ReportWire

Tag: D.C.

  • Kamala Harris says she owns a handgun—despite fighting to ban others from doing the same

    Kamala Harris says she owns a handgun—despite fighting to ban others from doing the same

    [ad_1]

    When Vice President Kamala Harris appeared in conversation with Oprah Winfrey last month, she dropped a tidbit that may have come as a surprise. “If somebody breaks in my house,” she said, “they’re getting shot.”

    It was, or at least it should have been, one of the more relatable things she’s ever said. Whatever your politics—Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Jill Stein groupie, etc.—the right to protect your life and your family when threatened with potentially deadly aggression is something so basic as to transcend partisanship.

    It’s a bit less relatable, however, when considering Harris’ past advocacy against other people accessing the same type of protection she has.

    She provided more specifics during her recent 60 Minutes interview. “I have a Glock, and I’ve had it for quite some time,” she said. “My background is in law enforcement. And, so there you go.”

    That admission should hardly be a bomb drop. But it’s difficult to reconcile with her support, as San Francisco District Attorney, for Proposition H, which banned the city’s residents from merely possessing (as well as manufacturing or selling) handguns. The ordinance passed in 2005, and a California appeals court threw it out three years later.

    Harris hasn’t said exactly how long she’s owned her firearm. Yet if it’s been for “quite some time,” as she said, then one can reasonably assume that her owning a gun overlapped with her view that the state should curtail others from doing the same. But the next detail she provided—that she was in law enforcement—possibly provides some context for her position, at least attitudinally, as Proposition H provided gun ownership exemptions for law enforcement, military, and security guards.

    Not long after, Harris would also go on to file a brief in District of Columbia v. Heller, the landmark Supreme Court decision that ruled D.C.’s handgun ban unconstitutional and established that people have a right to own a firearm for self-defense, divorced from military service.

    That was not the outcome Harris sought in the brief she submitted. Citing past jurisprudence at the time, she said that “the Second Amendment provides only a militia-related right to bear arms,” “the Second Amendment does not apply to legislation passed by state or local governments,” and “the restrictions bear a reasonable relationship to protecting public safety and thus do not violate a personal constitutional right.” Had that view prevailed, the handgun ban in D.C., where she now lives, would have remained intact.

    This position may be a bit easier to reconcile. “I don’t think there’s anything inherently hypocritical or duplicitous about someone owning a gun while also taking the position that the Constitution doesn’t protect the right to own a gun,” says Clark Neily, who successfully argued Heller as co-counsel, via email. “For example, many thoughtful people think women should be able to have an abortion—and have had or would have an abortion themselves—but nevertheless don’t believe there’s a constitutional right to an abortion.”

    The abortion comparison is an apt one, and it’s an interesting one to interrogate when considering Harris believes the U.S. Constitution promises a right to one, despite there being no text touching the topic directly. She has not struggled, meanwhile, to argue over the years that gun ownership should be heavily regulated, the Second Amendment notwithstanding.

    Neily is still correct, though, that these things are not necessarily inconsistent logically. But it’s still worth noting the practical implications: Had the Supreme Court ruled her way, the law would prohibit the people in the city where she lives from having the very sort of gun she now openly acknowledges she keeps to protect her safety—a contradiction that a journalist should be interested in cross-examining at some point during one of her campaign trail interviews, should she continue to give them.

    Harris’ interests as a prosecutor, it seems, directly contradicted her interests as a private person, and the interests of the little people generally. That discrepancy, if anything, is cause for introspection.

    [ad_2]

    Billy Binion

    Source link

  • Lupus Awareness Month: Georgia Chapter of Lupus Foundation supports those affected by the disease

    Lupus Awareness Month: Georgia Chapter of Lupus Foundation supports those affected by the disease

    [ad_1]

    Lupus is an autoimmune disease that affects thousands of individuals across the country. It can impact multiple parts of the body and cause severe internal damage. There isn’t a cure for this disease, and it imposes a significant emotional and financial toll on family members of people with Lupus. The Lupus Foundation of America (LFA) Georgia Chapter supports everyone affected by this issue. The organization offers assistance to those in need through various channels. May is Lupus Awareness Month, and the organization has planned activities for the rest of the month to allow locals to show their support for the Lupus community.

    “We should all care about this because anybody can get lupus. We should serve those who need to be served, and lupus is a very underserved population,” said Teri Emond, President and CEO of the Lupus Foundation of America, Georgia Chapter.

    May is Lupus Awareness Month background template. Holiday concept.

    The Lupus Foundation of America Georgia Chapter has been serving the community since 1978. Through advocacy, fundraising, and research, the organization has provided support to those dealing with the disease and their family members. In observance of Lupus Awareness Month in May, the chapter organized several events. On Saturday, May 18, the chapter hosted a Lupus walk in Augusta, GA, where Morehouse School of Medicine presented the latest research on Lupus. Additionally, Georgia chapter members traveled to Washington, D.C., from May 19 to May 21 to advocate for more funding for Lupus research at the national advocacy summit.

    [ad_2]

    Clayton Gutzmore

    Source link

  • Does Uncle Sam consider your backyard restricted airspace?

    Does Uncle Sam consider your backyard restricted airspace?

    [ad_1]

    Who owns the airspace over your backyard? In theory, everyone. The Federal Aviation Act of 1958 declared that “a citizen of the United States has a public right of transit through the navigable airspace.” That is, everywhere above the trees and buildings.

    But it’s up to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to set the rules of that navigation. While most of the land area in America is uncontrolled airspace, most of the land where people live falls under controlled airspace, thanks to the amount of air traffic flowing through.

    In 2012, Congress asked the FAA to begin regulating drones as aircraft. And in 2020, following changes in the law, the FAA removed the distinction between model planes and drones, classifying both as “unmanned aerial systems.” Although aircraft below 0.55 pounds don’t have to be registered with the feds, “remote pilots” all have to follow the same rules—including getting control tower permission to fly in controlled airspace.

    Remote pilots have to obey the same NOTAMs (short for “notice to air missions”) as regular pilots. Most NOTAMs are temporary security restrictions; there is also a permanent NOTAM banning flights over Washington, D.C., and somewhat confusing rules for the airspace around sports games.

    On the bright side, the FAA’s prerogative over airspace means that other wings of the government can’t regulate the air—though some have come up with creative ways around that. Although they can’t stop you once you’re in the air, the National Park Service and the city of New York both ban drone takeoffs and landings on their turf. St. Louis, meanwhile, has set up a restrictive licensing system for drone businesses.

    Reason has compiled a map of cities across America where the skies ain’t free. It doesn’t include NOTAMs, national security restrictions, stadium no-fly zones, or local regulations. (To get the most up-to-date restrictions, and to get control tower approval to fly in controlled airspace, you may want to use a licensed LAANC app.) You might be surprised at some of these.

    Between all the commercial airports—Los Angeles hosts the most airline hubs out of any American city—and the Hollywood private planes, there’s not a lot of room for Angeleno remote-control hobbyists. The Reason Foundation’s offices are located near LAX: convenient for catching a flight, not so convenient for taking a drone selfie.

