December, 12 2019, 11:00pm EDT
Stand Up America Implores Lawmakers to Impeach Donald Trump
Following a vote in the House Judiciary Committee to move articles of impeachment against Donald Trump forward, Stand Up America Founder and President Sean Eldridge released the following statement:
"On this historic day, the House Judiciary Committee did its duty by voting to uphold the Constitution and by approving articles of impeachment against a lawless president.
WASHINGTON
Following a vote in the House Judiciary Committee to move articles of impeachment against Donald Trump forward, Stand Up America Founder and President Sean Eldridge released the following statement:
"On this historic day, the House Judiciary Committee did its duty by voting to uphold the Constitution and by approving articles of impeachment against a lawless president.
"Donald Trump has shown time and again that he is willing to abuse the power of his office and conceal the evidence of his high crimes for his own gain--and unless he is removed from office, Trump's corruption will only become more brazen.
"Republicans in Congress have no substantive defense of Trump's actions, just a blind loyalty to their party and an allegiance to a corrupt president. If GOP lawmakers fail to put their country first by refusing to hold Trump accountable, they will be accomplices to the subversion of our democracy.
"We call on every lawmaker--Democrats and Republicans--to show their loyalty to our country and our Constitution by voting to impeach Donald Trump."
Stand Up America is a progressive advocacy organization with over two million community members across the country. Focused on grassroots advocacy to strengthen our democracy and oppose Trump's corrupt agenda, Stand Up America has driven over 600,000 phone calls to Congress and mobilized tens of thousands of protestors across the country.
LATEST NEWS
New Year's Attacks Underscore Ties Between Military Service and Violent Extremism
"U.S. military service is the strongest predictor of carrying out extremist violence," noted one expert.
Jan 03, 2025
As right-wing figures blamed factors ranging from Islam to the Biden administration's nonexistent "open borders policy" for the deadly New Year's Day attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas, progressive observers noted Thursday that the men who carried out those attacks both served in the U.S. military, which one historian called "a consistent incubator of violence that returns home."
Republican U.S. President-elect Donald Trump was among those weighing in on the New Orleans attack, in which authorities say 42-year-old Shamsud Din-Jabbar—who was killed at the scene during a shootout with police—plowed a pickup truck into a crowd of New Year's revelers on Bourbon Street, killing 15 people and wounding dozens more.
Apparently misinformed by an erroneous Fox News report, Trump falsely called Jabbar a career criminal and recent immigrant and attributed the New Orleans attack to President Joe Biden's "open border's (sic) policy."
"That Mr. Trump persists in deploying the politics of hate and bigotry is a bad sign for the U.S."
Jabbar was born and raised in Texas. He was an active-duty U.S. Army soldier from 2007-15 and a veteran of the war in Afghanistan.
"He was, in short, a patriotic American who did his part in fighting the War on Terror," Juan Cole wrote Thursday on his Informed Comment site. "He was not an immigrant or a member of a foreign criminal gang."
"That Mr. Trump persists in deploying the politics of hate and bigotry is a bad sign for the U.S.," Cole continued. "Even if Jabbar had been a immigrant, his actions would have said nothing about immigrants, who have low rates of criminality compared to the native-born population and whose productivity has been one key to American economic success."
"Nor is Jabbar's religion a reason to engage in Muslim-hatred," he asserted, decrying the New York Post for "ominously" reporting that "Jabbar referenced the Quran" and had animals including sheep, goats, and chickens in the backyard of his Houston home.
"D'oh," Cole added. "He was a Muslim. He also referenced the Quran when he was in Afghanistan as part of the U.S. Army's fight against the Taliban."
Matthew Livelsberger, the 37-year-old suspected driver of the Tesla Cybertruck blown ups outside the Trump International Las Vegas Hotel on Wednesday, was an active-duty U.S. Army soldier. The explosion of the truck, which was laden with fireworks and fuel canisters, injured seven people. Authorities said Livelsberger fatally shot himself inside the vehicle before the blast.
While given scant in-depth coverage in the U.S. corporate media, numerous observers highlighted the attackers' military backgrounds.
The Intercept's Nick Turse on Thursday published a piece asserting that "U.S. military service is the strongest predictor of carrying out extremist violence." Citing a new, unreleased report from researchers at the University of Maryland's National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), Turse, who viewed the publication, noted that "from 1990 to 2010, about seven persons per year with U.S. military backgrounds committed extremist crimes," and that "since 2011, that number has jumped to almost 45 per year."
