Skip to content

Month: February 2023

Fox’s 500 lb gorilla

I know I’m probably paying way to much attention to Tucker Carlson lately but he’s an especially dangerous force in our politics and half the time he’s an Orbanesque white nationalist and the rest of the time he’s just nuts. I don’t know quite what to make of it but I feel instinctively that we shouldn’t look away. There’s something going on here and it’s not good.

Philip Bump looked at the numbers and it’s worth taking note:

In the right-wing media universe, the 500-pound gorilla is now and has long been Fox News. There have been challengers, certainly, including some robust ones. Breitbart’s effectiveness in pulling rhetoric from the fringe into the mainstream conversation about a decade ago, for example, and cable news start-ups like One America and Newsmax more recently. But Fox News has weathered such challenges through co-option, heft, institutional support and combinations of the three. So, when Republicans are asked where they get their news, they are most likely to say Fox.

And within the Fox News universe, the 500-pound gorilla is Tucker Carlson.

It used to be the case that the most-watched host on the network was Sean Hannity. His prime-time opinion show (using Fox’s gauzy differentiation from its purportedly objective news programming) was not only the top show on Fox but, from 2017 to 2020, the most-watched show on cable news overall.

But that was the era of Donald Trump, who operated in symbiosis with Hannity. After running neck-and-neck with Hannity in 2020, Carlson passed Hannity in annual average viewers the following year, a lead he held in 2022.

Carlson also generates more attention in general. In 2020, Carlson started generating more search interest on Google than Hannity, a lead he has maintained every month of President Biden’s tenure in office.

Carlson achieved this position in large part because he retains credibility as someone who wants to tear down the establishment. Hannity’s loyalty to Trump ensnared him in the new GOP firmament, leading the Fox host to line up behind Trump’s endorsed candidates for office and to reflexively defend the president (and former president) as needed. His effort to cater to his audience meant Trump loyalty. Carlson’s approach is different, picking up the rhetoric that propelled Trump to the White House — the entire system is corrupt and the elites are trying to destroy you — and deploying it against all comers.

His disparagement of the powers-that-be is often starkly — or obnoxiously — articulated in service of his us-vs.-them framework. He’s taken to describing a loosely aggregated group of international business and political leaders — the sorts of people who attend the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, for example — as “lizard overlords.” On Wednesday night, he suggested that this vague group was for some reason trying to limit the ability of people to access cash, a discussion that occurred over on-screen text reading: “IT’S LOOKING MORE LIKELY THAT WE WILL SEE THE DAY WHEN OUR LIZARD OVERLORDS BAN CASH.”

Carlson has a track record of incorrect predictions (like his recent insistence that there would be violent protests after the release of video showing the police beating of Tyre Nichols), but he never allows that to encumber him.

This reflexive opposition to the elites in power, and his willingness to move individuals into and out of that group as it becomes useful, has led Carlson to some unusual positions. His autocratic sympathies are unsubtle; he’s offered fawning interviews to leaders like Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro, people who contest the Western leaders Carlson disdains. He has explicitly rationalized the Russian invasion of Ukraine on multiple occasions, making his commentary a regular feature of state-run programming in Russia.

It’s hard to disentangle his support for Russia: Is it enthusiasm for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s autocratic approach to governance? Is it that Russia is fiercely committed to kneecapping the same group of Western elites as Carlson? The trigger isn’t obvious, but the effect is. Carlson is a nexus of skepticism about Ukraine, and that has drawn him closer to politicians on the right-most fringe of the Republican Party who echo or share his position. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.), who parlayed her large platform of support to ally closely with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (Calif.), is a frequent Carlson guest and a vocal opponent of funding for Ukraine’s military.

This week, former British prime minister Boris Johnson, a member of that country’s Conservative Party, came to Washington. During an event Wednesday at the Atlantic Council about the war in Ukraine, Johnson called out Carlson specifically for both his position on the invasion — and for his grip on the American right.

“I’ve been amazed and horrified by how many people are frightened of a guy called Tucker Carlson. Has anybody heard of somebody called — has anybody heard of Tucker Carlson?” Johnson joked in response to a question about responding to Russian aggression. “What is it with this guy? All these wonderful Republicans seem somehow intimidated by his — by his perspective.”

“I haven’t watched anything that he’s said,” Johnson continued. “But I I’m struck by how often this comes up. Some bad ideas are getting into — starting to infect some of the thinking around the world about what Putin stands for, what he believes in. It’s a disaster. He stands for war, aggression, systematic murder, rape and destruction. That’s what he stands for.”

Carlson, of course, seized upon the comments in his show later that night.

“Former British prime minister Boris Johnson rolled, sashayed into Washington yesterday,” Carlson began. He said that he’d invited Johnson on the program only to learn, a few hours beforehand, that Johnson was going to pass. Carlson framed this as: “Boris Johnson, reputed to be the smartest leader of any English-speaking country in the world, did not want to publicly defend his position on Ukraine. He was afraid to take questions about it.”

Then he showed a clip of Johnson’s comments.

“All these cowards in Washington are afraid of this show, Boris Johnson said derisively,” Carlson said. “Yet somehow he never mentioned that he is one of them.”

Carlson, understandably, framed this as being a function of timidity, instead of a function of dismissiveness. And to support the idea that Johnson was afraid, he suggested that Johnson was “trying to sell lawmakers on a new world war.”

“Millions would die in the war that Boris Johnson is promoting,” Carlson claimed at one point. “The public has a right to know. Why are we doing this before it starts? And as you can probably tell, it looks like it’s starting very soon.” He added that there’s “no popular support in this country or in any country in Europe for what Boris Johnson is now pushing.”

This is how it works. Carlson casts Johnson as part of The Elite and, specifically, as someone who wants a full-scale conflict between Russia and the West. There’s no validity to this; it’s just Carlson extrapolating out from a consensus position — we should support Ukraine militarily — to an imagined one.

He’s been offering similar warnings since the earliest days of the war. He or his guests warned that the conflict could lead to World War III on March 4March 10March 15March 16March 22March 25 and March 28 of last year — and that was just March.

Johnson’s message was clear, even if off the cuff: There’s no reason to fear this guy. But Carlson’s response shows why so many people do. Carlson will claim that the worst possible thing will happen and that his opponents are participants in schemes that seek to ensure the worst possible outcomes for average Americans. He has invested years in stoking a sense among his viewers that wealthy political and business leaders are not only indifferent to them but actively hostile, and it’s trivial to simply slot new characters into this cabal. It’s a Ship of Theseus approach to fearmongering: The constituent elements aren’t even the point.

It’s made him the biggest force on the cable news channel that’s the biggest force in his political universe. And while Johnson is obviously right, it’s hard to imagine that his comments about Carlson will have the desired effect. Carlson’s talking to millions of people a night. Republicans are therefore more worried about what he might say than what Johnson already did.

Are they really worried? I don’t know. He hob-b=mobs with Trump and DeSantis has been on his show many, many times. Cui bono?

What they learn from right wing media

It’s all right here in this commentary from the man who tried to kill Nancy Pelosi’s husband:

“Liberty isn’t dying, it’s being killed systematically and deliberately.” 

The “people killing it have names and addresses, so I got their names and addresses so I could pay them a little visit … have a heart-to-heart chat about their bad behavior.”

“I want to apologize to everyone. I messed up. What I did was really bad. I’m so sorry I didn’t get more of them. It’s my own fault. No one else is to blame. I should have come better prepared.”

It’s all right out of the wingnut playbook whether it’s Fox, Breitbart, Truth Social, 8-Chan, Newsmax, or OAN. And yes, Facebook and twitter too. It’s what compelled all those rioters to storm the Capitol and go hunting for Nancy Pelosi and Mike Pence. It’s why they were screaming incoherently “this is MY house!”, telling the cops and anyone else to leave.

It isn’t just this nut. He happened to take action and he isn’t the only one. But they all believe it …

The Villagers weigh in on a culture war strategy

How nice of Axios to show such compassion for conservative parents who are being brainwashed by lies and propaganda.

The fractious Republican Party is consolidating around a “Protect the children” platform for 2024 that aggressively targets school policies on gender identity and how racial issues are taught.

 A year before presidential primaries begin, Republicans see this as a winning formula that can fire up their base and attract some independents, pointing to the recent electoral success of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin.

Much of the battle is being fought at the state and local levels, giving an edge to GOP officials such as DeSantis and Youngkin — both potential presidential candidates who recognized the potency of educational issues early on.

Driving the news: Former President Trump is now leaning hard into this strategy, unveiling sweeping proposals in the past week to ban gender-affirming care for minors nationwide and cut off federal funding for schools that teach “critical race theory” and “gender ideology” — without defining what exactly those terms mean.

