CRUZ 3 3% 2M
7 22 field error 2
THIS FUCKING GUY 8 26
CLIMATE LAWSUITS CHINA BS
RWW Tag: Ted Cruz
SEE ACTIV SUPPRESS ANTIFA TERROR BS 10 25
important in legal fkery; pow --> mofo on burn pits, Biden noms
CONSTOCK HAWLEY CLARENCE ALITO
SEE BUSH V GORE ACB ROBERTS KAVANAUGH
j6, traitor pending, pal of eastman
see pseudo pop good ol boy work class hero performative
chevron doctrine deference
gingrich anti-press deflection before “answer” question
judiciary comm ( scotus ethics)
oil $
drag new 10 26 midterm?
see ~ biden noms AAF minion jones
see staff paul teller islamophobe CNP ginni
launched boebert?!
bak
merri ok
===
-=-=
DOCKET 10 26
...
Among the people now going to bat for Eastman are Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), and a coalition of former Trump attorneys who helped his 2020 election subversion effort: anti-voting lawyer Cleta Mitchell, former One America News Network reporter Christina Bobb, recently departed U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney Ed Martin, lawyers Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell, and others.
-=-=
AN 9 26
HUH? TED C
https://www.alternet.org/clarence-thomas-2677870464/
-=-=
-=-=
8 26
Trump's AG pick is letting a a 111-year-old corpse dictate your rights
Thom HartmannAugust 06, 2026
Todd Blanche is campaigning to become our real, confirmed Attorney General, presumably so he can better help Donald Trump, his corrupt family, and the 13 billionaires in his cabinet make off with as much of our money as they can.
Most recently, his campaign took him to the rightwing “religious” group Intercessors for America. When he was asked about progress in totally ending legal abortion in America, or at least Red State America, he told them:
“We don’t have complete victory yet, but we will have victory, and victory will be soon, and and it will be permanent.”
He added, later in the call:
“If states have said, ‘We are going to protect the unborn and we’re going to protect every life from the moment of conception,’ we’re putting practices and policies in place so that other states and other organizations can’t attack that. They can’t do things like they’re doing with mailing in mail-order drugs.”
So, how’s he going to pull this off? His sworn testimony before Congress may offer us a glimpse into the plan.
Ted Cruz asked him:
“18 USC 24 Section 1461, the Comstock Act, provides that every article or thing designed or adapted or intended for producing abortion is declared to be non-mailable. I have to admit that statutory text to me looks quite straightforward. It is not subtle. It is not difficult. It is straightforward. …
“[W]ill you commit that the Department will carefully evaluate every lawful action available to ensure the faithful enforcement of the Comstock Act and other Federal pro-life acts?”
Blanche answered: “Yes.”
How does he plan to “protect every life from the moment of conception”? Apparently, with the Comstock Act. And he may well have the backing of the six Republicans on the Supreme Court as their next step after their Dobbs decision.
Back during oral arguments before the Supreme Court in March of 2024, the Comstock Act was invoked repeatedly by Sam Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Erin Hawley, the wife of Republican Senator Josh Hawley, who was the lawyer arguing before the Court that the abortion drug, Mifepristone, should be banned nationwide.
Justice Sam Alito said:
“This [Comstock Act] is a prominent provision. It’s not some obscure subsection of a complicated, obscure law. Everybody in this field knew about it.”
Erin Hawley was emphatic:
“We don’t think that there’s any case of this court that empowers FDA to ignore other federal law. The Comstock Act says that drugs should not be mailed … either through the mail or through common carriers.”
And Clarence Thomas laid out the possibility of future litigation when he essentially threatened the lawyer for Danco Laboratories, the manufacturer of Mifepristone:
“How do you respond to an argument that mailing your product and advertising it would violate the Comstock Act?” He went on to note that the law “is fairly broad, and it specifically covers drugs such as yours.”
In other words, they want the Act enforced today.
So, what the heck is the Comstock Act and why are Republicans trying to revive it before the Supreme Court and in threatening letters to pharmacy chains?
You’ve probably never heard of Anthony Comstock, a Civil War Union soldier and New York Postmaster, who died in 1915. You need to learn about him and his legacy, however, as his long fingers are about to reach up out of the grave and wrap themselves around the necks of every American woman of childbearing years.
Anthony Comstock was a mama’s boy who hated sex. His mother died when he was 10 years old and the shock apparently never left him; women who didn’t live up to her ideal were his open and declared enemies, as were pornography, masturbation, and abortion. He was so ignorant of sex and reproduction that he believed a visible human-like fetus developed “within seconds” of sexual intercourse.
Comstock spent decades scouring the country collecting hard-core pornography, which he enthusiastically shared with men in Congress, and harassing “loose women.” For example, when he visited a belly-dancing show (then a new craze) in Chicago at the Cairo Theatre during the World’s Fair of 1893, he demanded the show be shut down.
As Amy Sohn, who wrote a brilliant Comstock biography titled The Man Who Hated Women, noted:
“Despite national controversy and Comstock’s intervention, ultimately the only alteration made to the fair’s belly dancing was costuming: the dancers swapped their gauze blouses for thin woolen undershirts. The vice hunter had lost in Chicago. But he would not forget the dancers, and would have four of them arrested and fined when they came to New York that winter. New York, after all, was Comstockland.”
Comstock lobbied for and shepherded through Congress a law passed on March 3, 1873 titled “An Act for the Suppression of Trade in, and Circulation of, obscene Literature and Articles of immoral Use.” Today we refer to it as the Comstock Act.
It’s language with regard to abortion is not at all ambiguous:
“Every obscene, lewd, lascivious, indecent, filthy or vile article, matter, thing, device, or substance … designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral use; and
“Every article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose; and
“Every written or printed card, letter, circular, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or notice of any kind giving information, directly or indirectly, where, or how, or from whom, or by what means any of such mentioned matters, articles, or things may be obtained or made, or where or by whom any act or operation of any kind for the procuring or producing of abortion will be done or performed, or how or by what means abortion may be produced, whether sealed or unsealed; and
“Every paper, writing, advertisement, or representation that any article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing may, or can, be used or applied for producing abortion, or for any indecent or immoral purpose; and
“Every description calculated to induce or incite a person to so use or apply any such article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing—
“Is declared to be nonmailable matter and shall not be conveyed in the mails or delivered from any post office or by any letter carrier.” (emphasis mine)
The penalty is also not ambiguous. Persons mailing information about abortion, or drugs or devices to produce an abortion:
“[S]hall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, for the first such offense, and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both, for each such offense thereafter.” (emphasis mine)
The Biden administration argued that the Comstock Act of 1873 was set aside almost a century ago.
And, indeed, in 1930, the Appeals Court for the Second Circuit ruled in Youngs Rubber Corp. v. C.I. Lee & Co that the law couldn’t apply to things sent through the mail that are legal, even if they were illegal at the time of the passage of the Comstock Act. (The case involved condoms manufactured by Youngs Rubber Company.)
“Such a construction,” the Court wrote, “would prevent mailing to or by a physician of any drug or mechanical device ‘adapted’ for contraceptive or abortifacient uses, although the physician desired to use or to prescribe it for proper medical purposes.”
The law has been amended by Congress four times (in 1955, 1958, 1971, and 1994), but the language above about abortion was never struck because legislators figured the 1930 appeals court’s ruling rendered it nugatory.
But don’t tell that to Trump’s appointee, Texas District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk of Amarillo, who ruled in 2023 that Mifepristone was to be banned nationwide: he based a large part of his decision on the plain language of the Comstock Act.
Republican members of Congress agree, and want the Comstock Act enforced nationwide now. They think they don’t even need a ruling from the Supreme Court: they just need Todd Blanche to “enforce the law already on the books.”
In a letter sent to CVS (among other pharmacy chains), Mississippi Republican Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith and eight other Republican senators (Lankford, Daines, Braun, Rubio, Marshall, Risch, Crapo and Blackburn) wrote that the Biden interpretation (and that of Congress in 1955, 1958, 1971, and 1994) is wrong.
They explicitly asserted that the Comstock Act is still in effect and they want it enforced:
“We write to express our support and agreement with 21 [Republican] State Attorneys General,” they wrote “who have reminded you that Federal law in 18 U.S.C. 1461-1462 [the Comstock Act] criminalizes nationwide using the mail, or interstate shipment by any express company or common carrier, to send or receive any drug that is ‘designed, adapted, or intended for producing abortion.’”
The 1930 court ruling that lawmakers and judges had, for over 90 years, believed only applied the Comstock Act to items that were illegal (like child porn), Senator Hide-Smith wrote:
“[D]oes not protect CVS or any other individual or entity from being prosecuted within the five-year statute of limitations for the illegal mailing or interstate shipment of abortion drugs … even for conduct that occurs today.”
Keep in mind, under the plain language of the Comstock Act this could also apply to birth control pills, IUDs, and other things used to prevent pregnancy. And, of course, pornography and “masturbation devices” like vibrators.
The lawyer for Republicans defending Kacsmaryk’s ruling, Erin Hawley, went so far as to assert before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that even physicians and pharmacies shouldn’t be able to receive Mifepristone or other drugs that could produce an abortion via the mail, FedEx, or UPS:
“What the Comstock law says is that it is improper to mail things that induce or cause abortions, which is precisely the action the FDA took in 2021 when it permitted the mailing of abortion drugs.”
If Hawley’s interpretation is enforced by Todd Blanche once he’s securely settled into his office with a vote by Republicans in the Senate, all abortions in the United States could be ended when drugs and suction and surgical devices designed specifically for the procedure can no longer be shipped to hospitals, clinics, or physicians’ offices.
This is no idle threat.
As Washington Post reporter Dan Diamond wrote for his Substack newsletter, anti-abortion activist Mark Lee Dickson, who’s helped several cities around the country put into law local versions of the Comstock Act, told him:
“If a future president were to enforce these federal statutes, then they could shut down every abortion facility in America.”
This is the specific goal of these mostly “Christian” religious fanatics: to completely outlaw all abortion and radically restrict access to birth control. And having Blanche start enforcing the law that’s already on the books, provoking a battle heading for the Supreme Court, is all it would take.
Such a case would, based on Blanche’s sworn testimony to the Senate, have Republicans, Clarence Thomas, and Sam Alito gleefully rubbing their hands in anticipation.
So, if you’re concerned about the future of abortion rights in America, it might be a good time to call your Senators — particularly if either is a Republican — and let them know your thoughts on Blanche’s nomination that’ll probably get a vote in the next two days.
-=-=
-=-=
no immunity for big oil com
climaTE TOWN 7 26
that shoulder belongs to this woman. Her name is Sharon Eubanks and she's the former
24:5024 minutes, 50 secondsdirector of the tobacco litigation team for the United States Department of Justice.
24:5524 minutes, 55 secondsBoth industries lied to the public and regulators about what they knew about the harms of their products and when they knew it. The deceptive advertising
25:0425 minutes, 4 secondsand the PR of the fossil fuel industry is now under intense legal scrutiny.
25:1025 minutes, 10 secondsMore than 1,800 lawsuits has been fi have been filed regarding climate liability worldwide. Many of these cases
25:1825 minutes, 18 secondsconcern the misleading fake science that the industry per purposefully distributed to the public for decades.
25:2625 minutes, 26 secondsBut luckily for big oil, the US government looks a little different these days. Don't you ever accuse me of a crime.
25:3325 minutes, 33 secondsAfter some lobbying from the oil companies, the Trump administration is actively trying to prevent these lawsuits from going forward. In early
25:4125 minutes, 41 secondsMay, the Trump DOJ filed its own lawsuit to stop a Minnesota case, which was on track to begin discovery after the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the suit.
25:4925 minutes, 49 secondsThat same Justice Department filed similar lawsuits in Hawaii and Michigan, also designed to stop these state level cases. [music] I think we actually have a clip of the Trump DOJ here.
25:5925 minutes, 59 secondsOh no.
26:0226 minutes, 2 secondsOh no. Oh, [ ] my life. And to top it all off, Republicans have now introduced federal legislation that would give big
26:1026 minutes, 10 secondsoil full legal immunity from any lawsuit and the discovery process that goes along with them. Here's the Senate
26:1826 minutes, 18 secondsversion introduced by stand-up comedian John Kennedy's number one fan, Ted Cruz, to prohibit liability against those
26:2526 minutes, 25 secondsengaged in the mining, extraction, production, refinement, transportation, distribution, marketing, manufacture, or
26:3226 minutes, 32 secondssale of energy for damages or injunctive or other relief from the use of their products and for other purposes. So,
26:3926 minutes, 39 secondshere we are with some lawmakers arguing, "Yeah, maybe we should give open-ended absolute immunity to the biggest oil companies in the world." Well, also we get this [music] in the Senate.
---
COM DR
Ted Cruz Admits Trump Accounts Are Designed to Privatize Social Security Over Time
One advocate said the Texas Republican laid bare the “two-pronged strategy to push Social Security privatization: Creating the Trump accounts with one hand and gutting the Social Security Administration with the other.”
May 08, 2026
---
NO RIZZ? AN 1 26
Secret recordings reveal Ted Cruz trashing Trump and Vance
---
an 1 26
More Republicans in the U.S. Senate are now calling for the impeachment of federal judges who have issued rulings striking down President Donald Trump's policies.
NBC News reported Wednesday that U.S. District Judges James Boasberg (appointed by former President Barack Obama) and Deborah Boardman (appointed by former President Joe Biden) have now been targeted for impeachment by multiple pro-Trump lawmakers, including Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.). While a Republican member of the House of Representatives has issued articles of impeachment naming the two judges, there have not been any votes. Cruz is hoping that will change.
"Both of these judges, I believe, meet the standard for impeachment and for conviction and removal from office," Cruz said during a Wednesday hearing.
Sen. Schmitt called Boasberg — who ruled that Trump did not have the authority to deport Venezuelans to El Salvador last year under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 — "the embodiment of a rogue judge."
"[Boasberg has] made it clear time and time again in his rulings and his comments that he, instead of wearing that black robe, wears, in fact, a blue jersey," Schmitt said. "He has continually abused the power as chief judge."
Judge Boardman – who has jurisdiction in the District of Maryland — has been targeted for impeachment for sentencing someone who attempted to kill Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to eight years in prison. Republicans like Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) insist Boardman gave the defendant too light of a sentence, and that she treated the sentencing like "an ordinary criminal case."
Despite the calls for impeachment, it's unlikely that either judge will be removed from their position. In addition to a majority of the House of Representatives to support impeachment, two-thirds of the U.S. Senate — 67 members — would have to vote for conviction. Republicans currently have just 53 seats, and would need 14 Democrats to join them.
Click here to read NBC's report in its entirety.
---
-=-=
rww 10 26
Jennifer Bowers Bahney @ Mediaite: Ted Cruz Goes Off On ‘Left-Wing Transgender’ Witches In Bizarre Midterm Campaign Rant
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) made a bizarre statement about Democratic voters being transgender witches and lunatics during a pre-midterm interview with Alaskan Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) Saturday.
-=-=
icn
As efforts continue to hold some of the world’s largest fossil fuel corporations liable for destructive and deadly climate impacts, backlash from the politically powerful oil and gas industry and its allies in government is on the rise, bolstered by the Trump administration’s allegiance to fossil fuels.
From lobbying Congress for liability protection to suing states over their climate liability laws and lawsuits, attempts to shield Big Oil from potential liability and to shut down climate accountability initiatives are advancing on multiple fronts.
“The effort has escalated dramatically in the past six or seven months,” said Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity, an organization that advocates for holding fossil fuel companies accountable for selling products they knew were dangerously warming the planet.
Pushback to liability initiatives from fossil fuel interests is not new. But the political landscape has shifted dramatically this year as the second Trump administration works to reward loyalists and campaign donors, including fossil fuel interests.
The oil and gas industry spent $445 million during the last election cycle to influence President Donald Trump and Congress, including $96 million on Trump’s re-election campaign, according to the progressive advocacy group Climate Power.
“What has changed is that there is a new administration,” said Lisa Graves, founder and executive director of True North Research, a national investigative watchdog group. And the Trump administration, she said, “is continuing to defend the fossil fuel industry and assail anyone who dares try to hold them accountable.”
Over the past eight years, communities across the country have filed tobacco-style lawsuits targeting ExxonMobil and major players in the fossil fuel industry, seeking to recover damages for localized climate impacts or to force companies to cease greenwashing and other misleading behavior.
More than 30 of these lawsuits brought by municipal, tribal and state governments are working their way through the courts, and several are now closer than ever to reaching trial.
At the same time, some states are enacting or considering so-called climate superfund legislation that would hold large fossil fuel companies strictly liable for climate damages and require them to help pay for a portion of climate change costs incurred by state governments. Vermont and New York both passed climate superfund laws last year, and similar legislation is pending in a handful of other states.
In response to these budding accountability efforts, the fossil fuel industry, the Trump administration, Republicans in Congress and GOP attorneys general are mounting what Wiles describes as a “massive orchestrated campaign” to try to stop climate liability laws and lawsuits in their tracks, and to push for legal immunity akin to what gun manufacturers received two decades ago. Trump’s Department of Justice has even filed highly unusual, if not unprecedented, lawsuits against Vermont and New York seeking to overturn their climate superfund statutes.
“It’s just this superbly choreographed effort on the part of the oil industry and its allies to get gun-industry-style legal immunity for all the damage that they’ve caused,” Wiles told Inside Climate News.
Oil Industry Is Lobbying Congress for a Liability Shield
Among the climate liability lawsuits inching closer to trial: a consumer protection case brought by Massachusetts against ExxonMobil, and suits seeking damages filed by Honolulu, Hawaii, and Boulder, Colorado.
As reported by The Wall Street Journal earlier this year and confirmed by The New York Times last month, industry representatives are lobbying Congress for a liability shield of some kind.
The details remain unclear. But the American Petroleum Institute, a trade group, reports lobbying on “draft legislation related to state efforts to impose liability on the oil and gas industry,” while disclosures from ConocoPhillips show that the company has lobbied on the matter of “state superfund legislation,” including draft legislation in Congress addressing it.
Neither API nor ConocoPhillips responded to requests for comment.
Pat Parenteau, emeritus professor of law at Vermont Law and Graduate School, told Inside Climate News that he thinks immunity provisions for the fossil fuel industry are unlikely to pass the Senate.
But the fact that the fossil fuel industry is lobbying for legal protections suggests to Wiles that the industry realizes it could be facing serious legal jeopardy. “Let’s be clear. You don’t seek a [liability] waiver unless you know you’re guilty,” Wiles said.
Darren Woods, CEO of ExxonMobil, speaks alongside Energy Secretary Chris Wright (left) and Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, at the Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit at Carnegie Mellon University on July 15 in Pittsburgh. Credit: Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
Over the summer, language emerged in a draft House Appropriations Committee spending bill that specifically would prohibit the District of Columbia from using funds to enforce its consumer protection law “against oil and gas companies for environmental claims.” The bill that included this provision passed the committee but was not brought to the full House for a vote.
But climate accountability advocates say the provision was still alarming because it effectively would have shut down D.C.’s ongoing consumer protection lawsuit against Big Oil. That suit, filed in 2020, alleges that several major oil companies lied to consumers about the climate risks of their products and that they continue to mislead consumers through greenwashing campaigns. In April the D.C. Superior Court rejected the companies’ motions to dismiss the suit.
Anne Havemann, deputy director and general counsel at Chesapeake Climate Action Network, said the appropriations provision “is a threat to this ongoing lawsuit.”
“If [D.C.] can’t use any money to prosecute these cases and advance these cases, then it effectively can’t work on them,” she said.
Big Oil Lawyers Seek Supreme Court Intervention
A parallel effort to skirt accountability is playing out in the courts. Fossil fuel companies are vigorously defending themselves in climate liability lawsuits, and they have seen some success in recent months getting cases dismissed by state trial courts.
Now Boulder’s lawsuit is back before the nation’s highest court on a fresh petition from the oil company defendants, after Colorado courts, including the state Supreme Court, refused to dismiss the case. The question posed by the companies in their petition is whether federal law precludes such state law claims.
It is unclear whether the Supreme Court will take up the case this time.
In January the Supreme Court denied a similar petition from oil companies in a case brought by Honolulu. Courts in Hawaii have rejected the companies’ bids to have the case dismissed, and with the Supreme Court declining to intervene, Honolulu’s case is advancing toward a trial.
Parenteau said the prospect of facing a trial and a potential adverse verdict likely has the oil companies extremely worried. “They’re certainly frightened of a trial just from a reputational standpoint,” he said.
The new petition in the Boulder case now offers the Supreme Court another opportunity to step in. Should the justices decide to intervene, legal experts say that it could essentially shut down all climate liability attempts.
“If they do step in, that’s huge. That changes everything,” Parenteau said. “That is the end game.”
“In one fell swoop it could get rid of all of these cases,” said James May, a law professor at Washburn University.
On Oct. 9, over 100 Republican House members submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court backing oil companies ExxonMobil and Suncor in their petition to block Boulder’s lawsuit from moving forward. It is the first time that Republicans in Congress have called on the Supreme Court to intervene in this litigation and to shut down not just this one lawsuit but all others like it.
“In recent years, multiple state and local governments have launched a courtroom war against the American energy industry,” the brief asserts in its opening. “It must stop now.”
The 103 Republican House members who signed onto the brief argue that the municipal and state lawsuits against oil and gas companies are trying to “dictate national energy policy” and that only the federal government has the authority to regulate transboundary greenhouse gas emissions.
“They are arguing that it’s solely EPA’s role to regulate greenhouse gases, but the Trump administration is attempting to eliminate that role by revoking the Endangerment Finding. If that revocation goes through and survives in the courts, it will greatly weaken the oil companies’ preemption defense,” Michael Gerrard, founder and faculty director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, told Inside Climate News.
“This full-court press to block these lawsuits shows that the oil companies and their allies in Congress are really nervous about what would come out if any of these cases actually went to trial,” Gerrard added.
Trump Administration on the Offensive
The Trump administration, through its Department of Justice, is fully backing the fossil fuel industry in climate liability litigation, filing amicus briefs, for example, in cases now pending before the U.S. Supreme Court and the Maryland Supreme Court.
But its efforts to shield the industry from accountability extend beyond friend-of-the-court briefs.
Following a White House meeting where oil company executives raised concerns about state climate laws and lawsuits, Trump issued an executive order in April directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to try to put a stop to these legal initiatives.
In response, the DOJ then sued four states, including preemptive suits brought against Hawaii and Michigan before either state had filed such a lawsuit (Hawaii sued major oil companies the next day). The DOJ’s other lawsuits targeted Vermont and New York to try to strike down their climate superfund laws, which are based on the “polluter pays” logic of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Superfund program aimed at forcing polluting companies to remediate damage from toxic waste sites.
President Donald Trump poses for photos after signing a series of executive orders on American energy production during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House on April 8. Trump was joined by (from left) EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, Interior Secretary Doug Bergum and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. Credit: Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
Advances in a field known as climate attribution science have made the “polluter pays” aspect of the superfund laws possible, enabling scientists to quantify the individual contributions of major fossil fuel producers to climate impacts such as sea level rise and heat waves.
The DOJ has now filed motions for summary judgment in both of these lawsuits, asking federal courts to permanently block the states’ climate superfund laws.
“Vermont’s flagrantly unconstitutional statute threatens to throttle energy production, despite this Administration’s efforts to unleash American energy. It’s high time for the courts to put a stop to this crippling state overreach,” Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson said in a statement issued by the DOJ on Sept. 16.
Havemann, with the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, told Inside Climate News that the current Trump administration seems to be taking a more aggressive approach to protecting the fossil fuel industry and to fighting attempts to hold it accountable.
“The Trump administration has come in and used many different tools in its toolbox to go after these accountability lawsuits and the laws that also seek to hold the biggest polluters accountable for climate damages,” she said. “It’s very much on the radar of the Trump administration in a way that it has not been in the past.”
The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
“Enter the Dragon”
With U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) holding the gavel, climate litigation came up as the subject of a Republican-led congressional hearing this summer before a Judiciary Committee subcommittee.
The hearing’s provocative title: “Enter the Dragon—China and the Left’s Lawfare Against American Energy Dominance.”
Cruz used the hearing to attack climate liability lawsuits and claim that they are a nefarious left-wing plot that is in part funded by, and that benefits, the Chinese Communist Party. “Both China and the Democrats want to bankrupt the American energy industry,” Cruz said during the hearing.
NPR’s Michael Copley reported last month that “Cruz’s office has not offered evidence that China or a China-linked nonprofit that Cruz identified by name has funded climate lawsuits in the United States.”
In response to that reporting, Cruz told Inside Climate News that “NPR deliberately ignored objective facts.”
“The Chinese Communist Party uses cut-outs and ‘nonprofits’ to shape U.S. energy policy, funding propaganda, advocacy, and litigation that harm American workers,” Cruz said in an emailed statement, which was also included in the NPR story after it was published. The “China-linked nonprofit” referenced in the NPR story, Energy Foundation China, does fund some climate initiatives, Cruz said in his statement.
“In January 2024, three House committee chairs opened an investigation into Chinese influence, citing EFC’s ties and funding of groups like [the Natural Resources Defense Council] and RMI,” he added.
A spokesperson for RMI, a nonprofit group working on the global energy transition, said that the organization “does not participate in litigation.” RMI’s “work supported by Energy Foundation China, which is a U.S. based charitable organization, is focused squarely on the energy transition inside of China,” the spokesperson added.
The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a nonprofit group that works to protect public health and the environment, does some “work in China for one reason: there’s not a single global environmental problem that can be fixed unless China is part of the solution,” NRDC spokesperson Josh Mogerman said. He added that the organization “does not fundraise in China” and that “money from China does not fund NRDC litigation in the United States, period.”
Cruz, who represents the country’s biggest oil and gas producing state, did not respond to Inside Climate News’ question about whether he supports immunizing oil companies from liability.
GOP Attorneys General Enter the Fray
During the Cruz-led hearing, the Republican attorney general for the state of Kansas, Kris Kobach, testified as one of the majority witnesses. He referenced the New York and Vermont climate superfund laws, claiming these statutes impose extraterritorial regulation on energy companies, and mentioned that his state and other Republican-led states are suing to try to overturn these state laws.
“We will continue these fights in court as state attorneys general. But we do need some help from Congress,” Kobach said. He suggested that Congress could legislate to expressly preempt state climate laws like the climate superfund laws.
Kobach and 15 other Republican state attorneys general also made this suggestion, along with several other recommendations for congressional action, in a letter addressed to Bondi, the U.S. attorney general.
The June 12 letter references Trump’s executive orders to “unleash” fossil fuels and protect the fossil fuel industry from “state overreach.” The letter says its purpose is to “suggest additional steps” the Department of Justice could take to effectuate these orders and assist in the “fight against anti-energy interests.”
Specifically, the Republican AGs suggest the DOJ could recommend legislation to reinforce federal preemption of state climate liability laws or lawsuits; restrict federal funding for states seeking to impose liability on energy companies; create a right of removal to federal district court for climate suits; and, among other items, stop “activist-funded climate lawsuits” with a liability shield, similar to the law that granted immunity for gun manufacturers.
Wiles, with the Center for Climate Integrity, said it is especially striking to see Republican attorneys general explicitly recommend a similar liability shield for fossil fuel companies. “The attorneys general actually called for Congress to enact a gun-style liability waiver for the oil industry,” he said. “We saw how that [gun industry immunity] ended up. It certainly was not helpful in curbing gun violence or in serving any public interest objective.”
The coordinated litigation strategies and actions of Republican state attorneys general in defense of fossil fuel and other industries stem from an organization called the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), which Graves said was created in the wake of the tobacco industry being held accountable through the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement.
The organization, which currently lists 29 Republican state attorneys general as members, has been funded through donations from conservative judicial activists like Leonard Leo as well as from corporate interests including those in the fossil fuel industry. The American Petroleum Institute gave over $125,000 to RAGA in 2024, and in the first six months of this year Chevron’s Policy, Government and Public Affairs division donated $25,000 to the organization, for example.
Graves describes RAGA as a “pay-to-play organization.”
“It has a pay sheet listing what kind of access you get to attorneys general based on how much you give,” she told Inside Climate News.
“These attorneys general use the prestige of their office and their power and the resources that their taxpayers are providing to serve the interests of industry, select industries that they are most tied to, and that certainly includes the fossil fuel industry,” Graves added.
The Republican Attorneys General Association did not respond to a request for comment.
“A Perilous Moment”
The intensifying backlash to climate accountability efforts coming from the fossil fuel industry and its political defenders is happening at a time when some political scholars warn that the U.S. is sliding into some form of authoritarianism, which advocates say magnifies the challenges of holding powerful interests to account writ large.
“It’s a perilous moment for democratic norms and institutions,” said Kathy Mulvey, accountability campaign director for the climate and energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
“Anybody who is pursuing policy change or litigation for accountability or enforcement is counting on the courts to be a real backstop for democratic institutions,” Mulvey told Inside Climate News.
Should the fossil fuel industry somehow succeed in securing legal immunity, Wiles said it “would be consistent with the erosion of the rule of law that we’re seeing.”
“No industry should be above the law,” he added.
---
---
an 11 25
no lnx
Trump ally's claim about 'left-wing violence' just doesn't add up
Former acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf testifies in the Senate. Picture: Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution.
Jordan GreenNovember 02, 2025 |
Former acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf’s appearance before a Senate hearing on political violence this week resurfaced inconvenient remarks for a witness called by Republicans intent on painting rising political violence as a left-wing problem.
Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) read back Wolf’s Senate testimony from five years ago.
“White supremacist extremists, from a lethality standpoint over the last two years … are certainly the most persistent and lethal threat, when we talk about domestic violent extremists,” Wolf said at the time.
On Tuesday, before the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, chaired by Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-MO), Wolff offered a strikingly different assessment.
“The increase in politically motivated violence over the last several years has been driven largely by radical, left-wing extremist groups and individuals that believe violence is a legitimate means to achieve political goals,” Wolf testified.
Wolf is now executive vice president of the America First Policy Institute. Founded in 2021 and closely aligned with Trump, former leaders include Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, Secretary of Agriculture Brook Rollins and Attorney General Pam Bondi.
In a statement to Raw Story, Wolf did not disavow his 2020 assessment on white supremacist violence, but said: “America has experienced a historic rise in left-wing violence, especially following President Trump’s second election victory.”
At the time of Wolf’s September 2020 hearing, the U.S. had experienced a series of mass shootings by white supremacists, including Patrick Crusius, who killed 23 people, mostly Latinos, at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas in 2019, and Robert Bowers, who killed 11 at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018.
Both killers echoed Donald Trump’s rhetoric depicting immigrants and refugees as an “invasion” or “invaders.”
U.S. counterterrorism officials also took note of the 2019 massacre carried out by Brenton Tarrant, who killed 51 Muslims at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand.
Crusius cited Tarrant as an inspiration. So did Payton Gendron, who killed 10 African Americans at a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y. in 2022.
Tarrant’s attack catalyzed the emergence of the term “saints” among white supremacists to glorify terrorists. The U.S. Justice Department is currently prosecuting three Terrorgram leaders on terrorism-related charges.
“White supremacist violence is clearly not the primary threat facing our country today,” Wolf told Raw Story. “All you have to do is look at the data, which has changed significantly in the last five years.”
Wolf cited incidents often mentioned by the administration and allies to make the case that political violence now emanates from the left: the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, two attempts on Trump’s life, the attempted assassination of conservative Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and attacks on centers that offer an alternative to abortion services.
He did not cite the murder of Minnesota Democratic state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband by an abortion opponent; a recent death threat against Democratic House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) by a Jan. 6 rioter; or the bludgeoning of Paul Pelosi, husband of former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), by a QAnon follower.
Nor did Wolf mention some 1,500 individuals pardoned by President Trump over the Jan. 6 assault on Congress.
William Braniff, a former director of DHS’ Center for Prevention Programs under President Joe Biden testified alongside Wolf.
Braniff agreed that violent incidents are on the rise. But he told the subcommittee, “Violent events do not fit neatly into any one ideological category.”
Braniff noted that DHS contracted with the University of Maryland in 2005 to create a global terrorism database, by congressional mandate. In March, the Trump administration canceled funding.
Drawing on the database, Braniff said: “This year, compared to last year, terrorism events are up 67 percent. Fatalities are up nearly 150 percent. Americans are dying from ISIS-inspired, white supremacist, antisemitic, anti-government, anti-vax, anti-law enforcement and nihilistic attacks.”
‘Black Lives Matter and antifa riots’
In 2020, when Wolf flagged white supremacist violence, he was overseeing DHS as the first Trump administration deployed federal agents against protesters in Portland, Ore., a harbinger of the current standoff at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in the city.
On Tuesday, Sen. Schmitt and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) cited rioting related to protests against the police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis in 2020, a familiar Republican talking point.
“There is an epidemic of politically motivated violence,” Cruz said. “And the politically motivated violence in this country is overwhelmingly emanating from the left. We saw that during the Black Lives Matter and antifa riots across the country, as cities across America burned.”
Schmitt complained that some studies of political violence “systematically ignore antifa and Black Lives Matter riots.”
Michael Knowles, a podcast host at the conservative outlet The Daily Wire, complained in testimony that “the Black Lives Matter riots, overtly leftist demonstrations that left dozens of people dead … fail to show up on registers of left-wing political violence.”
Cruz, Schmitt and Knowles did not delve into who was responsible for such violence. The data suggests they were presenting an incomplete picture.
Drawing on data provided by the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED), and multiple news reports, Raw Story counted 34 deaths plausibly linked to racial justice protests and unrest in 2020, not counting the police killings that sparked protests. Of those, three appear to involve perpetrators directly linked to Black Lives Matter, “antifa” or their supporters.
On May 28, 2020, the second night of rioting in Minneapolis, rioters set fire to a pawnshop. The charred remains of 30-year-old Oscar Lee Stewart Jr. were found in the ruins. Montez Terriel Lee was convicted of arson and sentenced to a decade in prison.
The following month, 16-year-old Antonio Mays Jr. was shot inside a stolen Jeep Cherokee that sped through an area of Seattle known as the CHAZ — Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone — and occupied by protesters. No charges have been brought, but bystander video appears to implicate an activist security team patrolling amid fears of a right-wing attack.
In late August 2020, Aaron “Jay” Danielson, a member of the far-right group Patriot Prayer, was fatally shot in Portland, Ore. Michael Reinoehl, the self-described “antifa” shooter, claimed self-defense. Before he could be apprehended, Reinoehl was killed by federal agents, an event President Trump described as “retribution.”
Danielson’s death is the only politically motivated homicide in the U.S. linked to an identified antifascist in the past quarter-century.
In contrast, one study found that white supremacists and other right-wing extremists killed at least 329 between 1994 and 2020.
The circumstances of Danielson’s shooting remain unclear. As noted by ACLED, Trump supporters were staging a car caravan through downtown Portland, and some right-wingers “sprayed pepper spray and shot paintball guns at counter-demonstrators rallying in support of the BLM movement and against police brutality, as well as journalists.”
The entry also notes video showing right-wing demonstrators driving vehicles through left-wing counter-demonstrators attempting to block the streets.
‘Might shoot looters’
Eight other deaths in 2020 could be linked to racial justice protests, if not directly.
In some, civilian bystanders were killed by criminals who appeared to be exploiting chaos. Victims include David Dorn, a retired police captain in St. Louis whose widow spoke at the 2020 Republican National Convention; Chris Beaty, a former college football player murdered in Indianapolis while assisting a woman being mugged; and Marvin Francois, a photographer killed in a robbery while leaving a protest in Kansas City.
Among the most shocking deaths associated with the 2020 protests is that of 8-year-old Secoriea Turner, shot by an alleged Bloods gang member manning a barricade in the area where Rayshard Brooks was killed by Atlanta police. Julian Conley was convicted of murder and other offenses, and sentenced to life in prison.
But in at least 23 cases — roughly two thirds — Raw Story found that perpetrators of unrest-related deaths were not linked to Black Lives Matter, antifa or their supporters. They include five people killed by police, one killed by the National Guard, others killed by motorists and shopkeepers, a man with severe mental illness, and a security guard for a news crew.
In one example, Steven Carillo, an airman active in the far-right Boogaloo movement, took advantage of unrest after Floyd’s death to murder David Patrick Underwood, a federal security officer guarding the federal courthouse in Oakland, Calif., and Damon Gutzwiler, a Santa Cruz County deputy sheriff attempting to serve a warrant.
Raw Story’s analysis tallied 11 Black Lives Matter protesters killed: roughly equal to the number of unaffiliated civilians.
Two — Summer Taylor and Robert Forbes — were struck by vehicles. Barry Perkins III was dragged by a tractor-trailer. Others, including James Scurlock and Italia Impinto, were shot.
Garrett Foster, an Air Force veteran marching with BLM protesters in Austin, Texas on July 25, 2020, was fatally shot by Daniel Perry, a former soldier who reportedly searched for locations of protesters and told a friend he “might go to Dallas to shoot looters.” Perry was convicted of murder, then pardoned by Gov. Greg Abbott.
Perhaps most memorably, Kyle Rittenhouse fatally shot two BLM supporters during unrest in Kenosha, Wis. in 2020. He was acquitted on all charges.
---
---
an 10 25
Prominent conservatives are rebuking Kevin Roberts, the head of the Heritage Foundation — the organization behind Project 2025 and self-described “intellectual backbone” of the conservative movement — after he threw his support behind right-wing political commentator and podcaster Tucker Carlson, now under fire for platforming far-right extremist leader Nick Fuentes this week.
The editors of the right-wing National Review in a scathing editorial explained: “Tucker Carlson, knee-deep already, has taken another step into the muck with a friendly interview with Nick Fuentes.”
“The issue isn’t merely that Carlson ‘platformed’ a white-nationalist influencer,” they wrote. “The deeper problem is that Carlson didn’t actually challenge any of Fuentes’s noxious views that he has spelled out quite clearly over the years. Fuentes has engaged in Holocaust denial, called Adolf Hitler ‘really f– cool,’ and said that if his movement gained power, it would execute ‘perfidious Jews.'”
The editors continued: “In his appearance, Fuentes stated that the ‘big challenge’ to unifying the country against tribal interests was ‘organized Jewry in America,’ and he expressed admiration for Soviet butcher Joseph Stalin. He did not receive any pushback from Carlson.”
READ MORE: ‘Disturbing’: Johnson Scorched for Saying He’s Starving SNAP to ‘Pressure’ Democrats
In a video rushing to Carlson’s defense, Roberts declared, “The Heritage Foundation didn’t become the intellectual backbone of the conservative movement by canceling our own people or policing the consciences of Christians. And we won’t start doing that now.”
Instead, he framed the controversy surrounding Carlson and Fuentes as “the robust debate we invite, with our colleagues, our movement friends, our members, and the American public,” while vowing to “always defend truth.”
And Roberts insisted that “we will always defend our friends against the slander of bad actors who serve someone else’s agenda. That includes Tucker Carlson, who remains, and as I have said before, always will be a close friend of the Heritage Foundation.”
He vowed that the “attempt to cancel him will fail,” and said that “canceling” Fuentes is also “not the answer” — before denouncing “the vile ideas of the left.”
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in remarks made at a Republican Jewish Coalition gathering, said:
“If you sit there and nod adoringly while someone tells you that Winston Churchill was the villain of World War II, if you sit there and nod while someone says, ‘Well, there’s a very good argument that America should have intervened on behalf of Nazi Germany in World War II.’ If you sit there with someone who says Adolf Hitler was very, very cool and that their mission is to combat and defeat global Jewry, and you say nothing, then you are a coward, and you are complicit in that evil.”
READ MORE: Americans Turn Against Trump’s Crime Crackdowns: Report
As Jewish Insider reported, Cruz “did not mention the Heritage Foundation, Roberts, Carlson or Fuentes by name, though he accused anyone who uncritically promotes Adolf Hitler of being ‘complicit’ in spreading virulent antisemitism.”
Jewish Insider also reported that the head of the Republican Jewish Coalition, Matt Brooks, told the news outlet, “I am appalled, offended and disgusted that [Roberts] and Heritage would stand with Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes as somehow being acceptable spokespeople within the conservative movement.”
Brooks added, “obviously there’s going to be a reassessment of our relationship with Heritage in light of this.”
U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the former longtime Republican Leader, responded to Roberts’ video with biting condemnation: “The ‘intellectual backbone of the conservative movement’ is only as strong as the values it defends.”
“Last I checked, ‘conservatives should feel no obligation’ to carry water for antisemites and apologists for America-hating autocrats. But maybe I just don’t know what time it is…”
Right-wing commentator Erick Erickson, in a lengthy rebuke, blasted Roberts (and numerous other targets): “Kevin Roberts could have chosen to criticize Carlson as a friend. Kevin could have chosen silence. Instead, he picked the worst possible option of dismissing very legitimate criticism and did so in the most straw-man possible way.”
“I also know what Kevin Roberts, J.D. Vance, and others are doing as they dance around some of these guys, Erickson wrote. “They want to attract young zoomers to their side, many of them male, and they think the way to do that is to punch back hard at critics, refuse to fold to criticism, and show a high tolerance for inflammatory positions that rile up the left.”
===
---
OMFG
RWW
10/27/2025
by
Heritage Action, the political arm of the MAGA “think tank” behind the Trump administration’s Project 2025 policy agenda, is claiming that America’s city streets have been occupied by Marxist rioters to rally support for legislation that would empower President Donald Trump’s Justice Department to more aggressively wage war against the president’s political opponents.
“End the Marxist Occupation of our Streets,” reads a Heritage Action campaign message, which praises Trump's designation of Antifa as a "domestic terrorist organization." The message includes an illustrated graphic of a television “PUBLIC SAFETY ALERT” reading “MARXIST RIOTERS IN YOUR CITY AVOID PUBLIC AREAS AT ALL COSTS.”
The campaign by Heritage Action urges people to petition Congress to pass the Stop FUNDERS Act being promoted by Sen. Ted Cruz, Rep. Beth Van Duyne, and other MAGA Republicans. FBI Director Kash Patel endorsed the legislation at a congressional hearing last month.
Cruz told Fox News this month that his legislation would allow the Justice Department to “prosecute the money” that is funding “No Kings” protests and suggested without offering any evidence that the more than 200 organizations that have supported the overwhelmingly peaceful “No Kings” protests are part of a “criminal enterprise.”
