Another national embarrassment for Tennessee
Trump delegate from Riceville advocated replacing Homeland Security with citizen militias
Told magazine that U.S. Leaders who violate the Constitution should be killed
A Donald Trump delegate to the Republican National Convention from East Tennessee was also a delegate to a "Continental Congress of 2009" that advocated replacing the Department of Homeland Security with citizen militias, and told a national publication that U.S. leaders who violate the Constitution should be killed.
The Trump campaign approved M. David Riden of rural McMinn County as one of its delegates, and voters in East Tennessee's Third Congressional District elected him as a Trump-committed delegate, and his wife Perry Riden as an alternate, in the state's March 1 Republican presidential primary.
Barring any last-minute change in plans, the Ridens will be among the Tennessee delegation to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio, July 18-21.
Riden's views attracted the interest of the national liberal magazine Mother Jones,which published an article on its website Thursday linking him to the murky world of far-right militias and "patriot" groups. Riden did not return repeated calls and emails from the News Sentinel for comment, but the Mother Jones article reported that he discussed his views in an interview with the magazine.
The article quotes Riden as saying that U.S. leaders who violate the Constitution may have to be done away with: "The polite word is 'eliminated.' The harsh word is 'killed,'" Riden reportedly told Mother Jones. And he said all three branches of the federal government are "way off from the Constitution right now." - Knoxville News Sentinel (subscription)
Don't talk about it
Gag order issued in University of Tennessee sex assault lawsuit
A judge set a May 22, 2018 trial date in a sweeping sexual assault lawsuit filed against the University of Tennessee by eight former students earlier this year, while also ruling that attorneys stop making comments to the media in the high profile case.
The jury trial is expected to last approximately three to four weeks. The trial date was picked to accommodate end-of-year finals and graduation for the dozens of university coaches, students, faculty and staff who are expected to be called as witnesses.
The lawsuit filed in February alleges that the university fostered a culture that enabled sexual assaults by student-athletes, especially football players, and then used an unusual, legalistic campus disciplinary process that is biased against victims who step forward.
The lawsuit laid the blame at the very top of the UT administration.
“UT administration (Chancellor Jimmy Cheek), athletic department (Vice Chancellor and Athletics Director) Dave Hart and football coach (Butch Jones) were personally aware (as ‘appropriate persons’ under Title IX) and had actual notice of previous sexual assaults and rapes by football players, yet acted with deliberate indifference to the serious risks of sexual assaults and failed to take corrective actions,” the plaintiffs said in their lawsuit. - Tennessean (subscription)
Jailhouse lawyers
Tennessee Supreme Court weighs inmates' rights to file lawsuits
A Franklin lawyer challenging a state law that says inmates who have past-due court fees cannot file new cases asked the Tennessee Supreme Court Thursday to deem the law unconstitutional.
David Veile of Schell & Davies law firm argued before the state's top court Thursday on behalf of inmate Reginald D. Hughes. Hughes' appeal of a decision that denied him parole in 2011 was dismissed because he owed $258.85 in fees, according to court records.
"The reason we're here today is because my client, Mr. Hughes, has been denied access to justice because of two reasons: He is indigent and he is incarcerated," Veile said.
A lawyer for the state representing the Tennessee Board of Parole argued the law is constitutional. The justices questioned the purpose of the law and whether it unfairly singled out poor inmates.
Assistant Attorney General Michael Polovich argued parole is a privilege, not a right, and said Hughes has no legal right to challenge the denial. He said the law is in place to prevent inmates from filing frivolous lawsuits and prevent taxpayers from covering the costs of those cases. - Tennessean (subscription)
Tempest in a teapot
Mayor Andy Berke says he won't step down
Mayor Andy Berke said Thursday he has no intention of stepping down.
During a Thursday afternoon interview, WGOW 102.5 FM talk radio host Brian Joyce launched the on-air discussion with "the 5,000-pound elephant in the room" — allegations made by Bobby Stone that his wife, Lacie, the mayor's senior adviser, was having an affair with Berke.
Bobby Stone made the statements to police two weeks ago when they arrested him on domestic assault charges.
