BOWE BERGDAHL AND THE "TALIBAN fIVE."

                                    BY BILL JUNEAU

                                   Americans might be surprised to learn that five of the terrorists now running Afghanistan have army deserter Bowe Bergdahl to thank for their being set free from the Guantanamo Bay Prison. 

                                  In a negotiated deal with the Taliban in 2014, army Sgt. Bergdahl was returned to the USA, and five chosen terrorists were released from their cells at Guantanamo and returned to the battlefields.  After America's embarrassing and catastrophic withdrawal last year from Afghanistan,  the bloodthirsty Taliban regime  reemerged as the controlling Afghan government, and the "Taliban Five" as they have become known, were installed in key senior positions. 

                                  Sgt. Bergdahl had deserted his unit in Afghanistan in 2009 and wound up a captor of the Taliban for five years.  As has been reported, a disgruntled Bergdahl abandoned his post in the still of the night, knocked on the gate of America's enemy and was let in-and became a cooperating pet of the bloodthirsty regime.  He interacted with the terrorists to the extent that he became fluent in Pashto, the  national language of the country.                  I                       The five terrorists released in exchange for the young soldier from Hailey Idaho, had a reputation as the "worst of the worst," in the maximum security prison in Cuba.  They have been identified as  Abdul Haq Wasiq, Director of Intelligence;  Norulla Noori, Minister of Borders and Tribal Affairs; Mohammad Fazl, Deputy Defense Minister, and Khairullah Khairkahah, Minister of Information and Culture.  The fifth prisoner, Mohammad Nabi Omarim, was appointed  Governor of the eastern Khost province. 

                                   Their existence in the Taliban government of Afghanistan became known following America's inept withdrawal  which resulted in the deaths of 11 marines, a soldier and a sailor, and the stranding of thousands of Americans and Afghans who had aided America in ousting the Taliban and in bringing civility and freedom to residents. 

                                     In February of last year, Bergdahl, 35, who was convicted in 2017 of deserting the army in a time of war, filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking to have his conviction and dishonorable discharge status expunged because of "improper command influence" exerted on the military judge by President Trump and by the late Arizona senator, John McCain.  The issue is being litigated and the government has filed a motion to dismiss the case, which is now pending in district court in Washington, D.C.  

                                        Bergdahl is contending that he was called a "dirty, rotten traitor" by President Trump, and was targeted by McCain, a former POW (prisoner of war) in Viet Nam, as a soldier who deserved strong punishment, and lacking it, would become the subject of a hearing by the Senate Armed Services Committee.  Bergdahl and his attorneys charge their public demeaning of him prior to his trial influenced the military judge who was answerable to Trump as Commander-in-Chief.                                

                                         Bergdahl also is arguing that the military Judge, Col. Jeffrey Nance, was planning to retire from military service around the time of his trial in November, 2017,  and his severe sentence following his guilty plea to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, curried the favor of President Trump.

                                        The case triggered severe controversy after Bergdahl's disappearance  and a search-party soldier was killed in the effort to find him.  To some critics, Obama's  discussions with the Taliban constituted negotiations with terrorists which they saw as grounds for impeachment of the President.  Also, there were allegations that Obama had ignored a law requiring him  to give Congress at least 30 days notice of any prisoner exchange  with the enemy.   

                                           After the exchange, in May, 2014, following the soldier's five years in Taliban custody,  Bergdahl was welcomed back to the United States in a Rose Garden ceremony hosted by President Obama.  Bergdahl's parents were also present at the gathering and his father, who had grown a Taliban style full beard, thanked Allah, the Muslim God, for bringing his son home.  Susan Rice, Obama's National Security Advisor,  praised Bergdahl for having served his country with "honor and distinction." 

                                           After his repatriation, he pleaded guilty to  charges of desertion in time of war and of cooperating with the enemy. He faced a possible sentence of life in prison, and prosecutors were calling for a minimum of 14 years behind bars.

                                          After entering his guilty plea, Bergdahl told the court with emotion that he deeply regretted what he had done and the sadness and hurt he had caused the family of a soldier who had been shot in the head while searching for him. He made mistakes and wrong decisions, he said, with which he must now live with forever.   

