Skip to content

Month: June 2022

Free-fire zone America

Uvalde massacre response was a cluster

Surveillance footage from inside Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, May 24. (via Texas Tribune)

“Mistakes were made” is almost as cruel a joke as “thoughts and prayers.” Yet it remains a staple of post-tragedy explainifying. In Uvalde, Texas, post-shooting investigations and recriminations continue. Nineteen children and two teachers died.

Three minutes after the gunman began shooting children and teachers at  Robb Elementary on May 24, officers arriving on scene had enough equipment and firepower to storm the classrooms. But didn’t. They waited an hour and 14 minutes.

“The only thing stopping a hallway of dedicated officers from entering Room 111 and 112 was the on-scene commander,” Steven McCraw, the director of the Department of Public Safety, told a special Senate committee in Austin on Tuesday. McGraw called the police response “an abject failure.”

“Mistakes were made. It should have never happened that way. And we can’t allow that ever to happen in our profession. This set our profession back a decade is what it did.”

Ruben Ruiz, a police officer for the school district, was on scene at the school and received a call from his wife, teacher Eva Mireles. Mireles called Ruiz to say “she had been shot and was dying.”

“And what happened to him, is he tried to move forward into the hallway,” McCraw said. “He was detained and they took his gun away from him and escorted him off the scene.”

The more we learn, the worse it gets.

Texas Tribune:

Revelations have trickled out in the press: The New York Times has described officers’ doubts about the decision to wait; breakdowns in communications and tactics; and the fact that officers held off from the confrontation even though they knew people were injured, and possibly dying, inside. The San Antonio Express-News reported that there is no evidence that officers tried the doors on rooms 111 and 112 — contradicting a key assertion by the Uvalde schools police chief, Pete Arredondo, who told The Texas Tribune that officers tried the doors, found them locked and had to wait for a master key to unlock them. On Monday evening, the Austin American-Statesman and KVUE-TV revealed that the officers, in effect, had more than enough firepower, equipment and motivation to breach the classrooms.

Arrendondo, the commander, “decided to put the lives of officers ahead of the lives of children,” McGraw said. Arrendondo delayed confronting the gunman for over an hour to wait “for a key that was never needed.”

Everybody makes mistakes. Most do not cost others their lives. Victims not already dead bled to death on the classroom floor.

Outside, “armed to the teeth, the good guys are just standing around,” writes the Washington Post’s David Von Drehle. Compounding the problem, Drehle adds, “officers were quickly on the scene from at least four agencies: the Uvalde school district police, the Uvalde city police, the Uvalde county sheriff and — eventually — the U.S. Border Patrol. Texas Rangers arrived at some point, as did the FBI. That’s six agencies in a city of about 16,000 people.”

Drehle continues:

This proliferation of jurisdictions is a distinctly American problem. According to one ballpark guess, the United States is home to around 18,000 distinct police agencies. Sweden has one. Canada spans a continent, like the United States. Canada comprises local and provincial governments gathered into a federated whole, like the United States. But Canada has fewer than 200 agencies.

That’s right: The United States has close to 100 police agencies for each one in Canada.

Perhaps that’s because we have so many guns in this country. More guns in private hands, more guns in the hands of police. More freedom for us. More profits for gun marketers.

We seem unable to stop the proliferation of any of it. Even in small ways. The gun control bill advancing in the Senate “falls short of the sweeping gun control measures Democrats have long demanded.” The gun lobby is pushing back against efforts to close the “boyfriend loophole” and managed to weaken language in the bill to close it.

At this point, we’ll just accept “eight percent of the hundred percent package we need,” says longtime gun-control advocate, Cliff Schecter, in a commentary. (Subscribe here.)

Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans refused to accept Steven Dettelbach, President Biden’s nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, deadlocking 11-11 on the nomination days ago. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) filed a discharge petition to bring the nomination to the floor where confirmation is expected.

Huffington Post:

The ATF hasn’t had a permanent director in seven years. The position, which has long faced opposition from gun rights groups who don’t want anyone confirmed to run the agency charged with regulating them, has only had one Senate-confirmed director in 16 years.