Berke has denied he had a sexual relationship with his senior adviser and told Joyce he could not comment further on the matter while it is under investigation.
One caller asked Berke if he would step down if any of the allegations proved true.
Berke responded by saying he has said all he would on the matter, but later added, "No, of course not," when Joyce asked him if he had any intentions of stepping down.
Joyce also asked Berke if the allegations were politically motivated, considering he is a Democrat "in a sea of red."
"I honestly don't think about it," Berke said. "It's not important."
Reality is much different than the world of social media talk surrounding the allegations, Berke said, citing encouragement he has received from people in the community when talking with them face-to-face.
There is no way he can focus on improving Chattanooga's economy and public safety if he worries about social media chatter, Berke said. Work has been a refuge for him during this time, he said.
On a personal level, Berke said it has been a trying time for his family and his adviser's family. Initially, he added, he reacted to the allegations with shock. "I was surprised," he said. "It took me a minute to get my arms around it."
Then it came time to deal with it, Berke said, praising his family's willingness to make the kind of sacrifices they've had to make for him to be in the political arena. They said it was worth it if he could achieve some good, he said.
"We know that you have to have a thick skin and you have to be ready for what comes at you" when you run for elected office, Berke said. - Chattanooga Times Free Press (subscription)
Some good news for Memphis Schools
ASD commitment means AmeriCorps program coming to Memphis
An AmeriCorps program that provides academic support and wraparound services in schools is coming to Memphis next school year after the Achievement School District agreed to a partnership starting this fall.
Shelby County Schools already agreed to take on eight City Year members, enough to staff one school for a year, but program directors said they needed additional buy-in from the ASD to come to Memphis.
Two yet-to-be-determined schools, one in SCS and one in the ASD, will host 16 City Year members as a pilot program this fall, City Year spokesperson Sue McGovern said, with an expected full corps of at least 50 members the following year.
Tim Ware, executive director of the ASD's Achievement Schools in Frayser, said the state-run district is aiming for the first wave of City Year members to be in Westside Middle School. "We are committed to growing and expanding our partnership over the course of the next several years," Ware said.
The program employs recent graduates — the average age is 22 — to immerse in urban schools, building relationships with students, providing support for teachers and launching initiatives focused on needs like attendance. - Memphis Commercial Appeal (subscription)
Memphis mothers against gun violence
Hundreds gather in Memphis to protest gun violence
On Feb. 8, 2015, two men shot and killed 22-year-old Chris Thomas as he sat in his car outside a Hickory Hill bar.
On April 22, barely two months later, an 18-year-old playing with a gun shot and killed Curtis Johnson, also 18 and just days from graduating from Southwind High School.
The two victims were related, and their mothers leaned on each other in their grief.
On Thursday afternoon in Downtown Memphis, those mothers — Tara Johnson and Tara Thomas — spoke to a crowd of more than 200 people, most of whom were wearing orange in recognition of National Gun Violence Awareness Day. "We are standing here because we both lost our sons to gun violence," Thomas said.
Thursday's event, held at the new outdoor spot called Loflin Yard, was one of numerous such celebrations elsewhere in Memphis and in communities across the nation. Those gathered Downtown heard several speakers, including State Sen. Lee Harris, District Attorney Amy Weirich and Mayor Jim Strickland.
The point, organizers said, was to recognize those lost to gunfire while, hopefully, stirring others to action. "Showing up today and standing together, it's not just lip service. It's not just pretty. It means something," said Laura Gettys, a pastor at St. Mary's Episcopal Church Downtown.
In Memphis, Strickland declared Thursday to be "Gun Violence Awareness Day," and the lights that normally shine blue outside the Liberty Bowl stadium were turned orange for the day. Strickland, calling this city's escalating murder tally an "absolutely unacceptable rate of violence," said he recently visited the mother of Myneishia Johnson, the 18-year-old shot to death Downtown on May 22.
"It is hard to escape the sadness," he said. "That's the real cost of gun violence. Lives ended before they get a chance to reach their potential." - Memphis Commercial Appeal (subscription)
Enjoy reading the BUZZ? Help keep the news coming. Make a tax deductible contribution at CrockettPolicy.org. Thank you.

