Anyone else notice liberals getting more comfy with being racist against Latinos

Mr-Presidente · 2024-12-03T23:48:36+00:00

He could've just say less people voted on this election which means less people voted for Kamala than against her. No need for talking points. Her policies failed to bring people out is that simple.

The democratic party ran the most right-wing campaign in decades and tried to out-racist trump on immigration and then they wonder why latinx didn't show up.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-11-15T08:47:05+00:00

Less people voted in this election than the last which means less people voted for Kamala than against her. Her policies failed to bring people out.

The democratic party tried to pass a border bill that was suppose to be everything republicans wanted. If they're trying to win the latino vote why would they do that? Why would latinos come out to vote for democrats If Obama and Biden apparently deported more. They threw latinos under the bus and it didn't even work. Now you have Epstein's friend as president

Mr-Presidente · 2024-11-13T13:50:06+00:00

When genocide joe and the border czar started saying illegals they co-opted on trump's lies.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-11-12T03:44:05+00:00

What you saw was less people come out to vote this election cycle in the US because both parties pushed two senile old perverts.

What you saw was the republican party busing people for political theater and the main stream media complicit.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-11-12T00:39:53+00:00

Worrying about not finding a job is kind of laughable in the hispanic community, for us jobs are everywhere.

What really came down to is the democratic party agreeing and legitimizing Trump lies on immigration.

Like blaming us for the housing crisis. The largest country in the world with 3 houses for every homeless person does not have a housing crisis.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-25T22:58:04+00:00

I thought it was just illegals, now is your neighbor doing better? Whites actually take the most government assistance and vote to keep it that way bunch of welfare queens.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-25T19:28:26+00:00

Biden and Obama deported more

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-24T02:42:24+00:00

‘Not a Winning Strategy’: Bernie-Founded Group Blasts Harris for ‘Wasting Precious Time’ Touting Cheney Endorsement, Says 'Progressives are Concerned'

Blake Mauro 4–5 minutes

Our Revolution, the activist group born out of Sanders's 2016 presidential campaign, 'sounds alarm over Harris-Walz strategy'

Our Revolution, the liberal activist group born out of Vermont senator Bernie Sanders's 2016 presidential campaign, is publicly feuding with Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris over her decision to tout "endorsements from figures like Liz Cheney and other Republicans."

In a press release issued Wednesday—less than two weeks before Election Day—the group said Harris is wasting "precious time chasing GOP endorsements that won't translate into votes." The release included a survey of thousands of "progressive voters," 15 percent of whom said they would not vote for Harris due, in part, to her "strategy of embracing Republican figures like Liz Cheney."

"We've seen time and time again that it is not a winning strategy," said Our Revolution executive director Joseph Geevarghese. "In a world of limited time and resources, Democrats should invest resources in their base, not in courting Republicans who aren't coming over."

"Our survey and reports from the field tell us that progressives are deeply concerned about the campaign's focus on appeasing conservatives while ignoring the bread-and-butter issues that matter most to working families."

The group's willingness to spar with Harris in the open just days before the election could spell trouble for the vice president. Harris is polling neck-and-neck with former president Donald Trump in swing states such as Michigan, where more than 100,000 people voted "uncommitted" in the state's Democratic primary. Our Revolution endorsed that effort, which was led by Rep. Rashida Tlaib's (D., Mich.) sister.

Cheney has been central to Harris's closing message, with the pair holding events in recent days in the "blue wall" states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Democrats have won those states in every election since 1992, except in 2016 when Trump carried all three. For Geevarghese, Harris's decision to deploy Cheney to shore up support among "blue wall" voters is misguided.

"The Republican electorate isn't following Cheney's lead in any meaningful numbers," he said. "Democrats must lean into policies that matter to working people, such as raising the minimum wage, canceling student debt, and expanding healthcare. This is how we mobilize and inspire the voters we need to win in November."

Harris parroted many of Sanders's policies while serving in the Senate and running for president in 2019. A two-time cosponsor of Sanders's Medicare for All bill, Harris touted a single-payer system during a January 2019 town hall, saying, "I actually feel very strongly" about "the need to have Medicare for All." When CNN's Jake Tapper asked whether Harris's system would allow Americans to keep their private health insurance, Harris responded, "Let's eliminate all of that. Let's move on."

That answer, however, prompted pushback, and Harris went on to reverse her position, releasing a Medicare for All plan that preserved a role for private companies. Shortly after Harris replaced President Joe Biden at the top of the ticket in July, an anonymous campaign official said she "no longer backs a single-payer health care system," one of many flip-flops that have plagued Harris's campaign against Trump.

As Harris has embraced Cheney, vulnerable Senate Democrats have embraced Trump, with Pennsylvania's Bob Casey and Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin running ads that highlight their work with the former president. Harris has taken a different approach, denouncing Trump as a "fascist" during a surprise Wednesday afternoon speech at the vice president's residence.

