Sen. Cory Booker is trying to strip funding from Trump’s ‘sham’ voter fraud commission

Thinkprogress

Democratic lawmakers in both chambers of Congress introduced a bill Wednesday that would cut off funding for the White House’s voter fraud commission, claiming that “even one taxpayer dollar spent on this circus would be a waste of resources.”

Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Rep. Cedric Richmond (D-LA), Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM), and Rep. Judy Chu (D-CA) unveiled the Anti-Voter Suppression Act exactly one week before the “Voting Integrity Commission” is set to hold its first meeting. The bill would “repeal President Trump’s executive order establishing the commission and prohibit any funds from being used to investigate the non-issue of voter fraud,” according to Richmond.

Acknowledging the legislation is unlikely to pass in a Republican-controlled Congress, the Democrats claim it still represents another opportunity to raise concerns about commission’s end goal of voter suppression.

“We will not go back to a time when millions of people — most of them poor and minorities — were silenced through disenfranchisement,” Booker said in a statement. “Yet that is exactly what President Trump seems to want to do with this sham of a commission.”

Trump signed an executive order establishing the commission in May, stating that the goal was to find vulnerabilities in election systems that could allow for “fraudulent voter registrations and fraudulent voting.” Voting rights advocates immediately sounded the alarms, saying the administration was “laying the groundwork for voter suppression.” [MORE]

[is the guy siting nxt to his atty the one who did it?] Courtroom Identifications are Unreliable and Suggestive

From [HERE] In an article on Thursday, The Marshall Project delved into the practice of courtroom identifications, when the prosecutor in a criminal trial has the witness point out the perpetrator in court to great dramatic effect.

For the past five years, the Innocence Project has worked to limit the use of in-court identifications, warning that the practice is unreliable, since the witness will doubtlessly point to the person being prosecuted, and highly suggestive, since jurors often interpret the identification as irrefutable evidence of the defendant’s guilt.

“It’s injecting a whole lot of prejudice because jurors find it incredibly powerful,” Innocence Project Senior Staff Attorney Karen Newirth told the Marshall Project.

Of the 350 DNA exonerations to date, 71 percent involved eyewitness misidentification. Of that 71 percent, more than half involved an incorrect in-court identification.

Massachusetts and Connecticut have already limited the practice to cases in which witnesses have previously identified the perpetrator in a lineup or the identity of the perpetrator is not contested. A case before the Colorado Supreme Court might cause the state to follow suit.

Black Clergy Arrested After Protesting Health Care bill as Immoral to Cut Medicaid

From [HERE] Eleven interfaith protestors, including the Rev. William Barber II, were arrested outside Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office while protesting Medicaid cuts in the GOP’s revised healthcare bill.

About 50 protestors gathered Thursday (July 13) for the Capitol Hill rally, before marching to a Senate office building steps from the Capitol.

Some protestors, some wore red armbands to symbolize a “willingness to engage in civil disobedience,” said Barber, a North Carolina pastor at the forefront of state and national protests focused on poverty and civil rights.

The group was warned three times to stop protesting. Capitol Police then closed off the hallway and arrested any remaining protestors about 20 minutes later.

Barber has repeatedly been arrested for civil disobedience in North Carolina and elsewhere.

Protestors said they want McConnell to know it’s immoral to cut Medicaid because it helps many children, seniors, and disabled persons.

Elijah Cummings' Workforce antidiscrimination bill sails through House

fcw

The House of Representatives passed by voice vote a bill that would codify stronger antidiscrimination protections for federal employees.

The Federal Employee Anti-Discrimination Act, introduced in January by Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, seeks to bolster anti-discrimination laws enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and to expand agency accountability in disclosing and enforcing requirements in instances where discrimination and retaliation have occurred.

The bill is cosponsored by Reps. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), James F. Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) and Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas). Former House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was also a cosponsor before resigning from Congress.

Specifically, the bill directs the head of an agency's Equal Employment Opportunity program to report directly to the agency head, and directs agencies to publish all findings involving instances of discrimination, harassment or retaliation on their website for a year "in a clear and prominent location." [MORE]

Historians release rare glimpse of life in Hiroshima before the U.S. atomic bombing

PBS

New footage released by the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum depicts quintessential life in Japan about 10 years prior to the country’s destruction after the U.S. atomic bombing.

