Connect with us

News

Marian Robinson, mother of Michelle Obama, dies at 86

Published

6 months ago

on

WASHINGTON (AP) — Marian Shields Robinson, the mother of Michelle Obama who moved with the first family to the White House when son-in-law Barack Obama was elected president, has died. She was 86.

Mrs. Robinson’s death was announced by Michelle Obama and other family members in a statement that said “there was and will be only one Marian Robinson. In our sadness, we are lifted up by the extraordinary gift of her life.”

She was a widow and lifelong Chicago resident when she moved to the executive mansion in 2009 to help care for granddaughters Malia and Sasha. In her early 70s, Mrs. Robinson initially resisted the idea of starting over in Washington, and Michelle Obama had to enlist her brother, Craig, to help persuade their mother to move.

“There were many good and valid reasons that Michelle raised with me, not the least of which was the opportunity to continue spending time with my granddaughters, Malia and Sasha, and to assist in giving them a sense of normalcy that is a priority for both of their parents, as has been from the time Barack began his political career,” Mrs. Robinson wrote in the foreword to “A Game of Character,” a memoir by her son, formerly the head men’s basketball coach at Oregon State University.

“My feeling, however, was that I could visit periodically without actually moving in and still be there for the girls,” she said.

Mrs. Robinson wrote that her son understood why she wanted to stay in Chicago but still used a line of reasoning on her that she often used on him and his sister. He asked her to see the move as a chance to grow and try something new. As a compromise, she agreed to move, at least temporarily.

Granddaughters Malia and Sasha were just 10 and 7, respectively, when the White House became home in 2009. In Chicago, Mrs. Robinson had become almost a surrogate parent to the girls during the 2008 presidential campaign. She retired from her job as a bank secretary to help shuttle them around.

At the White House, Mrs. Robinson provided a reassuring presence for the girls as their parents settled into their new roles, and her lack of Secret Service protection made it possible for her to accompany them to and from school daily without fanfare.

“I would not be who I am today without the steady hand and unconditional love of my mother, Marian Shields Robinson,” Michelle Obama wrote in her 2018 memoir, “Becoming.” “She has always been my rock, allowing me the freedom to be who I am, while never allowing my feet to get too far off the ground. Her boundless love for my girls, and her willingness to put our needs before her own, gave me the comfort and confidence to venture out into the world knowing they were safe and cherished at home.”

Mrs. Robinson gave a few media interviews but never to White House press. Aides guarded her privacy, and, as result, she enjoyed a level of anonymity openly envied by the president and first lady. It allowed her to come and go from the White House as often as she pleased on shopping runs around town, to the president’s box at the Kennedy Center and for trips to Las Vegas or to visit her other grandchildren in Portland, Oregon.

She attended some White House events, including concerts, the annual Easter Egg Roll and National Christmas Tree lighting, and some state dinners.

White House residency also opened up the world to Mrs. Robinson, who had been a widow for nearly 20 years when she moved to a room on the third floor of the White House, one floor above the first family. She had never traveled outside the U.S. until she moved to Washington.

Her first flight out of the country was aboard Air Force One in 2009 when the Obamas visited France. She joined the Obamas on a trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana later that year, during which she got to meet Pope Benedict, tour Rome’s ancient Colosseum and view a former slave-holding compound on the African coast. She also accompanied her daughter and granddaughters on two overseas trips without the president: to South Africa and Botswana in 2011, and China in 2014.

Craig Robinson wrote in the memoir that he and his parents doubted whether his sister’s relationship with Barack Obama would last, though Fraser Robinson III and his wife thought the young lawyer was a worthy suitor for their daughter, also a lawyer. Without explanation, Craig Robinson said his mother gave the relationship six months.

Barack and Michelle Obama were married on Oct. 3, 1992.

One of seven children, Marian Lois Shields Robinson was born in Chicago on July 30, 1937. She attended two years of teaching college, married in 1960 and, as a stay-at-home mom, stressed the importance of education to her children. Both were educated at Ivy League schools, each with a bachelor’s degree from Princeton. Michelle Obama also has a law degree from Harvard.