Advocates warn that the Cruz legislation would, especially in the hands of the nakedly politicized Trump Justice Department, threaten freedom of speech and the right to dissent:
The legislation “would dangerously lower the bar for government investigations into Americans exercising their right to peaceful demonstration,” said Cole Leiter, executive director of Americans Against Government Censorship, a coalition of progressive and labor groups that launched late last year.
“By branding protest as a criminal activity, this bill threatens to intimidate people from engaging in peaceful, lawful advocacy and puts everyday Americans at risk of being dragged into sprawling investigations,” he added.
Trump has publicly demanded that the Justice Department deploy the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act – known as RICO – to prosecute his political opponents and progressive organizations and funders.
The Cruz bill would allow the federal government to, in Cruz’s words, “use the full suite of RICO tools against entities who fund or coordinate violent interstate riots.” According to Cruz’s office, those tools include “joint liability and group prosecution, conspiracy charges, asset forfeiture, and enhanced criminal penalties.” The Cruz press release claims the act would also “deter abuse of nonprofit status and expose hidden financial pipelines behind politically motivated violence.”
In his “war on the left,” Trump and his allies have repeatedly smeared and threatened philanthropists George and Alex Soros and the Open Society Foundations. The Guardian noted recently that Trump’s unsubstantiated claims “provided more specificity to a threat that liberal non-profits have been planning for since his election victory last year: a crackdown on their organizations and major Democratic funders designed to intimidate them from carrying out their work, waste their time with investigations and ultimately hobble the opposition.”
The Open Society Foundations recently responded to Trump administration attacks, saying in part:
Our activities are peaceful and lawful, and our grantees are expected to abide by human rights principles and comply with the law.
These accusations are politically motivated attacks on civil society, meant to silence speech the administration disagrees with and undermine the first amendment right to free speech. When power is abused to take away the rights of some people, it puts the rights of all people at risk.
Our work in the United States is dedicated to strengthening democracy and upholding constitutional freedoms. We stand by the work we do to improve lives in the United States and across the world.
Dozens of civil society organizations have condemned the Trump administration's attacks on the Open Society Foundations. In addition, People For the American Way has denounced “President Trump’s campaign to weaponize the entire federal government against anyone who stands in the way of his destructive agenda.”
Heritage Action is also urging the House to “establish — and dedicate adequate time, authority, staff, and resources to — a select committee to investigate the rise of left-wing terrorism.” In reality, there is evidence that “most domestic terrorists in the U.S. are politically on the right, and right-wing attacks account for the vast majority of fatalities from domestic terrorism.”
---}:
---
After Kirk shooting, right-wing media revive false narrative about attack on Minnesota legislators
Written by Matt Gertz
Published09/17/25
In the wake of the killing of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, many on the right have claimed that all political violence comes from the left, an argument used to justify a broad crackdown against their political enemies. The June shooting of two Democratic state legislators in Minnesota is the most prominent recent evidence against that argument (though hardly the only such case).
But several right-wing media figures have found a rhetorical solution by suggesting that the alleged Minnesota shooter — who reportedly had a “hit list” of dozens of other Democratic leaders and was, according to his friend and roommate, a supporter of President Donald Trump — is actually a leftist.
In fact, the right-wing media bubble is so impermeable to facts that contradict its narratives that prominent Republican figures, including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Attorney General Pam Bondi, have pushed the same claims.
The right’s false narrative about the Minnesota shootings
Federal prosecutors allege that Vance Boelter committed “targeted political assassinations” when he shot and killed Minnesota House of Representatives Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband, then shot and wounded Minnesota State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, in the early morning hours of June 14.
:{:{Boelter, like many alleged perpetrators of political violence, seemed to be suffering from mental illness that muddled the clarity of his views. But his preferences appear to be with the political right — he was reportedly an evangelical Christian who preached against abortion and the LGBTQ community, and according to his roommate and longtime friend, he “supported Trump and tuned in to programming from Alex Jones’s conspiracy-filled Infowars site.”}:
And his targets were universally on the political left: Hortman, and Hoffman’s legislative district, were reportedly named in a “hit list” that law enforcement subsequently recovered from Boelter’s vehicle; the list also included Gov. Tim Walz, dozens of other Democratic lawmakers from Minnesota and elsewhere, and “figures with ties to the abortion rights movement, including Planned Parenthood.”}:
None of these facts should suggest that the political right or the Republican Party as a whole bear responsibility for Boelter’s alleged political violence or that their repression is justified to prevent similar attacks. They are relevant, however, to the question of whether political violence is solely directed from the left toward the right.
But while those facts were trickling out in the days following the attack, MAGA influencers were spinning up a narrative in which Boelter was actually a leftist. Some even suggested that the attacks may have been ordered by Walz, perhaps as retribution for the legislators supporting legislation the governor opposed. This argument rested on two ludicrously thin pieces of evidence. First, Walz had, in 2019, reappointed Boelter to a workforce development advisory board that reportedly “has about 60 members, many of whom are not politically connected or would have meaningful access to the governor or interactions with him.” Second, police found flyers with “No Kings” written on them in Boelter’s vehicle, which they said could have indicated he planned to target anti-Trump protests scheduled to take place later that day.
The right revives the false Minnesota narrative following Kirk’s killing
Many prominent right-wing figures seem to have either never heard any information about Boelter outside of those initial conspiracy theories, or learned of it but decided to hide the facts from their audiences. And now, in the wake of Kirk’s killing by an apparent leftist whose alleged motive was to stop Kirk’s “hate,” the false narrative has been revived by MAGA commentators who are trying to push back against arguments that the Minnesota shootings were a case of political violence from the right.
Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade, while listing recent cases of politically motivated killings on September 13, described the Minnesota shootings as follows: “And then, June 14, these Minnesota legislators were killed, something to do with what’s going on locally — they didn’t like what Tim Walz was doing, or a former staffer of Tim Walz.” Neither Kilmeade nor Fox’s graphic identified the legislators as Democrats.
Fox host Will Cain claimed on his Tuesday broadcast that “essentially bullets are flying in one direction,” but the left is trying “to make this a both-sides problem of political violence” by falsely attributing cases like the Minnesota shootings to the right.
“What we know about that particular suspect’s motivations remains somewhat unclear, but we do know that he had with him flyers that had No Kings Day protests solicitation on them,” Cain said. “There is also some suggestion he was upset about the way Hortman voted when it came to illegal immigrants and health care. Before we assume it is both sides, let’s get the facts on each instance.”
Video
Citation
From the September 16, 2025, edition of Fox News' The Will Cain Show
Newsmax host Rob Finnerty offered a similar explanation on his show later that night. “They're trying to pretend that what happened to Charlie Kirk has nothing to do with the left, that this happens all the time on both sides, which is not true,” he said, before turning to the Minnesota shootings.
“The problem with that, Melissa Hortman was a Democrat, and while her death was tragic, she was actually killed by another Democrat,” Finnerty claimed. “Not only that, a Democrat who worked directly for Tim Walz, was appointed by Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, Kamala's running mate, meaning that in this case, a Democrat literally assassinated another Democrat.”
“Because that's the left,” he continued. “That's what they do as a party, and it's not being covered by the rest of the media. It's being covered up.”
This narrative about the Minnesota shooting is so prevalent in right-wing media — and the GOP’s leaders are so ensconced within the right-wing media bubble — that Republican politicians have promoted it.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who is pathologically online, had posted shortly after the June attack that the shooter had been a “Marxist.” He later deleted his posts after being confronted by Sen. Tina Smith (D-MN), who had also been on the alleged “hit list.”
But three months later, their colleague Cruz also linked the Minnesota shooter to the left.
When Cruz called political violence “a left-wing problem” during a CNN interview on Tuesday, host Kaitlan Collins responded by pointing to the Minnesota shooting.
“You need to get your facts right,” Cruz replied. “The assassin there was not a right-wing assassin acting on a political motive. The assassin there was someone who had been an appointee of Tim Walz, and he was a deranged lunatic.”
Likewise, asked about the Minnesota shooting on Monday, Bondi said of the alleged killer, “I believe they said that they were supporters of Gov. Walz."
As I wrote last week, we can’t have a real conversation about political violence if we can’t admit that it has come from both sides. But many on the right just don’t seem capable of doing that, and they’re backfilling whatever explanations they can conjure up to avoid admitting the existence of political violence from the right.
// MMA
09/12/25 1:22 PM EDT
06/16/25 12:50 PM EDT
06/20/25
---
---
rww
03/12/2025
by
- Andrew Prokop @ Vox: Conservatives’ decades-long quest to destroy the Department of Education
Trump has already cut the department’s staff in half. He won’t stop there.
- Sean Craig @ The Daily Beast: Boebert Doubles Down on Bizarre ‘Pimp Cane’ Attack on Black Lawmaker
The MAGA congresswoman is now claiming that her Democratic colleague Al Green does not have to use his mobility aid.
- Pavan Acharya and Robert Downen @ The Texas Tribune: Rafael Cruz, father of Ted Cruz, wants Texas to require school lessons about “evil” of communism
The prominent right-wing pastor told state lawmakers that an anti-communist curriculum is crucial to reaffirming that America is a “Christian country.”
- Alex Griffing @ Mediaite: ‘He’s Not Jewish Anymore’: Trump Escalates Attack On Chuck Schumer Being ‘Palestinian’ By Taking Away His Religion
President Donald Trump took questions in the Oval Office on Wednesday while meeting with the prime minister of Ireland and at one point declared that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) “isn’t Jewish anymore.”
- David Edwards @ Raw Story: 'Look what Christians endure!' MAGA TV host melts down over 'strip clubs on every corner'
Pro-MAGA Real America's Voice host Gina Loudon complained because she said Christians were forced to "endure" adult "strip clubs on every corner."
- Logan M. Davis @ The Colorado Times Recorder: ‘Bleed it Dry, Then Get the Hell Out’ – The Fight for Tax Dollars in Woodland Park Schools
When the Woodland Park City Council convened for a special meeting on Monday morning, no one expected the vote to be unanimous. No one was even quite sure which way the vote would go. By the time the adjourning gavel fell two and a half hours later, though, all seven members of council had converged on the same page, determined to put an end to the latest crisis triggered by the town’s controversial school board.
---
---
an 3 25
Ever since Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) became chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee in January, he's been fighting to get unilateral subpoena powers.
Politico reported Wednesday that he may soon get those expanded powers on a party-line vote this evening. Ranking member Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) reminded her colleagues that this would be a significant expansion of the chair's role, as subpoenas have previously been issued with bipartisan cooperation. Politico reporter Ben Leonard noted that this would be a "major break in precedent" in how the committee has previously handled the process of compelling testimony and obtaining documents.
"Going back at least 20 years, the chair and ranking member of this committee typically work together and reach consensus on subpoenas being issued because there is no question the matter being investigated is improper or the party being investigated was not being cooperative," Cantwell said.
READ MORE:'Delusional' or 'crazy reckless' Trump 'sleepwalking toward political loss': ex-Bush speechwriter
Cruz's gambit stems from an ongoing feud with the Massachusetts Port Authority (Massport), in which immigrants were allowed to sleep at Boston's Logan Airport up until last July due to a shortage of beds at designated immigrant shelters. Democratic Governor Maura Healey officially banned the airport from sheltering immigrants, though the Boston Globe has reported that immigrant families have still been spotted sleeping at the airport since Healey's ban.
The Texas Republican wants to subpoena Massport to get to the bottom of whether it's still allowing the practice. However, Massport spokesperson Jennifer Mehigan said "no families have stayed at the airport" since last July and that it is "working closely with the [Commerce] Committee and appreciate their patience as we gather the documents to voluntarily comply fully with their request." Cruz has pushed back and argues that Massport is violating federal grant rules.
“In recent years, the Senate has allowed our oversight muscles to atrophy. Oversight rarely occurs in our standing committees, and I believe our country is worse off for it. … It’s a front where I will continue to lead as chairman,” Cruz said. “Massport apparently believes that the Senate has no jurisdiction in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.”
While Republicans have a majority on the Commerce committee, it's still an open question whether Cruz will get his wish of expanded subpoena powers. Some in Trumpworld reportedly have reservations about his promise to subpoena Big Tech executives who became some of President Donald Trump's biggest donors in the 2024 cycle.
READ MORE:'Single greatest threat': Ted Cruz defiant after Trump attempts to curb his subpoena power
Click here to read Politico's report in full.
---
an 1 25
'Single greatest threat': Ted Cruz defiant after Trump attempts to curb his subpoena power
===
---
alternet
It's not just social media that's giving violent white supremacists a pass
Thom Hartmann January 11, 2025
— The fossil fuel industry is apparently paying off Republicans — in a practice legalized by Republicans on the Supreme Court — to make sure Congress never passes legislation to hold them accountable for all the death and destruction they’ve caused by lying about climate change for the past 50 years. Here, for example, are the biggest recipients of their largesse, according to OpenSecrets: Romney, Mitt (R-UT) $8,291,262; Cornyn, John (R-TX) $4,678,062; Cruz, Ted (R-TX) $4,138,421; McConnell, Mitch (R-KY) $2,852,107; McCarthy, Kevin (R-CA) $2,581,832; Hutchison, Kay Bailey (R-TX) $2,332,021; Inhofe, James M (R-OK) $2,320,139; Pearce, Steve (R-NM) $2,236,714; Barton, Joe (R-TX) $2,211,987; Brady, Kevin (R-TX) $2,087,396; Scalise, Steve (R-LA) $1,847,013; Murkowski, Lisa (R-AK) $1,792,602. If you haven’t yet noticed the trend, just check out the party affiliation of each…...
===
Texas’ largest newspaper gives 'bipartisan' Cruz challenger glowing endorsement
an 10 24
===
an 10 24
The stakes were high Tuesday night as U.S. Rep. Colin Allred, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate, and Republican Senator Ted Cruz, seeking re-election to a third term, met for their first and only debate. Allred, 41, a civil rights attorney and former NFL linebacker repeatedly knocked down Cruz, 53, running for a third term in office. The U.S. Senate majority is expected to be decided by possibly just two seats.
“WFAA issued a new poll for the more than 40,000 viewers on the YouTube livestream asking who won the debate,” MySanAntonio.com reported. “More than 25,000 viewers voted with 67 percent saying Allred while 33 percent said Cruz won the debate.”
Cruz is leading Allred in the latest polls by two to five points, according to FiveThirtyEight.
The Dallas Morning News called the debate “combative,” saying the candidates “attacked each other’s positions and character as they sparred over hot-button issues that included abortion, immigration and the economy.”
Congressman Allred accused Senator Cruz, whose podcast deal allegedly may have violated campaign finance laws, with having “introduced this new kind of angertainment, where you just get people upset and then you podcast about it and you write a book about it and you make some money on it, but you’re not actually there when people need you.”
READ MORE: ‘He’s Not Ok’: Questions of Trump’s ‘Cognitive Decline’ Explode Amid ‘Bizarre Behavior’
“Like when the lights went out, when 30 million Texans were relying on a senator to spring into action, he went to Cancun. That’s who he is.”
Allred attacked Cruz on abortion, one of the top issues for voters.
“I want to be very clear to the people of Texas. I support the protections and the restrictions under Roe,” Congressman Allred said. “But Senator Cruz just called himself pro-life. You’re not. You’re not pro-life. It’s not pro-life to deny women care so long that they can’t have children anymore. It’s not pro-life to force a victim of rape to carry their rapist’s baby. It’s not pro-life that our maternal mortality rate has skyrocketed up by 56%. That’s not pro-life, Senator.”
“So to every Texas woman at home and every Texas family watching this, understand that when Ted Cruz says he’s pro-life, he doesn’t mean yours.”
That line flew across social media countless times, with people posting and reposting the quote and videos of that moment.
Another line that went viral across social media was Allred prosecuting Cruz over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, declaring the Texas Senator a “threat to democracy.”
“I have to say, you can’t be for the mob on January 6th and for the officers. You can’t,” Allred declared, as Cruz nervously chuckled. “And it’s not funny. ’cause you’re a threat to democracy.”
“Sure,” Cruz replied, and he began to laugh.
“I was on the House floor when we went through the votes. I remember when you objected to the results in Arizona. Y’all at home might remember where you were on January 6th, what you were doing. I know where I was and I know where he was.”
“I remember when they told us to reach under our seats for these gas masks, I didn’t know we had because they had deployed tear gas in the rotunda. The officers locked all the doors, we barred the doors,” Allred said. “And I texted my wife, Ali, who was seven months pregnant with our son, Cameron, and at home with our son Jordan, who wasn’t yet two. ‘Whatever happens, I love you.'”
“I took off my suit jacket and I was prepared to defend the House floor from the mob. At the same time after he’d gone around the country lying about the election, after he’d been the architect of the attempt to overthrow that election, when that mob came, Senator Cruz was hiding in a supply closet.”
Cruz, again chuckling, shook his head.
READ MORE: ‘Petulant Toddler’ Trump Smacked Down by British Journalist at Chicago Economic Club
“And that’s okay. I don’t want him to get hurt by the mob. I really don’t. This election is his accountability. You cannot be just be patriotic when your side wins,” Allred said. “If, for the first time in 250 years, this project of ours, this shared American project, that we did not have a peaceful transfer of power, the folks responsible have to be held accountable. That’s why Liz Cheney has endorsed me, has got involved in this campaign, is saying to Texans everywhere, ‘Do not put Ted Cruz back in a position of authority.’ Because he’s done it once, he’ll do it again.”
The focus on reproductive healthcare continued, with Allred slamming Cruz for supporting Texas’s abortion ban.
“Listen, it’s time to finally tell the truth here. Senator Cruz just looked into a camera and lied to Texans about my position,” Allred told voters, as Cruz chuckled. “Let’s be very clear, you should look into the camera and speak to Kate Cox, who’s watching right now and explain to her why you said that this law that you said is perfectly reasonable, why she was forced to leave her two children behind and flee our state to get the care that she needed, or look into the camera and talk to the Amanda Zurawski, who’s watching right now, and explain to her why it’s perfectly reasonable that because she had a complication in her pregnancy and was denied care so long that she may never be able to have children of her own, or to the 26,000 Texas women who have been forced to give birth to their rapist’s child under this law that you call perfectly reasonable.”
“It’s not. This is not freedom. I trust Texas women to make their own health care decisions,” Allred continued. “You know, Allie and I had two baby boys here in Dallas in the last five years. You’re scared the entire time. You don’t know what they’re gonna say, but I can’t imagine if the doctor would come in so there’s a problem with the baby or a problem with Allie, but there’s nothing I can do because Ted Cruz thinks he knows better.”
Allred also blasted Cruz over in-vitro fertilization (IVF), an issue that has also dogged—and split—Republicans.
“IVF didn’t need protecting until he got his way of going after it,” the Texas Democrat charged. “No one was thinking that we need to protect IVF until he was singularly responsible for pursuing, by putting place in place judges at the district court level, the circuit court level and the supreme court level, folks who would put at risk, this miracle technology. And you know what? It’s not just that. When he ran for President in 2016, he supported the personhood amendment. You know what that means? That would make something like IVF illegal, but also ban certain forms of birth control. You did. You did.”
Cruz interjected: “No, fundamentally false.”
“When you ran for president in 2016, you could look it up, folks,” Allred replied. “You don’t have to believe me. Again. You’ve been seeing him lie to you for 12 years. Let’s have a senator who doesn’t.”
Ultimately, Allred branded Cruz with a Texas saying, calling him “all hat and no cattle,” meaning, “all show and no substance.”
Watch the videos above or at this link.
//
Democratic Senate candidate Colin Allred faced off with incumbent, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) Tuesday night, and things got heated when Allred slammed the Republican senator's blatant hypocrisy.
You can't be for the mob on January 6 and for the officers. You can't. And it's not funny. Because you're a threat to democracy. I was on the House floor when we went through the votes. I remember when you objected to the results in Arizona.
A poll released by last month by the Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation(TxHPF) showed Allred trailing Cruz by only 3 percent.
READ MORE:Colin Allred says Ted Cruz 'hid in a supply closet' while Jan. 6 rioters stormed the Capitol
Regina Montoya, a member of the TxHPF Board of Directors, told WFAA that "the dynamism of the Harris campaign has had an obvious down ballot impact in the Allred vs. Cruz race, where Colin is now effectively tied with Cruz going into the final days of the campaign."
In August, "Allred recalled the day the Capitol was attacked — noting that he played in the National Football League before serving in Congress," during an interview with Baptist News.
"When you're a former professional football player in a situation like that," Allred said, "people will unsurprisingly look to you for protection. So I took my suit jacket off and got ready to take on whatever came through that door."
The Democratic hopeful continued, "That day, we came closer to losing our democracy than a lot of people realize, and Ted Cruz is responsible for that. He spread the lie that the election was stolen and was the senator who objected to the certification of the results in an attempt to overturn the will of the American people. But when the mob stormed the Capitol, he hid in a supply closet."
READ MORE:[Ted Cruz dodges key issue that’s become major 'political liability' for GOP
Watch the video below or at this link.
===
Colin Allred says Ted Cruz 'hid in a supply closet' while Jan. 6 rioters stormed the Capitol
an 8 24
===
---
---
?
2013
---
an 9 24
mcc bails?
With three-term incumbent Sen. Jon Tester struggling in Montana's 2024 U.S. Senate race and the seat held by Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin (who isn't seeking reelection in West Virginia) almost certain to go Republican, Democratic strategists and organizers are hoping to save their Senate majority by unseating Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and/or Sen. Rick Scott (R-Florida). But according to The Hill's Alexander Bolton, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) is in no hurry to help Cruz or Scott out.
Republicans have enjoyed an advantage in Texas, where Republicans typically won statewide races by double digits during the 2000s, and Florida. But those states' 2024 Senate races, according to polls, have been surprisingly close. A Morning Consult poll released on September 21 showed Cruz's Democratic challenger, Rep. Colin Allred, ahead by 1 percent — although an Emerson College/The Hill poll released a few days later showed Allred trailing Cruz by 4 percent.
Meanwhile, in Florida, an Emerson College/The Hill poll showed Scott leading Democratic challenger Debbie Mucarsel-Powell leading by only 1 percent.
READ MORE:Dems 'going on offense' against 'vulnerable' Republicans in FL and TX to save Senate majority
Bolton, in an article published on September 27, reports that the McConnell-associated Senate Leadership Fund (SLF) "isn't helping two of McConnell's biggest critics in the Senate GOP conference": Cruz and Scott....
---
npr
...TED CRUZ: Do you condemn the atrocities of the Hamas terrorists?
ADEEL MANGI: Yes, that's what I was about to address, Senator.
FADEL: And then there was that famous TikTok questioning where Tom Cotton is asking the CEO of TikTok if he was ever a citizen of China.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
TOM COTTON: Have you ever been a member of the Chinese Communist Party?
SHOU ZI CHEW: Senator, I'm Singaporean. No.
FADEL: So I guess my larger question is, between what happened to you and these other examples, what does that say about the point of these hearings?
---
an 9 24
during the 1990s and 2000s, Republicans typically won statewide races in Texas by double digits. But Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) narrowly defeated Democrat Beto O'Rourke in the 2018 midterms, and in 2024, Cruz has been warning fellow Republicans not to underestimate the Democratic challenger he faces this year: Rep. Colin Allred, who trails Cruz by only 4 percent in an early September poll from The Hill and Emerson College.
One issue that Cruz has aggressively campaigned on in the past is abortion.
But journalist Joe Perticone, in an article published by the conservative website The Bulwark on September 12, stresses that the Texas Republican hasn't been talking about abortion nearly as much during his 2024 reelection campaign.
READ MORE:The MAGA plot to steal 2024 election is on a 'different level than 2020': experts
"For the entirety of his Senate career," Perticone explains, "Ted Cruz has been a warrior for the pro-life/anti-abortion movement. Banning abortion has been a major political priority for him. But now that Roe v. Wade has been overturned and some states are instituting abortion bans, Cruz — christened 'The Absolutist' in a New Yorker profile ten years ago — is approaching the issue quite differently."
Perticone notes that during his 2012 campaign, Cruz "opposed abortion in all cases except those where the life of the mother was at risk" — whereas in 2024, he "has decided to push the issue to the backseat of his policy agenda, if not avoid it entirely."
According to Perticone, Cruz's 2024 campaign shows how much of a "liability" abortion has become for Republicans.
"The Supreme Court fulfilled a major wish of Cruz and other anti-abortion politicians when it overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022," Perticone writes. "Since Dobbs v. Jackson was handed down, states like Texas have begun implementing sweeping abortion bans. These have become something of a political liability for Republicans."
READ MORE:'Nothing is off the table': Trump plans for 'bureaucratic bullying' of enemies if he wins
*Joe Perticone's full article for The Bulwark is available at this link (subscription required).
---
city climate lawsuits
horner cruz comer?:
Jean-Paul P. Cart Antonia I. Stabile Venable LLP 101 California Street, Suite 3800 San Francisco, CA 94111 Email: JPCart@Venable.com AIStabile@Venable.com Attys for Respondent, The Regents of the University of California
HORNER DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF PETITION DOCS_LA:351773.1 38333/008 1 James K.T. Hunter (State Bar No. 73369) 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard, 13th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067 Telephone: (310) 277-6910 Facsimile: (310) 201-0760 E-mail: jhunter@pszjlaw.com Attorney for Petitioner Energy Policy Advocates SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT ENERGY POLICY ADVOCATES, Petitioner, v. THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Respondent.
Case No. 22STCP03214 DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER HORNER IN SUPPORT OF PETITION FOR WRIT Trial Date: December 14, 2023 (Reserved) Time: 9:30 a.m. Place: Dept. 85 Petition filed: August 30, 2022 I, Christopher Horner, declare: INTRODUCTION 1. I make this declaration in support of the Petition for Writ filed by Petitioner Energy Policy Advocates (“EPA”) in the above-captioned proceeding against Respondent The Regents of the University of California (“Regents”). In this Declaration, I address the Regents’ response to the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”) request at issue in this matter dated August 2, 2021 (the “8/2/21 CPRA Request”)1 , and also set forth my opinions based on my experience with open records requests in California and nationwide, particularly as they relate to energy, environmental policy, and the global warming debate
...
...
h requests to federal agencies, state executive and
attorneys general offices and other agencies, and over two dozen academic institutions.
- I came to this work after learning, relatively and somewhat embarrassingly late in life but at least first-hand, about the business of leveraging pressure campaigns to influence public
institutions. Specifically, I began using open records laws to explore public-private interplay after,
and in great part inspired by, an eye-opening stint with a Houston-based energy company in 1997, after having left my law firm to become the company’s director of federal government relations (in a
non-attorney capacity). I was gone from the company’s ranks within weeks, about four years before it found itself in the news and its very name, Enron, became a cultural metaphor in 2001. After arriving at Enron I helped create an uncomfortable work environment for myself by indelicately voicing concerns over the company’s leading role in what was becoming a “global warming” industry. I was particularly struck by a meeting I had attended on the company’s behalf, in a large national law firm’s Washington, D.C. conference room among a Who’s Who of environmentalist
pressure groups as well as senior representatives of individual companies and trade associations representing several industry sectors, discussing how to ensure U.S. participation, despite public and congressional opposition, in what several months later would be called the Kyoto Protocol, a “global warming” treaty. As Lawrence Solomon of Canada’s Financial Post wrote as part of a series
p 3
exposing industry’s driving role behind this pact and related policies, Enron was the early ringleader of the global warming industry:
Enron Chairman Kenneth Lay...saw his opportunity when Bill Clinton and Al Gore were
inaugurated as president and vice-president in 1993. To capitalize on Al Gore’s interest in global warming, Enron immediately embarked on a massive lobbying effort to develop a
trading system for carbon dioxide, working both the Clinton administration and Congress.
Political contributions and Enron-funded analyses flowed freely, all geared to demonstrating
a looming global catastrophe if carbon dioxide emissions weren’t curbed. An Enron-funded
study that dismissed the notion that calamity could come of global warming, meanwhile, was
quietly buried.2
To magnify the leverage of their political lobbying, Enron also worked the environmental
groups. Between 1994 and 1996, the Enron Foundation donated $1-million to the Nature Conservancy and its Climate Change Project, a leading force for global warming reform,
while Lay and other individuals associated with Enron donated $1.5-million to environmental
groups seeking international controls on carbon dioxide.3
In December 1997, immediately on the heels of the 1997 Kyoto negotiation, CEO Ken Lay received
a memo titled “Implications of the Climate Change Agreement in Kyoto & What Transpired” from
Enron’s point-man on the issue (“You know that I am responsible for developing "climate change"
polices that promote our products and services”
4
), one who urged a (different) opponent of this form
of corporate “rent-seeking” (infra) to come around in an email, Subject line: “Climate Change/work with me to make Enron rich.”5 The memo noted, inter alia, “this treaty is exactly what I have been
lobbying for,” “This agreement will be good for Enron stock!!,” “if implemented, this agreement
will do more to promote Enron’s business than will almost any other regulatory initiative outside of restructuring of the energy and natural gas industries in Europe and the United States,” “Enron has
2 Sadly, no donors at the time or since have had the vision to organize an “Enron Knew” campaign.
3 Lawrence Solomon, "Enron's Other Secret", Financial Post (Canada), May 30, 2009, available at
https://ep.probeinternational.org/2009/05/30/enrons-other-secret/. This was “real money” at the time.
4 Memo from John Palmisano to Steve Kean, Cynthia Sandherr, February 28, 1997, available at
https://climatelitigationwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Principal-Enron-docs-11.11.15.pdf.
5 https://climatelitigationwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Work-with-me-to-make-Enronrich.pdf. ...
---
- Please describe the nature of UCLA’s Environmental Law Clinic’s work for Sher Edling,
the years during which that assistance was provided, and the specific cases that members of
that clinic worked on. Please also identify any expenses for that work that Sher Edling
reimbursed and any donations the firm or its partners have made to UCLA School of Law
since 2017.
- Please provide a list of every person and entity, excluding clients and vendors, that
provided Sher Edling with any amount of money. For each person or entity listed, please
include the following information: (a) the amount of the money provided; (b) the date the
money was provided; (c) the purpose for which the money was directed to be used; and (d)
the manner in which that money was provided, i.e., through a grant, litigation funding
agreement, or some other contract or agreement. If the funding was provided pursuant to a
written agreement, please provide a copy of that agreement.
Sincerely,
---
Ted Cruz James Comer
Ranking Member Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, Committee on Oversight and
and Transportation Accountability
---
an
May 23, 2024
US Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was one of the 17 Texas Republicans who refused to certify the 2020 election results, according to the Texas Tribune.
During a Wednesday night interview with the GOP senator, CNN's Kaitlan Collins noted Cruz's refusal to acknowledge President Joe Biden win over Donald Trump in 2020, and asked whether the Texas leader plans to accept the November election results in the case Biden wins again.
"Do you plan to object or will you accept the results regardless of who wins the election?" Collins asked.
READ MORE:Ted Cruz slapped with campaign finance laws violation complaint
"Kaitlan, I got to say, I think that's actually a ridiculous question," Cruz replied.
"It's a yes or no question," Collins insisted.
"Let me explain why it's ridiculous question," the Texas leader said, asking, "Have you've ever asked a Democrat that?"
Collins replied, "Have you ever had a sitting president who refused to facilitate the peaceful transition of power, refused to acknowledge that his successor won the presidency?
Cruz claimed, "We had peaceful transfer of power, I was there on January 20."
"Barely," Collins replied, before noting that in 2016, when Biden was vice president, "he went to the Senate floor and certified the votes."
READ MORE:'Ted Cruz isn’t fooling anyone': Texas senator slammed over outreach to Democrats
Cruz said, "You only ask Republicans" this question.
Collins replied, "Because it was Republicans who tried to block the transition of power. You have to acknowledge that. We've never seen it on a scale of what happened in 2020. And We've never seen the president refuse. He wouldn't even let Joe Biden get classified briefings at the beginning.I recall that. So my question for you again: Free and fair election, will you accept the results regardless of who wins?"
The senator replied, "If the Democrats win, I will accept the result, but I'm not going to ignore fraud," before claiming there was voter fraud in 2020. Collins replied, "No there wasn't, and you still objected."
"Oh you know, for a fact, there were zero voter-fraud?" Cruz asked. "What's your basis for that? Show me your evidence.'
Collins said, "We've spoken with [Georgia Republican] Governor [Brian] Kemp. They did three hand recounts in the state of Georgia. the director of CISA [Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency] said that this was one of the safest most legitimate elections."
READ MORE:['Taking a lot of ribbing': Ted Cruz now the butt of senators’ jokes amid FAA bill markup
The CNN host emphasized, "Republicans are twisting themselves in knots."
Cruz claimed Collins never asks Hillary Clinton, Stacey Abrams, or Al Gore whether they will certify election results.
"I haven't had any of them on my show," Collins said. "We'll talk to them, but I don't remember there being a president who was refusing to turn over the transition of power."
Watch the video below or at this link.
an 7 24
reality TV star is now dropping hints at the identity of a U.S. senator she was allegedly in a secret relationship with for the past year before she recently "cut ties" with him.
In a video she posted to her TikTok account reported on by the Daily Mail, former 90-Day Fiance cast member Stephanie Matto didn't reveal the name of her former undercover boyfriend, but said the two had unusual "virtual" dates in which the senator reportedly would "pay money to watch me eat Taco Bell." She said she felt the need to break it off due to the senator's "crazy" and "radical" beliefs that she fundamentally opposed "as a woman."
"I have dated a US Senator for the past year and kept it a huge secret up until today," Matto said. "Today I feel like exposing some dirt on this man because recently I saw him in the news supporting something that I as a woman can simply not stand by."
READ MORE:'Ted Cruz isn't fooling anyone': Texas senator slammed over outreach to Democrats
Matto said she felt compelled after one particular conversation with the unnamed lawmaker to "expose all of his dirty secrets." While she said she was normally "apolitical," she recalled asking the senator if he agreed with "the policies of his political party," and found his answer "so despicable and so concerning."
"He told me that he doesn't actually care about politics, he doesn't care about people, he doesn't care about women," she said in the video. "He only cares about money and the power that he yields."
According to Matto, the one thing preventing her from actually naming the senator was that she had family members who are immigrants, and her former online boyfriend threatened to have them deported if she outed him. But she did notably drop several hints — namely, that the senator used a burner account to communicate with her that had the number "24" in the screen name, and that the profile photo was of a fish, which aligned with the senator's hobby of "bass fishing."
Matto invited "internet sleuths" to crack the case, which prompted speculation from many of her 100,000+ followers. Two names that came up in numerous comments were Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) – both of whom are up for reelection in 2024.
READ MORE:Even Trump is 'well-aware' that Josh Hawley is 'beatable' in 2024: Ex-Missouri sec of state
While Hawley isn't known as a fisherman, Cruz has posted photos of himself in the past on a bass fishing expedition. One fishing website listed Texas among its top 10 states for bass fishing in the country (Missouri was not on that list). The Texas Republican is also on the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, and sits on the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Safety. This would mean Cruz is potentially in a position to have someone deported, given that he's on the committee with direct jurisdiction over the immigration system.
In another TikTok, Matto said the senator was a "famous person" whom she saw on TV while watching the news at her parents' house. As a former presidential candidate, Cruz fits the bill of a high-profile U.S. senator who is interviewed frequently. Matto also bears a resemblance to Cory Chase, who is an adult film actress who appeared in a video clip Cruz accidentally posted to his official Twitter account on September 11, 2017.
=
an 6 24
a
playbook belonging to Republican Sen. Ted Cruz — which appears to show how he aims to raise cash to get him reelected for another term in office — was found in the Senate refectory and scooped up by a reporter who posted it online.
Pablo Manríquez, co-publisher of "Capitol Press" and who describes himself on X as a "hill reporter and oil painter," landed on the tranche of briefing papers that contain innocuous information about the weather in New York this week, but also phone numbers and addresses of such notables such as billionaire Ron Lauder and Wall Street scion John Loeb.
"Someone, presumably a staffer, left a folder full of briefing documents on TED CRUZ donors in the Senate Refectory," Manríquez wrote on X. He then posted a thread of some of the senator's detailed itinerary and talking points to schmooze would-be deep-pocketed donors.
Cruz, 53, is being challenged by 40-year-old Rep. Colin Allred (D-TX), who served three terms in office and, before becoming a civil rights attorney, played four seasons in the NFL.
The documents offer a glimpse into the methods and tidbits that Cruz is prompted to bring up, as well as specific dollar amounts he should seek from each person. The document also coaches him on what to say during the meetups.
Raw Story reached out to Cruz's reps Tuesday night and didn't receive a response as of publishing.
The documents outline a busy week for the Texas senator.
In D.C., the documents show Cruz is to appear at a Capitol Grille dinner, and will hope to compel eight donors who've pledged $19,500. So far, they've paid nothing.
On Wednesday, Cruz will head up to New York City to lunch with Lauder at the posh eatery Cipriani. He's then expected to meet with Loeb at the Knickerbocker Club.
Afterward, Cruz's plans call for heading to billionaire Mike Novogratz's home, the address of which appears unredacted.
When Manríquez was challenged about posting all the documents on his feed would effectively force Cruz's camp to alter their schedule, he seemed unbothered.
"Not sure why this was revealed here but if the intent was to confront Cruz [sic], you've [sic] just ensured they change literally every time and location," writes @JefeJengibre.
Manríquez wrote back: "Then he should give me an exclusive on all his donor relations, as a thank you."
Cruz is hunting for financial support in New York City, where he once slammed for its questionable "values."
Cruz said, "there are many, many wonderful, wonderful working men and women in the state of New York, but everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal or pro-abortion or pro- gay-marriage, [and] focus around money and the media.”
The dig prompted outcry throughout the city and a rare pledge of support for then-candidate Donald Trump.
===
May 24, 2024 rww
- Rafael Cruz, father of Sen. Ted Cruz, told Lance Wallnau that “we have a communist regime in the White House today”: “The Biden administration is a communist administration.”
- Johnny Enlow is telling people to pre-order his new book because doing so will “really help the body of Christ and help the Kingdom.”
- Ben Zeisloft says that birth control “may prevent implantation of a fertilized embryo” and therefore “should be banned”: “We need equal protection under the law for all humans, with no exceptions or compromise.”
- It appears as if Mike Lindell is now partnering with groypers.
- Finally, speaking of groypers, white nationalist Nick Fuentes declares that Donald Trump must not choose Sen. J.D. Vance as his running mate because Vance is a race traitor who has “a non-white wife” and “a mixed-up family.”
===
an 5 24
at Texas GOP convention, Republicans call for spiritual warfare]
(https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/28/texas-gop-convention-elections-religion-delegates-platform/)" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.
SAN ANTONIO — From his booth in the exhibit hall of the Texas GOP’s 2024 convention, Steve Hotze saw an army of God assembled before him.
For four decades, Hotze, an indicted election fraud conspiracy theorist, has helmed hardline anti-abortion movements and virulently homophobic campaigns against LGTBQ+ rights, comparing gay people to Nazis and helping popularize the “groomer” slur that paints them as pedophiles. Once on the fringes, Hotze said Saturday that he was pleased by the party's growing embrace of his calls for spiritual warfare with “demonic, Satanic forces” on the left.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/ee33b4da54577749111fe238d8b0bd90/0905%20Impeach%20Trial%20Day%201%20BD%20TT%2013.jpg)
From left: Conservative activists Steven Hotze and Jared Woodfill enter the Senate gallery during the afternoon session of Day 1 of the Ken Paxton impeachment trial in the Texas Senate on Sept. 5, 2023. Credit: Bob Daemmrich for The Texas Tribune
“People that aren’t in Christ have wicked, evil hearts,” he said. “We are in a battle, and you have to take a side.”
Those beliefs were common at the party’s three-day biennial convention last week, at which delegates adopted a series of new policies that would give the party unprecedented control over the electoral process and further infuse Christianity into public life.
Delegates approved rules that ban Republican candidates — as well as judges — who are censured by the party from appearing on primary ballots for two years, a move that would give a small group of Republicans the ability to block people from running for office, should it survive expected legal challenges. The party’s proposed platform also included planks that would effectively lock Democrats out of statewide office by requiring candidates to win a majority of Texas’ 254 counties, many of which are dark-red but sparsely populated, and called for laws requiring the Bible to be taught in public schools.
Those moves, delegates and leaders agreed, were necessary amid what they say is an existential fight with a host of perceived enemies, be it liberals trying to indoctrinate their children through “gender ideology” and Critical Race Theory, or globalists waging a war on Christianity through migration.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/da9c4842dbc8e8cb35ddbcee11590f3b/0523%20GOP%20Convention%20EH%20TT%2031.jpg)
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick speaks during the Texas GOP Convention on Thursday, May 23, 2024 in San Antonio. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
Those fears were stoked by elected officials in almost every speech given over the week. “They want to take God out of the country, and they want the government to be God,” Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said Thursday morning.
“Our battle is not against flesh and blood,” Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, said Friday. “It is against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.”
”Look at what the Democrats have done,” U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said Saturday. “If you were actively trying to destroy America, what would you do differently?”
Controlling elections
The Texas GOP’s conventions have traditionally amplified the party’s most hardline activists and views. In 2022, for instance, delegates approved a platform that included calls for a referendum on Texas secession; resistance to the “Great Reset,” a conspiracy theory that claims global elites are using environmental and social policies to enslave the world’s population; proclamations that homosexuality is an “abnormal lifestyle choice”; and a declaration that President Joe Biden was not legitimately elected.
The 2024 convention went a step further.
It was the first Texas GOP convention set against the backdrop of a civil war that was sparked by the impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton and inflamed by scandals over white supremacists and antisemites working for the party’s top funders, West Texas oil billionaires Tim Dunn and Farris Wilks. This year’s convention was also sparsely attended compared to past years, which some longtime party members said helped the Dunn and Wilks faction further consolidate their power and elect their candidate, Abraham George, for party chair.
“What we're seeing right now is a shift toward more populism,” said Summer Wise, a former member of the party’s executive committee who has attended most conventions since 2008, including last week’s. “And the [party’s] infrastructure, leadership, decision-making process, power and influence are being controlled by a small group of people.”
