Biden-era racial justice conflicts echo through Washington post
Last week, Washington Post opinion editor Jonathan Capehart published a book detailing his decision to step down from the paper's editorial board in 2023. He attributed the move to a disagreement he had with another editor in the section, Karen Tumulty, over a piece by the editorial board saying that then-President Joe Biden's decision to call Georgia's voting laws 'Jim Crow 2.0' was 'hyperbolic.'
According to the book, Capehart, the only Black man on the Post's editorial board at the time, agreed with Biden's description and was bothered by the editorial and the fact that readers may believe it represented his view. He was incensed when Tumulty later did not apologize to him for publishing it; Capehart said he felt additionally put off when Tumulty said Biden's choice of words was insulting to people who had lived through racial segregation in the South.
'Tumulty took an incident where I felt ignored and compounded the insult by robbing me of my humanity,' he wrote in the book, which was published last week. 'She either couldn't or wouldn't see that I was Black, that I came to the conversation with knowledge and history she could never have, that my worldview, albeit different from hers, was equally valid.'
Capehart left the editorial board after complaining about the incident to human resources and other senior figures at the paper. His frustrations were notable enough that according to one person with knowledge, when the Post hired top opinion editor David Shipley several months later, one of the first moves he made was to meet with Rev. Al Sharpton to discuss the Capehart incident and alleged shortcomings in the paper's opinion coverage.
But Capehart's description of the incident in his book, along with a discussion about it he held with former Biden administration official Susan Rice at the Politics and Prose bookstore in Washington last week, has been the subject of internal recriminations at the Post in recent days.
According to two Washington Post staffers, staff have complained privately that the book publicly pitted current colleagues against each other and appeared to run afoul of the Post's editorial guidelines around collegiality, as well as rules that restrict staff from publicly disclosing internal editorial conversations. A spokesperson for the Post did not respond to requests for comment. Capehart did not respond to requests for comment.
In a statement to Semafor, Tumulty noted that the paper had repeatedly published opinion pieces criticizing Georgia's 2021 voting laws limiting ballot access, but said she would not comment further on the book or the Post's editorial processes.
'I have a very different recognition of the events and conversations that are described in this book, but out of respect for the longstanding principle that Washington Post editorial board deliberations are confidential I am not going to say anything further.'
Some current and former staff told Semafor that they felt Capehart's decision to go after Tumulty in a book and on his book tour over an editorial disagreement, as well as the actual description of the incident, was unfair to her.
'Ed board members, current and former, are honor bound not to discuss specific deliberations publicly,' former deputy opinion editor Chuck Lane said in a text. 'I can only say that Karen took an unsought leadership role when the paper needed her, and performed it superbly and 100 percent honorably, despite extraordinary health challenges — for which I admire her greatly.'
