Violent beating of three seniors in Chinatown sparks fear, outrage

While law enforcement has been attacking the newly elected District Attorney, what have the San Francisco cops been doing for years to stop the senseless crime which is happening on their watch?

The Police Officers Association can criticize the District Attorney. That’s easy.

Law enforcement needs to take a hard look at itself. If the cops aren’t apprehending the suspects so that they can be prosecuted then the POA has no business calling out the DA.

San Francisco Chronicle 11.11.2019

The violent beating of three older men captured on video in San Francisco’s Chinatown over the weekend has sparked fear and outrage among some residents in the city’s Chinese-American community, who said they feel increasingly targeted following several high-profile attacks on the neighborhood’s most vulnerable residents.

No one has been arrested and no suspects have been identified in the attack. Supervisor Aaron Peskin, whose district includes Chinatown, visited the scene on Monday and said police believe the same vehicle in the attack was involved in another robbery the day before.

“We do not tolerate this violence in San Francisco,” he said. “We’re going to apprehend these criminals.”

In that case, a man violently wrestled a woman’s purse away from her outside the Garden Bakery on Jackson Street. He then jumped into an SUV matching the description from Saturday’s incident and disappeared.

“In almost 20 years on and off the board of supervisors, I’ve never seen violence like this in District Three, particularly in the senior-filled community of Chinatown,” Peskin said. “I am more than concerned about it.”

The police department has “saturated” the area with officers as investigators work to track down the group, Peskin said.

A citizen captured the disturbing video of the attack from an overhead perch, showing four assailants ambushing a group at Clay Street and Walter U. Lum Place on the southwest corner of Portsmouth Square just after 9 p.m. Saturday.

Officials said the violence erupted after one of the attackers ripped the cell phone from a man’s hand and others tried to intervene only to be pummeled.

One assailant cold-cocked a man with a sweeping roundhouse punch, leaving him unconscious on his back as others struggled in the street feet away. The marauders then jumped into a waiting sport utility vehicle and sped off.

Three victims, all men ages 63, 67 and 68, were left with varying injuries, police said. Two were treated at San Francisco General Hospital and later released. A third was checked out by paramedics and released at the scene.

District Attorney Elect Chesa Boudin discards POA toxins into trash bin

Every Picture Tells a Story – Ongoing Series

Election Night San Francisco 11.5.2019

DA elect Chesa Boudin overcame a vicious campaign of character assassination by the Police Officers Association (POA) to be elected to office.

On election night Chesa, the usual picture of diplomacy and decorum, showed his devoted followers what he thinks of the attempt to smear and destroy him.

Into the trashcan of history the POA literature is tossed to join other noxious political literature.

Photo- San Francisco Chronicle

Israel on Chesa. “Jewish son of jailed far-left radicals elected San Francisco DA”

Chesa Boudin’s historic election as San Francisco District Attorney is a developing world wide story.

Chesa’s stunning election was the result of a hard fought People’s Campaign which found his devoted followers hitting the streets every weekend for almost a year. Their efforts overcame vigorous opposition from San Francisco’s entrenched power structure.

Here is one view from Israel re Chesa’s election as DA, complete with a 39 year old photo of his mother Kathy Boudin being hauled away by the cops. The Times of Israel thinks Chesa is not their kind of guy. Had The Times known earlier, it would have probably contributed to the San Francisco POA vicious effort to destroy Chesa’s campaign.

This type incendiary reporting is what Chesa can expect as he sets forth on his four year tenure as San Francisco’s chief law enforcement officer.

The Times of Israel 11.10.2019

Chesa Boudin, a public defender and former translator for Venezuela strongman Chavez, wins tight race after promising series of progressive reforms.

Chesa Boudin, a US former public defender who was raised by leaders of a far-left group and who previously worked for Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez, has been elected the new San Francisco district attorney.

Boudin, 39, who is Jewish, won a tightly contested race against Suzy Loftus, who had been appointed interim district attorney weeks before the public vote.