Ahead of Dettelbach’s committee vote, chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said a vote to confirm him is a vote to make the nation safer. He noted that Dettelbach, who has a two-decade career as a Justice Department prosecutor, has been endorsed by virtually every major law enforcement organization in the country.

“Seven years, no leadership,” Durbin said. “For stability, for responsiveness, for accountability and for agency morale, this is long overdue.”

Out of control equals freedom in this country. Freedom to kill and be killed.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com

“You’re a puppet”

via GIPHY

The right wingers are still pushing the silly story that the Colbert production team staged an “insurrection” by filming in the Capitol. They are just trolling, of course. But it’s exceedingly stupid.

Colbert responded:

Stephen Colbert opened his monologue on Monday’s broadcast by addressing the recent news of a field production team for his late-night program being detained at the Capitol while filming a comedy segment involving the acerbic puppet Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. With all the actual right-wing puppets in Congress, one would think Triumph would be welcomed with open arms.

“Triumph offered to go down to D.C. to interview some Congress people to highlight some January 6 hearings,” Colbert continued. “I said, ‘Sure, if you can get anyone to agree to talk to you. Because, and please don’t take this as an insult, you’re a puppet.”

Here is his monologue:

We are living in dangerous — and stupid — times.

Rabid, racist terrorists

Sorry, that’s what we’re dealing with

You may not be a rabid, racist terrorist if you were in that crowd, but you were absolutely an eager enabler.

Here’s a thread from that rally before the runoff election in December 2020. You’re going to tell me that this man should be president again?

Hearing Highlights day 4

This hearing choked me up. I can’t believe people in this country are so brainwashed and cruel that they would do to anyone what they did to these election workers.

The hearing proved how openly and persistently Trump and his henchmen pressured officials to lie and cheat. They promised proof and they never produced it. In fact, these officials proved that Trump was a liar.

It also showed how Trump incited his followers to threaten violence against those same officials — and innocent election workers just doing their job. The violence of January 6th was the culmination of a ratcheting up of violence all over the country in service of Trump’s Big Lie.

The fact that these people had to put up with the threats from Trump’s army of assholes is just too much:

https://twitter.com/flexghost1/status/1539312241681371144

A Trump documentary from 2020 emerges

Why didn’t we know about this before?

I don’t want to get my hopes up about this revealing anything new. It may have just been a celebration of the Trump family. Still, it’s intriguing:

The House select committee investigating Jan. 6 sent a subpoena last week to ALEX HOLDER, a documentary filmmaker who was granted extensive access to President DONALD TRUMP and his inner circle, and who shot interviews with the then-president both before and after Jan. 6. The existence of this footage is previously unreported.

A source familiar with the project told Playbook on Monday night that Holder began filming on the campaign trail in September 2020 for a project on Trump’s reelection campaign. Over the course of several months, Holder had substantial access to Trump, Trump’s adult children and VP MIKE PENCE, both in the White House and on the campaign trail.

According to the subpoena, which was obtained exclusively by Playbook, the committee wants three main things from Holder:

(1) Raw footage from Jan. 6.

(2) Raw footage of interviews from September 2020 to present with Trump, Pence, DONALD TRUMP JR., IVANKA TRUMP, ERIC TRUMP and JARED KUSHNER.

(3) Raw footage “pertaining to discussions of election fraud or election integrity surrounding the November 2020 presidential election.”

Holder is expected to fully cooperate with the committee in an interview scheduled for Thursday. Read the full subpoena

It appears that the committee believes Trump was planning his coup before the election. (We know he planned to say that the election was stolen if he didn’t win…) maybe there’s something here.

This is curious:

Ouch

Trolling on Truth Social looks like fun

Sure, why not? Newsom is running for re-election. So is Ron DeSantis.

Eastman goes under the bus

He had to know it would happen

This exclusive by Rolling Stone has Trump and his cronies abandoning the lawyer who gave them the legal rationale they were looking for to stage a coup. It figures. But I have to wonder if that’s such a smart thing to do. Eastman knows things ….

