Showing posts with label billionaire sociopath. Show all posts
Showing posts with label billionaire sociopath. Show all posts

Friday, January 20, 2017

The Relentless Assault On American Democracy Has Begun: The Billionaire Sociopath Comes to the White House

 All,

JANUARY 20, 2017:  NATIONAL DAY OF RECKONING

Here comes the straight up evil agenda of the incoming neofascist administration led of course by the trolling billionaire sociopath. And if you don't think that this incredibly wealthy, greedy, selfish, bigoted, cruel, dishonest and ignorant gang of mercenary demagogues and pathological liars (for verification do your own research check of exactly who these people are and what they have actually done throughout their careers for the ugly evidence), are not going to relentlessly try to do every single thing that their "Fearless Leader" promised (and more) then you are seriously deluding yourself. The very disturbing truth is that this bunch of swaggering far rightwing bullies are going to be far worse than they are depicted in this article (which is reprehensible enough), and the fallout from the draconian policies they will propose and enact are going to have a devastating impact on not only the millions who voted against this administration and everything it stands for but will also adversely affect many of their resentful and scapegoating supporters as well. If you don't believe me just WATCH AND SEE...Stay tuned because the worse is yet to come...for real...

Kofi


Politics

Trump Nominees Make Clear Plans to Sweep Away Obama Policies

by MICHAEL D. SHEAR
January 19, 2017
New York Times

WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald J. Trump’s cabinet nominees, while moderating some of their stances, have made it clear during two weeks of hearings that they intend to work hard to sweep away President Obama’s domestic policy by embracing a deeply conservative approach to governing.

In dozens of hours of testimony, Mr. Trump’s nominees told senators that they favored less regulation, a smaller federal government, more state control over policy decisions and taxpayer money, and greater personal responsibility by Americans across the country.

The sometimes contentious hearings continued up until the day before the inauguration, as Mr. Trump triumphantly arrived in Washington on Thursday to kick off three highly choreographed days that will usher Republicans back into full political power in Washington for the first time in more than a decade.

After arriving at Joint Base Andrews on a military plane that will become Air Force One the next time he steps onboard, Mr. Trump visited the Trump International Hotel before making an appearance at the Lincoln Memorial, where thousands watched an inaugural concert.

The Trump White House

Stories on the presidential transition and the forthcoming Trump administration.



Donald Trump’s Inauguration Becomes a Time to Protest and Plan JAN 20



5 Trump Voters on Going to Washington

JAN 20



Following in the Footsteps of Presidents Past

JAN 19



Concert for Trump Misses an Opportunity

JAN 19


A Trump Administration, With Obama Staff Members Filling In the Gaps JAN 19

See More »

“All over the world they are talking about it. All over the world,” Mr. Trump told the crowd before a fireworks display over the National Mall. “And I love you folks, and we’re going to work together. And we are going to make America great again.”
That work will be shaped by the new president’s cabinet, which is coming under scrutiny as lawmakers from both parties press the nominees about their fealty to Mr. Trump’s campaign promises and their adherence to their own long records.
Many of the nominees sought to shave the sharp edges off Mr. Trump’s more provocative campaign promises and their own past decisions and statements. Some backed away completely from past assertions, making clean breaks with Mr. Trump on climate change or the need to build a wall at the Mexican border.

Others remained vague about their commitment to the most divisive proposals in their policy areas, leaving a veil of uncertainty over what they would do to lead their departments if confirmed.

Ben Carson, the housing secretary nominee, told lawmakers that “safety net programs are important.” But he did not disown past statements about the failure of government interventions and his belief that poverty was “really more of a choice than anything else.”

PHOTO: Ben Carson during his confirmation hearing to lead the department of housing and urban development last week. Credit Al Drago/The New York Times

Scott Pruitt, the Environmental Protection Agency nominee, told senators that he now believed that “climate change is not a hoax.” But he also forcefully advocated a far smaller and more restrained agency, while criticizing federal rules established by Mr. Obama’s administration to protect air and water and tackle climate change.

Betsy DeVos, a longtime supporter of charter schools, pledged to work for “common ground,” but did not back down on the use of federal money for private and religious schools. Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, the attorney general nominee, vowed to be “impartial and enforce laws that I didn’t vote for,” while holding firm to a decades-long conservative approach to immigration and civil rights.

