Urban News Features

Dr. Barber 'Surprised' by Moral Monday Fame in Rome by Cash Michaels

Jan. 1, 2018

Dr. Barber 'Surprised' by Moral Monday Fame in Rome
By Cash Michaels

Bishop William J. Barber II poses with the Vatican guards in Rome during his visit.

Special to the Trice Edney News Wire from the Wilmington Journal

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Rome, Italy is over 4,600 miles away from Raleigh, NC. But when it came to “Moral Mondays,” the massive yet peaceful demonstrations held in North Carolina’s capital city, and led by the former president of the NCNAACP, no distance was too far as far as admirers attending a recent international conference on labor at the Vatican were concerned.

“I was …surprised by how many leaders from around the world had been inspired by Moral Monday, the moral revival last year, and the Poor People’s Campaign plans,” Bishop Dr. William Barber, leader of the social justice group, “Repairers of the Breach,” said by text from the Vatican shortly after the visit.

Dr. Barber was one of 300 participants from around the world attending the conference which addressed the conditions of working people, and the working poor on Thanksgiving. Representing the upcoming Poor People’s Campaign in the United States, Dr. Barber’s social justice reputation from the 12 years he led the NCNAACP preceded him, with an invitation already given him to attend and preach at another world gathering about labor rights and the poor in Liverpool, England next June. He has also been invited to Brazil next year.

As a birthday present, Dr. Barber took his mother, who had turned 84 the week before, along with his wife and one of his son, all part of an eight-person delegation.

In an exclusive telephone interview from Washington, DC, Dr. Barber recalled two “long, intense eight-hour days” of deeply committed religious and labor leaders working together. From countries like France, Sudan, England and others, Dr. Barber said he was greeted warmly by all.

Even the Vatican guards saluted him because of his title of “Bishop.”

During his presentation at the conference, Dr. Barber said, “Rightfully, the Pope has noted at the start of the twenty-first century that religious leaders must play a leading role in the struggle for justice in dialogue with all social and political actors. We must articulate a way of thinking that brings together the complexity of the current situation and proposes an action strategy for the construction of a just society. Not only is democracy at stake, but the wellbeing of world itself.”

Later in his remarks, Bishop Barber continued, “I believe Pope Francis’ call for a moral vision of the common good connected to a call for solidarity within the labor union economy and ethos is most important. I join you today as President of Repairers of the Breach and Co-chair of the Poor People’s Campaign: A National Call for a Moral Revival in the United States. We have identified five areas--five moral diseases that must be addressed if we are to be a people able to address the common good, promote the general welfare, and ensure the common defense, with liberty and justice for all. We must address systemic racism, systemic poverty, ecological devastation, the war economy, and the immoral narrative of extreme religionism.”

Before he left, Dr. Barber was satisfied with how his presentation was accepted by other religious and labor leaders.

“Many of the points that we raised were in the final document produced by the conference as a guide to the way forward,” he texted.

And what about that much anticipated Thanksgiving Day meeting between Dr. Barber and Pope Francis that was scheduled during the two-day gathering? It got cancelled at the last minute,” Barber says.

“Up until 4 p.m. yesterday the Pope was scheduled to come and be with us,” Bishop Barber texted last Friday. “[But] we were informed around 4:15 p.m. that due to challenges around his trip to Malaysia, and other world events (like the mosque [terrorist] shootings in Egypt), he had to change [his plans].”

“[The Pope] sent a personal note to us and a papal letter,” Dr. Barber added.

Indeed, Pope Francis walked a fine, and some say diplomatically peril less line during his visit to Myanmar and Bangladesh. Myanmar has cracked down on Rohingya Muslims in what some are calling an “ethnic cleansing.” Reports say villages are being burned and women and children are being raped, as over 600,000 refugees have fled to Bangladesh.

But before he left Italy, Pope Francis issued a letter at the conclusion of the international conference. In that papal letter, the Pope warned of “the money god” that leads to the exploitation of the working poor globally.

