The NAACP, which opposes net neutrality, has named AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast as corporate fundraising partners

From [HERE] LEADING CIVIL RIGHTS groups who for many years have been heavily bankrolled by the telecom industry are signaling their support for Donald Trump’s promised rollback of the Obama administration’s net neutrality rules, which prevent internet service providers from prioritizing some content providers over others.

The Obama administration’s Federal Communications Commission established net neutrality by reclassifying high-speed internet as a regulated phone-like telecommunications service, as opposed to a mostly unregulated information service. The re-classification was cheered by advocates for a free and open internet.

But now Trump’s new FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a former Verizon attorney, is pushing to repeal the net neutrality reform by rolling back that re-classification — and he’s getting help not only from a legion of telecom lobbyists, but from civil rights groups.

In a little-noticed joint letter released last week, the NAACP, Asian Americans Advancing Justice, OCA (formerly known as the Organization for Chinese Americans), the National Urban League, and other civil rights organizations sharply criticized the “jurisdictional and classification problems that plagued the last FCC” — a reference to the legal mechanism used by the Obama administration to accomplish net neutrality.

Instead of classifying broadband as a public utility, the letter states, open internet rules should be written by statute. What does that mean? It means the Republican-led Congress should take control of the process — the precise approach that is favored by industry.

None of the civil rights groups that signed the joint letter responded to a request for comment.

It’s not the first time civil rights group have engaged in lobbying debates seemingly unrelated to their core missions, but in favor of their corporate donors. At a time when OCA received major funding from Southwest Airlines, the group filed a regulatory letter on behalf of the airline in support of Southwest’s bid to open flights at Houston airport. The NAACP, after receiving financial backing from Wal-Mart, helped the retail chain during its contentious bid to open stores in New York City.

Telecom issues, however, are a particular specialty. Last week’s letter was organized by the Multicultural Media, Telecom & Internet Council (MMTC), a group funded by the telecom industry that has previously encouraged civil rights groups to oppose net neutrality. MMTC in previous years reported receiving about a third of its budget from industry-sponsored events; its annual summit, which was held last week, was made possible by $100,000 sponsorships from Comcast and AT&T, as well as a $75,000 sponsorships from Charter Communications and Verizon.

Click to read more ...

DHS details new guidelines for deporting Non-White immigrants: Due Process & Human Decency are Mere Inconvenient Obstacles to Mass Removal

From [HERE] Racist suspect John Kelly , Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) [official website], signed several memos [text, PDF] on Friday detailing plans to facilitate the detention and deportation of immigrants in the US illegally. According to the guidelines, DHS hopes [WP report] to further enforce immigration laws by increasing the number of immigrants targeted for primary removal and expediting removal hearings. DHS may also hire more enforcement agents and work with local authorities to make more arrest. The guidelines call for authorities to use expedited removal procedures, and immigrants hoping to avoid removal will need to prove that they have resided in the country continuously for two years. Regarding those seeking asylum, DHS is expected to tighten the "credible fear" threshold required to enter the country. Regarding parol, the new policies may cause more immigrants to be detained during the period between arrest and court. Should the DHS policies take effect, they would largely supersede [CNN report] former president Barack Obama's prior immigration orders. The new policies may still preserve Obama's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) [materials], which offers protection to immigrants who entered the US illegally as children. Currently the guidelines are unpublished, and therefore the DHS policies are still subject to change. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has since condemned the policies and warned that it may take future action if necessary. It stated;

“This is immigration enforcement under Trump: due process, human decency, and common sense are treated as inconvenient obstacles on the path to mass deportation. The Trump administration is intent on inflicting cruelty on millions of immigrant families across the country.

