Whoopi Fetchit Goldberg

Whoopi was never much of an actress but what's really sad is that, at 64, you look back on her film career and you're struck by how she played the stereotype over and over.  She's a modern day Steppin Fetchit which is probably why White people have enjoyed her more than Black people.  We see her shucking and jiving and playing insulting stereotypes. 

Those stereotypes have always produced chuckles from a lot of Whites -- that's the reason AMOS AND ANDY was a success to begin with.

Whoopi's 64 and she's played Aunt Jemimiah maids and nannys and buffoons -- buffalo-butted buffoons. In a varied career, you could look at Ota Mae in Ghost and enjoy her.  But in Whoopi's filmography, it's just one more insulting stereotype.

Whoopi attacked Bernie Sanders on THE VIEW on Wednesday.  Why?  Because she's a Joe Biden lover.  Of course she is.  She's a corporate whore completely out of touch with Black America -- let alone Young Black America.

Which is why she really needs to go.  She offers nothing on THE VIEW.  She's out of touch with Black America.  Maybe that's why she's on the show?  ABC needs a White-based faux Black?  That would be Whoopi.





"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Wednesday, April 1, 2020.  If the corporate media is going to pretend Joe Biden is already the nominee is it equally fair to start presenting as "presumed rapist Joe Biden"?  We look at that and many other things including Amanda Marcotte's latest nonsense.


Joshua Collins is running for Congress and Tweets under Joshua4Congress and this is one of his Tweets:

This is gonna make a lot of people mad, but because of the very credible rape allegation against Joe Biden, I have decided I cannot vote for him if he's the nominee. Y'all can vote for whichever rapist you want, count me out.


Meanwhile Meg Slay Tweets:

Symone Sanders tweeted her support for Blasey Ford + #MeToo

. She said if her rapist ran for president, she would come forward even if it was 50 years later. Now that she's a Senior Advisor to Joe Biden, who has been accused of sexual assault, Symone has scrubbed her tweets.


Yes, we're starting in the US with presumed rapist Joe Biden.  That is what he is, right?  He's not the presidential nominee for the Democratic Party but REUTERS calls him that here -- no, not in the text of the story but in the caption to Elizabeth Frantz's photo.  So if REUTERS can call him that with 27 primaries still to take place, over 1300 delegates still up for grabs and neither he nor Bernie Sanders having yet reached the 1991 delegate total needed to grab the nomination, I think an argument can be made that referring to him as "presumed rapist Joe Biden" is in line with the garbage that the corporate media -- and Bitch Amanda Marcotte -- are serving up.

Kamille Houston (THE DAILY PENNSYLVANIAN) observes:

Last week, former Senate staffer Tara Reade alleged that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her when she worked in his senate office in 1993. Last year, Reade told the Union that Biden touched her inappropriately on her neck and shoulders, but recently said a sexual assault also occurred. In the past, multiple women have made complaints against the former Penn presidential practice professor for touching them inappropriately or making them uncomfortable, though Reade’s is the first allegation of sexual misconduct.
[. . .]
On-campus political groups like Penn Democrats and Penn for Bernie are calling on Biden's campaign to investigate and address Reade's allegation. 
Penn Dems, who recently endorsed Biden for president, still support him despite the allegation.
In a written statement to The Daily Pennsylvanian, Penn Dems executive board expressed that they take allegations of sexual assault "extremely seriously," and reference their status as a group certified by Penn Violence Prevention's Anti-Violence Engagement Network.
“Tara Reade deserves to be heard and journalistic organizations have an obligation to investigate her allegations," the statement read. "VP Biden should also address them further immediately.” 

Over on the right-wing, Debra Heine (AMERICAN GREATNESS) notes, "It’s been nearly a week since former Joe Biden staffer Tara Reade leveled credible accusations of sexual assault against the presumptive Democrat nominee for president, yet ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC and CNN have yet to report on the troubling story, according to Newsbusters."  Brad Polumbo (WASHINGTON EXAMINER) adds, "Interestingly, some left-wing outlets such as the Intercept and Vox have covered the accusation, but major liberal national newspapers and networks have almost uniformly ignored it. (The Hill did cover it, in a television interview that’s worth watching.)"  Polumbo also notes this study by the conservative media watchdog the Media Research Center which found:

Since Reade went public, candidate Biden has given long interviews, including: an hour-long CNN town hall on March 27, where he faced 23 questions (13 from CNN’s Anderson Cooper, ten others submitted by audience members); nine minutes on NBC’s Meet the Press on March 29, where he faced nine questions from moderator Chuck Todd; and nearly a quarter-hour on Monday’s MSNBC Live with Katy Tur, where he faced an additional nine questions.
Out of 41 total questions, Biden didn’t face a single one about his new accuser.           

Branko Marcetic (JACOBIN) explains:

In 2017, the resignation of Senator Al Franken (D-MN) over a series of allegations that he had groped or kissed women without their consent was viewed as a pivotal moment in the long history of sexual abuse on Capitol Hill. As the allegations mounted, thirty senators from his own party, joined by two independents, placed what he later called a “tremendous amount of pressure” on Franken to resign, which he did.
Now, as a sexual assault allegation against Democratic front-runner and former vice president Joe Biden trickles from the world of online news into the mainstream media, all but one of those thirty-two senators are staying silent.
Last week, Tara Reade, a former staffer of Biden’s, alleged that in 1993, he had pushed her up against the wall and groped and penetrated her with his hands, telling her afterward, “You mean nothing to me.” Although Jacobin was unable to reach Reade and has not independently corroborated her story, the Intercept’s Ryan Grim, who originally broke the story, spoke to Reade’s brother and friend, who recounted hearing the story from her at the time. Grim had originally also broken the story about then–Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford.
Biden has previously said that “for a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real.” His senior adviser, Symone Sanders, whose personal website describes her as “a champion for women,” had said in 2018 she believed Ford’s allegation, stressing that she didn’t “think anyone that has ever done that, whether it was once in their life or fifty times, deserves to sit at the highest precipice of power.” Biden’s campaign has called Reade’s allegation “false.” 

Jacobin reached out to the twenty-nine Democratic and independent senators who had called for Franken’s resignation three years ago and are still in office, in some cases leaving multiple voicemails and emails, and sometimes speaking directly with staffers. Some of those senators have since endorsed Biden for president, including Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Kamala Harris (D-CA), and Cory Booker (D-NJ). Of those twenty-nine, only one — Ohio’s Sherrod Brown — offered a statement in response:
“Every woman has a right to be heard without fear of intimidation or retribution, and I will always fight for that right.”

Perhaps the most surprising silence came from Senator Gillibrand, who has carved out a profile as a champion of women and sexual assault victims. Gillibrand has fought for years to ensure accusers in the military can be heard and see justice, and she was the first senator to call for Franken’s resignation in 2017, without an investigation into the allegations first.


Nolan Finley (DETROIT NEWS) observes

I do tend to believe Reade. As I said, her allegations fit into Biden’s pattern of interactions with women, and there’s no doubt the two knew and worked together.

But she and Ford share in common a lack of evidence to support their claims, beyond their own word.

Ford’s word was good enough for the left to embrace as a weapon against Kavanaugh. No one is thanking Reade for telling her story. Few are even listening to her tell it.

#MeToo should change its motto. Believe all women, except when their stories are inconvenient to our political agenda.

On Tuesday, Tara Reade spoke to DEMOCRACY NOW! about her allegations:

TARA READE: I actually tried to tell the story to some extent in 1993, in the sense that I wanted to talk about it, but I was too afraid. My mother had encouraged me to file a police report, and I did not, and I should have. So I filed a sexual harassment claim, where just I filled out a paper and then did not hear back.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you give us the circumstances, how you ended up — what was the day, how you ended up alone with Joe Biden? Explain what happened that day.

TARA READE: I was approached by my supervisor. She handed me a gym bag and said, “Hurry, Joe wants this, so get it to him. He’ll meet you down towards the Capitol.” And I went down the stairs, and I don’t remember exactly where I was, because there’s connections between the Russell Building and all of that and the corridors, but we were in a semi-private location. It wasn’t a room. It wasn’t, you know, the Russell Office Building — I mean, in his office. It was down in the corridors. And I handed him the gym bag.
And then he — it was one, as I described, fluid moment. He was talking to me, and he said some things that I don’t recall. And I was up against the wall. And he — I remember the coldness of the wall. And I remember his hands underneath my blouse and underneath my skirt, and his fingers penetrating me as he was trying to kiss me and I was pulling away. And he pulled back, and he said, “Come on, man. I heard you liked me.” But he was angry. It was like a tight voice. And he tended to smile when he was angry. And he isn’t like the Uncle Joe like everybody talks about now. He was younger. He was my dad’s age at that time and very strong. And he looked insulted and angry. And I remember feeling like I had done something wrong when he said that statement. And then I was standing there when he said — he was still near me. He said — pointed his finger and said, “You’re nothing to me. You’re nothing.” And he walked away.
And I don’t remember exactly where I went after. I think I went to the restroom to clean up, but I don’t remember precisely. The next memory I have is sitting on the cold stairs, on the Russell Building back stairs, where the big windows are. And I remember just my whole body shaking. And I remember knowing that — knowing that I had made him angry and that my career was probably over. And I didn’t comply. And I didn’t comply when I was asked to serve drinks at a cocktail party for donors, because, apparently, Joe Biden said, according to a legislative staffer, that I had pretty legs, and he thought I was pretty, and I should serve the drinks. And my supervisor had encouraged me to do so, and I did not. So, sitting on those stairs, the reality hit me.
The next thing I remember was that night and talking to my mom, and she was like, “You need to file a police report. It’s a sexual assault.” And I didn’t think of it as sexual assault, and I didn’t really understand. And I was trying to just get over the shock of it, because I looked up to him. He was supposed to be a champion of women. And I was so thrilled to be at that office and so honored, and it shattered my life and changed the trajectory of my whole career and life. And I lost my job after I complained, and I was fired.