Several Democratic lawmakers appeared exasperated as they sought to pin the nominees down on the actions they intended to take in office.

“Will you insist upon that equal accountability in any K-12 school or educational program that receives federal funding whether public, public charter or private?” Senator Tim Kaine, Democrat of Virginia, asked Ms. DeVos.

“I support accountability,” she said, repeating that phrase three times in response to Mr. Kaine’s efforts to extract a more detailed answer.

But there is no doubt that Mr. Trump’s nominees collectively will lead an effort to undermine the legacy of Mr. Obama on the environment, health care, immigration, civil rights and education.

In his remarks to lawmakers, Representative Tom Price of Georgia, the nominee for secretary of health and human services, promised to lead an effort to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. Representative Ryan Zinke of Montana, the nominee to lead the Interior Department, said he supported drilling, mining and logging on federal lands. Mr. Sessions came to the defense of police departments, saying officers had been “unfairly maligned and blamed” for the actions of a few in cases involving the deaths of young black men.“There’s a great deal of reform coming to Washington,” Sean Spicer, the president’s incoming press secretary, said during his first on-camera briefing on Thursday. “These are amazing individuals that have a commitment to enacting an agenda of change.”

Taken together, the congressional testimony reflects a domestic policy agenda that is still evolving. The president-elect recently said he wanted his nominees to “be themselves and express their own thoughts, not mine!” On Friday, he will have an opportunity to sketch out a broad vision during his inaugural address from the steps of the Capitol. 

During his campaign, Mr. Trump was often contradictory in laying out a domestic policy blueprint.

On immigration, he talked about the mass deportation of 11 million undocumented workers, then later said he was focused on getting “bad dudes” out of the country. He also proposed, then backed away from, a total ban on Muslim immigration to the United States.

PHOTO: Betsy DeVos arriving for her confirmation hearing to be secretary of education on Tuesday. Credit Al Drago/The New York Times

Mr. Trump at times called for having guns in classrooms, but other times said he opposed that policy. He said he was against a “first-strike” policy on the use of nuclear weapons, but also said he could not “take anything off the table.” He said in one interview that he would criminalize a woman’s decision to have an abortion; in another, he said the opposite.

As his nominees faced lawmakers during the past two weeks, many of them took a similar approach, responding to questions about their records with less hard-edge language even as they declined to accept Democrats’ approaches.

The hearing for Mr. Price was one example. Mr. Price, an orthopedic surgeon from an Atlanta suburb, sought to reassure senators that he and Mr. Trump did not want to let people “fall through the cracks” as they overhauled the nation’s health care system.

“Nobody’s interested in pulling the rug out from under anybody,” Mr. Price said. “We believe that it’s absolutely imperative that individuals that have health coverage be able to keep health coverage and move, hopefully, to greater choices and opportunities.”

But any Democrats who heard those comments as a kind of concession in the fight to unravel Mr. Obama’s health care law are likely to be disappointed.

Mr. Price insisted that “states know best” in caring for Medicaid beneficiaries. He said the government should not dictate care to patients. And he vowed that Mr. Trump and his administration would put in place “a different construct” for providing health care to every American.

Wilbur Ross, the billionaire investor who will serve as commerce secretary if he is confirmed, also tried to reassure senators on issues like trade, even as he echoed some of Mr. Trump’s more incendiary promises of economic warfare with other nations.

Like the president-elect, Mr. Ross lashed out at China, accusing it of being “the most protectionist country of the very large countries — they talk more about free trade than they actually practice.”

But he also declared that he was “not anti-trade” and declared as unworkable Mr. Trump’s proposal of a 35 percent tax on American companies that manufacture goods overseas and try to sell them in the United States.

Shortly after arriving in Washington on Thursday, Mr. Trump toasted his cabinet nominees, telling a luncheon audience at his Pennsylvania Avenue hotel that there had never been better ones.

“We have by far the highest I.Q.,” he said, “of any cabinet ever assembled.”

