Woman Tells All

Day 2 folks, time to do the work.  I’m jumping in with a big one.  Yesterday was amazing and I loved being part of it.  I saw many women who had never protested before putting themselves out there and taking their first activist steps, which was beautiful.  But it’s important to remember that this is just a first step.

There’s an image that has been making the rounds on the internet.

This is a great photo that encapsulates a very important point that allowed white women to vote for a man who has espoused sexist, racist, and ignorant views.  A huge part of the ability to make that choice comes from the privilege that white women have in society.

White privilege is an uncomfortable concept because it’s difficult to accept that it applies regardless of how you feel on the inside.  Privilege doesn’t care if you’re not racist.  Privilege doesn’t even care if you’re an activist or an ally.  Privilege is based on the way you look and the way society treats you based on those looks.

I first learned of the concept of privilege when I was a freshman in college.  It abhorred me.  I didn’t ask to be born as a white woman.  I wanted to give it away, get rid of the privilege.  But you can’t do that.  And really, saying that you want to is disingenuous.  Privilege makes life easier.  That’s the entire point.

There are a few pieces of literature I read during that time period that literally blew my mind.  One is “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Backpack,” by Peggy McIntosh.  Please read it, and sit with it.  If it makes you uncomfortable or defensive, sit with that too.  If you don’t believe that privilege exists, here are the ways that I see and experience privilege in my own life.

I’ll start with male privilege.

• Males do not have to fear for their safety when they walk alone.  They can spend time thinking about whatever they want, while I think about how I will escape a potential attack.
• Men can wake up and get out the door in 15 minutes.  I cannot.  I will be penalized at work, subconsciously or consciously, if I do not do my hair and wear makeup.
• Men can wear comfortable clothing to work.  I need to wear heels to appear taller.
• Men are not looked at as someone who might get pregnant at any moment.  Their bodies are not ogled, their beverage choices are not monitored, and their co-workers do not worry they might be unable to complete an assignment due to pregnancy.
• If a male becomes a father, he does not need to stay home to feed the baby for the first few months of its life.  He is not criticized for working when the baby is young.  He does not have to interrupt his career to have a baby.
• Men do not have to worry about being groped, manhandled, or cat-called in public spaces.  They don’t need to watch their drinks in a bar.  They don’t even have to think about these things.  Men can spend that time thinking about whatever they want, while I worry about my safety.
• Men do not need to police their tone and speech in the same way women do.  They can be forceful and they will never be called a bitch.  They can ask for opportunities – in fact, they are more likely to be given these opportunities – and they will not be viewed as bossy or aggressive.

Any of that ring true to you?  That’s what privilege is.  Men didn’t ask for the privileges but they get them anyway.  They cannot give them to you even if they wanted to.  Now let’s talk about race.

As a white woman:

• When I need to find a band-aid, it’s easy to find one in my own skin color.  In fact, they’re all in my skin color.
• When I get pulled over by the police, I get the benefit of the doubt.  It is unlikely the police will harm me.  I can look at police and believe that they exist to protect me, not to protect others from me.
• Signs around me are in my native language.
• I can work with people who look like me, and spend my days with people who look like me.  I am comfortable at work and do not feel like I am looked at differently.
• My opinion is generally my own.  I do not speak for all white people, and I do not have to live with the responsibility that my words might be taken to apply to others.
• I can walk into any hair salon and someone will know what to do with my hair.
• I will not be denied housing, shown a different property, or given different rates based on how I look.  Brokers and real estate agents have no reason to distrust me.
• I can feel secure in my accomplishments because no one looks at me and thinks I am there as the product of affirmative action.  No one thinks I took someone else’s place, either at school or at work.

You cannot underestimate the impact of privilege.  These lists are not exhaustive, and were just things that come to mind easily.

It does not matter if you did not ask for these privileges.  You cannot change the fact that they exist, just as people who are not in positions of power cannot change what they look like.  Everyone has different privileges, and the different things we bring to the table lead to our intersectionality.

