Why Hasn't Pelosi Pulled The Funding Bill For The Department Of Homeland Security?

Why hasn't the House Democratic Leadership pulled the bill for funding for Department of Homeland Security off the floor. It's supposed to be voted on next week? Are Pelosi and Hoyer actually contemplating funding an agency that is helping Trump deploy his private militia/secret police on our streets? Many people are wondering.

ACRE, the Action Center on Race and the Economy, is a campaign hub for organizations working at the intersection of racial justice and corporate accountability. They provide research and strategic support for organizations working on campaigns to win structural change by directly taking on the corporations that are responsible for pillaging communities of color, devastating working-class communities, and harming our environment. Maurice BP-Weeks, Co-Executive Director, was very clear about ACRE's reaction to Pelosi moving forward with the funding bill: "As Trump unleashes an all-out attack on our cities with his brutal, militarized, and out-of-control secret police, Democrats shouldn’t be appropriating another single penny for his out control and reckless fascist regime. Bringing any bill to the House floor to fund a DHS that is deploying a cold, calculated, and secret police force is not only unconstitutional, but also deeply immoral. Democrats ought to be pulling every lever they have in their power right now to defund and abolish Trump’s secret police not to pour more money into it. Unfortunately, their track record is lacking to say the least. Democratic leadership in the past supported some of the same heavily militarized DHS practices that disappeared, surveilled and terrorized the Muslim, Arab and South Asian communities around the country for decades, and refused to take action when undocumented people were detained in countless raids. We’re at another make or break moment for Democratic leadership. If despite all the calls to defund and abolish the police nationwide the House chooses to further fund Trump’s secret force, they will cement a leadership failure of epic proportions. The time for rhetoric and nuance is over."




PPP did a series of surveys for MoveOn, released this week, that show voters in Arizona, Maine, and North Carolina prepared to vote against Trump and his Senate enablers at least in part because of the way Trump is using military force against civilian protesters in Portland. "Majorities of voters in all three states," reported MoveOn, "oppose Trump’s militarized used of federal agents without identification, witnessed in Portland and pledged to expand into NYC, Baltimore, Detroit, Philly, and Chicago. And voters want Congress to act to rein Trump in on this front-- again, majorities in all states, and particularly strongly in North Carolina, where 61% of voters support the no-brainer policies included in Sen. Merkley’s Preventing Authoritarian Policing Tactics on America’s Streets Act (eg: must wear ID on uniform, no unmarked vans for detentions, etc.). This Resolution has 42 cosponsors in the Senate-- Tillis, McSally, and Collins are all absent... This is more evidence of the broader story we’ve all seen: Republicans in the Senate have been choosing Trump over their constituents and their country. Our poll also shows that this decision might cost Republicans their jobs and control of the Senate. In all three races, the Republican incumbents are trailing their Democratic challengers. 

• In Maine, Gideon leads Collins 47-42 (in the first poll since Gideon clinched the nomination).
• In North Carolina, Cal’s up on Thom 48-40.
• And in Arizona, Kelly leads McSally 51-42. 

If you follow Marianne Williamson on Twitter you have probably noticed that she is more than outraged by the Trump unconstitutional incursions in Portland and his threats to do the same thing in Albuquerque and Chicago. A few days ago she used a longer form to write that Trump has announced that his goon squad is "going to go into American cities with high crime rates and fill them up with militarized agents who will fix all that. How, exactly? Well, no one is sure, because violent criminals don’t wear signs that say, 'Me! I’m the bad guy! Come get me!' Our esteemed crime-busters from DHS will presumably do what they’ve done in Portland: pretty much take anyone around and grab them into unmarked vans, in one of those 'proactive arrests' meant to make people aware that they should not and will not do anything criminal… such as… standing around in public after 10pm. The situation would be funny if it weren’t so dangerous. My biggest fear-- I’m sure everyone’s biggest fear if they think about it-- is that someone’s going to get killed in all this. And then, my fellow Americans, expect all hell to break loose. The giant of the American spirit has been slow to awaken to the deeper problems in our midst, but it’s awakened now. And she’s pissed."

I don’t think the president’s goons from the Department of Homeland Security (I always thought that name was creepy), untrained though they apparently are, are being told to shoot lethal weapons at protestors. But that’s not the point. Situations like this are volatile and they shouldn’t even be happening. Only in a dictatorship do squads of secret police invade cities, presumably to establish “law and order” but doing nothing but spreading chaos and fury.

When running for president, at my CNN Town Hall I said we needed to be aware of the risk of encroaching fascism. No wonder the political status quo didn’t think those the words of a serious candidate, huh? But what an insane system calls crazy might not be, and what it calls sane might be what is bound to drive all of us crazy. Such is the state of America today.

Am I hopeful? Yes, because hope is a moral imperative. Am I cynical? No, because to me that’s an excuse for not helping. In truth, I think that in the long run we’re going to be more than okay; I think we’re going to be magnificent. I think we’re going to have Lincoln’s proverbial “new birth of freedom.” But not immediately, not easily, and not without pain. Not in the short term, and perhaps not even in the middle term. There’s no reason to expect things will not get ugly very, very soon. The president is sending his troops to cities whose citizens simply will not have it.

Nor should they. This has gone too far. There are times when you have to draw a line, and now is such a time. A dangerous man is trying to destroy our democracy and we must not let him. America does not belong to him; it belongs to us. And millions of us are buckling up.

After she ended her presidential run, Marianne endorsed several progressive candidates for Congress this cycle. I asked a few of them if they're as disturbed by Trump's display of aggressive authoritarianism as she is. You can probably imagine that Shahid Buttar, running for the San Francisco seat occupied by Pelosi, is incensed. He told me that "the democracy of which we are rightfully proud is fragile. It has sustained brutal damage at the hands of Republicans-- and Democrats-- who have openly embraced authoritarian policies for generations. Mass incarceration, domestic surveillance, indefinite detention, executive secrecy, and militarized police are all facets of a problem far worse than the sum of its parts: fascism. The generations that preceded us fell asleep at the switch, but the sordid abuses of an aspiring tyrant have awakened in America a memory of our civic commitments. Today, from Portland to Washington, we are taking action reclaim our sovereignty, resist the unconstitutional orders of a criminal president, and hold the corporate opposition accountable for having funded authoritarian agencies for decades without meaningful oversight. I’m disgusted by our so-called leaders, and horrified by their mounting violations of our rights. At the same time, the growing movement to defend democracy makes me immensely proud of We the People of the United States."

West Virginia progressive Cathy Kunkel notes that even in the most Trump-friendly state, Trump has been turning toxic. "Congressman Alex Mooney has spent the last four years," she told me, "defining himself by his support for President Trump. And here in West Virginia-- as around the country-- voters are not impressed by Trump's handling of the pandemic. Running on Trump's coattails is not the strategy it was 4 years ago."

Eva Putzova, a former Flagstaff, Arizona City Council member, lived in Slovakia at one time and this authoritarian outburst from the dying-- but very dangerous-- embers of Trumpism is not her first brush with fascis, something she tweeted about yesterday. This morning she told me that "Trump's Homeland Security forces are no different than KGB, STASI, and my home country's ŠTB. What we see in the U.S. cities today is what we fought against in 1989 in former Czechoslovakia. I'm extremely worried about Trump's abuse of power and the long-term effects it can have on our democracy, especially when we consider how the public health crisis limits people's appetite to protest that power."

