George Floyd Protests (2020)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Facebook, Preparing for Chauvin Verdict, Will Limit Posts That Might Incite Violence

      by

      Facebook on Monday said it planned to limit posts that contain misinformation and hate speech related to the trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer charged with the murder of George Floyd, to keep them from spilling over into real-world harm.As closing arguments began in the trial and Minneapolis braced for a verdict, Facebook said it would identify and remove posts on the social network that urged people to bring arms to the city. It also said it would protect members of Mr. Floyd’s family from harassment and take down content that praised, celebrated or mocked his death.“We know this trial has been painful for many people,” Monika Bickert, Facebook’s vice president of content policy, wrote in a blog post. “We want to strike the right balance between allowing people to speak about the trial and what the verdict means, while still doing our part to protect everyone’s safety.”Facebook, which has long positioned itself as a site for free speech, has become increasingly proactive in policing content that might lead to real-world violence. The Silicon Valley company has been under fire for years over the way it has handled sensitive news events. That includes last year’s presidential election, when online misinformation about voter fraud galvanized supporters of former President Donald J. Trump. Believing the election to have been stolen from Mr. Trump, some supporters stormed the Capitol building on Jan. 6.Leading up to the election, Facebook took steps to fight misinformation, foreign interference and voter suppression. The company displayed warnings on more than 150 million posts with election misinformation, removed more than 120,000 posts for violating its voter interference policies and took down 30 networks that posted false messages about the election.But critics said Facebook and other social media platforms did not do enough. After the storming of the Capitol, the social network stopped Mr. Trump from being able to post on the site. The company’s independent oversight board is now debating whether the former president will be allowed back on Facebook and has said it plans to issue its decision “in the coming weeks,” without giving a definite date.The death of Mr. Floyd, who was Black, led to a wave of Black Lives Matter protests across the nation last year. Mr. Chauvin, a former Minneapolis police officer who is white, faces charges of manslaughter, second-degree murder and third-degree murder for Mr. Floyd’s death. The trial began in late March. Mr. Chauvin did not testify.Facebook said on Monday that it had determined that Minneapolis was, at least temporarily, “a high-risk location.” It said it would remove pages, groups, events and Instagram accounts that violated its violence and incitement policy; take down attacks against Mr. Chauvin and Mr. Floyd; and label misinformation and graphic content as sensitive.The company did not have any further comment.“As the trial comes to a close, we will continue doing our part to help people safely connect and share what they are experiencing,” Ms. Bickert said in the blog post. More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      After 10 Months at Sea, a Giant Carrier Returns to a Changed Nation

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }The Coronavirus OutbreakliveLatest UpdatesMaps and CasesRisk Near YouVaccine RolloutNew Variants TrackerAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyAfter 10 Months at Sea, a Giant Carrier Returns to a Changed NationA mounting pandemic death toll. A contested election. A riot at the Capitol. “The world at home has become completely different and we don’t know what we are coming home to,” one sailor on the Nimitz said.Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III greeting troops aboard the carrier Nimitz on Thursday. He told sailors and pilots that he knew what it felt like to be cut off from life during extended deploymentsCredit…Helene Cooper/The New York TimesFeb. 25, 2021, 5:25 p.m. ETABOARD U.S.S. NIMITZ, off California — When this aircraft carrier and its city-size crew departed Naval Base Kitsap in Bremerton, Wash., on April 27, George Floyd was still alive.Donald J. Trump was still president, Georgia had two Republican senators, and some 56,000 people in the United States had died of the coronavirus.Now, 10 months later, the nuclear-powered warship is returning home to a country vastly different from the one it left. That difference was highlighted on Thursday when the new defense secretary — for the first time, an African-American — landed aboard to talk to a travel-weary and isolated crew.“Secretary of defense in combat!” came the announcement.Lloyd J. Austin III, his baritone ringing through the ship’s public-address system, told the sailors and pilots on the Nimitz that he knew what it felt like to be cut off from life during extended deployments: Mr. Austin, a retired Army four-star general, was posted in Iraq about a decade ago for a tour even longer than the Nimitz’s.But that was on land, in Army bases near Baghdad and flying around to Erbil and Ramadi. The Nimitz sailors and Navy and Marine pilots were at sea, spending 2020 in what sometimes felt like a time warp, sailors said.They had to quarantine for two weeks before they even boarded the ship and, once on, they basically could associate only with one another, even during port calls.On the rare occasions that the ship came into port — in Guam or in Manama, Bahrain — the 5,000-strong crew was not allowed traditional shore leave, and had to sleep on board, in berths with around 100 other sailors. They were told not to interact with the public on land, because of the pandemic.They watched the presidential election returns from the Indian Ocean and woke up the morning of Jan. 7, in the Persian Gulf, to the news that rioters had stormed the Capitol.Petty Officer First Class Christina Ray, 31, said she turned on the television in her office on the ship’s second deck, and stared at the images. She recalled being aghast at what was happening.“That type of violence was what we were supposed to be defending the country against,” she said in an interview. “The world at home has become completely different and we don’t know what we are coming home to.”The Coronavirus Outbreak More

