March 16, 2016


News Clips For The Day


http://news.yahoo.com/official-entire-dc-subway-shut-down-inspections-202236448.html?post_id=1605282889713411_1714169098824789&nf=1#_=_

Official: Entire DC subway to shut down for inspections
Associated Press By BEN NUCKOLS and JESSICA GRESKO
March 15, 2016

Photograph -- Official: Entire Washington D.C. subway system to shut down for 29 hours for inspection


WASHINGTON (AP) — It's already being branded #Metromageddon.

Hundreds of thousands of Washington, D.C., workers were preparing for a potentially soul-sucking commute with the rail system serving the nation's capital facing a full-day shutdown Wednesday.

The federal government took some of the pressure off the city's traffic-choked highways by announcing Tuesday that workers have the option to take the day off or telecommute. The announcement from the Office of Personnel Management came under pressure from several members of Congress who said their constituents would have no way to get to work.

The Metro system will be shut down to allow for an emergency inspection of its third-rail power cables, General Manager Paul Wiedefeld announced at a news conference.

"While the risk to the public is very low, I cannot rule out a potential life and safety issue here, and this is why we must take this action immediately," he said.

Metro is the nation's second-busiest transit network: Its six rail lines and 91 stations serve more than 700,000 riders daily, and it is a vital link for federal workers and other commuters to Washington from Maryland and Virginia. The system will shut down at midnight Tuesday and remain closed until 5 a.m. Thursday, a total of 29 hours.

D.C. Councilmember Jack Evans, the chairman of Metro's board, said that while the system had previously been closed for days for weather, including earlier this year, Wednesday was believed to be the first time the system would be shut down for mechanical reasons.

A fire on the tracks led to major delays throughout the system on Monday. The fire was caused by the same kind of electrical component that malfunctioned last year and caused a train to fill with smoke inside a downtown Washington tunnel, killing one passenger and sickening dozens.

Wiedefeld said that during the shutdown about 600 so-called jumper cables will be inspected throughout the system. Wiedefeld said those cables were inspected after last year's L'Enfant Plaza fire, and deficient ones were replaced.

Rep. Gerry Connolly, a Virginia Democrat, called the decision to shut down "a gut punch to the hundreds of thousands of commuters who depend on the system."

"While I am extremely frustrated with this news, safety must be our No. 1 priority," Connolly said in a statement. "This dramatic action highlights the need for long-term safety and reliability improvements throughout the system."

Commuters using the system during Tuesday evening's rush hour said they hoped offices would close or let workers work from home.

"It's really frustrating. It's how everybody gets to work," said Atlee Ahern, 23, a Justice Department intern awaiting her train home to Bethesda, Maryland. "The whole system shuts down, the whole city shuts down."

Ahern, who rides Metro every workday, said she did not see how it would be possible for her to get to the office.

Brian Kirchner, 46, a federal contractor, said he was delayed by two hours getting home to Hagerstown, Maryland, on Monday because of the fire. He commutes by car, bus and Metro to his job downtown.

"I guess I won't be coming to work tomorrow," Kirchner said.

Follow Ben Nuckols on Twitter at https://twitter.com/APBenNuckols . Follow Jessica Gresko on Twitter at https://twitter.com/jessicagresko.



The report doesn’t mention what damage if any was done to the subway or trains. I always loved riding on the Metro trains, and waiting on the platform. Unlike so many systems it was clean and beautiful. I’m also glad that no riders were injured. The rush hour crowds at many stations would be in the thousands, but it was almost always free of any violence. Probably some had their purses snatched, but I never saw any of it. It is with fondness that I think back on my years in DC.



https://www.yahoo.com/tech/anonymous-just-declared-war-donald-154500802.html

Anonymous Just Declared War On Donald Trump
Refinery 29 UK
Christina Bonnington
March 15, 2016

Related video:Top 5 Facts about Anonymous -- Hacktivists, pranksters or Cyber Terrorists; regardless of what you think of the organization it has certainly been influential. Welcome to WatchMojo's Top 5 Facts.
Video -- The Anonymous Declaration of Total War On Donald Trump 2016


Just in time for primary season, the internet’s favourite masked vigilantes are at it again. The “hacktivist” collective Anonymous has declared “total war” against Donald Trump. You can check out the group’s message for yourself in the video below.

“Dear Donald Trump, we have been watching you for a long time and what we see is deeply disturbing,” a masked Anonymous member begins in the recording. “Your inconsistent and hateful campaign has not only shocked the United States of America, you have shocked the entire planet with your appalling actions and ideas.”

Anonymous says it has a detailed plan for taking down The Donald. On April 1, for example, the group plans to take down TrumpChicago.com. The collective also plans to destroy his brand by unearthing dirt that discredits his image. Already, the group has hacked Trump’s voicemail and leaked the messages.

Pippa ‎@pippajustsaid
People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people. #OpTrump
10:57 AM - 15 Mar 2016

-A ‎@SaratogaSprngs
I can't wait to watch #OpTrump unfold. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of this one. #DumpTrump
10:22 AM - 15 Mar 2016

Twitter users are showing their support for Anonymous’ efforts using the hashtag #OpTrump.

