Here’s how Alabama has the power to prevent another Charlottesville
The “Unite the Right” rally in August of 2017 led to widespread panic and chaos in Charlottesville, Va. One major cause of the panic, coupled with the violence, was the intimidating display of the paramilitary activity that rioters demonstrated. According to new study released by Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP) all 50 states have laws already on the books that would prevent the public displays of a private militia that the nation saw in August, and thus and can prevent similar crises in the future. “What we found is that every state has laws on the books that could be used to help ensure that the violence that occurred during the ‘Unite the Right’ rally never happens again in America,” stated Mary McCord, senior litigator at ICAP. “Local authorities in all 50 states should know that the law empowers them to restrict paramilitary activity during public rallies, while preserving the rights to free expression and peaceful assembly.” Here are the laws Alabama has on the books that could prevent another Charlottesville: Ala. Const. art. I, § 27. Standing army; military subordinate to civil power That no standing army shall be kept up without the consent of the legislature, and, in that case, no appropriation for its support shall be made for a longer term than one year; and the military shall, in all cases, and at all times, be in strict subordination to the civil power. Ala. Code § 31-2-125. Unauthorized military organizations Any two or more persons, whether with or without uniform, who associate, assemble, or congregate together by or under any name in a military capacity for the purpose of drilling, parading, or marching at any time or place or otherwise take up or bear arms in any such capacity without authority of the Governor, must, on conviction, be fined not more than $1,000. This section does not apply to any school or college where military training and instruction is given under the provisions of state or federal laws, nor to the order of Knights of Templar, Knights of Pythias, Patriarchs Militant, or Uniform Rank Woodmen of the World. Ala. Code § 31-2-18. Wearing foreign uniforms—Prohibited; exceptions (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to appear in any public place or in the public view attired in any uniform similar to that worn by the military, semi-military, naval, police, storm troop, or other official or semiofficial forces of any foreign state, nation or government, or attired in any distinctive part or parts of such a uniform, and to assemble with other persons similarly attired in any camp, drill ground, or other place for the purpose of engaging in military drill or training or other military purposes. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to appear in any public place or in the public view attired in the uniform or wearing the distinctive garment of any association of persons of whatsoever nature or form which engages in, adopts, or imitates the drill formations, salutes, or other methods or practices or the symbols of any foreign military, semi-military, naval, police, storm troop, or similar foreign organization, and, so attired, to assemble with other persons similarly attired in any camp, drill ground, or other place for the purpose of engaging in military drill or training or other military practices. (c) It shall be unlawful for the proprietor, manager, or keeper of any place of public meeting, resort or amusement to permit therein any assemblage of persons attired as prohibited in this section. (d) This section shall not apply to the officers or members of the military, semi-military, naval, police, or other official or semiofficial forces of any foreign state, nation, or government lawfully within the State of Alabama, any veterans’ organization chartered by Act of Congress, the Boy Scouts of America, any student of any school or academy recognized by the Board of Education of the State of Alabama, nor to the members of the cast of any stage or motion picture production characterizing the officials of a foreign
Charlottesville poses new civil rights test for Jeff Sessions
Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, a son of the segregated South who was named after leaders of the Confederacy, faces a tough new test of his commitment to protecting civil rights as he oversees the Justice Department‘s investigation of the deadly violence at a rally of white nationalists in Virginia. Sessions’ political career has been dogged by questions about race, including during his confirmation hearings this year. In his six months as attorney general, he has worked quickly to change how the department enforces civil rights law, particularly in the areas of police reform and voting rights. Yet Sessions was also quick to forcefully condemn the car attack at the neo-Nazi rally in support of a Confederate statue in Charlottesville. His response stood in contrast to that of President Donald Trump, who drew equivalence between the white nationalists and those protesting their beliefs. Sessions denounced racism and bigotry and called the driver’s actions an “evil” act of domestic terrorism worthy of a federal civil rights investigation. Observers say the real test will be in what Sessions does next, given the legal limitations he faces. Federal hate crimes law may not cover the killing even if it was motivated by hate. Federal criminal law has no specific, catchall charge for acts of domestic terrorism. Sessions may decide that the murder charges already leveled against James Alex Fields Jr. in state court are sufficient for justice. “It’s my hope that with the degree of national and international scrutiny, that this department will do the right thing,” said Kristen Clarke, a former hate crimes prosecutor and president of the liberal Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. “This is a case that the world is watching.” For Sessions, a genial 70-year-old with an Alabama drawl and an uncompromising conservative ideology, leading the Justice Department is the capstone of a decadeslong political career. He