    Miami has some things in common with Los Angeles: a sunny climate, a party culture, a district called Hollywood. More so than California, South Florida is also home to many private aviation enthusiasts. All that means lots of airports, with lots of controlled airspace around them. Then there’s the Everglades, much of which is national parkland, where drone takeoffs are banned.

    In the middle of the Everglades sits the Dade-Collier training center, previously known as the Big Cypress Jetport. Built in the late 1960s, the Jetport was slated to be the largest airport in the world, a hub for supersonic jetliners. But mass supersonic aviation never took off, and only one runway was completed. The rest of the airport grounds became the Big Cypress National Preserve.

    Central Florida is even worse for flight restrictions. There are lots of airports and military bases around Tampa and Orlando, a permanent no-fly zone over Disney World, and frequent flight restrictions due to space launchers from Cape Canaveral. Your average Florida Man isn’t that free to take to the skies.

    Knoxville is the “streaking capital of the world” and the namesake of Jackass star Johnny Knoxville, But the skies around it are not exactly naked. Most of downtown is clothed by controlled airspace, thanks to Downtown Island, a general aviation airport. The parks along the Tennessee River, meanwhile, fall under McGhee-Tyson Airport’s controlled airspace. Parts of the controlled airspace curve to avoid the Skyranch (a private airfield) and the University of Tennessee hospital helipad.

    Oh: And if you want to fly over the Great Smoky Mountains nearby, remember that the National Park Service doesn’t allow drone takeoffs.

    In the words of the D.C. municipal government, “The airspace around Washington, DC. is more restricted than in any other part of the country.” Perhaps more than any other part of the world, even Red Square. Flying a remote-control aircraft within a 15-mile radius of the city is a very good way to get a visit from an unpleasant three-letter agency. It’s hard to get a waiver unless you’re the Smithsonian—or a government agency spying on protesters.

    But some people take the risk. A Canadian drone photographer named Adrien Salv recently posted a video of a drone doing a jerky loop-de-loop around the Washington Monument, which Salv claimed (perhaps not believably) to have found on a memory card lying in the grass. The drone community was not amused by the stunt. “Imagine going to jail for this shitty of a dive,” one commenter wrote. There’s no word yet on what happened to the pilot.

    Speaking of American history, Concord is the home of “the shot heard ’round the world,” the opening battle of the American Revolution. But don’t think you can celebrate freedom by flying freely through the skies. The bridge where the Battle of Lexington and Concord began is right next to Hanscom Field, home to both a civilian airport and a U.S. Air Force base.

    To fly your remote aircraft as freely as possible, you’ll want to get as far away from big cities as possible, right? Not so fast. A lot of small towns on the Great Plains have their own municipal airports, with controlled airspace covering the entire town. Aberdeen is just one example.

    Dodge City is another one. To fly a drone without FAA approval, you’re going to have to get out of Dodge. Literally. 

    [ad_2]

    Matthew Petti

    Source link

  • D.C.’s Crime Problem Is a Democracy Problem

    D.C.’s Crime Problem Is a Democracy Problem

    [ad_1]

    Matthew Graves is not shy about promoting his success in prosecuting those who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. By his count, Graves, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, has charged more than 1,358 individuals, spread across nearly all 50 states and Washington, D.C., for assaulting police, destroying federal property, and other crimes. He issues a press release for most cases, and he held a rare news conference this past January to tout his achievements.

    But Graves’s record of bringing violent criminals to justice on the streets of D.C. has put him on the defensive. Alone among U.S. attorneys nationwide, Graves, appointed by the president and accountable to the U.S. attorney general, is responsible for overseeing both federal and local crime in his city. In 2022, prosecutors under Graves pressed charges on a record-low 33 percent of arrests in the District. Although the rate increased to 44 percent last fiscal year and continues to increase, other cities have achieved much higher rates: Philadelphia had a 96 percent prosecution rate in 2022, while Cook County, Illinois, which includes Chicago, and New York City were both at 86 percent. D.C.’s own rate hovered in the 60s and 70s for years, until it began a sharp slide in 2016.

    These figures help account for the fact that, as most major U.S. cities recorded decreases in murders last year, killings in the nation’s capital headed in the other direction: 274 homicides in 2023, the highest number in a quarter century, amounting to a nearly 50 percent increase since 2015. Violent crime, from carjackings to armed robberies, also rose last year. Some types of crime in the District are trending down so far in 2024, but the capital has already transformed from one of the safest urban centers in America not long ago to one in which random violence can take a car or a life even in neighborhoods once considered crime free.

    Journalists and experts have offered up various explanations for D.C.’s defiance of national crime trends. The Metropolitan Police Department is down 467 officers from the 3,800 employed in 2020; Police Chief Pamela Smith has said it could take “more than a decade” to reach that number again. But the number of police officers has decreased nationwide. The coronavirus pandemic stalled criminal-court procedures in D.C., but that was also the case across the country. The 13-member D.C. city council, dominated by progressives, tightened regulations on police use of force after the murder of George Floyd in 2020, but many local councils across the country passed similar laws. Reacting to public pressure, the D.C. council this month passed, and Mayor Muriel Bowser signed, a public-safety bill that rolls back some policing restrictions and includes tougher penalties for crimes such as illegal gun possession and retail theft.

    Jeff Asher: The murder rate is suddenly falling

    As a journalist who has covered crime in the District for four decades, I believe that one aspect of the D.C. justice system sets it apart, exacerbating crime and demanding remedy: Voters here cannot elect their own district attorney to prosecute local adult crimes.

    The District’s 679,000 residents and the millions of tourists who visit the capital every year could be safer if D.C. chose its own D.A., responsive to the community’s needs and accountable to voters. D.C. residents have no say in who sits atop their criminal-justice system with the awesome discretion to bring charges or not. Giving voters the right to elect their own D.A. would not only move the criminal-justice system closer to the community. It would also reform one of the more undemocratic, unjust sections of the Home Rule Act. The 1973 law, known for granting the District limited self-government, also maintained federal control of D.C.’s criminal-justice system; the president appoints not just the chief prosecutor but also judges to superior and district courts.

    “Putting prosecution into the hands of a federal appointee is a complete violation of the founding principles this country was built on,” Karl Racine, who served as D.C.’s first elected attorney general, from 2015 to 2023, told me. (The District’s A.G. has jurisdiction over juvenile crime.) “Power is best exercised locally.”

    Allowing the District to elect its own D.A. would not solve D.C.’s crime problem easily or quickly. Bringing criminals to justice is enormously complicated, from arrest to prosecution to adjudication and potential incarceration; this doesn’t fall solely on Graves or any previous U.S. attorney. The change would require Congress to revise the Home Rule charter, and given the politics of the moment and Republican control of the House, it’s a political long shot. In a 2002 referendum, 82 percent of District voters approved of a locally elected D.A. Four years later, Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District’s longtime Democratic delegate to Congress, began introducing legislation to give D.C. its own prosecutor. But her efforts have gone nowhere, regardless of which party controlled Congress or the White House.

