SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
");background-position:center;background-size:19px 19px;background-repeat:no-repeat;background-color:var(--button-bg-color);padding:0;width:var(--form-elem-height);height:var(--form-elem-height);font-size:0;}:is(.js-newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper) .widget__body:has(.response:not(:empty)) :is(.widget__headline, .widget__subheadline, #mc_embed_signup .mc-field-group, #mc_embed_signup input[type="submit"]){display:none;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) #mce-responses:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-row:1 / -1;grid-column:1 / -1;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget__body > .snark-line:has(.response:not(:empty)){grid-column:1 / -1;}:is(.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper) :is(.newsletter-campaign:has(.response:not(:empty)), .newsletter-and-social:has(.response:not(:empty))){width:100%;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col{display:flex;flex-wrap:wrap;justify-content:center;align-items:center;gap:8px 20px;margin:0 auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .text-element{display:flex;color:var(--shares-color);margin:0 !important;font-weight:400 !important;font-size:16px !important;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col .whitebar_social{display:flex;gap:12px;width:auto;}.newsletter-wrapper .newsletter_bar_col a{margin:0;background-color:#0000;padding:0;width:32px;height:32px;}.newsletter-wrapper .social_icon:after{display:none;}.newsletter-wrapper .widget article:before, .newsletter-wrapper .widget article:after{display:none;}#sFollow_Block_0_0_2_0_0_0_1{margin:0;}#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_11_0_0_1.row-wrapper{margin:40px auto;}#sBoost_post_0_0_0_0_0_0_1_0{background-color:#000;color:#fff;}.boost-post{--article-direction:column;--min-height:none;--height:auto;--padding:24px;--titles-width:calc(100% - 84px);--image-fit:cover;--image-pos:right;--photo-caption-size:12px;--photo-caption-space:20px;--headline-size:23px;--headline-space:18px;--subheadline-size:13px;--text-size:12px;--oswald-font:"Oswald", Impact, "Franklin Gothic Bold", sans-serif;--cta-position:center;overflow:hidden;margin-bottom:0;--lora-font:"Lora", sans-serif !important;}.boost-post:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){min-height:var(--min-height);}.boost-post *{box-sizing:border-box;float:none;}.boost-post .posts-custom .posts-wrapper:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article:before, .boost-post article:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row:before, .boost-post article .row:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post article .row .col:before, .boost-post article .row .col:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .widget__body:before, .boost-post .widget__body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .photo-caption:after{content:"";width:100%;height:1px;background-color:#fff;}.boost-post .body:before, .boost-post .body:after{display:none !important;}.boost-post .body :before, .boost-post .body :after{display:none !important;}.boost-post__bottom{--article-direction:row;--titles-width:350px;--min-height:346px;--height:315px;--padding:24px 86px 24px 24px;--image-fit:contain;--image-pos:right;--headline-size:36px;--subheadline-size:15px;--text-size:12px;--cta-position:left;}.boost-post__sidebar:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:10px;}.boost-post__in-content:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:40px;}.boost-post__bottom:not(:empty):has(.boost-post-article:not(:empty)){margin-bottom:20px;}@media (min-width: 1024px){#sSHARED_-_Social_Desktop_0_0_11_0_0_1_1{padding-left:40px;}}.donation_banner{position:relative;background:#000;}.donation_banner .posts-custom *, .donation_banner .posts-custom :after, .donation_banner .posts-custom :before{margin:0;}.donation_banner .posts-custom .widget{position:absolute;inset:0;}.donation_banner__wrapper{position:relative;z-index:2;pointer-events:none;}.donation_banner .donate_btn{position:relative;z-index:2;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_14_0_0_3_1_0{color:#fff;}#sSHARED_-_Support_Block_0_0_14_0_0_3_1_1{font-weight:normal;}#sElement_Post_Layout_Press_Release__0_0_1_0_0_11{margin:100px 0;}.grey_newsblock .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper, .newsletter-wrapper.sidebar{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter{background:linear-gradient(91deg, #005dc7 28%, #1d63b2 65%, #0353ae 85%);}.black_newsletter .newsletter_bar.newsletter-wrapper{background:none;}
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Guinean soldiers have been implicated in regular acts of theft and violence against businesspeople and ordinary citizens since a new government took power in a military coup in December 2008, Human Rights Watch said today. The new government should put a stop to these attacks and make certain that the police, gendarmerie, and judiciary carry out independent investigations and prosecute implicated soldiers.
