Digby's Hullabaloo Posts

Hold fast

We’ve reached “the end justifies the means” chapter of our American experiment. Peter Wehner runs down in The Atlantic a by-now familiar accounting of the fascistic things Donald Trump says and his MAGA audience applauds.

Trump’s rise to the presidency began with, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best.” (The Republican Party took that as candidate recruiting advice.) He’s gone from declaring Mexicans drug dealers, rapists and criminals in 2015 to telling crowds today that immigrants from south of the border are terrorists and escapees from mental institutions who are “poisoning the blood of our country.”

Wehner pointedly begins by sketching out the dehumanizing rhetoric that prededed the Rwandan genocide in 1994. I still remember just where I was when I heard that news on the radio.

But this sample from Wehner’s in-box and a personal interaction was particularly arresting:

As one Trump supporter put it in an email to me earlier this month, “Trump is decidedly not good and decent”—but, he added, “good and decent isn’t getting us very far politically.” And: “We’ve tried good and decent. But at the ballot box, that doesn’t work. We need to try another way.”

This sentiment is one I’ve heard many times before. In 2016, during the Republican primaries, a person I had known for many years through church wrote to me. “I think we have likely slipped past the point of no return as a country and I’m desperately hoping for a leader who can turn us around. I have no hope that one of the establishment guys would do that. That, I believe, is what opens people up to Trump. He’s all the bad things you say, but what has the Republican establishment given me in the past 16 years? First and foremost: BHO,” they said, using a derogatory acronym for Barack Obama that is meant to highlight his middle name, Hussein.

Some Americans’ embrace of American ideals and Constitutional principles has forever been a mile wide and an inch deep.

Trump is not speaking his plans in code. He and his acolytes speak bluntly of them. Republicans who gained control of state legislatures gerrymandered themselves into safe districts and boldly dismiss the will of voters are not just talking. They are showing us, plainly, and have in Wisconsin, in Ohio, in North Carolina. And on the steps of the Capitol on Jan. 6.

The end justifies the means. Might makes right. If they cannot get their way democratically, they’ll burn the republic to the ground and replace it with something, very, very different.

Wehner continues:

If I had told this individual in 2016 what Trump would say and do over the next eight years, I’m confident he would have laughed it off, dismissing it as “Trump Derangement Syndrome”—and that he would have assured me that if Trump did do all these things, then of course he would break with him. Yet here we are. Despite Trump’s well-documented depravity, he still has a vise grip on the GOP; he carried 94 percent of the Republican vote in 2020, an increase from 2016, and he is leading his closest primary challenger nationally by more than 45 points.

The first time I ran across the phrase “might makes right” was in a comic book I saw as a kid. It was the one atop this post, I think, and referenced the philosophy of Nazi Germany again and again: MIGHT MAKES RIGHT! MIGHT MAKES RIGHT!

The jingoistic lesson, of course, illustrated with images of air combat, was that the Allies eventually defeated fascism because, as Abraham Lincoln proclaimed at the end of his Cooper Union address, right makes might.

LET US HAVE FAITH THAT RIGHT MAKES MIGHT, AND IN THAT FAITH, LET US, TO THE END, DARE TO DO OUR DUTY AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.

“Unrelenting, top-to-bottom negativity”

Philosopher Linus van Pelt famously lamented, “There’s no heavier burden than a great potential!” It’s a burden Democrats carry too. Supporters and leaners are easily upset. Not so with Republicans. They anger us, sure, but because we expect so lttle of them they cannot disappoint us the way our friends can.

It is a dynamic David Roberts, a.k.a. Dr. Volts, wrote about in a thread on Sunday. A Washington Post profile of voters in Door County, Wisconsin (pop. 30k) finally pegged his P.K.E. meter.

Roberts writes (bolding mine):

This article is worth examining closely. It’s a classic “visit a swing county to hear about politics” piece, so it forces itself to be even-handed & “pox on both houses,” but if you read closely you can glimpse something else. washingtonpost.com/nation/interac…

Why are they upset? “the broader political backdrop— the impeachments, Trump’s torrent of falsehoods about the 2020 election, the Capitol insurrection, the band of hard-right Republicans ousting their speaker —has blocked out notice of what both sides cast as accomplishments…” 

Hm… what do all those things have in common? Oh, they’re all about Republican extremism! It’s relentless GOP agitprop & anger & corruption & hysteria that is making politics so draining. Because making people sick of politics *serves the right’s interests*. 

Here you see what might have been an alternate framing of the article: “the right’s quest to make politics toxic & to destroy citizens’ trust in basic political & media institutions is working.” The lead anecdote is about a woman seeing a *psychic* for answers. 

Then there’s this: “They long for compromise. They want to feel heard and understood. Most Americans, for instance, desire access to abortion, tighter restrictions on guns and affordable health care. Many wonder why our laws don’t reflect that.” 

There’s a party that talks constantly about compromise & making sure everyone’s heard. It supports access to abortion, tighter restrictions on guns, & more affordable health care. It’s the Democratic Party. It borders on performance art to refrain from saying so in that graf! 

Tell me again why Joe Biden’s approval ratings are so low. Rather, let Roberts tell us why Joe Biden’s approval ratings are so low. MSNBC’s Chris Hayes invited Roberts to explain it to viewers.

.@drvolts breaks down why it's unpopular to cheer on the Democratic Party:

"Everyone has incentive to criticize them. No one has the incentive to defend them." pic.twitter.com/qVahTS698I

— All In with Chris Hayes (@allinwithchris) November 22, 2023

An then this, from a swing voter:

“I can’t really speak to anything [Biden] has done,” he said, “because I’ve tuned it out, like a lot of people have. We’re so tired of the us-against-them politics.”

