with something to hide would object to police infiltration: If youve got nothing going on there but a beautiful religious service, why in His name would you not want to have police officers there?

All I can say is God bless Rudy Giuliani, said Una Clarke, who was at the police riot decades ago. Its a bundle of racists getting together to see if they can take us back to the old age.

from All Of Beer http://allofbeer.com/rudy-giuliani-divisive-new-york-past-has-many-in-fear-of-trump-cabinet-post/

0 notes

trendingnewsb · 6 years

Text

The Fight for LGBT Equality in 2018 Will Be Fierce

For that reason, it's even harder than usual to look toward 2018 with any sense of certainty. What are we most hoping for in the year to come? And what do we fear?

But in 2018, I am hoping to talk about bathrooms a lot less frequentlyand I have reason to believe that will be the case.

Im confident that well see somebut fewerred-state legislatures really push for bathroom bills. Theyre political losers and money drainersand everyone in elected office knows that by now

Im worried that, with so many other scandals dominating the headlines, the systematic erosion of LGBT rights will continue to fly under the radar

Already we've seen the United States retreat from the whole concept of human rights, giving carte blanche to murderous anti-LGBTQ elements in Russia, Egypt, Chechnya, Indonesia, and elsewhere.

Figure out some way to help those who dont have as much, or who are especially politically and culturally vulnerable, and who could do with support. Give money, volunteer, whateverdo what you can

Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-fight-for-lgbt-equality-in-2018-will-be-fierce

from Viral News HQ http://ift.tt/2Eudf8o via Viral News HQ

#IFTTT #Viral News HQ

0 notes