Human Rights Watch collected accounts from victims and witnesses to 19 such incidents, nearly all committed by heavily armed soldiers wearing red berets and traveling in both civilian and official military vehicles without license plates. Soldiers in groups numbering up to 20 have raided offices, shops, warehouses, medical clinics, and homes in broad daylight as well as at night. Soldiers have stolen cars, computers, generators, medicines, jewelry, cash, mobile phones, and large quantities of wholesale and retail merchandise, among other items. Victims include Guineans and foreigners. Many witnesses to these incidents reported that the soldiers appeared to be intoxicated. Many of the victims were also threatened or physically assaulted.
"The coup seems to have opened up a rash of abuses by the military; the impunity enjoyed by these soldiers must come to an end," said Corinne Dufka, senior West Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. "The coup leaders need to bring the rank and file under control, and ensure those responsible for these abuses are promptly investigated and prosecuted."
Human Rights Watch also documented numerous cases of extortion by soldiers during routine identification checks; the March 31 rape by a soldier of a 15-year-old girl; and several incidents of intimidation of the judiciary, during which small groups of soldiers interrupted judicial proceedings or threatened lawyers in an apparent attempt to influence the outcome of the proceedings.
A group of Guinean military officers calling themselves the National Council for Democracy and Development (CNDD) seized power hours after the death on December 22, 2008, of Lansana Conte, Guinea's president for 24 years. The coup leaders, led by a self-proclaimed president, Captain Moussa Dadis Camara, quickly suspended the country's constitution, and pledged to hold elections in 2009 and relinquish control to a civilian-led government.
It is unclear at what level the acts documented by Human Rights Watch were either ordered or sanctioned by senior members of the military. In some cases of theft, the attackers announced that they were on an official mission for the CNDD. However, none of the victims was shown any official documentation justifying the actions, such as a search or arrest warrant.
Most of the criminal acts and intimidation of the judiciary documented by Human Rights Watch involved soldiers wearing red berets. Prior to the coup, two divisions within the Guinean security services were routinely issued with red berets: the Autonomous Presidential Security Battalion, or presidential guard (BASP); and the Autonomous Battalion of Airborne Troops (BATA), an elite group of commandos. Since the coup, however, both units and a few other elite battalions have been folded into one unit based in the CNDD's headquarters at the Alpha Yaya Diallo military camp. Human Rights Watch was also told that soldiers of other divisions have been seen wearing red berets.
Since coming to power, the CNDD has led an official crackdown against drug traffickers, criminals involved in the production and sale of counterfeit medicines, and former government officials accused of corrupt practices. Ironically, many of the human rights abuses documented by Human Rights Watch appeared to have been committed within the context of this crackdown.
For example, following the January 2009 detention of several Chinese citizens suspected of making and selling fake antibiotics, several Chinese-owned businesses, including medical clinics and restaurants, and at least one Guinean-run pharmacy were robbed by soldiers who claimed they were looking for counterfeit medicines. None of the military involved in these operations produced a search warrant, nor officially seized suspected counterfeit medicines. In three cases documented by Human Rights Watch, the business owners were arbitrarily detained and whisked away in a military vehicle. They were robbed of their money, mobile phones, and other valuables by the soldiers and then ordered out of the vehicles some kilometers away.
Human Rights Watch documented numerous cases in which soldiers had robbed Guinean citizens living near the homes or businesses of individuals suspected of involvement in drug trafficking. Victims described how they were robbed by soldiers searching their homes or businesses for contraband the military alleged was there. A Guinean lawyer representing six clients seeking damages for forced entry and armed robbery said the soldiers had broken down doors, destroyed furniture, and stolen a generator, seven cars, computers, clothing, and money. The lawyer told Human Rights Watch:
"The fight against drug trafficking is noble, but they're using it as an excuse to act as common criminals - taking vehicles, money, jewelry - what does all this have to do with drugs? They didn't find any of my clients with drugs. In none of these cases is there a legitimate complaint, or at least not one that has been substantiated."
