Independent News

This post was originally published on this site

World leaders (with the notable exception of Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and a pouting Turkish strongman Recep Tayyip Erdogan) are meeting for another climate summit to determine what to do about the upcoming end of the world as we know it. Humanity’s chance to dodge a catastrophic 2 degrees Celsius of global warming are fading, and already we are seeing the results of the changing climate in the form of new megadroughts, stronger storms, shifting ocean currents, rising tides, and extreme fires. Beyond 2 degrees lies the apocalyptic stuff, in which Antarctic and Greenlandic ice sheets collapse into the oceans, large regions of the world become wastelands as the climate shifts more rapidly than evolution can, in the short term, account for, and we can kiss most of the Atlantic and Gulf Coast cities goodbye.

This is all extremely bad, the science is now so nailed down that all but the most recalcitrant or corrupt of world leaders cannot dodge it, and the premise remains the same: Every nation needs to wean itself from fossil fuels, and immediately. This is what world leaders are once again talking about today at COP26: how to get from here to non-apocalypse.

In what amounts to good news, the new Biden administration is flooding the zone with American officials, both career and appointed, and is both promising the United States will do its part and that it will put $3 billion per year toward helping developing countries transition as well. This is especially notable because his predecessor was a flaming garbage fire in a suit, had no patience for or even basic understanding of any of this, and appointed cronies who spent four years trying to sabotage not just our national preparedness plans, but any mention of the changing climate at all.

But it also shows the tenuousness of American, and world, efforts. Each nation can make all the promises it wants, and heaven knows many have been doing so, but so long as there is some corrupt kleptocrat or self-interested petro-state official who calculates that sabotaging what they can will bring them big enough cash to make the end of the world worth it, it can be undone as well. Republicanism has adopted illiteracy as a moral code—there is little to no chance any future Republican administration will abide restrictions on fossil fuels, just as the Senate’s own Democratic mini-coal-baron, Joe Manchin, single-handedly strips any climate-based considerations that might make his “blind trust” coal-pushing slightly less lucrative than it otherwise might be.

It is very difficult to feel optimistic about this new climate summit, simply because even though world leaders do finally appear to grasp the we-are-boned urgency of at least not chugging blithely toward rendering parts of the planet no longer tolerable for human life, we have also been here before. That leaders have to be regaled by the same phalanx of famous names urging them to rise to the challenge of sucking less may be a necessary part of the pageantry, but contributes to the ongoing impression that world leaders have spent a half-century in such meetings and are still working on being convinced to care.

So let’s put a call out: reasons for optimism. Go. Tell us what you got.

This post was originally published on this site

A New York Times investigation found that in five years police officers killed more than 400 people who weren’t in possession of a gun or knife and weren’t suspected of a violent crime, yet only five of the officers have been convicted in connection with the killings. The more likely outcome was a lawsuit, which played out with local governments (i.e. taxpayers) paying at least $125 million in 40 wrongful death suits, the Times reported. Journalists David Kirkpatrick, Steve Eder, Kim Barker, and Julie Tate wrote in the piece that Black drivers were overrepresented in the number of deaths when compared to the population, and they were stopped over minor infractions like red light violations or driving with broken taillights. “In case after case, officers said they had feared for their lives,” the reporting team wrote. “And in case after case, prosecutors declared the killings of unarmed motorists legally justifiable.

“But The Times reviewed video and audio recordings, prosecutor statements and court documents, finding patterns of questionable police conduct that went beyond recent high-profile deaths of unarmed drivers. Evidence often contradicted the accounts of law enforcement officers.” 

Some 24 cases involving the officers are pending, while only five officers have actually been convicted in relation to killings, the Times reported. Derek Chauvin, who was convicted of murdering George Floyd when the white Minneapolis cop kneeled on the Black father’s neck for more than nine minutes, was one of two officers sentenced to considerable time in prison. One cop got away with only probation, the Times reported. Another served seven months in prison, and cases involving the other two officers are still playing out in court, one of whom will have his appeal considered by the Texas Supreme Court, the Times reported.

The latter case is that of former North Texas police officer Roy Oliver, who was sentenced to 15 years in prison after being convicted of shooting and killing 15-year-old Jordan Edwards, The Texas Tribune reported. The teen was riding in a car that was driving away from officers, who had been called to a house party to investigate alleged underage drinking on April 29, 2017, Texas Monthly reported.