Virtually every immigrant is now a priority for detention and deportation.  Immigration and border agents will increase dramatically in number and are empowered to operate unfettered.  State and local law enforcement agencies, including those with records of racial profiling and police brutality, are encouraged to become immigration agents." [MORE]

The DHS policies are part of a larger overhaul of the country's approach to immigration undertaken by the new administration, largely departing from the policies of other post-WWII presidents [JURIST commentary]. In late January President Trump signed an executive order [JURIST commentary] to restrict travel to the US from certain countries and putting in place a temporary halt on refugees entering the US. Only a day later, a judge for the Eastern District of New York issued an emergency stay [JURIST report], temporarily preventing execution of the law, until the question of whether it applied to valid visa holders could be resolved. Earlier this month the Ninth Circuit upheld [JURIST report] a district court decision to block enforcement of the executive order nationwide. The proceedings regarding the order have been temporarily stopped [JURIST report], as Trump has announced that he will sign a new order on the issue soon.

[All Racists are Liars b/c Racism is Carried Out by Deception] FBI Docs Reveal the Trumps Had a 'No Niggers Allowed' Rental Policy

'He wanted me to get rid of the blacks.' From [HERE] and [HERE] This week the FBI released to the public nearly 400 pages of documents associated with the bureau’s 1970s investigation of racial discrimination in the Trump family’s real estate company, Trump Management, Incorporated. Donald Trump was at the time the president of the company, while his father Fred Trump was chairman.

While related documents had already been obtained and reported on by the Washington Post and other outlets via the Freedom of Information Act, this new release is significant because it provides the public immediate access to material from the investigation. The documents offer an unmediated view into Trump’s long record of racism, a personal history that sheds light on a watershed moment in civil rights history.

The federal lawsuit brought against Donald Trump and his father Fred Trump started the same way as so many other civil rights cases: with a test. In 1972, the Urban League decided to “test” the companies’ housing policies by sending both white and black volunteers seeking apartments. In case after case, they allege, black applicants were told there were no vacancies while white applicants were shown an apartment and given an application. Housing activists became so convinced of their case against Trump Management, Inc., that they alerted the Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ charged Trump and his company in violation of the 1968 Fair Housing Act—which forbade discrimination in housing on the basis of race—in October 1973.

The DOJ’s investigation into Trump would not have been possible without pressure from a powerful grassroots fair housing movement, which relentlessly advocated for integration, expanded tenant’s rights, and an end to exclusionary and exploitative practices like redlining, which barred communities of color from access to mortgage loans, and blockbusting, in which real estate agents would convince white homeowners in racially transitioning neighborhoods to sell their homes at low prices, and then re-sell them at inflated prices to black homebuyers.

The FBI’s Probe

The Trump files are illuminating in their ability to reveal what Sugrue describes as the “furtive tactics” real estate agents used after the Fair Housing Act to maintain segregation. The FBI documents reveal systemic discrimination against potential black renters—including allegations of fabricating rental leases, lying about the cost of rent and rejecting financially qualified black applicants.

Trump employees, according to the files, were instructed to write codes, including the letter “C” for “colored,” on the rental applications of blacks and Puerto Ricans. Trump’s coding system recalls the real estate codes used by the federal government’s Home Owners Loan Corporation during the New Deal. In “residential security maps” based on common practices in state and local ordinances as well as the real estate industry, the government color-coded areas with high populations of people of color as “red”—high-risk. This practice, known as redlining, denied mortgage capital to neighborhoods with high populations of non-whites—shutting out African Americans from homeownership and the accompanying wealth creation.

Many of the FBI documents reference “phony leases” that Trump employees allegedly showed to black applicants to convince them that an apartment had already been rented. In an interview with federal investigators, one employee stated that he believed phony leases were a “common practice” at the company and had heard about their use from at least two building superintendents. Another employee detailed how he was instructed by management to lie about the cost of rent to deter black applicants. A doorman who had worked at 2650 Ocean Parkway in Brooklyn submitted a handwritten statement alleging that his supervisor instructed him to tell African Americans “the rent was twice as much as it really was.” 

Subtler forms of discrimination mentioned in the files included requiring that applicants’ income be more than four times the monthly rent, which made even cheap apartments out of reach for many low-income black renters.

Even if black applicants could afford the rent, they were routinely turned away. A former rental supervisor at Tysens Park apartments in Staten Island—a complex that was overwhelmingly white—told the FBI that he had been instructed by a superior not to rent to African Americans or people on welfare. After a financially qualified black couple submitted an application, the supervisor recounted that he was told, “they’re black and that’s that.” Moreover, the man alleged that Fred Trump told him to “get rid” of the black residents in the complex by offering to pay their $500 down payment for cheap housing elsewhere.