A version of this article appears in print on January 20, 2017, on Page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Trump Arrives, Set to Assume Power. Order Reprints| Today's Paper


Related Coverage:

Steven Mnuchin, Treasury Nominee, Failed to Disclose $100 Million in Assets JAN. 19, 2017



Nominee Betsy DeVos’s Knowledge of Education Basics Is Open to Criticism

JAN. 18, 2017



Trump Budget Nominee Did Not Pay Taxes for Employee

JAN. 18, 2017



‘Learning Curve’ as Rick Perry Pursues a Job He Initially Misunderstood

JAN. 18, 2017

PHOTO: Scott Pruitt arriving for his confirmation hearing to be administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday. Credit Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times

Over two weeks of hearings, Donald J. Trump’s cabinet picks have strongly embraced a deeply conservative approach to governing.  nytimes.com


All,

If you think this speech by the billionaire sociopath and everything it both says and connotes is in any way whatsoever a sane or rational understanding of political, social, and economic reality in either this country or the rest of the world in the 21st century you are as clinically braindead and arrogantly delusional as he is...Look out folks because here comes the catastrophe...

Kofi

Donald Trump full inaugural address as 45th President of United States 

United States President Donald Trump spoke to the nation for the first time as Commander-in-Chief Friday afternoon moments after taking the oath of office to become the 45th President.

 
United States President Donald Trump spoke to the nation for the first time as Commander-in-Chief…

A BLAST FROM THE (VERY RECENT) PAST...
"WHAT'S PAST IS PROLOGUE..."


The Post's View
The clear and present danger of Donald Trump

by Editorial Board
September 30, 2016
The Washington Post

IF YOU know that Donald Trump is ignorant, unprepared and bigoted, but are thinking of voting for him anyway because you doubt he could do much harm — this editorial is for you.

Your support of the Republican presidential nominee may be motivated by dislike of the Democratic alternative, disgust with the Washington establishment or a desire to send a message in favor of change. You may not approve of everything Mr. Trump has had to say about nuclear weapons, torture or mass deportations, but you doubt he could implement anything too radical. Congress, the courts, the Constitution — these would keep Mr. Trump in check, you think.

Well, think again. A President Trump could, unilaterally, change this country to its core. By remaking U.S. relations with other nations, he could fundamentally reshape the world, too.

Of course, in many areas Mr. Trump would not have to act unilaterally. If he won, chances are Republicans would maintain control of Congress. GOP majorities there would be enthusiastic participants in much of what Mr. Trump would like to do: gutting environmental and workplace regulations, slashing taxes so that the debt skyrockets, appointing Supreme Court justices who oppose a woman’s right to have an abortion. In areas where Republican officeholders such as House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) imagine themselves acting as a brake on Mr. Trump’s worst instincts, skepticism is in order. If these supposed leaders are too craven to oppose Mr. Trump as a candidate, knowing the danger he presents, why should we expect them to stand up to the bully once he was fully empowered?

But say they did — or imagine, also improbably, that Mr. Trump faced a Democratic Congress. The president would appoint officers — a budget director, an attorney general, a CIA chief — who were disposed to let him have his way. And in the U.S. system, the scope for executive action is, as we will lay out in a series of editorials next week, astonishingly broad. At times we have questioned President Obama’s sweeping use of those powers even when we agreed with his goals, such as his broad grant of amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants. Mr. Trump could push it much further.

The Washington Post explores the origins of Donald Trump's transformation from a businessman to political candidate. (McKenna Ewen, Whitney Shefte, Dalton Bennett/The Washington Post)

Could he tear up long-standing international agreements? Round up and expel millions of longtime U.S. residents? Impose giant tariffs? Waterboard terrorist suspects? Yes, yes, yes and yes — all without so much as an if-you-please to Congress. Could he bar the media from covering him? To a large extent, yes. Could he use the government to help his businesses and, as he has threatened, injure those he perceives as enemies? Yes, he could.

Given Mr. Trump’s ever-evolving positions, and the apparent absence of fundamental beliefs other than in his own brilliance, it would be foolish to make flat predictions of how he would behave. Nor do we underestimate the resilience of the U.S. system or the devotion that U.S. government workers bring to the rule of law.

But it would be reckless not to consider the damage Mr. Trump might wreak. Some of that damage would ensue more from who he is than what he does. His racism and disparagement of women could empower extremists who are now on the margins of American politics, while his lies and conspiracy theories could legitimize discourse that until now has been relegated to the fringe. But his scope for action should not be underestimated, either. In our upcoming editorials, we will examine some arenas where Mr. Trump has been relatively clear about his intentions — and where presidential powers are mighty. We hope you will read them before you vote.

The damage Mr. Trump could do:

A President Trump could deport freely


A President Trump could end the era of American global leadership


A President Trump could wreck progress on global warming


A President Trump could destroy the world economy


How much damage could a President Trump do? We can only begin to imagine.