The gloves come off
Hillary Clinton Calls Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Ideas ‘Dangerously Incoherent’
Democrat says presumptive GOP nominee’s ideas are ‘bizarre rants, personal feuds and outright lies’
Hillary Clinton delivered an opening salvo in her expected November showdown with Donald Trump, a withering portrait of his foreign-policy positions as uninformed, unsophisticated and “dangerous.”
In an address Thursday before a crowd of supporters here, the Democratic presidential front-runner used humor, contempt and the presumptive Republican nominee’s own words to make her case that America would make a “historic mistake” by electing Mr. Trump president and making him the commander in chief.
“Donald Trump’s ideas aren’t just different,” she said. “They are dangerously incoherent. They are not even really ideas—just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds and outright lies.”
Mrs. Clinton made clear on Thursday that her principal line of attack will be on Mr. Trump’s temperament and unpredictability. “He is not just unprepared—he is temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility,” she said. Noting that the president has the power to launch nuclear weapons, she added: “Do we want him making those calls—someone thin-skinned and quick to anger, who lashes out at the smallest criticism? Do we want his finger anywhere near the button?”
Polls show that foreign policy is one of Mrs. Clinton’s biggest advantages over Mr. Trump. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released last month found 56% of voters said Mrs. Clinton would be better able to handle foreign policy, compared with 29% who picked Mr. Trump. The survey gave her a 10-point advantage on who would be the better commander in chief.
The two candidates’ approaches to foreign policy are markedly different. Mrs. Clinton is considered a hawk of the left, willing to take risks and engage in overseas skirmishes in order to project U.S. power and protect key alliances. She has spent more than two decades criticizing China’s human-rights record and has referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “bully.”
In her speech, Mrs. Clinton used several of Mr. Trump’s assertions to attack him. In March, for example, he said at a Milwaukee town hall: “Wouldn’t you rather in a certain sense have Japan have nuclear weapons when North Korea has nuclear weapons?”
On Wednesday, Mr. Trump denied saying this, anticipating it would be a line of attack from Mrs. Clinton. However, CNN has his remarks on tape and in a transcript from the event.
On Thursday, Mrs. Clinton reminded the audience of those comments and asked: “I wonder if he even realizes he’s talking about a nuclear war?” - The Wall Street Journal (subscription)
Fact Checker
(Editor's note - we've included the entire article, because Trumps contradictions, distortions, lies and delusions are fascinatingly dangerous.)
Here’s a guide to Clinton’s claims about Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton’s foreign-policy speech in San Diego was mostly a very long attack on Donald Trump, with many citations of the statements he has made on foreign policy. Below is a guide to some of her key claims, along with the context in which Trump made them.
In most cases Clinton was on target, though in a few instances one could argue that Trump’s statements were not as clear as she suggested. Trump speaks so often – and often says so many contradictory things – that Clinton apparently has a wealth of material she can deploy during the campaign.
Guide to key Trump statements
“This is a man who said that more countries should have nuclear weapons, including Saudi Arabia.”
This comes from an exchange during a CNN Town Hall on March 29. Trump first says yes to the Saudis having nuclear weapons, then says no and then says “it is going to happen anyway.” Trump’s actual position is unclear, but Clinton relied on his first comment.
ANDERSON COOPER: Saudi Arabia, nuclear weapons?
TRUMP: Saudi Arabia, absolutely.
COOPER: You would be fine with them having nuclear weapons?
TRUMP: No, not nuclear weapons, but they have to protect themselves or they have to pay us.
Here’s the thing, with Japan, they have to pay us or we have to let them protect themselves.
COOPER: So if you said, Japan, yes, it’s fine, you get nuclear weapons, South Korea, you as well, and Saudi Arabia says we want them, too?
TRUMP: Can I be honest with you? It’s going to happen, anyway. It’s going to happen anyway. It’s only a question of time. They’re going to start having them or we have to get rid of them entirely. But you have so many countries already, China, Pakistan, you have so many countries, Russia, you have so many countries right now that have them.