The museum released the 4K resolution film on July 5. The silent 16mm footage shows a bustling Hiroshima: families stroll the city streets and people row boats on the river.

“The film brings back memories of the days when I rowed boats and went fishing on the Motoyasugawa river,” Tokuso Hamai, 82, told the Japan-based newspaper, The Asahi Shimbun.

Genjiro Kawasaki, a local Hiroshima resident, captured the footage in the 1930s, and in 1963, donated the video to the museum. Imagica West Corp., a visual production company, helped digitally replicate the film. The film is believed to have been shot between April 4 and 5 in 1935.

Why it’s important

Kawasaki’s footage offers a rare glimpse into Hiroshima before it was devastated by the nuclear attack, which occurred on August 6, 1945. During World War II, the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb, killing nearly 150,000 people in Hiroshima. Three days later, on August 9, a second atomic bomb killed more than 70,000 in Japan’s northwestern city, Nagasaki.

Museum staff have made plans to request the public’s help in gathering materials in order to further depict life before the atomic bomb.

slavery is not a product of Western capitalism; Western capitalism is a product of slavery

How Slaves Built American Capitalism  by GARIKAI CHENGU

From [HERE] Today marks the 150th anniversary of the abolition of slavery in America and contrary to popular belief, slavery is not a product of Western capitalism; Western capitalism is a product of slavery.

The expansion of slavery in the first eight decades after American Independence drove the evolution and modernization of the United States.

Historian Edward Baptist illustrates how in the span of a single lifetime, the South grew from a narrow coastal strip of worn-out tobacco plantations to a continental cotton empire, and the United States grew into a modern, industrial, and capitalist economy.

Through torture and punishment slave owners extracted greater efficiencies from slaves which allowed the United States to seize control of the world market for cotton, the key raw material of the Industrial Revolution, and become a prosperous and powerful nation.

Cotton was to the early 19th century, what oil was to the 20th century: the commodity that determined the wealth of nations. Cotton accounted for a staggering 50 percent of US exports and ignited the economic boom that America experienced. America owes its very existence as a first world nation to slavery.

In the abstract, capitalism and slavery are fundamentally counterposed systems. One is based on free labor, and the other, on forced labor. However, in practice, Capitalism itself would have been impossible without slavery.

In the United States, scholars have demonstrated that profit wasn’t made just from Southerners selling the cotton that slaves picked or the cane they cut. Slavery was central to the establishment of the industries that today dominate the U.S. economy: real estate, insurance and finance.

Wall Street was founded on slavery. African slaves built the physical wall that gives Wall Street its name, forming the northern boundary of the Dutch colony designed to ward off resisting natives who wanted their land back. To formalize the colossal trade in human beings, in 1711, New York officials established a slave market on Wall Street.

Many prominent American banks including JP Morgan and Wachovia Corp made fortunes from slavery and accepted slaves as “collateral”. JP Morgan recently admitted that it “accepted approximately 13,000 enslaved individuals as collateral on loans and took possession of approximately 1,250 enslaved individuals”.

The story that American schoolbooks tell of slavery is regional, rather than national, it portrays slavery as a brutal aberration to the American rule of democracy and freedom. Slavery is recounted as an unfortunate detour from the nation’s march to modernity, and certainly not the engine that drove American economic prosperity. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In order to fully appreciate the importance of slavery to American capitalism, one need only look at the torrid history of an antebellum Alabama dry-goods outfit called Lehman Brothers. Warren Buffet is the CEO of Berkshire Hathaway and the richest billionaire in America. Berkshire Hathaway’s antecedent firm was a Rhode Island textile manufacturer and slavery profiteer.

In the north, New England was the home of America’s cotton textile industry and the hotbed of American abolitionism, which grew rich on the backs of the enslaved people forced to pick cotton in the south. The architects of New England’s industrial revolution constantly monitored the price of cotton, for their textile mills would have been silent without the labor of slaves on distant plantations.

The book Complicity: How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited from Slavery by Anne Farrow illustrates how the Northern bourgeoisie were connected to the slave system by a million threads: they bought molasses, which was made with slave labor, and sold rum as part of the Triangle Trade; they lent money to Southern planters; and most of the cotton that was sold to Britain was shipped through New England ports.