    • 100 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Eric Garner’s Mother Endorses Raymond McGuire for Mayor

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }N.Y.C. Mayoral RaceWho’s Running?11 Candidates’ N.Y.C. MomentsA Look at the Race5 Takeaways From the DebateAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyEric Garner’s Mother Backs McGuire for Mayor Over Progressive RivalsGwen Carr said she was endorsing Ray McGuire because his financial background could help him lead New York’s recovery and make the city a “safer place.”In a nearly two-minute ad, Raymond McGuire and Gwen Carr visit the location in Staten Island where her son, Eric Garner, had his fatal interaction with the police.Credit…Ray McGuire for MayorFeb. 11, 2021, 5:00 a.m. ETIn the nearly seven years since Eric Garner died at the hands of the police in Staten Island, his mother, Gwen Carr, has helped turn her son’s cries of “I can’t breathe” into a national movement against discriminatory policing.Ms. Carr has also become a sought-after endorser for political hopefuls looking to represent themselves as candidates of change, especially on policing matters.That is especially true in New York City’s crowded Democratic primary for mayor, where several candidates have been coveting Ms. Carr’s endorsement in the wake of the national protests that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis last year.But instead of giving her endorsement to one of the more liberal, progressive Democratic candidates, Ms. Carr will announce on Thursday that she will endorse Raymond J. McGuire, a former Wall Street executive who served on the New York City Police Foundation and who has embraced calls to reform the police, but not defund them.Mr. McGuire, formerly the vice chairman at Citigroup, is a moderate Democrat who was recruited to run by the city’s business community and quickly raised $5 million in three months. But he still must overcome his lack of name recognition among most voters, and expand his appeal beyond the Wall Street elite.Ms. Carr’s endorsement could help Mr. McGuire with some left-leaning voters and shore up support in the Black community, which makes up 26 percent of the electorate.“Eric Garner and George Floyd are examples of what can happen to any Black man in this country and what has happened to all too many Black men in this city,” Mr. McGuire said in an interview. “Gwen Carr’s endorsement means she recognizes that I have what it takes to lead this city and to reflect the voice of those who would not otherwise have a voice.”Ms. Carr said the next mayor can only undertake the necessary police accountability reforms if the city’s future and finances are stabilized.“We know that the budget is in a mess, and from what I read he can balance budgets,” Ms. Carr said. “I have grandsons and granddaughters growing up in this city and I want it to be a safer place for them.”Mr. McGuire, who is Black, has adopted a policing stance that echoes that of Black lawmakers in the city who resisted calls to defund the police last year, citing rising violence in the communities they represent.“Black people want better policing. We want to reform, restructure and reallocate the dollars,” Mr. McGuire said. “We want our policing to be respectful, accountable and proportionate.”Mr. Garner was killed in 2014 after being placed in a chokehold by a police officer, Daniel Pantaleo. A grand jury did not indict Mr. Pantaleo and federal prosecutors decided against pursuing civil rights charges. Mr. Pantaleo remained on the police force for five more years until he was fired and stripped of his pension in 2019 by the police commissioner at the time, James P. O’Neill, after a police administrative judge found him guilty of violating a departmental ban on chokeholds.Ms. Carr said that her pursuit for justice in her son’s death was caught up in politics. She has been critical of Mayor Bill de Blasio’s decision to delay a departmental trial and not fire Mr. Pantaleo. The mayor was elected in 2013 on a promise to overhaul the relationship between the New York Police Department and Black, brown and poor communities.“He has never been a politician,” Ms. Carr said of Mr. McGuire. “We need new blood.”Ms. Carr said she admired Mr. McGuire’s support of the National Action Network, the civil rights organization headed by the Rev. Al Sharpton. The group has been one of her biggest supporters since her son’s death. Mr. Sharpton has credited Mr. McGuire as one of many anonymous Black businessmen who had helped fund his organization during difficult times.Mr. McGuire’s campaign will reveal the endorsement on Thursday in a digital ad created by John Del Cecato, who is responsible for the successful 2013 campaign ad that featured Mr. de Blasio’s son, Dante; and Mark Skidmore, chief executive of Assemble the Agency, who wrote the script for Mr. McGuire’s campaign launch video that was narrated by Spike Lee.In the nearly two-minute ad, Mr. McGuire and Ms. Carr visit the location in Staten Island where Mr. Garner had his fatal interaction with the police. Ms. Carr holds onto Mr. McGuire’s arm as they walk toward the location, which is commemorated with a plaque and a mural. He refers to her as “Mother Carr”; she calls him “Mr. McGuire,” but he tells her to call him Ray.Her endorsement will be a disappointment to other candidates such as Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, and Maya Wiley, a civil rights lawyer who was Mr. de Blasio’s legal counsel and former head of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, said Susan Kang, an associate professor of political science at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.