                                          Judge Nance saw sadness and regret in the young soldier who had made mistakes, and declined to send him to prison.  He ordered a dishonorable discharge and forfeiture of $10,000 from accumulated pay, and stripped him of all benefits due a veteran who had served his country. An Appellate court subsequently affirmed the conviction and Judge Nance's sentence. 

                                                xxx

A REPORTER ASKS BIDEN: ARE YOU MENTALLY FIT?

 

                                    BY BILL JUNEAU

                         At President Biden's recent news conference marking his first full year as the nation's head man, Reporter James Rosen asked the President for his reaction to a poll finding that millions of Americans, Democrats as well as Republicans,  do not believe that he is "mentally fit" for the job.  

                         With millions glued to their TV sets to see and hear the President sans teleprompter,  Rosen, chief White House correspondent for Newsmax, let go with that haymaker and it must have taken some courage to do so. 

                         The President's perceived senility and forgetfulness  has been a topic for comments and discussions over the past two years, but until now, the 79-year-old, horse-whispering Biden had skated free from being confronted publicly with that  hot button issue.                      

                          Very likely, the inquiry from the aggressive Rosen who until recently had been a reporter for Fox News, certainly brought gasps of incredulity and "how dare yous " from Biden fans. It also produced huge applause from his detractors who have long been itching for the Biden lack of brain power to be laid on the table for all to see.

                          So how did Biden respond to the inquiry as to his mental fitness?  Rosen's question got sandwiched in between repeated inquiries from reporters dealing with  Russia's squaring off for an invasion of Ukraine.  Biden's answers about Putin and his plans were disjointed  and unclear and he indicated that a small incursion by Russia might not be such a big deal. What's Putin going to do?  That, no one knows, he said.  

                          When his turn came, Rosen, with his black, duck-billed mask, prefaced his inquiry by noting that he had respect for Biden and his many  accomplishments, and for the office of President. But why, he asked,  "do you suppose such large segments of the American electorate have come to harbor such profound concerns over your cognitive fitness? " 

                         With a painted-on smile and an empty look,  Biden responded:  "I have no idea."

                          A couple of incidents in the past should have tipped him off that citizens were wondering if he was playing with a full deck.  In August of 2020, during an interview with the National Association of Black Journalists, he was asked if he had taken a cognitive test.  Snapping back testily,  he said the question was "unfair," and "no, I haven't taken a test...Why the hell would I......that's like someone being asked if he was a "junkie."

                           Around that same time, President Trump was being hounded by a hostile press corps which was accusing him of having mental problems. Reporters demanded that he submit to a cognitive examination under the scrutiny of doctors.  After non-stop badgering by the liberal press,  President Trump submitted to an examination and passed with a perfect score.  

                            Last fall, 14 congressmen sent a  letter to President Biden requesting that he take a cognitive examination and that the findings be published.  His conduct and public appearances, they said, merited the examination. The letter had been drafted by Congressman Ronny Jackson of Texas, a physician and a retired navy Admiral who had served as the White House Doctor to both Presidents Obama and Trump. He knew Biden well, and while Biden was not his patient, as was Obama, he observed and interacted with the Vice President on an almost daily basis. 

                             Elected to Congress in 2020, Dr. Jackson has said that Biden is cognitively impaired and does "not know what he is doing....and is dangerous.. and is incapable of serving as President."  Some one else is pulling his strings, he has said.  The highly respected columnist and historian, Dr. Victor Davis Hanson, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, has said that Biden should not be holding any office.  "His mind continues to fade at a geometric rate."

                          Too often, tough questions posed to Biden by the friendly liberal press have dealt with his favorite ice cream flavor, and until Rosen, no inquiring reporters had spoken of the concern over his questionable acuity.  On one occasion, at his first news conference a year ago,  a question was prefaced by a NPR newswoman who noted that he (Biden) has been a moral hero to the country for years. The answer by Biden (whatever it was) came easy, and no teleprompter or crib notes were necessary. 

                            His reflections on the Ukraine-Russia conflict were difficult to follow.  His talk of big and little incursions which no one understood, were subsequently "rolled back" by his press aides and his advisors, who explained what the President actually was saying, or intending to say.