AMY GOODMAN: And how exactly did you complain, Tara? You filed a complaint of sexual harassment against Senator Biden at the time? Now, let’s be clear, this is 1993, two years after he led the Senate Judiciary Committee around the Anita Hill charges against Clarence Thomas. So this is soon after that. You filed a complaint. Did you talk about this happening?

TARA READE: No, I didn’t talk about the sexual assault. What I did was I went through office protocol, which would be to go to your supervisor. And if you’re not happy, you go to the next supervisor, and then the next one would be the chief of staff. And I did go up the chain verbally. And there were a couple of meetings — more than a couple, actually. And there were people taking notes. I mean, I know they took notes. And some were more informal in the hallway, with Marianne. And I was basically — after I had not served the drinks, that whole, you know, episode, I was immediately told, like within a few days, by Marianne’s assistant that I dressed too provocatively, that I was too — that I needed to be less noticeable. And then Marianne got me in the hallway, because I was annoyed by that, and she said, you know, “You want to just keep your head down and do as you’re told, if you want to last here.”
And I went to them and told them I was uncomfortable. So I couched it in those terms. We didn’t use the term “sexual harassment” a lot back then. And I remember saying I was uncomfortable and why. But nothing happened. And in fact, I was put in a windowless office, and I had my duties taken away from me. I was given a desk audit. I was told to call one of my upper-level supervisors even if I went to the restroom. I was not to call or talk to other staffers or go to legislative hearings. I was told that I was given a month to find another job. And I sent out my résumés. And before I did that, because of this retaliation, I told my mother, who gave me the term “retaliation” and explained to me what was happening, and said to march in there and file a sexual harassment claim. And I said — and she used the word. And I said, “Well, you don’t just march into their office. Like, that’s not how this is done.”
So, I had gone through that protocol. Then, when that didn’t work, I went to the outside, which was like a — they had a temporary office set up, so it was Senate personnel or something like that, and I was given a clipboard. I filled out a form and talked about just the incident of the sexual harassment, feeling uncomfortable. And I was told at the window that somebody would call back, you know, call me back in. And they never did.
I ended up looking for work, couldn’t find it. I volunteered for the Robert F. Kennedy memorial. I was fortunate enough to work in the VIP tent and with the family, and it was helping me emotionally, because I was trying to recover from the trauma of what had happened that day. And I didn’t share it with many people at all at that time. It’s just not something that was easy to talk about. It’s not easy to talk about now.
And when I came out in April, I started again — I had the intent to tell the whole history with Biden. But one of the first questions out of the reporter’s mouth was, “Yeah, but it wasn’t sexual, right?” when he was talking about the sexual harassment. And it shut me down. And that’s not his fault. It’s my responsibility, I know, to be brave and to be courageous and say the words. But it just put me off from being able to talk. And then, when the story was hitting, there was so much blowback and smearing on social media that I just didn’t feel comfortable. So I was trying to find a way to tell my story to a legitimate news agency. I didn’t want it sold or, you know, sensationalized or anything nonsense like that. I wanted to have the deeper conversation of how hard it is for survivors of sexual assault and sexual harassment in the workplace to go up against powerful men, because I have not received any payment for this, I have not received any compensation, because the facts are, you know, women are not paid to talk. They’re paid to stay silent. And so I wanted a women’s organization around me, and that’s why I went to Time’s Up.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Tara Reade, could you talk about your experience then with Time’s Up, when you went to them and you were hoping that they might be able to assist you in this?

TARA READE: Yes. I went to Time’s Up. They were very gracious. I filled out a form, first of all, on — you know, you do it online. And then I was called about January 24th-ish, right around there, and emailed back, and then we had a phone interview. There was about 20 emails between us, and there were several meetings on the phone. And what they did was they prepared a paragraph describing my case, and they were going to give me attorney referrals. And if you’re economically challenged or you need help with funds, they will help you with a public relations platform for one month, so access to a public relations firm, to tell your story with their platform, and also to have an attorney, which is what I was seeking because of the social media smears. I wanted like cease and desist for some of the things that were being said. I wanted protection, of some sort, and not to be alone.

AMY GOODMAN: And describe then what happened, I mean, this report in The Intercept of you waiting to hear from Time’s Up and then what you learned afterwards about its links to the Biden campaign through the PR firm.

TARA READE: It was absolutely stunning. In the 20-plus emails and the multiple conversations that we had, not one time, not once, did they say that they were connected to Anita Dunn, who worked for Harvey Weinstein and advised him and helped him keep — silence some of the women that came forward. Not one time did they talk about the payments that were made to the Joe Biden campaign. Now, bear in mind, in their defense, they said that that’s second removed. But part of their services was to provide a platform, you know, a public relations platform. I don’t understand, as a survivor — and I’m not an investigative reporter. I’m not an investigator. I’m just speaking as a survivor. It violated my trust, when I read Ryan Grim’s article. I found out with everyone else. And I’m still processing that. I shared my story with them again and again, with the attorneys that they sent to me. And each time I was rejected by each attorney. One attorney said, “We’ve met as a firm, and we have decided there is no legal strategy to safely tell your story, because it’s Joe Biden.”
And what I want to say is that’s wrong. That’s unconscionable. Anyone who has a claim or an assertion of something that’s happened of misconduct should be able to speak freely without reprisal. And as you can see in the social media, I am being ripped apart. I’ve had my family and my friends contacted. I’ve had my bankruptcy posted. I have had the fact that I had a name change, which was sealed, and a sealed Social Security change for safety, because I’m a domestic violence survivor. And I’ve been dragged through it. But I don’t care. I don’t care about that. They can try to strip away everything about me, but they won’t take my dignity, and they won’t get my silence, because all that does is make me more determined to tell my story, and it doesn’t change the fact of what happened in 1993.

JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And, Tara Reade, throughout all this time, when you were engaged in discussions with the Time’s Up folks, they never mentioned their relationship with Anita Dunn, or — and how did they finally notify you that they could not be involved?


TARA READE: They started an email. But then I called Ellie, asking her what was going on. It was taking some time, and I kept getting rejected by attorneys. And she said, “I was going to just email you, but I have to tell you that our 501(c)(3) status would be at risk. We can keep referring attorneys to you, but we cannot provide you funding.” So then I wanted to escalate it to the director, and so we had a meeting with the director and the program manager. And I pushed back a little, and I said, “I can’t help who did this. Where do I go? How do I get help? How do I get a woman’s organization to help me?” And her response was, “Keep in communications with us. Our attorneys have advised us our 501(c)(3) could be at risk because it’s a presidential election, and we can’t appear biased.” So, I accepted that response at that time —


Whenever anyone tells the truth, some will come along to try to destroy them.  I will give Tara the benefit of the doubt unless/until I hear something that makes me rethink her statements.  I do not believe we blindly believe all who claim to be victims of assault or rape.  I do believe we do let all who make that claim air their claims in public so that we can have a public dialogue and debate.  That is what we do in a democracy and it's also what we're really left with when a crime may or may not have taken place in private -- meaning no witnesses to the crime itself.

But there are those who will shut down discussions -- not with facts, not with anything but smears and lies.  Enter Bitch Amanda Marcotte.

I think I've earned the right to call her that, right?  John Edwards?  I've always shared how I met him after the VANITY FAIR profile, how it was a meeting to explore supporting him for a presidential run and how -- even with his wife in another room -- Grabby Hands John didn't know boundaries and I had to physically push him off me.  I've never hidden that story.

But Amanda worked for him, didn't she?  Not then.  Years later.  Her hate got her fired (she's got a problem with Christianity and Christians) but she was trying, in 2007, trying to put that jerk into the White House.  So I think that alone gives me the right to call her what she is: a bitch.

She's also a racist as she demonstrated in her book IT'S A JUNGLE OUT THERE with its racist illustrations portraying innocent White women attacked repeatedly by Black men.  Kate Tuttle (THE ROOT) noted in real time:

When the book came out in early March, few seemed to notice anything wrong. The first dozen reader reviews on its Amazon page were uniformly glowing, with many mentioning how they'd long admired the author's blog. It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments is Amanda Marcotte's first book, but the author is a seasoned blogger. A 30ish white woman from Texas, Marcotte wields a freewheeling I-don't-care-who-I-piss-off voice as she attacks sexism, homophobia and other patriarchal behaviors on her blog, Pandagon. Your typical third-wave feminist, she has also railed against racism and other ills because hey, you don't have to personally experience a social wrong to want to right it, right?

You can see where this is going, can't you? Turns out Marcotte's book, whatever sharp wit and political insight it conveyed, painted a thousand more with its illustrations: vintage comic-book images of a blonde chick rampaging through a tropical forest, battling seemingly endless variations of an undifferentiated brown horde.

In retrospect, it's surprising it took all of two weeks for the black blogosphere to rally against the thing. By the end of March and for the first two weeks in April, women of color from BlackAmazonto Angry Black Woman had attacked the book's publisher, Seal Press, a small San Francisco-based house that advertises itself as being "by women, for women."

For these women, the controversy was yet another outrage in the long and discouraging history of white feminists discounting, misunderstanding and disrespecting women of color. It turned out that this wasn't the first time Seal Press had shown what many saw as racial insensitivity—back in 2007 they had to scuttle an original cover for Marcotte's book that featured a King Kong-like ape-ravishing-white-woman image. And, some pointed out, where were the women of color among their author list?