Despite being turned into a civil rights hero, Abraham Lincoln did not think blacks were the equals of whites. Lincoln’s plan was to send the blacks in America back to Africa, and if he had not been assassinated, returning blacks to Africa would likely have been his post-war policy. Lincoln even admitted that the emancipation proclamation, in his own words, was merely “a practical war measure” to convince Britain, that the North was driven by “something more than ambition.”

For Blacks, the end of slavery, one hundred and fifty years ago, was just the beginning of the as yet unachieved quest for democratic and economic racial equality.

In the era before WWII, the American elite consensus viewed capitalist civilization as a racial and colonial project. To this day, capitalism in America can only be described as “Racial Capitalism”: the legacy of slavery marked by the simultaneous, and intertwined emergence of white supremacy and capitalism in modern America.

Black people in America live in a Racial Capitalist system. Racial Capitalism exercises its authority over the Black minority through an oppressive array of modern day lynchings by the police, increasing for-profit mass incarceration and institutionally driven racial economic inequality. Racial Capitalism is unquestionably a modern day crime against humanity.

Seeing an African American at the pinnacle of power in the land of slavery would be exciting if only black equality indicators were not tumbling. In fact, during Obama’s tenure the black-white median household wealth gap is down to seven black cents on the white dollar. The spread between black unemployment and white unemployment has also widened by four points since President Obama took office.

The nation’s police historically enforced Racial Capitalism. The first modern police forces in America were Slave Patrols and Night Watches, which were both designed to control the behaviors of African Americans.

Historical literature is clear that prior to the Civil War a legally sanctioned police force existed for the sole purpose of oppressing the slave population and protecting the property and interests of white slave owners. The glaring similarities between the eighteenth century Slave Patrols and modern American police brutality in the Black community are too salient to dismiss or ignore.

Ever since the first police forces were established in America, lynchings have been the linchpin of racial capitalist law and order. Days after the abolition of slavery, the worst terrorist organization in American history was formed with the US government’s blessing: The Klu Klux Klan.

The majority of Americans believe that lynchings are an outdated form of racial terrorism, which blighted American society up until the end of the era of Jim Crow laws; however, America’s proclivity towards the unbridled slaughter of African Americans has only worsened over time. The Guardian newspaper recently noted that historians believe that during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century on average two African-Americans were lynched every week.

Compare this with incomplete data compiled by the FBI that shows that a Black person is killed by a white police officer more than twice a week, and it’s clear that police brutality in Black communities is getting worse, not better.

Lynching does not necessarily mean hanging. It often included humiliation, torture, burning, dismemberment and castration. A lynching was a quintessential American public ritual that often took place in front of large crowds that sometimes numbered in the thousands and children played during the festivities.

Shortly after the abolition of slavery in 1899 the Springfield Weekly newspaper described a lynching by the KKK chronicling how, “the Negro was deprived of his ears, fingers and genital parts of his body. He pleaded pitifully for his life while the mutilation was going on…before the body was cool, it was cut to pieces, the bones crushed into small bits…the Negro’s heart was cut into several pieces, as was also his liver…small pieces of bones went for 25 cents…”.

Central to the perpetuation of Racial Capitalism is racial terrorism, which is why to this day, the US government refuses to designate the KKK as a domestic terrorist organization.

Racially terrorizing Black communities goes hand in hand with the systematic containment and imprisonment of Blacks. Thanks in large part to the racially motivated War on Drugs, the United States right now incarcerates more African-Americans as a percentage than South Africa did at the height of Apartheid.

Private prisons were designed by the rich and for the rich. The for-profit prison system depends on imprisoning Blacks for its survival. Much in the same way the United States was designed. After all, more Black men are in prison or jail, on probation or parole than were enslaved in 1850 before the Civil War began.

America’s “take-off” in the 19th century wasn’t in spite of slavery; it was largely thanks to it. Capitalism was created by slavery and slavery in turn created the enduring legacy of Racial Capitalism that persists in America today.