Similarly, a former building superintendent at Lawrence Towers Apartments in Brooklyn says he “received instructions from the Trump Management Office concerning special handling of applications from Black families.” This two-track system meant that financially qualified white applicants were automatically approved, while black applicants were sent directly to the Trump office.

While the files do not clarify what happened to black applicants once they arrived at the Trump office, evidence suggests they were directed to apartment complexes with majority nonwhite residents. This practice, known as steering, involves directing white renters and buyers to majority-white neighborhoods, and black buyers and renters to majority-black neighborhoods. It was common within the real estate industry after the passage of the Fair Housing Act in 1968. The Washington Post reports allegations that Trump and his associates frequently steered minorities to one Brooklyn complex, Patio Gardens, that was 40 percent black. Other Trump-owned locations, including Ocean Terrace and Lincoln Shore apartments, had almost no black residents. [MORE]

The Fair Housing Legacy

Ultimately, the DOJ suit resulted in a federal court order—called a “consent decree”—in which the Trumps and government officials came to an agreement on a proposed remedy. The Trumps were ordered to “thoroughly acquaint themselves” with the Fair Housing Act and place ads informing people of color that their properties were open for all.

Donald Trump, for his part, denied admission of any liability but not a denial of any of alleged facts in this file. He filed a $100 million countersuit for defamation against the government in 1973 -  which was dismissed. Truth, or substantial truth, is a complete defense to a claim of defamation. The language of the consent decree itself states that the settlement was “in no way an admission” of guilt - as all consent decrees state. But how many inncocent people with Trump's resources sign consent decrees? 

The Justice Department lawyers regarded the settlement as a victory for the enforcement of the Fair Housing Act, “one of the most far reaching [settlements] ever negotiated.”

[GOP White Votary Too Small to Elect Trump] Citing Trump's False Voter Fraud Claims States are working to Purge Non-White Voters, Again

html5 video converter by EasyHtml5Video.com v3.9.1

 

From [HERE] and [HERE] and [MORE] President Trump will never come up with real evidence to support his claim that three to five million ballots were cast illegally in the 2016 election. The allegation is false, and no number of investigations or committees will be able to substantiate Trump’s claim.

But that doesn’t mean that the lie won’t have consequences. Already, at least 21 states across the country are capitalizing on political rhetoric about fraud to push for laws that make it harder for eligible citizens to vote.

At the annual gathering of secretaries of state in Washington, D.C. this week, Republican elections chiefs blocked an attempt to official denounce Trump’s lie. Instead, they cited the president’s claims, telling ThinkProgress they support measures like voter ID laws, cuts to same-day registration, and efforts to make it harder to register to vote.

Alabama’s Republican Secretary of State repeated the White House’s unsubstantiated claim that thousands of out-of-state citizens cast ballots in New Hampshire, potentially handing the state to Hillary Clinton. New Hampshire’s Secretary of State defended his state’s voter accessibility while his legislature pushes for a measure that would potentially block thousands of college students from casting ballots. And Nevada’s Secretary of State said she supports voter ID laws because she has never had a problem showing an ID to vote.

Trump’s lie about illegal votes will have dangerous consequences 

Study after study has shown that voter fraud is non-existent, yet the Republican party has used the false narrative of rampant fraud to push for laws that have shown to disenfranchise minority, low-income, and younger voters. Voter suppression laws do not prevent voter fraud, but they do prevent a disproportionately large share of Democratic-leaning voters from casting ballots, helping Republicans to win elections.

Democratic secretaries of state, though fewer in number, were also at the gathering, where they told ThinkProgress that their work countering the “voter fraud” narrative has become more challenging with President Trump in the White House. Connecticut Secretary of State Denise Merrill (D) said she worries for the future of voting laws with Republicans controlling all three branches of government. And New Mexico’s Maggie Toulouse Oliver (D) said that all state election chiefs should know that Trump’s claims of massive fraud are false, given the small number of fraud cases each state has documented.