Fraser Robinson was a pump operator for the Chicago Water Department who had multiple sclerosis. He died in 1991.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

News

Trump demands Republicans ‘kill’ bill that would protect journalists from government spying

Published

2 weeks ago

on

November 22, 2024

By

New York CNN — In between his posts on Truth Social announcing nominees for his incoming administration, President-elect Donald Trump urged Republicans Wednesday to nix a bipartisan bill that would give journalists greater protections under federal law.

Trump wrote on his favorite social network that “REPUBLICANS MUST KILL THIS BILL!”

He linked to a PBS “NewsHour” interview with Jodie Ginsberg, the CEO of the Committee to Protect Journalists, who urged the Senate to pass the legislation.

Known as the PRESS Act, the Protect Reporters From Exploitative State Spying Act would prevent the government from forcing journalists to reveal their sources and limit the seizure of their data without their knowledge.

According to the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, one of the many groups advocating for the bill, “The PRESS Act would bar the federal government from using subpoenas, search warrants, or other compulsory actions against journalists to force the disclosure of information identifying confidential sources as well as other newsgathering records, except in very limited circumstances. It would also broadly limit the government’s ability to use the same actions against third parties, including email providers and search engines, to seize journalists’ data, with narrow exceptions.”

The bill has been passed by the House of Representatives twice with bipartisan support, and it has Republican sponsors in the Senate, but it has been stalled for months in the Senate Judiciary Committee, with Sen. Tom Cotton is said to be holding up the measure.

Cotton’s office did not respond to a request for comment about his position on the bill.

After Trump’s reelection earlier this month, press advocacy groups redoubled their efforts to get the legislation signed into law before the end of President Joe Biden’s term.

After Trump’s reelection earlier this month, press advocacy groups redoubled their efforts to get the legislation signed into law before the end of President Joe Biden’s term.

“It’s really important that we have that federal shield law to protect journalists at the federal level,” Ginsberg said on PBS. “We know that Trump is interested in going after whistleblowers, people who leak. And it’s absolutely essential that they are protected… and that journalists are allowed to do their job.”

Several media outlets and newspaper editorial boards have urged readers to contact their senators and lobby for the passage of the bill.

“Hostility toward the news media in the polarized politics of the day makes it more urgent than ever to ensure that reporters can continue to pursue their essential role as watchdogs,” The New York Times editorial board opined last month.

But “Senate Democrats are running out of time” to pass the law, WIRED reporter Dell Cameron wrote last week. Democratic lawmakers have focused on confirming Biden’s judicial nominees during the lame-duck session.

Trump’s edict on Wednesday may have sealed the bill’s fate while also raising public awareness of the issue.

Trevor Timm, executive director of Freedom of the Press Foundation, told CNN that Trump should reconsider his position because “the PRESS Act protects conservative and independent journalists just as much as it does anyone in the mainstream press.”

“Democratic administrations abused their powers to spy on journalists many times, too,” he said. “The bipartisan PRESS Act will stop government overreach and protect the First Amendment once and for all.”

“Much of the reporting Trump likes, from the Twitter files to stories poking holes in the Russiagate conspiracy, came from confidential sources,” Timm observed. “Many Trump supporters from Rep. Jim Jordan to Sen. Mike Lee are champions of the PRESS Act because it would protect all journalists, including many who reach primarily conservative audiences. That’s good for the public, whether they voted Republican or Democrat.”

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

News

USCIS Simplifies the Path to U.S. Citizenship for Long-Term Permanent Residents

Published

2 weeks ago

on

November 22, 2024

By

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced a significant update to its policy regarding the lawful admission requirement for naturalization applicants.

Effective November 14, 2024, this change clarifies the burden of proof for lawful permanent residents (LPRs) seeking to become U.S. citizens.

The new guidance specifies that naturalization applicants need only demonstrate lawful admission for permanent residence at the time of their initial entry or adjustment of status. This marks a departure from the previous interpretation, which considered subsequent reentries into the United States.