White women have let our black and brown sisters down time and time again.  We pushed them out of the suffrage movement.  We sacrificed their civil rights for our own advancement.  We ask them to show up and fight for us, but we have not shown up or fought for them.  They showed up.  Only 4% of black women voted for Trump.  A staggering 53% of white women voted for Trump.  Where were we a few months ago?  Complacent?  Disillusioned because of leaked emails?  Were we lazy?

It does not matter if you were there.  Our demographic was not there.  The fact that you voted for Hillary did not mean that our demographic voted for Hillary, and we did not win the election.  We have an obligation to show up for our sisters who have been showing up for us for decades.

Let’s quote Spiderman.  With power comes great responsibility.  Privilege is power, and we have a responsibility to use that privilege.  I stand with my sisters and am working on being an ally every day.  If you are interested in being an ally, start doing the work.  Sit with the concept of privilege and let it make you uncomfortable.  Start getting active, even if it’s not the cause that affects you directly.  If you want to learn more about being an ally, ask your friends who are already doing the work.  Do not burden your black and brown sisters or make them explain things to you.  They have enough on their plates, and it’s our responsibility to show up for them.  We’re all in this together, and it’s time we start taking responsibility and acting like it.  I don’t have all the answers and I’m working through it every day, but I’m happy to work through it with you.

One more thing.  It’s not enough to sit back and let things happen around us anymore.  We cannot be complacent.  Complacency got us here, and we won’t stand for it anymore.  The millions of women who took to the streets yesterday made that very clear.  Be an active ally, not a passive bystander.  We all lose when we let injustice happen on our watch.

Damn straight.

Today I had the privilege in participating in the Women’s March in Chicago.  To the protesters of Chicago, it was an honor to march with you.

It’s hard to put into words what it felt like to be part of the 250,000+ in Chicago, and the 1,000,000+ in the world who showed up today to speak out, but I’ll try.

It was peaceful.  It was filled with families spanning generations.  Daughters, mothers, and grandmothers marched together, hand in hand with their brothers and partners.  We moved for the strollers, we gave balloons to the kids, and we kept the chants clean.  I did not see one person push or shove, not one piece of property destroyed, not even one person littering.  This protest was built on respect and unity.

It was smart, inventive, and heartfelt.  I was so impressed with the effort people put into their signs and outfits.  Little girls were dressed as superheroes, women were dressed as Rosie the Riveter, and we even had our own Lady Liberty.

It was fun!  We danced, we sang, and made new friends.  We took pictures of slogans that were particularly thoughtful or moving and shared those pictures with our friends.  We talked about what we do next and how to keep this momentum.

It was very pink, and very diverse.  I looked across the crowd during the inauguration yesterday and I saw a sea of white.  Today we had a sea of color and gender, and it was beautiful.

Tomorrow we continue this fight, but today I remember Why I March:

• I march to speak my truth.
• I march to protect and promote access to reproductive health care for people in Illinois and neighboring states.
• I march to protect our children from negative policies built on hate and distrust.
• I march to stand with my sisters and brothers of color.
• I march to stand with my indigenous sisters and brothers.
• I march to stand with my Latina sisters and brothers.
• I march to stand with immigrants, who now feel unsafe in their own homes.
• I march to support the LGBTQ community and to make it clear that they are welcome wherever I am.
• I march to support the women who felt they did not need to march today.  I march for you too.

As Martin Luther King, Jr. said, the arc of justice is long, but it bends towards justice.  We cannot take the progress we have made thus far for granted, and we are the change that creates the movement.

I stand with you, as you have stood with me.  I’m not going anywhere.

I have been told that it is counterproductive to liken our current situation to Nazi Germany.  I have been told that it weakens my arguments and statements, that it makes me seem emotional, irrational.  I’ve even said those words to others before.  In an argument, when someone brought up Nazi Germany, it seemed like a fallacy, a stretch.  It’s actually called Godwin’s Law – as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler approaches – that is, if an online discussion (regardless of topic or scope) goes on long enough, sooner or later someone will compare someone or something to Hitler.  How can you compare our world a world that allowed the slaughter of millions?  Not here, not now.

The problem is, it’s impossible to see the end when you’re at the beginning.  We have no idea how this story ends.  People in Germany in the 1930s didn’t know either.  But we do have one benefit on our side.  We have the benefit of history, and we can speak now, speak often, speak loudly.

