Quo Vadis GOP?

[crazy canuck]

Their website address clearly states they have legal brains.  What's the problem?

[garbon]

Maybe not a coincidence the timing.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/supreme-court-justice-thomass-wife-urged-trump-white-house-overturn-2020-2022-03-25/

Supreme Court justice Thomas's wife urged Trump White House to overturn 2020 election

Virginia Thomas, the wife of conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urged former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows to work to overturn the results of the 2020 election in a series of text messages, the Washington Post and CBS News reported on Thursday.

The messages, sent in the weeks following the Nov. 3 presidential election, show that Thomas advised Meadows to "make a plan" and "release the Kraken" in a bid to preserve Donald Trump's presidency, the Post and CBS News reported.

Virginia Thomas, a conservative activist and attorney, could not immediately be reached for comment.

Now-President Joe Biden was projected to win the race on Nov. 7, 2020.

"Sounds like Sidney and her team are getting inundated with evidence of fraud. Make a plan. Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down," she said in one of 29 messages shared between the two, according to the Post.

Sidney Powell, who represented Trump's campaign when he sought to overturn the election result, filed lawsuits challenging counts in multiple states in support of Trump's false claims of widespread election fraud. She had previously vowed to "release the Kraken" to expose the alleged fraud, a reference to the sea monster of Scandinavian folklore.

The messages were handed over to the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, according to the Post and CBS, who said, without elaborating, that they had obtained copies of the messages.

Reuters could not independently verify the reports.

A spokesperson for the Jan. 6 committee declined to comment.

Reuters sought comment from Meadows at the Conservative Partnership Institute, an organization that helps elect conservatives to office where Meadows now serves as partner, but was unable to immediately reach him. An attorney for Meadows did not return a request for comment.

The messages do not directly reference Thomas's husband or the Supreme Court, according to the Post.

Trump's campaign distanced itself from Powell after she claimed without evidence at a Nov. 19, 2020 news conference that electronic voting systems had switched millions of ballots to Biden.

The news comes almost a week after Justice Thomas was admitted to a Washington hospital. The status of Thomas's health was not immediately clear.

[DGuller]

Health issues seem common for people serving Putin this week.

[Syt]

 

[crazy canuck]

I missed why Disney has become a target for the right

[Syt]

I missed why Disney has become a target for the right

Being woke (i.e. more diversity in their media).

EDIT: more background: https://www.vox.com/23036009/disney-culture-war-desantis-florida-dont-say-gay

[Sheilbh]

Also vocal opposition to Floridas planned don't say gay laws.

[The Minsky Moment]

As I recall Communism was the system where private business was subordinated to the state and private actors were subject to be punished for expressing views not in accord with the leader.

[Syt]

https://www.rawstory.com/desantis-on-disney/

DeSantis' attack on Disney is just the tip of the iceberg

When Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis picked a culture-war fight with the Walt Disney Co., old-school conservatives worried aloud about the precedent it might set.

It's a little late for that.

Defying decades of Republican subservience to America's business elite, the state of Florida has attacked Disney by repealing its "special independent district" status. But it turns out that DeSantis' move is hardly an isolated example among states in this, the faux-populist era of the GOP.

Modeling after Donald Trump's mob-like instinct to punish companies that offended him, politicians running red states have begun boycotting corporations to retaliate for policies aimed at protecting the planet. The once-unthinkable notion of Republicans using their government power to attack big business prompted the conservative Washington Examiner to tout its "alternative coverage" on the subject:

"Republican-led states are pushing back against firms that try to curb use of fossil fuels," the newspaper proclaimed in advance of Earth Day last week. "Pressure has been building on companies to follow environmental, social, and governance standards from both the private sector and the government.

"Because much of that pressure involves businesses' handling of carbon emissions and the fossil fuel industry, policymakers in some oil- and coal-heavy states are actively working against major investors and businesses."

There's no better example than West Virginia, where Treasurer Riley Moore has used his office to punish companies for the sin of trying to decarbonize their investments. Moore, the grandson of the state's late Gov. Arch Moore and nephew of Sen. Shelly Moore Capito, has boldly planted the flag against environmentalism.

"Earth Day should celebrate coal, oil, and natural gas instead of condemning the natural resources God has blessed us with," Moore tweeted last week.

It's no surprise, then, that Riley has led the charge against anti-polluters. Here's more from the Examiner:

"Last year, in response to pressure from the Biden administration for big banks to cut down on their emissions, more than a dozen state treasurers, led by Moore, wrote to presidential climate envoy John Kerry suggesting that they would pull state assets from firms that are trying to decarbonize their investments.