has faced questions about his treatment of minorities along the way. As a federal prosecutor in the 1980s, Sessions charged black community activists, who were swiftly acquitted, in a voter fraud case that, along with allegations of racially charged comments, cost him a federal judgeship. As a Republican senator more than 20 years later, he opposed expanding the federal hate crimes statute to protect people based on their sexual orientation and gender identity. Clarke said Sessions’ comments in the days after the Charlottesville attack made her cautiously optimistic, but his history has her concerned. Sessions promised to “advance the investigation toward the most serious charges that can be brought, because this is an unequivocally unacceptable and evil attack that cannot be accepted in America.” But he also acknowledged that deciding whether to bring federal charges won’t be quick or easy. Hate crime cases are often challenging because the government must prove that a suspect was primarily motivated by hatred of the victims’ race or religion, as opposed to their political views. The Charlottesville case could be tricky. The victim, 32-year-old Heather Heyer, was white. That means investigators will have to prove Fields was targeting minorities when he plowed into the crowd, not just anti-racism protesters. Prosecutors can argue that a suspect committed a crime not because of the race of the victim but because of the race of the people on whose behalf she was protesting, said William Yeomans, an American University law fellow and former high-ranking official in the Justice Department’s civil rights division. But that interpretation of the hate crimes law has rarely if ever been used, he said. “It’s a challenge, but I don’t think it’s entirely impossible or shouldn’t be explored,” Yeomans said. “The real measure of (Sessions’) commitment and his success in this case will be the thoroughness of the investigation” even if the case remains in state court. Fields already faces a long sentence if he is convicted in Virginia, so a federal charge could be seen as largely symbolic. Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, for example, said she brought hate crimes charges in a massacre at a black church in South Carolina because that state has no hate-crimes law, and federal charges were needed to adequately address a motive rooted in racial hate. The latest case is being investigated by career prosecutors and FBI agents, who will make recommendations to Sessions. The FBI would not describe the scope of the resources it has devoted to the investigation, but there are signs it is a priority. Agents were looking for clues in Fields’ hometown in Ohio the day of the attack. Sessions has said prosecuting hate crimes is a priority of his civil rights division. Yet he is reshaping the unit in other ways that make advocates nervous. Under Sessions, the department has expressed support for a strict Texas voter ID that a federal judge last month found discriminates against minorities; backed off court-enforceable improvement plans for troubled police agencies; and told local school districts they no longer must allow transgender students to use the bathrooms of their choice. The department declined to comment further on Sessions’ thinking about the Charlottesville case. Sessions has not said whether he personally favors the removal of Confederate monuments such as the one memorializing Robert E. Lee at the center of the Charlottesville violence. He has said only that cities should make that choice free from violence. His supporters say neither emotions nor his past will guide him in the investigation. “He will look at it from a very legal perspective. Was a crime committed, and what are we going to do to get a conviction?” said Armand DeKeyser, who worked closely with Sessions and became his chief of staff in the Senate. “He won’t be governed by emotion.” Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
Starbucks chairman questions country’s ‘moral fiber’
Starbucks chairman Howard Schultz says the events surrounding a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, last weekend have put the “moral fiber” of the country in question. Schultz said at an employee forum in Seattle on Tuesday that he has “profound concern about the lack of character, morality, humanity,” displayed at the rally, according to a recap of the meeting posted on Starbucks’ website. “The moral fiber, the values, and what we as a country have stood for is literally hanging in the abyss,” Schultz told employees. “We are at a critical juncture in American history. That is not an exaggeration. We are at and facing a crucible in which our daily life is being challenged and being questioned about what is right and what is wrong.” A throng of hundreds, mostly white men and many carrying guns, converged on the college town Saturday yelling anti-Semitic and racist slurs and carrying Confederate flags and neo-Nazi and KKK signs. A street fight broke out between them and counter-protesters, and a woman was killed and others injured when a man drove a car into people marching against the rally. After the violence, President Donald Trump was blasted for putting the blame on both sides and saying both sides included “very fine people.” Schultz was not a member of either of Trump’s two panels of business leaders that dissolved Wednesday after several CEOs stepped down in protest of Trump’s comments. And he told his employees Tuesday he’d let the actions and words of the president speak for themselves. “What we witnessed this past weekend … is against every sense of what is right,” he said. “My fear is not only that this behavior is being given permission and license, but its conduct is being normalized to the point where people are no longer hiding their face.” Telling employees he was speaking to them “as an American, as a Jew, as a parent, as a grandparent,” Schultz said it’s hard to remain optimistic about the country’s future “in the midst of such a storm,” but he still is. Starbucks and Schultz have been outspoken on social issues. Republish with permission of The Associated Press.
