Thomas Edsall:  The Democratic Party Is in Worse Shape Than You Thought!

Dear Commons Community,

Thomas  Edsall, contributing op-ed columnist for the New York Times, had a sobering piece yesterday on the state of the Democratic Party.  Essentially he looked at the slippage of voters for Hillary Clinton and paints a less-than-rosy picture for the Party’s success in the near future. Here is an excerpt:

“Sifting through the wreckage of the 2016 election, Democratic pollsters, strategists and sympathetic academics have reached some unnerving conclusions.

What the autopsy reveals is that Democratic losses among working class voters were not limited to whites; that crucial constituencies within the party see its leaders as alien; and that unity over economic populism may not be able to turn back the conservative tide.

Equally disturbing, winning back former party loyalists who switched to Trump will be tough: these white voters’ views on immigration and race are in direct conflict with fundamental Democratic tenets.

Some of these post-mortem conclusions are based on polling and focus groups conducted by the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA; others are drawn from a collection of 13 essays published by The American Prospect.

A consistent theme is that the focus on white defections from the Democratic Party masks an even more threatening trend: declining turnout among key elements of the so-called Rising American Electorate — minority, young and single voters. Turnout among African-Americans, for example, fell by 7 points, from 66.6 percent in 2012 to 59.6 percent in 2016.

Priorities USA, in surveys and focus groups, studied “drop off voters,” those who lean Democratic but failed to vote in either 2014 or 2016. By and large, these voters were members of the coalition that elected and re-elected Barack Obama:

people of color (41% African-American, Hispanic, or Asian), young (22% under the age of 29), female (60%), and unmarried (46% single, separated, widowed, or divorced).

Priorities found that drop off voters were distinctly lukewarm toward Hillary Clinton:

Just 30% describe themselves as very favorable to Clinton, far lower than the 72% who describe themselves as very favorable to Barack Obama.

Priorities also studied Obama-to-Trump voters. Estimates of the number of such voters range from 6.7 to 9.2 million, far more than enough to provide Trump his Electoral College victory. The counties that switched from Obama to Trump were heavily concentrated in the Midwest and other Rust Belt states.

To say that this constituency does not look favorably on the Democratic Party fails to capture the scope of their disenchantment.”

I hope the Democratic Party leadership reads this and can develop a strategy to win back the voters who supported Barack Obama.  I am not sure it can.

Tony

 

 

A Brooklyn Teacher Wants to Take his Students on a Field Trip to Spain!

Dear Commons Community,

Eric Jordan, a teacher at  Frederick Douglass Academy VII, is raising money to take about 12 black and Hispanic students on an eight-day tour of Spain in July. Jordan believes this trip could be life-changing for the high schoolers.

Jordan, who’s been an English teacher at the school for 10 years, is taking students on the school’s first international trip in four years. He chose Spain because he believed he could teach the students a lot about the country since he lived there for 10 months. He said that he wants to take the students out of their comfort zones and show them that they can go anywhere. 

“For a number of reasons, that’s something that our students aren’t shown. I think that’s true whether you’re talking about students in the inner city, black students, students of color, students who come from poor neighborhoods and I think in Brownsville, you kind of have, it’s like a triple whammy,” he told HuffPost. “[I]t’s not something that’s true for every student I teach but for many of them… it’s almost like this trip is something that they’re not supposed to do, it’s almost like it’s prohibited to them and I just think that’s wrong. 

Most of the students Jordan is taking on the trip have never owned a passport, let alone been out of the country. For all of them, it will be the first time they cross the Atlantic Ocean.

The trip isn’t totally free for the teens, however. They’re required to pay $605, or 20 percent of the total cost, to ensure those who attend are invested in the trip. Students also must be in good academic standing. 

In December, Jordan created a GoFundMe to raise $34,000 to fund the trip. Thanks to local businesses, alumni and Black Travel Movement, Jordan has raised more than $19,000.

