Skip to content

Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Congress Actually Takes A Step To Curb Trump

Published by digby on December 14, 2023

They sneaked it into the defense bill

The Hill reports:

Congress has approved legislation that would prevent any president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress. 

The measure, spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), was included in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which passed out of the House on Thursday and is expected to be signed by President Biden. 

The provision underscores Congress’s commitment to the NATO alliance that was a target of former President Trump’s ire during his term in office. The alliance has taken on revitalized importance under Biden, especially since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

“NATO has held strong in response to [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s war in Ukraine and rising challenges around the world,” Kaine said in a statement. He added the legislation “reaffirms U.S. support for this crucial alliance that is foundational for our national security. It also sends a strong message to authoritarians around the world that the free world remains united.”

Rubio said the measure served as a critical tool for congressional oversight.

“We must ensure we are protecting our national interests and protecting the security of our democratic allies,” he said in a statement. 

Biden has invested deeply in the NATO alliance during his term, committing more troops and military resources to Europe as a show of force against Putin’s war. He has also overseen the expansion of the alliance with the inclusion of Finland and ongoing efforts to secure Sweden’s full accession.

Trump, the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, has sent mixed messages on the alliance ahead of 2024. The former president’s advocates say his tough talk and criticisms of the alliance served to inspire member-states to fulfill their obligations to reach 2 percent of defense spending, lightening the burden on the U.S.

But Trump’s critics say the former president’s rhetoric weakens the unity and force of purpose of the alliance. And they expressed concerns that Trump would abandon the U.S. commitment to the mutual defense pact of the alliance or withdraw the U.S. completely. 

You have to love Trump supporter Marco Rubio proving once again that he talks out of both sides of his mouth. He publicly gives him kudos and slams Biden but clearly knows that Trump is a massive threat.

Also, Trumps critics are right. Even if he can’t unilaterally withdraw from NATO, he can easily destroy it just by letting his buddy Vladimir Putin have his way:

In an interview with columnist Thomas B. Edsall of The New York Times, Council on Foreign Relations senior vice president James Lindsay believes that a second Trump term would be a massive windfall for Russia’s Vladimir Putin, currently mired in a disastrous invasion of Ukraine that has evolved into a costly stalemate.

“Trump could effectively gut NATO simply by saying he will not come to the aid of NATO allies in the event they are attacked,” said Lindsay. “The power of Article V rests on the belief that alliance members, and specifically, the most powerful alliance member, will act when called upon. Destroy that belief and the organization withers. Walking away from Ukraine would damage the alliance as well even though Ukraine is not a member of NATO. Member countries would read it as a signal that Trump is abandoning Europe.”

Even in his first term, Trump was often hostile toward the NATO alliance, complaining that other member states needed to pay more in military spending to secure American support, and he frequently praised Putin on the world stage — to this day saying he trusts the Russian autocrat more than the U.S. intelligence agencies, whom he believes were out to get him.

“Trump’s hostility toward alliances, skepticism about the benefits of cooperation writ large, and his belief in the power of unilateral action will lead him to make foreign policy moves that will unintentionally provide strategic windfalls to China, Russia, Iran or North Korea,” Lindsay continued. “The scenario in which he withdraws the United States from NATO or says he will not abide by Article V is the most obvious example.”

The actual motivation of Trump in doing this, “will be to save money and/or free the United States from foreign entanglements,” Lindsay added. “But Vladimir Putin would love to see NATO on the ash heap of history.”

Putin is clearly going to hold out until next November in the hopes that Trump will win. And I’m sure he’ll do what he can to help. It wouldn’t be the first time. And now, Trump has the entire Republican Party on board the Putin train as well.

Here’s Julia Davis’ report from last week:

Republicans voted to block a $110.5 billion emergency spending bill to aid Ukraine and Israel Wednesday night, sparking celebrations in Moscow where they believe the U.S. will withdraw support for Kyiv allowing them to win the war.

A classified briefing with administration officials reportedly devolved into a meltdown on Tuesday afternoon, making it clear that the measure would fail. “We are about to abandon Ukraine,” Senator Christopher S. Murphy told the press as he left the briefing. “When Vladimir Putin marches into a NATO country, they will rue the day they decided to play politics with the future of Ukraine’s security.”

These developments prompted jubilation in Moscow. During Wednesday’s broadcast of a state TV program 60 Minutes, Evgeny Popov said Ukraine was now in “agony” and it was “difficult to imagine a bigger humiliation.”

During his morning show Full Contact on Wednesday, top pro-Kremlin propagandist Vladimir Solovyov joyfully noted: “[Janet] Yellen screamed, “Don’t you dare!” [Joe] Biden screamed, “Don’t you dare!” but Republicans said, “Go to hell! We won’t give your khokhols [slur for “Ukrainians”] any money.” The segment was entitled, “No one needs Ukraine anymore—especially the United States.”

Appearing on his program, America analyst Dmitry Drobnitsky noted, “The downfall of Ukraine means the downfall of Biden! Two birds with one stone!”

During his appearance on 60 Minutes, Dmitry Abzalov, president of the Center for Strategic Communications, predicted that the fiasco with the funding for Ukraine will spell the political demise of Biden. Host Olga Skabeeva added, “We’ll have no pity for him! To the contrary, we’re ready to hammer those final nails right in!” With a happy grin, Skabeeva said, “Well done, Republicans! They’re standing firm! That’s good for us.”

Roman Golovanov, the host of Golovanov’s Time on Vladimir Solovyov’s channel Solovyov Live, pointed out, “This will be a great revelation to other countries. It is even more dangerous to be a friend of the United States than its enemy. In the end, they will abandon you, leaving nothing but the scorched earth on your territory.”

The turmoil comes at a critical point in time, with Russia facing internal issues, while its invasion failed to proceed at the rate anticipated by the experts. The population is tired of the war but is predictably hesitant to express that for fear of being arrested or otherwise persecuted. Instead, many show their displeasure by tuning out the relentless war coverage. On Wednesday, Solovyov noted, “We lived in peace for too long and now we have to get used to living through war… With great interest, I’m observing the negative growth on my Telegram channel, meaning that the number of followers is sharply declining. Oh well, that’s life.” Solovyov previously complained that every day Russians are losing interest in Putin’s war.

The GOP’s willingness to jeopardize Ukraine’s ability to defend itself provided a sudden boost to the faltering Russian propagandists—a crucial element of Putin’s war effort that is used to motivate the masses. In recent months, their rhetoric devolved from “When we win” to “If we win,” reflecting realities on the ground. Winter’s arrival added another layer of concern. The Republicans brought back the joy for Putin’s gloomy propagandists, reviving their musings as to how they will “punish” Ukrainians once Russia wins.

The only news that dampened the celebration in Moscow was the revelation that Taylor Swift–and not Vladimir Putin–was named TIME Magazine’s Person of the Year. The host of The Meeting Place Andrey Norkin angrily complained, “Taylor Swift! No one knows who that broad is, but Americans worship her.”

As she says, they are very happy with the GOP but they are ecstatic about the potential return of Trump.

I don’t think there’s any doubt that the entire panoply of alliances that have been the bulwark of the post WWII world will be blown up. And maybe you think it’s time for a reevaluation of our national security and foreign policy in that regard which is certainly arguable. But I don’t think anyone with any sense would think that in a time of existential global threat of climate change and various new emerging threats it makes sense to just blow everything up with nothing but Donald Trump’s dazzling personality to put in its place.

For instance, this should work out well:

Trump may be prepared to give up on even attempting to convince Kim to dismantle his country’s nuclear weapons if he wins another term in 2024. At least part of his motivation, the people said, would be to avoid wasting time on what he sees as futile arms talks — and focus instead on the larger task of competing with China.

Trump, one of the people said, is highly motivated to get an agreement with North Korea. “He knows he wants a deal,” this person said of Trump. “What type of deal? I don’t think he has thought that through.”

“Thinking it through” would be a first.

That’s the kind of thing we’re looking at if Trump wins. His approach to foreign policy is just as lethal as his fascist domestic policy. It’s terrifying.

It’s Happy Hollandaise time, folks. If you’d like to contribute you can do so below:


Why Social Media Is A Toxic Influence

Published by digby on December 14, 2023

It’s overrun by horrible people and the bots that impersonate them

The First lady shared this innocuous Christmas video and then all hell broke loose:

Here’s a perfect example of everything that’s wrong with Xitter. First look at this fun White House Christmas video shared by the First Lady:

So what’s the problem?

Well:

That’s supposed to be Karine Jean Pierre with Volodymyr Zelensky

They seem nice, don’t they?

It goes on like that for days. I think Amanda Marcotte nailed it. It’s obvious:

I know! It’s tap-dancing, it’s not pole dancing fergawdsakes. And the choeography dancing through the White House was impressive! But yeah, some of the dancers are black and some are gay. And they are (apparently) too exuberant which means they don’t know their place. It’s pretty clear what these critics are upset about.

Honestly, there is nothing these homophobic racist jerks won’t whine about. Nothing…

It’s Happy Hollandaise time, folks. If you’d like to participate, you can do so below. 🙂

Another December at the Supreme Court

Published by digby on December 14, 2023

Let’s hope it goes better than it did 23 years ago

The Republican party’s descent into post-ideological madness has been well documented over the years, here and elsewhere. Those of us who have been around a while started seeing it back in the 1980s when Newt Gingrich and his gang started to adopt scorched earth tactics to destroy their political opponents and it gained steam during the Clinton years with a tabloid strategy designed to titillate the electorate and offend the allegedly pious right wing Christians.

But it shifted into something more dangerous in the 2000 election when they decided that there were no holds barred when it came to holding on to power.

I was reminded of all that yesterday when this popped up in my social media feeds:

I assume that you all know what went down in that case so I won’t belabor it. In a nutshell, when the Republicans pulled out every shady stop in a state run by the candidate’s brother to ensure that recounts were stopped so that his rival would never go ahead in the election, we should have known that our democracy was more fragile than we thought. And when the Supreme Court surprisingly stepped in and two Justices, who had been nominated to the court by the candidate’s father, made up the 5-4 majority that ended the count and put their boy into the White House it was a warning shot across the bow.

The inherent corruption of the Republican party and the weakness of our democracy was on full display but we turned away. They all told us to “get over it.” They won, we lost.

It was only 16 years later that once again we had an election in which the winner of the popular vote lost the electoral college. And then it happened again in 2020, with each time the margins becoming exponentially larger. And the Republicans, emboldened by their previous victories and the enthusiasm of their deluded base for a celebrity demagogue, went all in with the electoral corruption.

Donald Trump put three justices on the Supreme Court, two of them through corrupt means engineered by the gravedigger of democracy, Mitch McConnell. Now, they have agreed to look at a couple of cases that could end the Special Counsel’s pursuit of justice for Donald Trump’s coup and insurrection in 2020. Everything is on the line this time.

The first concerns the charge of obstruction of an official proceeding which has been used against many of the January 6th insurrectionists and is one of the charges against Trump. The other is the specious notion of blanket presidential immunity, which the court agreed to consider but which has also been taken up by the DC court of appeals on an accelerated basis. Both of them will have serious consequences for the rule of law and the upcoming election.

It was inevitable that the Supremes had to weigh in eventually so it’s probably better that they do it sooner rather than later. I wish I had more confidence that they will do the right thing but having been scarred by that earlier intervention, and with the court majority made up of right wing ideologues and partisan hacks, I’m not sanguine.

But I am hoping for the best, as always. What else can we do?

Here at Hullabaloo we’ll be following this closely. We have no lawyers on board but we do read and watch the news obsessively and will try to bring you the best coverage and analysis we see. The legal maneuverings are some of the most important stories out there.

Here’s why it matters so much:

If you could help us keep this place going for the next year as we face the most important election of our lifetimes (and I really mean that!!!!) it would be most appreciated. Your generosity in the past has meant so much and I will always be grateful

I sincerely hope everyone can take a break from all the crazy, rest up and get ready for what’s going to be a very bumpy year.

Cheers,
digby

Happy Hollandaise everyone!









You Could Have Said Something Sooner, Paul

Published by digby on December 14, 2023

Dreamy Paul Ryan has some thoughts about Donald Trump

The Guardian has a write up on his comments on a podcast from last month that’s only now making the rounds. He doesn’t say anything we all didn’t already know but it might mean something to a few swing voters who remember him as a normal Republican:

Ryan, from Wisconsin, left Congress in 2019 and now sits on the board of Fox Corp, parent company of Fox News. He was speaking to Kevin Kajiwara, co-president of Teneo Political Risk Advisory, in a podcast interview recorded in November but widely noticed this week.

Voices on both sides of the main political aisle have criticised Ryan for not strongly opposing Trump when he ran for the Republican nomination in 2016, or through four chaotic years in the White House that ended in the deadly January 6 attack on Congress.

When stepping down Ryan praised Trump’s 2017 tax cuts, widely blamed for increasing inequality and the national deficit, as one of his biggest achievements along with increasing defense spending.

Trump was impeached twice, including for January 6, but escaped conviction and now dominates polling for the next Republican presidential nomination.

He does so despite facing 91 criminal charges, including 17 related to attempted election subversion, and civil threats including a business fraud trial and a defamation suit arising from a rape claim a judge called “substantially true”.

Kajiwara asked Ryan how he thought history would judge Kinzinger and Cheney, conservative Republicans from Illinois and Wyoming who stood against Trump and sat on the January 6 committee before being forced out of Congress.

“Look,” Ryan said, “Trump’s not a conservative. He’s an authoritarian narcissist. So I think they basically called him out for that. He’s a populist, authoritarian narcissist.

“… All of his tendencies are basically where narcissism takes him, which is whatever makes him popular, makes him feel good at any given moment.

“He doesn’t think in classical liberal-conservative terms. He thinks in an authoritarian way. And he’s been able to get a big chunk of the Republican base to follow him because he’s the culture warrior.”

Ryan, an economic conservative who was Mitt Romney’s running mate in 2012, continued: “There has to be some line, some principle that is so important to you that you’re just not going to cross, so that when you’re brushing your teeth in the morning, look yourself in the mirror, you like what you see. I think Adam and Liz are brushing their teeth, liking what they see.

“And I think a lot of people in Congress … on the second impeachment, they thought Trump was dead. They thought after January 6, he wasn’t going to have a comeback. He was dead, so they figured, ‘I’m not going to take this heat, vote against this impeachment, because he’s gone anyway.’

“But … he’s been resurrected. There’s lots of reasons for that. But he has been. So I think there’s a lot of people who already regret not getting him out of the way when they could have. So I think history will be kind to those people who saw what was happening and called it out, even though it was at the expense of their wellbeing.”

@accountablegop Former House Speaker Paul Ryan praises Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney for standing up to Trump: “Trump's not a conservative. He's an authoritarian, a narcissist…Adam and Liz stepped out of the flow and called it out and paid for it with their careers.” #republican #accountability #gop #nevertrump #never #trump #politics #political #fyp #foryou #washingtondc #conservative ♬ original sound – AccountableGOP

Did Ryan call it out early? I don’t remember that.

But better late than never, I suppose. But it would be good if he appeared in some places other than an obscure podcast to make these comments. Like Fox news, for instance. He’s on the board for crying out loud.

Sure the MAGA crowd will reject him as the worst RINO. They did that all the way back in 2016. But there might be a few people who need to hear this that could be persuaded not to vote for him.

I don’t expect Paul Ryan to come out for Biden. (I suppose it’s possible since it’s looking more like Cheney and Kinzinger will do it, but I’d be shocked.) Still, if he made the case for staying home or writing in someone else it could help. Just saying this stuff is better than nothing but he could do a lot more.

Everybody knows that he’s not the only Republican who thinks this. Maybe his coming forward will motivate some of them to speak out as well. I’m not counting on it, but you never know.

Happy Hollandaise everyone! If you’d like to help keep the lights on I’d appreciate it:

Well, well, well

Published by digby on December 14, 2023

It appears that James Comer is quite the financial operator

Roger Sollenberger at the Daily Beast broke a story about Comer’s shady financial dealings with his brother a couple of weeks ago. When confronted with it in a hearing by Florida Congressman Jared Moskowitz, he got so mad he lost control and called Moskowitz a smurf.

Now the AP has filled in some more blanks on Comer’s finances:

Rep. James Comer, a multimillionaire farmer, boasts of being one of the largest landholders near his rural Kentucky hometown, and he has meticulously documented nearly all of his landholdings on congressional financial disclosure documents – roughly 1,600 acres in all.

But there are six acres that he bought in 2015 and co-owns with a longtime campaign contributor that he has treated differently, transferring his ownership to Farm Team Properties, a shell company he co-owns with his wife.

Interviews and records reviewed by The Associated Press provide new insights into the financial deal, which risks undercutting the force of some of Comer’s central arguments in his impeachment inquiry of President Joe Biden. For months, the chairman of the House Oversight committee and his Republican colleagues have been pounding Biden for how his relatives traded on their famous name to secure business deals.

In particular, Comer has attacked some Biden family members, including the president’s son Hunter, over their use of “shell companies” that appear designed to obscure millions of dollars in earnings they received from shadowy middlemen and foreign interests.

Such companies typically exist only on paper and are formed to hold an asset, like real estate. Their opaque structures are often designed to help hide ownership of property and other assets.

The companies used by the Bidens are already playing a central role in the impeachment investigation, which is expected to gain velocity after House Republicans voted Wednesday to formally authorize the probe. The vote follows the federal indictment last week of Biden’s son Hunter on charges he engaged in a scheme to avoid paying taxes on his earnings through the companies.

But as Comer works to “deliver the transparency and accountability that the American people demand” through the GOP’s investigation, his own finances and relationships have begun to draw notice, too, including his ties to prominent local figures who have complicated pasts not all that dissimilar to some of those caught up in his Biden probe.

[…]

The AP found that Farm Team Properties functions in a similarly opaque way as the companies used by the Bidens, masking his stake in the land that he co-owns with the donor from being revealed on his financial disclosure forms. Those records describe Farm Team Properties as his wife’s “land management and real estate speculation” company without providing further details.

It’s not clear why Comer decided to put those six acres in a shell company, or what other assets Farm Team Properties may hold. On his most recent financial disclosure forms, Comer lists its value as being as much as $1 million, a substantial sum but a fraction of his overall wealth.

Ethics experts say House rules require members of Congress to disclose all assets held by such companies that are worth more than $1,000.

“It seems pretty clear to me that he should be disclosing the individual land assets that are held by” the shell company, said Delaney Marsco, a senior attorney who specializes in congressional ethics at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center in Washington.

[…]

Comer created the company in 2017 to hold his stake in the six acres that he purchased two years earlier in a joint venture with Darren Cleary, a major campaign contributor and construction contractor from Monroe County, Kentucky, where the congressman was born and raised.

It’s not clear how Comer came to invest with Cleary, who did not respond to an interview request. They have offered mutual praise for each other over the years, including Comer having called Cleary “my friend” and “the epitome of a successful businessperson” from the House floor.

Cleary, his businesses and family have donated roughly $70,000 to Comer’s various campaigns, records show. He has also lauded Comer on social media for “For Fighting For Us Everyday” and has posted photos of the two on a golf course together.

At the time he and Comer entered their venture, Cleary was selling an acre of his family’s land to Kentucky so it could build a highway bypass near Tompkinsville, which was completed in 2020. He sold Comer a 50% stake for $128,000 in six acres he owned that would end up being adjacent to the highway.

Comer, a powerful political figure in this rural part of Kentucky, announced his bid for Congress days after purchasing the land.

Marketing materials described the land as “choice” property and play up its proximity to the bypass. The partnership sold off about an acre last year for $150,000, a substantial increase over its value when purchased, property records show.

Farm Team Properties has also become more valuable. On Comer’s financial disclosure forms, it has risen in value from between $50,000 and $100,000 in 2016 to between $500,001 and $1 million in 2022, records show.

As House Oversight Committee chairman, Comer has presented himself as a bipartisan ethics crusader only interested in uncovering the truth. As evidence, he has pointed to a long career as a state legislator and official who sought to build bridges with Democrats and to “clean up scandal, restore confidence, and crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse.”

Interviews with allies, critics and constituents, however, reveal a fierce partisan who has ignored wrongdoing by friends and supporters if they can help him advance in business and politics.

“The Jamie Comer I knew was light and sunshine and looking for common ground. Now he’s Nixonian,” said Adam Edelen, a former Democratic state auditor and friend, comparing the lawmaker to a disgraced former president who resigned from office amid the Watergate scandal.

He’s beyond Nixonian. He’s Trumpian which is even worse.

Everyone who’s known him says that he’s made an abrupt turn in the last couple of years from being a fairly moderate (for Kentucky), easygoing, guy who was willing to work with others. Now he’s an unapologetic MAGA crusader. If I had to guess, I’d say that being on TV all the time is a very intoxicating thing for some people. He’s on TV a lot.

By the way, Donald Trump has over 500 shell companies. Nobody knows where half of his money is. He’s being sued for fraud by the state of New York and has had to settle one massive lawsuit after another. Oh, also both of his sons, his daughter and his son-in-law were selling access to any foreigner with cash throughout the Trump presidency as was the president himself with his pay-to-play properties all over the world.

But hey, Burisma! Also Biden paid Hunter’s car payment.

Honestly, the biggest regret for me about Trump’s first term was that they never went after him for all the corruption that was going on right in front of our eyes. I know they felt they had to pick their battles but this was really low hanging fruit and they never wanted to go there. It was a mistake.

It’s Happy Hollandaise time. If you’d like to help …


“The Entertainers Took Over Congress”

Published by Tom Sullivan on December 14, 2023

Paul Ryan on MAGA

Howie Klein (Down With Tyranny!) posts this morning on former speaker Paul Ryan’s interview from two weeks ago.

“The entertainers took over Congress,” Ryan told Teneo Insights [timestamp 2:10]. When “a handful of nihilists who go to Congress not to legislate but to be provocative entertainers, this is what happens.”

The Party of Trump was not amused, Howie observes:

Now remember, this is the guy who predicted that if Trump is the nominee, Republicans will lose next year. He predicted Biden would beat Trump and said he thinks “leaders should endeavor to be honest, ethical, moral people who try to set standards for themselves and lead by example across the country. Donald Trump doesn’t try to do any of that. He does the opposite, frankly. So I just don’t think he’s fit for the job here… Do you think those suburban voters like Donald Trump more since Jan. 6? I mean, good grief. They didn’t vote for him this last time, they’re not going to vote for him again.” Nor was he excited about the congressional Republicans: “It’s nihilism, is what it is. We look like fools. We look like we can’t govern.” In the video below, he also predicted that if Trump is the nominee– he will be– the GOP will lose House and Senate seats. He’s correct.

Mediaite published the video of Ryan slamming Trump again yesterday. Kevin Kajiwara asked Ryan how he thinks history will remember Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, both Republicans whose political careers in the House of Representatives came to an end after they stood against the former president. Trump will go ballistic when he reads Ryan’s response:

Look, Trump’s not a conservative. He’s an authoritarian narcissist. So I think they basically called him out for that. He’s a populist, authoritarian narcissist. So historically speaking, all of his tendencies are basically where narcissism takes him, which is whatever makes him popular, makes him feel good at any given moment… He doesn’t think in classical liberal-conservative terms. He thinks in an authoritarian way. And he’s been able to get a big chunk of the Republican base to follow him because he’s the culture warrior.

And so I think Adam and Liz stepped out of the flow and called it out and, you know, paid for it. Paid for it with their careers. But I think, again, back to my earlier point, I don’t think he is really very good at these jobs unless you’re willing to lose these jobs. And there has to be some line, some principle that is so important to you that you’re just not going to cross so that when you’re brushing your teeth in the morning, look yourself in the mirror. You like what you see.

Mediaite adds:

Ryan has been on Fox Corporation’s board of directors since 2019. This has been a recurring point of contention for Trump, his allies, and Trump media backers like former Fox News host Tucker Carlson have accused Ryan of meddling behind the scenes.

Maybe yes, maybe no. But why not get well paid for doing it, eh?

Somewhere recently I read that once the war against the Axis powers was over, people all over France began claiming they were part of La Résistance against the Nazis and the collaborationist Vichy régime. A national case of stolen valor. So it may be in this country once MAGA is no more.

Cheney and Kinzinger earned their plaudits for standing up to Donald Trump while they were still in office.

It’s Happy Hollandaise Time! We’re glad you came.

First they come for the women

Published by Tom Sullivan on December 14, 2023

Martin Niemöller got it wrong

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Mike Luckovich distilled the current state of the conservative war on women to two panels. (Luckovich post from Threads.)

“First they came for the socialists,” etc. Per the Holocaust Museum’s Encyclopedia, Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller “sympathized with many Nazi ideas and supported radically right-wing political movements” in the 1920s and early 1930s. But once Hitler came to power and began interfering with the church, he became a critic. Niemöller spent WWII in Nazi prisons and concentration camps. He wrote “First they came for…” after the war.

Niemöller got it wrong. He was a man, after all.

First they come for the women.

First it was the Dobbs decision revoking half a century of women’s right to bodily autonomy. We’re throwing the abortion question back to the states, the court said. Let them decide.

Then came a string of ballot measures and laws passed protecting women’s rights. Ohio Republicans immediately declared the voters’ will was not binding on their gerrymandered legislative majority. They would revoke state courts’ jurisdiction over cases brought under the new constitutional amendment protecting reproductive rights.

Texas passed its highly restrictive abortion law while assuring the public that exceptions were built in to protect women’s lives. Then AG Ken Paxton, backed up by the state’s Supreme Court, proved that the exceptions were a sham.

The Arizona Supreme Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a case involving an 1864 law still on the books:

At stake in the case is the future of that Civl War-era law, which criminalized abortion by making it a felony punishable by two to five years in prison for anyone who performs or helps a woman obtain one. The law — which was codified again in 1901, and once again in 1913, after Arizona became a state — includes an exception to save the woman’s life.

A more recent law from March 2022 snapped into effect weeks after Roe was overturned banning abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy. The law makes exceptions for medical emergencies but not for rape or incest. 

Simmering in the background was the Texas case challenging women’s access to pharmaceutical abortion. Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern write:

The Supreme Court agreed on Wednesday to consider a challenge to access to mifepristone, the first drug used in medication abortion, teeing up the most important dispute over reproductive rights since Roe v. Wade’s reversal in June of 2022. Based on the narrow scope of the issue the court ultimately agreed to hear, there is good reason to believe that a majority of justices will quash the case by deciding that the plaintiffs had no business suing in the first place. Such a decision, which will come down months before the 2024 election, will probably be hailed as proof of the high court’s sober moderation. It will, in reality, prove no such thing. Rather, that outcome would leave the smoking wreckage of abortion access post-Dobbs intact, while pushing off, for now, its most unhinged expansion by a court below. More dramatically, such a move would leave open the possibility that a future Republican president could ban abortion nationwide without enacting a single new law by exploiting the puritanical Comstock Act of 1873. If, while protecting access to medication abortion, SCOTUS opts to keep this loaded gun on the table, then the legality of abortion in all 50 states will very much be on the ballot next year.

Jessica Valenti writes at her Abortion, Every Day substack:

What’s most important to know is that SCOTUS will not be looking at the original challenge to FDA approval of the drug. Instead, they’ll review the 2016 and 2021 changes to restrictions around mifepristone, and whether or not the Alliance of Hippocratic Medicine (the anti-abortion group who brought the lawsuit) has standing. 

In short, the legality of mifepristone shouldn’t be at risk, but access and availability of the medication is. It’s a reduced scope than what the anti-abortion movement was hoping for, and as Chris Geidner writes at Law Dork, it represents “a best-case scenario for abortion rights supporters.”

Still, the restrictions they’re reviewing are meaningful ones—like tele-health access, the ability to receive abortion medication in the mail, and how far into pregnancy you can take the pills. (Right now it’s 10 weeks, these restrictions could put it at 7 weeks.)

“They’re ready to be cruel. They’re watching themselves be cruel,” Valenti told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes Wednesday night. “They just don’t care.”

Niemöller got it wrong. First they come for the women.

And the extremists’ autocratic bent is about more than abortion.

“Government governs best that governs least,” conservatives intoned solemnly for decades. Until they gerrymandered themselves into legislative seats resistant to democracy. Now Republicans in control of state capitols are engaged on a war on blue cities. And universities. And women.

Republicans tolerated democracy so long as they felt it gave them a route to power and a smidgen of legitimacy. And now? They’ve abandoned democracy. A large swath of their party wants to elect Donald Trump again, a man whose rhetoric now echoes Hitler and Mussolini and who admires the world’s autocrats.

Remember the Russkies? Republicans spent the Cold War decades as the staunchest anti-Russia hawks. President Ronald Reagan, among the staunchest of them. And now? They want to be like them. They’re taking advice from Hungary’s autocratic Prime Minister Viktor Orban on abandoning Ukraine to Putin’s Russia.

We have a Holocaust Museum. Perhaps it’s time for a Hypocrisy Museum.

It’s Happy Hollandaise Time! We’re glad you came.

They Tried To Persuade Him That He Lost

Published by digby on December 13, 2023

He chose not to believe anyone who wouldn’t tell him what he wanted to hear.

Ken Chesebro was one of those who were happy to give him what he wanted. And Trump listened:

Former Trump lawyer Kenneth Chesebro has been talking to all kinds of legal inquiries andit seems there’s always something new for him to say. Here’s one of the latest:

Before a group of supportive lawyers entered the Oval Office for a photo-op with then-President Donald Trump in December 2020, they were given a clear instruction, according to one attendee: Don’t get Trump’s hopes up about overturning the election.

One attorney, Jim Troupis, toed the line. He’d just finished leading Trump’s failed election challenge in Wisconsin, and bluntly told the president it was over in that state.

But when the conversation shifted to Arizona, attorney Kenneth Chesebro deviated from the plan. He told Trump he could still win – and explained how the “alternate electors” he helped assemble in Arizona and six other states gave Trump an opening to continue contesting the election until Congress certified the results on January 6, 2021.

Chesebro’s optimistic comments immediately created problems by apparently giving Trump renewed hope that he could still somehow stay in office. Former RNC chairman Reince Priebus left the meeting “extremely concerned” about the January 6 conversation. Priebus, a Wisconsin native who served as Trump’s first chief of staff, later warned Troupis and Chesebro not to tell anyone about what happened.

This dramatic account comes from Chesebro, who sat for an interview last week with Michigan state prosecutors investigating the fake electors plot. CNN has exclusively obtained audio of that interview, which includes previously unreported details about the pivotal Oval Office meeting.

The Michigan attorney general already charged the 16 Republican electors who cast sham ballots in Lansing, and CNN recently reported that the investigation is still ongoing. Fifteen of the electors pleaded not guilty; one got his charges dropped in a cooperation deal.

The “photo-op … gone south,” as Chesebro called the December 16, 2020, meeting, reveals a previously unknown instance of Trump hearing directly that he lost – which could factor into his federal election subversion trial. But it also highlights how others in Trump’s orbit leaned into his delusions and aided his quixotic effort to cling onto power…

“There was a conscious effort to deflect him from a sense of any possibility that he could pull out the election,” Chesebro told Michigan prosecutors about the thinking going into the meet-and-greet with Trump. “…Our marching orders were: Don’t say anything that makes him feel more positive than the beginning of the meeting.’”

I’s unclear who gave the so-called “marching orders” to the group of pro-Trump attorneys.

Nonetheless, Chesebro told Trump he could still prevail in Arizona. He also spelled out the basics of the fake electors scheme, where Trump supporters in seven critical states cast faux ballots and signed phony certificates claiming they were the rightful electors.

“I ended up explaining that Arizona was still hypothetically possible — because the alternate electors had voted,” Chesebro told Michigan state investigators, later adding that this made it “clear (to Trump) in a way that maybe it hadn’t been before, that we had until January 6 to win.”

“And that, you know, created a real problem,” Chesebro added.

A source told CNN that a visibly angry Priebus, who arranged the photo-op for his home-state delegation, intervened to shut down the conversation after he saw Chesebro whispering to Trump about election procedures.

So I guess Trump is going to have to say that he was just listening to “his attorney”, Kenneth Chesebro, who told him he could win and we’re supposed to believe that it makes sense that he chose to believe every other legal and election adviser (except Giuliani and Sidney Powell)didn’t know what they were talking about.

I’m sure the cult will buy it. They believe everything he says. But it doesn’t seem to me that a jury, having taken an oath and been instructed by a judge, will see that as being reasonable. After all, this is the man who had been running the most powerful country in the world for four years. How is it possible that some obscure guy named Chesebro would be considered the expert when the entire DOJ, the Judiciary and his own white house counsel’s office made it very, very clear that he had lost the election and should concede?

But it does show one thing, doesn’t it? Trump knew about the alternate electors plot in December, didn’t he? And he embraced it.

Happy Hollandaise everybody! If you’ve a mind to throw something in the old stocking….


Stay Sane, Stay Decent

Published by digby on December 13, 2023

I am offering this thoughtful piece on the sexual violence of October 7th by Jill Filipovic with a gift link because I really want you to be able to read the whole thing. There’s so much sturm und drang around this topic that it’s hard to ever find clarity. This is one of the rare articles that provides it without pandering, excusing or obfuscating the reality.

