Six months earlier, two of Wood’s Advanced Placement English Language and Composition students had reported her to the school board for teaching about race. Wood had assigned her all-White class readings from Ta-Nehisi Coates’s “Between the World and Me,” a book that dissects what it means to be Black in America.
The students wrote in emails that the book — and accompanying videos that Wood, 47, played about systemic racism — made them ashamed to be White, violating a South Carolina proviso that forbids teachers from making students “feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress” on account of their race.
Reading Coates’s book felt like “reading hate propaganda towards white people,” one student wrote.
At least two parents complained, too. Within days, school administrators ordered Wood to stop teaching the lesson. They placed a formal letter of reprimand in her file. It instructed her to keep teaching “without discussing this issue with your students.”
Wood finished out the spring semester feeling defeated and betrayed — not only by her students, but by the school system that raised her. The high school Wood teaches at is the same one she attended.
It had been a long summer since. Wood’s predicament, when it became public in a local newspaper, divided her town. At school board meetings, and in online Facebook groups, the citizens of wealthy, White and conservative Chapin debated whether Wood should be fired. Republican state representatives showed up to a June meeting to blast her as a lawbreaker. The next month, a county NAACP leader declared her an “advocate for the education of all students.” The county GOP party formally censured the school board chair for failing to discipline Wood.
Finally Friday Reads: Rest in Power Senator Feinstein
Posted: September 29, 2023 Filed under: U.S. Politics | Tags: Chaos Caucus, Dianne Feinstein, SCOTUS 6 Comments
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
Today’s top headline is about a woman who was central in the fight for human rights. “Senator Dianne Feinstein, an ‘icon for women in politics,’ dies at 90. Her career was filled with firsts: first woman mayor of SF and one of the first women elected to the U.S. Senate from California.” This is from the San Francisco ABC affiliate. As you can read anywhere, her legacy of legislation and activity for civil rights for all is legendary.
Feinstein’s first foray into politics came in 1960 when then-Gov. Pat Brown appointed her to the California Women’s Parole Board. But it was in 1969, at the age of 35, that Feinstein first held public office, winning a seat on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown was in the state Senate at the time. He recalled meeting Feinstein during those years.
“I remember that I was trying to get a house here in San Francisco, when they wouldn’t allow Black people easily to get houses,” he said. “And there was a demonstration and this angular tall, great looking white woman pushing a baby stroller with a little kid in it, who nobody knew anything about, came out to participate in the protest. That was Dianne Feinstein! And it was that long ago, and so I am a great admirer.”
In the 1970s, while serving as the first female president of the Board of Supervisors, Feinstein ran twice for mayor, but lost. She had decided to not run again, when tragedy struck the city.
The tragic assassination of San Francisco Mayor George Moscone by Supervisor Dan White in 1978 put Feinstein in the job. In 1979, Feinstein won her first full term as mayor and began reshaping the city.
During the decade she served, she survived a recall attempt, lead mostly by detractors of her proposal to ban handguns in San Francisco. She oversaw the remaking of the city’s skyline, which some decried as the Manhattan-ization of San Francisco, also oversaw a raucous 1984 Democratic National Convention and saved the city’s cable car system.
“The cable cars still running!” Brown exclaimed. “Cause of Dianne.”
Feinstein rose to power as a crisis gripped the city’s gay community. A disease that would later be called AIDS, killed thousands of gay men. Hoping to save lives, Feinstein ordered the city’s bathhouses closed. A risky move, considering the political power of the gay community at the time.
Under her watch, the city’s health department created the global standard for AIDS healthcare at San Francisco General Hospital. In 1990, Feinstein set her sights on a higher office, running for California governor. She lost to Republican Pete Wilson, but still made history again as the first woman in the state to win a major party’s gubernatorial nomination. Then, in 1992, there was a turning point.
During what was dubbed the “Year of the Woman,” Feinstein was elected to the U.S. Senate, alongside Bay Area Congresswoman Barbara Boxer.
In Congress, Feinstein served as the first woman to chair the Senate Rules Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee. She authored the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, leading to a 10 year restriction on certain semi-automatic weapons. The legislation was prompted by the 101 California Street shooting, when a gunman opened fire at a law firm in San Francisco’s financial district, killing eight people.
“I worked with Republican and Democrats alike,” said Feinstein in an interview with CSPAN. “Ten Republicans along with 46 Democrats voted in favor of the amendment.”
Brown adds, “Dianne Feinstein is the only member of Congress either on the Congressional side or on the Senate side who’s ever been able to get a controlled weapons ban signed into law. Dianne got that.”
In 2014, Feinstein released a report revealing how the CIA was detaining and interrogating potential terrorists, sometimes torturing the suspects. The release of the report, led to anti-torture legislation.
“This program was morally, legally and administratively misguided,” she said in an interview with CSPAN. “This nation should never again engage in these tactics.”
Feinstein’s legislative legacy also includes:
- Creating federal coordination of Amber Alerts, the national child abduction warning system
- Passing the California Desert Protection Act, which protected millions of acres of California desert and created the Death Valley and Joshua Tree national parks
- Reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act, to protect women from domestic violence and sexual assault
- Authoring the 2022 Respect for Marriage Act, to enshrine marriage equality into federal law
In an interview with CSPAN she said, “Simply put, Americans should be free to marry the person they love regardless of sexual orientation or race.”
At times, Sen. Feinstein faced criticism from some in her own party.
She will be missed on many levels. The immediate impact is that Biden’s judicial appointments will be stalled. This is from Politico. “Feinstein’s death throws Senate judicial confirmations into new limbo. Filling the open seat on the Judiciary Committee requires at least 60 votes in the Senate, meaning it would require GOP support.”
Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s death at 90 creates a vacancy on the powerful Judiciary Committee. Democrats could need 60 votes to replace her, leaving controversial judicial nominees in limbo until then.
Senate Republicans are signaling they won’t try and block Feinstein’s committee seats from being filled. Back in April, Republicans blocked Democrats from appointing a temporary replacement for Feinstein as she was ailing with shingles and unable to return to Washington for months.
“Under the circumstances, it’s kind of follow whatever the precedent is,” Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said Friday.
Typically when a seat is vacant there is no fight about allowing vacant committee seats to be filled. Committee appointments are often done by unanimous consent.
Rules of replacement: If any Republicans were to object to a UC request, Democrats would need 60 votes to appoint a senator to fill Feinstein’s role on the Judiciary panel, meaning at least 10 Republicans would need to vote in favor of filling Democrats’ majority on the panel, assuming they move to do so before someone is appointed to the California Senate seat.
Senators are typically assigned to committees by unanimous consent, but such orders are subject to debate and can be filibustered. Republican senators could slow, or stop, Democrats from filling the Judiciary roster.
The panel, under Democratic control, has been advancing scores of judicial nominations that Republicans object to. Leaving the panel short one Democratic vote would hamper the majority’s steady confirmation of President Joe Biden’s nominees.
In April, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer had chosen Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who has since announced his plans to retire at the end of this Congress and has been named Senate Foreign Relations chair. It’s unclear if Schumer would still pursue that resolution.
It also puts focus on the race for her replacement. “Feinstein’s Death Intensifies Fight for a Coveted California Senate Seat. Gov. Gavin Newsom has pledged to pick a Black woman to fill the seat, but has also said he would not choose any of the current Democrats running for Senate.” This is from the New York Times.
The death of Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat, immediately turns the spotlight to an intense, ongoing three-way battle to replace her, fraught with racial, political and generational tensions over one of the most coveted positions in California and national politics.
It also puts new pressure on Gov. Gavin Newsom, who will chose someone to fill her seat. Mr. Newsom, whose profile has risen in national Democratic politics in recent weeks as he has traveled the country on behalf of President Biden’s re-election campaign, had come under fire for announcing he would not pick any of the declared candidates in filling any vacancy, so as not to elevate them and give them an advantage.
Mr. Newsom had originally promised to pick a Black woman to fill the position if it opened up, and many Democrats thought he would turn to Representative Barbara Lee, a progressive. But Mr. Newsom said he would pick a caretaker senator instead. “I don’t want to get involved in the primary,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Ms. Lee denounced Mr. Newsom for that decision, calling it insulting.