Dodai Stewart covered it for JEZEBEL:

There's a furor going on in the feminist blogsphere. The issue is complicated, but what follows is an attempt to give a general gist of what's gone down: On March 29 in Cambridge, the blogger known as Brownfemipower (BFP) spoke at WAM (Women, Action & the Media conference). Apparently, Brownfemipower (who has been called "one of the most important feminist bloggers in the history of the web") spoke about the racism and sexism faced by immigrant women in the US in our current "build a wall" climate. On April 2, writer Amanda Marcotte published an article on RH Reality Check called "Can A Person Be Illegal?" (It was republished a few days later on Alternet.) The jumping off point was a New York Times article about a 22-year-old immigrant from Colombia whose immigration agent used the threat of deportation to rape her. (The woman recorded the assault on her cell phone and the guy was busted.) Marcotte's article made many of the same points BFP made in her speech (the text of which she posted on her blog immediately after the conference.) BFP was not credited or linked to; Amanda Marcotte maintains that though she reads BFP's blog, she did not "steal" her ideas from BFP. In fact, Marcotte replied to a post on Feministe thusly:

"Considering the severity of the accusations leveled at me—plagiarism is not a minor thing to accuse someone of—my right to defend myself with the much-maligned facts shouldn't be a matter of question, regardless of race. I'm extremely eager to address racism, but I won't be made a scapegoat who has to roll over to scurrilous accusations to make anyone feel better. If you have to unfairly malign someone's reputation to make your point, then you have to reconsider if you have a point. Maligning people's reputations—making up lies and then spreading them around and saying, "Well, where there's smoke, there's fire" is a right wing strategy. I am deeply disturbed to see it picked up by people who ostensibly on the side of the angels."

Some WOC (women of color) bloggers maintain that BFP's views were marginalized because she is not white; Marcotte is white, gets and has a book deal. The book in question? It's a Jungle Out There: The Feminist Survival Guide to Politically Inhospitable Environments. Which, to make matters worse, is illustrated with retro comics picturing a blonde, white woman wearing animal print. Writes Holly from Feministe: "You know, the jungle. Where the savage brown people and ferocious animals are defeated by heroic white folks." 

So she's not just a bitch, she's also a racist.  What a glorious life Amanda must have.  Can we also note that the supposed 'feminist' likes to pretend she supports women in politics.  Well those of us with the scars of 2008 know a different reality.  Not only did she start off working for and supporting Grabby Hands John Edwards for the presidential nomination of the Democratic Party but when Edwards dropped out, she immediately announced her support for . . . Barack Obama.  Not for the only woman in the race: Hillary Clinton.  Hillary was never Amanda's first choice or her second choice.  Might she have ended up the third choice?

Amanda likes to rewrite history but there's this thing called reality that will always trip her up.

All of this is to give you the background on the bitch who is defending the media and attacking Tara Reade with garbage that she's posted to SALON.  As she fluffs and offers excuses for the media's refusal to cover Tara's story, she also -- objectively, you understand -- terms Katie Halper "podcaster Katie Halper, an avid fan of presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, released an episode of her podcast containing" -- a fan?  That's Amanda's way of short changing Katie Halper and insulting her.

Katie's a journalist.  She's a writer.  She's a comic.  She's a podcaster.  She's many things.  Calling her a "fan" of Bernie Sanders -- excuse me, "an avid fan" seems insulting and demeaning -- and seems that way because it's how it's intended.

Please note, Amanda's defending the corporate media and, in her first paragraph, is mocking and insulting a member of the independent media.

We get you, bitch, we see where your priorities are.


We covered Joe's awful stumbling -- even with note cards -- in his Monday MSNBC interview in yesterday's snapshot.  But as others weigh in, we'll note their takes as well.  Emily Jacobs (NEW YORK POST) notes:

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden conducted a gaffe-filled interview on MSNBC Monday, kicking off his media appearance by referring to the epicenter of the coronavirus by the wrong name.
“I suggested we should have people in China at the outset of this event, when it all started, in Luhan Province,” Biden told the network, meaning to refer to the city of Wuhan, in Hubei Province, where the virus originated.
The Democratic front-runner went on to claim that the Trump administration withdrew CDC staffers in the months leading up to the virus outbreak, likely stemming from a Reuters report from last week claiming that the administration slashed CDC staff in China.
“We had people in our administration, we had CDC people in other countries because we wanted to anticipate when in fact another virus would occur, when in fact a pandemic might occur as a consequence of a spreading virus in another country, to act quickly. The president withdrew those people,” Biden said.

The problem, however, is that regardless of staffing cuts, the CDC began offering to send a team of experts to the Chinese province back in early January, according to the New York Times.
As he did last week, Biden again gave the wrong date for a USA Today op-ed he penned on the virus, again claiming it was posted on Jan. 17 when it was actually Jan. 27.
The ex-VP also mixed up his drugstores and government agencies, accidentally referring to CVS as CVC.

Jeff Katz (WRVA) points out:

The former vice president said, "The president has to move more rapidly. You know, we know from experience that speed matters. We know that you can’t go too fast, it is about going too slow. In order to avoid that, those very high numbers, we have to do at least several things."
Looking down at his notes, Biden continued, "One, we have to depend on what the president is going to do right now."
Then, losing his train of thought, he said, "And first of all, he has to tell - uh uh wait until the cases before anything happens. Look, the whole idea is he has got to get in place things that were shortages of. "




Meanwhile another US service member has died in Iraq.  Howard Altman (MILITARY TIMES) reports, "A service member with Combined Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve died in a non-combat related incident in Erbil, Iraq, March 30, the command announced.  The cause of death remains under investigation, but COVID-19 is not suspected, officials said in a media release. No other details were provided."  STARS AND STRIPES notes the death here.  This is the sixth death of a US service member in Iraq since the start of this year.  At ANTIWAR.COM, Scott Horton offers:



Can anyone think what our society might have spent six and a half trillion dollars on instead of 20 years of war in the Middle East for nothing? How about the trillion dollars per year we keep spending on the military on top of that?
Invading, dominating and remaking the Arab world to serve the interests of the American empire and the state of Greater Israel sounds downright quaint at this point. Iraq War II, as Senator Bernie Sanders said in the debate a few weeks ago, while letting Joe Biden, one of its primary proponents, off the hook for it, was “a long time ago.” Actually, Senator, we still have troops there fighting Iraq War III 1/2 against what’s left of the ISIS insurgency, and our current government continues to threaten the launch of Iraq War IV against the very parties we fought the last two wars for. This would almost certainly then lead to war with Iran.
The U.S.A. still has soldiers, marines and CIA spies in Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Mali, Tunisia, Niger, Nigeria, Chad and only God and Nick Turse know where else.
Worst of all, America under President Donald Trump is still “leading from behind” in the war in Yemen Barack Obama started in conspiracy with Saudi then-Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman back in 2015. This war is nothing less than a deliberate genocide. It is a medieval-style siege campaign against the civilian population of the country. The war has killed more than a quarter of a million innocent people in the last five years, including at least 85,000 children under five years old. And, almost unbelievably, this war is being fought on behalf of the American people’s enemies, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). These are the same guys that bombed the USS Cole in the port of Aden in 2000, helped to coordinate the September 11th attack, tried to blow up a plane over Detroit with the underpants bomb on Christmas Day 2009, tried to blow up another plane with a package bomb and launched the Charlie Hebdo attack in Paris, France since then. In fact, CENTCOM was helping the Houthi regime in the capital of Sana’a target and kill AQAP as late as January 2015, just two months before Obama stabbed them in the back and took al Qaeda’s side against them. So the war is genocide and treason.





The following sites updated:

• 
   Music

  With Gigs Gone, Nicholas Payton Used The Time To Record And Release A New Album

  1 hour ago
• 
  Dissident Voice

  These Songs Kill Fascists

  5 hours ago
• 
  Like Maria Said Paz

  Safe in my garden

  5 hours ago
• 
  SICKOFITRADLZ

  David Schramm and Wings

  5 hours ago
• 
  Ann's Mega Dub

  Howie Hawkins and the Green Party

  5 hours ago
• 
  Thomas Friedman is a Great Man

  Science post

  6 hours ago
• 
  Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

  The Mamas and the Papas, Michelle Phillips, Stevie Nicks, Christine McVie, Carly Simon, Ben Folds Five, Cher

  6 hours ago
• 
  Oh Boy It Never Ends

  Another episode of EMPIRE

  6 hours ago
• 
  Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude

  the only reason to watch 'little fires everywhere'

  7 hours ago
• 
  Ruth's Report

  The return of Susan Rice

  7 hours ago
• 
  Trina's Kitchen

  There's a reason that US Socialist Worker dying wasn't a bad thing

  7 hours ago
• 
  Mikey Likes It!