We’ll have to wait and see if Anonymous’ efforts end up having any effect on the Trump campaign.



http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nicole-hemmer/articles/2016-03-15/donald-trump-is-conning-america-with-his-lies

Trump Is Gaslighting America
This is an intervention. America, you have a Trump problem.
By Nicole Hemmer
March 15, 2016, at 12:00 p.m.

Video -- Anti-Trump Ad has Women Read the Sexist things Trump has said
Veuer


Dear America,

This is an intervention.

You have a problem.

Donald Trump.

He’s gaslighting you.

It’s a technique abusers use: Through manipulation and outright lies, they so disorient their target that the person (or in this case, the country) is left defenseless.

[SEE: Editorial Cartoons on Donald Trump]

Trump is a toxic blend of Barnum and bully. If you’re a good mark, he’s your best friend. But if you catch on to the con, then he starts to gaslight. Ask him a question and he’ll lie without batting an eye. Call him a liar and he’ll declare himself “truthful to a fault.” Confront him with contradictory evidence and he’ll shrug and repeat the fib. Maybe he’ll change the subject. But he’ll never change the lie.

Evidence? He says he never settles lawsuits. He says he’s polling better than Clinton in New York. He says he never encourages violence at his rallies. He says he’s winning Latinos. He says he’s the first candidate to mention immigration. He says, he says, he says.

But forget all that, because evidence is for losers.

Political journalists have been repeatedly criticized for not confronting Trump on his lies. But of course they have. For political journalists, a politician caught in a lie is chum in the water. But when they confront Trump with his lies, he doesn’t behave like most people. He doesn’t blush or equivocate or argue. He steamrolls. He bullies. He lies some more. And the journalists don’t know what to do. They brought facts to an ego fight, and found them to be worthless weapons.

[READ: The Media Failed at Covering Donald Trump]

If it’s hard to wrap your mind around the gaslighting of a nation, just watch the dynamics at work on a single person: Michelle Fields. While covering a Trump rally last Tuesday, Fields was grabbed and pulled toward the ground. Ben Terris of the Washington Post reports seeing Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski do it. Fields has bruises on her forearm and there was audio of the event. Lewandowski himself reportedly told a Breitbart editor he grabbed Fields.

So what happened next?

Lewandowski said Fields was crazy. “Totally delusional,” he tweeted. Trump suggested she made the whole thing up. As my colleague Robert Schlesinger put it, “the Trump campaign pulled straight from the attack-the-victim playbook typically deployed against those who raise accusations of sexual assault – she's delusional, she's making things up, why didn't she tell the police, she has a history of this kind of behavior.”

In other words: gaslighting.

[READ: Republicans Are Going Through the 5 Stages of Donald Trump]

And what does this look like as he does it to an entire nation? Let’s go to Chicago, where Trump cancelled a planned appearance, resulting in a series of scuffles between outraged Trump supporters and cheering protestors.

Appearing on Sean Hannity’s show that night, Trump said law enforcement had advised him to cancel the rally out of safety concerns.

The Chicago Police Department says it never advised Trump to cancel.

Trump said, “I don't want anybody to be hurt. We want this to be a nonviolent situation.”

For more than a month Trump has been encouraging his supporters to get violent, not only spurring them to rough up protestors but offering to pay their legal fees if they are arrested for assault.

Trump said his supporters only fight back in self-defense – just three days after a Trump supporter was caught on tape sucker-punching a protester who was being led out of a rally.

[READ: Donald Trump Deals With More Violence at His Campaign Events]

Hannity – who has been gaslighting America a lot longer than Trump, but less effectively – said, “When did we start blaming victims of violence instead of the perpetrators of violence?”

Ask Corey Lewandowski.

The best way to end gaslighting is to sever ties with the abuser. Some Republicans are trying to do this, but it seems like the GOP is stuck with Trump, at least through July, probably until November.

But America, you can still resist. Trump will keep saying he loves you, but that’s the con. Like any abusive relationship, love is the misdirect. Power is the goal. The big test facing you now is preventing Donald Trump from getting any.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting

Gaslighting
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gaslighting or gas-lighting is a form of mental abuse in which information is twisted or spun, selectively omitted to favor the abuser, or false information is presented with the intent of making victims doubt their own memory, perception, and sanity.[1][2] Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.

The term owes its origin to the 1938 play Gas Light and its film adaptations. The term has been used in clinical and research literature.[3][4]



Anonymous -- “Dear Donald Trump, we have been watching you for a long time and what we see is deeply disturbing,” a masked Anonymous member begins in the recording. “Your inconsistent and hateful campaign has not only shocked the United States of America, you have shocked the entire planet with your appalling actions and ideas.” Anonymous says it has a detailed plan for taking down The Donald. On April 1, for example, the group plans to take down TrumpChicago.com. The collective also plans to destroy his brand by unearthing dirt that discredits his image. Already, the group has hacked Trump’s voicemail and leaked the messages.”