(https://thumbnails.texastribune.org/_X93OkVqWjKf0MF0YqIovXarXM4=/1200x804/smart/filters:quality(75)/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/37d777dfbb61f282f112bd04a575cbbc/0523%20GOP%20Convention%20EH%20TT%2055.jpg)
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and his wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, wave to attendees during the Republican Party of Texas convention in San Antonio on Thursday, May 23, 2024. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
That shift was most evident, she said, in a series of changes to the party’s rules that further empower its leaders to punish dissent. The party approved changes that would dramatically increase the consequences of censures — which were used most recently to punish House Speaker Dade Phelan for his role in impeaching Paxton, and against U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales for voting for gun safety legislation.
Under the changes, any person who is censured by the party would be banned for two years from appearing on GOP primary ballots — including judges, who are elected in partisan races but expected to be politically neutral once on the bench. The party also voted to unilaterally close its primaries, bypassing the Legislature, in a move intended to keep Democrats from voting in Republican primaries.
“It’s pretty hypocritical,” Wise said of the changes, which legal experts and some party members expect will face legal challenges. “Republicans have always opposed activist judges, and this seems to be obligating judges to observe and prioritize party over law — which is straight-up judicial activism.”
The convention came amid a broader embrace of Christian nationalism on the right, which falsely claims that the United States’ founding was God-ordained and that its institutions and laws should reflect their conservative, Christian views. Experts have found strong correlations between Christian nationalist beliefs and opposition to migration, religious pluralism and the democratic process.
Wise said she has seen parts of the party similarly shift toward dogmatic political and religious views that have been used “to justify or rationalize corrupting the institution and stripping away its integrity, traditions, fundamental and established principles" — as if “‘God wants it, so we can rewrite the rules.’”
“Being Republican and being Christian have become the same thing,” she said. “If you're accused of being a (Republican in Name Only), you're essentially not as Christian as someone else. … God help you if you're Jewish.”
The “rabbit hole”
Bob Harvey is a proud member of the “Grumpy Old Men’s Club,” a group in Montgomery County that he said pushes back against Fox News and other outlets that he claims have been infiltrated by RINOs.
“People trust Fox News, and they need to get outside of that and find alternative news and like-minded people,” Harvey, 71, said on Friday, as he waited in a long line to meet Kyle Rittenhouse, who has ramped up his engagement in Texas politics since he was acquitted of homicide after fatally shooting two Black Lives Matter protesters.
Rather, Harvey’s group recommends places such as the Gateway Pundit, Steve Bannon’s Breitbart News or the Epoch Times, a far-right website that also had a booth at this year’s convention and is directly linked to the Falun Gong, a hardline anti-communist group.
Such outlets, Harvey said, are crucial to getting people “further down the rabbit hole,” after which they can begin to connect the dots between the deep-state that has spent years attacking former President Donald Trump, and the agenda of the left to indoctrinate kids through the Boy Scouts of America, public schools and the Democratic Party.
Harvey’s views were widely-held by his fellow delegates, many of whom were certain that broader transgender acceptance, Critical Race Theory or “diversity, equity and inclusion” initiatives were parts of a sinister plot to destroy the country and take over its churches.
The culprits behind the ploy differed — Democrats, socialists or “globalists,” to name a few. But their nefarious end goals loomed over the convention. Fearing a transgender takeover of the Republican Party of Texas, delegates pushed to explicitly stipulate that the party’s chair and vice chair must be “biological” men or women.
At events to recruit pastors and congregations to ramp up their political activism, elected leaders argued that churches were the only thing standing between evil and children. And the party’s proposed platform included planks that claim gender-transition care is child abuse, or urge new legislation in Texas that's "even more comprehensive" than Florida’s so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, which prohibits the teaching of sexual orientation or gender identity in public schools.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/8fc7586ac950819feeeabb4760560fb8/0523%20GOP%20Convention%20EH%20TT%2072.jpg)
Kyle Rittenhouse shakes hands with conventioneers at a meet and greet during the Texas GOP convention on Thursday in San Antonio. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
“Our next generation is being co-opted and indoctrinated where they should have been educated,” Rep. Nate Schatzline, R-Fort Worth, said at a Friday luncheon for pastors and churches. “We are in a spiritual battle. This isn't a political one.”
For at least a half-century, conservative Christian movements have been fueled by notions of a shadowy and coordinated conspiracy to destroy America, said Mark Chancey, a religious studies professor at Southern Methodist University who focuses on movements to put the Bible in public schools.
“It's like the boogeyman that won't go away, that gets summoned whenever a justification is needed for these types of agendas,” he said. “They say that somebody is threatening quintessential American freedoms, and that these threats are posed by some sort of global conspiracy — rather than just recognizing that we're a pluralistic democracy.”
In the 1950s, such claims were the driving force behind the emergence of groups such as the John Birch Society, a hardline anti-communist group whose early members included the fathers of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and Trump. After decades of dwindling influence, the society has seen a revival since Trump's 2016 election. And in the exhibit hall last week, so-called Birchers passed out literature and pamphlets that detailed the New World Order's secret plans for "world domination."
Steve Oglesby, field director for the Birch Society's North Texas chapter, said interest and membership in the group has been on the rise in recent years — particularly, as COVID-19 lockdowns and international climate change initiatives have spurred right-wing fears of an international cabal working against the United States.
"COVID really helped," he said, adding that the pandemic proved the existence of a global elite that has merely shifted its tactics since the 1950s. “It’s not just communism — it’s the people pulling the strings.”
Throughout the week, prominent Republicans invoked similar claims of a coordinated conspiracy against the United States. On Friday, Patrick argued that a decadeslong decline in American religion was part of a broader, “Marxist socialist left” agenda to “create chaos,” including through migration — despite studies showing that migrants are overwhelmingly Christian. Attorney General Ken Paxton echoed those claims in his own speech minutes later, saying migration was part of a plan to "steal another election."
“The Biden Administration wants the illegals here to vote,” he said.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/f65ff0a8564b0acdb321e69bd3b233c7/0523%20GOP%20Convention%20EH%20TT%2011.jpg)
Ella Maulding and Konner Earnest watch as Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick speaks during the Republican Party of Texas convention in San Antonio on Thursday, the first day of the gathering. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
As Paxton continued, Ella Maulding and Konner Earnest held hands and nodded their approval from the convention hall’s front row. Last year, the two were spotted outside of a Tarrant County office building where Nick Fuentes, a prominent white nationalist and Adolf Hitler fan, was hosted for nearly seven hours by Jonathan Stickland, then the leader of Dunn and Wilks' most powerful political action committee. They eventually lost their jobs after The Texas Tribune reported on their ties to Fuentes or white nationalist groups.
Maulding has been particularly vocal about her support for Great Replacement Theory, a conspiracy theory that claims there is an intentional, often Jewish-driven, effort to replace white people through migration, LGBTQ+ acceptance or interracial marriage. Once a fringe, white nationalist worldview, experts say that Great Replacement Theory has been increasingly mainstreamed as Republican leaders, including some who spoke last week, continue to claim that migration is part of a coordinated effort to aid Democrats. The theory has also been cited by numerous mass shooters, including the gunman who murdered 22 Hispanic people at an El Paso WalMart in 2019.
Five hours after Paxton and Patrick spoke, Maulding took to social media, posting a cartoon of a rabbi with the following text: “I make porn using your children and then make money distributing it under the banner of women’s rights while flooding your nation with demented lunatics who then rape your children.”
David Barton
Kason Huddleston has spent the last few years helping elect Christians and push back against what he believes is indoctrination of children in Rowlett, near Dallas. Far too often, he said, churches and pastors have become complacent, or have been scared away from political engagement by federal rules that prohibit churches from overt political activity.
Through trainings from groups like Christians Engaged, which advocates for church political activity and had a booth at this year’s convention, he said he has been able show more local Christians that they can be “a part of the solution” to intractable societal ills such as fatherlessness, crime or teen drug use. And while he thinks that some of his peers’ existential rhetoric can be overwrought, he agreed that there is an ongoing effort to “tear down the family unit” and shroud America’s true, Christian roots.
“If you look at our government and our laws, all of it goes back to a Judeo-Christian basis,” he said. “Most people don’t know our true history because it’s slowly just been removed.”
He then asked: “Have you ever read David Barton?”
Since the late 1980s, Barton has barnstormed the state and country claiming that church-state separation is a “myth” meant to shroud America’s true founding as a Christian nation. Barton, a self-styled “amateur historian” who served as Texas GOP vice chair from 1997 to 2006, has been thoroughly debunked by an array of historians and scholars — many of them also conservative Christians.
/https://static.texastribune.org/media/files/7acf1f2412dd7df9c6f492e50a5f07ee/BD%20INC%20Barton%20David%20748%202012)
David Barton, left, of WallBuilders, at a Texas Eagle Forum reception at the Republican Party of Texas convention in Fort Worth on June 7, 2012. Credit: Bob Daemmrich for The Texas Tribune
Despite that, Barton’s views have become widespread among Republicans, including Patrick, Texas Supreme Court Justice John Devine and U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson. And his influence over the party was clear at last week’s convention, where his group, WallBuilders, maintained a booth and delegates frequently cited him.
This year’s platform, the votes for which are expected to be released later this week, included planks that urged lawmakers and the State Board of Education to “require instruction on the Bible, servant leadership and Christian self-governance,” and supports the use of religious chaplains in schools — which was made legal under a law passed by the state Legislature last year.
Warren Throckmorton, a former Grove City College professor and prominent conservative, Christian critic of Barton, told the Tribune that the platform emblematized Barton’s growing influence, and his movement’s conflicting calls to preserve “religious liberty” while attempting to elevate their faith over others. The platform, he noted, simultaneously demands that students’ religious rights be protected, and for schools to be forced to teach the Bible.
“What about the other students who aren’t Christians and who don't believe in the Bible?” he said. “This is not religious liberty — it’s Christian dominance.”
As Zach Maxwell watched his fellow Republicans debate and vote last week, he said he was struck by the frequency and intensity with which Christianity was invoked. Maxwell previously served as chief of staff for former Rep. Mike Lang, then the leader of the ultraconservative Texas House Freedom Caucus, and he later worked for Empower Texans, a political group that was funded primarily by Dunn and Wilks.
He eventually became disillusioned with the party’s right wing, which he said has increasingly been driven by purity tests and opposition to religious or political diversity. This year’s convention, he said, was the culmination of those trends.
“God was not only used as a tool at this convention, but if you didn’t mention God in some way, fake or genuine, I did feel it was seen as distasteful,” he said. “There is a growing group of people who want to turn this nation into a straight-up theocracy. I believe they are doing it on the backs of people who are easily manipulated.”
Nancy Leclerc poses for a photo in front of a GOP elephant statue during the Texas GOP convention in San Antonio on Thursday, May 23, 2024. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune
This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2024/05/28/texas-gop-convention-elections-religion-delegates-platf
---
---
an 4 24
rural white voters have, in many cases, far more political power than suburban or urban voters, and they’re using that outsized power to push our nation toward disaster. While they’re only 20 percent of the country, for example, because of gerrymandering they control fully 42 percent of seats in the House of Representatives.
The authors of new book, White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy point out that rural whites are measurably more bigoted and xenophobic than suburban or urban voters, 13 points more likely to hate on queer people, 15 points more likely to support Trump’s Muslim ban.
They’re also far more likely to agree that setting democracy aside for a strongman like Trump or another Putin wannabee will “fix the mess and drain the swamp.” And fully 74% of the members of Congress who voted to overturn the 2020 election represented rural districts.
The majority of rural white voters disagree with the statement (or have no opinion) that “diversity makes America stronger.” And while only 22 percent of city dwellers believe Trump won the 2020 election and Biden and Democrats “stole” it, a mind-boggling 47 percent of rural whites are certain Biden is illegitimately occupying the White House.
READ:Revealed: What government officials privately shared about Trump not disclosing finances
The astonishing paradox, though, is how Republican politicians regularly crap on their own voters in rural America. Instead of offering help or solutions to rural problems, the GOP and conservative media instead feed them a steady diet of xenophobic and racist fear and hate.
And they eat it up! The racist buffoons among them are one and a half times more likely to be QAnon followers than people who live in cities or suburbs.
Democrats created — and Republicans opposed — virtually all the programs that are keeping rural America from sinking even farther into poverty and despair. Social Security, unemployment insurance, SS Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, over 60 farm subsidy programs that funnel billions in taxpayer dollars into rural communities, food stamps, the Women and Infant Children (WIC) program, anti-addiction programs, etc.
The only real accomplishment of the Trump presidency was passing a massive $2 trillion dollar tax cut for the morbidly rich that had virtually no effect on rural voters. Nonetheless, 71 percent of rural voters cast a ballot for Trump in 2020.
There are still 11 mostly rural states where hospitals are closing and people are dying younger than necessary because Republicans in those states have refused to expand Medicaid.
Republicans in Congress fought against legislation to expand rural broadband access. They constantly try to cut or gut rural health and nutrition programs, and fought against expanding Obamacare in a way that would help rural people.
gerry SUPERMAJORITY
Most of the Red State Republican politicians in America know their seats will never be in danger, so they take millions from special interest groups to write loopholes into the tax code, vote for larger fossil fuel subsidies, and vote against efforts to lower prescription drug prices or do anything about global warming.
They get rich while the people who put them into office struggle to get by. Ted Cruz escapes to Cancun with the $600,000+ in cash he just got for his podcast, laughing at Texas voters all the way. JD Vance, a multimillionaire Wall Street guy, lives in an elite townhouse and travels by first class while people in Ohio watch Republican politicians gut their public schools and try to outlaw abortion and birth control.
Republican members of Congress representing rural states went all the way to the Supreme Court to successfully block President Biden’s first attempt at reducing student debt while rural students carry 60% more student debt than urban students by age 25.
One of the most chilling quotes from the book is about how rural voters are willing to both abandon democracy and embrace a violent rightwing coup:
“[R]ural Americans are more likely to believe that ‘it may be necessary at some point soon for citizens to take up arms against the government.’ Indeed, more than one out of four rural residents agree that Trump should be returned to office by force if necessary.”
White rural voters are more likely than any other demographic group — Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans — to be willing to overturn our democracy, and the people who represent them are in the majority of legislators who voted to overturn the 2020 election the day after the January 6th attack on our capitol.
If, say, Black people held that view, rightwing media would be trumpeting it every day from coast to coast. But because it’s rural white people, the so-called “heartland Americans,” it gets largely ignored by American media.
After all, most mainstream outlets treat rural people as if they’re an exotic species who must be listened to: going to rural diners to interview people is so common it’s become a cliché. In the past month I’ve seen dozens of such interviews played on MSNBC and CNN, but not once have I seen those same reporters go into a city and ask why people are voting for Biden.
The Biden administration has done more for rural America than any president since Lyndon Johnson rolled out Medicare, Medicaid, and food stamps. Biden’s American Rescue Plan provided specific tax breaks and credits targeted at rural poverty, subsidized mortgage payments, and provided rent assistance to tens of thousands of rural residents:
— Rural Americans are nine times more likely to lack access to affordable child care, so Biden’s program allocated $39 billion for subsidies for child care providers, with the money disproportionately going to rural communities. There was also $350 billion specifically allocated for small towns in rural areas to help them run basic government functions and upgrade their infrastructure. He even put up $198 million in funding for rural colleges and universities.
— Biden and Democrats delivered a 15% increase in SNAP (food stamp) benefits that have a huge impact in rural areas, reaching “2.9 million people in rural areas, including 800,000 children, reducing rural poverty by 11 percent and rural child poverty by 20 percent.” Biden’s USDA, over Republican objections, also put a billion dollars into rural food banks.
— Biden and Democrats “invested a historic $3 billion in the Department of Commerce’s (DOC) Economic Development Administration (EDA) to build local [rural] economies that are resilient to future economic shocks, including a $300 million Coal Communities Commitment.”
— Biden and Democrats — over GOP objections — expanded hunting and fishing opportunities on 2.1 million acres of public lands, the largest such expansion in U.S. history, and provided $1.5 billion in annual funding for wildlife and habitat conservation efforts. Another $2 billion went “for funding communities in the Rural Partners Network to spur job creation and build infrastructure.”
— They put $5 billion in “investments to help rural areas update infrastructure, boost high-speed internet access, and aid agricultural producers and small businesses in implementing climate-focused practices” and “$1.7 billion in funding to assist farmers, ranchers and foresters in adopting techniques to adapt to the changing climate, such as cover crops, nutrient management, and carbon storage.”
And that’s just the beginning: for a full list of the ways the Biden administration, over the objection of Republicans in Congress, has helped rural people click here.
Not one single Republican in either the House or the Senate voted for any of the things listed above: in fact, almost all voted against these helps to rural America.
Instead of concerning themselves with the well-being of rural people, they’re trying to block clean air standards that prevent rural communities from being poisoned, block clean water standards in rivers that supply water to rural communities, cut taxes on billionaires, and increase subsidies to the fossil fuel and banking industries.
All while taking huge campaign contributions, private jet rides, taxpayer funded junkets overseas, and the promise of million-dollar-a-year jobs when they leave Congress if only they vote the right way.
Because Republican politicians are more interested in feathering their own nests than helping out the people they were elected to represent, rural Red states are massively subsidized by urban Blue states just to keep their heads above water. As the Associated Press recently reported:
“Mississippi received $2.13 for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington in 2015, according to the Rockefeller study. West Virginia received $2.07, Kentucky got $1.90 and South Carolina got $1.71.
“Meanwhile, New Jersey received 74 cents in federal spending for every tax dollar the state sent to Washington. New York received 81 cents, Connecticut received 82 cents and Massachusetts received 83 cents.”
It’s undeniably true (and documented with each hotlink below) that Republican-controlled “Red” states, almost across the board, have higher rates of:
— Spousal abuse
— [Obesity — Smoking](https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2020/11/10/1994653/-Decades-of-Republican-Mismanagement-Have-Left-Red-States-Mired-in-the-Past-at-the-Bottom)
— Teen pregnancy
— Sexually transmitted diseases
— Abortion (at least before Dobbs; now it would be “forced births”)
— Bankruptcies and poverty
— Homicide and suicide
— Infant mortality
— Maternal mortality
— Forcible rape — Robbery and aggravated assault
— Dropouts from high school
— Divorce
— Contaminated air and water
— Opiate addiction and deaths
— Unskilled workers
— Parasitic infections
— Income and wealth inequality
— Covid deaths and unvaccinated people
— Federal subsidies to states (“Red State Welfare”)
— People on welfare
— Child poverty — Homelessness
— Spousal murder
— Deaths from auto accidents
— People living on disability
— Gun deaths
So, why do Red state voters tolerate being conned and ripped off by their own elected representatives? Are they just stupid?
One theory is that “they hate the same people we hate.” And, indeed, for a significant and measurable cohort of rural white voters, racial fear and hatred is a primary motivating factor in their embrace of the GOP, although that’s only, according to this new book, about 20% of rural people.
Others vote Republican because the party has been so effective at branding itself with county fairs, NASCAR, country music, and the overall rural lifestyle including a faux paean to rugged individuality and independence.
Having over 1500 radio stations daily broadcasting a rightwing Republican message to literally every nook and cranny of rural America is another large factor. As is the dominance of Australian billionaire Lachlan Murdoch’s Fox “News.”
Will rural voters ever wake up to how badly they’re being screwed now and have been screwed by Republicans ever since Reagan started the whole neoliberal austerity and free trade movement that shipped over 60,000 factories and 20 million jobs overseas?
Or is the GOP’s cynical manipulation of religion, gender, and race enough to keep them voting to hurt themselves and further enrich Republican fat-cats?
So far, all indications seem like that’s the case and will stay that way for at least the next election cycle.
While the media struggles with trying to “understand” the rural white voter every election cycle, instead they should be running stories on how the very real problems and crises of rural America are daily made worse by Republicans in Congress and at the helm of their Red States.
How to break through?
Democrats need to get smart and start using the “negative partisanship” strategies Rachel Bitecofer recommends in her new book Hit 'Em Where It Hurts: How to Save Democracy by Beating Republicans at Their Own Game. They can do this by pointing out, with ad buys and media appearances, just how bad Red state Republicans politicians have been for rural people and their communities.
And they need to do it soon. As the authors of White Rural Rage point out:
“By 2040, 70% of Americans will reside in the 15 most populous states and choose 30 of the 100 US senators. Concentrated in smaller and more rural states, the remaining 30% of the population will elect 70 senators. No matter how distorted these population ratios become, each state is guaranteed its two senators — past, present, and forever.”
Our mainstream media have made it clear, for over 40 years, that they won’t expose the damage Republicans are doing to rural areas because their TV programs will fail if Republican politicians boycott them.
So, the job falls to us and the Democrats. Can we do it? I believe so; we just need to get started.
NOW READ:GOP Senators back away from MTG's 'ridiculous' speaker threat
---
---
an 3 24
although 2024 GOP presidential frontrunner Donald Trump and the MAGA movement struggle in urban areas, rural areas are another matter. Much of Trump's hardcore support comes from rural areas, especially rural areas that are predominantly white.
In their new book, "White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy," authors Tom Schaller and Paul Waldman describe the link between MAGA authoritarianism and the economic and health problems plaguing rural areas. But unlike others who have written on that subject, Schaller and Waldman hold white rural voters accountable for their actions and do not pretend that rural Americans are somehow morally superior to urban Americans.
Schaller and Waldman spoke candidly during a Q&A interview with Salon's Amanda Marcotte, arguing that GOP politicians and right-wing media figures — not urban liberals and progressives — are the most overtly condescending where rural voters are concerned.
READ MORE:Economist Paul Krugman: Here’s what’s driving 'white rural rage' and 'the MAGA narrative'
Schaller told Marcotte, "Nobody is more insulting to rural voters than the people who are giving them nothing and taking their votes. They claim Democrats are insulting, but Democrats are doing something for them and getting none of their votes. But nothing's more condescending than getting votes and doing nothing in return. J.D. Vance, Elise Stefanik and Tom Cotton — all these people were educated at Harvard and Yale. They frankly laugh behind the backs of their own voters to some degree, right? Those are the people who are really insulting."
Schaller cited Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) as another highly educated far-right Republican whose performative politics are "insulting" to rural voters.
"When Ted Cruz says: My pronouns are 'kiss my ass' or 'you can't limit me to two beers,' now he's more insulting," Schaller told Marcotte. "What he is saying is: These voters are so easily won over by performative politics. I can reduce their core urges and reflexes to this. And I don't have to deliver a thing for rural Texas."
During the interview, Schaller and Waldman stressed that rural Americans have very real problems — from health care to poverty — and that "performative" MAGA politics do nothing to better their lives.
:{:{READ MORE:History's hateful echo: Century-old Klan resurgence resonates today}:
Waldman told Marcotte, "You see it in your home state of Texas almost more than anywhere else. Republicans have carefully gerrymandered the state legislative districts, using rural areas as a kind of a leverage to make sure they stay in power. Yet there are huge problems in rural Texas that the legislature never addresses. They've got terrible infrastructure problems. They've got problem with the water systems and the electrical systems. Because they refused to accept the Obamacare expansion of Medicaid, rural hospitals are closing all over. There are people in Texas who have to drive 200 miles to get to prenatal care."
:{:{READ MORE:'Christian nationalism' is a dangerous perversion of both religion and politics: conservative}:
---
---
bush v gore democ labs
Supreme Court has three lawyers who worked on Bush v. Gore
Justices Clarence Thomas voted to suspend the vote count in Florida that ended up with George Bush Jr. as president. Three other justices worked on the Bush team including John Roberts, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Comey Barrett. All three were later appointed to the Supreme Court! Roberts was appointed by Bush
---
Secret recording finds Texas Senate hopeful saying only Latino can defeat Ted Cruz - Alternet.org
---
---
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taking-mccarthyism-literally-flna1c8500006
---
11 23 an
n the day before Thanksgiving an American and his wife reportedly drove their $300,000 Bentley across the Rainbow Bridge that starts in the U.S from Niagara Falls, New York, and ends on the other side in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada.
They didn't make it to the other side.
Their "speeding car crashed in flames," Reuters reported Wednesday. The couple died. The New York Times reported the mayor of Niagara Falls, NY, "said the couple had originally been headed to a concert in Canada, and investigators believe it was a Kiss show that was called off after a band member’s illness."
The Times adds that the FBI on Wednesday, hours after the crash, concluded it was not related to terrorism. The Reuters headline now also says, "terrorism ruled out."
"Investigators were looking at the possibility that the driver had a medical incident, or there was a malfunction with the vehicle," the New York Post reports.
READ MORE: Fox News Host’s ‘$90 Turkey’ Claim Mocked as Prices Plunge in ‘Thanksgiving Miracle’
None of that information, which has now been widely reported, exists in a current social media post U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) wrote on X (formerly Twitter), Wednesday afternoon, after the crash but before facts were known and widely reported. Cruz's post has been viewed 4.8 million times.
"This confirms our worst fear: the explosion at Rainbow Bridge was a terrorist attack," Senator Cruz, who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, falsely claimed Wednesday afternoon. "Both attackers are dead, and one law enforcement officer is injured. I am praying that officer makes a full recovery and is able to spend Thanksgiving surrounded by family and loved ones. Thank you to our law enforcement officers who are remaining vigilant and working to protect Americans traveling for Thanksgiving."
It was not a terrorist attack, a fact made clear quickly, despite reports by Fox News portraying it as a terror attack.
Cruz posted his false claims atop a Fox News report posted by far-right political commentator Benny Johnson, once called a "Pizzagate propagandist," who also works for Charlie Kirk's far-right group Turning Point USA.
Both Cruz's post and Johnson's posts are still up. Johnson's video has been viewed 2.3 million times. A "readers' note" was appended to Johnson's video, pointing to New York Governor Kathy Hochul's post saying, "No evidence of terrorism indicated at this time."
READ MORE: Republicans Push to Gut Food Aid Program That Helps Feed Half of All Infants in US
A "Readers' note" was also appended to Cruz's post, saying: "The explosion at the bridge Cruz references was determined to not be a terrorist attack, and instead an accident involving reckless driving."
Senator Cruz, first elected to the Senate in 2012, is an attorney with a law degree from Harvard, and a former Texas Solicitor General. His official congressional biography adds Cruz was a "law clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist," and, "associate deputy attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice."
Cruz is very active on social media. Since his false tweet he's made numerous posts on X, including promoting his podcast ("Stay entertained during your Thanksgiving travels by subscribing to Verdict today,") five times, and late Friday morning promoting his book: "Perfect Black Friday Christmas Gift—The Bestseller Book Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism In America."
The Texas Senator's false claim, which he has neither removed nor corrected in any manner, has led to tremendous outrage.
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) reposted Cruz's claim with a screenshot of an FBI statement that reads in part: "FBI Buffalo has concluded our investigation at the scene of the Rainbow Bridge incident. A search of the scene revealed no explosive materials, and no terrorism nexus was identified."
"This erroneous tweet is still up. Because the truth means nothing to MAGA fascists like Ted Cruz," wrote former Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times editor Mark Jacob, who now writes a newsletter on politics and the media.
"Ted Cruz tells us it’s too soon to talk about the causes of gun violence in the aftermath of every mass shooting tragedy, but he didn’t hesitate to rashly and wrongly tweet that America was under attack by terrorists earlier today," wrote gun violence prevention activist and Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts.
"What a monster is Ted Cruz," wrote The Atlantic Norman Ornstein in response to Watt's tweet.
READ MORE: ‘Denying Career Advancement to White Straight Men’: Stephen Miller’s Law Group Targets Macy’s
"This is embarrassing for you, Ted. Why not just delete this now that it’s completely bogus and wrong? Why prove to everyone you have zero sense of responsibility to the truth?" asked Christian conservative and attorney Heath Mayo.
"This is reckless lie by a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who followed Fox News as it careened off the speculation cliff," noted Brandon Wolf, the national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign.
A former prosecutor for the New York Attorney General's Office, Tristan Snell, served up this warning:
"By the way, anyone who continues to say the Rainbow Bridge crash was a 'terrorist attack' is potentially now liable for defamation by the families of the deceased. Ted Cruz, among others, should be looking for a lawyer."
See the social media posts above or at this link. Thanksgiving an American and his wife reportedly drove their $300,000 Bentley across the Rainbow Bridge that starts in the U.S from Niagara Falls, New York, and ends on the other side in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada.
They didn't make it to the other side.
Their "speeding car crashed in flames," Reuters reported Wednesday. The couple died. The New York Times reported the mayor of Niagara Falls, NY, "said the couple had originally been headed to a concert in Canada, and investigators believe it was a Kiss show that was called off after a band member’s illness."
The Times adds that the FBI on Wednesday, hours after the crash, concluded it was not related to terrorism. The Reuters headline now also says, "terrorism ruled out."
"Investigators were looking at the possibility that the driver had a medical incident, or there was a malfunction with the vehicle," the New York Post reports.
READ MORE: Fox News Host’s ‘$90 Turkey’ Claim Mocked as Prices Plunge in ‘Thanksgiving Miracle’
None of that information, which has now been widely reported, exists in a current social media post U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) wrote on X (formerly Twitter), Wednesday afternoon, after the crash but before facts were known and widely reported. Cruz's post has been viewed 4.8 million times.
"This confirms our worst fear: the explosion at Rainbow Bridge was a terrorist attack," Senator Cruz, who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, falsely claimed Wednesday afternoon. "Both attackers are dead, and one law enforcement officer is injured. I am praying that officer makes a full recovery and is able to spend Thanksgiving surrounded by family and loved ones. Thank you to our law enforcement officers who are remaining vigilant and working to protect Americans traveling for Thanksgiving."
It was not a terrorist attack, a fact made clear quickly, despite reports by Fox News portraying it as a terror attack.
Cruz posted his false claims atop a Fox News report posted by far-right political commentator Benny Johnson, once called a "Pizzagate propagandist," who also works for Charlie Kirk's far-right group Turning Point USA.
Both Cruz's post and Johnson's posts are still up. Johnson's video has been viewed 2.3 million times. A "readers' note" was appended to Johnson's video, pointing to New York Governor Kathy Hochul's post saying, "No evidence of terrorism indicated at this time."
READ MORE: Republicans Push to Gut Food Aid Program That Helps Feed Half of All Infants in US
A "Readers' note" was also appended to Cruz's post, saying: "The explosion at the bridge Cruz references was determined to not be a terrorist attack, and instead an accident involving reckless driving."
Senator Cruz, first elected to the Senate in 2012, is an attorney with a law degree from Harvard, and a former Texas Solicitor General. His official congressional biography adds Cruz was a "law clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist," and, "associate deputy attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice."
Cruz is very active on social media. Since his false tweet he's made numerous posts on X, including promoting his podcast ("Stay entertained during your Thanksgiving travels by subscribing to Verdict today,") five times, and late Friday morning promoting his book: "Perfect Black Friday Christmas Gift—The Bestseller Book Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism In America."
The Texas Senator's false claim, which he has neither removed nor corrected in any manner, has led to tremendous outrage.
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) reposted Cruz's claim with a screenshot of an FBI statement that reads in part: "FBI Buffalo has concluded our investigation at the scene of the Rainbow Bridge incident. A search of the scene revealed no explosive materials, and no terrorism nexus was identified."
"This erroneous tweet is still up. Because the truth means nothing to MAGA fascists like Ted Cruz," wrote former Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times editor Mark Jacob, who now writes a newsletter on politics and the media.
"Ted Cruz tells us it’s too soon to talk about the causes of gun violence in the aftermath of every mass shooting tragedy, but he didn’t hesitate to rashly and wrongly tweet that America was under attack by terrorists earlier today," wrote gun violence prevention activist and Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts.
"What a monster is Ted Cruz," wrote The Atlantic Norman Ornstein in response to Watt's tweet.
READ MORE: ‘Denying Career Advancement to White Straight Men’: Stephen Miller’s Law Group Targets Macy’s
"This is embarrassing for you, Ted. Why not just delete this now that it’s completely bogus and wrong? Why prove to everyone you have zero sense of responsibility to the truth?" asked Christian conservative and attorney Heath Mayo.
"This is reckless lie by a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who followed Fox News as it careened off the speculation cliff," noted Brandon Wolf, the national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign.
A former prosecutor for the New York Attorney General's Office, Tristan Snell, served up this warning:
"By the way, anyone who continues to say the Rainbow Bridge crash was a 'terrorist attack' is potentially now liable for defamation by the families of the deceased. Ted Cruz, among others, should be looking for a lawyer."
See the social media posts above or at this link. Thanksgiving an American and his wife reportedly drove their $300,000 Bentley across the Rainbow Bridge that starts in the U.S from Niagara Falls, New York, and ends on the other side in Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada.
They didn't make it to the other side.
Their "speeding car crashed in flames," Reuters reported Wednesday. The couple died. The New York Times reported the mayor of Niagara Falls, NY, "said the couple had originally been headed to a concert in Canada, and investigators believe it was a Kiss show that was called off after a band member’s illness."
The Times adds that the FBI on Wednesday, hours after the crash, concluded it was not related to terrorism. The Reuters headline now also says, "terrorism ruled out."
"Investigators were looking at the possibility that the driver had a medical incident, or there was a malfunction with the vehicle," the New York Post reports.
READ MORE: Fox News Host’s ‘$90 Turkey’ Claim Mocked as Prices Plunge in ‘Thanksgiving Miracle’
None of that information, which has now been widely reported, exists in a current social media post U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) wrote on X (formerly Twitter), Wednesday afternoon, after the crash but before facts were known and widely reported. Cruz's post has been viewed 4.8 million times.
"This confirms our worst fear: the explosion at Rainbow Bridge was a terrorist attack," Senator Cruz, who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee, falsely claimed Wednesday afternoon. "Both attackers are dead, and one law enforcement officer is injured. I am praying that officer makes a full recovery and is able to spend Thanksgiving surrounded by family and loved ones. Thank you to our law enforcement officers who are remaining vigilant and working to protect Americans traveling for Thanksgiving."
It was not a terrorist attack, a fact made clear quickly, despite reports by Fox News portraying it as a terror attack.
Cruz posted his false claims atop a Fox News report posted by far-right political commentator Benny Johnson, once called a "Pizzagate propagandist," who also works for Charlie Kirk's far-right group Turning Point USA.
Both Cruz's post and Johnson's posts are still up. Johnson's video has been viewed 2.3 million times. A "readers' note" was appended to Johnson's video, pointing to New York Governor Kathy Hochul's post saying, "No evidence of terrorism indicated at this time."
READ MORE: Republicans Push to Gut Food Aid Program That Helps Feed Half of All Infants in US
A "Readers' note" was also appended to Cruz's post, saying: "The explosion at the bridge Cruz references was determined to not be a terrorist attack, and instead an accident involving reckless driving."
Senator Cruz, first elected to the Senate in 2012, is an attorney with a law degree from Harvard, and a former Texas Solicitor General. His official congressional biography adds Cruz was a "law clerk to Chief Justice of the United States William Rehnquist," and, "associate deputy attorney general, U.S. Department of Justice."
Cruz is very active on social media. Since his false tweet he's made numerous posts on X, including promoting his podcast ("Stay entertained during your Thanksgiving travels by subscribing to Verdict today,") five times, and late Friday morning promoting his book: "Perfect Black Friday Christmas Gift—The Bestseller Book Unwoke: How to Defeat Cultural Marxism In America."
The Texas Senator's false claim, which he has neither removed nor corrected in any manner, has led to tremendous outrage.
U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) reposted Cruz's claim with a screenshot of an FBI statement that reads in part: "FBI Buffalo has concluded our investigation at the scene of the Rainbow Bridge incident. A search of the scene revealed no explosive materials, and no terrorism nexus was identified."
"This erroneous tweet is still up. Because the truth means nothing to MAGA fascists like Ted Cruz," wrote former Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times editor Mark Jacob, who now writes a newsletter on politics and the media.
"Ted Cruz tells us it’s too soon to talk about the causes of gun violence in the aftermath of every mass shooting tragedy, but he didn’t hesitate to rashly and wrongly tweet that America was under attack by terrorists earlier today," wrote gun violence prevention activist and Moms Demand Action founder Shannon Watts.
"What a monster is Ted Cruz," wrote The Atlantic Norman Ornstein in response to Watt's tweet.
READ MORE: ‘Denying Career Advancement to White Straight Men’: Stephen Miller’s Law Group Targets Macy’s
"This is embarrassing for you, Ted. Why not just delete this now that it’s completely bogus and wrong? Why prove to everyone you have zero sense of responsibility to the truth?" asked Christian conservative and attorney Heath Mayo.
"This is reckless lie by a member of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, who followed Fox News as it careened off the speculation cliff," noted Brandon Wolf, the national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign.
A former prosecutor for the New York Attorney General's Office, Tristan Snell, served up this warning:
"By the way, anyone who continues to say the Rainbow Bridge crash was a 'terrorist attack' is potentially now liable for defamation by the families of the deceased. Ted Cruz, among others, should be looking for a lawyer."
See the social media posts above or at this link.
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/03/ted-cruz-2657051447/
overturn election role bigger
navarro said did what was told?!
'Came closer than widely realized': Ted Cruz worked 'directly with Trump' to try to overturn the election
David Badash and The New Civil Rights Movement March 28, 2022
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) has bragged that he was “leading the charge” to ensure Joe Biden was not certified as the rightful winner of the 2020 election. But until now the depths and extent of his actions, including that he was “working directly with Trump to concoct a plan that came closer than widely realized to keeping him in power,” have not been widely known.
That’s according to a report by The Washington Post on Monday that reveals one day after major news outlets called the election for Joe Biden, Donald Trump, still the President of the United States, made “an urgent call” to Sen. Cruz, asking him if he would be willing to argue Trump’s just-filed case at the Supreme Court.
“Sure, I’d be happy to” if the court granted a hearing, Cruz said he responded.
The call was just one step in a collaboration that for two months turned the once-bitter political enemies into close allies in the effort to keep Trump in the White House basedon the president’s false claims about a stolen election.
The Post adds another important revelation: Cruz’s longtime friend is John Eastman,the author of the “coup memos,” who retired from his post at the Chapman University School of Law after news of he memos became public. Eastman, who still serves as the chairman of an anti-LGBTQ organization, the National Organization For Marriage (NOM), is currently facing an ethics investigation from the California State Bar Assoc.
The House Select Committee of the January 6 Attack is now interested in Cruz’s relationship with Eastman.
“As Eastman outlined a scenario in which Vice President Mike Pence could deny certifying Biden’s election, Cruz crafted a complementary plan in the Senate,” the Post explains. “He proposed objecting to the results in six swing states and delaying accepting the electoral college results on Jan. 6 in favor of a 10-day ‘audit’ — thus potentially enabling GOP state legislatures to overturn the result.”
:{:{}:
}:
U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), the top Republican on the Committee, has said: “I think that Senator Cruz knew exactly what he was doing. I think that Senator Cruz is somebody who knows what the Constitution calls for, knows what his duties and obligations are, and was willing, frankly, to set that aside.”
Eastman pleaded the Fifth when asked by an attorney for the Committee if he had “any communication with Senator Ted Cruz regarding efforts to change the outcome of the 2020 election.”
Cruz canceled a scheduled interview with The Post, and through a spokesperson said:“To the best of his recollection, he did not read the Eastman memo until months after January 6, when it was publicly reported.”
'We have to be very careful': Trump and lawyer disagree on 'asking for recusal' of judge
New Judge Cannon order opens door for DOJ to ask for her Trump case removal: legal experts
Kayleigh McEnany claims she 'watched' Devon Archer’s non-public closed door testimony and 'learned a lot'
'You’ve been warned': Miami newspaper lays out 5 ways DeSantis 'violated his own principles' as Florida gov
Trump releases attack on Jack Smith’s wife just hours before arraignment
Ken Paxton legal team works to invalidate every article of impeachment before trial
Ted Cruz is not eligible to be president - The Washington Post ›
Ted Cruz using firm that harvested data on millions of unwitting ... ›
Ted Cruz's Daughters Attend a Private School That Is 'Antiracist ... ›
---
fedsoc contributer keynote address, many talks rachel bovard?
jan 2022?
Panel Three: School Choice: The Next Civil Rights Crusade? [Archive Collection]
Clint Bolick, Ted Cruz, Jennifer A. Grossman, Michael Meyers, Joseph Viteritti
1999 Stranahan National Issues Forum
On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the...
off bs
Ted Cruz represents 28 million Texans in the U.S. Senate as a passionate fighter for limited government and economic growth. He has authored 39 legislative measures signed into law. Recent victories include expanding 529 college savings accounts to allow parents to save for K–12 public, private, and religious education, leading the effort to repeal Obamacare’s individual mandate, imposing sanctions on terrorists who use civilians as human shields, designating North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism, reauthorizing and reforming NASA,ensuring the availability of additional records to help solve civil rights cold cases,supporting thousands of Texas jobs, and leading the fight to confirm principled constitutionalists to our courts.
Senator Cruz is a graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School, a former law clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist, and former solicitor general of Texas. He has argued nine cases before the Supreme Court. In November of 2018, he was re-elected to the Senate by the people of Texas.
---
salon 12/20
https://www.salon.com/2020/12/10/ted-cruz-tells-trump-hell-argue-garbage-texas-election-lawsuit-before-scotus/
President Trump's personal request, Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, has agreed to argue a longshot lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court that has been characterized as "insane," "garbage," and "simply mad."
The lawsuit was filed earlier this week by Cruz's fellow Texan Ken Paxton, attorney general of the Lone Star State and current target of an FBI bribery investigation. It was quickly met with derision from legal experts as a baseless and unconstitutional assault on the rights of voters.
There is no evidence of fraud in the presidential election, according to election officials in every state. President-elect Joe Biden won with a record-setting 81 million votes — a margin of victory of more than seven million votes over Trump.
Trump asked Cruz on Tuesday to argue the case, which was filed the previous night and asks the court to block what Paxton calls "unlawful and constitutionally tainted votes" about to be cast by electors from the key battleground states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
Paxton's complaint, which cites bogus claims warmed over after weeks of failed GOP legal efforts in state courts, aims to convince the justices that those states made illegal procedural changes ahead of the election to limit the spread of the coronavirus, and the votes from those states should be invalidated.