“There are some moderates in the reform criminal justice world for whom this will carry a great deal of legitimacy, particularly those of Ray McGuire’s and Gwen Carr’s generation who are very likely voters,” Professor Kang said. “Trust is an important issue among older voters and that group makes up a high percentage of people who turn out to vote in municipal primaries.”AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      How Trump’s Focus on Antifa Distracted Attention From the Far-Right Threat

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Capitol Riot FalloutVisual TimelineInside the SiegeTracking the Oath KeepersNotable ArrestsThe Global Far RightAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main storyHow Trump’s Focus on Antifa Distracted Attention From the Far-Right ThreatFederal law enforcement shifted resources last year in response to Donald Trump’s insistence that the radical left endangered the country. Meanwhile, right-wing extremism was building ominously.The outrage that President Donald J. Trump spent months stoking would later culminate in the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6 by loyalist supporters and right-wing extremists.Credit…Kenny Holston for The New York TimesAdam Goldman, Katie Benner and Jan. 30, 2021Updated 4:52 p.m. ETWASHINGTON — As racial justice protests erupted nationwide last year, President Donald J. Trump, struggling to find a winning campaign theme, hit on a message that he stressed over and over: The real domestic threat to the United States emanated from the radical left, even though law enforcement authorities had long since concluded it came from the far right.It was a message that was quickly embraced and amplified by his attorney general and his top homeland security officials, who translated it into a shift in criminal justice and national security priorities even as Mr. Trump was beginning to openly stoke the outrage that months later would culminate in the storming of the Capitol by right-wing extremists.Mr. Trump’s efforts to focus his administration on the antifa movement and leftist groups did not stop the Justice Department and the F.B.I. from pursuing cases of right-wing extremism. They broke up a kidnapping plot, for example, targeting Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, a Democrat.But the effect of his direction was nonetheless substantial, according to interviews with current and former officials, diverting key portions of the federal law enforcement and domestic security agencies at a time when the threat from the far right was building ominously.In late spring and early summer, as the racial justice demonstrations intensified, Justice Department officials began shifting federal prosecutors and F.B.I. agents from investigations into violent white supremacists to focus on cases involving rioters or anarchists, including those who might be associated with the antifa movement. One Justice Department prosecutor was sufficiently concerned about an excessive focus on antifa that the official went to the department’s independent inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, telling his office that politics might have played a part.Federal prosecutors and agents felt pressure to uncover a left-wing extremist criminal conspiracy that never materialized, according to two people who worked on Justice Department efforts to counter domestic terrorism. They were told to do so even though the F.B.I., in particular, had increasingly expressed concern about the threat from white supremacists, long the top domestic terrorism threat, and well-organized far-right extremist groups that had allied themselves with the president.White House and Justice Department officials stifled internal efforts to publicly promote concerns about the far-right threat, with aides to Mr. Trump seeking to suppress the phrase “domestic terrorism” in internal discussions, according to a former official at the Department of Homeland Security.Requests for funding to bolster the number of analysts who search social media posts for warnings of potential violent extremism were denied by top homeland security officials, limiting the department’s ability to spot developing threats like the post-Election Day anger among far-right groups over Mr. Trump’s loss.The scale and intensity of the threat developing on the right became stunningly clear on Jan. 6, when news broadcasts and social media were flooded with images of far-right militias, followers of the QAnon conspiracy movement and white supremacists storming the Capitol.Militias and other dangerous elements of the far right saw “an ally in the White House,” said Mary McCord, a former Justice Department official who teaches at Georgetown University and focuses on domestic terrorism. “That has, I think, allowed them to grow and recruit and try to mainstream their opinions, which is why I think you end up seeing what we saw” at the Capitol.Far-right and far-left groups clashing in Portland, Ore., in August. Dozens of F.B.I. employees and senior managers were sent on temporary assignments there, according to current and former law enforcement officials. Credit…David Ryder for The New York TimesA Focus on ‘Anarchists and Thugs’Mr. Trump’s focus on what he portrayed as a major threat from antifa was embraced in particular by Attorney General William