Democrats risk culture war fight in Charlottesville response
President Donald Trump‘s widely criticized response to white supremacist violence in Virginia has left Democrats in a quandary: how to seize the moral high ground without getting sucked into a politically perilous culture war. Democrats have denounced Trump for blaming “both sides” for deadly protests in Charlottesville, Virginia, and, more recently, for defending Confederate monuments. But the party faces a complex task: While addressing race and history in ways that reflect the party’s values, Democrats risk getting sidetracked from issues like jobs and the economy that resonate with voters ahead of the 2018 midterm election. The party has been looking to answer Trump’s populism by crafting its own middle-class brand, yet Democratic leaders across multiple states now are pushing to take down Old South monuments like the one that ostensibly sparked the events in Charlottesville, and a trio of rank-and-file House Democrats wants to pursue a congressional censure of the president. In interviews this week before his resignation was announced Friday, White House strategist Steve Bannon gleefully suggested Democrats are falling into a trap. “I want them to talk about racism every day,” Bannon told The American Prospect, a liberal magazine. “If the left is focused on race and identity, and we go with economic nationalism, we can crush the Democrats.” Trump himself has called Confederate memorials, most of them actually erected decades after the Civil War, “beautiful statues” that reflect “our nation’s history and culture.” Polls taken after last weekend’s violence offer some evidence backing Bannon’s and Trump’s view. While polls found widespread disgust with white supremacists, a Marist Poll for NPR and PBS found that just 27 percent of adults queried believe Confederate monuments “should be removed because they are offensive.” About two out of three white and Latino respondents said they should remain, as did 44 percent of black respondents. Andrew Young, a Democrat, civil rights leader and former U.N. ambassador, warned this week that the monuments are “a distraction.” He told reporters in Atlanta it is “too costly to refight the Civil War.” Boyd Brown of South Carolina, a former state lawmaker and onetime member of the Democratic National Committee, says Democrats are right to oppose Confederate monuments and criticize Trump’s remarks. “He tweets something crazy, we react – and we’re not wrong,” Brown said. But “we have to talk about a lack of jobs and education in poor districts, voter suppression laws. Ask why Medicaid funding is always the target. And then explain how all those things hurt more than just African-Americans.” Trump upset Democrat Hillary Clinton on the strength of his support from white voters, particularly working-class whites who possessed a combination of economic frustration and racial resentments salved by Trump’s promises of immigration controls, law-and-order and a booming economy. Clinton, meanwhile, concentrated so much on Trump’s deficiencies and outlandish statements that her own policy proposals received less attention. That’s a problem that has beset Trump rivals since he first declared his candidacy: All the attention focused on Trump – even unflattering stories – prevent them from getting out their own messages. Brian Fallon, who was spokesman for Clinton’s campaign, said Democrats shouldn’t let that happen after Charlottesville. “As horrifying as what the president has said is, you have to have an affirmative agenda,” he said. Still, Fallon praised Democratic efforts to keep Trump and Republicans on the defensive over the president’s response – even if it doesn’t help them politically. “Sometimes it’s important to take a stand regardless of the electoral impacts,” he said, noting that Clinton delivered a speech last year warning of white nationalists’ rise alongside Trump’s campaign. Democrats have tried various tactics to press the Charlottesville issue. Besides the push to censure Trump and remove monuments, they are planning voter organization drives across the United States. Andrew Gillum, the mayor of Tallahassee, Florida, and candidate for governor, is among the Democrats calling for monuments to be moved to museums or cemeteries. Gillum, who is black, says Democrats must argue “these monuments have been weaponized. We can’t pretend that didn’t happen.” The issue is reminiscent of South Carolina’s decision to remove the Confederate battle flag from statehouse grounds in 2015 after a white gunman killed nine people at a historic black church in Charleston. Then-Gov. Nikki Haley, a Republican who is now Trump’s United Nations ambassador, declared the flag untenably divisive after the wide distribution of photos showing the killer clutching it. “She was focused on leading the state through a grieving process so it could begin healing,” recalls Rob Godfrey, one of her top aides at the time. But Godfrey notes Haley never considered jettisoning other Old South relics. “That was going to drive people apart,” Godfrey says. Republish with permission of The Associated Press.
