Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 225 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: DC crackdown expands with national guard to be deployed by three more states

      by

      After deploying the national guard to the streets of Washington DC, Donald Trump’s federal crackdown is moving into a new phase.Three more states – West Virginia, South Carolina and Ohio – have said they will deploy hundreds of national guard troops to DC in the coming days. But crime prevention workers say the move will do little to prevent crime, and address systemic cycles of violence and property crime.Anticipating a further rollout of the controversial policy, Democratic cities are preparing for the worst with mayors from Seattle to Baltimore vowing to protect their cities legally and otherwise.Here are the key stories at a glance.Three states to deploy national guard troops to Washington DCThree states have moved to send hundreds of members of their national guard to the nation’s capital as part of the Trump administration’s effort to overhaul policing in Washington DC through a federal crackdown.West Virginia said it was deploying 300 to 400 guard troops while South Carolina pledged 200 and Ohio said it would send 150 in the coming days.Read the full storyRubio says Russia and Ukraine both ‘have to make concessions’ for peace dealIn a combative series of interviews on Sunday, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, said that “both sides are going to have to make concessions” for there to be a peaceful resolution to the war that erupted when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.“You can’t have a peace agreement unless both sides make concessions – that’s a fact,” the Trump administration’s top diplomat told ABC on Sunday. “That’s true in virtually any negotiation. If not, it’s just called surrender. And neither side is going to surrender. So both sides are going to have to make concessions.”Read the full storyJudge restrains Beto O’Rourke’s group from sending funds to Democrats outside TexasA Texas judge has expanded a restraining order against former congressman Beto O’Rourke and his political organization over its fundraising for Democratic state lawmakers who left Texas to prevent a legislative session on congressional redistricting.Read the full storyGhislaine Maxwell’s grand jury transcripts likely a dud but other documents could reveal muchWhen Donald Trump’s Department of Justice requested the release of grand jury transcripts in criminal proceedings against sex-traffickers Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, the move did little to quiet an ever-growing chorus of critics frustrated by the US president’s backtracking over disclosing investigative files.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      Trump hiked tariffs on US imports. Now he’s looking at exports – sparking fears of a ‘dangerous precedent’, writes Lauren Arantani in this analysis.

      US state department stops issuing visas for Gaza’s children to get medical care after far-right campaign.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened Saturday 16 August. More

    • 88 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Stephen Miller, Trump’s immigration mastermind – podcast

      by

      Stephen Miller is the man behind Donald Trump’s most controversial immigration policies, from separating children and their parents at the southern border to the sharp rise in arrests now being made by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.The journalist and writer Jean Guerrero explains to Nosheen Iqbal that Miller’s hostility towards immigrants was evident from a young age and over the years key figures have shaped the tactics and language he now uses.The pair discuss the power that Miller holds today, the importance of Miller to the Trump administration and what lies behind his political longevity.Support the Guardian today: theguardian.com/todayinfocuspod More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Rubio says both Russia and Ukraine ‘have to make concessions’ for peace deal