Soon after the election, I read an excerpt from a book called They Thought They Were Free.  This book was first published in 1955.  The book is a collection of interviews with ten German individuals who lived in Germany during WWII and participated in the Nazi movement.

Here’s part of that excerpt, from a chapter titled “But Then It Was Too Late:”

“The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway… Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and ‘crises’ and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the ‘national enemies,’ without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think?

“Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’ that no ‘patriotic German’ could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head.

“How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice—‘Resist the beginnings’ and ‘Consider the end.’ But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have. And everyone counts on that might.

“You see, one doesn’t see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don’t want to act, or even talk, alone; you don’t want to ‘go out of your way to make trouble.’ Why not?—Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty.

“In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to your colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, ‘It’s not so bad’ or ‘You’re seeing things’ or ‘You’re an alarmist.’  And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can’t prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don’t know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have.

“But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.

“Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we do nothing). You remember those early meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.”

This is a punch to the gut.  This one hits close to home.  This is the reason I wanted to start blogging about politics.

Do you know what I see right now?  I see our President-elect revoking the press credentials of the Washington Post during the election, calling the publication “inaccurate” and “dishonest.”  I see our President-elect conflating “fake news” with anything he dislikes in an effort to decrease the credibility of publications that criticize him:

Reports by @CNN that I will be working on The Apprentice during my Presidency, even part time, are ridiculous & untrue – FAKE NEWS!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 10, 2016

I see our President refusing to answer questions from CNN because now, CNN is fake news:

I see our President-elect shutting the media out from its traditional watchdog status.   Priebus, Trump’s Chief of Staff, just told Variety that they the administration is considering ending the daily press briefings, which have been a tradition since Eisenhower’s administration.  Yesterday, Trump held his first press conference since July 27, 2016 (wherein he asked Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s missing emails via hacking).

Just tried watching Saturday Night Live – unwatchable! Totally biased, not funny and the Baldwin impersonation just can’t get any worse. Sad

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 4, 2016

Just a sample of what our President-elect has in store for us.

Are you scared?  I am.  Who knows what the end here is.  I don’t, and I am not saying that it will end in internment or genocide, like Nazi Germany.  I have no idea how this will play out, but I will not let uncertainty or timidity stop me from speaking.  Speak loudly, speak often, and stay informed.  Be the canary in the coal mine.  I pray that I really am an alarmist.  I pray that this is all for naught, but nothing our President-elect has done so far has proven otherwise.  I am taking him at his word and pledging to stand up to it, even if it starts small.  Resist the beginnings.  Consider the end.

Time for the second installment of Trump’s Squad.  Check out the first installment here.  Trump has been naming people to his cabinet for weeks now, but some of his recent nominations have really stirred things up.  We’re going to cover a couple of those today.

Secretary of State – Rex Tillerson

Rex Tillerson is Trump’s choice for Secretary of State.  This is another big position.  The Secretary of State is in charge of the Department of State and United States Foreign Service, and is the outward-facing cabinet member for foreign policy.  As Secretary of State, Tillerson will be the primary negotiator with other countries.  Like I said, big position.

Tillerson is currently the chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil.  As an initial matter, Tillerson has never held public office.  He has worked for Exxon since 1975 in various capacities, and has been CEO since 2006.  Since Tillerson has never held public office, it’s difficult to get a sense of where is politics lie.  He has been a longtime supporter of the Republican party, has expressed his impatience with government regulation, has stated that he does not support sanctions, and although he has acknowledged that climate change is happening, has stated that it is not yet clear “to what extent and therefore what you can do it about it.”

The most we know about Tillerson is his connection to Putin.  Apparently the two are pretty close.  Tillerson has known Putin since 1999, when he began representing Exxon’s interests in Russia.  There’s a quote that’s making the rounds from John Hamre, the President and CEO of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.  Tillerson is on the board of that organization.  Hamre has said that Tillerson “has had more interactive time with Vladimir Putin than probably any other American, with the exception of Dr. Henry Kissinger.”