Rex Tillerson condemns hate speech, says bigotry is un-American
Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is condemning hate speech and bigotry as un-American and antithetical to the values the U.S. was founded on and promotes abroad. In his most extensive comments on race and diversity since last weekend’s violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, Tillerson on Friday called racism “evil.” He said freedom of speech is sacrosanct but that those who promote hate poison the public discourse and damage the country they claim to love. Speaking to interns and young minority staffers at the State Department, Tillerson pledged to diversify the overwhelmingly white ranks of the senior diplomatic corps. He also sought to calm fears he might eliminate programs designed to recruit minorities. He said an earlier suspension of the programs was only temporary. Republish with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump’s die-hard supporters show no signs of straying
They wash their hands of neo-Nazis and wag their fingers at leftists. They denounce a press corps they see as biased and controversies they view as manufactured. But in the frenzied blame game over the deadly violence at a rally of white supremacists, Donald Trump‘s loyal base is happy to absolve the president himself. Even as Trump’s zig-zag response to the weekend bloodshed in Charlottesville, Virginia, has brought criticism from some Republican lawmakers, many men and women who helped put him in office remain unmoved by the latest uproar. “He has done nothing to turn me away from him,” said Patricia Aleeyah Robinson, of Toledo, Ohio. Robinson is black and her support of Trump has put her at odds with many in her life, costing her friendships and straining family relationships. But the 63-year-old retired truck driver sees the controversy over Trump’s response to Charlottesville as being driven by those seeking to disrupt his agenda and push backers like her away. She said she knows he pays no deference to racists and feels he is the only president who has ever spoken directly to blacks. She admires his refusal to sugarcoat his beliefs. Three hundred miles south in a Charleston, West Virginia, shopping mall, Joyce Ash took a moment to ponder Trump after buying a dress Wednesday to wear to the funeral for her husband of 33 years, who died of pancreatic cancer. The 71-year-old woman summoned nothing but support for the political novice who led her to ditch her lifelong support of Democrats. She recalled sitting up all Election Night to watch Trump clinch the win, and said nothing since made her reconsider her vote. “Let the president do his job instead of trying to take him out every time you turn around,” Ash implored. She didn’t follow the back-and-forth over Trump’s statements on Charlottesville but saw no reason to question him: “I believe in Donald Trump, I really do. I believe that if they would just give this man a chance, the economy, everything will start going better.” Though images of Nazi flags and men in white hoods sickened many Americans, the president’s most ardent champions saw no reason any of that should change their feelings for Trump. “You know why it doesn’t bother me? Because he is everybody’s president whether you like him or don’t like him. Everything he does, he’s doing it for our country,” said Patsy Jarman, a 70-year-old retired factory worker in New Bern, North Carolina. “And if you don’t like being here, you need to leave.” Such enthusiasm may be unsurprising in some ways. Trump himself boasted last year he “could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters.” Polls showed his approval ratings dipping even before this flare-up, and now some commentators are proclaiming a historic low point and late-night comedians have turned serious. But many Trump voters interviewed Wednesday showed no sign of moving away from him. In Florida, 50-year-old Steven Damron of Spring Hill said the president handled the Charlottesville situation well, and he agreed with Trump that “both sides” were to blame. In Iowa, Branden Nong, 35, of Waukee said that while he wished the president was more careful with his tweets or in his criticism of fellow Republicans, his vote was driven by economic issues, and he has been happy with Trump’s performance. And in Pennsylvania, 46-year-old substitute teacher Julie Horrell of Mohrsville said: “I am sticking by the president. It’s early in his term yet. He needs to get the time to dig in his feet.” Julie Brown, a 42-year-old real estate agent in Gilbert, Arizona, accused the media of twisting Trump’s statements on Charlottesville and said local officials did a bad job preparing for the protests. But she remains fully behind a president she sees as exactly the unpolished, authentic leader that the U.S. needs right now, and thinks of how her 4-year-old son will someday learn of this time. “He’s going to be reading in a textbook one day about the good and the bad that this president is going to do,” she said, “but I hope and I believe it’s going to be more good.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Christian Cámara: No, white supremacists at Charlottesville were not ‘good people
There is much emotion on both sides of the current debate over race relations, even among people of good will. There are contentious questions to address, such as: should we remove Confederate statues? Should we allow racists to protest in public spaces? Are our elected leaders to blame for escalating tensions? Is one side more at fault for recent violence? I think these are all fair questions that good people might disagree on without necessarily making them “Fake News-Loving Commies” or “Nazi-Sympathizing Racists.” Thankfully, those two groups represent a tiny fraction of the population, but they unfortunately generate most of the coverage. Although I agree with much of the president’s response to Charlottesville, I fundamentally disagree with him on at least one statement: that there were good people on both sides. I believe there are many decent, non-racists who oppose the removal of Confederate monuments, and