History professor and Riverside County congressional candidate Liam O'Mara noted that his district, the 42nd "has been changing along with the rest of Riverside, but went for Trump from a combination of progressive apathy and Trump's own populist rhetoric. But while he claims to stand for the common man, all he cares to do is line his own pockets and funnel taxpayer cash to the oligarchy. And that's totally Ken Calvert's jam. For 28 years now, #CrookedKenCalvert has been serving his corporate owners in the defense and real estate industries, and actively making life harder for people in the 42nd. He likes to brag that he's helped with freeway congestion, but what he's actually done is helped developers throw up bedroom communities for commuters, thus creating that traffic, and then funneled jobs to contractors to deal with the same traffic... and never mind all the pollution. People are starting to get wise to Calvert's lies, and his full-throated support for reopening schools is just to help Trump's own play for reëlection. Crooked Ken doesn't care if kids die or get permanent lung damage, or if they bring the infection home to vulnerable family members. He cares only about serving Trump and the oligarchy. And people are talking about it. Is DC a swamp of corruption? Oh yeah. And we could have started draining it four years ago by electing Bernie Sanders. Instead we elected a swamp-monster like Trump, who brought in dozens of lobbyists to top jobs. Naturally, the long-term corrupt like Calvert drifted into his orbit, and now we have to knock them both out in November."

David Kim, is a progressive Democrat running for Congress in Los Angeles, promising a more activist and grassroots approach to governance than the incumbent, Jimmy Gomez. "As an immigration attorney who defends people fleeing dangerous governments," said Kim this morning, "I am incredibly saddened and disturbed by Trump's escalating displays of authoritarianism. I am equally disgusted that Congress has taken no proactive measures to address the current situation, such as pulling the bill for funding DHS off the floor. If our leaders allow Trump to oppress and silence the people with his fascist goon squad, then they, along with Trump, will be sent home in November by a mass of voters fed up with our morally bankrupt system. The American people cannot, must not, and will not let this country devolve into an authoritarian dystopia."

This week Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) introduced a bill in the House to restrict the ability of the U.S. Marshals Service to deputize other federal employees to perform the functions of a Deputy U.S. Marshal. The bill would also prohibit the Attorney General from designating Drug Enforcement Administration officers to enforce federal laws outside of their Title 21 authority. The bill allows for an exception when the federal support is requested by the state governor. The bill is in response to what the Trump goon squad has been doing in Portland, a city represented by Blumenauer. Lieu noted that "What happened in Washington, DC and Portland is outrageous... We cannot allow this Administration or any future one to abuse its authorities against Americans practicing their First Amendment right to protest. In light of reports that the Trump Administration may use authoritarian tactics in additional cities around the country, we are working at breakneck speed to reign in this unfettered and troubling use of force."

Blumenauer sees right through what Trump has been up to, "From the dramatic influx of unnecessary federal agents, to the egregious use of violent tactics, it’s clear that the Trump Administration’s goal in Portland is to inflame tensions for political gain, rather than to keep our city safe. No community should face such a siege from the very people sworn to protect them. In order to ensure the rights of all Americans, it’s clear that we must fundamentally change the way federal officials can be deployed and used."

Iowa Republican Voters Finally Kick Neo-Fascist Congressman Steve King To The Curb

Tuesday evening, J.D. Scholten was the first guest on Marianne's week long down-ballot progressive summit. (Tonight, Hector Oseguera will be on with Marianne; here's the schedule.) Tuesday, while J.D. and Marianne were chatting, Iowans were voting in their primaries. J.D. wasn't challenged so, no drama there. But his opponent, GOP neo-fascist and arch-racist-- largely disowned by the DC Republican establishment-- Steve King had 4 primary opponents. And he lost-- very badly.

King is a poor fundraiser and he was badly outraised by the GOP establishment favorite, state Senator Randy Feenstra. This is what each Republican spent clobbering each other (as of May 13):

• Randy Feenstra- $799,306
• Steve King- $325,135
• Bret Richards (self funder)- $219,655
• Jeremy Taylor- $140,818
• Steven Reeder- $77,595

Most Iowa Republicans-- not to mention DC Republicans-- have been embarrassed over and over again by King and are more than happy to see him go. For a long-term incumbent to get only 36% in a primary is nothing short of astounding-- if not historic. This is what you call a rejection:

Iowa is a swing state that national Democrats have largely given up on. Hillary, angry Bernie had toed her in the caucuses, pointedly and stupidly ignored the state and it went for Trump 798,923 (51.8%) to 650,790 (42.2%), after giving it's 6 electoral votes to Obama both times he ran. More recently, establishment Democrats-- mostly from the failed Clinton campaign-- have said they would not be contesting Iowa this year, a state Bernie's campaign felt very optimistic about bringing back into the Democratic fold. The state legislature is controlled by the Republicans-- 32 Republicans in the state Senate to 18 Democrats and 53 Republicans in the state House to 47 Dems. In 2018, Democrats won 5 more state House seats and two of the 3 congressional seats the GOP held. The 4th district would have been won-- by J.D.-- had the DCCC supported him, something their hatred of progressives had not allowed. J.D. came far closer to defeating King than they expected when they were telling institutional Democratic donors to not contribute to his campaign.

COVID-Kim

Iowa's governor is a clueless Trump Republican, Kim Reynolds, largely to blame for the catastrophic Iowa pandemic (6,344 confirmed cases per million, including 318 new cases yesterday and another 5 deaths, bringing the total to 561. In terms of cases per million, the worst hit counties are:

• Buena Vista- 42,150 cases per million
• Crawford- 30,940
• Louisa- 30,830
• Woodbury- 27,210
• Tama- 23,630
• Marshall- 22,300
• Wapello- 17,270
• Wright- 14,680

The 4 horribly-stricken counties in red are in King's district. Reynold's lackadaisical, ideological anti-scientific response to the coronavirus has seriously sickened thousands of Iowans needlessly. She's been on the top 10 list of the worst governors in America since the pandemic began. In way of comparison, the current cases per million in the worst hit (non-postage-stamp-sized) countries:

• Spain- 6,139 cases per million
• USA- 5,697
• Chile- 5,689
• Peru- 5,310
• Iceland- 5,295
• Ireland- 5,081
• Belgium- 5,065
• Belarus- 4,774
• U.K.- 4,124

I'm predicting that Iowans' general revulsion to Trump and to COVID-Reynolds' failure will result in a clean sweep for Democrats in November, all 4 House seats and the Joni Ernst Senate seat (even with a remarkably awful Democratic nominee handpicked by Schumer). The Dems are also in position to win back control of the state House if the anti-red wave in big enough.

King didn't get much sympathy from the media after his massive rejection by IA-04 voters. Politico: "Iowa Republicans drove Steve King out of office on a primary day marked by civil unrest... The nine-term congressman with a history of racist and anti-immigrant remarks was ousted after the GOP establishment offered his opponent both material and symbolic assistance... They starved him of cash, deprived him of committee assignments, and plied his challenger with outside support. But to avoid antagonizing his legion of loyal supporters, King’s detractors largely ignored his decades-long list of remarks condoning white supremacists and demeaning immigrants. Instead, they cast him as ineffective and powerless in Washington, unable to achieve results for his constituents... Nearly every corner of the Republican Party came together to aid Feenstra when tightening polls indicated he could nab the seat. Feenstra’s backers included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, evangelical leaders, former Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, Karl Rove, five current Republican congressmen and longtime Iowa political operatives."