      by

      In a combative series of interviews on Sunday, the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, said that “both sides are going to have to make concessions” for there to be a peaceful resolution to the war that erupted when Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.“You can’t have a peace agreement unless both sides make concessions – that’s a fact,” the Trump administration’s top diplomat said Sunday on ABC’s This Week. “That’s true in virtually any negotiation. If not, it’s just called surrender. And neither side is going to surrender. So both sides are going to have to make concessions.”Rubio said the recent talks in Alaska between Russian president Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump toward ending the war had “made progress in the sense that we identified potential areas of agreement – but there remains some big areas of disagreement”.“We’re still a long ways off,” Rubio added. “We’re not at the precipice of a peace agreement. We’re not at the edge of one. But I do think progress was made and towards one.”He declined to go into specific areas of agreement or disagreement, or outline what Trump has described as “severe consequences” for Russia if its aggression toward Ukraine continued.“Ultimately, if there isn’t a peace agreement, if there isn’t an end of this war, the president’s been clear – there are going to be consequences,” Rubio remarked. “But we’re trying to avoid that. And the way we’re trying to avoid those consequences is with an even better consequence, which is peace, the end of hostilities.”US special envoy Steve Witkoff said Putin agreed at the summit to allow the US and Europe to offer Ukraine a security guarantee resembling Nato’s collective defense mandate as part of any peace deal.In an interview on CNN, Witkoff said the US had won the concession that “the United States could offer Article 5-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in NATO”. He said the concession was “game-changing”.Rubio agreed that no agreement was possible without both sides – including that of Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy – being at the table. “You’re not going to reach a ceasefire or a peace agreement in a meeting in which only one side is represented,” Rubio told ABC News. “That’s why it’s important to bring both leaders together – and that’s the goal here.”Rubio confirmed that a ceasefire – or, as Trump now reportedly prefers, a straight-to-peace deal – “is going to be difficult”, despite the White House’s openly demanding one.The war, he said, has been “going on for three and a half years”.“You have two very entrenched sides, and we’re going to have to continue to work and chip away at it,” Rubio said.Separately, on NBC’s Meet the Press, Rubio said a ceasefire was “not off the table”, though he added: “It was agreed by all that the best way to end this conflict is through a full peace deal.”He said the US had advocated for a ceasefire, but “unfortunately, the Russians as of now have not agreed to that.“But the ideal here, what we’re aiming for here is not a ceasefire,” he said. “What we ultimately are aiming for is an end to this.”Soon after Rubio told Meet the Press that “no one is pushing” Ukraine to give up territory, Trump shared a Truth Social post from a supporter that said: “Ukraine must be willing to lose some territory to Russia otherwise the longer the war goes on they will keep losing even more land!!”Nonetheless, Rubio said he doubted that a new set of western sanctions on Russia would force Moscow to agree to any deal.“The Russian economy has basically been turned into a full-time wartime economy,” Rubio told CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday – while pointing out that Russia is estimated to have lost 20,000 soldiers in the last month alone.“That just tells you the price they’re willing to pay,” Rubio said. “Not saying any of this is admirable – I’m saying that this is the reality of the war that we’re facing. It’s become attrition, in some ways. It’s a meat grinder, and they just have more meat to grind.”He also denied that Trump, as critics claim, had merely given the aggressor in the conflict, Putin, an unwarranted place on the world stage.“Putin is already on the world stage,” Rubio said on ABC News. “The guy’s conducting a full scale war in Ukraine.“That doesn’t mean he’s right about the war. That doesn’t mean he’s justified about the war. You’re not going to end a war between Russia and Ukraine without dealing with Putin. That’s just common sense. So people can say whatever they want.”On NBC’s Meet the Press, the Democratic US senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut countered on Sunday that the Trump-Putin “meeting was a disaster”.“It was an embarrassment for the United States,” Murphy said. “It was a failure. Putin got everything he wanted.”Murphy said that Trump had given Putin “that photo-op” he wanted and to “be absolved of his war crimes in front of the world.“War criminals are not normally invited to the United States of America,” Murphy remarked.Secondly, he said, Putin had not been forced to give up anything.“President Trump said he wanted a ceasefire – it appears the ceasefire wasn’t even seriously discussed,” Murphy added. “And then, third, there’s no consequences.“Trump said, ‘If I don’t get a cease fire, Putin is going to pay a price.’ And then he walked out of that meeting saying, ‘I didn’t get a ceasefire. I didn’t get a peace deal, and I’m not even considering sanctions.’”Fiona Hill, a deputy assistant to Trump in his first term, told CBS: “The optics were much more favorable to Putin than they were to the United States. It really looked like Putin set the agenda there, the narrative and in many respects the tone for the whole summit meeting.”The national security adviser during Joe Biden’s presidency, Jake Sullivan, said the prior administration had concluded – based on contacts – that Russia was not in a position to negotiate an end to the war.“We didn’t want to set up a summit where we were literally rolling out the red carpet for Putin in America to have him come and walk away and continue the war without any clear and convincing outcome of the summit,” Sullivan told ABC News.“I think our judgment on that was correct,” he added, saying any summit needs to be “properly prepared to produce an outcome that the American president can articulate in advance and produce in the aftermath”.“The outcome that this American president articulated, a ceasefire or consequences – he did not produce,” Sullivan said. “And that is why I think we find ourselves in a difficult situation today.” More