P. Barr.Mr. Barr had long harbored concerns about protests and violence from the left. Soon after taking office in early 2019, he began a weekly national security briefing by asking the F.B.I. what it was doing to combat antifa, according to two people briefed on the meetings. Officials viewed his sense of the threat as exaggerated. They explained that it was not a terrorist organization, but rather a loose movement without an organization or hierarchy, and tried to correct what they described as misperceptions, according to one of the people.Still, in meetings last year with political appointees in Washington, department investigators felt pressured to find evidence that antifa adherents were conspiring to conduct coordinated terrorist attacks.When F.B.I. intelligence continued to deem white nationalists the leading domestic terrorism threats — part of what the bureau describes as racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists — prosecutors were asked to also consider information from the Department of Homeland Security that antifa and radical leftist anarchists were instead the leading threats, according to a person involved in the conversations.Mr. Barr said in a statement that “there was no ‘prioritization’” of the leftist threat, and that all violence should be condemned.“The F.B.I. already had a robust program to combat violence driven by white supremacy and nationalism,” Mr. Barr said. “I wanted there to be a comparable one for antifa and antifalike groups.”The pressure from Mr. Trump was unrelenting. After Christopher A. Wray, the F.B.I. director, testified to Congress in September that antifa was “more of an ideology or a movement than an organization,” Mr. Trump lashed out at him on Twitter, saying that the F.B.I. protected such “anarchists and thugs” and allowed them “to get away with ‘murder.’”Investigators at the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security moved quickly and forcefully to address the violence that erupted amid the summer’s racial justice protests.The demonstrations gave way to looting and rioting, including serious injuries and shootings. Over several chaotic nights in Minneapolis, rioters burned down a corridor of largely immigrant-owned businesses and set a police precinct on fire. Similar scenes played out in other cities.In late August, Michael Reinoehl, a self-professed antifa supporter, shot and killed a pro-Trump protester in Portland, Ore. The president cheered his death at the hands of the federal officers who later tried to apprehend him. “We got him,” he said.But while Mr. Trump and others saw the developments as evidence of a major assault from the left, the picture was actually more complicated.The shooting by Mr. Reinoehl, as the F.B.I. pointed out this month in an internal memo, was the first killing in more than 20 years by what the bureau classifies as an “anarchist violent extremist,” the type of threat Mr. Trump had emphasized.Over the late spring and summer, the F.B.I. opened more than 400 domestic terrorism investigations, including about 40 cases into possible antifa adherents and 40 into the boogaloo, a right-wing movement seeking to start a civil war, along with investigations into white supremacists suspected of menacing protesters, according to F.B.I. data and a former Justice Department official. Even among those movements, career prosecutors saw the boogaloo as the gravest threat.A group affiliated with the boogaloo, a loosely organized far-right movement preparing for a civil war, in Lansing, Mich., in October.Credit…Seth Herald/Getty ImagesMembers of violent militias began to go to protests as self-appointed police forces, sometimes saying that they had heeded Mr. Trump’s call. They attended Republican events as self-described security forces. Still, Justice Department leadership was adamant that terrorism investigators focus on antifa as the demonstrations spread, according to an official who worked on the inquiries.The small cadre of intelligence analysts inside the department’s counterterrorism section were pulled into the effort, writing twice daily reports. National security prosecutors staffed command posts at the F.B.I. to deal with the protests and associated violence and property crimes, and to help protect statues and monuments seen as potential targets.All of this was a strain on the counterterrorism section, which has only a few dozen prosecutors and like other parts of the department was reeling from the coronavirus. A top F.B.I. domestic terrorism chief also expressed concern to Justice Department officials over the summer about the diversion of resources.The counterterrorism section at the time was working with prosecutors and agents around the country on cases involving people affiliated with the Three Percenters, Oath Keepers, other militia members and violent white supremacists. In some parts of the country, agents who had been investigating violent white supremacists pivoted to investigate anarchists and others involved in the rioting, struggling in certain cases to find any conspiracy or other federal charges to bring against them.Around the same time, the F.B.I. was tracking worrisome threats emanating from the far right. Agents in Michigan monitoring members of a violent antigovernment militia called Wolverine Watchmen received intelligence in June that the men planned to recruit more members and kidnap state governors, according to court documents.After six members of the group were charged in October with plotting to abduct Ms. Whitmer, one of Mr. Trump’s most vocal opponents, the president insulted her and reiterated that the left posed the true threat. “She calls me a White Supremacist — while Biden and Democrats refuse to condemn Antifa, Anarchists, Looters and Mobs that burn down Democrat run cities,” Mr. Trump said on Twitter.Dozens of F.B.I. employees and senior managers were sent on temporary assignments to Portland — including the head of the Tampa field office, who was an expert in Islamic terrorism, according to current and former law enforcement officials — where left-leaning protests had intensified since tactical federal teams arrived. Some F.B.I. agents and Justice Department officials expressed concern that the Portland work was a drain on the bureau’s effort to combat what they viewed as the more lethal strains of domestic extremism. The bureau had about 1,000 domestic terrorism cases under investigation at the time, and only several hundred agents in the field assigned to them. The Homeland Security Department even sent agents to Portland who were usually assigned to investigate drug cartels at the border.Mr. Barr also formed a task force run by trusted U.S. attorneys in Texas and New Jersey to prosecute antigovernment extremists. Terrorism prosecutors working on the investigations arising from the summer’s violence were not told beforehand of Mr. Barr’s decision. They questioned the rationale behind the task force because it seemed to duplicate their work and could create confusion, according to two people familiar with their pushback.Ultimately, the federal response to last year’s protests elicited a mixed bag. Federal prosecutors nationwide charged more than 200 people with crimes, including some who self-identified with antifa.But the F.B.I. also charged adherents of the boogaloo, including an Air Force sergeant suspected of murdering a federal officer and trying to kill another in California. The sergeant had previously been charged with the shooting death of a sheriff’s deputy in Santa Cruz County during a gun battle on June 6 that led to his arrest.As attorney general, William P. Barr played up the threat from antifa, a loose collection of leftist agitators, even as Justice Department and F.B.I. officials saw a greater threat from the far right.Credit…for The New York TimesThe Homeland ThreatDomestic terrorism has long been a politically sensitive issue for the Department of Homeland Security.A warning in a 2009 homeland security report that military veterans returning from combat could be vulnerable for recruitment by terrorist groups or extremists prompted backlash from conservatives, forcing the homeland security secretary at the time, Janet Napolitano, to apologize and retract the report. An edited version was eventually issued, but the lesson about the political risks of highlighting far-right extremism lingered inside the department.“They overhype the threat of the far left at the expense of far-right extremism,” said Daryl Johnson, a former senior analyst at the department who wrote the 2009 report.Like Mr. Barr, Mr. Trump’s acting homeland security secretary, Chad F. Wolf, took his lead from the White House and emphasized the threat from antifa. At one point, Mr. Wolf formed a task force that deployed tactical agents to protect statues and monuments.Mr. Wolf denied that the administration’s response to the violence at racial justice protests came at the cost of efforts to combat far-right violence, noting that the agency affirmed the rising threat of white supremacy in an assessment in 2019..css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-c7gg1r{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:0.875rem;line-height:0.875rem;margin-bottom:15px;color:#121212 !important;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-c7gg1r{font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.9375rem;line-height:1.25rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-rqynmc{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-rqynmc strong{font-weight:600;}.css-rqynmc em{font-style:italic;}.css-yoay6m{margin:0 auto 5px;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-yoay6m{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1dg6kl4{margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:15px;}.css-16ed7iq{width:100%;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;-webkit-box-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;justify-content:center;padding:10px 0;background-color:white;}.css-pmm6ed{display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}.css-pmm6ed > :not(:first-child){margin-left:5px;}.css-5gimkt{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:0.8125rem;font-weight:700;-webkit-letter-spacing:0.03em;-moz-letter-spacing:0.03em;-ms-letter-spacing:0.03em;letter-spacing:0.03em;text-transform:uppercase;color:#333;}.css-5gimkt:after{content:’Collapse’;}.css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;-webkit-transform:rotate(180deg);-ms-transform:rotate(180deg);transform:rotate(180deg);}.css-eb027h{max-height:5000px;-webkit-transition:max-height 0.5s ease;transition:max-height 0.5s ease;}.css-6mllg9{-webkit-transition:all 0.5s ease;transition:all 0.5s ease;position:relative;opacity:0;}.css-6mllg9:before{content:”;background-image:linear-gradient(180deg,transparent,#ffffff);background-image:-webkit-linear-gradient(270deg,rgba(255,255,255,0),#ffffff);height:80px;width:100%;position:absolute;bottom:0px;pointer-events:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}#masthead-bar-one{display:none;}.css-1amoy78{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1amoy78{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-1amoy78:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-1amoy78[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-k9atqk{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-k9atqk strong{font-weight:700;}.css-k9atqk em{font-style:italic;}.css-k9atqk a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ccd9e3;}.css-k9atqk a:visited{color:#333;-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;border-bottom:1px solid #ddd;}.css-k9atqk