Turse continued:
From 1990 through 2023, 730 individuals with U.S. military backgrounds committed criminal acts that were motivated by their political, economic, social, or religious goals, according to data from the new START report. From 1990 to 2022, successful violent plots that included perpetrators with a connection to the U.S. military resulted in 314 deaths and 1,978 injuries—a significant number of which came from the 1995 bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.
"Military service is also the single strongest individual predictor of becoming a 'mass casualty offender,' far outpacing mental health issues, according to a separate study of extremist mass casualty violence by the researchers," Turse added.
Both Jabbar and Livelsberger were once stationed at Fort Liberty, formerly Fort Bragg, in North Carolina. Although their time there overlapped, there is no indication that the men knew each other. Turse called Fort Liberty "an exceptionally troubled Army base."
"Investigations found, for example, that 109 soldiers assigned there died in 2020 and 2021," he wrote. "Ninety-six percent of those deaths took place stateside. Fewer than 20 were from natural causes. The remaining soldier fatalities, including macabre or unexplained deaths, homicides, and dozens of drug overdoses, were preventable."
The issue of violence committed by soldiers and veterans gained national attention during the height of the so-called War on Terrord—which is still ongoing—amid a wave of domestic and other killings and suicides attributed to post-traumatic stress disorder. According to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), more than 1 in 6 veterans of the Afghanistan or Iraq wars screened positive for PTSD, compared with about 1 in 10 nondeployed vets.
The VA also reported in 2018 that 1 in 4 male and 1 in 5 female veterans deployed during the War on Terror who received care from the agency had PTSD.
There is also the issue of who the military allowed to enlist. In an effort to fill the military's ranks during the War on Terror, some service branches lowered recruiting standards and allowed neo-Nazis, gang members, and other violent criminals to serve.
"This policy, which was behind many atrocities abroad, is now coming home," author Matt Kennard said Thursday on social media.
In 2022, Democratic U.S. lawmakers led by Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) introduced an amendment to 2023 military spending bill requiring the Pentagon and federal law enforcement agencies to publish a report on countering white supremacist and neo-Nazi activity in the armed forces.
The measure passed—without a single Republican vote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Steelworkers Union Applauds as Biden Blocks Sale of US Steel to Japanese Giant
"We're grateful for President Biden's willingness to take bold action to maintain a strong domestic steel industry and for his lifelong commitment to American workers," said United Steelworkers International President David McCall.
Jan 03, 2025
The United Steelworkers union commended a decision by President Joe Biden, announced Friday, to block a proposed acquisition of U.S. Steel by the Japanese company Nippon Steel.
United Steelworkers International President David McCall said in a statement that the union is "grateful" to Biden for his "willingness to take bold action to maintain a strong domestic steel industry and for his lifelong commitment to American workers."
"We now call on U.S. Steel's board of directors to take the necessary steps to allow it to further flourish and remain profitable," he added.
McCall toldReuters in mid-December that Nippon Steel had not given him an assurance that the Japanese firm is committed to ensuring the lasting success of U.S. Steel. "When we've had discussions with them there's been nothing that would assure us that there's a long-term viability in the operations," McCall said in an interview with the outlet.
In December 2023, U.S. Steel—the Pittsburgh-headquartered company that played a key role in establishing U.S. industrial might—announced that it had entered an agreement to be acquired by Nippon Steel for $14.9 billion. The deal drew scrutiny from lawmakers, federal regulators, and the United Steelworkers union, causing its closing to be delayed. Biden, who has made reviving "American-style" industrial policy a key part of his presidency, has long indicated his opposition to the deal.
Biden said he ultimately decided to block the proposed acquisition because he believes that "a strong domestically owned and operated steel industry represents an essential national security priority and is critical for resilient supply chains."
The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, a federal committee that has the power to review certain transactions involving foreign investment in the United States to evaluate a deal's impact on national security, decided to forgo making a formal recommendation about whether the deal should be allowed to proceed last week.
The proposal also became ensnared in election year politics, with both presidential candidates saying that U.S. Steel should remain a domestically-owned firm. Rust Belt lawmakers in both parties, including Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)—both of whom lost re-election in November—and Vice President-elect JD Vance, an Ohio Republican, expressed opposition to the deal.
