Mediaboss Marketing

The Justice Department said it would no longer seek records of reporters contacts when investigating government leaks of sensitive informationa change that reverses a longstanding practice after President Biden said he believed it was wrong.

Department spokesman Anthony Coley on Saturday said the agency completed a review of pending requests for reporters records and in the future federal prosecutors will not seek compulsory legal process in leak investigations to obtain source information from members of the news media doing their jobs.

Scrutiny of the practice rose in recent weeks after the department notified reporters at the Washington Post, CNN, and the New York Times that, under the Trump administration, the agency sought and obtained their phone records from 2017. That drew objections from the news outlets and press-freedom organizations.

Prosecutors have sought such records in leak investigations for years, often after exhausting other options for identifying suspects. Under the Obama administration, for example, the Justice Department used the tool for investigations involving reporting by the Associated Press and Fox News. Multiple former government employees and senior officials were prosecuted by the Obama Justice Department.

In response to a backlash from press advocates and others, then-Attorney General Eric Holder in 2013 added new hurdles that prosecutors had to clear before they could obtain subpoenas and search warrants targeting reporters. The measures included requiring prosecutors to give a media organization notice before a subpoena could be issued to seize records, unless the attorney general certified that doing so would harm the investigation.

The rest is here:
Justice Department to End Pursuit of Reporters Contact Records Over Leaks - The Wall Street Journal

MADISON -Already thin, Republican support for nonpartisan redistricting in Wisconsin may be fading.

Democrats say they want to take partisanship out of redistricting so legislative and congressional maps are drawn in a neutral way. Republicans are not on board with that idea, saying they dont believe map drawing can be depoliticized.

Democrats point to polling to say the public is on their side, but if anything their support from Republicans is slipping.

Two years ago, five Republican lawmakers signed onto a bill that would require congressional and legislative districts to be drawn by an independent panel. This session, three Republicans have signed up.

The lack of Republican backing is a reminder that the effort to overhaul redistricting in Wisconsin is headed nowhere in the short term.

States must draw new districts every decade to account for population changes. Ten years ago, Republicans controlled all of state government and approved maps that greatly helped them.

This time, Republicans again control the Legislature, but Democratic Gov. Tony Evers can veto whatever maps they draw. Without an agreement between them, it would be left to courts to decide where to draw the lines.

Evers and other Democrats say the state should avoid a court fight by having a nonpartisan body draw the lines. Democrats in the Legislature recently unveiled a billthat would do that.

Its getting scant attention from Republicans, who have commanding majorities in the Senate and Assembly.

Signing onto the nonpartisan redistricting legislation this year were Republican Reps. Joel Kitchens of Sturgeon Bay, Todd Novak of Dodgeville and Travis Tranel of Cuba City. They also backed the bill two years ago.

Two others who joined them last time Republican Reps. Jeffrey Mursau of Crivitz and Loren Oldenburg of Viroqua havent done so this time. They didnt say why they hadnt.

A sixth Republican, Rep. Jon Plumer of Lodi, has repeatedly said he would vote for nonpartisan redistricting but has not signed onto the bill.

Eric Holder, who served as attorney general for President Barack Obama, acknowledged Democrats were unlikely to persuade many Republican lawmakers on the legislation like the bill in Wisconsin.

Republican voters might see it differently, said Holder, who leads the National Democratic Redistricting Committee. His group pushes for nonpartisan redistricting.

The Republican public I think can be reached and can be convinced theres a better way to do the process that has happened in the past in Wisconsin, Holder said. Republican politicians Im not sure they can be reached.

Republican lawmakers dont buy Holders claims that he wants nonpartisan maps, noting his group filed paperwork with the Internal Revenue Service saying its mission is to "favorably position Democrats for the redistricting process."

Former Republican Gov. Scott Walkerin a tweet last year said Holder and his group "want to throw out old maps in many states and gerrymander Democrats into long-term control of the House."

Holder said hes committed to nonpartisan causes, noting he opposed Democratic gerrymandering efforts in Maryland in court and pushed for Democrats in Virginia to give up power by creating a nonpartisan commission.

ContactPatrick Marley at patrick.marley@jrn.com. Followhim on Twitter at @patrickdmarley.

Our subscribers make this reporting possible. Please consider supporting local journalism by subscribing to the Journal Sentinel at jsonline.com/deal.