This policy update aligns with a recent decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of Azumah v. USCIS. The court determined that USCIS’s earlier interpretation imposed an additional requirement not found in the statute. The court ruled that applicants should only need to prove their lawful admission at the time of their initial admission or adjustment to LPR status, rather than at any subsequent reentry.

This change is expected to simplify the naturalization process for many applicants, as it removes a layer of complexity related to their travel history. Under the new policy, USCIS will focus on an applicant’s initial admission or adjustment to LPR status, meaning that subsequent reentries will not be considered in determining lawful admission. This shift could significantly benefit long-term LPRs who have maintained their status but may have faced complications during later travels.

By narrowing the scope of what is required for naturalization, USCIS aims to provide a clearer and more consistent process for applicants.

The updated guidance is effective immediately and applies to pending requests as well as new applications filed on or after November 14, 2024. It has been incorporated into Volume 12 of the USCIS Policy Manual.

This change is part of USCIS’s ongoing efforts to streamline immigration processes and align them with recent legal interpretations, ultimately reducing barriers for eligible LPRs seeking to become U.S. citizens.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

African American

‘Malcolm X Daughters’ sue CIA, FBI, NYPD over their Dad’s Assassination

Published

2 weeks ago

on

November 22, 2024

By

(AP) — Three daughters of Malcolm X have accused the CIA, FBI, the New York Police Department and others in a $100 million lawsuit Friday of playing roles in the 1965 assassination of the civil rights leader.

In the lawsuit filed in Manhattan federal court, the daughters — along with the Malcolm X estate — claimed that the agencies were aware of and were involved in the assassination plot and failed to stop the killing.

At a morning news conference, attorney Ben Crump stood with family members as he described the lawsuit, saying he hoped federal and city officials would read it “and learn all the dastardly deeds that were done by their predecessors and try to right these historic wrongs.”

The NYPD and CIA did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Nicholas Biase, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice, which was also sued, declined comment. The FBI said in an email that it was its “standard practice” not to comment on litigation.

For decades, more questions than answers have arisen over who was to blame for the death of Malcolm X, who was 39 years old when he was slain on Feb. 21, 1965, at the Audubon Ballroom on West 165th Street in Manhattan as he spoke to several hundred people. Born Malcolm Little in Omaha, Nebraska, Malcolm X later changed his name to El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz.

Three men were convicted of crimes in the death but two of them were exonerated in 2021 after investigators took a fresh look at the case and concluded some evidence was shaky and authorities had held back some information.

In the lawsuit, the family said the prosecution team suppressed the government’s role in the assassination.

The lawsuit alleges that there was a “corrupt, unlawful, and unconstitutional” relationship between law enforcement and “ruthless killers that went unchecked for many years and was actively concealed, condoned, protected, and facilitated by government agents,” leading up to the murder of Malcolm X.

According to the lawsuit, the NYPD, coordinating with federal law enforcement agencies, arrested the activist’s security detail days before the assassination and intentionally removed their officers from inside the ballroom where Malcolm X was killed. Meanwhile, it adds, federal agencies had personnel, including undercover agents, in the ballroom but failed to protect him.

The lawsuit was not brought sooner because the defendants withheld information from the family, including the identities of undercover “informants, agents and provocateurs” and what they knew about the planning that preceded the attack.

Malcolm X’s wife, Betty Shabazz, the plaintiffs, “and their entire family have suffered the pain of the unknown” for decades, the lawsuit states.

“They did not know who murdered Malcolm X, why he was murdered, the level of NYPD, FBI and CIA orchestration, the identity of the governmental agents who conspired to ensure his demise, or who fraudulently covered-up their role,” it states. “The damage caused to the Shabazz family is unimaginable, immense, and irreparable.”

The family announced its intention to sue the law enforcement agencies early last year.

Texas Guardian News
Latest posts by Texas Guardian News (see all)
Continue Reading

Trending