Trump’s proposals targeting trans rights would be more restrictive than any being pursued by Republican-led state governments, in what could be seen as an attempt to outflank DeSantis on the issue.

DeSantis notched a major victory today when the College Board announced it would revise its curriculum for AP African American Studies after heavy criticism from the Florida governor.

The big picture: These debates often are tagged as part of the “culture wars,” but many parents see them as fights over the quality of their kids’ educations. Under the banner of parental rights, Republicans are seeking to build a broad coalition centered on frustrations that schools are acting against their kids’ best interests.

It’s not a nasty culture war issue, it’s not! Teachers and administrators around the country are acting against their kids best interests! Who can blame Republicans for taking up their cause.

But let it not be said that Axios doesn’t present the other side of the story:

The other side: Polls show most Americans favor discrimination protections for trans people but are divided on teaching about gender identity in schools.

Critics of Republicans’ push to restrict teaching of racial issues view the GOP’s efforts as attempts to bury America’s history of racism and its impacts today.

Yeah, whatever. Anyway, here’s what matters:

 The GOP began to gain momentum on educational issues after lengthy school closures during the pandemic fueled opposition from frustrated parents.

Youngkin emphasized “parents’ rights” in an upset victory in blue-leaning Virginia in 2021 — an outcome that put education on the national map for Republicans.

After a successful bipartisan vote to overturn the mask mandate for some public school students, Youngkin also unveiled policy changes requiring schools to inform a student’s parents if the student wants to change their name or pronouns on their official records.

DeSantis took heat for championing legislation that would limit discussions about sexual orientation or gender identity for Florida students in third grade or below. But polls showed the legislation was broadly popular in Florida, and in November he was re-elected governor by 19 points.

And they’re right! Look at the numbers!

By the numbers: An October 2022 Pew Research Center poll found Democrats’ edge over Republicans on education was just five points. Education ranked the third most important of 12 issues tested, below the economy and the future of democracy.

A summer 2022 poll conducted in battleground states for the American Federation for Teachers union found that 39% of voters trusted Republicans more on education, while 38% favored Democrats.

Polls also show widespread opposition to age-inappropriate curriculum in K-12 education, though the details of what’s appropriate for kids have been the subject of heated local fights.

See? Democrat only lead on education by a mere five points! And they’re tied in a different poll! Obviously this is a huge winner for the GOP.

Governor Dreamboat is on to something:

What to watch: Much of DeSantis’ energy, as he mulls a presidential campaign, is focused on educational changes. He’s working to transform a progressive public honors university — the New College of Florida — to be more conservative-friendly.

He appointed six ideologically aligned trustees (including educational activist Chris Rufo) to the board. Already the new board has ousted the school’s president and taken steps to eliminate its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) staff.

“Conservative friendly?” “Educational activist Chris Rufo?” I guess that’s one way of putting it. A different observer might point out that he’s also hired a right wing extremist with ties to Christian nationalist Hillsdale College to be on the board and that Chris Rufo is not an “education activist” he’s a far right propagandist who works for a far right think tank that has made no secret of the fact that he’s creating culture war issues for the purpose of electing Republicans.

Axios points out how successful the strong and manly DeSantis is with all this:

After DeSantis banned the new AP African-American history course in Florida, the College Board stripped topics from the curriculum that had drawn scrutiny, including “Intersectionality and Activism,” “Black Queer Studies” and “Incarceration and Abolition.”

The College Board also added “black conservatism” as a research topic, though its president denies that the organization succumbed to political pressure.

Clearly this is a huge winner for the Republicans because they are on the side of “broad parental discontent” that has “achieved victories” in two states. Onward to a smashing Republican victory!

The bottom line: Republicans are tapping into broad parental discontent over educational issues and have achieved victories by rallying conservatives while engaging suburban independents.

Well, there might be a teensy hitch:

The risk for the party, however, is that the often-harsh rhetoric that draws in the base is alienating to many swing-voting suburbanites who determine elections.

Ya think????

Watch for more of this framing from the beltway. “Parental rights” is a very old right wing political strategy which they apparently believe was just minted by Ron DeSantis and Glenn Youngkin and which they seem to think is very clever. Let’s just say it has always had no better than mixed electoral results but wingnuts gonna wingnut.

.

Shocking quote o’ the day

Orange Julius Caesar sez:

In other words:

MAGA “Conservatism” defined(?)

S-Q-U-I-S-H

It’s hard enough to know what conservatives mean by socialism or woke. It may be harder still to know these days what they mean by conservative.

Charlie Sykes takes a swag at The Bulwark. He’s not sure anymore, beacuse “what passes for ‘conservatism’ now, in right-wing media and MAGA circles, is not really what Edmund Burke (or J.S. Mill, Milton Friedman, Bill Buckley, George Will, or Charles Krauthammer) had in mind, is it?”

What conservatism is and is not in his estimation (abbreviated here, see post for details):


MAGA “Conservativism” is for a strong national defense…

…except, of course, when it is not.

MAGA “Conservatives” believe in fiscal restraint…

…except when they are in the White House.

“Conservatives” are devoted to the constitution, which must be strictly observed…

… except when it needs to be scrapped in order to hold onto power.

MAGA “Conservatives” believe in “American Exceptionalism”…

…except when they are lavishing praise on foreign leaders like Viktor Orban, or (as I wrote earlier this week) wishing that we could be more like the Philippines, or China, in our willingness to kill suspected criminals.

Conservatives used to support resistance to Russian aggression…

…but MAGA “Conservatives” are now Vladmir Putin’s most useful idiots.

MAGA “Conservatives” are against Affirmative Action…

…except when they need to win a senate seat.

MAGA “Conservatives” are all about “law and order”…

…except when they say screw it.


One almost waxes nostalgic for the days when conservatism was more concerned with the efficiency of libertarian “getting and spending” and in defending “the unchanging ground of our changing experience.” 

Nowadays, conservatism means clown shows for armed, authoritarian cultists prone to violence who oppose any change that means they must share this nation of immigrants with people who “ain’t from around here” and who hold radical, “un-American” notions like “created equal” and equal treatment under law.

GOP plays gotcha … again

Governing is for losers

GOP gotcha exercises this week in Congress are for pre-positioning ammunition for blaring 2024 TV ads (with fine-print footers) against Democrats for being un-American. The party of arrested development de-prioritizes governing.

The MAGA-led House is on a tear. In the judiciary committee Wednesday, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) proposed that committee members recite the pledge of allegiance before meetings. Never mind that members do that at the opening of every session. He wants Democrats on record voting not to a second time. An hour-long debate ensued with Democrats snidely pushing back on whether “insurrectionists” on the committee could lead the pledge. Ultimately, Democrats voted with Republicans for supplemental performative patriotism.

HORRORS!

The U.S. House voted Wednesday on a resolution “denouncing the horrors of socialism.” That’s it. The rest is boilerplate.

On the floor, Republicans railed against socialism’s evils that they did not enumerate in H. Res. 83. The conservative base programmed for a century or more to view the nine-letter word as a four-letter word, Republicans did not need to. Before the resolution passed on a party-line vote, the GOP invested floor time on Wednesday so conservative dark-money groups can deploy round after round of screaming ads against Democrats in 2024. Because in the wake of a failed GOP candidate directing gunfire into the homes of Democratic officials, it’s never too early to “other” your political opponents.

And young people too!

Who knew Medicare for All and the Green New Deal was “Neo-Marxism”?

More Othering followed.

Someone less reactionary might ask what it is about modern corporate capitalism leads younger people to think so badly of it. But that would require self-reflection on Republicans’ part, and self-reflection is for losers.

The New Democrat Coalition took the bait and issued a statement:

The Hill:

House Democrats pushed Republicans to clarify the implications of a new bill that would denounce the “horrors of socialism” and socialist policies, expressing concern that it may include Medicare and Social Security benefits. 

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) objected:

“This resolution is instead as divisive as it is insulting to the American public. It is trying to suggest that Social Security, Medicare and even fire departments are anti-American,” Waters said. “None of this is surprising to me. Nor is this blatant attempt by Republicans to try and scare Americans.”

Ask Republicans if they support the elimination of socialist National Defense for All?

But then, shooting up shit is Real American™.

The Obnoxious Party

AKA the Republicans

David Frum:

Let’s say you’re a politician in a close race and your opponent suffers a stroke. What do you do?

If you are Mehmet Oz running as a Republican for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, what you do is mock your opponent’s affliction. In August, the Oz campaign released a list of “concessions” it would offer to the Democrat John Fetterman in a candidates’ debate, including:

“We will allow John to have all of his notes in front of him along with an earpiece so he can have the answers given to him by his staff, in real time.” And: “We will pay for any additional medical personnel he might need to have on standby.”