Jordan will be taking the kids to Barcelona, Zaragoza and Madrid. During the trip, students will learn via scavenger hunts, tours through cathedrals and a Flamenco dance class. They’ll also receive lesson on the country’s history before they take off in July. The teacher said he wants to teach them something he learned while traveling ― a lesson they can’t get in a textbook.

Worthwhile idea and good luck to Mr. Jordan with his fund-raising.

Tony

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand  Doesn’t Mince Words:  “Has Trump kept any of his promises? No. F**k no.”

Dear Commons Community,

As reported by various media, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) doesn’t mince words on the subject of whether President Donald Trump has kept his promises to the American people.  She raised the issue during a speech at New York University’s Personal Democracy Forum this morning commenting:

“Even though we as Democrats are on the right side of almost all issues, many hardworking families haven’t felt that we’ve been fighting for them,” she said. “Fundamentally, if we are not helping people, we should go the fuck home.” 

The New York senator had been considered a potential 2020 presidential candidate. However, she announced in May that she’s ruled out a run, saying she is “dedicated to serving our state as our senator, and I’m running for reelection so I can continue to be their senator.”

She is my kind of New Yorker!  Run Kirsten Run!

Tony

Watching the James Comey Hearing – More than Political Theater! 

Dear Commons Community,

I have to confess that I spent three hours yesterday watching James Comey testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee.  Some parts were riveting; some repetitive; and some we will hear again in some format in the months to come probably as part of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation.  Here are highlights, points of contention, and interesting moments.

  • President Trump has repeatedly denied that Russia interfered in any way in the 2016 election, dismissing the story as “fake news.” During the hearing, Comey said he has “no doubt” that interference did happen and will happen again.
  • Comey, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and other officials attended a briefing at the White House on Feb. 14. According to Comey, Trump asked to speak to him alone after the briefing and, during the ensuing conversation, said “he hoped you can let this go,” in reference to the FBI’s investigation of Flynn.Trump has denied this.  Senator Risch made the point that “hope” is not a directive to do something. A quote attributed to Henry II before he supposedly had Thomas Becket killed – “Will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest” was used by Comey in response to King’s question about how Comey interpreted language like “I hope” as a directive from the President.  Sen. Harris commented when a robber puts a gun to your head and says “I hope you give me your wallet” – one understands what “hope” means.
  • Comey said that during a Jan. 27 dinner, Trump told him, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” Trump’s private attorney, Marc Kasowitz, said the president “never” asked for loyalty “in form or substance.” 
  • In a May interview with NBC News’ Lester Holt, Trump claimed the January meeting took place because Comey “wanted to have dinner” with the president. On Thursday, Comey said it was actually Trump who invited him to dine at the White House. 
  • After Trump fired Comey on May 9, Trump administration officials claimed the FBI rank and file had lost faith in their director. Comey testified Thursday that “those were lies, plain and simple.”
  • There was a brief interesting comment from Comey about former Attorney General Loretta Lynch interfering with the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s private email server. 
  • Senator John McCain seemed confused and completely out of it during a series of questions about FBI investigations of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

This hearing was more than political theater.  The veracity of Trump and Comey were at the heart of many of the questions.  I, admittedly with a certain bias, would give Comey the edge on a truth test.  Regardless, supporters of Trump will see positives in this hearing.  Detractors of Trump will see the exact opposite.

Tony

All Eyes and Ears on James Comey’s Testimony Today!

Dear Commons Community,

Television and streaming video viewers will be tuning in to former FBI Director James Comey’s testimony this morning before the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee.  It is estimated that his testimony will be watched by tens of millions of people worldwide.  As a prelude, Mr. Comey distributed a prepared statement to the press.  Below are highlights of the statement as provided by The Huffington Post.

Tony

=========================

WASHINGTON ― Former FBI Director James Comey is set to testify Thursday about President Donald Trump’s alleged interference with a federal investigation into potential Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

Here are some of the highlights from Comey’s prepared testimony, released yesterday.

Comey says he spoke with Trump nine times ― including in six phone calls. He only spoke one-on-one with Obama twice.