There has historically been a sharp contrast between America’s lofty ideals, on the one hand, and the seemingly permanent second-class status of African Americas, on the other. The late 19th century irony of a statue named Liberty overseeing the arrival in New York’s harbor of millions of foreigners, even as black Southern peasants, not alien, just profoundly alienated, were kept enslaved at the social margins. The hypocrisy of a racist ideology that openly questioned the Negro’s human worth surviving America’s defeat of the Nazis. To this day, far from being a “post-racial” nation, American racial equality indicators and race relations are at a new low.

The race problem is America’s great national dilemma that continues to pose the greatest threat to America’s democratic experiment. Simmering discontent in Black communities will continue to rise towards a dangerous boiling point unless and until slavery’s greatest legacy of ongoing Racial Capitalism is exposed and completely dismantled.

Bill allocates $1.6 billion for Trump’s border wall

The Hill

The House Appropriations Committee on Tuesday released a bill allocating $1.6 billion to begin construction of a physical barrier along the U.S. border with Mexico, one of President Trump’s central campaign promises.

The bill funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for fiscal year 2018 also negates one of Trump’s central promises, that Mexico would pay for the construction of the wall.

“Keeping Americans safe by protecting our homeland is a top priority. This funding bill provides the resources to begin building a wall along our southern border, enhance our existing border security infrastructure, hire more border patrol agents, and fund detention operations,” said House Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee Chairman John Carter.

Earlier in the day, DHS spokesman David Lapan said that the requested funding would be crucial to moving the project beyond current repairs, replacements and prototype projects.

“On the DHS side it’s clear that we’ve gotten a direction to secure the southern border, that a wall and barrier is part of that process along with people and technology and that funding from Congress is required for us to move forward on that,” he said.

Conservative lawmakers in recent days had begun warning that they would pull their votes from a budget and spending plan that failed to fund the wall.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) went so far as to tell Breitbart News that Trump would not sign a spending measure if a wall were not funded, though the White House has not commented on the matter.

The bill's accompanying report, to be released next week, will specify where the segments of the wall are to be built and their associated funding.

In total, the bill allocates $13.8 billion to customs and border protection. That includes the $1.6 billion for the wall, $100 million to hire 500 more Border Patrol agents, $131 million for new border technology, $106 million for aircraft and sensors and $109 million for "non-intrusive inspection equipment."

It also adds $619.7 million to Immigration and Customs Enforcement over current levels, bringing total funding for ICE to $7 billion.

Harvard Analysis Highlights How White Media Failed the People of Flint

ColorLines

More than two years have passed since the water crisis in Flint, Michigan hit the national headlines. But the water crisis itself unfolded over three years ago in 2014—not 2015 when the rest of the country found out about it. Residents began complaining in April 2014; they knew something was wrong with their water, though it took some time until they knew it was lead.

National media began covering the issue quite late, argues a paper published today (July 11) by the Harvard University’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy. Local media such as M-Live/The Flint Journal covered it consistently from the beginning, but the same isn’t true for nationally lauded publications. The paper goes as far as to criticize The New York Times’ “parachuting into the crisis.”

The analysis poses the question: Would the situation have turned out differently if national media intervened sooner?

It specifically states:

Sustained and widespread media attention was not given until late 2015 and early 2016, when the state of Michigan and President [Barack] Obama declared an emergency over high levels of lead in the water and in the blood of thousands of children. Additionally, the nature of some of the coverage was problematic: Complaints of citizens were discounted when compared to the comments of officials, residents were portrayed as hopeless and downtrodden despite months of action, and narratives of “heroes” excluded African American activists in a city that is 57 percent black.

Here, three major points the paper makes on the media, its role in the water crisis that poisoned Flint residents—and on environmental justice, as a whole. 

National media trusted officials over residents.

In Flint, the conflict started out as a he-said, she-said debate. Residents complained their water was contaminated, that it smelled and looked odd. Government officials, on the other hand, stood firm that the water was safe.

In July 2015, before either the state or federal government declared the situation a state of emergency, the city issued a water quality update to residents. The water system had violated the Safe Drinking Water Act for excess amounts of trihalomethanes, a dangerous compound that could lead to liver and kidney disease, yet the city still tried to reassure residents everything was OK: “This is not an emergency. If it had been an emergency, you would have been notified within 24 hours.” [MORE]

White House Hires Billionaire War Profiteers To Aid In War Planning

Common Dreams

Blackwater founder Erik Prince testifies before a House committee examining the mission and performance of private military contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan, Oct. 2, 2007. (Susan Walsh/AP)

Two of President Donald Trump’s closest aides have reportedly solicited advice from two wealthy private military contractors — Erik Prince, founder of Blackwater, and Stephen Feinberg, the billionaire owner of DynCorp International—on how to proceed with the sixteen-year-long war in Afghanistan.