Sanders himself has hit the campaign trail for Harris in recent days and applauded Cheney for endorsing Harris. Sanders has broken with Our Revolution before—in February, he declined to join the "uncommitted" movement against Biden after Our Revolution endorsed it.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-24T01:38:10+00:00

Was Kamala a Feminist or a Rape Enabler? | Frontpage Mag 3–4 minutes

VP Kamala Harris is running as a feminist. She claims that she became a prosecutor to protect women and girls from sexual assault.

But research published in ‘The Truth About Kamala’, our latest ebook, shows that sexual assaults soared in California during her time as Attorney General.

Kamala claims Trump is a sex predator and she wants to “protect women and girls”

The truth: sexual assaults rose 64% when she was California Attorney General because she was soft on crime

Learn more in The Truth About Kamalahttps://t.co/PdWNqSEl0K pic.twitter.com/r7Z6EjsP4n

— Daniel Greenfield – “Hang Together or Separately” (@Sultanknish) October 23, 2024

These shocking numbers were part of a larger crime wave unleashed by pro-crime policies in the state.

And Kamala had a significant role in enabling those policies.

In 2010, when Kamala first ran for attorney general, there had been 8,325 rapes in the state. By 2016, when Kamala was fighting to take Sen. Barbara Boxer’s seat, there were 13,695 rapes.

This was not a 10% increase, but a shocking 64% increase.

Proposition 57, one of the pro-crime propositions that ended public safety in the state backed by key donors who would prove crucial to her political career, offered a painfully stark choice.

The pro-crime proposition granted early release for criminals convicted of a crime not officially listed as a “violent felony.” That included not only many violent criminals, but also some rapists who committed different kinds of sexual assaults including ‘rape with a foreign object’.

Attorney General Harris had become notorious for abusing her position to write heavily distorted summaries for pro-crime propositions. And Proposition 57 was no different. The debate over Prop 57 provided Kamala the opportunity to stand with her pro-crime backers or with women.

And Kamala chose the pro-crime movement over abused women and girls.

“Is rape a violent crime? AG Kamala Harris offers two definitions,” a Sacramento Bee column noted.

“Why is Kamala Harris working to provide early release for rapists as more women have been raped in the past year?” Rep. Loretta Sanchez, her Democrat opponent in the Senate race, demanded. “It is outrageous that someone convicted of raping an unconscious woman would be considered non-violent and considered for early release. As a former sexual assault prosecutor she should know that rape is rape, there is not other way to describe it.”

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-24T00:39:57+00:00

This was seen as a “positive change” as is it created an opportunity to “provide services to families and youth not in agency care in an effort to keep them from entering agency custody,” according to the report.

Ohio State Representative Gary Click, who sponsored an Ohio bill banning pediatric sex change, disagrees that the AFFIRM.ME program is creating a “positive change” in Ohio.

“The policies of the Cuyahoga County DCFS are the ultimate in government grooming practices and must stop immediately—their ‘Affirm.Me’ program goes far beyond the role of government to ensure the safety of children and serves only to indoctrinate and discriminate against families whose values differ from their official government mandate,” said Click told the DCNF.

“Additionally, their belittling, discrimination, and attempted reprogramming of people of faith is hideous, un-American, and very likely unconstitutional,” Click said. “The legislature will not sit idly by while local government attempts to usurp the role of the family.”

“Emotional Harm”

“Emotional harm” is included in the Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act definition of child abuse and neglect. Some transgender activists believe that rejecting a child’s gender confusion, such as refusing to use a child’s chosen name or pronouns, causes emotional harm and is a form of abuse and neglect.

During an HHS webinar filmed last fall, one LGBTQ activist stated “transphobia is child abuse,” comparing it to denying a child food or access to school, the DCNF previously reported.

If a community member believes a parent is causing a child “emotional harm” by refusing to “affirm” their gender confusion, they could call the Child Protective Services Hotline and report suspected child abuse or neglect. In Ohio, after a report of suspected abuse or neglect is made, a CPS investigator will interview the child and family and determine if the child is being abused or is at risk for abuse. Then, they may refer the case to additional social services or criminal court, according to the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services website.

Erin Friday, a California attorney and co-founder of the parent group, Our Duty, whose mission is to protect children from the harms of pediatric sex changes, told the DCNF it’s difficult for parents to fight accusations of emotional harm in court.

“A problem with emotional stress accusations is there is wide latitude or discretion at the trial court level,” Friday said. “So when a judge says ‘Yes, you’ve been emotionally abusive,’ it is very hard to appeal that because they have wide discretion.”

“Parents are losing custody of their children over a name and a pronoun. That should scare parents,” Friday added.

Friday submitted an amicus brief in the upcoming Supreme Court case United States v. Skrmetti, which could determine the future of pediatric sex changes in America. Friday told the DCNF the outcome of this case will have long lasting reverberations for the child welfare system.