Pennsylvania has already successfully argued that such an action would violate due process rights for millions of voters.
Legal experts immediately dismissed the suit's chances of getting a hearing at the nation's highest court. But on Wednesday afternoon, 17 Republican-led states, led by Missouri, joined an amicus brief in support of the quixotic crusade, despite the fact that several of those states had themselves implemented the same procedures that the lawsuit now seeks to invalidate post hoc.
Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman, writing in a Bloomberg op-ed, called it a lawsuit from "Trump's fantasy world," and said it amounted to asking the Supreme Court to engage in "a constitutional coup d'état and give Trump a second term." Republican attorney George Conway, husband of former top Trump official Kellyanne Conway, said the exercise was "insane," and top election-law expert Rick Hasen called it "utter garbage" and "dangerous."
Even Cruz's Republican Senate colleagues have spurned the idea.
Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, called it "madness" to ask the Court to override voters. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., who along with Romney has been among a handful of GOP senators to vocally criticize Trump, pointed out that Texas' solicitor general — the official who typically represents the state before the Supreme Court, and a position Cruz held before being elected to the Senate — declined to sign on to the suit.
Still, Cruz conceded to the will of a man who once called his wife ugly and insinuated that his father conspired in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
Cruz may well believe, as experts widely agree, that the Court will simply reject Paxton's application outright, as Bush-appointed Justice Samuel Alito did in a one-sentence order to Pennsylvania Republicans just this week. But Ilya Somin, a professor at George Mason University School of Law, noted that because the complaint falls within the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court — as opposed to trickling up from a lower-court appeal — there is an outside chance the suit gets a hearing. That would put Cruz on the hot seat.
It is unclear why Cruz, an attorney experienced in constitutional law, would take such a risk. As Sasse pointed out, it may have to do with Paxton's criminal exposure. Sasse summed up the filing as a "PR stunt" that amounted to "a fella begging for a pardon."
Hasen, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, agreed, tweeting on Tuesday that Paxton "should be sanctioned" for abusing his office to angle for a presidential pardon.
"It goes against the will of millions of voters," Hasen said. "He's going for a pardon with Trump."
Paxton faces dual threats: a federal probe into allegations that he committed bribery and abused his office on behalf of a wealthy political donor, and a state indictment for felony securities fraud.
The federal investigation was launched last month, but the fraud case has bounced around Texas trial courts for five years, reaching the state's highest criminal court before getting knocked back down to the county level. Paxton has still not faced trial.
A pardon by Trump would end the federal investigation, but the president has no power over state criminal charges.
By ROGER SOLLENBERGER
---
https://www.foxnews.com › politics › cruz-and-24-senate-republicans-file-amicus-brief-defending-second-amendment-rightsCruz and 24 Senate Republicans file amicus brief defending Second ...
Jul 20, 2021EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Ted Cruz and two dozen Senate Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, filed an amicus brief Tuesday in a Second Amendment case the Supreme Court is set...
https://www.cruz.senate.gov › newsroom › press-releases › sen-cruz-leads-amicus-brief-in-defense-of-american-sovereignty-in-suit-brought-by-the-government-of-mexicoSen. Cruz Leads Amicus Brief in Defense of American Sovereignty in Suit ...
May 30, 2023Press Releases 05.30.2023 Sen. Cruz Leads Amicus Brief in Defense of American Sovereignty in Suit Brought by the Government of Mexico WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, filed an amicus brief in the case Estados Unidos Mexicanos v.
---
==
ggl 8 23
Ted Cruz received more money from oil and gas ...
The Independent
https://www.independent.co.uk › ... › US politics
Feb 19, 2021 — Politicians and energy experts have blamed the power supplier for the catastrophe in Texas, claiming that the company did not properly winterise ...
Missing: dark | Show results with: dark
Here's where Ted Cruz gets his campaign money
Yahoo Finance
https://www.yahoo.com › here-s-where-ted-cruz-s-gets...
Jun 12, 2015 — The bomb thrower candidate probably can't count on a lot of corporate funding.
Cruz's quiet fundraising strength: A network of wealthy ...
Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2015/10/26
Oct 26, 2015 — Republican candidate Ted Cruz is finding support among constitutionalists, religious conservatives, and oil and gas executives, ...
Oil and gas industry has pumped millions into Republican ...
The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com › us-news › mar › oil-an...
Mar 3, 2016 — Fossil fuel barons have invested more than $100m in Republican presidential Super Pacs – raising concerns over special interests if GOP ...
The Super PAC Experiment That Bankrolled Ted Cruz
The Texas Tribune
https://www.texastribune.org › 2016/05/17 › cruz-sup...
May 17, 2016 — Super PACs backing Ted Cruz's presidential bid didn't just raise millions, they pioneered a new way to channel the money into his effort.
Billionaire donors aided Ted Cruz's rise in 2016 race
CBS News
https://www.cbsnews.com › Politics
Jan 25, 2016 — WASHINGTON -- Four of America's wealthiest businessmen laid the foundation for Ted Cruz's now-surging Republican presidential campaign and ...
Cruz presidential campaign says supporters donated $51 ...
Reuters
https://www.reuters.com › article › us-usa-election-cru...
Jul 5, 2015 — Republican Senator Ted Cruz and the outside groups supporting his presidential bid have raised more than $51 million in the three months ...
Missing: energy oil dark
RPT-Why Ted Cruz is wowing some of Wall Street's money ...
https://www.reuters.com › article › usa-elections-cruz
May 14, 2015 — Presidential candidate Ted Cruz, a Tea Party favorite and leading figure in the 2013 government shutdown that rattled investors, isn't the ...
---
WIKI 8 23 COMM:
- Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
- Committee on **Foreign Relation**s
- Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific, and International Cybersecurity Policy
- Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism
- Subcommittee on State Department and USAID Management, International Operations, and Bilateral International Development
- Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues
- Committee on Rules and Administration
- Committee on the Judiciary
- Joint Economic Committee[140]^
Previous
- Committee on Armed Services (2013–2019)
- Special Committee on Aging (2013–2015)
---
Advancing American Freedom
On April 7, 2021, former Vice President Mike Pence launched Advancing American Freedom, a policy and advocacy organization.[23] Teller was announced as the Executive Director of Advancing American Freedom, a position he currently holds.[24] As Executive Director of AAF, Teller works with the former Vice President to develop and build new policies, strategies, and coalitionsto promote conservatism and restore constitutionalism in today's America.
---
6 23
tyler durndl
sen. Ted Cruz took aim Thursday at a Supreme Court precedent that empowers the administrative state at the expense of the people’s will and the Framers’ vision in the Constitution.
This Supreme Court doctrine has “played an enormous role in the expansion of the administrative state,” Cruz, a Texas Republican, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview Thursday. “It has resulted in the American people being subject to thetyranny of the bureaucracy, over which they have very little control or ability to demand accountability.”
Cruz referred to “Chevron deference,” the doctrine that whenever a law is ambiguous, a federal agency has the authority to interpret the scope and content of that ambiguity to achieve its ends, so long as the interpretation is “reasonable.” The doctrine dates back to the 1984 case Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council. Cruz led a group of 35 senators and representatives in supporting fishermen challenging a federal regulation in the upcoming Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—a case in which the court will reconsider Chevron deference.
Under this doctrine, “the courts give an extraordinary amount of deference to agency interpretations of law, even when those agency interpretations are not mandated by the statue that Congress passed and the president signed,” Cruz explained.
The senator argued that Chevron deference insulates bureaucrats who make the rules and regulations Americans must live by — creating a perverse protection for people who make life worse for everyday citizens.
“Far too many of the bureaucrats, quite frankly, don’t give a damn about what the voters think,” Cruz said.“One of the reasons why you see so many policies that destroy jobs, that hurt people across the country coming from the unelected bureaucracy is precisely because elected officials don’t have to pay the price for those decisions.”
This protects elected officials because they can merely blame bureaucrats.
“Your jobs that these bureaucrats took away, gosh, don’t blame me because I’m not the one who did that,” Cruz said, paraphrasing an unscrupulous politician. “The framers rightly envisioned a constitutional structure where those creating legislative rules could be held to account by the voters.”
Cruz filed a AMICUS? brief arguing that Chevron deference undermines all three branches of government as laid out in Articles I, II, and III in the Constitution.
Chevron deference undermines Congress’ legislative power by allowing agencies to make their own rules and it undermines judicial review by weakening the courts’ ability to enforce the law.
Cruz told The Daily Signal that it undermines the presidential power to execute the laws as stipulated in Article II, as well.
“The president is a constitutional officer who is democratically accountable,” he noted. “Chevron has helped fuel the growth of the modern administrative state, and in many instances, the unelected bureaucrats are not only unresponsive to Congress, but they are unresponsive to the elected president and the political leadership.”
“We see frequently a disconnect between the bureaucracy that views itself as the permanent government and the elected leadership in Article II,” he noted, referring to what former President Donald Trump called “the Deep State.”
“The president should be able to execute the laws consistent with his or her policy priorities and not handcuffed by unelected bureaucrats who believe they don’t work for the president and they don’t work for anybody else, either,” Cruz argued.
The senator claimed that Loper Bright “provides an excellent vehicle to overturn Chevron.”
In Loper Bright, fishermen are challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service—represented by Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo. Federal law forces fishermen to carry inspectors aboard their vessels. A new Fisheries Service rule forces the fishermen to pay the salaries of these federal inspectors. The federal law requiring the inspections does not stipulate that fishermen must pay inspectors’ salaries, but the Fisheries Service insists that it has the power to demand payment under Chevron.
A divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit sided with the Fisheries Service in August 2022, noting that the statute leaves “room for agency discretion.” Yet the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari.
“Here the federal government enforced regulations requiring a family fishing company not only to allow a fishing monitor on their ship but also forcing them to pay the salary of that monitor,” Cruz explained. “Those facts illustrate well how bureaucrats easily stray and routinely stray from the language and the actual policies enacted by Congress.”
“They almost always stray in a direction of increasing the burdens on the American people, making regulations more costly, more burdensome, more destructive to jobs and economic growth,” the senator added. He noted that multiple justices have said they would like to revisit the Chevron precedent.
Cruz filed his brief Thursday, and many other Republican senators joined. Kentucky’s Mitch McConnell, Tennessee’s Marsha Blackburn, North Carolina’s Ted Budd, Texas’ John Cornyn, Arkansas’ Tom Cotton, North Dakota’s Kevin Cramer, Montana’s Steve Daines, Iowa’s Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley, Mississippi’s Cindy Hyde-Smith and Roger Wicker, Louisiana’s John Kennedy, Utah’s Mike Lee, Wyoming’s Cynthia Lummis, Missouri’s Eric Schmitt, Florida’s Rick Scott, and South Carolina’s Tim Scott signed on. Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., led the effort in the House of Representatives.
Cruz noted that he filed amicus briefs in other key Supreme Court cases, such as Groff v. DeJoy, 303 Creative v. Elenis, and Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College.
“The Supreme Court agreed with the position advocated in my amicus briefs,” upholding “religious liberty, free speech, and equal protection rights” in those cases, he noted.
---
---
unpack virtue signal? any word or deed in support of left ideas whether sincerely held or not? mere tribe solidarity or worse/more probable cave to peer pressure (of what is fashionable vs what is rt principled? / SJW
https://www.alternet.org/2659479681/ ukraine war cruz 2 23
---
https://www.alternet.org/ted-cruz-2662301818/
barbie ccp prop
---
---
Story by Thom Hartmann
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/you-know-america-is-in-crisis-when-barbie-has-more-integrity-than-6-supreme-court-justices/ar-AA1eCHTf
“In Barbieland, corporations are not people, and money is not considered protected free speech!”
You know America is in crisis when Barbie has more integrity than 6 Supreme Court justices
---
“Is Barbie Communist?” How One Scene Dragged the Barbie Movie Into Controversy
She’s a Communist. He’s just Ken.
JUNG YEON-JE/AFP/GETTY IMAGES
Is Barbie a Communist? According to Republicans, the answer seems to be, “Most likely.”
A growing number of voices on the right are accusing the upcoming Barbie movie of pushing Chinese propaganda. The film, which comes out July 21, stars Margot Robbie and Ryan Gosling as Barbie and Ken, who leave Barbie Land to explore the real world. In one scene before they leave, a rough, hand-drawn map of the world can be seen in the background. The map includes the so-called nine-dash line, a much-disputed division of territory in the South China Sea.
“I guess Barbie is made in China …” Ted Cruz tweeted Monday.
The next day, a spokesperson for the Texas senator told the Daily Mail, “China wants to control what Americans see, hear, and ultimately think, and they leverage their massive film markets to coerce American companies into pushing [Chinese Communist Party] propaganda—just like the way the Barbie film seems to have done with the map.”
Fox News anchor Rachel Campos-Duffy, while covering Cruz’s reaction, mused on air, “Is Barbie Communist?”
“Maybe!” her colleague replied.
China has used the nine-dash line to mark its controversial territorial claims in the South China Sea. Over the years, Beijing has tried to claim sovereignty over 90 percent of the region. Even though The Hague ruled in 2016 that China has no legal basis for its claims, the country has pressed on, building military installations on otherwise uninhabited islands in the sea.
Vietnam has already banned the Barbie movie for its inclusion of the nine-dash line. Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, and Brunei all say the marker violates their sovereignty.
The Philippines is also considering banning the film. “If the invalidated nine-dash line was indeed depicted in the movie Barbie, then it is incumbent upon the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board of the Philippines to ban the same as it denigrates Philippine sovereignty,” Filipino Senator Francis Tolentino told CNN Philippines on Tuesday.
For those wondering, this is the shot in question of the nine-dash line:
---
7 23 fox not doing x event? but bartiromo will interview trump
---
an 7 23
man who participated in the January 6th, 2021 insurrection at the United States Capitol and subsequently became the face of a Fox News conspiracy theory is suing the network for defamation, correspondents Alan Feuer and Jeremy W. Peters reported in The New York Times on Wednesday.
Ray Epps is "seeking an unspecified amount in damages" for the character assassination that he allegedly endured from fired Fox News host Tucker Carlson's "'fantastical story' that Mr. Epps was an undercover government agent who instigated the violence at the Capitol as a way to disparage then-President Trump and his supporters," Feuer and Peters wrote.
"Just as Fox had focused on voting machine companies when falsely claiming a rigged election, Fox knew it needed a scapegoat for January 6th," Epps' complaint states, according to Delaware Superior Court documents reviewed by the Times. Fox "settled on Ray Epps and began promoting the lie that Epps was a federal agent who incited the attack on the Capitol."
"After the unfounded accusations about Mr. Epps were aired on Mr. Carlson's show," Feuer and Peters explained, "they quickly spread to online communities of Trump supporters and to the political world as Republican members of Congress tried to link Mr. Epps to a fictitious conspiracy theory that he was involved in planning the Jan. 6 attack. They includedSenator Ted Cruz of Texas and Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky, both of whom made Mr. Epps — a two-time Trump voter — a focus of concern at public hearings."
Fox's false narrative "had damaging consequences for Mr. Epps and his wife, Robyn,who received numerous death threats and were forced to sell their five-acre ranch and wedding business in Arizona and move into a 350-square-foot mobile home parked at a remote trailer park in the mountains of Utah," per the**Times. "Online retailers began selling T-shirts that said 'Arrest Ray Epps.' Some people even recorded songs about him and posted them on YouTube, the complaint states, adding how he had been reduced 'into a character in a cartoonish conspiracy theory.'"
Epps' attorney, Michael Teter, noted that although his client "demanded in March that Fox and Mr. Carlson retract its stories about him and his purported role in the Capitol riot and issue an on-air apology, neither the network nor Mr. Carlson, whose prime-time show has since been canceled, responded."
Despite never being criminally charged for his role in the Capitol attack, the Times added, "Mr. Carlson and Fox settled on Mr. Epps as a 'villain' who could serve as a distraction from the network's own 'culpability for stoking the fire that led to the events of January 6th.' Mr. Carlson, it said, became 'fixated on Epps' and began the promoting the idea that Mr. Epps and the federal government were responsible for the Capitol riots.
---
---
2x?dr suess ban biden no exist
https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/ted-cruz-2650890996
---
jane mayer clime mach
...
The A.A.F. also claims to have sabotaged the nomination of David Chipman, Biden’s choice to lead the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. In the face of strong opposition from gun-rights activists, he withdrew his nomination last September, leaving the agency that regulates guns without a director. (The position has been unfilled for all but two years since 2006, when Senate confirmation for the position became a requirement.)
The A.A.F. compiled for the Senate a twenty-four-page dossier that incoherently accused Chipman, a twenty-five-year veteran of the A.T.F., of being both a racist and a radical social-justice warrior consumed by “wokeness.” The allegations came from anonymous sources. According to Jones, an unidentified A.T.F. agent had reported hearing Chipman say that so many Black candidates had passed an A.T.F. exam that they must have cheated.
Ted Cruz—Jones’s former boss—took up the campaign against Chipman. He and the A.A.F. demanded to see two complaints that had been filed against Chipman with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, even though both had been resolved without disciplinary action. At the same time, the A.A.F.’s dossier contained anonymous allegations claiming that Chipman was a radical “anti-racist” who favored destroying Confederate memorials and wanted to “use fighter jets to bomb” Mount Rushmore and Stone Mountain “into rubble,” because they offended people of color. The A.A.F. even contacted Chipman’s ex-wife in search of evidence against him, but she declined to coöperate.
Chipman told me that the A.A.F.’s modus operandi is to make claims that are “adjacent” to the facts and then “turn them around completely.” Although he had once accused a Black candidate of cheating on an A.T.F. exam that he had proctored, Chipman raised no questions about several other Black candidates who’d passed the same exam. The two dismissed E.E.O.C. complaints were the only ones that had ever been filed against him, he said, and in both cases he’d merely insisted that two subordinates be present for their regular work hours. He did say, on Facebook, that he opposed naming Army bases after Confederate soldiers, and he believes that monuments celebrating them are inappropriate and racially insensitive. But “it was characterized as if I was calling for violence,” he told me, adding, “I never advocated violence or called for anyone to blow up anything. I spent twenty-five years investigating bombings!” Chipman said, “The racial things they used were hugely ugly,” and noted that “the facts don’t matter to these people—they’re just used as weapons.” A protester appeared outside his house; on Twitter, users called for his death. Chipman’s wife, who had worked at the A.T.F. for decades, felt so unsafe at her job that she quit.
Race is also a theme of attacks that the A.A.F. has directed at Carlton Waterhouse, a Black environmental lawyer whom Biden has nominated to become an assistant administrator in the Environmental Protection Agency, overseeing environmental-justice efforts for underserved communities. Waterhouse’s résumé is strong: he studied engineering at Penn State, and has a doctorate in ethics from Emory and a law degree from Howard University, where he helped develop the school’s Environmental Justice Center. On Fox News, however, Jones dismissed Waterhouse as “a racist” who is “obsessed with pushing racially divisive rhetoric and policies into every aspect of public life.”
A dossier that the A.A.F. compiled on Waterhouse states that he “wants to resegregate America’s schools . . . by establishing schools explicitly for Black students.” Yet, in an article the dossier cites as evidence, Waterhouse actually writes that such schools should be “open to all children.” The A.A.F.’s dossier also claims that Waterhouse was “so radical he opposes the Civil Rights Legislation of the 1960’s and 1970’s.” Waterhouse told me that this was a distortion “intended to stir up disapproval.” His criticism of the civil-rights movement was only that it hadn’t gone far enough to establish a framework for reparations. “It’s hateful, and a gross misrepresentation,” he said. Waterhouse has yet to be confirmed, leaving a top environmental-justice job at the agency vacant. The blocking of so many Biden nominees has made it significantly harder for the President and his Administration to enact policies that they were elected to implement. Waterhouse said that he was hopeful and excited about the prospect of getting to work, but added that the A.A.F.’s campaigns were having a chilling effect: “People won’t want to serve, because your name will be dragged through the mud.”
As Jones has portrayed it, his group ismerely catching up with the sleazy tactics of progressive dark-money groups—which, he claims, went to great lengths to try to block Cabinet nominees during the Trump Administration, not to mention conservative Supreme Court nominees such as Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh. Of course, neither Thomas nor Kavanaugh were felled by anonymous slurs during their nomination hearings; they were credibly and directly confronted by female victims who accused them, in sworn testimony, of sexual misconduct. ..
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/right-wing-media-2661654976/
an 6 23
//
NO lnx
mAGA Republicans can be highly disdainful of anything they consider "green," be it wind and solar power, recycling or electric vehicles. Now, some of them are raging against new electric cars for not including AM radio.
The Guardian's Katie Thornton reports that Volkswagen and Mazda are joining Volvo, Tesla, BMW and Audi in excluding AM radio from their electric cars. They view it as a technical matter, while Turning Point USA's Charlie Kirk, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and far-right radio host Mark Levin are saying it is a conspiracy against far-right talk radio.
Thornton, in a report for The Guardian published on June 21, notes that some companies "have already dispensed with AM in their electric cars, because AM's already unpolished reception is subject to even more buzz, crackling."
READ MORE: 'That's not appropriate': Fox News host slams Steve Bannon for attacking the right-wing media network
"While some manufacturers have found workarounds for the interference," Thornton explains, "others appear to have decided that it's not worth the engineering expense."
Levin is furious, telling listeners, "They finally figured out how to attack conservative talk radio." Similarly, Kirk, on his radio show, claimed, "Whether they're doing this intentionally or not, the consequence will be.… an all-out attack on AM radio."
Cruz claims, "There's a reason big car companies were open totaking down AM radio.… Let's be clear: big business doesn't like things that are overwhelmingly conservative."
Thornton delves into the history of radio in her article, noting that "in the 1920s, when AM was all there was, listeners would gather around neighborhood and living room radio sets to hear everything from music to boxing matches, soap operas, and presidential speeches." But in the 1960s, she adds, FM — thanks to its superior sound quality — "overtook AM as the band of choice."
READ MORE: 'Fox News in Spanish': The new right-wing media outlet courting Latino voters
"Many music stations deserted AM, leaving it floundering in lo-fi isolation and struggling to secure advertising dollars, until it found its salvation in talk radio,"Thornton observes. "Initially, there was a wide variety of political perspectives on AM, but the deregulation of content and consolidation of ownership of radio during the 1980s edged many minority voices and local owners off the air…. These days, AM radio is somewhat synonymous in the public imagination with conservative blowhards, a place where false claims about the 2020 election, racist notions of a 'Great Replacement' and other conspiracy theories fester and escape into the atmosphere without accountability."
Thornton continues, "Far-right programming is not only ubiquitous, it's monotonous.… But the idea that AM radio is made up of nothing more than conservative talk is a myth that has dangerous implications for the medium."
READ MORE: Revealed: The text that toppled Tucker Carlson
The Guardian's full report is available at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is the subject of another hoax right-wing attack — but she got the last laugh ›
Libertarian journalist details the 'growing bloodlust among right-wing pundits and politicians' ›
Right-wing media outlets continue to rage against Dominion’s defamation lawsuits: report ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Right-wing influencers and media double down on anti-LGBTQ ... ›
This is how dangerous right-wing media *actually* is | CNN Politics ›
Elon Musk's right-wing media venture scores another big win - The ... ›
---
---
an 6 23
no lnx
next to helping President Joe Biden get reelected, the Democratic Nation Committee's (DNC) top goal for 2024 is keeping their party's effective majority in the U.S. Senate. Democratic strategists and organizers realize that if Biden is reelected but Republicans retake the Senate, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) would — assuming he became Senate majority leader again — do everything he could to block Biden's nominees.
That could everything from a possible U.S. Supreme Court nominee if there are any vacancies to lower federal court nominees to potential members of Biden's administration.
Democrats slightly increased their effective Senate majority in the 2022 midterms. But in an article published on June 12, Politico reporters Burgess Everett, Jennifer Haberkorn and Daniella Diaz describe the difficulties that Biden nominees have been facing in the Senate Commerce Committee.
READ MORE: Senate Republicans resist Biden's Highway Traffic Safety nominee: report
"Relatively obscure nominations are turning into Senate knife fights as 2024 approaches,"the reporters explain. "And the Commerce Committee is the center of the action. So far this year, three Biden picks for executive-branch positions withdrew because they lacked enough support in the Committee, which has four Democratic members up for reelection in swing states next fall. And when Republicans stick together —under the surprising leadership of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) — that can cause problems."
:{:{}:
}:
One of the Biden nominees who withdrew was Ann Carlson, who Biden had in mind to head the National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration.
:{:{}:
}:
According to Everett, Haberkorn and Diaz, "The Carlson episode is instructive for a White House and Democratic Senate that's faced several tough nomination crunches. At the moment, labor secretary hopeful Julie Su is in the highest-profile fight, as a handful of Democratic senators remain undecided and there's no floor vote in sight."
:{:{}:
}:
The Politico reporters add that "it's not hard to see why the Commerce Committee is so tough" for Biden nominees.
READ MORE: Watch: Ted Cruz lashes out at Biden nominee for referring to Fox News as propaganda
"The combative Cruz is the top Republican on the panel," Everett, Haberkorn and Diaz note. "And the Committee's Democratic members include incumbent Sens. KyrstenSinema (I-Ariz.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Jon Tester(D-Mont.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.)."
READ MORE: Susan Collins helps sink hopes of replacing Dianne Feinstein on Judiciary Committee
Politico's full report is available at this link.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Biden continues nominating a diverse slate of federal judges at a rapid pace ›
Dick Durbin under fire for letting GOP Senate minority veto Biden judges ›
Why Bernie Sanders took a stand against a Biden nominee ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
AOC: Dianne Feinstein inflicting "great harm on the Judiciary" and ... ›
With Sen. Feinstein back in Senate, 3 of Biden's judicial nominees ... ›
Sanders vows to oppose NIH nominee until Biden produces drug ... ›
---
---
no lnx twt an 5 23
'Mr. Nothing Burger has condiments': Ted Cruz fried for spreading debunked '87,000 IRS agents' claim
.
Maya Boddie May 22, 2023
United States Senator Ted Cruz made several false claims Sunday evening while discussing the continued debt deal fight between Republican and Democratic lawmakers.
:{:{}:
}:
The senator shared a clip from his Fox News Sunday with Shannon Bream interview, writing, "Democrats want an army of IRS agents to harass the American people. I've yet to find someone in Texas who wants 87,000 new IRS agents!"
Cruz began saying, "There's one person on planet Earth with the power to ensure that we don't have a default and you just played him a moment ago. His name is Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.A responsible president would've stood up at that press conference and said, 'Understand and hear me now, the United States of America will never, ever, ever default on our debts. We will pay the interests of our debts. The president can say that. Why can he say that? He can say that because every month, revenue from federal taxes exceeds the interest on the debt. He could take default off the table. Joe Biden doesn't wanna take default off the table, why? Because he wants to scaremonger. He wants to scare people into saying, 'Look at this bad thing that, I, Joe Biden am threatening is going to happen. The only result is to leave $32 trillion in debt."
READ MORE: 'Deeply dangerous nonsense': Treasury Dept. debunks GOP lies about 87,000 armed IRS agents
:{:{}:
}:
The GOP senator continued, "You know what's amazing, Shannon? Biden's position is way to the left of most Democrats. Recent polling shows 58 percent of Democrats think that we should have reasonable deficit reduction as part of raising the debt ceiling. And yet, Joe Biden's position is 'absolutely not.'"
NPR reported, "some Democrats on Capitol Hill are" actually "growing increasingly worried that President Biden will give into too many demands from House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in continuing talks over a deal to avoid a historic debt default."
Furthermore, the news outlet noted, "Biden and McCarthy both expressed optimism that a deal could get done," with McCarthy saying Thursday, "I see the path that we could come to an agreement. And I think we have a structure now and everybody's working hard."
Bream interrupted Cruz, saying, "I was gonna say, that's the accusation on both sides. That both sides are being controlled by the extremes of their party. Um, you would say the left and many others, Republicans, will say, 'it's the progressives. It's the squad. It's the people who say they won't even entertain work requirements, um, for government assistance,' those kinds of things. But the White House continues to say —By the way, we invited somebody from the White House to come on, they chose not to come on and talk about the debt ceiling today, but they did send us several memos. And one of them, um, uses a lot of language referring to you and your party, as extreme. 'You've taken the economy hostage, you're fighting tooth and nail to protect tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and biggest corporations.'"
READ MORE: Senate finance chief: Nothing unites GOP more than 'helping rich people cheat on their taxes'
Cruz replied, "You know, you're right. They use a lot of angry rhetoric and they call everyone else extreme. This is where actually truth and substance matters. If you look at the bill the House passed, it's a very reasonable bill. The bill the House passed saves $4.8 trillion over 10 years. Now that's a reasonable down payment. We owe $32 trillion, so that's not trying to solve it all but it's taking a reasonable step to solve it. Now how does it do it? The big thing it does is it reduces spending from current levels to what we were spending in 2022, in other words, five months ago. The Biden White House says, 'These are draconian cuts, the world will end.' I will ask you, Shannon, in December 2022, Christmas time, did you think suddenly the federal government had, had withered away — just reducing it by, to what it was five months ago. And then allowing it to grow 1 percent a year results in those savings."
"But the Democrats are all in. They wanna spend, for example, on 87,000 new IRS agents. They want those IRS agents to harass the American people, and Joe Biden says 'it's extreme' not to give them this army of IRS agents. Joe Biden wants to spend $30 billion that was appropriated for COVID funds. Now Biden has declared the COVID emergency over, but he wants a $30 billion slush fund that hasn't been spent. I think what the House has done is very reasonable and I'll tell you what Biden and the Democrats hate the most, are work requirements for welfare. Listen, I believe if you're an able-bodied man, you outta be working.And I think work requirements are one of the most compassionate things you can do cuz they get people back into the work force, back supplying for their family, and Joe Biden is threatening to veto the whole thing and default on the debt because he is so opposed to getting people back to work. That's an extreme party."
In 2022, The New York Times debunked Cruz's claim regarding "87,000 new IRS agents," reporting:
These claims are misleading. The 87,000 figure refers to a May 2021 estimate from the Treasury Department of the total number of employees — not just auditors — the I.R.S. proposes to hire over the next 10 years with funding requested by Mr. Biden. And while the I.R.S. plans to conduct more audits, wealthy Americans and businesses will bear the brunt of that scrutiny, not, as Republicans have suggested, working families.
Among the I.R.S.’s work force of about 79,000 employees, 10,000 are actually agents. (Of those, 8,000 are revenue agents who audit tax filings and 2,000 are special agents who investigate potential tax crimes.) In fact, the two most common I.R.S. jobs have little to do with tax auditing or investigations: about 13,000 are customer service representatives who answer taxpayer phone calls and 10,000 are seasonal employees who file mail or transcribe data. Other jobs include lawyers, examiners, technicians and appeals officers.
READ MORE: 'Highly misleading': CNN brutally fact-checks Kevin McCarthy's latest series of unfounded claims
Additionally, The Times reports, "In the past decade, tax audit rates have fallen most starkly for higher income earners, which the I.R.S. attributes to diminished resources and therefore its inability to retain specialized auditors needed to examine the filings of the wealthy," adding, "Increasing funding for the I.R.S., the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said in September 2021, would address those needs and result in increased audit rates for everyone, particularly for high-income earners."
:{:{}:
}:
Furthermore, Regarding Cruz's work requirement argument, The Post reported last month, "The debate in some ways resembles the Republican-led campaign against so-called welfare queens in the 1990s, when a politically resurgent GOP—then under the leadership of House Speaker Newt Gingrich—secured a dramatic restructuring of the government's social safety net. The resulting overhaul, enacted by President Bill Clinton, slashed cash benefits for millions of Americans in ways that GOP leaders now cite as a model."
Patriotic Millionaires, a group that supports tax hikes on the rich, tweeted last month, "The legislators that want new work requirements for food stamps and Medicaid are the same ones working to eliminate the estate tax so that billionaire heirs never have to work a day in their lives," adding, "It's not about work, it's about hurting the poor."
Cruz's tweet significantly backfired.
@shedsquatch: "Mr. Nothing Burger has condiments."
Rep. Dan Goldman: "Odd timing from someone who says we need to decrease the deficit if we pay our bills. The law that was passed that adds IRS agents reduces the deficit by $114bn. Yet @tedcruz wants to undo the law and add $114bn to our deficit. Hypocrite."
Andrew Wortman: ".@tedcruz: This is a LIE. It was debunked LAST YEAR. The funding provided to the IRS was in part to facilitate them hiring 87,000 employees OVER THE COURSE OF TEN YEARS, also helping to make up for agents who retire or leave during that time. Why are you dredging up old lies?"
READ MORE: GOP ramps up cruel push for work requirements
@File411: "Dear Lyin' @tedcruz THIS. IS. A LIE. You are a liar You are lying Stop lying and for once in your life start telling the truth."
Brian Tyler Cohen: "In 2022, before Dems funded the IRS, only 15% of live calls were answered. By 2023 it was 87%. The IRS cut phone wait times from 27 min to 4 min, served 100k more taxpayers in-person, digitized 80x more returns than in 2022. Ted wants it undone so his rich pals won’t be audited."
@LA_SassyPants: "We pay our taxes, Ted. The IRS doesn't scare those who *actually* pay their taxes."
Jedi Ghost: "The IRS actually hired customer service personnel, and as a result the wait times for the tax help line where reduced almost by an order of magnitude. It’s sad you need to keep lying about something so obviously beneficial to hardworking American taxpayers."
@sheeshkabob: "We need them. We need to prosecute people like tRump for cheating the tax system."
Watch the video below or at this link.
READ MORE: Biden must demand that Kevin McCarthy 'remove the threat' of debt default: former Obama adviser
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
House Republicans will use the debt ceiling battle to 'inflict significant pain' on Americans: journalist ›
GOP debt limit bill could out over 10 million at risk of losing Medicaid: analysis ›
Kevin McCarthy promises to repeal IRS funding meant to catch rich tax cheats ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Liberals Balk at G.O.P. Push for Stricter Work Requirements in Debt ... ›
IRS is not hiring an 'army' of auditors, what's really happening ›
Why Republicans Keep Spreading the '87,000 IRS Agents' Lie | Time ›
---
naacp aclu? say florida not safe travel AA; MLK dtr ~ twt
https://www.alternet.org/ted-cruz-2660543658/
---
May 19, 2023
- Michelle Goldberg @ The New York Times: Whose Version of Christian Nationalism Will Win in 2024?
- Hunter Walker @ Talking Points Memo: White House Denounces ‘Extremist’ Staffer In Paul Gosar’s Office.
- Ron Dicker @:{HuffPost: Ted Cruz Launches Senate Probe Into Bud Light’s Ad With Dylan Mulvaney.}:
- Erik Maulbetsch @ Colorado Times Recorder: Boebert Promotes ‘Globalist’ Conspiracy at Rally Opposing World Health Organization.
- Kelly Weill @ The Daily Beast: Senate Candidate ‘Patriot Whistleblower’ Admits to Fabricating Sex Trafficking Story.
- Lana Bellamy , Phillip Pantuso , Brendan J. Lyons @ The Times Union: Story of homeless veterans displaced by migrants was false.
Tags: Lauren Boebert Paul Gosar Ted Cruz Round-Up
---
an 5 23
newt memo update? just mirror BS devil term?
no lnx
Hopelessly insane' Ted Cruz flattened over Biden 'terrorist' insult
Tom Boggioni and Raw StoryMay 01, 2023
A glib comment about President Joe Biden made by Sen. Ted Cuz while appearing on Fox News on Sunday was hammered by MSNBC analyst Steve Benen, who called out the Texas Republican for his "juvenile nonsense."
Speaking with embattled “Sunday Morning Futures" host Maria Bartiromo – who was at the center of Dominion Voting Systems' defamation lawsuit that cost the network $787 million – Cruz attacked the president over the budget battle as a default deadline looms.
:{:{}:
}:
Cruz offered "advice" to Biden, stating, "Joe Biden from 2011 needs to come back, not the guy they got right now locked in the basement and a White House that’s being run by 25-year-old radicals who figure, ‘Heck, just let it all default, what do we care?’ These are little Marxists with no experience in the real world. We need to bring back the Joe Biden who’s done this before, not the one who is behaving like a terrorist, which is what Biden is doing right now.”
Aside from claiming Biden who just returned from a visit to Europe and told jokes at the televised White House Correspondents' Association Dinner on Saturday evening is "locked in the basement," Benen hammered Cruz over his "unserious" remarks.
"The first is that Biden, during his tenure as vice president, participated in debt ceiling talks. That’s true, he did. But Biden also learned from that experience that such talks don’t actually lead to worthwhile and constructive results, which is one of the reasons he’s opposed to making the same mistake twice," he wrote.
He then added, "The second was Cruz’s contention that the president is 'behaving like a terrorist,' which is so hopelessly insane that it was unsettling to see the senator deliver the line with a straight face."
According to the analyst, this is not the first time Republicans have turned to overheated rhetoric because they aren't getting their way.
:{:{}:
}:
"To hear these Republicans tell it, the heroes of our ongoing drama are those threatening to impose an economic catastrophe unless their ridiculous demands are met, and those being told to pay the ransom are 'behaving like a terrorist,'" he explained before concluding, "Or put another way, Cruz, convinced that many voters will believe garbage talking points, no matter how outlandish, is pitching a painfully dumb plot."
You can read more here.
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Newly revealed Ted Cruz tape has him telling Fox host to listen to 'actual facts' in 2020 coverage ›
Kellyanne Conway’s daughter ignites mockery of Ted Cruz and other conservatives ›
Ted Cruz says Democrats harbor 'special' hate for Clarence Thomas 'because he’s a Black man' ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Sen. Ted Cruz says Republicans are likely to impeach Biden if they ... ›
At least 12 GOP senators to challenge Biden's win - POLITICO ›
Special Counsel calls for tapes that implicate Ted Cruz in attempts to ... ›
---
4 23 raw
mSNBC's Ari Melber on Tuesday said that he had acquired a "damning" new recording of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) discussing how to potentially overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
"I think that the country deserves to have a credible assessment of these claims and what the evidence shows and the mechanism to try to force that is denying certification on the sixth," Cruz told Fox host Maria Bartiromo on Jan. 2, 2021.
"'Forcing this reassessment,' as he so dryly put it, of [Joe] Biden's actual win," alleged Melber, "was for Cruz one step in a larger coup plot. And that's what the next tape I'm going play for you shows after the violence on Jan. 6th, there was, of course, the ongoing process of trying to overthrow the election Cruz early in that day right before the Capitol was breached was one of 11 senators denying. I should point out, the majority of senators didn't go that far. That's just one thing. Then there's step two, which you can hear yourself tonight."
"Who's deciding who gets inaugurated?" Bartiromo asked.
"It would be the results of the commission and what they find, and if they found credible evidence of fraud that undermines confidence in the electoral results in any given state they would report on that," Cruz told her.
Melber explained that this is a tape of Cruz thinking that he was talking in secret.
"He admits it," Melber continues. "You heard the question — who decides who gets inaugurated that's what this is all about. You have a certified winner. You have the courts having passed up any potential challenge. So, at that point, it was President-elect Biden, and Cruz answers this fake, made-up commission he and his Trump buddy were planning to create to bureaucratize a coup. That's what they were trying to do. That was his answer. That's how they were trying to steal the race. The references to fraud, we know, one, he didn't believe in those we have that on tape.B. more importantly, the judges and fact-finding we have in the country didn't find there was that kind of fraud and then 3. that's all just talk anyway because they're literally trying to steal it for Trump, so all the words in the middle are just the words to get there."
Hear the recordings below or at the link here.
---
https://www.alternet.org/god-isnt-a-genie/
---
cruz outrage at gigi comment fox state tv
Murdoch gave Jared Kushner 'confidential information' about Joe Biden’s campaign ads: court filing
David Badash The New Civil Rights Movement
February 27, 2023
Dominion Voting Systems has filed another bombshell court document, this time also around 200 pages, which provides additional damning evidence of how the company believes Fox News operated during the...
---
---
an 2 23
There were fireworks on Tuesday at the Senate Commerce Committee hearing as Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) grilled Gigi Sohn, a nominee for a commissioner position on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Sohn is no stranger to the Senate Commerce Committee as this is herthird hearing for the position, since her initial nomination in October 2021 by President Joe Biden.
Cruz took that familiarity as an opportunity to blast Sohn ove
Sohn agreed with Cruz that the FCC has an obligation to “defend democracy,” then he used that opportunity to bring up Sohn’s past vocal opposition to Fox News.
Cruz read a past tweet from Sohn from September 2019 that stated, “I agree with the scrutiny of big tech is essential as scrutiny of big telecom, cable and media,” Sohn’s tweet continued. “And trust me, the latter have played their own role in destroying democracy and electing autocrats. Like, say Fox News?”
Cruz then pounced on Sohn for showing partisan scrutiny in her communications.
“You see why millions of people don’t think you are fair and impartial to regulate communications?” Cruz asked.
Cruz then featured a social media post from October 2020 where Sohn described Fox News as being “state-sponsored.”
Sohn quickly acknowledged her wrongdoing after the post was presented.
“I regretted the tone of that,” Sohn said.
However, Sohn acknowledged the close positioning the conservative news network had with former President Donald Trump.
“They were very, very, very, close to the Trump administration,” said Sohn.
Cruz countered her response by asking if MSNBC is close to the Biden Administration.
Sohn responded, “I listen to National Public Radio, I do not watch CNN or MSNBC.”
Watch video below or at this link.
---
fail biden noms
https://www.alternet.org/2021/04/ted-cruz-josh-hawley
---
---
mma 2 23 even wsj...
If you’ve been paying attention to this asinine saga at all – and let’s hope for your sanity that’s not the case – you know that Newsmax, with its prior contract with DirecTV having run out, is suddenly demanding a massive pay-out from DirecTV. Newsmax is still providing the channel for free to the likes of YouTube, Roku, and more. Given that the contract had expired and a new agreement could not be reached, DirecTV pulled Newsmax from the air. It began airing The First, another right-wing cable network.
Despite all the indications that the end of the contract was a content-neutral decision by a company under siege from rising cord cutting among its customer base (not to mention having lost the NFL Sunday Ticket), Republican politicians have joined in with right-wing pundits to call this censorship. There have been talks of congressional hearings. Presidential candidates have weighed in. It’s one of the silliest big right-wing media stories since Breitbart broke the news of Obama giving a hug to one of his law school professors.
Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy played the hits in an interview with Mike Huckabee. If you don’t want to watch – and again, I do not recommend it – it starts with Huckabee endorsing a congressional investigation into DirecTV and Ruddy in turn saying that Mike Huckabee’s daughter – current Arkansas governor and former Trump White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders – will be president in the future [vid]
the interview carries on with Ruddy saying that he was just asking for $1 per subscriber per year. That would be on the upper range of subscriber fees overall (above the likes of CNBC, FX, and Nickelodeon according to 2020 data) and would result in a higher bill for consumers, all of whom could right now access Newsmax content at no cost elsewhere.
Notably, DirecTV is not standing idly by. The company pushed back in a letter to Republican senators who have echoed Newsmax’s disingenuous “censorship” angle. The letter reads in part:
• When DIRECTV’s prior agreement with Newsmax was set to expire, Newsmax advised us that it would extend our right to distribute the channel only if we agreed to pay tens of millions of dollars in new licensing fees – a cost we would have to pass along to all of our customers. We did not agree. No other major pay TV operator in the market currently pays per subscriber fees to carry the channel.
• Newsmax seeks to change the model by which it commercializes its channel. To date, Newsmax has been an advertising-supported channel. To maximize ad sales it distributes the channel free of charge to the approximately 75 million US households that have a pay TV service as well as to the approximately 55 million US households that don’t and instead view the channel on Newsmax’s website or through services like Roku and Amazon Fire. Under its proposed new model, Newsmax plans to make its channel available exclusively in pay TV, to the detriment of the 55 million households that don’t have a pay TV service, and to start charging pay TV operators a per subscriber fee to distribute the channel.
• Newsmax insisted on its terms – as is its right to do – and we insisted on ours. Lacking continued authorization to distribute Newsmax, DIRECTV was forced to remove the channel from our lineup.
• Although not currently available on DIRECTV, Newsmax continues to be available on most other major pay TV operators and is also available free of charge (including to DIRECTV’s customers) on Newsmax’s website and on platforms like Roku and Amazon Fire.
• Newsmax’s claims that DIRECTV is biased against conservative voices is untrue. Importantly, DIRECTV recently launched The First, a conservative news and commentary channel featuring Bill O’Reilly, Jesse Kelly, Liz Wheeler, and Dana Loesch, among others.
• DIRECTV carries five channels that most people would consider to be predominately news: Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, The First and NewsNation. By most people’s measure, two lean conservative (Fox News and The First), two lean liberal (CNN and MSNBC) and one is a new channel that is advertising that it is news focused and in the center (NewsNation). Fox News is by far the leader in terms of audience and household penetration. Newsmax, when we distributed it, was a distant fourth among news channels to Fox, MSNBC and CNN.
• The amounts DIRECTV pays for conservative channels, in the aggregate, is roughly similar to what we pay for liberal channels, in the aggregate.
The company makes clear that its decision was made from a content-neutral perspective. (It is darkly hilarious that the only structural discrimination that right-wing figures can see is a far-right election-denying media company run by a friend of Donald Trump not getting a massive handout from another private company, but that’s a story for another time.)
Newsmax has repeatedly whined that Fox News was being silent about the matter. Now, even the opinion page of the Murdoch-owned WSJ is taking pot shots at Republican politicians falling for the charade:
We take no side in this business dispute, and it’s bewildering why many Republicans are getting involved. Forty-two House Republicans last month wrote a letter to DirecTV executives and its joint owners, AT&T and TPG, threatening to investigate the TV provider for colluding with the government to suppress conservative voices.
Sens. Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Mike Lee and Tom Cotton piled on this month with a letter suggesting DirecTV may have dropped Newsmax because of “pressure from administration officials or Democrats in Congress” and “may be the latest example of big business suppressing politically disfavored speech at the behest of liberal Democrats.”
Their evidence? A letter from Democratic Reps. Anna Eshoo and Jerry McNerney to AT&T CEO John Stankey last February calling for the company to combat misinformation spread by conservative news networks. A letter from two Democratic Congress Members, which was also sent to other TV providers, doesn’t add up to a vast leftwing conspiracy. The Fox News channel, where these pages have a news program, is also a Democratic target.
DirecTV notes that it helped launch Newsmax in 2014 and recently launched the new conservative channel called “The First,” which will increase diversity and competition among conservative voices. Newsmax CEO Chris Ruddy doesn’t want that. Instead, he is trying to bring political and government pressure to bear on DirecTV to force the satellite operator to carry the channel on Newsmax’s terms.
(First, a footnote about cable providers and Fox News: Fox News Channel has one of the highest carriage fees in the business, way out of line for what cable providers pay other networks. It’s so high thatFox News would remain profitable even with no advertising.)
It’s unclear where this story will go from here. There’s nothing that goes viral on the right like victimhood, and they simply cannot start examining those claims too closely given how many of them are snake oil. In the meantime, there’s no evidence that either consumers or DirecTV itself are the least bit intimidated by any of this. After all, it’s just another grift.
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/Bank/ted-cruz-2659363623/
no 3rd term tho he is in his
---
an mma 1 23
Panelists on Tuesday morning's edition of Fox & Friends threw a fit about M&M's announcing its new spokesperson – actress Maya Rudolph – and then transitioned into a diatribe regarding the energy-saving feature that Microsoft offers on its Xbox Series X.
As GamesRadar explained in December 2022, "using Xbox Series X standby sleep mode will boot up your console almost instantly and will even run at reduced power when off to do things in the background. However, this obviously slowly chews through more power, so you can sacrifice a bit of convenience for a more economical option in the form of the energy-saving Shut-down mode."
The Vergealso noted the monetary savings that users can generate by using the console's expedited shutdown.
READ MORE: 'Fox News in Spanish': The new right-wing media outlet courting Latino voters
This struck a nerve with conservative Fox News anchor Ainsley Earhardt and host Jimmy Failla, who claimed that Xbox's manufacturer is trying to brainwash kids into "woke" beliefs about climate change.
Earhardt:
Well, M&M's putting its woke spokescandies on hold. The candy giant most notably changing the green M&M's white go-go boots to sneakers. Remember that last year? Well in a statement, the company now is saying, 'We've decided to take an infinite pause from the spokescandies. In their place, we are proud to announce a spokesperson America can agree on: the beloved Maya Rudolph.' Remember her from 'Saturday Night Live' and from 'Loot, and also from 'Bridesmaids.' She's really funny. And another funny guy Jimmy Failla, who hosts Fox Across America, on Fox News Radio and Fox Nation joins us now.
Failla:
Hey, hey, hey. Be honest, did you book me for this story because I look like I get paid in M&M's? Tell the truth, Ainsley, come clean with me. There is a really valuable message here for companies around the world: If it ain't woke, don't fix it. And what I mean by that is M&M's injected a social justice initiative into a bag of candy and nobody had asked for this initiative. People don't go to candy to get identity politics. They go to candy to get love handles. They go because they want to eat and escape the day. I mean, that's what candy always was to kids. It was like alcohol for kids. You're having a rough day, you bag down some M&M's, you get on with your life. But in this instance, they found themselves in the middle of a little bit of a social justice firestorm. But thankfully the customer base pushed back as they should.
Earhardt:
What do you think about Maya Rudolph being the new spokesperson?
READ MORE: Far-right blasts Fox News’ Sean Hannity for saying he never believed Trump’s election lie
Failla:
I think they blew this! No no. Maya Rudolph is actually, she's really funny and I really genuinely like her a lot. But I still think they blew it. They should have leaned into the fact that this is some of the most fattening content on Earth and gotten, like, me, okay? I am a good spokesperson. If I wasn't on cable news, I would be a before model, okay? That's who you want pushing your product, it gives everyone permission to eat this candy. Maya Rudolph makes me want to go to the gym; she looks great. You need a Jimmy Failla, that's all I am saying.
Earhardt:
So Xbox is also announced they're going woke too in – you know, because of climate change – that they are adding a new feature to their default settings. So if you own an Xbox you can upload this new program and it will turn off after so long to save the environment, the power. And also they are saying the energy saving shut down feature is going to have a slower boot time. Ted Cruz writes on Twitter, first gas stoves and then your coffee, now you're gunning for my Xbox.
Failla:
Ah ha ha ha ha. Isn't it crazy though? Like when we were kids you were a rebel if you had like a leather jacket and a pack of cigarettes. Now you have like a full-powered Xbox and you're eating pizza rolls on a gas stove. I mean it's crazy what they're doing. But we understand what this is. It's not that it's actually going to offset emissions. The level of reduction is infinitesimal. But they are trying to recruit your kids into climate politics at an earlier age. Make them climate conscious now.
Earhardt:
Yeah, I didn't think of that, you're right. They are going after the children.
Failla:
Of course they are. But again, what's the point of video games? It's for kids to be kids. Now you sit down, pick up a controller and they're like by the way the world is on fire. You know what I mean? You just want to play the game. And if they cared, I think they would stop making games that kept kids trapped in the house.My kid played so much Xbox during the lockdowns he didn't know there was a lockdown until two months in.
Watch below via Media Matters for America or at this link.
==
---
same case as cruz?
an 11 22
...Justice Amy Coney Barrett again decided, late Friday afternoon, to not weigh in on the Biden plan. Barrett "denied an emergency application brought by the Pacific Legal Foundation to block federal student loan forgiveness," CNBC reports.
Unfortunately for those 16 million Americans, a GOP lawsuit, at least temporarily, is causing the forgiveness to be put on hold.
Insider on Thursday reported, "the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals temporarily paused the relief, in response to a lawsuit filed by six Republican-led states who argued the policy would hurt their states' tax revenues, along with those of loan company MOHELA."...
---
---
an ah 10 22
Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has long been a highly performative and theatrical politician, annoying not only liberals and progressives, but also, older conservatives who long for the days of Sen. Barry Goldwater, President Ronald Reagan, Sen. Bob Dole and National Review publisher William F. Buckley. And the far-right Republican senator has certainly been performative during the 2022 midterms, whether he’s stumping for fellow Republicans, trolling Democrats with inflammatory tweets, or appearing on his favorite media safe space, Fox News.
Never Trump conservative Jim Swift, in an article published by The Bulwark on October 26, argues that Cruz has a major reason for his recent midterms antics: He’s planning another presidential run.
“The Cruz-aligned Truth and Courage PAChas been putting on events for the Texas senator throughout the country, driving a decked-out, two-story bus on which fans can write whatever they want,” Swift explains. “On the surface, the goal is to help try to elect Republicans and take back Congress. In reality, though, the tour is Cruz’s shadow campaign for the presidency in 2024 — aimed at boosting his profile among the Republican base, having various officeholders owe him favors, and getting everything ready for the possibility, however remote, that Donald Trump won’t run again and Cruz can try to snatch the nomination.”
READ MORE: Why 'hack' Ted Cruz epitomizes the worst that American politics has to offer: conservative
Swift adds, “Cruz’s 2016 campaign logo of a flame is cleverly incorporated into a new logo on the side of the bus, the face of a lion that looks vaguely like the bearded Cruz. But ‘Truth and Courage’ hardly seem like the right words to describe a guy who spent four years abasing himself to stay relevant after Donald Trump lied about his loved ones.”
The conservative journalist describes Cruz’s recent visit to Virginia, where he was campaigning for Yesli Vega — the Republican who is trying to unseat centrist Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger. That race has found a deputy sheriff, Vega, running against a former CIA agent: Spanberger.
Cruz’s speech, Swift observes, was full of “lame quips about inflation” such as “Look, it’s so bad, Antifa can’t afford bricks” and “It’s so bad Hunter Biden can’t afford crack cocaine.” Cruz, according to Swift, not only gave a speech — he gave a performance designed to fire up his MAGA base, and that performance demonstrated that Cruz “clearly does not want to be a senator anymore.”
“In private,” Swift notes, “Cruz can be very different from how he is in public — he can be a whole lot more honest and likable. But when he’s in front of reporters, Cruz tends to be like one of those children’s toys where you squeeze its palm and he blurts out a canned line about (Nancy) Pelosi and planes, or (Joe) Biden and the Easter Bunny, and nothing else.”
READ MORE: Ted Cruz admits to hiding in a closet during the January 6th insurrection in new book: report
Swift points out that “one thing” he “didn’t hear” at the rally in Virginia “was any mention of Donald Trump.”
“As best as I can tell, no one at the Virginia rally, not a single speaker, uttered the former president’s name,” Swift writes. “Not even once. But he remains the most important figure in the Republican Party, and if he decides to run again for the presidency, then Cruz will presumably be in for four more years of subservient abasement. There’s no getting away from that fact, whether you try to escape by bus or plane.”
---
NY baseball did not go well
---
mma 10 22
ted Cruz appeared with one of Fox News’ top January 6 conspiracy theorists to sell his conspiracy-laden book
WRITTEN BY SOPHIE LAWTON
PUBLISHED 10/24/22
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) appeared on Mark Levin’s Fox News show to promote his new book, Justice Corrupted: How the Left Weaponized Our Legal System,and participated in an interview filled with conspiracy theories and election denialism.
Appearing on October 23, Cruz told Levin he wrote the book because Democrats have “turned the Department of Justice, they’ve turned the FBI, they’ve turned the intelligence community into political enforcers.” He said the Department of Justice under President Joe Biden has been taken over by the “deep state” and said it poses “a fundamental threat to our liberty.”
Levin is one of Fox News’ biggest election denialists and a major apologist for the January 6 insurrection:
- Levin defended Donald Trump’s fake elector scheme and the former president’s claims of a stolen election. He claimed that “the system is built for objections” and that “when people say that Trump was trying to reverse an election — it's not over until Congress says it's over.”
- Levin also claimedTrump’s potential tampering with January 6 witnesses would not be against the law and downplayed claims Trump directed the Secret Service to bring him to the Capitol on January 6.
- When coup memo author John Eastman was under investigation by the January 6 committee, Levin repeatedly defended the disgraced law professor, saying he “didn’t do anything that was corrupt.” Levin demanded the release of emails between him and Eastman secured by the committee, claiming, “I'd love to know how they got them, apart from what's in them. Nobody came to me, I didn't get a subpoena.”
- Levin also downplayed texts from Fox host Sean Hannity used by the January 6 committee to show Hannity’s hypocrisy over the insurrection.
- Levin downplayed sedition charges against members of the paramilitary group the Oath Keepers, claiming that “it’s still not an insurrection.”
- Levin attacked the January 6 committee, telling his audience, “I hope you don’t watch,” and calling the hearings “ridiculous.” He has also called the committee “an internal enemy” and said it represents “unprecedented totalitarianism.”
- He called for Republicans to investigate the January 6 committee and even threatenedstaffers.
- Levin pushed the lie that Vice President Mike Pence could have stopped the certification of the 2020 election and the conspiracy theory that the FBI instigated the insurrection.
- Prior to the January 6 insurrection, Levin pushed members of Congress to reject the election results, claiming refusing to do so is equivalent to “shredding the Constitution.”
Given Levin’s history, It is no surprise that Cruz decided to promote his revisionist history book on his show.
When asked about the Department of Justice’s handling of January 6 insurrectionists, Cruz said his book includes “the first inside account of what happened on January 6.” Cruz showed that the book includes both election denial and references to right-wing conspiracy theories, noting, “I take them through the evidence of election fraud and voter fraud in November 2020, which the Democrats and the corporate media insist doesn’t exist,” and, “I ask in the book questions like, who is Ray Epps?” (Right-wing media baselessly accused Ray Epps of being an FBI plant who incited the insurrection.
[vid oct 23 life, lib & levin
cruz also revealed that his book discusses “George Soros prosecutors,” saying there is “a really dangerous phenomenon where Soros has put millions in terms of electing radicals who let violent criminals go.” Cruz used the Waukesha, Wisconsin, massacre suspect as an example, claiming a “George Soros prosecutor” let him out of jail before he drove a car into a parade, repeating a conspiracy theory about the event and a commonright-wing trope about the philanthropist
[oct 23? vid]Video CitationFrom the October 23, 2022, edition of Fox News' Life, Liberty & Levin
In a bizarre parting comment to promote the book, Cruz noted the last time he was on Levin's show to promote a book it “shot to number on the Amazon bestseller list” and was released “when Ruth Bader Ginsburg had died,” noting “I'm hopeful we'll see the same thing.” sales vs death presumably
---
https://www.amazon.com/Justice-Corrupted-Weaponized-Legal-System/dp/1684513618
blurb
. . . with liberty and justice for some.
The left has corrupted the U.S. legal system. Wielding the law as a weapon, arrogant judges and lawless prosecutors are intimidating, silencing, and even imprisoning Americans who stand in the way of their :{:{radical agenda. Their "enemies list" even includes parents who dare to speak up for their children at school board meetings.}:
In this shocking new book, Senator Ted Cruz takes readers inside the justice system, showing how the wrong hands on the levers of power can strangle liberty, crush opposition, and wreck lives. The notion of a "Democratic" or "Republican" Department of Justice is outrageous. That institution should safeguard the Constitutional rights of all Americans. Justice Corrupted will equip patriots and lovers of liberty to hold their government accountable.}:
:{:{}:
}:
:{:{}:
Senator Ted Cruz has dedicated his life to upholding the principles enshrined in our Constitution. After graduating from Harvard Law School, he clerked for Judge J. Michael Luttig of the Fourth Circuit and Chief Justice William Rehnquist of the U.S. Supreme Court. He served as an associate deputy attorney general under President George W. Bush and later as solicitor general of Texas, arguing nine cases before the Supreme Court. Elected to the Senate in 2012, he is a member of the Judiciary Committee. His previous book is One Vote Away: How a Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History.
Sponsored
Product details
Publisher : Regnery Publishing (October 25, 2022)
}:
:{:{}:
}:
:{:{}:
This item: Justice Corrupted: How the Left Weaponized Our Legal System
$26.99
Breaking History: A White House Memoir
$21.12
Come On, Man!: The Truth About Joe Biden's Terrible, Horrible, No-Good, Very Bad Presidency
Come On, Man!: The Truth About Joe Biden's Terrible, Horrible, No-Good, Very Bad Presidency
One Vote Away: How a Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History
Ted Cruz
4.8 out of 5 stars 6,259
Hardcover
Come On, Man!: The Truth About Joe Biden's Terrible, Horrible, No-Good, Very Bad Presidency
Joe Concha
4.7 out of 5 stars 401
Created Equal: Clarence Thomas in His Own Words
Michael Pack
4.8 out of 5 stars 426
A Time for Truth: Reigniting the Promise of America
Ted Cruz
4.8 out of 5 stars 1,298
Only the Strong: Reversing the Left's Plot to Sabotage American Power
Tom Cotton
Hardcover
2,000 Mules: They Thought We'd Never Find Out. They Were Wrong.
Dinesh D'Souza
Hardcover
#1 Best Seller in Elections
$26.99
}:
---
bernie rips him on student debt lawsuit
---
an 10 22
Documents from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show that over the summer, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas received a payment of $555,000 from his campaign. Reporter Bryan Metzger, in an article published by Business Insider on October 18, explains why Cruz “has the U.S. Supreme Court to thank for it.”
Cruz, Metzger notes, challenged part of a 2002 law that “set a $250,000 limit on the amount of money that candidates could raise after the election for the purpose of paying off personal loans to their campaign committee.” The case, Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate, went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court — and the Court, in a 6-3 ruling, agreed with Cruz. Chief Justice John Roberts used some Citizens United-influenced language in the ruling, writing that Section 304 of the 2002 law “inhibits candidates from loaning money to their campaigns in the first place, burdening core speech."
The 2002 law was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, also known as the McCain/Feingold Act (as in Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin). The High Court’s ruling in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate struck down Section 304.
READ MORE: Senate Republicans unanimously filibuster bill to get dark money out of politics
“When Cruz first ran for the United States Senate in 2012,” Metzger explains, “he loaned his campaign over $1 million of his own money amid a heated primary campaign against then-Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst of Texas. Cruz would go on to win a run-off against Dewhurst. However, the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — championed by the late Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona — set a $250,000 limit on the amount of money that candidates could raise after the election for the purpose of paying off personal loans to their campaign committee. Thus, Cruz essentially lost $545,000 of his own money after the campaign, with the outstanding portion of the loans converted to an in-kind contribution.”
Metzger continues, “Six years later, facing an unexpectedly competitive reelection campaign against then-Rep. Beto O'Rourke in 2018, Cruz opted to challenge the law. He lent his campaign $260,000 — just $10,000 more than the limit — on November 5, just one day before the election. That allowed Cruz to initiate a lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission, which eventually made its way up to the Supreme Court.”
When six of the nine High Court justices found Section 304 of the 2002 law unconstitutional, Roberts’ reference to “burdening core speech” was right out of the Court’s 2010 ruling inCitizens United v. FEC — a decision that equated campaign spending with “speech.”
The three dissenters in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate were all appointed by Democratic presidents: Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and then-Justice Stephen Breyer, who has since been replaced by President Joe Biden’s appointee, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
READ MORE: Barack Obama was 'right' about the negative impact Citizens United would have: legal expert
In her dissent, Kagan wrote, “It takes no political genius to see the heightened risk of corruption — the danger of 'I'll make you richer and you'll make me richer' arrangements between donors and officeholders. In discarding the statute, the Court fuels non-public-serving, self-interested governance."
READ MORE: End Citizens United ad hits Mehmet Oz over New Jersey ties
---
an me 10 22
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is facing scrutiny for his latest attempt to criticize Democrats. Although he claimed "The Left is beyond parody," his attack fell flat when he was slammed for sharing a fake article that was photoshopped with reporter Abby Ohlheiser's old byline.
Blogger Parker Molloy has taken to Twitter with a series of fiery arguments laying out the case against Cruz and offering the Republican lawmaker a timeline for Ohlheiser, who is currently with The Washington Post — not The Atlantic.
"So, someone created a fake story, slapped [Abby Ohlheiser]'s byline on it even though they haven't worked at The Atlantic since 2014, which has led to a bombardment of harassment, and now a U.S. Senator is sharing said fake article," Molloy tweeted.
The write went on to further expound on the context of the fake story. "And when I say 'fake story,' I mean that the story literally does not exist," Molloy explained. It's just a mock-up that some right-wing troll made, and now these f°cking ghouls and liars like Ted Cruz are spreading it. 'Beyond parody,' Cruz says about something that isn't even real."
The writer added added, "Before Cruz tweeted it out, [Abby Ohlheiser] was already being smeared with antisemitic, transphobic BS from people insisting that the article was real. Cruz (who had FINALLY deleted his tweet) is only making it worse."
"One thing that's interesting, however: in their attempts to find a "real" article to smear [Abby Ohlheiser] with, they DID find a real headline... but because it was written by Conor [Friedersdorf] their conservative buddy, they changed the byline in their photo edits," Molloy also tweeted.
READ MORE: Ted Cruz says Obergefell was 'wrong when it was decided'
"Also, this isn't even necessarily photoshop," the writer explained. "Anyone can go in and create mock-ups of articles in their own browser, with the correct fonts and everything. Look, I did this on my phone. It's easy. It's fake."
Although Cruz appears to have removed his tweet, screenshots are still circulating.
READ MORE: 'Lacks principle': Liz Cheney torches 'chameleon' Ted Cruz over his attack on the FBI
---
an 10 22 tim miller 180
...Miller told Cruz, “Hey, senator, nice to see you in Arizona. You objected to the 2020 vote here…. Since then, there have been a few audits. The Republican governor, the Republican Senate president, the Republican speaker of the House all said the election was fair. Do you disagree with Doug Ducey and agree with Blake Masters and Kari Lake? Or have you changed your view? It’s been two years now.”
In response, Miller recalls, Cruz “launched into a rant about how ‘the people of Arizona’ don’t care about the 2020 election” and “insisted that what they really care about is gas prices and food prices and the rising murder rate.”
“Before he could continue his listicle,” Miller explains. “I interrupted. ‘The people of Arizona voted for Joe Biden, though. Right? Did they not?’ Cruz proceeded to call me a shill and a hack and repeatedly shouted, ‘You’re done, you’re done’ as I continued to try to get an answer to a very simple, yes-or-no, factual question about the 2020 election result — that he had tried to overturn. Blake Masters offered a similar deflection during his debate with Mark Kelly the next night, backing away from his more direct claims about voter fraud in favor of word salad about how Big Media, Big Tech, and the FBI were to blame for Trump’s loss.”...
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/09/ted-cruz-only-no-vote/ fix electoral act
---
an 9 22 kirk swear
Bestselling author Malcolm Gladwell recently posted some thoughts on the subject of high school sports, of all things. High schools do a good job at elevating elite athletes, he wrote, to the detriment of students of more average ability, or who lack parents who could afford to pay for soccer or baseball camps starting at age six.
Gladwell, who is a lifelong, serious runner — and can run a mile at age 55 nearly as fast as I did when I was 15 and winning races on the track team — came up with a law he named after himself: In any sporting endeavor, elite achievement comes at the cost of mass participation.
We can easily expand Gladwell's Law to the whole of society. Don't many of us view life in America as a dispiriting continuation of the ruthless, often shallow competitions of high school? And our thinking about how we relate to so-called elites can be complicated by our culturally driven feelings of envy and shame.
At least arguably, America's national sport is not played with a ball. It's electoral politics, which has always had elements of ruthless competition but used to be a lot more "sporting" than it is now. At its best, politics is about knowledge, hard work, compromise, mutual respect and some acknowledgment of shared goals, even alongside vigorous disagreement. None of those qualities are evident in the churlish zero-sum gamethat the Republican Party, with its backs against the demographic wall, has played in recent years.
This sea-change goes back at least as far as 1994, when Newt Gingrich invited Rush Limbaugh to train the incoming Republican House majority on how best to despise your political opponents and push disinformation and conspiracy theories. It was either un-American or, sadly, quintessentially American at the time, and has since metastasized into the right's embrace of false narratives, ever-wilder conspiracy theories, and authoritarianism — which is epitomized by a certain orange-hued former president, but certainly not limited to him.
We see prissy, stuck-up, wholly self-interested Ivy Leaguers like Ted Cruz (Princeton; Harvard Law), Josh Hawley (Stanford; Yale Law), Ron DeSantis (Yale; Harvard Law) andmuch of Trump's inner circle playing good ol' boys, affecting down-home dialects, and decrying the "elites" on the left who supposedly dominate American business, politics and culture. This would be merely laughable if they weren't also insisting that religious liberty means that everyone must live by the retrograde religious dogma they pretend to believe.
The Trumpist cult and other far-right political organizations around the globe continue to profitably press their pseudo-populist game planof going after elites (often the "educated elites") to inflame and enrage the mind of the common citizen.
If we know something about the role of actual elites throughout history, we know that they have understood the power of anger and contempt in motivating the masses; while a helping hand may be quickly forgotten (or even resented), an insult, real or imagined, locks itself in memory.
When the phony Wharton grad who reluctantly departed from the White House in January 2021 said
they were happy not to take that as an obvious insult. How, exactly, did he intend it? Both as contempt and affection. Any con man keeps a special place in his black-hole heart for people who cannot, or will not, see how he is hoodwinking them. None of us finds it easy to deal with the cognitive dissonance of realizing we may be wrong.
While Republican politicians have for decades praised and catered to the needs of oligarchs (as well as the merely wealthy who merely dream of being oligarchs), creating the greatest income disparity since the Roaring '20s, they have simultaneously encouraged working- and middle-class Americans to resent people who went to college and quite likely graduate school and have become specialists in various fields: historians, scientists, journalists, civil servants, elementary school teachers. Somehow, in this demented narrative, those professions are part of an administrative system that thwarts ordinary people's quest for freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. (And some of them asked you and your kids to wear a mask during a global health crisis.)
The "elites" despised by the actual Republican elites like Cruz, Hawley and DeSantis are, of course, the people able to expose their grifting, their disinformation campaigns, their flouting of the rules, their contempt for the rule of law (at least as it applies to them) and their determination to retain power at any cost. They and their compatriots in propagandaTV andsocial media are bringing authoritarianism to America under a marketing label borrowed from Hungary: "illiberal democracy."
Today's Christian fascists don't ask what Jesus would do; they ask what Viktor Orbán would do. Anti-immigrant "Christians" get a kick out of seeing red-state governors troll the libs by using real human beings as pawns in a deliberately cruel media spectacle.
As these beliefs begin to spread in cult-like fashion, then teachers, judges, health experts, academics and even members of law enforcement — whom Republicans have always claimed to venerate — become objects of derision, even death threats.
In this classic divide-and-conquer move,[us vs them, polarization]the right has worked hard to get Americans to believe the worst possible things about elites, those conspiratorial, secular liberals who read books, believe that science and history should be based in research rather than political agendas and maintain a naive faith in democracy and the rule of law.
Such has been the power of this slow brainwashing that the right has gleefully separated brothers from sisters, children from parents, and friends from friends. The MSNBC–New York Times side regrets the loss of political comity; theFox–Wall Street Journal side [murdoch] cries for insurrection or civil war, or just shrugs at such threats.
All of this (or at least a lot of it) has been in service of aphony,shameless,sexually predatory,pathologically insecure,malignant narcissist who somehow (surprising even himself) was elected president, impeached twice and refused to concede defeat after losing by more than 7 million votes, inciting a violent, if amateurish, insurrection.
Meanwhile, there really are elites in America — you know, the people who went to school with Hawley and Cruz and DeSantis and can afford multiple residences, exotic vacations, well-tended stock portfolios and Washington lobbyists. Those elites are still pushing discredited Reagan-era "trickle-down" economics, working to destroy the last threadbare remnants of the social safety net and gleefully eroding democracy — all while laughing at how easy it was to convince the "people" to look somewhere else.
---
---
dirty trick
an 9 22 badash
More than 50 House and Senate Republicans are joining in an effort to disenfranchise “lame duck” Democrats in the House and Senate to prevent them from voting on critical budget legislation, but not trying to apply the same standard to their fellow GOP lawmakers.
In a move that sounds somewhat like what Senator Mitch McConnell did to derail Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court appointment, the far-right Republicans are urging their colleagues to block any budget bill until a new Congress is sworn in, hoping Democrats lose control of one or both branches of Congress.“
The Monday letters come as Congress has 10 days to take action before government funding runs out at the end of the fiscal year after Sept. 30,” The Hill reports.
READ MORE: Biden Approval Soars as Trump’s Sinks
“We must not accept anything short of a ‘clean’ Continuing Resolution (‘CR’) that contains no additional spending or extraneous policy riders,” writes Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) in the Senate GOP’s letter. “At a minimum, any agreement on a clean CR must carry over into the beginning of the 118th Congress. Failure to stand strong against lame-duck spending and caving to the Democrats will likely worsen inflation, prolong the current economic recession, and advance policies contained in the Biden administration’s progressive wish-list.”
The U.S. is not in a recession, nor is one expected in the coming months.
The House letter is even more extreme.
“Federal dollars are fueling rampant inflation and funding theBiden administration’s radical agenda,” it begins. “This includes empowering authoritarian bureaucrats at agencies like the IRS and FBI, implementing open-border policies that are threatening our communities, imposing COVID-19 mandates that shut down schools and are forcing our military servicemembers out of their jobs, and advancing self-destructive energy policies.”
Among the far right Republicans signing on to the Senate letter are Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL).
In the House, signatories include far right GOP Members of Congress Chip Roy, Ralph Norman, Jim Banks, Dan Bishop, Jim Jordan, Lauren Boebert, Kat Cammack, Scott DesJarlais, Scott Perry, Jody Hice, Ken Buck, Matt Gaetz, Paul Gosar, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Byron Donalds, Thomas Massie, and Louie Gohmert.
---
---
dobbs amicus with cruz and mike lee
jOSH HAWLEY U.S. SENATOR Counsel of Record MICHAEL K. VELCHIK JOHN S. EHRETT 115 Russell Senate Office Bldg. Washington, D.C. 20510 (202) 224-6154 Ellen_James@hawley.senate.gov
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/09/no-shame-at-all-cancun-ted-cruz-brutally-mocked-after-attacking-california-governors-heatwave-response/
---
slams cowboy boot w/ come and take it, macho?
---
strict fr?
an ah 9 22
Although some progressives believe that President Joe Biden’s plan to cancel some student loan debt doesn’t go far enough, a long list of Republicans — from U.S. senators to right-wing think tanks to state attorneys general — have accused the president of overreaching and are looking for ways to undermine Biden’s plan. The National Review’s Charles C.W. Cooke is even calling for Congress to “impeach and convict President Biden.”
Student loan debt has become a major problem in the United States, where it isn’t uncommon for students to graduate from college with six-figure debts that they will spend decades paying off with interest. This debt affects a variety of decisions that college graduates make as young adults, from deciding whether or not to have kids to being able to buy a house. Some older Baby Boomers, according to common complaints from Millennials and members of Generation Z, fail to comprehend the severity of the problem — as they graduated from college at a time when tuition was much more affordable than it is now.
Journalists Tony Romm, Jeff Stein and Danielle Douglas-Gabriel take a look at GOP reactions to Biden’s student loan debt plan in an article published by the Washington Post on September 1, stressing that some of those Republicans are considering lawsuits.
READ MORE: Joe Biden could have gone much further on student loans
“Republican state attorneys generaland other leading conservatives are quietly exploring a slew of potential lawsuits targeting President Biden’s plan to cancel some student debt — challenges that could limit or invalidate the policy before it takes full effect,” the Post reporters explain. “In recent days, a number of GOP attorneys general from states including Arizona, Missouri and Texas have met privately to discuss a strategy that could see multiple cases filed in different courts around the country, according to a person familiar with their thinking who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the confidential talks.”
Romm, Stein and Douglas-Gabriel continue, “Other influential conservatives — including Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and allies of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank — are mulling their own options as they ratchet up criticism of Biden’s debt-relief plan, two additional people familiar with the matter said. And a conservative advocacy group founded by a major Trump donor said it would file a lawsuit against the policy.”
The Post interviewed John Malcolm, who serves as director of theHeritage Foundation’s Meese Center.The Heritage Foundation, founded in 1973, has been around 49 years — and its Meese Center was named after Edwin Meese, who served as U.S. attorney general during President Ronald Reagan’s second term and is now 90.
Malcolm told the Post, “The conservative public interest law firms in our network are exploring filing lawsuits against this. They are doing background legal research, trying to find out who might be the most suitable clients for them. They have to find a client with the standing and the gumption to take on a lawsuit. There are several groups in our network who are exploring that right now.”
READ MORE: 'For whom and why?' is the real question behind student loan forgiveness
Biden’s plan would forgive up to $10,000 in federal student loan debt, or as much as $20,000 if the former student also received Pell Grants. Some liberals and progressives were hoping to see larger amounts of student loan debt forgiven, but the centrist Biden believes that $10,000 or $20,000 is a step in the right direction.
The Post interviewed some former college students who have a lot of student loan debt, and they were appalled that Republicans oppose even the modest amounts that Biden favors.
One of those interviewees was 31-year-old Ohio resident Michael Loomus, who dropped out of the University of Toledo and has been struggling to pay down the $11,400 that he owes. Loomus told the Post, “It just seems they are continuously trying to keep borrowers in debt. I don’t make a lot of money.… and before this, it just felt like I’d never pay off my loans.”
READ MORE: 'We should be proud': Education secretary explains why student loan forgiveness is an 'investment'
---
---
cpac once has legit policy presented?
https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/cpac-speakers/
According to a report from Rolling Stone, the speeches thus far at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Dallas have been larded with "dark" threats of coming violence as the speakers brushed aside any discussion about the Jan 6 Capitol riot.
With Donald Trump --who instigated the Capitol insurrection -- taking the stage on Saturday, Tim Dickinson wrote that in many cases the speeches, "...menaced America with what seemed to be thinly veiled calls for violence."
Case in point, he notes, was a speech given by recently convicted former Donald Trump advisor Steve Bannon who proclaimed to the crowd, "We are at war."
"Repeating the Big Lie that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump,Bannon insisted that Joe Biden is an 'illegitimate imposter.' Calling on Republicans to send 'shock troops' to Washington, Bannon promised the crowd they had an opportunity to 'shatter the Democratic party as a national political institution'." he wrote. "He alleged that the party has been overrun by 'radical, cultural Marxists' and 'groomers' who 'want to destroy the Republic.'Bannon insisted the GOP must pursue absolute victory over 'power-mad and lawless' Democrats, asserting: 'There can be no half measures anymore'."
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) doubled down on Bannon's heated rhetoric, exhorting the crowd with the claim, "It’s like the old Roman Colosseum where you slam on a breastplate and you grab a battle axe and you go fight the barbarians. As they say in the military world, it is a target-rich environment.”
"The rhetoric of revolution and frontline confrontation went hand-in-hand with other speakers and presenters who cast the American left as demonic, evil, and destructive — in other words the kind of enemies who deserve to be dealt with harshly," the report states before adding, "CPAC has long been a political circus, a relatively harmless sideshow. But its latest incarnation has become manifestly dangerous — more fascist than farce. It is holding up alleged perpetrators of political violence as martyrs. It is demonizing its domestic political opponents as diabolical 'enemies within.' And it is giving MAGA supporters a militaristic frame for their charge to the 'front lines' of America’s culture wars."
"In short it is playing with fire. But it’s the rest of us who may get burned." Rolling Stones' Dickinson concluded.
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/ted-cruz-obergefell-wrongly-decided/
---
traitor?
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/08/mitch-mcconnell/
i wd have thot this impossible/popular?! BBB --> IRA
no lnx twt
senate Republicans on Sunday successfully stripped a proposed $35 per month cap on out-of-pocket spending on insulin for patients enrolled in private insurance from the tax and climate bill making its way through the Senate.
The Senate parliamentarian had earlier ruled that the provision, sponsored by Georgia Democratic Senator Raphael Warnock, is not primarily related to the federal budget and thus not eligible for a reconciliation bill. The ruling gave Republicans a chance to kill the proposal.
Waiving the rules required 60 votes to succeed.Only seven Republicans sided with Democrats to keep the insulin cap in the bill with a 57-43 vote.
“Republicans have just gone on the record in favor of expensive insulin,” Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden said. “After years of tough talk about taking on insulin makers, Republicans have once against wilted in the face of heat from Big Pharma.Fortunately, the $35 insulin copay cap for insulin in Medicare remains in the bill, so seniors will get relief from high insulin costs. I will continue working to deliver lower insulin costs to all Americans.”
"Republicans just forced out of the reconciliation bill a $35/month out-of-pocket cap for insulin users with private health insurance. What the hell is wrong with them? Really, what the hell is wrong with them?" said Robert Weissman, President ofPublic Citizenin a tweet.
Congressman Bill Pascrell Jr., representing the 9th District of New Jersey, said in a tweet "Here are the McConnell republican senators who just killed capping insulin at $35. Republicans told millions of Americans who use insulin to go to hell. Remember their names."
“Diabetic Americans are being used as political props to play partisan politics while 1 in 4 of us must ration the insulin we need to survive [because] both parties in Congress refuse to regulate insulin’s price,” tweeted Laura Marston, an intellectual property attorney and a patient advocate for affordable insulin.
---
---
vet burn pit cruz fist bump w HAWLEY 8-10 in huddle
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was caught on camera on the floor of the Senate fist-bumping his fellow GOP senators after they successfully blocked legislation to help veterans who are suffering after being exposed to toxic burn pits.
"Hundreds of thousands of American veterans were exposed to toxic fumes from burn pits on bases in Iraq and Afghanistan," NPR's Mary Louise Kelly reported in January. "So far, though, the Department of Veterans Affairs still denies the vast majority of their claims for respiratory illness and rare cancers. The White House, the VA and Congress have all promised action, but it is not happening fast enough for sick veterans."
This week, it was about to finally happen. But Republicans – many of whom previously voted to pass the bill, blocked it.
"The bill, known as the Honoring Our PACT Act, passed both the House and the Senate with bipartisan support in June, but due to a snag in the bill's language, it needed to go back and pass the House and Senate again," CBS News reports. "On Wednesday evening, 25 Republican senators reversed their support from June and voted no on a procedural vote to advance the legislation."
"President Joe Biden is a strong supporter of the bill," CBS News notes, putting the number of veterans exposed at 3.5 million. "At the State of the Union in March, he called on Congress to take action on burn pits, which he believes may have been a factor in his son's Beau's terminal brain cancer."
"Veterans have come home with a number of illnesses, including terminal cancers, but have been forced to argue to the Department of Veterans Affairs their illnesses were related to burn pit exposure," CBS adds. "The legislation would have removed the burden of proof from veterans and their families by presuming a number of conditions could be related to exposure to toxic fumes from burn pits."
A video that's quickly gone viral on social media captures Senator Cruz gleefully celebrating the GOP's defeat of the legislation that could help millions of veterans, and their families. In it he initiates a fist-bump with Montana Republican Senator Steve Daines.
https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/newsmax-host-squirms-kevin-cramer/
---
---
cruz fist bump daines et al PO'd b/c passed CHIPS bill
burn pits, passed 84-14 a mo ago, 180 for spite after manchin 180 jon s livid
https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/jon-stewart-veterans-health-bill/
// agent orange
on newsmax msnbc fox turned down]
Comedian Jon Stewart appeared on the right-wing media outlet Newsmaxon Thursday and shredded the Republican Party's blockage of a United States Senate Veterans Affairs Committee bill to provide health care to veterans who were exposed to poisonous substances while serving overseas.
The filibuster of the Honoring Our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act (PACT) was led by retiring Senator Pat Toomey (R-Pennsylvania).
"It's not just not true," Steward said of the GOP's claim that the legislation contains "unrelated spending."
READ MORE: Susan Collins under fire for threatening to tank marriage rights bill
Republicans, Steward continued, "don't like that it's mandatory as opposed to discretionary. There isn't unrelated spending to it. They're saying, 'there could be if there isn't oversight.' But that's what the Senate's job is. The bill itself is incredibly detailed and prescriptive about what it's for. It's about treating and preventing the different conditions that veterans are coming home with including cancers and chronic bronchiolitis and all these other issues from their exposures in Iraq in Afghanistan. And to push back on what they're saying, they're saying, 'what if this creates a slush fund?' Right? So, are you familiar with something called the OCO – the Overseas Contingency Operations Fund?" Steward asked anchor Shaun Kraisman.