The other leading Democratic candidates in the race for Ms. Feinstein’s seat are Representative Adam Schiff, a high-profile member of the congressional committee that investigated the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol; Representative Katie Porter, a third-term California member of the House; and Ms. Ms. Lee.
There are no black women currently serving in the Senate. Many disturbing things are happening, including a First Amendment case heading to the Supreme Court. It used to be a relief to hear that some crazy law would be tossed out when it hit SCOTUS. It’s not the crazy laws that get tossed out by the current court, so each significant case brings new fears. This is from the Washington Post. “Landmark Texas, Florida social media cases added to Supreme Court term. The justices on Friday announced which cases they will add to their calendar for the term that begins on Monday.” We can only wonder how much billionaire bribes will influence this outcome.
The justices’ decision to take the landmark social media cases came in an order that alsoadded 10other cases to the calendar for the Supreme Court term that begins Monday. The additional cases concern the FBI’s “no-fly” list, individual property rights and the ability of criminal defendants to confront witnesses against them.
Earlier this year, the high court had said it would tackle controversial issues in the coming term involving gun regulations, voting rights and the power of federal agencies. Those cases will be heard as the justices face intense pressure from Democratic lawmakers to address ethics issues confronting some of their colleagues, including potential conflicts in some of the cases.
Tech industry groups, whose members include Facebook and Google’s YouTube, asked the court to block Texas and Florida laws passed in 2021 that regulate companies’content-moderation policies. The companies say the measures are unconstitutional and conflict with the First Amendment by stripping private companies of the right to choose what to publish on their platforms.
The court’s review of those laws will be the highest-profile examination to date of allegations that Silicon Valley companies are illegally censoring conservative viewpoints. Those accusations reached a fever pitch when Facebook, Twitter and other companies suspended President Donald Trump’s accounts in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The justices’ ruling could have significant implications for the future of democracy and elections, as Americans increasingly rely on social media to read and discuss political news. It could also have wide-ranging effects for policymakers in Congress and statehouses around the country as they attempt to craft new laws governing social media and misinformation.
Tech industry groups, whose members include Facebook and Google’s YouTube, asked the court to block Texas and Florida laws passed in 2021 that regulate companies’content-moderation policies. The companies say the measures are unconstitutional and conflict with the First Amendment by stripping private companies of the right to choose what to publish on their platforms.
The court’s review of those laws will be the highest-profile examination to date of allegations that Silicon Valley companies are illegally censoring conservative viewpoints. Those accusations reached a fever pitch when Facebook, Twitter and other companies suspended President Donald Trump’s accounts in the wake of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The justices’ ruling could have significant implications for the future of democracy and elections, as Americans increasingly rely on social media to read and discuss political news. It could also have wide-ranging effects for policymakers in Congress and statehouses around the country as they attempt to craft new laws governing social media and misinformation.
I’m not sure anyone can predict what the nation’s highest court will do with important decisions like this. One of the most serious things the Supreme Court will decide is whether laws that bar gun ownership to Domestic Violence perpetrators will be overturned in the vein of the gun lobby’s idea of the Second Amendment. This is from August and was published in Roll Call. “Lawmakers urge Supreme Court to keep domestic violence gun law. A lower court ruling jeopardizes decades of bipartisan efforts to protect some of the most vulnerable citizens, a brief argues.”
The Supreme Court could undermine decades of congressional efforts to prevent gun violence if they agree with a lower court decision that struck down a nearly 30-year-old gun control law, two groups of lawmakers told the justices.
The members of Congress filed briefs Monday in a case now at the high court that is seen as a test on the limits of a 2022 decision, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, that expanded Second Amendment rights.
That decision kicked off a flood of litigation over firearms restrictions, changed the way federal judges evaluate the constitutionality of gun control laws. In some cases judges have struck them down. That includes a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit that tossed a federal restriction on firearm possession for people subject to domestic violence restraining orders.
The three-judge 5th Circuit panel wrote that the Bruen decision meant the court had to find specific historical laws to justify modern firearm restrictions — and no colonial-era law dealt with firearms of domestic abusers.
A brief from Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., and Rep. Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., told the justices that upholding the 5th Circuit decision wipes out an effective tool to prevent domestic violence and “jeopardizes decades of bipartisan efforts to protect some of our country’s most vulnerable citizens.”
“The Court must not stymie further work by Congress in this crucial area of law and policy. It should reverse,” that brief states.
Congress has gathered evidence that shows survivors of domestic violence “are safer when abusers subject to restraining orders do not have unfettered access to deadly weapons,” the brief states. “This is, frankly, common sense. And nothing in the text or history of the Second Amendment says or requires otherwise.”
Another brief from Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal, California Rep. Mike Thompson and 169 other Democrats in Congress argued that the 5th Circuit’s approach to evaluating gun laws would “unduly shackle Congress to the past, rendering it unable to develop innovative solutions for the benefit of the public.” The Democrats also argued that the 5th Circuit approach would let judges toss any gun law they thought didn’t have a specific enough analogue from the founding era and “allow courts to substitute their policy judgments for those of Congress.”
This term could have profound implications for public policy regarding public health. This includes easy access to guns and what kinds of misinformation on public health issues can be presented on social media outlets. It would be nice if we could get some campaign finance reform, too, but I doubt it would make it past Alito and Thomas, who love themselves some Dark Money. This should also be illegal. “Trump’s campaign machine is bleeding cash for legal expenses.” Why is it legal for campaigns to cover Trump’s lawers for his dalliances with fascism? Reuters is reporting this as breaking news.
Donald Trump’s political operation has helped pay the legal expenses of more than a dozen people contacted by prosecutors investigating the former president, tying up millions of dollars that otherwise could be used for his 2024 White House bid.
Reuters has identified 13 potential witnesses or co-defendants who were represented by law firms that received payments from a political group run by Trump, based on interviews and a review of court records and campaign finance disclosures. The payments were disclosed in campaign finance reports as general payments to law firms rather than specific payments to individuals.
Those law firms, which include Brand Woodward, Dhillon Law Group and Greenberg Traurig, received more than $2.1 million in the first six months of this year from Save America, a Trump group that is separate from his campaign but played a major role raising money to support him as the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican nomination.
The funds represent a significant chunk of the more than $21 million that Save America’s disclosures to the Federal Election Commission show it spent on legal expenses during that period, a sum that could grow substantially if the group keeps paying legal expenses that are expected to balloon in the coming year.
Some legal experts say campaign finance rules appear to allow Save America’s spending on legal bills involving Trump because the group is registered as a “leadership committee,” which faces few restrictions on spending. Others say, however, that prosecutors may scrutinize the payments for signs of any effort to influence witness testimony.
Four lawyers and legal experts consulted by Reuters said Trump’s defense in four criminal prosecutions could cost over $50 million, more than all the money raised in the first half of this year by Trump’s campaign and its top allied super PAC, Make America Great Again Inc, known as MAGA Inc
WASHINGTON, DC – DECEMBER 6: Ranking member Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) arrives for a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing concerning firearm accessory regulation and enforcing federal and state reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) on Capitol Hill, December 6, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
The world is still watching the chaos in the US House of Representatives. There’s a lot of political gossip on this topic today. But I’ll stick with this from the New York Times. “With a Shutdown in View, McCarthy Plays a Weak Hand. The G.O.P. speaker, whose style is to placate his detractors, does not have the Republican votes to keep the government open. He is calling the vote anyway.” This report is by Annie Karni.
When Representative Kevin McCarthy was short the votes he needed to become speaker in January, he didn’t browbeat his far-right Republican detractors or threaten retribution. Instead, he granted them major concessions, subjecting himself to a long, humiliating slog to win them over.
Mr. McCarthy is now facing a near-certain government shutdown and a possible move by the same faction to oust him from his post if he moves to head off the crisis. And he is turning to the same people-pleasing script, seeking to mollify a faction of his conference he privately scorns.