“The people of San Francisco have sent a powerful and clear message: It’s time for radical change to how we envision justice. I’m humbled to be a part of this movement that is unwavering in its demand for transformation,” Boudin said in a statement following his win.

After four days of vote-counting, and with some 1,200 ballots still left to count, Boudin had 85,950 votes to Loftus’s 83,511, leading the latter to concede defeat, local media reported Saturday.

On his progressive campaign trail, Boudin promised to take action to reduce incarceration rates and fight police brutality and racial bias in the criminal justice system.

He also highlighted his unique life story.

Boudin’s parents, Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, both belonged to far-left group Weather Underground. In 1981, when he was just 14 months old, both his parents were convicted and jailed over their role as getaway drivers in an armored car robbery in Rockland County, New York, in which two policemen were killed.

He was then raised in Chicago by Weather Underground leaders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

During his career as a public defender, Boudin served as a translator for the far-left socialist administration of now-deceased Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez.

Boudin’s mother served 20 years in jail until she was granted parole in 2003. His father, now aged 75, was sentenced to three life sentences and won’t be eligible for parole until 2058.

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, who endorsed Boudin, congratulated him on his “historic victory.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish-son-of-jailed-far-left-radicals-elected-san-francisco-district-attorney/

CHESA BOUDIN WINS DA RACE

PUBLIC DEFENDER CHESA BOUDIN WINS SAN FRANCISCO DA RACE IN MAJOR VICTORY PROGRESSIVE PROSECUTOR MOVEMENT

Son of incarcerated parents, backed by Black Lives Matter co-founders, Boudin will be the next DA of San Francisco.

The Appeal 11.9.2019 4:45PM

In a win for the progressive prosecutor movement, deputy public defender Chesa Boudin has declared victory over Interim District Attorney Suzy Loftus in the San Francisco race for DA. Boudin announced he’d won the race late Saturday afternoon following a concession from Loftus, Boudin’s campaign told The Appeal. The election was held on Tuesday, November 5, but it took several days to tabulate the votes. As with most local races in the city, voters can select their first-, second-, and third-place choices in a process called ranked-choice voting.

In the last weeks of the election, Loftus and Boudin led the four-candidate pack, which also included Alameda County prosecutor Nancy Tung and Leif Dautch, a deputy attorney general for California. In October, Mayor London Breed, who endorsed Loftus, appointed her to serve as interim DA after George Gascón resigned, affording her, what critics said, was an unfair boost. In addition to Breed, the San Francisco Chronicle, Governor Gavin Newsom, and Senator Dianne Feinstein also endorsed Loftus.

Boudin earned national headlines, as well as high-profile endorsements. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner, and Black Lives Matter co-founders Patrisse Cullors and Alicia Garza all announced their support for Boudin.

During the campaign, Boudin said he planned to continue the work he did as a deputy public defender to eliminate money bail, and expand alternative to incarceration programs, including for first-time DUI offenses.

Boudin also pledged to implement restorative justice practices, which, he said, helped him cope with the trauma of growing up with incarcerated parents, Weather Underground activists Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert. His parents were convicted for their participation in a robbery in which three people were killed. “I went through a lot of these kinds of challenges that many children with incarcerated parents go through: feelings of guilt and abandonment and anger,” Boudin told The Appeal in January.

During the campaign, Loftus also promised to end cash bail and pledged to prioritize decarceration through alternative to incarceration programs that, as her website states, “address the root causes of crime.” But as interim DA, Loftus has ended a diversion program for those charged with a first-time DUI offense.

“Traffic safety is so important for all of us, particularly given that so many of us have lost a loved one due to someone driving under the influence,” Loftus said in a statement last month. “These deaths are preventable, and prevention starts with people knowing there is accountability when it comes to drinking and driving.”

Boudin criticized Loftus’s decision, calling it an “ominous sign.”

“It was clear that she was never a reform candidate and her campaign promises are being violated before she has even won the election,” Boudin texted The Appeal on Tuesday.