While Oliver was prosecuted, that was not a common outcome in the cases The New York Times investigated. In more than 150 statements from prosecutors tasked with holding officers accountable for the deaths, many of them blamed the drivers. “Prosecutors and courts give more leeway to officers’ decisions to use force at vehicle stops, as a result of the exaggerated concern about the potential for officers getting hurt,” Michael Gennaco, a police consultant and former Justice Department prosecutor, told the Times. “Officers would likely kill fewer drivers if there were deterrence.”

The Philadelphia City Council and Mayor Jim Kenney seem to have taken steps in the right direction along those lines by passing the Driving Equality Bill, which is aimed at banning officers from pulling over drivers for low-level vehicle infractions and instead allowing officers to mail citations. Kenney told The Hill he signed the bill into law on Wednesday and his administration intends to implement it and accompanying legislation through executive action. The companion legislation requires officers to keep and make public data on traffic stops at least monthly.

“This is something that is historic that could put us in a position where we’re addressing an issue that has been plaguing Black communities,” the Driving Equality bill’s author Isaiah Thomas told The Philadelphia Inquirer. “Philadelphia is leading the nation when it comes to this particular issue.”

The U.S. Supreme Court began allowing officers to use minor traffic infractions as a means to investigate unrelated crimes in 1996, but the end result of that allowance has been cops disproportionately stopping Black and Latino drivers “despite those drivers being no more likely to be found to be carrying anything illegal,” the newspaper reported of studies.

“A person of color’s first exchange with a police officer shouldn’t be during a discriminatory traffic stop,” Thomas said in a June news release. “By working closely with the Philadelphia Police Department, we were able to identify traffic stops that do nothing to keep people safer and remove the negative interaction.

“I believe this Philadelphia legislation can set a precedent for other cities, not only through the policy itself but through the collaborative process.”

RELATED: Cops lie. Look no further than initial press release following George Floyd’s death as proof

This post was originally published on this site

The evidence that right-wing extremism has not merely politicized America’s law-enforcement authorities but has radicalized it keeps mounting, as more police officers are exposed as unrepentant Oath Keepers, participants in the Jan. 1 Capitol insurrection, and members of white-nationalist and other far-right organizations. The question that now looms like a cloud over our democracy—especially as more extremists talk about “getting to use the guns” to kill their political opposition—is acute: If a liberal Democrat comes under assault from a Trump-supporting right-winger, will our current police forces intervene? Or will they enable them?

The answer is now clear, at least in certain precincts in Texas: No, they will not intervene. Instead, they will sit back and giggle about the assault. That became self-evident this week, thanks to the lawsuit filed on behalf of the Democrats riding a Biden/Harris campaign bus who came under attack last year by a flag-waving “Trump Train” between San Antonio and Austin.

According to the evidence—including 911 call transcripts—filed in the lawsuit, police along the route, particularly in the city of San Marcos, adamantly refused to send a police escort to protect the bus. They mocked the victims of the terrorization about their request. And they were annoyed when a neighboring jurisdiction did send an escort.

“San Marcos refused to help,” the newly amended federal lawsuit claims. The first lawsuit in the matter, filed in June, targeted the Trumpist thugs—who organized their attack on the bus using Facebook—involved in the very specific actions that threatened the bus. The second suit now targets law enforcement who “turned a blind eye to the attack—despite pleas for help—and failed to provide the bus a police escort,” according to Protect Democracy, the group of lawyers representing the plaintiffs.

The bus was part of a late Texas push for the Biden campaign, which organized several events in the state as part of a “Battle for the Soul of the Nation” tour featuring various Democratic candidates appearing with Harris. The pro-Trump vehicles, dubbed the “Trump Train,” surrounded the bus as it passed near New Braunfels en route to Austin, and remained with it until San Marcos, 20 miles down the road.

Videos showed the vehicles lined up along the freeway in wait for the bus, then speeding up and surrounding it as pro-Trump onlookers cheered and laughed. According to people on the bus, the vehicles slowed and appeared to attempt stopping the bus altogether.

