Connect with us

Gay, Inc. Executive Blames LGBT Advocacy Groups For Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Failures



Offering analysis, inside information, Monday-morning quarterbacking, and, yes, blame, four high-level insiders of the LGBT political movement convened in Manhattan’s Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center Thursday night and spoke to a standing room-only house of hundreds for almost two hours. Political strategist Richard Socarides moderated, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell: Where Are We, and How Did We Get Here,” with panelists Jonathan Capehart of the Washington Post, author Dr. Nathaniel Frank, and the Center for American Progress’ Winnie Stachelberg.

Winnie Stachelberg

Winnie Stachelberg

It was clear that Stachelberg, the Senior Vice President for External Affairs at the Center for American Progress, and who reportedly had a great deal to do with the controversial DADT repeal compromise language, was the Obama-apologist and blame-thrower in the room.

Saying, “Two years, not much has happened,” Socarides, who served as chief advisor to Clinton on gay civil rights from 1997-99, was rebuffed by Stachelberg, who claimed, “We’re closer than ever to repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” When Socarides asked the panel what the chances were of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in 2011, if repeal fails in this year’s lame duck session, Nathaniel Frank opted to quote Rep. Barney Frank (no relation) and replied, “Zero.” Stachelberg, who later said, “I’m a Yankee fan. I’m an optimist,” said, “Very, very remote.”

Stachelberg’s optimism goes only so far. When asked about the current state of repeal, Stachelberg says, “You wouldn’t get sixty. You’d get fifty-four, fifty-six or -seven.”

But perhaps the most striking revelation of the evening was Stachelberg’s own indictment of what is commonly referred to as, “Gay, Inc.,” the cadre of professional LGBT advocacy groups, including her former employer, HRC. The title of the evening was, indeed, “How Did We Get Here?,” and Stachelberg certainly had a rather controversial take.

Socarides, who experienced gay rights challenges as part of the Clinton White House, posed the question, “Why did the Obama administration wait so long to get started [on repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”]?” Stachelberg offered that there was “disagreement from the advocacy community as to why a study was needed,” and claimed, “had advocacy groups in January of 2009 said, ‘Let’s get a study together,’ we’d be further ahead.” Nathaniel Frank immediately reminded the panel that there had already been twenty-two studies commissioned by the military on the subject of gays in the military.

Now, think about that for a moment. Then read Stachelberg’s bio:

“Winnie Stachelberg is the Senior Vice President for External Affairs at the Center for American Progress. Prior to joining American Progress, she spent 11 years with the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay civil rights organization. In January 2005, Stachelberg was appointed to the newly created position of vice president of the Human Rights Campaign Foundation. Previously, she was HRC’s political director, initiating and leading the expansion of HRC’s legislative, political and electoral strategies. Before joining HRC, Stachelberg worked at the Office of Management and Budget.”

So, Stachelberg is blaming gay “advocacy groups” for not advancing the need for yet another study, after there have already been twenty-two, as the reason “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal is about to fail?

Stachelberg has held top-level, senior positions in the very advocacy groups she is now blaming, and that many in the LGBT community hold responsible for having attained not a single goal in “the gay agenda,” namely, repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” repealing the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA,) and enacting the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA.)

Frank, renowned author of, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America, said, “the idea that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal needed to be studied is political cover.”

So, let’s be clear here. A senior “Gay, Inc.” executive wants to fall on her sword, giving the perception that LGBT advocacy groups have the power to make things happen, but failed, thus protecting politicians? While I don’t doubt that some key LGBT advocacy groups have clearly failed, that seems extraordinarily generous in my estimation.

I think it’s clear that “Gay, Inc.” thinks it wields more power than it actually does, and in the face of mounting public frustration over its repeated record of failure, is, by Stachelberg’s statements, willing to prop up the politicians even at the cost of their own futures.

Given the dismal record of the current Senate and the current administration, and LGBT advocacy groups on critical LGBT issues, the question is, “Why?”

Jonathan Capehart

Jonathan Capehart

Jonathan Capehart, who has been supportive of this administration, told the audience that President Obama in 2009 had two meetings with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and at one point, looked at the Secretary and said of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” “You know this is un-American?”

