Category: Columnists

  • The invisible volunteers who help keep democracy running

    The invisible volunteers who help keep democracy running

    They’ve been called the “most important people in running an election” by Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt, yet even as interest in election security has skyrocketed after Donald Trump’s persistent false claims of voter fraud, their jobs seem to be hidden in plain sight.

    Unlike the grifters and sycophants who help feed the president’s Big Lie and earn millions of social media followers, make frequent TV appearances, and are showered with adulation by the White House, the roughly 45,000 volunteers across Pennsylvania who are essential to ensuring elections happen fairly, smoothly, and efficiently are rarely recognized for the work they do.

    No wonder poll workers are in short supply — in the commonwealth and across the nation. A Brookings Institution report said that about half of all election officials found it either very or somewhat difficult to find enough workers.

    As someone who worked in elections before becoming a journalist, I’m hardly surprised. Running the polling booths is neither glamorous nor convenient. Voting starts promptly at 7 a.m. on Election Day and continues until 8 p.m. With prep and closing work, a shift can take up to 16 hours for some. In Philadelphia, doing your part to help preserve democracy can earn you up to $295. Elsewhere, compensation tends to be much less.

    In Pennsylvania, the job comes with an additional wrinkle. Our poll workers are elected. Across roughly 1,700 divisions in the city of Philadelphia alone, neighbors are asked to choose a judge of elections and inspectors. The judge then appoints a clerk, and either the city commissioners or the election board finds a voting machine operator. If the judge fails to show, the first voters may be asked to hold a curbside election to pick a successor.

    It is all somewhat delightfully antiquated even as it can contribute to Election Day delays.

    Recently, Philadelphia’s election officials sought to stem the shortage of poll workers. City Commissioners Omar Sabir, Seth Bluestein, and Lisa Deeley joined Schmidt to honor some of the city’s poll workers — and ideally recruit others at a rally in the City Hall courtyard, complete with pizza, pretzels, and water ice.

    Student poll worker India Nakai, 17, a Girard College senior, told the audience she was motivated to serve her community and see what happens behind the scenes, even though she isn’t old enough to vote herself yet. At the other end of the spectrum was another kind of senior, honoree Gwendolyn Clay, 74, who has been working the polls for 51 years.

    Their dedication to public service and commitment to helping their neighbors reminded me of the people who signed up to help count ballots during 2020.

    I was there at the Pennsylvania Convention Center, where — despite the pandemic and the threats of armed agitators who believed Trump’s false claims of fraud — scores of Philadelphians showed up every day to help tally the unprecedented flood of mail-in ballots.

    Vote counters zealously followed the law, erring on the side of strict interpretation and removing ballots for even minor and inconsequential errors like a missing date or an absent secrecy envelope.

    Poll worker Janice Masud-Paul (seated) speaks with 4-year-old Weston after his father, Bob Comfort, voted in the Erlton Fire House on Route 70 in Cherry Hill on Election Day last year.Tom Gralish / Staff Photographer

    Elections, and democracy itself, depend on this kind of selfless dedication.

    Unfortunately, people like Clay and Nakai, who are willing to do essential but usually thankless work, are becoming rarer. And it’s not just staffing the polls that has seen recruitment challenges.

    Service organizations like the Elks, Kiwanis, and Rotarians once built and maintained parks and memorials, but are now in the midst of rapid decline. Veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are less likely to join VFW or American Legion clubs, and more and more Americans are spending their days alone.

    Traditional, neighborhood-based churches have been supplanted by regional megachurches, with paid full-time staff replacing the volunteers and part-timers who once taught Sunday school and led worship.

    Across society, genuine connection is being eroded. It has been replaced by communities of outrage.

    The election-denying hordes are just one facet of this phenomenon. Instead of toiling away for hours in service of their fellow citizens, members of an outrage community must simply “like,” “reply,” or “repost” sentiments that align with their own half-baked suspicions. The actual factual record rarely matters, replaced by the wisdom of the algorithmic mob.

    Communities of outrage now exist for nearly every major facet of life, and every national news story. They allow participants to live in a world reconstructed to fit their belief system, with all the inconvenient facts smoothed away.

    School shootings like Sandy Hook are dismissed as false flags. Disappointing election results are attributed to fraud. People across the ideological spectrum increasingly believe antisemitic conspiracy theories, which blame every complex societal problem on Jewish people. Climate change is either denied or blamed solely on corporations, with no acknowledgment of who is buying all the gas, using artificial intelligence, or purchasing legions of plastic junk to fill our homes.

    Collective action to fix societal woes becomes impossible when individuals can no longer agree on what’s happening in the first place. As the internet has become a haven for everyone’s petty grievances, a society built on online outrage is a miserable one. At the turn of the century, roughly 70% of Americans reported being satisfied with the direction of the country. Today, that number sits at 25%.

    It is up to us as individuals to choose differently.

    Outrage artists will continue to peddle lies as long as we are willing to click on them. Outrage communities will keep growing as long as real communities continue to shrink. Filling a vacant seat on an election board won’t fix this problem overnight, but it is a step in the right direction.

    The more we strive to follow the example of service-minded people like Nakai and Clay, the closer we’ll be to creating a society we can be proud of.

  • Trump’s putting his thumb on the mail-in ballot scale. The Supreme Court is letting him.

    Trump’s putting his thumb on the mail-in ballot scale. The Supreme Court is letting him.

    There are those who would argue that Donald Trump poses the greatest threat to American democracy we’ve ever seen from a sitting president. However, with its decision to allow Trump’s executive order on limiting the use of mail-in ballots to move forward, the U.S. Supreme Court has surpassed him.

    The Constitution clearly gives states, and not the president, the primary authority to administer elections. Congress has secondary authority, but only under emergency conditions. That means the president’s executive order, which directs various federal departments to impose rules on mail-in balloting if it is “feasible” and “lawful,” is more than a cynical attempt to save Republicans from losing congressional seats. His executive order is blatantly unconstitutional.

    Yet, in a ruling that seems bizarre on its face, the Supreme Court has decided, with a crucial midterm election just weeks away, that Trump’s executive order does not interfere with the states’ authority “‘to create and enforce a legal code’ for elections.”

    That’s nonsense. In my view, and in the opinion of 56 former judges who submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court, Trump’s order is all about interference. Changing rules just weeks before mail-in ballots are set to be sent to voters is an exercise in chaos. It is designed to hamper voting in blue states whose cities are filled with African American voters and others who tend to cast ballots for Democrats.

    Joy L. Jackson (right) and Ketha Otis demonstrate against proposed changes to the U.S. Postal Service and President Donald Trump’s executive order regarding mail-in ballots in Miami Gardens, Fla., last month.Marta Lavandier

    Voter suppression is the apparent goal, and the Supreme Court has played an outsized role in helping the Trump administration to get there. Even now, as the U.S. Department of Justice petitions U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani to reverse her nationwide injunction on Trump’s executive order, the Supreme Court looms in the background, ready to further erode democracy.

    Of course, the threat posed by the court is about more than just one ruling. It is about the justices’ pattern of acceding to the whims of a president who seems to view the Constitution as a suggestion, rather than the law.

    In 2024, the court shocked legal observers by ruling in Trump v. the United States that presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for official actions they take while in office. And just a week ago, the court allowed construction of the president’s legally dubious $400 million ballroom to continue while lower court appeals play out, knowing the ballroom will likely be near completion by the time the courts catch up.

    Still, the Supreme Court, whose 6-3 conservative majority includes three justices Trump nominated to the bench, does not have the last word on his policies. In America, the people have the final say. That’s why this latest gambit to cripple mail-in voting is so dangerous, and it is why the Supreme Court must be held accountable.

    The people must sit in judgment of a president who starts a war that results in skyrocketing gas prices and American loss of life. The people must sit in judgment of a president who demolishes half of the White House without congressional approval. The people must sit in judgment of a president who wrecks the economy with illegal tariffs, and the people must sit in judgment of a president whose immigration crackdown costs American citizens their lives.

    Polling has already indicated that Trump, whose 33% approval rating represents his all-time low, could drag his party down in the upcoming midterm elections. But as a seasoned politician once told me, the only poll that matters is the one that takes place on Election Day. Trump understands this truth, and he is trying to put his thumb on the scales. That’s to be expected, but he should not have the Supreme Court’s help.

    At its best, America’s highest court should be apolitical, driven both by the letter and the spirit of the law. It should serve as a check on the worst instincts of politicians, and as a guardrail against tyranny. This court has failed on all those fronts, and has instead allowed itself to be driven and shaped by conservative ideology. It has fallen so far that it has seemingly been co-opted by those who would stop Americans from exercising their most basic freedom — the vote.

  • ICE cannot survive past the Trump administration

    ICE cannot survive past the Trump administration

    Another day, another video on social media featuring U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents behaving badly.

    Sometimes they act like bullies, intimidating goons trampling the Constitution. Other times they show they’ve learned nothing from their deadly encounters in Minnesota and Texas, using excessive force and putting people in harm’s way.

    And every time, my blood boils at the rampant thuggery on display.

    I abhor facile slogans, but as more and more incidents pile up, this one’s an easy call: Abolish ICE.