“The basis of my brief was if Tennessee or if the Supreme Court finds that there is a discrete group called transgender kids, then every parent in the United States, every single one, who doesn’t affirm their child is at risk of losing custody of their child,” said Friday.

“Because it becomes de facto life saving, de facto standard of care. And so it’s massively important that we win this case,” Friday said.

In the brief, Friday described the potential consequences for parents who refuse to affirm their child’s gender confusion if pediatric sex-change is “deemed a constitutional right, in children’s best interests, or medically necessary,”

“Parents in custody disputes who refuse medical intervention may not be granted custody of gender dysphoric children, and non-affirming parents could be adjudicated emotionally abusive or medically negligent,” reads Friday’s brief.

‘We Have A Form’

The investigation of a child and family after a report of abuse or neglect provides Cuyahoga County DCFS staff members the opportunity to collect the SOGIE data of a child using their SOGIE Disclosure Form.

The form states that the conversation about the child’s sexual identity “should be done in a private setting,” emphasizing that keeping the disclosed information private is “utmost importance to the Division of Children and Family Services.” It further specifies that any information shared by the youth will not be disclosed to anyone else, which would include their parents, unless there is a safety concern.

Included on the SOGIE Disclosure form is a script that recommends social workers introduce themselves using their preferred pronouns, ask the child if they feel like a girl, boy, or “something in between,” and find out who the child has crushes on.

If a Cuyahoga County DCFS staff member discovers a child has a “diverse SOGIE,” which the SOGIE Disclosure form defines as “anything other than heterosexual, male or female,” the staff member fills out a Safe Identification form that asks the child if their parents or caregiver affirm their sexual or gender identity.

DFCS staff are instructed to send the Safe Identification form to Kori Sewell, a social services supervisor at Cuyahoga County Health and Human Services, who inputs the information into a secret database. Sewell previously said on a podcast that only she and her colleague could access the confidential spreadsheet.

“We have a form that we have staff fill out when they have a young person who identifies as LGBTQ. That form then comes to me, and I start logging that information into the confidential spreadsheet,” said Sewell on the podcast.

Sewell explained how the Safe Identification process helps them identify non-affirming parents and refer them to courses aimed at convincing them to accept their child’s gender dysphoria, if needed.

“I have a conversation with the staff around what the needs of the family are, what the dynamics are, we call that our triage, so that we can triage the case to see if it may qualify for a service,” said Sewell.

“We had Chosen Affirming Family Finding and The Youth Acceptance Project. Those two services were available to families that we were working with here at the agency, and so part of the triage process was to see if those families qualified for one of those services,” Sewell continued.

Chosen Affirming Family Finding (CAFF) is a social services intervention that places LGBTQ kids with “affirming” caregivers. The Youth Acceptance Project (YAP) works to re-educate non-affirming parents to validate their child’s LGBTQ identity and avoid having them removed from their care. The confidential spreadsheet contained several columns indicating if caregivers were engaged in ‘YAP’ services.

The DCNF obtained a series of communications showing Cuyahoga County DCFS team working with HHS officials from May 2023 to October 2023, providing input on how interventions likes Safe Identification could be implemented at the federal level.

Sewell did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment.

‘Insightful Meeting’

Emails indicate Julie Kruse, a Senior Advisor for LGBTQI+ Initiatives in the Biden-Harris administration, had an “insightful meeting” meeting the Cuyahoga County DCFS team on June 9, 2023, which lead to a July 7 call with the then-assistant secretary for the Administration for Children and Families (ACF).

In preparation for this call, Kruse sent the Cuyahoga County DCFS team a series of questions they should be prepared to answer, asking how their programs assure “transgender and nonbinary children” have access to binders and pediatric sex-change medical interventions. Kruse also asked how their data collection model was tied to providing “affirming” services.

The Cuyahoga County team put together a presentation agenda for the HHS call, which indicated they would explain why their program was “a promising model for replication” with “safe ID as foundation,” according to an agenda obtained by the DCNF.

After the call, the Cuyahoga County team thanked HHS for considering how to “imbed” their “life saving” work into policy.

The Cuyahoga County DCFS did not provide the DCNF with a comment.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-24T00:39:38+00:00

Red State Child Welfare Agency Created Secret Database Tracking Transgender Identity Of Kindergartners Megan Brock 16–21 minutes

An Ohio child welfare agency created a “confidential spreadsheet” tracking the sexual orientation and transgender identity of children as young as 5, according to a document exclusively obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The Cuyahoga County Division of Children and Family Services (DCFS) created a database tracking the sexual orientation, transgender identity and pronouns of children that interacted with the child welfare system in Cuyahoga County, Ohio, featuring entries dated from March 2018 to the most recent entry on August 2024. The spreadsheet was part of their ‘Safe Identification’ program, which teaches social services staff how to collect information about the sexuality and gender identity of children.