Read or Share this story: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2021/06/01/wisconsins-partisan-divide-redistricting-reform-widening/5253359001/

Here is the original post:
Split between Wisconsin Democrats and Republicans on redistricting reform appears to be widening - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

Then-president Donald Trump addresses the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) annual meeting at National Harbor in Oxon Hill, Md., February 29, 2020. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

On the menu today: contemplating the uncomfortable question of whether the most lasting legacy of the Trump presidency will be a culturally dominant progressive left; a closer look at the early outlook for the 2022 House elections; the CIA offers a duh report; and an absolutely bonkers attempt to demonize Pfizer.

Were Woke Progressives the Real Winners from the Trump Presidency?

If youre a Republican officeholder, it is a fact of life that most of the media will be against you, and look for opportunities to make you look stupid, reckless, ill-informed, malevolent, and hopelessly out of date. You will have your own media that will be friendlier Fox News Channel, talk radio, etc. but by and large, youre going to have the wind in your face every day youre running for office and in office. While this could change someday, it does not appear likely to change anytime soon, and is arguably getting worse, as more and more media prioritize dramatic and partisan narratives over the facts in pursuit of clicks and television ratings.

Its also worth keeping in mind that the bias of the media is a hurdle that can be overcome; otherwise, no Republican would ever win anywhere. The Republican Party has 50 Senate seats, 212 House seats (with one more to be settled in a runoff soon), 27 governors mansions, 61 state legislative chambers, and a grand total of 4,008 state legislative seats. I would contend that many subpar GOP candidates use the media was biased against me as an excuse to cover their own bad decisions and flaws.

No doubt, communication skills matter a great deal for Republican officeholders, particularly the closer they get to the national stage. Theyre not going to get the airbrushed, protective coverage that insists Nancy Pelosi is a master strategist.

But even the most brilliant communication skills in the world arent much help if they arent connected to good judgment. Maybe one of the most underrated and under-discussed duties of a GOP elected official is to not make the job of the opposition easier. Dont hand them effective and accurate lines of criticism. Everybodys going to make mistakes, but a good elected official avoids the dumb ones. Dont practice cronyism or get caught in other scandals. Dont tell lies, and if you must spin, try to make the spin plausible. Dont overpromise, and whatever you promise, dont under-deliver. Work hard, and make sure people see you working hard. Hold your own people accountable. Know what youre talking about, and when you dont know, dont try to wing it. Have a set list of priorities that will product tangible results for your constituents, and dont get distracted by every media controversy that comes down the pike. And for Gods sake, dont waste any time or energy worrying about what Mika Brzezinski or Don Lemon is saying about you.

Our last Republican president broke just about all of those rules, and a recent Ross Douthat column spotlights the argument that the progressive Left was the true big winner from the Trump presidency:

[Richard Hanania, who runs the Center for the Study of Partisanship and Ideology] argues that its not simply that the millennials and Gen Z are more liberal, or that the Democrats are the professional-class party and so liberalism dominates the professional spheres. These tilts are real, but there are still enough conservative-leaning consumers, enough young and wealthy and well-educated Republicans, to create incentives for institutions to be apolitical or politically neutral.

The key difference, he argues, isnt sheer numbers but engagement, intensity and zeal. Liberals lately seem to just care a lot more about politics: They donate more, they protest more, they agitate more, in ways that change the incentives for public-facing institutions. Some of these gaps are longstanding, but others have opened only recently, with 2016 as the crucial turning point. That was the year when the mobilization gap exploded, creating irresistible pressure from both within and outside corporations for them to take a stand on almost all hot button issues.

Why 2016? Well, probably because of Donald Trump: In Hananias data, his nomination and election looks like the great accelerant, with anti-Trump backlash driving liberal hyper-investment in politics to new heights, enabling progressives to achieve true mass mobilization in a way conservatives never have in the modern era. That mobilization has consolidated progressive norms in almost every institution susceptible to pressure from activists (or activist-employees), and its pulled the entire American establishment leftward, so that conservatives are suddenly at war with Major League Baseball and Coca-Cola instead of just Harvard and the Ford Foundation, and the custodians of the national security state are eager to prove their enlightenment by speaking in the argot of the academic left.

For a long time, progressives and Democrats argued that Republicans were villains and Trump cheerfully and gleefully embraced that role. Quite a few Republican grassroots voters signed on for that characterization as well; having seen Mitt Romney demonized, Republicans figured they might as well gain the advantages of nominating a devil. That paid off in 2016, although we will probably be arguing until the end of time whether only Trump could have beaten Hillary Clinton, or whether she was such a quietly weak and overrated candidate that multiple Republicans could have beaten her.