The internal rehash of the 2023 saga comes at a moment when the Post is trying to keep attention off of its Opinion section, which has been the subject of reader fury following owner Jeff Bezos' decision not to endorse in the 2024 election, as well as his subsequent decisions to overhaul the section.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Metco, nearly 60, at crossroads amid search for next leader
Advertisement There also are growing parent demands for Metco to hold accountable its participating districts, following a number of allegations of 'We need someone that can speak out against the things that are being done that are wrong, and speak out against things that don't promote education,' said Dorchester mom Vanesa Morales, whose two children have participated in the Metco program. State Representative Christopher Worrell, who graduated from Lincoln-Sudbury Regional High School through Metco, said he wants to see the nonprofit and its next leader play a larger role in breaking down racial barriers in the state. 'Metco could be, and should be, bigger than just busing inner city kids to the suburbs,' said Worrell, who has two children attending Newton schools through Metco. 'It should be the main focal point of race relations and be a leader on race relations.' Advertisement Metco (officially the Metropolitan Council for Educational Opportunity) began in 1966 as a coalition of Boston parents and a handful of suburban school districts who agreed to bus predominantly Black children from the city into wealthier, suburban communities in hopes of obtaining a better academic experience. Today, the Metco program spans 33 communities around the state and enrolls about 3,000 students. (There is also a separate Springfield program for that sends about 100 students to four Western Massachusetts communities.) Since its inception, Metco has had two leaders, including Jean McGuire, who helped found Metco and served as CEO until late 2016, when she said she During Arbaje-Thomas's tenure, the state added about $8 million to the program's annual budget, for a total of nearly $30 million per year in state funding, and changed its enrollment process Related : That plan includes several commitments by member districts, including offering inclusive, antiracist school environments, personalized support for academic and postgraduate success, and equal inclusion in extracurricular activities. A search committee is working with a Advertisement Darnell Billings, 'At this time, no decisions have been finalized regarding the hiring of a new President & CEO. We are continuing to follow a deliberate and thorough process, and additional information will be shared publicly at the appropriate time,' Billings said in a brief email. By several measures, the Metco program is successful. Researchers in separate studies have found students enrolled in suburban districts through Metco perform better academically than their peers in Boston Public Schools. Metco students have had a higher graduation rate than their Boston peers, or the state as a whole, state data show. A greater percentage of Metco students also plan on attending college. A The program 'brings much-needed diversity to suburban districts and makes friendships, dialogue, and learning across race more possible,' the committee's report said. Meanwhile, in suburban districts, achievement gaps among Metco students persist, state testing data show. Domingos DaRosa, a Boston resident whose daughter attends high school in the Concord-Carlisle regional district, resigned last November as the School Committee's Metco parent representative, he said, after administrators and the board failed to listen to Black and Latino students, and didn't address his concerns about achievement gaps. 'The face of Metco Inc. has to be the individual who represents the students' interests,' DaRosa said, referring to the organization by its formal name. Advertisement Daniel Gutekanst, the superintendent in Needham and a member of the Metco Inc. board, said school administrators in member districts are taking reports of racist harassment seriously, and are working to address achievement gaps through the Metco 2.0 effort. 'I acknowledge there are problems, and there are problems in Needham,' said Gutekanst, who declined to speak about the search process. 'I also know there is a commitment among superintendents and Metco directors [in school districts] to really move the ball forward, and really make sure our classrooms are inclusive, that kids feel welcomed, and that they're achieving at high levels.' Several of Nita Holder, who sent her then-13-year-old son to Melrose Veterans Memorial Middle School through Metco in 2023 and 2024, The purpose of Metco is 'not only to support the families of Boston,' Holder said, 'it's to educate the suburban towns and cities about what it means to be a young Black boy, a young Black girl, coming from the city of Boston, and trying to navigate a whole other culture.' John Hilliard can be reached at
New York Times
6 hours ago
- New York Times
Trump Bows to Putin's Approach on Ukraine: No Cease-Fire, Deadlines or Sanctions