Gaslighting -- “Trump is a toxic blend of Barnum and bully. If you’re a good mark, he’s your best friend. But if you catch on to the con, then he starts to gaslight. Ask him a question and he’ll lie without batting an eye. Call him a liar and he’ll declare himself “truthful to a fault.” Confront him with contradictory evidence and he’ll shrug and repeat the fib. Maybe he’ll change the subject. But he’ll never change the lie. …. . Fields has bruises on her forearm and there was audio of the event. Lewandowski himself reportedly told a Breitbart editor he grabbed Fields. So what happened next? Lewandowski said Fields was crazy. “Totally delusional,” he tweeted. Trump suggested she made the whole thing up. As my colleague Robert Schlesinger put it, “the Trump campaign pulled straight from the attack-the-victim playbook typically deployed against those who raise accusations of sexual assault – she's delusional, she's making things up, why didn't she tell the police, she has a history of this kind of behavior.” …. The best way to end gaslighting is to sever ties with the abuser. Some Republicans are trying to do this, but it seems like the GOP is stuck with Trump, at least through July, probably until November.”


Trump is definitely a practitioner of both the gaslighting technique and the “big lie.” Hitler’s discussion of it is as a practice blamed on the Jews, but it fits Hitler himself to a T, and not surprisingly describes Trump as well. Read the description of how it can be used to confuse and enthrall the masses. “the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie ….” For the whole text, see Wikipedia below. Clearly Hitler was not an unintelligent person at all, but merely a vicious one.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

Big lie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A big lie (German: große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously." Hitler asserted the technique was used by Jews to unfairly blame Germany's loss in World War I on German Army officer Erich Ludendorff.

. . . All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X[1]
In that same chapter, Hitler accused "the Jews" of what he claimed was their use of the Big Lie.[1]

The principle is sometimes translated and abbreviated as the pithy saying: "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."



http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/15/470598733/ferguson-city-council-accepts-deal-with-justice-department

Ferguson City Council Accepts Consent Decree Worked Out With Justice Department
LAURA WAGNER
Updated March 16, 20169:02 AM ET
Published March 15, 20169:13 PM ET

Photograph -- Ferguson City Council's acceptance of the consent decree means the city retains control of the police and courts, but also pays for an independent monitor to ensure the reforms are implemented. Scott Olson/Getty Images
LAW -- Ferguson Mayor: 'There Was No Agreement' With The Justice Department

The Ferguson, Mo., City Council has approved a deal with the Justice Department that would overhaul the city's courts and police to protect citizens' rights. The vote comes a month after the council initially refused to accept the plan.

"Tonight, the city of Ferguson, Mo., took an important step towards guaranteeing all of its citizens the protections of our Constitution," said Vanita Gupta, head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. "We are pleased that they have approved the consent decree, a document designed to provide the framework needed to institute constitutional policing in Ferguson, and look forward to filing it in court in the coming days and beginning to work with them toward implementation."

But the St. Louis suburb, where the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in 2014 helped spark the Black Lives Matter movement, granted its approval reluctantly. Tuesday's unanimous vote in favor of the plan comes after the council first voted not to approve the decree, which had been negotiated extensively between city officials and the Justice Department.

The council said part of the plan would be too costly. Knowing that rejecting the plan could result in a lawsuit against the city, the council voted on Feb. 9 to amend the plan instead of passing it. The DOJ filed a lawsuit against the city the following day.

City leaders initially defended the council's decision, with Ferguson Mayor James Knowles insisting that there was no agreement between the city and the DOJ, and in an interview with NPR's All Things Considered, even questioning the DOJ's findings that police violated citizens' civil rights.

Ferguson Mayor James Knowles speaks during a Feb. 2 City Council meeting, where residents spoke with city leaders following a preliminary consent agreement with the Justice Department.

But the council, which recently appointed a new member who was in favor of approving the plan, made plans to vote again. At the same time, the DOJ lawsuit provided more pressure to approve the measure.

"We are fully prepared to litigate this matter," Gupta wrote in a letter addressed to city leaders on March 9. "Should the city wish to avoid the litigation process we submit that the alternative is to sign the agreement as negotiated."

Tuesday's approval of the consent decree without changes is expected to resolve the lawsuit, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports. The newspaper adds:

"Cheers erupted after the council cast the vote to accept the 131-page decree agreement puts stipulations on its police and court. It was prompted by an investigation of the city that last year resulted in a report detailing numerous constitutional violations."

As the Two-Way previously reported, the the 127-page agreement creates guidelines for training police officers and "[reorienting] Ferguson's use-of-force policies toward de-escalation and avoiding force." The agreement also requires police body cameras, an overhaul of the municipal court system, and a pay increase for police officers.



http://www.npr.org/2016/02/12/466565446/ferguson-mayor-there-was-no-agreement-with-the-justice-department

Ferguson Mayor: 'There Was No Agreement' With The Justice Department
NPR STAFF
Updated February 16, 20162:55 AM ET
Published February 12, 20165:02 PM ET

Photograph -- Ferguson Mayor James Knowles speaks during a Feb. 2 City Council meeting, where residents spoke with city leaders following a preliminary consent agreement with the Justice Department. Jeff Roberson/AP


The Justice Department slapped the city of Ferguson, Mo., with a civil rights lawsuit this week after the City Council voted to change a proposed settlement agreement to reform the police and courts.

When Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the suit on Wednesday, she said Ferguson police disproportionately targeted black people for traffic stops, use of force and jail sentences.

"These violations were not only egregious, they were routine," Lynch said. "They were encouraged by the city in the interest of raising revenue. They were driven at least in part by racial bias, and they occurred disproportionately against African-American residents of Ferguson. And they were profoundly and fundamentally unconstitutional."

Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced Wednesday that the federal government had filed a lawsuit against the city of Ferguson, Mo.

The Justice Department investigation into the city came after a white police officer shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown in 2014.

Ferguson Mayor James Knowles told All Things Considered host Ari Shapiro that the Justice Department refused to negotiate with the city further after Ferguson presented a comprehensive cost analysis on the terms of the settlement. The mayor also said the city never came to a final agreement with the Justice Department.

Interview Highlights

On why the City Council proposed changes after agreeing to the deal

Trust me, we brought many, many issues to the table during these negotiations, not least of which was the issue of cost and how much it would take for the city of Ferguson to comply with all of these points that were contained in the report.

“Let me be very clear about this. There was no agreement. The only agreement was that we would take it before the people, that we would take it before the entire council for consideration.”
Ferguson Mayor James Knowles

By the time our staff had a comprehensive cost analysis done on this, we did not have an opportunity to go back and have a negotiation with the Department of Justice. They did not want to have further negotiations. They wanted us to either accept it or decline it.

On the confusion over the settlement agreement

Let me be very clear about this. There was no agreement. The only agreement was that we would take it before the people, that we would take it before the entire council for consideration. Now the Department of Justice asked us to sign an agreement before we took it public and we refused.

On the Justice Department's claim that unconstitutional policing practices were used to generate revenue

Well if [Attorney General Loretta Lynch] forces us to raise our expenses, I mean, that would force us to go find new revenue. The point is our revenues have fallen.

Obviously, we don't pull over people at the rate we used to pull people over. We don't issue tickets like we used to issue tickets. Property values have fallen. Revenues from sales tax has fallen.

Ferguson mayor James Knowles III, (second from left) speaks during a city council meeting on Feb. 2. The meeting was the first opportunity for residents to speak directly with city leaders about the preliminary consent agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice.

THE TWO-WAY
Ferguson Approves Police And Courts Overhaul — With Some Changes

So she's complaining about the way we used to generate revenue, which we don't anymore, but now wants to tack on a huge amount of expenses to us. I mean, that's completely counterproductive.

On whether Ferguson and the Justice Department perceive different realities about a pattern and practice of discrimination

I don't know if that would be a proper characterization of this because of everything that started in April of 2014. The city of Ferguson began looking at both its core practices and its police practices, and immediately, we began changing things in our courts, which we felt were onerous, which were probably burdensome on the people who are going through our court system.

We started removing fines and fees from our court systems in September of 2014; that's long before the March 2015 report from the Department of Justice. We also began changing the way we do things in our police department once these things came to light.

I think it's very important to recognize that the city of Ferguson has taken an affirmative approach to ensuring that those things which the Department of Justice alleges does not occur in Ferguson going forward.

On whether Ferguson is putting a dollar amount on constitutional rights

We don't believe the Department of Justice should tell us how much we have to pay our city staff. I don't know anywhere in the Constitution of the United States where it says in order to have a constitutional policing police department, you must be paid among the highest in the area.

The issue was raised in the negotiations with the Department of Justice. But ultimately it's something that they refused to relent on.



Council accepts -- "We are pleased that they have approved the consent decree, a document designed to provide the framework needed to institute constitutional policing in Ferguson, and look forward to filing it in court in the coming days and beginning to work with them toward implementation." …. City leaders initially defended the council's decision, with Ferguson Mayor James Knowles insisting that there was no agreement between the city and the DOJ, and in an interview with NPR's All Things Considered, even questioning the DOJ's findings that police violated citizens' civil rights. …. As the Two-Way previously reported, the the 127-page agreement creates guidelines for training police officers and "[reorienting] Ferguson's use-of-force policies toward de-escalation and avoiding force." The agreement also requires police body cameras, an overhaul of the municipal court system, and a pay increase for police officers.”


Mayor -- When Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced the suit on Wednesday, she said Ferguson police disproportionately targeted black people for traffic stops, use of force and jail sentences. "These violations were not only egregious, they were routine," Lynch said. "They were encouraged by the city in the interest of raising revenue. They were driven at least in part by racial bias, and they occurred disproportionately against African-American residents of Ferguson. And they were profoundly and fundamentally unconstitutional." …. By the time our staff had a comprehensive cost analysis done on this, we did not have an opportunity to go back and have a negotiation with the Department of Justice. They did not want to have further negotiations. They wanted us to either accept it or decline it. …. I don't know if that would be a proper characterization of this because of everything that started in April of 2014. The city of Ferguson began looking at both its core practices and its police practices, and immediately, we began changing things in our courts, which we felt were onerous, which were probably burdensome on the people who are going through our court system. We started removing fines and fees from our court systems in September of 2014; that's long before the March 2015 report from the Department of Justice. We also began changing the way we do things in our police department once these things came to light. …. We don't believe the Department of Justice should tell us how much we have to pay our city staff. I don't know anywhere in the Constitution of the United States where it says in order to have a constitutional policing police department, you must be paid among the highest in the area.”