                     A few days after the news conference, citizens got a look at another Biden face.  Peter Doocy of Fox News asked the President if he thought that the current "inflation" was a political liability for Democrats in the approaching midterm elections. The question was fair, given the country's now roaring inflationary trends.  Assuming that his mike was off and that Doocy was on his way, Biden said sarcastically into the mike, "no that's an asset...what a stupid son of a bitch."    He later apologized to Doocy in a telephone call. 

                          Joe Biden has been around Washington for a half century--as a six-term senator from Delaware and a Vice President, and now as the nation's 46th President. He has an undisputed track record as a liar and  a plagiarist and as a touchy-feely guy with women; and as the "Lamborghini of Gaffes" (a description given him by the Washington Post).

                          He has told foolish stories about the infamous "Corn Pop," the swimming pool bully of Delaware who he (Biden) physically put down during his days as a lifeguard.  He has made other boastful comments about the hair on his legs which bristled in the noon-day sun. 

                         He told of once being arrested while trying to see Nelson Mandela-- and that was pure malarkey. He boasted at political rallies that he excelled as a student at Syracuse university, while attending law school on an academic scholarship and finishing in the upper half of his class.  In truth, as he later acknowledged, he finished close to the very bottom of his class, and he had no scholarship.  Former classmates have been quoted as having described Biden as the "dumbest s.o.b." in the school. 

                        But despite his history of  yarns, lies, gaffes and incompetent judgments, the media has always had his back.  He was just "Plain Ole Joe," a regular guy doing his thing.                                             Mark Levin, a lawyer, author and television personality has described Biden as a "bumbling fool" in having  orchestrated the incompetent exit of América from Afghanistan.  Levin was chief of staff for Attorney General Edwin Meese in the Ronald Reagan administration.                              

                              President Trump disparages Biden as "incompetent," and a "whacko with a low IQ."  He has also called for Biden to submit to a cognitive examination.  In response, Biden said he would like to take Trump behind the woodshed and beat the hell out of him. 

                               With the James Rosen question at the news conference, the issue of Biden's intelligence and cognitive ability to serve in the office of President has become a glaring issue which needs to be dealt with.  As requested by 14 members of Congress, along with other doctors,  Biden needs to take a cognitive exam.  Passing it would give citizens new confidence in their president.  Failing it would open another door. 

                                                 xxx

                                   

MERRICK GARLAND--THE LIBERAL MOUSE' THAT ROARED

 

                                     BY BILL JUNEAU

                                              Most Americans first heard of Merrick Garland in 2016 when he was nominated by President Obama to become the next Justice of the U.S Supreme Court, as the replacement for Antonin Scalia who had died in office.   Scalia was a popular conservative who followed the law and had the respect of his fellow jurists on the nation's final and highest court. 

                              Small in stature, timid and resembling a curious owl, Judge Garland, of the United States Court of Appeals for 30 years, was touted by Obama and Democrats as fair and impartial, and intelligent and passionate in deciding issues confronting citizens.  Few Americans had ever seen Garland or even heard his name, but they were being told by Democrats that he was a giant legal mind without any political animus.

       .                Because of the approaching presidential election in November of 2016,  and because of the nominee's reputation as a malleable puppet for Democrats, Garland's nomination was never considered for confirmation by the Senate.  Donald Trump won that election and he promptly nominated conservative Appellate Court Jurist Neil Gorsuch to fill the vacancy, and the Senate consented to the new President's selection.   

                                            Merrick Garland continued in his judicial role as Chief Justice of the D.C. Appellate Court, regarded by attorneys as the nation's most left-wing panel of federal judges. He was appointed Attorney General by President Biden in February of last year.  He had served on the Appellate court following his  appointment by President Clinton.  

                                             As the new Attorney General, the 69-year-old bespectacled Garland, who speaks in low, halting tones, similar to President Biden's raspy horse whisper, took over the Department of Justice with supervision of thousands and with a controlling whip over the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

                                            After some ten months of his liberal leadership, at least two senators have called for his resignation and Arkansas senator Tom Cotton characterized his  policies as "shameful," saying he was a "disgrace" as the nation's 86th Attorney General.   

                                            With his strong hand on investigations, Garland has seen to it that the misadventures and corruption of Biden's son, Hunter, allegedly a cocaine addict, has been set aside by the FBI. Garland's Department of Justice has had nothing to say about the allegations of corruption and money laundering and kick backs to Joe Biden, referred to on Hunter Biden's laptop computer as "the Big Guy."