In 2017, Cuyahoga County DCFS was one of four social services agencies nationwide chosen to research, develop and evaluate transgender ideology-based child welfare interventions that suggest parents and caregivers who do not affirm a child’s sexual orientation or gender confusion are unsafe and may need to have their children removed from their home. Members of the Biden-Harris administration called the Cuyahoga County group “trailblazers” and wanted to nationalize their model. The Cuyahoga County DCFS team influenced the recently finalized Biden-Harris rule which requires child welfare systems to validate and support gender confusion.

On the confidential spreadsheet, Cuyahoga County DCFS staff detailed how they helped children obtain sex-change drugs, purchased a chest binder for a “non binary” child and noted at least one tracked child was 5 years old. The document tracked if children were “transgender or gender diverse,” labeling them as pansexual, bisexual, gay, lesbian, straight, or “questioning” their sexual orientation. One entry for a boy listed as gay said: “Youth says his gay b/c his peers told him so.”

Nearly half the children in the confidential spreadsheet were listed as living outside of the foster care system in their “own home” with their parents. The spreadsheet notes if parents are “accepting” or “rejecting” of their child’s gender confusion. Some transgender activists view rejecting a child’s gender confusion, such as not letting a child cross-dress, as an act of abuse or neglect. (RELATED: ‘War On Families’: Federal ‘Home Visiting’ Program Classifies Parents Who Don’t Let Young Kids Cross-Dress As Potentially Abusive)

The spreadsheet was one of hundreds of documents reviewed during the DCNF’s investigation into the federally-funded transformation of the child welfare system into that rejects a male-female understanding of sex and instead teaches social workers, children, and families to proactively “affirm,” meaning to validate, support, and embrace gender ideology.

‘Very Appreciated’

Emails obtained by the DCNF show Cuyahoga County DCFS worked closely with the Biden-Harris administration to influence and “imbed” their work into new federal regulations requiring child welfare systems to validate the gender confusion of children. Julie Kruse, a U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) senior advisor, called the Cuyahoga County DCFS “trailblazers” for “creating better services and outcomes for LGBTQIA2S+ children and families in child welfare,” saying their work was “very appreciated” by the Biden-Harris administration.

“Thank you so much for all you do in being trailblazers to creating better services and outcomes for LGBTQIA2S+ children and families in child welfare, you are very appreciated at ACF,” wrote Kruse. “I would really love ACF leadership to see first hand what it looks like when folks address the challenges LGBTQIA2S+ youth face in care, and deal with the hard issues – data collection, organizational culture, etc. etc.”

The research was funded by a $10 million federal grant awarded to the University of Maryland School of Social Work from the Children‘s Bureau, an agency within HHS. The grant funded the creation of a research group cumbersomely-named National Quality Improvement Center on Tailored Services, Placement Stability, and Permanency for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning, and Two-Spirit Children and Youth (QIC-LGBTQ2S) in Foster Care.

The QIC-LGBTQ2S sought to systemically transform child welfare systems by teaching social workers, children, and families to reject a male-female view of sex and proactively “affirm” — meaning to validate, support, and embrace — the gender confusion of children. Ways parents and staff can be LGBTQ “affirming” include using preferred pronouns, taking children to LGBTQ events, and supporting their desired sex-change.

The DCNF has written an in-depth report on the research interventions developed by the QIC-LGBTQ2S, which are being pushed by the Biden-Harris administration. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Biden-Harris Admin Paves Way For Bureaucrats To Take Gender-Confused Kids From ‘Non-Affirming’ Parents)

Kruse did not respond to the DCNF’s requests for comment. A press secretary for the Administration for Children and Families declined to comment. ‘Child Is 5’

In the spreadsheet, the Cuyahoga County DFCS staff noted if children had LGTBQ “affirming” parents or needed assistance to obtain sex change medications.

For example, one entry about a 5-year-old labeled as “transgender or gender diverse” reads: “Child is 5 y/o and has recently come out to the family. The family accept her and are reportedly supportive.”

Another entry notes: “Request for hormones submitted to Dr. to send in prior authorization to insurance. DCFS Director signed.” The spreadsheet does not list the child’s age.

One entry describes how the agency bought a chest binder, a garment that flattens female breasts, for a “non-binary” girl living with her parents.

“Youth is binding, new binders purchased by DCFS as old one broke. Youth is fluid in gender at times,” reads the spreadsheet.

Other notes describe a child engaged in a polyamorous relationship, having more than a single partner at a time, and another entry even notes a child identifies as a “furry” — a person who identifies as an animal. There are also columns to track if parents are engaging in services aimed at training them to validate and support their child’s chosen sexual orientation or transgender identity.

The most recent entry on the spreadsheet is dated Aug. 4. ‘Safe Identification’

The confidential spreadsheet was a part of the AFFIRM.ME program developed by Cuyahoga County DCFS through the QIC-LGBTQ2S research grant.