“Work must serve the human person,” Pope Francis said, not the other way around.” He added that “…every worker is the hand of Christ who continues to create and do good.”

Even though Dr. Barber wasn’t able to personally meet the Pope as he had hoped, he was able to present one of the Pope’s cardinals with gifts for His Eminence from the United States – a small stone from the home of North Carolina civil rights leader Ella Baker, and sand from the Rio Grande [River] where Barber walked with families traveling to see relatives from Mexico they had not seen in years.

Beyond the conference, if there was one consolation, Dr. Barber wrote, it was that one of the cardinals [from Ghana] he exchanged personal information with promised to visit with the bishop in North Carolina upon his next visit to the United States.

Editor’s Note – you can red Dr. Barber’s Vatican presentation at https://thecashjournal.blogspot.com/p/bishop-william-j-barbers.html

Too Much At Stake to Allow the 2016 Federal Elections to Stand By Jerroll M. Sanders

Dec. 30, 2017

Too Much At Stake to Allow the 2016 Federal Elections to Stand

By Jerroll M. Sanders

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - We now know beyond all doubt that Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. elections to help Donald J. Trump and certain Republican congressional candidates win.

Although almost a year has passed since Trump and newly-elected congressional leaders took office, it’s still not too late for a revote. Redoing 2016 federal elections is the only way to make things right for the American people.

There is nothing unique about my call for a revote of the 2016 primary and general elections. It is customary for contest winners such as athletes who are victorious due to fraud or doping to relinquish their title and metals. Why shouldn’t we expect the same of politicians?

If the U.S. Supreme Court were to declare the 2016 federal elections unconstitutional, President Trump and newly elected congressional leaders would be forced to vacate their office. The ruling would also lead to an undoing of all federal laws, policies and judicial appointments accomplished during theTrump Administration.

Some view the call for a revote as wishful thinking. Others have taken a wait-and-see position, hoping that President Trump will be impeached and removed or will succumb to defeat in 2020—as might be suggested by recent democratic victories in Virginia and Alabama. But the Revote Coalition’s goal is not to remove President Trump from office but to ensure that the American people, not a foreign enemy, determine who our elected officials are.

Congressional and presidential actions undertaken during the Trump administration will change this nation for generations to come. Citizens, particularly minorities, will continue to rely heavily upon the federal judiciary to enforce laws and rights. Getting federal judges to rule favorably on discrimination claims and social injustices has been difficult in the past. But securing fair and balanced rulings in the future may prove far more difficult in federal courts stacked by Trump with judges who stand ready to rollback social and racial advancements and short-circuit policing and other protective reforms.

The Revote Coalition’s quest for a revote began days following the 2016 Presidential Election when I published a YouTube video calling for a new election and shared my first revote legal brief with 2016 Virginia Congressional Candidate Shaun Brown. Brown circulated the brief to various political camps. Soon, others joined our nationwide effort to find an attorney who would usher a constitutionally sound revote case to the U.S. Supreme Court. Unable to find an attorney, I—a non-lawyer—put pen to paper and drafted a legal brief based upon my newly devised legal argument, which asserts:

The United States has many territories, including a cyber territory.
Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution says: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion. . . “
The U.S. Government failed to protect each state’s cyber territory against invasion in 2016.
Because of Russia’s invasion, states do not know the source of winning votes, and consequently, do not know if they seated the right party’s electors to cast electoral votes.
Members of the former congress violated their oath of office when they swore into office candidates who were helped by Russia.

I provided my legal brief to three groups of citizens who filed the revote brief in three different federal courts. I was a named petitioner on the Colorado case. The Massachusetts Appeals Court quickly rendered a decision that labeled the case “novel,” since no one had ever made the argument before. I then drafted an appeals brief to advance the revote case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

While the Supreme Court opted to not review our citizen case, members of the Revote Coalition are convinced the Supreme Court will entertain the revote case if it is filed by a State Attorney General (AG), since our legal argument hinges on the federal government’s obligation to protect states from invasion. In the end, the actions of the American public will determine whether we get a revote. Make noise in the streets. Call, visit and email AGs listed at www.revote.info; insist the AGs work to have the 2016 federal elections declared null and void.

