Chris Hedges's Blog, page 322

The Battle Agains the Racist in Chief Wages On

Many dared hope, after the 2008 election of Barack Obama, that the United States could someday enter a “post-racial” era. The election eight years later of Donald Trump to the same office demonstrated, sadly, that the scourge of racism is alive and well in America. Trump’s profound racism was described by his former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, when he testified before Congress Wednesday. Any attempt to heal the deep wounds of racism that scar this country must include a direct challenge to Donald Trump, our racist in chief.

“I know what Mr. Trump is. He is a racist. He is a con man. He is a cheat,” Michael Cohen said early in his statement to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. He elaborated: “The country has seen Mr. Trump court white supremacists and bigots. You have heard him call poorer countries ‘s***holes.’ In private, he is even worse. He once asked me if I could name a country run by a black person that wasn’t a ‘s***hole.’ This was when Barack Obama was president of the United States.”

Cohen continued: “While we were once driving through a struggling neighborhood in Chicago, he commented that only black people could live that way. And, he told me that black people would never vote for him because they were too stupid.”

Cohen’s summary is damning enough, but Trump’s record of racism is much longer. “Trump’s presidency and entire career has been an affront to civil rights so nothing in Michael Cohen’s testimony is surprising for a person that has historically racialized and stigmatized those around him,” said NAACP President Derrick Johnson in a statement Wednesday. “From his racist housing practices, to his villainization of the Central Park Five, to his birther accusations against President Obama, to creating safe havens for white supremacists — all of this maps out the actions and personality of a liar and a racist.”

The housing discrimination Johnson mentioned refers to a 1973 federal lawsuit against Donald Trump and his father, Fred Trump, for discriminating against African-Americans seeking apartments. Beginning in the 1990s, Trump attacked Native Americans, questioning their heritage in his attempts to block tribal casinos that would compete with his failing ventures in Atlantic City. He aggressively urged restoration of the death penalty in New York after five youth of color were accused of raping a white woman in the Central Park Five case. All five were imprisoned for years, and later had their sentences vacated when the real perpetrator was identified. New York City awarded them over $40 million in damages. Trump, to this day, still insists they are guilty.

Trump launched his presidential campaign in 2015 by calling Mexicans murderers and rapists, and has made the vilification and persecution of Central Americans fleeing violence a pillar of his xenophobic immigration policies, which include building a wall along the southern border. He quickly attempted to implement his Muslim ban and was eventually allowed to enforce a watered-down version of it after the Supreme Court ruled in his favor.

A Trump ally on the Oversight committee, Republican Mark Meadows, had African-American HUD official Lynne Patton, who formerly worked as a party planner for the Trump Organization, stand silently behind him as a living testament that Trump could not be a racist. Two women of color on the committee, Democrats Ayanna Pressley and Rashida Tlaib, both called out Meadows’ maneuver. “The fact someone would actually use a prop, a black woman in this chamber, in this committee is alone racist in itself,” Tlaib said.

February is Black History Month, and this year, 2019, marks 400 years since the first Africans kidnapped from their homelands were forcibly brought to North American shores and a life of slavery. Legendary escaped slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglass was born in February 1818. Malcolm X was assassinated on Feb. 21, 1965. Seventeen-year-old Trayvon Martin was murdered on Feb. 26, 2012. Our shortest month is devoted to this incredibly long and painful history.

This month, we visited the Legacy Museum and Memorial in Montgomery, Alabama, with its indoor museum and outdoor lynching memorial. These two sites convey the enormity and sweep of crimes against Africans brought here against their will, and the crimes perpetrated against their African-American descendants. From slavery, to Jim Crow and lynching, to mass incarceration, this history is portrayed in its stark brutality. But resistance to racism has also been a constant throughout U.S. history. It must be a part of our daily work, wherever we find it, whether in our communities, in Congress or in the Oval Office.

Cohen Hearing Shows How Trump’s Presidency Is Built on Racism

Michael Cohen’s explosive testimony Wednesday before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee illuminated multiple issues. Many themes emerged during the hours-long public hearing on Capitol Hill featuring President Donald Trump’s former attorney, including cronyism, bribery, corruption, deception, greed and crime. But one of the enduring themes was racism—Trump’s racism in particular, and by extension, that of his colleagues in continuing to defend and protect him.

Early in his opening remarks, Cohen said about the president, “He is a racist.” Later, he gave more detail, saying, “The country has seen Mr. Trump court white supremacists and bigots. You have heard him call poorer countries ‘shitholes.’ ” Giving actual examples of his personal interactions with Trump, Cohen explained, “In private, he is even worse. He once asked me if I could name a country run by a black person that wasn’t a ‘shithole.’ This was when Barack Obama was president of the United States.” He then gave a second example: “While we were once driving through a struggling neighborhood in Chicago, he commented that only black people could live that way.”

None of this is surprising to honest observers of the Trump presidency. Trump used discriminatory practices to build his real estate career. He took great pleasure for years in perpetuating the racist notion that President Obama was not a natural-born citizen. He jumped on the racist fears of a resentful white minority to scrape together an election win and then proceeded to feed the insatiable mob relentlessly with dehumanizing policies and rhetoric aimed at communities of color.

So Cohen’s assertions of Trump’s racism were hardly shocking. They are perfectly consistent with many things the president has said and done prior to the election and during his presidency. But the Republican Party was having none of it. During Wednesday’s hearings, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) revealed a surprise guest—a black woman named Lynne Patton, who works at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and who is a friend of the Trump family.

Meadows, whose aim was apparently to display Ms. Patton as a prop to undermine claims of Trump’s racism, said to Cohen, “You made some very demeaning comments about the president that Ms. Patton doesn’t agree with. In fact, it has to do with your claim of racism.” He added that, “As a daughter of a man born in Birmingham, Alabama, [according to Patton] there is no way that she would work for an individual who was racist.” When asked, “How do you reconcile the two of those?” Cohen shot back, “As neither should I, as the son of a Holocaust survivor.”

For people of color, this is a familiar and weary ploy by some whites who feel that any positive association with a person of color nullifies their racism. Meadows’ stunt was equivalent to the discredited tactic used by those who, when accused of racist behavior, respond with, “Some of my best friends are black.” In 2019, such responses should no longer be acceptable—except that for Trump and for much of the GOP, whose bigotry often seem right out of America’s Jim Crow era, that kind of talk is perfectly acceptable and reasonable. And when confronted by accusations of racism, they generally turn around and accuse the accuser of racism.

Just days before the Cohen testimony, Trump responded to filmmaker Spike Lee’s Oscar acceptance speech exhorting people in 2020 to “Make the moral choice between love versus hate,” by accusing Lee of making a “racist hit” on him. (How does asking people to choose love over hate translate to racism?) He also implied Lee was ungrateful because in Trump’s view, he “has done more for African Americans (Criminal Justice Reform, Lowest Unemployment numbers in History, Tax Cuts,etc.) than almost any other Pres!” In other words, some of Trump’s best friends are black.

Only newly elected Reps. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) dared to call Meadows out for bringing Patton to the hearing. First, Pressley asked Cohen, “Would you agree that someone could deny rental units to African-Americans, lead the birther movement, refer to the diaspora as ‘shithole countries,’ and refer to white supremacists as ‘fine people,’ have a black friend and still be racist?” Cohen agreed with her.

Then Tlaib went even further and declared that Meadows’ gesture was racist, saying, “The fact that someone would actually use a prop, a black woman, in this chamber, in this committee, is alone racist in itself.” At this Meadows lost his composure, sputtering about how his nieces and nephews were people of color. Meadows’ defensive response and claims of associations with people of color as proof against his racism literally made Tlaib’s point about his rationale for bringing out Ms. Patton. Apparently, not only are some of Meadows’ best friends nonwhite, but some of his relatives as well.

In his closing remarks, Cohen went beyond the personal acts that reveal Trump’s racism by blasting the president for his racist policies, saying, “You don’t separate families from one another, or demonize those looking to America for a better life. You don’t vilify people based the god they pray to.”

For those of us living under the past two years of Trump’s presidency, the long nightmare has been about so much more than corruption, greed and a lack of decorum. It has been a modern-day existential threat. The millions of Americans who voted for Trump and still continue to support him effectively endorse his racist attitudes and are emboldened to act them out in parking lots,grocery stores and schools. Hate crimes have spiked. Children have been ripped away from their parents and have faced abuse.

What Cohen’s testimony confirms is that Trump’s corruption, deception and hunger for power are built on an edifice of racist scapegoating. America’s bigoted masses and their Republican representatives are perfectly happy to see a deceitful, self-interested, dirty-dealing failed businessman in the White House as long as he promises to restore the domination of the nation’s white population. Cohen himself helped to enable the Trumpian dumpster fire. But he seems to have seen the light. When will the rest of America?

No Deal Reached Between Trump, Kim at 2nd Summit

HANOI, Vietnam — The Latest on the summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un (all times local):

1:40 p.m.

U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un have failed to reach an agreement at their second summit in Vietnam, but talks between the two nations will continue in the future.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders says the two leaders discussed denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. She adds: “No agreement was reached at this time, but their respective teams look forward to meeting in the future.”

Still, Sanders is describing the meetings between Trump and Kim as “very good and constructive.”

Trump and Kim departed the hotel where they’ve been holding summit negotiations far earlier than planned Thursday. A joint agreement signing ceremony was scrapped.

___

1:25 p.m.

President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un have departed the hotel where they’ve been holding summit negotiations far earlier than planned.