But the progressive Left is a much stronger cultural force in 2021 than it was on Election Day 2016, and it is hard to believe that Trumps presidency had nothing to do with that. Nor is there much reason to think that any future version of Trump will be any less of a cultural accelerant; in a March interview with Laura Ingraham, Trump said of the January 6 Capitol Hill riot,It was zero threat, right from the start, it was zero threat. Look, they went in, they shouldnt have done it. Some of them went in, and they are hugging and kissing the police and the guards, you know, they had great relationships. A lot of the people were waved in, and then they walked in and they walked out.

This is something to think about as House Republicans contemplate kicking Liz Cheney out of leadership while taking a wait and see attitude toward Matt Gaetz.

Full House

One day after this newsletter told you that the odds of Democrats keeping the House keep getting worse. Post-census redistricting will help Republicans here and there, and the retirements of Democratic incumbents from swing-y districts keep piling up, the New York Times informs its readers that with 18 months left before the midterms, a spate of Democratic departures from the House is threatening to erode the partys slim majority in the House and imperil President Bidens far-reaching policy agenda.

The Times notes that we probably havent seen the last Democratic House retirement from a swing district this cycle:

[In addition to Charlie Crist], two other Democratic representatives, Stephanie Murphy of Winter Park and Val Demings of Orlando, are weighing runs for statewide office.

All three now hold seats in districts President Biden carried handily last November, but with Republicans in control of Floridas redistricting process, the states congressional map is likely to soon be much better for Republicans than it is now.

Representative Filemon Vela of Texas, whose Rio Grande Valley district became eight percentage points more Republican from 2016 to 2020, chose retirement rather than compete in what was likely to be his first competitive re-election bid.

Heres a dirty little secret about the House of Representative elections: Very few Washington political reporters pay close attention to them until the very end of the cycle, because theyre way more complicated and harder to get a handle on than statewide Senate elections. If I say Pennsylvania, you probably picture the Liberty Bell, Valley Forge, and steel mills. If I tell you that The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, chaired by Obama-era attorney general Eric Holder, released a statement calling for Pennsylvanias 15th congressional district to be eliminated, you probably have no idea where that district is. (Its a big chunk of the northwest corner of the state, but does not include Erie or much of the Pittsburgh suburbs.)

Theres still plenty of road ahead between now and the midterm elections. But these trends tend to pick up momentum as the cycle progresses. When a president wins, he brings out a lot of grassroots supporters to the polls who wont be as motivated in off-year special elections, gubernatorial elections, and midterm congressional elections. For the two-year span after a president wins, the opposition grassroots get fired up and the presidents grassroots get complacent. It doesnt happen every year, but it happened in 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018. (Yes, the GOP picked up two Senate seats in 2018, mitigating the effect somewhat. Republicans still got clobbered in the House and gubernatorial races.) White Houses and their affiliated party committees know about this pattern and exert enormous effort to counter it but most cycles, their efforts dont do much good.

All over the map, there are House Democrats who won in 2020 in part because turnout in a presidential year was just high enough to put them over the top. In New Jerseys seventh district, Tom Malinowski won by 1.2 percentage points while Biden was carrying the district, 54 percent to 44 percent. In Illinoiss 14th congressional district, Lauren Underwood won by 1.4 percentage points while Biden won by two points. In Iowas 3rd congressional district, Cindy Axne won by 1.4 percentage points, while Trump won that district by a tenth of a percentage point. In Virginias seventh district, Abigail Spanberger won by 1.8 percentage points, while Biden won by one point.

It works the other way, too; Republicans Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa, Claudia Tenney of New York, Mike Garcia and David Valadao of California, and Burgess Owens of Utah all won by the skin of their teeth in 2020 and should expect serious challenges and have little room for error in 2022.

Control of the House will probably come down to the mood of the country and the issue environment in the fall of 2022 and Bidens approval rating will probably be one useful measurement tool. By October 2010, Obamas approval rating in the Gallup poll had dropped from the post-inauguration 66 percent to 45 percent. In the FiveThirtyEight poll aggregator, Bidens approval rating started at 53 percent . . . and remains at 53 percent.

Thanks a Lot, Guys

I dont usually like to pick on the U.S. intelligence community, but sometimes you see a report that almost seems tailor-made to elicit a duh response: U.S. intelligence agencies are warning that any gains in womens rights in Afghanistan made in the last two decades will be at risk after U.S. troops withdraw later this year.