According to the New York Times, White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon and senior advisor Jared Kushner “recruited” the contractors, who have made a hefty sum from perpetual conflict in the Middle East, “to devise alternatives to the Pentagon’s plan to send thousands of additional troops to Afghanistan.”

Following a meeting with Bannon and Kushner, Prince and Feinberg have “developed proposals to rely on contractors instead of American troops in Afghanistan,” the Times notes.

 

“The highly unusual meeting dramatizes the divide between Mr. Trump’s generals and his political staff over Afghanistan, the lengths to which his aides will go to give their boss more options for dealing with it and the readiness of this White House to turn to business people for help with diplomatic and military problems,” the Times reports. “But it also raises a host of ethical issues, not least that both men could profit from their recommendations.”

 

As Common Dreams reported last month, Prince penned an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he recommended a “viceroy approach” in Afghanistan that would rely heavily on private security forces.

Critics characterized Prince’s proposals as tantamount to “colonialism” and argued they exude “sheer 19th-century bloodlust and thirst for empire.”

Rep. Elijah Cummings requests documents to review Donald Trump Jr. meeting with Russian attorney

WashExaminer

Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, wants to review information about the meeting between Donald Trump Jr. and a Kremlin-linked lawyer, and the email thread that detailed the planning for that meeting.

Cummings, D-Md., sent a letter Tuesday to Trump Jr., former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner, President Trump's adviser and son-in-law, requesting information about their meeting with a Russian attorney who claimed to have damaging information about Hillary Clinton.

Rep. Ted Lieu says Trump Jr. email further reason to revoke Kushner security clearance

The Hill

Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) renewed his call on Tuesday to revoke White House Senior Adviser Jared Kushner's security clearance after it was revealed that he attended a June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer who promised dirt on then-Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

"Don Jr., Manafort [and] Kushner were all at the same collusion meeting. But only Kushner has a security clearance. It needs to be suspended NOW," Lieu wrote on Twitter.

Maxine Waters: GOP wouldn’t care if a voicemail revealed Trump thanking Putin

The Hill 

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said Tuesday that the Republican Party would ignore collusion between President Trump's campaign and Russia even if they had a "voicemail" of Trump thanking Putin for the alleged collusion.

Waters's remarks came hours after Donald Trump Jr. released emails detailing his meeting with a Kremlin-linked attorney who promised compromising information on Hillary Clinton.

In a series of tweets Tuesday night, Waters called on Democrats to not let Trump Jr. "off the hook" for his actions.

"At this point, the [New York Times] could release Trump leaving a voice message thanking Putin for his services and GOP would still say “nothing burger,"" Waters wrote.

"Don’t let Trump Jr off the hook. Emails show his willingness to get info from Russia to influence election," the California Democrat added. "He is in a long line of LIARS."

Twitter users blocked for Criticizing Facist Trump sue for First Amendment violation

Jurist

A group of Twitter [website] users blocked by President Donald Trump [official website] filed a lawsuit [complaint, PDF] Tuesday alleging the the action is a violation of their First Amendment [text] rights. The group, represented by the First Knight Amendment Institute and Columbia University [official website], argue that Trump's account [Twitter profile] serves as a public forum that "has become an important source of news and information about the government, and an important public forum for speech by, to, and about the President" and individuals who are "blocked from the account are impeded in their ability to learn information that is shared only through that account." Those filing the suit assert that the Trump administration's blocking of Twitter users who have criticized the President's policies is an unconstitutional viewpoint-based restriction and an "effort to suppress dissent". The complaint cites the Supreme Court's recent decision in Packingham v. North Carolina [JURIST report] which stated that social media platforms like Twitter are "perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard" and that they have become "the modern-day public square." [MORE]

Activist group claiming Yanez's White attorney displayed racism toward Black juror [jury was mostly white]

From [HERE] The leader of a local activist group concerned with police brutality is calling out one of the attorneys who represented former St. Anthony police officer Jeronimo Yanez for allegedly displaying racism toward a juror during the officer's trial.