The leaders had been expected to hold a working lunch as well as attend a joint agreement signing ceremony at the Hanoi Metropole hotel on Thursday. Instead, they departed in separate motorcades within minutes of each other after doing neither.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters before Trump departed that there had been a “program change,” but she did not provide further explanation about what had prompted the upheaval or whether any deals had been agreed to.

Trump is scheduled to hold a news conference at 2 p.m. — two hours earlier than originally scheduled — before he departs Hanoi.

___

12:55 p.m.

Talks between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un are wrapping up earlier than expected.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters on Thursday that “negotiations are still ongoing” between the two delegations. Trump and Kim were scheduled to have lunch but did not enter the dining room where reporters were assembled.

Sanders says Trump will return with his delegation to his hotel soon, providing no updates on a scheduled joint signing with Kim that had been on the books for 2 p.m.

Sanders says Trump’s press conference, which had been scheduled for 4 p.m., has now been moved to 2 p.m. at his hotel.

___

12:50 p.m.

South Korean President Moon Jae-in expects to speak with U.S. President Donald Trump on the phone following Trump’s summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un over the future of the North’s nuclear weapons program.

A spokesman for Moon said Thursday that the call could take place shortly before Trump departs Vietnam or when he’s aboard the presidential plane.

Moon is desperate for a breakthrough in nuclear negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang so he can continue to push engagement with North Korea. Moon recently told Trump in a phone conversation that the South was ready to proceed with inter-Korean economic projects to induce further nuclear disarmament steps from the North.

___

Noon

South Korean President Moon Jae-in plans to offer new proposals for inter-Korean engagement following the high-stakes nuclear summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Moon’s announcement is planned for a Friday ceremony marking the 100th anniversary of a 1919 uprising by Koreans against Japan’s colonial rule and will likely include plans for economic cooperation between the rival Koreas.

Moon is desperate for a breakthrough in nuclear negotiations between Washington and Pyongyang so he can continue engagement with North Korea. He has driven the three-way diplomacy but is now held back by tough U.S.-led sanctions against the North.

Kim and Trump are meeting Thursday in Vietnam as they inch closer toward establishing formal ties.

___

11:25 a.m.

President Donald Trump says it’s “a good idea” for the U.S. to open a liaison office in North Korea, as Kim Jong Un calls the notion “welcomable.”

In an unprecedented question-and-answer session with reporters Thursday in Vietnam, the two leaders of the technically-warring countries inched closer toward establishing formal ties.

Asked by an American reporter if he was willing to allow the U.S. to open an office in Pyongyang, Kim said through a translator, “I think that is something which is welcomable.”

Trump says that he considers it “a good idea,” adding that it should happen “both ways.”

Earlier Thursday, Kim said he wouldn’t be holding a summit with Trump if he weren’t willing to make good on his denuclearization pledge.

___

11:15 a.m.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un says he wouldn’t be holding a second summit with President Donald Trump if he weren’t willing to make good on his denuclearization pledge.

Asked by a U.S. reporter Thursday in Hanoi whether he’s willing to denuclearize, Kim responded: “If I’m not willing to do that, I won’t be here right now.”

Trump told reporters that that’s what the two are discussing during their second day of talks.

Kim was also asked if the leaders would be talking about human rights, which he’s accused of abusing. But Trump responded to the question instead, telling reporters: “We’re discussing everything.”

The comments came as the two met with an expanded coterie of aides, including U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security adviser John Bolton.

___

11:05 a.m.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has answered a question from a foreign journalist almost certainly for the first time ahead of his high-stakes nuclear summit with U.S. President Donald Trump.

When asked by a member of the White House press pool about his outlook on the summit on Thursday, Kim said: “It’s too early to say. I won’t make predictions. But I instinctively feel that a good outcome will be produced.”

South Korea’s Unification Ministry, which deals with affairs with North Korea, couldn’t confirm whether it was the first time Kim answered a question from a foreign journalist.

But reporters didn’t get opportunities to ask questions of Kim during his three summits with South Korean President Moon Jae-in and his four meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Kim ignored questions shouted at him during his first summit with Trump last June in Singapore.

___

10 a.m.

U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong Un appeared more relaxed as they convened near the pool of the luxury Vietnamese hotel where they’re holding their second summit.

Trump and Kim emerged after their first formal bilateral meeting Thursday morning on the Metropole hotel’s pool patio, where they were joined by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and North Korean official Kim Yong Chol.

The group then went into a glass-enclosed area and sat down around a table for more talks.

Trump told reporters earlier that he’s in no rush for progress, saying: “What’s important is that we do the right deal.”

Trump and Kim will later be holding a working lunch and appearing at a joint-agreement signing ceremony later in the day.

Trump will hold a news conference before boarding his flight home.

___

9:10 a.m.

U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un are beginning the second day of their high-stakes nuclear summit with a one-on-one discussion.

Trump and Kim met Thursday, the morning after they opened the summit in Vietnam.

Trump told reporters that “a lot of great ideas” are “being thrown about.” He says, “When you have a good relationship, a lot of good things happen.”

The president also said he’s in “no rush” to make “the right deal,” a sharp break from his heated rhetoric a year ago about the threat posed by Pyongyang.

Kim added that the “whole world” was watching the talks and suggested that, for some, the image of the two “sitting side by side” must resemble “a fantasy movie.”

At Least 4,500 Abuse Complaints at Migrant Children Shelters

WASHINGTON — Thousands of accusations of sexual abuse and harassment of migrant children in government-funded shelters were made over the past four years, including scores directed against adult staff members, according to federal data released Tuesday.

The cases include allegations of inappropriate touching to staff members allegedly watching minors while they bathed and showing pornographic videos to minors. Some of the allegations included inappropriate conduct by minors in shelters against other minors, as well as by staff members.

Rep. Ted Deutch, D-Fla., released the Health and Human Services Department data amid a hearing on the Trump administration’s policy of family separations at the border. The data span both the Obama and Trump administrations, and were first reported by Axios.

From October 2014 to July 2018, the Office of Refugee Resettlement, a part of Health and Human Services, received 4,556 complaints, including allegations of sexual abuse, harassment and inappropriate behavior. Of those, the Justice Department received 1,303 more serious sex abuse complaints, including 178 allegations of sexual abuse by adult staff, officials said.

The number of complaints decreased during budget year 2017, but otherwise has hovered at about 1,200 per year. Refugee Resettlement officials said the majority of the allegations were “inappropriate sexual behaviors” between minors at the facilities, and shelters can often resolve these allegations through counseling and other non-criminal avenues.

Department officials said the majority of allegations weren’t substantiated, and they defended their care of children. They also noted the accused staff members were not employees of the department.

“We share the concern,” said Jonathan White, a Health and Human Services official who was in charge of the effort to reunify children with their parents, testifying before the House Judiciary Committee. “Any time a child is abused … is one time too many. We abide fully with the laws this Congress has passed, and we are very proud of our outstanding track record of full compliance including referring every allegation for investigation.”

The Office of Refugee Resettlement manages the care of tens of thousands of migrant children who cycle through the system each year. More than 2,700 children were separated from their parents over the summer at the border, and were placed in shelters. But most of the children in government custody crossed the border alone.

Children are placed in custody until they can be released to sponsors, usually a parent or close relative, while awaiting immigration proceedings. The shelters are privately run under contracts with the government.

Youth are held for increasingly longer periods of time, currently about two months. As of the first week of February, more than 11,000 migrant toddlers, children and teens were in federal custody as unaccompanied minors, up from about 2,500 detained children three months after Trump took office.

Sexual abuse allegations are reported to federal law enforcement, though it’s not clear whether anyone was charged criminally. In many cases, staff members were suspended and eventually fired.

Deutch said the data were clearly alarming.

“Together, these documents detail an unsafe environment of sexual assaults by staff on unaccompanied minors,” he said.

Health and Human Services officials say all allegations are taken very seriously, and the department cooperates with all investigations.

Facilities under government contract must provide training to all staff, contractors and volunteers. Background checks are completed on potential employees, and facilities are prohibited from hiring anyone who has engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior.

But Arizona officials moved last fall to revoke licenses for one of the major nonprofits that operates migrant children shelters after it missed a deadline to show that all its employees passed background checks.

A state investigation of Texas-based Southwest Key last summer, prompted by several reports of sexual abuse of immigrant children in Arizona, found that some shelters had not conducted fingerprint checks for all employees.

Southwest Key has apologized and is working with the state to ensure it never misses a deadline again, a spokesman said.

Trump, at North Korea Summit, Distracted by Cohen

HANOI, Vietnam — The moment was meant to be a grand diplomatic triumph, a headline-dominating spectacle that could lead to the disarmament of a dangerous nation while delivering a vital political victory.

Instead, President Donald Trump’s high-stakes summit with North Korea’s Kim Jong Un in Vietnam on Wednesday was in danger of being upstaged by a monumental betrayal unfolding half a world away in Washington.

Hours after Trump sat face-to-face with Kim in Vietnam, his former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, sat before Congress and testified that his longtime boss was a “con man” and a “racist” who lied about having advanced knowledge of WikiLeaks plans to release an opponent’s stolen emails.

The spectacle was proof the Trump presidency has not yet exhausted its ability to surprise. As the president staged a historic summit abroad, a former confidante delivered testimony, both detailed and taunting, that threatened to humiliate the president and undermine his foreign policy goals.

The drama drew Trump’s attention even amid sensitive denuclearization talks. Even before the hearing began, the president unleashed an attack on his former fixer, who has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and campaign finance violations and has been sentenced to three years. In a tweet, Trump downplayed Cohen’s influence and claimed he was “lying in order to reduce his prison time.”