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘We’re anti-federal chaos’: Democratic cities prepare for worst after Trump’s tirades against DC and LA

      by

      As sand-colored Humvees rolled down Washington DC streets against the wishes of local leaders, mayors around the country planned for what they would do if the Trump administration comes for them next.Donald Trump’s disdain for Democratic-run cities featured heavily in his 2024 campaign. The president vowed to take over DC – a promise he attempted to fulfill this week. Earlier this year, he sent national guard troops to Los Angeles amid protests despite California opposing the move, which led to a lawsuit from the state.City leaders say there are appropriate ways for the federal government to partner with them to address issues such as crime, but that Trump is using the pretext of crime and unrest to override their local authority, create chaos and distract from a bruising news cycle about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.Many cities have worked to bring down violent crime rates – they are on the decline in most large cities, though mayors acknowledge they still have work to do to improve the lives of their residents.“President Trump constantly creates a narrative that cities like Seattle are liberal hellholes and we are lawless, and that is just not the fact,” said Bruce Harrell, the mayor of Seattle. “We are the home of great communities and great businesses. So his view of our city is not aligned with reality. It’s to distract the American people from his failures as a president.”By sending in the military, some noted, Trump was probably escalating crime, contributing to distrust in the government and creating unsafe situations both for residents and service members.Even Republican mayors or mayors in red states have said they don’t agree with Trump usurping local control for tenuous reasons. The US Conference of Mayors, currently led by the Republican mayor of Oklahoma City, David Holt, pushed back against Trump’s takeover of DC, saying “local control is always best”.“These mayors around the country, by the way, from multiple ideological backgrounds, they love their city more than they love their ideology,” said Jacob Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis.Mayors told the Guardian they are ready to stand up for their cities, legally and otherwise, should Trump come knocking. They are working with their chiefs of police to ensure they agree on the chain of command and coordinating with governors in the event the national guard is deployed. Because Trump has so frequently brought up plans to crack down on cities, large Democratic cities have been strategizing with emergency planning departments and city attorneys.But Trump has shown he’s willing to bend and break the law in his pursuits against cities. The Pentagon is reportedly planning to potentially put national guard troops at the ready, stationed in Alabama and Arizona, to deploy to cities experiencing unrest. He has indicated this is just the beginning of an assault on cities. His attorney general sent letters to a host of Democratic cities this week, threatening to arrest local leaders if they don’t cooperate with federal authorities on immigration enforcement.The idea that troops could be on the ground for any number of reasons in cities around the US should alarm people, said Brett Smiley, the Democratic mayor of Providence, Rhode Island.“This is not something that we should be used to, and we shouldn’t let this administration break yet another norm or standard in our society, such that a couple years from now, we don’t think twice about when we see troops in our cities,” Smiley said.Why Trump is going after citiesThe roots of Trump’s battle with cities stretch back to his first administration, and they align with common narratives on the right about how cities today have fallen off because of liberal policies. Project 2025, the conservative blueprint, called for crackdowns on cities, including withholding federal funds to force compliance with deportation plans.His campaign promises included a commitment to “deploying federal assets, including the National Guard, to restore law and order when local law enforcement refuses to act”. In a video from 2023, he explained: “In cities where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order, where the fundamental rights of our citizens are being intolerably violated, I will not hesitate to send in federal assets including the national guard until safety is restored.”In 2020, he reportedly wished he cracked down much harder and faster on protesters and rioters during the demonstrations after George Floyd’s murder. Now, he’s using smaller problems – anti-immigration protests and crime against a government employee – to declare emergencies.Minneapolis, where the protests began after a police officer killed Floyd, has at times made Trump’s list of rundown cities. Frey, a Democrat, said he didn’t know whether 2020 protests played a role in Trump’s current actions.