As a representative of Exxon, Tillerson has worked closely with Putin.  In 2011, he struck a deal with Russia which gave Exxon access to Arctic resources.  In 2013, the Kremlin presented Tillerson with the country’s Order of Friendship.  The Order of the Friendship rewards foreign nationals whose work, deeds, and efforts were aimed at bettering the relations between foreign nations and Russia.  If you want a refresher on why connections with Putin might be bad, check out my previous post on this topic.

Russia might be a big issue for Tillerson during the committee and Senate hearings.  Tillerson will have to be approved by a majority of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and then a majority of the Senate.

The Foreign Relations Committee includes:

• Bob Corker (R-TN)
• Ben Cardin (D-MD)
• James Risch (R-ID)
• Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
• Marco Rubio (R-FL)
• Bob Menendez (D-NJ)
• Ron Johnson (R-WI)
• Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
• Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
• Christopher Coons (D-DE)
• Cory Gardner (R-CO)
• Tom Udall (D-NM)
• David Perdue (R-GA)
• Chris Murphy (D-CT)
• Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
• Tim Kaine (D-VA)
• Rand Paul (R-KY)
• Edward Markey (D-MA)
• John Barrasso (R-WY)

If you’ve been counting, that is 10 Republicans to nine Democrats.  Rubio has already come out saying he has serious concerns about Tillerson as Secretary of State.  If Tillerson’s not for you, start making your calls!  It only takes one Republican to cross the line.  As always, you can contact your senators for the main vote.

Labor Secretary – Andrew Puzder

Trump  has nominated Andrew Puzder for Labor Secretary.  Labor Secretary is in charge of protecting the nation’s workers, determine how to distribute benefits to unemployed Americans, and is runs unemployment and jobs reports.  Puzder also has never held a political office, and is currently the CEO of CKE Restaurants, the parent company of Hardee’s and Carl’s Jr.

Puzder has criticized the Affordable Care Act, argued against raising the federal minimum wage beyond $9 an hour, and worked for years as an anti-abortion lawyer in Missouri.  Under Puzder’s leadership, Carl’s Jr. has led an aggressively disgusting campaign of scantily clad women eating burgers.  He stands by that decision – he just “like[s] beautiful women eating burgers in bikinis.”

I’m personally disgusted by this guy, and I’m nervous about what he means for workers across the country.  If you feel the same, way, here’s what you can do.  Puzder first needs to receive a majority vote from the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and then a majority vote in the Senate.

The Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee includes:

• Lamar Alexander (R-TN)
• Patty Murray (D-WA)
• Michael Enzi (R-WY)
• Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
• Richard Burr (R-NC)
• Bernie Sanders (D-VT)
• Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
• Robert Casey, Jr. (D-PA)
• Rand Paul (R-KY)
• Al Franken (D-MN)
• Susan Collins (R-ME)
• Michael Bennet (D-CO)
• Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
• Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
• Mark Kirk (R-IL)
• Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
• Tim Scott (R-SC)
• Christopher Murphy (D-CT)
• Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
• Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)
• Pat Roberts (R-KS)
• Bill Cassidy (R-IA)

You’ll probably notice that some of the listed senators will no longer hold their position in next iteration of the Senate.  Once the new senators begin in early January, the Senate will reallocate some positions.  I will update as that becomes available.  In the mean time, feel free to start calling!  There are 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats on the committee, but we have some heavy hitters (Murry, Sanders, Warren).  For Republicans that may be easier to convince, I would reach out to Rand Paul, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski, but feel free to contact whomever you want.

As always, you can contact your senators for the main vote, in which Puzder will need a majority as well.

Treasury Secretary – Steven Mnuchin

If you’re keeping track, this is our second Steve and our eighth white male!  Mnuchin is tapped for Treasury Secretary, the position in charge of establishing economic policy, tax policy, financial policy, and any financial sanctions against foreign nations.  Mnuchin, like all others listed today, has never held political office.  He was the national finance chairman of Trump’s campaign, and worked in the banking world, including Goldman Sachs, prior to joining Trump’s campaign.  He was active in the residential lending market and bought several failed banks from 2008-2009.  In a bizarre aside, Mnuchin also has worked in Hollywood.  His production company has produced The Devil Wears Prada, Avatar, Gravity, The Lego Movie, and Magic Mike XXL.