[sound of Dave becoming the Joker] 

So what we really have here is an article about swing voters pining for calmer, more sensible politics & a range of moderate policies–EXACTLY THE SHIT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY STANDS FOR. But when they tune in, all they see is madness & ugliness & fighting & claim & counter-claim… 

… so they “tune out” & thus do not hear about Biden saying/doing exactly the f’ing things they want someone to say/do. That is the right’s mission, accomplished. That is the core US political dynamic. That’s what these articles should be about. 

Everywhere, reactionaries in politics are the same: they try to blur truth, increase bile & anger, exhaust everyone, and convince the public that no one can be trusted (ie, only a Strong Man can fix it). Those are the circumstances in which reactionaries flourish. 

That’s what the right is doing in the US & the media is helping them by rewarding them with endless attention when they act out. The public is telling the WaPo here, as clearly as it can: we care about calm, deliberation, substance, policy, but all we get is spectacle. 

This is been a head-f’ing aspect of US politics as long as I’ve paid attention: centrists & swing voters pining for someone to do/say exactly what Democrats are doing/saying. They just don’t know Democrats are doing/saying it, because the view they get of politics obscures it. 

But then obscuring Democrats’ accomplishments is the idea. Both-sidesing by the press contributes to clouding the view, not clarifying it. Plus, shitting on Dems is the business model of the right-wing noise machine. Roberts notes in an earlier thread that Hayes spotlights (my bolding again):

If you’re on the right, shitting on Dems is how you demonstrate the shared hatreds that make you part of the tribe.

If you’re on the center-left, shitting on Dems is how you demonstrate the above-it-all independence that earns the admiration of peers.

If you’re on the left … 

… shitting on Dems is how you demonstrate the moral & ideological purity that are the price of membership.

If you’re in the media, shitting on Dems is how you fight off accusations of bias & establish your “objectivity.” 

There is no faction in US politics — barely even elected Dems! — for whom praising Dems is socially advantageous. There’s no approbation waiting, no repetitional [reputational] boost, for anyone. It is, from almost every vantage point, uncool. (Just try it on Twitter to see for yourself.) 

Thus we get today’s information environment, which responds to a transition from four years of violent irrational madness & mass death to three years of relative scandal-free sanity & economic recovery with … unrelenting, top-to-bottom negativity. 

No faction — far as I can tell, not a single individual — wants to reckon with their role & responsibility in this state of affairs, so I guess we’re just going to talk ourselves into outright fascism and it’s gonna be no one’s fault. 

Roberts almost gets at the fact that this dynamic programs our brains (yours and mine) with the notion that Democrats are hopelessly disappointing. Gaslighting on a societal scale [timestamp 43:55]. Through endless repetition we are all gaslighted (the word of the year in 2022). Being told repeatedly by people we trust — pundits, friends, allies, the “news” — that Democrats are feckless, “half a loaf,” etc., leaves glass-half-empty progressives who endlessly accuse conservatives of voting against their best interests considering staying home or voting third-party. That is, as Roberts suggests, talking ourselves into outright fascism out of pique.

“It was a magical evening”

Trump doesn’t believe in any of this religion stuff. But he believes in MAGA and if they love him, he loves them. They can have whatever they want as long as it benefits him personally. It works out great for everyone — except the sane, decent people of this country and the world:

CHRISTIAN NATIONALISTS WERE out in force at Mar-a-Lago on Friday night, once again demonstrating their proximity to MAGA power.

Lance Wallnau — the chief promoter of a “Seven Mountains Mandate” for right-wing Christians to seize control over government and culture — was dressed in a tux and streaming live to his 1 million Facebook followers. The black-tie event was the America First Policy Institute gala at Trump’s Palm Beach estate, where the former president was soon to speak.

As he filmed with his cell phone, Wallnau grabbed co-religionist Jim Garlow — the MAGA pastor with whom now-House Speaker Mike Johnson recently prayed to spare a “depraved” America from the “judgment that we clearly deserve.” Both religious figures are associated with an evangelical movement called the New Apostolic Reformation, or NAR, which has an unusual obsession with earthly power. The duo engaged in jocular banter during the stream on Friday: “You can read about you in the news lately,” Wallnau ribbed Garlow, referring to Rolling Stone’s coverage of the pastor’s prayer call with Johnson. Garlow rejoined: “It’s because we’re dangerous — what do they call us? — ‘Christian nationalists.’”

Garlow at first mocked the media attention, saying he was “disappointed they didn’t call us Christian internationalists” — reflecting the global ambition of his quest for right-wing Christian dominion. But then Garlow played the victim: “The phrase ‘Christian nationalist’ has one purpose,” he insisted. “And that is simply to bully Christians — to intimidate, silence them so they will not be involved governmentally.” Garlow then claimed that this was done in the service of satanic forces, “so The Enemy can have his way and destroy the country.”

The fact that Garlow and Wallnau were palling around in tuxedos at Mar-a-Lago the same week that their religious movement made national news for its troubling reach into the highest ranks of elected Republican politics, was itself another remarkable sign of that influence. Wallnau shared that Garlow’s online prayer partner — who has credited the pastor as a “profound influence” on both his life and his “walk with Christ” — was also in attendance. “Mike Johnson is here tonight,” Wallnau said. “I want to hear Mike Johnson. He’s under attack because he’s such an outspoken Christian.” (Rolling Stone could not independently confirm Johnson’s attendance at Mar-a-Lago. The Speaker’s spokesperson did not respond to multiple requests.) 