Shortly after the deal was unveiled, multiple Pennsylvania Democrats, including Casey and Rep. Summer Lee, wrote to the president of Nippon Steel expressing concerns about the failure of the two firms to consult or notify the United Steelworkers union ahead of the announcement, according to Reuters.
"From the beginning, the workers who power this company should have had a seat at the negotiating table—their livelihoods hung in the balance. No matter what, I will keep fighting to protect Western PA Steelworker jobs and American steelmaking," wrote Representative Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) on Friday.
U.S. Steel, for its part, has attempted to refute criticisms of the deal. David B. Burritt, the president and chief executive of U.S. Steel, penned an op-ed in The New York Times in December, arguing that blocking the deal would help China. "With this deal, our workers' jobs would be more secure, our customers would be better served and China's domination of global steel production would be weakened. Without it, we would become more vulnerable," he wrote.
"Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel are confident that our transaction would revitalize communities that rely on American steel," the two firms said in a joint statement Friday. They condemned Biden's decision as "unlawful" and said that the president's "statement and order do not present any credible evidence of a national security issue, making clear that this was a political decision."
"Following President Biden's decision, we are left with no choice but to take all appropriate action to protect our legal rights," they wrote.
This article was updated to include a statement from Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Two Protesters Self-Immolate Over Bhopal Toxic Waste Plan in India
The plan to remove more than 370 tons of toxic waste from Bhopal and transport it to another city has been denounced as a "farce and greenwashing publicity stunt."
Jan 03, 2025
After more than 370 tons of hazardous waste from the deadliest industrial disaster in history arrived in the town of Pithampur in central India, two men were filmed in the city on Friday dousing themselves in liquid before they were set on fire in an apparent self-immolation protest.
The men poured the flammable liquid on themselves in a crowd of protesters and were then set on fire by another demonstrator.
They were taken to a hospital after the self-immolation and are "safe now," the administrative head of Dhar district, where Pithampur is located, told Agence France-Presse.
Note: The below video contains graphic images.
The protest took place 40 years and one month after a chemical disaster at a factory owned by the American company Union Carbide in Bhopal.
On December 2, 1984, a tank storing the toxic chemical methyl isocyanate, which Union Carbide used to produce pesticides, shattered from its concrete casing—allowing about 40 tons of the deadly gas to drift across the city of more than 2 million people.
The disaster killed roughly 3,500 people in the following days from direct exposure to the poisonous chemical, and 25,000 people are estimated to have died overall as the contamination has been linked to deadly illnesses including cancers, lung disease, and kidney disease.
Large numbers of babies have been born with severe disabilities, to parents affected by the gas leak, and a high rate of stillbirths in the area has been reported.
But Union Carbide—now owned by Dow Chemical—and the Indian government have never carried out an operation to remove all the contamination from Bhopal's groundwater, which has been found to contain levels of carcinogenic chemicals that were 50 times higher than what's accepted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Dow Chemical has denied liability for the accident, citing a 1989 settlement with the Indian government. The deal also gave about $500 to each person identified as a victim at the time—but nothing was set aside for most people who later developed health problems.
Last month, on the 40th anniversary of the disaster, the Madhya Pradesh high court ordered the government to begin removing the toxic waste and a plan was devised for the transport of more than 370 tons of sealed waste, which would be taken to a plant in Pithampur—150 miles away—and incinerated.
The plan has garnered condemnation from both Pithampur residents and people in Bhopal as well as campaigners who have demanded justice for Bhopal for decades.
The incineration is expected to take six months and to create nearly 1,000 tons of toxic residue, which will be buried in landfills—prompting fears that the damage and public health threats in Bhopal will spread to Pithampur.
The Hindu reported that police used water cannons and batons to disperse some protesters who tried to march toward the facility where the waste was delivered on Wednesday.
In Bhopal, Rachna Dhingra, a coordinator of the International Campaign for Justice in Bhopal, told The Guardian that the plan to move the contamination was a "farce and greenwashing publicity stunt to remove a tiny fraction of the least harmful waste," which had already been placed in containers and moved to a warehouse in 2005.
"There's still 1.2 million tons of poisonous waste leaching into the ground every day that they refuse to deal with," said Dhingra. "We can see for ourselves the birth defects and chronic health conditions. All this does is take the heat off the government and lets the U.S. corporations off the hook."
"It does nothing," said Dhingra, "to help the people in Bhopal who for decades have been seen as expendable."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular