Skip to content

Month: March 2023

“I am your retribution”

What’s he actually saying?

Aaron Blake takes a look at Trump’s latest slogan:

Even for a former president known for casting situations in the most apocalyptic terms possible, and his enemies as being as nefarious as possible, it was a remarkable rhetorical flourish.

“In 2016, I declared, ‘I am your voice,’” Donald Trump said Saturday night at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). “Today, I add: I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed: I am your retribution.”

The line validates long-held suspicions that Trump’s 2024 campaign amounts to something of a “revenge tour.” Trump has disputed that his goal is to stick it to his enemies; now he’s admitting that it is a revenge tour of sorts — if not for him personally, then for his supporters.

But as much as anything, it reflects just how much the Republican Party, despite its apparent interest in turning the page in 2024, has enabled Trump to rise again. There is no “revenge tour” or “retribution” without the GOP playing into speculative and often-fanciful ideas about the wrongs supposedly visited on its base — and which accordingly demand such vengeance. And there is no 2024 hopeful better situated to capitalize on that sense of persecution and injustice.

In that regard, the party and its allies made a series of fateful decisions in the three months after the 2020 election.

When it was clear that Trump wouldn’t concede the election and lodged a series of ridiculous claims about voter fraud, they reasoned, in the now-infamous words of one GOP official, “What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time?

Few high-ranking Republicans publicly subscribed to Trump’s false, most far-flung claims of mass voter fraud at the time. But we’ve learned in recent weeks that Fox News proactively decided to credulously air such claims — despite many involved knowing better — because it concluded that that’s what its viewers wanted. By the same token, GOP officials offered watered-down claims about “irregularities,” process issues and mail balloting that didn’t rise to the level of Trump’s conspiracy theories, but still played into perceptions of a “stolen election.” Virtually nobody in the party directly undercut his claims.

Despite there remaining no evidence that the 2020 election was compromised, 6 in 10 Republicans still “mostly” agree it was stolen. A recent CNN poll showed that 65 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say the GOP should be at least “somewhat accepting” of candidates who believe the election was stolen. Just 8 percent of Republicans say they are less likely to vote for a stolen-election promoter.

The trend continued after Jan. 6, 2021. For a time, the GOP flirted with a break from Trump, acknowledging the reality that his claims were the catalyst for his supporters storming the U.S. Capitol that day. But just as quickly, Republicans decided that a full break would be too perilous. They defended Trump from impeachment — again, often on process if not moral grounds — and walked back the distance they had briefly sought from him.

Perhaps more important, though, is what has happened since then. Many of the most popular voices in the party set about questioning the official narrative of Jan. 6. Initially, it was conspiracy theories about antifa being responsible, which Republican leaders denounced. But soon it was undercutting the idea that it was an insurrection at all, and playing into the idea that Jan. 6 defendants had been persecuted.

The Republican National Committee pointed to “ordinary citizens” engaging in “legitimate political discourse.” Fox News’s Tucker Carlson and others will often speak in those terms, even about those who made their way into the Capitol. Perhaps most tellingly, Carlson got Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) to back off calling it a “terrorist attack” in a groveling TV interview.

The consequence: A poll last summer showed more Republicans viewed Jan. 6 as a “legitimate protest” (61 percent) than an “insurrection” (13 percent) or even a “riot” (45 percent). It was both of the latter, but the percentage who described it as such dropped by about 20 points from the summer of 2021, while the “legitimate protest” crowd grew to a strong majority.

These instances involved Republicans not necessarily echoing the most overwrought claims about the election and Jan. 6, but doing virtually nothing to correct them and often playing into them in various ways.

Similarly, the GOP has had little to say as Trump has rather transparently played to the QAnon crowd. (While few Republicans directly subscribe to the bizarre conspiracy theory, as many as 4 in 10 GOP-leaning voters have said it’s at least “somewhat good” for the country.)

And now, we’re witnessing the GOP’s growing effort to cast the federal government as “weaponized” against its allies.

Republicans leaped to criticize the FBI’s search of Mar-a-Lago, despite knowing very little about what undergirded it. More recently, the new House Republican majority has launched a select committee on the “weaponization” of the federal government.

The committee’s name itself is extraordinary, with its conclusion built in. Early focal points for the GOP include vastly overstated evidence that the FBI purportedly targeted parents who protest school boards, unsubstantiated claims that government officials were directly involved in censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story, and more dissection of a Russia investigation for which a years-long special counsel probe has largely fallen flat.

The American people as a whole have taken a dim early view of the “weaponization” committee, saying by a 56-36 margin that it’s more an attempt to score political points than a legitimately purposed committee. Those numbers reflect how much its focus is meant to service the party base rather than things Americans more broadly are concerned about.

But Republicans are pressing forward. After all, there are few things more powerful in politics than a sense of persecution and victimhood. And all the while, they continue to feed into themes that strengthen Trump.

An early 2022 poll showed that as many as 56 percent of Republicans believed President Biden to be a “puppet president” who was “controlled by a group of ‘Deep State’ elites.” Many Republicans might believe a candidate such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) is able to wage the fight against those forces — and DeSantis in many ways speaks their language.

But nobody will match Trump’s rhetoric or years-long track record on this. National Republicans seem to largely understand that Trump’s electoral track record is poor and that it would be best to nominate someone else, but they’ve shown remarkably little interest in doing much of anything to steer the party away from him and his core issues.

And to the extent the 2024 primaries are allowed to be about emotion and “retribution” rather than a sober-minded review of their options, they’ll have paved the way.

Yep. And it goes way back. Listen to the ugly rhetoric of Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich from the 90s to see the direct thru-line.

As you know, one of the key points in the Gopac [instructional tapes] is that “language matters.” As we mail tapes to candidates, and use them in training sessions across the country, we hear a plaintive plea: “I wish I could speak like Newt.” That takes years of practice. But we believe that you can have a significant impact on your campaign if we help a little. That is why we have created this list of words and phrases. This list is prepared so that you might have a directory of words to use in writing literature and letters, in preparing speeches, and in producing material for the electronic media. The words and phrases are powerful. Read them. Memorize as many as possible. And remember that, like any tool, these words will not help if they are not used.

This is how it started.

Tucker Lies and the flock believes

Tucker: "To this day, there is dispute over how Chansley got into the Capitol building."

False. You can literally see QAnon Shaman entering in footage he aired moments earlier. He wasn't snuck in some back door, he came in moments after the door was kicked in.

Tucker is lying. Here is Jacob Chansley entering the Capitol less than 40 seconds after the breach. There is no dispute.

https://ia902307.us.archive.org/10/items/Cwxj9RMtddritN4Ds/Cwxj9RMtddritN4Ds.mpeg4

Also the “someone” who opened the door, as Tucker Carlson referred to him, is an anti-abortion extremism who purported to respect the sanctity of life until he (allegedly) plotted to kill a FBI agent following his Jan. 6 arrest. #Parasnooper

“Kelley and Carter discussed collecting information and plans to kill the individual law enforcement personnel on the list that included an attack on the FBI’s Knoxville, Tennessee Field Office.”

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/two-tennessee-men-arrested-planning-attacks-law-enforcement-personnel-and-fbi-s-knoxville

You can also see QAnon Shaman here at the front of rioters breaching the police line, near Brent Bozell III’s adult son Brent Bozell IV. Surely Tucker could’ve reached him for some context!

Originally tweeted by Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) on March 7, 2023.

The challenge this morning is how to alert you to a big dump of new misinformation without amplifying and validating it. The good news: This is an easier task when Kevin McCarthy and Tucker Carlson are involved because it is so transparent.

The speaker of the House gives special exclusive access to the security footage of the Jan. 6 attack on Congress to the leading propagandist minimizing, dismissing, and counter-programming the failed coup. What did you think was going to happen?

Monday night, Carlson began using the footage (much of which was already turned over to defense attorneys for the Jan. 6 rioters) to reinforce and continue to promulgate his made-up narrative that the attack consisted of peaceful “sightseers” touring the Capitol under escort:

More than 44,000 hours of surveillance footage from in and around the Capitol have been withheld from the public, and once you see the video, you’ll understand why. Taken as a whole, the video does not support the claim that Jan. 6 was an insurrection. In fact, it demolishes that claim.

Reporters who have covered the Jan. 6 attack and the criminal justice aftermath spent Monday evening debunking the Carlson segment in various ways: the footage isn’t actually new or unseen, it was selectively presented by Carlson, things he claimed were new or unknown were old and known, etc.

But of course the game plan here isn’t for McCarthy to simply provide Carlson with new fodder for predictable if outrageous segments on his show. In a pattern we all know too well, the Carlson segment takes the raw material and transmogrifies into even better, more useful fodder for all manner of elected Republicans, Jan. 6 deniers, other right-wing news outlets, and MAGA world.

Tiny D?

Ouch

Jezebel:

As a follower of Florida Gov. and likely presidential hopeful Ron DeSantis’ (R) varying moral crimes against queer kids, marginalized people, and even books that dare to mention LGBTQ+ issues, I feel obligated to direct your attention now to the irony of him continually wearing high heels. You see, American presidents tend to be tall. We rarely elect presidents under six feet tall, actually—a fact pointed out by Burlington County Times, which coldly quipped that “manlets” (ostensibly men under six feet) “need not apply” to the office. This is deeply intertwined with the fact that America has never elected a woman president: Voters still seem to be hanging onto this idea that a president has to appear manly and strong, though masculinity and physical strength literally have nothing to do with the job description.

Enter DeSantis, whom varying sources approximate to be in the height range of 5’8” to 5’10”. A lot of pundits are taking note of the authoritarian governor’s apparent height deficit and concluding that he is simply too short to win the presidency without compensatory shoes, podium stools, and photoshop stretching—especially not while standing next to someone taller, like Donald Trump (6’3″). And now, just days after DeSantis appeared in public in heels that I, a noted heel-wearer, would wager give him a good three inches, a new Bloomberg report revealed that among other disparaging nicknames, former President Trump is entertaining the idea of calling DeSantis “Tiny D.” This conveniently doubles as a dig at both his height and his dick.

I know what you may be thinking: Who cares?? Abortion access and trans existence are under the attack; what does DeSantis’ height have to do with these daunting political realities? But I would argue that an unrepentant bigot who’s determined to ban drag going around wearing heels—an act that’s obviously fine and even encouraged in itself—is quite ironic and hypocritical. The internet is certainly mocking him for it.

“For a guy who hates drag, he sure does love the high heels,” one user wrote in a tweet with a photo of DeSantis on stage in heeled boots.

https://twitter.com/akaMisterJayEm/status/1630330470222135298?s=20

Sharing the same photo, Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin wrote, “his heels look rather high. is he embarrassed about his height?” Last month, over on Trump’s Truth Social, right-wing political operative Roger Stone shared a graphic for a speaking event with DeSantis and Ben Shapiro with the caption, “Two short guys sitting around talking.” Sharing a screenshot of the post in a tweet, liberal media personality Ron Filipkowski observed, “Height is a big thing in Republican politics. Which is why Desantis wears the platform heels.” Talking Points Memo founder Josh Marshall last month disseminated a Twitter poll questioning the importance of “determining Ron DeSantis’s true height (prior to any surgical leg extensions, if they occurred)”—“We need the truth now” was the most popular response.

Amid the scrutiny surrounding DeSantis’ height lately, his supporters seem to be in damage control mode. On Sunday, one supporter shared a pretty ordinary photo of DeSantis with the caption, “Holy cow, @GovRonDeSantis looks FIT and ready for combat. Not sure how much weight he’s lost, but his health/appearance is not going to be one of Trump’s punchlines in the debates.” It sure reads like a desperate plea to Trump to not hit DeSantis’ “health/appearance,” which will inevitably go unheard.

Trump, of all people, is not one to mince words on height, size, and vigor. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), once seen as a front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, was tanked by two words from Trump’s lips: “Little Marco.” Trump wiped out a crowded field of competitors by referring to them as “lightweights.” He amplified and laughed along with a supporter who called former rival Ted Cruz a “pussy” at a rally, all while disparaging Cruz’s wife’s appearance.

Presidential campaign trails, which have historically always been glorified sausage fests, became a phallic parade of masculine domination under Trump’s direction in 2016 and 2020. His speeches and debate performances abounded with self-references to his supposed horse schlong of a penis. (This obsession with his dick size seems to imply the “Tiny D” moniker may poke at more than height.) Further, whenever another Republican rival bit the dust, Trump made a show of displaying their submission to him, allegedly reducing Chris Christie to a glorified butler, tasking former RNC chair Reince Priebus with swatting a fly for him, and—after all his comments about Cruz’s wife—appearing to force the Texas Senator to phone-bank for him in something akin to a hostage video. In 2020, just as “mini” Mike Bloomberg’s presidential campaign began to pick up steam, Trump made a series of appearances mocking the former New York City mayor’s 5’4” height.

None of this bodes particularly well for DeSantis’ odds against the former president when campaign season begins in earnest later this year. It seems inevitable, even, that Trump—who’s already called DeSantis a “disloyal” “bullshit artist” and even a literal groomer—will blast out these emasculating photos of DeSantis appearing to embody the “Virgin vs. Chad” meme alongside Joe Biden. (Peruse a lengthy, artful explanation of just how damning the photos are, here.)

DeSantis and Trump will likely soon vie against each other for a base that fanatically subscribes to dated and undeniably toxic standards for masculinity, in no small part because of the aggressively stupid culture war talking points that both men are routinely spewing. Between DeSantis’ height and feminized fashion choices, he’s given Trump no shortage of material to work with. “Tiny D” might just be the tip of the iceberg. It’s still March, people; the claws aren’t even out yet.

LOLOLOLOLOL…

Misinformation nation

Conspiracies about voter fraud put our country in danger

Navigator is out this morning with new polling:

Nine in ten Americans are concerned about the spread of misinformation. 90 percent of Americans say they are worried about misinformation, framed as “false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive those who read or hear it.” This includes overwhelming majorities across party lines: Democrats are most concerned about misinformation (95 percent), but more than four in five Republicans (86 percent) and independents (82 percent) say the same.

Cold War babies called this propaganda. But Americans associated propaganda with the Ruskies, with communists. Nowadays, more anodyne terms apply lest we paint Real Americans™ with the same brush. They might take offense.

Respondents report encountering misinformation most often on social media and from Fox. (Hullabaloo readers are yawning.)

Respondents are more optimistic than I about how to stop it:

By a 6-point margin, 43 percent trust Biden/Democrats to stop the spread of misinformation more than Republicans (37 percent), including Black Americans by a 46-point margin (65 percent Biden/Democrats – 19 percent Republicans), Hispanic Americans by a 25-point margin (52 percent Biden/Democrats – 27 percent Republicans), and Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders by a 12-point margin (48 percent Biden/Democrats – 36 percent Republicans). However, more than half of independents — 54 percent — don’t know which party to trust more on stopping the spread of misinformation.

Flooding the zone with shit feeds cultural disorientation, Steve Bannon’s goal. It’s working on independents.

Navigator adds:

A majority of Americans and independents find a range of statements around Republicans lying about recent elections in the United States concerning, including lies around voter fraud and the January 6th riot.

Sixty-one percent of Americans (including 58 percent of independents) believe voter fraud conspiracy theories spread by Republicans and “MAGA politicians like Marjorie Taylor Greene” are “putting our country in danger.”

Remember “Stranger Danger“? If only children learned to run from propagandists bidding them to climb into their online vehicles.

Damn, Arnold

Schwarzenegger keeps trying

God knows we all have our flaws, our blind spots and weaknesses. The Austrian immigrant who became an international superstar and California governor has his. One thing wealth and fame have not erased is the memory of what World War II did to his father and to the broken men of his father’s generation who served the Nazi cause.

Arnold Schwarzenegger filmed a 12-minute sermon on how the path of hate eats the soul:

Schwarzenegger’s rhetoric was couched in terms of a motivational pep-talk for those with prejudice: “Nazis? Losers. The Confederacy? Losers. The apartheid movement? Losers. I don’t want you to be a loser. I don’t want you to be weak … despite all my friends who might say, ‘Arnold, don’t talk to those people. It’s not worth it.’

“I don’t care what they say. I care about you. I think you’re worth it. I know nobody is perfect … I can understand how people can fall into a trap of prejudice and hate.”

Schwarzenegger is not talking just about antisemitism but, in the subtext, about the kind of venom being spewed at CPAC and by Gov. Wokety-woke DeWoke at immigrants, at nonwhites, and at transgender people MAGA Republicans think easy targets.

Is this guy still a Republican?

“It’s easier to hate than it is to learn … Nobody who has chosen the easy path of hate has gotten to the end of the road and said, ‘What a life.’ No. They die as miserably as they lived.

“No matter how far you’ve gone, I want you to know you still have a chance to choose a life of strength. You have to fight the war against yourself … The [hate] path is easier – you don’t have to change anything, everything in your life that you aren’t happy about can be somebody else’s fault … [But] you will end up broken. I don’t want you to go through all that.”

Embrace the discomfort that comes with growth, the former bodybuilder urges. “Conquer your mind.”

Schwarzenegger has a message, too, for Russians fighting in Ukraine:

“To the Russian soldiers listening to this broadcast, you already know much of the truth that I’m speaking. You’ve seen it in your own eyes. I don’t want you to be broken like my father.”

That message echoes one Schwarzenegger sent to the Russian people about Vladimir Putin’s disinformation campaign surrounding the Ukraine invasion.

“Ukraine did not start this war. Neither did nationalists or Nazis,” Schwarzenegger said nearly one year ago. “Those in power in the Kremlin started this war.”

It is hard to believe these days that there are any sane-ish Republicans left who have not fallen under the “crush your enemies” spell of bullies wearing lift shoes. There are. But for anti-Trump Republican, their party’s future is “Mostly Despair.”

Jeff Sharlet (“The Family,” “The Undertow: Scenes from a Slow Civil War“) credits Schwarzenegger for trying:

I know the 99 ways some will say this falls short, or, “who cares about this old Republican,” but this guy keeps trying. Count the stars who don’t. I doubt he has much sway left. But he’s using whatever he has. This Jew dad of a trans kid appreciates it.

I do too.

“Nobody cares”

Really????

They are trying to airbrush the insurrection:

Like most politicians considering a White House run, Ron DeSantis published a new book this past week, designed to frame him as an unapologetic truth teller, eager to tackle the hard issues of the day.

But as the work came under scrutiny, reviewers pointed out something missing. The Florida Governor had nothing to say about one of the most consequential political moments of the past few years: the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol.

They shouldn’t have been surprised.

If any subject is verboten in the early stages of the Republican presidential primary, it’s the insurrection that once served as a defining point in 2024 frontrunner Donald Trump’s career. Whereas Republicans once talked openly about it being disqualifying for the former president, today it is little more than a litmus test in GOP circles of a candidate’s MAGA bona fides. None of them want any part of it.

For a primary candidate, said Scott Walker, the former Republican governor of Wisconsin, going after Trump for Jan. 6 is “a huge risk.”

The Jan. 6 avoidance is not just in DeSantis’ book. Mike Pence, the former vice president and likely presidential candidate, is preparing to resist a grand jury subpoena for testimony about Trump’s efforts to overturn the election, seeing only political landmines in testifying. Nikki Haley, asked on a podcast recently if she would describe the riot at the Capitol as an “insurrection, a riot, or a coup,” went instead with a more banal — and safer — description: “a sad day in America.”

In the primary, said Dave Carney, a national Republican strategist based in New Hampshire, “I don’t think January 6th will come up, period.”

The insurrection wasn’t always destined to be taboo in GOP primary politics. In the immediate aftermath, the riot appeared to provide an opening not only for Trump’s loudest critics in the party, but also for more mainstream, otherwise-Trumpian Republicans seeking to distinguish themselves from him ahead of 2024.

It was Haley, the former U.N. ambassador, who once said she was angry and “disgusted” with Trump and told Republican National Committee members that his “actions since Election Day will be judged harshly by history.” Pence made his first post-presidential break with Trump by declaring that he and Trump might never “see eye to eye” on the insurrection. DeSantis once openly criticized “the rioting and disorder” at the Capitol.

“The calculation was that this is clearly indefensible, he’s not going to have a place in the party going forward,” said one Republican strategist and former congressional aide. “That clearly hasn’t happened … January 6th is advantageous for Trump in a Republican primary now. Nobody’s going to hit him on January 6th.”

The advantages for Trump, if they do exist, were in plain view at the gathering of conservatives at the Conservative Political Action Conference. At the yearly confab — held this year outside of Washington — some attendees wore their connection to Jan. 6 as a badge of honor and found sympathetic ears.

Micki Witthoeft, the mother of Ashli Babbitt — the protester shot and killed by Capital police at the riot as she tried to break down a door inside the building — appeared on set with Donald Trump Jr. outside the convention’s main stage. There were two booths in the CPAC exhibition hall focused on Jan. 6 defendants. And it was standing room only for a breakout session at the conference titled: “True Stories of January 6: The Prosecuted Speak.” Speakers included Jan. 6 defendants Brandon Straka, Simone Gold, West Virginia legislator Derrick Evans, John Strand and Geri Perna, the aunt of Matthew Perna, who died by suicide after pleading guilty to four charges related to the Capitol riot.

In the halls, it wasn’t unusual to bump into people who were protesting on Capitol Hill on Jan. 6. Deborah Gordon, a retiree from Maryland, said it was “disgusting” that politicians didn’t talk about Jan. 6 more. “I was there,” Gordon said. Bruce Cherry, the chair of Seminole County Republican executive committee in Florida, said it was important to reelect Trump “to pardon those people.” Melissa Cornwell, who attended CPAC from Beaumont, Texas, called Jan. 6 a “non-event,” adding that the “real insurrection” was the riots that followed the death of George Floyd in 2020.

If anything, the tone and tenor of the conference suggested that Republican presidential candidates may feel pressure from corners of the base to talk about Jan. 6 in positive terms — and rally to the defense of people arrested following the riot.

“I can tell you that just interacting with a lot of the activists here, there is concern that the violations of protocol and civil rights around the Jan. 6 issue haven’t gotten sufficient attention from the Congress, and that’s really a matter for us in the House majority more so than 2024 candidates,” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said on the sidelines of CPAC.

Already, the Trump world attacks on potential 2024 contenders for not being sufficiently supportive of the Jan. 6 protesters are coming. Alex Bruesewitz, a Republican strategist and influencer close to the Trumps, said others who could seek the nomination have shown they “don’t care” about Jan. 6 defendants “because they’re going to lose out on the Wall Street money, they hate Trump and his base.” Bruesewitz himself was summoned by the Jan. 6 committee but reportedly pleaded the Fifth when asked to testify about the events on that day. He once said he would help pay for the legal defense of accused Capitol rioters, while Trump has suggested pardoning some Jan. 6 defendants and even collaborated on a song with some of them.

CPAC has grown increasingly aligned with Trump, making it difficult to assess how representative its gathering is of broader Republican politics. Indeed, last August, the conference featured a fake jail cell where a convicted Capitol rioter sat, fake cried, and prayed with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.). Still, the crowd assembled there was full of precisely the kind of hardline activists critical to presidential contenders in a GOP primary.

In the broader GOP ecosystem, even more moderate Republicans see little upside in mentioning the riot.

“I’m not trying to downplay January 6th and how terrible it was, but really, a lot of us just want to move past this guy, right?” said Mark Graul, a Republican strategist who worked on George W. Bush’s 2004 campaign. “We want to move past him, and move past the awfulness, which culminated on January 6th. That was the peak of Trump awfulness.”

But Graul added that anyone running to be the GOP standard-bearer understood the calculations that come with it.

“We’re still in this stage where if you’re running for the Republican nomination, you’re going to need to get votes from people who voted for Donald Trump,” he said.

Indeed, polls show that there just isn’t much of a constituency in the GOP primary for anyone criticizing Trump on Jan. 6. More than two years after the riot, the share of Republicans who disapprove of Trump supporters taking over the Capitol building has fallen to 49 percent, from 74 percent in 2021, according to a recent Economist/YouGov poll. And even if Republicans didn’t like what they saw that day, a majority of them don’t blame Trump.

Two years ago, Walker said, Jan. 6 was worthy of condemnation. He said so at the time. But it makes no sense for presidential candidates to be talking about it now, he added, when most people have moved on.

Anymore, he said, “Nobody cares.”

Actually, Republicans may not care. But the rest of us care. A lot. And there are more of us.

John Bolton is not a hero

That’s not surprising

Charlie Sykes interviewed John Bolton and was surprisingly insistent:

During our interview, we talked about his serial defense of Trump’s relations with Putin, his refusal to voluntarily testify in the impeachment proceedings, and his decision to write a book instead. I may have more to say tomorrow after you all have a chance to listen, but here’s sample. (The transcript is edited for clarity.)

Charlie Sykes: [In your book, you write that Trump] said that it was a good idea to have these internment camps in China. He was offering favors to dictators, including the Turkish strongman. He did not know the United Kingdom was a nuclear power. He did not know that Finland was not part of Russia. And of course, you also write about what you colorfully called “The Drug Deal,” that was going down in Ukraine. You wrote about all of this, you put it in your book, but you wouldn’t testify voluntarily to the House when the impeachment of Donald Trump was up. Why not?

John Bolton: I felt that the impeachment effort was very ill advised. I thought it was inherently political by the Democrats, doing in a way exactly what they accused Trump of doing  — of using the powers of government for partisan political purposes, which is what he was doing in Ukraine. 

Charlie Sykes: This is not the same thing at all.

John Bolton: I think it is.  Let me explain. (crosstalk/audience applauding)

Charlie Sykes: Now wait — impeachment is in the Constitution — it is part of our structure. Calling up and trying to shake down a foreign leader for political dirt is not the same thing. (audience cheering and applause/crosstalk)

John Bolton: I think it is. (audience applauding) What what they did was knowingly to try and focus the effort in a very narrow way — among other things to avoid interfering with the schedule for the Democratic presidential nomination, which was going to take place in 2020. They did it knowing, knowing that they couldn’t get two-thirds in the Senate. And I called that “impeachment malpractice” because of the effect it had on Trump.  Nancy Pelosi loves to say, ‘Trump will always be impeached.’ What she omits to say is, ‘Trump will always be acquitted.’ And the maneuver to impeach him and have him acquitted in the Senate empowered Trump. It had exactly the opposite effect of what the advocates of impeachment said.

Charlie Sykes: When you said it was impeachment malpractice . . . were you also suggesting that they should have looked at a lot of other things?

John Bolton:  Absolutely….

Charlie Sykes: So what should they have done? When you say to broaden it out, should they have looked at the obstruction of justice with Erdoğan?

John Bolton: Sure, it depends on whether you’re serious about achieving an outcome by launching an impeachment process or whether you’re virtue-signaling: ‘Look at us, look how righteous we are’. . . .

Charlie Sykes: Okay, well that’s ironic, though, that you would suggest that they should have broadened it — to include some of the stuff that you have in your book — but were not willing to  testify to. So, you’re criticizing them for not going deeper, but when you had the opportunity, and to go back …  (crosstalk)…

Charlie Sykes: Okay, so you told Bill Barr? [There may have been a trace of sarcasm in my voice.]

John Bolton:  I talked to the attorney general — that’s right —  and I went to the attorney general, I put that in the book too. And I told Bill Barr about some of these things with Erdogan, and some of the others. That’s, that’s his job. It’s not my job. . . .

Near the end, I asked him about regrets.

Charlie Sykes: So looking back, a lot of people in this room have a lot of regrets, about a lot of things. So do you regret the role you played in defending Donald Trump? Enabling Donald Trump? Giving him the cover? Going into his administration? In retrospect, do you think that you wish that your wife pulled you aside and said, ‘John, what are you thinking?’

John Bolton: She did. Yeah, I’m an Edith Piaf guy. You know, “Je ne regrette rien.” Somebody’s going to be national security advisor. You want it to be Steve Bannon? Kash Patel? Because that’s what’s coming in the second term. And, you know. . . .

No, I don’t regret it at all. I knew what I was getting into.

As I say: I was wrong in that I thought that even Donald Trump would have to be disciplined by the gravity of the national security issues he had to face. But when I saw he wasn’t disciplined, it just reinforced in my mind that somebody who knew what was going on had to try and do the best they could.

I don’t believe him. He saw an opportunity to push his own agenda and he took it. It didn’t comport with Trump’s inchoate foreign policy ideas so he didn’t succeed. But if he could have done it he would have.

John Bolton is a malevolent force and one of the better things Trump did was not let him have his way. But he does have his moments:

That’s from a podcast that will be up later at the Bulwark if you want to hear the whole thing. I’m not sure I do …

They harassed a good teacher out of town

He discussed what high school kids all want to talk about

This is just sad:

Scott Kercher, a beloved history teacher in New Jersey, dared to tackle some of the tough issues of our times, hosting frank conversations about racism and gender identity when he came to the 85% white school district of Sparta in Republican Sussex County.

He won an award and statewiderecognition for his efforts as head of the district’s diversity council, but make no mistake: This is a cautionary tale. Now an effective leader who knew how to connect with kids is gone, thanks to an intrusion of right-wing politics that is threatening the quality of education in Sparta.

It’s a powerful example of the kind of atmosphere that we do not want to build in our schools, where teachers are scared to speak up and nobody wants this job because of the political lurch that we’re living through right now.

But let’s start at the beginning. In 2020, more than 400 former students wrote a letter in the wake of George Floyd’s killing, saying they didn’t think Sparta was doing enough to prepare them for a diverse world. Kercher, a social studies and languages supervisor, says he happily stepped in to help. It would have been negligent not to.

Having just created Sparta’s diversity council when he came to the district in 2019, he set to work, inviting the primary authors of the alumni letter to join his efforts – and in doing so, ended up becoming a target. “He was opening up a lot of really honest discussions and I think in our town, people are not as comfortable with that as they like to think,” said former school board member Jennifer Grana.

Kercher and the district’s only Black administrator, Saskia Brown, put together a virtual community screening in which people of color in Sparta shared their own experiences of being discriminated against, followed by a discussion. Called “Our Voices United,” their effort won an award from Kean University and was recognized by the state School Boards Association.

But back home, not everyone was pleased. The acting Superintendent called Brown and Kercher into his office to let them know that some members of the board of education – including its president at the time and another member who later voted not to renew Kercher’s contract – did not like the program, Kercher recalled.

“They thought that it made the town look bad,” according to Kate Matteson, a board member at the time who said she and Grana tried in vain to get the school board to honor the students and staff who worked on the project.

From that point on, Kercher felt he was being personally identified with diversity and equity issues in the district. His partner, Brown, moved on to another job, “and I was told by someone close to the board that I’d better watch out,” he said.

Which brings us tolast April: In a highly unusual move, the school board abruptly voted not to renew Kercher’s contract after his three years in the district. “I was devastated,” he said. “Still, to this day, I’ve never been given a reason why.”

A few dubious excuses were thrown about by his critics. They dug through Kercher’s personal Facebook page and took a screenshot of an anti-Trump post dating back to 2016, before he even came to Sparta, then quoted it out of context. They tried to scapegoat him for security problems at a Model UN dance back in 2020, even though the folks most adamant about this issue had previously voted to renew Kercher in both 2020 and 2021, after that field trip. The board did a fresh investigation after voting not to renew him last April, and again found that Kercher and the other chaperones were not negligent.

“The only thing that he has done that has put him in the spotlight by some district parents is taking part in diversity initiatives and adding pronouns to his (email) signature,” said parent Dana Gulino, one of the many supporters who showed up to a subsequent board meeting to defend Kercher.

The board ultimately reinstated him in June, reversing itself under public pressure. But a few months later he resigned, fearing that repeated attacks at public meetings would hurt his reputation and cause him and his family too much grief.

The last straw was being singled out again at a board meeting in July, shortly after he’d hosted a community screening of “Always Jane,” a documentary about a transgender kid growing up in a loving Sparta family. He’d invited the family and the producers, who flew in from California. “It was the event of my career of 24 years,” Kercher recalled. “It was such a powerful moment.”

But then it became the segue for a group of aspiring and sitting school board members to complain about an LGBTQ book in the high school library that they found too explicit. Instead of simply making that case, the critics, including the board’s current president, Kurt Morris, again made Kercher a target. He was recommending these books, they said at the public meeting.

“It’s only been a month now, and we’re already talking about this individual again,” Morris said of Kercher. “There’s not much we can do, we’re stuck with this guy again, unfortunately.”

Watching this from home with his children, Kercher decided he’d had enough. It was causing him too much stress. “I didn’t feel like I could do my job effectively,” he said, “constantly worried about what the next topic would be.” In the run-up to the November school board election, in which 17 people ended up vying for six seats, “I knew that I would become an issue.” So he resigned.

Board member Lauren Collier told us last week by email that the idea that Kercher was pushed out because of his association with diversity initiatives is “misguided.” The board has been “fully supportive” of diversity initiatives, she maintained. Morris and other current and former board members did not return our requests for comment.

But others in the community told us that Kercher was one of a succession of staff members harassed to the point of resignation, who had been involved in these kinds of diversity initiatives. Parents called him “a gem,” a “tireless” and “passionate” educator who made everyone feel like they mattered, including the many kids who saw him as their champion.

Here’s the thing. These throwbacks can try to put this genie back in the bottle but it’s not going back in. They should ask the kids. They are living in a world in which these questions and issues are a top priority. This is the stuff they care about. Pushing teachers who are willing to meet them where they are out of town isn’t going to change that.

DeSantis came to California to insult us

He didn’t just attack liberals. He attacked the whole state. I guess he figured that he would impress everyone in California by telling us that his state is so much better. I suppose he probably did impress those at the Reagan library — they were the usual California GOP masochists who love to be humiliated by red staters. He’ll probably get some money out of it. But still, this seems like a poor way to introduce yourself :

As he moves toward entering the 2024 presidential race, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis made a pilgrimage to the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library on Sunday, where the Republican accused leaders in blue states such as California of being “lockdown politicians” and charged that the nation’s coronavirus crisis created “a great test in governing philosophies.”

Speaking to a sold-out audience, with some 1,300 tickets sold and nearly 1,100 in attendance, according to organizers, DeSantis touted how Florida has led the nation in net migration — even though that is a trend set into motion long before he became governor.

“We’ve witnessed a great American exodus from states governed by leftist politicians imposing leftist ideologies and delivering poor results. And you can see massive gains in states like Florida, who are governing according to the tried and true principles that President Reagan held dear,” DeSantis said. He said that Americans “voted with their feet” by leaving some blue states in large numbers as Florida’s population boomed.

But many experts have argued that the shift in migration patterns, particularly from states along the West Coast, has stemmed largely from the lack of affordable housing and the greater flexibility that the pandemic created for work-from-home or hybrid work arrangements. DeSantis’s remarks served as the latest example of him advancing arguments in defense of his record in Florida that sometimes mask much more complicated debates.

DeSantis’s speech — inside the museum’s cavernous glass pavilion where he stood beneath the former Air Force One plane that carried Reagan and six other presidents — was billed as to promote his new book, “The Courage to Be Free: Florida’s Blueprint for America’s Revival.” But it also served as an audition before GOP voters here for an ambitious governor many expect to enter the presidential sweepstakes. California could play a major role in selecting the nominee in the state’s unusually early presidential primary next year on March 5.

Obviously, Trump is also one who likes to insult California (and anywhere else that didn’t vote for him.) But DeSantis is touting his state as being specifically superior, which is a slightly different thing. I have to wonder if that’s really going to sell here, even in a primary. Many of the minority of Republicans in California do love Trump. And I’m not sure they hate themselves.

By the way, if DeSantis was trolling for donors, he may want to re-think this approach. If he can:

The Florida governor did not spend time mingling with members of the crowd and did not take questions from the media in California.