Pages

Wednesday 13 November 2019

For Bill Taylor, first impeachment witness, 'everything's easy after Vietnam' (5 Pics)

 William B. Taylor Jr., was eating dinner in Berlin a few years ago with a group of former American diplomats when the group turned to him and asked him what it was like to fight in the Vietnam War.
“He was the one person at the table who had been there,” Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine who was at the dinner, told Yahoo News.
Taylor described his 18 months as an officer in the Vietnam War, a conflict in which 58,220 American soldiers were killed, as “the most fulfilling job he ever had,” Pifer said.
That grace under pressure helps explain why Democrats are calling Taylor — the 72-year-old acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine — as their first witness this Wednesday when the House impeachment inquiry of Donald Trump begins public hearings.
Most Americans came to know Taylor on Oct. 3, when Democrats released text messages that showed him calling it “crazy to withhold security assistance [to Ukraine] for help with a political campaign.”
Taylor sent that text to Gordon Sondland, U.S. ambassador to the European Union, on Sept. 9, the same day that House Democrats sent a letter to the White House asking for documents related to the Trump administration’s withholding of assistance funding to Ukraine. The letter mentioned a potential “abuse of power” and “betrayal of the public trust.”

Acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor. (Photo: Carlos Jasso/Reuters)
Acting U.S. ambassador to Ukraine Bill Taylor. (Photo: Carlos Jasso/Reuters)

Two days later, the Trump administration released its hold on nearly $400 million in military aid to help Ukraine fend off Russian aggression.
Now Taylor is a key witness for Democrats who hope to convince the nation that Trump should be removed from office. He will go first in part because he kept a documentary record of key conversations due to what one Democratic aide described to NBC News as his “exquisite note-taking.” He will testify, as he did in his deposition, that Sondland told him Trump would not release the funds unless the Ukrainians announced an investigation into Hunter Biden in order “to cast [former] Vice President [Joe] Biden in a bad light.”


“I said on September 9th … [it was] crazy. I believed that then, and I still believe that,” Taylor told House investigators during his impeachment inquiry deposition.
But it’s not just facts that are important for making a case to the American public. Taylor’s life and career are themselves compelling.
He was raised in the northern Virginia suburbs outside Washington, D.C., the son of a U.S. Army engineer whose rise through the ranks of the Army Corps of Engineers was stalled in his late 20s by a near-fatal fight with polio. William B. Taylor Sr. overcame his disease and went on to a distinguished career at NASA working on the moon-landing project, part of the Cold War race against the Soviets.
Like his father, Taylor attended West Point, the academy for training Army officers. He arrived in the fall of 1965, as U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War was escalating. Even so, during his first few months at the academy, the conflict in southeast Asia was largely a distant concern.
But then, in 1966, U.S. casualties in Vietnam began to skyrocket, and many of them were West Point graduates who, just a few months earlier, had been Taylor’s upperclassmen.
“Every week at least there was an announcement in the mess hall at the evening meal of a West Point graduate who had fallen in Vietnam,” retired Col. Bob Seitz, who was in Taylor’s class at West Point, told Yahoo News. “This kept rolling and rolling forward. The first year we didn’t know anybody but the second and third year it became very traumatic.”

From left, Bob Seitz, Bob St. Onge and Bill Taylor, servicemen in 101st Airborne’s 2nd Battalion, in Vietnam, spring 1971. (Photo courtesy of Bob Seitz)
From left, Bob Seitz, Bob St. Onge and Bill Taylor, servicemen in 101st Airborne’s 2nd Battalion, in Vietnam, spring 1971. (Photo courtesy of Bob Seitz)

Nevertheless, Taylor — and Seitz — both went through Army Ranger school and then were shipped off to lead rifle platoons in the war, which was still raging. U.S. casualties had peaked in 1968, but in 1970 — the year Taylor arrived as a first lieutenant — there were still more than 6,000 U.S. soldiers killed that year.
Taylor served in the 101st Airborne’s 2nd Battalion, 506th Infantry, and for a year commanded 20 to 30 men in his rifle platoon on the front lines of the conflict, in the Quang Tri and Thua Tien provinces of what was then South Vietnam.
“We moved on foot through this very mountainous and jungle-covered area carrying our weapons, our ammunition and very heavy loads in our rucksacks, for weeks at a time. We slept on the ground every night, and were very seldom ever brought back to rear-base areas,” Seitz said. “You just had to endure it and take it day by day.”
Many of their operations involved flying into enemy territory on Huey helicopters and jumping several feet to the ground under enemy fire. And their units were part of Operation Lam Son 719, providing support to South Vietnamese army units as they conducted an offensive into Laos.
“It was a very violent operation,” Seitz said. “It went on for two months. It was a fight every day.”

American servicemen during Operation Lam Son 719, Vietnam 1971. (Photo courtesy of Bob Seitz)
American servicemen during Operation Lam Son 719, Vietnam 1971. (Photo courtesy of Bob Seitz)

After a year, Taylor was eligible to return home to the U.S. Instead, he signed up to stay another six months, was promoted to captain, and became commander of Alpha Company.
“For those of us who were there, we still hear the echoes, we still see the shadows in our dreams and we grieve about the losses as if they were not that long ago,” Seitz said. “Everything’s easy after Vietnam.”
Taylor was awarded the Bronze Star Medal and the Air Medal. He left the military in 1975 and went on to work in senior positions at the newly created Department of Energy and then on the staff of Sen. Bill Bradley, D-N.J.
In the 1990s, Taylor oversaw U.S. assistance to Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union in the years immediately following the fall of the Iron Curtain. During the administration of Republican President George W. Bush, Taylor spent a few years working in Afghanistan, Iraq and on the Middle East peace process. In 2006, he returned to Eastern Europe as U.S. ambassador to Ukraine.
“He has done the hardest jobs in the hardest places with quiet dedication,” William J. Burns, the former deputy secretary of state under Obama and ambassador to Russia under Bush, told Yahoo News 
“He has never had an ounce of pretension or ego about him, and served Republicans and Democrats with equal patriotism and drive,” Burns said. “Bill is exactly the kind of person you’d want beside you in a diplomatic foxhole, just as he was all those years ago as a soldier in the foxholes of Vietnam.”
White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, however, described the men and women testifying in impeaching depositions as “a group of mostly career bureaucrats who are saying, ‘You know what? I don’t like President Trump’s politics, so I’m going to participate in this witch hunt that they’re undertaking on the Hill.’”

U.S. Diplomat Bill Taylor arrives on Capitol Hill on October 22, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Alex Wroblewski/Getty Images)
U.S. Diplomat Bill Taylor arrives on Capitol Hill on October 22, 2019 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Alex Wroblewski/Getty Images)

The day after Taylor’s Oct. 22 closed-door deposition, news coverage of his testimony got Trump’s attention. In one tweet, the president called Taylor a “Never Trumper.” This followed a tweet an hour earlier in which Trump had referred to “Never Trumper Republicans” as “human scum.”
Trump’s Republican and Democratic predecessors certainly didn’t see Taylor in a negative light.
In 2011, President Barack Obama sent Taylor back to the Middle East to oversee assistance to Egypt, Libya, Syria and Tunisia. And in 2014, Taylor became executive director of the U.S. Institute of Peace, a government-funded institution that provides support to the State Department.
It was this job at the institute that took Taylor to Berlin, along with Pifer and other American former diplomats, to meet with Russian and Ukrainian officials in unofficial talks aimed at reducing tensions in that part of the world.
At that dinner in Berlin, Taylor described teaching his soldiers to play bridge, and said that of all the experiences in his career, it was his ability to take care of the men under his command in Vietnam that he cherished the most.

Bill Taylor in Yavoriv, Ukraine, August 2019. (Photo courtesy U.S. Embassy, Kiev, Ukraine)
Bill Taylor in Yavoriv, Ukraine, August 2019. (Photo courtesy U.S. Embassy, Kiev, Ukraine)

Taylor was asked by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to return to Ukraine this past spring, and described his hesitations in his deposition.
“My wife, in no uncertain terms, strongly opposed the idea,” Taylor said.
In a series of texts in late May with Kurt Volker, special envoy to Ukraine, Taylor said he was “struggling with the decision whether to go.”
“Can anyone hope to succeed with the Giuliani-Biden issue swirling for the next 18 months?” Taylor asked. He knew even then, from press reports quoting Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, that the former New York City mayor was pressuring the Ukrainians to investigate Biden, a leading Democratic rival to Trump for the presidency.
“Do I want to enter this non-normal world?” Taylor asked Volker, and himself, in a May 28 text.
But in his deposition, Taylor recalled the advice that a friend and mentor had given him about the decision.  
“The mentor counseled: If your country asks you to do something, you do it if you can be effective,’” he said.

CROWNing Glory: New York City Just Resolved Its First Hair Discrimination Case—and a Celebrity Stylist Is Going to Pay

Heavy lies the crown,” they say—and for celebrity hairstylist Sally Hershberger, the CROWN Act has come down heavy indeed, as she and business partner Sharon Dorram are on the losing end of a $70,000 civil lawsuit that in part inspired New York City’s ban on hair discrimination, according to the New York Times.
“This first-of-its-kind case resolution sends an important message to all employers that anti-Black hair discrimination has no place in our diverse city,” said Janai Nelson, Associate Director-Counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund. “The outcome of this case illustrates the Commission’s firm commitment to implementing its legal enforcement guidance on hair discrimination—and we hope that it will deter future violations of this nature.”
Perhaps surprisingly (or not), the complaints that led to the landmark ruling weren’t filed by the well-heeled clientele of Sharon Dorram Color at Sally Hershberger, an elite hair salon on the Upper East Side, where one of Hershberger’s haircuts averages a whopping $800 to $1,000. Instead, it was former workers at the salon who took action, after being told by management that their hairstyles didn’t fit a dress code implemented in 2015. Specifically: “Afros and box-braided hairstyles did not reflect the upscale image of the neighborhood,” reported the Times in February, after the New York City Human Rights Commission announced it would begin considering hair discrimination—particularly against natural hair or hairstyles most commonly associated with black people—a form of racial discrimination.
Hershberger, who is perhaps best known for creating and maintaining Meg Ryan’s famous shag haircut, has also dressed the tresses of Michelle Obama and the First Family during their tenure in the White House. However, it was reportedly partner Dorram’s staff and policies at the source of the complaints—claims Dorram denied when interviewed by the Times, saying, “None of it is true.” Hershberger, a co-respondent due to her co-ownership, also denied the claims.
Nevertheless, the Times reports:
Between 2016 and 2018, four complaints were filed to New York City’s human rights commission about the management and one senior stylist at Sharon Dorram Color at Sally Hershberger. The resulting investigation into the salon led, in part, to the announcement last week of the city’s ban on discrimination based on hair.
The first complaint was filed in July 2016 by a former general manager who is white and said he felt sickened by being asked to implement an employee hair policy that he said was applied more to black workers than white ones. The second complaint was filed in December 2016 by a former receptionist, who is black and said she was a target of racial discrimination.
Two other complaints were filed in June 2018. One was from a former receptionist who is Hispanic and claimed she was asked to steer clients away from stylists who refused to sign a document attesting to the fairness of the salon’s dress code. The document, she said, stated that the dress code was longstanding and applied equally to black and white workers. (The fourth complaint was filed by a white stylist who said he was called an anti-Semitic slur and had his career threatened when he sought legal counsel. The complaints from 2018 were first reported by the New York Post.)
Furthermore, David Speer, the former general manager at Sharon Dorram Color at Sally Hershberger who filed the first complaint, told the Times the dress code was specifically requested by Dorram soon after the hiring of black receptionists Taren Guy, Raelene Roberts and Regine Aubourg. The code—which required black clothing and banned blue jeans, ripped apparel and nose rings—also included a mandate that shoulder-length hair be worn up or pulled back.
“I do not see anything wrong with having a style code—but it must be inclusive, respectful, and leave room for people of color, in this instance, African Americans,” Speer wrote in an email to Hershberger and financier Steven Tuttleman, also a co-respondent. “When I voiced concerns, I was told that if I couldn’t be supportive, I should leave.”
As evidence, Speer shared damning text exchanges with Dorram that read (h/t New York Times):
“Today looked awful. Rail yne (sic) had her dreads down; Regine just got hers to match as long and of course Tarren (sic) All 3 at desk and we look like we should be on E. 134th Street. Sorry, nor(sic) racist just telling you we are on Mad. and 71st.”
Mr. Speer, who said he had made clear he found these statements offensive, replied by text, “And Madison can never be black. Is that right?”
Ms. Dorram responded to him saying that he was “missing the point.”
Another text message sent on the same day from Ms. Dorram to Mr. Speer said:
“Can’t be 3 girls at the desk. 2 like this and 1 w/ big Afro. What is our image Please instruct them not to wear hair down and no nose rings”
Those rules apparently didn’t apply to a (presumably nonblack) Puerto Rican receptionist, who was reportedly told by Dorram, “We didn’t create this new rule because of you. You look beautiful with your hair down. It’s the other girls. Their hair looks disgusting.” The employee eventually quit in protest of what she considered a racist mandate.
Guy and Aubourg would also quit soon after the dress code was announced, but not before Aubourg, wearing box braids at the time, was purportedly told “Your hair is ugly” by a senior stylist. Aubourg didn’t pursue legal action, but Raelene Roberts, who also filed a complaint with the city, told the Times the hair rule was conditional, based upon how she wore her hair. After purportedly being asked by Dorram: “What are we going to do about your hair?” Roberts attempted to wear a wig to work, but was prohibited. “The next day, I blew out my hair straight and they liked that,” she told the Times, noting that by contrast, the hair-up rule was very lax for white employees.
Dorram insisted that she simply preferred a “traditional” aesthetic in her salon, saying, “It’s what clients will expect.”
“We’re not 8th Street,” she told the Times. “We’re not downtown.”
“We’re the United Nations here,” she continued, identifying herself as a descendant of Holocaust survivors. “I have every nationality, every skin color. I’m a Jew who was married to an Arab and a German. I am not racist. I am not a bigot.”
“Sally Hershberger is 100% against racist discrimination and all other types of discrimination in the workplace and beyond,” a statement from Hershberger’s spokeswoman to the Times simply read.
Concluding its investigation, the city’s Human Rights Commission disagreed. Despite an initial complainant’s grievance being withdrawn and settled out of court for an undisclosed amount, the commission ruled that Sharon Dorram Color at Sally Hershberger is still liable for a $70,000 civil penalty, according to documents obtained by The Root.
Additionally, the landmark ruling requires (verbatim):
  • Hershberger and Dorram personally must each complete community service with an organization that promotes Black beauty and combats hair discrimination.
  • Hershberger and Dorram must be trained in the styling, care and maintenance of natural hair, both personally and their employees. They must select an expert in the care and maintenance and styling of Black hair.
  • Hershberger Salon and Dorram Color must create an internship program that seeks out candidates from underrepresented backgrounds and provides internship experiences in the salons with potential for employment upon completion.
  • Policy revisions and training for all employees and respondents.
Psychologist, natural hair advocate, and director of the documentary Back to Natural Dr. Gillian Scott-Ward has since been hired by the salon to lead its trainings.
“Releasing our legal enforcement guidance on hair discrimination, which built on efforts of advocates, lawmakers, and scholars, was one of the steps we have taken to dismantle institutional racism and provide momentum for other jurisdictions to follow,” said Carmelyn P. Malalis, commissioner and chair of the NYC Commission on Human Rights.
“This resolution is another step towards ensuring that racist notions of professional appearance standards are not applied in New York City,” Malalis continued. The restorative justice components incorporated into the resolution demonstrate the Commission’s commitment to repairing and re-investing in the communities impacted by discriminatory practices. These restorative remedies move beyond punishment to focus on repairing harm and achieving lasting justice and equity.”