One of the caravan’s Facebook organizers, Randi Ceh, posted a video on her Facebook page claiming the staff car following the bus closely was breaking the law—and when a large pickup veered and hit it on the side fender, claimed that it was the staff car driver attempting to cause an accident. A campaign staffer told The Daily Beast that the Trump supporters appeared to be trying to force the bus off the road.

The 911 transcripts reveal that top San Marcos law-enforcement figures repeatedly denied providing the bus with a police escort, though police departments in neighboring jurisdictions along the Interstate 35 route did so. When one of those jurisdictions recommended doing so, San Marcos police corporal Matthew Daenzer simply refused.

As the Biden bus entered San Marcos’ jurisdiction, a 911 dispatcher from New Braunfels contacted San Marcos police dispatch in an attempt to get them to take over the freeway escort that the city had provided. The San Marcos 911 dispatcher put both other dispatchers, as well as a Biden campaign staffer calling to plead for assistance, on hold and called Daenzer.

“I am so annoyed at New Braunfels for doing this to us,” the dispatcher told Daenzer, who began laughing, according to the transcript. “They have their officers escorting this Biden bus, essentially, and the Trump Train is cutting in between vehicles and driving—being aggressive and slowing them down to like 20 or 30 miles per hour. And they want you guys to respond to help.”

“No, we’re not going to do it. We will ‘close patrol’ that, but we’re not going to escort a bus,” Daenzer responds.

The dispatcher then mockingly described the incoming call from the Biden staff aboard the bus: “[T]hey’re like really worked up over it and he’s like breathing hard and stuff, like, ‘They’re being really aggressive.’ Okay. Calm down,” she said to Daenzer.

Daenzer responded that the Biden bus should “drive defensively and it’ll be great.”

“Or leave the train,” the 911 dispatcher replied. “There’s an idea.”

The dispatcher then got back to the Biden staffer on the bus, telling him there’d be no escort: “If you feel like you’re being threatened or your life is threatened, definitely call us back,” she told him.

“Are you kidding me, ma’am?” the staffer responded. “They’ve cut in on me multiple times. They’ve threatened my life on multiple occasions with vehicular collision. I would like an escort immediately.”

The dispatcher replied: “Okay. Our officers are not going to escort the train. They are going to be in the area to monitor any traffic infractions, but they are not there to escort. This is from our Chief.”

When the bus attempted to reach its venue in San Marcos, its way was blocked by the Trump Train drivers. So, just as it had already done with other venues, the campaign canceled its event there and continued down I-35 to Austin. When a Biden staffer informed San Marcos’ director of public safety, Chase Stapp, that the bus was skipping the San Marcos event, he also pleaded with him for an escort: “We really could use your help.”

Stapp, who had ignored previous warnings from incoming callers about the Trump Train problem, informed his superiors of the cancellation but did not pass along the request for an escort. The San Marcos law-enforcement officers also exchanged further texts afterward, mocking the people aboard the Biden bus, referring to them using a right-wing slur indicating mental disabilities.

After the incident blew up to become national news, San Marcos officials began circling the wagons, fearing they were about to be subjected to a “political firestorm” over the “debacle,” according to texts they shared. Daenzer tried to publicly downplay his department’s actions in his report, stating that “due to the staffing issues, lack of time to plan, and lack of knowledge of the route, we were unable to provide an escort.”

Wendy Davis, a former state senator who was running for Congress at the time, is among the four plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Both it and the first lawsuit against the Trump Train participants are based on the 1871 Ku Klux Klan Act, which prohibits organizing such a “politically-motivated conspiracy” to disrupt the campaign and intimidate its supporters.

“Though I’ve been involved in many political campaigns for myself and others over the past couple of decades, I have never before experienced the threat or fear I felt when the ‘Trump Train’ surrounded our bus,” Davis told CNN. “I’m a part of this suit because I’m worried that this sort of dangerous behavior threatens to become the new normal if we don’t stop it.”

But Republicans proceeded to normalize this kind of threatening behavior by adamantly supporting the freeway thugs. Leading the parade was Donald Trump, who tweeted:

In my opinion, these patriots did nothing wrong. Instead, the FBI & Justice should be investigating the terrorists, anarchists, and agitators of ANTIFA, who run around burning down our Democrat run cities and hurting our people!