Mnuchin has actually supported both Democrats and Republicans in the past, but has been a staunch Trump supporter since spring of 2016.  Since Trump announced Mnuchin as his pick for Labor Secretary, Mnuchin has faced some public criticism, mostly relating to his background in the finance industry.  He has been criticized for profiting off of the financial crisis and for his role on finance in the midst of anti-Wall Street sentiments.

Not your guy?  Mnuchin has to be confirmed by the Senate Committee on Finance by a majority vote before he goes to the entire Senate for a vote.

The Senate Committee on Finance includes:

• Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
• Ron Wyden (D-OR)
• Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
• Charles Schumer (D-NY)
• Mike Crapo (R-ID)
• Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
• Pat Roberts (R-KS)
• Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
• Michael Enzi (R-WY)
• Bill Nelson (D-FL)
• John Cornyn (R-TX)
• Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
• John Thune (R-SD)
• Thomas Carper (D-DE)
• Richard Burr (R-NC)
• Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
• Johnny Isakson (R-GA)
• Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
• Rob Portman (R-OH)
• Michael Bennet (D-CO)
• Patrick Toomey (R-PA)
• Robert Casey, Jr. (D-PA)
• Dan Coats (R-IN)
• Mark Warner (D-VA)
• Dean Heller (R-NV)
• Tim Scott (R-SC)

If you’re counting, that’s 14 Republicans and 12 Democrats.  This might be a tough one – there are valid issues with Mnuchin but so far he wouldn’t be the one I’d target primarily, and the Republicans on this committee are pretty solidly conservative.  But please do reach out if this guy is not for you, and as always please contact your senators!

I’ve been focusing on national (and international) politics because the news cycle has been so crazy, but today we’re going to look at what a few of the states have been up to.

Ohio

Ohio has been making some moves to restrict abortion further.  On December 6, the Ohio Senate and House approved a ban on abortions once a heartbeat is detected, which generally occurs around six weeks.  The language was added to an unrelated bill concerning child welfare, and the language does not provide exceptions for rape or incest.  Two days later, the Ohio Senate and House approved a bill which bans abortions at or after 20 weeks.  Again, that bill has no exceptions for rape or incest.

On December 13, Governor John Kasich vetoed the 6-week ban but signed into law the 20 week ban.  The ban goes into effect in 90 days, barring any court fight’s over the law’s constitutionality.

Roe v. Wade legalized abortion up to the point of “viability,” which is defined as when a fetus is capable of prolonged life outside the mother’s womb.  Although some have lauded Governor Kasich’s veto of the six-week ban, almost all familiar with pro-choice precedent understand that a six-week ban would directly violate Roe v. Wade.  Viability is generally understood as occurring during the third trimester – some point between the 24th and 28th week of the pregnancy.  A 20-week ban on abortion has been ruled unconstitutional at the state and federal levels in Arizona and Idaho because fetuses are not viable at 20 weeks.  There are still dozens of other states that have similar legislation that has not yet been challenged.

Ohio knows this.  Governor Kasich knows this.  The pro-life group Ohio Right to Life has stated that it hopes the 20-week ban can be used to reopen Roe v. Wade, and that “[t]he time has come for this archaic line which is viability and Roe to end.  As science continues to develop and as public opinion continues to change we’re going to continue to chip away at Roe.”

They are hoping that the make up of the Supreme Court will change before the case gets challenged, and that if it is challenged, the Supreme Court will finally overrule Roe v. Wade, or, at a minimum, find that viability is no longer the appropriate standard, opening states up to additional restrictions to abortions.

North Carolina

North Carolina has had some issues since the election.  Republican incumbent Governor Pat McCrory ran for re-election in a very tight race against Roy Cooper, the Democratic nominee.  Even though Cooper won by almost 5,000 votes, McCrory refused to concede until almost a month after the election.

It does not appear that the North Carolina Republicans are going down without a fight.  After convening a special session of the legislature to address hurricane relief, Republicans called for a second special session, in which they have introduced bills to limit incoming Governor Cooper’s power.  For example, they have moved to make Cabinet appointees subject to state senate approval, remove the governor’s power to appoint trustees to the University of North Carolina system and the state board of education, and reduce the number of employees the governor could hire by 1,200.  Additionally, Republicans have introduced a bill that would overhaul the state’s election boards, which many view as the latest attempt to restrict voting in the state.