Jerroll M. Sanders is an entrepreneur and executive and originator of the Revote Project. For more information: www.Revote.info

Carmen de Lavallade, the Magnificent Dancer, Choreographer, Actress By A. Peter Bailey

December 24, 2017
Reality Check
Carmen de Lavallade, the Magnificent Dancer, Choreographer, Actress
By A. Peter Bailey

Carmen de Lavallade PHOTO: Julieta Cervantes

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - When hearing that master dancer, choreographer, and actress, Carmen de Lavallade, 86, would be one of the 2017 Kennedy Honors recipients, my first reaction was, “Y’all finally got the message. It’s about time. She should have gotten that honor at least 20 years ago.”

I became aware of the depth of Carmen’s talent while assisting the master choreographer Alvin Ailey in writing his book, Revelations, the Autobiography of Alvin Ailey, in the late 1980s. His deep respect, admiration and love for her is reflected when he said, “Dance, for me, would have been impossible without Carmen de Lavallade…Whatever you want her to dance, she will find a way to do it. Choreographers also love her because she has solid technique and a brilliant, unsurpassable talent for interpreting a ballet.” Other great artists who have marveled at and utilized Carmen’s encompassing talent include Duke Ellington, Geoffrey Holder (her husband), Agnes DeMille, Josephine Baker and Benny Goodman.

For over 60 years she has exhibited her brilliance on stages throughout the country and the world. To Carmen, dance is about storytelling. She is no fan of the overwhelming focus on technique that has engulfed much of modern dance. Says Carmen, “I am strong in many things. But the perfect feet? No. Perfect legs? No. Perfect turnout? No. I am not the greatest technician. I tended toward dramatic work.”

Her storytelling ability in dance has left dance enthusiasts with precious memories. Master dance, Judith Jamison marvels that “That body is so amazing. It can do anything…Her hand-moving on stage is enough to take your breath away, just a flick of the wrist or moving it slowly. Her nuance is beautiful.”

About her hands, Carmen says, “They gotta talk. Your hands gotta talk. Those are your words.” I last saw Carmen dance three or four years ago and was spellbound watching her move on stage. Her head, her legs, her arms, her hips fully communicated her story to us. One of my regrets is never having seen her dance with Alvin. Those who saw the two together regard it as a lasting precious memory. Alvin noted that when Lester Horton, their dance teacher, “put us together on stage together, the combination was electric. The minute we hit the stage together it was there—the lyricism, the emotion, the beauty and the passion Carmen could express in her dancing. She was like a great actress.”

Carmen remembers one of their duets thusly, “When we performed it at the Boston Common, we thought, ‘Oh dear, people aren’t going to like this...’ It was a real old blues song sung by Bother John Sellers…Well, we tore Boston Common up, absolutely tore it up.”

Carmen absolutely tore up other places through the years. That’s why Kennedy Center chairman David M. Rubenstein praised her as a “national treasure whose elegance and talent as a dancer led to a career touching many other art forms.”

It’s also why Meryl Streep, who introduced Carmen and who, 45 year ago, was one of her students in the Yale School of Drama, said, “Carmen, among other things, taught us how to replenish our souls.”

Carmen is currently teaching the same important lesson to dance students at several institutions, including the Dance Theater of Harlem and the Richmond Ballet.

As much as she is a brilliant dancer, she is also a principled and socially conscious woman of the 21st Century. Upon receiving the Kennedy Center Honor, she also released a statement declining a visit to the Trump White House: “I am truly honored to receive the Kennedy Center Honors Award and look forward to attending the ceremony at the Kennedy Center. In light of the socially divisive and morally caustic narrative that our existing leadership is choosing to engage in, and in keeping with the principles that I and so many others have fought for, I will be declining the invitation to attend the reception at the White House.”