Thats great, guys. Now could we get an update to the National Intelligence Estimate that water is wet?

ADDENDUM: Former secretary of labor Robert Reich complains that Pfizer made $3.5 billion on its COVID-19 vaccine in the past three months.

How much should that company make for creating and mass producing 430 million doses of the most effective coronavirus vaccine out there, the first mRNA vaccine ever produced, that is helping to stop a global pandemic that has killed 3.2 million people around the world?

By my math, $3.5 billion divided by 430 million doses comes out to $8 a dose. Hey, Reich, let me find a Hamilton, a Lincoln, and a Washington and Ill cover Pfizers profit on your doses.

The New York Times reports that Pfizers profit margins on the vaccine would be in the high 20 percent range. When you save the world, I think youre entitled to bring home the bacon!

More here:
After Trump, the Woke Left Roars - National Review

Hours after new redistricting data was released by the Census Bureau, lawsuits were filed Monday night to toss out expired election maps in three states.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who heads the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, and prominent Democratic voting rights lawyer Marc Elias filed the suits in federal and state courts on behalf of voters in Louisiana, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. They argue that population changes over the last decade have rendered the current maps unconstitutional.

Because these states have divided governments, it's likely that partisan disputes will prevent them from agreeing on new election maps in time for the 2022 midterms. The litigation was filed in anticipation of an impasse and with the hopes of expediting court-drawn maps.

Both Louisiana, with six congressional seats, and Pennsylvania, with 18 congressional seats, have Democratic governors and Republican-majority legislatures. Minnesota (eight congressional seats) has a Democratic governor and state House but a Republican state Senate.

Pennsylvania was the only state of the three to lose a House seat after the Census Bureau reported the new state population counts Monday afternoon.

Due to population shifts over the past decade, the lawsuits argue, the states' congressional maps have been rendered malapportioned and are therefore unconstitutional. The suits seek to prevent the states from using the current maps in any future elections. They also ask the courts to mandate the implementation of new maps that adhere to the "one person, one vote" constitutional requirement, in the event that the legislature and governor fail to agree on maps.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

During a press call on Tuesday, Holder linked the GOP-led efforts across the country to roll back voting access to the partisan gerrymandering that will inevitably take place this year.

"What we're facing right now is a Republican Party that has shown that they're willing to bend or break the rules of democracy, simply to hold on to power," he said. "I have no doubt that the same Republican legislators who have pushed these bills will now try to use the redistricting process to illegitimately lock in power."

The goal of the litigation filed this week, Holder said, is to protect the integrity of the redistricting process and ensure fair maps and representation across the country.

Elias, who will be litigating the cases, said these redistricting lawsuits won't be the last filed this year. In addition to these three states, there are six more with divided governments and no independent redistricting commissions, so disagreements over election maps are likely to occur.

"We are prepared and ready to use every legal tool available to make sure that new maps do not unfairly treat voters," Elias said. "These lawsuits ensure that there is a backstop if and when the normal process breaks down or if there is a deadlock between the legislature and the governor which is more than likely going to be the case."

From Your Site Articles

Related Articles Around the Web

Follow this link:
The first redistricting lawsuits are here - The Fulcrum

Summary

The Texas legislature has introduced legislation that, according to "The New York Times," would make Texas one of the hardest states in the country to cast a ballot in. Republicans want to ban 24-hour voting, in Texas, which is how many working people voted in the last election in Texas. Attorneys for the family of Andrew Brown Jr. described what happened to him as an execution when at least seven police officers approached him in his car, and shot him to death. If a company controlled 90 percent of anything in the United States, it became very likely the federal government was going to break up that company. President Biden will describe the tax increases he wants to use to pay for his $2 trillion infrastructure package, but there`s another way to pay for it, without raising any taxes. The "New York Daily News" has obtained previously unreported documents from a 2015 deposition of Donald Trump`s accountant Allen Weisselberg in a lawsuit over the now defunct Trump University.

LAWRENCE O`DONNELL, MSNBC HOST: Good evening, Rachel.

We have Beto O`Rourke tonight as our first guest to talk about those additional House seats that Texas is going to get and --

RACHEL MADDOW, MSNBC HOST: Uh-huh.