He has once again caved to the demands of far-right lawmakers, opening an impeachment inquiry into President Biden and then agreeing to slash government spending to levels they clamored for. When that was not enough, Mr. McCarthy pushed aside a stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown. Instead, he bowed to the right flank’s insistence on first bringing up a series of individual yearlong spending bills loaded up with arch-conservative policy dictates — even though none had a chance of enactment.
Democrats have criticized him as the weakest speaker in history. Hard-right members continue to demand more. But members of Mr. McCarthy’s inner circle — a coterie of mostly traditional Republicans who are deeply conservative but share little in common with the hard right — argue that the speaker’s malleability is actually his strength. They say it is the only way to deal with what they regard as a nearly ungovernable majority.
“He is in the driver’s seat, but he’s also willing to ask members in the car to help him navigate,” said Representative Dusty Johnson, a South Dakota Republican and McCarthy loyalist. “That is not — with all due respect to other speakers — they have mostly been interested in taking everyone in the car where they wanted to go.”
Yet with a four-vote voting margin and a far right that appears bent on forcing a shutdown, Mr. McCarthy’s car is spinning out of his control.
Now, he has decided to bring up a temporary spending bill he knows lacks the Republican support necessary to pass simply to show the public that he tried to keep the government open — a step that would likely have been deemed unthinkable by many of his predecessors.
I cannot dwell on the past for many reasons, including how difficult it was to live your own life if you did not want the stereotypical life Republicans love so much. However, it would be nice if we could go back to a functioning federal government, a Supreme Court that isn’t so topped up with corrupt and backward-looking theocratic judges, and the defeat of this craziness that Donald Trump has brought out from under the rocks of neo confederacy. Hell, I’d just settle for some common-sense governance and basic politeness.
However, this will be a battle royal, and we must do some deep breathing and conscious checking to get through it. At least we’re here for each other’s sanity and peace of mind. This will be a hell of an election season. Vote right down to the dog catcher, please! In a world of the Donald’s, let us be Diannes. Hang in there, Sky Dancers!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Mostly Monday Reads: Money Makes the Pol go ’round
Posted: September 25, 2023 Filed under: Corruption and Criminal Insanity | Tags: Donald Trump and fascism, public corruption, Uncle Clarence Thomas 5 Comments
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
I must admit that the headlines aren’t getting any less depressing about what was once our healthy democracy. Will we default on our debt because a few stupid Republicans in backwater, gerrymandered districts followed Trumpmania to blow up the system and fellate Trump’s ego? Will Trump get back in and try to jail and shoot his political enemies? This is from Brian Klauss at The Atlantic.
Eventually, all luck runs out. Political violence is notoriously difficult to forecast with precision, but would anyone really be surprised if Trump’s violent rhetoric led to real-world attacks in the run-up to the 2024 election—or in its aftermath, if he loses?
For all of these reasons, Trump’s recent unhinged rant about Milley should be a wake-up call. But in today’s political climate, the incident barely registers. Trump scandals have become predictably banal. And American journalists have become golden retrievers watching a tennis-ball launcher. Every time they start to chase one ball, a fresh one immediately explodes into view, prompting a new chase.
Eventually, chasing tennis balls gets old. We become more alive to virtually any distraction: The media fixate on John Fetterman’s hoodie instead of on stories about the relentless but predictable risk of Trump-inspired political violence.
Bombarded by a constant stream of deranged authoritarian extremism from a man who might soon return to the presidency, we’ve lost all sense of scale and perspective. But neither the American press nor the public can afford to be lulled. The man who, as president, incited a violent attack on the U.S. Capitol in order to overturn an election is again openly fomenting political violence while explicitly endorsing authoritarian strategies should he return to power. That is the story of the 2024 election. Everything else is just window dressing.
Well, maybe not everything else. Three days ago, we learned from ProPublica that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas “secretly participated in Koch Network Donor Events.”
During the summit, the justice went to a private dinner for the network’s donors. Thomas has attended Koch donor events at least twice over the years, according to interviews with three former network employees and one major donor. The justice was brought in to speak, staffers said, in the hopes that such access would encourage donors to continue giving.
That puts Thomas in the extraordinary position of having served as a fundraising draw for a network that has brought cases before the Supreme Court, including one of the most closely watched of the upcoming term.
Thomas never reported the 2018 flight to Palm Springs on his annual financial disclosure form, an apparent violation of federal law requiring justices to report most gifts. A Koch network spokesperson said the network did not pay for the private jet. Since Thomas didn’t disclose it, it’s not clear who did pay.
BB texted this article to me this morning about the leading Republican pol in the governor’s race. I seriously don’t want to live in a state run by this guy. This is from Politico. “GOP donor wants his money back after candidate hires Corey Lewandowski. An alleged unwanted advance causes ripples in Louisiana’s gubernatorial primary two years later.”
John Odom, a major Republican donor, has been a top backer of Louisiana gubernatorial candidate Jeff Landry. He’s dined with Landry, talked with him on the phone and attended one of his annual “Alligator Hunt” fundraisers. In all, he’s given $100,000 to his political operation.
But now Landry, the state’s attorney general and frontrunner in the race, has done something that, for Odom, is unforgivable.
He hired former Donald Trump 2016 campaign manager Corey Lewandowski as a political adviser.
And now, in response, Odom is demanding that Landry give him his money back and is “urg[ing] the voters of Louisiana to reject Landry at the polls.”
Odom, a construction company executive who made over $100,000 in federal donations to Republican-aligned candidates and groups in the 2022 midterm election, has deeply personal reasons for his dislike of Lewandowski. In 2021, Odom’s then-wife, Trashelle Odom, alleged that Lewandowski made unwanted sexual advances toward her at a Las Vegas charity dinner in September 2021.
Lewandowski was later charged with misdemeanor battery, and in September 2022 he cut a plea deal with Nevada prosecutors. Under the deal, the political strategist agreed to pay a $1,000 fine, undergo impulse control training, serve 50 hours of community service and stay out of trouble for a year. In exchange, Lewandowski would not have to admit guilt.
Along the way, Lewandowski remained active in Republican politics, advising several candidates during the 2022 midterms. Landry’s campaign has paid Lewandowski $100,000 ahead of the Oct. 14 primary, according to state finance records. The payments were first reported this past week by the Louisiana Illuminator.
Many folks are asking for their money back these days. This is from CBS News. “Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman calls on New Jersey Sen. Robert Menendez to resign amid bribery charges.” He’s also handing back all donations the Senator made to his campaign.
Earlier this week, Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey along with his wife were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of bribery.
The indictment comes after a yearslong investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice looking into public corruption.
The 69-year-old senator and his wife, Nadine Menendez, are facing one count of conspiracy to commit bribery, conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, and conspiracy to commit extortion under color of official right.
Also named in the indictment are three New Jersey businessmen, Wael Hana, Jose Uribe, and Fred Daibes.
Despite the charges, Sen. Menedez has indicated he does not plan to resign.
“I intend to continue to fight for the people of New Jersey with the same success I’ve had for the past five decades,” he said.
This is the second time in 10 years he has been facing corruption charges as in 2015 he was indicted on similar charges but the case ultimately ended in a mistrial.
Several elected officials in both New Jersey and Washington have called on Sen. Menendez to step down, and that includes one of Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senators, John Fetterman.
Sen. Fetterman released a statement on Saturday afternoon, calling for Sen. Menendez’s resignation.
“Senator Menendez should resign,” Fetterman’s statement read. “He’s entitled to the presumption of innocence under our system, but he is not entitled to continue to wield influence over national policy, especially given the serious and specific nature of the allegations. I hope he chooses an honorable exit and focuses on his trial.”
Menendez has called the accusations baseless but due to the Senate Democratic Caucus rules, he has agreed to step down as the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Of course, even Orangeholio is presumed innocent. So is the Senator. However, this is not Menedez’s first rodeo. But really, Trump is criminally insane by comparison. He shouldn’t be on the streets, let alone on the news. This is from Rachel Skully, writing at The Hill. “Trump pledges to investigate MSNBC parent company for ‘threatening treason.’ ”
Former President Trump pledged to investigate Comcast, the parent company for NBC and MSNBC, if he is elected in 2024, saying it “will be thoroughly scrutinized for their knowingly dishonest and corrupt coverage of people, things, and events.”
“They are almost all dishonest and corrupt, but Comcast, with its one-side and vicious coverage by NBC NEWS, and in particular MSNBC, often and correctly referred to as MSDNC (Democrat National Committee!), should be investigated for its ‘Country Threatening Treason,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Sunday.
“I say up front, openly, and proudly, that when I WIN the Presidency of the United States, they and others of the LameStream Media will be thoroughly scrutinized for their knowingly dishonest and corrupt coverage of people, things, and events,” the former President wrote.
Trump also rehashed a phrase he has often used for news media in the past, calling it the “enemy of the people.”
“The Fake News Media should pay a big price for what they have done to our once great Country!” Trump added.
So much for the First Amendment.
Anyway, this is crazy, this is crazy, this is crazy.
Here’s a little something weird and unusual to think about. Warren Zevon, citing a poem, improvising beat poetry jazz, was one of many artists on an album called Kerouac. It’s also politically timely. It’s the Running Through – Chinese Poetry Song. More respect for the cats! More Wine! More Poetry!
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Finally Friday Reads: Fuck Nebraska and Red States in General
Posted: September 22, 2023 Filed under: just because | Tags: Abortion Art, Abortion is Reproductive Healthcare, After Roe V. Wade, Bans off our bodies, Before Roe V. Wade 11 Comments
Juanita McNeely, “Is it Real? Yes It Is!” from 1969, a series of nine panels about the painter’s illegal abortion and medical emergency, It is displayed at the Whitney Museum of American Art
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
When my parents were trying to sell me in 4th grade on moving across the Missouri River, I clearly remember sitting in the back seat and telling them I didn’t like it here. I couldn’t really articulate how awful the boxy brick grade school looked compared to mine, which was built of granite by the WPA. Across the main road was a set of equally bricky and boxy stores in a shopping center.
All I could remember were the beautiful stores in the downtown area of Council Bluffs. There was the Hotel Ogden that looked straight out of a Western Movie, plus my Dad’s original dealership location, which was a typical auto dealership storefront straight out of the 1920s. I loved the old Victorian Houses nestled into the Bluffs and longed to own one when I grew up. I had dreams like that until we moved to Omaha. Then, my dreams were mostly of getting out of there as soon as possible. I could’ve graduated early and begged my parents to let me attend university and get out of here. My mother kept telling me these were the best days of my life. Then, I realized my mother was speaking for herself because I mostly remember her being as bored as I was. And we both hated football in a state where that’s about it for entertainment.
I can tell you that with certainty the best decades of my life came when I finally packed a car and headed out for good.
Barbara Kruger’s “Untitled (Your Body is a Battleground,” (1989).Credit…via Barbara Kruger, The Broad Art Foundation and Sprüth Magers
My daughter is 20 weeks pregnant, and her water broke last week at 19. The first question I get now is what state she is in. I don’t want to go into that, but you can google how exactly bad that is for a pregnancy. She was a high-risk pregnancy for me. I was placenta previa. I can tell you that my oldest daughter is an OB/GYN because of that pregnancy and the inoperable and incurable cancer that followed. I found out that the Insurance Company covering us and employing him wanted to send me to a Catholic Hospital. I said I’d pay to go to Methodist with my last dime if I had to. I badgered him to talk to the clerk, calling the shots on me and getting them to send me to Methodist. Luckily, Methodist Hospital had the only neontologist in my backward city. My husband worked for what I was told by my fifth-grade teacher was basically the employer of last resort. If we didn’t get grades, we would get stuck working in the land of endless file cabinets, evil bosses, and taxidermy animal decorations. I was due mid-December and drove myself to the hospital, bleeding profusely on Halloween.
The only good thing about that damned insurance company was it covered everything from the pre-birth trauma to the cancer treatment and surgery. It took my husband, a Vice President, to pressure them to let me go to Methodist Hospital with a good Jewish neonatologist(who later supervised Dr. Daughter’s Residency) that’s situated right across the street from Children’s Hospital’s Neonatology Unit. I gave my daughter a purple stethoscope when she entered Med school. I gave her an autographed copy of “This Common Secret ” when she graduated. My Journey as an Abortion Doctor.” She said, “But Mom, this won’t be my central practice.” She hadn’t read it when I last asked at the fall for Roe. I told her to just learn the procedure and ensure she could do it. One day, you may have to teach it secretly to save lives.
Yet in setting down her story, Wicklund has done something brave, not only by refusing to cower in the shadows but also by recounting experiences that don’t always fit the conventional pro-choice script. Before receiving her medical training, Wicklund had an abortion herself. She was asked no questions, offered no advice and left the clinic feeling violated. Years later, she terminated the pregnancy of a woman who’d been raped and wanted an abortion. Afterward, Wicklund examined the product of conception and discovered the pregnancy had occurred two weeks earlier, meaning it was not a consequence of the rape. Both she and the patient were horrified.
Opponents of abortion might view such episodes as proof that abortion is evil. For Wicklund, they are what drove and inspired her to help each woman she encountered make an informed, truly independent choice. At a clinic she ran in Montana, this meant placing the emphasis on counseling, which sometimes strengthened a patient’s resolve to terminate her pregnancy and other times led her to reconsider and bear the child instead. Wicklund may never convince the protesters who demonized her that women should be free to make such decisions on their own. But in sharing her secrets, she has shown why there is much honor in having spent a lifetime attempting to ensure they do.
Until now, very few can spend a lifetime ensuring they do. Count the states, remember the map, and be prepared to help someone you know. Be prepared for fines, jail, and neighbors reporting you.
I’ve always been a fighter, and fighting the patriarchy has been my thing ever since I found out I couldn’t play Little League baseball and was forced to wear a dress to school. One story that typifies the entire state came from one of the two Physicians performing abortions in Omaha. The biggest, most nasty of the protestors in front of his clinic was this woman and her daughter. One Sunday, he opened his clinic just for her so her daughter could have an abortion. The next day they both were out screaming crap that obviously they believed was for everyone else but them. Our bodies are in the hands of religious freaks, politicians, and insurance bureaucrats. This is not the world I planned for the girls and women coming after me.
I never thought we’d lose Roe completely. But we have. I live on an island at the edge of the rest of the state, which is primarily insane from too much religion and neo-Confederate rage. Almost all of us would love to be a city-state. But, since cancer took the one thing these nuts want to regulate the most, I don’t have to worry about the things I used to. It’s only for my daughters and now granddaughters. Location. Location. Location is everything if you have a functioning uterus. One is in Washington State. The other is in Colorado. Right now, they’re safe, but hopefully not in the way Anne Franck thought she would be in a hidey hole in the attic.
ILLUSTRATION BY VICTOR JUHASZ Rolling Stone, 2014
Here in Lousyana and up there in Nebraska, the state owns women’s bodies. We are chattel. The doctors, the parents, and confidants guiding such decisions in a free society no longer matter. This old, stale religion used to burn women and Jewish people at the stake and African-Americans on a cross wants its Dark Ages back. They’re in Africa trying out the death penalty for not loving and fucking their idea of the proper sex. Will we never be rid of these patriarchal missionaries who consider us chattel? I’ll shut up now. Just know that my child is safe and has her bills covered right now because she is not poor and is in Colorado. None of this makes it easier for me as I look at the faces of young women who walk my neighborhood streets, wondering if they’ll be able to make it to the Promised Land if need be.
So here’s the beef. This travesty of justice happened in Nebraska and is in The Guardian. “US mother sentenced to two years in prison for giving daughter abortion pills. Jessica Burgess pleaded guilty in July to providing an abortion after 20 weeks and tampering with human remains.” Remember, the earliest viability is not 20 weeks. It’s somewhere around 22-24 weeks and still at a point where life or health is not certain.
Jessica Burgess, a Nebraska mother accused of helping her teenage daughter use pills to end her pregnancy, was sentenced on Friday to two years in prison.
Burgess and her daughter, Celeste Burgess, stand accused of working together to end Celeste Burgess’s pregnancy in April 2022.
According to prosecutors, after the pair bought pills to end the pregnancy, Celeste Burgess gave birth to a stillborn fetus. At the time, Nebraska law banned abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Celeste Burgess’s pregnancy was well past that point, according to court records.
Police say that the Burgesses buried the fetal remains. An examination of the remains suggested they may have also been burned, according to court documents.
Jessica Burgess pleaded guilty in July to charges of false reporting, providing an abortion after 20 weeks of gestation, and concealing, removing or abandoning a dead human body. She was sentenced to one year in prison each charge, but the sentences for false reporting and tampering with human remains will run concurrently, with the sentence for the illegal abortion to served consecutively with the sentences for the other charges, a spokesperson for the Madison county courthouse said.
Celeste Burgess also took a plea deal and was sentenced to 90 days for concealing or abandoning a dead body earlier this year.
Although the case occurred before the US supreme court overturned Roe v Wade, it has been seen as a harbinger of how law enforcement may prosecute people for ending their own pregnancies in a post-Roe era – and how giant tech companies could go along with it.
One of the worst states of the Union is Texas. You can tell precisely how Pro-life Governor Abbott is from this headline from ABC News yesterday. “3-year-old dies while crossing the Rio Grande near Eagle Pass, Texas. The family was attempting to cross the river near a floating marine barrier.
The fetish fetishists omit this once-breathing, speaking, and walking child in the same class as a fertilized egg. This child already had dreams.
The Texas Tribune examined the reality of Abbot’s reign of terror. One year before, Grand Inquisitor Alito followed a judge who liked Witch Burning to decide that women’s reproductive health should be criminal. “A year after the Dobbs decision, Texas has settled into a post-abortion reality. The impact of Texas’ near-total ban on abortion is coming into focus as patients and providers leave the state, legal challenges languish, and the state’s social safety net braces for a baby boom.: This is reported by Eleanor Klibanoff.
A year after the Dobbs v. Jackson decision, an uneasy acceptance has settled over Texas, as even the most ardent abortion advocates acknowledge these new laws aren’t changing anytime soon.
“I don’t see the legal landscape of our state shifting in a major way, certainly not in the short-term future,” said Neesha Davé, executive director for the Lilith Fund for Reproductive Equity, an Austin-based abortion fund. “And so, unfortunately, we have had to figure out how to navigate the current legal landscape, if for no other reason than there are people who need abortion care today, yesterday, tomorrow.”
There are ongoing court challenges to Texas’ laws, but they are narrow and could drag through the courts for years. There is still momentum around meaningful political change, but that is the work of decades and much of the focus has shifted to shoring up the social safety net as a stop-gap measure.
Meanwhile, despite exceptions to the law, the number of monthly abortions in Texas has dropped into the low single digits. Women are nearly dying from pregnancy complications, or actually dying after having to travel out-of-state for abortions, or facing million-dollar lawsuits for helping friends acquire abortion medication. An unknown number are having babies they never planned for.
A year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson that there is no constitutional right to abortion, some long-time advocates see hope in the hopelessness. They’ve been sounding the alarm about the overturn of Roe and its consequences for years, and finally, people are forced to pay attention.
“There are so many more conversations happening about abortion today than there were two years ago,” Davé said. “I do think a tide is turning. It just takes time.”
Two states are trying to come out of the Reproductive Health Care Dessert. The next battlefield is Pennsylvania
. This is one of the reasons you really have to watch your state legislature. Forced Birthers are learning the numbers are against them if voters get their way. They’re not for states making their own decision. Now, they’re going straight for a Federal law banning all abortions. Every vote counts for this. Lousyana will invariably get worse after our election. A lot of us will vote with our feet. Women and children are not safe in Red State America. Neither are members of the LGBTQ+ community, immigrants, or people of color.
This is from The Hill. “Abortion battle to play out on multiple fronts in November.”
A battle over abortion rights is set to play out on multiple fronts this coming November with votes that could affect access to the procedure in several states.
Voters will go to the polls for key elections in half a dozen states this year, but abortion rights advocates in particular are looking at votes in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
A battle over abortion rights is set to play out on multiple fronts this coming November with votes that could affect access to the procedure in several states.
Voters will go to the polls for key elections in half a dozen states this year, but abortion rights advocates in particular are looking at votes in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia.
But the contests in Virginia and Pennsylvania will also be seen as proxy elections for the broader battle over abortion rights.
Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) has devoted much of his time and energy to working to help elect Republicans in this November’s state legislative races. He received a political boost in June after the slate of candidates he endorsed for these seats won their primaries.
But Youngkin has been unable to achieve the 15-week abortion ban he has called for with Democrats controlling the state Senate and Republicans controlling the state House.
The art piece by Chicago-based artist Michelle Hartney is a recreation of a historical letter written to Margaret Sanger in the 1920s by a woman seeking birth control. The artist used the letter’s original text and added the trim of Yarrow flowers, a plant historically used to induce miscarriages. The letter was removed by Lewis-Clark State College from an exhibit at its Center for Arts and History.
The state of Idaho has a law that will not even allow an Art Exhibit of Abortion Art in its Universities and Colleges. This is dated from yesterday from the Democrat & Chronicle. Rochester gives haven to censored art, letting people see an abortion health exhibit. The exhibition entitled “Unconditional Care: Listening to People’s Health Needs” is on display through Sept. 21.
An art exhibit censored at an Idaho college because of references to abortion can be seen at the Rochester Contemporary Art Center, known as RoCo.
The exhibition — “Unconditional Care: Listening to People’s Health Needs” — was originally meant to be shown at Lewis-Clark State College Center for Arts and History.
But that school removed six pieces from it. The college cited a 2021 state law that bars public dollars from funding speech that would promote abortion rights, according to the Idaho Capital Sun.
RoCo stepped in to share the exhibition without censorship, and “Unconditional Care” is on display at the Rochester art center through Friday, Sept. 22.
“It’s one of the first examples of art censorship in the post-Rowe era,” said Bleu Cease, RoCo’s executive director. “The artworks are touching on abortion and abortion care, not advocating for it. We’re really proud to support the artist and the overall exhibition and the educational component.”
The show features 11 artists who address various health and medical issues through their lived experiences using diverse art and visual media.
“Unconditional Care” is curated by artist Katrina Majkut, who said she avoided including protest art in the exhibition to help people move past politics and into spaces of empathy and reflection.
“I wanted to make sure that whatever was shown was either rooted in medical accuracy or personal storytelling,” Majkut said during an online discussion hosted by RoCo.
Some of the themes explored in “Unconditional Care” include:
- Maternal mortality rates
- Racial disparity
- Chronic illness
- Body autonomy and safety
Cease said that once news of the censorship went national, he reached out to Majkut, eventually providing her the opportunity to curate an exhibit in Rochester that would give the pulled pieces a platform.
Among the works:
- Majkut’s piece titled “Medical Abortion” is a cross-stitch showing bottles of mifepristone and misoprostol, medicines that will yield a miscarriage.
- Lydia Nobles made three documentary videos from a series titled “As I Sit Waiting,” featuring women describing their abortion experiences.
- Michelle Hartney’s work showcases handwritten letters written in the 1920s by a woman seeking information about birth control from Planet Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger.
“The show is really not about abortion, but abortion gets all the attention because the issue is so divisive,” Cease said. “The common thread with all the artworks in the exhibition is that they relate to the human right to health wellness and body autonomy, especially in the U.S.”
We’re not well, America.
What’s on your reading and blogging post today?
(p.s. I’m sorry this took so long. It took a lot out of me today to write this. I’ve spent the week feeling unable to do any good for any life circumstances. Please keep my personal stories here, especially the current one.)
Mostly Monday Reads: Turning in Your Neighbor to the American Thought Police (2024 edition)
Posted: September 18, 2023 Filed under: Fascist Florida | Tags: big brother, Donald Trump Meet the Press, Ninety-Eight-Four, Orwellian, Privacy Rights, Red State Dystopia, Republican Snitches, Thought police 6 Comments
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
I remember thinking how the Reagan years reminded me of George Orwell’s 1984 back before it was deeply embbeded in the Republican policies. We read it in school, along with Lord of the Flies and Brave New World. It’s on banned book lists in your fundamental Republican Dystopian Red State. Florida found it “pro-communist” and “sexually explicit.” I don’t remember being titillated or lustily singing the Internationale after my first read of the book or any of my rereads. I reread many of these classics during Republican Administrations, remembering I read about it first in any one of the dystopian novels I was assigned in literature classes.