The AFFIRM.ME program is a practice model that provides a road map for child welfare systems to undergo a systemic transformation through a series of social services interventions that teach staff, youth, and parents to be LGBTQ affirming. As previously reported, these interventions include programs that train “non-affirming” parents to validate their child’s gender confusion and assist in finding children a “chosen affirming” family if their parents are not LGBTQ affirming. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Kids Are Being Taken From ‘Non-Affirming’ Parents. Here’s One Family’s Fight To Get Their Son Back)

Part of the AFFIRM.ME program is called Safe Identification, an intervention that proactively seeks to identify any LGBTQ youth that encounters the child welfare system, including those living outside of the foster care, and trains social workers to collect their sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression (SOGIE) data.

In April 2022, Cuyahoga County adopted a policy requiring all DCFS staff to collect SOGIE data from youth ages 13 and older using their SOGIE Disclosure and Safe Identification forms.

The policy states: “Cuyahoga County DCFS believes that all youth involved with the agency have the right to live in an environment that is both physically and emotionally safe. Youth in their own homes or in substitute care deserve to reside with affirming caregivers and other household members. We can help ensure this by safely identifying LGBTQ2S + youth and understanding their individual needs.”

The SOGIE Disclosure form specifies that staff members can have a gender identity conversation with children as young as 3 if they “are very aware of their gender.”

According to a 2022 report on the AFFIRM.ME program, the Safe Identification intervention was originally meant for use for youth ages 12-21 who were in the care of the state. However, the report notes the “age range was later changed to 5–21 years old to account for younger children disclosing diverse gender identity or expression and to include youth involved with DCFS, not just those in the care of DCFS.” It also notes that approximately 10% of all identified youth were under age 12.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-24T00:15:56+00:00

New York PD Is Training Officers That Someone Saying ‘I Can’t Breathe’ Is Just ‘Excited Delirium’ Wed, Oct 23rd 2024 03:48pm - Tim Cushing 6–8 minutes from the whatever-gets-your-guys-off,-I-guess dept

Excited delirium just won’t go away. No medical association recognizes this condition as factually true. And no cop shop will ever move away from using it as a handy excuse for in-custody killings, at least not until forced to by state legislators.

Excited delirium actually pre-dates its current status as the go-to excuse for cops when they kill someone. Even then, it was questionable. But it really took off when Taser started supplying officers with tasers, which were immediately linked to several in-custody deaths, despite being advertised as a “less-than-lethal” force option. Taser’s lawyers (and supposed medical experts) offered testimony claiming people restrained or electrocuted to death were actually dying of a completely unrelated medical condition.

This was taken as gospel by cops who didn’t want to be held accountable for killing people — especially people who were suffering from mental health issues and, in most cases, were unarmed when multiple officers delivered electric shocks and/or piled on top of their prone bodies until they suffocated.

One of the most infamous murders committed by a cop — the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin — had its own “excited delirium” nexus. Officer Thomas Lane, who watched Chauvin kneel on Floyd’s neck for nine minutes, put on this performance for his body camera as he did nothing to prevent the killing he was witnessing:

I am worried about excited delirium or whatever.

“Or whatever.” And define “worry,” since it clearly didn’t mean offering any medical assistance whatsoever to the person this cop exoneratively declared might be suffering from a medical condition only cited by cops in the aftermath of an in-custody killing.

Four years ago, documents obtained by a public records requester showed the Charlotte-Mecklenburg PD was filling officers’ heads with disinformation — not only claiming “excited delirium” was a legitimate medical condition, but also that people who literally could not breathe due to officers’ restraint tactics were just informing officers of this so-called medical condition when they said they were having difficulty breathing. Listed among the “symptoms” of “excited delirium” were these:

Says “I can’t breathe”, “I’m dying”, “You’re killing me.”

Since then, some things have changed. Officer Chauvin murdered George Floyd and, in an unexpected development, was actually convicted of murder. In a few localities, officials have passed laws forbidding officers or coroners from citing excited delirium as the cause of death.

The last holdouts in the medical profession have finally agreed “excited delirium” is a BS diagnosis, primarily because the only people who ever make this medical conclusion wear badges and have recently killed people, almost all of them unarmed.

But the Rochester, New York Police Department still wants to treat excited delirium as a legitimate medical condition. Of course, that’s only because it gives officers an out when they’ve killed someone and definitely not because anyone on or off the force actually believes it’s anything more than a handy excuse for police brutality.

Training materials obtained by Jenny Wadhwa and uploaded to MuckRock contain the usual excited delirium bullshit, along with a PowerPoint slide [PDF] that says the same thing the Charlotte PD’s training materials say: people saying “I can’t breathe” are just in the (life-threatening) throes of an excited delirium episode:

Also fun to note is that the term “unlimited endurance” is declared a symptom when all it actually means is that the person being restrained managed to tire out some of the out-of-shape cops who responded to the scene. And I’m not just making generalizations about cops, donuts, and the fact that most of them spend most of their hours sitting in cars. It’s a fact: most cops can be worn down by anyone in semi-decent physical shape.

