Friday Reads: ру́сский Tяumpсский
Posted: July 14, 2017 Filed under: Afternoon Reads | Tags: Collusion, conspiracy, Donald Trump Jr, evangelicals, Hacking, Kushner, Pat Robertson, putin, Trump Russian 24 Comments
Steve Sack / Minneapolis Star Tribune
If you can find any kind of innocent explanation for these headlines and meetings, then I frankly will dub you the champion of Double Speak. Let’s see White House Mommy wiggle her way out of these latest headlines on relationships between the Trump Family, the campaign, and Russian election hacking.
From NBC News: Former Soviet Counter Intelligence Officer at Meeting With Donald Trump Jr. and Russian Lawyer .
The Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr. and others on the Trump team after a promise of compromising material on Hillary Clinton was accompanied by a Russian-American lobbyist — a former Soviet counterintelligence officer who is suspected by some U.S. officials of having ongoing ties to Russian intelligence, NBC News has learned.
The lobbyist, first identified by the Associated Press as Rinat Akhmetshin, denies any current ties to Russian spy agencies. He accompanied the lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, to the June 2016 meeting at Trump Tower attended by Donald Trump Jr.; Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law; and Paul Manafort, former chairman of the Trump campaign.
Born in Russia, Akhmetshin served in the Soviet military and emigrated to the U.S., where he holds dual citizenship. He did not respond to NBC News requests for comment Friday, but he told the AP the meeting was not substantive. “I never thought this would be such a big deal, to be honest,” he told the AP.
He had been working with Veselnitskaya on a campaign against the Magnitsky Act, a set of sanctions against alleged Russian human rights violators. That issue, which is also related to a ban on American adoptions of Russian children, is what Veselnitskaya told NBC News she discussed with the Trump team.
But, given the email traffic suggesting the meeting was part of a Russian effort help Trump’s candidacy, the presence at the meeting of a Russian-American with suspected intelligence ties is likely to be of interest to special counsel Robert Mueller and the House and Senate panels investigating the Russian election interference campaign.
This dude has some special skills. This is from The Daily Beast: Trump Team Met Russian Accused of International Hacking Conspiracy. “Rinat Akhmetshin allegedly stole sensitive documents from a corporation years before he joined Natalia Veselnitskaya to meet Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, and Jared Kushner.” Wow, he has mad hacking skills or knows folks that do. Imagine that!
The alleged former Soviet intelligence officer who attended the now-infamous meeting with Donald Trump Jr. and other top campaign officials last June was previously accused in federal and state courts of orchestrating an international hacking conspiracy.
Rinat Akhmetshin told the Associated Press on Friday he accompanied Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya to the June 9, 2016, meeting with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort. Trump’s attorney confirmed Akhmetshin’s attendance in a statement.
Akhmetshin’s presence at Trump Tower that day adds another layer of controversy to an episode that already provides the clearest indication of collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign. In an email in the run-up to that rendezvous, Donald Trump Jr. was promised “very high level and sensitive information” on Hillary Clinton as “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”
Akhmetshin had been hired by Veselnitskaya to help with pro-Russian lobbying efforts in Washington. He also met and lobbied Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee for Europe, in Berlin in April.
In court papers filed with the New York Supreme Court in November 2015, Akhmetshin was described as “a former Soviet military counterintelligence officer” by lawyers for International Mineral Resources (IMR), a Russian mining company that alleged it had been hacked.
Meanwhile, back in Stoogeсский Tower, Trump lawyers admit to knowing about the emails for weeks now. (There is never a dull Friday these days.) This is from Yahoo News.
President Trump’s legal team was informed more than three weeks ago about the email chain arranging a June 2016 meeting between his son Donald Jr. and a Kremlin-connected lawyer, two sources familiar with the handling of the matter told Yahoo News.
Trump told Reuters in an interview on Wednesday that he learned just “a couple of days ago” that Donald Jr. had met with the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, hoping to receive information that “would incriminate Hillary” and was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” A day earlier, on Tuesday, Donald Jr. released the email exchanges himself, after learning they would be published by the New York Times
Trump repeated that assertion in a talk with reporters on Air Force One on his way to Paris Wednesday night. “I only heard about it two or three days ago,” he said, according to a transcript of his talk, when asked about the meeting with Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in June 2016 attended by Donald Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, then Trump’s campaign chief, and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.
But the sources told Yahoo News that Marc Kasowitz, the president’s chief lawyer in the Russia investigation, and Alan Garten, executive vice president and chief legal officer of the Trump Organization, were both informed about the emails in the third week of June, after they were discovered by lawyers for Kushner, who is now a senior White House official.