Capehart believes that Obama deserves credit for getting Gates and Admiral Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, on board with repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and with creating the climate within the senior ranks of the military that will allow it.

Capehart, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and MSNBC Contributor, also says of the public’s level of frustration with the route “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal has gone, that the Obama administration has “always gotten it.”

“The impression I get is they know the frustration. They understand the frustration. They appreciate the frustration.”

Stachelberg added, “It is clear to me that the administration understands the importance of getting this done now. Very much a difference now.”

The panel essentially blamed Senator Reid for the way he brought the National Defense Authorization Act to the floor, with the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal rider attached, and the DREAM Act also attached at the last minute, as the reason the Senate voted down the measure in September.

Once the panel’s discussion was over, the floor was opened to questions.

(At this point I must say, on a personal note, I was extraordinarily proud. The only questions came from Tanya Domi, a regular contributor to The New Civil Rights Movement, and from Justin Elzie and Scott Wooledge, both of whom have written for The New Civil Rights Movement in the past. They were impressive, extremely knowledgeable, and insightful.)

Domi, an Assistant Adjunct Professor at Columbia and former U.S. Army Captain who in the late 1990’s was the legislative director and military freedom initiative director at the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce, stood and commandingly said, “I am stunned that this discussion did not include the fact that we are in a time of war.” She went on to say that the president has the right during a time of war, due to the military powers act, to choose any category of personnel (“even blonds,”) and stop all discharges.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Stachelberg answered that Obama’s lawyers are telling him he does not have that right. (A thought flashed through my mind at this point that I wish Bush 43 had had Obama’s lawyers. Perhaps we wouldn’t have waterboarded.)

Then Justin Elzie spoke, identifying himself as the first Marine to come out under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” author of the upcoming book, Playing By the Rules, as well as someone who has written extensively on the subject of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” emceed the Washington, D.C. May 2 rally at the White House which Howard Dean showed up unannounced, and has worked with GetEQUAL, “so this isn’t my first trip around the barbecue.” Having established his credibility, Elzie responded to Capehart’s assertion that if Obama had executed a stop-loss (executive order) early in his presidency that a “Palin presidency” or future president could come back and undo it was a “red-herring.”

Elzie stated that a stop-loss order early in Obama’s presidency would have negated any issue of a problem “in foxholes and showers,” and would have taken that argument away from those opponents of repeal after having LGBT servicemembers serving openly for two years, in which no enormous consequences would have happened, stating no president would have been able to undo that after “Pandora’s box had been opened.” He also responded to the assertion that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal couldn’t be done overnight, reminding the panel that the U.K. switched overnight into allowing openly-gay service.  Elzie also responded to an assertion that Obama, due to long-standing tradition, had to appeal the Log Cabin Republicans’ “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” court case by indicating the National Law Journal had written there were thirteen cases the Department of Justice under Bush and Obama never appealed.

The panel, needless to say, had little to offer in way of response, but Stachelberg did say that how the bill comes to the floor, and how the GOP is involved in the process, is up to Senator Reid.

Wooledge, who himself has worked as an activist for LGBT rights and has also written extensively about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” reminded the panel that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal bill isn’t actually even a repeal bill, which Senator Carl Levin has even admitted. What it is, what we’ve been fighting for, (thanks, by the way to Stachelberg and “Gay, Inc.,”) is a bill that puts the how and when of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal one hundred percent in the hands of the military.

Wooledge has an excellent point. As he says, this legislation is discretionary, it’s “not enduring policy.”

Socarides, Capehart, Frank, and even Stachelberg did a good job of presenting and defending recent history and facts as they saw them. I would add that Domi, Elzie, and Wooledge had at least as much to offer on the longer side of history, and deeper, more pro-active facts.

All images © David Wallace and used by permission.

Subscribe to
The New Civil Rights Movement

google_ad_client = “pub-6759057198693805”;
/* 468×60, created 10/21/10 */
google_ad_slot = “8507588931”;
google_ad_width = 468;
google_ad_height = 60;

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.


‘Recycling Stale and Debunked Burisma Conspiracy Theories’: Raskin Refutes Comer’s Claims as ‘Effort to Smear Biden’



It is an internal FBI document used to record an informant’s unverified statement, and House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer wants it.