"Fairly, yes," Kraisman replied.
Stewart underscored why that obscure statute – and its backing by lawmakers – is significant.
"So every year, 50 billion, 60 billion, 70 billion dollars is added to what's called the OCO on top of the 600 billion, 700 billion, 800 billion that goes to the Defense Department. That OCO fund is actually a slush fund. Sixty to 70 billion dollars every year – no oversight, no guardrails – and every one of those Republicans that voted against healthcare for veterans voted for the slush fund for the war," Stewart explained.
"They don't support the troops; they support the war machine," Steward added. "And that's gotta stop. The value of the US military isn't in the toys. It's not in the hardware, it's not in the tanks. It's in the men and women. And until they start supporting them in the manner that they purport to online, they are hypocrites."
Watch below or at this link.
---
---
edit bd
...
Last night’s hearing, however, suggested one more layer.
A cover-up of the congressional coup.
By the Congress.
Hinting hard
The goal appears to have been getting enough members of the US Congress to vote to overturn the results of the 2020 election. The GOP had a Senate majority at the time. They could have, in theory, overruled the will of the people, at least temporarily. Ultimately, however, just 147 Republicans, including eight senators, objected.
I don’t know, had they amassed enough votes in the Senate, where things would have gone after that. Perhaps it would have triggered the 12th Amendment. Perhaps it would have thrown the process back to red states that Joe Biden had won, where friendly Republican legislators would have fixed things so Trump could stay in office.
READ MORE: [Watch: Outtakes of Trump on January 7th — he can't say the election's over
In any case, the former president spent a lot of time talking about congressional Republicans and talking directly to congressional Republicans to such a degree as to suggest there was another layer of his grand seditious conspiracy that’s only now coming into light. That’s certainly what the J6 committee has been hinting hard at.
Co-conspirators?
Last week, the panel’s Stephanie Murphy saidTrump met in late December with US Reps. Matt Gaetz, Andy Biggs, Brian Babin, Jody Hice, Louie Gohmert, Andy Harris, Mo Brooks, Paul Gosar, Scott Perry and Jim Jordan. Margaret Taylor Greenewas there. So were Mike Pence, Mark Meadows and Rudy Giuliani. (Seven of these members asked for pardons. Ditto Meadows, Giuliani and Greene.)
They tried getting the former vice president to go along with the conspiracy. It called for him to reject the count all by himself or send it back to the states where state GOP legislators were waiting.
Pence had refused before. I’m guessing those at the meeting expected him to again. He did. The next step was finalizing a scheme to bring tens of thousands of Trump loyalists to the capital, including armed paramilitaries (eg, Proud Boys and Oath Keepers), in order to terrify not only Pence but GOP senators into reinstalling Trump.
Terrifying GOP senators
According to the J6 committee’s Elaine Luria, Trump was told 15 minutes after returning to the White House after his speech on the Ellipse that the US Capitol was under siege by an armed mob. After the briefing, Luria said, Trump began calling GOP senators for the purpose of persuading them to overrule the results of the election.
On the one hand, the former president had insurgents sacking and looting the seat of government, threatening lawmakers with death – in Mike Pence’s case, with hanging from a makeshift gallows. (It was revealed last night that Pence’s Secret Service detail believed they were going to die. They sent messages of love to their families.) On the other, Trump pushed GOP senators by phone to get on board.
During that time, White House staffers tried and failed to persuade Trump to respond to the assault. (He did not issue orders to anyone, not the secretary of defense, the secretary of homeland security, the attorney general, no one.) Instead of telling them to go home, as staffers had hoped, he posted a tweet accusing Pence of betrayal.
After “pouring gasoline on the fire,” as witness Sarah Matthews said, the former president made more phone calls to Republican senators. Later that evening, after Trump had called for the insurgents to go home, Rudy Giuliani made even more calls to Republican senators.
Indeed, the J6 committee’s Adam Kinzinger named them. They were: Josh Hawley, Ted Cruz,Marsha Blackburn, Bill Hagerty, Tommy Tuberville and Lindsey Graham. Of that number, only three voted to overturn the results of the election: Cruz, Tuberville and Hawley.
The cover-up
Giuliani also called US Rep. Jim Jordan.
Jordan, as I wrote last week, was nominated to serve on the initial select committee to investigate J6. Speaker Nancy Pelosi vetoed his nomination, though. Good thing she did. The current committee would have been compromised by the presence of a congressman who was a serial witness to the serial crimes under investigation.
Jordan was nominated by Kevin McCarthy. As the J6 committee reminded us last night, the House minority leader talked to Trump after the attack. He said Trump said he had “some responsibility” for J6. McCarthy said he told Trump that the House Democrats were likely to pass an impeachment resolution and that he should resign.
Trump didn’t resign, of course.
Perhaps the fix was in.
Implication by omission
Liz Cheney, the vice chair of the J6 committee, reminded us that the committee’s work goes on. Hearings will resume in September, she said. Then the Wyoming congresswoman used some curious math:
Today, we know far more about the president’s plans and actions to overturn the election than almost all members of Congress did when President Trump was impeached on January 13, 2021, or when he was tried by the Senate in February of that year.
Fifty-seven of 100 senators voted to convict President Trump at that time, and more than 20 others said they were voting against conviction, because the president's term had already expired.
Cheney said “almost all,” I think, because a dozen GOP members had been deeply involved in or material witnesses to Trump’s conspiracy.
She said “57 of 100,” I think, because it takes 67 senators to remove and convict a president. She said “more than 20 others,” because she’s apparently giving these GOP senators the benefit of the doubt.
But that still leaves around 20 unaccounted for. Why?
Perhaps because some, or all, of these 20 or so Republican senators had been in contact with the former president as the insurrection was unfolding and therefore potential co-conspirators in the crime.
Perhaps because some, or all, of these 20 or so Republican senators voted against conviction, thus taking steps to cover up the crime.
In any case, it was implication by omission.
The appearance of a conspiracy
We know at least six of them were evidently in both camps. On the evening of J6, Rudy Giuliani called Blackburn, Hawley, Cruz, Hagarty, Tuberville and Graham hoping they would object to the vote count. (Three did.) This same group voted to acquit Trump of treason.
If that’s not a rigged outcome, it sure looks like one.
Liz Cheney seemed to be inviting us to put the former president’s second impeachment trial in light of what we know now.
She seemed to be asking us to consider what it means when at least a dozen sitting members of the House were material witnesses as well as grand jury members deciding on an indictment (impeachment).
She seemed to be asking us to see that at least six of those Senators were materially involved in a crime of which they sat in judgment.
If that’s not a conspiracy, it sure as hell looks like one.
READ MORE:Video shows Josh Hawley running to evade the rioters he had earlier praised
---
In May 2021, SPLC reported on leaked documents appearing to show Gabriel and other Islamophobic figures as being members of the secretive right-wing coalition Council for National Policy.For 40 years, Council for National Policy has brought together influential right-wing leaders, political operatives, conservative media figures, members of the religious right, free-market fundamentalists and donors.
---
islamophobia has a presence within the Council for National Policy, a secretive and influential right-wing coalition, according to leaked documents reviewed by Hatewatch.
A cache of documents obtained and published by the investigative research organization Documented appears to show anti-Muslim hate group leaders such as Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney and others who have stoked Islamophobia are involved with the Council for National Policy, or CNP. The documents also reveal that the coalition has promoted policies championed by the broader anti-Muslim network.
Founded in 1981, CNP is a coalition of influential right-wing leaders, political operatives, conservative media figures, members of the religious right, free-market fundamentalists and donors. The coalition operates on multiple fronts and focuses on political strategy, media and grassroots organizing. The goal of the coalition is to advocate for right-wing and anti-rights policies that favor conservatives and the religious right.
CNP has a habit of cozying up to extreme figures, the coalition’s rosters and associations appear to show. This includes figures known for engaging in anti-Muslim hate.
Journalist and author Anne Nelson researches CNP and is the author of “Shadow Network: Media, Money, and the Secret Hub of the Radical Right,” which provides an in-depth look into the coalition and its history.
“The Council for National Policy and its affiliates would be revealed to associate with unsavory characters, and they would be shocked that such nice folk could harbor such nasty ideology,” Nelson writes in the book.
In 2016, Hatewatch published CNP’s 2014 membership directory, a 191-page compendium on its over 400 members, some of whom are deceased, and their interests. The directory shows CNP membership included extremists harboring anti-Muslim and anti-LGBTQ views. It also revealed so-called “Radical Islam” and “Islamic Fascism” to be among the interests identified by several CNP members. “Radical Islam,” a problematic term as detailed later, continues to be a topic among the group.
While the coalition’s existence and some of its officers are public knowledge, CNP works hard to keep its membership and activities shrouded in secrecy, including reportedly encouraging members to keep quiet about the group. The New York Times once described CNP as “a little-known club of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country.” CNP is invitation-only, with new members being nominated by current ones.
Reports and investigations over the years have sought to expose the coalition’s tactics, membership and influence. The cache of materials obtained by Documented provides further insight into the right-wing coalition’s inner workings in recent years, including its strategies, goals and talking points.
The documents also reveal CNP has only expanded the hate and far-right figures in its ranks. The inclusion of these figures puts Islamophobia among other problematic measures pushed by CNP that pose a threat to inclusive democracy.
CNP did not return Hatewatch’s multiple requests for comment.
Islamophobic figures in the mix
[ pix Brigitte Gabriel, founder and president of ACT for America, speaks at the 2017 Values Voter Summit at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Cheriss May/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
One of those listed in CNP’s September 2020 roster is Brigitte Gabriel, an anti-Muslim firebrand who has called Muslims a threat to the civilized world and claimed a practicing Muslim “cannot be a loyal citizen of the United States.” Gabriel is the founder and head of ACT for America, an anti-Muslim hate group that operates a network of chapters across the U.S. that disparage Islam and promote Islamophobic legislation at the state and national level.
Despite Gabriel’s anti-Muslim rhetoric, she operates freely within mainstream conservative circles and maintains allies in Congress such as Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Rep. Scott Perry, R-Penn.
According to Documented’s cache, Gabriel first appears in the January 2018 CNP membership roster. The cache spans back to 2017. She is listed as a member in subsequent rosters up to September 2020, the last list obtained by Documented. Documented did not return requests for comment by time of publication.
Regular members pay an annual fee of $1,750, according to CNP nomination documents published by Political Research Associates, an organization that researches the far right. There are other membership levels, and the higher the level, the higher the fees, up to several thousands of dollars.
Gabriel appears to be actively involved with CNP. In February 2020, she gave an “Update on the Middle East” at CNP’s meeting in Dana Point, California, according to a leaked copy of the agenda. Details about the presentation are unknown, however, the many other speeches of hers available on the Internet are often tinged with anti-Islam bias. The presence of anti-Muslim figures within CNP does not surprise Nelson.
“Islamophobia has been a core value of the Council for National Policy for a long time, an outgrowth of the Christian fundamentalist roots of the organization,” Nelson told Hatewatch in an interview. She posits CNP’s hardline Christian theology holds other religions, such as Islam, as “invalid.”
Gabriel’s relationship with CNP seems to be reciprocal, with the coalition promoting her brand and products.
“Brigitte Gabriel has been somebody who has been promoting and disseminating hate speech against Muslims,” Nelson said. “She’s a very fiery speaker and recently joined the roster of the Council for National Policy, whose member organizations also promote her books and her speaking engagements. It is a tragic decision because Muslims in the United States already face a great deal of prejudice and these figures just make their lives that much harder.”
Gabriel held a book signing at the CNP event she spoke at in February 2020. ACT for America and Gabriel did not return requests for comment.
According to a leaked 2016 copy of CNP’s media and confidentiality policy, “CNP members should not answer media inquiries about CNP. Only the CNP president or his or her designee is authorized to speak to the media about CNP.” Violation of this, according to the policy, “could result in sanctions, up to and including removal from CNP membership.”
Gabriel’s listed interests within CNP include “Radical Islam,” “Terrorism” and “Immigration,” among others, as revealed by Documented. CNP members’ interests are often listed with their names and affiliations and range from a variety of issues from “Judeo-Christian Values” to “Tax Reform” to “Regulatory Reform” to “Homosexual Issues.”
The term “radical Islam” is itself problematic because the descriptor “radical” is not used to describe any other religion and is often deployed to soften anti-Muslim bigotry. Gabriel herself has claimed that there is no such thing as radical Islam and that terrorism is associated with the “purest form” of the religion. Other CNP members view Islam in a similar way.
Gabriel and her group were some of former President Donald Trump’s most ardent supporters. CNP also threw its support behind Trump in 2016 after candidates more aligned with its members’ values, such as Ted Cruz and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, dropped out. As Nelson details in “Shadow Network,” Trump’s willingness to adopt retrograde policies aligned with CNP and appoint conservative judges earned the backing of the coalition and its networks.
Gabriel – like several other CNP members – enjoyed unprecedented access to the White House under Trump, meeting with his staff on numerous occasions. The Trump administration implemented policies long promoted by the anti-Muslim network, such as the Muslim ban and a low cap on refugees. Tony Perkins, an influential figure among the religious right, is also president of the anti-LGBTQ hate group Family Research Council, which also traffics in anti-Muslim ideology and is currently avidly supporting voter suppression bills.He also enjoyed extensive access to the Trump administration.
As Nelson notes in “Shadow Network,” “Perkins – the man who declared ‘Islam is not a religion … it is a comprehensive system which is incompatible with the Constitution’ – was named to the U.S. Commission on International Freedom [under Trump].” Perkins is a longtime CNP member, having been with the coalition for 25 to 30 years, according to the September 2020 roster. He also served as the CNP’s president from 2012 to 2019, except for 2013 and 2014 where he was listed as vice president.
In 2017, Gabriel met with then-White House staffer and CNP member Paul S. Teller to hand-deliver a petition in support of Trump’s Muslim ban. Teller previously served as Ted Cruz’s chief of staff. He is also active within CNP. In 2020 , The Washington Post reported he held weekly meetings of the CNP-affiliated Conservative Action Project.According to the Post, the Conservative Action Project helped “choose loyalists to run federal agencies and coordinate outside messages with nonprofit organizations to support [Trump] administration policies and leaders.” Pages from Documented reveal Teller’s interests at CNP include “Immigration,” “Foreign policy” and “Religious freedom.” Teller now serves as the executive director of Advancing American Freedom, a group founded by former Vice President Mike Pence.
Another anti-Muslim figurehead involved with CNP is Frank Gaffney. A former Ronald Reagan administration staffer, Gaffney has since become one of the most prolific anti-Muslim propagandists in the country. He is gripped by paranoid fantasies of foreign entities such as the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating and supplanting the U.S. from within. Gaffney founded the anti-Muslim hate group Center for Security Policy and now serves in an executive chairmanship role at the group.
[pix Frank Gaffney, founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, testifies during a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2013 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Hatewatch first reported on Gaffney’s CNP membership in the publication of the group’s 2014 roster. He is listed as a “Gold Circle Member” in CNP’s September 2020 membership roster. Gold Circle Members pay a yearly fee of $10,000, as shown by nomination documents. Like Gabriel, Gaffney’s listed interests at CNP include “Radical Islam.”
Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy did not respond to a request for comment.
In 2016, candidate Trump used data from a shoddy survey commissioned by the Center for Security Policy to justify his call for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.” The survey was done by The Polling Company, Kellyanne Conway’s company. Conway served as Trump’s senior counselor and was a member of CNP’s executive committee from 2014 to 2015, tax records show.
Like other anti-Muslim and far-right actors, CNP has begun to frame China as a new Cold War-style adversary. Gaffney and his group are active in stoking alarmism about the supposed threat from China. At a CNP conference in August 2020 in Arlington, Virginia, the coalition’s sister lobbying arm CNP Action, Inc., hosted a panel titled “Reckoning with China: Action Steps,” according to a leaked copy of the agenda obtained by the watchdog group Center for Media and Democracy. The panel featured Gaffney as a participant.
Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, a right-wing activist who is married to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, is also a CNP member and counts “Radical Islam” among her interests. In 2013, Mother Jones reported Ginni Thomas and Gaffney were part of another right-wing strategy group known as Groundswell.
CNP has also included Islamophobic figures in its orbit and network. Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn,Trump’s former National Security Adviser who was later pardoned by the former president after lying to the FBI, has ties to CNP, though he is not listed as a member. Flynn spoke at a CNP Policy Counsel event in July 2016. His name is also associated with a CNP Zoominfo account, as uncovered by investigative researcher Brent Allpress, suggesting Flynn might be involved more formally with the coalition. Flynn has a history of expressing anti-Islam sentiment, once calling the religion “a cancer.” In 2016, ACT for America advertised Flynn serving on its board of advisers. He was also a keynote speaker at ACT’s 2016 conference in Washington, D.C.
In September 2017, longtime anti-Muslim figurehead David Horowitz (who is not listed as a member) spoke at a CNP conference in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The theme of the event and Horowitz’s presentation was “Mapping the Left.” Horowitz heads the eponymously named David Horowitz Freedom Center, a hate group known for spreading anti-Muslim sentiment and helping fund other Islamophobic projects such as Jihad Watch and FrontPage Magazine. Once a leftist in the 1960s, Horowitz now tries to smear his former political affiliation as being totalitarian.
Dr. Mark Christian is listed as a member of CNP’s Board of Governors, which carries an annual fee of $6,000. Christian runs the anti-Muslim hate group Global Faith Institute, a group that peddles Islamophobic conspiracy theories while claiming to advocate for “the victims of Islam.” Christian is a former Muslim who converted to Christianity. He joins a cottage industry of former Muslims now disparaging their former faith. Christian is willing to associate with extreme figures in the anti-Muslim network, such as the former FBI agent turned anti-Muslim hate figure John Guandolo. Christian subscribes to the conspiracy theory that Islamic Sharia law is slowly “creeping” into American society.
“Islam has infiltrated all aspects of our life: our schools, churches, media, courts, military and our government,” reads a 2017 Global Faith Institute email to supporters. “Every day we are losing more of our freedom because of creeping sharia law.”
Christian did not answer a request for comment.
CNP’s rosters reveal the membership of other figures known for spreading Islamophobic rhetoric. One isfar-right historian William “Bill” Federer,who treads in Islamophobic and anti-LGBTQ conspiracy theories. According to the watchdog and research group Right Wing Watch, Federer once claimed that an “atheist homosexual gay agenda movement” will “open up” the U.S. “to move into an Islamic future.” Federer has been featured at events such as the Values Voter Summit, an annual conference put on by the Family Research Council. Brigitte Gabriel has also spoken at the Values Voter Summit in recent years, including 2018 and 2019. Family Research Council’s executive vice presidentJerry G. Boykin is also a member of CNP.
Boykin has a track record of making anti-Muslim remarks, once claiming Islam should not be protected by the First Amendment. Boykin used similar rhetoric in a 2014 news briefing for Policy Counsel, a CNP publication and speaker series to inform the public on a “wide range of topics” and “variety of opinions.” Boykin goes heavy on the anti-Islam rhetoric in the article, which touches on the rise and activities of the terrorist group ISIS at the time. Boykin took issue with former President Barack Obama’s attempts to not conflate the terrorist group with a religion of around 1.8 billion people.
“I think most Americans have figured this out,” Boykin said. “When you say Isis [sic] is not Islam the rest doesn’t really matter because if you are laying out a strategy that doesn’t start with an understanding of your enemy and who you are up against and what motivates him to do what he does the rest doesn’t matter.”
Boykin adds elsewhere: “One of the mistakes that we make about Islam is that only 16% of Islam is actually a religion.” He claims the rest is a legal, geopolitical and military system. Claiming Islam is not a religion – or only part one – is a well-tread trope deployed by Islamophobic figures. “But only 16% is an actual religion,” he said. “And we make the mistake of thinking that it’s exactly like Christianity. It is not.”
CNP’s Policy Counsel includes a disclaimer that views expressed in the articles are not always representative of the coalition. “These views should not be construed as the views of the Council for National Policy, as an attempt to aid or hinder the enactment of any legislation, or as an intervention in any political campaign for public office,” the disclaimer reads.
However, as CNP papers brought to light by Documented reveal, the coalition has advocated for policies steeped in Islamophobia.
Turning interest into action
It appears stoking fear of Islam goes beyond merely the interests of CNP members and has manifested into policy recommendations. Documented produced a cache of documents attributed to CNP Action, Inc.
According to Documented:
CNP members meet together in-person three times a year and strategize about their collective goals. A number of the sessions at each meeting are action focussed [sic], and the participants collectively agree on a set of ‘action-steps’ that the members and their organizations (including the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society, and the American Legislative Exchange Council) will carry out before the next meeting.
An action step from a May 2018 session called to “declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization.” The session was facilitated by Jerry Boykin and featured Frank Gaffney as a participant. Designating the Muslim Brotherhood has been a longtime goal of Gaffney and the anti-Muslim network. The designation fits into greater paranoia of Muslims being a fifth-column threat in the U.S., or a group that attempts to undermine the country from within.
Prominent Muslim civil rights and advocacy organizations are often accused by Islamophobia peddlers of having ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Arjun Sethi, a civil rights lawyer and author, noted in a 2017 column for The Washington Post that such a designation could have knock-on effects. “The result is likely to be intimidation, harassment and smears of Muslim and Arab groups here in the United States,” Sethi wrote.
Trump regularly threatened to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group while in office, but never did. Foreign relations experts and government officials have advised against such a designation. But there are still attempts to do so legislatively.
Bills attempting to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist group have been introduced in Congress multiple times in recent years. Sponsors of such bills include Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart, R-Fla., and Ted Cruz. Both members of Congress have ties to Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy. Diaz-Balart joined Gaffney on his radio program “Secure Freedom Radio” in 2016 to promote the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation bill. Cruz has longstanding ties to the Center for Security Policy and tapped Gaffney to serve as an adviser during his 2016 presidential run. Cruz also has ties to CNP, having given speeches to the coalition.
Brigitte Gabriel’s ACT for America also lobbies for bills to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, lobbying disclosure forms show. The group also supported Trump to do so. ACT tweeted in 2019: “President Trump should 100% designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group. Past administrations have promised but failed. MAKE AMERICA SAFE AGAIN!”
CNP supports the effort to halt refugees from Muslim majority countries being resettled in the U.S. Leaked copies of the coalition’s newsletters from 2015 and 2016 reveal this support. Halting refugee resettlement has been a tactic pushed by the anti-Muslim network, since many of those displaced are from Muslim majority countries, with many being ones the U.S. has a presence in. In 2015, ACT for America launched a working group to push back against the resettlement program and “ensure that this broken system is fixed, and that potential terrorists are kept on the outside looking in.”
Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy also launched an anti-refugee project for activists interested in “building resistance” to resettlement programs. The group also published two monographs in 2015 about the program steeped in demographic anxieties about Muslim refugees moving and relocating to the United States.
Anti-refugee sentiment features in a December 2015 newsletter of “Heard Around the Hill,” a publication of CNP Action, Inc. The newsletter promotes legislation aimed at curbing refugee resettlement.
“Intelligence officials have determined that Islamic extremists have explored using the refugee resettlement program to enter the United States,” the newsletter reads. This claim was pushed back on by U.S. officials and refugee advocates at the time.
The newsletter adds that House Republicans introduced H.R. 4218, which would suspend refugees from entering the U.S. The bill was introduced by Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and did not make it out of committee. Now serving in the U.S. Senate, Blackburn has connections to such anti-Muslim hate groups as ACT for America and Center for Security Policy, having attended ACT’s annual conference and been a guest on Gaffney’s radio program.
The newsletter notes that the anti-LGTBQ hate group Liberty Counsel produced a petition in support of the bill. “If you would like to sign the petition, click here,” it reads with a hyperlink. The newsletter notes, “Mat Staverserves as Chairman of Liberty Counsel Action.” Staver is on CNP’s board of governors and counts “Radical Islam” among his interests.
Another “Heard Around the Hill” newsletter from April 2016 touched on CNP’s opposition to refugees, with the effort being led by Paul Teller.
“At the most recent CNP meeting … CNP member Paul Teller, Chief of Staff for U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), referenced three pieces of immigration-related legislation introduced in the U.S. Congress that conservatives nationwide may want to examine and support,” the newsletter states. “One would suspend the entrance of refugees from terrorist-dominated countries, a second would give states the power to deny the resettling of refugees within their borders, and a third would focus key resources to better enable ICE agents to implement border security.”
The newsletter adds: “Please feel free to contact Paul Teller if you have questions or want to offer support for any or all of these efforts.”
While Islamophobia is at the coalition’s core, its activism and messaging on the issue may ebb and flow with what is politically relevant at the time.
“The political operatives of the Council for National Policy are very strategic,” Nelson said. “They do a great deal of polling, conduct focus groups, and promote inflammatory rhetoric when serves their political purposes. You are likely to see an uptick in their Islamophobic content at moments where the national news environment would favor it, such as periods of tension with Muslim countries or international incidents ascribed to terrorist organizations.”
Nelson says CNP and its network “were instrumental in convincing Trump to institute his infamous Muslim travel ban, which was opposed by foreign policy experts as being counterproductive to our national interests.”
She adds, “But again, this kind of dog whistle is signaling to their base. By lashing out at innocent populations, they are promoting a dangerous form of nationalism.”
‘We could expect a whole raft of measures’
The cache of documents reveals CNP’s willingness to embrace Islamophobic figures, their messaging and policies in its efforts to influence politics in the country. But Islamophobia is only one cog in the CNP machine.
The defeat of Donald Trump and Mike Pence has been a setback for CNP, having lost major allies at the federal level. The coalition continues to operate and reassess its strategy for the future. Nelson notes CNP and its networks will be eyeing the 2022 midterm elections. While the Democrats – who generally lean toward the left – narrowly hold both houses of Congress, Nelson notes trends show the party in White House generally does poorly in the midterms. She says the CNP has been active at the state level helping to promote voter suppression measures aiming to suppress “populations that favor the Democrats starting, but not ending with, African Americans.”
A CNP Action, Inc. action step from February 2020 advocated for “government-issued voter ID, including mail-in ballots and verification for residency and citizenship.” Voter ID measures have been criticized by voting rights advocates for disproportionately affecting black voters and other voters of color.
Nelson says that voter suppression efforts can help tip the midterms in favor of Republicans, some of whom have been known to support CNP affiliates’ access to power. A Republican takeover of Congress would derail the Biden administration’s policies and possibly set up a win for another Republican presidency in 2024.
“If the Radical Right of the Republican Party takes Congress in 2022 and the White House in 2024, there will be very little standing in their [CNP] way from reshaping the United States from the country as we know it,” Nelson says. “We could expect a whole raft of measures that would include not just depriving Muslims of basic rights, but rollbacks of voting rights, LGBT rights, women’s rights – and the list goes on and on.
“They have made no secret of the vision that they have for the United States, which is reminiscent of a 19th-century religious patriarchy. American voters will have to decide what kind of country they want for their children to inherit, and respond accordingly.”
---
SEE CNP GINNI
---
states rights
https://www.alternet.org/2022/07/ted-cruz/
---
Alliance Defense Fund To Launch Law School Aimed At Creating "Liberal Chaser" Attorneys
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Wed, 09/28/2011
Religious Right leaders are coming together to form yet another law school to train future lawyers of the conservative movement.The right-wing Alliance Defense Fund is helping Louisiana College, a Southern Baptist institution,start the Paul Pressler School of Law, which will join Liberty University, Regent University and others in providing politicized training to the next generation of Religious Right lawyers.
Pressler’s ties to the Alliance Defense Fund will be similar to the Liberty University School of Law’s partnership with Liberty Counsel and the Regent University School of Law’s (originally Oral Roberts University’s Coburn School of Law) alliance with the American Center for Law and Justice. As Sarah Posner notes, such law schools intend to“teach the ‘biblical’ foundations of the law” and create “lawyers unafraid to inject their particular Christian beliefs, not only into the public square, but quite deliberately into legislation, policy, and jurisprudence.”
According to the National Law Journal, the new law school “is named for Paul Pressler III, a former Texas Court of Appeals judge who helped lead the conservative takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention during the 1970s.”
The founding dean of the Pressler law school, J. Michael Johnson, was previously senior counsel of the ADF and, according to his Townhall.com bio, has “provided legal representation to organizations such as Focus on the Family, Concerned Women for America, Toward Tradition, the American Family Association, and Coral Ridge Ministries, and numerous family policy councils and crisis pregnancy centers.” In 2005, Johnson won the “Faith, Family and Freedom” award from Family Research Council president Tony Perkinsfor his work defending the Louisiana Marriage Protection Amendment, which placed a ban on same-sex marriage in the state’s constitution.
Yesterday on Today’s Issues, Perkins, who is a member of Pressler’s board of reference, spoke to Johnson about the new law school. Johnson said the law school would be “not unlike what our colleagues are doing at the Liberty University School of Law and the Regent University School of Law.” Perkins said, “This law school’s not going to be pumping out ambulance chasers, this is going to be pumping out liberal chasers, I mean we’re gonna track them down, wherever they are and we’re gonna defeat them, and if we can’t defeat them in the policy realm we’re gonna defeat them in the courts.” He added, “This law school is gonna be pumping out God-fearing, American-loving, family-defending attorneys”:
The choice of Louisiana College is no surprise. The school claims it “seeks to view all areas of knowledge from a distinctively Christian perspective and integrate Biblical truth thoroughly with each academic discipline” and believes “academic freedom of a Christian professor is limited by the preeminence of Jesus Christ, the authoritative nature of the Holy Scriptures, and the mission of the institution.”
In 2008 the school barred members of the Christian LGBT group Soul Force from appearing on campus. In his decision to bar the group, the college’s president cited a fake James Madison quote propagated by David Barton, which states that the U.S. government was based on “the Ten Commandments.”
Now David Barton is serving on the board of the law school.
Along with Perkins and Barton, Religious Right leaders on the board include Alan Sears of the Alliance Defense Fund, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson, Michael Farris of the Home School Legal Defense Association,Alveda King of Priests for Life, Religious Right luminary Tim LaHaye and his wife Beverly LaHaye of Concerned Women for America, Kelly Shackleford of the Liberty Institute and Reagan’s Attorney GeneralEdwin Meese. Republican politicians including Reps. Rodney Alexander and John Fleming, former congressman Bob McEwen, and senatorial candidate and Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz are also on the board.
PFAW
Filed under:
- Alliance Defense Fund
- Concerned Women for America
- Family Research Council
- Focus on the Family
- Liberty Counsel
- Liberty Institute
- Liberty University
- Regent University
- Religious Right
- Southern Baptist Convention
- Townhall
- undefined
- Alan Sears
- Alveda King
- Beverly LaHaye
- David Barton
- Michael Farris
- Richard Land
- Tony Perkins
- Louisiana
- Texas
- Attorney General
- choice
- Constitution
- Legal
- Legislation
- LGBT
- marriage
- Politics
- Religious Right
- Schools
- Solicitor General
- Women
---
---
TWO BAK TOP 1/2 NO LNX
see main for older
rival to hawley for trump 2.0
capt 921 html fail
html first-round
lest we forget, // brooks bros and Heller DC gun case
mofo on campaign finance (pluto-)
===
https://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/ted-cruz
3* 3%
farm bill trade guy tai
2021500Sung Confirmation (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary
2021459Restoring the Voting Rights ActJustice and Democracy
2021426Pérez Confirmation (Second Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary
2021420Voting Rights and Democracy ReformsJustice and Democracy
2021401Stone-Manning Confirmation (BLM Director)Other, Public Lands/Forests
2021357Build Back Better Budget ResolutionClimate Change, Clean Energy, Environmental Justice, Public Lands/Forests
2021346Promoting Polluting Energy SourcesDirty Energy, Climate Change, Air
2021320Eliminating Safeguards on Fossil Fuel ProductionDrilling, Dirty Energy, Climate Change, Oceans, Public Lands/Forests
2021303Defunding the Civilian Conservation Corps and Wildland FirefightingClimate Change, Public Lands/Forests, Other
2021298Restarting Construction of the Harmful Border WallWildlife, Public Lands/Forests, Environmental Justice
2021279Kim Confirmation (DOJ-ENRD Assistant Attorney General)Other, Environmental Justice
2021246Voting Rights and Democracy ReformsJustice and Democracy
2021236Fox Confirmation (EPA Assistant Administrator)Water
2021231Jackson Confirmation (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary, Climate Change, Justice and Democracy
2021203Clarke Confirmation (DOJ-CRD Assistant Attorney General)Justice and Democracy, Other
2021178Investing in Water InfrastructureWater
2021175Repealing Assault on Methane Pollution SafeguardsClimate Change, Dirty Energy
2021150Mallory Confirmation (Council on Environmental Quality Chair)Other, Environmental Justice
2021125Becerra Confirmation (Health and Human Services Secretary)Other, Environmental Justice
2021123Tai Confirmation (United States Trade Representative)Other
2021119Haaland Confirmation (Interior Secretary)Other, Public Lands/Forests
2021116Regan Confirmation (EPA Administrator)Other, Climate Change, Water, Air, Environmental Justice
2021114Garland Confirmation (Attorney General)Other, Justice and Democracy
2021113Fudge Confirmation (Housing and Urban Development Secretary)Other, Environmental Justice
202186Striking Provisions to Help Farmers of ColorEnvironmental Justice, Agriculture
202170Raimondo Confirmation (Commerce Secretary)Other, Oceans
202166Granholm Confirmation (Energy Secretary)Other, Clean Energy
202159Impeachment for Incitement of InsurrectionJustice and Democracy
202143Bolstering the Dirty Water RuleClean Water
202132Supporting the Destructive Keystone XL PipelineDirty Energy, Environmental Just-----
==
2021 28Promoting Drilling for Fossil FuelsDirty Energy, Drilling
2021 11Buttigieg Confirmation (Transportation Secretary)Other, Transportation
20212Certifying Pennsylvania’s Electoral VotesJustice and Democracy
20211Certifying Arizona’s Electoral VotesJustice and Democracy
2020224Barrett Confirmation (Supreme Court)Judiciary
2020222Barrett Cloture Vote (Supreme Court)Judiciary
2020168Inadequate COVID Relief PackageOther
2020126Inadequate Policing ReformJudiciary, Other
2020125Wilson Confirmation (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary
2020123Walker Confirmation (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary
2020121Great American Outdoors ActLands/Forests
2020118Defeating Effort to Derail the Great American Outdoors ActLands/Forests
202072Danly Confirmation (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)Dirty Energy, Clean Energy, Climate Change
202060MacGregor Confirmation (Interior Deputy Secretary)Dirty Energy, Climate Change, Lands/Forests, Oceans, Drilling, Wildlife
202041Kindred Confirmation (U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska)Judiciary
202036Brasher Confirmation (Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals)Judiciary
202014USMCA Trade DealClimate Change; Other
2019339Undermining the Land and Water Conservation FundLands/Forests
2019324Stopping Rollbacks of Carbon Pollution Limits for Power Plants Climate Change
2019313Scalia Confirmation (Labor Secretary)Other
2019300Jorjani Confirmation (Interior Solicitor)Other, Lands/Forests
201977Bernhardt Confirmation (Interior Secretary)Climate Change, Drilling, Lands/Forests, Wildlife, Other
201968Wyrick Confirmation (District Court for Western District of Oklahoma)Other, Justice and Democracy
201944Rao Confirmation (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals)Other, Justice and Democracy
201933Wheeler Confirmation (EPA Administrator)Climate Change, Clean Air, Clean Water
201929Miller Confirmation (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)Other, Justice and Democracy
201922Public Lands Package Lands/Forests
201920Undermining the Antiquities Act Lands/Forests
201919Blocking Permanent Reauthorization of the Land & Water Conservation Fund Lands/Forests
2018259Farm Bill Conference Report Climate Change, Clean Water
---
https://www.alternet.org/2022/03/ted-cruz-2657051447/
overturn election role bigger
---
on hanty
https://www.alternet.org/2022/06/ted-cruz/
accuse schumer of scotus assassin
---
raw story 6 22 an
Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado told Fox News on Wednesday she intended to take legal action against the political action committee widely credited with making Madison Cawthorn the youngest member of Congress to lose a primary.
Following Cawthorn's defeat in May, the American Muckrakers PAC announced they were targeting Boebert, who is also a first-term Republican.
On Tuesday, the PAC published salacious allegations about Boebert working through a "sugar daddy" website prior to her election to Congress.
The group said "their team and volunteers have uncovered that Lauren Boebert was an unlicensed, paid escort and met clients through SugarDaddyMeet.com. Text messages show she was bankrupt at the time and looking for some 'side income' and called her work 'pay to play.' She was paid to 'escort' with wealthy men," the group alleged.
"According to our investigation, Boebert was hired by a wealthy male client in Aspen, Colorado, who was a Koch family member. Boebert's rich client subsequently introduced her to U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in Aspen," the group alleged. "After meeting with Senator Cruz, Boebert was encouraged by Cruz to run for political office. When Boebert announced her campaign for Congress in December 2019, Senator Cruz donated at least $136,250.00 to the Boebert Campaign and helped her raise large sums of money during trips Boebert made to Texas."
Boebert is now denying the accusations.
"Boebert's attorney sent a letter to the American Muckrakers PAC regarding the claims that she was an 'unlicensed paid escort' who had 'two abortions,' pledging to bring 'civil defamation' lawsuits against the PAC," Fox News reported.
Boebert said she would be undeterred by the "blatantly false and disgusting accusations."
"I am not going to stand by and pretend this is normal behavior," she told Fox News.
On Twitter, Boebert threatened criminal legal action.
---
---
an 6 22
in a decision Monday that liberal Justice Elena Kagan warned will further corrupt the nation's money-dominated political system, the U.S. Supreme Court's right-wing majority struck down a campaign finance regulation limiting federal candidates' ability to use campaign funds to repay personal loans.
Established by the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, the rule barred candidates from using more than $250,000 in campaign funds collected after an election to recoup their loans to their own campaign.
The legal challenge to the cap was brought by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who intentionally violated the $250,000 cap during his 2018 reelection bid in order to pursue a repeal of the limit, which he characterized as a violation of free speech.
As CNN explained:
A day before he was reelected in 2018, Cruz loaned his campaign committee $260,000, $10,000 over the limit—laying the foundation for his legal challenge to the cap... [H]e could have been repaid in full by campaign funds if the repayment occurred 20 days after the election. But Cruz let the 20-day deadline lapse so that he could establish grounds to bring the legal challenge.
The high court's 6-3 decision strikes another blow to the nation's campaign finance restrictions, which were already weak and rife with loopholes that big donors readily and frequently exploit.
"While the direct effects of this decision are limited to the narrow federal provision at issue in the case, it reveals a Supreme Court increasingly out of step with the American people—who overwhelmingly recognize that unchecked campaign giving poses profound risks to the integrity of our democracy," said Trevor Potter, the president of Campaign Legal Center. "More immediately, the ruling could imperil an array of similar restrictions on post-election loan repayments adopted at the state and local level out of legitimate concerns over corruption."
Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) added on Twitter that "the right-wing Supreme Court has issued yet another preposterous decision effectively legalizing government corruption at the request of Republicans."
In her dissent, Kagan argued that the court's ruling will make even more common the kinds of "crooked exchanges" that have long sullied the U.S. political system, which is awash in money from corporations and ultra-wealthy individuals.
"Political contributions that will line a candidate's own pockets, given after his election to office, pose a special danger of corruption," Kagan argued, pointing to the issue of recouping personal loans. "The candidate has a more-than-usual interest in obtaining the money (to replenish his personal finances), and is now in a position to give something in return. The donors well understand his situation, and are eager to take advantage of it. In short, everyone's incentives are stacked to enhance the risk of dirty dealing."
Kagan went on to contend that quid pro quos—political favors carried out in exchange for money, in this case post-election donations—could become more rampant thanks to the Supreme Court's new ruling, which was authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, who helped orchestrate the high court's infamous Citizens United ruling and other attacks on campaign finance law.
"Post-election donors can be confident their money will enrich a candidate personally," Kagan wrote. "And those donors have of course learned which candidate won. When they give money to repay the victor's loan, they know—not merely hope—he will be in a position to perform official favors. The recipe for quid pro quo corruption is thus in place: a donation to enhance the candidate's own wealth (the quid), made when he has become able to use the power of public office to the donor's advantage (the quo)."
"The politician is happy; the donors are happy. The only loser is the public. It inevitably suffers from government corruption," she continued. "In allowing those payments to go forward unrestrained, today's decision can only bring this country's political system into further disrepute."
In a statement, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) voiced agreement with Kagan's dissent, calling the high court's ruling "another victory for right-wing donors in their assault on our campaign finance system, and another step toward unlimited special-interest spending in our elections."
"Big Republican donor interests built their supermajority to deliver wins like this one," Whitehouse added, "wins that help special interests skirt our democratic process to achieve what they want."
---
---
5 22
--> wingnuttery
https://www.alternet.org/2022/05/damning-supercut/
---
no lnx doc twt
Supreme Court hands Ted Cruz lucrative $555,000 win by declaring campaign finance rule violates free speech
David Badash and The New Civil Rights Movement May 16, 2022
In a 6-3 decision Monday the U.S. Supreme Court handed Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz a lucrative win, declaring a federal rule limiting the amount a candidate who loans money to their own campaign can be repaid violates the free speech clause of the First Amendment.
“With the latest SCOTUS decision to further deregulate campaign finance, the Texas senator will be able pay himself back with fresh donor money,” HuffPost reports, adding that Cruz can now “hit up donors to help pay himself back for the $555,000 he loaned to his campaigns in 2012 and 2018.”
Possibly the most consequential result of the ruling is it “could also enable politicians to personally make money on their campaigns by charging interest on loans later repaid by donors.”
Chief Justice John Roberts authored the majority opinion, which was joined by all conservatives on the bench. Justice Elena Kagan authored the minority opinion, which was joined by the liberals.
“And as they paid him, so he will pay them,” Justice Kagan, warning of corruption, wrote in her dissent. “In the coming months and years, they receive government benefits ― maybe favorable legislation, maybe prized appointments, maybe lucrative contracts. The politician is happy; the donors are happy. The only loser is the public. It inevitably suffers from government corruption.”