“This is someone who has threatened to abandon our allies in NATO, the countries that work with us to root out terrorists abroad before they strike us at home.”
Here, again, Trump’s point is confusing and inconsistent. In a March 30 town hall on MSNBC, Trump repeatedly suggested he will threaten NATO countries to bear a bigger burden, ultimately saying “If we have to walk, we have to walk.” (At an April 2 rally, Trump, however, also said: “Either they have to pay up for past deficiencies or they have to get out. And if it breaks up NATO, it breaks up NATO.”)
CHRIS MATTHEWS: We don’t need NATO?
TRUMP: Do you think — no, we don’t really need NATO in its current form. NATO is obsolete, and we’re spending disproportionately…
MATTHEWS: How do you walk from NATO, The Middle East, North Asia, China, all these relationships? Just drop them all?
TRUMP: Look, NATO is…
MATTHEWS: We have old deals we have to stick with.
TRUMP: … is 68 years old.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
TRUMP: OK, you have countries that are getting a free ride. You have countries that benefit from NATO much more than we do. We don’t benefit that much from NATO….Why aren’t they reimbursing us? Why aren’t they paying a good portion of the costs?
MATTHEWS: Well, that’s fine. It’s a good argument if you can get it. But if the alternative is we walk…
TRUMP: And we’ll get it, I’ll get it, I’ll get it. I’m the messenger.
MATTHEWS: If the alternative is we walk…
TRUMP: If we have to walk, we have to walk.
“He believes we can treat the U.S. economy like one of his casinos and default on our debts to the rest of the world, which would cause an economic catastrophe far worse than anything we experienced in 2008.”
This claim came from an interview Trump gave to CNBC, in which he said he might reduce the national debt by persuading creditors to accept less than full payment, which is in effect a default: “I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal. And if the economy was good, it was good. So, therefore, you can’t lose.”
Trump later said the media had misrepresented his comments and that he had no plans to default on the debt. “You never have to default because you print the money. I hate to tell you. So there’s never a default,” Trump asserted. (However, printing more money to cover government debt can lead to higher inflation.)
So, here, Clinton is relying on the first interpretation of Trump’s remarks.
“He has said that he would order our military to carry out torture.”
Trump said this during an appearance in Bluffton, S.C. on Feb. 17: “Don’t tell me it doesn’t work — torture works… Waterboarding is fine, but it’s not nearly tough enough, ok?”
“He says he doesn’t have to listen to our generals or our admirals, our ambassadors, and other high officials, because he has quote, ‘a very good brain.’”
Trump, in an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” was asked who his top consultant was and he responded this way: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things…my primary consultant is myself.” As evidence, he claimed he had predicted the rise of Osama bin Laden, a statement for which he had previously earned Four Pinocchios.
“He says climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese.”
This was an actual tweet from 2012:
“He has the gall to say that prisoners of war like John McCain aren’t heroes.”
This caused a stir last July, when some reporters wrongly thought it would be the end of Trump’s nascent campaign. “He’s not a war hero. He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured, ok? I hate to tell you,” Trump told the Family Leadership Summit.
“He praises dictators like Vladimir Putin and picks fights with our friends, including the British prime minister, the mayor of London, the German chancellor, the president of Mexico, and the Pope.”
This represents a series of statements, often in response to criticism made by foreign leaders of Trump. Clinton carefully says Trump “picks fights,” since not all of the comments are critical of the leaders.
- Trump has certainly compared Obama unfavorably to Russian President Putin: “I will tell you, in terms of leadership, he’s getting an ‘A,’ and our president is not doing so well.”
- Trump said of British Prime Minister David Cameron, after he faulted Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims: “It looks like we’re not going to have a very good relationship, who knows?”
- Trump responded to similar criticism by London mayor Sadiq Khan this way: “I think they’re very rude statements and frankly, tell him, I will remember those statements. They’re very nasty statements.”
- Trump was highly critical of German Chancellor Angela Merkel for allowing Muslim refugees into the country: “Everyone thought she was a really great leader and now she’s turned out to be this catastrophic leader. And she’ll be out if they don’t have a revolution.”