On Monday after weeks of threats and intimidation, Chairman Comer announced he will seek to obtain a contempt of Congress conviction against FBI Director Chris Wray, who refused to hand over to the committee the document, known as an FD-1023, which allegedly contains allegations of unlawful activity by then-Vice President Joe Biden.

Ranking Member Raskin late Monday afternoon released a statement slamming Comer.

READ MORE: Comer Struggles to Defend Need for Internal FBI Document on Biden as He Seeks Contempt of Congress for Director Wray

“As the FBI explained at length during today’s briefing, and in previous conversations leading up to today’s accommodation, releasing this form publicly could place the Confidential Human Source in grave danger and undermine the integrity of FBI programs and investigations going forward,” Reskin said in a statement. “Yet, rather than acknowledge these legitimate law enforcement concerns, Chairman Comer has declared his intent to hold Director Wray in contempt of Congress to further promote debunked Republican conspiracy theories.”

“We now know what I had long suspected: that Chairman Comer’s subpoena is about recycling stale and debunked Burisma conspiracy theories long peddled by Rudy Giuliani and a Russian agent, sanctioned by former President Trump’s own Treasury Department, as part of the effort to smear President Biden and help Mr. Trump’s reelection campaign,” Raskin revealed.

Announcing,”here are the facts,” Raskin wrote, “the FD-1023 form, which we reviewed first-hand today, records what a Confidential Human Source told the FBI about conversations he had with individuals in Ukraine. The source, who has been described as highly credible by the FBI, told the FBI he could not provide any opinion on the underlying veracity of the information provided by these Ukrainian individuals.”

“Chairman Comer’s actions prove that his interest in issuing this subpoena was never about seeking the truth, but was always about weaponizing the powers of this Committee to hold Director Wray in contempt as part of MAGA Republicans’ efforts to discredit and ultimately ‘dismantle’ the FBI.”

READ MORE: ‘Indictment Anytime’: Experts Explain Significance of Trump’s Attorneys Meeting With DOJ – Warn Plea Deal Possible

Indeed, then-President Donald Trump urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in an infamous July, 2019 telephone call, to “do us a favor though.”

“I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it,” Trump said, according to a declassified transcript released by the White House.

On Sunday Rep. Raskin told CNN Comer “admitted” this is an attempt to help Donald Trump. “It’s all about the 2024 campaign.”

Watch the video above or at this link.

Continue Reading


Comer Struggles to Defend Need for Internal FBI Document on Biden as He Seeks Contempt of Congress for Director Wray



House Oversight Committee Chairman Jim Comer (R-KY) Monday afternoon announced he will seek to obtain a contempt of Congress referral and conviction against FBI Director Chris Wray.

For months conservatives have been talking about a document supposedly damaging to President Joe Biden that the Federal Bureau of Investigation only recently verified exists. It is not classified, but it has also not been proven accurate. It was deemed so spurious even then-Attorney General Bill Barr questioned its credibility.

Chairman Comer has demanded Director Wray not only show him the document – which the Bureau did Monday – but hand it over to the Oversight Committee.

After the FBI, according to Comer, refused to hand over the document, Comer announced, “we will now initiate contempt of Congress hearings.”

On Monday, Comer said the FBI is using the document as part of an ongoing investigation.

READ MORE: Grassley Admits He Doesn’t Care if GOP’s Accusations Against ‘Vice President Biden’ Are True or Not – He Vows to Pursue Them

Comer announced he will seek contempt of Congress charges against Wray even after the Federal Bureau of Investigation briefed him Monday on the document, allegedly from an unverified whistleblower, claiming then-Vice President Joe Biden engaged in an unethical or unlawful act.

Some reports say the document alleges Biden accepted a bribe in exchange for enacting a policy decision, although there has been no evidence to support that claim.

When asked by a reporter why he is pursuing a contempt of Congress charge against Wray, since he has now seen the document and been briefed on it, Comer struggled to defend his actions.

“So why do you need to document at hand? You just got a chance to view it, so why do you need it? Why move forward with contempt when the FBI says they’re cooperating in good faith?” the reporter asked.