a:hover{border-bottom:none;}Capitol Riot FalloutFrom Riot to ImpeachmentThe riot inside the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Jan. 6, followed a rally at which President Trump made an inflammatory speech to his supporters, questioning the results of the election. Here’s a look at what happened and the ongoing fallout:As this video shows, poor planning and a restive crowd encouraged by President Trump set the stage for the riot.A two hour period was crucial to turning the rally into the riot.Several Trump administration officials, including cabinet members Betsy DeVos and Elaine Chao, announced that they were stepping down as a result of the riot.Federal prosecutors have charged more than 70 people, including some who appeared in viral photos and videos of the riot. Officials expect to eventually charge hundreds of others.The House voted to impeach the president on charges of “inciting an insurrection” that led to the rampage by his supporters.“You could argue the reverse. The fact we were focused on white supremacist extremists in late 2019, early ’20, we missed the antifa stuff coming up,” Mr. Wolf said. “One could always go back and say, ‘You focused on this at the expense of that.’ I would say we focused on things happening in real time.”Mr. Trump said in May that he intended to designate antifa a domestic terrorist organization. National Security Council staff members, including Andrew Veprek, an ally of Stephen Miller who is now at the State Department, asked homeland security officials for evidence to justify such a designation. They sought information about possible ties between antifa and foreign entities; federal law defines domestic terrorism but the statute does not carry any criminal penalties, and designations of terrorist organizations are limited to foreign groups.In fact, the F.B.I. had seen troubling evidence of white supremacists in the United States with foreign ties, including one group that agents believe was being directed by an American living in Russia. The group, called the Base, was such a severe threat that the F.B.I. briefed Mr. Barr about it.Homeland security officials balked at helping designate antifa as a terrorist organization, and the effort failed.Officials in the department’s Office of Intelligence and Analysis also expressed concern after Mr. Wolf questioned one of their reports that labeled the boogaloo as “far right” in describing the shooting death of the federal officer in which the suspect, an Air Force sergeant, was linked to the movement. Asked about his response, Mr. Wolf said he was only trying to gain information, not alter reports.Under the Trump administration, analysts in the intelligence and analysis office had even more incentive to produce reports on threats outside of right-wing extremism, said Elizabeth Neumann, the former assistant homeland security secretary for counterterrorism and threat prevention under Mr. Trump.Many viewed their performance reviews as tied to whether they produced reports that aligned with the Trump administration’s priorities, including Mexican cartel organizations, foreign terrorism and antifa, rather than reports on militias and white supremacists. The number of warnings about all types of extremists in the second half of last year eventually dwindled, according to current and former officials.“You can read the tea leaves and say domestic terrorism isn’t going to be our priority,” Ms. Neumann said.“The culture absorbs those messages they hear the president speak or tweet,” she said, adding that some White House officials even cautioned against using the phrase “domestic terrorism.”Last spring, Brian Murphy, then the homeland security intelligence chief, requested $14 million to bolster training and increase staff to analyze social media for extremist threats, given that online forums had become a prime recruiting and organizing ground. Mr. Wolf’s deputy, Kenneth T. Cuccinelli II, rejected the request, as well as an appeal for $8 million, officials said.Mr. Cuccinelli said in a statement that requests for additional funding would have come at the expense of other parts of the agency. He added that he had been working to shift resources from other parts of the department to expand training for the intelligence branch.Mr. Murphy had filed a whistle-blower complaint in September that prompted an outcry. He accused department leaders of ordering him to modify intelligence assessments to make the threat of white supremacy “appear less severe” and include information on violent “left-wing” groups and antifa. Mr. Wolf and Mr. Cuccinelli have denied the allegations, and after congressional backlash, they eventually released a report in October identifying white supremacy as the “most persistent and lethal threat” in the United States.As he campaigned for re-election, Mr. Trump focused relentlessly on antifa, which at one point he sought to designate as a terrorist organization.Credit…Anna Moneymaker for The New York TimesAntifa Until the EndCampaigning for re-election, Mr. Trump spent the summer blaming rioting and violence on Democratic governors and mayors and warning about a “left-wing cultural revolution.”Armed far-right militia groups started appearing at racial justice protests and demonstrations about the outcome of the election. Extremists groups like the Proud Boys marched in Washington in December, clashing with anti-Trump protesters in altercations that included stabbings. The Homeland Security Department’s intelligence branch issued an assessment on Dec. 30 highlighting the potential for white supremacists to carry out “mass casualty” attacks, according to a copy obtained by The New York Times.But there was no specific mention of armed groups targeting the Capitol, despite plenty of indicators online. The acting chief of the Capitol Police, Yogananda