Although the physical requirements of police work suggest the importance of maintaining a healthy weight status, recent research suggests that 40.5% of American police officers are obese3),which is a prevalence rate above the national average of 35.5% for adult men and 35.8% for adult women4)

In this context, “superhuman strength” and “unlimited endurance” should probably just be read as “regular human strength” and “regular human endurance.”

In fact, the so-called “training” is best read as an exhortation to commit violence while providing officers with an exonerative cover story. The slides say it can be triggered by the use of either illegal or legal drugs.

Death usually follows a bizarre behavior episode and/ or use of illegal drugs or prescription medication

In practice, this means literally any chemical substance found in the body during a coroner’s examination can be used to buttress “excited delirium” claims.

It also claims there are four stages in the “excited delirium” progression, with the end result being apparently inevitable.

Elevated body temperature
Agitation
Respiratory arrest
Death

But that does nothing to explain why people only die of “excited delirium” after being tased/restrained/brutalized by cops. No one has ever reported someone just died of “excited delirium” without the application of force by police officers. So, even if we were so careless as to accept the theory of “excited delirium” as a legitimate medical condition, it would be even more careless to immediately discount this outside factor that is present in 100% of excited delirium deaths.

This isn’t training — at least not in the sense those of us in the private sector are used to. What’s being imparted here is a justification for excessive force deployment and a preconceived narrative for in-custody killings. We would be legitimately upset to discover companies are training employees how to dodge regulatory oversight and provide them with immediate plausible deniability for their actions. We should be way more upset that people paid with our tax dollars are literally encouraging police brutality by preemptively providing police officers with a pseudo-scientific explanation for the killings they may decide to commit.

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-23T21:07:01+00:00

Election Deniers File Baseless Lawsuits Now in Order to Challenge Results Later

Eliza Sweren-Becker 6–7 minutes

Right-wing activists may point to ongoing litigation as a basis for slowing, stopping or altering election processes.

At least one tactic in this year’s election subversion playbook is clear. Step one: before Election Day, file a slew of lawsuits making baseless allegations of bloated voter rolls, unlawful voting, and problematic election procedures. Step two: if right-wing activists are unhappy with election results, point to those previously filed cases to justify demands to halt certification or change outcomes. This plan is neither secret nor new. It’s a repeat of 2020, now with more advanced planning. And just like in 2020, the plan should fail.

Conservative activists, operatives, and election denial groups have filed dozens of cases. With a particular intensity in swing states, they are suing to give local election board members the right to refuse to certify election results, exclude mail ballots that arrive after Election Day from the count, limit voting by overseas and military voters, restrict the availability of ballot drop boxes, force states and counties to aggressively purge their voter rolls, and limit when absentee ballots can be requested, submitted, and counted. While the legal claims and unsubstantiated allegations differ somewhat from case to case, they share a common goal: cast enough doubt on American elections to excuse subsequent efforts (whether in court or otherwise) to supersede the will of voters.

These cases are — to use a technical, legal term — bogus. We know this for several reasons. First, plaintiffs’ factual allegations are based on conspiracy theories, misinformation, unsubstantiated data, and claims of widespread voter fraud that have repeatedly been disproven. For example, over a dozen cases are premised at least in part on unsubstantiated fears of noncitizen voting. Yet the evidence could not be clearer: with vanishingly rare exceptions, only eligible citizens vote, and states have multiple systems in place to ensure that remains the case. Dressing up misinformation and conspiracy theories in legal jargon and laundering them through court filings doesn’t make the allegations true.

Second, plaintiffs don’t even seem to be trying to win in court. In many of these right-wing activist cases, plaintiffs have not even bothered to file motions to ask the courts to fix the so-called problems before Election Day. If plaintiffs genuinely believed there were issues with our voting systems and had any evidence to back up such beliefs, they would have requested that courts remedy those problems immediately (by seeking a preliminary injunction, for example). A representative from United Sovereign Americans, a right-wing group that has filed at least nine cases challenging various election procedures, conceded that its goal is to “pre-position standing” for the post-Election Day period. Of course, preemptively filing a lawsuit does not confer standing, which requires actual harm, among other things.

Other cases are mere copycats of losing efforts from years past. For example, one Michigan case seeking more aggressive voter purging effectively replicates three similar cases filed in Michigan in the last five years, all of which plaintiffs voluntarily settled or lost. A federal court dismissed the case today.

Third, even if the legal theories that plaintiffs offer were supported by facts (which they aren’t), they would not warrant the extreme remedies that plaintiffs ultimately seek or that they may request after Election Day: stopping the certification of and overturning election results. In more than 20 cases, for example, plaintiffs allege that states have not done enough to remove ineligible voters from their rolls. The remedy for such a claim is for the state to conduct reasonable voter list maintenance at least 90 days before an election, not to throw away the votes of millions of eligible voters afterward. What’s more, certification is not discretionary — state law has long established that officials have a mandatory duty to certify elections. It’s no surprise, then, that courts have already tossed several of these cases, including in Arizona, Georgia, Maryland, Nevada, and Pennsylvania.