    Smash it up. Close it down. Dismantle it. It shouldn’t be too hard, since it’s already been broken by President Donald Trump and his GOP allies in Congress, who have flooded the agency with billions of dollars and a mission directive that rewards lawlessness and recklessness.

    Under Stephen Miller, the architect of the administration’s anti-immigrant policies, the goal is mass arrests and deportations, no matter the cost. A June 2025 post by the president on Truth Social made it explicit: “ICE Officers are herewith ordered, by notice of this TRUTH, to do all in their power to achieve the very important goal of delivering the single largest Mass Deportation Program in History.”

    This has led to the foreseeable consequences that are playing out on America’s streets and inside immigration detention centers. The stories of abuse are so common, their number so overwhelming, that I don’t see how the agency survives.

    This should not be interpreted as a call for nonexistent borders or unfettered immigration. Having spent much of my life in and around southwest Texas, I count myself among those who have a particular appreciation for the importance of humane, rational, and consistent immigration policies — but, by almost any measure, we’re getting none of the above from ICE as it’s currently formulated.

    And it’s not just me or the usual left-leaning advocates who are questioning the national framework on immigration. Nearly three-quarters of Americans believe immigration is a good thing for our country, and most people prefer widening paths to citizenship rather than increasing enforcement efforts.

    The prospect of doing away with ICE does not garner nearly as much support from undecided midterm voters, with just 21% of them saying in a recent poll that they favored eliminating the agency.

    As I’ve written about how the administration is demonizing immigrants, I’ve heard from conservative readers who say the media is doing the same to ICE, casting it as the worst of the worst and inevitably forcing a critical look at its future.

    To answer the question of what the agency might look like in the years to come — or if it should even continue to exist at all — I reached out to a few people who may know ICE better than nearly anyone else: those who’ve worked inside it.

    Federal agents make a traffic stop on a U.S. citizen in Minneapolis in January.Adam Gray

    Changing tactics

    I put the question of ICE’s future and how its agents are regarded to Jason Houser, who spent his government career at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and is a former ICE chief of staff. The Afghanistan combat veteran told me it starts and ends with leadership.

    “The tactical and operational guidance and directives from the administration are putting ICE officers in a place to be demonized,” he said. “There’s a lot of authority and power in law enforcement, and the way that power is being used by this administration for the first 18 months has been disjointed, punitive, shortsighted, and targeted at the most vulnerable communities.”

    While the behavior of some agents is inexcusable, and they should be held accountable, the agency is ultimately an instrument wielded by those in power.

    For example, some of the same agents who are being maligned today were redeployed to Del Rio, Texas, in 2021 to help humanely and safely process almost 16,000 mostly Haitian immigrants who were living in substandard conditions in a makeshift border camp, Houser noted.

    How ICE is operating today cannot be separated from the administration’s demands.

    Some of the worst examples of abuse by ICE agents have come during vehicle stops, including the July killing of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston. Agents have been captured on video in high-speed pursuits, cutting off cars, and smashing windows.

    Before Trump returned to office, the agency rarely engaged in these kinds of tactics, let alone used them to target noncriminal immigrants, said Joe Sifuentez, who worked for ICE until he retired in 2020.

    “If it’s a bad guy in that vehicle, we have a judicial warrant, we stop them. Then we can break that window and drag that person out of the vehicle,” he said. “But that’s not what’s happening now.”

    While the president campaigned on mass deportations, many voters believed the government would focus on immigrants with serious criminal records. Increasingly, that is not the case, with most people being detained only charged with violating civil immigration laws.

    And in trying to fill a reported White House quota of 2,000 arrests a day, federal agents are engaged in random sweeps and racial profiling that put people at risk.

    “I’m concerned that one of my loved ones could get pulled over tomorrow,” Sifuentez said. “God only knows what can happen.”

    Detainees stand at windows at the Delaney Hall immigration detention center in Newark, N.J., in May, as demonstrators gather outside.TODD HEISLER

    Bad math

    The Republican-controlled Congress has given the administration more than $150 billion for immigration enforcement. The question is what taxpayers are getting in return. It isn’t increasing public safety, the former officials I spoke with said.

    Houser pointed to a recent report by the DHS Office of Inspector General that found that as ICE shifted priorities toward immigration enforcement, its efforts to combat fentanyl trafficking declined. From fiscal years 2024 to 2025, the report said, fentanyl investigations decreased by 24%, investigative hours spent countering fentanyl decreased by approximately 30%, and fentanyl seizures decreased by almost 40%.

    It’s not just drug trafficking investigations that are falling by the wayside over Trump’s misplaced priorities. ICE agents descending on a Home Depot or a Walmart to fulfill their arrest quotas fail to target the kinds of criminals the agency should be focused on.

    “Real sex predators, convicted rapists, murderers, aren’t just hanging out at a Starbucks on a Tuesday, right? They’re not at the corner, walking their kids to school,” Houser said.

    Mass arrests also put people in detention who do not have a final order of removal. These are immigrants who are going through the system and would generally be allowed to walk free until they had exhausted their legal options. Instead, the administration is deciding to hold them without bond for what can be an indeterminate amount of time.

    Sifuentez, who oversaw ICE’s national fugitive operations program and detention facilities, told me that even under regular circumstances, detention is extremely challenging. As the government works to not only increase the number of such facilities in the country, but also how many people these places hold, the situation is bound to get worse.

    “When I was in Atlanta, I oversaw a facility with 2,000 detainees. That in itself was very difficult to oversee and keep your staffing levels intact,” he said. “What do you think it’s going to be like when you ramp it up to 10,000?”

    Already, there have been more than 50 deaths in detention since the start of Trump’s second term, with the detention fatality rate hitting a two-decade high.

    “You’re going to see more suicides. You’re going to see more people die of health conditions. You’re going to see more both mental and physical stress that leads to horrific outcomes,” Houser added. “It’s just math.”

    Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-year-old Mexican immigrant, was fatally shot by ICE agents in Houston in July. A makeshift memorial took shape at the site where he was killed.ANTRANIK TAVITIAN

    Abolish ICE

    If ICE is being used to indiscriminately terrorize communities, and ignore constitutional protections while disregarding its public safety charge, what is the point of its continued existence? Even if you see it as a tool, if it can be abused so readily and so thoroughly by an out-of-control executive, wouldn’t the cause of sensible and coherent immigration policy be better served by replacing it?

    Neither of the former officials I spoke with would endorse the call to abolish ICE, and perhaps their experiential knowledge of the agency’s complexity would keep them from ever embracing what can feel more like a facile bit of political sloganeering than anything else. After all, activists have long called to eliminate the agency, rightly underscoring the need for accountability over the lives that have been destroyed by detention and deportation — but they hardly ever offer realistic or politically viable alternatives.

    Indeed, as long as we are a nation of laws, there will be the need for enforcement. In humanitarian terms, whatever agency takes ICE’s place will be judged harshly under those same standards, but exist it must.

    Still, Sifuentez, until recently a lifelong registered Republican, said that at the very least ICE should be renamed and its functions divided among other agencies.

    “Everybody in America should be very concerned about what’s going on,” he said. “This isn’t about politics. This is about what’s right and what’s wrong, and what’s going on is wrong.”

    For his part, Houser stressed that we need migrants in this country, and we need public safety. Immigration enforcement is difficult, nuanced work and should be entrusted to those who have the highest level of training and expertise.

    “No matter what the structure and organization of the bureaucracy is, there’s going to be immigration enforcement, and it needs to be handled with professionalism,” he said. “Remembering that 95% of individuals who are coming to this country want the American way of life, and that’s something to be embraced.”

  • The sheriff’s office doesn’t need a babysitter; it needs to be abolished | Shackamaxon

    The sheriff’s office doesn’t need a babysitter; it needs to be abolished | Shackamaxon

    This week’s edition of Shackamaxon covers data centers, property assessments, and more woes at the Philadelphia Sheriff’s Office.

    Jason Kelce with Liquid Death mascot Murder Man in an ad for the canned water and Garage Beer.Garage Beer

    Sports data center

    Former Eagles offensive lineman Jason Kelce seems to be more omnipresent in retirement than he was during his career. Most recently, he filmed a commercial for Garage Beer and Liquid Death that asked Americans to send him their urine to supply data centers.

    While conjuring a negative image of yellow liquid in a cup is probably an unwise strategy for someone who co-owns a light beer company, Kelce’s commercial had another major problem — data centers don’t actually use as much water as public perception suggests.

    In fact, the biggest threat to U.S. water supplies is something far more mundane: alfalfa farming.

    Across the arid Western states, farmers are using vast amounts of water to irrigate their fields, which are then used to feed cows for the beef industry. A single acre of alfalfa uses 1.6 million to 2.5 million gallons of water. In Utah, feed farming uses over half the state’s water supply. Meanwhile, the data centers themselves increasingly rely on closed-loop systems. The water used as coolant gets purified and reused, reducing their own need.

    The confusion over water use is emblematic of the general debate over the centers, which is rife with hard-to-vet claims. And shifting public opinion has left politicians in both parties flat-footed and scrambling to react.