The exchange apparently was initiated on June 3, 2016, when a Trump family associate, publicist Rob Goldstone, emailed Donald Jr. with an offer of something “very interesting” … “official documents and information” that “would be very useful to your father.” On June 8, 2016, Trump Jr. forwarded an email to Kushner and Manafort about the upcoming meeting with the subject line: “FW: Russia-Clinton-private & confidential.” Trump Jr. wrote back later that day, telling Goldstone “if it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”
The discovery of the emails prompted Kushner to amend his security clearance form to reflect the meeting, which he had failed to report when he originally sought clearance for his White House job. That revision — his second — to the so-called SF-86, was done on June 21. Kushner made the change even though there were questions among his lawyers whether the meeting had to be reported, given that there was no clear evidence that Veselnitskaya was a government official. The change to the security form prompted the FBI to question Kushner on June 23, the second time he was interviewed by agents about his security clearance, the sources said.
So, this makes THREE changes to Kushner’s form with an additional 100 or so names. Gee, that doesn’t just sound like a bad memory does it? Democrats are trying to have his security clearance revoked by passing a law. Republicans are blocking it and his father in law controls his access atm.
President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner updated a federal disclosure form needed to obtain a security clearance three times and added more than 100 names of foreign contacts through the updates after initially providing none at all, reports CBS News’ Major Garrett.
The first form had no foreign names on it even though people applying for a security clearance need to list any contact with foreign governments. Kushner’s team said it was prematurely sent.
Then the team submitted the second one after they updated it with all of the names except for one — the Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya who met with Donald Trump Jr., Kushner and Paul Manafort, Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman in June 2016.
After omitting her name in the second form, that meeting was then conveyed to the FBI in the third revamping of the form before July.
This comes as some Democrats call for Kushner’s security clearance to be revoked. On Thursday, House Republicans reportedly in the Appropriations Committee blocked a Democratic amendment to a spending bill that targeted Kushner. It would have prevented the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for a White House employee under criminal investigation by a federal law enforcement agency for aiding a foreign government.
The Chicago Tribune has an in depth look at Peter W Smith. He’s the guy that was trying to put together a team of Russian hackers who committed suicide shortly after spilling the beans to the WSJ. This part of his suicide note alone makes me suspicious. Can’t you just here Kremlin Caligula ordering up this?
In the note recovered by police, Smith apologized to authorities and said that “NO FOUL PLAY WHATSOEVER” was involved in his death
And, oh wait we do know what icky Campaign mommy will say about all of this.
White House aide Kellyanne Conway accused critics of the Trump administration of moving the goalposts on the ongoing investigations into possible coordination between members of the Trump campaign and Russian nationals.
“The goalposts have been moved,” Conway told “Fox & Friends” Friday morning. “We were promised systemic — hard evidence of systemic, sustained, furtive collusion that not only interfered with our election process but indeed dictated the electoral outcome. And one of the only people who says that seriously these days is still Hillary Clinton and nobody believes it.”
However, authorities investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election have long asserted that there is no evidence votes were physically changed as part of the effort.
Conway’s analysis came in response to coverage of Donald Trump Jr., who admitted to meeting with a Russian lawyer in June 2016 after being promised damaging information on Hillary Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to help his father’s campaign. Campaign manager Paul Manafort and top aide Jared Kushner were also in attendance.
So far, all the right wing media can say is it’s either Hillary’s fault or Lorretta Lynch’s fault. SAD! I’m still wrapping my mind around the number of right wing Republicans that actually find Putin and Russia to be respectable. Try read this from the NYT to understand the allure. Jeremy Peters believe the ‘revere’ Putin.
Mr. Putin is no archvillain in this understanding of America-Russian relations. Rather, he personifies many of the qualities and attitudes that conservatives have desired in a president of their own: a respect for traditional Christian values, a swelling nationalist pride and an aggressive posture toward foreign adversaries.
In this view, the Russian president is a brilliant tactician, a slayer of murderous Islamic extremists — and not incidentally, a leader who outmaneuvered and emasculated President Barack Obama on the world stage. And because of that, almost any other transgression seems forgivable.
“There are conservatives here who maybe read into Russia things they wish were true in the United States,” said Angela Stent, director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University. “And they imagine Russia and Putin as the kind of strong, traditional conservative leader whom they wish they had in the United States.” To these conservatives, she added, “Russia is the true defender of Christian values. We are decadent.”
Mr. Trump’s opponents have tried repeatedly to make an issue of the mutual admiration between him and the Russian president, anticipating that Republicans would not tolerate any whiff of sympathy from one of their own toward the leader of what Ronald Reagan called the “evil empire.” But Mr. Trump has never had to wait long for conservatives to leap to his defense — and often Mr. Putin’s as well.