PHOTO: Donald Trump at a rally in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on Wednesday. (John Locher/Associated Press)

The first in a series of editorials on the damage he could wreak unilaterally as president.

Thursday, January 19, 2017

The Clear and Present Danger of Donald Trump


A BLAST FROM THE (VERY RECENT) PAST...
"WHAT'S PAST IS PROLOGUE..."


The Post's View
The clear and present danger of Donald Trump
by Editorial Board 
September 30, 2016
The Washington Post

IF YOU know that Donald Trump is ignorant, unprepared and bigoted, but are thinking of voting for him anyway because you doubt he could do much harm — this editorial is for you.

Your support of the Republican presidential nominee may be motivated by dislike of the Democratic alternative, disgust with the Washington establishment or a desire to send a message in favor of change. You may not approve of everything Mr. Trump has had to say about nuclear weapons, torture or mass deportations, but you doubt he could implement anything too radical. Congress, the courts, the Constitution — these would keep Mr. Trump in check, you think.

Well, think again. A President Trump could, unilaterally, change this country to its core. By remaking U.S. relations with other nations, he could fundamentally reshape the world, too.

Of course, in many areas Mr. Trump would not have to act unilaterally. If he won, chances are Republicans would maintain control of Congress. GOP majorities there would be enthusiastic participants in much of what Mr. Trump would like to do: gutting environmental and workplace regulations, slashing taxes so that the debt skyrockets, appointing Supreme Court justices who oppose a woman’s right to have an abortion. In areas where Republican officeholders such as House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (Wis.) and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) imagine themselves acting as a brake on Mr. Trump’s worst instincts, skepticism is in order. If these supposed leaders are too craven to oppose Mr. Trump as a candidate, knowing the danger he presents, why should we expect them to stand up to the bully once he was fully empowered?

But say they did — or imagine, also improbably, that Mr. Trump faced a Democratic Congress. The president would appoint officers — a budget director, an attorney general, a CIA chief — who were disposed to let him have his way. And in the U.S. system, the scope for executive action is, as we will lay out in a series of editorials next week, astonishingly broad. At times we have questioned President Obama’s sweeping use of those powers even when we agreed with his goals, such as his broad grant of amnesty to millions of undocumented immigrants. Mr. Trump could push it much further.

The Washington Post explores the origins of Donald Trump's transformation from a businessman to political candidate. (McKenna Ewen, Whitney Shefte, Dalton Bennett/The Washington Post)

Could he tear up long-standing international agreements? Round up and expel millions of longtime U.S. residents? Impose giant tariffs? Waterboard terrorist suspects? Yes, yes, yes and yes — all without so much as an if-you-please to Congress. Could he bar the media from covering him? To a large extent, yes. Could he use the government to help his businesses and, as he has threatened, injure those he perceives as enemies? Yes, he could.

Given Mr. Trump’s ever-evolving positions, and the apparent absence of fundamental beliefs other than in his own brilliance, it would be foolish to make flat predictions of how he would behave. Nor do we underestimate the resilience of the U.S. system or the devotion that U.S. government workers bring to the rule of law.

But it would be reckless not to consider the damage Mr. Trump might wreak. Some of that damage would ensue more from who he is than what he does. His racism and disparagement of women could empower extremists who are now on the margins of American politics, while his lies and conspiracy theories could legitimize discourse that until now has been relegated to the fringe. But his scope for action should not be underestimated, either. In our upcoming editorials, we will examine some arenas where Mr. Trump has been relatively clear about his intentions — and where presidential powers are mighty. We hope you will read them before you vote.

The damage Mr. Trump could do:

A President Trump could deport freely

A President Trump could end the era of American global leadership

A President Trump could wreck progress on global warming

A President Trump could destroy the world economy

How much damage could a President Trump do? We can only begin to imagine.

PHOTO: Donald Trump at a rally in Council Bluffs, Iowa, on Wednesday. (John Locher/Associated Press)


The first in a series of editorials on the damage he could wreak unilaterally as president.

Friday, January 6, 2017

From Talladega College to Dylann Roof and Donald Trump: White Supremacy Runs Amok in 21st Century America...with and without our cowardly complicity


THE UGLY LEGACY OF AMERICAN PLANTATION POLITICS IN THE 21st CENTURY... 


“...To a number of Talladega alumni, the Dec. 30 announcement that the band would march in the parade was an insult to the very principles of the college, which was established two years after the end of the Civil War. The school is affiliated with the United Church of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination that was deeply involved in the civil rights movement, and for decades it served as an incubator for theories and practices of social justice.

Nikky Finney, a poet and Talladega graduate who is now a professor at the University of South Carolina, said in a statement this week that the band should not help celebrate Mr. Trump, who, she said, has maligned women and Mexican immigrants and has proposed barring all Muslims from entering the country. In an interview on Thursday, Ms. Finney, channeling a James Brown lyric, said the college had “sold out the history of Talladega College for chicken change” and “maybe a tin star on a hatemonger’s parade route.

As of Thursday afternoon, an online petition calling for the band to withdraw from the inaugural parade had attracted more than 1,900 signers, some of them supporters of the college who have threatened to withhold future contributions..."

...Up the street at a real estate office near the 1830s-era courthouse, Randy and Heather Roberts, a white couple who voted for Mr. Trump, raved about the Talladega College band and its performance at the Dec. 5 Christmas parade. Ms. Roberts showed a video of the band on her phone. “They were phenomenal,” Ms. Roberts said..."

U.S.

Ending Speculation, Black College Says Band Will Play at Inaugural Parade

by RICHARD FAUSSET
January 5, 2017
New York Times

 
The marching band at Talladega College featured on the front page of a local newspaper in Talladega, Ala. The school has become the subject of an impassioned national outcry. Credit Kevin D. Liles for The New York Times

TALLADEGA, Ala. — For a band at a tiny, little-known, historically black college, it seems in some ways to be the gig of a lifetime: a chance to march and perform at the Jan. 20 presidential inaugural parade in Washington. Some of the musicians at Talladega College have been excited to see the capital for the first time.
But because the president-elect is Donald J. Trump, the school has become the subject of an impassioned national outcry, with online petitions, threats to end donations and a flurry of how-could-yous from alumni who feel that performing in the parade would betray the values of an institution founded by newly freed slaves 150 years ago.
On Thursday, after days of speculation that the college administration might bow to the pressure and remove the band from the parade roster, the president of Talladega College, Billy Hawkins, issued a statement confirming the participation of the band, the Marching Tornadoes, and argued, in essence, that the 58th presidential inauguration is about something bigger than Mr. Trump.
“We respect and appreciate how our students and alumni feel about our participation in this parade,” Dr. Hawkins said. “As many of those who chose to participate in the parade have said, we feel the inauguration of a new president is not a political event but a civil ceremony celebrating the transfer of power.”
Similar issues have been raised about other entertainers scheduled to perform, among them the Radio City Rockettes and the Mormon Tabernacle Choir. But because of Talladega’s history, the issues have been especially intense here, with calls for the college to reverse its decision to take part in the festivities.
And beyond Talladega, the controversies raise tough questions for Mr. Trump’s most ardent critics as his presidency dawns: What is the proper response to a president as polarizing as Mr. Trump? Should the office of the president be honored, no matter who fills it? Or should there be four years of pure rejection and defiance?
And if Mr. Trump’s opponents refuse to participate in his presidency, can critics on the right do the same thing to some other president-elect in the future?
To a number of Talladega alumni, the Dec. 30 announcement that the band would march in the parade was an insult to the very principles of the college, which was established two years after the end of the Civil War. The school is affiliated with the United Church of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination that was deeply involved in the civil rights movement, and for decades it served as an incubator for theories and practices of social justice.
Nikky Finney, a poet and Talladega graduate who is now a professor at the University of South Carolina, said in a statement this week that the band should not help celebrate Mr. Trump, who, she said, has maligned women and Mexican immigrants and has proposed barring all Muslims from entering the country. In an interview on Thursday, Ms. Finney, channeling a James Brown lyric, said the college had “sold out the history of Talladega College for chicken change” and “maybe a tin star on a hatemonger’s parade route.”
As of Thursday afternoon, an online petition calling for the band to withdraw from the inaugural parade had attracted more than 1,900 signers, some of them supporters of the college who have threatened to withhold future contributions.
The campus of Talladega College on Wednesday. To a number of alumni, the announcement last month that the band would march in the parade was an insult to the principles of the college. Credit Kevin D. Liles for The New York Times
But a second petition, which had nearly 300 supporters, argued that the parade was not about politics but “about seeing firsthand the process of a transition” and giving the students a chance to be a part of history. “We are not one-track thinkers and believe everyone is entitled” to their own beliefs, it stated. “However, we are in support of the United States of America.”
As the debate heated up this week in online forums for students and alumni, the leadership at the private, four-year college hunkered down to consider how best to proceed. The campus police ordered reporters off the 50-acre campus.
Brief interviews with a few band members on Tuesday evening revealed a group divided.
Jerome Haynes, 18, a freshman who plays the snare drum, said he hoped politics would not get in the way of an exciting opportunity for the band.
In contrast, Ronald Peterson, 21, a sophomore who plays cymbals, said he was going to talk to the director about staying home. “I feel that those who are not Republicans should not have to play for it,” he said.
On Thursday afternoon, some students said the administration had done the right thing, despite the protests from alumni.
Antonio Phillips, 24, a senior and a drum major, welcomed the exposure. “We’re musicians, so this is a good platform for us to showcase our talent in front of the world,” he said.
His friend Ken Randolph, 20, a junior who is not in the band, said the concerns of alumni like Ms. Finney “weigh heavily on the students of Talladega.” But he said Mr. Trump might benefit from the exposure to a black art form. “This is a part of our culture,” Mr. Randolph said. “With it being on his front doorstep, he might be able to apprehend the vibe and the culture.”
That drama in Talladega, a city of 15,000 about an hour’s drive east of Birmingham, played out as black activists, including the N.A.A.C.P. president, Cornell William Brooks, were arrested on Tuesday in Mobile in a civil-disobedience action at the office of Senator Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican nominated to be attorney general in the Trump administration. Mr. Sessions, who is white, was rejected by the Senate for a federal judgeship in 1986 after he was accused of making racially insensitive statements.
To some Talladega alumni, the possibility that policies long opposed by African-Americans could now be enacted by a Republican-dominated Congress and executive branch was what made the notion of a black band marching for Mr. Trump seem so distasteful.
“There’s a great deal of fear in this country that the Voting Rights Act is going to be abolished, that the Affordable Care Act is going to be abolished, that Planned Parenthood is going to be cut off from funding, that Medicaid is going be cut off from funding,” said J. Mason Davis, a Birmingham lawyer who graduated from the college in 1956. “Don’t you understand why we have a fear of the man?”
“I don’t think they should go,” said Curt Welch, owner of a barbershop. “They might get shot at.” Credit Kevin D. Liles for The New York Times
Donavon Jackson, 24, a former trumpet player in the band who graduated last year, said performing as part of the inauguration would be particularly special for a college of about 1,000 students whose band program is only about five years old. The school does not have a football team, which makes parade invitations all the more important.
“I’m honored to go to a school that can say they marched in an inauguration parade,” said Mr. Jackson, who received a chemistry degree and now lives in Houston. “Not necessarily for the person — and that’s not necessarily saying he’s a bad person.”
In the statement on Thursday, school officials said they still faced the “challenge” of raising more than $60,000 to cover expenses for the trip.
The population of the city of Talladega is divided about evenly between blacks and whites, and to a visitor, it can feel like a place where racial harmony and discord coexist on seemingly parallel planes. Whites speak with pride about the historic black college downtown — though one white person was overheard on Wednesday warning of a liberal plot to foment a “race war” so that President Obama might declare martial law before the inauguration.
While some residents said the band should stay home, and others said it should attend the event in Washington, a few spoke harshly of Mr. Trump while hoping the inauguration would help the band get noticed — something the city, which was bypassed by the interstate highway system, has struggled with in recent decades.
Bonquita McClellan, 26, manages her father’s restaurant, Big Mac’s Open Pit BBQ, near campus. Ms. McClellan, who is black, said the disdain for Mr. Trump among her African-American peers was universal. “If anybody would have had us in concentration camps,” she said, “it’d be him.”
But she also said the band should go and make a name for itself in the nation’s capital. “How often,” she asked, “does Talladega College get a chance to play for the president?”
Up the street at a real estate office near the 1830s-era courthouse, Randy and Heather Roberts, a white couple who voted for Mr. Trump, raved about the Talladega College band and its performance at the Dec. 5 Christmas parade. Ms. Roberts showed a video of the band on her phone. “They were phenomenal,” Ms. Roberts said.
Ms. Roberts, 41, said she grew up with black and white friends. Mr. Roberts, 48, said he and his wife were pleased to cater to their multiracial clientele.
But when they spoke about politics, the couple sounded like people who knew something was broken but did not know how it might be fixed.
“It is not going to be pleasant for the next four years,” Ms. Roberts said. “It is going to be a battle.”