    Gov. Josh Shapiro, the ever-Ambitious Abingtonian, issued his own response to the situation. Much of what Shapiro said is reasonable. He wants tech companies to pay for their own power and contribute to community benefits agreements, and to respect the Pennsylvania Constitution’s guarantee of clean air and pure water. Some of it is less sensible, specifically his commitment to local control.

    Local control sounds great in theory: Why shouldn’t communities have the final say over how they are developed? In practice, however, it is shortsighted. There are two reasons for this.

    One, the impact of data centers is regional, not local. If opponents are correct about the impact on water and electricity bills, this impact will exist no matter where the centers operate. Given the PJM grid Pennsylvanians rely on spans multiple states, there is no plausible pathway for local communities to insulate themselves from rising energy demand by blocking data center proposals.

    Two, not every community can afford to say no. Take the bankrupt city of Chester, for example. From its efforts to sell the Chester Water Authority to its role as host for the Reworld Trash Incinerator, financial considerations already play a big role in that city’s policymaking. By handing control to local authorities, the governor is ensuring cities like Chester will disproportionately play host to data centers.

    For those who believe they will have a strong negative impact on quality of life, how is that possibly fair?

    Instead, what is needed is federal, regional, or at least statewide coordination.

    The 1700 block of North Newkirk Street on Aug. 20. On this block in Strawberry Mansion, some homeowners saw their property assessments double.Monica Herndon / Staff Photographer

    Fair value

    Over in Allegheny County, home to Pittsburgh and many of its suburbs, the courts have ordered local officials to begin a full property reassessment, which must be completed by 2032. Pennsylvania is unique in not requiring regular reassessment.

    Pittsburgh’s values were last set in 2012, but more than a third of the state’s counties haven’t been reassessed since the 20th century. This leads to wildly out-of-whack and unfair tax bills for some residents.

    Of course, Philadelphians can tell you that regular reassessment is not a panacea for discontent. The city’s most recent valuations have set off a firestorm of consternation, especially given how many lower-income areas saw big increases. It doesn’t help matters that the neighborhoods Cherelle L. Parker used to represent on City Council, and powered her election as mayor, saw some of the smallest boosts in valuation.

    As tempting a story as the mayor favoring her core supporters while squeezing the city’s poorest neighborhoods may be, that is not an accurate assessment.

    Given the massive decrease in shootings and consistent efforts to clean and green the city, it is not surprising to see increased demand for neighborhoods like Kensington, Grays Ferry, and Fairhill. While there is still a long way to go on public safety, higher valuations are a sign of progress.

    It also should remind Council members that their theory that development drives property appreciation is faulty. Many of the neighborhoods with higher appreciation have seen little to no new development. In Northern Liberties/Fishtown, one of the city’s hot spots for new construction, values increased by just 1.7%.

    Additionally, the city has a powerful tool for protecting low-income homeowners: the homestead exemption. While the city’s stated property tax rate is 0.013998, owner-occupants pay a much lower rate. For a home valued at the city’s median of $260,000, the total tax bill is $2,239.68, or 0.008614. In Fairhill, where the median home value is $80,000, the homestead exemption eliminates the total tax liability for many residents. Boosting the exemption from $100,000 to $110,000 or $120,000 would ensure more low-income homeowners are protected from rising tax bills.

    Sheriff Rochelle Bilal is seen exiting a courtroom at City Hall on Wednesday.Tyger Williams / Staff Photographer

    Bilal’s babysitter

    Mayor Parker wouldn’t do it. City Council wouldn’t, either. Accountability for the Philadelphia Sheriff’s Office instead came from Common Pleas Court Judge Paula A. Patrick.

    After listening to a list of excuses and promises, it was clear Patrick had her fill of incompetence. The beleaguered department, which had been ordered to produce a specific set of documents months ago, suddenly released thousands of pages the night before the hearing.

    Instead of putting officials before the court with direct knowledge of why a backlog in processing property deeds began, Sheriff Rochelle Bilal instead sent Steven Wakefield, a deputy undersheriff who was hired just two months ago. Wakefield was tasked with testifying about past events he was not privy to, despite repeated warnings from the judge.

    As for Bilal herself, she claims to have “limited personal knowledge of the underlying facts.”

    Issuing deeds is one of the core functions of her job, but apparently the sheriff had no idea what was going on. Instead, Wakefield tried to scapegoat a former employee named Melissa Simpson, who had apparently been handling the entire process on her own without oversight from anyone.

    This testimony led to an agreement in which Bilal will have to identify someone to oversee deed sales for six months. A babysitter, essentially.

    While it is good to see someone holding the sheriff accountable for once, a temporary babysitter is only a partial solution. The office should be abolished.

    Sadly, that seems unlikely. Bilal may struggle to perform her day job, but she has thrived at building up political allies. She has been invited to news conferences by District Attorney Larry Krasner, remains a political player after her years running the Guardian Civic League, and faces next to no criticism from City Council. She was even honored by the Phillies as a “hometown hero.”

    Troublingly, Bilal does not even seem to have an opponent in next year’s elections, despite the continued public mismanagement of her office. That, at least, should change.

    Perhaps the Ambitious Abingtonian can find a Perspicacious Philadelphian willing to take on the challenge of replacing Bilal.

  • I don’t care what anyone says: Being ‘woke’ isn’t a bad thing

    I don’t care what anyone says: Being ‘woke’ isn’t a bad thing

    I was chatting with a friend recently whom I’ve known for a long time when she used the term woke as if it meant something disgusting.

    I was so stunned that I didn’t bother trying to correct her. But I hung up the phone thinking about how the concept has become a political football, with even some Dems kicking it around.

    African Americans created this vernacular. It preexisted MAGA’s hijacking of it by decades, dating back to the days of civil rights activist Marcus Garvey, founder of the Universal Negro Improvement Association. It has long been a part of pop culture, showing up in musical performances by everyone from Depression-era blues singer Lead Belly to Erykah Badu in her 2008 song, “Master Teacher.”

    I first heard it during the early 1990s. Back then, if someone said, “You’re not woke,” it was considered the ultimate insult, right up there with being an Uncle Tom — or worse. Being woke refers to being alert to racial transgressions. The opposite of woke is to be asleep, and therefore oblivious to systemic racism and injustice.

    No matter how President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth attempt to vilify the term, I stand by the notion that being woke is a good thing. As in the exhortation, “Stay woke, brother.”

    It’s galling to watch politicians bastardize it. U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently brought it up during an ABC News interview when she said, “I have a local city councilman that has this saying: ‘Woke 1 was crazy.’”

    She was talking about Francesca Hong, a progressive candidate running for governor of Wisconsin with a history of making radical statements, and was also quoting New York City council member Chi Ossé, who used the “woke 1” term on social media. I get that Ocasio-Cortez was referring to far-left calls to defund the police — which most Black people never fully supported — among other extremist ideas. But her words still stung.

    I found myself wondering: Since when did the concept of being woke become a bad thing for Democrats?

    I have an awful lot of respect for Ocasio-Cortez. I recognize she may be weighing a run for the presidency in 2028 and trying to center herself politically. But this kind of virtue signaling won’t be as beneficial as she hopes if it also alienates African Americans.

    M.K. Asante said that “the idea of staying woke became associated with consciousness,” but that the meaning of the term has changed after being co-opted by the mainstream.

    For insight, I reached out to M.K. Asante, a professor at Morgan State University whose father is Molefi Kete Asante, a renowned professor of Africology at Temple University. “The idea of staying woke became associated with consciousness,” Asante told me, but added that the term was co-opted around 2020 following the widespread uprisings after the murder of George Floyd by a police officer.

    Asante pointed out, “Now it does not have the same meaning in the mainstream.”

    That’s mainly because of Trump, who, after his return to the White House, immediately began vilifying woke and other things associated with diversity.

    He declared an all-out war on diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts in both federal and private sectors, and has also taken aim at museums he says are “essentially, the last remaining segment of ‘WOKE.’” Trump also has cut funding from key government programs that support DEI.

    Even the military hasn’t been immune. Trump summarily dismissed Air Force Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., who was the second Black person to serve as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and set about renaming military bases after Confederate generals.

    Earlier this year, Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell announced on X that officials were targeting Stars and Stripes, an independent newspaper that covers the military, in part to “refocus its content away from woke distractions that syphon morale.” Since then, the paper’s publisher, editor-in-chief, and a reporter have all been terminated, ending 155 years of editorial freedom, as my colleague Will Bunch reported.

    Meanwhile, the United States is at war with Iran, Canada, our closest ally, has announced retaliatory tariffs on U.S. products, and American consumers are wondering if the influx of tariff-free foreign beef imports Trump is pushing will be safe to consume.

    Yet, Trump says woke is the enemy.

    Despite the president’s best efforts, he can’t stamp the term or its real meaning out.

    As Asante pointed out, “You can co-opt a word, but the spirit of what ‘stay woke’ means is alive and well.”

  • A strip club scene was cut from ‘National Treasure’ and other insights from Philly’s celebration of the film

    A strip club scene was cut from ‘National Treasure’ and other insights from Philly’s celebration of the film

    I’ve watched National Treasure more times than I can count and if I could count how many times I’ve seen it, I wouldn’t admit it to you.