  Nancy Pelosi better get her s**t together

  7 hours ago
• 
  Antiwar.com Original

  America, We Have To End the Wars Now

  8 hours ago
• 
  Gorilla Radio

  Gorilla Radio with Chris Cook, Alan Hirsch, Taylor Scollon, Janine Bandcroft April 2, 2020

  10 hours ago
• 
  Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union

  The Transgender Community Needs More than Visibility

  15 hours ago
• 
  Latino USA

  Live From Latino USA: Brianna Cash

  15 hours ago
• 
  World news: Iraq | guardian.co.uk

  Fears over hidden Covid-19 outbreak in Lebanon, Iraq and Syria

  1 day ago 

Science post

Let's do a science post and let's focus on Mars. Ashley Strickland (CNN) reports:

One of the biggest mysteries in piecing together the story of Mars' past is a key question: Where did the water come from? Researchers may have found a large clue in tiny slices from Martian meteorites that fell to Earth, according to a new study.
Mars was likely a warm, wet planet billions of years ago before its atmosphere was slowly stripped down and whisked out into space -- leaving behind the thin atmosphere and frozen desert planet we know today.
But how did the water get to Mars in the first place? To understand that, researchers have to look at the layers of Mars. Like any planet, it has a core, mantle, crust and atmosphere. Fortuitously, Martian meteorites contain samples of the planet's crust. The crust is also where the largest reservoir is estimated to be on Mars, containing 35% of the total estimated water beneath the surface.

Mike Wall (SPACE.COM) adds:

Barnes and her colleagues analyzed two Mars meteorites: Northwest Africa (NWA) 7034, also known as Black Beauty, and Allan Hills 84001 (ALH84001), probably the most famous Red Planet rock of all time. In the mid-1990s, a team of researchers announced that they'd found compelling evidence of Martian life in ALH84001. Most other scientists were not convinced, and the claim remains controversial, and debated, to this day.
Barnes and her team determined the hydrogen-isotope compositions of Black Beauty and ALH84001, which interacted with water in the Martian crust about 1.5 billion years ago and 3.9 billion years ago, respectively.
Isotopes are versions of an element that have different numbers of neutrons in their atomic nuclei. For example, the hydrogen in "normal" water has no neutrons in its nucleus, whereas the hydrogen in deuterium, or "heavy water," has one.
Studies of Mars meteorites over the years have found a wide variety of hydrogen-isotope ratios. But, in the new study, which was published online Monday (March 30) in the journal Nature Geoscience, Barnes and her team found that Black Beauty and ALH84001 have very similar amounts of normal versus heavy hydrogen.

Christopher Carbone (FOX NEWS) offers:

Their analysis, which was published today in Nature Geoscience, showed that Mars likely received water from at least two vastly different sources early in its history.
The variability the researchers found seems to imply that Mars, unlike Earth and the moon, never had an ocean of magma completely encompassing the planet.

So that's interesting. So much we learn. There's a lady in our church back home in Georgia who is 102 years old and she remembers -- and has photos of -- the Oklahoma land rush. Can you imagine all the changes she has lived through? Meanwhile, the Mars helicopter is due to take off in a few months. Meghan Bartles (SPACE.COM) reports:

NASA's next mission to Mars will carry what is meant to become the first aircraft to fly on another planet, and that experimental helicopter just spun its blades on Earth for the last time.
The Mars Helicopter is scheduled to launch in July with the new Mars rover, now dubbed Perseverance, as an add-on project to the primary Mars 2020 mission. NASA is still striving to meet that launch date despite continuing closures enacted to slow the spread of the serious respiratory disease COVID-19 caused by a new coronavirus.

Now my favorite land rover on Mars will always be Curiosity. But there will soon be another land rover on Mars. And we know the name of the land rover. Lisa Grossman (SCIENCE NEWS FOR STUDENTS) reports:

Meet Perseverance. It’s NASA’s next ambassador to the Red Planet.
The Mars rover’s new name was announced March 5. NASA held a six-month “Name the Rover” competition. It drew more than 28,000 entries from students in kindergarten through high school. Students were asked to make their name suggestions in essays.
The winning entry came from 7th grader Alex Mather. He became interested in becoming a NASA engineer after he attended the space agency’s Space Camp at age 11.  

Alex read from his winning essay at the official naming event, which was broadcast from Lake Braddock Secondary School in Burke, Va. “We are a species of explorers, and we will meet many setbacks on the way to Mars,” he said. “However, we can persevere.”

On science, be sure to read Cedric's "A giggle in difficult times" and Wally's "THIS JUST IN! WE ALL COULD USE A LAUGH!" joint-post which is humorous but is about space.

"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Tuesday, March 31, 2020.  Joe Biden continues to stumble and bumble around, while the corporate media treats him like he's the nominee there are still 27 primaries to take place and over 1300 delegates up for grabs, the corporate media ignores that and they ignore Tara Reade.


Starting in the US where Joe Biden is not the Democratic Party's presidential nominee despite spin from the media.  1991 delegates are needed to win the nomination.  Currently, Bernie Sanders has 914 and Joe Biden has 1217 -- neither has reached the 1991 threshold.  More to the point,  Setting aside territories and DC, there are still 23 states that have yet to hold a primary.  Joe Biden is not the nominee.

When over 20 candidates were vying for the nomination, the corporate media insisted they couldn't cover all of them, they could only cover the top ones.  Well there are now only two candidates for the nomination and yet MEET THE PRESS and MSNBC and other garbage keeps bringing on Joe and acting as though he's the nominee.

No, we don't have a nominee until the primaries are over or one of the candidates reaches 1991.

That's reality.  The corporate media needs to be covering Bernie Sanders' campaign as much as they are Joe Biden's or they are not a free press, they are not journalists.  There are two candidates and the nomination could go to either right now.  The corporate media's decision to freeze out one candidate in an active primary is not journalism and needs to be called out.  Repeating -- neither has reached 1991 delegates and there are 23 states who have yet to hold their primaries.  Counting states, DC and territories, there are 27 primaries still to be held in this race and over 1300 delegates still up for grabs. The race is not over.

Appearing on in-the-tank-for-Joe MSNBC yesterday, Tim Haines (REAL POLITICS) reports Joe was still faced with the question on people's minds: "Where is Joe Biden?"

MSNBC, YASMIN VOSSOUGHIAN: Mr. Vice President, I've got to be honest with you, over the last two weeks or so I've had a lot of people ask me online, every single day, where is Joe Biden? As a candidate for president, are you making yourself visible enough, especially during this crisis, because it is a fine line to walk. You certainly don't want to be seen as the candidate who is politicizing a pandemic when Americans face this crisis.

His answers included "I've been on the phone."  Yes, Joe, we saw that video.



It's rather embarrassing but if Joe wants to bring it up again, so be it.


Jack Brewster (FORBES) notes Joe declared in the MSNBC interview yesterday that the coronavirus has not led to him changing his mind about Medicare For All -- he still opposes it.  Is that really a surprise?  When has Joe Biden ever been able to learn from a mistake?

Never.

Eoin Higgins (COMMON DREAMS) adds:

"Are you now reconsidering your position when it comes to single-payer healthcare?" asked Vossoughian.
"Single payer will not solve that at all," Biden replied, referring to the strained U.S. healthcare system. 
The former vice president's rejection of Medicare for All in the midst of a global pandemic was not lost on observers.
"The primary voice speaking out against single-payer right now in the middle of an epidemic is Joe Biden," noted Dig Left researcher Andrew Perez.
Biden's remaining rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), has made his outspoken support for Medicare for All a central plank of his campaign. 
Critics of the former vice president bemoaned his "doubling down" on a position which seemed sure to result in electoral ruin. 

"This is a losing politics," tweeted The Nation literary editor David Marcus. "In almost every state that's held a primary so far, including those Biden has won, exit polls show a majority of Democrats prefer single payer."
The question of whether the U.S. would be better suited to handle the crisis with a Medicare for All system has persisted throughout the coronavirus outbreak, which is expected to get worse and peak in the coming weeks and months. Progressives mourned a California teen who died last week, likely from the coronavirus, after being turned away from a hospital for a lack of insurance and questioned the viability and morality of a healthcare system where something like that could happen during a raging pandemic. 

"How can anyone defend this system?" tweeted Claire Sandberg, the Sanders campaign's national organizing director. "Treatment must be free for all."
In addition to the California teen's death, progressives have cited mass layoffs and unemployment as a reason to transition to a healthcare access arrangement not dependent on one's employer providing health insurance.


While Joe was denying the need for Medicare For All yesterday, Bernie was explaining the need.



Joe's inability to grasp why Medicare For All is a need is a lot like the people who refuse to grasp the need to address climate change.


On MSNBC, Joe gave  a very poor interview.  Joshua Caplan (of the right-wing BRIETBART) notes, "Appearing Monday on MSNBC, former Vice President Joe Biden erroneously referred to Wuhan — the Chinese city (of the Hubei province) in which the deadly coronavirus originated — as 'Luhan province."  William Davis (THE DAILY CALLER) adds that Joe stumbled throughout the interview and had to repeatedly refer to notes in his hand because he repeatedly got lost while answering basic questions.  Senility is not pretty.  Right-winger Pat Buchanan (at CNS NEWS) states, "He pops up infrequently in interviews out of the basement of his Delaware home where, sheltering in place, he reads short scripted speeches from a teleprompter."  No, Pat, that's not true.  He also does interviews from his basement where he has to repeatedly refer to note cards.  For those not grasping why we, a left-wing site, note right-wing outlets, have you forgotten that Joe's 'electable' -- or claims to be?  He keeps swearing he's going to bring in right-wing votes.  Right-wing outlets and polling (of independents, moderates and swing voters) are not bearing that out, but that is his claim.

RING OF FIRE notes:

Joe Biden’s latest poll numbers against Donald Trump should make every Democrat in this country nervous. The former Vice President is suffering from a near-complete lack of enthusiasm with American voters, including his own supporters, and that’s exactly what happened with Hillary in 2016. The establishment and the voters are making the same mistakes they made in 2016, and they’re going to yield the same results, as Ring of Fire’s Farron Cousins explains. 