D. Pittman, later said that the department knew militias and white supremacists would be coming and “that there was a strong potential for violence and that Congress was the target.”In the days before Jan. 6, the Secret Service was told by homeland security officials to expect only an “elevated threat environment,” according to people familiar with the meeting.The doors to the House chamber after the attack on the Capitol. Trump administration officials did not foresee the extent of the threat from the far right.Credit…Erin Schaff/The New York TimesThe Trump administration, however, continued to play up the threat of antifa. The night before the assault on the Capitol, the White House issued a memo seeking to bar any foreigners affiliated with antifa from entering the country and, once again, try to determine if the movement could be classified as a terrorist organization.When the pro-Trump mob stormed the Capitol, some shouted explicit chants against antifa. Others were captured on video yelling, “We were invited by the president of the United States.”Mike Baker and John Eligon contributed reporting.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      5 Takeaways From the Mayor’s Race: A Subway Pledge and Police Scrutiny

      by

      #masthead-section-label, #masthead-bar-one { display: none }Race and PolicingFacts on Walter Wallace Jr. CaseFacts on Breonna Taylor CaseFacts on Daniel Prude CaseFacts on George Floyd CaseAdvertisementContinue reading the main storySupported byContinue reading the main story5 Takeaways From the Mayor’s Race: A Subway Pledge and Police ScrutinySome New York City candidates vowed to reform the Police Department — or to ride the subway more often than Mayor Bill de Blasio.Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, was less critical of how the police handled Black Lives Matter protests than some of his rivals.Credit…Elizabeth D. Herman for The New York TimesEmma G. Fitzsimmons and Dec. 21, 2020, 3:00 a.m. ETThe Democratic candidates running for mayor of New York City differ on many issues, but they tend to agree on one thing: All aspire to be different from Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat in his second term whose approval rating dropped after his failed run for president last year.On Friday, the city Department of Investigation released a report that sharply criticized the de Blasio administration for its handling of the Black Lives Matter protests earlier this year.The findings were uniformly welcomed by the mayoral hopefuls, many of whom have been critical of the police tactics deployed. One went further, vowing to remove the police commissioner, Dermot F. Shea, if elected mayor.One other way they vow to differ from Mr. de Blasio? They say they will ride the subway more often.Here’s what you need to know about the week that was in the mayor’s race:Who’s landing the big political guns for hire?The huge field of candidates running for mayor — as well as the City Council and other local races in New York — is expected to be a bonanza for campaign consultants, and some key hired guns have landed in some interesting places.L. Joy Williams, the president of the Brooklyn N.A.A.C.P., signed on with Raymond J. McGuire, a Black businessman. She was an adviser for Cynthia M. Nixon, the actress and activist who ran for governor in 2018.Ms. Williams could help Mr. McGuire, a first-time candidate, reach Black voters in Brooklyn, especially women — a critical constituency that will be courted by other Black candidates, including Eric Adams, the Brooklyn borough president, and Maya Wiley, a former top counsel to Mr. de Blasio and MSNBC analyst.Scott M. Stringer, the city comptroller, hired Rebecca Katz, a confidante of Mr. de Blasio’s who helped shape his image, but has been critical of the mayor recently. Ms. Katz has worked for progressive candidates, including Representative Jamaal Bowman.Ms. Wiley hired Alison Hirsh, who left Mr. de Blasio’s administration earlier this year and worked for the powerful 32BJ local of the Service Employees International Union; and Maya Rupert, who worked on the presidential campaigns of Julián Castro and Elizabeth Warren.Maya Rupert, a former campaign manager for Julián Castro in the 2020 presidential race, was hired to work on Mara Wiley’s mayoral campaign.Credit…Michael Starghill Jr. for The New York TimesMr. Adams hired Katie Moore, political director of the influential Hotel Trades Council.But the competition is fierce.Abbey Lee Cook, the campaign manager for Representative Max Rose, who just announced his mayoral bid, already signed up to work with Tali Farhadian Weinstein, a former prosecutor who is running for Manhattan district attorney. A high-profile political firm led by Stu Loeser, an aide to former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, is also working on Ms. Weinstein’s campaign.Be like Bill de Blasio and ride an SUV? Not likely.Mr. de Blasio has been criticized for not riding the subway regularly to see riders’ commuting misery up close, opting instead to view the city from the windows of his chauffeured SUV.Admitting that he could do better, Mr. de Blasio told reporters last week that he would ride the subway soon, to show New Yorkers that it is safe during the pandemic.But some candidates are pledging to do more. Shaun Donovan, a former housing secretary under President Barack Obama, promised to ride the subway every day. Mr. McGuire said in an interview that the subway is the “easiest, cheapest and quickest way to get around,” and that he would ride the subway as much as possible if elected.Others followed suit after Streetsblog, a website dedicated to street safety, inquired about their commuting habits. Mr. Adams said that he was already a regular subway rider, and would continue to be one if elected mayor.Carlos Menchaca, a