Connect with us

News

Grenell bragged to Jared Kushner about decriminalization initiative: emails

Gay ambassador said support from Germany company ‘huge’

Published

on

Richard Grenell (left) told Jared Kushner an endorsement of the global initiative to decriminalize homosexuality was "huge." (Screen capture of Grenell via YouTube; photo of Kushner by excellentphoto via Bigstockphoto)

Former U.S. Ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell, who was the face of LGBTQ outreach for former President Trump, bragged to Jared Kushner about a major German company’s endorsement of the Trump administration’s global initiative to decriminalize homosexuality, suggesting the former White House adviser had a greater role or interest than previously known.

The latest emails obtained by the Washington Blade from its Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the State Department, which was filed by attorneys at Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP and seeks Grenell’s emails related to the initiative, includes the communication from Grenell to Kushner.

“Huge” says Grenell simply in the email to Kushner forwarding a tweet from Daimler AG, now known as the Mercedes-Benz Group, in support of decriminalization at a time when Grenell was working in Germany to build support for the initiative.

It’s unclear why Grenell sought to engage with Kushner on the initiative, nor whether Kushner offered any response. No reply from Kushner is included in the emails obtained by the Blade, although such a response could come in a further email production under the FOIA lawsuit or may have happened offline.

The message, however, is consistent with the perception that Kushner and Ivanka Trump were among the players in the Trump administration who supported LGBTQ rights, privately pushing to include that in President Trump’s agenda and resisting efforts to roll back LGBTQ rights. Critics would point to policies such as the transgender military ban and regulations allowing anti-LGBTQ discrimination in the name of religious freedom as evidence they failed in that effort, although bright spots, such as the decriminalization initiative and the first-ever appointment of an openly gay person to an acting Cabinet-level role, were unprecedented for a Republican administration.

Insiders close to the decriminalization initiative at the time it was underway told the Blade one White House adviser who was “all over” the effort was Ivanka Trump, although she never publicly articulated anything about the plan.

Grenell didn’t respond to a request for comment from the Blade on why he emailed Kushner about the initiative. Kushner couldn’t be reached for comment, although the Blade sought to contact him through his private equity firm, Affinity Partners.

The email from Grenell to Kushner is revealed at a time when Kushner is facing criticism and accusations of corruption after The New York Times reported the Public Investment Fund — led by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler — contributed a $2 billion investment to Affinity Partners six months after Kushner left the White House in the aftermath of the Trump administration taking no action after U.S. intelligence agencies concluded the Saudi government gave the order to assassinate and dismember Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi columnist for The Washington Post.

Zeeshan Aleem, writer and editor for MSNBC, wrote in an op-ed piece the Saudi leaders’s $2 billion contribution to Kushner’s firm “sure looks corrupt” because it’s a bad deal for the Saudi fund financially and Kushner is inexperienced in private equity.

“One cannot rule out that MBS views it as a down payment as well,” Aleem writes. “If Trump were to return to the White House, MBS has proven a willingness to pay handsomely for cushy treatment. And even if it’s not Trump returning to the White House, perhaps a Trump-influenced figure like a future President Ron DeSantis would take note of how things went down between MBS and Trump World.”

Saudi Arabia is among the 10 countries where homosexuality is punishable by death. Hillary Clinton, during the 2016 presidential election, faced criticism for accepting Saudi money as a contribution to the Clinton Foundation because of the country’s record on LGBTQ and women’s rights. The money, however, was used for human rights, including medications for HIV treatment and prevention in Africa, as opposed to personal enrichment.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

District of Columbia

GLAA releases ratings for 18 candidates running for D.C. mayor, Council, AG

Mayoral contender Janeese Lewis Geroge among those receiving highest score

Published

on

Janeese Lewis George received a +10 ranking from GLAA. (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

D.C. mayoral candidate Janeese Lewis George, a Democrat, is among just four candidates to receive the highest rating score of +10 from GLAA D.C. who are competing in the city’s June 16 primary election.  

GLAA, formally known as the Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, has rated candidates for public office in D.C. since the 1970s. It rated 18 of the 36 candidates on this year’s primary ballot for mayor, D.C. Council, and D.C. attorney general based on its policy of only rating candidates who return a GLAA questionnaire asking for their positions on a wide range of issues, most of which are not LGBTQ-specific.

Among the candidates who did not return the questionnaire and thus did not receive a rating, according to GLAA, was Democratic mayoral contender Kenyan McDuffie, who along with Lewis George, is considered by political observers to be one of the two leading mayoral candidates running in the Democratic primary.  