“I felt compelled to document my first conversation with the President-Elect in a memo. To ensure accuracy, I began to type it on a laptop in an FBI vehicle outside Trump Tower the moment I walked out of the meeting. Creating written records immediately after one-on-one conversations with Mr. Trump was my practice from that point forward. This had not been my practice in the past. I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) – once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016. In neither of those circumstances did I memorialize the discussions. I can recall nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months – three in person and six on the phone.”

Trump invited Comey to dinner at the White House. Comey assumed others would be there. It was just the two of them.

“The President and I had dinner on Friday, January 27 at 6:30 pm in the Green Room at the White House. He had called me at lunchtime that day and invited me to dinner that night, saying he was going to invite my whole family, but decided to have just me this time, with the whole family coming the next time. It was unclear from the conversation who else would be at the dinner, although I assumed there would be others.

“It turned out to be just the two of us, seated at a small oval table in the center of the Green Room. Two Navy stewards waited on us, only entering the room to serve food and drinks.”

Comey believed Trump wanted to “create some sort of patronage relationship.”

“The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to. He said that lots of people wanted my job and, given the abuse I had taken during the previous year, he would understand if I wanted to walk away.

“My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. That concerned me greatly, given the FBI’s traditionally independent status in the executive branch.”

Comey was “uneasy” about the meeting. Then Trump asked for “loyalty.”

“I replied that I loved my work and intended to stay and serve out my ten-year term as Director. And then, because the set-up made me uneasy, I added that I was not ‘reliable’ in the way politicians use that word, but he could always count on me to tell him the truth. I added that I was not on anybody’s side politically and could not be counted on in the traditional political sense, a stance I said was in his best interest as the President.

“A few moments later, the President said, ‘I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.’ I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner.

“At one point, I explained why it was so important that the FBI and the Department of Justice be independent of the White House. I said it was a paradox: Throughout history, some Presidents have decided that because ‘problems’ come from Justice, they should try to hold the Department close. But blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the problems worse by undermining public trust in the institutions and their work.”

The whole thing was “very awkward.”

“Near the end of our dinner, the President returned to the subject of my job, saying he was very glad I wanted to stay, adding that he had heard great things about me from Jim Mattis, Jeff Sessions, and many others. He then said, ‘I need loyalty.’ I replied, ‘You will always get honesty from me.’ He paused and then said, ‘That’s what I want, honest loyalty.’ I paused, and then said, ‘You will get that from me.’ As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible we understood the phrase ‘honest loyalty’ differently, but I decided it wouldn’t be productive to push it further. The term – honest loyalty – had helped end a very awkward conversation and my explanations had made clear what he should expect.

“During the dinner, the President returned to the salacious material I had briefed him about on January 6, and, as he had done previously, expressed his disgust for the allegations and strongly denied them. He said he was considering ordering me to investigate the alleged incident to prove it didn’t happen. I replied that he should give that careful thought because it might create a narrative that we were investigating him personally, which we weren’t, and because it was very difficult to prove a negative. He said he would think about it and asked me to think about it.”

After an Oval Office meeting, Trump talked to Comey about “letting Flynn go.”

A few weeks later after an Oval Office briefing on counterterrorism, Trump pulled Comey aside to talk one-on-one.

“The President signaled the end of the briefing by thanking the group and telling them all that he wanted to speak to me alone. I stayed in my chair. As the participants started to leave the Oval Office, the Attorney General lingered by my chair, but the President thanked him and said he wanted to speak only with me. The last person to leave was Jared Kushner, who also stood by my chair and exchanged pleasantries with me. The President then excused him, saying he wanted to speak with me.

“When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, ‘I want to talk about Mike Flynn.’ Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify.”

“The President then returned to the topic of Mike Flynn, saying, ‘He is a good guy and has been through a lot.’ He repeated that Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but had misled the Vice President. He then said, ‘I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.’ I replied only that ‘he is a good guy.’ (In fact, I had a positive experience dealing with Mike Flynn when he was a colleague as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency at the beginning of my term at FBI.) I did not say I would ‘let this go.’”

Comey “understood the President to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn.”