Just because he's not Steve King doesn't make Feenstra what's needed in the 4th district. The tired right-wing elixirs and bathtub remedies he's peddling have never been enough to revitalize rural communities or enough to ensure farmers get a fair price and can stay on their land or enough for families to afford healthcare and save for retirement. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say Feenstra is lacking in vision and utterly devoid of the ability to bring people together, the way Scholten does. Feenstra takes every dime he can from corporations and special interests-- the same corporate system that's taking away power, opportunities, and wealth from Iowa communities. He already represents the D.C. swamp and everything that spells out real (not Trumpian) reform. Remember, his big complaint about King was that he was ineffective perpetrating policies like building a border wall. And in the state legislature he voted for the heartbeat bill and has always opposed all abortion exceptions beyond saving a woman’s life.

Not having King in the race, makes it tougher for J.D. in a red district like IA-04. But his 2018 campaign made him well-known in every county and he is very well-regarded by Democrats, independents and even many non-ideological Republicans. There is already talk about die-hard King supporters boycotting Feenstra, who is generally as conservative as King, but without the overt fascism and racist carryings-on. Now J.D. is going to need all the financial support he can get since there is no doubt that the GOP establishment will fight like dogs to hold onto the seat and spend immense amounts of dark money. Please help J.D. with transparent money by clicking on the Blue America 2020 congressional thermometer on the right-- and giving what you can. After the vote, J.D. acknowledged to his supporters that "This election is not going to be easy. But it wasn’t easy in 2018, and we came within 3 points of defeating Steve King. This time, we know we can win. That’s because 'not Steve King' isn’t good enough. It’s not enough to not be blatantly racist. We need someone who will fight for our farmers to get a fair price and for our families to be able to afford quality healthcare, put food on the table, and save for retirement. To do that, we can’t keep propping up the corporate system that is sucking wealth and opportunities out of our district like Randy does.We don’t need another representative who is already bought and owned by corporate interests and the 1%."

This morning he told me that "King set a low bar for a Member of Congress. We must do better than not being blatantly racist. We’re in an extraordinary moment in history: the vibrancy of rural America is declining while we’re facing a global pandemic and nationwide protests calling for justice, accountability, and long overdue changes to address white supremacy and systemic racism. Our next representative must be able to meet these challenges and have a vision for the future of rural Iowa. We can’t accept the status quo of another corporate-backed career politician and allow the rich, powerful, and well-connected to continue bleeding rural America and vulnerable Americans dry."

Marianne Williamson Has A Weeklong Summit Starting Tonight With Congressional Candidates

Starting tonight at 9 PM (ET)-- so 6 PM on the West Coast-- Marianne Williamson will be hosting a week-long summit for progressive Congressional candidates on her Facebook page-- one candidate each night. Her first guest, someone she has already shared a stage with in Iowa, is J.D. Scholten, the progressive Democrat who nearly beat neo-fascist and racist Iowa Republican Steve King, in 2018. That was a race sabotaged by the DCCC but so much momentum was built up by Scholten's grassroots campaign that this year not even progressive-hating DCCC chair Cheri Bustos will be able to stop J.D.

Monroe County, NY progressive Robin Wilt will be on with Marianne on Saturday. Today she told me that "At the heart of Marianne Williamson’s run for the Presidency was a commitment to humanitarianism that was lacking from many of the corporate, establishment-based candidates in the race. I am proud to be among the down-ballot candidates that Marianne Williamson has endorsed, because we share the fundamental belief that we can only make progress if we center the needs of those most directly impacted by the deleterious policies that have created the inequities that we witness. As Marianne will be the first to tell you, the ideas at the center of her platform are not novel. They are supported by a majority of everyday Americans who recognize that the vast wealth and income inequality that plagues our nation is not sustainable, and that we need representatives at all level of government who are willing to prioritize the needs of the people over those of corporate elites that have been disproportionately and unfairly benefiting from government largesse at our expense."

We need expanded and improved Medicare for All, not only because it is inhumane for 45,000 Americans to die each year from a lack of access to health care, but also because our for-profit, atomized health care landscape fails to address the many social determinants of health that are the root causes of preventable diseases.

We need a Green New Deal, not only because it is inhumane for communities like Flint, MI and Newark, NJ to have poisoned air and water, but also because we need a solution to the current crisis that recognizes the scale of the threat to civilization and transitions to a green economy that ensures that those communities that have been disproportionately impacted by polluters receive the support they need to equitably share in the economic opportunities of a green economy.

We need publicly-funded, freely available pre-K through 16 education because it is inhumane for one’s educational opportunity to be determined by one’s zip code.

Most importantly, we need bold, new representatives in Congress that will unabashedly support these policy positions on behalf of the people that they represent, because our current leadership has not been up to the task.

"Slavery is a crime against humanity," said Shan Chowdhury, who is running for a seat in Queens held by corrupt New Dem Greg Meeks and Marianne's Sunday guest. "The path to restorative justice begins with the United States acknowledging our past crimes against Americans of African descent, whose ancestors were transported here against their will and enslaved. Meaningful and transformative reparations begins with implementing a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). I believe prioritizing access for African Americans to services, fully-funding Black institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), Community Banks, and Black Owned Businesses, central to racial, social, and economic justice."





Shahid Buttar, the attorney and community organizer who is taking on Nancy Pelosi, will be joining Marianne on Friday. This morning he told me that "One of the overarching themes that unite our campaigns is our shared recognition of social justice as an extension of mutual concern and compassion. That, in turn, drives our shared commitment to universal healthcare, as well as ending police violence and ensuring that black lives matter-- not just to We to the People, but also the government that answers to us. We’re excited to get into the issues and explore why change is so desperately needed!"

This is the whole schedule-- at least for week 1:

• J.D. Scholten- Tuesday, June 2
• Andrew Romanoff- Wednesday, June 3
• Hector Oseguera- Thursday, June 4
• Shahid Buttar- Friday, June 5
• Robin Wilt- Saturday, June 6
• Shan Chowdhury- Sunday, June 7
• Jen Perelman- Monday, June 8

You can contribute to any of the Marianne-endorsed candidates by clicking on the ActBlue thermometer. Whether Trump is re-elected (or gets away with stealing the election) or Biden is elected, one thing we are going to need in Congress is more progressives to work with the handful of members-- like AOC (D-NY), Ro Khanna (D-CA), Pramila Jayapal (D-WA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), Jamie Raskin (D-MD), Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Andy Levin (D-MI), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)...-- trying to move a progressive agenda forward and trying to move the Democratic Party in a progressive agenda and away from corporatism, careerism and corruption.

How Long Will the Actual Left Stay with the Democratic Party?

My statement on the officer-involved death in Minneapolis: pic.twitter.com/HUoGfXEj7R

— Amy Klobuchar (@amyklobuchar) May 26, 2020

Former Minnesota prosecutor Amy Klobuchar’s comment on the “officer-involved death” (her phrasing) of George Floyd on May 25

by Thomas Neuburger

I have three points to make, which leads to a fourth point.

1. Black Activists to Biden: If You Pick Klobuchar, We May Not Support You

On May 23, Politico wrote that "more than a dozen black and Latino strategists and activists warned in interviews that selecting Klobuchar would not help Biden excite black voters — and might have the opposite effect. Klobuchar would “risk losing the very base the Democrats need to win,” said Aimee Allison, founder of She the People, which promotes women of color in politics."

