Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Sha’Carri Richardson’s domestic violence arrest should be a real wake-up call

Published

on

Sha’Carri Richardson’s domestic violence arrest should be a real wake-up call

U.S. Olympic champion sprinter Sha’Carri Richardson is copping a plea from the public after an ugly incident that involved her assaulting her boyfriend at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport last month and being booked on a charge of misdemeanor fourth-degree domestic violence assault. But the public absolution she’s seeking via social media mea culpa may not be what the talented 25-year-old champion needs most. For her sake, one hopes she engages in a deeper, less public, reflection about how she might safeguard her career by making fewer mistakes off the track.

One hopes she engages in a deeper reflection about how she might safeguard her career by making fewer mistakes off the track.

Security footage of the July 27 scene at the airport shows Richardson shoving her boyfriend, Olympic sprinter Christian Coleman, into a wall and throwing something at him as the couple walked through a terminal. Though she was shoving him in full view of dozens of witnesses, including TSA agents working nearby, bodycam footage captured Richardson lying to the responding officers that she hadn’t touched Coleman. Even worse, she was recorded telling an officer, “I can definitely have evidence of him assaulting me, if possible.” It’s unclear what that refers to, as none of the surveillance footage shows Coleman making contact with Richardson.

An officer who submitted a report of the incident wrote, “I was told Coleman did not want to participate any further in the investigation and declined to be a victim.”

She’s a human being and a great person,” Coleman, 29, later said of the woman he described as “the best female athlete in the world.” He said, “Does she have things that she needs to work on for herself? Of course. But so do I. So do you. So does everybody. And I’m a type of guy, I’m in the business of extending grace and mercy and love.”

Four days after Richardson was arrested, but before news of her arrest had been made public, she ran what Nick McCarvel at Olympics.com described as “a strong showing” in the 100 meters heats. But then the news of her arrest was released, and she withdrew from the rest of the 100 meters competition. She also initially withdrew from the 200 too, but reconsidered and missed qualifying for the final by a hundredth of a second.

All is not lost. She has a bye into the 100 in September’s World Athletics Championships in Tokyo.

Richardson said on Instagram Monday that she had put herself in a “compromised situation,” and on Tuesday, she issued a written apology to Coleman on Instagram. “I love him & to him I can’t apologize enough,” she wrote. She wrote that her apology “should be just as loud” as her “actions,” adding: “To Christian I love you & I am so sorry.”

In her video, Richardson said she’s practicing “self-reflection” and refuses “to run away but face everything that comes to me head-on.”

If we’re serious about eradicating domestic violence, then we must take what she did seriously, too.

Richardson, unfortunately, is joining a long list of athletes who have been extremely talented in competition and frustratingly self-sabotaging when they’re not competing. She’s 25. She should be basking in everything, including lucrative endorsements, that world-class talent brings an athlete entering their prime. But Richardson has consistently asked her fans to look past her unforced errors. She missed the 2021 Tokyo Games after she was suspended for testing positive for marijuana use. Later, she hired as her coach Dennis Mitchella former sprinter who once received a ban from the sport’s international regulating body for doping. Now, she’s not only been seen engaging in domestic violence against a partner but suggesting to police that they arrest that partner — even though there’s no evidence he did anything wrong.

We’ve seen athletes implicated in domestic violence incidents before. And it’s important to be consistent and say that Richardson’s aggression is not OK because she’s a woman, because she’s smaller or because she pushed Coleman instead of striking him. If we’re serious about eradicating domestic violence and holding its perpetrators accountable, then we must take what she did seriously, too.

Each time she’s messed up before, Richardson’s fans and sponsors have ultimately embraced her and helped elevate her to new levels of popularity. But there’s no guarantee they’ll keep doing that. Richardson is decorated. She has silver and gold medals from the 2024 Olympics, gold and bronze from the 2023 world championships, and a slew of collegiate championships and records on her resume. And yet it seems clear that if she’d been more disciplined, she could be even more decorated.

She won’t yet be 30 when the 2028 Olympic Games roll around, and she should be the star of arguably the most popular Olympic sport when it returns to her home country. Rightfully, millions of fans are rooting for her and thousands of young athletes hope to someday embody her singular fusion of individuality and athleticism.

She’s promising to do the self-reflection and work to become the athlete we can all be proud of. Let’s hope she does.