Later, as he sat for a photo with Kim, Trump bristled at reporters’ questions about Cohen. After the event, the White House took the extraordinary step of barring four U.S. reporters, including one from The Associated Press, from Trump’s dinner with Kim, citing the “sensitivities” of the meeting.

Democrats consider Cohen their star witness as they kick off investigations into Trump’s business practices, presidential campaign and embattled charitable foundation, including any payments relating to efforts to influence the 2016 election. He was initially due on Capitol Hill earlier this month, but his appearance was delayed. The president’s son Donald Jr. accused Democrats of timing the hearing to interfere with Trump’s trip abroad.

Cohen’s testimony appeared designed to get under Trump’s skin.

Reading from his prepared remarks, Cohen said Trump instructed him to threaten schools that Trump attended to prevent release of his grades or SAT scores. Cohen also described discussing the Vietnam War with his former boss, who didn’t serve because he received a medical deferment for bone spurs. But Cohen says Trump could not provide any medical records and said: “You think I’m stupid, I wasn’t going to Vietnam.”

Added Cohen, addressing the president thousands of miles away: “I find it ironic, President Trump, that you are in Vietnam right now.”

The hearing began just before midnight in Hanoi. It was not clear whether Trump stayed up late to watch. The president did spend some of the downtime at his hotel before his dinner with Kim watching the coverage of Cohen’s prepared testimony, which was released the evening before his Capitol Hill appearance.

In the written testimony released in advance of the appearance, the president’s former lawyer and fixer acknowledged he organized a cover up of potentially damaging allegations of infidelity, which Trump denies, and listened to Trump’s racist remarks. Cohen claimed Trump was told by an associate, Roger Stone, that WikiLeaks had emails damaging to his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton’s campaign and planned to release them. Trump has previously denied knowing anything about Stone’s communications with WikiLeaks.

Cohen’s testimony on the very day Trump met with Kim is a particularly acute moment of domestic humiliation for a president engaged in foreign diplomacy, but it wasn’t the first, said Princeton University history professor Julian Zelizer.

Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, all endured trouble at home that hampered their foreign policy aims. Zelizer noted that Clinton ordered air strikes on Iraq in 1998 as an impeachment vote loomed in the House of Representatives. In that case, critics accused Clinton of staging a distraction — a concern that has been raised regarding Trump’s moves with North Korea.

“The presidency doesn’t stop, even when scandal hits,” said Zelizer. “The one thing that’s different is that he’s tweeting. In ’98 the president said, ‘I’m focused on foreign policy,’ and he tried to act presidential.”

Added Zelizer of Trump: “I think he is going to connect the stories himself.”

The president’s two-day summit with Kim in Hanoi began with a highly choreographed greeting and photo-op, followed by a dinner, while the serious negotiating was set for Thursday. But Cohen shadow’s reached across the Pacific, as Trump was asked at the summit by an Associated Press reporter if he had any response to Cohen’s testimony.

The president shook his head and scowled.

And a short time later, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders approached the press and said that no reporters would be allowed into the dinner. That was an abrupt change from the initial plan issued by the White House, which had said that access would be granted to the usual 13-person group of reporters, known as the traveling press pool, who follow the president to every event.

Hours after Trump’s day ended, Cohen remained present. Several White House staffers, including chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, retired to the hotel lobby for a drink. But on the TVs behind them, Cohen’s testimony beamed in from thousands of miles away.

___

Associated Press writer Catherine Lucey in Washington contributed to this report.

Michael Cohen’s Testimony Underscores Rifts Between Parties

WASHINGTON — The Latest on President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer Michael Cohen (all times local):

6:10 p.m.

Michael Cohen says he was “humbled” as he left the House Oversight and Reform Committee after daylong testimony.

In a brief statement to reporters, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer thanked the committee’s chairman, Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, “for giving me the opportunity today to tell my truth.”

Cohen called Trump a “racist,” “con man” and a “cheat” in his testimony.

He says he hopes his testimony “helps in order to heal America.”

Cohen starts a three-year prison sentence in May for lying to Congress, campaign finance violations and other charges.

__

5:15 p.m.

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen says he’s worried that if the president doesn’t win re-election, there will not be a “peaceful transition of power.”

Cohen is testifying Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee. He told the committee in closing remarks that his loyalty to Donald Trump has cost him his job, his family and his freedom. And he’s worried the country will suffer a similar fate unless people stop supporting Trump.

Cohen has pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and orchestrating hush-money payments to women who said they had affairs with Trump.

He told the committee Trump is a racist con man who repaid him the hush money from the White House after he became president. Trump has strongly denied the allegations.

__

5 p.m.

Michael Cohen says President Donald Trump devalued his assets in order to pay lower real estate taxes.

Cohen, Trump’s former attorney, is testifying before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

His comment on Trump’s assets came in response to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a New York Democrat.

Cohen says Trump claimed Trump National Golf Club in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., was worth more than what he reported to local tax authorities. Cohen says that in order to reduce real estate bills, he would devalue the assets and then put in a request to tax officials for a deduction.

Cohen also testified he had knowledge that the president inflated his assets to an insurance company.

__

4:55 p.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, says he’s seen the president’s tax returns but hasn’t gone through them.

Cohen is testifying Wednesday before the House oversight committee.

Trump broke with decades of tradition for presidential candidates by refusing to release his income tax filings during his 2016 campaign. He has said he won’t release them because he is being audited.

Cohen on Wednesday undercut that rationale, saying he presumes Trump is not being audited.

Cohen says he asked Trump for paperwork about the audit to prepare Trump’s response to reporters about the issue but never received any documentation.

Cohen says Trump didn’t want to release his tax returns because he “didn’t want an entire group of think tanks, who are tax experts, to run through his returns.”

__

3:40 p.m.

The Florida Bar has opened an investigation into a U.S. congressman from Florida after it received a complaint about a taunting tweet he made hours before President Donald Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, testified before a U.S. House committee.

Florida Bar spokeswoman Francine Walker said in an email Wednesday that an investigation has been opened into Republican Matt Gaetz, but confidentiality rules prevent her from offering any further details.

Gaetz, who is a Florida Bar member, has 15 days to respond.

After an initial evaluation, the case is sent to a branch office and then a grievance committee, if Bar officials believe it has merit.

If the grievance committee finds probable cause, charges are filed with the Florida Supreme Court and then a judge is appointed to hear the case.

__

3:20 p.m.

A spokeswoman for President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign is dismissing Michael Cohen’s testimony as coming from a felon and convicted liar.

Kayleigh McEnany says in a statement Wednesday that Cohen is offering “what he says is evidence, but the only support for that is his own testimony.”

Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer, is appearing before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

In his testimony, Cohen painted Trump as a racist and con man who acted like a mob boss. He said Trump used those around him to tamp down allegations that could be damaging to him.

McEnany emphasizes that prosecutors have said Cohen had an instinct to blame others and committed crimes, in part, to benefit himself.

Cohen has pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and lying to Congress.

__

2:40 p.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer says he was pressured by the president to lie to first lady Melania (meh-LAH’-nee-ah) Trump about hush money payments paid to a porn actress who alleged she had an affair with Donald Trump.

Michael Cohen tells the House Oversight and Reform Committee that the president put him on the phone with Mrs. Trump, and Cohen says he misled her in that conversation.

Cohen is referring to $130,000 that he arranged to be paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford.

The White House has denied that Trump had an affair with Daniels.

___

2:10 p.m.

Fordham University is confirming it received a letter from Donald Trump’s then-lawyer threatening legal action if Trump’s academic records became public.

Ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen has testified to Congress that Trump directed him to write letters warning his schools and the College Board not to disclose his grades or SAT scores.

Cohen has given the House Oversight and Reform Committee a copy of his letter to Fordham. It was dated May 2015, about a month before Trump started his presidential campaign.

Fordham says the letter from Trump’s lawyer was preceded by a phone call from a campaign staffer. Fordham says it’s bound by federal law barring the release of student records.

Trump attended the Roman Catholic university in New York City for two years. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania.

Penn and the College Board declined to comment.

___

1:50 p.m.

Ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen says President Donald Trump called him and asked him to mislead the public about hush money paid to a porn actress.

Cohen says during testimony before the House Oversight and Reform Committee that Trump called him in February 2018 to discuss the public messaging about $130,000 paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet about allegations of an extramarital affair.

Cohen says Trump asked him to say that the president “wasn’t knowledgeable” about the payments.

In fact, Cohen says Trump directed and coordinated the payments. Documents also show Trump personally signed at least one check paid to Cohen to reimburse him for the payments.

The White House has denied Trump had an affair with Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford.

___

1 p.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, says prosecutors in New York are investigating conversations that Trump or his advisers had with Cohen after his hotel room was raided by the FBI.

Cohen is testifying before the House Oversight and Reform Committee, and he was asked by a Democrat, Raja Krishnamoorthi (krish-nah-MOOR’-thee) of Illinois, about the last contact Cohen had with Trump or any agent representing the president.

Cohen says it was about two months after his hotel room was raided by the FBI in April 2018. But Cohen is declining to provide more specific details and says prosecutors are investigating the matter.

Cohen has pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations, lying to Congress and other offenses.

He’s been cooperating with prosecutors and is expected to begin a three-year prison sentence in May.

___

12:45 p.m.

For much of Michael Cohen’s congressional testimony, Republicans on the House Oversight and Reform Committee have called President Donald Trump’s former lawyer a liar.