The special session is ongoing, and so far we are still waiting  to hear how the voting goes.  Governor-elect Cooper currently serves as the Attorney General of North Carolina, and has threatened to sue the state of North Carolina if the legislature passes anything unconstitutional.  I’ll post updates as they arise.

Trump has been making moves on appointing cabinet members.  Let’s break them down.

A minority of the positions do not require Senate confirmation, making them difficult to oppose.  Those include:

Chief of Staff – Reince Priebus       

Reince Priebus is the former Chairman of the Republican National Committee, and has spoken out against certain statements made by Trump in the past, such as Trump’s proposal to temporarily suspend Muslim immigration, and Trump’s criticisms of the Khan family.  Priebus is generally well-liked in the Republican party and to some, signals Trump’s ability to work within the system.

Chief Strategist – Steve Bannon       

Steve Bannon is worrisome to many.  He has had many positions in corporate America, but most recently was the executive chair of Breitbart News.  Breitbart is an alt-right (or white supremacist) news site that’s pretty gross.  There have been valid criticisms that Bannon is anti-Semitic, racist, misogynistic, and homophobic.  (Incidentally, if you want to put pressure on companies advertising on Breitbart, check out Sleeping Giants on Twitter.)  There’s a MoveOn petition to stop the appointment Steve Bannon, but because the Senate does not need to confirm Bannon, the actions to stop him are indirect, and involve threatening other action in the Senate.

White House Counsel – Don McGahn II        

Don McGahn is a partner at Jones Day, who served as commissioner and chairman of the Federal Election Committee.  He served as Trump’s campaign counsel for the presidential campaign.  McGahn has pushed to deregulate campaign finance laws, and is known for being combative.

National Security Adviser – Michael Flynn          

This guy is kind of a disaster.  He is the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, and was reportedly forced out in 2014 after clashing with superiors.  During his time as director, it was said he was “abusive with staff, didn’t listen, worked against policy, bad management, etc.”  Additionally, the New York Times has reported that Flynn exhibited a loose relationship with facts, which his subordinates began referring to as “Flynn facts.”  Flynn’s tenuous relationship with facts transfers over to social media, where he has pushed conspiracy theories about Hillary Clinton.  He has since deleted his tweet, which linked to an article on True Pundit accusing Clinton of being connected to sex crimes with children, among other things.  Fortunately, news sources reported on the tweet, including its language:

U decide – NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex Crimes w Children, etc…MUST READ! https://t.co/O0bVJT3QDr

— General Flynn (@GenFlynn) November 3, 2016

And there’s more.  The Washington Post just broke a story today on how General Flynn shared classified information with foreign military officials in Afghanistan during a 2010 U.S. military investigation.

That’s just the four appointees who do not need to be confirmed by the Senate.  Trump has made public 16 of the remaining 21 positions of his cabinet.  Instead of going through them one by one, we will be doing an “Cabinet Member of the Day” post to address each of them.  Today is…..

Attorney General – Jeff Sessions

This one is a biggie.  The United States Attorney General is the nation’s top law enforcement official and the head of the United States Department of Justice.  Sessions will oversee all arms of the Department of Justice, and will be supervising the types of enforcement the DOJ chooses to pursue.  It’s a big deal.

Sessions is currently the junior U.S. Senator for Alabama.  Prior to his time as senator, he worked as an Assistant U.S. States Attorney and was nominated by Ronald Reagan to be a district judge in the Southern District of Alabama.  Sessions was not confirmed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.  During the confirmation process, four DOJ lawyers who had worked with Sessions testified that he had made racially insensitive remarks, such as calling the NAACP and ACLU “un-American” and “Communist-inspired,” that he thought the KKK was “OK until I found out they smoked pot,” and that Sessions had admonished a black Assistant U.S. Attorney to “be careful what you say to white folks.”