Oz’s derision of his opponent’s medical condition continued right up until Oz lost the race by more than 250,000 votes. Oz’s defeat flipped the Pennsylvania seat from Republican to Democrat, dooming GOP hopes of a Senate majority in 2023.

A growing number of Republicans are now pointing their finger at Donald Trump for the party’s disappointments in the 2022 elections, with good reason. Trump elevated election denial as an issue and burdened his party with a lot of election-denying candidates—and voters decisively repudiated them.

But not all of Trump’s picks were obviously bad. Oz was for years a successful TV pitchman, trusted by millions of Americans for health advice. The first Muslim nominated for a Senate run by a major party, he advanced Republican claims to represent 21st-century America. Oz got himself tangled up between competing positions on abortion, sometimes in consecutive sentences, precisely because he hoped to position himself as moderate on such issues.

But Oz’s decision to campaign as a jerk hurt him. When his opponent got sick, Oz could have drawn on his own medical background for compassion and understanding. Before he succumbed to the allure of TV, Oz was an acclaimed doctor whose innovations transformed the treatment of heart disease. He could have reminded voters of his best human qualities rather than displaying his worst.

The choice to do the opposite was his, not Trump’s.

And Oz was not unique. Many of the unsuccessful Republican candidates in 2022 offered voters weird, extreme, or obnoxious personas. Among the worst was Blake Masters, a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Arizona. He released photos and campaign videos of himself playing with guns, looking like a sociopath. He lost by nearly five points. Trump endorsed Masters in the end, but Trump wasn’t the one who initially selected or funded him. That unsavory distinction belongs to the tech billionaire and Republican donor Peter Thiel, who invested big and early in the campaign of his former university student.Trump-led Republicans have now endured four bad elections in a row.

Performative trolling did not always lead to failure. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis indulged in obnoxious stunts in 2022. He promoted anti-vaccination conspiracy theorists. He used the power of government to punish corporations that dissented from his culture-war policies. He spent $1.5 million of taxpayer money to send asylum seekers to Martha’s Vineyard.

But DeSantis was an incumbent executive with a record of accomplishment. Antics intended to enrapture the national Fox News audience could be offset by actions to satisfy his local electorate: restoring the Everglades, raising teacher pay, and reopening public schools early despite COVID risks.

DeSantis’s many Republican supporters must now ponder: What happens when and if the governor takes his show on the road? “Pragmatic on state concerns, divisive on national issues!” plays a little differently in a presidential race than it does at the state level. But the early indications are that he’s sticking with divisiveness: A month after his reelection, DeSantis is bidding for the anti-vax vote by promoting extremist allegations from the far fringes that modern vaccines threaten public health.

Ageneration ago, politicians invested great effort in appearing agreeable: Ronald Reagan’s warm chuckle, Bill Clinton’s down-home charm, George W. Bush’s smiling affability. By contrast, Donald Trump delighted in name-calling, rudeness, and open disdain. Not even his supporters would have described Trump as an agreeable person. Yet he made it to the White House all the same—in part because of this trollish style of politics, which has encouraged others to emulate him.

Has our hyper-polarized era changed the old rules of politics? James Poniewozik’s 2019 book, Audience of One, argues that Trump’s ascendancy was the product of a huge shift in media culture. The three big television networks of yore had sought to create “the least objectionable program”; they aimed to make shows that would offend the fewest viewers. As audiences fractured, however, the marketplace rewarded content that excited ever narrower segments of American society. Reagan and Clinton were replaced by Trump for much the same reason Walter Cronkite was replaced by Sean Hannity.

It’s an ingenious theory. But, as Poniewozik acknowledges, democratic politics in a two-party system remains an inescapably broadcast business. Trump’s material sold well enough in 2016 to win (with help from FBI Director James Comey’s intervention against Hillary Clinton, Russian hackers amplified by the Trump campaign, and the mechanics of the Electoral College). But in 2020, Trump met the political incarnation of the Least Objectionable Program: Joe Biden, who is to politics what Jay Leno was to late-night entertainment.

Trump-led Republicans have now endured four bad elections in a row. In 2018, they lost the House. In 2020, they lost the presidency. In 2021, they lost the Senate. In 2022, they won back the House—barely—but otherwise failed to score the gains one expects of the opposition party in a midterm. They suffered a net loss of one Senate seat and two governorships. They failed to flip a single chamber in any state legislature. In fact, the Democrats gained control of four: one each in Minnesota and Pennsylvania, and both in Michigan.