Comey’s FBI leadership team “concluded it made little sense to report it to Attorney General Sessions, who we expected would likely recuse himself from involvement in Russia-related investigations. (He did so two weeks later.) The Deputy Attorney General’s role was then filled in an acting capacity by a United States Attorney, who would also not be long in the role.

“After discussing the matter, we decided to keep it very closely held, resolving to figure out what to do with it down the road as our investigation progressed. The investigation moved ahead at full speed, with none of the investigative team members – or the Department of Justice lawyers supporting them – aware of the President’s request.”

Comey told Jeff Sessions that Trump was acting inappropriately. Sessions went mum. 

“I took the opportunity to implore the Attorney General to prevent any future direct communication between the President and me. I told the AG that what had just happened – him being asked to leave while the FBI Director, who reports to the AG, remained behind – was inappropriate and should never happen. He did not reply.”

Trump told Comey he wasn’t involved with Russian “hookers.”

“On the morning of March 30, the President called me at the FBI. He described the Russia investigation as ‘a cloud’ that was impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with Russia, had not been involved with hookers in Russia, and had always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia.”

Trump wanted to know if some “satellite” associates of his had done something wrong.

“The President went on to say that if there were some ‘satellite’ associates of his who did something wrong, it would be good to find that out, but that he hadn’t done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we weren’t investigating him.”

Trump asked for loyalty again, and complained about the “cloud” over his administration.

“On the morning of April 11, the President called me and asked what I had done about his request that I ‘get out’ that he is not personally under investigation. I replied that I had passed his request to the Acting Deputy Attorney General, but I had not heard back. He replied that ‘the cloud’ was getting in the way of his ability to do his job. He said that perhaps he would have his people reach out to the Acting Deputy Attorney General. I said that was the way his request should be handled. I said the White House Counsel should contact the leadership of DOJ to make the request, which was the traditional channel.

“He said he would do that and added, ‘Because I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.’ I did not reply or ask him what he meant by ‘that thing.’ I said only that the way to handle it was to have the White House Counsel call the Acting Deputy Attorney General. He said that was what he would do and the call ended.

“That was the last time I spoke with President Trump.”

 

CUNY to “Rein In” its Foundations with New Procedures!

Dear Commons Community,

The City University of New York announced yesterday that it would be “reining in” foundations that have been established at its colleges in an effort to provide broader fiduciary oversight on private giving.  As reported by the New York Times:

“The City University of New York, troubled by federal and state investigations, plans to overhaul the rules governing its affiliated nonprofit foundations as part of an effort to reassure alumni and donors.

If adopted, the guidelines would give CUNY, the largest public urban university in the country, more control over a sprawling network of more than two dozen funds that last year gave $250 million to the university and collectively have more than $900 million in assets, according to tax records. The New York Times obtained a draft of the new rules.

The changes are being proposed as federal prosecutors in Brooklyn expand their investigation into several CUNY foundations, including two associated with the City College of New York, the university’s flagship school, for their handling of federal research money and personal expenses.

The former president of City College, Lisa S. Coico, resigned abruptly in October after The New York Times contacted officials with questions about more than $150,000 of her personal expenses, which had improperly been paid by the CUNY Research Foundation. A memo concerning her expenses seemed to have been fabricated, apparently to deceive prosecutors.

In recent months, prosecutors have subpoenaed records related to the presidential discretionary funds of all CUNY schools, not just City College.

Donations to City College’s main fund-raising arm, the 21st Century Foundation, are on track to be significantly lower this year, according to budget documents, reflecting unease among alumni and potential donors.

The new guidelines were still being ironed out, and were subject to last-minute changes. They are part of a package of administrative reforms to be voted on by CUNY’s trustees, most of whom have been appointed by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, at their June 26 meeting — the last one before the next academic year.

When asked about the guidelines, James B. Milliken, CUNY’s chancellor, confirmed that they were intended “to ensure transparency and accountability” to give “people confidence in the administration and governance of this university.”