Numerous other cases of breaking and entering were seemingly unrelated to the crackdown. These included attacks against small family-run kiosks during which the contents were emptied into vehicles driven by the military, roadside stores selling construction materials, private homes, primarily of wealthy Guineans, and warehouses holding imported items.
Military personnel interviewed by Human Rights Watch suggested that individuals posing as soldiers were responsible for the criminal acts. However, several factors cast doubt on this claim. First, many witnesses told Human Rights Watch of soldiers committing abuses in broad daylight in public places and dressed in full military uniform, some with bars indicating rank up to the level of sergeant. Second, in two cases, businessmen whose cars were stolen at gunpoint by soldiers later saw their cars being driven by men in military uniform; in one case, the car was seen driven in and out of a military camp in Conakry. Third, several victims told Human Rights Watch that they recognized individual soldiers whom they knew to be members of the military. Fourth, the soldiers committing many crimes operated in groups of 10 or more, and circulated in small convoys of two or more vehicles.
Under Guinean law, it is the gendarmerie and police who are mandated to investigate crimes, whether the alleged perpetrators are civilians or members of the military. However, victims consistently told Human Rights Watch that since the coup, the military has increasingly taken over some police tasks, including criminal investigation. The owners of five businesses robbed at around the same time on February 16 filed a police report, but were told by the police that since the coup, they were no longer "authorized by the military to conduct investigations." The business owners were told to file a complaint directly with the military.
When Human Rights Watch asked police officers how they were responding to a wave of crimes apparently perpetrated by soldiers in one Conakry suburb, the officers said that the military had "forbidden" them to conduct patrols and investigations; one police officer described how a civilian suspect he had detained for questioning in connection with a burglary at the station was removed from police custody and put into a military vehicle for questioning at a military camp. Another victim told Human Rights Watch that after he complained to the police, they told him that if he wanted action he would need to either file a complaint with the military or denounce it on the radio. Yet another victim filed a complaint at the local police station and later at the head office of the judicial police in charge of investigating crimes, which is under the authority of the prosecutor. Both referred her to the military.
Five victims interviewed by Human Rights Watch had lodged complaints with military authorities in which they had asked for an official investigation into what they claimed were criminal acts by soldiers. No follow-up investigation has been conducted in any of these cases. One victim visited the military camp five times asking for an investigation, and lamented, "I've been to the [military] camp and made many follow-up calls, but not once heard back. The case is going nowhere."
The only case documented by Human Rights Watch where there had been a response by the military involved the rape of the 15-year-old girl. According to family members and community leaders, the accused soldier's superior visited the family and arranged to settle the case outside of court. The soldier was detained for several days in the military camp. The family decided not to file a police report after the military agreed to pay the girl's medical costs.
Under article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, the government of Guinea is under the obligation to protect the right to property, which includes ensuring that state officials (including the military) do not seize property arbitrarily and without compensation.
"The military's duty is to protect and safeguard the Guinean people, not take advantage of them. The lawlessness seen in these abuses is without excuse," said Dufka. "The military should end the abuses and allow the police, gendarmerie, and judiciary to uphold the rule of law."
Accounts from victims and witnesses of abuses by the Guinean military in Conakry
Abuses committed under the pretext of the crackdown on drug trafficking, counterfeit medicines, and corruption:
The Guinean owner and manager of a transport company described the theft of his car and other items on February 15 by a dozen uniformed soldiers ostensibly searching for drugs. He said the soldiers, who smelled of alcohol, were heavily armed, and several were draped with bandoliers:
"They arrived in a Nissan pickup truck without license plates. They told me they were there on a mission ordered by the CNDD to recover 4x4 trucks that I was hiding for the leader of a Guinean opposition party. Some of the Red Berets accused me of hiding drugs and weapons. I told them I am not a military, so I don't have weapons, but they searched the warehouse and ransacked my secretary's office and mine. I am not hiding anything. They did not tell me their names, but I noticed that they all addressed one of them with 'Excellence.' I asked for a mission order, but they said that they didn't have one, that mission orders are nonsense. They said, 'Did you not see what kind of vehicle we came in?' The military threatened my employees and told them to lie down on the floor, face down. They were told, 'You will not get out of here alive' and 'Nothing will leave this place.' They did not find any drugs or weapons, but they took two computers, my own car, and a large amount of cash. Several people have told me they've seen my car being driven around town by an army man."