Farron Cousins: A new ABC news and Washington post poll was released over this weekend that shouldn’t leave anybody that calls themselves a Democrat feeling hopeful about the 2020 presidential election. This latest poll looked at the head to head match-ups between Donald Trump and Joe Biden and it looked at enthusiasm. It looked at where each candidate stood on the issues in terms of support from the public and it revealed that yes, we are reliving 2016 folks. Not only is Joe Biden statistically tied now with Donald Trump and head to head matches, whereas just a month ago before the whole pandemic, Biden was beating him by a fairly decent margin and now they’re tied. Even after Donald Trump bungled the response for the pandemic, he is still tied with Joe Biden. So impeachment didn’t affect him. Pandemics not affecting him. Joe Biden’s in trouble. But honestly, folks, that’s not even the worst part of this poll. The worst part is that much like Hillary Clinton, there is absolutely no enthusiasm among Democrats to vote for Joe Biden.
Only 24% of Democrats say that they are very enthusiastic about voting for Joe Biden. That number is over 50% by Republicans who say they’re very enthusiastic about voting for Donald Trump. That spells disaster, and that’s Joe Biden’s biggest problem. That enthusiasm gap. Why, why should we vote for you? What are you offering? How are you going to make our lives better? Here’s the thing I think a lot of people don’t quite understand. You know, we have sat here every single day for the last three plus years talking about all of the horrible things that Donald Trump has done. All of the people he is injured, all of the economic harm he has inflicted. All the attacks on healthcare, all the empty promises, all of it. But here’s the thing. Most of the things that Donald Trump has done do not personally affect most Americans. The trade wars have absolutely devastated American farmers.
That’s, that’s true. That is a policy that is 100% Trump that had a very real impact on these people’s lives. They have lost a lot. But look at the average person walking down the street. Okay. Has their life changed since Donald Trump came into office? Did it get worse? Did it get better or did it stay the same? For most people, the answer is it stayed the same. And that’s the problem, folks. If things aren’t getting worse for too many people and you have a candidate who’s not offering anything different than those people are thinking, well, nothing’s changed for me as it is. You’re telling me nothing’s going to change under you. So why should I switch horses right now in mid stream? Like, why not, why not just keep with the guy who hasn’t effected my life?

And that’s where the enthusiasm gap comes in. Now, if Joe Biden were actually out there offering something to benefit most people instead of a health insurance plan that still leaves 10 million to die, maybe he’d have a little bit more support. If he was offering debt-free college, student loan forgiveness, a green new deal, anything like that, there would be enthusiasm. But he’s not offering that. He’s offering people more of the same without realizing most people’s lives haven’t actually changed under Donald Trump. And I know that’s a sad reality for people to accept, but it’s reality nonetheless. Honestly, look at your day to day life. Tell me what’s different between now and five years ago. You’re still paying astronomical cost for pharmaceuticals, but you also did that under democratic presidents. If you’re not a minority, and I know that sounds horrible, but you’re not experiencing the hate crimes that we have seen increase under Donald Trump and most people don’t even think about those things.



Alex Swoyer (WASHINGTON TIMES) adds:

Exit polls from Michigan and Missouri on Super Tuesday, when more than a dozen states cast their ballot for a Democratic nominee, revealed less than half of all Democratic voters were enthusiastic about Mr. Biden.

The lack of enthusiasm for Mr. Biden could be concerns over his age and health, said Towson University professor Richard E. Vatz, a scholar of political rhetoric and campaigning.


In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, Joe has no answers.  When asked -- like on THE VIEW -- he refers people to his website where a confusing paper that someone wrote exists.  Branko Marcetic (IN THESE TIMES) notes that the paper answers nothing and we'll zoom in on this section of Branko's report:

On the other hand, Biden is supporting the coronavirus emergency bill that has been the subject of days of congressional wrangling, including its provisions of direct checks of $1,200 per American making less than $75,000 a year, and $500 per child. Biden has cautioned that “it’s not everything that I would want,” and indeed, these provisions have come under heavy criticism from progressives. Not only does the bureaucracy involved mean the payments will come far too late for many families, but the means-tested, one-time sum of $1,200 falls far short of the proposals for universal payments of $2,000 a month per family for the duration of the crisis, $1,000 a month per American until a year after the crisis is over following an initial payment of $2,000, and $2,000 a month per adult and $1,000 per child, all respectively proposed by progressives like Sanders, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), and Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).
Does Biden prefer a larger payment? If so, how much larger? Would it be means-tested or universal? Would it be a one-time check or continuous? How does he feel about the potentially months-long delay involved? And does he still prefer to devolve power to state and local governments to distribute this money?
Biden himself hasn’t clarified. His defenders say he’s trying not to step on Democrats’ toes during negotiations; yet as the prospective nominee, not only is he meant to be setting the party’s agenda, but he should also be putting forward ideas that will compete against Trump come the general election, who has improbably ridden his catastrophically bungled response to the crisis to his best-ever approval ratings.

Biden’s approach to mortgages and evictions faces similar confusion. Contrary to his statement on The View, there is no eviction freeze laid out in Biden’s plan. Rather, he leaves it up to governors and mayors to draw on the Emergency Fund “to implement rental assistance, no-interest forbearance or mortgage payment relief.”


Now Bernie and Elizabeth Warren were repeatedly hounded by the media with 'how will you pay for it' on plans related to Medicare For All, college tuition, etc.  But no one asks Joe how he will pay for his plan, nor do they even try to pin him down on specifics.

As for the $2,000 a month that Americans need?  Jake Johnson (COMMON DREAMS) explains why that will probably not happen -- the GOP and Donald Trump are saying last Friday's stimulus will be the last.  If that surprises you, you weren't paying attention.  It's now up to Nancy Pelosi to show some leadership and demand the American people get the money they need.

At THE NATIONAL, Toby Harnden points out:

Now he is unable to hold fundraisers at the homes of wealthy donors or whip up enthusiasm with large rallies. Trying to ask people facing economic ruin to donate cash to a politician can look unseemly. So, too, does running television advertisements lambasting Mr. Trump.
Mr Biden, a full-time politician for five decades, is a traditionalist who shows little aptitude for the mastery of digital tools. On camera, he is an uncertain performer prone to stumbles and misstatements of fact.
The former vice president’s impromptu home television studio is an imperfect setting for broadcasts. In a speech last week, he apparently lost track of his teleprompter and suddenly stopped talking before frantically motioning to off-screen aides.

Coughing repeatedly and often touching his eyes and nose, Mr Biden was chastised by one host for sneezing into his hand rather than his arm. At times he has been plain puzzling, such as when he stated: “We have to take care of the cure. That will make the problem worse no matter what.”

Regarding the first paragraph above, it wouldn't be that hard for Joe to note that, if he became the nominee, he would accept public financing for the general election.  That's what everyone did post-Watergate until Barack Obama's Wall Street contributions (passed off as small donors until the press finally took a serious look) in 2008 led him to become the first to opt out of public finance.

Meanwhile "Did Joe Biden assault staffer Tara Reade"?  That's a key question.  In RELEVANT MAGAZINE's latest podcast, they explore the charges of assault that Tara Reade, former staffer of then-Senator Joe Biden, has made against the nominee.  As  Mike noted in last week's community roundtable:

This week, Tara Reade became an issue for Joe when Ryan Grimm reported on her allegations for THE INTERCEPT and noted that TimesUp! refused to help her.  He then discussed that on THE HILL's RISING with Krystal Ball.  Katie Halper interviewed Tara about her story.  Those late to the party can refer to my "Tara Reade was assaulted by Joe Biden" and "Joe Biden assaulted Tara Reade" and C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot," "Iraq snapshot" and "Iraq snapshot."  Anna North (VOX) explains, "Reade says Biden sexually assaulted her, pushing her against a wall and penetrating her with his fingers. When she pulled away, she says, he said he thought she 'liked' him."  The corporate media has been reluctant to cover the issue all week. 


Robby Soave (REASON) notes the corporate media's silence on Tara Reade:

The mainstream media have remained bafflingly silent about Tara Reade, a former member of then-Senator Biden's staff who claims that he sexually assaulted her in 1993. Reade's name has only appeared twice in The Washington Post, and both were quick asides: A news roundup from April of last year briefly acknowledged an earlier, milder version of Reade's accusation, and a recent rapid-fire Q&A asked a Post political reporter to weigh-in on the political ramifications "of the Tara Reade bombshell." (The nature of the bombshell is not described.)

And while the coronavirus pandemic is obviously dominating news coverage, CNN has made plenty of time for Biden. Chris Cillizza is still ranking Biden's potential veep choices, and the network conducted a virtual townhall event with the candidate last Friday. Reade's name didn't come up, and it has never appeared at CNN.com. At NBC, it's the same story: Chuck Todd interviewed Biden but didn't ask about the allegation.

At INDIANA DAILY STUDENT, Liam O'Sullivan notes:

Sexual assault allegations obviously didn’t prevent President Donald Trump from winning the White House in 2016. But at the time, mainstream media networks urged us to believe the president’s accusers. This time, however, legacy news media has largely ignored the allegations. Tara Reade, a former staffer for then-Sen. Biden, told her story in an interview with podcast host Katie Halper that circulated across social media nearly a week ago, but mainstream liberal news organizations have not reported on it.
That same practice of believing women when they come forward has apparently not applied to Reade. If we are to believe the president’s many accusers, which I do, then we also need to accept that Reade’s accusations are being made in good faith.

Conservative outlets have seized the opportunity to point out the hypocrisy. The National Review, for example, published a story with the headline “Joe Biden, Democrats, and Sexual Assault: They Never Learn.”

