Skip to content

Month: May 2021

Smoke bombers

The election “fraudit” continues in Arizona:

Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer on Saturday called a Trump statement accusing the county of deleting an elections database “unhinged” and called on other Republicans to stop the unfounded accusations.

“We can’t indulge these insane lies any longer. As a party. As a state. As a country,” Richer tweeted.

I want to comment on Digby’s Saturday post on the circus happening in Arizona. That tweet thread from an election technology professional details the myriad of ways that the fraudit is a disaster. These tweets in particular caught my attention:

It could spread elsewhere, Perez warns. And it has. Or at least, it did. Trump Twitter is buzzing that Wisconsin has joined in with its own audit of 2020 results. Except that news is three months old. Whatever.

Weaponized doubt has been one of the right’s favorite tools for undermining democracy for decades. The rise of Fox News and social media (with the aid of foreign bots) simply pumped up the effect the way certain features enhance the yield of nuclear weapons. Only these bombs are designed to generate smoke, not fire.

A quick review (from 2012):

… some people really don’t want you to vote. Every couple of months, their agents (figuratively) fling smoke bombs into newsrooms and yell “voter fraud.” By the time the smoke clears and reporters realize there’s no fire — and no fraud — all viewers remember are hearing the words “voter fraud” over and over again, and the eye-popping crawlers on the news at six about dead people voting. Thus is spread an urban legend.

“Smoke” filling the studios of your local news outlet sticks in the brain more than reports that it was all right-wing fake news.

Here is a memorable example from South Carolina (from earlier in 2012):

After claims that hundreds of the walking dead had voted in the Republican primary, the Attorney General released the names of only six to the State Election Commission for review.

By early February, the election officials were able to confirm all of the voters were legitimate: five were very much alive, and one had voted before dying. Clerical errors were blamed.

Even as Fox News pressed ahead with its zombie voter headlines, the State Election Commission pressed ahead with its investigation, reporting its findings this week:

In 197 of [the 207 cases examined], the records show no indication of votes being cast fraudulently in the name of deceased voters. Research found each of these cases to be the result of clerical errors, bad data matching, errors in assigning voter participation, or voters dying after being issued an absentee ballot. In 10 cases, the records were insufficient to make a determination.

With all that smoke, casual viewers conclude there must be a fire. And for smoke bombers, the truth is beside the point. The allegations land on Page 1 and on the news at six. Investigation findings showing no fraud occured wind up on page six.

It might be dead people. It might be busloads of “those” people using fake, pristinely uncreased utility bills for ID. It might be “double voters.” It might be “Chinese ballots” or voting machines rigged by Venezuela. It’s not voters who are dead. It’s truth.

Loud, well-publicized allegations are the point, just as in the ongoing miniseries in Arizona.

Here’s another clip from 2014 regarding alleged double voting:

Chris Kromm of the Institute for Southern Studies just as quickly debunked the study by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach whose office, after checking 5 million voter records in 2013, “couldn’t provide any evidence of a single instance in which the Interstate Crosscheck’s data had led to an actual legal charge of voter fraud.” Because the data, Kromm writes, ”offers no proof such fraud is occurring.” Requiring citizens to present identity cards to vote would have no effect on voting in multiple states.

Per Kobach’s method, a two-state match of just last and first names and a birthday are enough to flag someone as possibly voting in two states. “There are going to be a lot of David Lees on that list,” said Philadelphia elections commissioner Stephanie Singer last October of the Kobach Crosscheck of Pennsylvania’s database. In a 2007 study on the “Birthdate Problem,” Michael P. McDonald and Justin Levitt demonstrated how it is common, statistically, to find people sharing the same name and birthdate in a large population. They wrote, ”And common sense should expose the flaws in accusations like that against a New Jersey woman who, based only on a matched name and birthdate, allegedly voted at the northern tip of New Jersey in 2004 and then drove the length of the state to vote in-person for a second time.”

Yet, as Laura Clawson observes regarding old, straight white guys, “[I]f they aren’t on the winning side of discrimination, that’s like being discriminated against themselves, by their way of thinking.” If their side loses an election, someone must have cheated. The panic among the white Republican base over voter fraud, dead voters, messy voter rolls, double voting — the proximate threat varies — is because demographic trends in this country show that the numerical edge to which they feel entitled will be gone within decades. They avoided looking at that fact square on for years, maybe peeking through their fingers at the supposed threat posed by high Muslim birthrates and lamenting the West’s “lack of civilizational confidence” (instead of “banging away elsewhere,” as Michael Kinsley once suggested). But when a half-black man moved into the White House, they could no longer look away. Barack Obama embodies the demographic trends reducing white people to just another minority in this melting-pot country. And the Republican base knows how minorities are treated in America. Their European forebears did most of the treating here for several centuries. They are as scared as Stephen Stills at Woodstock.

Babylon Berlin: Enfant Terrible (***)

https://i0.wp.com/www.backseatmafia.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/enfant-terrible.jpg?quality=89&ssl=1

“It isn’t easy to accept that suffering can also be beautiful… it’s difficult. It’s something you can only understand if you dig deeply into yourself.”

― Rainer Werner Fassbinder

An oft-quoted Chinese philosopher once proffered “The flame that burns twice as bright burns half as long”. He could have been prophesying the short yet productive life of Rainer Werner Fassbinder. Over a 15-year period ending with his death in 1982 at age 37, the German playwright, director, screenwriter, actor, producer, editor, cameraman, composer, designer, etc. churned out 40+ feature films, a couple dozen stage plays , two TV mini-series, and various video productions, radio plays and shorts.

As illustrated in a new biopic, he also snorted lots of coke, cruised a lot of rough trade, threw a lot of tantrums, and generally treated friends, lovers, and actors (frequently all one and the same) like shit. It could be argued he didn’t suffer for his art, so much as make those around him suffer for it. He was “the bad boy” of New German Cinema.