This gives me hope that similar changes in the police departments of cities across the country can be made which: will stop the use of fines to finance the city government, will usher in the retraining of officers to make them “good guys with a gun” rather than “bad guys with a badge,” and will refocus police activity, away from people of color to real villains who are committing crime.

It’s like the recent moves that are being made in some other cities toward less violent and abusive police techniques. The truly frightful events at Ferguson and that army of police who marched into the neighborhood have brought to the fore a new realization of what is going on among the average good white citizens. That’s us, folks! We blithely felt our country was on a path to progress until that situation showed regression instead. It has shocked many of us into a commitment to making a change, and I am truly grateful. I have no love or respect for bullies.

There will still be racial/cultural/religious bias as long as there are humans, but I believe it won’t, as commonly, be protected by the law. That is, of course, as long as Radical Rightists don’t make it into some even more firmly entrenched positions in government. I don’t believe in perfection, but I do believe in progress. Our country has to continue to move forward on these things, and not backward. A vote for Trump or for some of the Tea Partiers, either, is five steps back. Get out and help your local Democrats, and don’t fail to vote come November.




http://www.copblock.org/155948/baltimore-school-cop-charged-after-filmed-slapping-kicking-student/

Baltimore School Cop Charged After Filmed Slapping, Kicking Student
MARCH 9, 2016 BY ASA J 12 COMMENTS


Two Baltimore city schools police officers have been criminally charged in an incident that was caught on video showing one of them repeatedly slapping and then kicking a student.

Filmed at Reach Partnership High School by another student on his cellphone on March 1, the short clip does not show the events proceeding the assault, but the unidentified boy can be seen standing up against a wall.

The footage then proceeds to show officer Anthony Spence, 44, start smacking the 16-year-old student repeatedly in the face and head.

“Fuck you!” Spence says while delivering the first hard slap.

“Go home then!” he says as he delivers a second more powerful smack to the left side of the student’s face.

“Get the fuck outta here!” Spence finally says while delivering a third slap, which doesn’t completely connect because the student ducks.

For good measure, the school cop then kicks the boy in the back as he is walking away.

Watch the raw footage: [Do watch this video. The cop uses his whole body weight to deliver the slaps.]

Spence has now been charged with second-degree child abuse, second-degree assault and misconduct in office. The other officer, identified as Saverna Bias, 52, has also been charged charged with second-degree assault and misconduct in office.

According to arrest warrants issued on Tuesday, a witness told investigators that Bias was heard telling Spence, “You need to smack him because he’s got too much mouth,” before the attack occurred.

Investigators said both officers were on duty at the time of the incident and that Spence was “not acting in reasonable self-defense” during the assault.

The two cops reportedly turned themselves in overnight and have each been released after posting $50,000 bond.

As a result of the incident, the head of the Baltimore school police force was placed on administrative leave and Spence was reassigned away from the school. An investigation was launched and school and city officials called what transpired “appalling.”

Spence’s lawyer, Mike Davey, has said that the officer believed the student was trespassing on school grounds and not allowed to be there so he confronted him.

A lawyer for the teen however, said that he is in fact a 10-grade student at the school and school officials assert that he is “believed to be a student on the school’s roster.”

According to the lawyer, the cops most likely made a mistake identifying the teen and acted without properly investigating. He called the incident an “unprovoked assault” that resulted in facial injuries.



“According to arrest warrants issued on Tuesday, a witness told investigators that Bias was heard telling Spence, “You need to smack him because he’s got too much mouth,” before the attack occurred.” There is a certain kind of person, male or female, who gets intense pleasure out of being abusive to someone who either can’t or decides not to defend himself. In this case, however, there was a friend at hand with a camera. We have a number of problems in today’s schools, and violence is one of the worst, and the presence of cops on the campus should cut down on the prevalence of it rather than increasing it. This particular kind of thing in which a cop “punishes” a citizen for some transgression is among the worst. They are there to make arrests, not to administer “street justice.”

In schools like this, we definitely need guidance counselors, nurses and mental health counselors, but not police on a day in and day out basis. As the beautiful old song goes, “Try a little tenderness.” Well in relation to students, maybe not tenderness exactly, since you don’t want to be accused of sexual abuse, but substitute the words “empathy, communication, caring, gentleness etc.” Teens can be annoying, but they need understanding as well as “discipline.” We as adults can be extremely hard on children, going well beyond “firm” into harsh. As a society that is one of the things we most need to reverse, because our citizens are getting more and more uncontrollable and hostile. What is happening at the Trump rallies is occurring partly because too many of our citizens are borderline psychotic and full of rage. They wouldn’t rally around someone like Trump if they weren’t.