some might have very well attended to protest the removal of the Lee statue. However, it is hard to believe that any good person would have stuck around more than five minutes after noticing that an innocent event to protest the removal of a statue was actually a grotesque gathering of Nazi sympathizers, white supremacists and other malcontents. Therefore, I would take issue with the president’s assertion that there were “good people on both sides” that day. Good people on both sides of the issue? Yes. Present that day? No. I do, however, agree with him that elements inside the counter protest indeed included bad people looking to cause trouble: Antifa and other communist groups that likely instigated violence. Of course, the diabolical terrorist act of plowing a car into a crowd falls squarely on the driver and whoever else might have helped him. So as we look to address this escalating racial tension, decent Americans on all sides of this issue should agree to uphold certain principles. First, we must reject any assault on free speech. As detestable as these racist groups are, they have a constitutionally protected right to express their views—and yes, even their hate—so long as their actions don’t trample on other people’s rights through violence or other means. If they choose to live life hating others and expressing their hate, their right to do so trumps our sensibilities and our justified reaction to be offended by them. Indeed, I may not agree with one iota of what they’re saying, but I’ll defend their right to say and think it. However, with rights come responsibilities, and with responsibilities come consequences. They must also understand that, although we support their right to think and speak what they think, we regular Americans can and will exercise our right to condemn them for their vile views. That may include exposing and ostracizing them, though I do caution that we should be careful not to misidentify the innocent. But those who are accurately identified may be subject to public ridicule and contempt, and the repercussions thereof. Secondly, our elected officials, including President Donald Trump, need to exercise some moral clarity. There is no moral equivalence between a bunch of racist, Nazi-sympathizing white nationalists and those who protest them. Indeed, there were violent troublemakers within the counter protesters’ ranks. But to equate the entire diverse group of counter protesters to the overwhelmingly racist other side is just plain wrong. Likewise, Democrats and others on the left need to come down as hard on the violent communists as they do on the violent racists. In short, all sides need to come down hard on violence. No more sugar-coating or excusing why one side can be violent and the other side shouldn’t be. Finally, we all must adhere to the rule of law. Emotions cannot compel us to break the law. As much as some detest the existence of Confederate monuments and what they represent, we law-abiding Americans cannot and should not endorse or tolerate an angry mob destroying or vandalizing any property, much less physically assaulting people. Neither a constitutional republic nor its civil society can survive if the rule of law is replaced with mob rule. Debates can be had about what to do with Confederate memorials, and legislative bodies may elect to keep, remove or relocate them through normal deliberative processes. But to support or encourage angry mobs to enter and destroy property undermines the most basic tenets of a representative democracy governed by laws—not to mention that it would likely instigate the opposing side to retaliate unlawfully, thus escalating violence on all sides. As much as I utterly loathe racism, racists have a right to be racist, albeit peacefully and in such a way as it does not trample on other people’s rights. If we use the power of government—or worse, mob rule—to silence or crush undesirable thoughts, then we ourselves risk becoming just a different brand of fascists, but fascists nonetheless. ••• Christian R. Cámara is R Street’s Southeast region director and a senior fellow and co-founder of the institute. He previously was Florida director of the Heartland Institute’s Center on Finance, Insurance and Real Estate.
Campaign begins in Huntsville to remove Confederate monument
The weekend’s events — where violence broke out in Charlottesville, Va. during a demonstration by white nationalists and neo-Nazi groups opposed to the removal of a statue of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee — has prompted a national conversation on whether symbols of the Confederacy should be removed, and many monuments and statues have started to come down across the country. One of those monuments in question — the Confederate monument on the Madison County courthouse grounds in Huntsville, Ala. There, a local group is fighting for its removal. “This monument is in the center of downtown Huntsville, a forward-looking city with important ties to the federal government and two African-American colleges. Huntsville is proud to have been the first city in Alabama to integrate public schools and facilities. It’s completely unacceptable to honor ‘the principles which gave birth to the Confederate cause’ at the seat of our local government,” the Tennessee Valley Progressive Alliance (TVPA) wrote on their GoFundMe page where they’re working to raise funds in order to pay the $25,000 fine the state has set for those who violate the Memorial Preservation Act. The law, signed by Gov. Kay Ivey earlier this year, prevents the removal of historic statues more than 40 years old from public spaces. Under it , Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall has the authority to fine the city $25,000 for each violation. Huntsville would be in violation of said law if the city removed the monument without Legislature approval. “Here is a small, concrete action you can take to join the fight against white supremacy right here in Madison County, AL,” TVPA wrote on their Facebook page linking to the GoFundMe campaign. At the time of publishing, they have raid $1,310 of their $2,000 goal.