O`DONNELL: And how they might try to -- Republicans might try to gerrymander those. And also, of course, what "The New York Times" is calling the most-restrictive voter laws in the country now, being pushed through the Texas legislature. Beto O`Rourke is fighting that. He will be joining us to discuss that.

But, Rachel, before you go. I got to tell you about a funny thing happened to me on the way to the TV show today.

MADDOW: Uh-oh.

O`DONNELL: You know how hard it is, these days, for the author of a scholarly book to get on the show like this? Because we have so much breaking news and so many difficult other things of the day we have to cover.

MADDOW: Sure, yeah.

O`DONNELL: I had a guest booked, today. To be a preview guest for the Biden address, Wednesday night.

MADDOW: Okay.

O`DONNELL: But -- but it was one of those things, and this, I`m sure, happens, I`m not sure whether your bookers even tell you this. But, you know, every once in a while, the deal will be, can you just ask one question about the book? Like, just one question about the book. Like, maybe, at the end of the interview.

And -- and I said, yeah, maybe. Thinking I probably wouldn`t. And then, I got my hands on the book, and now I just want to do the whole hour on the book. And it is -- it`s going to get an award tonight on the show. An award I am inventing tonight, which is the -- the Moynihan book award and that is the award for the most scholarly book written this year by a United States senator.

MADDOW: Nice.

O`DONNELL: And I`m giving that award in April. I don`t care because -- I`m -- I`m hiding the author`s name, Rachel, but I want to show you. It couldn`t have a more boring title.

MADDOW: Oh, I know what book that is.

O`DONNELL: Yeah. You just couldn`t have a more boring title, "Antitrust". I hesitate to even say it because it will scare off viewers. But this book is getting the award for most scholarly book by a United States senator and I cannot wait to talk about it with my mystery guest.

MADDOW: And your mystery. I know that book and I know that thesis and I know who the senator is. And that the story of why that senator has these strong feelings, and that level of scholar scholarly depth about that topic is fascinating. So --

O`DONNELL: Yeah, and Rachel, it has -- and you will love this -- 205 -- I counted them -- 205 pages of footnotes, which is a record. It is a record for footnotes in a scholarly work by a United States senator.

MADDOW: Yeah. If that Senate career does not end, in the White House, which is one very significant possibility for that senator, there is a professorship waiting for that senator, whenever that senator wants one, for sure.

Look at me. I am helping you keep a secret.

O`DONNELL: You`re doing great. Thank you, Rachel.

MADDOW: Thank you, Lawrence.

O`DONNELL: Thank you.

Well, when President Joe Biden does address the nation Wednesday night, in a joint session of Congress, he will be the first president of the United States to have two women sitting behind him. Vice president of the United States, Kamala Harris, and the speaker of the House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi.

When the president addresses the nation on Wednesday, at the end of the 99th day of his presidency, he will have the approval of a solid majority of Americans, something, that the previous president never had. Joe Biden is running 13 points ahead of the previous president in the latest NBC poll that shows Joe Biden`s approval rating 13 points higher than the previous president`s approval rating, at this exact point four years ago.

The trouble for Republicans is that the most popular person in their party is the person who lost the presidential election to Joe Biden. And that means Republicans, now, believe they simply cannot win. Republicans believe they cannot win presidential elections, if those elections are held fairly. And so, instead of trying to counter Joe Biden`s popular policies with their own policies, Republicans are now lying about Biden policies.

For example, Republicans are now claiming that Joe Biden wants to ban the consumption of meat, which is a complete-and-total lie. Republicans find it easier to tell that lie, instead of arguing against policies. Like, say, the increase in the corporate-tax rate that Joe Biden will describe Wednesday night, as part of his infrastructure package, which now has the support of 68 percent of Americans.

CNBC reports the stock market is performing the best it has during the first-hundred days of a presidency, going back to at least the 1950s, and the Dwight Eisenhower administration.

But you don`t hear Joe Biden mentioning that stock market stuff the way the previous president would because the previous president was actually our only president, who firmly believed that the stock market was an accurate measure of good government. Republicans no longer believe that they can win elections by turning out voters. And so, now, they are attempting to turn away voters.

Texas is one of the winner states in the census data released today that shows Texas will gain two more members of the House of Representatives to represent the state`s 29 million people, second only to California`s 39 million people. The Republican legislature and the Republican governor in Texas will do anything they can to gerrymander congressional districts so that the two new congressional seats will go to Republicans.