                                            All talk about Joe Biden's activities in the Ukraine and how he arranged an $83,000 a month job on a the board of a corrupt gas company for Hunter, has also disappeared in the wind.  Instead, over his first 10 months in office, Garland has endorsed continued attacks on former President Trump and last May had a search warrant served on the home of Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, a former New York mayor who is best remembered for having reduced street crime and corruption in the Big Apple.    

                                       Applauded by the Democratic party and its progressive wing led by Bernie Sanders and the female "squad" of four in Congress, Garland has demonstrated his  dogged commitment to promoting  Marxist, left wing policies, and of allowing America to head down a path of socialism and hard- handed  authoritarianism. 

                                       Last October, with back door approval from President Biden and his minions, Garland lighted a firestorm with issuance of a memo endorsing the far out theory that parents who object passionately to CRT (Critical Race Theory) being taught in schools, or the forced wearing of masks by  children, can be considered "terrorists" and should be dealt with by the iron hand of the FBI, using the Patriot Act whenever necessary. 

                                       With the CRT, children are filled to the brim with anti-American philosophy and derogation of the U.S. Constitution and our nation's many brave Americans who have made America stand tall in the world. 

                                       In the case of a  Virginia girl who had been sexually assaulted in a girl's bathroom by a non-binary boy wearing  a skirt,  an angry father became enraged when the school board treated the incident as a fairy tale.  In that situation,  police were called and the father was physically thrown on the floor, hauled away and  charged with a crime.  Radical school board members endorsed the treatment of the parent as a"terrorist," in keeping with  the get-tough-with-terrorists memo issued and promoted by Garland.

                                          Films of the pummeling of the father by police at the school board meeting were shown to Garland during a hearing before the Judiciary Committee of the Senate. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri then demanded that Garland apologize to the concerned father, and recall and delete the memo. Garland avoided an answer, explaining that his  concern is "violence" which cannot be tolerated anywhere.  Hawley then called upon Garland to resign.  

                                         At that committee hearing, Senator Cotton  took issue with Garland when he denied that the memo was depicting complaining  parents as terrorists. They are protected by the first amendment said Garland.  Violence by anyone, everywhere is the target, said Garland, sidestepping the senator's concern.

                                        "True threats of violence are not protected by the First Amendment," said Garland.  Those are the only things we are worried about.  We are not investigating peaceful protests or parents involvement in school board meetings. ..we would never do that."  

                                         The Congressman, a former captain in the Infantry, told the mousey, soft speaking Attorney General that your conduct and judgment is "shameful...Your directive (memo)  is shameful. Thank God, you are not on the Supreme Court.  You should resign in disgrace."                                                                                                             Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, former attorney general for the state,  demanded to know if Garland had considered the chilling effect the memo might have on parents exercising their constitutional rights.  Garland replied that “I don’t believe it’s reasonable to read this memo as chilling anyone’s rights."                                                      Cornyn shot back: “Let the record reflect the attorney general refused to answer the question.”  

                                       Garland also faces criticism for his leadership role in fostering the investigation into the January 6 mob action at the Capitol.  His claim of five deaths resulting from the "insurrection," is inaccurate and made up to satisfy Democrats who want to blame former president Trump.  Factually, one person was killed in the rioting----Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed air force veteran, who was shot by a Capitol police lieutenant who acted recklessly and without provocation.  According to medical determinations,  two  succumbed from  natural causes and two officers committed suicide in the days following the rioting inside the Capitol.  

                                       Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has also criticized Garland during hearings for his possible  conflict of interest in allowing the dissemination of CRT materials,which are sold to schools by Garland's son-in-law.  Cruz has charged that the Attorney General should have obtained an ethics opinion concerning his daughter's husband's activities.  To date, Galand has declined to respond to Sen. Cruz or explain his alleged violation of ethics requirements.

                                         The perception that the bespectacled, ultra- liberal Garland is fair, judicious and patriotic is an illusion in the face of him not only disparaging parents who object to progressive, anti-American theories being force-fed to young students in many schools, but also for his unwillingness to investigate  the possible corrupt practices of President Biden's drug addicted son.

                                        Chuck Grassley of Iowa, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and a respected and veteran congressman, summed up his assessment of Garland as a hearing was closing.