The next day, he went even further, claiming that a CNN report on the investigation was wrong: “This story is FALSE. They did nothing wrong. But the ANTIFA Anarchists, Rioters and Looters, who have caused so much harm and destruction in Democrat run cities, are being seriously looked at!”

Trump also boasted about the caravan at campaign events. In Washington, Michigan, he told the audience: “Did you see the way our people were protecting his bus yesterday? Because they’re nice. Saw his bus. They had hundreds of cars. Trump! Trump! Trump! And the American flag.”

Republicans on the national scene joined in. At a Florida Trump rally prior to his arrival, Senator Marco Rubio—who once decried Trump’s indulgence in violent rhetoric—joined in the Trump Train parade: “I saw yesterday a video of these people in Texas,” Rubio said. “Did you see it? All the cars on the road, we love what they did.”

The behavior of San Marcos police is consistent with what has been occurring in jurisdictions around the nation: Police departments not only tolerate the presence of right-wing extremists within their departments, but have built a culture both friendly to the radical right and hostile to mainstream democracy, particularly when it’s practiced by anyone they perceive as more liberal, especially “leftists” such as Black Lives Matter or antifascists. It has had profound consequences for the communities they are tasked with protecting, most notably when it comes to enforcing laws to protect minorities, such as hate-crime laws.

“History tells us that once a cycle of political violence starts, it becomes very hard to stop—and it’s communities of color that bear the brunt,” said Mimi Marziani, president of the Texas Civil Rights Project. “A nation governed by the rule of law can’t allow for the normalization of political violence or harassment, and we must hold those who engaged in or failed to prevent this behavior accountable.”

This post was originally published on this site

Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro leads two dozen House Democrats in calling on the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of Justice (DOJ( to open a federal investigation into Gov. Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star, an unconstitutional scheme that has detained asylum-seekers and migrants for weeks at a time, some for months, with no formal charges.

”These operations have continued to militarize Texas’ border communities and interfered with the federal immigration system, likely violating the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution,” legislators said. “Even more egregiously, these programs have directly led to a violation of state laws and constitutional due process rights.”

Last month, the Texas Tribune reported that Texas law “requires that defendants be released from jail if prosecutors delay cases by not filing charges quickly,” which is anywhere from 15 to 30 days for the trespassing charges Abbott has sought under his plan. But as legislators note to DHS Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland, “the state has passed multiple state statute deadlines to file charges … as a result, almost 1,000 migrants to sit in prison for weeks and sometimes over a month.”

“Additionally, the governor’s efforts have led to the wrongful separation of families and the violation of state and federal laws,” legislators continue (click here for a full list of signatories). “In fact, there have been delays of filing charges, delays in appointing attorneys for migrants, and migrants unknowingly filling out documents they could not read to waive their right to counsel.” Civil rights groups that have gone to court on behalf of migrants have said many “were forced to sign pre-filled legal forms in English they could not understand and detained for extended periods of time in inhumane prison settings.” Many have not received any legal help at all.

But as we’ve previously noted, that’s just scratching the surface. That’s because The Texas Tribune also reported that a prosecutor dropped charges against 11 men who said that officers zip-tied their hands, forced them to climb 10-foot-fencing onto private property, then arrested them for trespassing. The report noted that the men had been imprisoned for nearly two months. Even when asylum-seekers have won release from the court, officials have unlawfully held them so Customs and Border Protection can detain them. “Attorneys chased a prison bus and threatened a lawsuit to find men arrested in Gov. Greg Abbott’s Operation Lone Star,” NBC News reported earlier this month.

Legislators in the letter ask DHS and DOJ to “review and investigate” Abbott’s scheme “regarding both its likely violation of the Supremacy Clause and its treatment of migrants, especially in regards to an individual’s constitutional right to due process.” Legislators also request more information on the “immigration process” for people detained under the scheme. “We also request that DHS provide migrants who enter into its custody after their release from state custody with timely and regular telephone access so that they can inform their loved ones and attorneys of their location,” they continued.