“Well,” Comer replied, “if, let’s just look at what what I’ve read in a lot of the media accounts. and and with statements that Ian Sam’s has made from the White House, that, ‘There’s no merit to this. this is crazy. This is a conspiracy theory.’ And you’re just supposed to take my word or, or the FBI’s word, I’m supposed to take the FBI’s word that they’re investigating this, or that, uh, you, you’re gonna write that the source is unverified wherever, remember, the main reason they’re not wanting to make this public is because they’re concerned about the source.”

Comer also told reporters, “All I know is there’s an ongoing investigation. They’ve confirmed there’s an ongoing investigation, using, this information. I assume that ongoing investigation is in Delaware. I don’t know that.But I assume that.”

Meanwhile, Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin was asked about Comer’s remarks that the document is part of an ongoing investigation.

Shocked and stunned, with his jaw literally hanging open, Raskin looked around as reporters told him what the chairman said, and he replied, “then I must have missed that because I had not heard that this is part of any ongoing investigation.

Comer, according to the clip below, also described the source of the allegation as “highly credible,” but Raskin appeared to correct Comer, saying the highly credible source “reported a conversation with someone else.”

Raskin has previously described the document as a “tip,” containing “unsubstantiated, second-hand claims.”

READ MORE: ‘Untrue and Hateful’: Nikki Haley Slammed for ‘Damnable Lie’ of Blaming Teen Girls Contemplating Suicide on Trans Kids

The unverified document, called an FD-1023 form, “has origins in a tranche of documents that Rudy Giuliani provided to the Justice Department in 2020, people briefed on the matter said,” CNN has reported.

“According to Comer,” CNN added last week, the FD-1023 form, “dated June 30, 2020, says [a] foreign national allegedly paid $5 million to receive a desired policy outcome, based on unclassified and legally protected whistleblower disclosures.”

“The allegations of wrongdoing by the then-vice president,” CNN added, many originating from sources in Ukraine, were dubious enough that Attorney General William Barr in early 2020 directed that they be reviewed by a US attorney in Pittsburgh, in part because Barr was concerned that Giuliani’s document tranche could taint the ongoing Hunter Biden investigation overseen by the Delaware US attorney.”

Watch the video clips above or at this link.


Continue Reading


‘Untrue and Hateful’: Nikki Haley Slammed for ‘Damnable Lie’ of Blaming Teen Girls Contemplating Suicide on Trans Kids



GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley is under fire for what some are calling “outrageous and fact-free,” and “unserious, untrue, and hateful” statements during her CNN town hall Sunday night, where at least one of her more attention-getting remarks is drawing anger and upset.

Asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper to define the term “woke” as conservatives see it, Haley, according to Mediaite, replied: “There’s a lot of things,” which seemed to define her responses to several of the questions she was asked.

“You want to start with biological boys playing in girl sports,” said the former Trump Ambassador to the United Nations, referring to transgender girls. “That’s one thing. The fact we have gender pronoun classes in the military now.”

NCRM could find no reference to “gender pronoun classes in the military” via a Google search, although at least one right-wing website has posted what allegedly is a U.S. Military training video on pronouns.

“All these things that are pushing what a small minority want on the majority of Americans, it’s too much,” Haley continued.

READ MORE: ‘Indictment Anytime’: Experts Explain Significance of Trump’s Attorneys Meeting With DOJ – Warn Plea Deal Possible

That complaint could easily be applied to right-wing bans on abortion, school library books, and refusal to allow background checks on all gun purchases, to name a few.

“The idea that we have biological boys playing in girls’ sports, it is the women’s issue of our time,” Haley, a former South Carolina governor insisted, choosing that over equal pay for women, access to health care including abortion services, the economy, or gun violence.

But it was the next portion of her remarks that have many especially outraged.

“My daughter ran track in high school. I don’t even know how I would have that conversation with her. How are we supposed to get our girls used to the fact that biological boys are in their locker room? And then we wonder why a third of our teenage girls seriously contemplated suicide last year.”

Georgetown University professor of policy Don Moynihan blasted Haley.

“This really is grotesque scaremongering. Research I’ve done suggests that such stigmatizing political rhetoric has mental health effects,” Moynihan writes, pointing to this piece. “Of course, Haley does not mention that trans teens have the highest suicide rates.”

Haley baselessly suggesting teens are contemplating suicide because of transgender girls participating in girls’ sports has no bearing in fact.