Plausible theories about why Republicans fared so badly in 2022 abound. The economy? Gas prices fell in the second half of 2022, while the economy continued to grow. Abortion? The Supreme Court struck down Roe v. Wade in June, and Republican officeholders began musing almost immediately about a national ban, while draconian restrictions began spreading through the states. Attacks on democracy? In contest after contest, Republicans expressed their contempt for free elections, and independent voters responded by rejecting them.America is a huge country full of decent people who are offended by bullying and cruelty.

All of these factors clearly played a role. But don’t under-​weight the impact of the performative obnoxiousness that now pervades Republican messaging. Conservatives have built career paths for young people that start on extremist message boards and lead to jobs on Republican campaigns, then jobs in state and federal offices, and then jobs in conservative media.

Former top Trump-administration officials set up a well-funded dark-money group, Citizens for Sanity, that spent millions to post trolling messages on local TV in battleground states, intended to annoy viewers into voting Republican, such as “Protect pregnant men from climate discrimination.” The effect was just to make the Republicans seem juvenile.

In 2021, then–House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy posted a video of himself reading aloud from Dr. Seuss to protest the Seuss estate’s withdrawing some works for being racially insensitive (although he took care to read Green Eggs and Ham, not one of the withdrawn books).

Trump himself often seemed to borrow his scripts from a Borscht Belt insult comic—for instance, performing imagined dialogues making fun of his opponent’s adult children during the 2020 campaign.

This is not a “both sides” story. Democratic candidates don’t try to energize their base by “owning the conservatives”; that’s just not a phrase you hear. The Democratic coalition is bigger and looser than the Republican coalition, and it’s not clear that Democrats even have an obvious “base” the way that Republicans do. The people who heeded Representative Jim Clyburn’s endorsement of Joe Biden in South Carolina do not necessarily have much in common with those who knocked on doors for Senator Elizabeth Warren’s presidential campaign. Trying to energize all of the Democratic Party’s many different “bases” with deliberate offensiveness against perceived cultural adversaries would likely fizzle at best, and backfire at worst. On the Republican side, however, the politics of performance can be—or seem—rewarding, at least in the short run.

This pattern of behavior bids fair to repeat itself in 2024. As I write these words at the beginning of 2023, the conservative world is most excited not by the prospect of big legislative action from a Republican House majority, and not by Trump’s declared candidacy for president in 2024 or by DeSantis’s as-yet-undeclared one, but by the chance to repeat its 2020 attacks on the personal misconduct of President Biden’s son Hunter.

In the summer of 2019, the Trump administration put enormous pressure on the newly elected Zelensky administration in Ukraine to announce some kind of criminal investigation of the Biden family. This first round of Trump’s project to manufacture an anti-Biden scandal exploded into Trump’s first impeachment.

The failure of round one did not deter the Trump campaign. It tried again in 2020. This time, the scandal project was based on sexually explicit photographs and putatively compromising emails featuring Hunter Biden. The story the Trump campaign told about how it obtained these materials sounded dubious: Hunter Biden himself supposedly delivered his computer to a legally blind repairman in Delaware but never returned to retrieve it—so the repairman tracked down Rudy Giuliani and handed over a copy of the hard drive. The repairman had also previously given the laptop itself to the FBI. Far-fetched stories can sometimes prove true, and so might this one.

Whatever the origin of the Hunter Biden materials, the authenticity of at least some of which has been confirmed by reputable media outlets, there’s no dispute about their impact on the 2020 election. They flopped.

Pro-Trump Republicans could never accept that their go-to tactic had this time failed. Somebody or something else had to be to blame. They decided that this somebody or something was Twitter, which had briefly blocked links to the initial New York Post story on the laptop and its contents.

So now the new Twitter—and Elon Musk allies who have been offered privileged access to the company’s internal workings—is trying again to elevate the Hunter Biden laptop controversy, and to allege a cover-up involving the press, tech companies, and the national-security establishment. It’s all very exciting to the tiny minority of Americans who closely follow political schemes. And it’s all pushing conservatives and Republicans back onto the same doomed path they followed in the Trump years: stunts and memes and insults and fabricated controversies in place of practical solutions to the real problems everyday people face. The party has lost contact with the sensibility of mainstream America, a huge country full of decent people who are offended by bullying and cruelty.