Advocates have been pushing for the administration to fight Abbott’s policy. “I’ve seen a lot in my time doing this work, but I have never seen something on this scale,” Grassroots Leadership Co-Executive Director Claudia Muñoz told Prism in September. “He has orchestrated this entire enforcement operation in Texas, and it’s been really effective. I keep telling people that if we don’t get a grip on this soon, it’s going to be really, really bad.” Meanwhile, Abbott’s spokesperson claimed to NBC News “that Texans deserve to have the rule of law enforced on the Texas border.” Truly, a bold claim to make when Ken Paxton is the state’s attorney general.

This post was originally published on this site

On a Halloween Sunday night, Republican Senators Josh Hawley, of Missouri, and Ted Cruz, of Texas, spoke at the National Conservatism conference in Orlando, Florida. Hawley’s topic was the need to reinforce the “American man.” We will assume, based on Sen. Hawley’s views on education, history, and race in America that he means white cishet American men. The speech was covered and quoted across the internets as it is such a lazy retreading of toxic masculinity—the kind of sophistry that has been visited upon the public discourse every time our unequal economic system meets a crisis.

Both men want to be president so badly they can taste it. Of course, the taste they are confusing with power is sulfur. Hawley’s elevator pitch? “Can we be surprised that after years of being told they are the problem, that their manhood is the problem, more and more men are withdrawing into the enclave of idleness, and pornography, and video games?” You’ve heard this story before and it coincidentally becomes what can pass as a political platform every few years, when stagnating wages and deregulated corruption at the top of our economic pyramid, lead to an untenable situation. 

Since conservative policies exacerbate existing inequalities in our society, these are usually the times when more traditional liberal policies—like taxing wealthier members of our society, adding some regulation to our industries, and spending money on a government that works to help citizens—gain traction. Unfortunately, conservative politicians, especially those as cravenly ambitious—probably criminally so—and corrupt as Hawley, want power so badly they are willing to turn our government into a money-laundering operation for big corporations and defense contractors by any means necessary. 

This necessitates their need to stir up what is now called the “culture war,” in our national discourse. This “culture” is simply the same thing it has always been: a bunch of white hegemonic oligarchs, promoting racism, xenophobia, sexism, and homophobia, in order to obfuscate the real issues of income and social inequality created by our economic and justice systems. It also leads to, in 2021, hearing an adult white man tell other adults that “American men are working less, getting married in fewer numbers; they’re fathering fewer children. They are suffering more anxiety and depression. They are engaging in more substance abuse.”

You might think the implications of that above statement would lead a person in a position to make laws in our country to consider passing some fucking laws. Namely, infrastructure bills that might help employ Americans and ease some of the economic insecurity that Americans say is the cause of virtually everything on that list—especially the “fewer children” bit.

When Morning Consult polled Americans for The New York Times about reasons they expect to have fewer children, top of the list was “Child care is too expensive.” Like with the opioid crisis, not a single respondent came up with “Because my masculinity has been butthurt by women doing stuff and trans folks asking for the most basic human rights.” Weird. Here’s that list [bold is my emphasis]:

Child care is too expensive (64%)

Want more time for the children I have

Worried about the economy

Can’t afford more children

Waited because of financial instability

Want more leisure time

Not enough paid family leave

No paid family leave

Worried about global instability

Struggle with work-life balance

Worried about domestic politics

Met a partner too late

Worried about climate change

Responsible for other family care

Worried about population growth

Prioritized my education and career

Split from my partner

Partner doesn’t want children

Don’t think I’m a good parent

This post was originally published on this site

All that work Democrats have been doing all weekend long to get President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan onto the House floor? West Virginia Democrat Joe Manchin just blew it all to smithereens, or did his damnedest to do so, anyway. He held a press conference Monday blasting House progressives for refusing to compromise—when they’ve come down from a figure of $6 trillion to $1.75 trillion to answer his concerns—and insisting that he won’t support a BBB bill until it answers whatever made-up bullshit he has a problem with this week. So that we can go through this whole charade again next week.

Manchin’s endgame has been clear for weeks now: Force his colleagues and President Biden to spend time chasing him down for support on Build Back Better, and at the same time force the House to pass his gift to the fossil fuel industry, the hard infrastructure bill (BIB) he negotiated with Republicans.

“The political games have to stop,” Manchin said, as if this process hasn’t been dragged out for weeks by his ever-moving goalposts. “Holding this bill hostage is not going to work in getting my support for the reconciliation bill.”