[. . . ]

For some, Biden’s alleged conduct isn’t a barrier to support at all. Podcaster Stephanie Wittels Wachs said in a now-deleted tweet, “For the sake of argument, say Biden is a rapist. Trump is also a rapist. So why not vote for the rapist with better policies?”
That ghoulish sentiment is wrong on the face of it. We should not trust someone with credible sexual assault allegations against him with women’s policy, regardless of his political record.
Believing Reade and holding Biden to this standard may hand Trump the presidency. That’s a very real possibility, but if the Democratic Party has principles, it needs to follow them now.

Personally, when faced with a choice between two alleged rapists, I would elect to choose neither. It’s not like he has the nomination quite yet anyway. Bernie Sanders is still running and thus far has had no sexual assault allegations publicized against him. It’s time for principles to prevail, and that means not risking the election of another sexual predator.


We'll close with this ALJAZEERA report on Iraq's healthcare system:



New content at THIRD:

• Truest statement of the week
• Truest statement of the week II
• A note to our readers
• Editorial: The suffering never ends in Iraq
• TV: Entertainment?
• Did Joe Biden assault staffer Tara Reade
• Avoid GIllian G. Gaar's very bad book (Ava and C.I...
• NPR hires idiots who strip women of the credit the...
• Roundtable
• Murder Most Foul
• This edition's playlist
• Highlights

The following sites updated:

• 
  SICKOFITRADLZ

  What do we need?
  

  4 minutes ago
• 
  Mikey Likes It!

  Bernie
  

  7 hours ago
• 
  Dissident Voice

  The Swedish Alternative: Coronavirus as a Grand Gamble
  

  7 hours ago
• 
  Thomas Friedman is a Great Man

  INDEBTED
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Trina's Kitchen

  Stories from the past
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Kat's Korner (of The Common Ills)

  John Prine, Joe Diffie, Alan Merrill
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Oh Boy It Never Ends

  DVD sales?
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Ruth's Report

  Seth Rich
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Sex and Politics and Screeds and Attitude

  the silencing of tara reade
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Like Maria Said Paz

  Tara Reade?
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Ann's Mega Dub

  Tweet of the week?
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  World news: Iraq | guardian.co.uk

  Fears over hidden Covid-19 outbreak in Lebanon, Iraq and Syria
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Antiwar.com Original

  Netanyahu Uses Coronavirus To Lure Rival Gantz Into ‘Emergency’ Government
  

  8 hours ago
• 
  Third Estate Sunday Review

  TV: Entertainment?
  

  9 hours ago
• 
  Cedric's Big Mix

  A giggle in difficult times
  

  13 hours ago
• 
  The Daily Jot

  THIS JUST IN! WE ALL COULD USE A LAUGH!
  

  13 hours ago
• 
  Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union

  Is Location Tracking Technology the Magic Pill to Stemming the Coronavirus?
  

  15 hours ago
• 
  The Official Jody Watley Website

  Jody Watley Digital Music Update. March.
  

  20 hours ago
• 
  Cindy Sheehan's Soapbox

  Clarity on Corona with Sayer Ji (Soapbox Podcast March 29, 2020)
  

  1 day ago 

INDEBTED

INDEBTED aired two episodes Thursday night. I did not watch live. I posted without even thinking it was Thursday. It's hard to keep track sometimes. Like most people, I'm sure, I'm just trying to get through the day. I was about to turn in when I realized that it was Thursday so I went to my DVR on HULU PLUS and there were two episodes. I was looking over some work during the first episode. :( Or first one I watched.

In the second one Joanna was upset because, when she was a teenager, Stew walked in as she was making out with her girlfriend and it upset her and made her stay in the closet longer. She said. Stew didn't remember it. So she starts dating that high school girlfriend again so that the woman can back her up on what happened. Stew apologizes and plans to make a Mexican meal for them to make up for it. The girlfriend doesn't want it, she tells Joanna. She has reservations for them at an expensive place that will charge them if they don't keep the appointment. Joanna has a point to prove and, darn it, they're proving a point. The episode ends with Joanna, her girlfriend and Stew headed off for an Indigo Girls concert.

In that episode, or maybe the first one, Dave and Rebecca . . .

In the other episode, Dave and Rebecca were trying to spend time alone because the kids were staying with friends. It was not as easy as they hoped. First off, Debbie and Stew wanted to spend time with them. Joanna was off to a yurt and wanted Dave and Rebecca to walk her dog. In the end, Debbie and Stew spent time with Joanna and had fun and posted online about it while Dave and Rebecca were not able to get into a club and their plans to binge stream a program didn't work because there were cable or internet problems. So they ended up going to the yurt and it is not fun -- an inflatable mattress and bear spray -- spray to keep bears away.

They see all photos on social media with Joanna and Stew and Debbie having fun and they decide to go over to Joanna's and give up their plans for a night alone. Later, they start to watch the binge show and quickly learn that it's not worth watching.

INDEBTED has been a very good show to watch. I hope NBC renews it for a second season. It's my pick for best new show of the year. Doubt it?

Shortly HOW TO GET AWAY WITH MURDER returns. I cover that. It airs on Thursdays. I will be doing double duty. Wasn't planning on taking on another Thursday night show but INDEBTED is so good.


"Iraq snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Monday, March 30, 2020.  New Zealand follows France's lead in announcing a withdrawal from Iraq, thug Moqtada al-Sadr states same-sex marriage caused the coronavirus, Joe Biden continues to struggle but it helped by a corporate media that refuses to say the name "Tara Reade."


Starting in the US where nonsense prevails.  Senile and struggling Joe Biden remains a car wreck.  Mark Moore (NEW YORK POST) reports:

Former Vice President Joe Biden and President Trump are virtually neck and neck in the 2020 presidential race, a new poll released Sunday found.
Registered voters opted for Biden by 49 percent over Trump’s 47 percent, the Washington Post-ABC News poll shows — with the president closing a 7 percentage point gap from February as his administration responds to the coronavirus outbreak.
Registered voters by 47 to 43 percent said they “trust” Trump to handle the coronavirus pandemic over Biden, but thought the Democratic presidential candidate would be better able to manage health care than the president by 50 to 41 percent.

On who they trust on the economy, registered voters picked Trump 52 to 42 percent.

Martin Pengelly (GUARDIAN) reporting on the same poll notes:

Biden has not yet secured the Democratic nomination for 2020 but he is well ahead of the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders in the delegate count. Amid widespread public lockdowns as the coronavirus spreads, many primaries have been delayed, leaving the race in limbo.
The Post-ABC poll put Biden 55%-39% up over Sanders among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.


Bernard Goldberg (THE HILL) offers, "Joe Biden is the presumptive candidate for his party’s nomination for president. As such, he’s also, or should be, the one visibly leading the party. But that role has been left to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) who, unlike Biden, aren’t under quarantine, self-imposed or otherwise. And since Biden didn’t lead the fight to get the bill passed, he’ll have a hard time taking credit for it if it works."  Emily Zanotti (THE DAILY WIRE) drops back to the WASHINGTON POST-ABC NEWS poll to point out that "the poll found that fewer than 35% of Democrats are 'enthusiastic' about casting a ballot for the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee."  Fewer than 35% of Democrats are enthusiastic.  This 35% is "the lowest on record for a Democratic presidential candidate in 20 years of ABC [-] Post polls." Rick Klein and Mary Alice Parks (ABC NEWS' THE NOTE) report on that enthusiasm gap and explain, "Biden is behind where Hillary Clinton was in terms of enthusiasm four years ago, even though Biden's delegate edge over Sanders is larger than Clinton's was at the time."  Brad Polumbo (WASHINGTON EXAMINER) offers, "Turnout and enthusiasm are a big part of what wins elections. On this front, Trump looks strong while Biden looks downright awful. This poll suggests that Biden’s voters lean toward him because they think he’s the least-worst option, not because they’re passionate about supporting his candidacy. That’s a recipe for low-turnout and bad news for the former vice president."  REAL CLEAR POLITICS notes:

The "Joe Rogan Experience" host predicted that President Trump would eat Joe Biden alive in a general election: "Trump is going to eat him alive. He’s going to eat that guy alive. The guy can barely remember what he’s talking about while he’s talking."

"You have to be able to call out s**t that’s wrong on your side. That’s the problem the Democratic Party is having right now with that Joe Biden guy. You guys have to be able to call it out. You can’t let this slide, because everybody else sees it, and Trump is going to eat him alive," Rogan said. "He’s going to eat that guy alive."

"The guy can barely remember what he’s talking about while he’s talking," Rogan said. "I'm looking at this like a medical condition."

Call him on his s**t?  The corporate media won't even ask him about his former staffer Tara Reade who has accused him of assault.  Hayley Miller (HUFFINGTON POST) reports:

A former Senate aide to Joe Biden accused him this week of sexually assaulting her nearly 30 years ago. But television hosts who have interviewed the former vice president since she went public with her allegation have so far failed to ask him about it.

In an interview with podcast host Katie Halper published in part on Wednesday, Tara Reade said she had been working in Biden’s Senate office in 1993 when he kissed her and penetrated her with his fingers without her consent. Biden’s presidential campaign has denied the allegation.

Since Wednesday, Biden has appeared on CNN and NBC, as well as a makeshift quarantine edition of ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live” that aired on YouTube. But none of the hosts broached the subject of the recent assault claim.

Neither ABC, CNN nor NBC immediately responded to HuffPost’s requests for comment.