Gay teen goes viral for defending himself against homophobic bully

An Indiana teenager has gone viral for defending himself against another teenager who had allegedly bullied him for his homosexuality, Insider reports. 
Last Friday, Jordan Steffy, a junior at LaPorte High School, tweeted a video of himself confronting a classmate who had purportedly posted a homophobic message about him on Snapchat. 
"He made an anti-gay post with a picture of me on it saying how he hated gays and a bunch of throwing up emojis all over it," he told Insider. "I walked up to him and said 'Why did you post this?' He said 'It was just a post.' And I said 'Well, it's not just a post. It's a post about me, saying how you dislike who I am, and I don't appreciate that.'"
Steffy, who added that he's been dealing with bullying since he came out in the seventh grade, said the classmate then tried to provoke him.
"He went on to say 'Okay, but what are you going to do about it?' I said 'I'm not going to deal with this, this is the last time I'm called anything,'" Steffy recalled. "And then he said 'What are you going to do about it, f*ggot?' And that's when I was like 'No, I'm not doing this.'"
In the now viral video, Steffy tells the unidentified student to back up before the student calls him a homophobic slur. Steffy then shoves the purported bully before telling him to "not f*** with" him.
"I just got sick of it," he told Insider. "It's crazy the amount of hatred I received just for liking who I like and being me."
Unfazed, the student repeats the slur before a fight ensues seconds later. 

As of Monday afternoon, Steffy's video has received more than 2.4 million views and close to 24,000 retweets. Many on Twitter praised him for sticking up for himself. 


"Jordan I'm a retired teacher and judge of the juvenile court," one person wrote. "I don't hold with violence but I do hold with self-defense and I think you did a very very good thing. Maybe this youngster will think twice before trying to build himself up by being an idiot. Good for you!"
Good for you!"

"Jordan, I am so proud of you," another person tweeted back. "I wish I had your courage when I was in school. You probably don’t even realize that you just spoke for so many kids that get bullied. You will see how many other kids you inspire to be themselves and stand up for themselves."

Steffy told Insider that he was sent to the principal's office and subsequently suspended. Though he admitted he regrets getting into a confrontation, he said he does not feel sorry for standing his ground. 
"If I could take it back, personally, I would," he said. "But I'm glad I stood up for myself. If you were in my shoes, you'd probably get sick of it and you'd want to stand up for yourself."
In several follow-up tweets on Monday, the teenager thanked his followers for their support while encouraging others to use his incident as a lesson to be more tolerant and inclusive. 
"I just want to say that people out there that are bullying the kid who call me the slur, it needs to stop all bullying needs to stop regardless people calling him things is no better than what he said to me I want all the hatred and negative comments to stop," Steffy tweeted. "Please love All!!"