Hence the title of Oskar Roehler’s fitfully inspired Enfant Terrible, which is propelled by Oliver Masucci’s scenery-chewing turn as Fassbinder (a performance that vacillates between Bruno Ganz as Hitler in Downfall and John Belushi as Bluto in Animal House).

After several years of rushed, provocative and audience-alienating theater productions, Fassbinder declares to his long-suffering collaborator Kurt Raab (Hary Prinz) “Wherever you go is material that is about how people see their dreams and how their dreams get destroyed. The theater can’t do it. Only cinema can do it.” This launches a torrent of rushed, provocative and audience-alienating films.

Eventually critics and audiences warm to Fassbinder’s work, starting with his internationally acclaimed 1974 drama Ali: Fear Eats the Soul. The narrative thread about Fassbinder’s relationship with leading man El Hedi ben Salem (Erdal Yildiz) provides Enfant Terrible with an emotional core it otherwise lacks (as nihilism  runs through much of Fassbinder’s work, perhaps it is intended to reflect the artist himself).

Roehler cannily replicates the aesthetic of Fassbinder’s films; bold colors, the cinematography (by Carl-Friedrich Koschnick), production design (done by Roehler himself), self-consciously theatrical sets, and the use of doorways and windows to create multiple frames within the camera frame indicates that he did his homework.

Using metatheatre, Roehler and co-writer Klaus Richter draw parallels between snippets of Fassbinder cruelly manipulating actors on set and vignettes depicting his tortured personal life, but it becomes repetitive. It’s a shame they didn’t take a deeper dive into Fassbinder’s creative vision; what you’re left with is a highlight reel of his filmography sandwiched between yet another sad study in willful self-destruction.

(“Enfant Terrible” is now playing in select physical and virtual cinemas)

Previous posts with related themes:

The Baader-Meinhof Complex

Synecdoche, NY

More reviews at Den of Cinema

Dennis Hartley

From the annals of Orwellian dystopia

First, I’m sure you recall that dipshit who declared the other day that January 6th was just a bunch of tourists ambling through the capitol:

“There was an undisciplined mob. And there were some who committed acts of vandalism. But let me be clear: There was no insurrection. And to call it an insurrection, in my opinion, is a bold-faced lie. You know, if you didn’t know the TV footage was a video from January 6, you would actually think it was a normal tourist visit.”

Here’s that same guy helping to barricade the door to the House chamber on January 6th.

I don’t think they routinely do that during Capitol tours, do you?

Then there’s this atrocity:

My God:

Media Matters reviewed our internal archive of cable news segments airing weekdays from 6 a.m. through midnight for any statements that undermined coronavirus science on Fox News. We broadly categorized the network’s coronavirus science misinformation into six different angles of attack: politicizing health measures, dismissing health measures, unfairly criticizing health officials, undermining COVID-19 vaccines, misrepresenting basic coronavirus facts, and dismissing or politicizing coronavirus data. We counted each angle once per segment. Segments could — and often did — include more than one angle.

From January 25 through April 23, 2021, Fox News personalities and guests misinformed viewers about the science of the coronavirus in at least 325 segments.

Misinformation was spread across the network on both its so-called “news” and “opinion” shows. The shows that aired the most segments against coronavirus science were The Ingraham Angle (59), Fox & Friends (57), Fox News Primetime (44), Tucker Carlson Tonight (34), The Story with Martha MacCallum (19), and America’s Newsroom with Bill Hemmer and Dana Perino (18).

Of the 325 segments that attacked coronavirus science:

47% politicized health measures designed to slow the spread of the virus.

39% dismissed the efficacy of health measures.

37% implicitly or explicitly alleged that health experts or government officials could not be trusted on guidelines designed to protect the public from the spread of coronavirus.

27% undermined vaccine efficacy, encouraged vaccine hesitancy, or politicized vaccines.

13% misrepresented basic facts about transmission and infection risks or misrepresented health studies on the coronavirus.

5% dismissed, misrepresented, or politicized coronavirus data.

Fox’s assault on coronavirus science

During the 13 weeks following January 25, Media Matters identified at least 325 segments that featured Fox News personalities or guests undermining coronavirus science by politicizing the implementation or dismissing the efficacy of health measures designed to slow the spread of the virus; undermining confidence in guidelines by attacking prominent health experts and government officials; downplaying the efficacy of vaccines or encouraging vaccine hesitancy; or misinforming viewers about basic facts on transmission, infection risk, or other data.

These attacks on science are having real-world consequences. At the beginning of our study period, little more than 1% of the U.S. population was fully vaccinated. By April 23, approximately 29% of the U.S. population had seen two weeks pass since receiving their final shot.But vaccination rates in the U.S. have slowed recently. Polling from CBS News/YouGov suggests that vaccine hesitancy is stubbornly sitting at roughly 22% of those polled, and another 18% aren’t yet sure whether they will get any coronavirus vaccine. Republicans — who favor Fox as their regular news source over other conservative cable outlets — are more likely than other groups to reject the vaccines: 30% told pollsters that they would not get any vaccine while another 19% were unsure. (The poll doesn’t take into account children, who are not being vaccinated yet and who make up 22% of the population.)

Such reluctance from adults threatens to prevent the U.S. from reaching herd immunity through immunization. This observation is bolstered by a recent study from The Journal of Medical Internet Research, which found that exposure to conservative media increased COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and led to mask and vaccine reluctance.Media Matters reviewed Fox segments that included misinformation or attacks undermining coronavirus science and found a persistent theme of Fox personalities and guests sowing doubt. Week after week, Fox viewers were inundated with statements undermining health measures and vaccines, attacking health officials, and misrepresenting basic coronavirus facts and data.

This level of gaslighting, propaganda, projection and Newspeak is unprecedented as far as I can tell. It’s enabled by the internet and social media, of course. But we are in an era in which flagrant, obvious lying and choosing to believe lies you know are lies has become a cultural norm. When Donald Trump responded to Hillary Clinton accusing him of not paying his taxes by saying “that makes me smart” and was revealed to have bragged that women “let him” grab them by the pussy because he’s a star and the Republican party cheered him on we should have known that something very important in our society is broken. I don’t know what it will take to fix this.