A Guinean woman who resides next door to a group of Nigerians allegedly suspected of involvement in drug trafficking was robbed twice by soldiers. The first time they came, they claimed to be looking for Nigerians. She described the incidents that took place on February 25 and March 13:
"The first night, they woke me up when they climbed the walls of my compound. They asked me if there were any Nigerians hidden and searched my house. They did not have a search warrant. They apologized and left. I later noticed my mobile phone was missing. Then on March 13, eight heavily armed Red Berets returned to the residence at 10 p.m. I wasn't there, but my aunt told me what happened. The military threatened to shoot if my aunt did not open the door, so she let them in. When my aunt asked why they were there after not finding anything the first time, they yelled at her to shut up. They took a black backpack with a laptop, 3 million Guinean francs [about US$600], and jewelry. This time, it was clearly not a mistake like the first time they came. Because of these visits, I decided to move out of my house."
The owner of a medical clinic raided by soldiers at 1 p.m. on January 26 described what happened during an attack on his clinic:
"My brother and I are Chinese medical doctors and run a clinic in Conakry. The military came in a gray truck and three motorcycles. There were eight of them and they all wore red berets. Three had rifles and all were in camouflage uniform. They came in saying they were looking for fake medicine, but they went through the house and stole many things, including two diagnostic machines, two mobile phones, 3 million FG [Guinean francs, about US$600], US$3,000, a TV and DVD [player], and bags full of all our clothing. They even went into the freezer and stole the meat we had there! They also stole [my brother's] car - we have yet to see it. They didn't take any medicines; they came to steal. [My brother] was taken in the car by the military, like they were going to arrest him, but they then let him go - stopped the car and told him to get out. Many people from the neighborhood used to come into the clinic, but for the moment we've closed."
A restaurant owner who was robbed in the middle of the day in late January described what happened:
"At about 3 p.m., 10 soldiers came to the restaurant; they were dressed in soldier uniforms and several had guns. As they entered, they kicked at our door, pointed their guns at me and hit me in the stomach. They said they were looking for fake medicines - that it was us the Chinese selling them. I told them this was a Chinese restaurant! What do we have to do with medicines? I even told them it's OK to check, knowing they wouldn't find any of it here. They stole several phones, took two cartons of beer and our personal things, including our clothes. They were very aggressive."
A Guinean businessman whose pharmacy was robbed by 10 soldiers on January 28 described the events to Human Rights Watch:
"At 2 p.m., I was in my pharmacy when 10 Red Berets burst into the place saying they wanted to check if the medicines in my pharmacy were fake. They pretended to look at the medicines, but then went straight for the small safe I have in the corner. They broke it open and stole the 50 million FG [about US$10,000] we had there. They came in a green military pickup without license plates. After stealing the money, they took me along with them, as if to make it look like it was me who'd done something wrong. They stuffed me in the car, but let me go a few kilometers down the road. They wanted to make it look like a proper operation but they just wanted to steal the money - they didn't even take any medicine with them!"
Abuses against judges and lawyers
Human Rights Watch spoke with a judge in Conakry who described an attempt by six soldiers to intimidate him into changing a judicial decision he had made in a civil dispute involving two businesswomen, one of whom had a family member in the military. The incident took place on February 17:
"On the day in question, I was to hand over the official decision in a civil case involving two businesswomen. Suddenly, six soldiers entered my courtroom. To me, it seemed like the woman whose relative was a soldier had organized the red berets to intervene on her behalf. They were armed, uniformed, and wore red berets. I said, 'You have nothing to do with this process - I have rendered a judicial decision which is entirely independent of the military!' They got very angry and one of them responded, 'Things have changed; you must change this decision.' They threatened to see that I was removed from power - they said they are the ones in power now. I stood my ground and they eventually left."