A. Peter Bailey, whose latest book is Witnessing Brother Malcolm X, the Master Teacher, can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

The Prophet Is Rarely Welcome In His Own Village By Dr. Wilmer J. Leon, III

Dec. 27, 2017

The Prophet Is Rarely Welcome In His Own Village
By Dr. Wilmer J. Leon, III

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - "Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? … And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his own town and in his own home.” Matthew 13:53-57

On Sunday December 17, The Guardian published an Op Ed penned by Dr. Cornel West entitled “Ta-Nehisi Coates is the neoliberal face of the black freedom struggle”. It is a very clear and well thought through analysis of Coates’ book, “We Were Eight Years in Power”. West’s Op Ed was also a border critique of Coates’ Weltanschauung, his controlling perspective or image of the universe and of humanity's relation to it. Simply put, Coates’ worldview.

Dr. West’s critique has kicked off a firestorm of controversy via social media and other outlets. Most of the controversy has been critical of Dr. West. In Slate.com, Ismail Muhammad wrote, “Not only is it a case of one of black thought’s elder statesmen attempting a hatchet job on a younger writer, West thoroughly botches the job…” In Huffington Post Dwayne Wong wrote, “For me, the biggest problem with Dr. West’s piece is that are there more pressing issues that need to be addressed.” Jelani Cobb took to Twitter accusing Dr. West of having “cloak[ed] petty rivalry as disinterested analysis.”

We will never progress as a political constituency so long as our politics are based upon the politics of personality and not the politics of policy. Honest critique needs to include substantive policy analysis. Honest analysis of the work of African American writers or intellectuals by other African American writers or intellectuals should be framed within the context of the analysis, not the personality. By placing the critique in the context of personal animus, the critique can be summarily dismissed and not dealt with on the level that the issue and critique truly requires.

Most of the critique received from Muhammad, Wong, Cobb and others centered around West’s motivations. There was very little actual analysis of West’s critique that would invite substantive dialogue about the issues. The focus of analysis should not be if Dr. West is angry or jealous. The focus should be if Dr. West is correct. By focusing on West’s motives instead of his analysis, his critics are, as James Brown would say, “talkin’ loud and saying nothing.”

In his Op Ed Dr. West states, “The disagreement between Coates and me is clear: any analysis or vision of our world that omits the centrality of Wall Street power, US military policies, and the complex dynamics of class, gender, and sexuality in black America is too narrow and dangerously misleading. So, it is with Ta-Nehisi Coates’ worldview.”

Contrary to the position taken by many of his detractors, Dr. West’s analysis is not a “hatchet job” or “petty rivalry”. It is a substantive analysis of a very good writer whose worldview is worthy of critique and analysis. By his critic’s own admission Dr. West has earned the right to provide it. Muhammad says, “…if you are a young writer who interrogates American race relations and white supremacy, Cornel West is the foundation upon which you stand.” Wong writes, “Dr. West doesn’t just write books and deliver lectures about fighting injustices. He is someone who has been on the frontlines marching…even going to jail for his convictions…involved in the struggle in very direct ways.” If his curriculum vita and bona fides do not allow him the space in which to critique Coates, who can?

In the search for the “Next One; The Best and Brightest” some may have heaped too much upon Coates a bit too soon. In West’s critique he writes, “There is no doubt that the marketing of Coates – like the marketing of anyone – warrants suspicion.” Since Coates has been accepted by the dominant culture is his analysis and writing above reproach?

It was the brilliant writer Toni Morrison who prematurely put Coates in the rare-air of James Baldwin. It was also Ms. Morrison who in 1998 wrote about Bill Clinton in The New Yorker that “white skin notwithstanding, this is our first black President. Blacker than any actual black person who could ever be elected in our children’s lifetime.” Really? Could this be more unsubstantiated hyperbole?