Michelle Gross, president of Communities United Against Police Brutality, filed a complaint in late June with the Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility about what she says was unprofessional conduct on the part of defense attorney Earl Gray.

It's not clear whether the office will investigate the complaint or determine it lacks the requirements necessary to move to that stage.

Gray, along with attorneys Paul Engh and Thomas Kelly, represented Yanez in his successful legal case against manslaughter charges stemming from his decision to fatally shoot Philando Castile during a traffic stop last summer.

Gross attended the duration of the trial and said in a statement released Tuesday that Gray's behavior was unacceptable.

"I understand the need for lawyers to provide zealous representation of their clients but Mr. Gray's conduct toward a very earnest potential juror simply because of her ethnicity was beyond the pale," Gross said in the statement.

Gray, a longtime defense attorney, called Gross's complaint "ridiculous."

"She has the right to file a complaint, but if I had done something wrong in the courtroom I am sure Judge (William H. Leary III) would have sanctioned me and he didn't," Gray said.

A jury acquitted Yanez in mid-June after the officer testified at trial that Castile, a 32-year-old black man, ignored his orders not to grab for his gun. Yanez said he fired out of fear for his life. The state had argued that Castile was trying to comply with the officer's request to see his driver's license when Yanez, who is Latino, recklessly shot him.

Gross alleges in her complaint that Gray violated the Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct in his treatment of a young Ethiopian woman during the trial's jury selection process.

Gray twice tried to get the 18-year-old struck from the final jury panel, arguing that the woman had an insufficient grasp of the United States' legal system.

He also inappropriately asked her if she was a citizen and whether she grew up in a camp or village in Ethiopia and further if she attended school, the complaint argues.

The young woman told Gray she grew up in a house and that "of course," she attended school as a child, the complaint said.

He went on to ask her to define legal terms, such as "culpable negligence" and "impeachment" and instructed her to explain the country's criminal justice system.

When she struggled with the tasks, Gray moved to strike her for cause, telling Leary that the woman wouldn't "be able to contribute to jury deliberations," the complaint said.

Leary denied the motion, saying at the time that many people who sit on juries aren't familiar with the country's criminal justice system and that they don't need to be in order to competently serve as jurors.

Gray tried to strike the woman a second time during the defense's opportunity to exercise its allotted "peremptory strikes," or strikes granted without explanation so long as they are not motivated by race or gender.

The prosecution objected, arguing the strike was racially motivated. Leary ended up denying the defense's motion and the woman was ultimately seated on the 12-member jury.

"I am not an attorney but I believe Mr. Gray's conduct during this encounter violates Minnesota Rules of Professional Conduct. ... in that his conduct with this potential juror had 'no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person,' especially given that Mr. Gray asked no such questions of and displayed no similar animosity toward white potential jurors," Gross wrote in her complaint.

Gray said Gross's complaint was baseless.

"I wasn't insulting to the young lady," Gray said. "...This is a ridiculous complaint. It's just crazy."

Susan Humiston, the director of the Minnesota Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility, said she does not comment on complaints filed unless they result in public discipline.

Speaking in general terms, she said her office first determines if a complaint has grounds to be investigated before passing it onto a team of lawyers to begin that work.

Only about half of the complaints filed last year made it to that stage, Humiston said.

Most don't end up resulting in discipline, either. Only 44 attorneys were publicly disciplined last year and 115 privately disciplined, for example. The office has received about 1,300 complaints annually since 2009, according to its 2017 annual report.

Gray has never been publicly disciplined for his conduct as an attorney in Minnesota. His career dates back to the 1970s.

Gross said the office has not yet notified her whether her complaint against Gray will be investigated.

After Scaring White People to Death w/his Talent RGIII is at Home On Couch

NBC

Nothing is more valuable in the NFL than a talented quarterback, and yet there’s a quarterback who has been chosen to a Pro Bowl, has led a team to the playoffs, is just 27 years old, and can’t get so much as a sniff from any team in the league: Robert Griffin III.

We at PFT monitor every single report about player signings around the NFL, and we haven’t had a post about Griffin since the day he was cut by the Browns, on March 10. We’ve mentioned Griffin a handful of times, but generally in passing when listing veteran quarterbacks who are available. There hasn’t been so much as a rumor of a team that might bring him in for a workout, or a visit, or offer him a league-minimum contract.