Supported by News Analysis The net effect of the Alaska summit was to give President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia a free pass to continue his war against his neighbor indefinitely without further penalty, pending talks on a broader peace deal. By Peter Baker Peter Baker, the chief White House correspondent and a former Moscow co-bureau chief for The Washington Post, reported from Anchorage. On the flight to Alaska, President Trump declared that if he did not secure a cease-fire in Ukraine during talks with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, 'I'm not going to be happy,' and there would be 'severe consequences.' Just hours later, he got back on Air Force One and departed Alaska without the cease-fire he deemed so critical. Yet he had imposed no consequences, and had pronounced himself so happy with how things went with Mr. Putin that he said 'the meeting was a 10.' Even in the annals of Mr. Trump's erratic presidency, the Anchorage meeting with Mr. Putin now stands out as a reversal of historic proportions. Mr. Trump abandoned the main goal he brought to his subarctic summit and, as he revealed on Saturday, would no longer even pursue an immediate cease-fire. Instead, he bowed to Mr. Putin's preferred approach of negotiating a broader peace agreement requiring Ukraine to give up territory. The net effect was to give Mr. Putin a free pass to continue his war against his neighbor indefinitely without further penalty, pending time-consuming negotiations for a more sweeping deal that appears elusive at best. Instead of a halt to the slaughter — 'I'm in this to stop the killing,' Mr. Trump had said on the way to Alaska — the president left Anchorage with pictures of him and Mr. Putin joshing on a red carpet and in the presidential limousine known as the Beast. 'He got played again,' said Ivo Daalder, who was ambassador to NATO under President Barack Obama. 'For all the promises of a cease-fire, of severe economic consequences, of being disappointed, it took two minutes on the red carpet and 10 minutes in the Beast for Putin to play Trump again. What a sad spectacle.' Mr. Trump's allies focused on his plans to convene a three-way meeting with Mr. Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine. 'Let me tell you, I've never been more hopeful this war can end honorably and justly than I am right now,' Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a leading hawk on the Ukraine war, said on Fox News Friday night. The cease-fire that Mr. Trump gave up in Alaska had been so important to him last month that he threatened tough new economic sanctions if Russia did not pause the war within 50 days. Then he moved the deadline up to last Friday. Now there is no cease-fire, no deadline and no sanctions plan. Mr. Trump, characteristically, declared victory nonetheless, deeming the meeting 'a great and very successful day in Alaska.' After calling Mr. Zelensky and European leaders from Air Force One on the way back to Washington, Mr. Trump said he would now try to broker the more comprehensive peace agreement Mr. Putin has sought. 'It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a Peace Agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere Ceasefire Agreement, which often times do not hold up,' he wrote on social media on Saturday. He said that Mr. Zelensky would come to Washington for meetings on Monday to pave the way for a joint meeting with Mr. Putin. 'If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin,' Mr. Trump said. 'Potentially, millions of people's lives will be saved.' Mr. Putin's conditions for such a long-term peace agreement, however, are so expansive that Ukrainian and European leaders are unlikely to go along. Mr. Putin referred to this during his joint appearance with Mr. Trump in Anchorage after their talks, when he spoke about addressing the 'root causes' of the war — his term for years of Russian grievances not just about Ukraine but about the United States, NATO and Europe's security architecture. 'We are convinced that in order for the Ukrainian settlement to be sustainable and long-term, all the root causes of the crisis, which have been discussed repeatedly, must be eliminated; all of Russia's legitimate concerns must be taken into account; and a fair balance in the security sphere in Europe and the world as a whole must be restored,' Mr. Putin said in Alaska. In the past, Mr. Putin has insisted that a comprehensive peace agreement require NATO to pull forces back to its pre-expansion 1997 borders, bar Ukraine from joining the alliance and require Kyiv to not only give up territory in the east but shrink its military. In effect, Mr. Putin aims to reestablish Moscow's sphere of influence not only in former Soviet territory but to some extent further in Eastern Europe. President Joseph R. Biden Jr., Mr. Zelensky and European leaders rejected similar demands on the eve of the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022. But Mr. Trump appears willing to engage in such a discussion, and since his Friday meeting with Mr. Putin, he has sought to shift the burden for reaching an agreement to Ukraine and Europe. Mr. Trump has long expressed admiration for Mr. Putin and sympathy for his positions. At their most memorable meeting, held in Helsinki in 2018, Mr. Trump famously accepted Mr. Putin's denial that Russia had intervened in the 2016 election, taking the former K.G.B. officer's word over the conclusions of American intelligence agencies. Much like then, the president's chummy gathering in Alaska on Friday with Mr. Putin, who is now under U.S. sanctions and faces an international arrest warrant for war crimes, has generated ferocious blowback. Some critics compared it to the 1938 conference in Munich, when Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of Britain surrendered part of Czechoslovakia to Germany's Adolf Hitler as part of a policy of appeasement. Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, once considered the Trump of London, called the Alaska summit meeting 'just about the most vomit-inducing episode in all the tawdry history of international diplomacy.' But Mr. Zelensky and European leaders sought to make the best of the situation. Some were heartened by Mr. Trump's comments on the way to Alaska suggesting a willingness to have the United States join Europe in offering some sort of security assurance to Ukraine short of NATO membership. He broached that again in his call with them following the meeting. 'We support President Trump's proposal for a trilateral meeting between Ukraine, the U.S.A. and Russia,' Mr. Zelensky said on Saturday. 'Ukraine emphasizes that key issues can be discussed at the level of leaders, and a trilateral format is suitable for this.' Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain praised the American president. 'President Trump's efforts have brought us closer than ever before to ending Russia's illegal war in Ukraine,' he said in a statement. 'His leadership in pursuit of an end to the killing should be commended.' What remains unknown is whether Mr. Trump secured any unannounced concessions from Mr. Putin behind the scenes that would ease the way to a peace agreement in the days to come. Mr. Trump talked about 'agreement' on a number of unspecified points, and Mr. Putin referred cryptically to an 'understanding' between the two of them. At the moment, however, it does not look like Mr. Putin has made any move toward compromise, even as Mr. Trump has now given up on his bid for an immediate cease-fire. Before the Alaska summit, Russian forces were pounding Ukraine as part of their relentless yearslong assault. And for now, at least, they will continue.
Boston Globe
7 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Where D.C. crime is bad, residents question Trump's motives
'If Trump is genuinely concerned about safety of D.C. residents, I would see National Guard in my neighborhood,' said Karen Lake, 62, a lawyer who has lived in Congress Heights since 2017, in the far eastern corner of the diamond-shaped district. 'I'm not seeing it, and I don't expect to see it. I don't think Trump is bringing in the National Guard to protect Black babies in Southeast.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Trump might have found a more sympathetic audience in the distant southeastern quadrant of the city, far away from the National Mall, the White House, or the restaurants and clubs of 16th Street and 14th Street, where a young employee of the Department of Government Efficiency recently was beaten in an assault that raised the city's criminal profile to presidential level. Advertisement In neighborhoods such as Congress Heights and Washington Highlands, where the District of Columbia abuts Prince Georges County, Maryland, the city's Black working class struggles with the twin challenges that have diminished the ranks of what was once, when Washington still had a majority-Black population, affectionately called Chocolate City. There's crime, for sure, but also gentrification driving Black residents into suburban Maryland and Virginia. Advertisement In Ward 8, where Congress Heights is found, there have been 38 homicides this year, according to data from the District of Columbia government. That's almost 10 times as many as Ward 2, where the National Mall is located. But when Trump on Monday described the district as 'dirty' and 'disgusting,' menaced by 'roving mobs of wild youth,' he offended some who otherwise might have been more receptive to his 'law-and-order' pitch. 'I know that we're not those things,' said Le'Greg Harrison, who lives in Congress Heights and said he is supportive of more law enforcement, so long as Black residents aren't the target. 'I know we have a beautiful city.' Trump did not mention Congress Heights by name, but residents say they are well aware of the community's crime statistics and the challenges their neighborhood faces. Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, said that federal law enforcement agents had increased their presence in all of the city's neighborhoods, including those in Ward 8. In parts of the ward, she said, arrests have been made in connection with illegal guns and drugs, as well as murder, cruelty to the elderly and other offenses. 