In the letter, the treasurers urged banks and financial institutions "not to give in to pressure from the Biden Administration to refuse to lend to or invest in coal, oil, and natural gas companies."

The trend is not limited to West Virginia. In Texas, Gov. Greg Abbott signed a bill into law last year banning state investments in businesses that cut ties with the oil and gas industry." As industry magazine WorldOil.com reported, "Boycott Texas oil, and Texas will boycott you."

But like West Virginia, Texas has gone beyond defending its industries to launch a broadside attack on companies advocating for green policies. Indeed, both states have targeted investment giant Black Rock for advancing the use of Environmental Social and Governance criteria (ESG).

"BlackRock, a massive $10 trillion investment firm, has led the corporate world in the prioritization of ESG," the Examiner reported. 'Part of the push has been the encouragement of 'net zero' investment strategies, which Moore contends would hurt the fossil fuel industry and, ultimately, residents of the Mountain State who make a living in that industry.

"Moore took action against BlackRock this year, (announcing) that the state would end the use of one of the firm's investment funds. He said the inflows and outflows of that fund were about $1.5 billion."

Moore termed it a "conflict of interest for West Virginia to do business with BlackRock -- "particularly as it relates to their stance on the fossil fuel industry" -- since West Virginia ranks fifth nationally in energy production.

As NPR reported last month, "the goal of pushing companies to a more fossil fuel friendly position – at least publicly – appears to be working.

BlackRock representatives have met with Texas state leaders trying to smooth things over, and highlighting their fossil fuel investments. CEO Fink also wrote a letter this year flatly stating that the firm does not pursue fossil fuel divestment.

"You can already see that they [BlackRock] have now written back to the state and said, 'Hey, hey, hey, don't worry, we love you guys,'" says Amalgamated Bank's Ivan Frishberg. "'We're open for business. Bring us your oil and gas!'"

[HisMajestyBOB]

One opinion article:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/27/gop-no-longer-a-party-movement-impose-christian-nationalism/

The GOP is no longer a party. It's a movement to impose White Christian nationalism.

By Jennifer Rubin

People might be confused about how a Republican Party that once worried about government overreach now seeks to control medical care for transgender children and retaliate against a corporation for objecting to a bill targeting LGBTQ students. And why is it that the most ambitious Republicans are spending more time battling nonexistent critical race theory in schools than on health care or inflation?
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates

To explain this, one must acknowledge that the GOP is not a political party anymore. It is a movement dedicated to imposing White Christian nationalism.

The media blandly describes the GOP's obsessions as "culture wars," but that suggests there is another side seeking to impose its views on others. In reality, only one side is repudiating pluralistic democracy — White, Christian and mainly rural Americans who are becoming a minority group and want to maintain their political power.

The result is an alarming pattern: Any moment of social progress is soon followed by reactionary panic and claims of victimhood. It's no mere coincidence that Donald Trump, the leader of the birther movement, succeeded the first African American president. Nor should the anti-critical-race-theory movement surprise anyone given the mass protests in the wake of George Floyd's murder in 2020. Understanding his phenomenon is crucial to preserving pluralistic democracy.

Sherrilyn Ifill, former head of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, recently recalled the period of protest after Floyd's murder in an engrossing podcast with former secretary of state Hillary Clinton. The movement, Ifill explained, was the first time many Americans collectively empathized with those who had experienced systemic injustice. But "those who are arrayed in opposition to justice and equality have not lost sight of it," she said. "What they saw [in the protests] is part of what undergirds the current movement that you're seeing around the country right now."

Thus, Ifill argued, the MAGA crowd is frantically maneuvering to halt education "about the truth of the history of racism and white supremacy, of the struggle for justice in this country." The goal is to stymie the development of children's empathy and awareness of racial injustice.

In a real sense, the MAGA response is an effort to conserve power and to counteract the sense of a shared fate with Americans who historically have been marginalized. The right now defines itself not with policies but with its angry tone, its malicious labeling and insults (e.g., "groomer," "woke"), and its targeting of LGBTQ youths and dehumanization of immigrants. Right-wingers' attempt to cast their opponents as sick, dangerous and — above all — not "real Americans" is as critical to securing power as voter suppression.