Mr. Putin is no archvillain in this understanding of America-Russian relations. Rather, he personifies many of the qualities and attitudes that conservatives have desired in a president of their own: a respect for traditional Christian values, a swelling nationalist pride and an aggressive posture toward foreign adversaries.
In this view, the Russian president is a brilliant tactician, a slayer of murderous Islamic extremists — and not incidentally, a leader who outmaneuvered and emasculated President Barack Obama on the world stage. And because of that, almost any other transgression seems forgivable.
“There are conservatives here who maybe read into Russia things they wish were true in the United States,” said Angela Stent, director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies at Georgetown University. “And they imagine Russia and Putin as the kind of strong, traditional conservative leader whom they wish they had in the United States.” To these conservatives, she added, “Russia is the true defender of Christian values. We are decadent.”
Mr. Trump’s opponents have tried repeatedly to make an issue of the mutual admiration between him and the Russian president, anticipating that Republicans would not tolerate any whiff of sympathy from one of their own toward the leader of what Ronald Reagan called the “evil empire.” But Mr. Trump has never had to wait long for conservatives to leap to his defense — and often Mr. Putin’s as well.
While there are parts of the world where the persecution of religious minorities, including Christians, is a real problem, the United States is not one of them. Russia, on the other hand, has enacted laws that bar Protestant groups from proselytizing on penalty of fines, and has even gone so far as to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses entirely.
At first blush, then, it might seem odd that one of the Russian Orthodox Church’s leading hierarchs, Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk—who was staying at the Trump International Hotel—not only participated in BGEA’s summit yesterday, but also, as first reported by Time, met privately with the vice president. Curiously enough, a key talking point from their meeting was that America and Russia should work together to fight international terrorism, a hallmark of the Trump campaign’s election season foreign policy rhetoric.
Metropolitan Hilarion heads the ROC’s Department of External Relations, and in this capacity he has worked tirelessly in recent years to cultivate relationships with Catholic and Protestant supporters of “traditional values” abroad, in order to work with them to promote Christian supremacy at the expense of women’s and LGBTQ rights—an example of what I call “bad ecumenism.” Such efforts are coordinated with the Kremlin’s foreign policy, which seeks to foster relationships with anti-democratic forces outside Russia. While Moscow made similar efforts during Soviet times, Russian President Vladimir Putin has rebranded post-Soviet Russia into the global standard bearer for “traditional values conservatism,” and in this capacity attracts primarily right-wing fellow travelers.
On the one hand, this policy would seem to make President and CEO of BGEA Franklin Graham a natural partner for Putin and the ROC, and, indeed, Graham has warmed considerably to both in recent years. In October 2015, Graham met with both Putin and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and all Russia, after which Patriarch Kirill declared Christians of all confessions who oppose marriage equality to be “confessors of the faith.” Graham reminded his followers on social media of his connections to Russia last month
There’s a good article to read about this unholy alliance from Talk Progress.
To fully understand how some members of the Religious Right came to appreciate Putin, it’s important to asses how Putin came to appreciate the role of organized religion — particularly brands that oppose LGBTQ equality.
Russia, after all, is hardly a bastion of religious freedom. The 2016 U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom report listed the country as one with an increasingly “negative trajectory in terms of religious freedom,” pointing to policies that limit the activities of Muslims and other minority religious groups such as Jehovah’s Witnesses and Pentecostals.
Yet Graham’s remarks are the result of a years-long international power consolidation effort by Putin, who is is well known for using faith — particularly the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), a subset of Eastern Orthodox Christianity whose reach extends beyond Russian borders — as a mechanism to expand his country’s influence and antagonize Western opponents.
According to Christopher Stroop, a visiting instructor at the University of South Florida honors college and a published expert on modern Russian history, Putin became close with the ROC after beginning his third term in 2012.
“The Orthodox church domestically shores up the [Putin] regime, but it also works internationally to push the party line in pursuit of its own goals as well — and the church hierarchs are genuinely socially conservative,” Stroop told ThinkProgress, noting that Putin’s embrace of the ROC coincided with a broader shift toward right-wing populism.
“Putin has rebranded himself [and Russia] as a Champion of traditional values,” Stroop said.
Putin and the church are technically two entities with different agendas, but Stroop said they’ve developed a codependent strategy that benefits both parties. The Russian president often grants the ROC privileges not afforded to other faith groups to help him win domestic debates, for instance. Meanwhile, Russian priests in countries like Moldova and Montenegro have pushed back against efforts to align those nations with Western powers, and a Kremlin-funded spiritual center now sits near the Eiffel Tower in Paris, France.