Afroze Fatima Zaidi (THE CANARY) covers the story here (link is text and audio).  Jon Allsop (CJR) notes:

Last year, Tara Reade, a former staffer in Joe Biden’s Senate office, accused Biden of inappropriate touching. (Afterward, some commentators accused Reade of shilling for Vladimir Putin, based on a blog post she wrote praising the Russian president.) Last week, Reade told the podcast host Katie Halper that Biden sexually assaulted her. (Biden denies the allegation; “Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims,” his campaign said.) Media outlets on both the left and the right have covered Reade’s claim, yet mainstream news organizations have mostly avoided it. For The Guardian, Arwa Mahdawi explores the reasons for that.


Javier Manjarres (THE FLORIDIAN), in his round up of news stories, notes:

“Biden sexual assault allegation goes unmentioned in another televised interview” by Fox News’ Gregg Re – Democratic presidential front-runner Joe Biden, who has previously said that women leveling misconduct accusations should be presumptively believed, sat for another television interview Sunday — and again wasn’t asked about the recent accusation by former Senate staffer Tara Reade that the former vice president sexually assaulted her in 1993. Speaking to NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Biden discussed everything from whether sanctions on Iran should be suspended during the coronavirus pandemic (“I would need more information to make that judgment,” Biden responded) to whether Bernie Sanders should drop out of the race (“I think it’s up to Bernie to make the judgment whether or not he should stay in the race or not stay in the race,” Biden said.)  


Turning to Iraq, yesterday New Zealand made news by announcing they were withdrawing all of their troops from Iraq.   The NEW ZELAND HERALD reported, "Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Defence Minister Ron Mark made the announcement today, saying it followed the successful conclusion of the mission at Taji to train Iraqi forces."  This follows last Thursday's announcement by the French government that France would be pulling all of its troops out of Iraq.  And the US?  Keeping the same troop numbers, just shuffling them around.  AP reports:

The U.S.-led coalition in Iraq withdrew Sunday from a military base in the country's north that nearly launched Washington into an open war with neighboring Iran.

The K1 Air Base is the third site coalition forces have left this month, in line with U.S. plans to consolidate its troops in two locations in Iraq.



In other news, Mark Mazzetti and Eric Schmitt (NEW YORK TIMES) report,  "The Pentagon has ordered military commanders to plan for an escalation of American combat in Iraq, issuing a directive last week to prepare a campaign to destroy an Iranian-backed militia group that has threatened more attacks against American troops."  Louisa Loveluck and Missy Ryan (WASHINGTON POST via PITTSBURGH POST-GAZETTE) report that this is in response to increased rocket attacks on US bases is prompting the move and that "American requests that Iraqi authorities track down and prosecute those responsible for rocket attacks have made little  headway."  Gregory Aftandilian (ARAB WEEKLY) adds, "The US military said the Katyusha rocket attacks that killed two US soldiers and one British soldier at Camp Taji base on March 11, which were preceded by other attacks, were coordinated by Kata’ib Hezbollah. In response, the United States struck the militia but the Iraqi government accused the United States of killing and wounding Iraqi soldiers and civilians in the process."  i24 NEWS notes:

The US Department of Defense issued an order last week commanding top generals to come up with a plan to step up the action against an Iraqi Tehran-backed militia seen as the force behind a string of rocket attacks at bases hosting international troops, New York Times reported Friday.

Citing officials with knowledge on the matter, the newspaper says the Pentagon was seeking a plan to destroy Kataeb Hezbollah in a drastic escalation against the Iranian proxy that is formally operating within the Iraqi chain of command.

The order was authorized by US Defense Secretary Mark Esper, the officials told the NYT.

THE NATIONAL explains:

The Pentagon blamed Kataib Hezbollah for a March 11 rocket attack that killed one British and two US personnel in Iraq.
The order was described by officials with knowledge of the internal communications to the New York Times.

But the order faced resistance from within, the military's top commander in Iraq, Lt Gen Robert P White, who said thousands more US troops were required in the country for any such campaign to take place. He also said that such an operation would risk war with Iran.

Karwan Faidhi Dri (RUDAW) observes, "This comes amid the recent US handover of two key military bases to Iraqi forces. Al-Qaim and Qayyarah military bases were signed over to the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) recently, and a US withdraw from Kirkuk’s K1 airbase is expected in the coming weeks."                                                                         

Maira Fantappie and Sam Heller offer their take at WAR ON THE ROCKS:


This dynamic is two-sided, of course, but the armed factions demanding a U.S. exit have little reason to stop it. The asymmetric campaign paramilitaries are waging is low cost and sustainable. And for them, violence is working — they now seem on their way to dramatically reducing U.S. influence in Iraq, tilting Iraqi politics toward their agenda, and, if they run the United States out of the country entirely, scoring a major strategic victory regionally.
If anyone is going to break this retaliatory cycle, then, it has to be the United States. But it cannot be done by doubling down on threats and reflexive deterrent responses. Nor can the United States realistically expect the Iraqi security forces to confront these paramilitary factions, risking wide-open civil conflict. Instead, America’s best chance is to exercise restraint, consult with its Iraqi partners, and provide an opportunity for the formation of a new Iraqi government.
With a new government in place, the United States and its coalition partners could negotiate a new agreement on the deployment of foreign forces in the country that reasserts Iraqi authority and supervision; reduces the U.S. footprint in Iraq, even if only symbolically; and ensures countries other than the United States are the face of the coalition effort to support Iraq. An agreement of this kind would both solidify the legitimate legal basis for coalition forces’ presence and undercut the argument of those denouncing the U.S. presence as a foreign occupation violating Iraqi sovereignty. If the controversy over the legitimacy of foreign forces’ presence can be dialed down, political and popular forces that advocate more balanced relationships with both the United States and Iran should be in a stronger position to reassert themselves. Washington will also be freer to partner with Baghdad on initiatives that could win lasting Iraqi goodwill for the United States, such as support for the country’s coronavirus response.
This broader political shift could also constrain anti-American paramilitaries, which would be defying the country’s government and laws if they continued armed “resistance” against U.S. and foreign forces. These factions are not wholly immune to Iraqi politics; they have an ideology and an agenda, but they also must take into account Iraqi public opinion.

It may be a long shot. Still, this could be the United States’ best hope to remain in the country under relatively stable conditions, both to continue a counter-ISIL fight that is an important U.S. priority and to balance Iran’s influence in Iraqi politics. De-escalation in Iraq is a U.S. interest — it can help create conditions for the formation of a new government and for putting U.S.-Iraqi relations on more solid footing. That is what would represent a genuine strategic victory, albeit not a victory won on the battlefield.


Meanwhile, Thursday, the US Treasury Dept issued the following:

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) today designated 20 Iran- and Iraq-based front companies, senior officials, and business associates that provide support to or act for or on behalf of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) in addition to transferring lethal aid to Iranian-backed terrorist militias in Iraq such as Kata’ib Hizballah (KH) and Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq (AAH). Among other malign activities, these entities and individuals perpetrated or supported: smuggling through the Iraqi port of Umm Qasr; money laundering through Iraqi front companies; selling Iranian oil to the Syrian regime; smuggling weapons to Iraq and Yemen; promoting propaganda efforts in Iraq on behalf of the IRGC-QF and its terrorist militias; intimidating Iraqi politicians; and using funds and public donations made to an ostensibly religious institution to supplement IRGC-QF budgets. The terrorist militias supported by the Iranian regime such as KH and AAH have continued to engage in attacks on U.S. and Coalition forces in Iraq.
“Iran employs a web of front companies to fund terrorist groups across the region, siphoning resources away from the Iranian people and prioritizing terrorist proxies over the basic needs of its people,” said Treasury Secretary Steven T. Mnuchin. “The United States maintains broad exceptions and authorizations for humanitarian aid including agriculture commodities, food, medicine, and medical devices to help the people of Iran combat the coronavirus.”
Today’s designations were taken pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, as amended, which targets terrorists and those providing support to or acting for or on behalf of designated terrorists or supporting acts of terrorism.

RECONSTRUCTION ORGANIZATION OF THE HOLY SHRINES IN IRAQ

The Reconstruction Organization of the Holy Shrines in Iraq (ROHSI) is an IRGC-QF-controlled organization based in Iran and Iraq whose leadership was appointed by the late IRGC-QF Commander Qassem Soleimani. Though ostensibly a religious institution, ROHSI has transferred millions of dollars to the Iraq-based Bahjat al Kawthar Company for Construction and Trading Ltd, also known as Kosar Company, another Iraq-based entity under the IRGC-QF’s control. Kosar Company has served as a base for Iranian intelligence activities in Iraq, including the shipment of weapons and ammunition to Iranian-backed terrorist militia groups. 
Additionally, Kosar Company has received millions of dollars in transfers from the Central Bank of Iran, which was designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 in September 2019 for its financial support of the IRGC-QF and Lebanese Hizballah. Both the IRGC-QF and Hizballah have been designated by the U.S. Department of State as Foreign Terrorist Organizations under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
In addition, IRGC-QF officials have used ROHSI’s funds to supplement IRGC-QF budgets, likely embezzling public donations intended for the construction and maintenance of Shiite shrines in Iraq. 
ROHSI and Kosar Company are being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being owned, controlled, or directed by, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF.
OFAC is also designating Mohammad Jalal Maab, the current head of ROHSI, who was personally appointed to the position by former IRGC-QF Commander Soleimani. Jalal Maab succeeded Hassan Pelarak, an IRGC-QF officer and co-owner of Kosar Company, who was selected by Soleimani to serve as his special assistant on an IRGC-QF-led committee focused on sanctions evasions activity. Pelarak also worked with IRGC-QF officials to transfer missiles, explosives, and small arms to Yemen, intensifying the Yemeni conflict and exacerbating one of the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophes.
Mohammad Jalal Maab is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being a leader or official of ROHSI. Hassan Pelarak is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF. 
Alireza Fadakar, another co-owner of Kosar Company, has worked in Iraq on behalf of the IRGC-QF for several years and is an IRGC-QF commander in Najaf, Iraq. Muhammad al-Ghorayfi is an IRGC-QF affiliate and employee of Kosar Company who provides administrative support to Fadakar and has facilitated the travel of IRGC-QF officials between Iraq and Iran.
Alireza Fadakar is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF. Muhammad al-Ghorayfi is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, Alireza Fadakar.
Masoud Shoustaripousti, another co-owner of Kosar Company, has worked in Iraq on behalf of the IRGC-QF for several years and has laundered money for the group. Shoushtaripousti worked with Mashallah Bakhtiari, who used Kosar Company to launder money and worked with officials at the Baghdad-based branch of Iran’s Bank Melli to deposit funds for the IRGC-QF in Iraq. OFAC designated Bank Melli in November 2018, pursuant to E.O. 13224, for acting as a conduit for payments to the IRGC-QF which also used Bank Melli to dispense funds to Iranian-backed terrorist groups in Iraq.
Masoud Shoustaripousti is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF. Mashallah Bakhtiari is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF.

AL KHAMAEL MARITIME SERVICES

Separately, OFAC is taking action against Al Khamael Maritime Services (AKMS), an Iraq-based company operating out of Umm Qasr port in which the IRGC-QF has a financial interest. The IRGC-QF leveraged Shiite militia group contacts to evade Iraqi government inspection protocol at Umm Qasr port and has charged foreign companies and vessels fees for services at its terminal at the port. AKMS also worked to sell Iranian-origin petroleum products in contravention of U.S. sanctions against the Iranian regime.
AKMS is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being owned, controlled, or directed by, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF. 
OFAC is also designating Hasan Saburinezhad, also known as Engineer Morteza, who is involved in the finances of AKMS. As a representative of AKMS, Saburinezhad worked to facilitate the entry of Iranian shipments into Iraqi ports for the benefit of the IRGC-QF. Saburinezhad is also involved in IRGC-QF financial and economic activities between Iran, Iraq, and Syria, including smuggling activities along the Syria/Iraq border. Saburinezhad also runs smuggling routes to help Iraqi terrorist group KH and the IRGC-QF smuggle goods into Iraq from Iran, and has assisted KH in funding the acquisition and transfer of goods out of Iran.  
Saburinezhad is the Managing Director and a member of the board of directors of Mada’in Novin Traders (MNT), an Iran- and Iraq-based company associated with multiple IRGC-QF officials, including Vali Gholizadeh, who has worked with Saburinezhad for the benefit of both AKMS and MNT. 
Hasan Saburinezhad is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF. Mada’in Novin Traders is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being owned, controlled, or directed by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Saburinezhad. Gholizadeh is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being a leader or official of Mada’in Novin Traders.
OFAC is also designating Mohammed Saeed Odhafa Al Behadili, the Managing Director of AKMS, and Ali Hussein Falih Al-Mansoori, also known as Seyyed Rezvan, the company’s deputy managing director and head of its board of directors. Additionally, as of 2018, Al Behadili was focused on facilitating shipments and business transactions to circumvent U.S. sanctions against the Iranian regime. Al-Mansoori has worked with IRGC-QF officials on business issues related to AKMS. 
Mohammed Saeed Odhafa Al Behadili is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, AKMS. Ali Hussein Falih Al-Mansoori is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being a leader or official of AKMS.
Sayyed Reza Musavifar, who is responsible for the accounts and finances of AKMS, has worked with the IRGC-QF to transfer money to terrorist militias, including KH and Lebanese Hizballah. In 2014, Musavifar transferred the equivalent of millions of dollars of foreign currency to senior IRGC-QF officials. 
Musavifar is a part owner of Middle East Saman Chemical Company, an Iran-based company that maintained an account at Rashed Exchange, an Iran-based exchange house used to convert currency for the IRGC-QF that was designated in May 2018 for being owned or controlled by Mohammadreza Khedmati, an individual designated for support to the IRGC-QF. 
Sayyed Reza Musavifar is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, the IRGC-QF. Middle East Saman Chemical Company is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for being owned, controlled, or directed by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Sayyed Reza Musavifar.
Additionally, Ali Farhan Asadi is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, AKMS.

SAYYED YASER MUSAVIR AND MEHDI GHASEMZADEH

IRGC-QF official Sayyed Yaser Musavir has been deployed to Iraq extensively since early 2014 in support of the IRGC-QF, and he has coordinated operations between the group and Iraqi terrorist militia group officials. In 2019, Musavir coordinated with IRGC-QF officials to sell Iranian petroleum products to Syria. In 2018, Musavir coordinated propaganda efforts with AAH on behalf of senior IRGC-QF officials. AAH was designated in January 2020 by the U.S. Department of State as a Foreign Terrorist Organization under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and as Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) pursuant to E.O. 13224.
Sayyed Yaser Musavir is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF.
Mehdi Ghasemzadeh is an IRGC-QF official and is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, the IRGC-QF.

SHAYKH ‘ADNAN AL-HAMIDAWI

Shaykh ‘Adnan Al-Hamidawi is a Special Operations Commander for KH who in 2019 planned to intimidate Iraqi politicians who did not support the removal of U.S. forces from Iraq. KH, an Iranian-backed terrorist militia group that has been a U.S. Department of State-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization and SDGT since 2009, receives lethal support from the IRGC-QF, and has been responsible for numerous terrorist acts against Iraqi, U.S., and Coalition forces in Iraq for over a decade, including bombings, rocket attacks, and sniper operations.  
Shaykh ‘Adnan Al-Hamidawi is being designated pursuant to E.O. 13224 for having acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, KH.

SANCTIONS IMPLICATIONS

As a result of today’s action, all property and interests in property of these persons that are in or come within the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons must be blocked and reported to OFAC. OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all dealings by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve and property or interests in property of blocked persons.
In addition, persons that engage in certain transactions with the persons designated today may themselves be exposed to sanctions. Furthermore, any foreign financial institution that knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant transaction on behalf of individuals and entities designated today could be subject to U.S. correspondent account or payable-through account sanctions.
Identifying information on the entities designated today.

####

In coronavirus news, TREND NEWS AGENCY notes, "Iraq's Health Ministry on Saturday confirmed two more deaths from COVID-19 and 48 new cases of infections with the virus, Trend reports citing Xinhua. The new cases included nine in the capital Baghdad, 10 in Najaf, six in Basra, five in Erbil and Duhok each, four in Muthanna, three in Karbala, two in Wasit and one in the provinces of Kirkuk, Sulaimaniyah, Diyala and Maysan each, the ministry said in a statement."  KURDISTAN 24 notes that the number of confirmed cases is now 506.


AFP notes:

Fearing the respiratory illness could somehow spread from the corpses to nearby population centres, Iraqi religious authorities, tribes and townspeople have sent the bodies of COVID-19 victims back to hospital morgues, where they are piling up. 
"We couldn't hold a funeral for him and haven't been able to bury his body, even though it's been more than a week since he died," Malik told AFP, his voice laced with bitterness.
Armed men claiming to be tribal leaders threatened Malik, his family and his friends, saying they would set fire to his car if they tried to bury the body in their area. 
"Can you imagine that across this huge country Iraq, there aren't a few square meters to bury a small number of bodies?"


Still on coronavirus, The whispers on social media that Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr is gay won't go away.  In Iraq, you can be killed if someone suspects you are gay and Moqtada's thugs have killed many thought to be gay over the years.  Moqtada?  He'll never be killed even though many suspect he is gay because Moqtada has his own militia -- his only claim to power beyond his shrinking cult at present.  Moqtada's latest announcement is only yet again fueling the rumors on social media.  Yasmine Mosimann  (RUDAW) reports:

Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr is the latest global religious leader to ignore scientific consensus and accuse the LGBT+ community of causing the coronavirus pandemic.

“One of most significant things to cause the spread of this epidemic is the legalization of same-sex marriage,” said the top cleric in a tweet on Saturday, adding “hence, I call on governments to repeal this law immedietely, without delay.”

Sadr’s comments come at a time when coronavirus has rapidly swept across the world, devastating countries with and without same-sex marriage alike.

Stephen Hickey, British ambassador to Iraq, responded to Sadr’s comment in a tweet saying the United Kingdom “will not change its law on equal marriage, which they are proud of.”

“Instead, let's work together on a better foundation of medical and scientific advice to win the battle against coronavirus,” added the ambassador.

Amir Ashour, founder and executive director at IraQueer, says tweets like Sadr’s are dangerous for Iraq’s LGBT+ community: “We believe such tweets are not only misleading the public scientifically, but are also an attempt to weaponize the current situation and capitalize on the fear of people from the unknown to increase attacks against LGBT+ people.”

“Muqtada al-Sadr is leading a militia which has a documented history of torturing and killing LGBT+ people in organized campaigns using horrific means,” added Ashour in an email statement to Rudaw English.

IRAQUEER, an LGBTQ organization in Iraq, released the following statement:

We condemn Muqtada Al Sadr's statement which claims that same sex marriage is the cause of the coronavirus.  Such statements do not only lack scientific grounds, but are also weaponizing Iraqi people's fears during stressful times to target LGBT+ people. Making such ignorant statements will not only endanger LGBT+ people's lives, but will also put the lives of all Iraqis at risk.  The coronavirus is a pandemic that must be dealt with seriously and medically, and Muqtada Al Sadr's tweet will only distract us from what is really important, which is to save Iraqi lives.