“I read the News today; oh Boy.” A day in my life usually includes at least moving one of these books from my hallway library to the small bookshelf by my bed for easy reference. I may need a bigger shelf. Here’s an article from the Washington Post on scenic South Carolina. “Her students reported her for a lesson on race. Can she trust them again?” This is reported by Hannah Natanson.
This is something I could never dream up. Someone’s point of view can be censored by an arm of the government because it hurts your feelings. I can only tell you how many times Algebra tests hurt my feelings, but sheesh, buckle up, chucko. Then, decide you’re not going to be like that because Coates’ book outlines actual harm done to people of color by the actions and attitudes of thoughtless white people and not some idle adventure into name-calling. We should be ashamed that one group controls everyone’s destiny and grants favor to their own. The country has run like that since the days of slavery and the mass slaughter and removal of indigenous nations from their property.
Things that some of us label Orwellian have become everyday events in totalitarian-tilting Red States that chase women who go to other states or who transport pregnant women to other states, then fine them and jail them or worse. Will we even find justice for this in the courts, given that the majority of the Supreme Court appears to be Theocratic Tolatarians?
“Doublespeak” and “groupthink” came straight from Orwell’s frightening vision of a totalitarian future in which children spy on their parents, and the ultimate punishment for independent thinking is to be confronted by the thing that frightens one most. Anyone who has ever read 1984 cannot possibly forget Winston Smith and the rats.
This is from NBC News. (Yes, the NBC News that gave Big Brother an interview on Meet the Press yesterday.) “Indiana attorney general sues hospital system over privacy of Ohio girl who traveled for abortion. The lawsuit, filed Friday in Indianapolis federal court, marked Attorney General Todd Rokita’s latest attempt to seek disciplinary legal action against Dr. Caitlin Bernard.”
Indiana’s attorney general has sued the state’s largest hospital system, claiming it violated patient privacy laws when a doctor publicly shared the story of an Ohio girl who traveled to Indiana for an abortion.
The lawsuit, filed Friday in Indianapolis federal court, marked Attorney General Todd Rokita’s latest attempt to seek disciplinary legal action against Dr. Caitlin Bernard. The doctor’s account of a 10-year-old rape victim traveling to Indiana to receive abortion drugs became a flashpoint in the abortion debate days after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last summer.
Rokita, a Republican, is stridently anti-abortion and Indiana was the first state to approve abortion restrictions after the court’s decision. The near-total abortion ban recently took effect after legal battles.
“Neither the 10-year-old nor her mother gave the doctor authorization to speak to the media about their case,” the lawsuit stated. “Rather than protecting the patient, the hospital chose to protect the doctor, and itself.”
The lawsuit named Indiana University Health and IU Healthcare Associates. It alleged the hospital system violated HIPAA, the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and a state law for not protecting the patient’s information.
Indiana’s medical licensing board reprimanded Bernard in May, saying she didn’t abide by privacy laws by talking publicly about the girl’s treatment. It was far short of the medical license suspension that Rokita’s office sought.
So the state is suing, but the girl and her mother aren’t part of any case? I’m confused. Plus, none of this would even be necessary if Ohio hadn’t turned a ten-year-old into state chattel and denied healthcare she desperately needed.
Hunter Biden has sued the IRS for their agents leaking his tax information. This is from CNN.
Hunter Biden sued the Internal Revenue Service on Monday, alleging its agents illegally released his tax information and that the agency failed to protect his private records.
President Joe Biden’s son alleges the IRS unlawfully disclosed his tax return information and did not establish safeguards to ensure the confidentiality of his records. He is seeking, among other things, all documents involving the disclosure of the tax information, $1,000 for each unauthorized disclosure and attorneys fees.
The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in Washington, DC, does not name the two IRS agents turned whistleblowers as defendants. But the lawsuit is centered on disclosures made by the agents, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, and their lawyers in public statements, congressional testimony and interviews.
Judge Timothy Kelly, a Donald Trump appointee, has been assigned to the case.
It’s being filed amid a swirl of other legal issues facing Hunter Biden, who was indicted by special counsel David Weiss on three felony gun charges last week and is potentially facing additional tax charges by Weiss.
“Despite clear warnings from Congress that they were prohibited from disclosing the contents of their testimony to the public in another forum, Mr. Shapley and Mr. Ziegler’s testimony only emboldened their media campaign against Mr. Biden,” the lawsuit states. “And finally, since their public testimony before the House of Representatives on July 19, 2023, the agents have become regular guests on national media outlets and have made new allegations and public statements regarding Mr. Biden’s confidential tax return information that were not previously included in their transcripts before the Committee on Ways and Means.”
Specifically, Hunter Biden’s attorneys point to details Shapley shared in an interview with CBS News that aired in late June. During the interview, Shapley alleged that Biden took certain personal expenses as business expenses, including “prostitutes, sex club memberships, hotel rooms for purported drug dealers,” and that Biden owed $2.2 million in unpaid taxes, the lawsuit alleges.
Everyone is talking about Meet the Press and Kristen Welker’s first interview. She chose poorly. NBC characterized it this way. “Here are 11 top moments from Trump’s ‘Meet the Press’ interview. The former president tells Kristen Welker he’s not worried about going to prison, and he thinks he can broker peace on abortion, and he explains where he stands on shutting down the government.” CNN, however, characterizes it this way. “Fact check: 14 of Trump’s false claims on ‘Meet the Press.” I’ll just single out this horrifying moment.
Trump, attacking Democrats on abortion policy, claimed, “You have some states that are allowed to kill the child after birth.” He also said specifically, “You have New York state and other places that passed legislation where you’re allowed to kill the baby after birth.”
Facts First: This is false. Killing a child after birth is not allowed in any state, and New York did not pass legislation permitting infanticide.
A law New York approved in 2019 makes abortion illegal after 24 weeks with the exception of cases where the fetus is not viable or the abortion is “necessary to protect the patient’s life or health.” The law does not legalize post-birth murder. Since its passage, however, it has been the subject of online misinformation falsely claiming it does.
There are some cases in which parents decide to choose palliative care for babies who are born with deadly conditions that give them just minutes, hours or days to live. That is simply not the same as killing the baby.
Let’s just change “online misinformation falsely claiming” to right-wing religious propaganda and leave it at that. Trump also gave the country’s Jewish population a special Rosh Hashanah Greeting. This is from The Guardian. “Trump marks Rosh Hashanah with antisemitic post claiming ‘liberal jews’ voted to ‘destroy America’, ‘Let’s hope you learned from your mistake & make better choices moving forward,’ New Year’s message from former president says.”
Donald Trump decided to mark the Jewish New Year by sharing an antisemitic message stating that “liberal Jews” voted to “destroy America and Israel” by supporting President Joe Biden.
The former president shared an image wishing Jewish Americans a happy new year on Rosh Hashanah on Truth Social on Sunday.
“Just a quick reminder for liberal Jews who voted to destroy America & Israel because you believed in false narratives!” the image said. “Let’s hope you learned from your mistake & make better choices moving forward! Happy New Year!”
The image posted by Mr Trump also included a flyer from JEXIT, a group based in Florida working to push the message to Jewish Americans “that the Democratic Party has abandoned them and Israel,” The Times of Israel has reported.
“Wake Up Sheep. What Natzi /Anti Semite ever did this for the Jewish people or Israel?” the flyer states.
So, this one is the strange one to me. I think he just admitted to a lot of felonies. This is from CNN again. “Trump acknowledges he was told 2020 election lies were false in wide-ranging interview.” It’s reported by Katie Sullivan. I wonder how Trump’s attorneys feel about this? Also, exactly who is under the bus here?
Former President Donald Trump acknowledged in a new interview that, despite receiving counsel from multiple people that the 2020 election was not stolen, he pushed ahead anyway with his false claims to try and overturn the results.
The comments to NBC’s “Meet the Press” directly address a central premise of special counsel Jack Smith’s case against Trump over his efforts to subvert the 2020 election results: that Trump knew the election claims he was making were false after being told by several close aides that he had lost.
“It was my decision, but I listened to some people,” Trump said.
In his first broadcast network interview since leaving office, the 2024 Republican front-runner also criticized members of his party over how they’ve approached abortion policy, discussed pardoning himself in the final days of his presidency and said he would testify under oath he did not direct an employee to delete security footage.
The former president said he didn’t listen to his attorneys who told him he had lost the election because he didn’t respect them and that he “respected many others that said the election was rigged.”
“I was listening to different people, and when I added it all up, the election was rigged,” Trump told NBC’s Kristen Welker.
He added, “You know who I listen to? Myself. I saw what happened.”
In the indictment against Trump, prosecutors detailed the “prolific lies” Trump made in the wake of the 2020 election, including knowingly pushing false claims of voter fraud and voting machines switching votes despite state and federal officials telling him the claims were wrong.
Prosecutors put forward several examples of Trump being told by his aides that fraud claims he was promoting were false. The indictment cites instances where Trump was informed that his claims were false by then-Vice President Mike Pence, the director of national intelligence, senior members of the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, his own staffers, state lawmakers as well as state and federal courts.
“But the defendant disseminated them anyway – to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, create an intense atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and erode public faith in the administration of the election,” the indictment reads.
So, what fools would want a President who takes lousy advice? Uh, that’s rhetorical.
So, let me quote directly from Nineteen Eighty-Four to address that.
“Talking to her, he realized how easy it was to present an appearance of orthodoxy while having no grasp whatever of what orthodoxy meant. In a way, the world-view of the Party imposed itself most successfully on people incapable of understanding it. They could be made to accept the most flagrant violations of reality, because they never fully grasped the enormity of what was demanded of them, and were not sufficiently interested in public events to notice what was happening. By lack of understanding they remained sane. They simply swallowed everything, and what they swallowed did them no harm, because it left no residue behind, just as a grain of corn will pass undigested through the body of a bird.”
Do your remember a time when pretty much all of us agreed that NAZIs and Fascists were terrible?
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
Finally Friday Reads: Strike!
Posted: September 15, 2023 Filed under: Labor unions | Tags: Labor Unions, SAG/AFTRA, Solidarity forever, Strikes, United Auto Workers 3 Comments
Good Day, Sky Dancers!
It’s been a while since the labor markets have aligned to empower workers to unionize and strike for better wages and benefits. A combination of more jobs than potential workers, years of stock buybacks, and considerable increases in upper management bonuses and salaries have created a perfect storm. The New York Times has characterized this as a “Summer of Strikes. Work stoppages in the United States this year are approaching heights rarely seen in recent decades.” (Be certain to check out the graphs on the various unions’ history of work stoppages.)
This year, workers across industries in the United States have increasingly walked off the job or threatened to do so. In July, tens of thousands of actors joined screenwriters on the picket line, bringing Hollywood to a halt. Meanwhile, a summertime strike of more than 300,000 United Parcel Service workers had seemed imminent before a deal was reached last month.
Now, another potentially large-scale strike has begun. After the United Auto Workers and the country’s largest carmakers were unable to agree on a new contract before Thursday night’s deadline, union members at General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis — which owns Chrysler, Jeep and Ram — have walked off the job.
About 12,700 workers began the strike on Friday, at plants in Michigan, Missouri and Ohio. That’s a small portion of the unionized factories of G.M., Ford and Stellantis across the United States. But the union hasn’t ruled out a full-scale strike.
If all 150,000 of the U.A.W. members go on strike, nearly 460,000 workers will have walked off the job at some point over the course of this year, the highest level since 2018, another notable year for work stoppages.
Strike activity increased slightly in 2021 and 2022 after a lull during the coronavirus pandemic. Much of this can be attributed to a historically strong economic recovery, which has strengthened workers’ bargaining power, said Ruth Milkman, a professor at the City University of New York’s Graduate Center and School of Labor and Urban Studies. “The single most important factor is the tight labor market,” she said.
Despite the recent uptick, overall union activity has fallen since the 1970s and ’80s, when the number of workers on strike in a year regularly surpassed 400,000.
Today’s news is the”UAW strike 2023 against Detroit automakers: Live updates, news from the picket sites.” This is reported by the Detroit Free Press.
The UAW declared a strike against Detroit Three automakers Thursday as contract talks failed to secure new labor agreements before the current deals expired at 11:59 p.m.
UAW President Shawn Fain announced the first wave of plants the union would strike if a new labor agreement was not reached before midnight: Ford Michigan Assembly Plant (Final Assembly and Paint only) in Wayne, Stellantis Toledo Assembly Complex in Ohio and General Motors Wentzville Assembly in Missouri.
The DFP has a number of exciting stories that analyze the impact of the strike on Michigan, the US, and the industry, including the many small suppliers to the Big 3 and the workers.
“Experts weigh implications of UAW strike strategy” is one such report.
The UAW’s targeted plan for a possible strike could mean that some workers are on the picket lines making $500 a week in strike pay while others are on the assembly lines making their full wages.
Whether such a situation would breed contempt among workers would depend on the messaging from the United Auto Workers union, said Brett Miller, a labor and employment attorney at Butzel law firm.
“There may be some comfort if the union plans to start small and escalate the strike involving more members or it is making representations that the final result of the strike would be worth the sacrifice,” he said.
As to whether the union strikes a plant that supplies parts to another plant, thereby halting the second, non-striking plant’s production, the automaker could shut down that non-striking plant and essentially it would be a lockout for those workers at the non-striking plant.
Miller said that under the UAW constitution, those on strike or locked out could get strike pay. Generally, unemployment will not cover employees who are on strike, but there are exceptions, such as in New York and New Jersey.
It is important to note that UAW members must wait about 8 days for strike pay, face challenges ahead: What to know.” This is also part of the DFP coverage. It is also interesting to note that a strike against all three simultaneously is unprecedented. This is from CNN.
The United Auto Workers union is on strike against General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, the first time in its history that it has struck all three of America’s unionized automakers at the same time.
Workers on Friday walked out of three plants – one each from the Big Three automakers – in Missouri, Michigan and Ohio. Picketers were met with cheers from sign-waving union members.
The UAW referred to its targeted strike of three plants as a “Stand Up Strike,” which it called a strategic “new approach” to walking off the job.
“As time goes on, more locals may be called on to ‘Stand Up’ and join the strike,” the union told members. “This gives us maximum leverage and maximum flexibility in our fight to win a fair contract at each of the Big Three automakers.”
The UAW’s strikes began at GM’s Wentzville Missouri, which has 3,600 UAW members on its staff; Ford’s Michigan Truck plant in Wayne, Michigan, which will have 3,300 strikes; and Stellantis’ Toledo Assembly complex in Ohio, where 5,800 will be be on strike.
In all, fewer than 13,000 of the UAW’s 145,000 members walked off the job.
“These were chosen carefully by the UAW and reflect a strategy that will ensure a large number of suppliers and dealers are affected, while reducing the number of UAW workers that, at least initially, are on strike and receiving strike pay,” said Patrick Anderson. CEO of Anderson Economic Group.
A local L.A. ABC TV station reports that “Thousands of striking actors, writers swarm Hollywood in massive solidarity march.” The SAG/AFTRA strike continues.
Thousands of striking writers and actors staged a solidarity march through Hollywood Wednesday, culminating in a boisterous rally outside Paramount studios as the dual labor stoppages continue to halt movie and TV production.
The Writers Guild of America has been on strike since early May. The SAG-AFTRA actors’ union joined the writers on the picket lines in July. There have been some negotiations between the WGA and Hollywood studios in recent weeks, but still no indication a resolution is at hand. There has not been any word of talks between the studios and SAG-AFTRA.
On Wednesday morning, thousands of striking writers and actors gathered outside Netflix headquarters in Hollywood, then marched to Paramount studios on Melrose Avenue. Once there, a massive rally was held, featuring speeches and music performances — and forcing closures of streets surrounding the studio.
SAG-AFTRA billed the event as a solidarity march to send a message to studios that actors and writers are standing firm in their push for fair contracts.