Keith Reed

Keith Reed is an award-winning journalist and a past senior editor at ESPN. His work has appeared in The Boston Globe, The Root, Vibe, Essence and elsewhere.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

‘I don’t care about that’: Trump moves the goal posts on Iran’s uranium stockpile

Published

on

‘I don’t care about that’: Trump moves the goal posts on Iran’s uranium stockpile

More than a month into the war in Iran, there’s still great uncertainty about why the United States launched this military offensive in the first place. There’s reason to believe, however, that the conflict has something to do with Iran’s nuclear program.

At an unrelated White House event on Tuesday, for example, Donald Trump said“I had one goal: They will have no nuclear weapon, and that goal has been attained.”

It was a curious comment, in part because by the president’s own assessmentIran didn’t have a nuclear weapon before he decided to launch the war, and in part because Secretary of State Marco Rubio this week presented the administration’s four major objectives in the conflict, none of which had anything to do with Iran’s nuclear program.

As for whether Trump’s newly manufactured “goal” has actually been “attained,” The New York Times reported“Unless something changes over the next two weeks — the target Mr. Trump set to begin withdrawing from the conflict — he will have left the Iranians with 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium, enough for 10 to a dozen bombs. The country will retain control over an even larger inventory of medium-enriched uranium that, with further enrichment, could be turned into bomb fuel, if the Iranians can rebuild that capacity after a month of steady bombing.”

The American president has acknowledged that these details are true, though he apparently no longer cares. Ahead of an Oval Office address to the nation about the war in Iran, the Republican spoke to Reuters about his perspective:

Of the enriched uranium, Trump said: ‘That’s so far ⁠underground, I ​don’t care about that.’

‘We’ll always be watching it by satellite,’ he added. He said Iran was ‘incapable’ of developing a weapon ​now.

The president’s comments definitely have a practical element: It’s been an open question for weeks as to whether Trump intends to try to seize Iran’s uranium stockpile, which would require ground troops and be profoundly dangerous for U.S. military service members.

If Trump told Reuters the truth and is prepared to let Iran keep the uranium it already has because he no longer “cares about that,” it would drastically reduce the likelihood of a ground invasion — one that would almost certainly cost lives.

But there’s another element to this worth keeping in mind as the process moves forward: Ever since the Obama administration struck the original nuclear agreement with Iran in 2015, Trump has insisted that it was wrong to allow the country to hold onto nuclear materials that might someday be used in a nuclear weapon.

A decade later, he’s suddenly indifferent to Iran’s uranium stockpile — which has only grown larger since Trump abandoned the Obama-era policy.

Trump’s goalposts, in other words, are on the move.

Indeed, if the American president’s comments reflect his true perspective (and with this guy, one never really knows), we’re due for a serious public conversation about the motives and objectives for the war. Because as things stand, before the war, Iran had a regime run by radical religious clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard; the country had a significant uranium stockpile; and the Strait of Hormuz was open.

And now, Trump’s apparent vision for a successful offensive will include Iran with a regime run by radical religious clerics and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard; the country still holding a significant uranium stockpile; and the Strait of Hormuz will be open.

Mission accomplished, I guess?

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Mike Johnson caves to the Senate, paving the way for likely DHS shutdown deal

Published

on

Just days after labeling the Senate deal to end the record-breaking shutdown at the Department of Homeland Security a “crap sandwich,” Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., now appears ready to swallow it whole.

Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., announced Wednesday they will move forward with the two-track approach senators unanimously backed last Friday. They will pass a bill to fund most of DHS — with the exception of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and parts of Customs and Border Patrol — and then look to approve money for ICE and CBP in a separate reconciliation package.

“In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited,” Johnson and Thune said in a joint statement.

The announcement amounts to a stunning reversal for Johnson, who was facing pressure from conservatives to oppose the Senate deal. Their objections centered on the lack of money for ICE, as well as the Senate’s failure to include new voter ID restrictions, championed by President Donald Trump, with the so-called SAVE America Act.

Instead, Johnson on Friday forced a House vote on an alternative measure to fund all of DHS for eight weeks. While it passed almost entirely along party linesthe stopgap measure stood no chance in the Senate, where Democrats have repeatedly rejected a similar proposal in recent weeks.

Lawmakers were back to square one.

But it turns out, all they needed was a little push from Trump.

Less than three hours before Johnson and Thune’s announcement, Trump urged Republicans — in a lengthy statement on Truth Social — to pass funding for ICE and border patrol through budget reconciliation. While that approach allows GOP lawmakers to bypass Democratic opposition, it requires near-unanimous GOP support.