    It’s a confluence of things that keep me coming back — the scenes filmed in Philly, Nic Cage taking an absurd plot line very seriously, and the fact that this movie always seems to be on TV. Plus, there’s a quick cameo of my favorite stand in Reading Terminal Market, which closed in 2016, that always makes me nostalgic (RIP Salumeria).

    On Friday, I got to geek out with other fans of the film and its sequel, National Treasure: Book of Secrets, during a ticketed talk with the director of the franchise, Jon Turteltaub, at the Independence Visitor Center. Turteltaub’s other films include Cool Runnings, While You Were Sleeping, and The Meg, which tracks.

    In the audience were a self-proclaimed “real-life treasure hunter,” several Freemasons, and Philly tour guide Stephen Pierce of Havertown. Pierce came dressed in his finest colonial garb and told me the movie, which came out when he was 9, was “definitely a huge inspiration for me growing up.”

    Stephen Pierce, a local tour guide with America’s Rising Son Tours, asks a question while wearing colonial-era clothing during a live recording of the “National Treasure Hunt” podcast at the Independence Visitor Center in Philadelphia on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026.Erin Blewett / For The Inquirer

    But there were no bigger fans in attendance than the cohosts and moderators for the evening, Aubrey Paris and Emily Black, creators of the National Treasure Hunt podcast, who helped curate Philly’s first National Treasure Weekend of events in conjunction with the Philadelphia Visitor Center.

    Aubrey Paris (left) and Emily Black (center), creators and hosts of the “National Treasure Hunt” podcast, speak with “National Treasure” director Jon Turteltaub during a live recording at the Independence Visitor Center in Philadelphia on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026.Erin Blewett / For The Inquirer

    Their palpable joy while interviewing Turteltaub for their podcast was only exceeded by the shock and excitement that washed over their faces when the director gave them the scoop that National Treasure 3 is “finally real.”

    That wasn’t the only gem Turteltaub dropped during their talk, though. Here are five other nuggets and behind-the-scenes stories the director shared about one of the best and most ridiculous films ever partially filmed in Philly.

    All up in Independence Hall

    Turteltaub said he was surprised that the National Park Service let the cast and crew climb up Independence Hall’s bell tower to film.

    “That was special. Being next to the Centennial Bell — amazing. More interesting was being behind the clock, coming up those stairs and seeing how that works was like ‘Wow, this is why I want to be in the movie business,’” he said. “It’s not art. You just get treated better than other people.”

    Visitors stand in a long line on Oct. 12, 2025, in front of Independence Hall waiting to view the nearby Liberty Bell.Tom Gralish / Staff Photographer

    But the NPS didn’t allow filming at the doors or inside the building because it would have impeded visitors’ experience, Turteltaub said. And it was at this point in the conversation I learned there’s a replica of Independence Hall at Knott’s Berry Farm in Buena Park, Calif., which is where the interior scenes of the film were shot.

    So I either need to make a movie or go to California to live out my dream of climbing the bell tower. Duly noted.

    A meaty role

    During the chase scene that winds through Reading Terminal Market, Abigail (played by Diane Kruger) ducks into a butcher stand while clutching the Declaration of Independence. The woman running the counter initially says in the most unenthusiastic, Philly way possible: “If you’re not a steak, you don’t belong here.”

    But when Abigail tells the woman she’s running from her “ex-husband” (who’s actually a bad guy), the woman says: “Honey, stay as long as you like.”

    Pedestrians fill the sidewalk outside Reading Terminal Market in Center City on June 3, 2025.Alejandro A. Alvarez / Staff Photographer

    Paris said that the butcher has become “a favorite non-named character.” Some have even called her “the real national treasure.”

    “It’s a huge cult thing,” Paris said.

    Mark another win for Philly’s notoriously kind-but-not-nice attitude.

    Stripped down

    Turteltaub revealed that the first version of the original film was four hours long, so many scenes had to be left on the cutting room floor, including the original ending.

    “The original ending scene, they were back at the National Archives looking at the Declaration back where it belonged. We thought the world needed to know that,” Turteltaub said. “Everyone’s feeling good and then they get started talking about a different treasure and they go off like, ‘Oh no, I’m not doing that!’ It’s like the end of a Gilligan’s Island episode.”

    Jon Turteltaub, director of the 2004 film “National Treasure,” speaks during a live recording of the “National Treasure Hunt” podcast at the Independence Visitor Center in Philadelphia on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026.Erin Blewett / For The Inquirer

    Another scene that was stripped from the film took place when Abigail and Riley (played by Justin Bartha) are chased through Center City.

    “As Riley’s being chased, he cuts into a strip club and he runs through the strip club to get away,” Turteltaub said. “So my idea was he runs in and no one’s in there and it’s just some guy vacuuming and [Riley] says, ‘Well, that was disappointing,’ and keeps going.”

    I’m disappointed the cleanest scene ever filmed in a strip club didn’t make the cut.

    High school reunion

    Turteltaub and Cage attended Beverly Hills High School together and the director said the two were friends.

    “He’s kind of a great, nonconforming, march-to-his-own drum guy, which in high school is not easy,” Turteltaub said. “I was desperate to fit in and be liked by every single person ever. He didn’t care.”

    Nicolas Cage runs through the Old Pine Street Presbyterian Church cemetery in a scene from “National Treasure.”Alamy Stock Photo

    The director said he sold the actor on taking the part of Benjamin Franklin Gates in National Treasure when he described the character to Cage with one word: audacity.

    “Nic is audacious and that was that connection. Nic never has a superficial connection to a character. He goes and finds the person,” Turteltaub said. “Sometimes that’s insane stuff and craziness and awesomeness and unpredictability and sometimes it just makes somebody very, very real.”

    Page turner

    During audience questions at the end of the talk, a child of no more than 6 asked Turteltaub: “What’s on page 47?” to thunderous applause from the crowd.

    The question referred to the end of the sequel film, when the President of the United States asks Gates what he thinks of what’s on page 47 of the book of secrets handed down from president to president. Gates calls what’s contained on the page “life-altering,” but its contents are never revealed to the audience.

    It may not be a secret for much longer, though.

    “The worst thing, to make it interesting, was we added the line at the last second — ‘life-changing, life-altering’ so now we have to come up with something that’s ‘life-altering,’” Turteltaub said. “If I said ‘I don’t know,’ everyone will hate me. If I said ‘I do know,’ you’ll hate me for not telling you, but I don’t think we can make the third movie without at least helping people out.”

    Aubrey Paris (left) and Emily Black (center), creators and hosts of the “National Treasure Hunt” podcast, speak with “National Treasure” director Jon Turteltaub during a live recording at the Independence Visitor Center in Philadelphia on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. The event was part of Philadelphia’s first National Treasure Weekend.Erin Blewett / For The Inquirer
  • Trump’s Ukraine negotiators are too chicken to visit Kyiv and support its independence

    Trump’s Ukraine negotiators are too chicken to visit Kyiv and support its independence

    There were two noticeable no-shows as Western leaders gathered Monday to mark the 35th anniversary of Ukraine’s independence — and its five years of resistance to Vladimir Putin’s effort to re-subjugate the country to Russian rule.

    There were multiple news reports that President Donald Trump’s clueless peace envoys — son-in-law Jared Kushner and real estate magnate Steve Witkoff — might finally join European allies at anniversary ceremonies.

    I say “finally” because neither of these supposed peacemakers has ever deigned to visit Ukraine. Not once. Meantime, Witkoff has visited Moscow eight times, and gushed over Putin as he and Kushner (also a repeat visitor) discussed business deals with Russia.

    It is no surprise, then, that Trump’s blinkered envoys postponed their trip, reportedly blaming their absence on intensified Russian missile and drone strikes. Never mind that former Vice President Mike Pence, British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, and other European leaders showed up.

    They recognized — as Trump and his envoys still do not — that Ukraine is fighting not just for its own freedom, but for the security of Europe and the United States.

    Burnham, who came to Kyiv on his first foreign trip as prime minister, understands the significance of Ukraine’s brave stand against the world’s second-largest army. A Russian military that is heavily aided by the dictators of China, North Korea, and Iran, all eager to undermine America and the democracies of the West.

    The U.K. leader rightly compared Ukraine’s resistance against Russian imperialism to Britain’s fight against Nazi Germany in the 1940s, telling Ukrainians, “My nation kept the flame of European freedom alive in the 20th century; you hold that flame in the 21st.”

    Burnham is right on the mark.

    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky hands over the flag of a military unit during the ceremony to mark Ukraine Independence Day in Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday.Efrem Lukatsky

    The image of London firefighters bravely battling the blazes caused by the German Blitz, which rained rockets down on civilians in order to break their morale, comes right to mind when watching video of Ukrainian rescue workers pulling women and children out of the rubble of collapsed apartment towers that have been hit with Russian missiles or drones.

    Then-Prime Minister Winston Churchill understood that if Britain fell, the Nazis would take over Europe. The Battle of Britain in the summer and fall of 1940, in which incredibly courageous Royal Air Force pilots pushed back the Luftwaffe, forced Adolf Hitler to abandon his planned invasion of England. The courage and spirit of Britons under bombing gave the RAF the time to regroup and attack the Nazis in Europe. It gave President Franklin D. Roosevelt time to act on sending Lend-Lease war supplies to Britain.