“Clinical psychologist here,” writes Heather O’Beirne Kelly, PhD. “Nikki Haley’s suggestion that trans youth are responsible for girls’ elevated suicide risks is disgusting. Let’s also be clear that the suicide rate for trans youth is sky high — they need support, not blame from a politician seeking the presidency.”

And just how many transgender girls playing girls sports in the U.S. are we talking about?

“While we don’t know the exact number of trans women competing in NCAA sports, I would be very surprised if there were more than 100 of them in the women’s category,” researcher and medical physicist Joanna Harper told Newsweek in April.

READ MORE: ‘No Longer the Lord’s Chicken’: ‘Christian Woman’ Says She’s ‘Grieving’ Over ‘Woke’ Chick-fil-A Hiring a Diversity Officer

“One hundred transgender athletes would comprise an incredibly small number of the U.S. population,” Newsweek added, “and the number dwindles even further when it comes to middle school and high school athletes.”

NYU Professor Scott Galloway also criticized Haley.

“There is no data, or study (anywhere) linking teen depression to presence of trans kids,” he writes. “This mocks a serious issue, and reinforces a GOP theme of demonizing our most vulnerable. The opposite of leadership.”

Boston Globe opinion writer Renée Graham went even further: “There isn’t a shred of evidence connecting suicidal ideation in teenage girls to being in close proximity to trans girls. None. An ugly, damnable lie and exactly what one should expect from Haley.”

But Haley wasn’t done attacking transgender Americans.

“We should be growing strong girls, confident girls. Then you go and you talk about building a strong military. How are you going to build a morale and strong military when you’re doing gender pronoun classes?”

Her remarks on CNN were just part of her regular stump speech – Haley has said the exact same thing several times before.

And while she appeared to struggle for terms to define “wokeness,” back in March she had little trouble, telling attendees of the right wing conference, “wokeness is a virus more dangerous than any pandemic – hands down.”

Haley apparently does not see transgender service members as part of the U.S. Military — or part of its need to build “morale.”

“Our veterans deserve to be proud of their service,” Haley tweeted in May. “As president, we’ll ban gender pronoun classes in our military. No more ‘diversity and inclusion’ training.”

Chasten Buttigieg also blasted Haley.

“Nikki Haley suggesting that 1/3 of American teenage girls are contemplating suicide because of the existence of trans people is an unserious, untrue, and hateful thing to say. But hate is the point, isn’t it?” he asked. He also lauded CNN’s Tapper who appeared to mildly served up some important facts to Haley.

Author, essayist, and former naval aviator Brynn Tannehill responded, saying: “Nikki Haley’s claim last night that transgender people are the reason why teen girls contemplate suicide is beyond specious, it’s actively contradicted by the actual statistics. It’s also dangerous pro-extermination propaganda.”

READ MORE: Extremist Group Targets Florida High School’s Yearbook Over Inclusion of LGBTQ Students Section

“Idaho leads the nation in teen suicides. It has been one of the leaders in banning trans youth from everything from sports, health care, bathrooms, government IDs, and inclusion in sex ed. It was the first to ban trans athletes,” she adds, linking to this Reuters article from 2020.

“The six states with the lowest teen suicide rates are all either blue or purple. Five of the six (CA, NJ, NY, MA, and MD) all have explicit protections for trans people codified into law. So it’s not the existence of trans kids in school,” Tannehill adds.

“Haley is also making the claim that Dylan Mulvaney being on TikTok is enough to cause teen girls to want to kill themselves,” Tannehill continues, noting her “videos are basically floof (hair, makeup, comedy, video diary). Mulvaney’s stuff is light entertainment. No one has to watch it, and she’s not telling people to go out and be a jerk to anyone.”

Haley has been using Mulvaney as a “punch line” for months, including last month, when her “joke” reportedly bombed.

“But simply by being visible, she (and any other visible trans person) is somehow responsible for the deaths of hundreds or thousands of cisgender girls,” Tannehill adds, saying Haley’s “implication is clear: tolerating transgender people causes the deaths of lots of cisgender kids.”

Journalist Emma Vigeland notes the GOP presidential candidate is “saying that trans kids’ very existence is so confusing that it’s causing cis suicide.”

“Barbaric,” Vigeland concludes.

Watch the videos above or at this link.



Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.