                                     " Right now," said Grassley, "it looks like the Department of Justice is running you.  The department has moved as far left as it could go. You politicized the department in ways it shouldn’t be.”

                                                      xxx    

                                             

.  

                                                                      

                                            

CHICAGO NEEDS A REDO

 

                                     BY BILL JUNEAU

                           Chicago under Mayor Lori Lightfoot is setting records for crime in the streets, homicides and shootings.  On weekends, it is really humming in the Windy City as innocent persons, young and old, get shot by thugs and gang members  asserting their dominance on south and west side streets. 

                            Police are ridiculed and departments have been defunded and policemen are walking away from their jobs. Criminals  have become more important than their victims and in Lightfoot's Chicago, racism and misogyny are the root causes of  troubles. The fact that it is predominantly her black brothers and sisters being gunned down in south and west side neighborhoods by blacks does not excite her enough for her to focus more upon safety on streets, avenues and alleys then on her imagined hangup that the city is "systemically racist."   

                            A few months ago, as guns were blazing and men women and children were going down on dimly lit streets, Lightfoot marked her second year in office with an announcement that she would restrict her one-on-one interviews to only those reporters "of color."  Her justification, she explained at a news conference, was that there are just too many white faces in the city hall press corps, and that that has to change. 

                            Her remarks pretty well boxed her in as a confirmed racist.  On the tube, one reporter described her as a "lunatic and a dangerous bigot," and other prominent persons called for her resignation. However, the criticism and name-calling didn't seem to bother her and her animus for whites is continuing, unabated. 

                             Adding to her concerns over a lack of diversity in the city hall press room, the diminutive mayor (61 inches tall and sometimes seen wearing a floppy, cowboy hat), went on a rant charging that racism has become a public health crisis and is robbing windy city residents of the opportunity to live and lead full, healthy and happy lives. Blacks in the city, she said, live an average of 71.4 years, while non-Blacks live 80.6 years. She called upon the Chicago Department of Public Health and its partnered community organizations to address these inequities, and give equal attention to persons "of color." 

                             Concerning the lawlessness on city streets, statistics are in for 2021.  Chicago, third largest city in population in the country, logged 797 homicides  and in that category was number one in the nation.  New York and Los Angeles, the nation's two largest urban centers, each had some 300 less homicides than Chicago.  The number of Chicago deaths was 300 more than it had been in 2020. The youngest gunshot victim was a one month-old-infant boy, and the oldest was an 84-year-old man. 

                           Incidents in which guns were fired  last year totaled 3,561, equating to nearly 10 per day.  Eighty two per cent of the gun crimes involved black victims and the police said the heavy majority of shootings were gang related. 

                           "Keeping you safe is my priority," Lightfoot has declared. "I wake up every morning with this as my concern and I push myself and all involved to step up and do more...we cannot continue to endure the level of violence we are now experiencing."

                            In the face of her call for safety, Democratic Alderman Raymond Lopez countered  that Lightfoot is "incompetent," and that she charges "racism" whenever her spacy proposals are challenged.    Susan Lee, a former advisor to Lightfoot and former deputy mayor for safety, has said that Chicago is a "city in crisis." Ald. Brendan Reilly, a Democrat Committeeman of the powerful 42d ward on the near northside, said that in his many years in office he has never seen Chicago lawlessness reach this level.  

                            Last month, Lightfoot announced at a news conference that she has requested Atty Gen. Merrick Garland to provide a battery  of ATF agents (Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearm) to come to Chicago for a six-month period and assist the administration and the police in taking guns off of the streets and in arresting criminals and gang members.  Garland's decision and response has not yet been announced though it is expected that the U.S. Attorney General will  provide assistance in some fashion. 

                            In the final months of 2020, President Trump had offered to provide federal troops and assistance to Mayor Lightfoot in confronting the violent crime on city streets.  Lightfoot rejected assistance from Trump noting that he was a racist President she did not respect.  She accused him of also being a misogynist who targeted women in high places. In response, the Chicago Tribune editorially urged Lightfoot to be more collaborative with the nation's President. 