“I don’t think anybody can pretend to know what’s in Donald Trump’s head,” Frey told the Guardian. “It’s an utter mess of idiocy. I don’t know what he’s thinking. I don’t know what he’s thinking or what the rhyme or reason is. I mean, clearly there’s a focus on Democratically run cities.”When Trump called out other cities on his radar, he named blue cities run by Black mayors – Baltimore, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago.“The fact that my city and all the others called out by the president on Sunday, led by Black mayors, are all making historic progress on crime, but they’re the ones getting called up – it tells you everything that you need to know,” Baltimore’s mayor, Brandon Scott, said in a press call this week.DC is differentThe federal government can often partner with cities to address crime – several Democratic mayors noted that they worked with the Biden administration on this front successfully. But those partnerships are mutually agreed upon collaborations, not overrides of local policing.“We’re not anti-federal help. We’re anti-federal chaos,” Frey said.Detroit’s mayor, Mike Duggan, said in a statement that his city is seeing its lowest homicides, shootings and carjackings in more than 50 years, crediting a partnership with federal agencies and the US attorney as a major part of that success.“This partnership is simple and effective: DPD does the policing and the feds have strongly increased support for federal prosecution,” Duggan said. “We appreciate the partnership we have today and are aware of no reason either side would want to change it.”Mayors are not saying they have solved the issue of violent crime, Scott said, though they are acknowledging they have reduced it and will continue to work toward further reductions. “We need folks that want to actually help us do that, versus try to take and show force and make us into something other than a representative democracy that we all are proud to call home,” he said.Mayors throughout the US made a clear distinction between Trump’s authority in Washington DC compared to other cities. Washington has a legal provision in the Home Rule Act of 1973 that allows for a president to take over its police department during an emergency on a temporary basis, though Trump is the first to use this power. Other cities have no similar concept in law.Even with the Home Rule Act, Washington officials sued Trump after his attempt to replace the city’s police chief, saying the president was mounting a “hostile takeover” of DC police. Trump and the city agreed to scale back the federal takeover on Friday, keeping DC’s police chief in place.“We know when people want to say they’re going to be a dictator on day one, they never voluntarily give up that aspiration on day two,” Norm Eisen, an attorney who frequently sues the Trump administration, said in a press call this week. “That is what you are seeing in the streets of the District of Columbia.”Cities are preparingIn Minneapolis, Frey said the city has prepared operational plans with police, fire and emergency management and readied itself legally.“Our chief of police and I are lockstep, and he reports up to the commissioner of safety, who reports up to me,” Frey said. “There’s no lack of clarity as to how this reporting structure works, and it certainly does not go to Donald Trump. Doing something like that in Minneapolis, it would be just a blatantly illegal usurpation of local control were this to happen here. Of course, we would take immediate action to get injunctive relief.”Trump’s decision to send in national guard troops to Los Angeles is also legally questionable. Governors typically direct guard troops. The California governor, Gavin Newsom, sued Trump for using the military for domestic law enforcement in defiance of the Posse Comitatus Act. The case was heard by a judge this week.Harrell, of Seattle, said he is confident he will be able to protect his police department and the city’s residents if Trump sends troops.“What I have to do is make sure that the people under my jurisdiction as mayor feel confident in an ability to fight his overreach, and that our law department is well geared to advance our legal arguments,” he said.Scott, of Baltimore, said he was prepared to take every action “legally and otherwise”.Still, there is some uncertaintyand unsteadiness about how cities can respond if Trump calls up the national guard.“It’s very difficult to know what our options are, because we’re in unchartered territory here,” Smiley, of Providence, said. “It’s unprecedented and I don’t know what my options are with respect to preventing troops from coming in, which is one of the reasons that I’m trying to be so proactive about making it clear that it’s not necessary, it’s not wanted.” More

    • 188 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Ghislaine Maxwell’s grand jury transcripts are likely a dud, but other documents could reveal much

      by

      When Donald Trump’s Department of Justice requested the release of grand jury transcripts in criminal proceedings against sex-traffickers Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, the move did little to quiet an ever-growing chorus of critics frustrated by the US president’s backtracking over disclosing investigative files.Indeed, the justice department’s filings in this request revealed that only two law enforcement officers testified during grand jury proceedings in New York, undermining notions that unsealing them would reveal numerous truths.Manhattan federal court judge Paul Engelmayer recently rejected the justice department’s unsealing gambit and, in his decision, dealt yet another blow to the suggestion that grand jury documents would foster transparency about Epstein and Maxwell’s crimes and their social links to powerful figures such as Bill Clinton, Donald Trump himself and many others.“Insofar as the motion to unseal implies that the grand jury materials are an untapped mine lode of undisclosed information about Epstein or Maxwell or confederates, they definitively are not that,” Engelmayer said, adding that anyone who expected new information to emerge from the documents “would come away feeling disappointed and misled”.“There is no ‘there’ there,” Engelmayer said in his written decision.In disabusing the possibility of bombshells in Maxwell’s grand jury transcripts, questions once again abound as to whether other investigative documents on Epstein will ever see the light of day – and whether there will be any political consequences for Trump if his justice department does not deliver them to a public increasingly convinced of a cover-up.Neama Rahmani, founder of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, said the US attorney general, Pam Bondi, and the FBI director, Kash Patel, have the legal power to release these other documents – but it might be politics that is keeping them from doing so.“They hold the key,” he said. “With a stroke of their pen, they can release the Epstein files.”Most of the Epstein files are not grand jury transcripts protected by sealing, Rahmani said. “There has to be a treasure trove of information that the Department of Justice has.“Members of the public [and] the media, they can’t compel the DoJ to release the information under a [Freedom of Information Act] request or anything similar, because there’s the law enforcement privilege, the deliberative process privilege,” Rahmani added. “The DoJ doesn’t have to make public its confidential files just because the public wants to, but they can certainly choose to do so.“Trump was inaugurated in January. Bondi has been AG for seven months now. How long does it take to go through these documents?“I think we’re waiting for something that’s never going to come to fruition.”Victims’ advocates have also noted that the Trump administration is capable of releasing these documents so that those whom Epstein and Maxwell preyed on can get justice.“For the last 20 years the victims have always wanted the full disclosure of information regarding Epstein and Maxwell’s sexual-trafficking scheme. They have always wanted all individuals to be held accountable for their part in the sexual exploitation,” said Spencer Kuvin, chief legal officer of Goldlaw, who has represented multiple Epstein victims.“The current administration has the power to release everything by merely signing an executive order. Instead of trying to help victims and expose sexual predators, they are more worried about protecting their friends who socialized with these criminals.”Analysts have voiced differing views on whether there is longterm political liability for Trump if the documents are not released.Susan MacManus, professor emerita of political science at the University of South Florida, said there are several possibilities. Republicans might hope that people grow bored with the issue and start focusing on other subjects.A smaller cohort of ultra-conservative Republicans, however, is dissatisfied that the documents have not been released.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“They’re disappointed in Trump because they think that there’s something hidden there, and they believe in transparency,” MacManus explained. Some Republicans might think that “ultimately, at least some of this stuff will come out”, implicating Democrat and Republican politicians alike.MacManus does not think that this issue will sway an election, however.“I see this as something that goes out of the picture and comes back in and goes out and comes back in,” MacManus said. “But I don’t think it’s enough to move somebody’s vote if they’re a Republican or if they’re a Democrat, they’re going to stick with their party.”Rick Wilson, the Lincoln Project co-founder and former Republican strategist, felt the document issue presented a dramatic problem for Trump.“I just feel like they’re in a really bad rut right now. I don’t think they’ve got an easy way out of this,” Wilson said.Wilson said that recent polling he’s conducted indicates that the controversy is not going away.“Americans, and Republicans in particular, are paying attention to this story because there is a ‘there’ there for them,” he said.Matt Terrill, a Republican strategist and managing partner of public affairs firm Firehouse Strategies, said that at the moment, interest in the issue has died down for the time being. Americans are focused on issues such as the economy, and many are on vacation.When Congress returns, however, Terrill expects the controversy will also return to the forefront, but that doesn’t mean the attention will be entirely on Trump. The House oversight committee subpoenaed Bill and Hillary Clinton, as well as several former attorneys general and law enforcement officials, to testify about Epstein.“That could take the spotlight off President Trump,” he said. Even if this diverts attention from the president, Terrill said it would behoove the administration to be more open about whatever is going on.“There are many people in the Maga base who joined the Maga base because they want government transparency and they want accountability. They want justice and, for right or wrong, many people in the Maga base, and even those outside of the Maga base, feel as though they’re not getting that right now with this situation.”“So I do think it’s important, if you’re the administration, the Trump administration, to continue to put out everything you have in terms of this case,” he said. “If you can’t put things out, explain to the American people why you can’t put those things out.” More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s DC crackdown will do little to prevent crime, advocates say: ‘That’s not what creates safety’