“This group knows better and is potentially poised to be very vocal about that,” she told ThinkProgress. “I would be dismayed to hear that those false claims are being used to make things harder for voters.”

Looking for proof of fraud, GOP grasps at straws

Voting experts have repeated since the election that there is no proof of fraud on the level that Trump has claimed. At the National Association of Secretaries of State convention, David Becker, executive director of the Center for Election Innovation and Research, reminded the attendees that if massive fraud had occurred, they would be the first to know.

“There is a system of checks and balances in place,” he said during a panel on trust in elections. “We all know in this room that if there were massive voter registration fraud, we would have seen large numbers of flagged records that didn’t match DMV records or social security records, that we would have seen unusual levels of activity we hadn’t seen before, that we would have seen large numbers of requests for out of state mail ballots that we hadn’t seen before.”

None of that occurred, but that hasn’t stopped elections chiefs from crying fraud.

Click to read more ...

Racist Suspect Texas election officials say hundreds may have voted improperly but Have No Evidence

From [HERE] According to Texas election officials, hundreds of people were allowed to improperly cast ballots [USNews report] in the recent presidential election, evading the state's stringent voter ID law, by signing affidavits in lieu of showing their photo ID. State election officers are now contemplating whether to ask local prosecutors to bring criminal charges for the violations of the election laws. The Texas voter ID law, which required voters to show one of seven forms of identification to cast a ballot, was stepped back in August, allowing individuals to vote by signing an affidavit stating they faced an impediment to obtaining one of the seven forms of authorized identification. The lessened standard was implemented on the heels of an appeals court decision holding that the state's voter ID law discriminated against minorities. Among those using this softened voting requirement were individuals who claimed to have ID, but refused to show it. One election official said "[i]f we see that somebody blatantly says 'I have ID' and refused to show it, we're going to turn that over to the D.A.." While some perjury charges may be brought against those in violation of the law, it remains unlikely that much will come of the charges. Despite believing a large number of people broke the law, one county election official stated that it would likely not be proven in court "without a serious investigation or a lot of legwork."

Voter fraud has been a hot button issue of late. Several states have enacted statutes to address the issue, often by setting a stricter requirement for what type of ID is necessary to be allowed to vote. Some have argued [JURIST commentary] however, that having stricter voter ID laws will not improve the integrity of elections. In April 2016 the Arizona Superior Court dismissed [JURIST report] a lawsuit alleging voter fraud during the 2016 primaries. In January the US Supreme Court refused to hear [JURIST report] a lawsuit about a Texas voter ID law, that would limit IDs that could be used to vote to seven specified government issued IDs.

Analysis Finds that Racist Santander Bank Denied Mortgages to African Americans

From [HERE] Outlets of Santander Bank, already under fire for lending practices, denied mortgages to women, minorities and low-income borrowers in the U.S. Northeast more frequently than nearby banks, according to an analysis by an industry reform group on Thursday.

The Committee for Better Banks, a coalition of bank workers, consumer advocacy groups and unions, dug into government data on home loans in the U.S. Northeast, including nearly 10,000 Santander home-purchase applications, and found "a disturbing pattern of racial and economic discrimination."

Santander denied more than 26 percent of borrowers of color a mortgage in 2014, when other banks in the same locations only turned down 17 percent in aggregate, according to the analysis.

It also refused loans to 30 percent of low-income applicants, compared to the aggregate rate of 18 percent, and 20 percent of women, compared to the aggregate rate of 13.6 percent. 

Meanwhile, in 2015, Santander rejected more than three people of color for every white borrower it turned down.

Click to read more ...

Federal judge requires bail hearing for DACA immigration detainee

From [HERE] US Magistrate Judge James Donohue [official website] on Friday ruled that Daniel Ramirez Medina [IBT backgrounder], a Mexican immigrant-detainee, must be granted a bail hearing during the pendency of his immigration case [JURIST report]. Ramirez Medina was granted permission to stay and work in the U.S. by the Obama Administration's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, but is now being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). ICE alleges that Ramirez Medina has gang ties and should therefore be deported in accordance with President Donald Trump's mandate to deport DACA beneficiaries with criminal ties. According to his lawyers, Ramirez Medina is the first DACA beneficiary the Trump administration has sought to deport.