With the Justice Department and Jan. 6 committee taking a close look at Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, he and his cronies could certainly use a fall guy, and it looks like they’ve found their patsy: right-wing lawyer John Eastman.

Eastman worked for Trump as the attorney devised legal strategies to overturn the election to keep the outgoing president in power. But, in recent weeks, Trump has confided to those close to him that he sees no reason to publicly defend Eastman, two people familiar with the matter tell Rolling Stone. The ex-president is also deeply annoyed with Eastman and all the negative “attention” and media coverage that the lawyer’s work has brought Trump and his inner sanctum, including during the ongoing Jan. 6 hearings on Capitol Hill.

Furthermore, to those who’ve spoken Trump about Eastman in recent months, the ex-president has repeated an excuse he often uses when backed into a corner, as investigators confront him with an associates’ misdeeds: He has privately insisted he “hardly” or “barely” knows Eastman, despite the fact that he counseled Trump on taking a string of extra-legal measures in a bid to stay in power and wrote the so-called “coup memo,” which laid out the facsimile of a legal argument for reversing Trump’s election defeat.

Behind closed doors, Trump will occasionally ask questions about Eastman’s fortunes, including bluntly inquiring: “Is [John] going to jail?” according to a source who has heard the former president say this. But publicly, Trump has stayed silent. Over the past several months, Trump has been strongly advised by lawyers and several associates not to openly discuss Eastman or his work — and to personally avoid the man altogether, according to three sources familiar with the matter. At this time, Trump, his legal advisers, and various political counselors would prefer to cut ties with Eastman and keep their distance, in a perhaps vain attempt to build a firewall between the lawyer who enthusiastically pitched strategies for delegitimizing the 2020 election outcome and the ex-president who repeatedly sought his help.

[…]

But the idea that Eastman is becoming something of a fall guy for Trump and various Republicans’ efforts in 2020 and early 2021 is now so prevalent in influential conservative circles that it’s now being acknowledged by some of the former president’s favorite right-wing media stars.

“How many lawyers did Trump have? He had several…And John Eastman has turned into the fall guy,” Mark Levin, a Fox News and radio host, said on-air last week. “He’s a lawyer, he’s an advocate for the [former] president. Whether you agree with his legal judgment, his legal findings, or not, it’s what lawyers do.” (According to a New York Times report last year, Levin is indirectly responsible for landing Eastman in then-President Trump’s inner orbit — simply due to the fact that Trump had seen the attorney on a 2019 episode of Levin’s program.)

On Trump’s social media forum, Truth Social, the former president has remained silent about Eastman — even as he’s come to the defense of other aides and supporters now under scrutiny for their efforts to wage a coup against Joe Biden. In fact, Trump has “Truthed” about Elon Musk’s spat with Twitter, the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trial, and the PGA tour — but hasn’t posted even a fleeting defense of Eastman.

When the FBI arrested Trump’s former trade advisor Peter Navarro for defying a subpoena from the committee, the former president thundered with outrage that “our great trade genius, Professor Peter Navarro, was just handcuffed, shackled, and put in jail.” Ginni Thomas, whose efforts to overthrow Biden’s victory in Arizona, received similar encouragement from Trump when The Washington Post uncovered her emails urging legislators there to ignore the voters’ will and proclaim Trump the state’s victor. Thomas, Trump wrote after the Post story, is a “Great American Patriot, the wonderful wife of Justice Clarence Thomas” who “fought for Voter Integrity in the Great State of Arizona.”

On Trump’s personal website, where the former president hosted written statements after his ouster from Twitter and before the launch of Truth Social, he’s been similarly mum. Eastman’s name appears on the site only twice, in hosted copies of the Supreme Court election briefs he authored in 2020.

Despite multiple stories about the January 6th committee’s interest in Eastman, however, Trump’s thumbs have remained unmoved on the subject of his onetime attorney’s fate. On Truth Social, where the former game-show host has offered a running commentary on the committee’s hearings, Trump has not once mentioned Eastman who, as president, he had once hailed on Twitter as a “Brilliant Constitutional Lawyer.”