Rep. Paul Gosar (GOH’-sahr) of Arizona and other Republicans say Cohen can’t be trusted for what he says about Trump because Cohen pleaded guilty last year for lying to Congress.

At the hearing, Gosar put up a sign that read “Liar, Liar Pants on Fire” and called Cohen a “pathological liar.”

Democrats shot back, with Massachusetts Rep. Stephen Lynch saying committee Republicans “aren’t afraid you’re going to lie. I think they’re afraid you’re going to tell the truth.”

Cohen turned the focus on the president, saying lying became “the norm” working for Trump.

___

12 p.m.

President Donald Trump’s eldest sons are tweeting their thoughts about Michael Cohen’s public testimony — and they’re ridiculing him as a disgruntled ex-employee out to try and save himself.

Cohen is the president’s former lawyer who’s cooperated with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May. Cohen is testifying before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

Donald Trump Jr. tweets that Cohen’s testimony sounded “like a breakup letter” and that it’s “funny how things change when you’re trying to save your ass.”

Trump Jr. and Eric Trump suggest the longtime Trump loyalist is retaliating against the president after getting rejected for a White House job.

Eric Trump tweets Cohen was “lobbying EVERYONE” to be chief of staff and that it “was the biggest joke in the campaign.” Cohen tells the committee he was never interested in such a position.

Eric Trump also is taking aim at Cohen’s impending prison sentence by tweeting a Republican Party video about Cohen with the title, “Have Fun in Prison!”

___

11:17 a.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, says he doesn’t know whether Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election, but he has “suspicions” about that.

Cohen tells a House committee that he witnessed instances before the election in which Trump was informed about WikiLeaks’ release of Democratic National Committee emails and about a Trump Tower meeting that included campaign advisers, Trump’s oldest son and a Russian lawyer.

Cohen says Trump had told him that the younger Trump “had the worst judgment of anyone in the world.”

Cohen also said Donald Trump Jr. “would never set up any meeting of any significance alone — and certainly not without checking with his father.”

Cohen has turned on his former boss and cooperated with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Cohen begins a three-year prison sentence in May.

___

11:15 a.m.

“Not true.”

That’s the word from Roger Stone, a confidant of President Donald Trump, in response to a claim by Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen.

Cohen has testified to a House committee that Stone told Trump that the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks planned to release emails damaging to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Cohen says Stone told Trump in July 2016 that Stone had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange, who run WikiLeaks, and that there would be a “massive dump” of emails harmful to the Clinton campaign.

Cohen’s allegation would contradict the president’s assertions that he was in the dark on this issue.

It’s not immediately clear what evidence Cohen has to support the allegation or how legally problematic the claim it might be for Trump.

Stone has pleaded not guilty to witness tampering and obstruction in Mueller’s investigation.

___

11:10 a.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer is apologizing to Congress and the American people for, in his words, “actively working to hide from you the truth about Mr. Trump when you needed it most.”

Michael Cohen is also apologizing to lawmakers for lying to Congress in 2017. Cohen pleaded guilty to that lying, among other offenses, and is headed to prison in May.

Cohen tells a House committee that “it seems unbelievable that I was so mesmerized by Donald Trump that I was willing to do things for him that I knew were absolutely wrong.”

___

11 a.m.

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen says he wouldn’t accept a pardon from the president and he didn’t ask for one.

Cohen is testifying under oath before the House Oversight and Reform Committee — and has said that Trump instructed him to pay off women who said they’d had affairs with the president. Trump has denied the claims.

For more than a decade, Cohen was a key power player in the Trump Organization and a fixture in Trump’s political life.

Cohen is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May after pleading guilty to lying to Congress in 2017 and committing campaign finance violations while he was working for Trump.

Cohen says he’s speaking before the committee to set the record straight and try to atone for some of his mistakes.

___

10:58 a.m.

President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, says Trump personally signed checks repaying him for hush money paid to porn actress Stormy Daniels.

Cohen has presented a check to the House Oversight and Reform Committee. The $35,000 check was from dated August 2017.

Cohen has pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations connected to a $130,000 hush-money deal involving porn actress Stormy Daniels. She alleges an affair; Trump denies it.

Cohen says he personally paid Daniels. But Trump’s current lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, has said Cohen was repaid through a retainer agreement.

Prosecutors have said the Trump Organization paid Cohen in monthly installments to reimburse him for the Daniels’ payment. They say Cohen used “sham” invoices to try to conceal the true nature of the payments.

A second check from March 2017 was signed by Donald Trump Jr. and Trump’s chief financial officer.

___

10:55 a.m.

The president’s former personal lawyer says Donald Trump lied about his wealth to look richer to Forbes magazine and less wealthy for tax authorities.

Michael Cohen is testifying under oath before the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

Cohen says financial documents show Trump inflated his assets to rank higher on the Forbes world’s billionaires list. Trump ranked 766th on the publication’s latest list, which was released last March.

Cohen claims Trump would also deflate his assets to pay lower real estate taxes.

Democrats have promised an aggressive effort to investigate the president since they regained control of the House in January.

For more than a decade, Cohen was a key power player in the Trump Organization and a fixture in Trump’s political life.

Cohen is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May after pleading guilty to lying to Congress in 2017 and committing campaign finance violations while he was working for Trump.

___

10:52 a.m.

Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen is telling Congress that President Donald Trump lied to the American people about negotiations during the 2016 presidential campaign about a proposed Trump building in Russia.

Cohen says in public testimony before the House Oversight and Reform Committee that Trump “knew of and directed” the negotiations about a proposed Trump Tower in Moscow. Cohen pleaded guilty last year to lying to Congress about the timing of the business proposal.

Cohen is testifying that Trump didn’t “directly” tell him to lie to Congress about the project but he did so “in his way.”

Cohen says that while he was negotiating the Russian business deal during the campaign, Trump would look him in the eye and tell him “there’s no business in Russia.”

___

10:50 a.m.

The top Republican on the House Oversight and Reform Committee is charging that Democrats are bringing President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to testify so they can “start their impeachment process.”

Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio tells the committee chairman, Maryland Democrat Elijah Cummings, at the start of the hearing that “your chairmanship will always be identified by this hearing.”

Jordan and other Republicans are challenging Cohen’s credibility because Cohen is going to prison for lying to Congress in 2017, among other charges.

Democrats invited Cohen to testify after he turned on Trump and started cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

___

10:45 a.m.

President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, is accusing Trump of being a “racist.”

Testifying under oath before a House committee, Cohen says he heard Trump say that black people “would never vote for him because they were too stupid.”

Cohen says that when he and Trump were driving through a “struggling neighborhood” in Chicago, Trump said that “only black people could live that way.”

Trump has denied charges of racism before, and has said, “I’ve never used racist remarks.”

For more than a decade, Cohen was a key power player in the Trump Organization and a fixture in Trump’s political life.

Cohen is set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May after pleading guilty to lying to Congress in 2017 and committing campaign finance violations while he was working for Trump.

___

10:30 a.m.

The president’s former personal lawyer claims Donald Trump was told in advance that WikiLeaks planned to release emails damaging to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 White House campaign.

That’s what Michael Cohen is telling the House Oversight and Reform Committee.

In his prepared testimony, Cohen says he was in Trump’s office in 2016 when Trump adviser Roger Stone called.

Cohen says Stone told Trump that Stone had just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange, who run the anti-secrecy WikiLeaks group, and that there would be a “massive dump” of emails harmful to the Clinton campaign.

Cohen’s allegation would contradict the president’s assertions that he was in the dark on this issue.

It’s not immediately clear what evidence Cohen has to support the allegation or how legally problematic this claim it might be for Trump.

Special counsel Robert Mueller hasn’t suggested that merely being aware of WikiLeaks’ plans is by itself a crime.

Stone has pleaded not guilty to witness tampering and obstruction in Mueller’s investigation.

___

10:25 a.m.

The chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee says the public has a right to hear from former Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer.

Democrat Elijah Cummings of Maryland says Cohen’s testimony is necessary because it’s the committee’s job to search out the truth. Cummings says the committee won’t restrict any questions, and that means some lawmakers may ask about special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

___

10:20 a.m.

As soon as the House hearing involving President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, got underway, a key Republican lawmaker claimed that the committee was violating its own rules.

Rep. Mark Meadows, a top Trump ally, said Cohen was showing “disdain” for the committee process by failing to submit his prepared remarks ahead of time.

Meadows claimed it was an intentional “violation of the rules.”

Cohen’s much-anticipated testimony was received by the committee the night before Wednesday’s session, according to the chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Democratic Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland.

Meadows made a motion to postpone the hearing. Lawmakers quickly voted to reject the motion and the hearing resumed.

___

10:15 a.m.

A Democratic member of the House Oversight and Reform Committee says that restrictions on questions about Russia have been lifted when the committee questions Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former lawyer.

Just before the hearing began, Rep. Gerry Connolly said he’d discussed the issue with the committee’s leadership. The Virginia congressman said previous limits on questions about Russia were “null and void” because Cohen mentioned the issue in his opening statement.

The committee chairman had issued a memo outlining the scope of the hearing, and it didn’t include questions about Russia. Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings had said that he didn’t want to interfere with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

___

10 a.m.

A congressional hearing is underway featuring the much-anticipated public testimony from Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer.

Cohen is expected to detail before the House Oversight and Reform Committee what he believes is Trump’s lying, racism and cheating, and possibly even criminal conduct.

Cohen, who was Trump’s longtime fixer, is the first high-profile witness called before the committee as newly empowered Democrats pursue an aggressive effort to investigate the president.