The last two weeks have been spent in that project, chasing his concerns down and answering them. In fact, the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) has been working in those weeks moving closer to Manchin on BBB, and the House is now just about ready to vote on their package. They have stated explicitly that they will enthusiastically vote for BIB once they can vote on BBB, and have the Senate’s commitment to passing BBB. Which Manchin explicitly refused to provide Monday. “I’m open to supporting a final bill that helps move our country forward. But I’m equally open to voting against a bill that hurts our country,” Manchin said.

The House is in the process of moving BBB,  starting as soon as Tuesday. It seems pretty clear that the fact that BBB passing imminently had to be stopped, and that’s what Manchin is trying to do Monday. Manchin’s goal remains getting his BIB passed, and to keep whittling down the social spending package into nothingness.

The White House is not particularly amused by this stunt from Manchin. His demands, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement released immediately after his press conference, have all been met. He said he wanted legislation that “combats inflection, is fiscally responsible, and will create job,” Psaki said. “The plan the House is finalizing meets those tests—it is fully paid for, will reduce the deficit, and brings down the costs for health care, child care, elder care, and housing,” she continued.

“Experts agree,” she said. “Seventeen Nobel Prize-winning economists have said it will reduce inflation. As a result,” she continued, “we remain confident the plan will gain Senator Manchin’s support.”

For now, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, head of the CPC says that they still plan to vote on both bills this week, and the progressives will support both because Biden has assured them there will be 50 votes for the bill in the Senate. “I trust the president,” she said.
 

Stay tuned. Manchin’s antics, while met with grace and composure from Jayapal, might throw the rest of the House Democratic caucus into question.

This post was originally published on this site

One month to the day before the Supreme Court hears arguments on the Mississippi abortion ban that looks likely to lead to the full and official overturning of Roe v. Wade, it heard arguments on two challenges to the even more restrictive Texas abortion ban. Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson and United States v. Texas aren’t seeking to directly overturn the law, which bans abortions after about six weeks’ gestation by putting enforcement in the hands of anyone who wants to turn vigilante and sue people who “aid or abet” an abortion for $10,000 and attorneys’ fees. Rather, they’re seeking to be allowed to sue to get the law blocked.

On that front, a number of experienced readers of Supreme Court tea leaves felt the procedurally dense oral arguments offered some good signs. But with Mississippi’s Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on the horizon, that doesn’t give much reason for true optimism about the future of reproductive rights in the United States.

In September, the three Trump justices plus Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas allowed SB 8 to go into effect, with an unsigned, one-paragraph order released the day after the law had already gone into effect. Chief Justice John Roberts joined Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Stephen Breyer in dissenting then, and he once again seemed skeptical of the Texas solicitor general’s arguments. There still needs to be at least one more vote if opponents of the Texas law are going to be allowed to challenge it in court—and looks likely that there is one or even two.

Texas’ defense of the law is that abortion providers who are sued can go to state court and argue that their constitutional rights are being violated, but Barrett repeatedly suggested that they may not actually be able to get a “full constitutional defense” that way. Kavanaugh, meanwhile, was worried about guns. Because if the Supreme Court allows a state to evade the scrutiny of federal courts by deputizing anyone and everyone to enforce a law curtailing constitutional rights, then what’s stopping a state strongly controlled by Democrats from passing a similar law about guns? So it’s possible that the right to challenge SB 8 gets up to six votes … but then comes the Mississippi case, which the right-wing justices had already been looking to as their way to overturn Roe.

Even taken in isolation, without the threat of Dobbs, the day’s arguments offer a deeply troubling picture of the Supreme Court. As Elie Mystal summarized it, “the CORE of the Texas argument is that a STATE COURT will find Texas’s own law unconstitutional… so somehow that means the Supreme Court should do nothing.” He added, “It’s just a goddamn RIDICULOUS argument.”

And early on in the Whole Women’s Health arguments, Jessica Mason Pieklo of Rewire News made an essential point about what was being left out of the courtroom. “If you want to know why I say abortion law is all about POWER this is what I’m talking about,” she tweeted. “Nobody is talking about the pregnant people needing care right now. We’re talking about the power (or lack thereof) of the state and federal courts to enforce or not abortion bans.”