She discusses in detail how difficult it was to get reliable forensic evidence in the aftermath of the attack and explains why it was important, as a journalist, to wait for the facts. Reporting of sexual violence is war is always fraught and with all discussions of rape it’s important to be precise because so often the reflexive response is to dismiss it. But that’s not the whole story here:

But soon after the attacks, the evidence started to come in, and it took the form that evidence of wartime rape often does: accounts from survivors of the attacks, emergency responders, medical personnel, those who examined the bodies and journalists who were permitted to see some attack footage. Some of these accounts have been presented by organizations, including Physicians for Human Rights-Israel. A Civil Commission on Oct. 7 Crimes by Hamas Against Women and Children has been established in Israel […]

But even as evidence mounted, so did disbelief. On social media, accounts often flood mentions of Hamas’s gendered violence with arguments that no such thing happened, often insisting that the allegations were invented by the Israeli government as a pretext for war, are simply too unsubstantiated to be believed or pale in comparison with Palestinian suffering. Some of these accounts may be bots; others have hundreds of thousands of followers. […]

Denials and deflections have come from people with vast reach. Some work at prominent magazines; others run popular podcasts, YouTube channels and websites. These denials have migrated into global leftist discourse and seem intended to sow doubt or prompt wholesale dismissal of the subject.

You may find this surprising in the age of MeToo. But I can testify to the fact that it is absolutely true. She asks why anyone would doubt that sexual violence is part of war. After all, it’s been the case since the beginning of time. And she wonders, “does anyone really believe that, were it not for rape claims, Israel’s campaign in Gaza would be any less brutal,  let alone nonexistent?”

But that misses the point. For many denialists, truth doesn’t seem to be the goal; a monopoly on righteousness is.

From the earliest days after Oct. 7, individual supporters of all sides have disseminated and fallen for distortions and blatant fabrications. This war comes at a time of minimal global trust and maximal ability to seek out evidence that supports whatever theory suits one’s political context.

Reporting on the attacks and the war also produced genuine confusion. Muddying the picture even more were claims later modified by reputable journalistic outlets, which has only propelled conspiracy mongering and denialism. Further, while much of the obfuscation has been stoked by bad actors — be they hostile foreign governments, right-wing bigots or cynical left-wing activists — those atrociously dishonest messages are then amplified and repeated, even by no doubt well-meaning people who simply sympathize with a brutalized population.

She makes the obvious point that while these horrors are often part of war, that doesn’t make it legitimate. Also:

Some of those who deny or question allegations of Oct. 7 sexual abuse argue not only that those abuses may not have happened but also that giving credence to these claims is, in effect, justifying Israel’s war in Gaza — a theory weakened by the fact that the Israeli incursion began well before stories of sexual violence made very many headlines. It’s a profoundly morally bankrupt position, one that demands silencing the truth to achieve a desired end. It’s a means of undermining stories of violence that has worked throughout the ages, as women have been told to keep quiet for the cause or encouraged not to ruin a good man’s life or written largely out of history as inconvenient or even deserving victims of the good guys.

It’s exhausting having to argue such an obvious point with the rabid hawks. It’s profoundly depressing to have to make the same argument to members of the left who have never, up until now, taken that stance.

The horrors of this war do not have to be either/or. One can both face the mountain of evidence of sexual violence on Oct. 7 and confront the staggering Palestinian death toll — people who were not mere collateral damage but individuals whose lives were brutally snatched away and many more who will carry this displacement and loss and trauma with them for the rest of their lives. One can seek to understand the context in which a group like Hamas comes to be and curb the impulse to recast openly misogynist fundamentalists into freedom fighters. One can hold deep contempt for this right-wing Israeli government and oppose this war with every bone in one’s body.

That is such an obvious point I can’t believe anyone has to say it out loud. But it must be said out loud, I guess. What I’m seeing unfold on social media on both sides, admittedly at least partly fueled by malicious propaganda and fake news bots, is a modern version of what unfolded after 9/11, when so many people lost their moorings and gave in to blood lust and vengeance.

There is no excuse for October 7th and there is no excuse for the massive slaughter taking place in Gaza. It’s not hard to acknowledge that, it really isn’t.

These excerpts don’t do the piece justice and I urge you to click on the gift link above to read the whole thing. It’s very nuanced and filled with important facts and analyses that need to be understood if we are to try to understand this horrific event without losing ourselves.

It’s that time, folks. If you like to throw something in the old stocking, I’d be grateful:


Your Daily Dose Of Hopium

Published by digby on December 13, 2023

I suspect you haven’t heard about this. The only hysterical headlines are the ones that show Biden losing.

Ok, so what about those battleground states everyone was shrieking about the other day based on one poll?

Oh.

And then there’s this:

This is good too:

I’m not saying these things mean any more than anything else going into the election year. We don’t know what is really going to motivate people next November. But there’s no reason to discount them either. Let’s just say that there is a lot of information out there and there’s no reason to fall into a doom spiral just because the media likes to play up the negative Biden stories.

It’s Happy Hollandaise Time! If you’ve of a mind…