Cohen played a pivotal role in buying the silence of a porn actress and a former Playboy Playmate who both alleged they had sex with Trump. The president has denied their claims.

Cohen has pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations connected to the payments and to lying to Congress.

He’s set to begin a three-year prison sentence in May.

___

4:30 a.m.

President Donald Trump is lashing out at his former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, before Cohen testifies at a public hearing.

Trump is distancing himself from Cohen in a tweet from Hanoi, Vietnam, where he has traveled for a summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Trump insists Cohen was just “one of many lawyers who represented me (unfortunately).” He also says Cohen “had other clients also” and “did bad things unrelated to Trump.”

Cohen plans to tell a House committee on Wednesday that Trump knew ahead of time that WikiLeaks had emails damaging to 2016 Democratic rival Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and that Trump is a “racist,” a “con man” and a “cheat.” That’s according to prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press.

Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about a project in Russia. Trump accuses Cohen of now lying to reduce his prison sentence.

___

2:15 a.m.

President Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer is planning to tell a House committee that Trump knew ahead of time that WikiLeaks had emails damaging to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

In prepared testimony obtained by The Associated Press, Michael Cohen says that Trump implicitly told him to lie about a Moscow real estate project.

And the former Trump fixer brands his old boss a “racist,” a “con man” and a “cheat.”

On the matter of racism, Cohen says the president made racist comments “disparaging African-Americans, saying at one point that black people would never vote for him because they were too stupid.”

Ahead of his appearance, Cohen said Tuesday that the American people can decide “exactly who is telling the truth” when he testifies Wednesday before the House Oversight and Reform committee.

House OKs Democrats’ Bill Blocking Trump Emergency on Wall

WASHINGTON — House Democrats have ignored a veto threat and passed legislation that would stymie President Donald Trump’s bid for billions of extra dollars for a U.S.-Mexico border wall. The move has escalated a clash over whether he has abused his powers to advance the signature pledge of his 2016 campaign.

The House’s 245-182 vote Tuesday to block Trump’s national emergency declaration fell well below the two-thirds majority that would be needed to override what would be the first veto of Trump’s presidency. Thirteen Republican backed the Democrats’ measure as top Republicans worked to keep defections as low as possible, wanting to avoid a tally suggesting that Trump’s hold on lawmakers was weakening.

The issue is now before the Republican-run Senate, where there already were enough GOP defections to edge the resolution to the brink of passage. Vice President Mike Pence used a lunch with Republican senators at the Capitol to try keeping them aboard, citing a crisis at the border, but there were no signs he had succeeded.

“I personally couldn’t handicap the outcome at this point,” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who plans a vote within the next three weeks. He even said Republicans remained uncertain about the legality of Trump’s move.

The showdown was forcing Republicans to cast uncomfortable votes pitting their support for a president popular with GOP voters against fears that his use of emergency powers would invite future Democratic presidents to do likewise.

House Republicans who joined all voting Democrats to support the resolution included moderates from competitive districts such as Fred Upton of Michigan and libertarian-leaning conservatives like Thomas Massie from Kentucky.

The White House, in a letter to lawmakers threatening a veto, said blocking the declaration would “undermine the administration’s ability to respond effectively to the ongoing crisis” at the border.

Republicans said Democrats were driven by politics and a desire to oppose Trump at every turn. They said Trump had authority to declare an emergency to protect the country and they defended his claims of a crisis.

“We are at war on the southern border with the drug cartels,” said Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas.

Trump has asserted that barriers would stop drugs from Mexico from entering the U.S. In fact, government figures show that 90 percent of drugs intercepted from Mexico are caught at ports of entry, not remote areas where barriers would be constructed.

Democrats said Republicans repeatedly accused former President Barack Obama of flouting the Constitution, which gives Congress control over spending, but are ignoring Trump’s effort to do the same.

“Is your oath of office to Donald Trump, or is your oath of office to the Constitution?” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., asked Republicans.

Trump’s push for the wall reflected a continuation of the anti-immigrant views that helped fuel his election, some Democrats said.

“Since when do we call human beings in need a national emergency?” said Mexican-born Rep. Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, D-Ill. “Is he running out of insults for people like me?”

Democrats said the crisis is a fiction manufactured by Trump to evade Congress’ vote this month to provide less than $1.4 billion for barrier construction. That was well below the $5.7 billion Trump demanded as he forced a record-setting 35-day federal shutdown.

“The president does not get to override Congress in a raucous temper tantrum over his inability to broker a deal” with lawmakers for more money, said Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, sponsor of the one-sentence measure blocking the declaration, called Trump’s move “constitutional vandalism.”

Trump used a 1976 law to declare a national emergency and ordered the shift of $3.6 billion from military construction projects to wall building. Citing other powers, he intends to shift an additional $3.1 billion from Defense Department anti-drug efforts and a fund that collects seized assets.

The money would be used to build steel barriers up to 30 feet tall and other barriers and for “law enforcement efforts,” said a White House statement.

In the Senate, three Republicans have said they will back Democrats’ drive to block the emergency declaration: Maine’s Susan Collins, Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski and North Carolina’s Thom Tillis. One more GOP defection would provide enough votes to approve the Democratic measure, assuming all Democrats and their independent allies back it.

Republicans said senators asked Pence numerous questions about which projects Trump would divert to pay for the wall, with Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., saying the discussion was “hearty.” Shelby, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, which controls spending. said the committee would quickly “backfill” money for military construction with other funds he did not identify.

“That issue won’t stay alive long,” Shelby told reporters.

Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the chief GOP vote counter, said there may be GOP attempts to amend the House measure, saying Republicans “think they have amendments that would improve it.”

That suggests that McConnell may try finding a way to add language that could sink the Democratic resolution or, perhaps, make it more palatable for Republicans. The law requires the Senate to vote on a measure within 18 days of receiving it from the House.

Though presidents have declared 58 emergencies under the law, this is the first aimed at acquiring money for an item Congress has explicitly refused to finance, according to Elizabeth Goitein, co-director for national security at New York University Law School’s Brennan Center for Justice. This is also the first time Congress has cast votes on whether to annul an emergency declaration, she said.

Several lawsuits have been filed aimed at blocking the money, including by Democratic state attorneys general, and progressive and environmental groups. Those suits are likely to delay access to those funds for months or years.

___

AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro and Associated Press writer Colleen Long contributed.

The Right May Finally Get Its War on Iran

John Bolton has never made a secret of his burning desire to stoke a war between the United States and Iran. But Bolton is not the only one on Donald Trump’s national security team who dreams of such a military confrontation. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has joined with Bolton in recent months to prepare a case for possible war with Iran.

The tactics used by Pompeo and Bolton bear a strong resemblance to those pursued by Dick Cheney when he pushed for an attack on Iran from 2004 to 2007. Like Cheney, Pompeo and Bolton have sought to generate a phony crisis over Iranian “proxies” in Iraq, and have created the equivalent of a myth of an Iranian covert nuclear weapons program by conjuring up a nonexistent Iranian intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) threat.

When the plan for unprecedented economic sanctions on Iran was unveiled in May 2018, along with Trump’s announcement that he was pulling out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal—the administration denied that its objective was regime change. As Pompeo put it, Trump was “ready, willing and able to negotiate a new deal.”

The Trump White House has taken advantage of Trump’s diplomacy with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to sell the idea that he’s willing to negotiate a new relationship with Iran. In July, Trump said of the Iranians, “[A]t some point, they’re going to say ‘let’s make a deal.’ ”

But the demands on Iran that accompany the administration’s pressure campaign belie the notion that its objective is to reach a new agreement. The key demands outlined by Pompeo on May 21, 2018, are clearly based on the policy agenda of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. It’s an agenda for regime change and war, not a new deal with Iran.

At the top of Pompeo’s list are demands that Iran end its support for Hezbollah, including its supply of ballistic missiles to the Lebanese Shiite organization, and the “halt [to] further launching or development of nuclear-capable missile systems.”

Those demands reflect an extraordinary agreement in December 2017, reported in the Israeli press, between the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government on a joint strategic work plan that included precisely those points on Pompeo’s list—countering Iranian ballistic missile development, as well as the supply of more accurate missiles to Hezbollah through Syria.

The consequences of enforcing such demands would be a dangerous destabilization of the already tense military standoff between Israel and Iran. Iran now depends on a combination of its own ballistic missiles and Hezbollah’s ability to retaliate against Israel to deter an Israeli, Saudi or U.S. attack on its homeland. To agree to stop testing its own missiles to improve their accuracy and supplying Hezbollah with accurate weapons would allow Israel, which has long wanted to destroy Hezbollah’s military capability, to degrade Hezbollah’s deterrent over time through its own missile strikes. The net result would be to leave Iran with a seriously degraded deterrent, especially in light of Israel’s modern missile defense system.

No Iranian leader, regardless of ideology, could survive politically after agreeing to such demands, as any intelligence analyst worth his or her salt has pointed out in recent months. Those clearly nonnegotiable demands give away the real aim of the Trump administration to bring about regime change. Instead of relying entirely on internal Iranian dynamics to topple the regime, the administration’s Iran strategy has now begun to resemble the one pursued by Cheney and the neoconservatives, who sought an excuse to provoke war with Iran during the George W. Bush administration.

Threatening War Over Harmless Incidents

In September, the response of Bolton and Pompeo to incidents in Iraq involving a few rockets that reportedly fell in the vicinity of U.S. diplomatic posts in Baghdad provides insight into their concept of regime change. Bolton requested retaliatory options from the Pentagon, which responded with a set of options that included a raid on an Iranian military facility, according to The New York Times.