                             Mayor Lightfoot, 59, was elected in a runoff election in May, 2018, promising safety on the streets, elimination of the deficit and police reform.  She was heralded by the media as Chicago's first gay, African American woman mayor, but in the following two years, her accomplishments are difficult to put a finger on. She has delivered on nothing, asserted Ald. Lopez. 

                               In April of 2020, Lightfoot appointed David Brown as the new police superintendent, replacing Eddie Johnson whom she dismissed for lying to her. She promised that Brown, former police chief in Dallas, Texas, and a seasoned  professional, would bring reform and safety to the war torn streets. Democratic Ald.  Reilly has said that Supt. Brown is a "moron" who will not listen to anyone.

                                        With Lightwood castigating the press corps for having  too many whites, and as shootings and violence make headlines, the Fraternal Order of Police, which represents  thousands of rank and file officers, voted a unanimous "no confidence" resolution on Mayor Lightfoot and on Supt. Brown, and on Brown's first deputy, Eric Carter.  The union cited what they called a lack of consideration for officers' working conditions.  

                               In March of last year, the mayor upbraided police for the foot pursuit and fatal shooting  of a 13-year-old Latino youth in an alley in the black of night after shots were fired and the young man was seen with a pistol in his hand.  It was reckless, asserted the mayor, and she excoriated the officer for his ill-advised pursuit and the shooting of the boy which she said should never have happened.  

                               Shortly thereafter, Lightfoot proposed and backed new rules for foot-pursuit by police.  The new "police pursuit rules" allow such chases in the face of felonies, says Lightfoot, but they forbid foot chases of suspects who commit misdemeanors and traffic offenses. Many policemen believe that the Lightfoot chase rules, which have now been implemented, are unworkable since decisions by an officer often need to be made in split seconds and the policeman knows he faces discipline if he makes a mistake.                  

                                    Last month, Lightfoot fired the city's lead  counsel when he refused to endorse her demand that an African American woman be given $2.9 million for her embarrassment and loss of dignity suffered when raiding police mistakenly crashed into her home, looking for a wanted fugitive.  Entry to her home was a gross error, but was not illegal, as the raiders were acting pursuant to a warrant obtained from a county judge. The cashiered city's head lawyer Mark Flessner, had recommended that the woman be awarded $50,000 for the embarrassment caused her. 

                                    When police barged into her home, the 51-year-old woman was naked and preparing for bed.  In seconds, police gave her a blanket, and subsequently apologized for the blunder.  The woman's embarrassment was exacerbated in Lightfoot's judgment because some of the raiding officers were white skinned. and the female occupant, a social worker, was an African American. After firing the corporation counsel , the city council approved the massive award. on the mayor's recommendation. In an OpEd, Flessner called Lightfoot, "mercurial, petulant, rude and unprofessional"

                                      Former Democratic Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, a Presidential candidate in 2020, described Lightfoot's conduct as "abhorrent," and has called for her resignation---and has urged President Biden and Vice President Harris to join her in the demand.

                                       But it seems that it will be "politics as usual," as the state's Democratic Governor, Jay Robert "J.B."      Pritzker, remains strangely silent about the crisis in his state's largest city. Biden and Harris are unlikely to go against any of the liberal big city mayors even though their racial policies and denigration of policemen are bringing anarchy to the streets of our nation's biggest cities.

                                                 xxx

                                     

                                        

                                

                             

MAYOR LIGHTFOOT PLAYS ANOTHER RACE CARD

  

                                    BY BILL JUNEAU

                                   After a good deal of arguing and consternation, the city of Chicago has awarded $2.9 million to 51-year- old Anjanette Young, a woman of color, whose apartment was wrongfully raided by police looking to arrest a dangerous fugitive in possession of drugs and guns.   

                                   Ms Young, a social worker and recipient of a masters degree, was naked and preparing for bed when police officers barged through the front door. The officers had acted pursuant to a no-knock warrant from a Cook county judge which allowed the forcible entry. 

                                   Ms. Young screamed in fear and stood unclothed as the armed officers handcuffed her and began a search for the drug dealing fugitive.  Reportedly, one officer reacted within seconds to find a blanket for the distressed naked woman who yelled over and over that the police were at the wrong address.  Her fright was obvious and she was humiliated as officers saw her naked for an estimated six seconds.  Clearly, she was terrified, humiliated and robbed of her dignity for those brief moments. 