The indignation of MAGA personalities when presented with the reality of systematic racism is telling and very much in line with White evangelical Christian views. As Robert P. Jones, the head of the Public Religion Research Institute who has written extensively on the evangelical movement, explained in an interview with Governing:

    What we saw in the 20th century was that edifice of white supremacy that got built with the support of white Christian leaders and pastors and churches. Once it was built, the best way to protect it was to make it invisible, to create a kind of theology that was so inward focused that Christianity was only about personal piety. It was disconnected from social justice, politics, the world. It led white Christians to be fairly narcissistic and indifferent to injustice all around them. Martin Luther King Jr. had that line in Letter from Birmingham Jail where he's in dismay not about racist Christians, but about so-called moderates in Birmingham, the "more cautious than courageous" white Christians who "remained silent behind the anesthetizing security of stained glass windows."

Indeed, rarely has King's admonition been more appropriate: "I have watched white churches stand on the sidelines and merely mouth pious irrelevancies and sanctimonious trivialities. In the midst of a mighty struggle to rid our nation of racial and economic injustice, I have heard so many ministers say, 'Those are social issues which the gospel has nothing to do with.' "

Today, those who argue that America is a White, Christian nation simultaneously insist they are devoid of bigotry. The MAGA crowd is offended by any attempt to identify the ongoing reality of systemic racism (evident, for example, in the criminal justice system, maternal health care, housing discrimination and gerrymandering to reduce minority voting power). The notion that institutions they refuse to reform perpetuate racism is a sort of moral challenge to their claim to be "colorblind." Perhaps it is simply self-interested blindness.

No one should be surprised that the "big lie" has become gospel in White evangelical churches. The New York Times reports: "In the 17 months since the presidential election, pastors at these churches have preached about fraudulent votes and vague claims of election meddling. ... For these church leaders, Mr. Trump's narrative of the 2020 election has become a prominent strain in an apocalyptic vision of the left running amok."

If anti-critical-race-theory crusades are the response to racial empathy, then laws designed to make voting harder or to subvert elections are the answer to the GOP's defeat in 2020, which the right still refuses to concede. The election has been transformed into a plot against right-wingers that must be rectified by further marginalizing those outside their movement.

Our political problems are significant, but they are minor compared with the moral confusion that is afflicting the millions of White Christian Americans who consider themselves victims. Left unaddressed, this will smother calls for empathy, tolerance and justice.

And one local article, but still very revealing of where the GOP is now and the direction they continue to move in. I've bolded what I consider to be the critical sections.

Youngkin prevails on vetoes but draws Democrats' fire in heated session

RICHMOND — Democrats in the House of Delegates accused Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) of illegal overreach and compared him to Russian President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday as a session to consider vetoes and bill amendments turned ugly over the governor's attempt to force new elections for the Loudoun County School Board.

Republicans who control the House approved a Youngkin amendment targeting Loudoun, with one GOP delegate proclaiming that the governor was right to punish the school board for its role in handling a student sexual assault case and its conflict with conservative parents over teaching "critical race theory."

The issue became moot a short time later, though, when the Democratic-controlled Senate killed the same amendments after a supercharged debate of its own.

Youngkin otherwise turned in a mixed record in his first veto session as governor, with the General Assembly sustaining all 26 of his vetoes and approving many of his amendments to more than 100 bills that had passed earlier this year.

One notable failure: The Senate nixed Youngkin's attempt to create a new class of criminal misdemeanor for possessing more than two ounces of marijuana. Youngkin had proposed the change in an amendment to a bill related to legalization; he also proposed amendments that would limit what hemp products can be sold. The Senate sent the amendments to a committee, effectively killing them for the year.

The Senate also handed Youngkin a defeat on his proposal to suspend the state's 26-cents-per-gallon gasoline tax for three months. One Republican joined all Democrats in killing the proposal in a Senate committee meeting Wednesday morning. Senators have argued that suspending the tax would provide little actual relief to drivers and would deprive the state's transportation accounts of needed money.

Late Wednesday night, Youngkin issued a statement thanking the General Assembly for its work.

"I'm pleased with the progress made in the general assembly today. An overwhelming majority of our recommendations were adopted in the assembly and all of the vetoes were sustained," he said, adding that the body "must reach a compromise on the budget." House and Senate negotiators have not yet worked out differences on the two-year spending plan.

The House debate on the Loudoun bill marked one of the harshest partisan eruptions since Youngkin took office in January — his victory fueled, in part, by tapping into a national movement of conservative parental grievance against school boards, displayed most explosively in Loudoun.

"This amendment is not only appalling, it's offensive," Del. Candi Mundon King (D-Prince William) said. She and other delegates said the governor was meddling in local elections — effectively cutting short the terms of several school board members because he dislikes their policies.

Del. Christopher T. Head (R-Botetourt) thundered that that was exactly what the governor and the General Assembly were trying to do. "Should a local governing body go completely off the rails, then it's up to us to set things right," Head said. "This school board is using powers delegated to them by this legislature and they're misusing them terribly, so it's up to us to fix it."

That provoked a vehement response from Del. Marcus B. Simon (D-Fairfax), who said the scenario described by Head "is exactly the scenario the Virginia Constitution forbids." If elected officials are displaying malfeasance, there is a recall process, Simon said, adding: "Vladimir Putin can dissolve a city council and have a new mayor elected, but that's not how we do it in democracies."

The amendments were approved on a party-line vote of 51 to 48.

That moved the matter over to the Senate, which erupted over it as well — a departure from an otherwise drama-free day. While Senate Democrats argued the move would undermine the will of Loudoun voters who elected the board to a four-year term, most Republicans said the school board deserved to be ousted over its handling of the sexual assault situation.

"Why does anybody think they're entitled to a term? I don't give a damn about their terms," roared Sen. Richard H. Stuart (R-King George), usually one of the Senate's more soft-spoken members. "Why would these people be entitled to anything?"

The Senate rejected the amendment 18 to 22, with Sen. David R. Suetterlein (R-Roanoke) joining Democrats. Suetterlein said he was no fan of the school board and he hoped Loudoun voters would clean house in 2023, but he still found the amendment "troubling."

"Once it enters the realm of, 'We oppose these folks so much that we're going to shorten their terms,' we are fundamentally changing our system," he said.

The House and Senate let stand all 26 of Youngkin's vetoes, all of them aimed at bills that passed with bipartisan support, several unanimously.

Democrats put up a fight on several of the vetoes, highlighting what they said were inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the governor's reasoning. Del. Charniele L. Herring (D-Alexandria) accused Youngkin of acting mainly "to strike back at Democrats" and "to fan the flames of culture war in order to boost his national profile."

Del. Nadarius Clark (D-Portsmouth) argued that a bill he had sponsored setting a three-year statute of limitations on medical debt was supported by a wide range of consumer groups and had passed the House by a margin of 89 to 7.

"We all agree this is a good bill," Simon said. "Are we going to have the courage of our convictions? Are we going to do what we thought was right 60 days ago, or are we going to take our marching orders from the policy office of the governor?"

The House failed to overturn the veto on a party-line vote of 52 to 48.

Del. Patrick A. Hope (D-Arlington) argued that a bill he had sponsored to stop allowing health insurance companies to levy a surcharge on people who use tobacco was the unanimous recommendation of a bipartisan study commission and followed national studies that showed it would lower costs for consumers. Youngkin vetoed the bill, claiming that it would increase costs for consumers.

"The governor got this one wrong, and big time," Hope said. The House failed to overturn that veto on the same party-line vote, 52 to 48.

Youngkin's proposed amendments to bills met a slightly more mixed fate in the House. Republicans agreed to pass by — not vote on — an amendment proposed by Youngkin that would have reduced by $1 the amount paid to a man who had been wrongly imprisoned for 22 years.

"If ever, ever there was a situation in which someone deserves every penny, every dollar that they have been promised, this is one of those situations," Del. Richard C. "Rip" Sullivan Jr. (D-Fairfax) said. Sullivan said Youngkin's staff had made a rounding error.

Republicans also agreed to not vote on an amendment proposed by Youngkin that would have required the General Assembly to vote again next year on a law setting out qualifications for membership on boards and commissions in the city of Falls Church. However, Republicans approved an amendment proposed by Youngkin to require people on the city's boards and commissions to be legal citizens.

House Republicans killed several amendments proposed by Youngkin that would have required various bills to be reenacted next year. In the House, lawmakers of both parties generally oppose that practice.

On the other side of the Capitol, senators slogged through dozens of bills that Youngkin had amended, mostly without debate and with bipartisan agreement to changes that they deemed purely technical in nature.

But the chamber also rejected some of Youngkin's amendments — at times with Republicans bucking the new governor alongside Democrats.

The Senate voted unanimously against Youngkin's attempt to gut a bill intended to beef up the state's flood preparedness. Only three of the Senate's 19 Republicans stood with Youngkin on an amendment that would have forced a citizen challenging a governor's executive order to do so in Richmond Circuit Court — an inconvenience for people living in other parts of the state that the rest of the Senate saw as an attempt to make such challenges more daunting.