Brooklyn city councilman, committed to taking the subway or riding his bike while “significantly limiting car trips.”It should be noted that Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo actually controls the subway, and is rarely seen aboard a passenger train. But the mayor appoints members to the board of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the agency that oversees the subway, and can use his or her bully pulpit to help the system, which is in a deep financial crisis.Being early contenders pays off for Stringer and AdamsThe city’s Campaign Finance Board announced last week that it had approved more than $17 million in matching-funds payments to 61 candidates in races across the city next year.The initial outlay underscored the advantages of establishing early candidacies: Mr. Adams’s campaign qualified for about $4.4 million in matching funds, while Mr. Stringer’s campaign received about $3.3 million.The city comptroller, Scott Stringer, qualified for about $3.3 million in public matching funds; the only other mayoral candidate to receive matching funds was Mr. Adams.Credit…Chang W. Lee/The New York TimesNo other candidate met the dual threshold of raising at least $250,000 in contributions of $250 or less from at least 1,000 city residents by July.Mr. McGuire is not participating in the 8-to-1 matching-funds program, which effectively turns a $10 campaign contribution from a city resident into $90. Lupé Todd-Medina, a spokeswoman for Mr. McGuire, said the campaign felt good about not accepting taxpayer resources during a financial crisis and could raise enough money to get its message out.But Paul J. Massey Jr., a wealthy real estate executive who ran against Mr. de Blasio in 2017, suggested that mayoral candidates like Mr. McGuire may regret not participating in the matching-funds program. He said his biggest mistake as a first-time candidate was deciding to opt out; Mr. Massey raised $1.6 million, but spent it quickly on consultants and lent his campaign $1.2 million.“Being involved in the matching-funds program or writing checks the size Michael Bloomberg wrote are probably the few practical paths to financing a campaign for mayor,” he said in an interview.A ‘monumental failure of leadership’One candidate called for an elected Civilian Complaint Review Board and “massive disinvestments” in the New York Police Department. Another said the mayor demonstrated a “monumental failure of leadership.” And one candidate called for the dismissal of the police commissioner.The reactions came in response to a Department of Investigation report that concluded that the Police Department’s use of aggressive tactics had inflamed the summertime protests over the death of George Floyd, and violated protesters’ rights.The strongest reaction came from Dianne Morales, considered among the most progressive candidates in the race, and Ms. Wiley, a former chairwoman of the Civilian Complaint Review Board, which investigates accusations of police misconduct.Ms. Morales said the Police Department committed “acts of violence,” and called for “dedicated prosecutors” for police misconduct.Ms. Wiley said the police used “brutally violent tactics” against the protesters, and called for the dismissal of Commissioner Shea and a policy change that would require the police to be more accountable to civilian review.Mr. Stringer, Mr. Donovan and Mr. McGuire focused on what they saw as a failure of leadership.“When I’m mayor, I’ll make certain that my police commissioner understands my values and the perspective of people who look like me,” said Mr. McGuire, who is Black.Mr. Stringer, who has collected a string of endorsements from progressive candidates, called for “wholesale reform” because the Police Department operated without “real accountability.”Mr. Adams, a former police officer, had perhaps the most moderate view among the major candidates. He said the report detailed “tactical errors and acts of heavy-handed policing” and called for more diverse leadership and enhanced de-escalation and implicit bias training.Lawsuit against ranked-choice voting suffers setbackA lawsuit seeking to prevent the use of ranked-choice voting in the June primary was dealt a significant blow last week when a State Supreme Court judge declined to issue a temporary restraining order in the matter.“This court is disinclined to take any action that may result in the disenfranchisement of even one voter or take any action that may result in even one voter’s ballot being nullified,” Justice Carol R. Edmead of State Supreme Court in Manhattan wrote in her ruling.Under a new system approved by referendum last year, voters in primary and special elections can rank up to five candidates in order of preference. If no candidate receives a majority, the last-place winner is eliminated and the second-choice votes of those ballots are counted. The process continues until a candidate has won a majority.But several members of the Black, Latino and Asian Caucus of the City Council have filed a lawsuit suggesting that voters had not been educated about the new process, and that people of color and immigrants would be disenfranchised as a result.Two Black mayoral candidates, Mr. Adams, the borough president of Brooklyn, and Mr. McGuire, a businessman, both expressed concerns about Black voter disenfranchisement. Other Black mayoral candidates, Ms. Morales, a former nonprofit executive who is Afro-Latina, and Ms. Wiley, support the use of ranked-choice voting.The ruling directly affects a Feb. 2 special election for a City Council seat in Queens, which is slated to be the city’s first contest to use ranked-choice voting since the referendum was passed. Justice Edmead noted that overseas ballots for the race were about to be mailed out.AdvertisementContinue reading the main story More