Racial politics haunt GOP in the Donald Trump era
The statue of Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia, was the focus of an emotional debate in the state’s Republican primary election weeks before it became a flashpoint in the nation’s struggle over race. Corey Stewart, an outsider candidate for governor sometimes compared to President Donald Trump, seized on possible removal of the Confederate general’s memorial as an “attempt to destroy traditional America.” Stewart, who said in an interview Tuesday that such an action “hits people in the gut,” found unexpectedly strong support, forced his main opponent to defend the statue and almost won. Now the fight over “traditional America” is throwing a spotlight on the Republican Party’s struggle with race in the age of Trump. The deadly white supremacist rally against removal of the Lee statue served as a painful example of the uncomfortable alignment between some in the party’s base and the far-right fringe. But despite the party’s talk of inclusiveness and minority outreach, it’s clear white fears continue to resonate with many in the GOP base. Politicians willing to exploit those issues are often rewarded with support. One big beneficiary, critics say, has been the president himself. For those critics, on both the left and right, Trump’s response to Charlottesville was a glaring example. On Saturday, he denounced hatred and violence on “many sides,” seeming to assign blame equally to counterdemonstrators as well as hate groups protesting the proposed removal of the statue. He waited until Monday to specifically name the groups he was condemning — the KKK, neo-Nazis and white supremacists. On Tuesday, he was back to assigning partial blame to those protesting the white supremacists. “I think there’s blame on both sides,” Trump charged in a fiery Trump Tower news conference. He added, “There are two sides to a story.” “Not all of those people were neo-Nazis, believe me. Not all of those people were white supremacists by any stretch,” Trump continued. “Those people were also there because they wanted to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.” For Republicans who hoped the president might use the moment to send a new message about racism and their party, Trump failed the test. “We have reached a defining moment,” New Hampshire GOP chair Jennifer Horn said. “We, as Republicans, every single one of us, needs to speak up and make it very clear that this is not our party, these are not our values.” Such moments have the potential to undermine years of attempts to portray the party as more welcoming to minority voters. The Republican National Committee, led by Trump’s former chief of staff Reince Priebus, released an exhaustive report in 2013 noting that the GOP’s traditional base of older, white voters was becoming a smaller and smaller portion of the electorate in America. “If we want ethnic minority voters to support Republicans, we have to engage them and show our sincerity,” the RNC wrote. Yet Republican officeholders, including the president, have found success by seizing on semi-hidden “dog whistle” rhetoric and policies largely designed to appeal to whites. — Across the Midwest, Trump and others have appealed to suburban white voters by decrying a rise in urban violence, even as statistics show violent crime is down in many cities. — With no evidence of widespread voter fraud, Republicans nationwide have promoted voter ID laws that several courts determined discriminate against minority voters. — Trump’s promise to build a massive wall along the southern border resonates with conservatives across the West and even in overwhelmingly white Northeastern states where Republicans fear the influx of illegal Hispanic immigrants. — And, particularly in the South, some conservatives continue fight to preserve symbols of a Confederate Army that fought for Southern states’ rights to continue slavery. The relics are simultaneously denounced as symbols of oppression by most blacks and celebrated as marks of Southern pride by many whites. This week in Alabama, three Republicans running in Tuesday’s special U.S. Senate primary demonstrated the careful tiptoeing politicians do around the subject. Rep. Mo Brooks generally bemoaned “bigotry.” Former Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore rejected “violence and hatred.” Sen. Luther Strange, appointed to the seat when Trump tapped Jeff Sessions as attorney general, made no reference to racial motivations at all. Brooks and Strange also expressed support for Trump’s remarks, and Strange seemed to echo the president’s assertion that “many sides” were at fault, as he encouraged “Americans to stand together in opposition to those who encourage hate or promote violence.” Trump recently endorsed Strange. The careful language reflects a political reality in a state where nearly all Republican votes come from white voters, says David Mowery, an Alabama-based political consultant who has worked for Republicans and Democrats. That doesn’t mean Republicans actively pursue racist votes, he said, but sometimes it means they take the most cautious path to avoid controversy. “I don’t think here that any Republican benefits by talking about it or is necessarily hurt by not talking about it,” he said. Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, now Trump’s representative to the United Nations, said as recently as 2014 that the Confederate battle flag should fly at the state Capitol. She changed course two summers ago only after a white supremacist who was photographed holding a Confederate flag murdered nine black people inside a South Carolina church. About the same time, then-Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama removed Confederate banners from a Confederate monument outside his office, though the monument remains. In this year’s Virginia primary for the Republicans’ candidate for governor, outsider Stewart lost to establishment favorite Ed Gillespie, but by less than 2 percentage points. On Sunday, Gillespie attended church in Charlottesville and minced no words in naming names and urging those responsible for the violence to take their “vile hatred” out of the state. “We have stared down racism and Nazism and white supremacy before, and we will stare it down again,” the Republican candidate for governor told a local TV station. His campaign later added that Gillespie continues