A handful of Republicans crossed party lines to reject other Youngkin amendments, including the Senate version of the bill related to Falls Church commissions.

In a few cases, Republicans who objected to the governor's amendments to their bills pushed back in a slightly less confrontational way, by asking that the recommendation get passed by for the day and, therefore, not get a vote.

Amendments that do not get a vote fail and the bill returns to the governor in its original form, as is the case when the governor's amendments get voted down. The governor then can choose to sign the unamended bill, allow it to become law without his signature or veto it. If he opts for a veto, the General Assembly will not have a chance to override it.

Youngkin had wielded his veto pen with uncommon vigor against Sen. Adam P. Ebbin (D-Alexandria), targeting nine of his 10 bills. Youngkin appeared to blame Ebbin, as chairman of the Senate committee that oversees gubernatorial nominees, for a nominations battle that began with the rejection of a former Trump administration official for his Cabinet.

Ebbin's vetoed bills included legislation to prohibit insurance companies from discriminating against organ donors, a measure to bolster consumer data protection, and another to require real estate agents to disclose whether they have an ownership interest in the transaction.

All of Ebbin's vetoed bills passed the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. Six won unanimous support in both chambers, and Youngkin signed six identical House bills. Typically a governor signs both versions, allowing both sponsors to claim credit for getting a bill passed into law.

Ebbin asked the chamber to overturn the vetoes matter-of-factly, without criticizing Youngkin or indulging in heated rhetoric. Sen. Jeremy S. McPike (D-Prince William) backed him up at one point in an equally muted tone.

"When the governor signs a bill in one chamber and then vetoes in the Senate — I really hope we take the ... Senate version and not a partisan approach to it. Just a suggestion," McPike said.

While one or two Republicans crossed over to support Ebbin in some cases, he failed to muster the two-thirds majority needed to overturn the vetoes.

[The Minsky Moment]

Del. Christopher T. Head (R-Botetourt) thundered that that was exactly what the governor and the General Assembly were trying to do. "Should a local governing body go completely off the rails, then it's up to us to set things right," Head said. "This school board is using powers delegated to them by this legislature and they're misusing them terribly, so it's up to us to fix it."

And there it is - the other shoe drops.  Youngkin's education policy was never really about empowering parents; it was about mobilizing the coercive power of the state to crush the local school districts into compliance with the GOP Kulturkampf.

[The Minsky Moment]

DeSantis made an oopsie

Section 56 of the Reedy Creek Act

The State of Florida pledges to the holders of any bonds issued under this Act
(1) that it will not limit or alter the rights of the District (a) to own,
acquire, construct, reconstruct, improve, maintain, operate or furnish the
projects or to levy and collect the taxes, assessments, rentals, rates, fees,
tolls, fares and other charges provided for in the Reedy Creek Act, and (b)
to fulfill the terms of any agreement made with the holders of any bonds
or other obligations of the District; and (2) that it will not in any way
impair the rights or remedies of the holders, and that it will not modify in
any way the exemption from taxation provided in the Reedy Creek Act,
until all such bonds together with interest thereon, and all costs and
expenses in connection with any act or proceeding by or on behalf of such
holders, are fully met and discharged

US Constitution Article I Section 10

No State shall . .  pass any . . . Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts

[Oexmelin]

À reminder of the rhetoric that is being peddled.

« Together we're standing up against some of the most menacing forces, entrenched, interest and vicious opponents our people have ever seen despite great outside dangers. And we do have outside dangers. What's happening with Russia and Ukraine is a tremendous outside danger. Our biggest threat remains the sick, sinister and evil people from within our country. They're a bigger threat than the outside threat. But no matter how big or powerful these corrupt, radical politicians may be, you must never forget, this nation does not belong to them, this nation belongs to you. This is your home, this is your heritage and our American liberty is your God-given right, they're not going to take it away. »

DJT, Nebraska rallye.

[Berkut]

That is fucking terrifying. 

Frankly, I am surprised there hasn't been more outright violence, beyond Jan 6th.

[alfred russel]

If you are terrified of that you need to toughen up.

The guy was just president for four years, had a majority in both houses for half of it, and the major thing he got through was a tax cut. He commanded the executive branch and tried to launch an insurrection to stay in office and only got a band of goofballs led by a guy in a viking helmet to respond. If he wasn't a threat then, he isn't a threat now that he is out of power and is getting more senile by the day. Notice the crowd sizes of his rallies keeps diminishing.