Right-wing judges have the power right now. They’re not overly concerned with how ridiculous the arguments are if they’re arguments for right-wing policies, and they definitely don’t want to be talking about the women whose lives are being affected every day in Texas.

This post was originally published on this site

After months of meticulously avoiding any contact, photo ops, or visits with Donald Trump, Virginia GOP gubernatorial candidate Glenn Youngkin got yet another unwelcome intrusion into the final 24 hours of the race.

“The Fake News media,” Trump said in a Monday morning statement, “are trying to create an impression that Glenn Youngkin and I are at odds and don’t like each other.”

“Importantly, this is not true,” Trump continued. “We get along very well together and strongly believe in many of the same policies. Especially when it comes to the important subject of education.”

Trump said the media was trying to create a division among the two men in order to suppress his voters so that “my great and unprecedented Make America Great Again base will not show up to vote.”

Then, in literally the next line of the statement, Trump suppressed his voters.

“Also, I am not a believer in the integrity of Virginia’s elections,” he said, “lots of bad things went on, and are going on.”

But in an effort to undo a year’s worth of damage he’s done to the GOP’s faith in elections, Trump added, “The way you beat it is to flood the system and get out and vote.”

That’s Trump trying to have his cake and eat it too. He gets to tell his base that the system is rigged against them and then get credited for urging them to turn out anyway in order to beat the rigged system.

That way, if Youngkin loses, the system was rigged. If he wins, Trump will say it’s because MAGA voters turned out in huge numbers at his command.

It’s worth noting that Trump’s jumble of messages is an unmitigated PR blunder. “Send mixed signals!” said no communications professional ever.

The polling is incredibly tight in Virginia, with FiveThirtyEight’s aggregate currently giving Youngkin a slight one-point edge. Based on the polling alone, this appears to be a very competitive race, with Youngkin getting a boost in the closing weeks. That said, in 2017, GOP gubernatorial candidate Ed Gillespie also appeared to be gaining ground on Democratic candidate Ralph Northam in a close race that Northam ultimately won by a cushy 9-point margin.

That is to say, we can’t trust the polls—particularly the horse-race polls. Ever since Trump’s entrance on the national scene, polling has been wonky, sometimes fairly accurate, and other times a complete miss. National polling has typically been most off-kilter when Trump actually appeared on the ballot (2016, 2020) and most accurate when he wasn’t on the ballot (2018).

However, polling in California’s September recall of Gov. Gavin Newsom totally whiffed—this time in Democrats’ favor. While the RealClearPolitics average predicted Newsom surviving the recall by a roughly 15-point margin, Newsom actually turned back the recall effort by a whopping 24 points, 62% – 38%—the exact same margin by which he won the 2018 gubernatorial race. But the recall polling average missing the mark by roughly 9 points is significant.

So pollsters still don’t seem to have exactly cracked the code in the Trump era. They could just as easily be close in Virginia or wildly off.

Finally, the media has entirely bought into GOP talking points on the idea that this election will turn on voter anger over how race issues are being taught in schools and, more specifically, what Republicans have coined as “critical race theory.”

As a counterpoint to that narrative, last week Pod Save America talked to a Democratic activist with an organization that is actually knocking doors in Virginia—Tram Nguyen, co-executive director of New Virginia Majority (who we also had on The Brief a month ago). The organization has knocked on over half a million doors and made roughly 780,000 phone calls, and Nguyen’s message to the Pod was very similar to what she told us on The Brief in late September—critical race theory is nowhere to be found when they’re knocking doors.

“It probably won’t surprise you that the Number 1 one issue that folks have been talking about is health care,” Nguyen told Pod Save America, noting that the pandemic is still top of mind for voters.

“Parents care about the fact that their kids are back in school,” she also said. “They’re worried, right—what happens if they get that phone call from the teacher or the principal, saying, ‘There’s been exposure, your child has to quarantine for 14 days’? How will they care for their child, will they be able to take time off work?”

Nguyen said that question, for instance, gives organizers a chance to talk about Virginia Democrats’ plan to pass paid family and medical leave in the state next year.

Asked if she thought the race was as close as the polls show, Nguyen said, “There’s a lot of noise—the other side is certainly louder. So it makes it feel like they have more urgency.”