DACA has been a contentious issue in recent weeks. In January DACA-protected Mitzie Perez and the California League of United Latin American Citizens filed a lawsuit [JURIST report] against Wells Fargo alleging that the bank refused to extend Perez and other similarly situated students loans solely because of their immigration status. A Georgia state court refused last month to back down from its earlier ruling granting in-state tuition to Georgia university students protected by DACA. Also in January the US House of Representatives passed a funding bill [JURIST report] that included amendments designed to repeal key elements of DACA. A collection of mayors from major US cities, including Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, warned [JURIST report] then president-elect Donald Trump in December about potential negative economic consequences of repealing DACA.

Undocumented [non-white] Mother in Sanctuary in Denver Church: I've Paid Taxes for 20 Years, Why Hasn't Trump?

TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: So we go now from Seattle, Washington, to Denver, Colorado, where another parent is also fighting against possible deportation, by seeking sanctuary in a church. On Thursday, I spoke with Jeanette Vizguerra, a mother of four children who’s taken refuge in the First Unitarian Society church of Denver, out of fear she would be arrested and deported to Mexico if she went to her scheduled check-in with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. She has lived in this country for 20 years. She has four children here. I began by asking her, by Skype, as she sat in the church with her translator, how she decided to seek sanctuary in the church?

JEANETTE VIZGUERRA: [translated] So, in 2012, when I came back to the United States from my mother’s funeral, I knew that my case depended only on the discretion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, because my court process had already ended. And I came back to the U.S. I knew that I was going to need to organize more protection, not only for myself, but for other people in the community. And I began working with the American Friends Services Committee to create the Sanctuary Coalition. So, fortunately for me, I have not needed to enter refuge or sanctuary here at the church. The first person who benefited from that was Arturo Hernández García. And thanks to God that he was able to go home and is still here with his family.

And what led me to take the decision this time in my case was the silence from Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Homeland Security about my stay application that I submitted on December 7. They kept saying over and over again that they were just reviewing my case, just reviewing my case. They wouldn’t give us any information. And then, last week, with the arrest and deportation of Guadalupe, as well as the detention of a young DREAMer named Daniel, who has DACA, I decided that it was not worth the risk to go and present myself at Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Click to read more ...

On Every Goddamm Channel, All Day, Everyday, Trump's Play War with the Media [the people who made him]

Media Matters

President Donald Trump and his administration are engaged in an unprecedented war on the press, which began during his presidential campaign and continued into the transition period. Trump and his administration’s continued attacks on the press pose a distinct threat to our First Amendment freedoms, and Media Matters is devoted to tracking them. If you know of an attack by Trump or his administration on a journalist or media outlet that should be added to this list, email press@mediamatters.org with a link to the abuse. We will update this list regularly. 

January 20

New Jersey Reporter Said There Was A “Blackout On Regional Newspapers” At The Inauguration. Poynter quoted Jonathan Salant, a Washington correspondent for NJ Advance Media who has covered inaugurations since 1989, saying, “The presidential inaugural committee imposed a blackout on regional newspapers with Washington correspondents.” Salant added that he had “never seen such disdain for the media.”

Jonathan Salant, Washington correspondent for NJ Advance Media who has covered every presidential inauguration since 1989, informs me of the following:

"The presidential inaugural committee imposed a blackout on regional newspapers with Washington correspondents. They never returned emails, never responded to requests and denied everyone credentials to cover the Trump inaugural events but never told anyone so reporters had to wait on lines to pick up non-existent credentials."

They wouldn't even let reporters pick up their already-approved Secret Service credentials, Salant said.

"The Regional Reporters Association email list was buzzing the last two days as Washington reporters from papers across the country traded stories of not being told anything about their credentials, and being turned away when they showed up to try to find out anything," he said.