And while he said that the guidelines were “part of a larger plan that we’ve talked about, how to improve over all the operations of CUNY,” he also noted that outside investigations, one by the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and the other by the New York State inspector general, had “identified and raised” important issues.

“We want an environment that contributes to successful fund-raising and stewardship and that certainly includes an assurance to donors that their dollars are being invested wisely,” he said. “To the extent that it’s consistent with what the I.G. has identified, and others, all the better.”

The overall impact of the new rules would be to centralize oversight of the foundations. They would have to open their records to CUNY, and would be subject to periodic audits by the university. Each foundation must enter into a new memo of understanding, which will outline the purpose of the fund, its personnel and the expectations of how it will operate. The university will also keep closer track of whether funds are being used as donors intended them.”

This action was inevitable after the scandals at City College last year.  Private giving is a lifeblood to the operations of many of our colleges.  We need to get it right.

Tony

Stevens Institute of Technology to Name New Building for Alumnus Greg Gianforte!

Dear Commons Community,

The Chronicle of Higher Education is reporting that administrators at the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey are re-evaluating their decision to name a new building in honor of Greg Gianforte and his wife, Susan. The Gianfortes have donated more than $20 million to Stevens for the new facility.  Gianforte, a supporter of conservative causes in his home state of Montana, became the subject of news headlines a few weeks ago when while running for Congress, he “body slammed” a reporter just days before he was elected to Congress.  As per The Chronicle:
 

“Mr. Gianforte and his wife, Susan, are generous donors to Stevens…giving a combined total of $20 million to the institute for the new facility — the last $10 million of which came in December.

But some alumni, students, and faculty members have expressed outrage at the school’s decision to honor Mr. Gianforte with a building name, saying it contradicts the university’s commitment to scientific inquiry and inclusivity. Tensions have only escalated in light of the body-slamming incident (for which Mr. Gianforte has apologized), prompting Stevens administrators to “seriously deliberate” over the development and its ramifications for the donation.

Mr. Gianforte ran as the Republican candidate for Montana’s single seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in the special election held last month. A wealthy technology entrepreneur, he has in the past lobbied against a local ordinance in Montana that protects people in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community against discrimination in housing and employment, and his family’s foundation has donated extensively to anti-LGBT rights, anti-abortion, creationist, and climate-change skeptic organizations, several news outlets have reported.

petition started by three recent Stevens alumni cites those gifts and actions in denouncing the decision to name the new center after Mr. Gianforte. The petition has been circulating on Change.org for about two months and has garnered more than 500 signatures….

The institute’s president, Nariman Farvardin, defended the acceptance of the donation in an April 4 statement that was circulated among faculty members.

“The Gianforte Family Foundation’s gift of $20 million — the largest single gift in our 147-year history — supports a building that addresses the University’s most urgent and highest priority infrastructure need,” Farvardin wrote. Mr. Farvardin also noted that Mr. Gianforte did not attach any specific political or religious agenda to his donation, and reaffirmed the campus’s commitment to diversity and inclusion.

But while the campus’s position on the name has not changed, the administration’s resolve may have been at least somewhat shaken. Top administrators met on Monday with the student body president, the Faculty Senate chair, and other officials to discuss the naming issue. Mr. Steinmann said after the meeting that he was confident the university would re-evaluate its decision, if not immediately this summer, then certainly in the fall. “There’s no doubt that will happen,” he said.

Edward Stukane, a campus spokesman, said the university is collecting feedback from alumni. For all those who express opinions opposing Mr. Gianforte, Mr. Stukane said, there have also been alumni who express support for the newly elected congressman. “We are deliberating seriously,” he said.”

We will see but I do not believe that the Stevens administration will back-peddle on this gift.

Tony

Wall Street Journal Editorial Slams Donald Trump:  “The Buck Stops Everywhere Else!”

Dear Commons Community,

The Wall Street Journal this morning has a blistering editorial on Donald Trump over his tweeting, his undermining of staff and appointees, and his criticism of the mayor of London over this weekend’s terror attack on London Bridge.   The title, The Buck Stops Everywhere Else, portrays Trump as the ultimate incompetent who blames everyone else but himself for his and his administration’s shortcomings. The editorial concludes:

“If this pattern continues, Mr. Trump may find himself running an Administration with no one but his family and the Breitbart staff. People of talent and integrity won’t work for a boss who undermines them in public without thinking about the consequences. And whatever happened to the buck stops here? … Mark it all down as further evidence that the most effective opponent of the Trump Presidency is Donald J. Trump.”

The editorial is also notworthy considering that the Wall Street Journal is owned and controlled by Rupert Murdoch, one of Trump’s friends and biggest supporters. It’s not the first time the WSJ has questioned Trump’s competence, check out Loose Lips Sink Presidencies and Tower of Babel.

Tony

 

David Brooks on Warren Buffett’s Giving Pledge Letters!

Dear Commons Community,

David Brooks, in his New York Times column this morning, examines the Giving Pledge letters, which billionaires write when they join Warren Buffett’s Giving Pledge campaign. They take the pledge, promising to give away most of their wealth during their lifetime, and then they write letters describing their giving philosophy.  He starts by reviewing several of the letters as follows:

 “I suppose I arrived at my charitable commitment largely through guilt,” writes George B. Kaiser, an oil and finance guy from Oklahoma, who is purported to be worth about $8 billion. “I recognized early on that my good fortune was not due to superior personal character or initiative so much as it was to dumb luck. I was blessed to be born in an advanced society with caring parents. So, I had the advantage of both genetics … and upbringing.”

Kaiser decided he was “morally bound to help those left behind by the accident of birth.” But he understood the complexities: “Though almost all of us grew up believing in the concept of equal opportunity, most of us simultaneously carried the unspoken and inconsistent ‘dirty little secret’ that genetics drove much of accomplishment so that equality was not achievable.”

His reading of modern brain research, however, led to the conclusion that genetic endowments can be modified by education, if you can get to kids early. Kaiser has directed much of his giving to early childhood education.

Most of the letter writers started poor or middle class. They don’t believe in family dynasties and sometimes argue that they would ruin their kids’ lives if they left them a mountain of money. Schools and universities are the most common recipients of their generosity, followed by medical research and Jewish cultural institutions. A ridiculously disproportionate percentage of the Giving Pledge philanthropists are Jewish.

Older letter writers have often found very specific niches for their giving — fighting childhood obesity in Georgia. Younger givers, especially the tech billionaires, are vague and less thoughtful.

Brooks concludes by “fantasizing” what he would do if he had a billion dollars and describes establishing social collectives to help reweave the social fabric in neighborhoods and communities throughout the country.  Each collective would have 25 people who would meet once a week to share and discuss life, go on retreats, and celebrate life events.

The Giving Pledge includes letters from the likes of Michael Bloomberg, George Lucas, and Paul Allen.   Very interesting! And a very noble fantasy on Brooks’ part!

Tony

 

Hunter College Student Graduates on Subway Train!

 

 

 

Dear Commons Community,

Graduation ceremonies are special events generally filled with greetings of congratulations as friends and family gather to hear speakers praise students for what they have accomplished and provide advice as they go out into the world.  This was true for most of Hunter College’s graduates during its ceremony last week except for nursing graduate Jerich Alcantara who was stuck underground during his commencement after the E train he was on stopped between stations due to a malfunction. After rescue trains arrived to remove passengers, the 22-year-old decided to make the most of the situation and stage a graduation with his friends, family and fellow passengers looking on. 

“The subway graduation began on our rescue train after I jokingly thanked everyone for coming to watch me graduate,” Alcantara told The Huffington Post.

 “I did it originally because everyone seemed restless. My friend, Bobby, and I then proceeded to play music and hold our own ceremony, to everyone’s amusement.”

The duo played Green Day’s “Time of Your Life” as Alcantara received a makeshift diploma his friend created on a phone. A video of the moment was shared online by passenger Nadiya Afzal and has since garnered more than 2 million views.  

Congratulations Jerich! 

Tony