Oops? Donald Trump retweets critic saying ‘he’s a fascist’
President Donald Trump appears to have mistakenly retweeted a message from one of his critics saying “he’s a fascist.” Trump deleted his retweet Tuesday after about five minutes, but not before the message sent to his 35 million followers racked up a big response. Trump seems to have been trying to draw attention to a Fox & Friends article on a possible presidential pardon for former Phoenix-area Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, who was convicted of a crime for ignoring a U.S. court order to stop traffic patrols that targeted immigrants. A Twitter handle identified as “@MikeHolden42” tweeted to Trump “He’s a fascist, so not unusual.” The user suggested in subsequent tweets that he was calling Trump a fascist, not Arpaio. Trump retweeted the message to his massive following, triggering an avalanche of replies. @MikeHolden42 responded: “I’m announcing my retirement from Twitter. I’ll never top this RT.” He later updated his description on Twitter as “Officially Endorsed by the President of the United States.” I’m announcing my retirement from Twitter. I’ll never top this RT. pic.twitter.com/HuGHkiPoyR — Mike Holden (@MikeHolden42) August 15, 2017 On Tuesday, Trump also retweeted and deleted a cartoon showing a train labeled “Trump” running over a man with “CNN” covering his face Monday morning. The retweets come after a national uproar over race-fueled clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia. It took two days of public equivocation and internal White House debate before the president condemned white supremacist groups by name on Monday, declaring “racism is evil.” Late Monday, Trump had retweeted Jack Posobiec, a conservative Trump supporter who used social media to draw attention to “pizzagate,” an unfounded conspiracy theory that claims Democrats harbor child sex slaves at a pizza restaurant. Posobiec’s tweet read: “Meanwhile: 39 shootings in Chicago this weekend, 9 deaths. No national media outrage. Why is that?” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Why won’t Donald Trump condemn white nationalism?
Why doesn’t President Donald Trump just unequivocally condemn white supremacists? It’s a jarring question to ask about an American president. But it’s also one made unavoidable by Trump’s delayed, blame-both-sides response to the violence that erupted Saturday when neo-Nazis, skinheads and members of the Ku Klux Klan protested in Charlottesville, Virginia. Trump has faced such a moment before — one that would have certainly drawn swift, almost predictable condemnations from his recent predecessors, regardless of party. As a candidate and now as president, when racial tensions flared or fringe groups rallied around his message, Trump has shown uncharacteristic caution and a reluctance to distance himself from the hate. At times, his approach has seemingly inflamed racial tensions in a deeply divided country while emboldening groups long in the shadows. On Saturday, as Trump read slowly through a statement about the clashes that left dozens injured and one woman dead, he condemned hatred, bigotry and violence “on many sides.” The president was silent when journalists asked whether he rejected the support of nationalists’ groups. That silence was cheered by the white supremacist website Daily Stormer: “When asked to condemn, he just walked out of the room. Really, really good. God bless him.” Trump denies that he’s racist or sympathetic to such groups. Son-in-law Jared Kushner, the grandson of Holocaust survivors, and daughter Ivanka, who converted to Judaism, are among those who have defended the president against those charges. Still, he has a history of engaging in high-profile, racially fraught battles. Early in his career as a developer, Trump fought charges of bias against blacks seeking to rent at his family-owned apartment complexes. He long promoted the lie that the nation’s first black president, Barack Obama, was not born in the United States. As a candidate, he proposed temporarily banning Muslims from the United States. He retweeted a post from accounts that appeared to have ties to white nationalist groups. And he was slow to reject the endorsement of former KKK leader David Duke. Some of the president’s friends and advisers have argued that Trump is simply refusing to bend to liberals’ desire for political correctness. A boastful, proudly disruptive politician, Trump often has been rewarded for saying impolite and impolitic things. Some supporters cheered him for being someone who said what they could not. Democrats frequently assert that Trump sees a political advantage in courting the support of the far right. Indeed, he has benefited politically from the backing of media outlets such as Breitbart or InfoWars. They have consistently promoted Trump and torn down his opponents, sometimes with biased or inaccurate reports. Charlottesville’s mayor, Democrat Mike Signer, said Sunday that Trump made a choice during his campaign to “go right to the gutter, to play on our worst prejudices.” “I think you are seeing a direct line from what happened here this weekend to those choices,” Singer said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” White House senior adviser Steve Bannon ran Breitbart before joining Trump’s campaign, and several of the president’s other aides believe Bannon continues to have influence over the website. In “Devil’s Bargain,” a new book about his role in the Trump campaign, Bannon is quoted as saying that attempts by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton to tie Trump to the alt-right and nationalists did not move voters. “We polled the race stuff and it doesn’t matter,” Bannon said, according to the book. But there here’s no reliable public polling on the scope of Trump’s support among those with white nationalist leanings or the percentage of the electorate they comprise. The reaction from Republicans following Trump’s statement Saturday suggests there may be greater political risks for the president in aligning himself with bigoted groups. “The president needs to step up today and say what it is,” said Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., who was one of several GOP lawmakers urging Trump to be more strident in calling out the nationalists and neo-Nazis that gathered in Charlottesville. Gardner said plainly: “It’s evil. It’s white nationalism.” By Sunday, the White House was scrambling to try to clean up the president’s statement. The White House issued a statement saying the president does condemn “white supremacists, KKK, neo-Nazi and all extremist groups.” The spokeswoman who issued the statement refused to be named. And the president himself remained silent. Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