There’s talk of some kind of review by the Republican National Committee of what went wrong in 2022. If it happens, it will likely focus on organization, fundraising, and technology. For any political operation, there is always room to improve in these areas. But if the party is to thrive in the post-Trump era, it needs to start with something more basic: at least pretend to be nice.

I’ve been saying it for a while. There is a massive case of arrested development in our culture and the victims have mostly gravitated to the right. They are obnoxious, juvenile, bullies. It is the main reason they love Trump and now DeSantis so much. They’re both the snotty little bitches they all wish they could be.

FlOrwellida

DeSantis’ latest move to own the libs is really something. Will it be possible for him to go too far? I wonder. His refusal to allow the AP Black history course resulted in the college board changing the curriculum… sigh:

The College Board purged the names of many Black writers and scholars associated with critical race theory, the queer experience and Black feminism. It ushered out some politically fraught topics, like Black Lives Matter, from the formal curriculum.

And it added something new: “Black conservatism” is now offered as an idea for a research project.

So much for academic freedom. Wingnuts are now in charge of education, not scholars and educators. What could go wrong?

DeSantis isn’t finished:

He’s really going for it:

As he “actively” prepares for a presidential run, Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) announced Tuesday that he plans to defund diversity, equity and inclusion programs in every public university in the state. 

The plan is part of the Republican governor’s larger plot to remake the Florida public school system into a hub for far-right ideology, which reportedly includes grounding curricula in “the history and philosophy of Western Civilization” and “course correct universities’ missions to align education for citizenship of the constitutional republic and Florida’s existing and emerging workforce needs.”

It’s also seemingly part of a broader scheme for DeSantis to stay in the national news cycle as he riles up the most far-right members of his base ahead of 2024. 

During a press conference on Tuesday afternoon, the governor said that he intended to eliminate all DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) “bureaucracies” in Florida, claiming the programs impose “an agenda” and force people to “take a political oath.”

“No funding, and that will wither on the vine,” he said.

DeSantis seems to have chosen so-called “Critical Race Theory” as the focus of his attacks as he seeks national attention going into the likely launch of a presidential bid this year: Earlier this month, he overhauled the board of New College of Florida, a state school that is known to serve students from marginalized communities, and filled it with staunch conservatives, like far-right, anti-CRT activist Christopher Rufo.

His administration also rejected a proposed AP African American Studies course from the College Board for “lack[ing] educational value” and approved a new training program that could force teachers to avoid books on race and LGBTQ+ issues.

While it is clear that DeSantis’ war on “woke” education is rooted in a broader political calculus, the chill from his initiatives can be felt on a granular level. Earlier this month, for example, Manatee County teachers received directives from their school district instructing them to “remove or cover all classroom libraries” until they can be reviewed to make sure they adhere to the state’s standards. 

These latest moves are the trickle-down effects of his Stop Wrong To Our Kids and Employees (W.O.K.E.) Act signed into law last April. The language of the legislation is vague when it comes to actual enforcement, but aims to ban academic institutions and employers from teaching race-conscious concepts that make anyone feel “guilt, anguish or other psychological distress.” 

The press is reporting that DeSantis isn’t going to attack Trump because he thinks Trump is going to destroy himself. Good luck with that.

Trump isn’t holding back, however. Let the games begin:

And he’s not going to let DeSantis be the biggest scourge on teachers and students:

Catching up with Tucker

Tucker on Dancing with the Stars

This is the highest rated show on cable news and the most influential right wing media figure in America. Just a sample of his latest because I think you need to know what the right is seeing and believing so I’ll post excerpts from time to time. Don’t look away. This is what’s frying the brains of Fox “News” voters and they are one election away from running the country:

As I said the other day, I think he might be losing his mind. Those short barks of inappropriate laughter are just weird. But interspersed with his crazy little segments about M&Ms and Don Lemon’s hoodie are ideas that are penetrating into the collective lizard brains of the right. And those ideas are straight up patriarchal, white, nationalism.

Bill Barr’s Rep is irreparable

And he took John Durham down with him

One of the most mysterious chapters of former Attorney General Bill Barr’s tenure at the Department of Justice got a little sunlight last week when the New York Times published a deeply reported piece on the Durham Investigation, Donald Trump’s “investigation of the Mueller investigation.” We knew that Special Counsel John Durham, a man whose reputation was one of seriousness and rectitude, had only brought two prosecutions but failed to win convictions in both. And we knew that there had been turmoil in his office with several people resigning at what seemed to be pivotal moments in the case. But, until now, we didn’t know the details — and they are explosive.