    Burnham grasps that Putin is a stalking horse for an axis of adversaries – namely China, North Korea and Iran – that backs and finances Russia’s crimes.

    Ukraine’s battle of the skies is effectively the first round of World War III. And only one weapon can take down the ballistic missiles Russia is pouring down on Ukraine’s civilian infrastructure: U.S.-made Patriot interceptors.

    Yet, Trump has wasted much of America’s Patriot missile stock chasing cheap Iranian drones, and refuses to sell Kyiv a small percentage of what the U.S. retains. And after proposing joint production of Patriots with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the U.S. president immediately backed off.

    That is why Burnham announced Monday that the U.K. (along with France) will help Ukraine make its own version of a Anglo/French long-range cruise missile by sharing classified technical information. That will help Ukraine preempt Russian missiles by eliminating the firing sites.

    But setting up that production line will take months or years, and Ukraine desperately needs Patriots now.

    Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky (left) hands over the Ukraine state award to European Council President António Costa during a commemorative ceremony in Kyiv, Ukraine, Monday, marking Ukraine’s 35th Independence Day.Efrem Lukatsky

    It is hard for many Americans to grasp how important Ukraine’s survival is to our future security. Few U.S. politicians consider Ukraine to be a critical campaign issue. Trump has communicated his disdain for Kyiv to his MAGA followers, and Vice President JD Vance boasts that his proudest moment was helping cut off aid to Ukraine. As for Democrats, they’d rather focus on cost of living and the endless Iran war.

    But Gen. Ben Hodges, former commander of U.S. Army Europe, nailed it when he told me recently that what’s been missing from the lack of U.S. attention “is the recognition that it’s in the U.S. interest for Ukraine to be successful.” President Joe Biden was too timid, he noted, and Trump is worse.

    America’s enemies are taking full notice.

    China is watching and learning from the drone, robot, and electronic warfare being fought in Ukraine, while sharing dual-use weapon parts and technology with Moscow. Every lesson is being fed into the hopper of Xi Jinping’s massive agglomeration of data used for prep to take back Taiwan and dominate South and East Asian neighbors and territorial waters.

    North Korea is earning hard currency by sending troops and missiles to aid Russia’s war on Ukraine. In return, it is accessing Russian technology to build up its nuclear arsenal. Iran sends Shahed drones to Russia and learns from Russian upgrades of those drones, which helps Tehran attack U.S. bases and threaten Gulf Arab states in the Middle East.

    Meantime, Trump is focused on his White House ballroom, car races, and starting a trade war with Canada, while Kushner and Witkoff chicken out of visiting Kyiv. They have no clue that the fate of the Ukraine war will overshadow everything they now think is important.

    Their trips to Moscow are feckless unless they recognize that Putin has no interest in peace. Any “peace process” is dead (irrespective of CIA Director John Radcliffe’s secret visit to Moscow last weekend) until the United States recognizes reality and joins Europeans in squeezing Putin until he fears the war is endangering his survival.

    I believe Ukraine will hold out via its tech brilliance and innovation, and its people’s determination not to surrender to the brutal domination of Russia. But the United States will pay a dear price for failing to step up when it could have blocked Putin and his allies — before their war on the West got much, much worse.

  • Why Trump’s attack on Stars and Stripes was a gut punch | Will Bunch Newsletter

    You’ve probably noticed that many of your favorite TV news anchors are on vacation right now, because the conventional wisdom is that nothing ever happens in August. That conventional wisdom has been wrong since Aug. 24, 79 A.D., when Mount Vesuvius erupted. The calendar has failed to stop natural disasters like Hurricane Katrina (see item below) or human-made ones like Richard Nixon, who resigned on Aug. 9, 1974. I’m going to tempt fate and take some vacation time next week, including a rare newsletter skip. I’ll see you in two weeks. What could possibly go wrong?

    If someone forwarded you this email, sign up for free here.

    Trump’s autocratic assault on Stars and Stripes isn’t just bad. It’s personal.

    Sgt. John Hubbuch of Versailles, Ky., one of the members of NATO-led peacekeeping forces in Bosnia, reads a copy of the Stars and Stripes in 1999.AMEL EMRIC

    Less than two months after the U.S. dropped the most powerful weapon humankind had ever invented — the atomic bomb — on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the American military arrived in Japan to implement a very different kind of tool in the U.S. arsenal of democracy.

    A free and largely unfettered newspaper.

    The first edition of the Stars and Stripes Pacific newspaper was published from downtown Tokyo on Oct. 3, 1945, when the ink on the Japanese surrender that ended World War II was barely dry. This was the start of a decades-long run when print journalism was still the best way to get information that could be entertaining or essential out to hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops who initially occupied Japan and other Pacific outposts, and later would see combat in Korea and Vietnam.

    Stars and Stripes Pacific — like virtually everything tied to U.S. imperial might after the war — is part of a complicated legacy that overlapped with American censorship of local and outside media in Japan. Yet, U.S. soldiers managed to get their own information from a publication that celebrated the better angels of the First Amendment back home, with coverage of Tokyo’s war-crimes trial and later from the front lines in Korea.

    It was only part of a much grander legacy for Stars and Stripes, which has been the American military’s independent news source tracing all the way back to 1861 and the Slaveholder’s Rebellion.

    Famously, when legendary World War II Gen. George Patton threatened to jail editorial cartoonist Bill Mauldin over a cartoon lampooning him, his superior, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, stopped him. “Stars and Stripes is the soldiers’ newspaper,” Ike reportedly said. “We will not interfere.” Mauldin was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his wartime cartoons. In 2010, Stars and Stripes reporters exposed the Pentagon’s efforts to slant mainstream media coverage of the war in Afghanistan, and won a George Polk Award.

    That feisty spirit of Stars and Stripes runs deep in my family’s DNA. My maternal grandfather, Thomas Blender, who’d been a photo editor at the Peoria (Ill.) Journal Star before joining the Army, was sent to Tokyo in those early days to work as a top editor of the Pacific publication. I’ve always regretted, after Grandpa Tom died when I was only 11, that I never got to ask him about those days once I’d been infected with the family journalism bug I’d eventually pass on to my own son.

    That must be why it felt like a personal attack last Friday when the Pentagon of Donald Trump and his like-minded “Secretary of War” Pete Hegseth obliterated 155 years of editorial freedom by firing its editor, its publisher — who, seeing the writing on the wall, was about to retire — and its Middle East correspondent. That journalist, Lara Korte, said she was pink-slipped for an interview with CBS News about her reporting on the dreadful conditions for Navy sailors aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln.

    The fuse had already been lit back in January when Hegseth’s Pentagon gutted the regulations regarding the government-funded news organization by stripping language that called for “a free flow of news and information to its readership without news management or censorship.” The new rules, which instead said Stars and Stripes’ journalism “must be consistent with good order and discipline of the military,” were seen as an invitation for censorship. Sean Parnell, the formerly embattled Pennsylvania Republican who is now Hegseth’s chief spokesperson, blasted Stars and Stripes for “woke distractions.”

    Three months later, Jacqueline Smith, the internal editorial watchdog of Stars and Stripes at the Pentagon, criticized military brass for editorial interference and was promptly fired. But the last straw for the outlet came two weeks ago with its aggressive reporting about problems aboard the Lincoln, which spent nine months mostly at sea with dwindling supplies tied to Trump’s ill-advised war on Iran. Journalist Alison Bath reported that sailors’ families were growing deeply concerned about the mental health of the aircraft carrier’s exhausted crew.

    That work epitomized everything that has been good and decent about Stars and Stripes. What the newspaper has shown at its best is that — despite all the contradictions and moral failings of U.S. postwar imperialism — a democratic government can value the press freedom that its armed readers literally died for from Gettysburg to Omaha Beach. That high-minded ideal was a beacon to set us apart from our adversaries in Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia, who never would have permitted the kind of honest coverage Stars and Stripes offered for decades.

    Until America found itself with a government with the same philosophy as 1939 Berlin or 1949 Moscow. Just like his boss, Hegseth has shown nothing but contempt for the notion that his “warfighters” might actually serve to protect Americans’ right to the truth about their own government, including the foibles of his Pentagon.

    On Monday, it came out that the military’s U.S. Central Command told the Intercept that it maintains “a list of people to disregard,” a.k.a. a blacklist. This is the same U.S. Department of Defense — sorry, Pete, that is still its legal name — that also forced out any journalist who wouldn’t sign their integrity away to work in the press room at the Pentagon.

    The firings at Stars and Stripes and the Pentagon’s apparent desire to turn the award-winning newspaper into a Pravda-style propaganda sheet for Hegseth’s testosterone-dosed military feels like a new low on the road toward the utter obliteration of all press freedom.

    Since returning to power last year, Trump and his MAGA minions have waged war against journalists they’ve called “the enemy of the people” — and they’ve done so not through some grand Orwellian censorship edict, but through a mix of billionaire carrots and sticks that have inflicted a thousand small cuts. That means rewards for wealthy allies who buy prominent news organizations (think the Ellison family assuming control of CBS and being on the brink of getting CNN) or neuter them (Jeff Bezos at the Washington Post) — but lawsuits, obstacles, or straight-up bullying for everyone else.