“But,” she added, “when we’re on the doors and we’re actually talking to people—our folks are pretty excited.”

We are about to find out whether Youngkin and Republicans really have more enthusiasm and a stronger message, or whether they just yell a heck of a lot louder.

Sign up to make get-out-the-vote calls in Virginia, from the privacy of your home. We will win if we get out the Democratic vote.

This post was originally published on this site

The insurrection on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was not a spur-of-the-moment or spontaneous outbreak of protesters at a rally: It was a long-planned event months in the making with a stunning number of alarms raised that could have prevented it.

After an exhaustive investigation, The Washington Post uncovered documents, videos, photos, social media posts, interviews, and audio recordings all leading to the fact that there were hundreds of warnings prior to the Jan. 6 riot—and that the event was spurred on by twice-impeached, one-term former President Donald Trump along with woefully unprepared local and federal agencies.

Evidence that the riot was planned far in advance came from a whistleblower who contacted the FBI as far back as Dec. 20 to inform them that Trump supporters were chatting online about how to sneak guns into Washington, “overrun” police, and arrest members of Congress. The whistleblower added that those online were under the delusion that they had “orders from the President” and used code words to plan what weapons to bring and where to meet across the nation to caravan into the city for the event—even targeting Sen. Mitt Romney.

Analysis from the Post points to several agencies being too focused on outside threats such as Middle East terrorist plots post 9/11 instead of our own domestic-grown terrorists… despite the barrage of information flowing.

In the months following Trump’s epic loss to President Joe Biden, he was on a rampage, spewing conspiracies about broken voting machines and rigged elections, even calling states such as Georgia to try to strong-arm the governor into overturning the results. And as the Post points out, when all of that failed, Trump began focusing his energy on Jan. 6.

In rally after rally after rally, Trump stirred the pot, coaxing his followers to show up in D.C., face down Congress, and focus their ire on Vice President Mike Pence. He fomented his base to the point that there was really nowhere else to go except to make “Congress itself” the target, according to analysts.

Trump and his supporters were desperate, and without the U.S. Capitol Police or Secret Service in place due to pathetic planning, the only way to help stop the mob was to call in the National Guard. But, as the Post reports, the military was hesitant to step in, frightened by an erratic president who just months earlier had used the National Guard to break up a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest to hold a Bible upside down for a photo-op. The end result was an hours-long wait for the National Guard to help quell the chaos in the Capitol.

As the fight to uncover the truth behind Jan. 6 continues, a recent poll shows that not much has changed since the infamous day and in fact, things have gotten worse.

A poll released Monday by the Public Religion Research Institute shows that even after the shocking display at the Capitol, a large number of Republicans—30%—believe “true American patriots may have to resort to violence in order to save our country.”

There were many folks who tried to alert the various agencies about a possible insurrection, but warnings fell on deaf ears.

The Post reports that Donell Harvin, head of intelligence at Washington, D.C.’s Homeland Security office, called his counterpart in Northern California, Mike Sena, four days before Jan. 6. Sena organized a call with the nation’s regional homeland security offices and from coast to coast, offices were receiving alerts. And the hour, date, and location of concerns were the same: 1 PM, at the U.S. Capitol, Jan. 6—but nothing was done.

Trump allowed 140 members of law enforcement to be injured when his supporters stormed the Capitol. Over 691 people have been arrested and charged with crimes stemming from the insurrection, and five people died.

Two hours into the breach, GOP House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy called Trump, begging him to stop the riot.  “You have to denounce this,” McCarthy said. Trump alleged the mob was members of antifa. McCarthy corrected him, telling him they were his supporters.

“You know what I see, Kevin? I see people who are more upset about the election than you are. They like Trump more than you do,” the president replied.

“You’ve got to hold them,” McCarthy said. “You need to get on TV right now, you need to get on Twitter, you need to call these people off.”

Trump responded, “Kevin, they’re not my people.”

McCarthy told the president, “Yes they are, they just came through my windows and my staff is running for cover. Yeah, they’re your people. Call them off.”

The U.S. Capitol was breached at around 2 PM, and it wasn’t back in the hands of authorities until after 6 PM. In four hours, a failed president did nothing to stop it. And as he claims to be on his way to a 2024 run at the office, know that he will continue to do nothing.