But senior U.S. military officials were alarmed at Bolton’s apparent promotion of such a retaliatory strike, which they feared could either start a war with Iran or result in the complete expulsion of U.S. military personnel from Iraq. “People were shocked,” one former administration official said. “It was mind-boggling how cavalier they were about hitting Iran.”

But it wasn’t only Bolton who seized on the incident to lay the political basis for a possible strike against Iran. In a Sept. 21 interview with CNN, Pompeo said, “We will not let Iran get away with using a proxy force to attack American interests. If they are responsible for the arming and training of these militias, we will go to the source.”

And in a Foreign Affairs magazine article in October, Pompeo claimed that Iranian “proxies” had “launched [a] life-threatening rocket attack against the U.S. embassy compound in Baghdad and the U.S. consulate in Basra.” He declared that the administration would “respond swiftly and decisively in defense of American lives” if such an attack were to result in injury to U.S. personnel or damage to U.S. facilities.

But Pompeo’s description of the incidents bore little resemblance to the reality. Not only was there no danger to U.S. diplomats, but no reason to believe that any such danger was intended. On Sept. 8 and 9, two rockets fired in Baghdad landed in an “abandoned lot” near the Egyptian Embassy, according to a Reuters report—more than one full kilometer away from the U.S. Embassy.

That same night, in southern Iraq, two rockets fired in the general direction of the U.S. Consulate, which is adjacent to the Basra International Airport, struck the airport’s outer security perimeter, well away from the consulate, according to Michael Knights of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. This indicates that they were not intended to harm the consulate, but were merely warning shots, Knights believes. On Sept. 28, three more rockets struck consulate property, but caused no damage or casualties.

The distortion of incidents that appear to have reflected a cautious political signaling by Shiite militias in order to justify a U.S. retaliatory strike against Iran presents a striking parallel with Cheney’s effort to spark a war with Iran in 2007. Cheney’s ploy was to claim that Iran was supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with highly lethal charges that could penetrate U.S. armored vehicles.

Other key policymakers in the Bush administration rejected Cheney’s assertion that Iran was supplying those weapons, so Cheney did an end run around them: He prevailed on Bush to choose Gen. David Petraeus as the new commander in Iraq in early 2007 on the condition that Petraeus support the Cheney charge against Iran.

That summer, Cheney proposed that if the U.S. military found evidence of Iranian support for anti-U.S. forces in Iraq, it should carry out a limited strike against Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps camps in Iran used to train Shiite militia fighters in Iraq. But Pentagon officials stifled Cheney’s proposal by arguing that such a move would begin a tit-for-tat escalation with Iran, according to former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State J. Scott Carpenter.

Thus, both Cheney in 2007 and Bolton and Pompeo in 2018 discussed a U.S. strike against Iran based on a fabricated Iranian threat to U.S. personnel in Iraq through “proxy” forces.

The Mythical Iranian ICBM Program

Bolton and Pompeo are pursuing another angle on Iran that parallels Cheney’s. As Cheney’s policymaker on Iran from 2003 to 2007, Bolton argued that Iran was threatening to get nuclear weapons. Now, Bolton and Pompeo have adopted Netanyahu’s longtime argument that Iran is developing an intercontinental ballistic missile that will allow it to target the United States with nuclear weapons.

On Jan. 3, Pompeo condemned Iran for planning to launch three rockets called Space Launch Vehicles (SLV) that he said incorporate technologies “virtually identical” to what is used in intercontinental ballistic missiles. Pompeo said the planned rocket launches would violate U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which called upon Iran not to “undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons.” He warned Iran that the administration “will not stand by and watch the Iranian regime’s destructive policies place international stability at risk.”

Pompeo and Bolton base their ICBM argument on the spurious claim that Iranian SLVs rely on technology that is essentially indistinguishable from an ICBM. But that idea has been thoroughly demolished by the leading independent specialist on the issue. Michael Elleman of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, in Washington, D.C., explained in detail in March 2018 why Iran’s SLVs—the Safir and the Simorgh—are fundamentally different from an ICBM or any other ballistic missile.

The second-stage propulsion systems for the SLVs, Elleman wrote, “rely on low-thrust, long-action time engines, which are ideal for accelerating a satellite on a path parallel to the earth’s surface and into a sustainable orbit.” But such engines are “poorly suited for ballistic missile trajectories,” which must reach much higher altitudes, he observed.

Elleman also pointed out that the Simorgh must be “prepared for launch over an extended time on a fixed launching pad,” making it “vulnerable to pre-launch attack.” That would explain why, he wrote, no country has ever “converted a satellite launcher into a long-range ballistic missile.”

Because Iranian SLVs cannot be considered as designed to carry a nuclear weapon, testing them is certainly not a violation of Resolution 2231, contrary to Pompeo’s position. But for Pompeo and Bolton, it provides another rationale to attack Iran—just as Cheney originally planned to use the false claim of a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program as justification for attacking Iran, until he and Bush were rebuffed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in a December 2006 meeting.

These parallels between the Cheney push for war against Iran and the Pompeo-Bolton schemes to justify such a war tell only part of the story. There are differences between the two situations that could make the present danger even greater. Trump may be more manipulable by Pompeo and Bolton than George W. Bush was by Cheney. And although the military leadership is clearly still opposed to war with Iran, as it was in 2006 and 2007, it remains to be seen whether the next secretary of defense will be independent enough to stand up to Pompeo and Bolton on the issue.

On the face of it, the combination of Bolton, who seems utterly irrational about war with both Iran and North Korea, and Pompeo, who has apparently adopted extreme right-wing views on Israel as a result of his belief in “the rapture,” presents a greater danger of success in precipitating war than did Cheney. Unless much stronger anti-war forces can be organized in coming months, that danger appears extremely serious.

Pakistan Says 2 Indian Warplanes Downed, 1 Pilot Captured

MUZAFARABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan’s military said Wednesday it shot down two Indian warplanes in the disputed region of Kashmir and captured a pilot, raising tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals to a level unseen in the last two decades.

India acknowledged one of its air force planes was “lost” in skirmishes with Pakistan and that its pilot was “missing in action” on a chaotic day, which also saw mortar shells fired by Indian troops from across the frontier dividing the two sectors of Kashmir kill six civilians and wound several others. A helicopter crash in the region also killed six Indian air force officials and a civilian on the ground.

Pakistan responded by shutting down its civilian airspace as Prime Minister Imran Khan called for negotiations with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi, to ensure “better sense can prevail.”

“Let’s sit together to talk to find a solution,” Khan said. There was no immediate reaction from Modi.

The aircraft went down Wednesday morning in Kashmir, a mountainous region claimed by both India and Pakistan since almost immediately after their creation in 1947. One of the downed planes crashed in Pakistan’s part of Kashmir while the other went down in Indian-controlled section of the Himalayan region, Pakistan’s army spokesman Maj. Gen. Asif Ghafoor said.

Pakistani troops on the ground captured an Indian pilot, he later said, after earlier saying it captured two. He did not explain what caused the confusion.

The pilot was injured and was being treated at a military hospital, Ghafoor said. He did not elaborate beyond saying the pilots were being “treated well” and made no mention of them being returned to India.

“We have no intention of escalation, but are fully prepared to do so if forced into that paradigm,” he added.

India’s External Affairs Ministry spokesman Raveesh Kumar said one of its MiG-21 fighter aircraft was missing. He said India was still “ascertaining” whether its pilot was in Pakistan’s custody. He said one Pakistani aircraft was shot down, something Pakistan denied.

Meanwhile, Indian police said officials recovered seven bodies from the wreckage of an Indian Air Force chopper that crashed in Indian-controlled sector of Kashmir, which included six Indian airmen and a civilian on the ground. They gave no cause for the crash.

Senior police officer Munir Ahmed Khan said the chopper crashed close to an airport on Wednesday in Budgam area, in the outskirts of the region’s main city of Srinagar. The Srinagar airport, which has been shut along with two other airports for civilian flights in the region, is also an air force station.

Eyewitnesses said soldiers fired in air to keep residents away from the crash site.

Hours later, Pakistan’s Civil Aviation Authority said it shut Pakistani airspace to all commercial flights on Wednesday, without elaborating or indicating when the flights might resume. It was not clear if the shutdown applied to commercial overflights, though aviation authorities in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates stopped all flights to Pakistan.

Meanwhile, the Foreign Ministry in Islamabad said the country’s air force was carrying out airstrikes Wednesday from within Pakistani airspace across the disputed Kashmir boundary but that this was not in “retaliation to continued Indian belligerence.”

Ghafoor, the Pakistani military spokesman, said the strikes were aimed at “avoiding human loss and collateral damage.”

The shelling earlier Wednesday by India hit the village of Kotli in Pakistani-controlled Kashmir, killing six people, including children, local police official Mohammad Altaf said.

Kashmir is split between Pakistan and India and claimed by both in its entirety. Though Pakistani and Indian troops in Kashmir often trade fire, the latest casualties came a day after tensions escalated sharply following a pre-dawn airstrike and incursion by India that New Delhi said targeted a terrorist training camp in northwestern Pakistan.

Tuesday’s pre-dawn strike by India was its first inside of Pakistan since the two nations’ 1971 war over territory that later became Bangladesh. Pakistan had said that Indian warplanes dropped bombs near the Pakistani town of Balakot but there were no casualties.