Much of Loftus’s career has been spent in law enforcement. She was president of the San Francisco Police Commission from 2012 to 2016 and worked under Senator Kamala Harris, a 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful, in both the DA and attorney general’s offices. (Harris tweeted her support on Election Day.) Before serving as interim DA, Loftus was assistant chief legal counsel for Sheriff Vicki Hennessy.

Local law enforcement spent more than $650,000 campaigning against Boudin. “Chesa Boudin: The #1 Choice of Criminals and Gang Members!” read one mailer sent by the San Francisco Police Officers Association. “Say No to Chesa Boudin.” The association also donated $3,500 to a pro-Loftus political action committee.

Former police chief Greg Suhr, whom then-Mayor Ed Lee asked to resign in 2016 after several police shootings and mass demonstrations, also supported Loftus. While Loftus was head of the police commission, there were 15 fatal police shootings, according to SFPD data; 10 involved people.

Top Photo-San Francisco District Attorney elect Chesa Boudin and family

https://theappeal.org/public-defender-chesa-boudin-wins-san-francisco-da-race-in-major-victory-progressive-prosecutor-movement/

Chesa Boudin’s lead increases to 2439 over Suzy Loftus in DA contest

San Francisco Examiner 4:00PM 11.9.2019

San Francisco District Attorney hopeful Chesa Boudin continued to lead in ranked-choice voting on Saturday, surpassing interim District Attorney Suzy Loftus by more than 2,400 votes.

The latest results from Tuesday’s election showed progressive challenger Boudin leading with 85,950 votes to Loftus’ 83,511 votes.

While Loftus was initially ahead in the neck-and-neck race, Boudin began to close in on her lead Thursday, reducing it from 2,205 votes to 879 votes. On Friday, the race flipped after Boudin surpassed Loftus by 156 votes.

Boudin is now ahead by 2,439 votes.

https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/chesa-boudins-lead-increases-over-suzy-loftus-in-da-contest/

Chesa takes lead: Provisional “Hippie” voters may carry Boudin into DA’s Office

The community newsletter Mission Local keeps close tabs on goings on at City Hall. Following is its report and analysis on the status of the District Attorney and legislative seat race.

Political Science professor Jason McDaniel state emphatically, “It’s very clear to me Boudin will be the winner of the DA’s race” based on his analysis of the vote count to date.

Stay tuned.

Mission Local – By Joe Eskenazi 11.8.2019

With provisional ballots making up the vast majority of outstanding votes, challengers Boudin and Preston are in the catbird seat

Provisional voters tend to lean left — way left. “They vote like hippies,” one longtime city political operative told me.

If so, the hippies may yet carry DA hopeful Chesa Boudin and District 5 challenger Dean Preston to victory. It was a very good Friday for them. Boudin erased an 879-vote hole and is now atop interim DA Suzy Loftus by 156 votes.

A purported construction mishap Friday knocked out running water at City Hall. Anyone only aware of San Francisco’s condition via misery safari/needles-and-feces articles regarding our filthy streets would not have been surprised with the woeful state of the restrooms today at our seat of government.

One thing that wasn’t backed up, however, was ballots. Department of Election workers crossed their legs and diligently flushed through some 26,761 of them, leaving 1,500 mail ballots and 14,000-odd provisional ballots to begin working through on Saturday.

Yes, 156 votes: 78,809 to 78,653. Boudin has 50.05 percent of the vote to Loftus’ 49.95.

The moderate candidates’ inability to adopt a ranked-choice strategy and Boudin’s heavy investment in Chinatown and endorsements from Chinese organizations and newspapers may yet loom large.

That’s close. But District 5 is even closer. Preston, who led by 35 votes over Supervisor Vallie Brown at the end of yesterday, now leads by — 35 votes. This is a statistical anomaly.

Rarely does a flipped coin land on its side, but, dios mio, it does happen.