Lewis George and McDuffie, who each have long records of support for the LGBTQ community, are among a total of eight candidates running for mayor on the June 16 primary ballot: seven Democrats and one Statehood Green Party candidate. In addition to Lewis George, GLAA rated just two other mayoral candidates. Rini Sampath, a Democrat who self identifies as queer, received a +6.5 rating, and Ernest E. Johnson, also a Democrat, received a +4.5 rating

Under the GLAA rating system, candidate ratings range from a +10, the highest score, to a -10, the lowest possible score. In its ratings for the June 16 primary, the lowest score issued was +4.5. GLAA said in a statement that each of the 18 candidates it rated expressed strong support for LGBTQ-related issues in their questionnaire responses, indicating that the overall rating scores reflect the candidates’ positions on mostly non-LGBTQ-specific issues. 

The three other candidates who received a +10 GLAA rating are each running as Democrats for the Ward 1 D.C. Council seat. They include gay candidate Miguel Trindade Deramo; Aparna Raj, who identifies as bisexual; and LGBTQ ally Rashida Brown. The only other Ward 1 candidate rated by GLAA is LGBTQ ally Terry Lynch, who received a +5.5 rating.

Ward 5 D.C. Councilmember Zachary Parker, the Council’s only gay member who is facing two opponents in the Democratic primary, received a +7 GLAA rating. The two challengers did not return the questionnaire and were not rated.

“In seven out of 10 of our priorities, every candidate indicated agreement,” GLAA said in its statement to the Washington Blade in referring to the candidates it rated. “Total consensus on core issues signals that whomever is elected to Council and mayor, we should expect to hold our elected officials accountable to our goals of protecting home rule, resisting federal overreach, advancing transgender healthcare rights, and eliminating chronic homelessness in the District,” the statement says.

“While candidates agree on the basics, they distinguish themselves in the depth and creativity in their responses, and their record on the issues,” according to the statement, which adds that candidates’ full questionnaire responses and ratings can be accessed on the GLAA website, glaa.org.

Like past election years, GLAA does not rate candidates running for the D.C. Congressional Delegate seat or the so-called “shadow” U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate seats.  

With the exception of one question asking about transgender rights, none of the other nine of the 10 questionnaire questions are LGBTQ-specific. But most of the questions mention that LGBTQ people are impacted by the issues being raised, such as affordable housing, federal government intrusion into D.C. home rule, and access to healthcare and public benefits for low-income residents.

One of the questions asks candidates if they support decriminalization of sex work in D.C. among consenting adults, which GLAA supports. Lewis George is among the candidates who said they do not support sex work decriminalization at this time. The other two mayoral candidates that GLAA rated, Sampath and Johnson, said they support sex work decriminalization.

In the race for D.C. attorney general, GLAA issued a rating for just one of the three candidates running: Republican challenger Manuel Rivera, who received a +4.5 rating. Incumbent Democrat Brian Schwalb and Democratic challenger J.P. Szymkowicz were not rated because they didn’t return the questionnaire.

D.C. Council Chair Phil Mendelson (D), who is running unopposed in the primary, received a +6.5 rating. Ward 6 Councilmember Charles Allen, who is facing three Democratic challengers in the primary and who is a longtime LGBTQ ally, received a +6.5 rating.

In the special election to fill the at-large D.C. Council seat vacated by the resignation of then-Independent Councilmember McDuffie to enable him to run for mayor as a Democrat, GLAA has rated two of the three Independent candidates competing for the seat. Elissa Silverman received a +5.75 rating, and Doni Crawford received a +5.6 rating.

Finally, in the At-Large D.C. Council race GLAA issued ratings for five of the 11 candidates running in the primary, each of whom are Democrats. Oye Owolewa received a +9; Lisa Raymond, +7.5; Dwight Davis, +6.5; Dyana N.M. Forester, +6; and Fred Hill, +6.6.

The full list of GLAA-rated candidates and their detailed questionnaire responses can be accessed at glaa.org.

Continue Reading

News

Blade finalist for D.C. Society of Professional Journalists awards

Editor Kevin Naff to be inducted into Hall of Fame at June. 9 dinner

Published

on

The Society of Professional Journalists’ Washington, D.C., Pro Chapter on Tuesday announced the Washington Blade is a finalist for various awards it will hand out at its annual dinner next month.

International News Editor Michael K. Lavers is a finalist for the weekly editorial/opinion writing category for his piece “Vacationing abroad with an embarrassment in the White House.” He is also a finalist for the weekly newspaper non-breaking news category for his article “Trump executive orders leave LGBTQ migrants, asylum seekers in limbo.”

Photo Editor Michael Key is a finalist for the weekly newspaper feature photography category for a photo of a protest that he took outside the D.C. Attorney General’s office. He is also a finalist for the weekly newspaper photography story category for his article “‘Trump Must Go Now’ march to the White House” and for the weekly newspaper photojournalism category for his coverage of the WorldPride Street Festival and Closing Concert.

Senior Reporter Lou Chibbaro is a finalist for the weekly newspaper non-breaking news category for his article “In D.C., LGBTQ homelessness on the rise despite overall decline.”

Kevin Naff, the Blade’s editor and co-owner, will be inducted into the Society of Professional Journalists’ Washington, D.C., Pro Chapter’s Hall of Fame at its annual dinner that will take place at the National Press Club on June 9.

Continue Reading

Commentary

He is 16 and sitting in a Cuban prison

Jonathan David Muir Burgos arrested after participating in anti-government protests

Published

on

Jonathan David Muir Burgos remains in a Cuban jail. (Graphic by Ignacio Estrada Cepero)

Jonathan David Muir Burgos is 16-years-old, and that fact alone should force the world to stop and pay attention. He is not an armed criminal, nor a violent extremist, nor someone accused of harming others. He is a Cuban teenager who ended up behind bars after joining recent protests in the city of Morón, in the province of Ciego de Ávila, demonstrations born out of exhaustion, desperation, and the growing collapse of daily life across the island.

Those protests did not emerge from privilege or political theater. They erupted after prolonged blackouts, food shortages, lack of drinking water, unbearable heat, and a level of public frustration that continues to deepen inside Cuba. People took to the streets because ordinary life itself has become increasingly unbearable. Families are surviving for hours and sometimes days without electricity. Parents struggle to find food. Entire communities live trapped between scarcity and silence.

Jonathan became part of that reality.

And today, he is sitting inside a Cuban prison.

The World Health Organization defines adolescence as the stage between approximately 10 and 19 years of age, a period marked by emotional, psychological, and physical development. That matters deeply here because Jonathan is not simply a “young protester.” He is a minor. A teenager still navigating the fragile years in which identity, emotional stability, and personal growth are being formed.

Yet the Cuban government chose to place him inside a high-security prison alongside adults.

There is something profoundly disturbing about a political system willing to expose a 16-year-old boy to the psychological brutality of prison life simply because he exercised the right to protest. A prison is never only walls and bars. It is fear, humiliation, emotional pressure, intimidation, and uncertainty. For a teenager surrounded by adult inmates, those dangers become even more alarming.

The situation becomes even more serious because Jonathan reportedly suffers from severe dyshidrosis and has previously experienced dangerous bacterial infections affecting his health. His condition requires proper medical care, hygiene, and adequate treatment, precisely the kind of stability that is difficult to guarantee inside the Cuban prison system.

Behind this story there is also a family living through a kind of pain impossible to fully describe.

Jonathan is the son of a Cuban evangelical pastor. Behind the headlines there is a mother wondering how her child is sleeping at night inside a prison cell. There is a father trying to hold onto faith while imagining the emotional and physical risks his teenage son may be facing behind bars. Faith does not erase fear. Faith does not prevent parents from trembling when their child is imprisoned.

And this is where another painful contradiction emerges.

While a Cuban pastor watches his son remain incarcerated, there are still political and religious voices outside Cuba romanticizing the Cuban regime from a safe distance. There are people who speak passionately about justice while remaining silent about political prisoners, repression, censorship, and now even the imprisonment of adolescents.

That silence matters.

Because silence protects systems that normalize abuse.

For too long, parts of the international community have spoken about Cuba through ideological nostalgia while refusing to confront the human cost paid by ordinary Cubans. The reality is not romantic. The reality is families surviving in darkness, young people fleeing the country in massive numbers, parents struggling to feed their children, and now a 16-year-old boy sitting inside a prison after joining a protest born from desperation.

No government has the moral right to destroy the emotional and psychological well-being of a teenager for exercising freedom of expression. No ideology should stand above human dignity. And no institution that claims to defend justice should remain indifferent while a child becomes a political prisoner.

Jonathan David Muir Burgos should not be in prison.

A 16-year-old boy should not have to pay for protest with his freedom. 

Continue Reading

Popular