                                  The indignity was exacerbated, in Mayor Lightfoot's judgment, in that some of the policemen were white, and Ms. Young is an African American.   

                                    The police had made a horrendous mistake as the wanted man was not in the apartment and the sergeant leading the raid apologized profusely to Ms. Young.  Officers had relied on information from an informant whom they deemed credible.  The police conduct, though obtrusive and regrettable, did not violate any law as the officers, led by a veteran sergeant, were acting in accord with regulations governing the service of warrants. Also, it was later reported, that the wanted-man had once lived in that apartment, but apparently not for years.  

                                     The raid occurred on February 21, 2019, shortly before Lightfoot was elected in a run-off election.  During the following two years, controversy surrounded the incident and Lightfoot spoke of the humiliation and indignity caused Ms. Young, who like the mayor, is a woman of color.  The fact that some of the police officers were white-skinned apparently weighed heavily in Lightfoot's judgement of the extreme  humiliation and loss of dignity inflicted upon Ms. Young.  The victim was watching an episode of "Grey's Anatomy," and preparing for bed, when raiding officers crashed their way into the apartment, shouting that they had a warrant.  

                                      There was a video of the raid which apparently depicted Ms. Young unclothed and surrounded by armed policemen.  Controversy also erupted when the video was publicized 18 months later on television, and Lightfoot said that it was the first that she had heard of the raid. although she later acknowledged that her staff had advised her of a botched police raid in November of 2019. 

                                     Mark Flessner, the city's corporation counsel,  recommended that Ms. Young be given $50,000 as damages for the fear and humiliation which she had suffered.  Flesser said that the police broke no law and did not allow Ms. Young to linger in her naked state.  A cover and a blanket was found in a few seconds and wrapped around her. He predicted that the lawsuit filed against the city would be dismissed since there was no violation by the police in carrying out the raid.

                                     He said that $50,000 was appropriate and in keeping with such settlements where there was "no legal wrong." Word of Flessner's insistence on paying Ms. Young $50,000 reached the mayor, and an angry Lightfoot fired Flessner whom she had appointed as the corporation counsel, the city's lawyer.   Lightfoot and Flessner had previously worked together as Assistant U.S. attorneys.

                           After his discharge, Flessner slammed Lightfoot in an OpEd and said her tenure as mayor was a "disaster" for the city.  Pushing the huge settlement, said Flessner, was part of a deal she made with the National Civil Rights Movement. Organizations would donate millions to her reelection campaign, and in return she would do their bidding, as she has done in the Young case," Flessner wrote.  She was "jump-starting" her campaign, he said. 

                                     He described the mayor as mercurial, petulant, rude and unprofessional.  "She belittles the police, fire department and teachers...and has no respect for any of the hardworking, dedicated public servants who make this city run from day to day."  

                            In response, Lightfoot said that Flessner has said "disparaging things related to Ms. Young."  He does not value her (Young's)  experience and has reacted negatively to her either because "she was a woman or a woman of color."

                                     Last May, upon completing her second year as Chicago's first woman mayor of color, and its first lesbian chief executive, Lightfoot announced that she would limit her one-on-one interviews to only reporters "of color." The City Hall press corps is just too white, she said. 

                                     Her comments drew wide attention. Tucker Carlson of Fox News described her as a "racist and a lunatic,'' and a "dangerous bigot." Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic Congresswoman, and a presidential candidate in 2020, said that Lightfoot's racial  hang-up "is abhorrent, and I call upon President Biden, Kamala Harris, and other leaders of our country—of all races—to join me in calling for her resignation."  

                                      The botched raid was indefensible, and brought stress, fright and humiliation to Ms. Young. The police and the mayor have apologized to Ms. Young and she is entitled to be compensated for the egregious mistake by the police. 

                                     Veteran attorney Flessner has more than three decades of experience as a litigator and trial attorney, and he knew that a $2.9 million award was grossly excessive,  enhanced as a result of Lightfoot's judgments concerning race and her alleged promises to National Civil Rights organizations.     

                                  Ms. Young was indeed wronged, but was it $2.9 million dollars worth of indignity? That seems excessive, and Flessner's decision to settle on $50,000 seems more reasonable. It certainly doesn't seem so unreasonable that it should have cost him his job.  

                                       

                                                  xxx