The reason given was two-fold. High in the article, in the first sentence in fact, the writer announced, "Sen. Amy Klobuchar performed abysmally among black voters in the Democratic primary."

Later, in the third paragraph, the writer said that the Black activists "pointed to Klobuchar’s poor performance among nonwhite voters during the presidential primary as well as her record as a prosecutor in Minnesota."

Adrianne Shropshire of the Clinton-connected BlackPAC is quoted in the sixth paragraph as saying, “It [the activists’ concerns about Klobuchar] comes from her performance in the primary,” and Al Sharpton is quoted as offering this explanation: “It is not her [Klobuchar’s] fault, but she is in the middle of an ongoing battle from the last few presidential races.”

The writer herself helpfully adds, "Klobuchar symbolizes a strategic division within the Democratic Party: whether to focus on winning back white, Midwestern voters who flipped to Donald Trump in 2016, or on activating voters of color who were not excited to vote."

But the article is ostensibly about "Black activists" and their rejection of Klobuchar — it says so even the headline — not about Shropshire and Sharpton's ground-cover explanation.

The writer waits until the eleventh paragraph, a place few readers will get to, before she explains the real reason the activists are concerned — namely, that Klobuchar "would risk losing the very base the Democrats need to win" — and to explain the activists' comment "as well as her record as a prosecutor in Minnesota." There the writer references a Washington Post op-ed penned by those same activists, who write:

A choice such as Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), who failed to prosecute controversial police killings and is responsible for the imprisonment of Myon Burrell, will only alienate black voters.

(Read this AP story to see all of what’s wrong with both the Myon Burrell case and Klobuchar’s handling of it.)

Despite all the obfuscation and Klobuchar-protection by Politico, the bottom line is clear: "Black activists" remember Klobuchar's record as a "tough prosecutor" of blacks and are threatening to fail to support her (and thus Biden) in November if Biden picks her for VP — a clear and open threat to his electoral chances.

In other words, progressive black activists are threatening to abandon the Democrat, Trump or no Trump, over this issue.

2. From George Floyd to Derek Chauvin to Amy Klobuchar

On May 25, this happened (account courtesy of the Minneapolis Police Department):

On Monday evening, shortly after 8:00 pm, officers from the Minneapolis Police Department responded to the 3700 block of Chicago Avenue South on a report of a forgery in progress. Officers were advised that the suspect was sitting on top of a blue car and appeared to be under the influence.

Two officers arrived and located the suspect, a male believed to be in his 40s, in his car. He was ordered to step from his car. After he got out, he physically resisted officers. Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress. Officers called for an ambulance. He was transported to Hennepin County Medical Center by ambulance where he died a short time later.

At no time were weapons of any type used by anyone involved in this incident.

That’s copspeak for “we murdered a guy and it’s not our fault.” Here’s what really happened (emphasis added):

The latest example of America’s racist police brutality problem was caught on camera in Minneapolis Monday, as Officer Derek Chauvin knelt on 46-year-old African-American George Floyd’s neck for over seven minutes until he passed out and died. In its headline on its website, Minneapolis police described the event as “man dies after medical incident during police interaction,” laundering themselves of any responsibility. Chauvin continued his assault even as Floyd desperately pleaded that he could not breathe, while bystanders protested his brutality. “You’re fucking stopping his breathing there, bro,” warned one concerned passer-by. Even after passing out, Chauvin did not release pressure on his neck. Chauvin has killed multiple times before while in uniform, has shot and wounded others and is well-known to local activist groups.

Amy Klobuchar is directly connected to this “officer-involved death” via her history with Officer Derek Chauvin:

[A]s the state’s chief prosecutor between 1999 and 2007 … [Klobuchar] declined to bring charges against more than two dozen officers who had killed citizens while on duty – including against Chauvin himself, who shot and killed Wayne Reyes in 2006 and would later go on to shoot more civilians while in uniform.

There’s more:

At the same time, however, Klobuchar was ramping up the number of arrests as part of her tough-on-crime agenda, something which inordinately affected people of color. In her first year in office alone, the prison sentences for first-degree drug crimes doubled. Activists allege her embracing of the broken window-style policing was a deliberate strategy to win support in the white suburbs of Minneapolis, to the detriment of the city’s non-white communities, bolstering her successful run for senate in 2006. A case in point is Elsayed Salim, who was convicted of failing to declare a secondary income that put him above the threshold for welfare and food stamps. A judge sentenced Salim to 364 days in jail – deliberately attempting to protect him from deportation by keeping his sentencing under a year which downgraded the case from a felony to a gross misdemeanor. An outraged Klobuchar appealed the decision, lobbying for an upgrade and condemning the state’s judges for “letting offenders off the hook too easily.” Mr. Salim was subsequently deported.

If you’ve heard stories of how brutal Klobuchar is to staff, consider this a deadly extension of that conscienceless pattern. Definitely not the “Minnesota-nice,” unobjectionable candidate her image-makers in the press would have believe she is.

3. A Tale of Two Protests

On May 26, the Minneapolis black community erupted in protest:

The scene at the Minneapolis 3rd Police Precinct. pic.twitter.com/ykxsfPn8PD

— Carlos Gonzalez (@CarlosGphoto) May 27, 2020

If you click through the images, note this one, my personal favorite:

Now contrast that image with this one, from a Michigan protest a few weeks ago:

It’s almost like blacks live in a different country than white people.

4. “I Don’t Think Progressives Will Stay After November”

If you add these three points together, you’ll see this piece isn’t about Amy Klobuchar at all. It’s not even about Joe Biden.

It’s about progressive activists, the sleeping mass of progressive voters (and non-voters) who are starting to wake, and the potential beginning of the end of progressive support of the Democratic Party.

Recall the opening point: “Black activists to Biden: If you Klobuchar, we may not support you.” That’s a threat for this time, for the 2020 election.

Will it actually happen this way? It could. After all, Biden himself gladly gave the country Clarence Thomas, and allowed an African American woman, Anita Hill, to be trashed in the process:

If Sen. [Alan] Simpson [R-WY] so eagerly wanted Angela Wright to testify, as he has repeatedly said, why didn’t he force her to do so? … “Because,” he says, “she had an attorney who chose to tell us she didn’t care to come. And Joe Biden said he didn’t care to have her. And I didn’t care to have her. She was going to say some vicious things about Clarence Thomas.”

It's not like Biden has clean hands in the matter. But what about next time, after 2020, regardless of the winner?

There’s no question knee-jerk Democratic voters, and also some thoughtful ones, will line up to support every bad mainstream Democrats (because Republicans!), but the real resistance (hashtag #RealResistance) is not to Republican rule, but to donor class rule and devastation by both parties.

How long will actual progressives — let’s call them “FDR voters” or #RealResistance voters, those who used to flock to Sanders every time he spoke — continue to flock to Democrats at the ballot box, simply because they’re Democrats no matter how bad?

Marianne Williamson thinks the day will come soon when the actual left will abandon the Democratic Party.

"I pray with all my heart that we will defeat Donald Trump in November. But the work that needs to be done starting the next morning is the same, whether it's Donald Trump or Joe Biden who wins. Because progressives have been sidelined. The progressive voice as a serious political force has been suppressed ... even within the Democratic Party.

"So the Democratic Party will make its own decision. It will continue to suppress and sideline progressives — in which case [long pause] I don't think progressives will stay after November."

• Will the Democratic Party's service to their donors, and disservice to their voters, be tolerated forever, or will people seek real change outside donor- and media-approved channels on both the left and right?