Donald Trump drawing criticism for not explicitly rebuking white supremacists
President Donald Trump is drawing criticism from Republicans and Democrats for not explicitly denouncing white supremacists in the aftermath of violent clashes in Virginia, with lawmakers saying he needs to take a public stand against groups that espouse racism and hate. Trump, while on a working vacation at his New Jersey golf club, addressed the nation Saturday soon after a car plowed into a group of anti-racist counter-protesters in Charlottesville, a college town where neo-Nazis and white nationalists had assembled for march. The president did not single out any group, instead blaming “many sides” for the violence. “Hate and the division must stop, and must stop right now,” he said. “We have to come together as Americans with love for our nation and … true affection for each other.” Trump condemned “in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides.” He added: “It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump. Not Barack Obama. It’s been going on for a long, long time.” He did not answer questions from reporters about whether he rejected the support of white nationalists or whether he believed the car crash was an example of domestic terrorism. Aides who appeared on the Sunday news shows said the White House did believe those things, but many fellow Republicans demanded that Trump personally denounce the white supremacists. Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., tweeted: “Mr. President – we must call evil by its name. These were white supremacists and this was domestic terrorism.” Added Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.: “Nothing patriotic about #Nazis,the #KKK or #WhiteSupremacists It’s the direct opposite of what #America seeks to be.” GOP Chris Christie of New Jersey, a staunch Trump supporter, wrote: “We reject the racism and violence of white nationalists like the ones acting out in Charlottesville. Everyone in leadership must speak out.” On the Democrat side, Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer of New York said “of course we condemn ALL that hate stands for. Until @POTUS specifically condemns alt-right action in Charlottesville, he hasn’t done his job.” The president’s only public statement early Sunday was a retweet saluting two Virginia state police officers killed in helicopter crash after being dispatched to monitor the Charlottesville clashes. The previous day, Trump tweeted condolences to those officers soon after the helicopter crashed. His tweet sending condolences to the woman killed in the protests came more than five hours after the incident. Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, said Sunday that he considered the attack in Charlottesville to be terrorism: “I certainly think anytime that you commit an attack against people to incite fear, it is terrorism,” McMaster told ABC’s “This Week.” “It meets the definition of terrorism. But what this is, what you see here, is you see someone who is a criminal, who is committing a criminal act against fellow Americans.” The president’s homeland security adviser, Tom Bossert, defended the president’s statement by suggesting that some of the counter-protesters were violent too. When pressed, he specifically condemned the racist groups. The president’s daughter and White House aide, Ivanka Trump, tweeted Sunday morning: “There should be no place in society for racism, white supremacy and neo-nazis.” White nationalists had assembled in Charlottesville to vent their frustration against the city’s plans to take down a statue of Confederal Gen. Robert E. Lee. Counter-protesters massed in opposition. A few hours after violent encounters between the two groups, a car drove into a crowd of people peacefully protesting the rally. The driver was later taken into custody. Alt-right leader Richard Spencer and former Ku Klux Klan member David Duke attended the demonstrations. Duke told reporters that the white nationalists were working to “fulfill the promises of Donald Trump.” Trump’s speech also drew praise from the neo-Nazi website Daily Stormer, which wrote: “Trump comments were good. He didn’t attack us. He just said the nation should come together. Nothing specific against us. … No condemnation at all.” The website had been promoting the Charlottesville demonstration as part of its “Summer of Hate” edition. Mayor Michael Signer, a Democrat, said he was disgusted that the white nationalists had come to his town and blamed Trump for inflaming racial prejudices with his campaign last year. “I’m not going to make any bones about it. I place the blame for a lot of what you’re seeing in American today right at the doorstep of the White House and the people around the president,” he said. Trump, as a candidate, frequently came under scrutiny for being slow to offer his condemnation of white supremacists. His strongest denunciation of the movement has not come voluntarily, only when asked, and he occasionally trafficked in retweets of racist social media posts during his campaign. His chief strategist, Steve Bannon, once declared that his former news site, Breitbart, was “the platform for the alt-right.” Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