A lawyer described how on February 23, two armed soldiers apparently acting on behalf of a plaintiff - a retired general - attempted to intimidate the judge presiding over the case:
"That day I was in court on behalf of an indigent client. Being heard at the same time was a civil case - a dispute over money - between a retired general and another man. The general's lawyer was pushing for the case to be decided that day, but the other man's lawyer was pushing for a postponement on account of a technicality - that the second man had not been formally summoned to appear. Shortly thereafter, two armed soldiers came into the courtroom. They paraded with their long guns up and down the courtroom for 10-15 minutes. When the man's lawyer saw this, he abandoned the courtroom and I took over. The soldiers didn't point their gun directly at the judge, but their presence was really frightening for everyone. It was obvious the judge was afraid, but in the end, the judge held his ground and postponed the case. When the general heard this, he started insulting and yelling at the judge and me! He said, 'If you do this, you will see what we'll do.' I was extremely frightened. When we went outside the court, I saw about five to seven soldiers, all with red berets, inside a vehicle without license plates."
General criminal acts by members of the military
The unarmed security guard for the residence of a wealthy Guinean businessman described a robbery by about 10 soldiers on March 13:
"I was sitting outside with a few friends. It was around 9 p.m. We heard a car pull up, then around 10 of them - all wearing camouflage, red berets, and with long guns - burst through the compound door. They came in a white truck that they parked outside our gate - it did not have number plates. One of them had one bar on his uniform - I believe he is a sergeant; and I recognized another one - I'd seen him around Conakry in uniform. They entered pointing their guns at us; one of them yelled at the owner's wife to give him the keys to their car. She told them her husband wasn't there and that he had the keys to the car. They got angry and went into the house to look for the key. They found her purse, searched through it and eventually found the key. As one of them was getting in the car, the others were looking for things to steal. They stole two computers, three telephones, a 2 KVA generator, jewelry, and money - around 500,000 CFA [US$1000]. They were drinking - I could smell alcohol on their breath."
A Guinean businessman described the theft by a group of soldiers of 50 cartons of red wine he had recently imported from Europe. He explained how a few days after the theft, he saw and photographed the stolen goods being sold in a shop just outside the Alpha Yaya Diallo military camp:
"On January 8 at around 6 p.m., 10 Red Berets - all uniformed and with arms - arrived at my house in a pickup truck. They entered my house and asked my brother for the key to the container. He didn't want to give it to them, but they beat him up and eventually he gave them the key. They then stole all 50 cartons of the wine. Earlier, I'd approached a store just outside Alpha Yaya camp and asked them if they'd like to sell my wine; it [the store] is owned by a gendarme. I left a sample bottle for them to try. I had a feeling the stolen wine was there and after the robbery, I went there and yes, the wine was in that shop! I took pictures of my wine, which I thought could be used as evidence. I asked the people where they'd gotten the wine and they said the military had come a few days before asking if we wanted to buy the wine. I took the pictures to the police and to a gendarme, who gave me a paper that authorized me to retake possession of the wine, but the second time I went to the shop, the wine was all gone. I've gone to the military several times to sort out this problem, but as of yet have had no luck."
Human Rights Watch urged the government of Guinea to take the following actions:
To the International Contact Group on Guinea:
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
Although the move was "largely symbolic" due to lack of such mandates, one expert still warned it is "legitimization of anti-science and anti-vax noise."
Amid fears of what U.S. President Donald Trump's second term will mean for global health and public education, the Republican on Friday signed an executive order to defund schools that require Covid-19 vaccination for students.
Trump's order bars federal funding "from being used to support or subsidize an educational service agency, state education agency, local education agency, elementary school, secondary school, or institution of higher education that requires students to have received a Covid-19 vaccination to attend in-person education programs," according to a White House fact sheet.
The order, first reported by Breitbart News, also directs the secretaries of education and health and human services (HHS) to develop a plan "to end coercive Covid-19 vaccine mandates, including a report on noncompliant entities and a process for preventing federal funds from supporting educational entities that impose Covid-19 vaccine mandates."
While signing the order in the Oval Office, Trump—who was president during the onset of the pandemic and has received intense criticism for his handling of the public health crisis—said, "OK, that solves that problem."
The White House claimed that "parents are being forced into a difficult position: comply with a controversial mandate or risk their child's educational future." However, according toABC News, Trump's move was actually "largely symbolic" considering that no states currently require K-12 students to have the Covid shots.
