Showing posts with label National Lawyers Guild. Show all posts
Showing posts with label National Lawyers Guild. Show all posts

Monday, October 15, 2012

US election double standards

Russia Today




While the US prides itself in free and fair elections, RT’s Anastasia Churkina reports on some of the flaws and double standards in the electoral system that American politicians pretend don’t exist.

Honesty is the best policy, but maybe not in US elections.

“Two words define why people hate America: double standard, on everything,” said editorial columnist and author Ted Rall.

This presidential election season, these two words are back in full swing. The basic definition of a “double standard” is a rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups. Let’s take a look at whether or not this is relevant to the US election system.

 Respecting every single voice is key in a democracy. Yet – voter suppression is alive and well in the US.

“Our citizens are kept away from the voting booth by rules that are meant to keep away a certain segment of the population, we have a lot of nerve, frankly, criticizing other countries for the way they run their democracies,” said blogger and investigative journalist Brad Friedman.

From questionable voter I.D. regulations, to shortened early voting time slots, to gerrymandering – or redrawing congressional district lines to favor a certain party – laws affecting voters’ rights are passed left and right, and vary state by state. Photo I.D. laws can affect 10 percent of Americans that simply don’t have one.

“There is an attempt to prevent large numbers of people from actually exercising their ballot,” said Jeanne Mirer from the National Lawyers Guild.

Election monitors usually serve the purpose of keeping track of indiscrepancies.

“We have the right to monitor other people's elections – of course! And if they don't do it, they are clearly cheating, it's not democracy, it's rigged, it's a dictatorship, what the hell?!” said Rall.

“When you are looking at an election where the votes are counted in public, by humans, that's the kind of election that is possible to observe. There really is virtually no opportunity for international observation,” said Jonathan Simon, co-founder and director of the Election Defense Alliance.
But the same goes for domestic observers.

“Even the Carter Center, which goes abroad and does the great work of monitoring elections abroad, refuses to monitor US elections on the grounds that they don't meet the basic standard of integrity,” said Jonathan Simon.
When election ideals are not met elsewhere, criticism runs rampant.

“Elections in Venezuela, elections in Iran, elections in Russia – the press will go to town on any sign that the outcome was fixed. Regardless of whether the evidence is sound, they'll just go crazy,” said Mark Crispin Miller, NYU Professor and author.

While nitpicking abroad is all the rage, the elephant in the room remains unnoticed at home.

“I promise you, the evidence they use to scream and yell about the outcome in those countries, is usually a whole lot weaker than the evidence of election theft in this country,” said Miller.

The good news: not all of the hypocrisy goes unnoticed.

“Our policy makers, and to a great extent our media, and trickle down to the American people – they literally think that the rest of the world is stupid. That they don't see it, that everybody naturally has to admire us, that we're great – and it's not the case,”Ted Rall.

While obvious flaws are met with a deaf ear, year in and year out – a flawed election process continues to be the first vote cast in the US.

Friday, May 18, 2012

Chicago cops start preemptive arrests on the eve of NATO Summit

Russia Today

 
Authorities in Chicago are gearing up for a weekend of anti-NATO activity in the Windy City, but it's already being reported that law enforcement there might be a little too eager to begin arrests. The home of known activists was raided Wednesday.

The National Lawyers Guild confirms that law enforcement agents broke down the door of a 6-unit apartment building in the Chicago, Illinois neighborhood of Bridgeport at around 11:30 pm on Wednesday. Once inside, they entered the apartment of known activists with guns drawn and then cuffed the residents.

For two hours, tenants were shackled and questioned by officers with the Organized Crime Division of the Chicago Police Department. The Chicago Tribune writes that police reports detailing the incident have been obtained by the newspaper and confirm that nine people were arrested in the raid for allegedly making or possessing Molotov cocktail explosives. Police sources add to the paper early Friday, however, that none of the suspects had been charged.

Attorneys for the accused attest to the innocence of their clients. The reason they cannot prove that they were making Molotov cocktails, they say, is because they weren’t — instead, police saw and seized equipment used for home brewing beer.

“As far as we know, there was no liquid in the bottles,” Kris Hermes, a spokesman for the lawyer’s guild, tells the Tribune on Friday in speaking of the alleged paraphernalia pilfered by law enforcement. Another source with ties to the police tells a Chicago ABC News affiliate that Molotov cocktails were discovered in the raid, but those claims have yet to be verified.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

It's Official White House and DHS Behind #OWS Thug Crackdowns Nationwide

12160


 http://www.businessweek.com/finance/occupy-wall-street/ows_arrest_600.jpg

 
Atlanticwire

Update (2:33 p.m. EST): NBC New York reports that the city has closed a garage where it was storing things police seized at Zuccotti Park Tuesday morning. Sanitation Department workers said broken glass amid the piles of belongings posed a safety hazard.

Update (2:24 p.m. EST): Ydanis Rodriguez, the New York City Council member arrested early Tuesday morning as part of the sweep of Zuccotti Park, is still in custody.* At a press conference to discuss his arrest, his council colleague Tish James said his legal team still hadn't been able to see him, tweets New York Times reporter Kate Taylor. Taylor also tweeted: "Ppl at @ydanis presser using human mic to report on proceedings in courtroom; report that "it looks positive," triggers twinkle fingers."

*Correction: This update initially said Rodriguez had been released from custody. He has not.

Update (2:03 p.m. EST): Primary document fans can take a look at the city's filing in response to the injunction against it courtesy of The New York Times posting on Document Cloud. In short, deputy mayor Cas Holloway argues in the document that the protest encampment represented a safety threat, and that protesters detracted from the neighborhood's quality of life.

Update (1:57 p.m. EST): On Twitter, the buzz from many sources is that a verdict in the injunction hearing is expected to come down by 3 p.m. Meanwhile, at Zuccotti Park, protesters mill around, drumming and cracking wise about the cops and private security (those in the green vests, someone told our live feed cameraman) who continue to guard the empty park:

Update (1:39 p.m. EST): The legal wrangling continues at Manhattan Supreme Court. City Hall News has some good updates on the arguments via its Twitter stream:

Update (1:29 p.m. EST): For a bit of background on Tuesday morning's legal wrangling, The Daily News's Celeste Katz posted both the letter from Brookfield requesting the eviction, and the temporary court order telling the city to allow protesters back into Zuccotti park.

Update (1:20 p.m.EST): Lawyers for the city are making their case before Judge Stallman, arguing that protesters in Zuccotti Park pose a safety threat. The New York Times tweets: "City tells court, "Protesters may have had significant number of items that could potentially be used as weapons." Incl. mace, knives. But lawyers for the occupation say "this isn't a camping case, like Brookfield is arguing, but a free speech case," according to City Hall News's Twitter. Furthermore, "OWS lawyer argues Brookfield created no camping rules in response to occupation. Determined response to free speech activity." Meanwhile, the live feed at UStream reports that a march from Duarte is starting to arrive at Zuccotti with as many as 500 people.

Update (12:38 p.m. EST): Judge Michael Stallman has been assigned to the hearing on a court order to allow protesters back into Zuccotti Park, tweets The New York Times. You can read his official profile here, for starters. Meanwhile, the actual location of the hearing seems to be causing a problem for those trying to attend. Tweets writer Nancy Scola:

Update (12:31 p.m.EST): Protesters who remained at Duarte have decided to march back to Zuccotti in anticipation of a court order they hope will allow them back in. A judge is expected to rule at any minute on whether the city had cause to evict the Zuccotti encampment.

Update (12:20 p.m. EST): Police have cleared Duarte Square entirely, Student Activism reports, sharing this photo:



more

Bloomberg Unleashes Riot Police on Occupy Wall Street Zuccotti Park | Police Defy Court Order

    
http://www.bloomberg.com/image/is8FCVyyTUNs.jpg
NYC, NYC (Nov 15) – Mayor Bloomberg unleashed the NYC PD on peaceful protesters encamped at Zuccotti Park around 1 am local time today setting off a chain reaction of protests throughout the area. The news media was blacked out inclusive of an order to clear the airspace above the park by the mayor’s office.

Accordingly, a group of OWS NYC occupants at the camp peacefully resisted until the end eventually forcibly arrested and removed from the private park by police in full riot gear, some protesters left the area prior to the raid.

At least one local official was seriously injured and arrested during the initial wave of arrests that have top 200 so far.
Bloomberg had agreed to allow the protesters back into the park following cleanup operations at the park however, the NYCPD have the park ringed and barricaded from the crowds.

Meanwhile, the National Lawyers Guild had obtained a restraining order against the city from preventing OWS protesters to return, and camp at that location. The court has issued an 11:30am hearing for Bloomberg to appear in court to show probable cause for the actions.

Riot clad police destroyed thousands of dollars of personal property smashing camera equipment, laptops, tents, and what the OWS protesters describe as, their media tent.

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

Tucson Activist Craig Barber discusses constitutional protections against fines levied on local Occupy movements

Current

Keith and Craig Barber, one of the organizers for Occupy Tucson, discuss constitutional protections against the fines and other tactics local governments are using to punish Occupy movements around the United States.

KEITH OLBERMANN: “Congress shall make no law bridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people to — peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”



In our fourth story — despite those words in the First Amendment, several cities — including Tucson, Arizona — have begun enforcing petty laws with hefty fines in an attempt to financially force the Occupy protesters to break up. Starting Saturday, police in Tucson began writing criminal citations to anyone in Armory Park past 10:30 P.M. prevailing local time. Fifty-three citations were issued on Saturday, 32 Sunday, and between 30 and 40 on Monday. Each citation comes with a penalty of up to $1,000 in fines, up to six months in jail, up to three years on probation. And, yes, many protesters have received several citations.

Tucson authorities stressed to the protesters that the law does not prohibit their right to peaceably assemble, but prohibits camping in the park. The Arizona constitution, though, takes all this one step further which makes the citations seem even more egregious. According to Article Two, Section Five of that state constitution, “The right of petition, and of the people peaceably to assemble for the common good, shall never be abridged.”

Similarly, Occupy Dallas participants were forced to relocate from Pioneer Plaza to a park outside City Hall after Dallas city officials informed them that to obtain a permit to gather in the park, the group needed an insurance policy — a $1 million insurance policy. Joining me now one of the organizers for Occupy Tucson, Craig Barber. Good to talk to you again, sir.

BARBER: Thank you, Keith. Thank you for having me back.

OLBERMANN: How do you fight accumulating $1,000 fines?

BARBER: We fight it any way we can. We’ve put out posts on our website and our Facebook letting the public know what is going on about the $1,000 fines, about the misdemeanor charges that are being handed out every night. And we’ve linked to our city council web page, which has their email addresses and their phone numbers, encouraging the public to demand that the charges against the occupiers be dropped and also that TPD — the Tucson Police Department — stop using these tactics to intimidate the protesters.

Fortunately. from what we’ve been hearing from our attorney from the National Lawyers Guild, who has an avenue of contact with the city, they have been getting flooded. Their phones have been getting flooded and their email boxes have been getting flooded. So, our community is definitely behind us in this and they have been showing it. And, additionally, we have been hearing from this attorney, the tone that he has been hearing from City Hall has been changing. Again, nothing publicly coming out one way or the other as far as policy is concerned, but definitely a more conciliatory tone.

And another avenue that we’re taking right now is as we speak, Occupy Tucson is marching down to City Hall. There’s a city council meeting occurring right now. We’re holding a rally out in front of City Hall and we’re also sending in representatives from Occupy Tucson to participate in the public-speaking aspect of that meeting.

OLBERMANN: Given the state and Federal Constitutional citations that I just read, do you — in addition to community pressure and the possibility of some sort of negotiated settlement with the city — do you have legal action that you can take?

BARBER: The attorney from the National Lawyers Guild, who has been helping us out all along, has advised me that he thinks we have a very strong case for our actions in the park being protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. And he thinks that it’s definitely a protected right, what we are doing — the spirit of the law as far as the city code, which is, you know, providing or putting the curfew on the park, which is preventing us from being in there after 10:30 — he thinks that the spirit of the law is not encompassing what we’re doing. We are expressing our first-amendment rights. And he is researching what actions he is planning on taking as far as what injunctions he might file, what lawsuits he is planning to file. And he says that he thinks we are in a very strong position, constitutionally speaking.

OLBERMANN: In the interim, are you going to stay in the park?

BARBER: Absolutely. We’re not moving.

OLBERMANN: The group in Cincinnati, Occupy Cincinnati, had to file suit in federal court saying the city officials were violating their first-amendment rights. They got 200 citations, they were each at $100 roughly or thereabouts. Is the prospect of a federal suit also an option for you guys or are you working just state-wise?

BARBER: All options are on the table at the moment. We are not going to negate any avenue at all. And again, our attorney is researching what those options are right now. And as soon as he lets us know, you know, what he thinks the best course of action is, that’s what we’re going to take. But, I mean, what we are seeing is an absolutely absolute lack of leadership from our elected representatives locally. They’ve been hiding behind the bureaucracy. We’ve only seen press releases from the chief of police, we’ve only seen press releases from the Parks and Recreation Department, and these are not the city officials which set policy. These are the city officials of the bureaucracy who are there to enforce the policy. There’s been an absolute silence in the public forum from our elected representatives.

And this is a movement, you know, encouraging people from all ethnicities, all genders, all, you know, economic backgrounds, all ages to come out and participate in this. And you would think that these are the types of constituents that these politicians would want to come out publicly on the side of, and I think they’re missing a golden opportunity. I mean, you look at LA — the city councilmen of LA came out strongly and publicly in support of the Occupy LA movement — and that halted LAPD dead in their tracks when they were going to go in there and bust them up. And it’s just chilling and disturbing to see an absolute lack of leadership on behalf of the city local government here in Tucson.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

Boston Police Brutally Assault Occupy Boston

Occupy Boston

At 1:30 this morning hundreds of police in full riot gear brutally attacked Occupy Boston, which had peacefully gathered on the Rose Kennedy Greenway. The Boston Police Department made no distinction between protesters, medics, or legal observers, arresting legal observer Urszula Masny-Latos, who serves as the Executive Director for the Massachusetts branch of the National Lawyers Guild, as well as four medics attempting to care for the injured.

Earlier in the day, an estimated ten thousand union members, students, veterans, families, men, and women of all ages marched from the Boston Common to Dewey Square, and then to the North Washington Bridge to demand economic reform on Wall Street and the end of special interest influence in Washington.

Following this massive outpouring of public support, dozens of police vans descended on the Greenway, with batons drawn, assaulting protesters and arresting more than one-hundred people. Members of Veterans for Peace carrying American flags were pushed to the ground and their flags trampled as the police hauled them away.

Following the raid, Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis made no mention of veterans, organized labor, students, or families, nor did he issue an apology for his department’s aggressive tactics. Since the beginning of its occupation, Occupy Boston has worked tirelessly and successfully to maintain a positive working relationship with city officials. Today’s reprehensible attack by the Boston Police Department against a movement that enjoys the broad support of the American people represents a sad and disturbing shift away from dialogue and towards violent repression.