- After Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto said that Trump was using the same kind of language that ushered in Hitler and Mussolini, Trump told ABC’s “Good Morning America:” “I don’t know about the Hitler comparison [President Nieto made]. I hadn’t heard that, but it’s a terrible comparison. I’m not happy about that certainly. I don’t want that comparison, but we have to be strong and we have to be vigilant.”
- Trump also faulted Pope Francis for planning to visit the Mexican border to pray with migrants: “I don’t think he understands the danger of the open border that we have with Mexico. I think Mexico got him to do it because they want to keep the border just the way it is. They’re making a fortune, and we’re losing.”
“He says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the Miss Universe pageant in Russia.”
Trump said this in an interview with Fox News: “I know Russia well. I had a major event in Russia two or three years ago, Miss Universe contest, which was a big, big, incredible event. An incredible success.”
“He called our military a disaster.”
Trump did use this language– “Our military is a disaster,” he said during a GOP debate–but this was during a discussion of reductions in military spending. Clinton, however, framed this as part of pattern of saying the United States is weak, which is not quite the correct context.
“It’s no small thing when he suggests that America should withdraw our military support for Japan, encourage them to get nuclear weapons.”
Clinton carefully says “suggests” because, again, Trump’s point was not especially clear and he contradicted himself. Here’s how The New York Times wrote up his statement:
At his second event, he returned to the question of a nuclear Japan, arguing both sides of the issue in almost the same sentence.
“I would rather have them not arm, but I’m not going to continue to lose this tremendous amount of money,” Mr. Trump said. “And frankly, the case could be made, that let them protect themselves against North Korea. They’d probably wipe them out pretty quick.”
“He praised China for the Tiananmen Square massacre; he said it showed ‘strength.'”
Clinton goes deep in the archives for this comment on the 1989 massacre, made during a 1990 interview with Playboy: “When the students poured into Tiananmen Square, the Chinese government almost blew it. Then they were vicious, they were horrible, but they put it down with strength. That shows you the power of strength. Our country is right now perceived as weak … as being spit on by the rest of the world.”
“He said, ‘You’ve got to give Kim Jong Un credit’ for taking over North Korea – something he did by murdering everyone he saw as a threat, including his own uncle, which Donald described gleefully, like he was recapping an action movie.”
Clinton here retooled her language on this Trump quote after getting Two Pinocchioslast week. She had previously said Trump “praised” the North Korean leader, but now she just lets Trump’s words speak for themselves:
“If you look at North Korea — this guy, he’s like a maniac, okay? And you have to give him credit. How many young guys — he was like 26 or 25 when his father died — take over these tough generals, and all of a sudden — you know, it’s pretty amazing when you think of it. How does he do that? Even though it is a culture and it’s a cultural thing, he goes in, he takes over, and he’s the boss. It’s incredible. He wiped out the uncle. He wiped out this one, that one. I mean, this guy doesn’t play games.”
With words such as “incredible,” Clinton’s use of the word “gleefully” probably can be justified.
“He actually said – quote – ‘maybe Syria should be a free zone for ISIS.’ That’s right – let a terrorist group have control of a major country in the Middle East.”
This is from one of Trump’s interviews after he announced for president in June. In context, he appears to saying that ISIS could be defeated after they have been weakened through fighting, not that they should gain control of Syria.
Trump told Fox News: “Syria’s supposed to be our enemy. Iran and Russia are protecting Syria and it’s sort of amazing that we’re in there fighting ISIS in Syria so we’re helping the head of Syria who is not supposed to be our friend although he looks a lot better than some of our so-called friends. It’s really rather amazing, maybe Syria should be a free zone for ISIS, let them fight and then you pick up the remnants.”
“He bought full-page ads in newspapers across the country back in 1987, when Reagan was president, saying that America lacked a backbone and the world was – you guessed it – laughing at us.”