The COVID carnage

The Economist:

Official figures say there have been 55,000 covid deaths in South Africa since March 27th last year. That puts the country’s death rate at 92.7 per 100,000 people, the highest in sub-Saharan Africa. It is also a significant underestimate—as, it seems safe to infer, are all the other African data on the disease.

Over the year to May 8th the country recorded 158,499 excess deaths—that is, deaths above the number that would be expected on past trends, given demographic changes. Public-health officials feel confident that 85-95% of those deaths were caused by sars-cov-2, the covid-19 virus, almost three times the official number. The discrepancy is the result of the fact that, for a death to be registered as caused by covid-19, the deceased needs to have had a covid test and been recorded as having died from the disease. Although South Africa does a lot of testing compared with neighbouring countries, its overall rate is still low. And the cause of death is unevenly recorded for those who die at home.

South Africa is not particularly unusual in its levels of testing or in missing deaths outside the medical system. Excess mortality has outstripped deaths officially reported as due to covid-19, at least at some points in the course of the epidemic, in most if not all of the world. According to the most recent data, America’s excess deaths were 7.1% higher than its official covid-19 deaths between early March 2020 and mid-April 2021.

Studies of such mismatches have proved illuminating in some countries. For example, Britain saw excess deaths higher than official covid-19 deaths during its first wave, but lower than the official covid death rates in the second—an effect taken to show that measures to stop the spread of covid had saved lives which in another year would have been lost to other diseases, such as seasonal flu, perhaps. Something similar was seen in France.

But the excess-mortality method has failed to provide useful or robust global figures for the simple reason that most countries, and in particular most poor countries, do not provide excess-mortality statistics in a timely fashion. Global estimates have used the official numbers, despite knowing that the figure—currently 3.3m—surely falls well short of the true total.

To try to put numbers on how much of an underestimate it is—and thus on how great the true burden has been—The Economist has attempted to model the level of excess mortality over the course of the pandemic in countries that do not report it. This work gives a 95% probability that the death toll to date is between 7.1m and 12.7m, with a central estimate of 10.2m. The official numbers represent, at best, a bit less than half the true toll, and at worst only about a quarter of it.

As well as providing a new estimate of the overall size of the pandemic, the modelling sheds light on the distribution of its effects and on its overall course.

Unsurprisingly, most of the deaths caused by covid-19 but not attributed to it are found in low- and middle-income countries. Our figures give a death rate for the mostly rich countries which belong to the oecd of 1.17 times the official number. The estimated death rate for sub-Saharan Africa is 14 times the official number. And the first-and-second-wave structure seen in Europe and the United States is much less visible in the model’s figures for the world as a whole. Overall, the pandemic is increasingly concentrated in developing economies and continuing to grow.

To create these global estimates of total excess deaths during the pandemic, we drew on a wide range of data. Official counts of covid-19 deaths, however imperfect they may be, are available for most countries; they are shown in the top map on this page. So, frequently, are data on the number of covid cases and the share of covid tests that are positive. In general, if lots of tests are coming back positive, it is a fair bet that many more infections are being missed by a testing regime that is looking only at those seeking medical treatment and those near them.

In some places there have been seroprevalence surveys which show how many people have detectable sars-cov-2 antibodies, a sign of earlier infection. Other factors we thought might matter included the steps governments have taken to curb the spread of disease—such as closing schools—and the extent to which people moved around.

Demography matters a lot: more younger people typically means lower death rates. So, we inferred, do less obvious factors such as systems of government and the degree of media freedom. To take a specific example, excess deaths in Russia are 5.1 times greater than official covid deaths.

All told we collected data on 121 indicators for more than 200 countries and territories. We next trained a machine-learning model which used a process called gradient boosting to find relationships between these indicators and data on excess deaths in places where they were available. The finished model used those relationships to provide estimates of excess deaths in times and places for which there were no data available. A description of our methodology and the ways in which we tested it, as well as links to replication code and data, are here.

We estimate that, by May 10th, there was a 95% probability that the pandemic had brought about between 2.4m and 7.1m excess deaths in Asia (official covid-19 deaths: 0.6m), 1.5m-1.8m deaths in Latin America and the Caribbean (v 0.6m), 0-2.1m deaths in Africa (v 0.1m), 1.5m-1.6m deaths in Europe (v 1.0m) and 0.6m-0.7m deaths in America and Canada (v 0.6m). In Oceania, with only 1,218 official deaths, the model predicted somewhere between -12,000 and 13,000, the lower bound reflecting the possibility that precautions against covid-19 had reduced deaths from other causes.

There’s more at the link if you want to go deeper.

We will never know exactly how many people died from COVID during this pandemic. And it’s a long way from over. But they have developed good models to extrapolate death tolls like this and it’s already clear that the carnage is overwhelming.

This is why I find it so infuriating that Americans and Europeans are having to deal with fools who refuse to get vaccinated for political reasons when we are literally the luckiest people on the planet to have these scientific miracles at our disposal. How ungrateful we are.

Harlem Hellfighters

This story amazes me every time it comes up, which isn’t often enough. I’m always struck by the the fact that Black Americans were always willing, indeed desperate, to go and fight for their country when their country treated them so badly. It’s a higher form of patriotism:

Private Henry Johnson of Albany, New York, held tight his French Lebel rifle and stared into the darkness of no-man’s-land, listening for German raiders. Beyond the parapet, he could make out shapes and shadows under the waning moon.

Johnson was a 25-year-old railroad baggage porter, the son of North Carolina tobacco farmers. Under French command, he manned the front line of the Great War about 115 miles east of Paris on the early morning of May 15, 1918.

He heard a sound and turned to his partner in their tiny observation post, Needham Roberts, who gestured toward the direction of the noise. They heard it again: the snip of barbed wire being cut.


Johnson fired an illumination rocket into the sky, then ducked as German grenades flew toward him. The grenades exploded behind him, and pain struck his left leg and side. Roberts, bleeding from his head, threw grenades of his own back over the parapet.