• Will black voters and activists take murder-by-cop lying down? That seems unlikely.

• How long will they tolerate the world of difference between the way police — the military arm of the state in every community — tolerate armed white protests and punish unarmed black and left-inspired ones, like Occupy?

• How long before the white underclass, like the black underclass, decides, in Covid-forced unemployment times, that they've had enough? Has that day dawned already?

• And finally, how long before the nation's obvious anger spills outside its "safe" electoral bounds and a brutal Establishment response sparks even more anger?

Marianne Williamson may be onto something. But if she is, what's next?
   

Marianne Williamson Takes On The Party Establishment

Yesterday, Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti invited Marianne to be a guest on Rising to discuss her 2020 congressional endorsements. She explained (above) her thinking about backing candidates who are challenging Democratic congressional leadership-- like Shahid Buttar (vs Nancy Pelosi), Mckayla Wilkes (vs Steny Hoyer), Jen Perelman (vs Debbie Wasserman Schultz), Lauren Ashcraft (vs Carolyn Maloney), Jamaal Bowman (vs Eliot Engel)... To have a national figure who can command attention on media the way Marianne does, is incredibly valuable to the progressive movement. In fact, Friday she's tape a show for next week with Anand Giridharadas at Vice.

The candidates she's backing span a wide range of progressives, some-- like Mike Siegel (TX-10), J.D. Scholten (IA-04), Nate McMurray (NY-27), Julie Oliver (TX-25) and Lisa Ring (GA-01)-- who came incredibly close in 2018 and are tee-ed up to win in November. Others are first time candidates who are part of the future of the progressive movement and, hopefully, the Democratic Party, win or lose-- like Eva Putzova (AZ-01), Keeda Haynes (TN-05), Shan Chowdhury (NY-05), Rebecca Parson (WA-06), Hector Oseguera (NJ-08), Robin Wilt (NY-25)... Marianne's ActBlue thermometer is on the right and finding a candidate or two you could support with a contribution could make a real difference in a campaign and in the tenor of Congress for the next two years. Is it going to be a corporate pig-sty again or a place where progressive ideas and values are going to play a role?

After Marianne was finished taping the show, she started some inspired tweeting. First this thread:

And then this one-- powerfully and directly to the point:

Then she focused her 2.7 million twitter followers on Jamaal Bowman brand new campaign video, released moments before. 2.7 million twitter followers is a big deal. Three of Biden's top VP contenders don't have that many combined: @SenKamalaHarris (1.2 million), @AmyKlobuchar (1 million), @RepValDemings (135,800). I sure hope a lot of those 2.7 million people have watched or will watch Jamaal's video:





Marianne hasn't endorsed many candidates for U.S. Senate. One, though is Teresa Tomlinson who is running for the Georgia seat occupied by odious Trump ass-kisser David Perdue. Before Teresa can beat Perdue, though, she has to beat Chuck Schumer. Schumer has stuck his nose into Georgia politics and thinks he's entitled to chose the state's Democrats nominee. He recruited a pointless centrist, Jon Ossoff who couldn't beat Perdue in a million years. And now Schumer is raising money for Ossoff from the Wall Street and corporate whores who he serves. Take a look at this little fundraising chart:

Teresa is getting her contributions from Georgians (68.7%). Ossoff is getting his contributions from out of state, much of it from Schumer's senator-purchasers (63.3%-- so just 36.7 from Georgians). This contest is June 9. Teresa: "Despite Jon Ossoff’s supposed fundraising prowess, we are smokin’ him in Georgia. Georgians are the voters and they will decide this race... From the beginning, this battle has been Ossoff’s 2017 national fundraising network vs. our 'For Georgians, by Georgians' campaign. Now, we know that his national network is responding tepidly to his candidacy and our in-state fundraising has significantly outpaced him. With our $1.6M to his $1M and with nearly two thousand more Georgia donors than Jon’s campaign-- we see that Georgians are demanding their say in this election."

#DirectCashRelief

As the COVID-death toll surged past 100,000 this Memorial Day, Marianne Williamson recorded a new video in the home where's she's sheltering, a video based on the hashtag she's been promulgating for months. Just before recording, she told me that "Anyone with a heart can see that $2,000 a month direct cash relief is necessary in order for tens of millions of people to make it through this crisis. Instead, our government is actually cutting back on its commitments to help our citizens cope with a calamitous economic crisis. Neither history nor God will judge us well."

It's why it's so crucial to be electing leaders in every part of the country who are motivated by the legitimate interests of working families, not by the bought-and-paid for interests of corporate entities. That's our job in this-- picking the right leaders, not people like Trump, Mitch McConnell and Gregory Meeks. According to a Newsweek survey of politicians supporting regular payments during the pandemic, Bernie "was one of the earliest people to push for the recurring checks. In mid-March, the former Democratic presidential candidate tweeted that a one-time $1,200 check-- which was the only direct payment included in the historic $2 trillion CARES Act--wasn't enough. 'The Senate must provide a $2,000 per month emergency payment for every American until this crisis is over,' he tweeted at the time. Since then, Sanders teamed up with Senators Kamala Harris (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA) to introduce legislation that would provide such monthly payments to every individual who earns less than $120,000 annually. The checks would arrive each month throughout the pandemic and in the three months after the crisis comes to an end. 'If we can bail out large corporations, we can make sure that everyone in this country has enough income to pay for the basic necessities of life,' Sanders said in a statement after the bill was introduced... In the House, Representatives Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Tim Ryan (D-OH) introduced legislation in April calling for $2,000 for every American over 16, for up to one year. The bill has 18 Democratic co-sponsors... Khanna argued that a 'one-time $1,200 check isn't going to cut it' and that 'Americans need sustained cash infusions for the duration of this crisis in order to come out on the other side alive, healthy and ready to get back to work.'" Others in the House pushing for this include AOC, Pramila Jayapal, and Rashida Tlaib. Polls have found that a majority of Americans support a monthly $2,000 UBI check to help weather the financial storm. 66% of respondents in one poll said they preferred recurring payments of $2,000 until a year after Trump declares an end to the federal state of emergency.

But congressional leaders aren't there. They seem to have other priorities-- Pelosi and Hoyer want to bail out lobbyists and McConnell wants to indemnify businesses that open too rapidly from any consequences-- like workers or customers dying.

Marianne introduced me to Kentucky progressive Mike Broihier, vying to take on the odious and villainous Mitch McConnell. Over the weekend, Mike told me that just last week he and his wife had finally "received our one-time stimulus check of $2,400, ten weeks into the acknowledgment of a full on pandemic. As farmers, just hitting the prime production days of our operation, we have cash flow. What our lives would be like if we were unemployed and uninsured facing the greatest health crisis in a century is hard for us to imagine. We have food, water, shelter but 40-million American households teeter on the brink. A one-time check is a joke for those in need. Opinions vary but predictions of a recession/depression lasting 18-months to five years are  common. Congress must fight their first instinct and habit of handing money to corporations and deliver it directly to the people who need it, who will spend it, and who deserve it as compensation for their corrupt and inept leadership in Washington."