In his banter with Wallnau, Garlow certainly did not distance himself from a Christian nationalist ideology. In fact, he underscored his belief that Christians are meant to be in control — to advance the Kingdom of God across the planet. Garlow even advised Americans to break up with their pastors if the religious leaders don’t use the pulpit to advance “the issues that God has commanded us to.” Garlow explained: “We don’t just ‘preach Jesus.’ We preach what Jesus preached. He preached the Kingdom … What’s the King over? Everything. Everything. Including the governmental and political realm.”

The Friday evening gala at Mar-a-Lago was the culminating party of a three-day conference held by America First Policy Institute. AFPI exists to formulate policy for what MAGA-world anticipates will be a second Trump term. AFPI’s leaders include past bigwigs from the Trump administration like chair Linda McMahon, a former Trump cabinet member, and CEO Brooke Rollins, who served as Director of the Domestic Policy Council in the Trump White House. 

Other AFPI leadership include executive director Chad Wolf, who was the illicit acting Homeland Security chief when the Trump administration battled protestors in the streets of Portland; far-right economist Larry Kudlow; and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who addressed the AFPI conference on day one.

AFPI’s gathering featured a strong Christianist undercurrent. Paula White Cain — a top religious influencer in Trump’s circle — led prayer and scripture at an AFPI “Ladies” event, later posting on Instagram: “God moved at our prayer breakfast 🙏🏻.” Televangelist Jentezen Franklin, whose broadcast is called Kingdom Connection, was honored, along with his wife, with AFPI’s 2023 Patriot award.

In fact, right-wing religion seems to be woven through the DNA of AFPI. The group’s chief digital officer is Adam W. Schindler. Schindler is also a pastor who works closely with Garlow; they co-founded the World Prayer Network, which hosted the call where Mike Johnson decried the rise of LGBTQ children as evidence of America’s “dark” and nearly “irredeemable” culture. AFPI has also championed Johnson’s rise to speaker. Rollins, the CEO, wrote a Newsweek op-ed praising Johnson’s selection, calling him “indefatigably optimistic.” Rolling Stone sought interviews with Garlow, Wallnau, and Rollins; none responded. Schindler emailed that he is “proud to work at AFPI and support the work we do there.”

As the MAGA movement seeks a return to the White House, religious extremism is no longer marginalized. It is now baked into the cake. The AFPI conference proceedings included an appearance from Christian nationalist Charlie Kirk, of Turning Point USA. Self-proclaimed Christian nationalist congress member Marjorie Taylor Greene was also in attendance at the gala.

There were secular elements, too, including a performance by country star Wynonna Judd. Boldface MAGA names included former Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, former Notre Dame football coach Lou Holtz, former Trump spokesperson Kellyanne Conway, and former acting attorney general (and well-endowed-man toilet promoter) Matt Whitaker. Rollins described the gala night as “The most magical evening … with 700 closest friends, supporters, and partners.” 

The whole coalition gathered together at the scene of Trump’s theft of America’s nuclear secrets. And it was magical.

Johnson did turn up on Monday night for a fundraiser and met with Trump after fervently endorsing him just last week. He’s come a long way since 2015 when he wrote this:

“The thing about Donald Trump is that he lacks the character and the moral center we desperately need again in the White House,” Mr. Johnson wrote in a lengthy post on Facebook on Aug. 7, 2015, before he was elected to Congress and a day after the first Republican primary debate of the campaign cycle.

Challenged in the comments by someone defending Mr. Trump, Mr. Johnson responded: “I am afraid he would break more things than he fixes. He is a hot head by nature, and that is a dangerous trait to have in a Commander in Chief.”

Mr. Johnson, then a state lawmaker in Louisiana, also questioned what would happen if “he decided to bomb another head of state merely disrespecting him.”

“I am only halfway kidding about this,” he wrote. “I just don’t think he has the demeanor to be President.”

Apparently, his discussions of golden showers and calling his rivals fat pigs and drug addicts on the campaign trail are no longer characteristics of someone who doesn’t have the demeanor to be president. Certainly no one could say the man who wants to deport half the country doesn’t have a moral center.

I have been saying for years that the good news about all of this is that we no longer have to believe these self-appointed moral guardians have any morals or principles. Clearly they don’t. On the other hand, these people are no longer in the fringe. They have cast their lot with Donald Trump and he owns the party.

Judd Legum’s great newsletter featured this look at Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey, a dedicated MAGA warrior who gladly does Stephen Miller’s bidding:

Stephen Miller, the notorious advisor to former president Donald Trump, suggested on X yesterday that a “conservative state Attorney[] General” should pursue civil and criminal charges against Media Matters. Miller claims that Media Matters committed “fraud” by reporting that X was displaying ads from major brands next to white nationalist and neo-Nazi posts. X has accused Media Matters of “completely misrepresent[ing] the real user experience on X.” But, according to X’s own statement, all Media Matters did was create an account, follow some users, and observe what ads were displayed. 

Musk, a self-described “free speech absolutist,” responded favorably to Miller’s proposal to subject journalists to criminal prosecution, declaring it “interesting.” But the idea that Media Matters’ conduct is legally actionable is absurd, especially since X has already admitted that ads were displayed next to the posts identified by Media Matters.  

Nevertheless, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey (R) took Miller up on his suggestion. “My team is looking into this matter,” Bailey posted in response to Musk. 

Bailey expanded on his investigation of Media Matters’ reporting in an interview on Newsmax, a far-right cable channel: 

The Missouri Attorney General’s Office is tasked in statute with protecting Missouri consumers. That means consumers that participate on social media platforms as well. And so if we have an instance where there was a deceptive or fraudulent business practice where Media Matters was using some sort of coercive or fraudulent algorithms or advertising, that’s going to be problematic on the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. 