'President Trump is committed to making D.C. safe again for all residents,' she said in a written statement. On a humid, overcast afternoon in Washington this week, hungry patrons, mostly Black, pulled up to the retail space known as Sycamore & Oak, which Harrison helped bring to Congress Heights. They grabbed a bite from Black-owned restaurants and discussed what they called Trump's takeover of their city. Advertisement Among the residents of Congress Heights and other neighborhoods of Southeast Washington, the apparent new order has been met with a sense of both incredulity and inevitability. Despite the area's challenges, residents say they take pride in their neighborhood and their city and feel disrespected by the president's portrayal. They feel unseen and misunderstood, their challenges reduced to crime statistics, their children cast as threats, and their culture caricatured. They don't reject safety measures outright. Gerald Walker, a 38-year-old Congress Heights resident, said federal intervention was 'definitely needed.' The National Guard, the FBI, a federalized District of Columbia police force -- 'the more the better.' But many said they were by no means seeking out additional federal involvement in their neighborhoods. And some said they resented being treated as political piñatas in a larger national narrative. It has 'nothing to do with crime in D.C.,' said Ronnie McLeod, 68, a retired bus driver and lifelong Washingtonian who lives in Congress Heights. 'Crime is already down!' 'It's got something to do with something else,' he said. Most of all, many Congress Heights residents say they do not trust Trump's motives. 'He's very out of touch with D.C. people in general,' said Michelle Lee, 42, who lives in Southeast Washington. He may know the political culture of the city, may even have a passing understanding of the ritzier parts of town, she said. Lee, seeming to address the president personally, added, 'You have no idea what an actual resident of D.C. does, goes through.' Advertisement It's not the first time a violent crime against a young, white political staffer has prompted outrage from the federal government. In 1992, an aide to Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama was murdered on Capitol Hill. In the aftermath, Shelby forced a referendum to restore the death penalty in Washington; the initiative was overwhelmingly rejected by voters. Some residents of Southeast described the president's decision to declare a crime emergency and federalize the Metropolitan Police Department for a 30-day period as a power grab or a way to appease affluent white Washingtonians who are anxious about crime. (Any extension would have to be granted by Congress.) Some residents saw the move as a sly way to further gentrify what is left of affordable Washington, by striking fear in residents of low-income neighborhoods that federalized police officers will harass them, or worse. The city has already showed more interest in developing luxury condominiums than in building community recreation centers for children, said Jimmie Jenkins, 35, who grew up in Congress Heights. Many Black residents are not benefiting from the city's growth, he said, and if conditions don't change, Black people will no longer be a significant part of the city's future. Now Trump is pushing aside the city's Black leadership and bringing in federal troops. 'They're definitely aiming to push more Black people out,' said Tyree Jones, 30, who works in Congress Heights. Salim Adofo, a member of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission that represents parts of Congress Heights, was not surprised that residents were drawing connections among crime, federalized law enforcement and gentrification. 'It's becoming harder to live in this specific community as it continues to get developed,' he said. 'It's all wrapped up in together. You really can't separate any of these things.' Advertisement Like opponents of Trump on national cable talk shows and social media, residents of Southeast Washington said the president's message of 'law and order' was undermined when he pardoned even the most violent assailants who attacked police officers during the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. They also brought up his own criminality and raised the possibility that he was deploying forces in Washington to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein scandal. But the residents of Southeast Washington have taken the president's moves personally. Trump, they said, is using them. Older residents remember a time when crime was much worse. 'I grew up in the town in the '90s, when we were, quote unquote, the murder capital for almost 10 years,' said Harrison, 40. 'I wouldn't call what we have a state of emergency,' he said. Still, any deployment of extra enforcement must be done with sensitivity for Black citizens, he added. Many Black communities have said for years that they want to be protected from crime, but they don't want to be aggressively targeted for simply being Black. The president's orders have only underscored those positions. 'My father was murdered in my home when I was 15 years old,' said Erica Champion, 28, who was born and raised in Southeast Washington. 'I watched him die.' Champion said she believed the federal government should step in to prevent violent crime, but she is concerned about abuse of power from law enforcement officers and the White House. 'I just don't want him to use it as a means to make it a dictatorship,' she said. Advertisement Local residents said a more comprehensive strategy to combat crime in the city would involve bigger investments in recreation centers, arts and youth job programs. But that will be difficult after Republicans in Congress forced a $1 billion hole in the district's budget. Trump's federal government layoffs already have Washington officials slashing revenue projections. This article originally appeared in