“Thank you so much for showing up like this, this is an amazing turnout,” SAG-AFTRA President Fran Drescher told the crowd. “Your strength and your solidarity and your resolve is going to get us to the other side of this, and history is in the making right now. I know that this strike is not easy, in fact, it’s hard. It’s very hard. And with the passing of time its going to even get harder, but the reason why we had the largest strike authorization in our union history is because we stand at an inflection point.
My Granddad was around for the Great Railroad Strike of 1922 while he and Nana had two kids. My Dad was born the year after the strike.
Even though these unions do work in industries that could not be more different, it is important to remember the economic rationale for the strikes. These workers have more in common than you would think. An economist at Stanford answers the question “Why are workers striking now?” As I mentioned above, “falling wages and unequal earnings distribution are among the reasons workers are striking, says Stanford economics professor” Dr. John Pencavel. The gap between the earnings of senior management and the folks who actually do the work is at an all-time high.
According to Pencavel, many workers are feeling frustrated by seeing their wages suppressed in less competitive labor markets and by the loss of a voice (such as a trade union). Moreover, he argues, a low unemployment rate makes the timing right.
“Strikes tend to be more frequent and longer when workers have opportunities for other possibly temporary work, as indicated by a low unemployment rate,” Pencavel said.
…
Why are so many strikes happening now?
When it comes to measuring earnings inequality, economists tend to be relativists, that is, if all workers get the same x% increase in wages, economists usually conclude wage inequality has not changed. By contrast, many workers are absolutists and measure inequality in terms of absolute dollar differences in wages. This distinction helps to explain why economists are more inclined to accept certain earnings differences that workers do not. An example is provided by examining the U.S. household income and comparing the household whose income is near the top of the income distribution.
Specifically, the household whose income is at the 95th percentile with the household whose income is below the median (specifically at the 20th percentile). Approximately these two households experienced the same 9% increase in income between 2018 and 2019. Given the existing wide income distribution, this 9% increase in income constituted a $2,484 increase for the household at the 20th percentile and a $21,274 increase for the household at the 95th percentile. To the relativist, inequality has not changed; to the absolutist income inequality has increased.
Tending to be absolutists, workers are outraged at the earnings reported for certain managers and business owners. They see the system as basically unfair. Indeed, it is well documented that the share of the nation’s total income that is categorized as profits has risen and the share called wages has fallen.
Amazon workers strike to expose the horror behind ‘Black Friday’ sales
The workers in Amazon warehouses in Europe sought to highlight atrocious working conditions, including Injuries from accidents, overworked employees collapsing unconscious on the floor, constant robotic surveillance and workers having to skip toilet breaks to avoid missing the targets. (2018)
There have been work stoppages also for workers in search of Union protection recently. Amazon and Starbucks have experienced nascent unionization efforts. This is an article from VOX that was published in May. “Why unions are growing and shrinking at the same time. Joining the picket line like it’s 1939.” This report was written by Rani Molla.
Based on the news lately, it would seem like unions are growing.
Staffers at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced on Tuesday they had formed a union. This is after Starbucks workers last week reached 50 union wins across the country, and many more locations are slated to do so in the near future. According to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), about 250 total Starbucks stores, representing nearly 7,000 employees, have so far petitioned to unionize. And last month, workers at an Amazon warehouse in New York City defied all odds by winning their first union battle against the second-biggest employer in the United States. People are successfully unionizing across the economy, from retail to tech, and their wins are leading to even more union interest. Petitions for union representation in the first half of 2022 are up nearly 60 percent from last year.
This raft of union organizing, unthinkable just a few years ago, is happening against a very favorable backdrop, including a tight labor market, record inequality, and a pro-union administration, which extends to the leadership at the NLRB, the organization tasked with running union elections and enforcing labor law. Meanwhile, public approval of unions is at its highest level since 1965.
What we don’t know yet is whether these events are enough to meaningfully combat longstanding headwinds, from anti-union policy to the rise of gig work, that have caused union membership to decline for decades. Last year, amid a similar set of circumstances, the number of union members in the US went down by 240,000, leaving the rate of union membership at a low of 10 percent — half what it was in the 1980s. The pandemic has been a sort of double-edged sword for unions, giving people more reasons to organize and also causing union and non-union workers to lose their jobs.
It’s possible the psychic weight of union wins is bigger than their actual weight. A typical Starbucks only has 26 workers, and there hasn’t yet been public union activity at the vast majority of the company’s 9,000 corporate stores. After one Staten Island Amazon fulfillment center won its vote to unionize, a second sort center lost, and there are more than 800 Amazon warehouse facilities across the country.
It’s not clear where this will all net out. This year’s total union membership numbers won’t be available until the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases them early next year. Until then, we do know that a number of individual unions have been successfully bucking the trend in recent years by adding members. Labor organizers have done so by employing a variety of tactics, new and old, and could help other shops do the same. Labor experts laud unions’ efforts but say more is needed at a policy level to ensure these recent wins aren’t just a flash in the pan.
PBS has this analysis about what the UAW strikes to the campaigns of Republicans and Trump. Statistics show that many traditional members may have voted for Trump.” The PBS analysis suggests that “UAW strike puts Trump, GOP in political bind in key states.” However, many GOP think any negative impact will fall back on the Democratic Governor Gretchen Whitmen. We shall see.
Democrats were quick to back working-class United Auto Workers in their strike against General Motors, delivering doughnuts and holding picket signs outside factories to show solidarity. It’s a union they long have aligned with politically.
There were no doughnuts from Republicans.
Led by President Donald Trump, GOP officials have largely avoided taking sides in the strike that threatens to upend the economy in Michigan, an election battleground, a year before the 2020 vote. Both here and nationally, most Republicans said little about the substance of the dispute beyond hope for a speedy resolution.
The muted response reflects the tricky politics of labor for Republicans.
Trump has made inroads with members of some unions, due partly to promises to get tough on trade and keep manufacturing jobs in the United States. The message pulled key voters away from their Democratic union bosses, who Trump argues are corrupt.
But a strike prompted in part over GM’s plan to close American plants highlights Trump’s unfulfilled promises on manufacturing and gives Democrats a chance to play up their union credentials.
Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren planned to show up on the picket line in Michigan on Sunday, with rival Bernie Sanders expected this coming week. Nearly all the candidates have tweeted support for the workers.
“Proud to stand with @UAW to demand fair wages and benefits for their members. America’s workers deserve better,” Joe Biden tweeted.
Trump is in a bind.
Backing the union would undermine Trump’s message that labor does not advocate for its workers and give a powerful Democratic force a boost before an election.
Siding with GM would call into question his promises to defend workers and he would risk getting blamed for economic woes in Rust Belt states he needs to win reelection.
I may be a Financial economist, but anyone in the field has had a healthy dose of Labor Economics at some point in their training. Classical labor theory suggests that everyone will be paid based on their contribution (productivity). It fails to account for the differences in salaries for women and minorities. It also underestimated how much the capital side would be given tremendous tax benefits as well as the bonuses and stock plans that are supposed to align management with the stockholders. Labor became the redheaded stepchild and was frequently overlooked in the rise of the service industry. Additionally, the investment in technology to replace workers has been intense, even pushing shoppers to self-checkout when it used to be a radical idea that you would pump your own gas.
Anyway, my bottom line is it’s about time that every person who actually does the work gets the pay, recognition, and benefits they deserve. Hope I haven’t been too wonky or too much of a history nut for you on my wonky thread. All I can say is my life was a lot better when I had a union bargaining for my terms of employment. It hasn’t been the same since. But then, I first taught at a community college where many of the instructors were in trades. I still shudder at the thought that your fundamental English Professor is paid far less than anyone in my field. I was active in the bargaining unit of my Union and was fascinated by the process. Also, the Union does make us strong.
By the way, is it any surprise that icky Bill Maher is a scab?
What’s on your reading and blogging list today?
peej
Carissa
bostonboomer
dakinikat
ecocatwoman
jjlo
mablue2
Mama Lopez
peggysue22
quixote
skydancingguestblogger
Mona (aka Wonk the Vote)
Sky Dancing 
Recent Comments