I think there is something to Dr. West’s critique and putting Coates’ work in the context of “…narrow racial tribalism and myopic political neoliberalism…” that is worth further analysis and honest debate.” In his piece The Myth of Western Civilization Coates writes in direct contradiction to Dr. King, “I am an atheist…I don't believe the arc of the universe bends towards justice. I don't even believe in an arc. I believe in chaos.” If there is no arc, then what’s the point of our struggle? Is his “chaos” is Hobbes’ “state of nature”?

Atheists tend to be more sympathetic to the interests of the individual over the collective. Neoliberalism is about the privatization of public goods and the actualization of individual interests over the interests of the collective. Our struggle has always been about the collective. DuBois’ The Souls of Black Folk is not about the soul of some random individual. Mrs. Fannie Lou Hamer dedicated her life to ensure the franchise for all; not just so she alone could vote.

Dr. West writes, “Coates rightly highlights the vicious legacy of white supremacy – past and present…” but “…he hardly keeps track of our fightback, and never connects this ugly legacy to the predatory capitalist practices…” This is important as Paulo Freire wrote, “the interests of the oppressors lie in “changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation which oppresses them…” Is Coates working to change consciousness or situation?

What is wrong with an honest critique of a popular writer and his work? Especially since, as Dr. West writes, the issues are “substantive and serious”. He continues, “Must every serious critique be reduced to a vicious takedown or an ugly act of hatred? Can we not acknowledge that there are deep disagreements among us with our very lives and destinies at stake?” I will add, and work to resolve them?

Amilcar Cabral tell us, “…on the political level-however fine and attractive the reality of others may be – we can only truly transform our own reality, on the basis of detailed knowledge of it and our own efforts and sacrifices.” We can only gain that detailed knowledge through honest study, debate and dialogue. The personal attacks on those who offer honest critique of the established narrative and work to change what Freire called the “culture of silence” of the dispossessed will not bring about our freedom and liberation. As he struggles against the Svengali spin of the comprador class; the prophet is rarely welcome in his own village.

Dr. Wilmer Leon is producer/ Host of the nationally broadcast call-in talk radio program “Inside the Issues with Wilmer Leon,” on SiriusXM Satellite radio channel 126. Go to www.wilmerleon.com or email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. www.twitter.com/drwleon and Dr. Leon’s Prescription at Facebook.com © 2017 InfoWave Communications, LLC

Omarosa's Final Days at White House Full of Controversy, Accusations by Hazel Trice Edney

Dec. 22, 2017

Omarosa's Final Days at White House Full of Controversy, Accusations

Some say she blocked qualified Black applicants; Others say that's not possible

NNPA president says she may have been fighting for diversity

By Hazel Trice Edney

Omarosa Manigault Newman stares into camera as Black photographer Cheriss May takes photo early in the Trump administration.

PHOTO: Cheriss May

Omarosa (fifth from left) among this media delegation in Haiti, was a celebrity ambassador for IBW's Haiti Support Project in 2010. IBW President Ron Daniels, in cap behind her, says she has since rejected his advice to her about President Trump.

Elroy Sailor of Insight America and Spencer Overton of the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies listen to now HUD Secretary Ben Carson on a panel. Insight America and the Joint Center worked together to in attempt to get bi-partisan resumes of African-Americans to the Trump Administration. Sources said most were blocked. PHOTO: InsightAmerica4u.com

Omarosa and Ben Chavis during an NNPA Black Press Week breakfast in March. She ended up walking out of the meeting after this reporter, Hazel Trice Edney, pressed her on the promised NNPA "first" interview with Trump.

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Omarosa Manigault Newman, who has resigned under duress from her public liaison job at the White House, is leaving true to form - amidst a cloud of controversy and with sparks flying.

The White House has confirmed her resignation effective Jan. 20. The official White House reason was that she is leaving to pursue "other opportunities."

"Thank you Omarosa for your service! I wish you continued success," says a Dec. 13 tweet from President Donald Trump, who had handpicked Manigault Newman - best known for her first name only. A personal friend of Trump's, they have known each other 14 years since her national television debut on his reality show, "The Apprentice."

But the full circumstances surrounding Omarosa's departure remain cloudy at best amidst numerous reports that she was actually fired or forced to resign amidst cursing and a heated confrontation with Trump's Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly. She has only conceded that there was a tense conversation with Kelly in the White House Situation Room. Since his arrival last July, Kelly had limited her access to the Oval Office, where she initially had the freedom to come and go.

On ABC, the only media outlet that has interviewed her since the resignation, the clearly angry Omarosa said reports that she was fired are "a hundred percent false." But, then she added, "But when I have a chance to tell my story to tell - quite a story - as the only African-American woman in this White House, as a senior staff and assistant to the president, I have seen things that have made me uncomfortable, that have upset me, that have affected me deeply and emotionally, that has affected my community and my people and when I can tell my story, it is a profound story that I know the world will want to hear," she said, leaving an obvious cliffhanger.

Omarosa was reached to obtain responses on issues raised in this article, but she declined comment due to the fact that she is still a White House employee until Jan. 20. She was only allowed the interviews with ABC News.

Black Republicans say Omarosa blocked them from jobs.

Meanwhile, Black Republicans claim Omarosa blocked them from jobs in order to maintain her status as the "only African-American woman... senior staff and assistant to the president" as she described herself on ABC. Her actual White House title has been assistant to the president and director of communications in the White House Office of Public Liaison.

But her actual job description appears not to have been clearly defined. In interviews with the Trice Edney News Wire Black Republicans blame her for blocking Black job applicants from the Trump administration - including Republican stalwart Kay Coles James, who was appointed Dec. 19 as the first African-American and first woman president of the conservative Heritage Foundation.

"I was blocked personally. Essentially, my file was pulled and I wasn't deemed pro-Trump enough," says Eugene Craig. "The official excuse was that I wasn't pro-Trump enough although I was the sitting chair of the Maryland Republican Party."

Sources said because of President Trump's need for loyalty, that attribute - loyalty - was among the top considerations for key White House positions. Craig admits that he was a "never Trumper all the way", but that was during the campaign. Craig says he noticed that when the time came for consideration for jobs and the broad banner of Republicanism, White never-Trumpers were given consideration where African-Americans were not.

"The flood gates were opened, but Omarosa held all of us to a different standard. She had say over a lot of the Black resumes. I know for a fact from promises that she made us directly."

Craig says a January conference call with the Republican National Committee and Trump transition team was held "specifically for African-American activists and party loyalists." He said, "During the middle of the call, she jumped on and bogarted on. And she came in and she made us these promises that this would be the most diverse administration in history. And she'll help us with whatever we need and wherever we wanted to go into government and to shoot our resumes over to her and she gave us her official transition email. She said this administration has a goal of having 25 percent minority hiring. They wanted 25 percent of the work force to be Black and Hispanic...So she positioned herself as the end all be all for Black things; for Black people in the administration," Craig said.

Ayshia Connors, a former deputy director of African-American engagement at the Republican National Committee, now a senior advisor to Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), agrees. She describes an initiative by The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies and Insight America, an organization headed by former Republican Congressman J. C. Watts:

"There were hundreds, probably thousands of resumes of qualified individuals in the Black community that were ready and prepared to go into any administration no matter who won the election. And when President Trump got elected, all of those names were submitted and Omarosa literally trashed those names. Nobody got a call back. Nobody got an interview. Nobody was ever heard about again. People tried to go in. People were eager and willing to serve the President, willing to serve our country. But Omarosa, she didn't want other Black Republicans there. She wanted to be the big shot. She wanted to be the only one. And so, everybody kind of just decided it wasn't worth our times to keep dealing with it. And so, by February, people had just moved on from Omarosa and dealing with the White House and decided to start working with Congress and dealing some other policy matters."

Connors added that Kay Coles James, former Virginia Secretary of Health and Human Resources under Virginia Republican Gov. George Allen and director for the United States Office of Personnel Management under President George W. Bush, received the same treatment.

"She was willing and prepared to go back into the government and to help the administration. But Omarosa was such a distraction and created so much drama and confusion that Ms. James just decided not to engage it anymore. So that's what ended up happening. That's why you only saw Omarosa as a senior Black Republican in the White House."

In a brief interview with James upon her appointment as president of the Heritage Foundation, James was clear about why she did not go to work in the Trump White House.

"When Donald Trump said that he wanted to improve the urban areas and that he wanted to make the lives of minorities in this country better, I said, wow, if he wants to do that, I genuinely want to be a part of that and I was excited and hopeful the opportunity to come in," she said. "But that opportunity never really afforded itself. I am told that I was blocked...I don't have specifics about how that happened, but I was extremely disappointed that I didn't have the opportunity to serve there."

Connors said the clearest evidence that Omarosa was not going to work with other Black Republicans came in February when Omarosa was in charge of pulling together the Black History Month program for President Trump.

"During Black History Month, these credible Republicans such as Kay Coles James and J. C. Watts and Elroy Sailor, they tried to engage Omarosa." Instead, Omarosa put an event together that included her personal picks of African-Americans, including Black Democrats, Connors said.

"She didn't invite any of the prominent Black Republicans. In fact, we had folks calling us from the White House calling and saying, 'Why aren't your names on the list for this event?' It was very evident from the beginning that she wasn't going to work with us and that she was just going to do her own thing."

Connors cited another event for Vice President Pence that was planned by Black Republicans to be held at West Point. "That was another example of Omarosa using her position in the White House to block that event as well. And that was actually the turning point for Black Republicans. We decided she was just too distracting too disruptive and we decided to focus our efforts elsewhere."

On the record sources willing to speak in defense of Omarosa were difficult to find. But, high placed Republican sources say it is not possible that Omarosa could have made such powerful decisions without oversight in the White House - most likely the President himself. Other high Republican sources said James was offered positions, but Omarosa fought against any Black staff appointment that would be above her own.

Yet another rationale for why some Black Republicans seeking employment were rejected may have been because they had left the Republican National Committee Headquarters in protest against treatment by then RNC Chairman Reince Priebus nearing the end of the presidential campaign. Priebus then became President Trump's first chief of staff and was likely adverse to hiring the same staffers who had left the RNC, one source said.

Christopher Metzler, an active member of the Black GOP Coalition, who has long worked Republican policy and strategy, had one answer when asked why there were no long time Black Republicans hired as White House staff. "It's very simple. Omarosa," he said.

"Somebody like Kay [Coles James] who could serve as a whisperer in the President's ear like a Condoleezza Rice; like a Valerie Jarrett, was never given that opportunity. There was a lot of back and forth pertaining to that. And Kay said, "Well, it is not going to serve the President well for me to try to cut through this thicket. And as a result of that, she did not push it any further."

Metzler concluded, "All of these things were blocked by Omarosa. At the end of the day, Omarosa is first and foremost a Democrat. She is not a conservative. She is not a Republican. She never has been. She is simply an opportunist. And that's where we ended up."

Black Republicans do not necessarily mean Black representation; nor justice.

Dr. Ron Daniels, president of the Institute of the Black World 21st Century (IBW) and a long-time associate of Omarosa's Youngstown, Ohio family, has had a unique view of Omarosa in the White House. He worked directly with her when she was a Democrat. He even named her a celebrity ambassador for IBW's Haiti Support Project after she traveled with a group of journalists to document the level of disaster following the 2010 earthquake. His view in the midst of her departure from the White House is two-fold.

First, as it pertains to those Black Republicans who felt that they earned a position due to their loyalty to Black Republicans, "diversity does not equal representation of the Black community," he said. "That's one of the fallacies...Trump's agenda is a negative agenda. Fact number one is the way he dogged President Obama, the way he talked badly about Mexicans, etc. Why would anybody want to associate with that administration in the first place?"

Citing pioneering Black Republicans such as Nixon's Art Fletcher, known as "the father of affirmative action," Daniels says modern day Black Republicans can hardly hold a candle to some of the Black Republicans who - instead of following the party line - stood for justice when it was needed most. "The brand of Republicanism that we have now is extremely out of step with the vast majority of Black people and the mainstream of Black aspirations and Black policy and the concepts of Black policy prescriptions."