These are amazingly close races. But S.F. State political science professor Jason McDaniel said both Boudin and Preston are now in commanding positions with some 1,500 late absentee ballots and 14,000 provisional votes to be tallied.

“I will be shocked if the provisionals change this now,” said McDaniel. “It’s very clear to me Boudin will be the winner of the DA’s race and it’s most likely that Dean Preston will win the D5 race.”

A provisional ballot, if you’re wondering, is a ballot given to a voter when there are questions regarding that voter’s eligibility.

And, again, if you’re wondering, 86 percent of them have been deemed valid over the past four San Francisco mayoral elections, per John Arntz, the city’s election director.

Boudin continued to rack up first-place votes at a greater clip than Loftus. She is getting more of the transfer votes from third- and fourth-place finishers Nancy Tung and Leif Dautch — but not enough, and not as many as she had in past batches.

Loftus received only 26% of first place votes from today’s batch of votes, compared to 34% on Nov 6, and 30% on Nov 7. Boudin received 33% of first choice votes today. Loftus not able to overcome that through the RCV tally today, receiving 36% of Tung transfers. pic.twitter.com/paY2x64rq5

— Jason McDaniel (@ValisJason) November 9, 2019

The water has come back at City Hall. But the counting never stopped. The next update will come at 4 p.m. on Saturday.

https://missionlocal.org/2019/11/s-f-election-update-a-watershed-moment-for-chesa-boudin-and-dean-preston/

The contradictory and dangerous conservatism of Clarence Thomas

The current issue of The Nation has a review of this book which until today I was unaware of. The fact Clarence Thomas replaced Civil Rights icon Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court is infuriating. Justice Thomas has done more to destroy civil rights for all citizens, irregardless of skin color or gender than any Justice, black or white.

Jane Mayer’s book “Strange Justice” (1992) on the confirmation hearing in 1991 is essential reading for those who are interested in how Justice Thomas came to his current position as an arbiter of Justice in America.

Washington Post 9.26.2019

As a justice, Clarence Thomas has remained the most extreme conservative on a court increasingly packed with conservatives, hewing to a set of far-right positions on federalism, corporate free speech, police and prisons, civil rights, and other issues.

In March 1960, the civil rights movement came to Savannah, Ga., and an 11-year-old Clarence Thomas did his best to join in. At the behest of his grandfather, a quiet but diligent supporter of the local NAACP chapter, Thomas and his brother dutifully sat through protest meetings, even though many in the city’s conservative black Catholic community stayed away. Soon, Thomas was staring down hostile whites while using the newly desegregated public library and refusing to sit in the black balcony in the movie house.

As an adult, he became an ardent black nationalist, attended Yale Law School and militantly opposed interracial marriage. Thereafter, Thomas sought out white Republicans as his political patrons, became a conservative and eventually married a white woman (his first wife was black).

He strongly endorsed patriarchal protection of black women, but his Supreme Court nomination famously produced Anita Hill’s credible testimony that he had sexually harassed her while serving as her supervisor in the federal government.

He rhetorically invokes originalist jurisprudence but follows it quite inconsistently — and rarely with regard to race discrimination, the issue that concerns him most. He officiated at the third marriage of Rush Limbaugh, the right-wing talk show host and racial provocateur. But Thomas also understands himself to be a black justice, and he sometimes inserts references to black history and anti-black racism into his opinions.

Thomas is, in short, a bundle of contradictions, which Corey Robin proposes to sort out in his important and well-argued book, “The Enigma of Clarence Thomas.” Thomas’s racial dilemma, he argues, is a microcosm of America’s.

Robin, a political scientist, asserts that a consistent strain of black nationalism unites Thomas’s politics and jurisprudence from his early adulthood through his decades as a justice — a general point that, Robin concedes, has been made by other scholars. What makes his account distinctive is his claim that three central frameworks organize Thomas’s thought: race, capitalism and the Constitution.