Trump said he wants the legislation on his desk by June 1 — an ambitious timeline that dramatically increased pressure on Republicans.

“We are going to work as fast, and as focused, as possible to replenish funding for our Border and ICE Agents, and the Radical Left Democrats won’t be able to stop us,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “We will not allow them to hurt the families of these Great Patriots by defunding them. I am asking that the Bill be on my desk NO LATER than June 1st.”

With Johnson suddenly on board, lawmakers appear poised to end the DHS shutdown just as soon as the House can reconvene. It’s unclear exactly when that might happen. The House isn’t due back until April 14. But Johnson could always call lawmakers back sooner — or look to pass the Senate bill while both chambers are out on recess through a special process.

Because the House never technically sent its 60-day continuing resolution to the Senate, the House could just recede from its amendment of the Senate-passed bill and immediately send the legislation to the president.

Either way, barring another sudden shift from Trump or House leadership, the longest government shutdown in U.S. history may soon be over — and Democrats are already taking a victory lap.

“Throughout this fight, Senate Democrats never wavered,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement. “We were clear from the start: fund critical security, protect Americans, and no blank check for reckless ICE and Border Patrol enforcement.”

“We were united, held the line, and refused to let Republican chaos win,” Schumer added.

Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW.

Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Former White House official: Trump’s Supreme Court attendance could be ‘perceived as intimidation’

Published

on

Former White House official: Trump’s Supreme Court attendance could be ‘perceived as intimidation’

President Donald Trump became the first sitting American president to attend oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning when he sat in the audience to hear his administration argue to limit birthright citizenship guarantees for the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary U.S. residents.

Before arguments began, Trump entered the courtroom wearing his usual red tie and sat in the front row of the public seating area. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Attorney General Pam Bondi were also in the room.

None of the justices acknowledged Trump’s presence while he was in the courtroom.

As the justices began to question U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer, who was arguing on behalf of the administration, Trump remained focused and wore a blank expression.

After Sauer finished his arguments, Trump remained in the courtroom for a few minutes. He got up and quietly left, flanked by Secret Service agents, shortly after Cecillia Wang began her arguments for the ACLU.

Chart: Carson Elm-Picard / MS NOW; Photos courtesy the Supreme Court of the United States

Trump’s presence at the court is significant. A sitting president of the United States has never attended oral arguments at the high court before, which is widely considered a sign of respect for the balance of power between the federal government and the judiciary.

Two senior White House officials who requested anonymity to speak about the president’s internal strategy told MS NOW that Trump wanted to listen to the oral argument because “it’s an important case.” The outcome of the case will have sweeping legal implications for Trump’s sprawling immigration enforcement agenda.

“Behind closed doors there’s a realization of the tremendous legal wall this is to climb,” a former White House official familiar with Trump’s thinking who spoke on the condition of anonymity told MS NOW.

“I’m not sure of the calculation from him to go today. It will be perceived as intimidation, and some justices won’t like that,” the former official said.

Trump has shown scorn for the justices for their ruling on his aggressive tariff policy. Earlier this year, Trump said the justices who ruled against the policy were an “an embarrassment to their families.” The president has railed against the justices, including the ones he appointed in his first term, for striking down his sprawling trade agenda.

Trump has pivoted between slamming the justices on social media for the February tariff ruling and calling on them to uphold his birthright citizenship order.

Domicile, the legal term for the place where an individual maintains a permanent home, was at the heart of Sauer’s argument Wednesday. Sauer argued that parents of children born in the U.S. must be domiciled in the United States and demonstrate allegiance to the country in order for their children to be granted citizenship.

Trump left the court after his administration’s argument faced pushback from the court’s key conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch, as well as the rest of the justices on the bench.

As Trump’s motorcade rolled back to the White House, droves of tourists watched and responded with positive and negative gestures. National Guard members were in the crowds, as well.

The case, Trump v. Barbara, centers on the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment, which has long been understood to confer citizenship to almost all individuals born on U.S. soil: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Shortly after returning to the White House last year, Trump signed an executive order seeking to end that guarantee. The justices will weigh whether the executive order complies with the federal statute that codified that clause.

Trump did not stay to hear more than the first few minutes of the dissenting arguments. But after returning to the White House, he posted a response on his Truth Social platform. “We are the only Country in the World STUPID enough to allow “Birthright” Citizenship!”

Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.

Jake Traylor is a White House correspondent for MS NOW.

Fallon Gallagher is a legal affairs reporter for MS NOW.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending