Politics
EXCLUSIVE: Annise Parker, Lori Lightfoot outline path to victory for Harris
Former Houston and Chicago mayors emphasize importance of big cities
Former Houston Mayor Annise Parker and former Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot spoke exclusively with the Washington Blade last week in Chicago during the Democratic National Convention.
Among other topics, they discussed their impressions of the convention, Vice President Kamala Harris and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s path to victory in November, the Democratic campaign’s efforts to mobilize voters in key battleground states, the candidates’ proven track records of fighting for LGBTQ rights, and the ways in which their administration would build on this work of expanding freedoms and protections for the community.
This year’s DNC was the last Parker will attend as president and CEO of the LGBTQ Victory Fund, which works to elect LGBTQ candidates to public office, and the LGBTQ Victory Institute, which coordinates placement of LGBTQ federal employees and administers training and networking events.
“It’s not my first convention, but I have to say it is the most exciting and energetic convention,” she said. “There’s an energy around Kamala — the surprise, the sense of change and possibility that I’m not used to, and it feels really great.”
Prior to President Joe Biden’s announcement on July 21 that he would step aside to clear the path for Harris’s nomination, Parker said that “respectfully, some of us were slogging through” because “we knew he was the better candidate than Donald Trump, and we were going to support him because of that reason.”
“Now we’re excited because we have somebody new and different,” she said, “a shift in personality and also a shift in energy, and that works its way through the campaign.”
Lightfoot agreed that “there is a tremendous amount of energy and excitement,” but hedged that “if that doesn’t translate to butts at the polls, it doesn’t matter.”
“So, everywhere I’m going and talking to folks, it’s like, this is great; step one, get the base reunified, because it was very fractured, I think, even a month ago,” she said. “The level of excitement, consolidating the votes for the nomination, positive press, the amount of money that’s being raised — that’s all good stuff, but it’s got to have a significant ground game, because people need to show up.”
Lightfoot noted that folks from Chicago and elsewhere in Illinois, a deep blue city in a largely blue state, are traveling to Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota because “no one wins in November unless they win the Midwest, so we’re reaching out to our friends, our neighbors, and saying, ‘you got to plug in; you got to pay attention, educate yourself and get to the polls.'”
Parker echoed those remarks. “Our job is to bring in those who are not the regular Democratic rank and file,” she said, “the independents, and even disaffected Republicans, and there are a lot of those out there.”
The former mayors agreed that Trump’s narrow electoral college win in 2016 was made possible in part by the decision of many voters to stay home because they believed Hillary Clinton’s victory was not just likely — but certain.
The 2024 presidential election will be very close. Harris’s emergence as the nominee has put some states in play for the Democrats that were out of reach when Biden was leading the ticket, but even as she pulls ahead, recent polls in key battlegrounds show the candidates are in a near-dead heat.
In this race, Parker is counting on the “push-up” effect. Down-ballot candidates can expect a boost from Harris, she said, but likewise “we’re going to turn people out to vote for their school board candidates,” or in city council and statehouse races “and they’re going to vote at the top of the ticket as well.”
Lightfoot said that part of the task before the Harris-Walz campaign will be to engage a “broad cross section of Americans who, frankly, are still disengaged, disenchanted, angry, frustrated, scared” and otherwise struggling as they recover from the “traumatic shocks” of COVID.
The pandemic worsened preexisting skepticism toward the government, she said, so the candidates must “talk about why they are the solution to a lot of the concerns that the average voter has” particularly by “speaking to those incredibly important swing voters in the seven or eight states that are in play.”
First they must win
As Democrats, Lightfoot said, “we have a great propensity, sometimes,” of “trying to make the perfect be the enemy of the good” but “we need to win first, right?”
“This is one of those Bill Clinton-Al Gore moments back in the ’90s,” she said. “It’s like, I get it, I get it, but let me get there first, let me win, and then we can accomplish great things together.”
Parker and Lightfoot, both out lesbians, agreed that LGBTQ issues are not necessarily what Harris and Walz need to be talking about on the campaign trail with little more than two months until the election.
Rather, the focus must be on “the issues [that are] top of mind for the American voter,” Parker said, because the candidates “need to be talking to that great middle America out there that needs to show up to vote.”
Of course, she and Lightfoot said, it is important for LGBTQ folks, especially those who have a seat at the table, to make sure the community’s policy agenda is understood by the candidates, and likewise for the campaign to remind voters of Harris and Walz’s pro-LGBTQ backgrounds — even if, as Parker said, “that’s not how she’s going to win this election, talking about that.”
With respect to their commitments to advancing LGBTQ rights, the former mayors repeatedly stressed that the vice president and the governor have nothing to prove. “They don’t have to promise anything,” Parker said. “They’ve already done it.”
“We are working with folks who have a proven track record of understanding the importance of our community,” Lightfoot said. “They’ve hired, they’ve appointed, they get it.”
Expanding freedoms and protections for LGBTQ people has been a through line of Harris’s career in public service. For example, well before it would have been politically advantageous, she fought for same-sex marriage when serving as district attorney of San Francisco and attorney general of California, defying legal restrictions to perform some of the country’s first gay and lesbian weddings.
Additionally, the past four years have cemented the Biden-Harris administration’s legacy as the most pro-LGBTQ presidency in American history, in no small part thanks to the work of the vice president.
And for his part, practically from the moment he was chosen as Harris’s running mate, Walz has been attacked by Trump and his conservative allies over his pro-trans record as governor. Before he entered public life, Walz was a high school teacher and football coach who served as faculty adviser to the student-led gay-straight alliance club in the 1990s, an anecdote that was shared by Harris when she appeared with him for the first time on stage at a rally on Aug. 6.
The campaign has also made outreach to and engagement with LGBTQ constituents a major priority. During an Aug. 21 meeting of the LGBTQ Caucus at the DNC, Harris for President National LGBTQ+ Engagement Director Sam Alleman outlined plans for additional activity and investment in Out for Harris, the LGBTQ national organizing push.
Putting aside the looming election, when asked whether there are specific LGBTQ policies she would like to see in a Harris-Walz administration, Parker said those conversations will be possible in earnest only if Democrats are able to win not just the White House but also flip control of the House and hold onto their majority in the Senate.
Then, she said, “we’re going to want to make sure” that LGBTQ appointees are picked to serve in key positions throughout the federal government, noting that historic numbers — 15 percent — were nominated and confirmed under the Biden-Harris administration.
“I expect that to continue,” Parker said.
Congress will play a critically important role in effectuating the Harris-Walz agenda, including on LGBTQ issues, she said, but policy is implemented “in the departments and in the bowels of government” which is why representation in these spaces matters, too.
The Democratic candidates’ support for LGBTQ rights is of a piece with the positive and inclusive spirit of their bid for the White House, which stands in stark contrast with the approach seen from their opponents.
“There is a joy, truly, about Kamala Harris’s campaign,” Parker said, and while it is unclear whether and to what extent the good vibes will be sustained until Election Day, “you get the sense that she’s really, emotionally, she’s all in it.”
Lightfoot agreed. “What happened within the next 24 hours,” after Biden endorsed his vice president to run in his stead, “no one could have predicted it. No one could have scripted it. It was this organic movement and coalescing around her with really genuine enthusiasm.”
The former Chicago mayor also praised Harris’s digital team. “Their social media game is off the charts,” she said. “They are hitting home runs every single day,” maintaining the vice president’s positive message while trolling Trump and his running mate, U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio.
Meanwhile, as he has done in previous campaigns, Trump “hurls insults and slurs,” deploying a strategy of “constant attack — disrespecting, vilifying people on the other side,” Parker said. “It’s negative, negative, negative.”
Harris “doesn’t have to do that,” she said. Moreover, “people don’t want her to do that.”
Lightfoot agreed. “It would be easy” for the vice president “to roll in the mud with with Trump, and my money’s on her, but she hasn’t done that — what she’s done is addressed the criticism to some extent, but then immediately pivoted to a more positive, forward thinking message.”
The approach is “clearly throwing off the Trump world,” Lightfoot said. “I love it. I think it’s exactly what people want to hear. They don’t want to see, you know, WWE in their presidential candidates.”
Voters “want somebody who is strong, who is ready and up for the task,” but — at least just as importantly — they want a leader sho is “always making sure that they are tuning in with those people who work hard every day,” she said.
Parker said Harris made “a great choice” picking Walz as her running mate, adding,” I’ve met him before, and he’s the real deal.”
Nodding in agreement, Lightfoot said, “I grew up in one of those small towns where football was everything” and “it’s unimaginable, unimaginable, that the football coach” would have publicly embraced the high school’s LGBTQ students as Walz did, including by chairing the GSA club.
Tapping into the power of cities and mayors
Conservatives are fond of characterizing Democrats from progressive coastal cities, especially those from San Francisco, as out of touch elitists whose values do not align with those held by the overwhelming majority of American voters.
Nancy Pelosi, the longtime Democratic leader whose congressional district includes most of the city, balked when Vance sought to smear not only Harris but also Walz, her former House colleague, as a “San Francisco-style liberal,” a label that the former speaker has co-opted for herself and worn as a badge of honor.
Not only was the governor beloved by colleagues when he represented Minnesota’s 1st Congressional District, but he was also widely seen as a moderate, she said. “I can say this with some authority: He’s not on the left,” Pelosi told NBC News. “He was right down the middle, right down the middle in his values and leverage in the debate in the Congress.” (As it happens, Walz had never set foot in San Francisco before last month.)
Parker and Lightfoot agreed the matter strikes at an issue that is deeper than misleading political rhetoric targeting the 2024 Democratic candidates.
“Americans live in the big cities across the country,” the former Houston mayor said. “We are a powerful voting bloc, but we’re also where people’s lives happen. Trump has built this mythology — there’s tires burning in the streets, barricades and riots everywhere, there’s armed camps.”
“He’s been attacking cities,” she said, and we need to reclaim them.
Together, America’s largest metropolises are “like 80 percent of the GDP,” Lightfoot added. “So, why are you attacking the economic engine of our country? Why are you attacking the places where innovation happens? Of all the good things that come in America, a huge percentage of that comes from big cities.”
Not only has Trump characterized D.C. as a crime-ridden hellscape, but he has also pledged to “take over” the district — potentially exercising the authority he would have, if elected, to put the police force under his control and arrogate powers that are exercised by the D.C. Council and the mayor.
“I think Mayor [Muriel] Bowser has done a yeoman job under difficult circumstances where she doesn’t get to make her own calls, because she’s got to worry about folks in the federal government, and particularly in Congress, second guessing everything that the good citizens of D.C. do,” said Lightfoot, who noted that Bowser is a close personal friend.
Cities “are the heartbeat of this country, and I think a leader who says, ‘I want to bring everybody together, I want to be the leader of the free world,’ — well, you got to start with being a leader of cities and recognizing our importance on every single issue domestically,” she said.
Parker and Lightfoot agreed that the Harris-Walz campaign would be well served in the election by reclaiming cities.
“All things local,” Lightfoot said. The chief executives of municipalities are some of “the best surrogates to get the message out, particularly mayors of the towns like those that we represented.”
“If the [Harris-Walz] campaign is smart, and it’s getting there, it’s going to galvanize mayors all across the country to be those surrogates,” she said. “Mayors like me who governed under Trump, governed under Biden and Harris, and [can speak to] the sea change and the difference in how cities in particular were helped and recognized and respected in a way that we didn’t see in the previous four years in the previous administration.”
Parker agreed. “Mayors can talk about their cities. Mayors are the public face and the voice of their cities.”
This does not mean one should avoid talking about the challenges facing places like D.C. or Chicago, but there must be an understanding that “cities have to be strong and healthy, or America’s not strong and healthy,” she said.
Next up for Victory
Parker announced her planned departure from Victory at the beginning of February, though she will continue leading the organizations past the election and through the end of 2024 or “until I find my successor.”
She told the Blade that “the goal” is to choose a new president and CEO in September.
“I’m sure that they’re going to find somebody amazing to step in,” Parker said, but in the meantime, “I’m going to leave it in good shape, I can tell you that.”
Over Parker’s six-year tenure, annual budgets were doubled, contributions to candidates served by the Victory Fund were increased fourfold, and the Victory Institute’s David Mixner Political Appointments Program was relaunched to advocate for LGBTQ representation in government.
Strikingly, during this time the number of LGBTQ officials served by Victory swelled from 450 to more than 1,300. “I would love to take credit for that, but some of it is truly the Trump effect,” she said. “The more we are attacked as a community, the more people want to stand up and say, ‘no, I’m not going to put up with this.'”
“The work of Victory has continued for more than 30 years,” Parker said. “The work is still there, it’s still important, representation still matters.”
“We need to elect tens of thousands more [LGBTQ] people to achieve parity,” she said, because even though the number of out elected officials has more than doubled in six years, 1,300 is only 0.25 percent of the “hundreds of thousands of open positions.”
Lightfoot added, “her leadership has been phenomenal. Phenomenal. I mean, really, the organization is stronger now than when she found it. It’s going to be stronger when she leaves it. The amount of things that we’ve been able to accomplish — the programmatic gains, the financial gains, these would not have happened without Mayor Parker.”
The White House
White House counterterrorism strategy targets ‘anti-American, radically pro-transgender’ groups
Administration released document last week
The White House released the “United States Counterterrorism Strategy” last week, introducing enforcement priorities that include references to people with “extreme transgender ideologies.”
The document is the first executive branch counterterrorism strategy released since former President Joe Biden’s 2021 “National Strategy for Countering Domestic Terrorism,” which largely focused on threats tied to domestic extremism and the Jan. 6 Capitol attack. The Trump-Vance administration’s new strategy instead centers heavily on cartels, Islamist organizations, and what it describes as “violent left-wing extremists.”
The report identifies three primary categories of terror threats facing the U.S.: “Narcoterrorists and Transnational Gangs,” “Legacy Islamist Terrorists,” and “Violent Left-Wing Extremists, including Anarchists and Anti-Fascists.” The strategy repeatedly frames those groups as existential threats to the U.S. and outlines a more aggressive, militarized counterterrorism posture.
The introduction to the report closes with a warning from President Donald Trump referencing counterterrorism operations carried out during his second administration: “We will find you and we will kill you.”
In the section outlining the administration’s counterterrorism priorities, the document argues that federal intelligence, and law enforcement agencies under prior administrations focused on the wrong threats while overlooking violence committed by left-wing extremists. The strategy specifically references transgender ideology while discussing political violence.
“As real threats were ignored or underplayed, Americans have witnessed the politically motivated killings of Christians and conservatives committed by violent left-wing extremists, including the assassination of Charlie Kirk by a radical who espoused extreme transgender ideologies.”
Claims tying a trans person to Kirk’s killing have been disputed, however, and multiple news outlets later retracted or corrected early reports that identified the shooter as trans.
The report later expands on that argument, saying the administration will prioritize targeting “violent secular political groups” it describes as anti-American and “radically pro-transgender.”
“In addition to cartels and Islamist terror groups, our national CT activities will also prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.”
The rhetoric mirrors claims frequently made by Trump allies and conservative commentators linking trans people and left-wing activism to political violence. However, data compiled by researchers and organizations tracking mass shootings does not support the idea that trans people are responsible for a significant share of such attacks.
Factcheck.org says rhetoric from Trump and several far-right political pundits contradicts available data, noting that the percentage of mass shootings committed by trans people is “exceedingly small.”
Despite the lack of evidence supporting generalized claims about trans people, the president’s son Donald Trump, Jr., told Fox News in September 2025 that he could not “name a mass shooting in the last year or two in America that wasn’t committed by, you know, a transgender lunatic.”
Factcheck.org also found that even if cases involving shooters with unclear gender identities were included in statistics about trans mass shooters, the number would still account for only a fraction of a percent.
Mark Bryant, founding executive director of the Gun Violence Archive, said the number of trans mass shooters could be as high as eight, but would still account for less than 0.1 percent of mass shootings over the last 12 years, according to GVA data. He added that the figure would remain below 0.2 percent even when examining incidents from 2018 to the present.
Beyond domestic extremism, the strategy frames the administration’s broader counterterrorism agenda through the lens of “America First” foreign policy and renewed U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere. The report repeatedly references the Monroe Doctrine, the nearly 200-year-old policy warning European powers against interference in the Americas.
“After years of neglect, the United States will reassert and enforce the Monroe Doctrine to restore American preeminence in the Western Hemisphere, and to protect our homeland” Trump said in the report.
The document also breaks down counterterrorism priorities by region, including the Middle East, where it argues the U.S. is “no longer as dependent” on the region because of increased domestic energy production.
“Our growing domestic energy production means the Middle East is no longer as central to America’s stability, yet threats from this region remain, and our counterterrorism goals continue to be specific and rooted in realistic threat analysis.”
The statement comes amid rising gas prices tied in part to instability surrounding the war involving Iran, with fuel costs reaching some of their highest levels since 2022. According to AAA, the national average price for gasoline climbed to $4.52 per gallon as the national average rose “$.25 for a second straight week.“
Congress
Bill seeks to block global gag rule expansion
Policy now bans US foreign aid to groups promoting ‘gender ideology’
Lawmakers on Wednesday introduced a bill that would block the expansion of the global gag rule.
President Ronald Reagan in 1985 implemented the global gag rule, also known as the “Mexico City” policy, which bans U.S. foreign aid for groups that support abortion and/or offer abortion-related services.
Trump reinstated the rule during his first administration. The Biden-Harris administration shortly after it took office in 2021 rescinded it.
The Trump-Vance administration earlier this year expanded the global gag rule to ban U.S. foreign aid for groups that promote “gender ideology.” The expansion took effect on Feb. 26.
U.S. Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) introduced the Protecting Human Rights and Public Health in Foreign Assistance Act in the U.S. Senate. U.S. Reps. Grace Meng (D-N.Y.), Lois Frankel (D-Fla.), Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) introduced it in the U.S. House of Representatives.
“Using taxpayer money to export the Trump administration’s anti-trans, anti-science, and anti-abortion ideological agenda isn’t just immoral — it’s antithetical to efficient, effective, and rights-based foreign assistance,” said Council for Global Equality Senior Policy Fellow Beirne Roose-Snyder on Wednesday in a press release.
Meng added the Trump-Vance administration’s “crusade against healthcare and global aid is putting millions of lives at risk worldwide.”
“No one will flourish under the new expanded global gag rule,” said the New York Democrat. “These policies weaponize foreign aid and will result in greater harm, particularly for women and girls, marginalized communities, and LGBTQI+ individuals.”
“They should never have been implemented at all, let alone without even a basic public comment process,” she added. “This legislation will reverse these dangerous policies.”
The White House
From red carpet to chaos: A first-person narrative of the WHCD shooting
The Blade’s WH correspondent Joe Reberkenny recounts his night at the WHCD after a shooter attempted to gain entry.
It started as any White House Correspondents’ Dinner is supposed to go—I assume. I’ve never been to one before this, but based on other events I’ve attended at the Hilton, including an HRC gala, it all seemed fairly normal.
There was a lot of traffic. Police had blocked off streets encompassing a large portion of Adams Morgan—particularly around the hotel. The president was making his first appearance after boycotting the event during his first term, so there was a sense of anticipation. It took me about 45 minutes to go just under a mile from my apartment to about three blocks from the hotel in my Uber. I waited until the last possible second before I felt like I was going to be late—6:30—to get out of the car, because it was raining and I was wearing my green tux.
I walked up to a group of people checking tickets at the base of the hotel. They seemed to just be glancing at the tiny, index-card-sized tickets rather than conducting any kind of full security screening outside. As I walked from that first checkpoint to the drive-around drop-off area, I joined what was essentially one long line for the red carpet. It eventually split into people who wanted photos and those who didn’t—but again, there was no real need to show anything beyond that small ticket upon entering, and even that wasn’t being checked closely.
A light went off in my head; I felt that, given the speed at which security was checking tickets, they couldn’t fully see the foil logo and tiny table numbers from that distance. I remember thinking that if I had a similarly sized piece of paper, I could have gotten through up to that point.
I also noticed there was no real security checkpoint or metal detectors upon initially entering the hotel grounds—unlike what I had seen at the HRC gala the year before.
I waited about 35 minutes in line in the car drop-off area—without cars, since it had been repurposed to corral press and their guests before entering the building and heading onto the red carpet. I took my photo, then went up the escalator to meet my date, Jacob Bernard from Democracy Forward. They wouldn’t let him onto the red carpet without his ticket, so I gave him his, which I had been holding. He was already inside the venue despite not having his ticket on him and had been at one of the pre-parties.
That also struck me as odd—that you could access a pre-dinner party without a ticket or going through any visible security.
After I found him, we took a photo together at a step-and-repeat past the main red carpet area around 7:45. Oddly enough, a group of my friends—gays who I regularly see on the dance floors of the gay bars of Washington, who work in various government and media-adjacent fields—found me, and we took pictures together. None were White House correspondents or held a “hard pass” to the White House (security credentials that allow entry into the White House complex).
Another light went off in my head that indicated party crashers probably shouldn’t be getting inside to an event that is supposed to be one of the most secure rooms in the country.
After the photos, I could see groups of people being moved from pre-party spaces in various meeting rooms on other floors and directed toward the main floor where the red carpet had been.
My guest and I went back up to the main floor and walked through a small security checkpoint that included only a handful of metal detectors. From there, I went down the stairs from the lobby into the International Ballroom, where we took our seats at Table 200. I talked to a few people I knew—very traditional pre-event chit-chat. The vibes felt good. It was my first time attending, and I was genuinely excited.
Around 8:15, the Marine Corps Band played and “Commandant’s Four” color guard presented the flags. We were then told to take our seats.
They introduced the head table—the president, first lady, vice president, and members of the White House Correspondents’ Association board. Weijia Jiang, senior White House correspondent for CBS News and president of the WHCA, gave a brief speech, essentially saying we would eat first and then move into the main program, which was supposed to feature mentalist Oz Pearlman.
At this point my table, 200 which included members of the Wall Street Journal, the Blade, and a European outlet all started eating. About 15 minutes later, Washington Hilton staff began clearing plates and preparing to bring out the next course.
As they cleared the plates, I heard four loud bangs.
I saw hotel employees immediately start ducking. They seemed to understand the gravity of the situation much faster than most attendees, including myself. At first, it sounded like a tray might have fallen over (but I later found out that wasn’t the case).
After about 30 seconds of watching some people duck, others look around in confusion, and some continue eating and drinking, I got down. I kneeled with my chair in front of me as a kind of barrier. Being at Table 200, I felt somewhat removed from where the actual incident occurred.
Then I saw the president being whisked away quickly by Secret Service, along with the first lady and others at the head table.
My reporter instincts kicked in. I grabbed my phone and started filming. I saw SWAT team members rush into the ballroom and onto the stage, clearing the area. I captured a video of people looking around, confused about what had just happened.
A few minutes later, the room was told by the WHCA president to hold on—that they would provide more information and guidance on what would happen next. There was some indication that they might try to continue the event despite what had occurred.
Everyone started frantically checking X to see if any major outlets were reporting. I was receiving texts from family, friends, and colleagues about the rapidly unfolding situation.
I walked to the bathroom—twice, technically. I couldn’t find it initially because it was hidden behind black curtains. (Later, those curtains were removed, and the men’s room was in clearer view.)
During the first walk to the bathroom, I called my editor to tell him what was happening. He instructed me to start sending copy to another editor, who would get it online. The ballroom had almost no service—it’s in the basement of a 12-story hotel—so it was a challenge. I utilized SMS fallback (since iMessage wasn’t working) to send updates.
I returned to the table, where people were still hovering—calling editors, scrolling, texting, sending photos and copy. I was already drafting my story and sending it in chunks, adding details as I gathered more information.
I walked my guest toward the bathroom again, which was on the opposite side of the ballroom from our table, so I had to cross what felt like a sea of journalists, PR officials, guests, and others on their phones, talking and scrolling. My guest pointed out that the press pool was being held in an alcove away from the ballroom doors and escalator exit—not in the ballroom with everyone else.
“Alive” by the Bee Gees was playing over the speakers in the bathroom, which felt a little too on the nose.
On my way out, I heard someone speaking over a microphone and rushed to the ballroom entrance. WHCA President Weijia Jiang was speaking. She announced that the event was over and the space was being evacuated.
She also said that President Trump would hold a press conference at the White House in about 25 minutes.
That’s when I knew it was a race against the clock.
I called my editor a second time to update him and asked if I should head to the briefing (knowing the answer would be yes). He confirmed.
Then the crowd began to move. People grabbed purses, bottles—some left belongings behind. Even though it was technically becoming a crime scene, no one was actively forcing us out. It felt more like a collective understanding: It was time to go.
I texted my guest: “OK, I have to go to the White House. I’m so sorry to leave you.”
I made my way with the sea of people toward the one exit we were allowed to use and zipped between women in fancy gowns and men looking like penguins.
I put on my hard press pass, opened the Capital Bikeshare app, reserved the closest e-bike, and headed out.
I walked up Columbia Road to 20th and Wyoming, grabbed the bike, and rode down Wyoming, then 18th, cut over to U Street, and went straight down 16th to the White House. That ride was exhilarating. I also filmed an Instagram Reel updating my followers on what was going on. I could see tourists and D.C. residents alike looking at me from their cars and the sidewalk, obviously confused as to why a man dressed in a tux had hopped on a bike.
I got off the bike where 16th Street meets Lafayette Square and darted toward the first White House security checkpoint, where they were verifying press credentials. Luckily, I had mine. After that, it turned into a mad dash. Everyone who made it through started moving quickly.
The sound of heels on what I think was cobblestone—or maybe brick—sticks with me. My own shoes were clacking as I ran toward the White House alongside other journalists in heels and dress shoes.
At the Secret Service checkpoint, there was a separate line for hard pass holders. Having my hard pass let me skip much of the impeccably dressed line of journalists who didn’t think to bring their hard pass with them.
It was probably the most exquisitely dressed press crowd I’ve ever seen—tuxedos, gowns, full makeup. It felt like something out of “The Hunger Games.”
I went through security, put my belongings through the metal detector, entered my code, grabbed my things, and ran to the briefing room.
PHOTOS: Blade Summer Kickoff Party
PHOTOS: Taste of Point
Honey, have we been priced out of gay paradise?
Comings & Goings
IDAHOBiT a reminder we all must stand up against transphobia
UK government makes trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban a legislative priority
Bureau of Prisons declines to reconsider transgender inmate policy
Yes, chef!
What’s new in Rehoboth Beach for summer 2026
LGBTQ community must say NO to Janeese Lewis George
-
United Kingdom4 days agoUK government makes trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban a legislative priority
-
Federal Government4 days ago
Bureau of Prisons declines to reconsider transgender inmate policy
-
a&e features4 days ago
Yes, chef!
-
Rehoboth Beach4 days ago
What’s new in Rehoboth Beach for summer 2026