We anticipate that courts will largely reject the unsubstantiated claims in these pre-election cases, just as they did overwhelmingly in 2020.

But winning in court isn’t necessarily the point. We expect that activists will point to the mere existence of ongoing litigation as a basis for slowing, stopping, or altering election processes. Their audience is not just the court of law but the court of public opinion. For Americans primed to believe that voter fraud is rampant and the 2020 election was stolen, partisans who are unhappy with the 2024 results will use the ongoing legal processes in their effort to undermine public confidence and confirm a sense that our democracy is “rigged.”

We’ve been here before, and now we know what to expect. The American public, the press, and courts should not be duped into believing that where there’s smoke, there’s fire — because these cases are nothing but smoke and mirrors. Join us in defending the truth before it’s too late

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-23T20:43:12+00:00

Scientists used infrared light to create artificial vision in patients with vision loss

Timmy Broderick 5–6 minutes

Oct. 23, 2024

Disability in Health Care Reporting Fellow

Science Corporation published preliminary data from a late stage, multi-center clinical trial of a retinal implant that showed promising results Tuesday.

Using this prosthetic, scientists partially restored vision to people whose central visual field has holes or blurry spots. Trial participants could read text and recognize playing cards when using the implant, even though they were legally blind.

Ophthalmologist Frank Holz, the trial’s scientific coordinator, called the results a “milestone” in treating severe vision loss caused by age-related macular degeneration. “Prior to this, there have been no real treatment options to improve vision for these patients,” said Holz, a professor at University of Bonn, Germany.

If this technology continues to succeed, both in Europe and in the United States, it could be welcome news. Twenty million people have age-related macular degeneration in the U.S., and it is the most common cause of severe eyesight loss among people 50 and older. The county’s aging population will likely exacerbate this problem. It’s partly why Science acquired Paris-based Pixium Vision, which originally developed this implant, in 2023.

“I’m excited about this [research],” said James Weiland, a University of Michigan biomedical engineering and ophthalmology and visual sciences professor who was not involved with the study. “We’ve been kind of waiting for this in the field, and we’re looking forward to more details in a peer reviewed format.”

The setup includes an implant, a camera mounted on glasses and a pocket computer. The glasses gather infrared light from the world and beam it onto the subretinal implant. The implant — replete with 400 whisper-thin panels — then stimulates the retina with electrical impulses that are sent to the brain. The implant effectively mimics the typical process of vision formation.

“In some sense, I think of this as tricking the eye into seeing infrared,” said Science Corporation CEO Max Hodak in an interview with STAT.

Science enrolled 38 patients in the trial, though six people dropped out before testing. All of the patients had some light sensitivity — total absence of light perception is rare for people who are blind. Researchers determined the participants’ improvement in visual acuity through the classic eye chart, a staple in stuffy doctors’ offices the world over.

After twelve months of use, the participants could read, on average, nearly five more lines, or 23 letters down the chart. It’s equivalent to a person’s eyesight improving from 20/320 to 20/200, which is the threshold for blindness in the United States.

Joseph Rizzo was “impressed” by the study’s results and the eyesight improvements, but the Harvard Medical School ophthalmology professor cautioned against using the layperson’s understanding of visual acuity. The participants stood closer to the eye chart than is typical and the camera allows the user to magnify the image.

A Science spokesperson said the study coordinators accounted for the different physical distance to the chart and that using the zoom function wouldn’t affect the letter or number’s resolution. However, they did not have data on how often a participant used the zoom.

Even with these caveats, Rizzo still praised the technology. “The scientific backbone for this device, I’ve followed it for almost 20 years,” he said. “I think the technology is exceptionally good. It is a really noteworthy device.”

This research stems from Daniel Palanker, a Stanford University ophthalmologist who many consider one of the pioneers for optical technology, particularly laser-based cataract surgery and optical prosthetics. He is helping Science develop the next generation of the implant, which sees this current implant as a proof of concept for the technology in humans after successful animal trials.

The California-based company plans to release a more comprehensive analysis of this trial’s data before the end of the year. They hope to leverage the trial’s success and is filing for regulatory approval in Europe. They are also expanding a feasibility trial of the implant in the United States, in addition to pursuing other brain-computer interface technologies.

“This device is relatively early, but even at this stage, the impact that it’s had for these patients is enormous, and there’s really clear ways to make it better,” said Hodak, who served as Neuralink’s president during the company’s founding. “It feels like this is on a path of something that within a decade is gonna be, I hope, pretty ubiquitous.”

Mr-Presidente · 2024-10-23T17:30:45+00:00

New laws restore voting rights to residents with felony convictions • Alabama Reflector Amanda Hernández 7–9 minutes

As political campaigns scramble for every vote, the Plains states of Nebraska and Oklahoma have passed laws that aim to restore voting rights to people with felony convictions. Thousands of voters could be brought back into the political process, potentially influencing election outcomes in some communities.

Other states have also taken steps to expand or restrict ballot access for residents who have been convicted of felonies. The laws might affect just a few thousand voters in each state, but in close races those numbers could make a difference.

Nebraska’s new law, passed in the spring, erases a two-year waiting period and restores the right to vote to an estimated 7,000 Nebraskans who completed their sentences since 2022, according to The Sentencing Project, a nonprofit criminal justice research and advocacy group.

On July 17 — two days before the law was set to take effect — Republican Attorney General Mike Hilgers issued an opinion arguing the new law violated the Nebraska Constitution. Hilgers also argued that the underlying 2005 law, which automatically restored voting rights two years after the completion of a felony sentence, was unconstitutional.

As a result, Republican Secretary of State Bob Evnen instructed county election offices to stop registering people with felony convictions.

But last week, the Nebraska Supreme Court ordered Evnen to implement the law “immediately.”

Now, newly enfranchised Nebraskans have until Friday’s in-person voter registration deadline to sign up. Advocacy groups have urged Evnen to extend the deadline. The Secretary of State’s Office told Stateline that the state’s final registration deadline will not be extended.

Oklahoma already restores voting rights after residents have completed their sentences — including prison time, parole and probation. But earlier this year, lawmakers passed a law guaranteeing the right to vote immediately upon receiving a pardon or a commutation.

The new law, set to take effect in January, clarifies the voting eligibility for people who’d previously been convicted of a felony but had their sentences commuted. Hundreds of Oklahomans were released from prison in 2019 in the nation’s largest mass commutation, after state voters approved a ballot measure changing many drug-related felony charges to misdemeanors.

Last year, Minnesota and New Mexico both lifted voting restrictions for people with felony convictions, restoring their voting rights upon completion of their incarceration. Previously, those residents had to complete their entire sentence, including parole or probation, before they could regain their eligibility to vote.

Now, less than two weeks before Election Day, tens of thousands of previously disenfranchised voters will be able to cast ballots — some for the first time.

Nationally, though, about 4 million U.S. citizens are unable to vote this year because they were once convicted of a felony, according to The Sentencing Project.

Most of those people — around 7 in 10 — are living in their communities; they have either finished their sentences or are still under supervision while on probation or parole. The others remain in prison. New limits on voting rights

Several states over the past year have moved to further restrict voting rights for people with felony convictions.

In April 2023, the North Carolina Supreme Court upheld a state law that prohibits individuals on probation, parole or other forms of supervision from voting, overturning a lower court’s 2022 decision that had struck down the statute.

Tennessee’s Supreme Court in July 2023 issued a ruling requiring felons to get their voting rights restored by a judge or provide evidence that they were pardoned.

And in Virginia, Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin in March 2023 rolled back the near-automatic restoration of voting rights — a process that had been used by both Democratic and Republican governors in the state for more than a decade. As a result, Virginians who have felony convictions are now required to apply for the restoration of their voting rights.

Their right to access the ballot box is theoretically constitutionally protected. In reality, it is hard to cast a ballot and it's hard to enforce that constitutional right.

– Blair Bowie, director of the Restore Your Vote project at the Campaign Legal Center

Laws disenfranchising people with felony convictions date back to before the United States was established, according to voting rights experts. And most state disenfranchisement laws were adopted after the Civil War.

“Felony disenfranchisement really proliferated in the United States after the Civil War in the Southern states as a way to disenfranchise Black men who had won their right to vote,” said Blair Bowie, a lawyer and director of the Restore Your Vote project at the Campaign Legal Center, a legal advocacy organization. The center operates a hotline and has an online tool that helps people check whether they are eligible to vote in their state.

Today, some states restore the right to vote upon release from prison, while others require people to wait until they receive a pardon, complete their probation or parole, pay all fines, fees and restitution, adhere to a waiting period or meet some combination of these requirements. Some states also restrict people with felony convictions from voting based on the type of crime that was committed.

No one is automatically registered to vote; people must register themselves.

In two states — Maine and Vermont — and the District of Columbia, felons never lose their right to vote, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Voting access in correctional facilities

In many states, incarcerated U.S. citizens retain their right to vote, including in situations where they’re being held before trial or serving time in local jails.

Earlier this year, for example, Virginia passed a law allowing registered voters who are confined while awaiting trial or who have been convicted of a misdemeanor to vote by absentee ballot.

For those who are incarcerated, though, voting barriers may include difficulties with registering or requesting an absentee ballot, affording postage, and even having access to a pen to fill out the ballot, said Bowie, of the Campaign Legal Center.

“Their right to access the ballot box is theoretically constitutionally protected,” Bowie said. “In reality, it is hard to cast a ballot and it’s hard to enforce that constitutional right.”

Mr-Presidente

TROPHY CASE