But gerrymandering is no longer enough for Republicans to win elections. And so, the Texas legislature has introduced legislation that, according to "The New York Times," quote, would make Texas one of the hardest states in the country to cast a ballot in. Republicans want to ban 24-hour voting, in Texas, which is how many working people voted in the last election, in Texas. The state`s biggest county used 24-hour voting for a single day, just a single day, on the Thursday before the election.

"The New York Times" described some of the middle-of-the-night voters as fast-food workers, nurses, construction workers, night owls, and other- late-shift workers. Texas Republicans do not want those people to vote, again, because they might vote for Democrats. Some of the restrictions on Texas voting proposed by the legislature would apply only in counties with populations of more than 1 million. That means, of course, the big cities of Texas, the places, where Democrats live.

Texas-based companies, such as American Airlines and Dell Technologies say they are opposed to restrictions on the right to vote, like banning drive- there you drive-through voting, which was used by 127,000 voters in the state`s biggest county.

Texas is the biggest state where the legislature is trying to restrict the right to vote. There is no more forceful opponent of restricting the right to vote in Texas than our first guest tonight.

Leading off our discussion tonight, Beto O`Rourke, former Democratic congressman representing El Paso, Texas. He is the founder of Powered by People, on organization helping elect Democrats in Texas.

Beto O`Rourke, thank you very much for joining us this night. This night became even more important than we thought when Texas today picked up what will be two additional congressional seats starting in the next election.

What do you think that`s going to mean for Texas? And what will the Texas - - the Republican Texas legislature do to try to ensure that those are Republican seats?

BETO O`ROURKE (D-TX), FORMER U.S. CONGRESSMAN: It makes the fight to secure voting rights. The ability for any eligible Texan to cast their ballot that much more important because, Lawrence, I`m convinced, with 40 Electoral College votes, Texas now clearly becomes the biggest-swing state in the country. And could, very well, decide the next-presidential election, or perhaps, the next ten presidential elections.

And it`s population growth that has produced these new -- two new congressional seats has been brought about by the young, by the people of color. And by those who have chosen to come to this state. It`s -- it`s the future, knocking on the door of this country. And Republicans in Texas are trying to bar the door shut, before these folks can get in and cast a ballot.

Nearly 7 million Texans in 2020 did not vote because this is the most voter-suppressed state in the union, 750 polling place closures, the racial gerrymandering that you talked about at the top of the show, the most onerous voter ID laws in the country. And now, these proposals that would make it even harder.

O`DONNELL: Let`s listen to what former Attorney General Eric Holder said about these two new congressional seats, today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC HOLDER, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL: Going to get additional seats it`s largely because an increase in the Hispanic population, African-American population, suburban population, young people. And yet -- and yet, I suspect they are going to try to draw the lines there. They will draw them to minimize the acquisition of power by -- by those groups.

And so, you know, that -- those additional seats that Texas is going to get, I suspect, will be, you know, they`ll attempt to gerrymander them, which means we`re probably going to end up -- end up in court.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Beto O`Rourke, the legislature is completely run by Republicans. You have a Republican governor. So they will -- the only thing they will have to be concerned about, as they try to draw these lines for congressional districts, is how, as Eric -- Eric Holder just put it, how they might end up in court.

O`ROURKE: That`s right. And -- and really, our best hope right now is in United States Senate with the For the People Act. I know, there`s been a lot talk about Senator Manchin`s position on the filibuster and the need to reform that, in order to be able to pass democracy bills like this one.

But -- but really, the future, the fate, the fortune of this country, rests on states like Texas. And not for the Democratic Party, but literally, for democracy. One person, one vote.

If -- if we believe that`s important, we need federal protections, federal safeguards to ensure that we can do that. Absent that, it`s going to be left to Texas. To the Texas voters to -- to do what they can. And -- and they`ve done some pretty impressive things in the past.

Despite these racially gerrymandered district that you have from the 2010 and 2011 redistricting, you had Colin Allred and Lizzie Pannill Fletcher both win important long shot victories in 2018. We can do it again in 2022 and going forward.

But if we really believe in democracy, if we really believe everyone should have a seat at the table, and every vote should be counted, then we have got to stop these voter-suppression efforts in Texas. And we`ve got to pass voter protection reform in Washington, D.C. It`s as simple as that.

The good news is these voter-suppression bills in Texas have not yet passed. They`ve not, yet, been signed into law. As you mentioned, Dell, American Airlines, faith groups, civic organizations, and everyday voters are stepping up and standing out, and speaking up to make sure that we stop this while we still have time.