      by

      Donald Trump’s hyperbolic portrayal of crime in major American cities, and his deployment of the national guard in Washington DC ostensibly in an effort to combat it, have reignited a decades-old debate about crime, violence and which policies and approaches can address it.The US president has cited cities such as Oakland, Philadelphia and Chicago as examples of places overwhelmed by crime and violence. He has put forward an increased militarization of law enforcement, and more money and legal protections for police, as the most effective ways to address homicides and other violent crime.But to violence prevention workers, the recent statements appeared made not out of care and concern for the lower-income Black and Latino victims who bear an outsized share of the nation’s crimes, but to undermine and dismiss the progress community groups have made.And, the advocates argue, the administration’s emphasis on law enforcement and prosecution as the sole ways to stop crime will do little to stop the cycles of violence and property crime that these groups have faced through Republican and Democratic administrations alike.“The police are about response. But that’s not what creates safety,” said Aqeela Sherrills, a longtime community violence intervention leader in Los Angeles. “A lot of our urban communities have been war zones because they lack investment in infrastructure and programming. It’s really disheartening to hear the president of the United States put out misinformation.”Sherrills began his career in violence prevention in Watts in the early 90s. Since then he’s been a leading force in several organisations that work intensely with the small portion of a city’s population responsible for the most violence in an effort to prevent crime and support victims of crime. Throughout his tenure, he said, he had seen the biggest successes in violence reduction come through training local non-profits, community leaders and officials on different violence community prevention models and then allowing them to build bespoke strategies from there.Over the decades, various models have seen major successes. Some deploy violence prevention workers to middle and high schools. In other programs, they use probation officers as a conduit to connect with young adults who are carrying and using firearms illegally. Some programs send workers to hospitals after a shooting, in an effort to prevent retaliatory violence. Some models rely on a police-community partnership, others don’t involve police at all.But most programs center on connecting with mostly young men and teenage boys whose conflicts spill out on to city streets, traumatizing entire neighborhoods.This method has shown promise, research shows, In 2024 the Brooklyn community of Baltimore went a year without homicides after deploying a program called Safe Streets. And cities such as Oakland, Seattle and Philadelphia, where city leaders have invested in similar gun violence reduction programs, have seen drops in homicides when the programs were thriving, according to the Major Cities Chiefs Association’s violent crime survey.And while the reasons for the ebb and flow of homicides can’t be reduced to one program or strategy, those working to build these programs up have been fighting for credit and acknowledgment.During the Biden administration, they got it. Their approaches finally found federal support with the creation of an office of gun violence prevention and federal dollars for community prevention groups working on the ground. In past years, programs have expanded across the US as more municipalities build their own offices of violence prevention.But these insights don’t appear to inform the Trump administration’s approach, Sherrills adds.“He’s not reading the data, he’s not looking at the trends and reports, it’s just more kneejerk reactions,” he said. “It’s shortsighted because they’re only speaking about one aspect of our criminal legal system.”This most recent crime debate comes nearly four months after the Trump administration cut nearly $170m in grants from gun violence prevention organizations, including several groups founded and co-founded by Sherrills who have had to lay off several staff members, dealing a serious blow to critical summertime programming.For small, upstart organizations this loss of funds puts their work in jeopardy, said Fredrick Womack, whose organization, Operation Good, lost 20% of its budget due to the April cuts.Womack says he was dismayed to hear the list of cities that Trump singled out, because they are all cities with Black leaders who have invested in community violence intervention. The calls for increased police and potential military presences, he says, shows a disconnect between the halls of power and the needs of the people most affected by violent crime.“How is the military going to provide support for victims when they need someone who’s going to be compassionate to what they’re going through?” He asked. “I know people want justice, but they also need support. They need healing and counseling.“They won’t go into the projects and ask the people how life is going for you. But they’ll look at someone who lives in the hills who heard a gunshot two miles away last week and say: ‘We have a crime problem,’” he continued.Womack founded Operation Good in 2013, and since then he and his small staff and gaggle of volunteers have worked with the teenagers and young men responsible for most of the city’s violence and given them odd jobs and taken them to civil rights museums so they can understand where they come from and gain a sense of community. Womack’s work has made a difference: in the years since the pandemic – which saw nationwide surges of gun violence – the homicide rate started to tick down, a change city officials have attributed in part to the work of community-based groups including Operation Good, and their collaboration with the police.Community leaders also argue that not only will Trump’s approach be less effective, it’s not aimed at helping the people most affected by violence. During a 12 August press conference, Jeanine Pirro, the former Fox News host who was recently appointed the US attorney for DC, argued that Trump’s rhetoric about crime and his administration’s approach to violence in DC were done in the name of victims. Flanked by posters of mostly Black teenagers and children killed by gun violence, Pirro argued that policies including DC’s Youth Rehabilitation Act have only emboldened perpetrators.“I guarantee you that every one of these individuals was shot and killed by someone who felt they were never gonna be caught,” Pirro told reporters.And when reporters asked about addressing the root causes of crime and violence and the recent cuts to community-based programs, Pirro argued that her focus is on being punitive, not preventive.For Leia Schenk, a Sacramento-based victim and violence prevention advocate, these sorts of sentiments, while common among conservatives, miss the point.“It’s tone-deaf and an oxymoron. The root causes are why we have victims,” Schenk said. “In my experience [crime and violence] come from systemic oppression. Meaning if a family can’t feed their kids, they’re gonna steal, rob or commit some sort of fraud to just live and survive.”Schenk has been working in the community advocacy space for more than three decades and in that time has seen the most successful approaches to youth crime, shootings and other forms of violence happen when schools districts, local mental and physical healthcare systems get a level of investment that matches the scale of the problem.“We’re seeing the most success when we are supported – from schools to law enforcement to churches – their support allows us to do what we’re doing on a bigger scale.”Despite the comments and moves from the Trump administration, Sherrills says the field of violence prevention will continue to thrive thanks to a strong foundation that was fortified in recent years due to federal support and increased support from philanthropic groups.“We know that we’re in challenging times but it’s about doubling down on success and making sure we preserve the wins,” he said. “We’re going to continue to see violence trend down because of the work practitioners are doing in the field. Folks are tired of the killing and the dying and are looking for alternative ways to create better ways of navigating a conflict so that it doesn’t lead to violence.” More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Three states to deploy hundreds of national guard troops to Washington DC