It does not appear that Bailey gave this “investigation” much thought. Media Matters’ conduct did not involve “fraudulent algorithms” or “advertising.” And the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act only applies to “the sale or advertisement of any merchandise in trade or commerce.” Media Matters was not selling anything. 

But Bailey’s announcement should not come as a surprise. Bailey has never been elected by the people of Missouri. He was appointed to his position in January by Missouri Governor Mike Parson (R). Since then, Bailey has brazenly exceeded the legal authority of his office to grab headlines. Bailey is running for a full term in 2024 and is seeking to make sure he is not outflanked from the right in the Republican primary. 

Read on for more about Bailey. He’s a real piece of work. And unfortunately, there are a lot more like him. For instance, massively corrupt Texas Attorney general Ken Paxton who recently survived and impeachment run by his fellow Republicans. He too says he will be “investigating” Media Matters. (That’s, of course, when he’s not chasing down pregnant women, trans kids and banning books. ) The MAGA movement is fully enmeshed in the right wing legal system now. Even the Federalist Society is a bunch of squishes in their minds. And they’re prepared to go for it.

Retribution For Dummies

TPM reports on the latest Trump boot licking move by the House Republicans:

Now that they finally have a new House speaker, some congressional Republicans are mounting an effort to question the select committee investigation into the January 6 attack that wrapped up last year. Their push is the perfect fox and the henhouse type scenario. Some of the members most loudly attempting to question the official probe — including the new speaker — played a part in elements of the conspiracy-fueled push to challenge the 2020 presidential election results that was a major focus of the investigation.

The latest calls to investigate the select committee’s work gained momentum on Friday after Johnson announced a plan to release some of the security footage of the attack that involved thousands of supporters of former President Trump storming into the U.S. Capitol building as his loss was being certified on January 6, 2021. Johnson, who became speaker late last month after weeks of contentious votes and intraparty fighting, had campaigned on a promise to air out the footage. In a statement on Friday, Johnson suggested it would “provide millions of Americans, criminal defendants, public interest organizations and the media an ability to see for themselves what happened that day, rather than having to rely upon the interpretation of a small group of government officials.” 

The January 6 attack has been — like Trump’s 2020 loss — the subject of far-right conspiracy theories that suggest  the hundreds of people prosecuted for their role in the attack were being politically persecuted. Along with easily disproved suggestions the crowds who brawled with police and broke through barricades that day were peaceful, there have also been thoroughly debunked claims that federal law enforcement was really behind the violence raised in the right-wing media. 

[…]

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY), who helped lead the select committee and has been one of the most prominent Republican critics of Trump’s efforts to falsely deny his loss, responded to Johnson’s move with some clips of her own showing the crowds fighting with police officers at the Capitol. 

This is not Johnson’s first time dabbling in 2020 denialism and revisionist history. The new speaker, who will play a role in certifying the next presidential election, was among the 147 Republican members of Congress who voted to overturn the last one. In the leadup to the certification, Johnson was also among members of Congress who worked with the Trump campaign to promote baseless conspiracy theories about the results as part of an official effort to dispute the results that precipitated the violence at the Capitol. 

In the weeks after the American people voted on Nov. 3, 2020, Johnson participated in legal challenges to the election and promoted debunked conspiracy theories that the results had been manipulated. In a Facebook post on Nov. 7, 2020, the day media outlets determined President Joe Biden had won the race, Johnson revealed he was coordinating with the Trump campaign on efforts to overturn the former president’s loss. 

“I arrived back in northern Virginia last night and have been in legal and political strategy meetings for the Trump Campaign all day. Though the media is calling the election for Biden, they shouldn’t,” Johnson wrote. “As I write this, very important legal challenges are pending and being filed today in several states. President Trump is fighting for you, and we are fighting for him.”

After he became speaker, Johnson’s efforts to dispute the election received new scrutiny. On the night he was selected as the speaker nominee, he and his Republican colleagues literally laughed off questions about his role. 

Johnson’s push to air out the security footage prompted a new round of conspiracy theories from other Republicans who worked with him to overturn the 2020 election. On Saturday, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) took to the site formerly known as Twitter to share a message from a West Virginia man who pleaded guilty to criminal charges related to the Capitol attack. The man suggested the clip showed someone “flashing a badge,” implying it was proof law enforcement was behind the violence. Lee, who did not respond to a request for comment, responded that he wanted to question the FBI director about the clip at an upcoming hearing and predicted the answers would “be 97% information-free.”

The clip Lee promoted has gained traction in far-right Jan. 6 conspiracy circles, but it has also been totally debunked. As the Bulwark noted, the footage shows a man who is not a federal agent holding a vape pen rather than a badge. It’s one of many examples of how the supposed evidence of federal involvement being promoted by the far-right just doesn’t add up. 

Denver Riggleman, a former Republican congressman and Air Force intelligence officer who worked with the January 6 committee, responded to Lee with a post of his own noting his team had reviewed the evidence and found nothing to support the idea the attack was a grand conspiracy involving federal agents. 

“We’ve been down this road many times (over two years now). I’ve used validated data —as Senior Tech Advisor to the J6 committee—to help GOP & Dems understand that FBI/Antifa/Deep State conspiracies are hogwash,” Riggleman wrote. 

Riggleman, who co-wrote a book on the investigation with this reporter, also pointed to the text messages his team helped obtain from Trump’s former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows. 