    Another alarming example of the precarious state of the First Amendment came earlier this month when a lawyer for Trump threatened a $5 billion (with a “b”) lawsuit against a left-leaning think tank, the Center for American Progress (CAP), if it didn’t retract a factual report that the Trump regime’s deployments of National Guard troops to U.S. cities have not lowered crime rates.

    The CAP has stood its ground so far, but this reveals the state of play right now. MAGA World has already either bought off or intimidated much of the mainstream media, so now they are hoping they can crush the outliers like Stars and Stripes or CAP, one by one.

    The mission my grandfather was dispatched to Tokyo to carry out after World War II was on the fringe of an idea that came to be known as “soft power” — the now-quaint notion that America could form healthy alliances with the rest of the world through good things like vaccinating children or printing uncensored journalism, instead of dropping bombs. Other organizations meant to show people in oppressed lands that press freedom and democracy are things to fight for — like Radio Free Europe — have been forced to grapple with Trump-ordered cutbacks.

    The right knows exactly what it is doing — that truth and knowledge are kryptonite for its authoritarian project. Increasingly, they are saying the quiet parts out loud. The great Tennessee journalist Phil Williams recently unearthed a sound bite from a white supremacist confab in Rome in which the conversation turned to America’s growing number of news deserts where journalism has all but perished.

    “Local media has been dying all over America, which means that there’s essentially no real way to hold local governments accountable — and they can do whatever they want,” white nationalist Kevin DeAnna told the gathering. “You should be fantasizing about this. This is a good thing.”

    No, it’s not. The government’s bludgeoning of Stars and Stripes has truly — to borrow from a storied military campaign of yesteryear — crossed the Rubicon of no return for its all-out blitzkrieg against the truth. All of us, including the laggards of the mainstream media who continue to pretend this war doesn’t exist, need to fight back with everything we have.

    I never got to know my Grandpa Tom very well, but I know in my soul that this is what he would have wanted.

    Yo, do this!

    • Meep, meep! If timing is really everything, then the half-animated, half-real feature film Coyote vs. Acme, which hits theaters this week, will be the greatest motion picture of all time. The film is based on a 1990 New Yorker essay that imagines Warner Bros. cartoon icon Wile E. Coyote suing the giant Acme Corp. over years of faulty products that literally blew up in his face and ruined his shot at catching the speedy Road Runner. The fact that real-world corporate baloney delayed for several years the release of this film mocking the excesses of runaway capitalism is an unbelievable irony. I’m really looking forward to seeing it.
    • Books, despite their apparent looming extinction, remain a great way to track what humankind is thinking about. This summer, the hot topic is anxiety over AI and the unchecked power of Silicon Valley. In addition to the best-selling Nerd Reich, now there’s the great essayist and Harvard historian Jill Lepore with her new tome, The Rise and Fall of the Artificial State, out today. Lepore’s timely work tracks the rise of authoritarianism run not so much by a tinhorn dictator, but by machines, and how humanity can fight back.

    Ask me anything

    Question: Do PA Dems have a legit chance of freeing us from Joe Pittman’s reign of terror in the state Senate? — Travis (@unraptured.bsky.social) via Bluesky

    Answer: Travis, the answer is absolutely yes. Democrats in the Keystone State have managed to chip away at what once seemed like a permanent GOP majority in the upper chamber at the same time that they’ve recaptured the state House. The current Republican Senate edge is just 27-23, meaning Democrats have to flip only three more GOP seats among November’s 25 contests. Every arrow — Trump’s high disapproval, the popularity of Gov. Josh Shapiro at the top of the ticket, and special-election results like last week’s shocking Democratic House victory in a blood-red district in Western Pennsylvania — points toward a blue tsunami. The Democrats have reportedly targeted three suburban swing districts. The big question for 2027 may be whether Shapiro really wants a Harrisburg trifecta pushing him to the left.

    What you’re saying about …

    OK, last week’s question about Georgia Sen. Jon Ossoff’s pointed comments regarding Donald Trump’s corruption, including an eyebrow-raising mention of ever-present aide Natalie Harp, was kind of a slam dunk for readers of this newsletter. You saw nothing uncivil in the fighting spirit of his remarks, and a surprising number of you echoed back a phrase from my question: “a breath of fresh air.” Wrote Daniel Fleischer: “Jon Ossoff called Trump a ‘crook.’ If anything, that’s a euphemism understating Trump’s criminality.” Added Patricia Eisenberg: “What he said was undeniably true — the President chose this young woman to travel on his escape plane, not one of his cabinet members.”

    📮 This week’s question: It seems like the GOP’s got nothing ahead of the midterms beyond its opposition to what it calls “men playing women’s sports.” It’s kind of pathetic, but it does pose a question for Democrats: Do they strongly embrace transgender rights, or is that risking political defeat in today’s culture wars? I have a strong opinion on this, but what do you think? Please email me your answer and put the exact phrase “transgender politics” in the subject line.

    Backstory on Indiana’s new, outrageous Katrina

    A woman sits inside the City Life Center as she waits for food in Gary, Ind., on Aug. 20, more than a week after a deadly storm passed through the area.Nam Y. Huh

    Exactly 21 years ago today, a tropical storm in the Atlantic Ocean rapidly intensified into a hurricane — Hurricane Katrina — and raced across Florida on a path into the Gulf of Mexico, where it became a Category 5 monster. Still, many of us in 2005 briefly thought the Gulf Coast dodged a bullet when Katrina weakened slightly, and its center struck what looked like only a glancing blow on populated New Orleans. Then, one by one, the city’s levees began to break, and the water rose.

    The death and destruction in Katrina’s wake was covered around the clock on cable TV, yet it took a couple of days for news anchors to articulate what viewers were seeing with their own eyes. The thousands of people who crowded interstate overpasses or were trapped on roofs were almost all Black, and most were desperately poor.

    In These Times wrote the following week that “many Americans were surprised that most of the victims of the New Orleans flood were Black: Their image of the Crescent City had been one of jazz, tasty cuisine and the good-natured excesses of its lively festivals. Where did all those black people come from, they wondered; and where were the white victims?” Katrina triggered some long-overdue conversations about inequality and racism in America, and the inept response from the George W. Bush administration would start his steep decline in public approval. Long before the roughly 1,400 New Orleanians who died in the flooding or chaotic aftermath could be buried, many folks were asking how to prevent this from ever happening again.

    One generation later, it’s happening again.

    It wasn’t a hurricane that struck Gary, Ind., and surrounding communities in the state’s northwest corner exactly two weeks ago on Aug. 11 — just a thunderstorm — but the winds were nearly as intense, snapping trees and downing power lines across the region. Gary’s 67,000 predominantly Black residents hunkered down in the dark nights and blistering hot August days as their refrigerated food went bad, and waited for help. And waited.

    While life returned to normal across the rest of the storm-battered Midwest, the massive outage in the region that includes Gary that began with some 375,000 homes lacking electricity dwindled at a snail’s pace. After two weeks, there were still more than 5,000 families without power and struggling with spoiled food and closed schools and workplaces. There is growing anger among residents who say that Indiana’s heavily Republican power structure and Donald Trump’s federal government feel no sense of urgency to rescue a city that is mostly African American.

    “This isn’t a problem that started with the storm,” the hip-hop star Freddie Gibbs, who grew up in Gary, told MS Now Monday night. “We are a predominantly Black city that tends to get ignored.” It feels like Katrina redux — an island of utter despair in the world’s wealthiest nation, with a government’s inaction bordering on criminal neglect. But there is one big difference: This festering crisis has been mostly ignored by the national media. The tragedy isn’t just our inability to stop the next Katrina, but our inability to care.

    What I wrote on this date in 2022

    One of George Orwell’s greatest passages in 1984 concerns Winston Smith’s job of cutting out old newspaper articles and tossing them into “the memory hole” — inconvenient truths meant to be forgotten by civilization. That’s how it feels now reading news stories from those four years in the early 2020s when Donald Trump was out of power, and America took baby steps back toward normalcy that would later get crushed. On Aug. 25, 2022, I wrote about one of these: Joe Biden’s eventually failed plan to wipe out some $300 billion of the nation’s massive student loan debt. I wrote that “this week will be remembered as one giant leap toward an idea that can change everything — the notion that higher education should be a public good, not the privatized rat race that has demoralized our rising generations.”

    Dive into the memory hole to pull out: “Biden’s big move on student loans only a first step toward making American college great again.”

    Recommended Inquirer reading

    • Look what’s happening out in the streets, got a revolution — and it’s not the one anyone saw coming. Growing public rage against Big Tech — the intrusiveness of artificial intelligence and the noisy, polluting data centers that power it, and increasingly also against omnipresent surveillance cameras — has become the surprise issue of the 2026 midterms. Politicians in both parties are performing backflips to join the bandwagon. Over the weekend, I wrote about how voter anger against Silicon Valley and its billionaires is rapidly reshaping our politics, and what could happen if our broken system fails to deliver radical change.
    • For the first time in recent memory, August has been living up to its reputation as a slow news month (so far), but on the baseball diamond things have really been heating up as kids are drifting back to school. The Phillies’ just-ended nine-game winning streak has electrified a city that’s been having a pretty good summer in spite of everything. The Inquirer’s oft-cynical sports columnist Marcus Hayes even published a list of five reasons to believe the Phils can go deep into October with a reenergized starting lineup, world-class pitching, and improved defense. A stunning turnaround from long-anticipated rookie pitcher Andrew Painter has also been key to the team’s revival in the National League East. It’s an old-fashioned pennant race, and subscribing to The Inquirer is the best way to keep up.

    By submitting your written, visual, and/or audio contributions, you agree to The Inquirer’s Terms of Use, including the grant of rights in Section 10.

  • Krasner’s candor problem started with his first exoneration win

    Krasner’s candor problem started with his first exoneration win

    A number of judges have called out District Attorney Larry Krasner’s office for lying and sloppy lawyering in several recent exoneration cases.

    A supervisor in Krasner’s office was disbarred last year for repeatedly lying while attempting to overturn a death penalty conviction. In June, another former supervisor was suspended from the region’s federal courts for three years for her role in attempting to mislead a judge in the same case. Last month, a former assistant district attorney said she was pressured to lie in court and instead resigned.

    But judges have raised concerns about a lack of candor dating back to the first exoneration Krasner secured after he became Philadelphia’s chief prosecutor in 2018, according to a review of judicial rulings, court transcripts, as well as internal district attorney’s office emails and other documents obtained through discovery in a lawsuit and shared with The Inquirer.

    Exoneration cases often take years to litigate. But just six weeks after Krasner was sworn in, his office vacated the first-degree murder conviction of Dontia Patterson. He was set free three months later.

    Patterson had spent 11 years in prison after being convicted in the shooting death of Antwine Jackson. Patterson’s first trial ended in a hung jury with an 11-1 vote in 2008, but he was convicted at a second trial the following year based largely on the testimony of two eyewitnesses.

    The Pennsylvania Innocence Project, along with pro bono lawyers, began working on Patterson’s post-conviction appeal well before Krasner was elected as district attorney on a promise to end mass incarceration and reexamine past cases. The focus of the group’s claim was ineffective defense counsel.

    Just weeks after he was sworn in as district attorney in January 2018, Larry Krasner secured an exoneration for Dontia Patterson, who was convicted in a 2007 murder.JESSICA GRIFFIN / Staff Photographer

    But Krasner’s office offered a bolder theory: In addition to the ineffective counsel, it claimed prosecutors working under then-District Attorney Lynne Abraham and police withheld evidence that would have bolstered Patterson’s defense.

    In May 2018, Anthony Voci, then the chief of Krasner’s homicide unit, signed a legal motion that called Patterson’s conviction “an egregious example of police and prosecutorial misconduct” and moved to drop the charges.

    Along the way, Voci began coordinating with the DA’s press officer to spread the word to the media. “I think this could be a great story for our office to tell,” Ben Waxman, then the DA’s director of communications, wrote in an email to Voci on Feb. 28, 2018.

    The district attorney’s office did not respond to requests to interview Krasner and Voci.

    Three months after Waxman’s email, in May 2018, Voci made a stirring speech in court that referenced the Declaration of Independence’s guarantees of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and excoriated the former prosecutors, saying they were required to be right, sure, and fair.

    Richard Sax, the former prosecutor who oversaw Patterson’s conviction, denied any wrongdoing. He said jurors concluded Patterson was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and a previous appeal of the conviction was denied. He called Krasner’s exoneration of Patterson “a horrific travesty of justice.”

    Beth McCaffery, a former prosecutor who oversaw the first trial that ended in a hung jury, was offended by the attack on her character by Krasner’s office, and decided to fight to clear her name.

    Richard Sax, who oversaw the prosecution of Dontia Patterson, denied any wrongdoing in the case and called the district attorney’s office’s exoneration “a horrific travesty of justice.”David Maialetti / Staff Photographer

    McCaffery filed a Right-to-Know request in 2020 seeking access to the case file, which she believed would show she operated by the book. Krasner’s office initially denied the request, claiming the information was not public, even though it had shared the files with researchers at the New York University School of Law.

    At a hearing last year, McCaffery testified that she kept detailed notes and records of her cases that would show she acted properly.

    Voci, who signed the motion that blamed the former prosecutors, also took the stand. By then, his story had shifted.

    McCaffery’s attorney, Bryan Lentz, wanted to find out what sort of independent investigation Krasner’s office undertook before deciding to free Patterson.

    “Before signing the motion, what did you do?” Lentz asked. “What did you review personally to assure yourself of the facts in this motion?”

    Voci responded, “Virtually nothing.”

    Turns out, prosecutors didn’t interview the two eyewitnesses from the trial or the former prosecutors who tried the cases. They didn’t interview a police officer who lived near the shooting, heard the gunshots, and saw a man fleeing the scene.

    However, Voci did sit in on a PowerPoint presentation by attorneys from the Pennsylvania Innocence Project that focused on Patterson’s ineffective legal counsel, which the DA’s office largely adopted.

    In May 2018, Anthony Voci, then the chief of Krasner’s homicide unit, signed a legal motion that called Dontia Patterson’s conviction “egregious.” He later testified that he hadn’t read the document before signing it.David Maialetti / Staff Photographer

    To be sure, a case could have been made that Patterson, who was 17 at the time of the killing, should not spend his life behind bars. Or that his defense counsel was inadequate, and that eyewitness misidentifications have been found to be a major reason for many wrongful convictions.

    But Voci — who had previously criticized the prosecutors in court — testified that he didn’t believe everything he said.

    “Were you onboard with accusing Beth McCaffery of prosecutorial misconduct?” Lentz asked.

    “No,” Voci said.

    “But you signed the motion anyway, right?” Lentz asked.

    “I did,” Voci said.

    Voci revealed something even more stunning: “I didn’t draft this motion, and I didn’t review it before I signed it.”

    That would appear to violate the Pennsylvania Rule of Criminal Procedure, which makes clear that an attorney signing a motion certifies that he or she has read the document and believes the facts as stated.

    Ed Cameron spent four decades prosecuting cases for the district attorney’s office. He questioned efforts to secure an exoneration for Dontia Patterson.Laurence Kesterson / Staff Photographer

    Ed Cameron, who spent nearly 40 years in the district attorney’s office prosecuting mainly homicide cases, sent an email to Voci at 7:36 a.m. the day after Patterson was released. He said he was “up all night” and proceeded to question the exoneration.

    “A lot of mistakes and misstatements were made in the ‘investigation’ and filing by our Office,” Cameron wrote, adding that he was never consulted about the motion to exonerate Patterson and blame the former prosecutors. After Cameron died in 2020, he was praised for his honesty and experience handling high-profile cases.

    Voci’s testimony echoes a similar issue playing out in a separate exoneration case that is before U.S. District Judge Paul S. Diamond.

    In that case, one of Krasner’s former assistant district attorneys, Jaclyn Mason, testified that the DA’s office failed to do any independent investigation in another exoneration case involving a convicted murderer and instead accepted the arguments provided by the Pennsylvania Innocence Project.

    Mason testified she signed the legal document asserting the man’s conviction should be thrown out, but didn’t independently examine all the evidence. Instead, Mason testified, she followed the orders of her supervisor, Matthew Stiegler, who she said told her, “‘If it’s good enough for the Innocence Project, it’s good enough for me.’” That case is ongoing.

    Like Mason, Voci testified that he was just following orders, and that another lawyer in the office, Patricia Cummings, wrote the Patterson motion.

    Krasner hired Cummings in January 2018 — the same month he was sworn in — to oversee the city’s Conviction Integrity Unit, which was set up to review old cases for wrongful convictions. She came from Dallas, where she started a similar unit, and reported to Krasner.

    Cummings maintained a separate role while working in Krasner’s office as a research scholar at NYU School of Law — the same place that was granted access to the DA’s case files McCaffery had requested.

    Cummings helped research and draft a 180-page report released by NYU that detailed a long history of prosecutorial misconduct in Philadelphia, an apparent conflict of interest that seemingly undermines the report’s independence.

    Cummings had an opportunity to defend Patterson’s exoneration and the NYU report at McCaffery’s Right-to-Know hearing. But when called to testify, she failed to show up. (Cummings did not respond to questions I emailed her.)

    McCaffery sued Cummings and NYU for defamation. The case was dismissed and is now on appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

    Separately, McCaffery’s effort to clear her name dragged on in court for four years. In March 2024, Common Pleas Court Judge Anne Marie Coyle issued a stemwinder of an opinion that stretched for 149 pages and found Krasner’s office unfairly accused McCaffery and Sax of misconduct.

    Dontia Patterson is shown at the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center after a hearing in May 2018, at which a judge cleared him of a 2007 murder and agreed to drop the charges.Chris Palmer

    The judge said the claims by Krasner’s office that the two former prosecutors illegally withheld evidence to secure a wrongful conviction were “intentionally and maliciously created” and “had no good faith basis.”

    Coyle listed 11 scathing findings involving Patterson’s exoneration and the efforts to fight McCaffery’s Right-to-Know request, including that Krasner’s office “misplaced and/or destroyed requested records and relevant evidence.” She found the DA’s office “dishonorably publicly maligned” McCaffery and Sax.