The Associated Pressreported that "some colleges started requiring students to be immunized against Covid-19 during the pandemic, but most have dropped the requirements. A few continue to require vaccines at least for students living on campus, including Swarthmore and Oberlin colleges. Most of those colleges allow medical or religious exemptions."
As ABC noted:
One open question is whether the new administration could opt to go beyond Covid vaccines and put pressure on schools to drop requirements for other vaccines.
Currently, all 50 states mandate that students receive certain vaccinations, including to prevent the measles. Many states, however, offer religious exemptions.
"This is anti-vax pandering," Timothy Caulfield, a professor focused on public health and law at Canada's University of Alberta, said of Trump's order. "Still worrisome, however. It is yet more normalization and legitimization of anti-science and anti-vax noise."
The new measure came a day after Senate Republicans voted to confirm vaccine conspiracy theorist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as HHS secretary and Trump signed another executive order establishing the Make America Healthy Again Commission.
Also on Thursday, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions held a confirmation hearing for Linda McMahon, the billionaire GOP megadonor and former World Wrestling Entertainment CEO nominated to serve as education secretary, even though Trump has signaled that he ultimately intends to fully dismantle the department.
"It's time to do your job and stop this outrageous sabotage of justice in the interests of naked political corruption," said the lawmaker.
Amid reports that attorneys in the Public Integrity Section at the U.S. Department of Justice—those tasked with fighting political corruption—were being intimidated into dismissing the federal criminal charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams on Friday, Congressman Jamie Raskin demanded that Attorney General Pam Bondi "immediately halt" the actions of DOJ leaders.
A day after three top federal prosecutors in New York and Washington resigned following a demand from acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove to drop the case against Adams, MSNBC legal analyst and former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade reported that DOJ leaders had given the remaining lawyers in the anti-corruption unit an ultimatum.
They "put all Public Integrity Section lawyers into a room with one hour to decide who will dismiss [the] Adams indictment or else all will be fired," said McQuade.
Reutersreported Friday afternoon that one of the attorneys, veteran prosecutor Ed Sullivan, agreed to file a motion to dismiss the charges in order to spare the jobs of his colleagues in the Public Integrity Section.
On Thursday, Danielle R. Sassoon, the acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, resigned after receiving a memo from Bove saying the charges against Adams would interfere with his ability to fight "illegal immigration and violent crime."
The acting head of the Public Integrity Section and the acting head of the DOJ's Criminal Division also refused to drop the case and resigned.
Adams was charged with bribery, campaign finance violations, and conspiracy offenses last year, with U.S. attorneys saying an investigation had found that he allegedly took bribes from foreign nationals, including to allow a skyscraper in Manhattan to open without a fire inspection.
In a letter to Bondi, Sassoon wrote that "Adams' attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with department's enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed."
A lawyer for Adams toldThe New York Times Thursday that the allegation of a quid pro quo was "a total lie," but President Donald Trump's border czar, Thomas Homan, alluded to the deal in a Fox News appearance with Adams on Friday.
"If he doesn't come through," said Homan, "I'll be in his office, up his butt, saying, 'Where the hell is the agreement we came to?'"
Vanessa Cárdenas, executive director of immigrant rights group America's Voice, said the Trump administration's engagement in the alleged deal reflected the president's "obsessive focus on mass deportations."
"His obsession to purge America of immigrants seems to have no limit: cutting a quid pro quo with Mayor Adams, to drop criminal charges in return for immigrant roundups; diverting resources from stopping fentanyl at ports of entry to deport workers; gutting entire immigrant-dependent industries that put food on the table and keep prices low; and intruding into the homes and apartments and going door-to-door to instill fear among people mostly legal, many citizens," she said.
Raskin (D-Md.) demanded that Bondi "put an immediate halt to this illegal and unconscionable intimidation campaign."
"Your Department of Justice has been caught engaging in a corrupt deal with Mayor Adams and now attempting to cover it up," he said in a statement. "It's time to do your job and stop this outrageous sabotage of justice in the interests of naked political corruption."