“Maybe it’s time to look at Mike Lee’s texts to Mark Meadows—again,” Riggleman wrote.

Those texts, which have been examined thoroughly here on TPM, showed the Trump White House coordinating with Lee and over 30 other congressional Republicans on efforts to overturn the 2020 election.  And one of the many messages Lee exchanged with Meadows also shed light on Johnson’s participation in the push. 

On Nov. 7, 2020, as the race was being called for Biden and Johnson was admittedly coordinating with the Trump campaign, messages obtained by the committee show that Lee texted Meadows some strategic ideas for reversing the former president’s loss. Lee also provided Meadows with a petition that was signed by him, Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Johnson, and a slew of Republican activists:

“Dear Mr. President, We the undersigned offer our unequivocal support for you to exhaust every legal and constitutional remedy at your disposal to restore Americans’ faith in our elections. This fight is about much more than just this election. This fight is about the fundamental fairness and integrity of our election system. The nation is depending upon your continued resolve. Stay strong and keep fighting Mr. President. Sincerely, Senator Mike Lee Congressman Andy Biggs … Congressman Mike Johnson Brent Bozell, Founder and President, Media Research Center Adam Brandon, President, FreedomWorks Bill Walton, President, Council for National Policy Marjorie Dannenfelser, President, Susan B. Anthony List David McIntosh, President, Club for Growth PAC Matt Schlapp, Chairman, American Conservative Union Jenny Beth Martin, Chairman, Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund David Bozell, President, ForAmerica Tom Fitton, President, Judicial Watch Seymour Fein M.D., MRC Board of Directors.”

Lee, who did not respond to a request for comment on this story, encouraged Meadows to share the petition with Trump — and potentially publicly.

“We’re sending this as a private communication from us to him through you. We are not issuing it as a press release,” Lee wrote, adding, “Use it however you deem appropriate And if it’s helpful to you for you to leak it, feel free to do so.”

Marge Greene is right in the middle of this too.

I have a sneaking suspicion that any spectacle they put on over the 2020 election is going to be greeted with eye-rolling by certain members of the voting public who may like Trump but really don’t want to hear about this crap anymore. So sure, bring it on guys. Let’s re litigate 2020 just as Trump’s being tried for staging the coup. Very helpful.

Some things never change

Robert Reich reminds us that the “populist” MAGA movement is backed by some very rich fellows:

Donald Trump is going full fascist these days and gaining the backing of prominent billionaires.

Earlier this month, on Veterans Day, Trump pledged to “root out the communists, Marxists, fascists and the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country”, whom he accused of doing anything “to destroy America and to destroy the American dream”. (Notably, he read these words from a teleprompter, meaning that they were intentional rather than part of another impromptu Trump rant.)

Days before, Trump claimed that undocumented immigrants were “poisoning the blood of our country”. The New York Times reported that he’s planning to round up millions of undocumented immigrants and detain them in sprawling camps while they wait to be expelled.

Trump has publicly vowed to appoint a special prosecutor to “go after” Joe Biden and his family, and has told advisers and friends that he wants the justice department to investigate officials who have criticized his time in office.

This is, quite simply, full-throated neofascism.

Who’s bankrolling all this? While Trump’s base is making small contributions, the big money is coming from some of the richest people in the US.

During the first half of the year, multiple billionaires donated to the Trump-aligned Make America Great Again, Inc Super Pac.

Phil Ruffin (net worth of $3.4bn), the 88-year-old casino and hotel mogul, has given multiple $1m donations.

Charles Kushner (family net worth of $1.8bn), the real estate mogul and father of Jared, who received a late-term pardon from Trump in December 2020, contributed $1m in June.

Robert “Woody” Johnson (net worth of $3.7bn), Trump’s former ambassador to the United Kingdom and co-owner of the New York Jets, donated $1m to the MAGA PAC in April.

And so on.

But Trump is not the only extremist pulling in big dollars.

Nikki Haley – who appears moderate only relative to Trump’s blatant neofascism – claimed in her campaign launch that Biden is promoting a “socialist” agenda.

During her two years as UN ambassador under Trump, Haley was a strong proponent of his so-called “zero tolerance” policy under which thousands of migrant children were separated from their parents and guardians.

She supported Trump’s decision to pull out of the UN Human Rights Council and to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal.

Though she briefly criticized Trump for inciting the mob that attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, Haley soon defended Trump and called on Democratic lawmakers to “give the man a break” when they impeached him for a second time.

Haley recently told Kristen Welker of NBC’s Meet the Press that while Trump’s floating the idea of executing retired Gen Mark Milley might be “irresponsible”, it is not enough to disqualify Trump from running for the White House again.

Haley’s billionaire supporters include Stanley Druckenmiller and Eric LeVine. Republican megadonor Ken Griffin has said he is “actively contemplating” supporting Haley.

Notably, Haley has also gained the support of JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive Jamie Dimon, who’s about as close as anyone in the US comes to being a spokesperson for the business establishment. Dimon admires Haley’s recognition of the role that “business and government can play in driving growth by working together”.

The moneyed interests have been placing big bets on other Trumpist Republicans.

Peter Thiel, the multibillionaire tech financier who once wrote that “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible,” contributed more than $35m to 16 federal-level Republican candidates in the 2022 campaign cycle, making him the 10th largest individual donor to either party.

Twelve of Thiel’s candidates won, including Ohio’s now-senator JD Vance, who alleged that the 2020 election was stolen and that Biden’s immigration policy has meant “more Democrat voters pouring into this country”.

Republican House majority leader Steve Scalise is creating a new fundraising committee which will be soliciting contributions of up to $586,200 a pop.

Elon Musk is not a major financial contributor to Trump nor other anti-democracy candidates, but his power over one of the most influential megaphones in the US gives him inordinate clout – which he is using to further the neofascist cause.

Witness Musk’s solicitude of Trump, his seeming endorsement of antisemitic posts, his embrace of Tucker Carlson and “great replacement” theory, and his avowed skepticism towards democracy.

Democracy is compatible with capitalism only if democracy is in the driver’s seat, so it can rein in capitalism’s excesses.

But if capitalism and its moneyed interests are in charge, those excesses inevitably grow to the point where they are able to extinguish democracy and ride roughshod over the common good.

That’s why Trump’s neofascism – and the complicity of today’s Republican party with it – are attracting the backing of some of the richest people in the US.

This is correct. The history of fascism is very clear on this point. It is a movement that exploits the working class by focusing its discontents on the other while reaping the advantages of government largesse and support. Anyone who buys into Trump’s alleged “populism” is a chump.

Biden has an opening to change the script on immigration

The Trump immigration plan is so extreme that if normal people actually see what it is, their hair will stand on end. But they have to be told and they have to be convinced that they are dead serious about implementing it. Which they are:

As [Steven] Miller put it: “Trump will unleash the vast arsenal of federal powers to implement the most spectacular migration crackdown…The immigration legal activists won’t know what’s happening.” “What former President Trump and Stephen Miller are laying out has crossed a line that should set off alerts for every American.”

“What former President Trump and Stephen Miller are laying out has crossed a line that should set off alerts for every American,” Vanessa Cardenas, executive director of America’s Voice, said during a recent press call with reporters. “Calling his political opponents ‘vermin,’ saying that the blood of America is being poisoned, and the continuous calls to violence, election denialism, and white nationalism cannot be normalized or go unchallenged. What Trump is describing is not just about immigration policies…He’s openly talking about changing who we are as a nation, who is considered American, who belongs to this country.”

Latino voters appear to be evenly divided between Trump and Biden, including in battleground states. And with the economy and the war in Israel, immigration policy might not rank as the top-of-mind issue for most voters. But it has the potential to draw a striking contrast between the two candidates. Biden came into power vowing to roll back many of Trump’s worst policies and restore humanity to a broken immigration system. While he has delivered on some campaign promises—rescinding the Remain in Mexico program, launching efforts to reunite families separated under Trump, and expanding the use of temporary humanitarian protections for migrants from several nationalities—his administration has also come under fire from advocates for turning to restrictive asylum measures and even Trump-like policies to appease criticism from Republicans of “open borders.” 

Immigration has long been a hot-button, base-rallying issue for Trump and the GOP. But it is one that has come to be perceived as a political liability for Biden, who is unable to please either immigration advocates or those in favor of a tougher approach. “No matter how cruel or restrictive Mr. Biden’s policies are, they will never be enough to appease his critics,” David J. Bier of the Cato Institute wrote in the New York Times this month. “They also aren’t working. He can continue to do everything Mr. Trump did and more and still be the ‘open-borders president.’”

Instead of brushing immigration to the wayside as a campaign issue, there’s a growing chorus for Biden to embrace it. Indeed, some political strategists believe the current moment presents an opportunity for the president to come out on top and win over a critical segment of the electorate. “Biden’s poor numbers on immigration and with Latino voters aren’t a coincidence,” Sawyer Hackett, a Democratic strategist and consultant, said on X. “Yes, like all voters, Latinos don’t vote on immigration alone. But in cycles when the immigration contrast has been front-and-center, Democrats have done extremely well. Ceding political ground on this issue is terrible politics and terrible for the human lives involved.”

Especially as Trump becomes increasingly strident. As if separating families at the border, undercutting the refugee program, and forcing asylum seekers to wait in squalid migrant camps in dangerous Mexican border towns wasn’t bad enough the first time around, Trump and Miller have dialed up the cruelty. Their plan, first reported by the New York Times, includes bringing back Trump-era policies such as the travel ban on travelers from Muslin-majority countries and Title 42, a border measure premised on a health statute used to summarily expel migrants, which Trump invoked during the Covid-19 pandemic, but will expand to other infectious diseases.  

Trump’s plans also include fast-tracked mass deportations and detention camps, and the deployment of state law enforcement to conduct raids. In a second term, Trump would likely try to end birthright citizenship for US-born children of undocumented immigrants—an extreme stance that appears to have become a mainstream GOP policy. Plus, the visas issued to foreign students who took part in pro-Palestine protests would be revoked, as would the temporary legal status of thousands of Afghans who have resettled in the United States since 2021.

Trump recently went on Univision, the most popular Spanish-speaking network in the United States, to tout his record on immigration. On an exclusive, extremely friendly interview reportedly set up with the help of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, the former president went unchallenged as he falsely claimed the Obama administration also separated families as a matter of policy and bragged without providing any evidence that “we had the most secure border in history” during his presidency. The interview sparked backlash from dozens of Latino organizations, who, in a letter to Univision executives, criticized the dissemination of “unfiltered, unaddressed, and unrestricted disinformation.” 

It doesn’t take a degree in immigration law to realize how legally dubious and chilling these proposals are. Many of these so-called policies would inevitably be subject to challenges in court, but one of Miller’s projects since the end of the Trump administration has been as president of America First Legal, a conservative legal organization that engages in “relentless litigation” and purports to be a “long-awaited answer to the ACLU.” In the past few years, America First Legal has sued the Biden administration over a broad collection of policies, from a debt relief program for Black farmers to anti-discrimination protections for transgender patients. 