Trump aides have remained similarly quiet on the subject of Eastman. His spokeswoman Liz Harrington has not mentioned the campaign lawyer since a tweet on January 6, when she hailed his speech at the rally on the mall “explain the rigged voting machine system that corrupt politicians kept in place for the GA runoffs.”

Maybe Eastman will go down with the ship. He wouldn’t be the first. And Trump would surely pardon him if he steals 2024. (He’d owe him for plotting the dry run…) But if he doesn’t want to lose everything he may just decide that Donald Trump isn’t worth it. He is the most disloyal man on the planet.

Normalizing political violence

Are Troubles are coming?

“From the 1920s through the 1940s, while fascism pervaded Europe, hundreds of right-wing extremist groups operated in the United States, primarily in Midwestern states like Michigan,” writes Salaina Catalano in her 2018 dissertation, “When It Happened Here: The Transnational Development of American Fascism, 1920-1945.”
Photo: “Nazis Hail George Washington as First Fascist.” Source: Life 4:10, March 7, 1938, 17.

“Remarkable moment,” observes Plum Line’s Greg Sargent:

@JoeNBC flatly states that “fascism” is rising in the GOP, and that Republicans must condemn the Eric Greitens “RINO hunting” ad, or it will get worse.

“Scholars of democratic breakdown agree that what GOP leaders do now is critical,” Sargent tweets, referencing a column written last week after retired judge J. Michael Luttig’s “foreboding” testimony before the Jan. 6 investigating committee on Thursday. Donald Trump and his allies pose a “clear and present danger to American democracy,” Luttig warned:

Two of those experts, Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way, professors of government and politics, recently argued that we’re heading into a “coming age of instability.” This is not a claim of pending “civil war.” It’s more subtle: a future of smoldering conflict akin to “the Troubles” in Ireland.

“Such a scenario would be marked by frequent constitutional crises, including contested or stolen elections,” they wrote, predicting our elections might devolve into periodic referendums on whether the United States will be “democratic or authoritarian.”

This portends “heightened political violence,” they suggested, including assassinations, bombings and violent confrontations in the streets, “often tolerated and even incited by politicians.”

How GOP leaders respond to the moment will help determine whether that happens, the scholars noted. It bodes badly that GOP leaders rejected a bipartisan Jan. 6 accounting and have “refused to unambiguously reject violence.”

A strong stance against violence by party leaders “would make all the difference in the world” to what happens next, Levitsky said.

Luttig concurred. If they don’t, we are headed for “protracted democratic instability.”

“Here’s what troubles me,” tweets Sargent. “It’s easy to get seduced by these vivid, damning revelations” in the Jan. 6 hearings. “But in the background, even as headlines explode around the country, scores of pro-coup GOP candidacies continue.”

And they are “packing.”

Trumpists think intimidation and threats of violence work for them. Appearing in ads holding weapons is a tribal signifier on the right. A mark of manliness, virility. When Republican candidates start posing barechested like Benito Mussolini and Vladimir Putin, brace yourselves.

The best Donald Trump can do is tweet photoshops.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com

First they came for abortion funding

And then what happened, grandma?

Photo 2019 by Lorie Shaull via Flickr (CC BY 2.0).

Like Jack Russell terriers, conservative zealots are.

So when opponents of women’s autonomy began attacking the right to an abortion guaranteed in Roe v. Wade (1973), they did not immediately go for the big enchilada. They started nibbling away at the edges. The Hyde Amendment (1976), the Global Gag Rule (1984), and more. After the assassination of Dr. George Tiller in 2009 came TRAP laws (starting 2011) and bans after 20 weeks of pregnancy (2014). Planned Parenthood has a list.

The U.S. Supreme Court is widely expected to overturn Roe by the end of June. Opponents of women’s autonomy will achieve their decades-old goal.

You don’t think zealots’ labors will end there, do you? See: The Heritage Foundation goes full Gilead.