Salant has "never seen such disdain for the media," he said. [Poynter, 1/20/17]

January 21

President Donald Trump: “I Have A Running War With The Media.” During a visit to CIA headquarters, President Donald Trump said he has “a running war with the media” and called reporters “among the most dishonest human beings on earth.” 

Click to read more ...

Rhode Island Court System Has Only 3 African American Judges in the Entire State

From [HERE] February is black history month, a time when we celebrate the contributions of African-Americans. RIPR political analyst Scott MacKay says that when it comes to the Rhode Island judiciary, there isn’t much to cheer.

Of the 85 judges and magistrates in the Rhode Island court system, just three are African-American. When it comes to the judiciary, says Jim Vincent, president of the NAACP, the “`judiciary is one of the most egregious, in terms of the lack of diversity.”

There are no black judges on the state Supreme Court. There are no blacks on the state’s Traffic Court or among the state’s judge-magistrates. There are no black women on the bench at any state court.

Click to read more ...

Gallup: Trump Job Approval 21 Points Below Average at One-Month Mark

Gallup

President Trump's 40% job approval is 21 points lower than the average for presidents near the one-month mark and 11 points behind any other president's. [MORE]

Message to Magician Trump & his Jesusized Believers: Please Shut the Fuck Up

Trump's rambling of generalized theoretical messages about accountability to the public and independence have absolutely nothing to do with him and what he is actually doing now, here in this present reality. His many words are someone else's talking points. His statements to African Americans, "what do you have to lose?" Meaningless words in his racist mouth that were paraphrased & borrowed from Karl Marx. He is standing for whatever his believers will fall for. [MORE]

Undeceiver Dr. Blynd explains in Funktionary:

Believer - one who accepts that which has no basis in reality. 2) a person who enjoys being deceived. A believer does not seek—just accepts theologies and/or ideologies. 3) one who is addicted to vanity and/or chained to convention with conviction. 4) one who lives in a cloud of illusions, confounded by language and its deceptions. Believers are people who make their lives subjective slaves to a mere belief—engineered my limited and fragmented understanding and fostered by erroneous conclusions based solely on effects and appearances. A true believer would rather believe in something and be wrong than not believe in it and be right. 

Jesusize - to believe in something (or someone—real, mythologized or imagined) or even worship it, based on little (scant and sketchy) to no evidence in support of it (single-source propaganda), and uncorroborated accounts that fly in the face of knows history, facts and science. 2) to turn fiction or fictional accounts into fact and history through propaganda, indoctrination coercion and violence.  Just because a man called "Jesus" did not exist in history does not mean that you cannot become the Christ you are awakening in (or at least to) the Divine Mystery. (See: Jesus Seminar & Christ Consciousness). [MORE]

Doc Blynd further states, Racism is a "virus in the mind. A racist is a psychopath at war with his own being." [MORE] Suffering from the disease of constant comparison racists and their make believe beliefs, [imagining themselves to be a part of a hierarchy wherein persons unable to produce color & lacking melanin are supreme; imagining themselves to be higher than whatever they imagine you to be] are in a state of non-reality, a play world. "A divided mind, with the an unconscious and a conscious one, can never apperceive things as they are. Truth is adulterated with falsehood in the same proportion to which one is unconscious." 

Osho Rajineesh says "beleivers create their own deceivers." 

Trump has found suckers; people who want to be deceived & dominated by him & feel necessary to his domination. In being dominated they feel important [egos elevated] because his domination depends on them. Without believers where would he be? 

With his finger pointing to the moon, Osho provides further understanding in the break down of the following koan; 

There was a monk who called himself “The Master of Silence.”

Actually he was a fraud and had no genuine understanding.

To sell his humbug Zen he had two eloquent attendant monks

to answer questions for him,
but, as if to show his inscrutable silent Zen,
he himself never uttered a word.

One day, during the absence of his two attendants,

a pilgrim came to him and asked:
Master, what is the Buddha?

Not knowing what to do, or how to answer,

he looked desperately around in all directions

for his missing mouthpieces.

The pilgrim, apparently pleased and satisfied,

thanked the master, and set out again on his journey.

On the road the pilgrim met the two attendant monks

on their way home.
He began telling them enthusiastically
what an enlightened being this Master of Silence is.