Alright, alright.  That was 30 years ago.  What has Sessions been up to since then?  Last year he authored the Immigration Handbook For the New Republican Majority, which calls for a slowdown of legal immigration and blames immigration for “welfare dependency” in the United States.  Sessions also appeared on a Breitbart Radio show last December, where he stated that we’re seeing “more and more persons enter [the United States] and a lot of them have done terrorist acts.”  Sessions also stated that “[t]heir faith commands them to do these things,” and that a Muslim registry was “appropriate” to discuss at this time.  He also thinks stop-and-frisk laws, which have been ruled unconstitutional because it targets minority men, are just fine.

FYI, Jeff Sessions is on the ACLU’s radar.  He’s also on the radar of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, which is a coalition of more than 200 human rights groups.  Before he is confirmed as Attorney General, Sessions must get through the Senate Judiciary Committee.  This is a two-day process scheduled for January 10-11, 2017.  If Sessions is confirmed by a majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee, it goes to the full Senate, and will also require a majority vote.  By the way.  Sessions is ON the Senate Judiciary Committee, but he will not be able to vote for himself.

If this doesn’t sound good to you, here’s what you can do.

You can contact the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which include:

• Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
• Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
• Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
• Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
• Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
• Lindsey Graham (R-SC)
• Dick Durbin (D-IL)
• John Cornyn (R-TX)
• Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
• Michael Lee (R-UT)
• Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
• Ted Cruz (R-TX)
• Al Franken (D-MN)
• Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
• Chris Coons (D-DE)
• David Vitter (R-LA)
• Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
• David Perdue (R-GA)
• Thom Tillis (R-NC)

If you are a constituent, call the office of your senator and tell them you oppose the confirmation of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General, especially if one of your senators is Republican.  There are 10 Republican votes and nine Democrat votes if no one switches party lines.

Also contact your senators, even if they’re not on the Senate Judiciary Committee.  They will have to vote on any confirmation, and if a majority do not confirm Sessions, it’s a no go.  The Republicans will have a majority come January, with 52 seats as opposed to 48 seats for Democrats, but that doesn’t mean individuals can’t be swayed.

Things are developing on a daily basis with PEOTUS.  On Friday, the Washington Post published an article about how a CIA assessment made clear that Russia not only interfered with the election, but did so to help Trump win.  On Sunday, Trump was interviewed by Fox News, and during that interview he denied the CIA’s findings.

Of course, he’s supplemented that interview with the following tweets:

Can you imagine if the election results were the opposite and WE tried to play the Russia/CIA card. It would be called conspiracy theory!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2016

Unless you catch “hackers” in the act, it is very hard to determine who was doing the hacking. Why wasn’t this brought up before election?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2016

In a statement released on Friday Trump’s transition team also had this to say:

“These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The election ended a long time ago in one of the biggest Electoral College victories in history. It’s now time to move on and ‘Make America Great Again.'”

CIA’s Assessment

This is not entirely new news.  On October 31, 2016, the New York Times published an article about the FBI investigation into interference with Russia.  That article stated that FBI investigators “have become increasingly confident, based on the evidence they have uncovered, that Russia’s direct goal is not to support the election of Mr. Trump, as many Democrats have asserted, but rather to disrupt the integrity of the political system and undermine America’s standing in the world more broadly.”

The CIA assessment goes further, and states that they have identified individuals who are closely connected to the Russian government, and these individuals provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from Democrats, including from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta (remember him from #Pizzagate?).  The CIA has reported that it is now “quite clear” that electing Trump was Russia’s goal.

President Obama has ordered a full review and report on the issue, and wants the report before he transitions out of office on January 20, 2017.

What Does this Mean?

The CIA report is classified and has not been made public.  It’s hard to understand the extent to which hacking impacted the election.  I have not seen any reputable news source stating that Russia was able to actually infiltrate any voting machines.  Instead, credible news sources state that individuals connected to the Russian government hacked into the Democratic National Committee’s emails with the intent to support Trump in the election.  Notably, the New York Times states that Russian hackers also hacked the Republican National Committee’s emails but did not release any of those documents.

This means that there is a foreign government directly interfering with our elections and backing a leader it believes will be most beneficial.  This type of interference is unprecedented in our democracy.

Why Does it Matter?