Because of his working with Omarosa and his affinity for projects that she led for Haiti and for children in the U. S., Daniels now sees what he believes to have been her true agenda based on her most recent situation.

"I think Omarosa, for whatever reason, is somebody who had been on the liberal side. She had supported Hillary Clinton...She had been in Democratic politics and all that. I think Omarosa saw an opportunity to advance her own interests and that is why she was blocking everybody else in terms of the Republicans who wanted to get close. She wanted to be the Queen bee," Daniels said. "She wanted to be able to fire folks, metaphorically speaking, or block people. That's not a good thing. But the idea that if she had opened the flood gates of somehow having more Ben Carsons or more Clarence Thomases or people like that, [that would not have been a good thing either]. But I don't think Omarosa was there advocating. It was really stunning to see her make that transformation."

Black Republicans are not the only ones who say they were rejected by Omarosa.

American Urban Radio Network reporter April Ryan, a White House correspondent who has covered four presidents, confirmed that now former Trump press secretary, Sean Spicer, told her that Omarosa had asked him to "stop calling on me" during press briefings. Had he adhered to that request, it could have blocked important information and coverage on behalf of millions of African-American listeners to AURN radio stations across the nation. Ryan says Omarosa also tried to get her fired by calling her boss at AURN.

Many of Omarosa's previous friends and associates, who rejected Trumpism, say they were also rejected. Daniels says he was one of them.

"Omarosa is my home girl. My roots are in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania and most of my adult life was spent in Youngstown, Ohio," her hometown, he recalls. "I had my own television show in Youngstown, Ohio for 18 years. She said she grew up watching me and was inspired by that. I saw the good work she was doing with children in Compton and that she had a progressive vision. So we forged a friendship," he said. "All of that was positive. Then, all of a sudden Trump came along and I saw her in and around Trump and I became very nervous. She's my homegirl. I cared about her. So at one point, I just sort of, as an elder, a friend, I just sort of called her to say, 'Be careful. You seem to be getting very close to Donald Trump and I don't think...' And she just sort of went off on me, kind of like, 'You don't need to be telling me, nobody needs to be telling me what's going on. I know what I'm doing. And somebody needs to be able to talk to him. And that was it. I just said bye because I did not want to see her become what she has now become in the Black community - a pariah in the Black community."

There are many such stories told by former friends. But the truth about Omarosa's tenure and final days at the White House is yet to be made clear.

NNPA Interviewed Omarosa last fall, but is still awaiting Trump interview that she promised.

Ben Chavis, president/CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association, said he interviewed Omarosa last fall in her White House office, located in the Old Executive Office Building. At that time, shortly after the Congressional Black Caucus Annual Legislative Weekend, there was no indication that she would be leaving, Chavis said.

However, he speculated that, based on the content of the interview - which he said has not been published - she may have been pressing for diversity too much.

"She indicated broadly her determination to press diversity and inclusivity issues. She's always maintained that posture," Chavis said. "I think that's probably one of the things that probably got her in trouble in the White House is that she probably was pressing for more diversity," Chavis said.

In an off-the-record meeting with several hundred Black leaders, including Chavis, during the Trump transition last January, Omarosa said NNPA would get the first interview with President Trump, a promise she later denied despite multiple sources that confirmed the conversation. In the recent interview, she indicated that the Trump/NNPA interview was still possible, Chavis said. He said NNPA will continue to request the interview with Trump.

What happened in the final days of Omarosa's tenure and the detailed reasons for her departure from the Trump administration are far from clear.

"There are two sides of the story - Omarosa's story and those being told by other sources are two completely different stories," said Ayshia Connors. "But based on her patterns of erratic behavior and disruptive behavior, it wouldn't surprise me at all if she was confrontational with General Kelly and things were played out the way they were reported to have played out - outside of her story."