On race, Robin shows how the black nationalism of the early 1970s, with its skepticism of the civil rights movement’s successes and its emphasis on black self-help, fed into Thomas’s embrace of conservatism. But Thomas, as usual, went further. Thomas, according to Robin, believes that “whites — southern and northern, liberal and conservative, rural and urban — are racists” and have always been. Thus, in one opinion Thomas took a swipe at campaign finance laws by noting that the Tillman Act of 1907, which regulated corporate contributions, was named for the white-supremacist Sen. Benjamin Tillman of South Carolina. Such regulations, he seems to think, have their roots in racism — although exactly how remains unclear. Thomas’s jurisprudential opposition to affirmative action, Robin concludes, is based on his belief that the practice is a continuation of historical white supremacy — a system that requires blacks to ask for the patronage of white people.

Thomas also embraced black capitalism, Robin argues, but it is a black enterprise with little protection under law. Aided by the writings of the conservative black economist Thomas Sowell, Thomas came to believe that blacks should eschew civil rights and politics and instead pursue the kind of work that Thomas’s self-employed, middle-class grandfather used to do. In a 1994 voting rights case, Holder v. Hall, and in later opinions, Thomas rejects the notion that blacks can achieve any kind of collective political agency through voting rights, Robin asserts. In economic matters, Thomas embraces what Robin calls a futilitarian argument — that white supremacy is so entrenched, it is not worthwhile fighting it through law — as he seems to do in a 2015 dissent rejecting “disparate impact,” a theory that even facially neutral state policies may discriminate based on race. Even his grandfather’s patient support of the NAACP, it would seem, was a fool’s errand.

Ultimately, Thomas believes in what Robin calls the White Constitution — an American Constitution so tainted by its historical origins in slavery that its main use has been (and continues to be) to oppress African Americans. He also, according to Robin, believes in a Black Constitution — a spare set of constitutional rights claimed by self-sufficient, patriarchal black men during Jim Crow, such as the Second Amendment right to bear arms, which Thomas described at length in a 2010 case involving a Chicago handgun ban. Thomas seems to argue that even these rights are few in number and offer little legal protection for blacks, for expansive rights guarantees would only sap the manhood of black America. He almost seems to pine for the lost world of lynching and Jim Crow.

Robin argues that Thomas inhabits a bleak world of entrenched white supremacy that might seem unrecognizable to many — with the exception of many writers and advocates on the left who, Robin argues, largely share it. Robin asserts that the progressive left parts company with Thomas only in that it seeks legal remedies for discrimination and inequality. He closes on a somber note: “We may ask whether we, in the shadow of defeat, have simply come to accept and repeat, without realizing it, the story he has been telling us for decades.”

Robin has produced a thoughtful and careful explication of Thomas’s core ideas, showing how they emerge partly from his biography and setting out their disturbing implications. This is as good a synthesis of Thomas’s intellectual world as we are likely to get.

But Robin’s ambitious project is based on the assumption that a unified philosophy ties together Thomas’s complicated life. Robin acknowledges that on several key issues — affirmative action and disparate impact, for instance — Thomas indicated a flexibility as a young, ambitious Republican officeholder that later hardened into an inflexible pessimism. Moreover, judicial opinion-writing is hardly a transparent vehicle for the explication of a judge’s social philosophy.

After all, Thomas’s racial observations occur in relatively few of his opinions, and on most issues he seems to get to the same general position as his conservative white colleagues, albeit sometimes more extreme. As Robin acknowledges, “In certain cases, where Thomas is trying to reason his way to a conservative outcome, race affords him easy access to that destination.”

Moreover, if Thomas has a philosophy, black nationalism is an odd name for it. Most black nationalists, from 19th-century figures such as the abolitionist Martin Delany to the Black Panthers of the post-civil-rights era, could claim a nation — some set of black institutions through which they sought to practice their nationalist craft. Thomas, by contrast, has articulated his vision largely in white-dominated settings where he is often the only black person in the room. He seems most comfortable in far-right circles where even traditional black conservatives now often feel unwelcome, and among those whom he believes are openly racist and intend to do his people harm — at least if one takes his rhetoric at face value.

Whatever the proper name for it, Thomas’s philosophy is perplexing. Despite Robin’s valuable efforts, Thomas remains, in so many ways, an enigma.

The Enigma of Clarence Thomas

By Corey Robin

Metropolitan. 301 pp. $30

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/the-contradictory-conservatism-of-clarence-thomas/2019/09/26/05ad97a4-d325-11e9-9343-40db57cf6abd_story.html

Political Coup d’etat in San Francisco

By: Lee Heidhues 11.6.2019

Coup d’état. definition

A sudden decisive exercise of force in politics especially the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group

San Francisco may now live with a District Attorney who is a favorite of the City’s power elite while the rest of the citizenry which cares about fairness, ethics and democracy have been left in the dirt.

Democracy has failed.

Regardless of who is the District Attorney in San Francisco the alarming fact is that the City power elite thrust its choice on the electorate via a virtual political Coup d’état.

It is a shameful and alarming event in this allegedly progressive City.

What were the events which led to this government seizure of the District Attorney’s race less than three weeks before the votes were tabulated? The tawdry story is well known to most San Franciscans. It has escaped notice of the world at large.

San Francisco was to have held its first open District Attorney election in over 100 years. Yet 18 days before the election the Mayor swore in her hand-picked candidate who was one of four people seeking the seat. This blatant and brazen political move drew the scorn of many people who knew it to be a power play. Nothing more. The Mayor herself said she wanted a DA, “I can trust.”

The ”Interim” DA was then anointed with the mantle of incumbent and all the favorable press coverage which goes with a newly minted public official.

Next, and even more insidious, was the intervention of the notoriously right-wing Police Officers Association. The POA set up a Political Action Committee (PAC), spent upwards of a Million dollars and blanketed City mailboxes and television viewers with outright libelous, defamatory, inciteful and shameless ads. This abuse of free speech was directed towards one candidate, Chesa Boudin.

Boudin was the only one of four candidates who vowed to hold the SFPD accountable for its misconduct, a state of affairs which is well known throughout San Francisco. This conduct includes the killings of unarmed civilians, racist behavior and a pattern of abuse towards many San Franciscans, particularly those of minority background.

It is a sad day for San Francisco.

People’s Candidate Chesa Boudin leads in early returns for San Francisco DA

UPDATE: 11PM. ALL THE VOTES ARE COUNTED AND CHESA BOUDIN IS AHEAD BY 33% TO 31% OVER THE “INTERIM” DA SUZY LOFTUS. CHESA LEADS BY OVER 2000 VOTES. NOW WE ENTER THE RANKED CHOICE COUNT OF VOTES.

With Ranked Choice voting there’s a long way to go before the votes are finally tabulated and a winner announced.

At this point Chesa Boudin is in the lead and could be the next San Francisco District Attorney. Should Chesa win all the money spent by the Police Officers Association in its demagogic attempt to destroy Chesa and the Mayor’s appointment of an “Interim” DA 18 days before the election will have failed miserably. As well it should.

Photo above. Chesa Boudin arriving at Election night party

San Francisco Chronicle 11.5.2019 Election Night in San Francisco

Chesa Boudin, an attorney in the San Francisco public defender’s office, collected 31.8% of votes in early election returns, narrowly leading interim District Attorney Suzy Loftus’ 31.1% in Tuesday’s race to become San Francisco’s top prosecutor.

The two candidates offered contrasting visions for the city’s criminal justice system, with Boudin amassing a groundswell of support, both locally and nationally, for his plan to make progressive reforms favoring rehabilitation over incarceration.

If elected, Boudin wouldn’t be the first progressive to hold the seat in San Francisco. Gascón was widely seen as one of the most progressive district attorneys in the country. Terence Hallinan, a former defense attorney like Boudin, ran the office for two terms beginning in 1996.

Before running, Boudin worked to overhaul the state’s cash bail system, helped develop an immigration unit in the public defender’s office, and created the office’s pretrial release unit, which put attorneys in city jails to review defendants’ cases before arraignment.

Boudin used his life story to drive home his vision of reform. His left-wing radical parents, members of the Weather Underground, were incarcerated when he was an infant for taking part in an armored car robbery in upstate New York that led to the death of two police officers and a security guard.

Boudin was raised in Chicago by Weather Underground leaders Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. He went on to study law at Yale, earn a Rhodes Scholarship and work for Venezuela’s now-deceased socialist President Hugo Chávez before coming to San Francisco.

He pledged to be tougher on police shootings and was the only candidate who said he would have filed charges against officers in the 2015 killing of Mario Woods in the Bayview.

The union representing rank-and-file San Francisco police officers spent more than $600,000 to run attack ads against Boudin. Meanwhile, a progressive group, Youth and Families Taking Power Supporting Chesa Boudin for SF District Attorney, spent more than $188,000 to support him.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/local-politics/article/Loftus-leads-Boudin-Tung-for-San-Francisco-14812809.php

America 2019 – White diner won’t sit by blacks. Buffalo Wild Wings ousts blacks

Sick and twisted racism. This is Trump’s America in 2019. Such conduct is beyond reprehensible.

America is reaping the whirlwind for permitting such a Racist buffoon to sit in the White House. All the racist crazies have been cut loose to live out their perverse fantasties of a white supremacist social order.

Washington Post 11.4.2019

The Vahls went out on a Saturday night near Chicago in search of dinner.

But the family and their party, a mostly African American group of parents and young kids celebrating a birthday, say they faced discrimination head-on instead when staff at a Buffalo Wild Wings repeatedly ordered them to leave their table — all because another customer did not want to sit next to black people.

Buffalo Wild Wings III 11.4.2019.jpg

Now, the incident has gone viral, the staff has been fired, and the restaurant chain is facing backlash after yet another troubling example of public discrimination captured online.

“If you don’t want to sit next to certain people in a public restaurant then you should probably eat dinner in the comfort of your own home,” Mary Vahl wrote on Facebook, in a post that has been shared more than 4,500 times as of early Monday.

The Vahls went out on a Saturday night near Chicago in search of dinner.

Now, the incident has gone viral, the staff has been fired, and the restaurant chain is facing backlash after yet another troubling example of public discrimination captured online.

Riley told the station he answered with his own question: “If they don’t value us as people, as human beings, would you want to pay them?”

Still, the incident seemed to weigh on some of them. Ethan Vahl, 10, would later tell the TV station, “No one should experience what we experienced that day with racism.” His friend Dereon Smothers, also 10, said he had been thinking about the incident all last week.“That was the most troubling thing for me,” said Riley, who is also their basketball coach. “To have my children go through that, it brought me to tears.”

He reached out to Buffalo Wild Wings, which later told the Sun that it was “in direct communication with the guest to understand their account of what happened and to offer our deepest apologies for any unacceptable behavior.”

By Sunday, multiple employees at the restaurant had been fired and several others had quit, though local media did not report how many were dismissed or what role they had played in the incident.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/11/04/buffalo-wild-wings-black-customers-seated-by-white-racist-results-fired-staff/

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog

Chesa Boudin’s historic election as San Francisco District Attorney is a developing world wide story.

Chesa Boudin, a public defender and former translator for Venezuela strongman Chavez, wins tight race after promising series of progressive reforms.

Share this: reblog

PUBLIC DEFENDER CHESA BOUDIN WINS SAN FRANCISCO DA RACE IN MAJOR VICTORY PROGRESSIVE PROSECUTOR MOVEMENT

Son of incarcerated parents, backed by Black Lives Matter co-founders, Boudin will be the next DA of San Francisco.

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog

With provisional ballots making up the vast majority of outstanding votes, challengers Boudin and Preston are in the catbird seat

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog

Share this: reblog