    Many Republicans in Congress—as well as former President Donald Trump—like to hold up the District as a crime-ridden example of liberal policies gone wrong, and they have repeatedly called for increased federal control to make the city safer. Ironically, what distinguishes the District from every other U.S. city is that its criminal-justice system is already under federal control. If Republicans really want to make D.C. safer, they should consider empowering a local D.A. who could focus exclusively on city crime.

    In two interviews, Graves defended his record of prosecuting local crime and pointed to other factors contributing to D.C.’s homicide rate. “The city is lucky to have the career prosecutors it has,” he told me. He questioned whether a locally elected D.A. would be any more aggressive on crime. But he also said he is fundamentally in favor of the District’s right to democratically control its criminal-justice system.

    “I personally support statehood,” he said. “Obviously, if D.C. were a state, then part of that deal would be having to assume responsibility for its prosecutions.”

    The District’s porous criminal-justice system has long afflicted its Black community in particular; in more than 90 percent of homicides here, both the victims and the suspects are Black. Since the 1980s, I have heard a constant refrain from Washingtonians east of the Anacostia River that “someone arrested Friday night with a gun in their belt is back on the street Saturday morning.”

    In the District’s bloodiest days, during the crack epidemic, murders in the city mercilessly rose, peaking in 1991 at 509. From 1986 to 1990, prosecutions for homicide, assault, and robbery increased by 96 percent. Over the next two decades, homicides and violent crime gradually decreased; murders reached a low of 88 in 2012. That year, the U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecution rate in D.C. Superior Court was 70 percent. But the District’s crime rate seemed to correspond more to nationwide trends than to any dramatic changes in the prosecution rate.

    David A. Graham: America’s peace wave

    The rate of federal prosecution of local crime in the District stood at 65 percent as recently as 2017 but fell precipitously during a period of turbulence in the U.S. Attorney’s Office under President Trump, when multiple people cycled through the lead-prosecutor spot. (“That is your best argument about the danger of being under federal control,” Graves told me.) After a mob attacked the U.S. Capitol in 2021 and Graves took office later that year, he temporarily redeployed 15 of the office’s 370 permanent prosecutors to press cases against the violent intruders in D.C. federal court. The prosecution rate for local crime stood at 46 percent in 2021 but plummeted to the nadir of 33 percent in 2022.

    “It was a massive resource challenge,” Graves said of the January 6 prosecutions. “It’s definitely a focus of mine, a priority of mine.” But he added: “We all viewed the 33 percent as a problem.”

    Graves, 48, an intense, hard-driving lawyer from eastern Pennsylvania, told me that his job, “first and foremost, is keeping the community safe.” He has a track record in the District: He joined the D.C. federal prosecutor’s operation in 2007 and worked on local violent crime before moving up to become the acting chief of the department’s fraud and public-corruption section. He went into private practice in 2016 and returned when President Joe Biden nominated him to run the U.S. Attorney’s Office, in July 2021. He has lived in the District for more than 20 years. “It’s my adopted home,” he said.

    Graves attributes D.C.’s rising murder rate in large part to the fact that the number of illegal guns in D.C. “rocketed up” in 2022 and 2023: Police recovered more than 3,100 illegal firearms in each of those years, compared with 2,300 in 2021. “D.C. doesn’t appropriately hold people accountable for illegally possessing firearms,” he told me. According to Graves, D.C. judges detain only about 10 percent of defendants charged with illegal possession of a firearm.

    He attributed his office’s low prosecution rates to two main causes: first, pandemic restrictions that dramatically cut back on in-person jury trials, including grand juries, where prosecutors must present evidence to bring indictments. Without grand juries, Graves said, prosecutors could not indict suspects who were “sitting out in the community.” Second, the District’s crime lab lost its accreditation in April 2021 and was out of commission until its partial reinstatement at the end of 2023. Without forensic evidence, prosecutors struggled to trace DNA, drugs, firearm cartridges, and other evidence, Graves explained: “It was a massive mess that had nothing to do with our office.” Police and prosecutors were unable to bring charges for drug crimes until the Drug Enforcement Agency agreed in March 2022 to handle narcotics testing.

    Even with these impediments, Graves said his office last year charged 90 percent of “serious violent crime” cases in D.C., including 137 homicides, in part by increasing the number of prosecutors handling violent crime cases in 2022 and 2023.

    But accepting Graves’s explanations doesn’t account for at least 18 murder suspects in 2023 who had previously been arrested but were not detained—either because prosecutors had dropped charges or pleaded down sentences (in some cases before Graves’s tenure), or because judges released the defendants. (The 18 murder suspects were tracked by the author of the anonymous DC Crime Facts Substack and confirmed in public records.) “Where the office does not go forward with a firearms case at the time of arrest, it is either because of concerns about whether the stop that led to the arrest was constitutional or because there is insufficient evidence connecting the person arrested to the firearm,” Graves told me in an email.

    Andrew Exum: We need to learn to live with guns

    Last month, the National Institute for Criminal Justice Reform, a research and advocacy nonprofit, released a report showing that in 2021 and 2022, homicide victims and suspects both had, on average, more than six prior criminal cases, and that most of those cases had been dismissed. Police and nonprofit groups working to tamp down violence described “a feeling of impunity among many people on the streets that may be encouraging criminal behavior.” Police “also complained of some cases not being charged or when they are, the defendant being allowed to go home to await court proceedings,” according to the report, which cited interviews with more than 70 Metropolitan Police Department employees.

    “Swift and reliable punishment is the most effective deterrent,” Vanessa Batters-Thompson, the executive director of the DC Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, a nonprofit that advocates for increased local governance, told me.

    In January, the Justice Department announced that it would “surge” more federal prosecutors and investigators to “target the individuals and organizations that are driving violent crime in the nation’s capital,” in the words of U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland. Graves welcomed the move, which he said has added about 10 prosecutors so far and will create a special unit to analyze crime data that could provide investigators with leads. Similar “surges” have been deployed in Memphis and Houston.

    “But [D.C. has] no control over what that surge is,” Batters-Thompson said—how large or long-lasting it is. Even if federal crime fighters make a dent in the District’s violence and homicide rates, the effort would amount to a temporary fix.

    Electing a D.A. for D.C. would not only take Congress reforming the Home Rule Act. There’s also the considerable expense of creating a district attorney’s office and absorbing the cost now borne by the federal government. (It’s an imperfect comparison, but the D.C. Office of the Attorney General’s operating budget for fiscal year 2024 is approximately $154 million.) Republicans in control of the House are more intent on repealing the Home Rule Act than granting District residents more autonomy.

    Hannah Giorgis: D.C. statehood is more urgent than ever

    But if Republicans want D.C. to tackle its crime problem, why shouldn’t its residents—like those of Baltimore, Philadelphia, Denver, Boston, Seattle, and elsewhere—be able to elect a district attorney dedicated to that effort? Crime is often intimate and neighborhood-based, especially in a relatively small city such as the District. Effective prosecution requires connection and trust with the community, both to send a message about the consequences of bad behavior and to provide victims and their families with some solace and closure. Those relationships are much more difficult to forge with a federally appointed prosecutor whose jurisdiction is split between federal and local matters, and who is not accountable to the people he or she serves.