“Cruz,” HuffPost notes, “will be able to raise $555,000 and put it in his own pocket immediately. For that, he can thank the six conservative justices ― three of whom he voted to confirm.”
---
22 signed inhofe? ltr:
Ted Cruz, Texas
Oil & gas: $2,465,910 + Coal: $103,900 = $2,569,810
---
---
5 22
Liberals still take right-wing propaganda too literally. This is partly because we are liberal. We are often annoying pedants. If there’s an error in one’s thinking, liberals can be trusted to rush in and correct it.
That’s usually as far as it goes, alas.
Consider the reaction among liberals to the latest bit of incoherence by the Republican National Committee. It tweeted: “11,007 pounds of methamphetamine was seized at the southern border in April alone!”
It’s a variation on a familiar theme. “Joe Biden has created the WORST border crisis on record,” the account said last month. Also: “234,088 illegal immigrants were encountered crossing the border in April.”
The RNC says these facts are evidence of a “border crisis” that the president – as well as the vice president – are ignoring. We are not told, but expected to understand, that this “border crisis” is part of a leftwing “open border policy” that’s bent on “replacing Americans.”
What was the reaction among liberals?
Pretty typical.
Rightwing word-power
If immigrants are being apprehended and detained at the border, that means they didn’t get away with breaking federal immigration law.
The law is working as it’s supposed to.
Ergo, there is no border crisis.
If the border patrol is seizing drugs and contraband at the border, then law enforcement officers are doing what they should. So … what crisis?
Among liberals, the question appears to be: Why do Republican propagandists keep saying there’s a crisis at the border when the evidence they present to prove a border crisis proves the opposite?
I don’t think anyone is satisfied, because virtually no one has gone beyond the fact that claims of a border crisis are self-evidently bunk.
Worse is when liberals are content with pointing out the flaws in logic. Liberals, as is their wont, confuse liberal virtue for liberal politics.
And liberals lose.
To the rightwingers, language is about power. It’s not about meaning or coherence or sense-making or freedom of speech or thought.
Why would they use language everyone understands when such a social, democratic and equitable approach to language undermines their goal of protecting and defending the natural order of things?
Instead, they use words that everyone else thinks they understand fully but that only the natural and chosen in-group fully understands.
Liberals should presume their word-power is a fetish.
Fetish? Yes, fetish
I do not mean an obsession.
That’s a common understanding of the meaning of the word “fetish.” To be sure, a fetish can be an obsession, but it’s not only that. By “fetish,” I mean a thing that’s really a stand-in for another thing. It’s a blank line that Republican propagandists know rightwingers will gladly fill in.
I mean there’s no there there.
The principle there is the one that isn’t there.
A man with a foot fetish isn’t not aroused sexually by feet or the visual representation of feet. Feet are a stand-in for something else. Feet are a vessel into which fetishists pour associations with sexual pleasure.
Once liberals see the there that isn’t there, they can react effectively. Instead of meeting righting politics with liberal virtue, as they usually do, they can meet it with equal and opposite liberal politics.
Abortion isn’t about abortion. Immigration isn’t about immigration. Gun rights are not about guns. I have explained all this before.
What I haven’t explained is that laws at the center of these “hot button issues” is not the right-winger’s principal concern. It can’t be.
The closer you look, the clearer it is that “the law,” “lawlessness,” “law-abiding” and “the rule of law” are not what they seem to be.
The law is supposed to apply equally to a people created equally. When right-wingers say “the law,” they can’t mean equal treatment under law.
Equal treatment undermines their goal.
“The law” is, therefore, a fetish, a blank line, an empty vessel.
“The law” is a stand-in for “white power.”
Rightwing politics, liberal virtue
A Senate subcommittee held a hearing last week about a proposed federal law similar to a Connecticut statute permitting police to seize guns owned by perpetrators of domestic abuse and violence before they have a chance to murder women fleeing their abuse and violence.
US Senator Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, is on the panel. He said:
If the objective is to stop violent crime, what is effective is targeting actual violent criminals. The approach of today’s Senate Democrats is to try to go after the firearms of law-abiding citizens instead of targeting the violent criminals that are the real threat. Firearms, yes, are used by violent criminals but they are also used over and over and over again by victims of violent crimes to defend themselves.
In response, US Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, said:
Congress … should have eliminated the loopholes that leave women in the crosshairs of violent spouses and partners with guns a long time ago. What we’re talking about, I say to my colleague from Texas, is not going to take away gun rights for law-abiding citizens.
Wyden is correct. No law-abiding citizen would be affected by a federal version of Connecticut’s “Lori’s Law.” It would instead affect citizens who have committed criminal acts of domestic violence.
But Wyden did what most liberals do when confronted by statements that are not intended to make sense. He took them literally. Cruz’s words are mistaken, he said, before “correcting” Cruz’s word-power.
Wyden met rightwing politics with liberal virtue.
He failed to see the there that isn’t there.
White is the law is a gun
When Cruz talks about “law-abiding citizens,” he’s not talking about law-abiding citizens. That’s a fetish, a blank line, an empty vessel.
It’s a stand-in for white men, for white power.
White men are “the law” by dint of being white men. No one else can be the law. If nonwhite people try to enforce the law equally, white men are under no obligation to respect their effects, because the law, when it’s prosecuted by nonwhite people, isn’t legitimate. It’s lawless.
Cruz accused President Barack Obama of being “the most lawless president in the history of the United States.” He said it was because the former president refused to enforce federal immigration law.
What he really meant was that “the law” and “a Black man” are incompatible terms in America. A Black man is subject to “the law” – to white power, yes. He is not, however, enforcer of “the law” – of white power. That can’t be. That would be a perversion of the natural order.
Indeed, “the rule of law” was seen as “rule by a Black man.”
After the reelection of the first Black president, and after 20 school children were shot to pieces at Sandy Hook, the GOP made sure to right the wrong of “rule by a Black man.” They passed laws allowing white men to take “the law” into their own hands – with a gun.
Legal is white, illegal is not white
The Senate subcommittee hearing occurred the week after a law-abiding citizen legally purchased a semi-automatic rifle, drove 200 miles to the East side of Buffalo and shot to pieces 10 Black people.
The Democrats wasted a chance to see the there that’s not there – that “law-abiding” is a stand-in for white power, that it’s an empty vessel into which a white-power terrorist by the name of Payton Gendron poured meaning in order to take “the law” into his own hands.
Liberals should pay less attention to what right-wingers say and more attention to what they mean. Liberals should presume the principle there is the one that isn’t there. And they should spell it out for normal people in order to ask if this is the kind of country they want to live in.
You can’t beat right-wing politics with liberal virtue.
You can with liberal politics.
---
---
an 4 22
Former Trump White House trade advisor Peter Navarro was initially scheduled to appear on MSNBC’s The Beat on Tuesday, March 29. However, that appearance was abruptly canceled following the House Select Committee's vote on Monday in favor of holding Navarro in contempt of Congress for his failure to cooperate with the Jan. 6 investigation.
Sharing the news with viewers, MSNBC host Ari Melber said, “Late today, [Navarro] then indicated he could not do an interview tonight."
While the exact reason for Navarro's cancellation remains unclear, there is speculation that it may be due to the House's reference to a previous Navarro appearance on Melber's show. Back in February, Navarro became embroiled in a heated debate with Melber and made remarks that ultimately conflicted with his assertion of executive privilege.
Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-FL) highlighted the discrepency.
“[Navarro] has so much knowledge to share with a journalist, but he refuses to share that knowledge in response to a lawful subpoena,” Murphy said. “Evidently, Mr. Navarro is only concerned with executive privilege with keeping certain matters confidential when it’s convenient to him.”
In addition to speaking out about his involvement during the last MSNBC appearance, Navarro also shared a pertinent piece of information with The Daily Beast. Back in December of last year, Navarro detailed the “Green Bay Sweep” strategy he and former Trump White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon had laid out in hopes of keeping Trump in office.
“We spent a lot of time lining up over 100 congressmen, including some senators. It started out perfectly. At 1 p.m., Gosar and Cruz did exactly what was expected of them,” Navarro told The Beast. “It was a perfect plan. And it all predicated on peace and calm on Capitol Hill. We didn’t even need any protestors, because we had over 100 congressmen committed to it.
The committee is now recommending charges for both Navarro and Dan Scavino, who served as former White House Deputy Chief of Staff for the Trump administration.
---
---
https://www.ecowatch.com/koch-brothers-paris-agreement-2430226599.html
Paris Exit Was 'Victory Paid and Carried Out' by Republican Party for the Koch Brothers
nolink
The 22 Republican senators who sent a letter to President Donald Trump last week urging the United States' withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement received more than $10 million dollars in campaign funds from fossil fuel interests.
The two-page letter was signed by a number of Republican heavyweights from coal/gas/oil-rich states, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma and Ted Cruz of Texas.
The Guardian calculated that the 22 senators received a total of $10,694,284 from oil, gas and coal money in just five years. (See the breakdown below.
However, that sum does not even come close to the amount of undisclosed funds coming from the deep pockets of Charles and David Koch's coal, oil and gas conglomerate, Koch Industries, and other outside groups.
As the Guardian explains:
"Visible donations to Republicans from those industries exceeded donations to Democrats in the 2016 election cycle by a ratio of 15-to-1, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. And that does not include so-called dark money passed from oil interests such as Koch industries to general slush funds to re-elect Republicans such as the Senate leadership fund.
"At least $90m in untraceable money has been funneled to Republican candidates from oil, gas and coal interests in the past three election cycles, according to Federal Election Commission disclosures analyzed by the Center for Responsive Politics."
Jeffrey Sachs, professor of economics and director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, shared recently his views on Trump's climate walkout.In an interview with Bloomberg Surveillance, Sachs referenced the senators' letter and specifically cast blame on the billionaire oil barons for pulling the strings of Republican party leaders such as McConnell and House Speaker Paul Ryan, who both supported exiting the Paris accord.
"This is the victory paid and carried out for 20 years by two people, David and Charles Koch," Sachs said. "They have bought and purchased the top of the Republican party. Trump is a tool in this."
Notably, most of the Republican signatories of the letter do not support the belief that human activity contributes to climate change.
During an appearance on MSNBC, Democratic Sen. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts explained why he thinks his Republican colleagues do not believe in the science of climate change.
"This Conservative party in the United States is funded by the Koch brothers [and] it's funded by the coal industry," Markey said. "[They] insist that Scott Pruitt—the Attorney General of Oklahoma that actually sued the EPA 19 times on clean air, clean water, soot, mercury issues—becomes the head of the EPA in our country."
The 22 Republican signatories' funding from Big Oil, Gas and Coal in the past three election cycles (2012, 2014 and 2016):
James Inhofe, Oklahoma
Oil & gas: $465,950 + Coal: $63,600 = $529,550
John Barrasso, Wyoming
Oil & gas: $458,466 + Coal: $127,356 = $585,822
Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
Oil & gas: $1,180,384 + Coal: $361,700 = $1,542,084
John Cornyn, Texas
Oil & gas: $1,101,456 + Coal: $33,050 = $1,134,506
Roy Blunt, Missouri
Oil & gas: $353,864 + Coal: $96,000 = $449,864
Roger Wicker, Mississippi
Oil & gas: $198,816 + Coal: $25,376 = $224,192
Michael Enzi, Wyoming
Oil & gas: $211,083 + Coal: $63,300 = $274,383
Mike Crapo, Idaho
Oil & gas: $110,250 + Coal: $26,756 = $137,006
Jim Risch, Idaho
Oil & gas: $123,850 + Coal: $25,680 = $149,530
Thad Cochran, Mississippi
Oil & gas: $276,905 + Coal: $15,000 = $291,905
Mike Rounds, South Dakota
Oil & gas: $201,900 + Coal: none = $201,900
Rand Paul, Kentucky
Oil & gas: $170,215 + Coal: $82,571 = $252,786
John Boozman, Arkansas
Oil & gas: $147,930 + Coal: $2,000 = $149,930
Richard Shelby, Alabama
Oil & gas: $60,150 + $2,500 = $62,650
Luther Strange, Alabama (Appointed in 2017, running in 2017 special election)
Total: NA
Orrin Hatch, Utah
Oil & gas: $446,250 + Coal: $25,000 = $471,250
Mike Lee, Utah
Oil & gas: $231,520 + Coal: $21,895 = $253,415
Ted Cruz, Texas
Oil & gas: $2,465,910 + Coal: $103,900 = $2,569,810
David Perdue, Georgia
Oil & gas: $184,250 + Coal: $0 = $184,250
Thom Tillis, North Carolina
Oil & gas: $263,400 + Coal: $0 = $263,400
Tim Scott, South Carolina
Oil & gas: $490,076 + Coal: $58,200 = $548,276
Pat Roberts, Kansas
Oil & gas: $388,950 + Coal: $28,825 = $417,775
---
---
https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/peoples-convoy-fails-to-disrupt-washingtons-roads-meets-with-far-right-congress-members/
no lnx
rww thus trifecta 3 22
the convoy of anti-vaccine-mandate, pro-Trump, and QAnon-conspiracy activists was determined to disrupt Washington, D.C., by circling the Beltway, the 64 miles of highway that’s generally a hellscape for commuters. Organizers of the “People’s Convoy” modeled their efforts after the trucker convoy in Canada that took over downtown Ottawa and shut down the bridge connecting Ontario to Michigan, disrupting trade and business in both countries. U.S. organizers demanded an end to vaccine and mask mandates and an end to the national emergency around COVID-19 that was declared under former President Donald Trump and extended under President Joe Biden.
On Monday, the truck convoy entered the Beltway with instructions to take up two lanes of traffic. By 2 p.m., the convoy was “struggling to occupy one lane of traffic let alone two,” The Daily Beast’s Zachary Petrizzo reported. Regular traffic separated convoy vehicles as it had on Sunday. With diesel hitting $4.75 this week, driving their gas-guzzlers slowly around the Beltway seemed like an expensive effort in futility, especially since D.C. had lifted its mask and vaccine mandate and the Biden administration and Congress had. Brase stated the convoy’s demands to “end the state of emergency, end the vaccine mandates” and to hold “our elected and unelected officials accountable for their actions that led to this,”” the AFCLF representative told Cruz and Johnson. “We have a pendulum that’s swinging from ‘woke’ to ‘the great awakening’.”
Shortly thereafter, a larger group met with Reps. Matt Gaetz, Marjorie Taylor Greene, and Thomas Massie for a “trucker round table” on Capitol Hill. The truckers and adjacent activists complained about rising gas prices, mask and vaccine mandates, critical race theory, and government tyranny, with one trucker calling on the legislators to simply stop funding the government. When one convoy member from Michigan asked how to prevent stolen elections, Gaetz repeated debunked voter fraud claims about the state.
“Michigan, where they waited, the center in Detroit, to see how the rest of the state voted to figure out how many ballots they needed,” Gaetz said. “You want to be very suspicious of federalizing elections. If we federalize elections, then we have the swamp and the Washington, D.C., Beltway telling you how to count votes in Lansing, Michigan.”
Massie decided to focus on mail-in ballots—which Trump baselessly insists was a source of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election—warning that “they may have to find some excuse to go back to mail-in ballots.”
Greene was in agreement. “The last thing you want is the federal government to be involved in your election,” she said.
Gaetz tried to wrap up the questions, joking that if the group stayed over its allotted time in the room he reserved, they would be accused of “an insurrection.”
“We don’t want to be accused of that,” Greene said. “It’s frowned upon here.”
The meeting with far-right members of Congress and the focus on the Big Lie from a convoy demanding an end to COVID-19-related mandates might be surprising to those just tuning in. But the rhetoric exhibited on rally stages and social media throughout the convoy’s two-week trek across the country and the organizations supporting the convoy have always indicated that this was never just about public health mandates.
A new report from the nonprofit research organization Advance Democracy, Inc., details the ties that three organizations supporting the effort have to the so-called Stop the Steal movement, whose massive rallies to overturn the 2020 presidential election attracted many of the same elements featured in the People’s Convoy.
AFCLF, whose representative met with Cruz and Johnson, has faced scrutiny over its connections to dubious efforts to overturn 2020 election results in Michigan. It claims to have raised more than $1.6 million for the convoy as of Monday, but it’s unclear how that money has been used.
The People’s Convoy also partnered with Freedom Fighter Nation on strategic and logistical planning, Brase, the convoy organizer, said on a Feb. 12 livestream.
“We don’t want to end up on the news for weird money stuff, we’re making sure that accountants and attorneys are handling it personally through freedomfighternation.org. They have helped set up a lot of this infrastructure. They are working with us one on one to help guide us,” Brase said.
Freedom Fighter Nation is led by Leigh Dundas, a COVID-19 and election conspiracy theorist who was seen near the U.S. Capitol during the insurrection. The day before the attack, she told Trump supporters at a D.C. rally that they would be “well within our rights to take any alleged American who acted in a turncoat fashion and sold us out and committed treason, we would be well within our rights to take ’em out back and shoot ’em or hang ’em, because that is what we did when they tried to overthrow our government by way of assassinating Abe Lincoln, and it is not too good of an end for the guys who sold out our government on our own soil.” Dundas and Chris Marston of AFCLF say they are https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/03/04/peoples-convoy-donations-fraud-afclf
Before the convoy left from California to make its way across the country, it was also supported by The America Project, an organization founded by election conspiracy theorists Mike Flynn and Patrick Byrne.
The organization frequently promotes election fraud claims and contributed $3.2 million to fund the 2020 election audit in Maricopa, Arizona. The group was listed as a supporter of the convoy in a Feb. 20 press release, but by Feb. 23—when the convoy began its trip and...Byrne announced The America Project was “stepping away” from the convoy, alleging that it had been “penetrated by the left.” The convoy—which an estimated 1,000 people committed time and money to join—doesn’t appear to be penetrated by the left in the least bit.
At a Sunday night convoy rally in Hagerstown, Maryland, speakers railed against tyranny, stolen elections, and the mainstream media. QAnon conspiracy theorists ...;Christian nationalists, members of the Proud Boys hate group, and likened the rally to a “county fair,” with music, food, and speeches building community and connections among factions of the fringe right-wing.
The convoy continues its Beltway circling this week. It has yet to be as successful as its Canadian counterpart in bringing gridlock to the nation’s capital, but it has served a purpose for far-right organizers, attracting Republican star power and bringing activists from different factions of the movement together under the banner of “freedom.”
Tags: Marjorie Taylor Greene American Foundation for Civil Liberties and Freedom Freedom Fighter Nation People's Convoy
---
---
ez to demagogue b/c ppl don't get it's a world commodity? supply and demand fundamentalism/reductionism?
https://www.alternet.org/2022/03/ted-cruz-fact-checked-gas/
---
mothertrucker
an 2 22
Canadian officials have a message for US Republicans hyping anti-vax protests in Ottawa: Butt out
Sen. Ted Cruz (Screengrab)
Alex Henderson February 08, 2022
In Ottawa, Canada’s capital city, anti-vax truckers have been protesting a Canadian law that went into effect on January 15 and requires truckers entering Canada from the United States to show proof that they have been vaccinated for COVID-19. And far-right Republicans, from Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to Sen. Ted Cruz to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, have been pandering to the United States’ anti-vax fringe by praising those truckers in Ottawa.
Some Republicans have been donating to their cause. But Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has a message for those Republicans: butt out.
During a debate in the Canadian Parliament, Trudeau explained, “Individuals are trying to blockade our economy, our democracy, and our fellow citizens’ daily lives. It has to stop.”
Trudeau stressed that the border restrictions will not last forever.
“Canadians trust science,” Trudeau declared. “A few people shouting and waving swastikas does not define who Canadians are.”
Other Canadians who have been critical of the anti-vax protests in Ottawa range from Public Safety Minister Marco Mendicino to Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson.
In a letter to Trudeau, Watson complained, “What was initially described as a peaceful protest has now turned into a siege of our downtown area.” And Mendicino, obviously referring to Republicans in the U.S., said, “We need to be vigilant about potential foreign interference.... Whatever statements may have been made by some foreign official are neither here nor there. We’re Canadian. We have our own set of laws. We will follow them.”
Although former President Donald Trump is not an anti-vaxxer — he said he has received a COVID-19 booster shot and has encouraged others to do the same — he took offense at Trudeau’s comments, calling the Canadian prime minister a “far-left lunatic” and saying that he has “destroyed Canada with insane COVID mandates.”
According to the Associated Press, there have been incidents of violence in connection with the raucous Ottawa protests.
AP reporters Rob Gillies and Tracey Lindeman note, “Steve Bell, the city’s deputy police chief, said a person from Ohio was arrested in connection with a threat against Ottawa police headquarters. Meanwhile, Ottawa police were investigating a fire at an apartment building that was apparently set by protesters. Matias Munoz said residents of the building south of Parliament Hill were already at their wits’ end Saturday night as the noise of the protest blared through their homes for the ninth night in a row. When he came downstairs Sunday morning, Munoz said the carpet and floor were charred, and there were blackened fire-starter bricks strewn across the lobby.”
---
hillary epstein fail
https://www.alternet.org/2022/02/ted-cruz-2656766482/
---
an 1 22
no lnx twt
The 'radicalized, weaponized' Texas GOP is pushing Republicans all over the US to the extreme right: journalist
Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas speaking at the 2021 Young Latino Leadership Summit, hosted by Turning Point USA at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix, Arizona,]
Alex Henderson January 31, 2022
Although Texas is still a red state, it is by no means the reddest of the red. Trump carried Texas by about 6% in the 2020 presidential election compared to 43% in Wyoming, 26% in Alabama or 30% in Idaho. And former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, who is running for governor in the 2022 midterms, came within striking distance of Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas’ 2018 U.S. Senate race, losing by only 2%.
Texas Republicans, however, haven’t responded to Democratic gains in their state by becoming more moderate, but rather, by becoming increasingly extreme. And journalist Wajahat Ali, in an op-ed published by the Daily Beast on January 30, argues that Texas Republicans are having a destructive influence not only in Texas, but all over the United States.
“Everything is bigger in Texas, including a radicalized, weaponized and emboldened GOP’s audacious abuse of power to fuel their culture wars and subvert democracy,” Ali warns. “If you want to see a sneak preview of the GOP’s national project to maintain white, minority rule, then look no further than Texas, the second-most populous state in the nation, that now serves as a trendsetter for Republican state legislatures across the nation.”
Ali continues, “Texas Republicans, led by Gov. Greg Abbott and Sen. Ted Cruz, are committed to one-upping their colleagues by introducing the most extreme versions of voter suppression, open carry laws, anti-abortion bills, and critical race theory (CRT) bans…. The Lone Star State has become the ‘laboratory’ for GOP politicians and their hard-right agenda, according to Democrat Ben Chou, who is running to be commissioner of Harris County Precinct 4.”
Chou believes that Abbott and Cruz are trying to “one-up” far-right Republicans in other states, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis. The Houston-area Democrat told the Beast, “This is all for a national platform for when they go into the Republican primary.”
Abbott, Cruz and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, according to Ali, are pandering to the extreme right in a variety of ways — from voter suppression to anti-vaxxer extremism.
“Texas serves as a warning for Democrats across the nation to pay particular attention to state legislature races,” Ali writes. “Currently, both houses in Texas have a Republican majority. As a result, the GOP controls redistricting.”...
---
---
https://theintercept.com/2018/10/01/ted-cruz-lobbyist-google/
lee f
TED CRUZ IS RUNNING AS A POPULIST. HERE’S HIS LITTLE-KNOWN HISTORY AS A CORPORATE LOBBYIST.
Between his two stints in public service, then-lobbyist Ted Cruz used his connections from government work to help Google and other corporate clients.
Lee Fang
October 1 2018,
TEXAS REPUBLICAN SEN. Ted Cruz, locked in a heated battle for re-election, is once again touting his credentials as an anti-establishment populist, claiming to voters that he has taken on K-Street, the proverbial corridor of Beltway corporate influence-peddling.
Not so long ago, however, in a largely forgotten chapter in his meteoric political career, Cruz was a card-carrying member of the swamp.
Not long ago, in a largely forgotten chapter in his meteoric political career, Cruz was a card-carrying member of the swamp.
And, as part of his lobbying, he worked for some of the most well-known companies in the world. Cruz was once retained by Google to influence a high-profile government investigation led by his former colleagues in the Texas Attorney General’s Office, helping the Silicon Valley giant squash an inquiry that the company had abused its market power to undermine competitors.
The lobbying was done while Cruz worked for the mega law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, before his first campaign for elected office. Though his public profile with the firm focused largely on his work as a litigator, Cruz was also listed as a member of the firm’s lobbying division.
During that time, Cruz was a board member and state chair of an advocacy group called the Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity Institute. The now-defunct group was run by corporate lobbyists to mobilize grassroots support for industry priorities, primarily on energy, health care, and telecom issues. Records show that Cruz’s nonprofit — which was funded by the financial giants AIG and Goldman Sachs, according to an online archive of its website — pressured Congress to enact the 2008 law known as Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, that bailed out big banks at the public’s expense.
In his political career, Cruz has presented himself as a populist — fighting against big business and moneyed interests. In his first campaign for Senate in 2012 and during his 2016 presidential campaign, Cruz projected an image as a firebrand populist to rail against bailouts and political corruption. Cruz argued that he was compelled to run for office over frustration that “career politicians in both parties get in bed with the lobbyist and special interest.”
Cruz’s image on the campaign trail contrasts sharply with his years of climbing through the ranks of the political establishment. Cruz’s work for George W. Bush is well-known. He served as a campaign legal adviser, then gained appointments in the Bush administration at the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission. In 2003, Cruz was appointed as Texas’s solicitor general by the state’s then-Attorney General Greg Abbott. Cruz used the position to argue cases on a range of hot-button issues, including gun rights and redistricting, before the Supreme Court, earning acclaim among conservative activists.
Years later, Cruz re-emerged as a tea party darling, appearing at events to denounce former President Barack Obama’s domestic policy program. He successfully ran in 2012 as an insurgent candidate for the U.S. Senate.
THE YEARS BETWEEN Cruz’s stints in government — after he left the solicitor general’s office in 2008, but before his first run for elected office — have received little attention.
During that period, Cruz served as a partner at the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, a position that earned him as much as $1.5 million a year. At the firm, he worked on traditional litigation, representing, for instance, pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca and Shandong Linglong Tire Co., a Chinese tire manufacturer, in court as an attorney. But he also worked to influence his former colleagues in government.
Cruz’s team was advertised as a collection of attorneys and lobbyists “who focus on helping clients anticipate—and succeed amid—legislative and regulatory change and heightened Congressional oversight.”
Cruz was listed as a practice group member of the Morgan, Lewis & Bockius lobbying division, a team known as the “Washington Government Relations & Public Policy” practice group. The team was advertised as a collection of attorneys and lobbyists with “alumni from both Republican and Democratic administrations, who focus on helping clients anticipate—and succeed amid—legislative and regulatory change and heightened Congressional oversight.”
His deep connections to the Texas Attorney General’s Office and experience with antitrust issues from his work during the Bush administration brought at least one major client matter to the firm. In July 2010, Texas announced that it would open an inquiry into the business practices of Google, charging that the firm had unfairly demoted the search rankings of smaller competitors to undercut their business. The state filed “civil investigative demand” to the Mountain View, California-based tech company requesting documents. Cruz was retained to help influence the potentially explosive investigation from his former employers in the attorney general’s office.
The following month, a team of in-house attorneys from Google, its longstanding law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Cruz traveled to Austin to meet with Abbott’s staff to discuss the investigation. In an email dated August 23, 2010, Wilson Sonsini partner Renata Hesse emailed an antitrust attorney at Texas Attorney General’s Office, alerting her that Cruz would be among the Google attorneys visiting her office.
The meetings continued as Google worked to respond to inquiries from the antitrust office. According to schedule logs obtained by Yahoo! News, Cruz attended three other meetings with the Texas attorney general’s staff to discuss the Google investigation.
The Texas Attorney General’s Office eventually closed its investigation without bringing charges. But the office also shared the documents it gathered from the inquiry with the Federal Trade Commission, which was quietly pursuing its own major antitrust inquiry into Google. A memo obtained by the Wall Street Journal prepared by FTC staff shows that federal investigators cited documents obtained in the Texas probe 28 times in their report recommending a federal antitrust investigation of the internet search giant.
In the end, however, Google again prevailed — by exerting tremendous political influence. The company retained lobbyists and set up meetings with administration officials at least 280 times during Obama’s first term. Google co-founder Larry Page and former Google chair Eric Schmidt met with senior administration officials to discuss the antitrust probe, among other high-level contacts made to influence the FTC. Despite the memo recommending an investigation, the FTC closed the probe in exchange for Google volunteering to change some of its business practices.
IT WAS DURING this time — between his stints in government — that Cruz was affiliated with the nonprofit called the Hispanic Alliance for Progress Institute, serving as a board member and state chair. The organization was founded by Manuel Lujan, a veteran of the George H.W. Bush administration and a registered lobbyist. The Hispanic Alliance engaged in a wide range of political advocacy tied directly to its corporate donors, a practice that earned it suspicion from critics as an “astroturf” lobbying front set up to provide business interests with the facade of genuine grassroots support.
The Hispanic Alliance, for instance, received financial support from the Coca-Cola Company while helping to lobby against taxes on sugary drinks. The group was listed as a supporter for “Energy Citizen” rallies against federal legislation on fossil fuel companies while receiving funding from the American Petroleum Institute, an oil industry trade group. Similarly, the Hispanic Alliance, which received funding from telecommunication firms, joined a coalition calling for the repeal of an excise tax paid by cellphone firms. (Cruz’s office did not respond to repeated inquiries from The Intercept about his former clients or his role at the Hispanic Alliance.)
During the 2008 financial crisis, the Hispanic Alliance pushed for a public bailout of the big banks whose dicey investments had collapsed.
During the 2008 financial crisis, the Hispanic Alliance played a role during the debate over the government rescue of failing financial firms — pushing for a bailout for big banks whose dicey investments had collapsed using public coffers. In September of that year, as the stock market rapidly plunged from bad bets on subprime mortgages, Congress debated a $700 billion bailout package. On September 29, the first vote on the bailout legislation in the House of Representatives failed, sending the market into even more turmoil.
The Hispanic Alliance sprung into action. “Hispanic Alliance severely censures the failure of Congress to enact the economic rescue,” reads a press release sent on October 1. “Both parties in both Chambers can not continue to waste time – they must approve a new measure of Economic Rescue, and they must do it this week,” said Jose Niño, co-president of the Hispanic Alliance, in the release.
Massive pressure from major financial institutions and fear of continued market collapse spurred lawmakers to act, finally approving the bank bailouts two days later.
Cruz’s affiliation with the Hispanic Alliance was proudly displayed in several profiles of Cruz before his rise to the Senate. Cruz’s professional biography on his former Morgan, Lewis profile similarly touted his ties to the group. Since then, however, the group has faded from biographical sketches.
Meanwhile, as Cruz campaigns for re-election decrying the influence of special interests, he has received over $600,000 from corporate-controlled political action committees, including $6,000 from Google’s PAC.
---
an 1 22
no lnx
Economist Paul Krugman analyzes the 'bizarre alliance between Bitcoin and MAGA'
[Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas speaking at the 2021 Young Latino Leadership Summit, hosted by Turning Point USA at the Arizona Biltmore in Phoenix, ]
Alex Henderson January 12, 2022
In MAGA World, it isn’t uncommon to find far-right Republicans trumpeting their love of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Sen. Ted Cruz, in October 2021, declared that he wanted to “see Texas become the center of the universe for Bitcoin and crypto” — and former Ohio State Treasurer Josh Mandel tweeted that Ohio “must be a pro-God, pro-family, pro-Bitcoin state.” Liberal economist and New York Times opinion writer Paul Krugman analyzes the MAGA far right’s “bizarre” obsession with Bitcoin in his January 10 column, offering some reasons for the obsession.
Krugman writes, “There has long been a strong connection between support for Bitcoin and right-wing extremism — like the traditional association between conservatism and an obsession with gold, only more so…. It does seem important to understand the cultish aspects of the cryptocurrency movement.”
Krugman’s column isn’t critical of Bitcoin itself, but he finds MAGA Republicans’ obsession with it strange — including Mandel’s goofy willingness to equate Bitcoin with “God and country.”
“I still sometimes encounter people who say that we live in a digital age, so we should be using digital money,” Krugman explains. “But we already do! Like many people, I pay for most things by clicking a mouse, tapping my debit card or pressing a button on my phone. I used to keep singles in my wallet to buy fruit and vegetables from New York’s ubiquitous sidewalk stands, but these days, even they often accept Venmo.”
Krugman continues, “All of these payments, however, depend on trusting a third party: People accept debit cards, Apple Pay, Venmo and so on because they’re linked to a bank account. Bitcoin’s whole purpose, as laid out in its original 2008 white paper, was to remove the need for that kind of trust: It would validate payments using methods related to cryptography — coded communication. The goal was to create a peer-to-peer system of payments independent of financial institutions.”
States that submit to the authority of Almighty God // states that don\u2019t\n\nStates that are pro-family // states that aren\u2019t\n\nStates that invest in #bitcoin infrastructure // states that won\u2019t\n\nOhio must be a pro-God, pro-family, pro-bitcoin state. \n\nI promise we will be.
— Josh Mandel (@Josh Mandel) 1640649612
The economist adds that although Bitcoin has been available since January 2009, it hasn’t caught on with the general public the way its strongest proponents would like.
“The truth is that although Bitcoin has been around a long time by internet standards — 13 years! — it and other cryptocurrencies have made hardly any inroads into the traditional role of money, as a medium of exchange used to purchase goods and services,” Krugman notes. “Hard numbers are scarce, but it looks as if a vast majority of cryptocurrency transactions involve market speculation rather than the ordinary business of life. Yet Bitcoin and its rivals now have a combined market valuation of more than $1 trillion.”
Krugman adds, “What do investors think they’re buying? One answer is protection against the perennial fear that governments will inflate away all your wealth.”
The Times columnist argues that the MAGA movement’s obsession with Bitcoin fits in with its conspiracy mindset.
Krugman writes, “What’s with the deepening alliance between Bitcoin and MAGA? The answer, I’d argue, is that Bitcoin was supposed to create a monetary system that functions without trust — and the modern right is all about fostering distrust. COVID is a hoax; the election was stolen; California’s forest fires had nothing to do with climate change, and they were started by Rothschild-controlled space lasers. In this context, it’s perfectly natural for MAGAesque politicians to demand an end to a monetary system that runs through banks — we know who controls them, right? — and rests on a currency that’s managed by government-appointed officials.”
Krugman adds, “There’s no evidence of widespread monetary abuse, but that doesn’t matter on the extreme right. The point, then, is that while there are real economic issues associated with cryptocurrencies, their rise has a lot to do with the broader political madness that has American democracy on the brink.”
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
The myths of Ayn Rand pose real threats to democracy - Alternet.org ›
El Salvador becomes first nation to make Bitcoin legal tender amid ... ›
Cryptocurrency is becoming mainstream — but its carbon footprint ... ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Texas Republicans want to make the state the center of the ... ›
What Is Cryptocurrency? – Forbes Advisor ›
Bitcoin could become 'worthless', Bank of England warns | Bitcoin ... ›
---
1 22 mma
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/msnbc-angelo-carusone-describes-how-fox-news-picking-crazy-things-fever-swamps-and-pushing
ALICIA MENDEZ (HOST): Time, again, to raise the alarm about the danger of selling lies as journalism. We know the 1/6 committee has revealed texts from Fox News hosts sent to members of the Trump administration as the riot unfolded. But now Fox is apparently so powerful that it now has a sitting senator backtracking, and apologizing for calling the Capitol a terrorist attack. Joining us now to discuss, the president of Media Matters, Angelo Carusone. Angelo, thank you so much for being with us. Listen, this is your bread and butter. This is what you do day in, day out. So when I saw this, I needed to know what you thought about why this unfolded the way it did, what it tells us about Fox News, and what it tells us about the state of the Republican Party.
ANGELO CARUSONE (PRESIDENT OF MEDIA MATTERS FOR AMERICA): Well, there's a lot there. And I would just say there's one thing that's really important here, it's that one of Ted Cruz's penances wasn't just that he had to backtrack. During that same segment, he also endorsed and started to carry water for Tucker Carlson and Fox News’ conspiracy theory that the attack on January 6 was actually a FBI-orchestrated false flag operation. That happened in that exact interview as well, and that was Ted Cruz's way of trying to demonstrate that – to get Tucker and the audience to believe them.
And the reason I start with that example is because it illustrates a few things: One, that it is really here that Fox is really at the nexus of power. Because they weren’t just able to get him to apologize and to backtrack, but actually to start carrying water for Fox News' narrative. And that's where the power really comes from. And if I would describe it, I would say it's unrivaled agenda-setting power at this point. And that was always their purpose. Remember, they were born – I think the way you described it at the beginning was spot-on. They’re not a news operation, they were born as a political operation. That was the entire theory behind Fox News. Sure, they make a bunch of money on the side, but that isn't the goal. The goal really is political power, and the Ted Cruz thing is just an example of it.
MENDEZ: The reason I was so struck by this, and you know, is we always come back to this question of who is a trusted messenger, who could actually be the person to say the election was fair and true and we have to believe this vote count and we have to move on, and what happened on January 6 was an attack on American democracy and here's the path forward. When you see someone who attempts to do that even for a fleeting second, then taken down so quickly, it diminishes hope that there is even a possibility that there can be that messenger. Because the other side is clearly so powerful.
CARUSONE: Yes, it does. It actually does diminish that hope, because we actually need Fox's – I mean, just imagine COVID and the way that the country responded to a public health crisis, not a political question, but a public health crisis, if Fox News didn't begin by calling COVID a hoax. Then promotes – for two months promoting a fantasy treatment of hydroxychloroquine, and then the remaining summer downplaying the threat of the virus, and then now, of course, their antagonism toward vaccinations. It would be a different response, right? I mean, and that just illustrates to your point how depressing it can be sometimes. And that doesn't mean we're stuck with it. I think part of it is, and I think broadly the media and the public has been slow to react, because, you know, we value free speech and they exploit that. They exploit one of the American values, is that we care about freedom of expression and free ideas. They exploit that, and that means they exploit that to get away with accountability.
And so many have said, well, they get to have their opinions, they get to have their take, but what the result of that is, is that we ignore their destructive influence. And then as a result of that, then the accountability and consequences needed to diminish and dilute what that destructive potential really is. I mean, they have hosted people who don’t – members of Congress that don’t support Joe Biden as president more than 947 times. Ted Cruz is an anomaly on Fox News, not the norm, when it comes to who they host and who they promote. And if you think about that in the context of his political aspirations -- and he's not the only one, he can't run for president if Fox News ices him out. It's a dealbreaker, forget about it. There's no chance. And that then portends the future and it gets to, I think, an important part of this discussion, which is that we're going to have to recognize the threat and then start to take more serious concerted efforts to hold them accountable and force some change.
MENDEZ: Angelo, I only have about 30 seconds left, but I want to loop back to something you said in that first answer, which is that what struck you wasn't just the fact that Ted Cruz came on and apologized, but then he was forced to carry water for this conspiracy theory. What does it tell you that a year out, they are feeling the need to complicate and heighten the lies that they have already put out there?
CARUSONE: Yeah. This is exactly how they're going to retain their power. And it says a lot about what this means for the future. Because I said they were unrivaled. And the reason they are unrivaled is because Limbaugh is not around anymore and the rest of the right-wing media is really fragmented. The way that Fox has responded is by picking up crazy things from the fever swamps, things that wouldn't have made Fox News five years ago, and now they're actively now promoting them on the channel. The FBI false flag thing is one of these examples. And so what does that mean? More stuff coming from what otherwise would have been the fringes that never would have seen the light of day. And so the fact that they're going to turn people like Ted Cruz into validators and messengers for it is quite bad.
---
an 12 21 me
A former Trump White House advisor has revealed he collaborated with a right-wing agitator to execute a behind-the-scenes effort to halt the certification of President Joe Biden's election victory.
Speaking to The Daily Beast last week, Peter Navarro —ex-adviser to former President Donald Trump— touched on his role in the plans and how he and former Trump White House strategist Steve Bannon corroborated with Republican lawmakers like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) to halt the certification of the election results.
“We spent a lot of time lining up over 100 congressmen, including some senators. It started out perfectly. At 1 p.m., Gosar and Cruz did exactly what was expected of them,” Navarro told The Daily Beast. “It was a perfect plan. And it all predicated on peace and calm on Capitol Hill. We didn’t even need any protestors, because we had over 100 congressmen committed to it.”
The commitment Navarro discussed came as lawmakers were affirming the presidential election certification highlighting Biden's victory over Trump. Although they failed to successfully overturn the election, their goal was to stall as much as possible in hopes of pressuring Vice President Mike Pence (R) to send election results back to the six states Trump and his allies fought to overturn.
As reputable news outlets refused to circulate Trump's claims of widespread voter fraud, The Daily Beast noted that Navarro and Bannon "hoped to force journalists to cover the allegations by creating a historic delay to the certification process."
“The Green Bay Sweep was very well thought out. It was designed to get us 24 hours of televised hearings,” he said. “But we thought that we could bypass the corporate media by getting this stuff televised.”
Navarro went on to highlight what his exact role was in the plot. He was responsible for providing what has been described as "raw materials" such as the report he created with subtitles like “The Immaculate Deception” and “The Art of the Steal.”
“My role was to provide the receipts for the 100 congressmen or so who would make their cases… who could rely in part on the body of evidence I'd collected,” he told The Daily Beast. “To lay the legal predicate for the actions to be taken.” (Ultimately, states have not found any evidence of electoral fraud above the norm, which is exceedingly small.)
In his memoir titled, In Trump Time, Navarro also shed light on Bannon's role in the plot.
“Steve Bannon’s role was to figure out how to use this information—what he called ‘receipts’—to overturn the election result. That’s how Steve had come up with the Green Bay Sweep idea,” he wrote.
Navarro added, “The political and legal beauty of the strategy was this: by law, both the House of Representatives and the Senate must spend up to two hours of debate per state on each requested challenge. For the six battleground states, that would add up to as much as twenty-four hours of nationally televised hearings across the two chambers of Congress.”