There are no farmers in the southeast Queens district where Democratic Socialist Shaniyat Chowdhury is taking on corrupt New Dem Gregory Meeks. And there are almost no people feeling the financial squeeze of this pandemic. "I believe," he told me yesterday, "we should have UBI beyond the pandemic. During this time, billionaires have made $434 billion dollars according to a CNBC report. While we lost everything-- our homes, jobs, and loved ones. This is just morally wrong and we need to have a working class agenda that includes Medicare for All, Universal Paid Sick Leave, and guaranteeing everyone has an income to pay for the basic necessities. Not only will we be financially relived, but we live happier, longer, and be more productive."

What Shan and Mike have in common is that both are part of Marianne Williamson's organizing effort to elect more progressives to Congress. All of the candidates endorsed by Marianne would be co-sponsoring Ro Khanna's bill in the House or Bernie's in the Senate if they were in Congress now. If you're a regular DWT reader, you're already familiar with many of these candidates. Please hear them out on this crisis and consider contributing to their campaigns by clicking on the Marianne's Endorsed Candidates thermometer below.

Despite the corporate void of a candidate Chuck Schumer is pushing-- furiously-- in Georgia, former Columbus mayor Teresa Tomlinson is the best candidate to take on David Perdue and flip his Senate seat. When I asked her about helping workers through the pandemic-- something Perdue adamantly opposes-- she said "we need to rethink what fiscal stimulus and unemployment insurance looks like. We must provide for liquidity in the market, which occurs most efficiently when cash money or credits are given to families at the lower end of the economic scale or to super small businesses. Universal base income is just a re-envisioning of Unemployment Insurance for a new day and a new economic moment. It means no more than a targeted stimulus to the economy and to civic stability by bridging the gap between the despair of high unemployment and the regeneration of our economic future." Smart, right? Another Georgia candidate-- this one running for a GOP-held House seat-- is Lisa Ring, who noted that "The only way we will make it through this crisis without permanent damage to our nation is together and with good governance. Half of all Americans were already living paycheck to paycheck before the pandemic. Now, with 38 million people filing unemployment claims and millions more who won’t have jobs to return to in the coming months, we must do everything we can to help all people survive and then get back on their feet. $2,000 per person per month is a start, healthcare for all is an important next step, and we can continue from there on a path toward progress and humanity."




Austin-based House candidate Julie Oliver took up that same theme. "Too many members of Congress," she told me, "don't know what it’s like to live paycheck-to-paycheck, let alone to be unemployed with bills piling up. In #TX25, our Congressman is a wealthy car dealer from Weatherford only interested in putting himself first. There is bipartisan support in Congress for Rep Pramila Jayapal’s bill-- it would cover workers’ salaries up to $90,000 for up to six months-- allowing businesses to rehire furloughed and laid-off employees. ⁦That’s the kind of solution this moment needs."

One state up is Oklahoma and there's a candidate, Tom Guild, there taking on a Blue Dog, Republican-lite incumbent, Kendra Horn. Guild: "We should invest $2,000 a month in each American during the current pandemic. Many still have not received their stimulus checks. In Oklahoma, tens of thousands have not received a penny in unemployment compensation, because of an incompetently administered system. The system’s top administrator just resigned and who knows how much longer Oklahomans and beleaguered Americans can pay their mounting bills and afford food and shelter. This is a unique challenge in the history of our country. We can do this if we pull together! As the Hollies sang so beautifully-- He’s Not Heavy. He’s My Brother!!

Lauren Ashcraft is a financial services expert running in New York's old Silk Stocking district-- that now includes swaths of working class Queens, Brooklyn and Manhattan neighborhoods as well. The seat is occupied by a Wall Street-friendly Democrat, Carolyn Maloney, and Lauren is crystal clear about what a difference she would make in Congress. "It needs to be $2,000 per month for every person regardless of income, dependency status, etc. so far, many New Yorkers have been excluded from federal help at this time because our cost of living is so much higher than across the USA. The $2,000 per month will begin to make up for the fact that New Yorkers have not had their basic needs met, Medicaid benefits have come under attack in our state, and the majority of my district consists of renters who cannot pay their rent at this time."

Way up north in a very different part of New York-- Monroe County-- progressive Robin Wilt is seeking to replace another New Dem in Congress. She pointed out yesterday that "The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (a nonpartisan research and policy institute that pursues federal and state policies designed to both reduce poverty and inequality while restoring fiscal responsibility in equitable ways) has enumerated the criteria for effective economic response to the COVID-19 crisis based on the lessons we learned from our historical fiscal response to past economic crises (most recently the Great Recession of 2008). Its research demonstrates that fiscal stimulus is most effective if: 1) it is implemented as early as possible in a recession; 2) it is directed to individuals and entities who will quickly spend, not save or invest, any additional resources they receive; 3) it errs on the side of being larger than ultimately necessary rather than smaller; and 4) its size and duration respond to changing circumstances. Notably, the Congressional Progressive Caucus has been championing a fiscal stimulus package for the masses that adheres to these criteria and meets the scale of the crisis. We can learn from our past mistakes in crisis response during the 1918 influenza pandemic, the Great Depression, and the Great Recession by leaving no one behind in our federal response and implementing the key elements currently lacking from our fiscal stimulus: namely, by increasing direct payments and aid to individuals and small businesses, expanding our unemployment insurance, increasing nutritional aid benefits, and providing health care coverage, and housing security to those who need it most. That is the stimulus the American people need and deserve. We need more representatives who are willing to unabashedly champion those priorities."

Another candidate who I didn't know-- and who practically lives in my neighborhood-- who Marianne introduced me to is David Kim, a young progressive taking on Jimmy Gomez in the heart of Los Angeles. "Pre-COVID19," Kim told me, "masses of our people were working 2-3 jobs just to make ends meet. Now they have no jobs to make ends meet. Yet, instead of providing the people recurring monthly cash payments to survive these times, our elected officials chose to give the people a one-time means-tested $1200 check while bailing out corporations and their corporate donors in billions. This clearly shows that our elected officials pledge their allegiance to corporations and not the people, and that they can't get a pulse of the human suffering in our communities. What's the point of opening everything back up, when the people have no money? When the people have no money, there's no economy. Giving recurring cash payments of $2K/month is long overdue and Congress must act now, or risk being voted out this November."

Voting out "ex"-Republican Blue Dog Tom O'Halleran would be good for everyone-- except his corporate donors-- and Eva Putzova wouldn't wait to make up for lost time. "I support the Sanders-Harris-Markey legislation calling for a $2,000 per month check for every American earning under $120,000 per year," she stated flatly. "Thirty-million people are out of work and can't pay their bills and now have no health insurance. Meanwhile, America's billionaires saw their combined wealth soar by $434 billion between March 18 and May 19. There is no reason why we can't guarantee every needy American worker livable income, healthcare, and housing during the Covid-19 pandemic and beyond. In fact, I believe all Americans should be guaranteed these things as a human right. Cost certainly is not the issue. We have plenty of wealth in the U.S.  It is just unfairly distributed to those who are already wealthy. It is time for some modest redistribution to those in need."