He said: I asked him what Buddha is
and he immediately turned his face to the east and to the west

implying that human beings are always looking for Buddha
here and there, but actually,
Buddha is not to be found in any such directions.
Oh what an enlightened master he is,

and how profound his teachings!

When the attendant monks returned,

the Master of Silence scolded them thus:

Where have you been all this time?

A while ago I was embarrassed to death and almost ruined

by an inquisitive pilgrim. [MORE] 

Did Deluded Racists Elect a President Who Can't Read? Anecdotal Evidence Shows an illiterate Puppetician w/ His Finger on the Nuclear Button

Racist Suspect Chicago Mayor Agrees to Work w/ Racist Trump to Help [Destroy] "the Blacks"

From [HERE] In the first three weeks of Donald Trump’s presidency, mayors across the country became some of his most vocal opponents and vowed to fight his discriminatory executive orders. But there’s at least one city leader who wants to work closely with the new administration: Democratic Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. A member of the Democratic Party, Emanuel was elected in 2011, becoming Chicago's first Jewish mayor. He was re-elected on April 7, 2015. Without the black vote, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel wouldn't have won reelection. In the runoff election he receivied on average 57 percent of the vote in those South and West side wards. [MORE]

On Monday, Emanuel sat down with Attorney General Jeff Sessions to discuss “topics from public safety to public transportation.” According to the mayor’s office, Emanuel specifically asked for a federal crackdown on gun violence in the city.

“Public safety is a top priority for everyone, and over the course of the day the mayor reiterated his request for added federal resources including ex-offender programs, mentoring and increased federal gun prosecution in Chicago, as well as additional federal agents,” Emanuel spokesman Matt McGrath said of the meeting.

The request comes three weeks after Trump spewed false data about Chicago gun violence and threatened to send “the Feds” to “fix the horrible ‘carnage,’” and two weeks after the mayor replied, “Just send them.”

Trump has long skewed crime statistics and pointed to Chicago as a hotbed of violence to support his tough on crime agenda. Last week, he argued the city is rife with gang members who “are not even legally in our country” — a point disputed by the top commissioner in Cook County, where Chicago is located.

While gun violence did spike in Chicago last year, the meeting on Monday indicates that Emanuel’s solution is to work with people who have documented histories of racism.

Besides Trump’s recent Islamophobic and anti-immigrant policy decisions, Sessions made inflammatory remarks about communities of color in the past and launched a witch hunt against black civil rights organizers. And he has always been a supporter of the War on Drugs that landed millions of African Americans behind bars.

The meeting also indicates that Emanuel is backpedaling on his recent commitment to police reform and instead aligning himself with an administration that threatens police accountability and favors harsh criminal penalties — and, by extension, the culture of police violence that pervades cities across the U.S.

In recent years, Emanuel apologized for officer misconduct and scrambled to reform the Chicago Police Department (CPD) amid city-wide protests and calls for his resignation. Last month, following a damning Justice Department (DOJ) investigation that revealed a culture of police brutality and aggression in the city, he agreed to follow a consent decree if one were negotiated in the future. But Sessions opposes consent decrees, and has made no commitment to establish one in Chicago.

Emanuel’s meeting with the Trump administration is also a notable departure from the path chosen by his colleagues in other cities.

Few mayors have met with Trump and his team since Election Day. Five delegates from the U.S. Conference of Mayors sat down with Trump in December, but the organization, representing approximately 1,400 U.S. cities, later released statements opposing the executive order against sanctuary cities, as well as the Affordable Care Act repeal effort. The group also affirmed support for immigrants and refugees.

Along those lines, some mayors — including the leader of the country’s largest city, Mayor Bill de Blasio — defied Trump as soon as he issued the order against sanctuary cities. They opened their doors to immigrants and vowed not to use local law enforcement as immigration officers.

Emanuel made that promise, but his meeting with Sessions is a sign that he’s more inclined to work with the new administration than some of his peers.

Border Patrol Cops Asking Religious Questions As a Result Of Muslim Ban [like do you believe jesus' daddy is a white man?]