This is not just campaign bombast:

Presumably, Miller has learned a trick or two about legal warfare and raised millions of dollars in the process. America First Legal’s financial documents show revenue growth of 600 percent—from about $6.3 million to almost $44.4 million between fiscal years 2021 and 2022, boosting Miller’s $110,062 original salary by $77,000. The organization also added Blake Masters, the defeated Arizona senate candidate who spawned conspiracy theories linking migration to a supposed plot by Democrats to win elections by changing the demographics of the country, to its board of directors packed with former Trump officials. 

Will Trump and Miller’s anti-immigration agenda also create an opening for the Biden campaign to take the offensive on this issue? CBS News recently reported that the campaign has plans to “bring attention” to Trump’s extreme proposals in hopes of turning potential Latino voters away from the GOP candidate, who is polling well with that demographic. “Donald Trump is offering us a vision of what America would be under his second term in the White House in 2025,” María Carolina Casado, the campaign’s Hispanic media director, told CBS News. “This is not about restoring our immigration system—that he basically destroyed—or border security. This is about hurting our Latino community, hurting our families and family separation.” In a statement, Ammar Moussa, a spokesperson for the Biden campaign, said, “These extreme, racist, cruel policies dreamed up by him and his henchman Stephen Miller are meant to stoke fear and divide us, betting a scared and divided nation is how he wins this election.”

Immigration advocates are ramping up their calls on the Biden administration to embrace an unapologetically pro-immigrant stance, both in rhetoric and policymaking. “This isn’t merely a call to ring the alarms on a Trump second term,” Praeli said. “It is also a call to action to Democrats and to President Biden, to not just be in a dueling vision match, but to advance a proactive, pro-immigrant narrative, to claim it and to embrace it and also to deliver for people right now. He has the power of the presidency right now to show a much stronger vision and to draw that contrast in real-time.” As the New Yorker‘s Jonathan Blitzer posted on X, the Biden administration might prefer to avoid talking about immigration, but Trump’s “extremism gives Biden the space to pitch himself as a true foil/alternative.” 

There is no advantage in hiding from the issue. It won’t work. The only answer is to expose the extremism on the right and embrace humanitarian policies. It may not help, but trying to avoid the issue can only hurt — everyone.

It takes long term repetition to penetrate the minds of the voters

If Trump taught them nothing else, he should have taught them that:

Got a little hot about the notion expressed by John Kelly that speaking out against Trump might not have an impact.

These guys need to actually engage in a campaign not just do interviews with the Atlantic (no offense Atlantic friends) https://t.co/BswJJIHscW

— Tim Miller (@Timodc) November 21, 2023

Here’s Mark Esper from yesterday:

Mark Esper, who served as the United States secretary of defense under Donald Trump, warned the former president “is a threat to democracy” — telling CNN Trump is “not right” and can’t beat President Joe Biden in the general election.

Esper on Tuesday was asked about a Washington Post article that revealed many of Trump’s former Cabinet members — including former chief of staff John Kelly — believe he’s unfit to hold office.

“You have previously said that Trump ‘unprincipled’ and should not be in the position of public service,” CNN’s Poppy Harlow began. “Will you work to publicly fight the lead that he has now or are you going to stay on the sidelines?”

“I have been very clear about this matter for three years since my book came out,” Esper said. “I have been on the record multiple times and I don’t think he should be president. I don’t think he is qualified. I think he is a threat to democracy. I will do whatever i can to try to make sure that doesn’t happen.”

Esper argued there are “good Republicans in the Republican primary that could deliver on conservative principles and goals and objectives, but also unify the party, and when put [them] in the White House … I think can unify the country.”

Asked to “elaborate” on what he’ll personally do to keep Trump out of office, Esper noted, “Here I am talking to you this morning trying to convince my fellow Republicans that Donald Trump is not right. I don’t think Donald Trump can beat Joe Biden either. Other Republicans have said that. I want to do whatever I can to make sure that Donald Trump is not the nominee and we get a Republican in the Oval Office in 2025. “

Let’s hope he means it and he has many others on his side. There is a chance that swing voters who voted Republican in the past and may have voted Biden but are souring on politics today can be reminded that people they used to respect are sounding a shrill alarm. It’s probably going to be necessary because we have craven gadflies all over the place trying to convince young voters who don’t know any better that it’s very important that they protest vote to “send a message.” (That’s a message that Trump will never hear.) The Dems have to get every swing voter they can and those are people who may listen to guys like Esper and John Kelly and others like them. It must be a sustained campaign.

“We” are losing the country to “them.”

Very recent comments by now-Speaker Mike Johnson brought to mind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s “God damn America” sermon for the Bulwark’s Tim Miller. Asked if America faces a time of judgment, Johnson replied:

You all know the terrible state that we’re in. . . . The faith in our institutions is the lowest it’s ever been in the history of our nation. The culture is so dark and depraved that it almost seems irredeemable at this point. The church attendance in America dropped below 50 percent for the first time in our history since they began to measure the data sixty years ago. And the number of people who do not believe in absolute truth is now above the majority for the first time. One in three teen girls contemplated suicide last year. One in four high school students identify as something other than straight. We’re losing the country.

The divergent right-wing outrage over Wright’s sermon and non-response to Johnson’s criticism of America reflects more than a double standard for black preachers and white politicians, Miller finds. Even though in a sense their critiques of America’s failings contain similarities. The differences are more significant.

Johnson is saying that the American people are sick, present tense. That our culture is dark and irredeemable. That non-binary youth and people not attending church are causing us to fall from grace.

Wright argued that our government is sick. That those in power have marginalized certain groups and failed them.