Liam O'Mara is running for a seat in Riverside County, CA, held by a Republican, Ken Calvert, that even Fox News says is too corrupt for public office. O'Mara, a progressive and a history professor, won his primary in a landslide and is running on a UBI. "Supporting the House and Senate proposals for a 2,000 per month stimulus has to be one of the easiest political decisions I've made since entering this race," he told me. "I am, after all, one of just a handful of post-primary Democratic candidates running on a universal basic income. Too many in Washington have forgotten one of the fundamental lessons of the Great Depression-- that cash in the hands of the workers is what drives the economy, not Wall Street. Back when they did understand it, in the immediate postwar decades, wage growth matched productivity gains and we created a middle class lifestyle for most Americans. The 1940s, '50s, and '60s saw the longest sustained boom in the real economy in our country's history, and we made the American Dream real for countless millions. But since the 1970s, the Fordist principle-- that money in the hands of the workers lets them buy your stuff-- has been under assault. The new oligarchs do not care about the economy as a whole, only their own profits, and they have guided into place policies which have undermined the middle class. Pay has stagnated for forty years and benefits are shrinking; the cost of housing, health care, and education have skyrocketed; and the tax burden has been shifted onto our shoulders so the rich can siphon ever more out of the real economy. This pandemic is only laying bare how precarious the situation is for countless American families. Many of us lack savings and have no way to weather a quick fall in income. And the sharp decrease in our weekly spending has been crushing small businesses across the country. It is a perfect time to remind Americans that it is their spending which keeps the whole engine running, not the so-called 'job creators' in the 1%. And the best way to restart the economy and get us back on track is to put cash directly into the hands of the people who will spend it."

There Really Is A Reason We Have Primaries-- Too Bad So Few People Use Them

Do you watch the Humanist Report much? If not, maybe you should. In the video above, host Mike Figueredo successfully explains why progressives need to show some spine when it comes to dealing with foot draggingly corporate careerist Democrats, especially in leadership. As you know, Marianne Williamson has endorsed Shahid Buttar, who's running against Nancy Pelosi, Mckayla Wilks, who is running against Pelosi's top lieutenant, Steney Hoyer, and Jen Perelman, who is taking on faded party leadership figure Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Look at Marianne's list of candidates; 14 of them are taking on entrenched Democratic incumbents.

One senior congressional Democrat, a progressive, didn't agree that anyone can lump Pelosi and Hoyer together. "It's like apples and hand grenades," he told me. "And to have this video come out within 24 hours of her calling Trump a "fat fuck" is bad timing. Would anyone else call Trump a "fat fuck!"

Yesterday Shahid Buttar told us that he's "incredibly grateful for Marianne Williamson's support. Having seen her as a voice encouraging empathy at the highest levels of our national politics, I'm eager to build a brighter future together with her-- finally putting people and communities, rather than corporations, at the center of our public policy. Often, it takes a voice like hers, from the outside of politics, to see so clearly what the root of the problem is in Washington-- entrenched Democratic so-called leaders like Nancy Pelosi who are our immediate hurdles to progress. I'm impressed by Marianne's courage in joining me to take on the top brass of political corruption, and I hope other figures in the Democratic Party have the strength to follow in her footsteps."

Well, one of those figures is Eva Putzova who served on the Flagstaff City Council and as a Bernie DNC delegate. Now she's running for Congress in a district (AZ-01) held by former Republican state legislator Tom O'Halleran, who now bills himself as a Blue Dog. He opposes everything the Democratic Party stands for. Eva told us that she "became a U.S. Citizen in 2007 and the day after the naturalization ceremony I registered to vote as a Democrat because I am a democrat. Then in 2016, I went to the DNC as a delegate for Bernie Sanders, which opened my eyes to how the party leadership at both national and state levels is enmeshed with corporate interests and how the only way we can reclaim Democratic Party for democrats is to replace those who are bought by corporations. So many young people we talk to on the campaign trail are turned off by conversations about policies because they are turned off by the corrupted politics. I'm challenging the most Republican Democrat in Arizona precisely for these reasons: his votes and inaction on the most enormous challenges we face, like climate change, are a direct reflection of his support of the corporate agenda. The top Democratic Party representatives in Congress lost their ability to lead with courage and to drive transformation because they are out of touch with the people of this country and because they accepted and institutionalized corruption. They have to go because they are no longer Democrats."

All the details are here: https://secure.ngpvan.com/DAR1YEp-bkWTNtpHzgUd7A2

Michael Owens is a former Democratic chairman for Cobb County, which went blue under his leadership. He knows the party inside and out and he's taking on one of the last of the Georgia Blue Dogs, David Scott. He was very happy to have received an endorsement from Marianne. "Her willingness to suppprt progressive candidates," he said, "is a breath of fresh air, in what can often be the caustic environment of primary politics where challengers are running against establishment Democrats. The true strength in moving the progressive movement forward is through down ballot candidates."

Jan Perelman is the progressive Democrat running for the south Florida seat that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is sitting in-- opposing everything remotely progressive other than gay rights and abortion. When it comes to working families' interests, she's a baby step from being a Republican. "I'm always so amazed that I'm considered the 'left,'" Jen told us last night. "I have been a Democrat since I registered to vote in 1989. I am pro-labor, pro-environment, and anti-war, which are not radical positions. It was the Democratic Party that 'left' me when it was taken over by corporate interests and stopped representing working people. We cannot move forward as a country as long as entrenched corporate Democrats remain beholden to special interests. As a primary challenger who takes zero corporate money, I am going to do everything in my power to bring the Democratic party back to its roots as the party of the people."

Robin Wilt is also challenging an old school corrupt political hack, Joe Morelle, in Monroe County, New York. Robin was very enthusiastic about Marianne endorsing Shahid and told me that "not only proved that her run for the Presidency was not borne of vanity, but of integrity; but she has also demonstrated the type of political leadership and courage that the left wing of the party has long been lacking. As Democrats, as long as we remain complicit in supporting leadership within the party that does not advance an agenda that centers those most impacted by the deleterious policies that have produced the massive inequities that we witness today, we can no more say that we care about marginalized communities and the plight of the disenfranchised than can Republicans make that claim."

Continuing, Robin said that "It is disingenuous and craven to claim that you support universal health care, and then support leadership that blocks Medicare for All at every turn. It is disingenuous and craven to claim that you care about wealth and income inequality, and then support leadership that preserves a tax structure that benefits only the top 1% and accepts massive amounts of money from corporate interests. It is disingenuous and craven to claim that you care about climate justice, and then support leadership that thwarts implementation of the Green New Deal. It is disingenuous to claim that you care about housing justice and then support leadership that will not advance a Federal Homes Guarantee. In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail, Martin Luther King warned us about the well-meaning moderate that compromised his/her principles for the sake of pragmatism. King understood that whenever we compromise with a lie about who people are, and barter the human rights of the people we serve for our own comfort, we empower the political forces that have exploited our divisions to maintain power. The politicians who are blocking the expansion of healthcare to all Americans, abiding corporate polluters, increasing investment in the war and mass incarceration and detention economies, all while slashing our nation’s safety net and denying workers the right to earn a living wage are the selfsame politicians who are blocking a progressive agenda. Our silence is enabling their deceit. It is time that we follow Marianne Williamson’s courageous lead, give voice to the voiceless, and unabashedly support true progressives that adhere to the principles we hold dear."

Hector Oseguera, the New Jersey progressive running for a seat held by party hack Albio Sires, told us this morning that "It's an absolute honor to be part of Marianne Williamson's movement to bring the Democratic Party back to earth. This is a party that's supposed to represent the working-class people of this nation, but has gotten way too comfortable with their corporate sponsors. When you look at my race, you'll find that I'm the only Democratic candidate in this Democratic primary. The incumbent has an abysmal record on immigration, corporate welfare, and mass surveillance. Whether it's the environment, healthcare, or affordable housing, my opponent is to the far right of the average voter in my district, relying on a network of political cronies and corrupt big money interests to keep him in power. He's received dishonorable mentions in books like the Soprano State and the Jersey Sting, covering his history of corruption and ethics violations that have contributed to New Jersey's reputation as a politically corrupt state. This progressive movement, which owes a lot to Marianne's leadership, is working to dismantle the facade that corporate Democrats offer much substantive difference from their Republican colleagues."