    Racine, the former D.C. attorney general, was regularly required to testify in oversight hearings before the city council. Graves doesn’t have to show up for hearings before the District’s elected council, though he couldn’t help but note to me that progressive council members have in the past accused D.C.’s criminal-justice system of being too punitive.

    Graves told me that his office has a special community-engagement unit, that he attends community meetings multiple times a month, and that his office is “latched up at every level” with the police, especially with the chief, with whom Graves said he emails or talks weekly.

    “Given our unique role,” he said, “we have to make ourselves accountable to the community.”

    Sounds like the perfect platform to run on for D.C.’s first elected district attorney.

    [ad_2]

    Harry Jaffe

    Source link

  • FSU’s 2nd-half surge fuels 86-76 victory over Virginia Tech at ACC Tournament

    FSU’s 2nd-half surge fuels 86-76 victory over Virginia Tech at ACC Tournament

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Jamir Watkins scored 12 of his career-high 34 points in the final three minutes, Jalen Warley added 18 points and ninth-seeded Florida State pulled away in the second half to beat No. 8-seeded Virginia Tech 86-76 on Wednesday in the second round of the Atlantic Coast Conference Tournament.

    What You Need To Know

    • FSU defeated Virginia Tech 86-76 Wednesday in the second round of the ACC Tournament

    • Jamir Watkins led the Seminoles with 34 points, a team record in the tournament

    • Next up for ninth-seeded FSU is top-seeded North Carolina at noon Thursday

    • Sean Pedulla scored 24 points for Virginia Tech

    Watkins was 9 of 15 from the field and 14 of 17 at the free-throw line to set a program record for points in an ACC Tournament game. He also had 11 rebounds and four steals. Warley made 8 of his 10 shots as Florida State shot 54% from the field.

    Virginia Tech was 4-of-17 shooting in the opening 17 minutes of the second half. The Hokies also finished with 13 turnovers, leading to 25 points for the Seminoles.

    Florida State (17-15) advances to play top-seeded and fourth-ranked North Carolina in the quarterfinals at noon Thursday. The Seminoles dropped both regular-season meetings with the Tar Heels, 78-70 on the road and 75-68 at home. Florida State hasn’t beaten North Carolina since the 2020-21 season.

    Tyler Nickel sank a long 3-pointer with 7 minutes, 28 seconds left to tie the score at 57, but Virginia Tech did not make another field goal until Sean Pedulla’s basket with 2:42 remaining to pull within 71-62.

    Florida State took advantage of back-to-back Virginia Tech turnovers with layups by Warley and Primo Spears to take a 63-58 lead with 5:01 left. Another steal under the basket led to Warley’s fast-break layup to make it 68-58 at 3:06.

    Each team turned it over on an inbounds play, and Watkins was fouled before making two free throws at 2:49. Watkins added two more free throws at 2:30 and had an alley-oop dunk at 2:11 for a 74-65 lead.

    Spears finished with 10 points for the Seminoles.

    Pedulla scored 24 points, Nickel added 18 and MJ Collins had 15 for Virginia Tech (18-14).

    Both teams shot 55% or better from the field in the first half. Virginia Tech shot 64% (16 of 25), despite going 4 of 11 from 3-point range, in the first half before finishing at 49%.

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Israel-Hamas war: Latest updates

    Israel-Hamas war: Latest updates

    [ad_1]

    Get the latest updates on the war between Israel and Hamas.

    [ad_2]

    Spectrum News Staff

    Source link

  • Marjorie Taylor Greene Storms Out Of Hearing As Dem Lawmaker Puts Her On Blast

    Marjorie Taylor Greene Storms Out Of Hearing As Dem Lawmaker Puts Her On Blast

    [ad_1]

    Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) stormed out of a committee meeting on Tuesday as a Democratic lawmaker gave her a reminder about her own recent past during a hearing on crime in Washington, D.C.

    Greene, a conspiracy theorist who spoke at a white nationalist event in 2022, went on a lengthy rant on everything from crime in the nation’s capital to gun rights to Donald Trump to Black Lives Matter and beyond.

    “That was a lot,” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) said when she was done, then pointed out what he found “ironic” about Greene talking about crime in Washington, D.C.

    “She literally supported an insurrection and attack on the Capitol,” Garcia said.

    He said Greene “coddled” the insurrectionists when she visited them last year in jail, where she offered them handshakes and pats on the back and said they were “political prisoners.”

    “They actually tried to overthrow our government,” Garcia reminded her.

    That caused Greene ― who last month called Hunter Biden a “coward” for leaving a hearing when she was speaking about him ― to walk out of the hearing. She appeared to shout something as she left, but it’s not clear what she tried to say.

    “She’s insane,” Garcia later wrote on X:

    Garcia last year also lashed out at Greene over her support for those arrested in connection with the Jan. 6 attack.

    “The first thing she does is … greets them and hugs them and prays with them and apologizes and is treating them like heroes, and I’m sitting there going, this is disgusting,” Garcia told MeidasTouch co-founder Ben Meiselas in autumn. “These people attacked our government, they tried to overthrow our government.”



    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Newsom releases attack ad on DeSantis and Florida’s abortion ban

    Newsom releases attack ad on DeSantis and Florida’s abortion ban

    [ad_1]

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom released an ad Sunday attacking Florida’s six-week abortion ban as he and Gov. Ron DeSantis get set for a televised debate at the end of the month.

    The ad, called “Wanted,” lays the abortion restriction on DeSantis, who in April signed into law the “Heartbeat Protection Act” prohibiting abortions after six weeks of pregnancy. DeSantis is also a Republican candidate for president.

    The ad was set to run in Florida and Washington, D.C., television markets on NFL Sunday Night Football, as well as on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show on days leading up to the governors’ debate on Nov. 30. Hannity will moderate the 90-minute debate in Georgia, which will be broadcast on Fox News.

    In the ad, which looks like a wanted poster, Newsom intones: “By order of Gov. Ron DeSantis, any woman who has an abortion after six weeks and any doctor who gives her care will be guilty of a felony. Abortion after six weeks will be punishable by up to five years in prison. Even though many women don’t even know they’re pregnant at six weeks. That’s not freedom. That’s Ron DeSantis’ Florida.”

    The debate will come in the midst of a contentious Republican presidential contest, offering an odd sideshow in an already unusual political season dominated by former President Trump’s campaign to return to the White House while fighting criminal charges in Florida, New York, Washington, D.C., and Georgia.

    Newsom posted his ad on X, formerly known as Twitter, where DeSantis has posted a video criticizing California and promoting Florida.

    “Decline is a choice and success is attainable,” DeSantis said in a tweet accompanying the video. “As President, I will lead America’s revival. I look forward to the opportunity to debate Gavin Newsom over our very different visions for the future of our country.”

    DeSantis will also appear at the next Republican presidential primary debate on Dec. 6.

    Times staff writer Taryn Luna contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Roger Vincent

    Source link

  • Striking Contemporary In A Washington, D.C. Suburb Asks $9.2 Million

    Striking Contemporary In A Washington, D.C. Suburb Asks $9.2 Million

    [ad_1]

    A couple building a high-end contemporary house close to the Potomac River near Washington, D.C., had distinct ideas about what it should be. One person favored a Moroccan courtyard-style design; the other wanted a sustainable and well-built home.