The German forces rushed into the Americans’ dugout. Johnson shot one German in the chest, point-blank, then swung his rifle to club another. Two enemy soldiers tried to haul Roberts away, until Johnson drove his nine-inch knife into one of their skulls. Another German shot Johnson in the shoulder and thigh; Johnson lunged with his knife and slashed him down. The enemy soldiers ran. Johnson chucked grenades as they fled.

Reviewing the carnage the next day, a U.S. Army captain estimated that Johnson had killed four of at least 24 German soldiers. Days later, Johnson and Roberts became the first Americans to receive the French Croix de Guerre – the first of many honors awarded to the 369th Infantry Regiment, better known as the Harlem Hellfighters.

The Hellfighters, the most celebrated African-American regiment in World War I, confronted racism even as they trained for war, helped bring jazz to France, then battled Germany longer than almost any other American doughboys. (Their nickname’s origin is unclear: it was possibly coined by enemy soldiers, the American press, or both.) Like their predecessors in the Civil War and successors in the wars that followed, these African-American troops fought a war for a country that refused them basic rights – and their bravery stood as a rebuke to racism, a moral claim to first-class citizenship.

They were mostly New Yorkers, the first black troops in their state’s National Guard. After years of lobbying by civic leaders from Harlem, Manhattan’s celebrated black neighborhood, Governor Charles Whitman finally formed the all-black unit, first known as the 15th New York National Guard Regiment, in 1916, as the U.S. prepared for possible entry into World War I.

The majority of the enlistees actually came from Harlem, which was home to 50,000 of Manhattan’s 60,000 African-Americans in the 1910s. Others came from Brooklyn, towns up the Hudson River, and New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania. Some were teens, some in their mid-40s. Some were porters, doormen, or elevator operators, some teachers, night watchmen or mailmen. Their motives included adventure, patriotism and pride. “To be somebody you had to belong to the 15th Infantry,” wrote enlistee Arthur P. Davis of Harlem.

Whitman named his former campaign manager, William Hayward, a white attorney and former Nebraska National Guard colonel, as commander. Hayward hired a mix of white officers, to please the governor, and black officers, to build support for the regiment in Harlem. Hayward told white officer candidates to “meet men according to their rank as soldiers,” and warned that if they “intended to take a narrower attitude, [they] had better stay out.” In the years to come, he would repeatedly advocate for fair treatment for his regiment within the Army.

Hayward also recruited African-American bandleader James Reese Europe to form a first-rate marching band for parades, recruitment and fundraisers. Europe, a classically trained violinist and ragtime performer, enlisted as a lieutenant and convinced top Harlem musicians to join.

Even before combat, the regiment faced unjust challenges from fellow Americans. In October 1917, six months after the official U.S. entrance into the war, they trained for combat in Jim Crow-ruled Spartanburg, South Carolina. There, the regiment pledged to follow an unusual military discipline: Hayward asked them to respond to racist insults and threats with “fortitude and without retaliation,” but to report any incidents to military authorities.

“There had been all kind of insults hurled at our body who were on duty in town,” wrote musician Noble Sissle in his memoir. “Our boys had some pretty bitter pills to swallow.” Sissle himself was kicked and called a racial slur by a hotel’s proprietor when he stopped in to get some newspapers. A hundred black and white soldiers gathered at the hotel’s entrance, “bent on seeking restitution,” Sissle wrote, but Lieutenant Europe’s calm intervention defused the confrontation until military police arrived. “He really showed his mettle and ability to handle men in that very unpleasant episode,” Sissle recalled.

“As a direct result of such repeated confrontations (not despite them),” wrote Peter N. Nelson in A More Unbending Battle, a history of the Hellfighters, “a bond was forged among the men of the 15th, a fighting spirit they hoped would serve them well when they got to France.”

The 2,000 troops arrived in Brest, France, on the first day of 1918. On the docks, they surprised French soldiers and civilians with a jazz rendition of “La Marseillaise.”

“As the band played eight or ten bars, there came over [the French people’s] faces an astonished look, quickly alert, snap-into-it-attention, and salute by every French soldier and sailor present,” wrote Sissle in his memoir. Though some Parisians had heard American jazz music before, the syncopated beats were likely new to Brest, a port town in Brittany.

Renamed the U.S. 369th Infantry Regiment, they were assigned to the U.S. Army’s Services of Supply, unloading ships and cleaning latrines, a typical assignment for African-American soldiers at the time. But General John Pershing, commander of the American Expeditionary Forces in Europe, soon offered the 369th to the French army to solve a political problem. The French and British were demanding American reinforcements for their badly depleted divisions. Pershing, under orders from President Woodrow Wilson, had insisted on forming an independent American force in France, to preserve troop morale and accountability for American casualties and to strengthen Wilson’s clout in eventual peace talks.

Yet Pershing made an exception for the black soldiers of the 369th, reassigning them to the French on March 10. (Pershing’s attitudes toward black troops were complicated; he served with the all-black 10th Cavalry in 1895, from whence he got his nickname “Black Jack,” but wrote in his 1931 memoir that black soldiers needed more training because of “lower capacity and lack of education.”) Hayward, who had lobbied Pershing to let his troops fight, captured the ironies of the general’s decision in a letter. “A fairy tale has materialized,” wrote Hayward. “We are now a combat unit…. Our great American general simply put the black orphan in a basket, set it on the doorstep of the French, pulled the bell, and went away.”

After three weeks’ training by French troops, the 369th entered the combat trenches on April 15, 1918 – more than a month before the American Expeditionary Forces’ first major battle. For three months, as the German spring offensive raged dozens of miles to the northwest, the 369th manned the front line and fought occasional skirmishes, including Johnson and Roberts’ battle against the German raiding party.

American reporters’ accounts of their heroics reached home within days. “Two New York Negro Soldiers Foil German Assault,” declared the New York World’s lead headline on May 20, 1918. “Pershing Praises Brave Negroes,” read a New York Sun headline the next day. Such stories made Johnson and Roberts two of the best-known American soldiers in World War I, at a time when most U.S. troops either hadn’t yet arrived in France or were training away from the front lines.

At the front on July 15, the 369th withstood heavy bombardment as Germany launched the Second Battle of the Marne, its final offensive of the war. The Hellfighters took part in the French counterattack, losing 14 members of the regiment, with 51 more sustaining injuries.

For the Hellfighters, like the war’s millions of soldiers, front-line combat was a nightmare of shelling, fear of chemical-weapons attacks, and the terror of going “over the top” – charging out of the trenches to face enemy fire. “For two nights they gave us shell fire and the gas were thick and the forest looked like it were ready to give up all its trees every time a shell came crashing through,” wrote Horace Pippin, a private from Goshen, N.Y. who later became a prominent painter. “We barely knew what to do for we could not fight shells, but we could the Germans. We would rather face the Germans to come over the top than to have their shells.”

As part of the Meuse-Argonne Offensive, in which more than a million American and French troops attacked the German lines, the 369th suffered some of the worst casualties suffered by an American regiment in the war, with 144 killed and almost 1,000 wounded. “What have I done this afternoon?” wrote Captain Arthur Little in his memoir, From Harlem to the Rhine. “Lost half my battalion—driven hundreds of innocent men to their death.”

Lieutenant Europe, gassed at the front, wrote his best-known song, “On Patrol in No Man’s Land,” from a hospital. Ruled unready for combat but fit to serve, Europe took the 369th’s band to Paris, and at the request of AEF headquarters, the band spent eight weeks in the city, playing for troops and dignitaries. At a concert with British, Italian, and French bands at Paris’ Jardin des Tuileries, Europe’s band played W.C. Handy’s “Memphis Blues” and “St. Louis Blues” for an enormous crowd that was shocked by jazz’s rhythms. “Everywhere we gave a concert, it was a riot,” Europe told a New York Tribune reporter. “We played to 50,000 people [at the Tuileries], at least, and had we wished it, we might be playing yet.”

Histories of the regiment say the troops spent 191 days on the front, more than any other Americans. On February 17, 1919, a massive crowd filled Fifth Avenue for a victory parade honoring the Hellfighters. The band kicked off the procession with a French marching song, full of “bugle fanfares,” reported the New York World, as well as “saxophones and basses that put a new and more peppery tang into it.” The soldiers marched in a French formation, 16 abreast. Johnson, who’d become one of the war’s most famous American soldiers, rode in a convertible, holding a bouquet of red and white lilies and bowing to the crowds.

The Hellfighters’ story of wartime valor brought mixed results as the veterans reentered American society. Europe launched his Hellfighter Band on a tour of the Northeast and Midwest, but two months in, after a concert in Boston, he was stabbed to death by the band’s deranged drummer. Noble Sissle carried on the band’s legacy as a songwriter and vocalist; his 1921 musical Shuffle Along, co-written with Eubie Blake, became one of the Harlem Renaissance’s major works.

Johnson himself became a champion for his fellow troops, testifying before the New York legislature in early 1919 in support of a bill to give veterans a preference in government hiring. But he soon tired of public speaking. “Henry Johnson was expected… to grin, laugh, show good cheer, and talk about what he’d done that night in May as if it had afforded him the thrill of a lifetime,” wrote Nelson. “He’d become, to his own race, a symbol of black manhood, but to whites, he was expected to be a voice for racial harmony.”

Instead, after a fiery speech in St. Louis in March 1919, in which he accused white soldiers of racism and cowardice, Johnson disappeared from the public sphere. He spent part of 1920 in the Army’s Walter Reed hospital and later grew sick from tuberculosis. He died in July 1929, at age 39, of an enlarged heart.

“America can’t change what happened to Henry Johnson,” said President Barack Obama in 2015. “But we can do our best to make it right.” Ninety-seven years after Johnson’s battle in France, Obama awarded him a posthumous Medal of Honor, the nation’s highest military award.

Arizona snipe hunt

The following twitter thread is from an election and voting technology professional. It will curl your hair:

The post-election sham underway in AZ should concern every American.

Whether you’re an avid or casual observer, here’s a deep-dive🧵to explain why it’s not just about AZ — it’s a harbinger of grave threats to democracy that could spread farther.

To start: The charade in AZ is not an “audit.” And my pointing that out is not rhetoric. It’s a critical fact to name the danger.

The AZ Senate has hijacked a term for an important, proven, post-election verification process and cynically exploited it for partisan purposes.

As far as “every American should care,” here’s the “big picture” reveal, up front:

What’s happening in AZ is a potentially mortal attack on the firewall that protects impartial election administration from political influence & disinformation.

And it could spread elsewhere.

When weaponized doubt undermines faith in elections forever, it’s game-over for democracy.

And when it’s game-over for democracy, there’s no peaceful transfer of power. That’s what’s at stake. It’s the diff btw civil society & fighting in the streets.

This is not hyperbole.

In this thread, I will not call the AZ process an “audit,” as that would be a misnomer. It is no more an audit than cutting into someone’s chest with a dull stone is “heart surgery.”

Instead, I will simply refer to “the Arizona post-election sham.”

In this thread, I’ll unpack and illustrate why…

a) the premises of the sham are faulty; and

b) the sham cannot accomplish what a true audit is supposed to do, which is to increase public confidence in the correctness of election results

First off, on the faulty premises:

Post-election audits are supposed to be consequential.

But Senate Pres @FannKfann has said this exercise is not to change the already-certified election results. So, what’s it for?

(More on this in a moment.)

It’s reasonable to question the purpose of the sham, because it cannot do what an audit is supposed to do (i.e. increase public confidence in elections). Why not?

– It’s not transparent
– It’s not impartial; and
– It relies on unprofessional procedures lacking in rigor

The biggest tell about why the sham is *not* designed to increase public confidence in elections is because:

– it’s used to provide daily fuel for an escalating disinfo campaign

– to push the Big Lie; and

– to raise political funds.