You might be asking yourself why it matters that Russia cares about U.S. politics, and you might even be asking why Russia is so bad.  It’s not just because its leader likes to run around looking like this:

Vladimir Putin is the President of Russia.  He was a member of the KGB, Russia’s intelligence agency, before getting involved in politics in the 1990s.  His policies on international intervention are broad and militaristic.  In the past few years, he has ordered Russian troops to seize Crimea from the Ukraine, has authorized Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War, and is actively working to increase its nuclear weapons capabilities.  Let’s also not forget that Russia intervened in Chechnya’s war several years ago, and in the process committed dozens of war crimes against Chechens.

Putin has enacted many restrictive human rights policies during his time as president.  For example, to name a few: (1) Russia is ranked 148 out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom index, which ranks countries according to the level of freedom available to journalists; (2) there have been multiple allegations of torture and abuse, despite the fact that the Constitution of Russia forbids it; (3) the rise of xenophobia, racism, and nationalism; (4) the June 2013 ban of “propaganda” relating to LGBT relationships; (5) the June 2013 law banning adoption of Russian children by foreign same-sex couples; and (6) the rise in human trafficking out of Russia.

UPDATE: I missed a very important part of why it matters that Russia is meddling in our democratic system.  This is not the first time Russia has interfered with elections in foreign countries.  Many believe that Russian presence on social media impacted Brexit.  The Foreign Policy Initiative held a conference call on this very subject this summer, during which it provided evidence that Russia has provided support for Marine Le Pen, the president of the National Front, a conservative political party in France.  Russia has also been accused of influencing elections in Estonia and the Ukraine.

Russia wants to influence elections for a lot of reasons.  An in depth report on this, referenced by Politico, states that Russia does this for the following reasons:

• To undermine citizen confidence in democratic governance;
• To foment and exacerbate divisive political fractures;
• To erode trust between citizens and elected officials and democratic institutions;
• To popularize Russian policy agendas within foreign populations; and
• To create general distrust or confusion over information sources by blurring the lines between fact and fiction.

Russia does this to weaken their opponents.  They’re bragging about it:

Aleksandr Dugin, #Putin‘s éminence grise: “Washington is ours, Chisinau is ours, Sofia is ours. Now we just have to drain the swamp at home” pic.twitter.com/gcQPj40roK

— Evan O’Connell (@evanoconnell) November 14, 2016

Aleksandr Dugin is an advisor to Putin, and is a lead theorist of the underpinnings of Putinism.  He has been likened to Trump’s adviser, Steve Bannon, in terms of his influence and role.  Russia is celebrating, and we’re the losers.

What are People Doing About it?

I previously posted about the legal efforts underway to stop Trump from taking office in January.  Those efforts are growing, in part in response to the CIA’s assessment.  There is a movement to brief the electors of the Electoral College on the CIA’s findings before they cast their votes on December 19, 2016.  Ten electors have explicitly asked for a briefing on the issue, and there is support from Hillary Clinton’s campaign.  Russia’s involvement in the election may weigh in as a factor when the electors make their decisions.

UPDATE:  The number has now grown to 40 electors who would like to receive a briefing on Russian involvement before the Electoral College votes.  Additionally, there is now support for pushing back the date of the Electoral College vote to accommodate such a briefing:

The Dec 19 date for the Electoral College to vote isn’t set in constitutional stone. Congress set that date. Congress can easily change it.

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) December 12, 2016

There is also a new movement in support of directly invalidating the election.  Again, I’m not a constitutional lawyer, but the legal basis for this course of action seems tenuous, and invalidating an election, without evidence of actual hacking of voting machines, would be a huge blow to democracy.  At this point, it seems that unless some of the electors of the Electoral College vote against Trump, it is still unlikely that a legal movement will stop Trump from taking office.

LAST WORDS:

It seems insane to be talking about Russian interference in this day and age, but this is real.  This is not a conspiracy theory, and has been verified by individuals in the highest levels of their respective agencies.  We may never know the extent of the interference, at least until the CIA report becomes unclassified.  However, we should be very concerned that our president-elect sees no problem with this, especially in the face of bi-partisan support for investigating the issue.  Our democracy is only as strong as the people who protect it, and interference from foreign governments into our electoral process is about as big a hit to democracy as there is.