      by

      Three states have moved to deploy hundreds of members of their national guard to the nation’s capital as part of the Trump administration’s effort to overhaul policing in Washington through a federal crackdown.West Virginia said it was deploying 300 to 400 guard troops, while South Carolina pledged 200 and Ohio said it would send 150 in the coming days.The moves announced on Saturday came as protesters pushed back on federal law enforcement and national guard troops fanning out in the heavily Democratic city following Donald Trump’s executive order federalizing local police forces and activating about 800 District of Columbia national guard members.West Virginia governor Patrick Morrisey’s office said in a statement that the deployment was “a show of commitment to public safety and regional cooperation” and the state would provide equipment and “approximately 300-400 skilled personnel as directed”.The statement came after Donald Trump ordered hundreds of Washington DC national guard troops to mount a show of force and temporarily took over the city’s police department to curb what the president depicts as a crime and homelessness emergency in the nation’s capital.Data compiled by the DC police department shows that violent crime was actually at a 30-year-low when Trump returned to office in January, and has declined a further 26% since then.Last weekend, Trump ordered the district’s homeless residents to leave, or face forcible relocation, after his motorcade passed a handful of unhoused people en route to his golf course outside the city. On Thursday, local officials cleared away one of the roadside encampments Trump had complained about, arguing that they could do so in a more humane fashion than untrained federal forces.A justice department order to replace the Washington police chief, Pamela Smith, with DEA head Terry Cole as the city’s “emergency police commissioner” ran into problems after a challenge in federal court by the DC attorney general, Brian Schwalb.Without issuing a direct ruling on the challenge, US district judge Ana Reyes indicated that Smith has to remain in charge.But efforts to increase federal control of the district resumed on Saturday with the order to deploy West Virginia’s national guard.Drew Galang, a spokesperson for Morrisey, said the state’s national guard received the order to send equipment and personnel to DC late on Friday and was working to organize the deployment.A White House official told Reuters on Saturday that more national guard troops were being called in to Washington to “protect federal assets, create a safe environment for law enforcement officials to carry out their duties when required, and provide a visible presence to deter crime”.View image in fullscreenA protest against Trump’s intervention drew scores to Dupont Circle on Saturday before a march to the White House, about 1.5 miles away. Demonstrators assembled behind a banner that said, “No fascist takeover of DC”, and some in the crowd held signs saying, “No military occupation”.Fueling the protests were concerns about Trump overreach and that he had used crime as a pretext to impose his will on Washington.The Chamberlain Network, a veteran’s group that describes itself as “dedicated to protecting democracy”, commented on X that the order for West Virginia’s national guard to police DC was “pulling them away from their core mission of protecting our communities”.“From floods to winter storms, we count on our Guard on in a crisis,” the group said. “They should be home, ready to respond—not on a political policing mission.”Since arriving in Washington last week, about 800 national guard troops under Trump’s direct control have served as a visible presence in public areas, assigned to administrative and logistical duties as well as “area beautification” work, according to the Wall Street Journal.Defense officials had said they would not be carrying weapons but “weapons are available if needed but will remain in the armory,” the US army said in a press release.A US official told Reuters that a formal order authorizing the national guard troops to carry firearms would be issued but it would largely affect military police officers with sidearms.The White House also said on Saturday that national guard in DC are conducting patrols on foot and in vehicles around the national mall and Union Station, adding that the troops are not making arrests at this time.Trump has indicated that he may take similar actions in other Democratic-controlled cities. A federal judge in San Francisco is expected in the coming weeks to issue a ruling on whether Trump violated the law by deploying national guard troops to Los Angeles in June without the approval of California’s governor, Gavin Newsom.Typically the national guard is deployed only instances where a state governor requests it. However the DC national guard reports directly to the president. More