    It would be up to the architects to make it work—and they did, spectacularly.

    “Our response was to create a large, delicate and transparent inner core of steel, glass and zinc, flanked with two robust concrete wings, stucco-clad, containing the private spaces,” says the website for McInturff Architects based in Bethesda, Maryland. “All three parts share a common width and structural rhythm.”

    The award-winning building at 410 Chain Bridge Road in McLean, Virginia, was designed by architect Mark McInturff and his team and built by Added Dimensions Constructions.

    The five-bedroom home built in 2016 contains 8,367 square feet of interior space in a balanced trio of boxes. The Potomac Valley chapter of the American Institute of Architects gave the home a design award in 2018.

    It is now on the market for $9.2 million.

    Skylights and floor-to-ceiling windows create an airy, light-filled atmosphere. It’s a striking home suitable for entertaining inside and out—everything from casual outdoor gatherings to formal events.

    The dramatic glass facade is centered on a large living room instead of a courtyard (a nod to local weather) that “completely opens through walls of sliding glass doors to a porch, pool and terraces leading to the wooded ravine below,” the website says. Sustainable accents, such as wood louvers and motorized shades that offer protection from the sun as well as privacy, have been woven seamlessly into the home’s details.

    Inside the primary level, the great room with 25-foot ceilings and a chandelier studded with Swarovski crystals sets a sophisticated European tone. Off the great room, there’s a formal dining area in one wing and a media room in the other.

    The kitchen, located toward the back of the house, has top appliances as well as a sleek, wood-topped island with curves that resemble a boat. It was built by European kitchen company Alno. Floors combine three elements: white oak, white limestone and polished concrete.

    Upstairs, the primary bedroom takes up an entire wing. It comes with a sitting area, walk-in closet and two bathrooms featuring a soaking tub and steam shower. Other bedrooms are located in the opposite wing.

    Outside, mature trees flank the front and backyards. The landscaped backyard overlooks a creek and includes a travertine lounge patio with a gas fire pit and barbecue station. There’s also a saltwater infinity swimming pool as well as an elevator, gym and several patios.

    Who might be in the market for this home?

    Listing agent Fouad Talout of Long & Foster Real Estate thinks the buyer will be someone who appreciates the architecture of the “robust fortress in its design and durability.”

    [ad_2]

    Mary Forgione, Contributor

    Source link

  • Potomac River Castle Outside Washington, D.C. Seeks $22 Million

    Potomac River Castle Outside Washington, D.C. Seeks $22 Million

    [ad_1]

    Large and stately homes in the Washington, D.C., area sometimes come with a historic pedigree. Not so for a luxury landmark property on the Potomac River in Virginia that may look more at home in Europe than the nation’s capital.

    The sprawling castle-like house at 612 Rivercrest Drive in McLean, Virginia—a stone’s throw from the border with Maryland and the D.C. area—was built in 2008 on 1.2 acres. The eight-bedroom home on four levels is being sold by the owner who lovingly built it.

    “[They] personally had his hand in designing every piece of it, all the materials that were chosen, the iron railings, the wood on the staircase, the doors that were imported—everything,” says listing agent Megan Thiel of Long & Foster Real Estate.

    Indeed, the bespoke interior features eight different types of wood, including cedar, mahogany, maple, Brazilian cherry and walnut as well as granite, marble and travertine floors. The limestone exterior topped with Vermont red slate and copper accents covers the home’s square towers and rounded turret. Large arched windows and doors on the main level keep the outdoors close.

    The waterfront setting adds a one-of-a-kind magical note. “From the back of the property, all you have is a view of the river. To have 1.2 acres of riverfront is really special,” Thiel says.

    Inside, the main foyer has a pantheon-style ceiling that rises nearly 40 feet while ceilings in other rooms range from 10 to 15 feet. A wooden staircase with custom wrought-iron railing links the four levels. There’s also a glass exterior elevator that offers views of the Potomac as you move from floor to floor.

    Other rooms include a living room facing the river, formal dining room, bedrooms with wooden floors and en suite bathrooms, five fireplaces, two wrought-iron balconies with river views, and a custom contemporary kitchen with granite countertops as well as Corinthian capitals and columns.

    Amenities give the home its luxurious heft, such as a 1,000-square-foot indoor pool with sauna, hot tub and casual dining area; gym; screening room and an escape room. Outdoor stairs amid the landscaped grounds lead to a large lawn with a fire pit and chairs that face the river.

    It’s a 20-minute drive to downtown D.C., along the scenic George Washington Memorial Parkway. The property is also close to green spaces, such as Scott’s Run Nature Preserve and Langley Oaks Park.

    Who might be a potential buyer? “Someone who needs to come to D.C. a lot to meet with policymakers, potentially an ambassador,” Thiel says. “I think there are a lot of different potentials there.” The home is well known in the area. It has been the site of private presidential events and opera performances. It also has been used as a filming site for The Real Housewives of Potomac and featured in films and TV shows.

    The house is for sale for $22 million.

    MORE FROM FORBES GLOBAL PROPERTIES

    MORE FROM FORBESChic Ultra-Modern Home Amps Up Tony Toronto BoulevardBy Lauren BealeMORE FROM FORBESStylish Terrace Home Pays Tribute To Melbourne’s Architectural HeritageBy Lauren BealeMORE FROM FORBESA Fairy Tale Estate In Pennsylvania Has A Former Barn At Center StageBy Lisa ChamoffMORE FROM FORBES18th Century New Jersey Farmhouse Holds A Place In Baseball HistoryBy Lisa ChamoffMORE FROM FORBESTouring Three Exceptional Properties In The Texas State CapitalBy Spencer Elliott

    [ad_2]

    Mary Forgione, Contributor

    Source link

  • Trump claims he can’t get a fair trial in DC as latest indictment dominates GOP primary | CNN Politics

    Trump claims he can’t get a fair trial in DC as latest indictment dominates GOP primary | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Former President Donald Trump, who is facing charges in Washington, DC for allegedly conspiring to overturn the results of the 2020 election, claimed on Sunday that he wouldn’t receive a fair trial in the nation’s capital as he continues to rail against his latest indictment.

    “No way I can get a fair trial, or even close to a fair trial, in Washington, D.C. There are many reasons for this, but just one is that I am calling for a federal takeover of this filthy and crime ridden embarrassment to our nation,” Trump said in a Truth Social post.

    If he were to ask in court to move his federal criminal case out of Washington, DC, the former president would join three dozen January 6, 2021, riot defendants who have asked to move their cases out of DC.

    No judges – even those appointed by Trump – have ever agreed. And appeals courts and other judges have overwhelmingly kept high-profile cases in the districts where charges are filed.

    Several January 6 defendants have argued that there’s been too much pretrial publicity in DC for a fair trial and that the jury pool in the city would be too biased.

    But the Supreme Court has previously held that trials can still be fair even if they have received widespread publicity, and the DC District Court has used specific questioning of potential jurors and instructions to try to ensure fair trials for January 6 defendants.