Reason number one why I don’t like to see police stationed in a normal, typical high school. There are an alarming number of police officers on the city forces who are there, not so they can “protect and serve,” but so they can get away with dishing it out like this guy did whenever they feel the urge, and when some of those rogue cops find that they can’t keep their city job anymore, they end up applying at a school, where the application process isn’t as rigorous. Those aren’t the best cops, but the grade B cops – active alcoholics, etc.

A second problem is that, in my view, a school doesn’t need a police officer on the site, but rather if a criminal problem does occur, they should then be called to make an arrest. That’s a knife or shockingly a gun, drugs, extreme violence, theft, etc. In my opinion a kid beating up another one is a criminal problem. We make a mistake when we call that “a fight” and pretend that it’s normal. We are failing to “teach peace” by not reinforcing toleration of differences by some means, such as good citizenship awards. We could praise being a nice person as well as excelling in school grades or sports. Instead we tend to intervene when something violent does occur, but only then. The verbal abuse tends not to be noticed by the school staff, or at any rate stopped. We are producing some pretty darned bad citizens who will grow up to go out on the streets and into jobs acting that same way. There was a great article a few months ago about bullying in the workplace, sometimes by a boss and other times by peers.

Third, in a couple of cases in the last year an article has shown that teachers, rather than doing the job of controlling a student themselves or calling in the Principal, called the handy dandy School Resource Officer (i.e. cop) and something like this scene which is the subject of this news article occurred. In the case I particularly remember, a female student, black, overweight, was sitting in a desk and apparently the teacher had demanded that she get up for some reason, maybe to go to the principal’s office. When she stubbornly refused, the teacher called in the uniformed officer, who literally grabbed her and yanked her out of the chair. The video of that hit the national news. Cops are complaining now that they “don’t want to be the next viral video,” but if that’s true they need to become more honest, decent and professional in the way they do their jobs.

Violent kids are disturbed kids. Slapping them around is not an effective mental health treatment. If that’s what parents are doing at home, the DCF needs to get involved and mandate genuine professional mental health treatment. Sometimes that’s why the kids are violent in the first place. They’re abused on a daily basis, even sexually abused because some parents have no basic sense of decency, and they are filled with rage. Other times, they are severely ill. Both schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder tend to develop in the teens. Too often parents do absolutely nothing about it.

One to one talk therapy and group sessions are both effective, and a carefully chosen drug may also help. The ADHD kids come to mind. Most modern mental health drugs are effective and are not usually too problematic in their side effects. It’s true that some can’t be given to children, but put it in the hands of mental health professionals rather than sweeping the whole issue under the rug and turning up the TV.




https://www.yahoo.com/politics/obama-scotus-nominee-announcement-live-134637234.html

Obama nominates Merrick Garland for Supreme Court
Dylan Stableford, Senior Editor
March 16, 2016


President Barack Obama announced on Wednesday that he has chosen Merrick Garland, chief justice for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, as his Supreme Court nominee to fill the vacant seat left by the death of Antonin Scalia.

Obama introduced Garland as his nominee in an announcement from the White House Rose Garden Wednesday morning.

“I said I would take this process seriously and I did,” Obama said. “I chose a serious man and exemplary judge.”

Garland, 63, was a clerk for the late Supreme Court Justice William Brennan and served in the Justice Department in several leadership roles, first as the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and later as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General.

After graduating from Harvard Law School, the Illinois-born Garland worked for several years in private practice with a focus on litigation and pro-bono representation of disadvantaged Americans.

Obama also highlighted Garland’s work overseeing the federal response to the Oklahoma City bombings.

Garland reportedly edged out two other top candidates considered by the president: Sri Srinivasan, a judge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia; and Paul Watford, a judge in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

“This is the greatest honor of my life,” an emotional Garland said. “I know my mother is watching this on television and crying her eyes out.”

Merrick Garland (Photo: U.S. Court of Appeals/Handout via Reuters)

Following Scalia’s death, Republicans in the Senate had urged President Obama to allow the next president to nominate a replacement and threatened to not consider his pick. But Obama said it is the Senate’s job to do so.

“I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him a fair hearing and then an up or down vote,” Obama said. “I have fulfilled my constitutional duty. Now it’s time for the Senate to do theirs.”

At least one Republican senator is on the record in support of Garland.

”[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man,“ Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch told the conservative website Newsmax earlier this week. ”[But] probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.“

In 2010, as the Senate was confirming a successor to Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, Hatch called Garland as “a consensus nominee.”

And while GOP leaders have vowed not to commence confirmation hearings before the November election, there might be room for the Senate to confirm a nominee in the lame-duck period between between [sic] Election Day and the Jan. 20, 2017, inauguration.

In a statement released ahead of Obama’s announcement, the president said he had “consulted with legal experts and people across the political spectrum, both inside and outside government” and “reached out to every member of the Senate, who each have a responsibility to do their job and take this nomination just as seriously.”

“This is a responsibility I do not take lightly,” the president said in his statement, outlining three principles that “reflect the role the Supreme Court plays in our democracy.“

Those principles:

First, a justice should possess an independent mind, unimpeachable credentials, and an unquestionable mastery of law. There is no doubt this person will face complex legal questions, so it is imperative that he or she possess a rigorous intellect that will help provide clear answers.