Griffin’s immense talent made him the second overall pick and the rookie of the year in 2012. His knee injury that postseason may have permanently changed him as a player, but what would be the harm in offering him a camp-arm contract and letting him show if he still has something left?

There are no questions about whether Griffin can keep his mouth shut and avoid being a distraction as a backup, because that’s exactly what he did in his last season in Washington. He was benched for Kirk Cousins in the preseason, never played a down all year, and also never complained in the media or made the kinds of headlines that coaches don’t want their backup quarterbacks to make. Griffin hasn’t been arrested or otherwise been in off-field trouble, and his social media presence consists of things like welcoming his newborn daughter into the world and announcing that his foundation has given money to support an injured firefighter. He conducts himself exactly the way teams want players to conduct themselves off the field.

And yet Griffin remains unemployed, with training camps fast approaching. Griffin wasn’t particularly good in Cleveland last year, but he was no worse than Josh McCown, who managed to get a $6 million salary this year with the Jets. Among the quarterbacks who have shown significantly less upside than Griffin but have managed to sign with new teams this offseason are Mark Sanchez, Nick Foles, Josh Johnson, Aaron Murray, Case Keenum, Geno Smith, David Fales, T.J. Yates, EJ Manuel, Matt McGloin, Blaine Gabbert and Austin Davis. If you’re an NFL coach and your starting quarterback goes down, would you really rather turn to Murray, Manuel or McGloin than Griffin?

Apparently some coaches would. And so Griffin will have to hope the call that hasn’t come yet comes some time before the start of the season.

NC NAACP Wants Special Master to Draw Legislative Maps & to Stop Lawmakers from passing laws until a special election is held

USNews

The North Carolina NAACP wants an outside authority — and not the General Assembly — to redraw legislative maps and state lawmakers barred from passing laws until a special election is held.

Attorneys for the civil rights group asked a Greensboro federal court Tuesday to consider the requests in its deliberations about when redistricting should occur, even though the NAACP isn't formally in a lawsuit. A three-judge panel is weighing how to proceed after the U.S. Supreme Court last month upheld the judges' earlier ruling throwing out 28 House and Senate districts as racial gerrymanders.

The NAACP says a special master should be ordered to redraw lawful maps and elections held under those boundaries this year. The group argues the current Republican-dominated legislature can't be trusted to pass constitutional laws.

Bernie Sanders to endorse Ben Jealous, former NAACP president, in Maryland governor’s race

WashPost

Sen. Bernie Sanders and Our Revolution, a national progressive group that formed after the senator’s upstart presidential bid, are scheduled to endorse Ben Jealous in the Maryland governor’s race on Thursday, according to an email sent to Our Revolution supporters in Maryland.

The joint announcement of the endorsement of Jealous, former president of the NAACP, will be made in Silver Spring.

“With Ben as governor, we can make health care a right, not a privilege,” Sanders said in a statement. “We can create a minimum wage which is a living wage. We can stop the school-to-prison pipeline and end mass incarceration. We can make college tuition affordable, protect our environment and create good-paying jobs.”

Backing from Sanders (I-Vt.) and Our Revolution is not a surprise given Jealous’s role in Sanders’s 2016 presidential campaign and his former position on the board of Our Revolution. The endorsements will help Jealous, a civil rights leader and political outsider who has never run for political office, raise money and energize liberal voters across the country.

But it remains unclear how much the support will mean to voters in Maryland, where Sanders lost the 2016 Democratic primary to Hillary Clinton by a wide margin, and where Jealous is competing with several other Democrats for the nomination to challenge popular Republican Gov. Larry Hogan in 2018.

 

Jealous, who served as the co-chairman of Sanders’s campaign in Maryland, said he and Sanders both believe that “now is not a time for timidity.”

“Our leadership must reflect the urgency of this moment,” Jealous said in a statement. “It’s time for Maryland to get back to doing big things again, but it starts with new leadership.”

Our Revolution is the second national progressive group to throw its support behind Jealous. In May, before Jealous announced his candidacy, Democracy for America said it was ready to mobilize to help him run. [MORE]