    Just last week, prosecutors argued against a Capitol riot defendant’s change of venue request in the DC federal court, arguing that many politically known defendants, including Trump’s adviser Roger Stone, have been fairly tried in the downtown Washington courthouse.

    The court also refused to move the trial of the co-conspirators of Richard Nixon in the Watergate scandal, at a time when the city was also voting heavily Democratic.

    “The fact that most District residents voted against Donald Trump does not mean those residents could not impartially consider the evidence against those charged in connection with the events on January 6,” Justice Department prosecutors wrote in a court filing at the end of July – an assertion that the judges of the DC District Court have widely agreed.

    Still, Trump attorney John Lauro on Sunday cast doubt on the idea that Trump could receive a fair trial in the nation’s capital. In an interview on CBS’ “Face The Nation,” Lauro suggested West Virginia as a more diverse alternative.

    “We would like a diverse venue. A diverse jury … that reflects the characteristics of the American people,” Lauro said. Speaking to CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” Sunday, Lauro also advocated for cameras in the courtroom in order to show the public “what kind of prosecution is going on.”

    When Lauro expressed similar concerns about a fair trial at Trump’s arraignment last week, the magistrate judge responded: “I can guarantee everybody that there will be a fair process and fair trial in this court. So let me just respond to that comment, Mr. Lauro, I’m certain of that.”

    The DC appeals court has found that voting patterns shouldn’t play into where a trial is held and that national news coverage can work against the need to move a trial.

    “Scandal at the highest levels of the federal government is simply not a local crime of peculiar interest to the residents of the District of Columbia,” the DC Circuit Court of Appeals found about the Watergate conspirators’ trial in 1976.

    DC jurors on major January 6 cases, including an Oath Keepers seditious conspiracy case, sometimes spend days deliberating and have delivered nuanced verdicts, including some acquittals.

    Trump’s latest indictment comes against the backdrop of the 2024 GOP primary contest. Republican candidates have largely sought to walk a fine line between knocking the former president’s growing legal troubles and not alienating his base of supporters.

    GOP presidential hopeful Chris Christie on Sunday touted his experience as a prosecutor in the heavily Democratic state of New Jersey on Sunday as he told Bash he always got convictions on political corruption cases.

    “So my view is, yeah, I believe jurors can be fair. I believe in the American people. And I believe in the fact that jurors will listen fairly and impartially,” Christie said.

    Former Vice President Mike Pence, who recently made his sharpest condemnation of Trump, told CBS on Sunday he “would hope” Trump can receive a fair trial in Washington.

    Notably, according to the law in DC determined during the Watergate conspirators’ case and other appeals court decisions, defendants can ask for a change of venue, but if they are denied, they can’t appeal it until after the trial takes place.

    That’s one reason why the January 6 defendants’ trials have gone forward without delay even though so many attempted to move their cases out of Washington, DC.

    Other high-profile cases where defendants have tried and failed to move their cases then also failed to overturn their convictions later with appeals include the Enron-related trial of Jeffrey Skilling in Houston and Boston Marathon bomber Dzokhar Tsarnaev, who was tried in Boston.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FBI searching for Proud Boy after he disappears days before January 6 sentencing | CNN Politics

    FBI searching for Proud Boy after he disappears days before January 6 sentencing | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Christopher Worrell, a member of the Proud Boys who was convicted in a bench trial on seven charges related to his actions during the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, was scheduled to be sentenced in federal court in Washington on Friday but is now missing, according to court records and the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

    “We are interested in hearing from any members of the public who might have information regarding Mr. Worrell’s whereabouts,” Patty Hartman, a spokesperson for the US Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, told CNN in a statement.

    The FBI has released a wanted poster for Worrell, 52, saying he “violated conditions of release pending sentencing.”

    “Christopher John Worrell is wanted for violating conditions of release pending sentencing on federal charges related to the violence at the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C., on January 6, 2021,” the poster states. “A federal arrest warrant was issued for Worrell in the United States District Court, District of Columbia, Washington, D.C., on August 15, 2023.”

    Worrell’s attorneys declined to comment.

    Worrell has been under house arrest in Florida. His case had become a cause célèbre in right-wing circles because of his health issues while in jail and claims that officials had dragged their feet in getting him medical treatment for a broken finger. He is also diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and at one point he contracted Covid-19 while at the jail.

    Worrell’s sentencing was canceled on Tuesday and a bench warrant for his arrest was issued, according to court records.

    Federal prosecutors were seeking a 14-year sentence for Worrell, according to the government’s sentencing memorandum which was submitted on Sunday.

    “Worrell was found guilty, after a bench trial in which he perjured himself, of assaulting a group of police officers with a deadly and dangerous weapon in order to thwart Congress’s certification of the 2020 electoral vote and the peaceful transition of power,” prosecutors wrote in the memorandum.

    The FBI asked that anyone with information on Worrell’s whereabouts contact their local FBI office or the nearest American embassy or consulate.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • State Support for Higher Ed Continues to Rise. Yet Public Colleges Still Face Headwinds.

    State Support for Higher Ed Continues to Rise. Yet Public Colleges Still Face Headwinds.

    [ad_1]

    While enrollment is down at the nation’s public colleges, state funding for higher ed is up — and students have been footing less of the bill for their education over the last four years.

    State and local support for higher ed increased nearly 5 percent in the 2022 fiscal year, according to the latest State Higher Education Finance report, published on Thursday by the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association. States allocated more money for higher education both in the form of financial aid, which increased 2 percent, and general public operations, which increased 7 percent. (The report adjusted those proportions for inflation.)

    The SHEF report, released annually since 2003, is a data set detailing state and local funding for both two- and four-year higher-education institutions, as well as tuition revenue and enrollment. The association measures state support and net tuition revenue per student by considering enrollment on the basis of full-time-equivalent students, or FTE.

    The growth in higher-ed funding since the pandemic-related economic downturn of 2020 bucks a historical trend, according to the report. Recessions traditionally lead to lower state support for public higher education, which prompts colleges to raise tuition and other costs for students.

    In the 2022 fiscal year, the “student share” — which the association defines as the percentage of total revenue that comes from tuition for each full-time student — decreased in 32 states and Washington, D.C. In Connecticut, Kansas, Louisiana, and New Jersey, the student share has fallen below 50 percent of total revenue in each of the last five years.

    The report’s authors, Kelsey Kunkle and Sophia Laderman, attributed that trend to three factors: the national enrollment decline, increasing commitments at the state-government level to higher-education funding, and some federal stimulus money given to states for higher education during the pandemic.

    Still, Kunkle told The Chronicle, students’ tuition and fees continue to make up far more of public colleges’ revenue — nearly 42 percent — than in 1980, when that share was just 21 percent.

    Robert Kelchen, a professor in the department of educational leadership and policy studies at University of Tennessee at Knoxville who studies higher-education finance with a focus on state funding, said the report is significant because states and colleges often use it as a barometer with which to compare one another.

    “There have been states and universities that use this to try to advocate for more funding,” he said. “And then there are some states that try to match their peers.”