The Fix counted 100 plus times that Trump has said the United States was a laughingstock. In the fall of 1987, Trump took out full-page advertisements in The Washington Post, the New York Times and the Boston Globe to argue that the United States should charge Japan for help protecting its oil tankers passing through the Persian Gulf. “The world is laughing at America’s politicians as we protect ships we don’t own, carrying oil we don’t need, destined for allies who won’t help,” Trump wrote at the time. - Fact Checker in The Washington Post (subscription)
Wait, there's more
Trump Could Threaten U.S. Rule of Law, Scholars Say
Donald J. Trump’s blustery attacks on the press, complaints about the judicial system and bold claims of presidential power collectively sketch out a constitutional worldview that shows contempt for the First Amendment, the separation of powers and the rule of law, legal experts across the political spectrum say.
Even as much of the Republican political establishment lines up behind its presumptive nominee, many conservative and libertarian legal scholars warn that electing Mr. Trump is a recipe for a constitutional crisis. “Who knows what Donald Trump with a pen and phone would do?” asked Ilya Shapiro, a lawyer with the libertarian Cato Institute.
With five months to go before Election Day, Mr. Trump has already said he would “loosen” libel laws to make it easier to sue news organizations. He has threatened to sic federal regulators on his critics. He has encouraged rough treatment of demonstrators.
His proposal to bar Muslims from entry into the country tests the Constitution’s guarantees of religious freedom, due process and equal protection.
And, in what was a tipping point for some, he attacked Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel of the Federal District Court in San Diego, who is overseeing two class actions against Trump University. Mr. Trump accused the judge of bias, falsely said he was Mexican and seemed to issue a threat.
“They ought to look into Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace,” Mr. Trump said. “O.K.? But we will come back in November. Wouldn’t that be wild if I am president and come back and do a civil case?”
Beyond the attack on judicial independence is a broader question of Mr. Trump’s commitment to the separation of powers and to the principles of federalism enshrined in the Constitution. Randy E. Barnett, a law professor at Georgetown and an architect of the first major challenge to President Obama’s health care law, said he had grave doubts on both fronts.
“You would like a president with some idea about constitutional limits on presidential powers, on congressional powers, on federal powers,” Professor Barnett said, “and I doubt he has any awareness of such limits.”
Republican officials have criticized Mr. Obama for what they have called his unconstitutional expansion of executive power. But some legal scholars who share that view say the problem under a President Trump would be worse. “I don’t think he cares about separation of powers at all,” said Richard Epstein, a fellow at the Hoover Institution who also teaches at New York University and the University of Chicago.
President George W. Bush “often went beyond what he should have done,” Professor Epstein said. "But I think Trump doesn’t even think there’s an issue to worry about. He just simply says whatever I want to do I will do.”
Mr. Trump has boasted that he will use Mr. Obama’s actions as precedent for his own expansive assertions of executive power. But Mr. Post said there was a difference between Mr. Obama’s view of executive power and that of Mr. Trump. “Whatever you think of Obama’s position on immigration, he is willing to submit to the courts,” he said. “There is no suggestion that he will disobey if the courts rule against him.”
More generally, Mr. Trump has discussed revising libel laws to make it easier to sue over critical coverage.
“I’m going to open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money,” Mr. Trump said in February. On one hand, Mr. Trump seemed to misunderstand the scope of presidential power. Libel is a state-law tort constrained by First Amendment principles, and a president’s views do not figure in its application.
Many of Mr. Trump’s statements about legal issues were extemporaneous and resist conventional legal analysis. Some seemed to betray ignorance of fundamental legal concepts, as when he said in a debate that Senator Ted Cruz of Texas had criticized Mr. Trump’s sister, a federal appeals court judge, “for signing a certain bill,” adding for good measure that Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., while still an appeals court judge, had also “signed that bill.”
But bills are legislative rather than judicial documents. And, as it happened, Judge Alito had not joined the opinion in question.
Asked on “Good Morning America” in March about whom he would name to the Supreme Court, Mr. Trump said he would “probably appoint people that would look very seriously at” Hillary Clinton’s “email disaster because it’s criminal activity.” In the constitutional structure, however, Supreme Court justices are neither investigators nor prosecutors. - The New York Times (subscription)
Thought for the day:
"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." - Thomas Jefferson
Terrific, wonderful, magnificent, yuuge, fantastic items from the Trump University Bookstore.