The violence Wednesday marked the most-serious escalation of the long-simmering conflict since 1999, when Pakistan’s military sent a ground force into Indian-controlled Kashmir at Kargil. That year also saw an Indian fighter jet shoot down a Pakistani naval aircraft, killing all 16 on board.

Residents on both sides of the de-facto frontier, the so-called Line of Control, said there were exchanges of fire between the two sides through the night into Wednesday morning. Hundreds of villagers fled border towns in both India and Pakistan.

In New Delhi, Indian officials said Wednesday at least five of their soldiers were wounded in firing by Pakistani troops along the volatile frontier.

Lt. Col. Devender Anand, an Indian army spokesman, said Pakistani soldiers targeted dozens of Indian military positions across the Line of Control throughout the night. An Indian military statement said that “out of anger and frustration,” Pakistan “initiated unprovoked cease-fire violation.”

The statement said Indian troops “retaliated for effect” and claimed to have destroyed five Pakistani posts. It accused Pakistani soldiers of firing mortars and missiles “from civilian houses, using villagers as human shields.”

On Wednesday, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told state-run Pakistan Television he was in touch with his counterparts across the world about the “Indian aggression,” adding that New Delhi had endangered peace in the region by Tuesday’s airstrike on Pakistan.

India’s External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj said Wednesday her country does not wish to see further escalation of the situation with Pakistan and that it will continue to act with responsibility and restraint.

She said the limited objective of India’s pre-emptive strike inside Pakistan on a terrorist training camp Tuesday was to act decisively against the terrorist infrastructure of Jaish-e-Mohammad group, to pre-empt another terror attack in India.

The latest wave of tensions between Pakistan and India first erupted after the militant group Jaish-e-Mohammad claimed responsibility for the Feb. 14 suicide bombing of a convoy of India’s paramilitary forces in the Indian portion of Kashmir that killed over 40 Indian troops.

Pakistan has said it was not involved in the attack and was ready to help New Delhi in the investigations. India long has accused Pakistan of cultivating such militant groups to attack it.

Police Investigating Themselves Leads to Predictable Results

What follows is a conversation among Jacqueline Luqman, Stephen Janis and Taya Graham of the Real News Network. Read a transcript of their conversation below or watch the video at the bottom of the post.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: I’m Jacqueline Luqman with The Real News Network, coming to you from Baltimore.

Despite a national outcry and increased attention, police killings of African American men continue to roil communities across the country. Here in Maryland, the recent death of Anton Black, a 19-year-old former high school track star, has brought controversy and turmoil to the small Eastern Shore town of Greensboro, Maryland, where he lived. In September, police chased him to his mother’s home, where two officers and one civilian tasered him, wrestled him to the ground, and it’s during that arrest that Anton Black died. The Medical State Examiners Board ruled his death an accident, and that decision has caused controversy because The Real News consulted an independent pathologist that determined that Black’s death was the result of positional asphyxiation, meaning that his death was not an accident.

But The Real News investigation did not stop there. Our reporters, Taya Graham and Stephen Janis, looked into other cases of police involved deaths that had also been ruled accidents. And what they found is the topic of our discussion today. So thank you, Taya and Steven, for joining me today on The Real News Network.

TAYA GRAHAM: Thank you for having us.

STEPHEN JANIS: Thank you for having us.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: This case is not only troubling, but it turns out it’s not the only case like it that you have examined. But let’s start with the case of Anton Black. Give me a little overview of what happened in this case.

TAYA GRAHAM: Certainly. Well, Anton Black, as you mentioned, was a 19-year-old with an incredibly bright future. He wasn’t only just a track star and a football star, but he was a budding model. He had actually just walked the catwalk in New York’s Fashion Week. So what happened was a white woman called 911 and said that she saw Anton abducting a boy. It turns out, the boy that Anton was walking down the street with was his 12 year old cousin. Whether or not they were roughhousing a bit or horseplaying, obviously this woman saw it in a particular way. She chose to call the police.

When the police arrived, Officer Tom Webster was on the scene. Officer Tom Webster’s interaction with Anton made him start to run away. Once he started running, another police officer, not in uniform, started chasing him, and that’s when Anton got really scared and started running home to his mother. There was also a man on a motorcycle, who was a civilian, who joined into the chase, which is something that’s actually not uncommon on the Eastern Shore, for citizens to get involved with policing, but we can talk about that another time. But for Anton, this all started with a white woman who called 911 on him. He was chased, tasered, and it led to his death, and the State Medical Examiner ruled this an accident.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So how did the State Medical Examiner’s office justify ruling this young man’s death an accident.

STEPHEN JANIS: Basically, the Medical Examiner, which we should note took four to five months to come up with this conclusion, used an underlying abnormality in his heart, which is not something that had caused any problems for him previously or there was even a medical fact about, because actually, he had had an electrocardiogram and it did not come up. So the Medical Examiner said that he had this underlying anatomical aberration that prompted him to basically die out when he was in the process of being arrested. The Medical Examiner also pointed to a psychological condition which really had nothing to do–bipolarity I guess, right?

TAYA GRAHAM: Yes, it was bipolar disorder.

STEPHEN JANIS: So really, using those two things. So it really doesn’t make any sense, because as the medical pathologist that we consulted, Dr. Cyril Wecht said, this had been something he’d lived with his whole life. I mean, as Taya pointed out, he was a track star, so obviously if he had a heart problem–which is not what this really is, it’s just an aberration, and there’s a big distinction there. It’s not like something that would be known as a medical condition, it’s just his heart is shaped a little differently.

TAYA GRAHAM: Right. It’s just a little bit different from the standard, just a slight aberration, which doesn’t mean that it’s actually pathological, that it would have caused him any trouble throughout his life.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So this raises the question. The term “underlying heart condition,” it doesn’t mean what we think it means, does it? It does not mean that Anton Black was sick and suffering from a heart condition that would have taken his life or ended his life anyway. So if that is the case, can it be said that if Anton Black had not had this interaction the way it happened with the police, even with this underlying heart condition, would he still be alive?

TAYA GRAHAM: Yes.

STEPHEN JANIS: Yes, because what we did is we consulted an outside medical pathologist, Dr. Cyril Wecht, who is pretty famous for doing–he worked on the Kennedy assassination and he’s been a President of the American Association of Pathologists. So he’s a pretty famous guy. And what he said was that this had nothing to do with a heart condition, this had to do with something called positional asphyxiation. Right now we’re going to be showing the video, which is from the body cam of one of the officers. And as you can see, the officer is lying across Anton’s body, and Anton is face down on the ground and has this fairly large man on him.

TAYA GRAHAM: A very large man on him. So positional asphyxiation, and this is what we learned from Dr. Cyril Wecht, is when someone is lying face down on the ground and someone else is laying on top of them. Sometimes it’s also called traumatic asphyxiation or riot crush, because it’s seen when there is a riot, a movement of people, and someone gets trampled and people step on top of them. So what happens is the person is on the ground and another body is placed on top of them and their lungs become compressed. They’re unable to breathe. And you would be surprised how little it takes, how little time it takes, for you to be deprived of oxygen, for it to cause a cardiovascular event or your death.

STEPHEN JANIS: So let’s listen to what Dr. Wecht said specifically about Anton’s case.

TAYA GRAHAM: Yes.

CYRIL WECHT: I strongly disagree with the final diagnosis that the cause of death was a coronary artery, anatomical aberration. That defect had been present in Mr. Black’s life his entire life and had not produced any problems to my knowledge from reading the reports. How convenient that he should have died from that defect at the time that he is being restrained in a position that has been barred, banned, and prohibited from various national police agencies throughout the country and elsewhere in the world. This is a classical case of positional asphyxiation in which somebody is placed face down and then someone leans on his back, presses down on his back, he’s tasered after several minutes, and then he goes limp. That’s a classical case of positional asphyxiation.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So I want to go back to positional asphyxiation, because this is fascinating to me. If we understand that in a riot situation, in a crowd situation, if someone falls on the ground and other people step on them or other people accidently fall on them, that that weight on a person’s body can cause death.

TAYA GRAHAM: Yes.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Then how is that not carried over? How is that not the same phenomenon in a situation where a teenage boy has a 250 pound adult man lying on his back?

TAYA GRAHAM: Well, the reason why it’s not the same phenomenon is because police officers are involved. It’s that simple. One of the problems is that in the Medical Examiner’s Office, when they are doing the autopsy, very often the same police officers who were involved in the incident that led to the death are in the autopsy room with the Medical Examiner.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Is that normal? Is that procedure or is that unusual?

STEPHEN JANIS: Well, according to A. Dwight Pettit, who is an attorney who also has litigated one of these cases of positional asphyxiation, it is very common. And we can listen and talk about the clip we have right here.

A. DWIGHT PETTIT: The police officers are right in the room. The police officers–I’ve seen in case after case where the police officers go into the autopsy, and I think they tend to intimidate the doctors.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So it’s common, but is it right?

STEPHEN JANIS: Great question.

TAYA GRAHAM: That’s a great question. I would have to give this as my opinion as someone who’s investigated these stories. I don’t think it’s right, because when you have a police officer guiding the autopsy, it can’t help but influence the way the doctor is perceiving the evidence in front of them. And I think a good example of this is in Anton Black’s case, because they said it was an underlying heart condition exacerbated by his bipolar disorder. If you had that body in the room and you were examining it, there is no way in doing an autopsy you could possibly know if someone had a mental health condition like bipolar disorder unless they had medicine in his system for it, which he did not. And that gives a sign that the officers were leading the Medical Examiner to the conclusion that the officers wanted to see.

STEPHEN JANIS: And why this is so critical, if you look at the coverage of Anton’s death, you’ll see once the Medical Examiner concludes it’s an accident, all the media starts reporting “accident, accident,” every headline you see “accident.” And suddenly, there’s no real imperative for the prosecutors to bring any sort of case against the police officers, because it says it’s an accident. I mean, the Medical Examiner plays a critical role in this, and if the police are influencing them, it’s the dilemma of police investigating themselves. So you don’t really have an impartial body here, and yet it’s critical to what happens later on.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So this is an interesting perspective, because I don’t think we usually think about the role of the Medical Examiner in police involved deaths. But here, we have a case, and not just one case, several cases, and probably more than what you two have investigated, where biased police rather are influencing what is supposed to be the unbiased entity in the process, which is the Medical Examiner’s office. So that leads us to the question, who appoints the Medical Examiner, where does the Medical Examiner come from?

TAYA GRAHAM: Great question.

STEPHEN JANIS: So there’s a board made up of a couple prominent physicians and the Baltimore City Health Commissioner, and it’s called the Board of Pathology or something. It’s a very small, obscure board, not elected, not appointed by anyone other than I think the governor or even themselves. And they are the people who sort of make the decision of who to hire to be the Chief Medical Examiner. So there’s really–and this is very different from other jurisdictions where what you have is a Coroner’s System where a Coroner is elected by the population, just like a State’s Attorney. Like Marilyn Mosby is a Baltimore Prosecutor, she’s elected. Many states have a Coroner who is an elected official, it doesn’t really have to be a medical pathologist. But here we have a system where it’s all centralized. And I think we could safely say an obscure board appoints them, so the accountability mechanisms are absent from this situation.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So even in light of the kind of nebulous nature of the Medical Examiner being appointed and the exposure that these questionable findings from the Medical Examiner’s office is highlighting, what recourse do citizens have when they now question the reputation, they now question the motives of the Medical Examiner in these cases. What can citizens do?

TAYA GRAHAM: That’s a good question. That’s really the problem here. There is such a thing as a Civilian Review Board, for example in Baltimore City, which is a body that’s connected to the Office of Civil Rights and Wage Enforcement. And if someone has experienced police brutality, discourtesy, they can file a complaint with the Civilian Review Board. However, once the Civilian Review Board makes a recommendation, they can recommend that an officer be disciplined or even be fired, they pass that onto the police department, but the police department has no obligation to do anything with that recommendation. So when it comes to police accountability, our citizens really have trouble holding them accountable.

STEPHEN JANIS: With the Medical Examiner’s Office, you can appeal a ruling, I think, for like 60 days. But in terms of the actual board, the only really way people have to fight back with this or to question it is through litigation. And in the case of litigation in terms of some of the other cases we’ve looked at, they went and they deposed the pathologist and actually questioned them. And we have a little piece of sound from A. Dwight Pettit where he talks about what happened in those depositions.

A. DWIGHT PETTIT: When we took the depositions of the doctors in the West case, they really did not back their own conclusions. When we got to the conclusions, “Well, I don’t remember,” or “I’m not sure, I didn’t really examine this,” well this is basically them saying, “Hey, there was another factor involved which I don’t want to get into.” The factor is that five or six police officers were sitting there while you were doing the autopsy, telling you what they wanted you to find.

STEPHEN JANIS: So as you can see, he felt from talking to these Medical Examiners that they were influenced by police and sort of were saying, “I didn’t know what happened,” or “I don’t remember what happened,” which is very odd. So you’re right. There’s really no mechanism for people other than litigation, which can be expensive, and you can’t always get a lawyer. So it really comes down to litigation as the only way right now to hold them accountable.

TAYA GRAHAM: For example, in the case of Tawanda Jones, her brother, Tyrone West, died in police custody. She felt that the Medical Examiner, our Medical Examiner in the state of Maryland, who ruled this death by dehydration and an underlying heart condition, she thought that instead, that she believed the witnesses who talked about this incredibly physical and brutal interaction of the police officers and her brother. So she not only paid for an autopsy for someone outside of the state of Maryland, she actually had to pay to have her brother’s body exhumed.

TAWANDA JONES: And my attorneys, they went and got their own doctor, their own forensic person, and his name was Dr. Manion. He concluded that my brother was murdered. Second person, reliable source, concluded–.

TAYA GRAHAM: Was it positional asphyxiation?

TAWANDA JONES: Positional asphyxiation. And then I went a step further. I’m like, “You know what, Tyrone West is going to have the final word, even through his death.” I paid 50 grand to have my brother’s body dug up. So we had to go through all this pain of having him brought out the ground, not to be back with this family, as if that was humanly possible, but the torture and pain that we went through that I felt was very important. This doctor, Dr. Shaker, concluded the same thing, a whole different doctor.

TAYA GRAHAM: So just going into litigation, it’s not the only thing that these families have to go through. Having to assume her brother’s body.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: That is not inexpensive and it’s also emotionally traumatic.

TAYA GRAHAM: It’s not inexpensive, and it’s just this incredibly re-traumatizing process for the entire family.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: So I think you raise an issue for me that is a bit larger. I want to step back from just these two cases, because in both of these instances, these deaths were ruled accidental because of underlying heart conditions. When we look at the nature of policing in Baltimore and in many cities around the country, we see a disparity in how the police are used, how they’re deployed, and how they treat, how they interact with citizens in different communities. The second case that you mentioned, Tyrone West, I’m familiar with his sister, so I know that Mr. West was a Black man, Mr. West’s sister is a Black woman. I understand also, that in Baltimore, the cases of accidental deaths involving the police overwhelmingly involve People of Color, Black men and women, and overwhelmingly poor people.

So I’m going to ask a loaded question of both of you. And I understand you might not be able to give an expert answer, but here is where I just want your opinion. If these accidental deaths during these interactions with the police were happening in wealthier, whiter neighborhoods in Baltimore or anywhere else around the country, do you think there would be more scrutiny, not just on the police, but on the practices of the Medical Examiner’s Offices? And would citizens be given a more direct path to challenge these kinds of findings and to have better outcomes and more transparency in the system? Stephen, you first.

STEPHEN JANIS: When we were covering Zero Tolerance, which was Baltimore City’s experiment with mass arrests, mass incarceration, where they arrested 100,000 people a year and 90 percent of the people who were arrested were African American, we used to have this saying like, “Well, this would never happen in Roland Park, which is a predominately white neighborhood,” like give it the Roland Park test. Could you arrest a 7 year old child in Roland Park? Could you go out in the street and drag people out and take their belongings, like the Gun Trace Task Force, in Roland Park? And the answer is absolutely not.

If you look at the Justice Department report, it said racist and unconstitutional policing targeted primarily poor Black neighborhoods. Look at Marilyn Mosby’s decision just recently to stop prosecuting marijuana possession. Why? Because all of the enforcement had been targeted at poor Black communities, West Baltimore, East Baltimore. It is absolutely an instrument of race in this city, and it has been. And it’s provable just by statistics. The reason behind that is very complex–it may be simple, but complex, but absolutely none of this would ever happen in a Roland Park or Hampden, and it never has happened.

TAYA GRAHAM: When you were talking about would this happen in a white community, in a more affluent community, my first thought was of this young white skater who was down at the Inner Harbor. And Officer Riviera encountered this young man, who was incredibly discourteous to him, and then put him in a chokehold and threw him to the ground. So Officer Riviera lost his job with incredible alacrity.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Really?

STEPHEN JANIS: And it went national.

TAYA GRAHAM: And this story became a national story because it was a white child, a white teenager child at our Inner Harbor in Baltimore, who was treated in this way. How often have we heard about Black children, young Black men and women being placed in chokeholds, being treated discourteously, being told to get off a corner, and it does not get national attention, they do not receive any sort of justice in that police officer losing their job or losing pay or being held accountable? So to me, it’s very obvious.

Stephen mentioned Zero Tolerance. At the height of Zero Tolerance in Baltimore, let’s say 2008, there was over 100,000 arrests in Baltimore City. This city has 630,000 people in it, in a majority Black city. And not only that, is that we know that there are certain neighborhoods that weren’t being targeted for these arrests from the Justice Department report. So we know that these incredible amount of arrests were being targeted against African Americans.

STEPHEN JANIS: And one thing that’s really interesting about it is that the architect of zero tolerance, Martin O’Malley, went on to run for president. And it rarely was brought up, of what he did, rarely was he held accountable by the Democratic Party for this atrocity. It really was a human atrocity.

TAYA GRAHAM: It was a civil rights injustice on a massive scale.

STEPHEN JANIS: Of a massive scale. And I’m not saying this as an opinion, I’m saying what the Justice Department said.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Right. These are documented facts.

STEPHEN JANIS: Documented facts. And nobody called him out. I mean, maybe once or twice, but he just went running for president as if he was a liberal.

TAYA GRAHAM: As if he was a progressive.

STEPHEN JANIS: They would call him a classic progressive liberal. Well, this man presided over one of the worst instances of mass incarceration of African Americans in this country’s history, I think.

JACQUELINE LUQMAN: Thank you so much for joining me today to talk about this really fascinating aspect of not just police corruption, but the entire system of injustice that is the injustice system, examining how the Medical Examiner’s office doesn’t do its job for the people, but actually in too many cases, works for the police, and the turmoil and the pain that causes the citizens of Baltimore and cities all across the country.

Taya, Stephen, thank you so much for your work and thank you for joining me here today at The Real News Network. This is Jacqueline Luqman reporting for The Real News Network.