During a segment on his podcast, "War Room Pandemic," Bannon also alluded to elements of the plot.
"We are right on the cusp of victory,” Bannon said on the show. “It’s quite simple. Play’s been called. Mike Pence, run the play. Take the football. Take the handoff from the quarterback. You’ve got guards in front of you. You’ve got big, strong people in front of you. Just do your duty."
Although Navarro had a role in the plot, he admitted that it was likely best that someone canceled his scheduled appearance to speak at the "Save America" rally shortly before the insurrection on the U.S. Capitol.
“It was better for me to spend that morning working on the Green Bay Sweep. Just checking to see that everything was in line, that congressmen were on board,” he said during the interview. “It was a pretty mellow morning for me. I was convinced everything was set in place.”
---
global elite eco-hyp gore tenn house fail? gop rep/sen does too pseudo-populist
Ted Cruz embarrassed after claiming Republicans don’t have private jets
Travis Gettys Raw Story
November 04, 2021
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) put his foot in his mouth on Wednesday while attempting to attack the Biden administration.
"John Kerry has a private jet that has flown dozens ...
---
10 21 trms
why Ted Cruz's pitch to Spain's far-right political party matters
Sen. Ted Cruz's pitch to Spain's far-right political party is emblematic of a larger shift in Republican politics...
---
https://www.alternet.org/2021/10/ted-cruz-2655236983/
Dallas Morning News torches Ted Cruz for blaming Trump's debt crisis on Democrats
Meaghan Ellis
October 06, 2021
The Dallas Morning News is pushing back against Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) attempt to blame Democrats for the massive debt the United States is faced with as the party tries to pass the much-needed, trillion-dollar infrastructure package.
Its no secret that the Republican lawmaker is worki....
---
"Unprecedented': Ted Cruz accused of 'undermining' America's national security
Tom Boggioni Raw Story
October 03, 2021
According to a report from the New York Times, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is taking withering fire for delaying dozens of appointments to the State Department and leaving multiple ambassadorship appointees in...
---
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/supreme-court/which-prez-candidate-obsessed-over-death-murder-as-scotus-clerk/
Which Prez Candidate Obsessed Over Death, Murder as SCOTUS ...
Search domain findlaw.com https://www.findlaw.com › legalblogs › supreme-court › which-prez-candidate-obsessed-over-death-murder-as-scotus-clerk
Ted Cruz's Supreme Court Tenure. That's right, Senator Ted Cruz's stint as clerk for then-Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist in 1996 was marked by Cruz's morbid, charnel house fixation on capital punishment and grisly murders. That is, at least according to The New York Times. The Times' Jason Horowitz tracked down Cruz's old clerk ...
mentor luttig murdered, 134 kia as tex sol gen'l
---
For junior high school Cruz went to Awty International School in Houston.[27] Cruz attended two private high schools: Faith West Academy, near Katy, Texas;[28] and Second Baptist High School in Houston, from which he graduated as valedictorian in 1988.[15][29][30] During high school, Cruz participated in a Houston-based group known at the time as the Free Market Education Foundation, a program that taught high school students the philosophies of economists such as Milton Friedman and Frédéric Bastiat.[20][31]
Cruz graduated cum laude from Princeton University in 1992 with a Bachelor of Arts in public policy[32] from the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.[2][33] While at Princeton, he competed for the American Whig-Cliosophic Society's Debate Panel and won the top speaker award at both the 1992 U.S. National Debating Championship and the 1992 North American Debating Championship.[34] In 1992, he was named U.S. National Speaker of the Year and, with his debate partner David Panton, Team of the Year by the American Parliamentary Debate Association.[34] Cruz and Panton later represented Harvard Law School at the 1995 World Debating Championship, losing in the semifinals to a team from Australia.[35][36][37] Princeton's debate team named their annual novice championship after Cruz.[37] At Princeton, Cruz was a member of Colonial Club.[38]
Cruz's 115-page senior thesis at Princeton investigated the separation of powers; its title, Clipping the Wings of Angels: The History and Theory behind the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, was inspired by a passage attributed to James Madison from the 51st essay of the Federalist Papers: "If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." Cruz argued that the drafters of the Constitution intended to protect their constituents' rights, and that the last two items in the Bill of Rights offer an explicit stop against an all-powerful state.[10][39]
After graduating from Princeton, Cruz attended Harvard Law School, graduating magna cum laude in 1995 with a Juris Doctor degree.[2][40] While at Harvard Law, he was a primary editor of the Harvard Law Review, an executive editor of the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, and a founding editor of the Harvard Latino Law Review.[33] Referring to Cruz's time as a student at Harvard Law, Professor Alan Dershowitz said: "Cruz was off-the-charts brilliant."[41][42][43][44] At Harvard Law, Cruz was a John M. Olin Fellow in Law and Economics.[45]
Cruz serves on the Board of Advisors of the Texas Review of Law and Politics.[46]
---
921 an
when a coronavirus pandemic has killed more than 4.7 million people worldwide and over 695,000 of them are in the United States — according to Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore — a vaccine mandate for the U.S. Armed Forces makes perfect sense. But a lawsuit filed by a "MAGA medical group," consisting of far-right anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, is aiming to stop the Pentagon's vaccine mandate, according to Daily Beast senior researcher Adam Rawnsley.
Gen. Lloyd J. Austin, Secretary of Defense in the Biden administration, ordered all active-duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces to get vaccinated for COVID-19 — and the far-right MAGA anti-vaxxers, in response, have filed a lawsuit against the Pentagon.
Rawnsley, in an article published on September 30, explains, "Lt. Col. Theresa M. Long, who serves as the brigade surgeon for the Army's 1st Aviation Brigade, filed an affidavit late last week in support of the suit's motion to block the vaccine mandate — arguing against the requirement based in part on her false belief that 'all persons who have received a COVID-19 vaccine are damaged in their cardiovascular system in an irreparable and irrevocable manner'…. The affidavit was filed as part of a suit brought by lawyers working with America's Frontline Doctors (AFLDS), according to the group, and requests a declaratory judgment blocking the vaccine requirement, on behalf of Staff Sergeants Dan Robert (USA), Hollie Mulvihill (USMC), and anti-vaxxers within the military."
Long, according to Rawnsley, "has joined a small but increasingly vocal group of field-grade officers encouraged by conservative activists and media as part of the right wing's crusade against COVID-19 vaccine mandates."
"The few officers and enlisted service members who have gone public with their opposition to the vaccine mandate are now finding increasing support among Republican members of Congress," Rawnsley notes. "Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX), James Lankford (R-OK), Roger Marshall (R-KS), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), for example, have recently drafted (a) proposed amendment to the annual National Defense Authorization Act that would gut the proposed vaccine mandate."
According to Rawnsley, roughly 70% of the U.S. military has been vaccinated for COVID-19. Austin and President Joe Biden would like to get that number even higher.
The good news about the AFLDS lawsuit, according to Rawnsley, is that it "faces long odds."
"Within the military," Rawnsley observes, "Long's own court filing suggests that ardent anti-vaccine attitudes may not be that widely shared. Long wrote that she's encountered 'mixed results in terms of acceptance, rejection and threats of punishment' over her opinions."
---
~ paris hands off
cf trms legis vs PR/hit enemy dems own libs
https://www.alternet.org/2021/01/ted-cruz-2650069802/
---
an 921
...Cruz asked Tolson, "In your judgement, are voting ID laws racist?" — to which she replied, "It depends." And when Cruz wanted to know which ones in particular she considers racist, Tolson responded, "Apologies, Mr. Cruz, your state of Texas, perhaps."
Cruz told Tolson, "OK, so you think the entire state of Texas is racist" — and the USC law professor clarified, "I'm not saying the entire state of Texas is racist…. The voter ID law was put into place to diminish the power of Latinos, with racist intent."
Cruz asked her what the evidence for this claim was, and she quickly had an answer: A federal district court ruled that the voter ID law was enacted for an "unconstitutional discriminatory purpose." Cruz had no response to this reply, so he just moved on.
The hearing was titled, "Restoring the Voting Rights Act: Combating Discriminatory Abuses."
Here are some responses to Tolson's testimony:...
---
kremlin cruz
https://www.alternet.org/2021/05/ted-cruz-2653083243/
---
trump camp money back?!
https://www.alternet.org/2021/06/ted-cruz/
---
cf trms legis vs PR/hit enemy dems own libs
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/06/donald-trumps-parting-gift-to-washington-was-a-party-of-shitposters/
rkj
i've seen many things at the Conservative Political Action Conference over the years, including many things I wish I hadn’t. But until Ted Cruz spoke to a ballroom of activists from the main stage in Orlando in February, I had never seen an elected official interrupt his own speech to promote a podcast.
“Please go subscribe,” barked the Texas Republican, sounding more like a street performer with a SoundCloud than a second-term senator. “Verdict With Ted Cruz! Verdict With Ted Cruz! Click on ‘subscribe.’ Five stars, please!”
One week earlier, Cruz had left his constituents and his poodle behind to wait out his state’s deadly grid failure at the Ritz-Carlton in Cancun. It was the sort of PR disaster that would leave many politicians reeling. Cruz tried to monetize the controversy instead, printing a line of Barstool Sports–chic “spring break” tank tops with a caricature of his nascent mullet. He may never lead the Republican Party, but Cruz always knows its temperature, and in the space of a few minutes in Orlando, between jokes about his ill-advised Mexican vacation and plugs for his side project, he managed to distill this conservative moment to its essence. Increasingly, as world-historical crises unfurl all around them—often exacerbated by their own policies and actions—the GOP’s most ambitious officials view their primary responsibility less as public servants than as content creators, churning out an endless stream of takes, memes, stunts, and podcasts. So many podcasts.
The Republican Party has long been infused with an irrepressible hustle, what the historian Rick Perlstein calls “mail-order conservatism.” Talk radio and direct mail were not only effective at peddling reactionary politics to voters; they were also perfect vehicles to sell products, such as gold and home-security systems. For decades these conjoined strains of politics, entertainment, and marketing have eroded trust in public institutions and the media and provided a template for self-aggrandizement and enrichment. There is nothing really like this on the left; Infowars and Goop sell the same pills, but Gwyneth Paltrow is not fomenting rebellion.
The way conservatism manifested itself over the airwaves has shaped what rank-and-file conservatives expect to be told and how they expect to feel about it. The late Rush Limbaugh’s listeners called themselves “dittoheads,” eager to nod along with everything. Newt Gingrich used to distribute tapes of himself talking so that candidates could emulate his language. In the 1980s, he weaponized C-SPAN’s new House cameras—where members previously addressed each other, Gingrich and his allies began speaking past them. They turned the Capitol into a studio and made politics into a product. Donald Trump easily won the Republican base because it had been primed for someone who could provide both the programming and the commercial breaks, sometimes all at once; in conservative politics, after all, you’re always being asked to buy something.
Trump’s presidency blew past the old frontiers: The performance of politics became the purpose of it.
But Trump’s presidency blew past the old frontiers: The performance of politics became the purpose of it, and the grind of governance became secondary to the responsibilities of posting.
It was as if, after years of awkward but largely profitable power-sharing between conservative politicians and conservative media, the Republican Party at last stumbled upon the ultimate efficiency: What if both roles could be played by the same person? Trump once dreamed of spinning a losing presidential bid into his own media entity.
During the pandemic, in lieu of crisis management, he turned briefings into a variety show, assembling a rotating cast of characters, and plugging an array of sponsors—MyPillow, Carnival, Pernod Ricard. You would not necessarily get good medical advice, but you would learn that Hanes is a “great consumer cotton products company” that’s being recognized more and more.
no lnx
There was no issue grave enough to take seriously and no controversy too petty to weigh in on. Anything could be resolved via tweet, precisely because nothing really can; the ephemerality was the point. And a rising generation of politicians learned an important lesson about what conservative voters wanted. If Limbaugh taught them all how to talk, Trump taught them how to govern. His enduring gift was a caucus of content creators.
Just consider the Republican congressional class of 2021—the new arrivals to Washington who modeled themselves most directly after Trump. They seem almost blissfully detached from the work of Congress. There is 25-year-old Madison Cawthorn of North Carolina, who was elected on the strength of a largely invented personal story amplified with loads of influencer-style Instagram posts. He recently posted a 19-second video of himself punching the bark off a tree. Cawthorn boasted to his colleagues that he had built his staff “around comms rather than legislation.” He was in Washington, in other words, mostly just to post.
Cawthorn boasted to his colleagues that he had built his staff “around comms rather than legislation.”
When Marjorie Taylor Greene, the QAnon representative from Georgia, was stripped of her committee assignments in February by colleagues upset that she had harassed fellow members of Congress and blamed forest fires on the Rothschilds, she greeted the news with relief. “If I was on a committee, I would be wasting my time,” she said. Now she was more free to share videos of her CrossFit workouts with the hashtag #FireFauci. Not that showing up for committee hearings necessarily means you’re there to work. Colorado’s Lauren Boebert, who like Cawthorn and Greene spent her first weeks on the job scaring the shit out of her co-workers, recently hijacked a virtual committee hearing by posing like John Wick in front of a shrine of firearms in her living room. (“Who says this is storage?” she responded to critics. “These are ready for use.”)
Cawthorn, Greene, and Boebert were all members of the National Republican Campaign Committee’s “Young Guns” program, which takes its name from an earlier trio of House Republicans—one of whom, Paul Ryan, went on to become a vice presidential nominee and speaker of the House and unite the party behind a vision of budget austerity. There is surely some sort of ideology at work here, too, but it’s more Jake Paul than Paul Ryan; they are treating the Capitol like their own hype house, using the stature of their office for clout.
R. Kikuo Johnson
These younger, gunnier guns are taking cues from their elders. Texas Rep. Dan Crenshaw, a content farm of a congressman who has filmed not one but two Avengers-style videos in which the ex–Navy SEAL parachutes out of airplanes to fight Democrats, also hosts a podcast. So does Devin Nunes. Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz has a podcast called Hot Takes. Before he became publicly embroiled in a federal sex-trafficking investigation (“If you aren’t making news, you aren’t governing,” Gaetz once said), he was considering retiring to take a job at the conservative cable channel Newsmax. In February, more than a dozen House Republicans—including Gaetz and Nunes—skipped work to speak at CPAC with Cruz. They took advantage of a covid-era policy that let members vote by proxy in medical emergencies; to them, promoting their brands is the job.
After watching Cruz’s speech I took his advice and checked out Verdict, which he co-hosts with Michael Knowles, who rose to prominence after publishing an entirely blank book called Reasons to Vote for Democrats. Cruz recorded the first episode at 2:40 a.m. after the opening day of Trump’s Ukraine impeachment trial—hence the name of the show—and returned to the studio every night of the proceedings. Within days of its debut, Verdict had passed Joe Rogan on the iTunes charts. At CPAC, Cruz announced it had been downloaded 25 million times. It is almost certainly the most popular thing he has ever done.
From the start, there were gestures that this was all “for work”; while Cruz plugs his book with regularity, he does not hawk brain pills or sell ads. In the premiere episode, Cruz solicited listener questions he could ask during the impeachment. When Knowles asked him why he was doing the show, Cruz replied with two words: “Substance. Matters.”
This is true in a technical way: Cruz talks on his show about many of the things he and his Republican colleagues talk about in the Capitol. But that Washington conversation is increasingly just an extension of what they talk about on their podcasts. The biggest crises in America right now, according to Cruz, CPAC, and Trump, are the interlocking threats of Big Tech and “cancel culture.” Hearings with tech executives have become a must-watch for conservatives. Cruz advertised his hearing-room clash with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey last summer with a Christopher Nolan–ish movie trailer and a poster reminiscent of welterweight boxing—“The Free Speech Champion vs. the Czar of Censorship.” There are substantive things to say about corporate power, but this brand of conservative opportunism zips past what’s real to fixate on what isn’t. Twitter moderators, or someone being “canceled,” is not something Congress is really positioned to do much about. They are just creating content about content creation; this is the uroboros of mail-order conservatism.
Twitter moderators, or someone being “canceled,” is not something Congress is really positioned to do much about. They are just creating content about content creation.
Big Tech and “cancel culture” have emerged as key villains for the new right, not just because of how neatly they fit into long-standing tropes about “cosmopolitan elites,” but because so much of modern conservatism lives online. Offline, there are issues that warrant serious attention from one of the nation’s two governing parties—cities without water, cities soon to be underwater, whole states without power, and a world still suffering from a deadly virus. But with a nudge from Trump, the right has become ever more dissociated from reality, channeling its energy into an endless series of fights over “deplatforming” and who’s triggering whom. During the Obama years, a Breitbart provocateur interrupted a White House press conference to complain about losing his Twitter verification badge. Then, it was a sideshow; now, it’s the whole point. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a likely presidential candidate, recently signed a law prohibiting social media companies from banning public officials.
The rise of politics as content creation is hardly the sole domain of the right. After his 2016 presidential campaign ended, Bernie Sanders kept his media imprint running. He organized town halls on Facebook Live and recorded a regular podcast. Sanders, who has made no secret of his distaste for corporate-owned media, hoped to build out his own information stream for his supporters. So did Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the New York representative whose prolific posting has gotten her in trouble with other members of her caucus. (Her arrival in Washington precipitated a closed-door meeting in which a colleague pleaded, “Everyone stop tweeting!”)
The content creators of both the left and the right pose some of the same big-picture challenges—the rise of politicians as independent news sources, of politics as stan culture, and the acceleration of the permanent campaign. A Pew analysis found that the outgoing 116th Congress was one of the least productive of the last half-century, but the most prolific ever when it came to posting. Members sent 50 percent more tweets than they did two terms ago; they were still talking—just not to each other. The more politicians function as affinity brands peddling a product to be consumed, the more “politics,” the entertainment vehicle, becomes dissociated from politics, the distributor of power. Barack and Michelle Obama run a media company now and each hosts podcasts, too; the ease with which political figures can rebrand themselves as entertainers speaks to the two spheres’ increasing coziness. This is not what “seizing the means of production” was supposed to mean.
But the way this dynamic is unfolding on the left and the right is asymmetrical. Though you would not necessarily know it from listening to Gaetz, Obama is not in office. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez are not angling for TV gigs; nor are they reducing the world of lawmaking to the kind of retrograde distractions that get you booked on Tucker. They use their enormous social media platforms for civics lessons, offering behind-the-scenes glimpses of the legislative process and the work of movement building, in an effort to get more people invested in both. You can buy the “Tax the Rich” sweatshirt Ocasio-Cortez wears when she holds court on policy and procedure on Instagram Live, but it is not the only thing she is selling. She and Sanders are trying to make the online world more engaged with the real world, rather than the other way around, to advance an ambitious governing program. It is a theory of change, of which clout and performance are merely a means, not the endpoint, of politics. That is the opposite of the reductive nihilism of Cawthorn or Boebert, or the eternal stagecraft of Cruz.
In the first few months of the Biden administration, the world of Twitter and real life have become increasingly estranged. In a paradoxical way, the transformation of a major political party into a meme factory has even eased some of Washington’s dysfunction. While Republicans were pitching their podcasts and talking about Dr. Seuss and his imaginary canceling—Cruz began selling copies of Green Eggs and Ham, signed by himself—Democrats pushed through a $1.9 trillion covid relief and stimulus package with little dissent.
In March, Trump, banned from Facebook and Twitter, announced that he was considering launching his own social media network. “I’m doing things having to do with putting our own platform out there,” he promised. “You’ll be hearing about [it] soon.” The website he unveiled didn’t amount to much, but that’s what made it so perfectly Trump—there’s not supposed to be a there there. Meanwhile, younger Republicans aiming to take his place continued their auditions. In April, Marco Rubio called on the government to treat companies that pollute “our culture” just as harshly as it treats companies that pollute our water—sort of like an Environmental Protection Agency for tweets. Cruz, himself accused of poisoning the discourse by John Boehner, polled his hive on whether he should shoot the former speaker of the House’s new book with a machine gun.
But none of the Republicans vying for Trump’s role have embraced the new posting reality as fluidly as DeSantis. In May, not long after guaranteeing Florida politicians the right to shitpost, DeSantis scored his biggest coup yet: passage of a bill to roll back voting access in the state, fueled by Trump’s lies about the 2020 election. When it came time to sign it, local reporters were stopped at the door—only a crew from Fox and Friends got in. DeSantis had turned an attack on fundamental rights into a live television event. Supporters of the ex-president stood behind him, cheering on cue, as the governor bantered with the hosts via satellite. Then he picked up a blue Sharpie, scrawled his name, and held up the embossed legislation for the cameras.
Trump may be gone, but the show never ends.
==
https://www.alternet.org/2021/05/ted-cruz-walks-out-of-gun-violence-hearing-when-democratic-senator-refuses-to-let-him-change-the-subject/
---
"cancun" cruz
ivy Leaguer Ted Cruz attended Kentucky Derby — then told Fox News the GOP is a 'blue collar party'
---
an alexh 421
Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, like many other far-right Republicans, has been railing against corporate America for what he sees as promoting "woke" liberalism and has been tweeting "get woke, go broke" — a phrase that has become popular on the far right. Cruz, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed published on April 28, warned corporations, "When the time comes that you need help with a tax break or a regulatory change, I hope the Democrats take your calls, because we may not. Starting today, we won't take your money either." And the Washington Post's Philip Bump, in an article published the following day, stresses that Cruz has said something that many other politicians are reluctant to come out and say.
Bump explains, "A senator is not only suggesting that he may ice out an affected constituency when developing policy, but also, that he understands that both access and contributions can be used as leverage against them. It's like the guy who runs the sausage factory taking out an ad on television to ensure everyone knows the manufacturing process."
Railing against large corporations is a recent trend among Republicans, who for many years, defended them vigorously. But the Republican Party took a pseudo-populist turn with Donald Trump's presidency, which brought Patrick Buchanan's ideas — a combination of far-right nativism, protectionism and isolationism — to the forefront of the GOP. And Cruz is among the Republicans who has been attacking corporations for speaking out against the voter suppression bills that members of his party have been pushing in Texas, Arizona and many other states. Georgia's so-called Election Integrity Act of 2021 has been vehemently criticized by Delta Airlines, Coca-Cola and other major companies based in the Peach State.
"It's important to recognize that some of the motivation for the corporate response to the Georgia law and the attempt to upend the 2020 presidential election — that Cruz also supported and that led to some corporations halting their contributions to him — is a simple capitalist calculation," Bump observes. "Younger Americans skew heavily Democratic and embrace corporate activism. Businesses that want young people as customers at times see politics as a way to build that loyalty."
Bump continues, "What's more, the working-age population itself skews more heavily Democratic. If we roughly combine data on the distribution of the workforce by age with the 2020 presidential exit polls, it suggests that workers tend to be more than five points more Democratic than Republican. This makes sense, given how much more Republican older Americans are."
Obviously, major companies like Delta, Coca-Cola and Texas-based Dell Computers aren't being totally altruistic when they criticize voter suppression laws that are designed to make it harder for African-Americans to vote. African-Americans buy Dell laptops, book flights on Delta and purchase smartphones made by Apple — and corporations, mindful of their bottom line, know that, which is why they sometimes do the right thing for selfish reasons.
"If workers skew more heavily Democratic, companies will often listen," Bump notes. "Combine that with a corporate leadership that itself is more likely to skew left than in years past, and you get a business community that's less interested in aligning overwhelmingly with the GOP than it had been in the past…. I still think it's the case that policy influence happens one-on-one, but the senator does make a compelling counterpoint."
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Where is Ted Cruz in the middle of Texas' growing humanitarian ... ›
Ted 'Cancun' Cruz gets destroyed by Trevor Noah after starting ... ›
Ted Cruz spews disgust at 'waiters and waitresses' who he says don ... ›
Did Ted Cruz just accidentally drop a major confession? - Alternet.org ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Scientific Evidence Doesn't Support Global Warming, Sen. Ted Cruz ... ›
AOC rejects Cruz support over Wall Street chaos: 'You almost had ... ›
Ted Cruz's Cancún Trip: Family Texts Detail His Political Blunder ... ›
---
https://www.alternet.org/2021/04/anti-corporate-gop/
no lnx twt
how 'anti-corporate rhetoric' captured 'the paranoid, vindictive post-Trump GOP': conservative
Alex Henderson April 27, 2021
Historically speaking, right-wing Republicans are strident defenders of corporate America. Economist Milton Friedman argued that corporations had no obligation to anyone but their shareholders, and the late talk radio host Rush Limbaugh equated anti-corporatism with anti-capitalism — that is, before he flip-flopped and endorsed former President Donald Trump's pseudo-populism. And in 2021, railing against "woke corporations" is a badge of honor for Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri and other Trumpian GOP wingnuts. Never Trump conservative Amanda Carpenter takes an in-depth look at the strident "anti-corporate rhetoric" coming from the far right in an article published by The Bulwark on April 27 — stressing that it underscores the "paranoid, vindictive" nature of the "post-Trump GOP."
The message of Republicans who have been railing against "woke capitalism," according to Carpenter, is "Screw with our elections…. and we'll screw your trusts, tax cuts, loopholes and credits."
"Republicans try to pretend that their bullying is something more principled — that it's anti-woke corporate populism — but in reality, it's little more than grievance weaponized as policy," Carpenter explains. "But don't laugh. The way things are going, this could be the next grand unifying theory for the GOP."
Carpenter points out that everyone from Hawley to Fox News' Tucker Carlson to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has been lambasting Corporate America for being "woke." Cruz, who once employed Carpenter as his communications director, came up with the hashtag #GoWokeGoBroke.
"The GOP's clash with business over the last few weeks is different in two ways from what came before," Carpenter observes. "First, on the business side, this case is different because the 'activism' in question — the holding back of donations, the criticism — is not related to some matter of policy or party, but rather, to election administration and the preservation of democracy itself. And on the GOP's side, this case is different because it is based solely upon the politics of retaliation."
The Republicans who have been raging against corporations, Carpenter notes, are upset because the companies have acknowledged Joe Biden as the legitimate president of the United States — rejecting Trump's false claims of voter fraud — and spoken out against GOP voter suppression bills.
"Republicans are proposing punitive action in direct response to political speech from companies about the post-election Big Lie, the attempts to overturn the 2020 election, and Georgia's recently enacted voting law," Carpenter observes. "Threatening to use the power of the state to crack down on that speech is repulsive…. This anti-corporate rhetoric has captured the paranoid, vindictive imagination of the post-Trump GOP."
By "post-Trump GOP," Carpenter isn't saying that the former president is no longer influential in his party. Most Republicans are afraid to say one word against him. Rather, Carpenter means "post-Trump White House GOP" or "post-Trump presidency GOP." And she stresses that the GOP, following Trump's presidency, has maintained his mean-spirited nature.
"There is a culture clash underway," Carpenter writes. "Hawley and the rest of the anti-woke crusaders are saying that Corporate America must heed their 'values' or get smashed — just like Hawley's rioters smashed up the Capitol when the Democrats didn't agree with their 'values' about 'election integrity.' It's all the same brute idea. Comply with my party, or get the fist."
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
GOP's 'anti-democratic' rhetoric on HR 1 signals a disturbing battle ... ›
The basic deal between corporate America and the GOP is alive and ... ›
Here's why 'anti-corporate rhetoric' from Republicans is a 'hollow ... ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
Robert Reich: Don't Buy the GOP's Phony Anti-Corporate Turn - In ... ›
Will the GOP Rift with Big Business Lead to Higher Corporate Taxes ... ›
The GOP Is No Longer the Pro-Business Party ›
---
// gaetz sees role as soc media tweeter own the libs punish those losers who hate am?
dynamic duo; st'd GOP hardball retaliation for corps that step out of line?
https://www.alternet.org/2021/04/mlb-georgia/
---
Cruz melts down over voting rights bill because people on 'welfare' might vote
David Edwards Raw Story
March 28, 2021
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) answered questions about the border and voting rights on Sunday by repeatedly accusing Democrats of enabling child rape.
Cruz made the remarks on Fox News after host Maria
---
Cruz sparks outrage over his cruel attack on Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
David Badash The New Civil Rights Movement
February 26, 2021
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) delivered what many are calling "unhinged" remarks at CPAC, the Conservative Political Action Conference, Friday.
During his speech he once again appeared to try to...
==
https://www.alternet.org/2021/03/ted-cruz-merrick-garland/
---
chris hayes sez victim of new GOP trump model that MOC is not about governing/serving constit but just podcast/twt/own the libs
---
compensatory cpac rant ie pound the table? FREEEE_DUMB! wow combines star wars and nazi ref
https://www.alternet.org/2021/02/ted-cruz-speech/
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), fresh from near-universal condemnation over his Cancun vacation during the Lone Star State's ice and snow storms, power outages, and water shortage, spoke at CPAC Friday morning in an apparent effort to win back some of his lost approval rating.
He screamed for nearly a minute.
"These are dark days and the media tells us this is the new Galactic Empire forever and 1000 years, but already Joe Biden and the radicals in his administration they are already overshooting, they are already going too far, their policies don't work, they are disasters, they are bad, they are destroying jobs, they are stripping our freedom," Cruz said, screaming out unsubstantiated falsehoods.
"There is a natural pendulum to politics and the country will come back to sanity and mark my words, 2022 is going to be a fantastic election year, and so is 2024, as we stand together and defend liberty, defend the Constitution, defend the Bill of Rights of every American. In the immortal words of William Wallace, 'Freedom!'" he screamed.
Watch:
---
https://www.alternet.org/2021/02/cruz-cancun/
pranked by sen?!
---
running hard trump 2.0 2024? no choice but 2x 3x down? recall he passes himself off as an intellectual, so does not bode well for GOP //chomsky most dang org in hist.
https://www.alternet.org/2021/01/ted-cruz-2650069802
when President Joe Biden announced his intent to rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was one of the first Republican lawmakers to publicly slam the newly-elected president's decision. Echoing a line from former President Donald Trump, Cruz claimed to be protecting the interests of Pittsburgh over Paris. Almost immediately after he shared his statement via Twitter, critics began firing back.
Now, according to CBS-Pittsburgh, local official Rich Fitzgerald has a message for the embattled Texas senator. When asked about Cruz's remarks, Fitzgerald did not mince words when he expressed his level of disdain for the Republican lawmaker. He also offered a clear message to Cruz: stay out of Pittsburgh business.
"Outrageous. He doesn't know what he's talking about. He's been a climate denier. He was a COVID denier. We believe in science around here," Fitzgerald told KDKA. "We'll run what we need to do here, Senator, and keep your nose out of our business."
Allegheny County Executive gave us this answer when we asked for his reaction to Senator Cruz’s statement about the… https://t.co/5omQ18KP9j
— Chris Hoffman (@Chris Hoffman)1611261666.0
Fitzgerald's remarks come just one day after Cruz released a full statement about Biden rejoining the Paris Climate Accord. On Wednesday, Jan. 20, Cruz tweeted, "By rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, President Biden indicates he's more interested in the views of the citizens of Paris than in the jobs of the citizens of Pittsburgh. This agreement will do little to affect the climate and will harm the livelihoods of Americans."
By rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, President Biden indicates he’s more interested in the views of the citize… https://t.co/cFjZu8k2z7
— Senator Ted Cruz (@Senator Ted Cruz)1611186621.0
On Thursday, Cruz tweeted another message that suggested he was standing by his previous remarks.
Who do you stand with? Paris or Pittsburgh? If you support blue-collar union workers, if you stand for jobs, get… https://t.co/pRVH9vRT2D
— Ted Cruz (@Ted Cruz)1611253558.0
However, Fitzgerald argued that Biden made the right decision by rejoining the accord as he explained the benefits of addressing environmental issues.
Fitzgerald added, "We have green initiatives that have happened around here, not just with our governmental side of things, but our private sector."
He continued, "It is also improving our quality of life here. So companies continue to grow here."
"Extremists who don't want to do anything, Senator Cruz, who have their head in the sand. The flat-earth society that basically doesn't believe in science," Fitzgerald said, adding, "You have other people who want to shut everything down tomorrow."
FROM YOUR SITE ARTICLES
Watch: Viral video calls for Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley to be ... ›
Ted Cruz helped Texas fracking billionaires reap millions in COVID ... ›
Ted Cruz Has Been Ridiculed for Years by His Former College ... ›
Ted Cruz spews disgust at 'waiters and waitresses' who he says don ... ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
How Ted Cruz's attempt to overturn election ended in violence at the ... ›
Editorial: Resign, Senator Cruz. Your lies cost lives ... ›
Elected Officials Directory: U.S. Senator Ted Cruz | The Texas Tribune ›
---
HNN
https://www.alternet.org/2021/01/conservative-movement/
One of the challenges in trying to understand what has happened to a conservative movement that has clearly become detached from reality, is that for decades we've heard that some conservatives needed to be taken seriously as intellectuals. These chosen conservatives are often anointed as "serious" due their academic pedigree (usually Ivy Leaguers). But the equating of impressive degrees with intellectual seriousness has an especially bad track record for conservatives. Time and again when it comes to the integrity, honest analysis, and basic grasp of facts that are the basic standards of any "serious" scholar, they have failed.
Let's make a list of today's conservatives who currently get the "serious" designation by virtue of their elite education and for not being Louis Gohmert. In light of last week's conspiracy-driven, right-wing attack on Congress, Senators Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz stand out for their unrelenting intellectual dishonesty. Both Hawley (Yale, JD) and Cruz (Princeton BA, Harvard JD) took to the floor of the Senate just hours after right-wing collaborators had vandalized the Capitol and threatened their colleagues out of an unmoored conviction that the 2020 election had been stolen. Multiple recounts, election certifications, and dozens of court cases later, these two Ivy Leaguers shamelessly continued to raise "concerns" about the election's basic fairness. Yet, when Hawley lost his book contract on the dangers of "big tech" with Simon & Schuster over the weekend, the Washington Post's Fred Hiatt expressed a hesitant reservation at a publisher deciding it didn't like the author instead of the manuscript....Up until that point, Simon & Schuster "obviously believed" that Hawley's manuscript had "merit" and Hiatt assumes that it would have made "a useful contribution to public debate on a vital subject." Especially after Hawley's surreally dark turn last Wednesday night, why should we assume that a "useful contribution" was forthcoming from him on any debate? Hawley had led investigations into Google and Facebook, to be sure. But certainly part of the answer is that Hawley was seen a "serious" conservative. Ana Marie Cox's recent Washington Post article on Ted Cruz meanwhile stands out for her refreshing willingness to suggest that perhaps, just perhaps, Cruz, despite his reputation for smarts, is "devastatingly average." Mimi Swartz has also started to peel the protective cover of seriousness back. Cruz used "his pseudo-intellectualism and his Ivy League pedigree as a cudgel." And now, she adds, "Any decent soul might ask: If you are so smart, how come you are using that fancy education to subvert the Constitution you've purported to love? Shouldn't you have known better?" Assuming that an Ivy League degree translates into conservatives knowing better has been the problem all along. Swartz adds correctly that Cruz "did know better; he just didn't care." And because he was tabbed as a "serious" conservative, he didn't have to.
Senator Tom Cotton (Harvard BA, JD) stood out last Wednesday by not joining his fellow Ivy Leaguers in their objections on the Senate floor; but he'd already shown his flair for dangerous hyperbole and distortion last summer when the New York Times ran the Senator's opinion piece calling for the troops to march on Black Lives Matter protestors. Cotton cherry-picked the most extreme examples of unrest to malign the overwhelmingly peaceful protests happening on the streets. As any scholar will tell you, cherry-picking the evidence is both lazy and untrustworthy. Not a good look for someone posing as a "serious" conservative.
And one could go on. What really connects these elite-educated Senators is precisely their lack of seriousness intellectually. It's not new, however. Going back to the 1960s, alarmed that the conservative movement was falling into the grips of the delusional John Birch Society, William F. Buckley (Yale, BA) was anointed as that generation's "serious" conservative. While Buckley was public intellectual rather than an office-holder, his political influence was considerable and timely for the conservative movement. In particular, Buckley disavowed the Birchers, whose view of the world was rife with conspiracy theories and seething anti-communism. Some Birchers were convinced that Dwight Eisenhower himself was a communist plant, so the bar was pretty low here for a "serious" conservative to clear. The soft bigotry of low expectations, I guess. But Buckley also wrote in 1957 that the white South was right to oppose the civil rights movement because, he wrote, "for the time being, it is the advanced race." This was, he continued, "a fact . . . that cannot be hidden by ever-so-busy egalitarians and anthropologists." While over his long career Buckley did continue to reexamine the state of conservatism – indeed he had grave reservations about the war in Iraq – his entry into the ranks of "serious" conservatism was by virtue of his patrician background and elite education. Once in, like the "serious" conservatives of today, he had permission to be either wildly wrong or occasionally right.
in between Buckley's heyday and the current crop of Ivy League-right wingers, we had the era of William Bennett and Newt Gingrich in the 1980s and 1990s. Bennett (Williams College BA, University of Texas PhD, Harvard JD) harrumphed his way to becoming the nation's high school principal, or officially, the Secretary of Education, under Ronald Reagan. In the early 1990s he published The Book of Virtues: A Treasure of Great Moral Stories. It started with a quote from Plato's Republic, and invoked Aristotle in the first paragraph, so you knew it was serious. The book included lessons on the importance of saying "please" and a Laura Richards poem, "In which we which learn to sit still." That this was heralded as an "important" book can only be attributed to the fact that Bennett had earned his stripes as a "serious" conservative. Newsweek practically sighed with gratitude: "Maybe this is just what the country needs."
And then there was Newt Gingrich (PhD, Tulane). After having been denied tenure at West Georgia College, Gingrich eventually won a seat in the House of Representatives in 1978. He injected into the increasingly conservative Republican Party the slashing political style we all recognize now. Democrats were not simply the opponent, they were "radical" and "traitors." Pundits and columnists of the 1990s raised their collective eyebrow over Gingrich's style even as they soberly reminded their readers that Gingrich had a doctorate and had been a college professor. A 1995 New York Times profile noted that he compared himself to, "Washington, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Churchill, and De Gaulle." But it also noted that while Gingrich "came to congress in 1979 as a 35 year-old history professor," he often used "hyperbole, absolutes and distortion to make his points, and he can be careless with facts and numbers." While perhaps these are just tools of the trade in politics, they make one unserious as a scholar. But Professor Gingrich has dined out for years now on his farcical reputation as a "serious" conservative.
Like Gingrich, today's elite-educated conservative politicians continue to get a pass when it comes to the basic ethical standards of real scholars, especially the moral obligation to be true to the evidence and facts. Ironically, toward the end of that long day of sedition last week, this principle was articulated poignantly by another conservative, one known more for his religion and wealth than his academic credentials. Mitt Romney (Harvard, JD/MBA), looking exhausted and shaken, pleaded with his fellow Republican senators, "The best way we can show respect for the voters who are upset is by telling them the truth." Sadly, Hawley, Cruz, Cotton, et al., will likely continue to spread lies to keep their conservative base shored up. Their seriousness lies in the danger of their politics, but they themselves are not "serious" conservatives.
---
ggl 8 23
https://fedsoc.org › contributors › ted-cruzTed Cruz | The Federalist Society
Ted Cruz | The Federalist Society Hon. Ted Cruz United States Senator, Texas Ted Cruz represents 28 million Texans in the U.S. Senate as a passionate fighter for limited government and economic growth. He has authored 39 legislative measures signed into law.
https://www.fedsoc.org › contributors › ted-cruz › commentaryTed Cruz | Commentary | The Federalist Society
On March 26, 1999, the Federalist Society co-sponsored the Stranahan National Issues Forum with the... Apr 20 2021 Video. Short Videos Leave a Decent Comment: Section 230 & the Fight for the Future of the Internet Ted Cruz ... Ted Cruz, Ashkhen Kazaryan, Rachel Bovard, and Jeff Kosseff.
https://fedsoc.org › events › litigation-update-fec-v-cruz-for-senateLitigation Update: FEC v. Cruz for Senate - Federalist Society
Cruz for Senate Jan 21 2022 Friday 1:00 p.m. EDT Sponsors: Free Speech & Election Law Practice Group • Litigation Practice Group Teleforum Listen & Download % buffered 00:00 Download
https://fedsoc.org › case › cruz-v-arizonaCruz v. Arizona | The Federalist Society
Facts of the Case. In 2005, a jury convicted John Montenegro Cruz of first-degree murder for the 2003 killing of a Tucson police officer and sentenced Cruz to death. The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed Cruz's conviction and sentence, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied his petition for a writ of certiorari. In 2012, Cruz filed a petition in ...
The Federalist Society And The Capitol Attack: What Is To Be Done?
Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), two members of what conservative law professor John O. McGinnis once dubbed " the Federalist Society caucus " — a group of senators with...
https://www.bostonglobe.com › news › politics › 2016 › 04 › 27 › ted-cruz-may-despised-washington-but-has-network-influential-friendships-through-harvard-federalist-society › bqyatwlxc39GqxVjtunfSI › story.htmlTed Cruz found kindred spirits at Harvard's Federalist Society
Apr 27, 2016Ted Cruz found kindred spirits at Harvard's Federalist Society By Tracy Jan Globe Staff,April 27, 2016, 9:46 p.m. 36 Ted Cruz, at an election night party at Harvard Law School's Hastings Hall in...
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Federalist_SocietyFederalist Society - Wikipedia
The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies ( FedSoc) is an American conservative and libertarian legal organization that advocates for a textualist and originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
The Federalist Society And The Capitol Attack: What Is To Be ... - Substack
Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), two members of what conservative law professor John O. McGinnis once dubbed " the Federalist Society caucus " — a group of senators with strong, longstanding ties to FedSoc — led the charge in the Senate against certification of the election results, just hours after the horrific Capitol...
Ted Cruz, the Absolutist | The New Yorker
Ted Cruz, the Republican junior senator from Texas, has heard the line about how the Party needs to become more moderate to win Presidential elections. "It is amazing that the wisdom of the...
https://lawliberty.org › meet-the-federalist-society-caucusMeet the Federalist Society Caucus - Law & Liberty
With the election of Josh Hawley from Missouri, there are now four such senators, including Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, and Tom Cotton of Arkansas. The Federalist Society Senate Caucus, as it were, is also an important development. It brings a kind of intellectual firepower to the Senate that Republicans have rarely had.
---