News

Lori Lightfoot Comes Under Attack for Racist Policies

Lonnie H. Chambers Jr / Shutterstock.com
Lonnie H. Chambers Jr / Shutterstock.com

For decades now, the political left has tried to purport that their adjacent counterpart was racist and against all changes to society that may be more inclusive. Hillary Clinton even said as such, recently, claiming that all Trump supporters, as Republicans, were afraid of “civil rights” and “culture changes.”

But time and time again, it seems to be those on the left, not the right, who act and speak on a discriminatory basis.

Take Democratic Mayor of Chicago, Illinois, Lori Lightfoot, for example.

Back in May, the discriminatory mayor announced that her office would only be granting interviews to certain journalists in the future, namely those who aren’t white. Apparently, she thought this was a fitting way to “celebrate” her second anniversary of leading Chicago.

She even boldly tweeted about it.

Naturally, the idea hasn’t exactly gone over all too well with a great many reporters, especially those who don’t happen to be of the right skin tone.

One such reporter, Thomas Catenacci, tried to interview either Lightfoot or her office shortly after this announcement. But because he is white, the mayor’s office ignored both his initial request and two follow-up emails about an interview.

Catenacci and his employer, the Daily Caller News Foundation, found this to be absolutely outrageous and, as such, immediately reported the discrimination to Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group. From there, the matter was taken to the courts when a civil rights lawsuit was filed against Lightfoot on May 27.

However, here it is nearly Christmas, and the matter is still unresolved. Why?

Well, because Lightfoot has consistently dodged all responsibility for her racist policy and even the opportunity to defend or explain it.

The only thing she has done to cooperate with the process is to provide a designee to testify on her behalf. But even that has its issues, which is precisely why a motion to force Lightfoot herself to come before the court was filed on November 23 by Judicial Watch.

According to the motion, the mayor failed her “obligation under Rule 30(b)(6) to designate a person or persons to testify on her behalf.” The motion continues, explaining that while a person was sent to the court on Lightfoot’s behalf, Kathleen LeFurgy did not offer anything new to the court and was “grossly ill prepared to testify.”

“(C)onsequently, Mayor Lightfoot has failed to produce a proper and prepared Rule 30(b)(6) witness.”

And so the group is asking that Lightfoot herself finally take some responsibility and give an “oral examination.”

After all, as Judicial Watch’s president, Tom Fitton, explains, the whole case is centered around Lightfoot’s policy and no one else. That makes her responsible alone for the outcome and a “necessary witness in this civil rights lawsuit.”

In a separate motion, the group also asks that Lightfoot’s office be compelled to answer all 19 questions given to her unprepared designee that she either could not or would not give an account for.

According to both the reporter who was discriminated against and the Daily Caller’s president Neil Patel, all they want to do is hold her accountable for her actions. And yet, at every turn, the mayor has succeeded in shirking her responsibilities. They are now asking that the court does not allow this to continue happening.

Now, I may not be a lawyer or even remotely acquainted with matters of court, but I don’t really see how Lightfoot can adequately defend her policy without proving that it’s wrong. I mean, she flat out said that she, nor her office, would be holding interviews with anyone who wasn’t a “black or brown journalist,” as if no white person could ever be worth a mere second of her time.

And so far, she’s been unremorseful about that. Over the summer, when questioned about it, obviously by a “journalist of color,” the New York Times’ Kara Swisher, she actually said she was “unapologetic” about her policy and “would absolutely do it again.” Apparently, she’s going to stick by her decision.

Just not in a court of law, it would seem…

Then again, with these motions being filed, it looks as though she might not have much of a choice.