    • 275 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Trump supports Putin plan for Ukraine peace, report says; West Virginia to send national guard to DC

      by

      Donald Trump has told European leaders he believes a peace deal could be negotiated if the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, agrees to give up the Donbas region, which Russian invaders have not been able to seize in over three years of fighting, the New York Times reported on Saturday after his summit with Vladimir Putin.Two sources with direct knowledge of the talks in Alaska told the Guardian that Putin demanded Ukraine withdraw from Donbas, which is made up of the Donestk and Luhansk regions, as a condition for ending the war, but offered Trump a freeze along the remaining frontline.Although Luhansk is almost entirely under Russian control, Ukraine still holds key parts of Donetsk, including the cities of Kramatorsk and Sloviansk and heavily fortified positions whose defence has cost tens of thousands of lives.Here are the key US politics stories at a glance:Trump to back ceding of Ukrainian territory to Russia as part of peace dealDonald Trump will back a plan to cede unoccupied Ukrainian territory to Russia to secure an end to the war between the two countries, it was reported on Saturday, after details of his post-summit call with European leaders leaked out.Read the full storyWest Virginia to deploy hundreds of national guard troops to Washington DCWest Virginia is to deploy 300 to 400 national guard troops to Washington DC at the request of the Trump administration, the state’s governor said on Saturday.Read the full storyUS state department stops issuing visas for Gaza’s children to get medical careThe US state department announced on Saturday that it would stop issuing visas to children from Gaza in desperate need of medical care after an online pressure campaign from Laura Loomer, a far-right influencer close to Donald Trump who has described herself as “a proud Islamophobe”.Read the full storyThousands join ‘Fight the Trump Takeover’ protests against Republican redistricting plansThousands gathered in cities and towns across 34 states on Saturday for a national day of protest against Republican redistricting plans in Texas and elsewhere. “Fight the Trump Takeover” was anchored in Austin, Texas, with other sites spread nationwide.Read the full storyRFK Jr denies 2028 presidential ambitions after attacks from Trump influencer Laura LoomerThe US health and human services (HHS) secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, has fended off an attack by conservative firebrand and Donald Trump influencer Laura Loomer by issuing a statement of fealty to the president which calls it “a flat-out lie” that he is running for the White House in 2028.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      A new wave of book bans has hit Florida school districts, with hundreds of titles being pulled from library and classroom shelves as the school year kicks off.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on Friday 15 August More