    Here are three other key takeaways from this year’s report.

    Some states are reinvesting in higher ed, but others are still cutting.

    States’ higher-ed funding over all has recovered to levels not seen since before the 2008 recession. In 28 states, however, the funding remains lower than it was before 2008. From 2008 to 2018, public-college funding dropped 9.1 percent.

    Finances have generally begun to recover from pandemic pressures, Kunkle said. “State budgets were hurting in 2021, but they’ve gotten a bit better,” she said.

    State financial aid, which accounted for nearly 10 percent of all higher-ed appropriations, was at a high of $990 per full-time student in 2022.

    The state with the largest funding increase was Nevada, with a 27-percent jump — in part due to money in the federal appropriations bill that passed Congress in March 2022. It contained $22 million for Nevada public colleges.

    The largest decrease, at more than 28 percent, was in Wyoming, whose Legislature cut $31.3 million in June 2021 from the University of Wyoming, the largest higher-ed institution in the state and the only public four-year college.

    Nationally, public-college revenue per full-time student — from both state appropriations and net tuition revenue — totaled $17,393, another record high. But the trend doesn’t hold in most of the country; only 11 states hit record highs.

    Federal pandemic relief provided one last windfall.

    State and local funding for higher education totaled $120.7 billion in the 2022 fiscal year, with $2.5 billion — or about 2 percent — coming from federal stimulus money. In the future, colleges won’t be able to count on that support: Pandemic-relief funding has nearly run out.

    Thirty-nine states used some stimulus funding for higher education in 2022, according to the report.

    The money both covered general state costs from the pandemic, preventing higher education from taking a hit from spending in other budget areas, and raised operating appropriations for higher education.

    Some states … are already feeling a fiscal cliff now that federal stimulus is waning.

    In Vermont, more than 42 percent of state appropriations for higher education came from federal stimulus money. In the previous year, both Vermont and Colorado used federal stimulus dollars for around half of their higher-education appropriations, but this year Colorado returned to regular state funding.

    “We’re really trying to hit home that it’s really important for states to prioritize and continue committing to funding higher education,” Kunkle said. “Because right now we do have some states that are already feeling a fiscal cliff now that federal stimulus is waning.”

    Enrollment challenges will be a long-term problem for public higher ed.

    From 2021 to 2022, public-college enrollment declined 2.5 percent, the second-largest decrease since 1980. The year before, public higher ed experienced a 3-percent drop.

    The report emphasizes that the bleeding is worse at community colleges. Net tuition revenue declined 7 percent at two-year institutions, compared with a fraction of 1 percent at four-year institutions in the last year.

    [ad_2]

    Helen Huiskes

    Source link

  • Police in Washington, DC, release bodycam video from the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Dalaneo Martin by an officer | CNN

    Police in Washington, DC, release bodycam video from the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Dalaneo Martin by an officer | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    US Park Police and Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police have released body-worn camera videos showing the fatal shooting of 17-year-old Dalaneo Martin by a Park Police officer last month after the teen was found sleeping in an allegedly stolen vehicle.

    The videos from both agencies were released Tuesday, less than three weeks after the March 18 shooting in northeast Washington, DC.

    The release of the videos comes amid nationwide scrutiny of police use of force, sparked by the release of bodycam footage in several cases where an interaction with police resulted in death or injury, including the fatal February shooting of Alonzo Bagley in Shreveport, Louisiana, and the beating death of Tyre Nichols by officers in Memphis, Tennessee.

    Officers from both the Park Police and the Metropolitan Police were responding to a report of a stolen vehicle just before 9 a.m. when the shooting of Martin happened, they said.

    An MPD officer arrived first and “observed the occupant of the vehicle was asleep and the ignition was punched. The officer determined the vehicle was stolen and then called for additional units,” Park Police said in a statement.

    Several officers from both agencies arrived and began discussing how to approach the situation, including the possibility of breaking the window and pulling the driver out.

    “Once you break it, he’s gonna wake up, start it and put it in drive to go. We don’t want nobody to get hurt,” one officer is heard telling another officer in Park Police bodycam footage.

    As the officers continue to strategize, an MPD officer can be heard in the bodycam footage saying, “So, here’s the plan. He’s knocked out. The back window is just a plastic. I’m going to try to cut that out quietly, unlock the door. If he doesn’t get startled, doesn’t wake up then we’re going to try to get in there, grab him before he puts that car in gear.”

    The officer continues, “If he does take off, just let him go.”

    Officers from both agencies eventually approach the vehicle and try to pull the driver out as the footage shows a Park Police officer jump into the backseat and yell, “Police, don’t move. Don’t move. Don’t move.”

    The vehicle then suddenly drives off as the Park Police officer is still in the backseat, the footage shows. The officer yells, “Stop!” The vehicle keeps going and the officer yells, “Stop man, just let me out. Let me go!”

    Then the officer then yells, “Stop. Stop or I’ll shoot!”

    “The driver did not comply” and the officer “discharged his firearm,” Park Police said.

    Seconds later, the vehicle crashes into a house and the officer jumps out, the footage shows.

    Officers pulled the driver out of the vehicle, called for medical assistance and began administering aid, including doing chest compressions.

    US Park Police said the driver, identified as Martin, died at the scene and a gun was recovered inside the vehicle. No one inside the house was injured.

    The officer who shot Martin and a second Park Police officer were transported to an area hospital for treatment, the Park Police said.

    “The investigation into this incident is being handled by the Metropolitan Police Department and reviewed by the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. An administrative review of this incident is being conducted by the Department of the Interior,” Park Police said.

    None of the officers involved have been identified by either police agency and their faces are blurred in the bodycam videos.

    An attorney for Martin’s family, Jade Mathis, told The Washington Post the family reviewed the videos shortly before they were released to the public.

    “Their initial reaction was tears and then it turned to anger,” Mathis told the Post. “But it was also relief because they have more answers than they had before.”

    The family wants the Park Police officer who shot Martin to be identified, prosecuted and terminated, Mathis told the Post.

    CNN has reached out to Mathis for comment.

    Park Police would not confirm the status of the officer who shot Martin. “Pursuant to applicable law and department policy, we do not publicly disclose information about personnel actions concerning our employees,” a Park Police spokesperson told CNN.

    The head of the Park Police union, Kenneth Spencer, defended the officer who shot Martin, telling the Post, “There is a lawful reason for him to be in the car, the use of force was justified and the union stands behind the actions the officers took.”

    The Metropolitan Police told CNN in a statement, “The preliminary investigation by our Internal Affairs Division has been sent to the (US Attorney’s Office) for their independent review.”

    CNN has reached out to the US Attorney’s office for Washington, DC, and the Department of the Interior for comment.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden could face issuing his first veto of presidency as Democrats weigh whether to rescind DC crime law | CNN Politics

    Biden could face issuing his first veto of presidency as Democrats weigh whether to rescind DC crime law | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Multiple Democrats are undecided about how they will vote on a measure that would overturn a rewriting of Washington, DC’s criminal code, which critics have argued is soft on violent criminals.

    The measure is expected to come up for a vote by next week and only needs a simple majority to pass. Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from West Virginia, has said he will vote with Republicans on it.