    The judge’s opinion echoed a recent finding by the state Supreme Court in a separate exoneration case when she found “the DA’s office demonstrated a patterned lack of candor” to the courts through “misstatements” and by “omitting salient” facts related to the post-conviction review of Patterson’s case and McCaffery’s Right-to-Know appeal.

    Coyle said a culture existed within Krasner’s office “to denigrate prior prosecutors” and “prior administrations.”

    She fined Krasner’s office $120,000 and called on an appellate court to impose more penalties. The DA’s office is appealing to the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania.

    After Patterson’s release, he sued the city and received $1.7 million in a settlement for his time in prison. In 2023, Patterson was arrested for selling drugs in Kensington. He struck a plea deal with prosecutors in Krasner’s office and received two years probation.

    The Pennsylvania Innocence Project stands by its efforts to exonerate Patterson.

    “Before the Pennsylvania Innocence Project agrees to take a case, we conduct a thorough, often yearslong review of the facts and the record,” Nilam A. Sanghvi, the Innocence Project’s legal director, said in a statement. “In this case, the facts pointed to Dontia Patterson’s innocence, and his exoneration was the just result. We will continue to pursue justice for our wrongfully convicted clients based on the facts.”

    Krasner, a former defense attorney, has long railed against what he considered a win-at-all-cost mentality among police and prosecutors in the city. While Philadelphia has a fraught history of overreach by officers of the law and officers of the court, the remedy for any past abuses isn’t more of the same.

  • Fighting AI and Flock, today’s Luddites are the revolutionaries we need

    Fighting AI and Flock, today’s Luddites are the revolutionaries we need

    It’s a good bet that a suburban Cincinnati man named Cody Morelock probably never heard of “Ned Ludd,” the mythical English weaver of the early 1800s who became the avatar of a movement to save society from the destructive force of a new technology.

    But Morelock was absolutely channeling the spirit of history’s Luddites, who smashed up the newfangled machines of the nascent Industrial Revolution, when he was allegedly captured on video toppling a Flock automatic license plate reader near his home and obliterating the high-tech device and the solar panel powering it.

    Morelock was arrested after the June incident, and then prosecutors in Clermont County, Ohio took what looked like an open-and-shut case — with surveillance tapes, credit card receipts, and other hard evidence connecting the 35-year-old man to the alleged crime — before a grand jury of his peers.

    But Morelock’s peers apparently didn’t see a crime in the wanton destruction of a Flock camera spying on their community. The grand jury refused to indict him — another victory for the 21st-century Luddites who’ve turned U.S. politics upside down with their rage against the machines.

    Public anger over the dystopia of omnipresent cameras tracking their every movement has caused more than 50 municipalities from coast to coast to cancel or reject contracts between local law enforcement and Georgia-based Flock Safety, the leading firm.

    But that’s just the tip of a political iceberg: What’s becoming a mass movement against Big Tech’s intrusiveness in our everyday lives has also seen activists in scores of communities beat back proposed data centers that power artificial intelligence, or AI. Suddenly, politicians in both parties are tripping over each other to oppose the advanced technology they were backing just months earlier.

    This weekend, I watched an online ad from a former Democratic state representative in Massachusetts running for the Bay State’s open congressional seat. The ad channels voter anger over Flock cameras, citing two local cases of police using them to stalk unsuspecting citizens. She slams an opponent for raising money from Big Tech sources.

    With a wicked Boston accent, Jamie Belsito says, “Flock cameras feed our movements into a massive searchable network that we know can be tapped into by ICE, and now — in our own backyards — we see how that power can be abused.”

    The uprising against Flock and government mass surveillance is merging with the already explosive movement against new data centers, which now sees a whopping 75% of Americans opposed to building one in their hometown — a kind of unity that in today’s bitterly divided nation you wouldn’t even see for cuddly puppies or ice cream sundaes.

    Here in Pennsylvania, which has become an epicenter of proposed data centers, a recent analysis by Spotlight PA found at least 20 state legislative races in November in which these facilities have become a pivotal issue.

    A governor’s race that started with both candidates seen as data center advocates now has the GOP’s Stacy Garrity calling for a moratorium as Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro — who in 2025 posed in front of earth movers to hail AI complexes as the Keystone State’s bright economic future — issued stringent new regulations while calling data centers “secretive … predators” and “bullies.”

    Did I mention that Shapiro is seriously considering running for president in 2028? Did I need to?

    Even right-wing and zealously pro-business red-state Republican governors like Texas’ Greg Abbott and Florida’s Ron DeSantis have turned sharply against data centers this year.

    It seems like the only U.S. politician with anything nice to say about these energy-sucking, polluting behemoths is Donald Trump, who told reporters last week, “If I were the mayor of a town or the governor of a state, and I had a chance to get a big plant in, an AI plant or a data center, I would absolutely want it because the jobs are enormous and the money paid, the taxes paid, are just enormous.”

    You don’t need Kalshi to bet that dozens of Democrats will feature Trump’s toxic words in their fall campaign ads.

    In the 21st century, the most exciting moments are the ones the TV pundits — who have more in common with their political drinking buddies or the cartoon villains of Silicon Valley than heartland voters — never saw coming. That list includes the progressive upheavals of 2011’s Occupy Wall Street, arguably a reaction not just to the Great Recession but Barack Obama’s tepid response, or 2017’s #MeToo movement after a man with multiple sexual misconduct allegations was elected president.

    But then Trump’s two terms, including his popular vote plurality in 2024, were also arguably the result of public fury at elites, even if a big chunk of that anger was against the ones calling out racism or sexism or homophobia. It’s worth noting, of course, that the progressive revolts, especially 2020’s Black Lives Matter marches, sparked intense backlash, yet Trump’s MAGA movement now seems in full meltdown.

    In one sense, the ability of billionaires and their endless money and their reactionary political allies to put down 21st-century unrest feels like a callback to the Luddites, whose revolution against the new machines changing the landscape of northern England in the early 19th century was also crushed, often violently, by the powers that be.

    But Fred Hampton famously said, “You can jail a revolutionary, but you can’t jail the revolution,” and the radical spirit of the Luddites continued to fuel pro-worker and pro-human rights movements for two centuries. On the whole, the Industrial Revolution won, but in 2026, revulsion over the way Silicon Valley — and especially AI — is changing our daily lives so quickly feels as if things could turn out differently.

    This moment was captured in a recent cartoon that roughly depicted George Jetson — whose world of flying cars was the future my generation of boomers was promised in the 1960s — doing the drudge work of vacuuming while Rosie the robot paints at an easel. Robots were supposed to free us to create beautiful music or write the great American novel in our leisure time, not do those things, as well.

    Charolette Baierl (left), the Ohio River Valley regional organizer for Climate Reality Project, and Sally Simpson, a Ford City organizer, protest a planned data center near the Rachel Carson Riverfront Park in Cheswick, Pa., in June.Stephanie Strasburg

    To live in America in 2026 is to experience the constant anxiety of being watched by the government or big corporations — whether that’s on our phone or on the streets — and wondering when people stopped reading books, or whether that song was by a real person, or whether that video you just watched of the president (or from the president) is even real.

    This weekend came news of an actual event in China called the World Humanoid Robot Games in which one of the robots shattered Usain Bolt’s world record for the 100-meter dash. Who wants this? … other than a handful of billionaires who are also rapidly building their own remote high-tech cities to save themselves from the looming torches and pitchforks.

    They are going to need them. It was one thing when the Luddites trashed automated textile looms, when the meaning of work was up for grabs. That same threat is also posed by AI, which is starting to drag down the job market, but when robots take over track and field or pop music, people see that our fundamental humanity is under attack. That realization seems to have really kicked in this summer, and the future of our revolution is both exhilarating and somewhat scary.

    Acts of vandalism — like the Ohio attack on the Flock camera — or worse are becoming somewhat more commonplace. Acts of violence — like the gunshots fired into the home of an Indianapolis city council member who supported data centers — are reprehensible and not helpful to the larger cause. In the present moment, there is rising hope that AI can be reined in the right way: at the ballot box.

    When it comes to this issue, the ground beneath our feet may continue to keep shifting between now and Election Day. An article in Sunday’s New York Times described how the politics of data centers has scrambled a midterm election that was supposed to hinge on high gas prices and the growing threats to democracy. The piece noted that in Wisconsin and Florida — as well as Pennsylvania — the gubernatorial candidates from both major parties are now attacking the high-tech facilities.

    Yet, it’s hard to jibe the politicians’ embrace of populism with news that the AI industry and its related political action committees will spend as much as $200 million on the November elections. What will happen in 2027 and beyond if, and likely when, the American body politic doesn’t have the strength to slow down these sprinting robots? Will Morelock’s alleged destruction of one Flock camera seem like child’s play?

    The story of America in the 21st century has been a tale of widespread consensus that a grossly unequal and unfair nation is on the wrong track, yet bitter disagreement over whom to blame. Until now. The fight that no one saw coming — pitting everyday folks against billionaires and their robots, who can already outrun us — is about much more than an election for U.S. Congress. Today’s Luddites may be our best hope.