O`DONNELL: Are Texas Republicans in the legislature listening to those corporate entities in Texas that are -- that are opposing this? It seems as though they have just decided that they`re -- their politics is taking them in a different direction, and they will no longer pay attention to these corporate interests.

O`ROURKE: It`s interesting. They are listening to them but I don`t know if they`re getting the right message. The chairman of the statehouse committee that oversees elections, a guy named Briscoe Cain, who`s just outside of Houston, he was, by the way, after the election in Pennsylvania trying to overturn the presidential election. He is now in charge of the election law reform effort in Texas if that gives you any indication.

He just proposed legislation that would punish these companies that speak out trying to not help Democrats or Republicans but help Texans ensure that they can vote. So, that`s the way that they`re responding to this. I think that`s a good sign. It -- it shows that they`re concerned, that they`re anxious, this they`re defensive. They know they are on the wrong side of history and the wrong side of this fight. Now, we just have to win it.

O`DONNELL: How do you -- I mean, you are -- one of your -- one of your roles here, from my distance, is cheerleader. You are in charge of keeping spirits up, and keeping the smile going. As the -- as the -- the -- the struggle gets -- seems to be getting more and more difficult.

O`ROURKE: Well, there`s a lot to be optimistic about. You know, when we went to the state capitol to testify against SB-7, HB-6, there are hundreds of other Texans who have driven from all over the state. And as you know, it`s 254 counties, two time zones. There is a lot of miles, lot of hours to get to the capitol, in the midst of a pandemic, which we`re not through yet.

And yet, people were willing to come out and stand up for democracy. They`d wait 14, 15, 16 hours to get their two minutes to testify. All these great groups like the Texas civil rights project, move, the Texas Democratic party is doing a lot of great work. So, I see a response that meets the moment. And that, I think, is going to be more than a match for these voter suppression efforts in Texas.

And the thing is, Lawrence, if we don`t have hope and if we don`t move and if we don`t take action, then we definitely are going to lose. And the best antidote to despair is action and I want to just make sure we continue to do that here in Texas.

O`DONNELL: There does seem to be a reverse effect phenomenon in this voter suppression field because we see these attempts at voter suppression. That seems to provoke a certain kind of voter turnout, on its own. I mean, that -- that just may be a mirage. But as we watch it, they did everything they could. They were trying in Georgia.

And -- and yet, Georgia got this remarkable turnout in the face of these attempts to suppress it.

O`ROURKE: It`s interesting. We -- we have spent, in our group powered by people, the last couple of months registering voters in the lowest voter turnout counties in Texas. So Webb County, where Laredo is, 50 percent of registered voters. So, El Paso, where I am now, 56 percent of registered voters turned out in 2020.

We are knocking on the doors of unregistered future voters and they are telling us that they want to get registered with our volunteers because of what is happening in the state capitol right now. In the words of one woman, they wouldn`t be trying this hard to take away our vote, if our vote wasn`t this important. So yes, sign me up.

So, I agree with you. I think there is a going to be a response from the Texas voters. They are smart enough to know what`s going on. They realize they hold the future of this country in their hands. They will decide the outcome, not only of Texas-based elections but Texas-based elections, like the next presidential, that will determine who our next president will be. And I think you are going to see Texans show up, in record numbers.

O`DONNELL: Beto O`Rourke, thank you very much for starting off our discussion tonight, we really appreciate it.

O`ROURKE: Thank you.

O`DONNELL: Thanks.

And coming up. Another case of police use of deadly force in North Carolina left lawyers calling that incident, today, an execution after they saw some of the police body-cam video. That`s next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

O`DONNELL: An execution. That`s what attorneys for the family of Andrew Brown described what happened to him, when at least seven police officers approached him in his car, and shot him to death.

Today, members of Andrew Brown`s family and one of the lawyers, local attorney Chantel Lassiter, were allowed to see only-20 seconds of just one of the police bodycam videos.

Here`s what the lawyers for Andrew Brown`s family said after seeing that video.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BEN CRUMP, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: We only saw a snippet of the video. When we know that the video started before and after what they showed the family. And they determined what was pertinent.

BAKARI SELLERS, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: One body cam, 20 seconds. An execution.

CHANTEL CHERRY-LASSITER, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: This was an execution. Andrew Brown was in his driveway. The sheriff truck blocked him in his driveway, so he could not exit his driveway.

Andrew had his hands on his steering wheel. He was not reaching for anything. He wasn`t touching anything. He wasn`t throwing anything around.

He had his hands, firmly, on the steering wheel. They run up to his vehicle, shooting.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yep, sure did.

LASSITER: He still stood there, set there, in his vehicle with his hands on the steering wheel, while being shot at.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

O`DONNELL: Joining us now, Kirk Burkhalter, criminal law professor at New York Law School where he is the director of the 21st Century Policing Project. He is a former-NYPD detective.

Professor Burkhalter, we -- we know very little other than what we heard described about that 20 seconds of video. The video has not, yet, been released. There is going to be a court hearing about releasing that, and possibly more video. Based on what we know, so far, what`s your reaction to the evidence as we know it, at this point?

KIRK BURKHALTER, NYU SCHOOL OF LAW CRIMINAL LAW PROFESSOR: Well, Lawrence, my reaction is we actually do not know much. And that is the problem.

The family was shown this 20-second video. We know, the suspect/victim was unarmed. And we`re not sure how many shots were fired, how many police officers were on the scene. We`re not even sure how much video footage was captured.

And this is a tremendous problem, in this era where police have lost the benefit of the doubt. You would think that police officers -- I`m sorry, police departments would err on the side of transparency. And that doesn`t seem to be the case, here.

So, this leaves the door open for speculation from the public. That`s not a good thing, in this day and age. So, unfortunately, we know very little, except that this man was unarmed. And when a person is shot by the police, and particularly a person of color, and they are unarmed in this day and age, the public does deserve some form of information, far beyond we have to wait to complete the investigation.

O`DONNELL: But if these accounts are accurate, that his hands were on the steering wheel the entire time that he`s being fired at. And -- and they also did say that, at the very beginning of the video, there was already an empty shell casing that was visible. So that this video actually is a shooting-by-police, in progress.

So far, there is no evidence that we are seeing in this, so far, that in any way justifies the shooting.

BURKHALTER: Well, that`s correct, Lawrence. Based on what we have heard from the police department, what we have heard from the family. What we have not heard, one allegation that in any way, shape, or form, that this man was attempting to use deadly-physical force against the police officers.

Once again, we don`t know. In most instances, if a gun was found, if someone fired shots at the police, if someone aimed a gun at the police, we would hear it. But we do not hear that here.

In addition to the officers that were placed on administrative leave, we have, I think, it`s a total of three officers that left the department immediately. Two resigned and one retired and that`s a very poor sign as to what is going on here.

I think that this was handled -- it`s been ill handled and this is a textbook example of where, perhaps, an independent investigative body needs to step in and take charge of this investigation. The public does not have much faith in what will come out of this investigation, if handled by the local authorities.

O`DONNELL: Let`s take a look back at one of the expert witnesses in the Chauvin trial. That we analyzed, as it was under way. Last week, 400 doctors signed a letter calling for a review of every one who died in police custody, in Maryland, during Dr. David Fowler`s 17 years as Maryland`s chief-medical examiner. After Dr. Fowler delivered testimony in Derek Chauvin`s defense, that was contradicted by every-other medical expert in the case.

The letter from 400 doctors said, quote, Dr. Fowler`s stated opinion that George Floyd`s death during active-police restraint should be certified with an undetermined manner is outside the standard practice and conventions for investigating and certification of in-custody deaths. This stated opinion raises significant concerns for his previous practice and management. If forensic pathologists can offer such baseless opinions, without penalty, then the entire criminal-justice system is at risk. And on Friday, Maryland`s attorney general began investigating deaths in police custody during Dr. Fowler`s tenure as medical examiner.

Joining us now is Phillip Jackson, criminal justice reporter for "The Baltimore Sun" covering this story.

Phillip Jackson, what else can you tell us about the attorney general`s review of these cases?

PHILLIP JACKSON, CRIMINAL JUSTICE REPORTER, BALTIMORE SUN: Well, what we can tell you right now is that this is in the preliminary stages. But mostly, with Dr. David Fowler, it`s the families that have been affected. Which they have expressed a lot of concern about a lot of his rulings and the reason why the attorney general`s looking at that 17-year tenure is because there is a lot of cases, specifically the case of Anton Black, a 19-year-old, black teenager, who died while in police custody on Maryland`s eastern shore.

Continued here:
Transcript: The Last Word with Lawrence O'Donnell, 4/26/21 - MSNBC