No, the zealots are just getting warmed up, writes Susan Rinkunas for Jezebel:

The country’s oldest, largest anti-abortion group has unveiled absolutely chilling model legislation that proposes not only near-total state bans on abortion—even for a pregnant person who’s suicidal—but would criminalize sharing information about abortion pills online or by phone. It previews a worsening hell of criminalization, state surveillance, and maternal deaths.

Abortion rights advocate and Alabama clinic worker Robin Marty highlighted the model legislation on Monday on Twitter. It’s essentially a boilerplate bill that would help Republican lawmakers propose pre-written legislation in their respective state legislatures—which they undoubtedly will.

In a press release dated June 15, the National Right to Life Committee said that if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade—as it looks likely to do by the end of June—states should pass its model law that would ban abortion unless it’s immediately necessary to prevent the death of the pregnant woman, or if “a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” Literally anything short of those scenarios? Sorry, no abortion. (It doesn’t count, the organization says, if a pregnant woman is openly suicidal.) If a pregnant person somehow qualifies for an abortion, the bill says the abortion should be “performed in the manner which provided the best opportunity for the unborn child to survive.”

The model law would ban abortions except to prevent the death of the woman, or if “a delay will create serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.”

“With this model law, we a laying out a roadmap for the right-to-life movement so that, in a post-Roe society, we can protect many mothers and their children from the tragedy of abortion,” Carol Tobias, president of NRLC said in a statement on Wednesday. The NRLC release claims “the model law ensures that no criminal or civil penalty will be imposed on a pregnant woman,” nevermind that more than 1,300 people have faced criminalization for their pregnancy outcomes between 2006 and 2020.

Conservatives don’t simply wish to roll back the 20th century. They’re headed for the 19th after that.

“The Comstock Law of 1873 made it illegal to disseminate information about birth control and abortifacients,” Rinkunas reminds readers.

https://twitter.com/robinmarty/status/1538913668376760320

Then come the chastity belts.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Request a copy of For The Win, 4th Edition, my free, countywide get-out-the-vote planning guide for county committees at ForTheWin.us.
If in a position to Play to win in 2022 (see post first), contact tpostsully at gmail dot com

The Heritage Foundation goes full Gilead

Maybe they can re-open the lunatic asylums for this purpose

If you were wondering where the radical right is going in the post-Roe world, here it is:

[A]s we await a likely Supreme Court decision overturning Roe, here is a sign of what will follow: A Heritage Foundation mediocrity touting a “thoughtful proposal” to commit women who have abortions to “mandatory psychiatric custody”

I have not seen any polling on this but I strongly suspect “mandatory psychiatric custody” for women who have abortions would be pretty unpopular and would suggest that perhaps Democrats would do well to sound the alarm about this consequence of Republican rule.

btw this isn’t some random dude endorsing “mandatory psychiatric custody” for women, it’s a Director at the Heritage Foundation — the most important right-wing think-tank of the last 50 years.

Every Republican candidate should be asked about this.

[A]lso just a casual reminder that the Republican Party cannot be the party of small government if it is also the party of involuntary psychiatric custody for women who make decisions it doesn’t like, and journalists who persist in describing it as the former are lying.

One reason our political/electoral environment tends to be dominated by things like right-wing lies about CRT and crime is that our biggest media companies are conservative.

Another is that conservatives constantly peddle that BS, and progressives don’t bother saying true things

Originally tweeted by Jamison Foser (@jamisonfoser) on June 20, 2022.

He’s not exaggerating:

Sure, that’s fine.

Here’s how some asylums handled the crazy women in the past. No reason it can’t work again:

In the 19th century, women who exhibited sexual desire and strong emotions were diagnosed with the medical condition “hysteria.” From 1968 to 1870, the formative years of the Athens Lunatic Asylum, 132 female patients were deemed insane due to similarly “issues,” including “menstrual derangements.” The asylum’s treatment for these women included freezing, shocking, kicking, and in some cases, lobotomizing said patients to rid them of their sickness. One such patient, Margaret Schilling, is said to still haunt the asylum. In an attempt to escape, Schilling had hid in the attic, and ultimately died of starvation there. They say the stain her decomposing corpse left behind on the floor can’t be scrubbed clean.