Johnson is damning the American people, while Wright is damning the American government. So if you were inclined to be offended by one of these statements on behalf of our nation’s honor and dignity, on its face it seems Johnson’s critique was more sweeping and censorious.

Johnson wouldn’t be a white Christian nationalist if his comments weren’t steeped in othering, Miller notes:

In the dominant American culture, black men aren’t given the same leeway to criticize America that whites are. A white Christian patriot can talk about how things in America have gone to shit because of our sinfulness and his fellow white Christian patriots understand that they are not the ones being criticized. The connotation in his remarks does not point the finger at themselves or at the foundational core of the nation. Johnson is saying that Those People Over There Are Taking America Away From God. “We” are losing the country to “them.”

The “them” might be gays or critical race theorists or people with nose rings or liberals or Jews or Bud Light PR reps or woke teachers or atheists or someone else entirely depending on the day. But the not-quite-explicitly-spoken-but-completely-understood argument is: They are bad. We have done nothing. We are being punished for their sins.

So for Johnson’s allies there is nothing to be upset about in this condemnation of America, obviously. And Johnson’s foes don’t really care much about the moral judgment of someone they find morally repulsive.

But when a black pastor damns America that’s a different ball of wax.

The difference is over whose ox is being gored. (Does anyone use that anymore?) Miller observes, “For Wright to say that these actions of the American government are fundamentally sinful hits at the heart of the national story, ego, and identity.” Guess whose?

“Wright was not merely saying that America did bad things via its government but that we ourselves in some sense are bad.”

THAT, suh, is an insult to mah honor.

Ask a white person to feel shame over America’s past? Why … why … that’s almost worse than a Black man looking sideways at the flower of Southern womanhood. Which is why over a decade later Republicans assuage their hurt egos by dragging out the Wright sermon to drag black politicians. Johnson’s remarks barely raised a ripple.

That’s gotta be some kind of crime

How will the U.S. Supreme Court take to having a lower court essentially invalidate its recent Voting Rights Act decision in Allen v. Milligan?

New York Times:

A federal appeals court moved on Monday to drastically weaken the Voting Rights Act, issuing a ruling that would effectively bar private citizens and civil rights groups from filing lawsuits under a central provision of the landmark civil rights law.

The ruling, made by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, found that only the federal government could bring a legal challenge under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, a crucial part of the law that prohibits election or voting practices that discriminate against Americans based on race.

The opinion is almost certain to be appealed to the Supreme Court. The court’s current conservative majority has issued several key decisions in recent years that have weakened the Voting Rights Act. But the justices have upheld the law in other instances, including in a June ruling that found Alabama had drawn a racially discriminatory congressional map.

Yeah, that’s bullshit. For background on the Private Right of Action, see here. Democracy Docket weighs in on the Eight Circuit’s attempted erasure of the PROA under the VRA:

Now, under today’s ruling only the U.S. attorney general, who brings relatively few election-related cases each year, would be able to bring Section 2 claims in the seven states in the 8th Circuit: Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.

This decision hurts voters and organizations who seek to ensure voters are fairly represented across the 8th Circuit and who will no longer be able to file Section 2 cases if and when Republicans abuse the redistricting process to draw racially discriminatory districts. As the dissent cites from experts,

Over the past forty years, there have been at least 182 successful Section 2 cases; of those 182 cases, only 15 were brought solely by the Attorney General.

It is clear that the ability of private parties to bring these lawsuits has made an insurmountable impact on the fight for fair maps. 

They’re really reaching now. Or should we say yanking the Overton Window? Who are they? Charlie Pierce checked:

It probably goes without saying but the Eighth Circuit is loaded with Republican appointees, including four lovely parting gifts from the previous administration*. Here is the roster of amici who weighed in on the side of Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders and the state of Arkansas.

Honest Elections Project; Senator Tom Cotton; State of Texas; State of Alabama; State of Florida; State of Georgia; State of Indiana; State of Kentucky; State of Louisiana; State of Mississippi; State of Missouri; State of Montana; State of Nebraska; State of Oklahoma; State of South Carolina; State of Utah.

Let’s see — Conservative dark money group, bobble-throated slapdick, Confederate state, Confederate state, Confederate state, Red state, Red state, Confederate State, Uber-Confederate state, Red state, Red state, Red state. Home office of American sedition, Mormonland. The opinion was written by Judge David Stras, one of the lovely parting gifts from Camp Runamuck. His confirmation was, as they say, rocky. In the first place, then-Judiciary chairman Senator Chuck Grassley ignored a blue slip on the nomination from then-Senator Al Franken of Minnesota and brought Stras forward anyway. This was a cynical maneuver by Grassley, who had treated the blue slip like Holy Writ during the Obama administration. Grassley’s gross hypocrisy was part of the reason why the Leadership Conference of Civil and Human Rights sent a letter to all the senators opposing Stras’ elevation to the bench. You will note from the letter that, during his time on the Minnesota Supreme Court, Stras was very fond of measures that would restrict the franchise. He was not a big fan of historic civil rights legislation in any context. From the Minneapolis Star-Tribune:

Stras, in his words and writings, has suggested he’d prefer that judges worry less about their “moral and ethical obligations” to the country. Stras once lamented that the Supreme Court’s “ventures into the contentious areas of social policy — such as school integration, abortion and homosexual rights” have politicized judicial nominations.

Voting and election rights attorney Marc Elias responds, “I expect virtually every other Circuit would say there is a PROA. And, I expect the Supreme Court will too.”

Doesn’t mean the fringiest of the Federalist Society won’t stop trying.