Second, a Justice should recognize the limits of the judiciary’s role. With a commitment to impartial justice rather than any particular ideology, the next Supreme Court justice will understand that the job is to interpret the law, not make law. However, I know there will be cases before the Supreme Court in which the law is not clear. In those cases, a justice’s analysis will necessarily be shaped by his or her own perspective, ethics, and judgment.

Therefore, the third quality I looked for in a judge is a keen understanding that justice is not about abstract legal theory, nor some footnote in a dusty casebook. It’s the kind of life experience earned outside the classroom and the courtroom; experience that suggests he or she views the law not only as an intellectual exercise, but also grasps the way it affects the daily reality of people’s lives in a big, complicated democracy, and in rapidly-changing times. In my view, that’s an essential element for arriving at just decisions and fair outcomes.

The White House also launched a dedicated Twitter feed, @SCOTUSnom, to coincide with announcement.

— With Yahoo News chief White House correspondent Olivier Knox contributing reporting



“I said I would take this process seriously and I did,” Obama said. “I chose a serious man and exemplary judge.” Garland, 63, was a clerk for the late Supreme Court Justice William Brennan and served in the Justice Department in several leadership roles, first as the Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division and later as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General. After graduating from Harvard Law School, the Illinois-born Garland worked for several years in private practice with a focus on litigation and pro-bono representation of disadvantaged Americans. …. “I simply ask Republicans in the Senate to give him a fair hearing and then an up or down vote,” Obama said. “I have fulfilled my constitutional duty. Now it’s time for the Senate to do theirs.” At least one Republican senator is on the record in support of Garland. ”[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man,“ Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch told the conservative website Newsmax earlier this week. ”[But] probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.“


Hatch got his pick, it seems. I’m sure he won’t stand up for Obama and press for a review any time soon, though. The Republicans almost never behave as individuals.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/georgias-religious-liberty-law-stirs-backlash-from-business/

Georgia's "religious liberty law" stirs backlash from business
By AIMEE PICCHI NEYWATCH
March 16, 2016, 9:32 AM

Play VIDEO -- Lawmakers to make changes to Indiana's new religious objections law


While Georgia is known for peaches and pecans, some business leaders are warning that the state may become better known for a controversial bill that would allow discrimination against gay people.

The bill, which has passed Georgia's House and Senate, would prohibit "any adverse action" against organizations or people with "a sincerely held religious believe regarding lawful marriage between ... a man and a woman. Billed by supporters as a "religious freedom" law, the legislation has drawn concern from a number of businesses that say it will hurt the state and make it less competitive on several fronts.

One such business is telecommunications firm 373K, which was founded by engineer and developer Kelvin Williams. His company is planning to move to another state -- possibly Delaware or Nevada -- because of the bill, which he worries would make it more difficult to recruit workers.

"For the past year we've been building a global carrier network. We have to start hiring more," Williams said. "I can't always find the perfect person in Georgia. I might have to reach out across the world. Would I want to move to Georgia if someone else offered me a job after this? The answer was no."

Williams, who is gay, said that his staff voted in support of the decision to move the company's headquarters, although employees who want to stay in Georgia may do so. After sending a tweet about his company's decision to uproot itself from the Atlanta area, he said numerous other cities and states reached out to his company. The governor of Delaware personally called Williams to invite the company there, he said.

Large corporations ranging from Microsoft to Atlanta-based Coca-Cola are urging the state to abandon the bill, while Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff is speaking out against the proposed law and how it might impact his company's investment in the state. Benioff, by the way, has experience in fighting against "religious freedom" bills, given that he was an outspoken critic of Indiana's similar legislation, which was passed last year.

"We're looking squarely at what's going on in Georgia with House Bill 757, which means that we may have to reduce our investments in the state of Georgia," Benioff said on a conference call with financial analysts last month.

There's evidence to back up opponents' claims that such legislation can harm a state's business climate. Indiana's Religious Freedom Restoration Act resulted in a loss of as many as a dozen conventions and as much as $60 million in lost revenue, according to tourism group Visit Indy.

The rise of legislation that permits business owners to refuse service based on their religious beliefs stems from a national push for gay and transgender rights, including the Supreme Court's ruling last year that legalized same-sex marriage.

Georgia isn't the only state where lawmakers are currently mulling laws that would allow businesses to refuse service to gay customers. Kentucky's Senate this week approved a similar bill that would allow business owners to refuse service to gay customers based on their religious beliefs. Last year, more than 100 anti-LGBT bills were filed in 29 states, according to the Human Rights Campaign.

In Georgia, 373K's Williams says the bill caused him to reconsider where his business taxes are going.

"How am I going to pay corporate income taxes to a state that supports hate? Williams said. "Other places have passed laws against discrimination. We're passing a discrimination law, and something is wrong."

It's unclear what will happen with the Georgia bill, given that Governor Nathan Deal has said he would reject any legislation that "allows discrimination in our state in order to protect people of faith." Deal's office didn't return a request for comment.

In the meantime, Williams said his plans to move his company out of the state are on track.