U.S.


No Regrets From Dylann Roof in Jailhouse Manifesto





Officers with the Department of Homeland Security on Thursday outside the courthouse in Charleston, S.C., during the sentencing phase for Dylann S. Roof. Credit Leroy Burnell/The Post and Courier, via Associated Press 
 


 DYLANN ROOF

CHARLESTON, S.C. — More than six weeks after killing nine members of a black congregation here in 2015, Dylann S. Roof wrote extensively in a journal about his purpose, emphasizing that he hoped to incite others to join him in fomenting a race war.
“I did what I thought would make the biggest wave,” the then 21-year-old white supremacist wrote, “and now the fate of our race is in the hands of my brothers who continue to live freely.”
Page after page from the journal was read aloud on Thursday afternoon in Federal District Court here, where jurors will decide, perhaps as early as next week, whether to sentence Mr. Roof to death. The journal provided a startling extension of the manifestoes Mr. Roof wrote before he opened fire in the fellowship hall of Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church on June 17, 2015.
Seemingly aware that he faced the likelihood of at least a life term in prison, Mr. Roof wrote that he “would rather live in prison knowing I took action for my race than live with the torture of sitting idle.”
Mr. Roof’s choice to represent himself in the penalty phase of his trial, and to reject a defense based on mental incapacity, has raised questions about his desire to avoid execution. But in the aftermath of the attack, at least, he saw a continued purpose for his life.
“I want to live now,” he wrote in the journal, most of which was read from the witness stand by a Charleston County Sheriff’s Office official, Lauren M. Knapp. “I want to see a future. I want to help make the way.”
He began by explaining that he wanted to complete the rambling racist thoughts included in an online manifesto that he began before the massacre, which he said he “was unable to finish before because I was in a hurry to get to Charleston.”
In a dizzying blitz of insults and stereotypes, predictions and perceived problems, Mr. Roof railed against Jews, Hispanics, African-Americans, gays and Muslims. He said that Adolf Hitler would someday “be inducted as a saint,” and he warned that unless white people “take violent action, we have no future.”
Prosecutors used the writings, which were confiscated by jail officials on Aug. 3, 2015, to bolster their contention that he had opened fire with “substantial planning and premeditation,” which the authorities argue is an aggravating factor in Mr. Roof’s capital case.
The reading of Mr. Roof’s journal and Ms. Knapp’s accompanying testimony took less than an hour on a day that was otherwise focused on four of the shooting’s victims: the Rev. DePayne Middleton Doctor, 49; the Rev. Sharonda Coleman-Singleton, 45; the Rev. Daniel Lee Simmons Sr., 74; and Myra Thompson, 59.
Family members and friends of the dead repeatedly walked to the witness stand and recounted anecdotes of vacations and holiday meals, final conversations and funerals.
“DePayne was a stickler for the truth, and she was a stickler for rules and order,” said Bethane Middleton-Brown, a sister of Ms. Middleton Doctor. “She governed her life according to the word.”
Mr. Roof and his court-appointed lawyers have grown frustrated with the hours of testimony about the victims of the shootings.
“If I don’t present any mitigation evidence, the victim-impact evidence will take over the whole sentencing trial and guarantee that I get the death penalty,” Mr. Roof wrote in a motion that was unsealed on Thursday.
One of Mr. Roof’s lawyers, David I. Bruck, argued that some witness testimony had been improper for the trials’ sentencing phase. “This is sentencing,” Mr. Bruck told Judge Richard M. Gergel on Thursday morning. “It is not a memorial service.”
Although Judge Gergel rejected Mr. Bruck’s request that he be allowed to object to testimony, he cautioned prosecutors against calling an excessive number of witnesses. Julius N. Richardson, a prosecutor, said that the government expected to rest its case on Monday.
Mr. Roof has said that he does not plan to call any witnesses.




Dylann Roof, Addressing Court, Offers No Apology or Explanation for Massacre
January 4, 2017

Dylann Roof Himself Rejects Best Defense Against Execution 
January 1, 2017