The Times story, reported by Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman and Katie Benner, essentially reveals that the investigation which was supposed to blow the lid off of the Russia investigation by proving that it was a “partisan witch hunt,” was itself a witch hunt — only on behalf of Trump. Barr was enabling and covering for Trump throughout his tenure as we saw with his preemptive press conference to diminish the Mueller Report and mislead the public as to its conclusions and his willingness to back Trump’s strategy to discredit Vote-By Mail during the 2020 campaign. Even when he finally deserted the sinking ship in December of 2020, his letter of resignation showered Trump with praise even as he knew he was plotting to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power. But the Durham investigation was his personal project and it turns out that it was a monstrous abuse of power.

The whole point of naming a Special Counsel is to remove the taint of political interference by keeping a distance between the politically appointed Attorney General and the investigation. Barr did not do that. In fact, he directly participated in the probe by traveling overseas to the United Kingdom and Italy with Durham to interrogate their intelligence officials about whether they helped American investigators frame Trump which apparently offended them to no end since they did nothing of the sort. Durham and Barr became bosom buddies, throwing back scotch together at the end of the work day and having dinner on a regular basis. And Barr, who was convinced that the CIA had created the whole “Russia hoax,” eagerly ran interference with the Intelligence agencies for him as needed. Evidently, Durham was very taken with Barr and agreed from the get-go that Trump had been set up.

We had previously heard that Barr and Durham went to Italy on some sort of Hardy Boys expedition, but now we learn that they had been told by Italian authorities about some very credible information that Trump had committed serious financial crimes. Barr and Durham realized that it wasn’t something they could completely ignore (as much as they probably wanted to) so Barr assigned that case to Durham instead of another prosecutor and opened a criminal investigation. This was then leaked to the public in a way that implied they had found evidence of criminal behavior on the part of the FBI, the intelligence agencies or possibly even Hillary Clinton. They certainly didn’t let on that they were investigating Trump. 

From what we know, Durham quietly closed that “investigation” without much fuss. Considering the rest of their behavior one can’t help but suspect that he and Barr either didn’t look too closely or decided that revealing Trump’s crimes wasn’t worth jeopardizing their crusade to expose the “deep state.”

This is stunningly unethical behavior by an Attorney General. But we shouldn’t be too surprised. After all, Barr got the job in the first place by sending an unsolicited letter to Trump in which he criticized the Mueller investigation by claiming that a president can’t obstruct justice. In fact, Barr pretty clearly believes former president Richard Nixon’s famous line “when a president does it it’s not illegal” since his view, according to legal expert Marty Lederman, was that “the president has absolute constitutional authority over actions by executive branch officers in carrying out law enforcement powers given to them by Congress.” If you ever wondered where Trump got the idea that the Constitution gave him the power to “do whatever I want,” look no further than Bill Barr.

He and Durham colluded together for months and came up with zilch. There simply was no evidence that the FBI, DOJ, CIA or the Mueller team had done anything untoward. But that didn’t stop Durham. He decided to focus on Trump’s bête noire Hillary Clinton and he brought a couple of cases designed to show that she set Trump up with bogus claims of Russian collusion. That blew up in his face too. He’s still in business today doing what we don’t know, yet Attorney General Merrick Garland doesn’t seem to be willing to pull the plug.

As a New York Times op-ed by David Firestone points out, this exposè pretty much destroys Barr’s attempt to rehabilitate himself with the public. He famously dissed Trump repeatedly in his January 6 Committee testimony and wrote a book in which he turns on his former boss, calling him “detached from reality” and urging Republicans not to nominate him for the presidency in 2024. But he narrows his criticism to the post-election period conveniently forgetting the previous four years of incompetence, corruption and mental instability which Barr encouraged. It’s a little too little and way too late.

Unfortunately, while Barr’s lame attempt at rehabilitation may have finally been put on ice by these latest revelations, the conspiracy theories that fueled it have not. As Firestone notes:

Republicans in the House are launching a new snipe hunt for proof that these same government offices were “weaponized” against conservatives, an expedition that is likely to be no more effective than Mr. Durham’s and Mr. Barr’s.

In fact, now that I think about it, this might be the one thing that will make Bill Barr and John Durham look good by comparison. These House extremists will air every half baked, fever dream of twitter randos and QAnon weirdos in public hearings and present them as facts. At least Barr and Durham mostly kept their conspiracy theories to themselves over scotch and prime rib. That’s about the best you can say for them

Salon