None of this is normal for audits.

To learn about what looks “normal” for audits, or if you need an easy, plain language introduction to the topic, take a look here from @OSET’s CTO, @ejsebes.

It’s critical to recognize that in the elections world, if they are done right, post-election audits are not taken lightly; they are a big deal, & they must be done with great precision and public transparency – not “flying by the seat of your pants.”

https://verifiedvoting.org/publication/principles-and-best-practices-for-post-election-tabulation-audits/

An analogy: election officials think about ballots in a way similar to how like bankers take care of money.

Every single ballot is akin to a piece of currency – each and every piece of paper must be securely protected, preserved, and accounted for.

Every. Single. One.

13/ So, now that you’ve seen the Q&A to get caught up in AZ (above), and now that you have an intro to normal audits, let’s take a deeper dive into the faulty premises and poor execution of this post-election sham in AZ…

And why this model must not be repeated in other states.

ISSUE #1: There’s No “There” There

Professional election administrators in Maricopa County already performed a post-election audit of the 2020 pres election, and confirmed the correctness of reported results.

In addition to Maricopa’s own post-election audit, the County also commissioned an audit of its voting equipment, performed by two third-party voting system test laboratories, accredited by @EACgov. No irregularities were found.

ISSUE #2: Not Transparent

Nothing is more impt to the integrity of post-election audits than public transparency. Yet the AZ sham repeatedly fails to meet this standard.

Likely because the contractor (Cyber Ninjas) has no experience with elections. They just don’t get it.

An especially egregious example of how Cyber Ninjas doesn’t get elections-related civic values is their requirement that observers of the sham sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Or, as @maddow put it: “You can observe…but you just can’t tell anyone what you observed.”

ISSUE #3: Not Impartial

For a post-election audit to be credible, it’s essential that the parties administering it not be tainted by bias. Yet Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan was a vocal advocate of Trump’s “Stop the Steal” message.

ISSUE #4: Poor Procedures, Voter Marks

Voters make mistakes when they mark their ballots, & they have diff styles of marks too. In an audit, there must be standards to determine the interpretation of marks, i.e. “what choice did the voter intend?” The sham has none.

ISSUE #5: Poor Procedures, Ballot Security

The conditions in the Coliseum, where the sham was being conducted, do not inspire confidence. For example, ballots were kept in a chain link “corral” — but it doesn’t even have a ceiling and access control appears sloppy.

ISSUE #6: Poor Procedures, Partisan Teams

In keeping with the value of impartiality, it is typical in post-election audits to ensure that auditors reviewing ballots are bipartisan teams, with equal representation.

Cyber Ninjas has said they cannot guarantee any of that.

ISSUE #7: Poor Procedures, IT Security

For a firm that claims to be “experts” in cybersecurity, the number of bad practices Cyber Ninjas has displayed is striking: Unattended laptop PCs, WiFi routers on servers w/ ballot images, etc.

Just horrible.

ISSUE #8 – Poor Procedures, Discrepancies

Former election official @lizlhoward of @BrennanCenter scratched her head over the lack of any procedures to reconcile different tallies for the same ballots among the human reviewers on a team. Duh.

24/ ISSUE #9 – The Snipe Hunt

Not only are the procedures silent on critical issues, but they are also constantly changing, apparently without end. So, this sham exercise is looking like an open-ended snipe hunt, bleeding into areas with no relevance.

SO FAR:

– Prior audits done
– No evidence of wrongdoing
– Biased “auditor,” no elections experience
– No standards for voter intent
– Poor procedures for ballot security
– Review teams not bipartisan
– Lousy IT security
– Silent on discrepancies
– Snipe hunt

That’s a pause.

BUT WAIT, THERE’S MORE…

All of those problems should be enough on their own. Big, big problems. Not transparent. Not professional. Partisan. And now, to make it worse…

…they are moving all the ballots and equipment.

It’s a security nightmare.

ISSUE #10: Doing It Wrong

@SecretaryHobbs has been just one of a loud chorus pointing out the problems with this sham exercise. As an elections professional, she would know. In a lengthy letter to the AZ Senate, she provided details.

ISSUE #11: Intimidation & Harassment

For having the temerity to point out problems, supporters of the sham (no doubt committed to “freedom” and “transparency”) responded to @SecretaryHobbs with anonymous death threats.

ISSUE #12: Lies Beget More Lies – And Money

Undermining democracy like this would be bad enough. But the troubling part is that it likely doesn’t stop in AZ. This model could go elsewhere. It could become a model for other states. Why? Read on…

Like a cancer that produces more cancerous cells, the sham is itself fuel for an ongoing disinformation machine that spreads to other states – producing more donations, and more resources for the Big Lie, to keep our country divided in perpetuity.

I wouldn’t blame you if reading this far makes you feel like you need to take a shower. But I try to maintain hope. Because, as I said above, this is a binary choice.

When weaponized doubt undermines faith in elections forever, it’s game-over for democracy.

Forging ahead:

Develop more and better practices to provide transparency on election administration processes. It’s not easy, but if democracy is to survive, even the politicians sowing doubt must be reached, somehow.

Forging ahead:

The responsible press must keep telling the truth.

And that also means calling something “a lie” when it is a lie.

Forging ahead:

Voters should keep learning about the difference between a true audit, and a sham that hijacks the term. Audits are impartial, transparent, bipartisan, and based on rigorous procedures developed by election administration professionals. Forging ahead:

Listen to your local election officials, and support them. In a loud voice. They are heroes for democracy.

Contact your Congressional and state representatives, and tell them you support your local election officials too.

Forging ahead:

Support the free press. There are too many local reporters in AZ to thank them all for their coverage, but their noble work is a great reminder of how impoverished the public would be without the work of journalists committed to the public interest.

And finally:

Remember, when it’s game-over for democracy, there’s no peaceful transfer of power. (And that affects both parties. Undermining elections is like a snake eating its own tail.) This is a national security issue.

This is not hyperbole. /END

Originally tweeted by Eddie Perez (@eddieperezTX) on May 14, 2021.

Excommunicating the heretics

Jonathan Chait pointed out in this piece that Republicans have not had any problem excommunicating losing presidents in the past. I assumed he was talking about Richard Nixon. 538 looked at this a while back and showed that it took a very long time for the country to come around and a large majority of Republicans stuck with him to the bitter end:

Days before he resigned, a Gallup poll found that only 31 percent of Republicans thought Nixon should no longer be president. And some of those supporters deeply resented their representatives for their role in ousting Nixon, which may even have contributed to the Democratic landslide in the 1974 midterm elections.

It’s become a cliche, but true nonetheless: if Nixon had Fox News he wouldn’t have resigned. But it’s also true that something has changed in our society since then. Many right wingers have adopted the proposition that winning by any means necessary is the moral choice and they are aggressively hostile to any form of social contract. Their leaders believe the same.

But as it turns out Chait wasn’t talking about Nixon at all. He was talking about George H.W. Bush:

One of the rationalizations Republicans have made for their party’s refusal to disavow Donald Trump’s authoritarianism is that asking a party to renounce a former president is categorically unreasonable. “He’s an ex-president. You can’t just excommunicate him,” pleads Representative Dan Crenshaw. “People in their parties would also have thrown out people openly critical of Obama and Bush,” says Republican pollster Patrick Ruffini.

Parties don’t just disown their former presidents, right? Actually, it has happened. The Republican Party excommunicated George H.W. Bush after his 1992 defeat. That episode was a seminal moment in the formation of the party’s modern identity, and the contrast between its gleeful abandonment of the 41st president and continued fealty to the 45th one reveals a great deal.

In 1990, Bush faced a rising budget deficit that was pushing up interest rates and threatening the recovery. Democrats, who controlled Congress, insisted that any deficit deal impose shared sacrifice on the rich (who had disproportionately benefited from the Reagan tax cuts that had largely caused the deficit). Bush had campaigned against any new taxes but had no choice but to compromise. The price he paid — a tiny increase in the top tax rate, from 28 percent to 31 percent — was small in comparison with the spending cuts he secured, which were in fact one of the toughest austerity measures ever enacted.

But Bush’s deal violated conservative-movement canon, which abhorred any tax increase for any reason. Conservatives in Congress revolted against the deal, and that revolt drove the mainstream conservative leadership out of power and brought a right-wing faction led by Newt Gingrich into ascendancy. The budget official who had advised Bush on his budget deal, Richard Darman, was driven out of Republican politics. Since Bush still had to run for reelection, conservatives temporarily patched things up with him for the purpose of his campaign, during which he apologized for his apostasy and vowed never to repeat it again.

After Bush lost to Bill Clinton, conservatives wrote him out of the party. In conservative mythology, he became the Great Apostate. For years afterward, right-wing propaganda repeated a simple fable in which Ronald Reagan won because he was the good, loyal conservative, and Bush had justly lost because he strayed from the Reaganite path. “He ran as Ronald Reagan ’88,” Grover Norquist explained later. “The problem was he didn’t govern as Reagan. He raised taxes. He betrayed the people who elected him.”

The purge was so thorough that when George W. Bush sought the nomination eight years later, the central message he used to woo conservative elites was that he would not repeat the mistakes of his banished father. In a series of interviews, Bush disavowed his father’s tax-hiking apostasy. “A George W. Bush presidency, he signaled, will be Reagan III, not Bush II,” noted one conservative columnist.

George Bush had been a popular president with the Republican base, which lionized him for his role in leading the Gulf War. They turned against him in part because the party’s leaders hammered the message that he was an ideological traitor and used his defeat to discredit him.

When a Republican president had actually violated a core tenet of conservative belief, his fellow partisans knew what to do about it. They shunned him, turned his name into a synonym for “loser,” and forced even his children to denounce him. The difference is that Bush had committed a truly unforgivable sin: agreeing to increase the top tax rate by three percentage points. Trump won’t be purged because he committed what is, in the eyes of the conservative movement, a more forgivable sin: fomenting the violent overthrow of the government in order to seize an unelected second term.

I don’t think they would abandon Trump if he had raised taxes either, frankly. His popularity isn’t based upon his fealty to their ideology. They know he doesn’t really believe in anything and they know his voters don’t either. As long as he owns the libs they’re on board.

And there is another big difference between 92 and now. There was a usurper working to take over the party: Newt Gingrich. He and his band of bomb throwers were the ones who led the charge against Bush and it was mostly in order to obtain power for himself, not because of ideological purity. The only person taking that position today is Liz Cheney and she’s swimming against a strong riptide in the GOP. She’s no Gingrich — which is why she’s an apostate instead of a leader. Republican voters today revere adolescent bully boys and servile sycophants. Neocon imperialism is way, way out of fashion. And that’s a good thing. Unfortunately, replacing it with neo-fascist autocracy isn’t an improvement.

Grifters gonna grift

Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s behavior may be, as one of her targets/obsessions said Friday, indicative of deeper mental health issues (Daily Beast):

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) expressed concern on Friday for conservative firebrand Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s mental well-being amid Greene’s obsessive harassment of the Democratic lawmaker. Greene (R-GA) pursued and aggressively screamed at Ocasio-Cortez outside the House chamber earlier this week, prompting AOC to raise security concerns. CNN’s KFILE also unearthed a since-deleted 2019 livestream of Greene hurling abuse. “Get rid of your diaper,” Greene, who wasn’t yet a congresswoman, yelled through Ocasio-Cortez’s locked office door. “Stop being a baby and stop locking your door and come out and face the American citizens that you serve!” (One of the livestreamers with Greene at the time, Anthony Aguero, was later seen at the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection.)

Considering Greene has pulled this stunt in the past with others, specifically with Parkland survivor David Hogg, Ocasio-Cortez told reporters on Friday that she’s worried Greene is “deeply unwell and clearly needs help.” “At this point, I think, the depth of that un-wellness has raised concerns for other members,” she said “I’m concerned about her perceptions of reality.”

Greene may be the most publicly unwell of the grifter caucus — Greene appears to think her job as a congresscritter is to raise money off trolling — but that condition seems more of a feature than a bug. Insert your favorite head case [here].

As I suggested the other day, just because Greene has a need to start arguments doesn’t oblige Ocasio-Cortez to give her one.

Add to Greene’s antics this report on a lawsuit filed Thursday by a former staffer of Rep. Doug Lamborn. Lamborn shares Colorado’s Republican congressional caucus with pistol-packing Rep. Lauren Boebert.

Brandon Pope filed the lawsuit over unsafe working conditions in Lamborn’s office and a disregard for his employees’ safety (Slate):

The suit says Lamborn was “reckless and dangerous” in his approach to the coronavirus, often calling it a “hoax,” and it’s hard to argue with Pope’s characterization. Lamborn, Pope alleges, refused to wear a mask or enforce any safety protocols in the office while simultaneously refusing to allow staff to work from home. The result was—surprise, surprise—many of them got sick! When Lamborn himself was exposed to infected staffers, he refused to wear a mask or isolate. “Well, I don’t care about you guys getting it,” Lamborn allegedly told his staff. When Pope raised concerns with the chief of staff, the suit says, he was branded a troublemaker and, in retaliation for raising his concerns, was ultimately dismissed in December.

In addition to allegations of generalized pandemic terribleness, the suit also offers up a host of ethics violations by Lamborn, mostly having staff run personal errands for their boss and allowing “his wife to take the Office’s supplies for her own personal use.” There is also this delightful nugget on Lamborn allowing his son to sleep in a U.S. Capitol storage room while he was in D.C. looking for a job that Lamborn had his staff help him try to land! From the suit:

The whole ethics/public servant/governance/democracy thing seems to be a foreign concept to the current class of GOP officials on Capitol Hill.

Essential workers yet “we’re disposable”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s relaxation of almost all masking requirements on Thursday was celebrated as a milestone in the fight against COVID-19. “But with a majority of Americans unvaccinated,” the Washington Post reports, “others questioned the sudden and blanket recommendation, worrying that the onus is now heavier on state and local governments, businesses and individuals to determine whether precautions are necessary.”

Those fully vaccinated are cleared to take off their masks indoors and outdoors except on airplanes, buses, trains and other public transportation, and in health-care settings. Business owners may decide for themselves whether to continue to require masks. But who is to police who is and isn’t fully vaccinated? Certainly not Walmart greeters.

And while some retailers and restaurants are raising pay to attract workers in a market with 1.2 unemployed workers per job opening, staffing up is still slow. The sudden lifting of the mask mandate means restaurants are unprepared.

“If we don’t have the staff, we can’t seat people,” said Jane Anderson, executive director of the Independent Restaurant Association in Asheville, North Carolina. Gov. Roy Cooper on Friday lifted the state’s mask mandate to match the CDC’s new guidance.

Employees themselves are not ready to go back to work in an environment with hostile customers who may or may not be vaccinated.

“The entire industry preys upon desperation”

Jake Galardi Marko, a ten-year restaurant industry veteran, quit his Olive Garden job of two over abuse from customers over Covid-19 protections.

From The Guardian:

“It’s a minefield of unsafe working environments and exploitative practices still permeate the hiring and training processes,” he said. “People always say but we make tips so it can’t be that bad. This is used as an excuse to ignore abusive and exploitative practices.”

Before starting his new position, he applied to dozens of restaurants and had several interviews, and noted many restaurants are in a chaotic state and unprepared to take on new workers. He said they are baiting potential hires with signing bonuses that don’t pan out, promises of higher wages, or applying for a position only to be told on the first day of hire they have to start out as a busser and work their way up. He left one job because the restaurant was not enforcing coronavirus safety protections.

“I contemplate leaving the industry every day. Most of us do but we have bills to pay, rent comes due every month. A lot of us have kids to support,” he added. “The entire industry preys upon desperation.”

The industry itself and the US Chamber of Commerce blame federal unemployment supplements for jobs going unfilled. Several Republican-led states used that rationale to stop distributing those benefits to force people back to work.

The argument ignores the fact that so many daycare facilites closed permanently during the pandemic. Not all schools are open and kids still remote learning at home need supervision. Not to mention workers are reluctant to take those desperation jobs for less than a living wage.

Workers in the restaurant industry say that any issues the industry is experiencing in hiring enough workers is a result of low wages, safety concerns and harassment from customers over Covid-19 protocols

According to a report published by One Fair Wage and the UC Berkeley Food Labor Research Center in May 2021, 53% of workers in the restaurant industry have considered leaving their job since the pandemic started, with low wages and tips, safety concerns, and harassment from customers as the primary reasons provided by workers.

Workers in the restaurant industry were among the highest sectors of workers who died of coronavirus during the pandemic, according to a University of California San Francisco study published in January.

That makes those reluctant to return to work lazy in conservative eyes.

Cris Cardona, a shift manager at a McDonald’s in Orlando, is one of several workers at the fast-food chain in at least 15 US cities who will participate in a daylong strike on 19 May to demand the company raise its minimum wage to $15 an hour.

Cardona has worked at McDonald’s for four years, and makes just over $11 an hour, which he explained has prevented him from moving out of his parents’ home, getting his own car, or being able to go attend college.

“They call us essential, but the reality is they treat us like we’re disposable,” said Cardona. “They like to say that no one wants to work, that they’re having trouble finding workers and they blame this on unemployment benefits, but the problem is no one wants to work for a poverty wage, to risk their lives for $7.25 an hour.”

The marquee on a fast food restaurant up the street offers $12/hr for new hires and $13/hr for shift supervisors in a city with a high cost of living, low wages, and an affordable housing problem like many other cities.

Friday Night Soother

https://twitter.com/BT0731/status/1390890927145713664

I don’t know where that is, but it looks like fun.

Here are some adorable baby monkeys.

https://youtu.be/cWl_3HVdnjg