In the Oklahoma City congressional district, Tom Guild is running against one of the most conservative Blue Dogs in the House, Kendra Horn. Tom noted yesterday that "Marianne Williamson is showing exemplary leadership in endorsing, raising money and fighting for progressive congressional candidates throughout America. My opponent opposes Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, raising the minimum wage to $15; she voted against labor’s major legislative initiative in Congress in 2020, voted against Sen. Tim Kaine’s and Ro Khanna's resolution to restrain Donald Trump from taking military actions that could start another endless war in Iran, and recently met remotely with lobbyists for Big Insurance Companies who were seeking money to bail out COBRA in the HEROES Act. That’s just a small sampling of her support for Republican-lite regressive policies. On the CARES Act she voted for the rule to let the bill proceed to the floor of the House to be debated and voted on, then she voted no on the bill. Go figure. Unless progressives oppose Nancy Pelosi’s DCCC gravy train and their support for Republican-lite members of the House running as Democrats, we essentially have two big corporate parties corrupted to the hilt by Wall Street and special interest campaign money. That may be one of the big untold stories as to why so many Americans choose to opt out and not vote every year. They see little structural and substantive difference between the two major parties on issues important to them. I thank Marianne for her support for our campaign and commend her for her integrity in grabbing the bull by the horns and supporting, Shahid, Pelosi’s primary challenger. Marianne has the guts of a government mule and that’s exactly what it will take for progressives to rule the roost. Progressives need to be tougher and stick out their necks to support fellow progressive candidates even when it’s hard to do and not convenient for them. I’m happy that I promoted Marianne to help her make the presidential debates and encouraged people on Facebook and Twitter to donate to her campaign. I was all in for Bernie, but saw that progressives needed all the help we could get in the primaries and in the debates. We need to GO BIG, GO BOLD, or GO HOME!"

Marianne Williamson Draws A Line In The Sand-- For Shahid Buttar And For David Kim

A few weeks ago Marianne Williamson wanted to discuss the congressional election in CA-34, a district that starts a few blocks from my house. I can walk there; before the new reality, I used to have dinner there a couple of times a week. And Konbi, my favorite sandwich shop-- also, according to Bon Appétit, the best sandwich shop in America-- is in the district. CA-34 includes Echo Park, Eagle Rock, Highland Park, Koreatown, Mount Washington, El Serano, Cypress Park, Boyle Heights, DTLA (the Arts District, the Financial District, the Fashion District), Dodger Stadium, City Terrace, Chinatown, Bunker Hill, Little Tokyo, Newton Park and Skid Row. It borders on Adam Schiff's district, Ted Lieu's district, Judy Chu's district, Karen Bass' district and Lucille Roybal-Allard's district. It's the heart of Los Angeles.

The district is 64% Hispanic, 20% Asian and 10% white. The $40,215 median income makes it one of the 20 poorest congressional districts in the country. It's one of the bluest districts in the country (D+35), gave Romney 14% of the vote and Trump 11%. It was the only district in Los Angeles to give Bernie a majority in the 2016 primary. The congressman representing CA-34 is Jimmy Gomez. Progressive Punch rates his voting record-- the 16th most progressive-- a solid "A." The only Californians voting further left are Mark DeSaulnier, Judy Chu and Ro Khanna. Gomez's #16 compares well to actual heroes of the revolution like AOC and Rashida Tlaib (tied at #18), Barbara Lee (#22) and Ilhan Omar (#37). But Marianne wasn't calling me to discuss endorsing Gomez's reelection campaign. She knows the meaninglessness of these kinds of ratings and wanted to know what I thought of David Kim, Gomez's opponent.

David's a 36 year old anti-corruption attorney whose campaign motto is "Financial Freedom, Love & Justice for All" The jungle primary was March 3 and the two who emerged to face off in November were Gomez with 49.5% of the vote (just under 50) and David Kim with 23.2% of the vote. Turnout was abysmal-- 34,034 voters in total. After the vote, the other 3 candidates (including the Republican) all endorsed David Kim. This video will give you a good idea about what his campaign is all about and why he has been gaining momentum:





I asked him how he's going to persuade voters to replace Gomez and he told me that Gomez isn't "a true progressive and does the bare minimum, only chiming in to support certain legislation once Nancy Pelosi does so first. He is scared to lead in legislation and just follows. If he were a true progressive, he should be supporting Ilhan Omar's HR 6515 and not HR 6314 in place of that. Moreover, Jimmy doesnt have a pulse with the suffering of our people here in L.A. I have nothing personal against him but when career politicians have been in office too long, they're unable to connect with the suffering of the people no matter how hard they try because they've been in their political cash bubbles for so long... [W]e need a federal representative who will fight and lead for us, not do everything Nancy says. We have corrupt local politician/developer relationships/money rampant in L.A. and our federal representative hasn't stepped in because they're all part of the same pack, with the same campaign donors... 98.8% of Jimmy's campaign contributions are from PACs, corporate PACs, banks, developers, military industrial complex/defense, etc.. And our people in L.A. don't like that kind of energy feeding our federal representative. We want to move away from a Jimmy Gomez [towards someone more like] Ro Khanna. We need someone to take a firm stance on clean campaign finance reform, while addressing homelessness, housing and these systemic issues that haven't been addressed for years... Nothing personal against Jimmy. But people are suffering and we don't want to waste another 2 years by electing someone who just follows."

Marianne endorsed him. That was a big step towards a kind of political clarity that differentiates between real leadership and... well, however you want to describe professional politicians who try to be on the right side of their districts' prevailing sentiments.

Marianne was just getting started though. She asked me about the grassroots progressive taking on Nancy Pelosi, Shahid Buttar, which began a process that led to the video up top. As she noted, she's "a lifelong Democrat who has become has become very very concerned with the corporatist direction of the party in too many cases." Her own experience in running for president this year showed her, she said, "how the control of certain forces, at the expense of progressive voices, is a direction that is taking the Democratic Party away from the principles" that she was-- like many of us-- raised to believe the party stands for. The Heroes Act Pelosi pushed through Congress on Friday snapped something in Marianne. She is insisting that there should be $2,000 a month for everyone until the pandemic is under control, as well as Medicare for All... "We need a show of compassion for the American people that is simply not the agenda these days for the corporate-backed Democratic Party."

"Progressives," she said, "can't just be sidelined all the time... or pandered to, suppressed. It's got to stop. Let's stop it now. ShahidButtar.com." Please take a look at the candidates Marianne has already endorsed by clicking on the thermometer on the right. And don't be surprised if she gets behind others taking on the Ancien Régime beyond just Nancy Pelosi, Steny Hoyer, Mitch McConnell, Carolyn Maloney, Gregory Meeks, Albio Sires and Susan Collins. I wouldn't be surprised if, for example, Debbie Wasserman Schultz doesn't find herself with a Marianne Williamson problem down in Broward and Miami-Dade counties in the not too distant future. Meanwhile, please take a look at the candidates, like David Kim, Shahid Buttar, Mckayla Wilkes, Andrew Romanoff and Betsy Sweet, who Marianne has already endorsed. And please contribute what you can to their campaigns at the page the thermometer will take you to.