"The Trump administration is trying to write us out of that history," said one transgender writer. "We will not let them."
They were on the front lines of the most famous uprising for LGBTQ+ civil rights in history, but the Trump administration has erased mention of transgender and queer people from the official website of the national monument marking the event.
The National Park Services' (NPS) website for Stonewall National Monument in New York City now welcomes visitors with the lines: "Before the 1960s, almost everything about living openly as a lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) person was illegal. The Stonewall Uprising on June 28, 1969 is a milestone in the quest for LGB civil rights and provided momentum for a movement."
Previously, the site said "lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer (LGBTQ+) person."
This, despite the fact that queer and transgender people including Marsha P. Johnson and Sylvia Rivera—who, according to a still-standing NPS web page, threw the second Molotov cocktail at police—were front-and-center during the six-day uprising at the Stonewall Inn gay bar on Christopher Street in Greenwich Village.
In a statement posted on Instagram, the Stonewall Inn and its Stonewall Gives Back Initiative said they are "outraged and appalled" by the NPS move, adding that "this blatant act of erasure not only distorts the truth of our history, but it also dishonors the immense contributions of transgender individuals—especially transgender women of color—who were at the forefront of the Stonewall Riots and the broader fight for LGBTQ+ rights."
The statement continues:
Let us be clear: Stonewall history is transgender history. Marsha P. Johnson, Sylvia Rivera, and countless other trans and gender-nonconforming individuals fought bravely, and often at great personal risk, to push back against oppressive systems. Their courage, sacrifice, and leadership were central to the resistance we now celebrate as the foundation of the modern LGBTQ+ rights movement.
The decision to erase the word "transgender" is a deliberate attempt to erase our history and marginalize the very people who paved the way for many victories we have achieved as a community. It is a direct attack on transgender people, especially transgender women of color, who continue to face violence, discrimination, and erasure at every turn.
Also gone from the NPS site is a page previously containing an interactive " Pride Guide" for visitors "to explore the legacy and history of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) people and places."
Stonewall National Monument—which was dedicated by then-President Barack Obama in 2016—commemorates the 1969 Stonewall Uprising at and around the Stonewall Inn, a gay bar in Greenwich Village.
Police raids of LGBTQ+ spaces were a frequent fact of life during a time when consensual same-sex sexual relations, cross-dressing, and even dancing with members of the same sex were illegal. On the night of June 28, 1969 New York City police raided the mafia-owned Stonewall Inn, ostensibly to investigate illegal alcohol sales and find "three-article rule" violators to arrest, provoking the six-day uprising that is widely credited with sparking the LGBTQ+ rights movement.
This is the New York Daily News' front-page coverage of the Stonewall Uprising.
(Photo: New York Daily News)
Although there were earlier uprisings—like the 1966 trans-led Compton's Cafeteria Riot in San Francisco—Stonewall became synonymous with the ongoing struggle for LGBTQ+ equality.
While attempts to marginalize and separate the fight for transgender rights from the wider LGBTQ+ movement are nothing new—Rivera lamented this "gay liberation but transgender nothing" ethos a generation ago—such efforts have accelerated in recent years, fueled by the far-right and prominent figures in the "trans-exclusionary radical feminist" (TERF) movement, author J.K. Rowling, anti-trans gay activists, and others.
The NPS' move is part of Trump's wider war on transgender people that began during his first administration and continues today with the president's executive orders aimed at delegitimizing transgender identity, cutting off federal support for gender-affirming healthcare, pushing for a ban on trans women and girls from female sports, renewing his first-term prohibition on trans military enlistment, and other insidiously discriminatory and dangerous moves.
Transgender activists and their allies aren't taking the Trump's administration's latest move sitting down. A protest took place at the monument site on Friday afternoon, with others vowing future action.
#Stonewall today
[image or embed]
— bonnjny.bsky.social (@bonnjny.bsky.social) February 14, 2025 at 9:42 AM
"The Trump administration is trying to write us out of that history," Media Matters LGBTQ program director Ari Drennen asserted on social media. "We will not let them."
Lamenting that "the federal government is attempting to erase us and take away our history," researcher and self-described "transgender menace" Allison Chapman said on the social platform Bluesky, "This Pride, we riot."