    Congress, under DC’s Home Rule charter, is able to veto every law approved by either DC voters or government. If the repeal passes,it is likely to be the first bill that President Joe Biden will consider vetoing. Biden has said he opposes rescinding the DC crime measure but has not explicitly said if he will veto it.

    The question is whether Manchin will be alone in his vote. If he is, it would be the first time that Pennsylvania Democrat Sen. John Fetterman’s absence had an effect on a vote in the Senate because then the measure would only need 50 votes to pass. Fetterman has stepped away from the Senate for the time being to seek treatment for depression.

    Many Democrats oppose overriding the DC law. They argue local officials should make their own laws free of congressional interference and decry Republicans as hypocrites since they typically promote state and local rights. The law was passed after the city council overrode the veto of Mayor Muriel Bowser who, despite her opposition to the new law, opposes Congress overturning it.

    The DC Council had defended the measure in a letter last week, writing that “the District of Columbia has the right to self-govern as granted to us under the Home Rule Act.”

    “Any changes or amendments to the District’s local laws should be done by the elected representatives of the District of Columbia. As those representatives, we alone are accountable to the voters of the District of Columbia,” the letter continued, adding: “Just as Congress does not interfere in the local matters of other states, we compel you not to interfere in our matters.”

    Tennessee Republican Sen. Bill Hagerty, the chief sponsor of the legislation to repeal the local law called it a “common sense” approach in a city where many violent crimes are up. Politically, he compared it to the “defund the police” issue and said for centrist Democrats, “I don’t think that’s going to be very popular in their states and this falls right in that lane.”

    Sen. Jon Tester, one of those centrist Democrats who is up for reelection this cycle, told reporters he still has not decided if he would back the measure.

    “I hate to be a cop out for you guys all the time, but I do have to look at it. I just don’t know what it does yet,” Tester said Tuesday. “There is the issue of, you know, DC does what DC wants to do and let DC do what they do, but we do have some oversight.”

    Democratic Sens. Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Mark Kelly of Arizona and Gary Peters of Michigan also told CNN they have not made up their minds and are weighing the legislation.

    The measure passed out of the House with 31 Democratic votes.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Louis Farrakhan Fast Facts | CNN

    Louis Farrakhan Fast Facts | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Here’s a look at the life of Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.

    Birth date: May 11, 1933

    Birth place: The Bronx, New York

    Birth name: Louis Eugene Walcott

    Father: Percival Clark

    Mother: Sarah Mae (Manning) Clark

    Marriage: Khadijah Farrakhan, formerly Betsy (Ross) Walcott, (September 12, 1953-present)

    Children: Mustapha, Joshua Nasir, Abnar, Louis Junior, Donna, Hanan, Maria, Fatimah and Khallada

    Education: Attended Winston-Salem Teachers College, 1951-1953

    Farrakhan was named for Louis Walcott, the man his mother became involved with after his biological father, Percival Clark, deserted them.

    The Walcott family moved from the Bronx to the Roxbury neighborhood in Boston during the mid-1930s.

    He won a track scholarship to college in North Carolina.

    Farrakhan is an accomplished classical violinist who began playing at the age of 5. He is also a singer, songwriter, playwright and film producer. Farrakhan wrote two plays, “The Trial” and “Orgena.” (“A Negro” spelled backward).

    Farrakhan is known for having preached antisemitic, anti-White, anti-Catholic and anti-homosexual rhetoric.

    1955 – Joins the Nation of Islam (NOI) and adopts the name Louis X.

    December 4, 1964 – Condemns rival Malcolm X in the NOI newspaper, Muhammad Speaks, saying “the die is set and Malcolm shall not escape… such a man is worthy of death.”

    February 21, 1965 – Malcolm X is assassinated. Louis X replaces him as the national spokesman of the NOI.

    Late 1960s – Takes the name Louis Abdul Farrakhan.

    Late 1970s – Farrakhan has a falling out with NOI leader, Wallace Deen Muhammad, who wants to move the NOI away from racial separatist teachings to a more conventional and racially inclusive Islam. The dispute leads to the formation of two rival groups. Farrakhan becomes head of the NOI, while Muhammad becomes the head of the World Community of al-Islam.

    December 1983 – Accompanies Jesse Jackson and other clergy to Syria to negotiate the release of US Navy pilot Lt. Robert O. Goodman.

    1984 – Months after Jesse Jackson came under heavy fire for his off-the-record comments that were later published in the Washington Post, referring to Jews by the insulting nickname “Hymie” and New York as “Hymietown,” Farrakhan, during his weekly radio broadcast, comes to Jackson’s defense claiming Judaism is a “gutter religion” and supporters of Israel are criminals in the sight of God.

    May 1, 1985 – Announces acceptance of a $5 million interest-free loan from Libyan president Moammar Gadhafi.

    June 25, 1986 – Files a lawsuit against US President Ronald Reagan, Secretary of State George Schultz, Secretary of Treasury James Baker and Attorney General Edwin Meese, claiming the government’s economic sanctions and travel ban on Libya violate Farrakhan’s freedom to worship and freedom of speech.

    June 3, 1987 – Farrakhan’s lawsuit against the government is terminated after a district court judge upholds economic sanctions against Libya and prevents the repayment of the $5 million loan.

    1991 – Receives first prostate cancer diagnosis.

    October 16, 1995 – Organizes the Million Man March, also known as the Day of Atonement, on the Mall in Washington, DC. The event features 12 hours of speeches on the commitment of black men to take responsibility for improving themselves, their families and communities.

    April 1999 – Prostate cancer reoccurrence requires emergency surgery at Howard University.

    February 25, 2000 – Farrakhan makes peace with former NOI leader, Muhammad, who formed his own Islamic group in the wake of a dispute with Farrakhan on the direction of NOI. The men announce the unification of their groups during an event called the Savior’s Day Rally.

    May 10, 2000 – Appears on “60 Minutes” with Malcolm X’s daughter, Qubilah Bahiyah Shabazz, and says he regrets that his writing may have influenced others to assassinate Malcolm X.

    October 15, 2005 – Organizes and speaks at the Million More Movement at the Mall in Washington, DC, commemorating the 10th anniversary of the Million Man March.

    September 22, 2006 – Releases a letter stating he is giving up many day-to-day duties as leader of the NOI due to illness, but will remain its leader.

    January 6, 2007 – Farrakhan undergoes a successful surgery to remove his prostate and cancerous colon tissue.

    October 10, 2015 – Farrakhan speaks at the “Justice or Else” rally in Washington, DC, marking the 20th anniversary of the Million Man March.

    February 11, 2016 – Farrakhan speaks at a rally at Tehran University in Iran, marking the 37th anniversary of Iran’s Islamic revolution.

    May 2, 2019 – Facebook designates Farrakhan “dangerous,” and bans him from its social media platforms.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Wish comes true for WWII veteran celebrating 100th birthday in Battle Creek

    Wish comes true for WWII veteran celebrating 100th birthday in Battle Creek

    [ad_1]

    WWII veteran celebrates his 100th birthday

    [ad_2]

    Source link