"The plan is by the end of the summer to be gone," he said. "It's just the fact that it passed the Senate was enough in my eyes to taint the image of Georgia and to make it more difficult to recruit people from different walks of life."



http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-survey-religious-objections-law-cost-indiana-as-much-as-60-million-20160126-story.html

Survey: Religious objections law cost Indiana as much as $60 million
Brian Slodysko
Associated Press
January 26, 2016


Indiana may have lost as much as $60 million in hotel profits, tax revenue and other economic benefits when a dozen groups decided against hosting conventions in Indianapolis last year due at least in part to the controversy surrounding the state's religious objections law.

A document prepared by the tourism group Visit Indy shows that the 12 out-of-state groups were surveyed and all said that the state's controversial law played a role in their decision to hold their events elsewhere. The document was obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its formal release Thursday.

The Republican-backed law garnered quick and largely negative national backlash after it was signed by Gov. Mike Pence in March, with critics saying it sanctioned discrimination against gay people on religious grounds. Lawmakers hastily made changes days later, after the NCAA, the gamer convention GenCon and other business interests raised the possibility of moving events, but critics said the law still doesn't go far enough to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination.

The findings by Visit Indy are among the first to quantify the law's financial effect, an impact that social conservatives have skeptically downplayed. Visit Indy also is among several prominent Indiana business voices advocating for statewide protections for anyone fired from a job, denied service or evicted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

In the group's surveys, Indianapolis tourism officials asked the conventions why they chose to locate in other states, without specifically mentioning the controversial law. All 12 cited the law — and the backlash it provoked — as one reason for choosing another city, said Chris Gahl, vice president of marketing and communications for Visit Indy.

"We'd say, 'Why didn't you select Indy?' and they proactively cited (the law) as a reason they did not select Indianapolis," Gahl said when asked about the document. "That is not news you want to hear when you are in the business of marketing a city."

In an emailed statement Monday, Pence spokeswoman Kara Brooks said Indiana was a "welcoming" state with a strong economy. She noted that multiple organizations that have expanded their role or recommitted to hosting conventions and events in the state, including the NFL scouting combine and the Future Farmers of America group.

Gahl declined to name the 12 conventions or detail their individual financial impacts. Visit Indy typically considers hotel room rentals, meal purchases, entertainment expenditures and shopping figures, as well as state and local taxes, when calculating those figures.

The AP independently confirmed that one organization, the International Association of Fairs and Expositions, bypassed Indianapolis due in part to the law. Indianapolis was a finalist after the group decided to no longer hold its four-day event in Las Vegas, said Marla Calico, the association's president and CEO.

"There were some of our members who were aware that the city was under consideration, and a few were very vocal that they didn't think it would be appropriate," Calico said.

She said the uproar over the new law was "a piece of the equation" when her group decided not to choose Indianapolis, which she said was appealing because of its amenities and central location.

The Indiana Senate is expected to debate two bills Wednesday addressing LGBT issues. One would offer statewide protections for anyone fired from a job, denied service or evicted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The other would do the same but exclude transgender people. Both offer exemptions for clergy, small businesses and religious organizations.

Passage is far from certain. The governor said during his recent State of the State speech that he would prioritize religious freedom over LGBT rights and that not everyone believes that the state's business climate has been harmed.

"There are states with (religious objections) laws on the books right now that are doing quite well with regard to business," said Pastor Kevin Baird of the Indiana Pastors Alliance. He said arguments made by the business community about the impact of the law and the need for LGBT protections were a "false narrative."

Still, Visit Indy estimates that the actual amount of money lost could be greater than $60 million because fewer convention prospects are in the pipeline compared with years past.

"We work with a sense of urgency to make sure that Indianapolis tourism and the region's tourism is healthy," Gahl said. "Hopefully something will be done at the Statehouse."



Georgia -- Billed by supporters as a "religious freedom" law, the legislation has drawn concern from a number of businesses that say it will hurt the state and make it less competitive on several fronts. One such business is telecommunications firm 373K, which was founded by engineer and developer Kelvin Williams. His company is planning to move to another state -- possibly Delaware or Nevada -- because of the bill, which he worries would make it more difficult to recruit workers.


Indiana -- “A document prepared by the tourism group Visit Indy shows that the 12 out-of-state groups were surveyed and all said that the state's controversial law played a role in their decision to hold their events elsewhere. The document was obtained by The Associated Press ahead of its formal release Thursday. The Republican-backed law garnered quick and largely negative national backlash after it was signed by Gov. Mike Pence in March, with critics saying it sanctioned discrimination against gay people on religious grounds. Lawmakers hastily made changes days later, after the NCAA, the gamer convention GenCon and other business interests raised the possibility of moving events, but critics said the law still doesn't go far enough to protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from discrimination. …. The findings by Visit Indy are among the first to quantify the law's financial effect, an impact that social conservatives have skeptically downplayed. Visit Indy also is among several prominent Indiana business voices advocating for statewide protections for anyone fired from a job, denied service or evicted because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”


I’ve heard that black people “vote with their feet,” but it appears that gays vote with their pocketbooks. Given the way most Republicans, or just serious businessmen, view the world it seems to me this is a positive and hopeful trend; it’s more good news in my view.