And as the New York Times reported last fall, Putin lifts up the church’s moral authority as a “traditional” answer to the west’s increasing liberalism, positioning Russia as an opponent to progressive causes such as LGBTQ rights and multiculturalism. This allows Putin to perpetuate the idea that Europe and America — not Russia — are faithless nations by comparison.
So, once again, the idea is that as long as “Traditional Values” are enshrined in law somehow, they don’t care who does it. There’s been a piety show at the White House with a gross, disgusting laying of hands (more grabby grabby) and a cuckoo Pat Robertson. Trump’s best base is the folks who fell for the longest running conspiracy theory every so they’re easy prey.
In an interview airing Thursday, Trump sat down with Pat Robertson of the Christian Broadcasting Network. The aging icon of the religious right has been outspoken in his support for Trump, calling him “God’s man for this job.” It will be Trump’s second interview with CBN since he became president.
And earlier this week, photos surfaced from an impromptu Oval Office prayer session in which two dozen evangelicals laid their hands on the President and petitioned the Almighty on his behalf.
We were praying that God would give him guidance and direction and protect him,” said Richard Land, who served on Trump’s evangelical advisory board and is president of Southern Evangelical Seminary in Charlotte, North Carolina.
The images of hands praying over the President’s distinctive coiffure caught fire on social media. To some, the timing seemed suspicious. Though raised Presbyterian, Trump is not affiliated with a church, nor does he attend worship services most Sundays. Was he “getting religion” just as the waters were rising around his White House? Was it a repeat of President Bill Clinton conspicuously carrying a Bible and meeting with religious leaders during the Monica Lewinsky scandal?
The White House disputes that interpretation. “The idea that someone would pray only when they’re in crisis is ridiculous,” said Sarah Huckabee Sanders, deputy White House press secretary.
Land agrees. “That’s a very cynical and negative connotation of what happened.”
Instead, Land, a Southern Baptist who has been active in presidential politics since the Reagan administration, said he and two dozen fellow evangelicals were summoned to Washington for a “work day.”
The group, many of whom advised Trump during the campaign, heard reports from administration officials and gave feedback on issues like Israel’s security, judicial nominations and the Senate’s health care bill. Jared Kushner dropped by, as did Vice President Mike Pence — a fellow evangelical — who said the President invited the group to visit the Oval Office that afternoon and say hello, Land recalled.
As evangelicals gathered around Trump’s desk, he asked how their work meeting was going, Land said, and several praised his recent speech in Warsaw, in which the President pledged to protect Western values.
Okay. I need another shower. This all creeps me out to no end. It’s like a terrifically bad movie plot.
So, let me know what you’re reading today?
The Cult of Pat Robertson Culls the Herd
Posted: November 7, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections | Tags: Pat Robertson, the whacky right 61 CommentsThe shocked look of Fox Newsbots that believed all the pap they spooned out and were fed during 2012 has been replaced by the quiet realization that attacking every group of people in the country just isn’t going to get your freaks into office. However, late last night as the returns came in, the biggest predators of the Republican Party were already looking for what they considered the weakest links in the voters that rejected them yesterday. I took my eye off the Chicago Celebration long enough to hit FOX news, CNBC, and CBN.
CBN broadcasters did not share that shell shocked look given by a demographic shellacking that characterized the CNBC and FOX news commentariat. It was evident that Robertson and his US version of the Taliban are not going stop their religious war on women, GLBT, science, and reason. They’re going to try another tactic. They were signalling their intent to be more sensitive to immigration issues. They’ve decided that it’s possible to still go after the civil rights of others by loosening up on their kill the brown invader approach to immigration.
Robertson’s group has looked at Hispanics before with their greedy, little soul snatching eyes. John McCain and the Bush brothers have enjoyed decent support by segments of the Hispanic population which isn’t–as they say–monolithic. Cuban Americans have always trended Republican insisting that US policy towards Castro and Cuba stay in Cold War mode. Cubans, however, can stay in the country as long as they can put a foot on US soil. This is not how the country approaches the immigrants of other Hispanic nations.
As Hispanic voters grow in number and influence (Hispanics are the fastest-growing segment of America’s electorate), some conservatives wonder why Republican candidates don’t spend more time reaching out to them instead of joking about an electric fence.
According to Jennifer Korn, with the Hispanic Leadership Network, although most Latinos identify themselves as Democrats, “when you ask about the specific issues they all trend conservative. We’re talking about issues in the economy, smaller government, even religion.”
Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, appeared on “The 700 Club” today to talk to Pat Robertson about why Republicans need the Latino vote, educating undocumented teenagers, and the way he believes Jesus would have Christians approach immigration reform.
As I said, Robertson seems to know more about target marketing and recruiting than your average Republican Zealot. Last night, he was talking loosening up on immigration policy. This morning, we begin to see that this may indeed by the way the Republicans try to become relevant again.
Mitt Romney and the Republican Party’s tremendous difficulty appealing to Latino voters dealt a significant blow to their chances of winning in 2012.
Romney got off on the wrong foot with Latino voters early in the campaign. During the GOP primary, he took a hard line on immigration, endorsing the concept of “self-deportation” that would implement immigration crackdown policies to spur undocumented immigrants to leave the country on their own.
The Republican candidate tried to moderate his rhetoric over the next several months, but the damage was already done. According to the national exit polls, Obama won 71 percent of the Latino vote while Romney won 27 percent. That’s an improvement over Obama’s 2008 performance when Latinos backed him 67-31 percent over Republican John McCain and the largest Democratic margin since 1996. To give you an idea of how badly the GOP’s Latino support has eroded, just eight years ago, George W. Bush won around 40 percent of the Latino vote.
Obama faced questions about higher-than-average unemployment among Latino voters and a lack of progress on immigration reform during his first term. But he was able to energize Latino voters, especially after he enacted a program over the summer to provide a temporary reprieve from deportation to young undocumented immigrants.
Conservative Democrats even believe that the issue of immigration reform may be one of the first items where Republicans may actually reach across the aisle to save their skins. Tim Kaine believes Republicans will become more willing to discuss immigration reform.
“There’s so much bad that’s going to happen if we go over this fiscal cliff and I think that’s going to bring both parties together for a solution that’s going to springboard into a bigger picture budget deal,” Kaine said the morning after Election Day. “I do think the Republican Party’s going to look in the mirror and decide that they need to work hand-in-hand on issues like immigration reform.”
“In the future of the Republican party, they’re not going to be able to continue to put such a hard face toward Latino voters and so that’s going to provide an opportunity for another significant issue where we can build bridges early in 2013,” he said.
President Obama has repeatedly listed immigration reform as something he believes Democrats and Republicans could find agreement on after the presidential election. The president has said avoiding the fiscal cliff would be his top priority after the election and has said he believes he could find support for immigration reform in his second term.
Obama’s victory on Election Night was aided in part by his strong edge among Latino voters, who broke for the president 69 percent to 29 for GOP challenger Mitt Romney.
This jaded attempt to maintain the Republican party’s core commitment to rolling back the rights of women, GLBT, and minorities may fail. But, it could very well succeed. The Republican Party was generally quite successful when it used code words–instead of blatant dog whistles–to signal to Ralph Reed’s army of zombies or the Chamber of Commerce that they would be amenable to gutting the rights of workers, women, and minorities. I’m afraid the lessons of this election will be that they need to go back to their subtle approach. The key will be how susceptible the Tea Party nuts will be to the suggestion they roll back their rhetoric. The worst Republican defeats–and ones where the demographics played in their favor–were districts where over-the-top rhetoric scared off the electorate. Believe me, the rhetoric won’t stop in party offices. They’ll just try to go back to the day when they can signal their own that they hate affirmative action and birth control. Can they gussy up their weirdos enough to make them camera-friendly in two years?
As Republican after Republican made crackpot comments about rape, contraception, and abortion, the GOP’s rightwing brain trust unfailingly followed up and said, yeah, that’s what we believe, that’s what we’ve always believed.
And because the conventional wisdom had always been that autonomous, sexually active women and the men who love them are just a fringe constituency, instead of questioning the wisdom of attacking them, the big brains questioned the wisdom of having Sandra Fluke speak at the Democratic Convention.
I always knew this issue was a winner for the Democrats, but now I’m beginning to think that it affected everything else as well. That is, Romney’s crackpot economic and environmental policies might have had more traction with voters if so many of them were not convinced that he represented and was listening to a bunch of lunatics who were totally out of touch with how human beings live. In tough times, you might go for a small-government reformer who says he has a plan to turn things around if you trust him. Americans have bought bigger grifters than Romney; a lot of them haven’t even figured that the nice old man who unleashed the markets in the 1980s set them up for the hard times we have now.
Who knows what a Romney campaign might have achieved if he’d decisively cut loose the Erick Erickson contingent and run like a man trying to be governor of Massachusetts?
The likes of Pat Robertson, Pat Buchannan, Michelle Bachmann, and Allen West–who wear their emotional and mental issues on their sleeves with pride instead of seeking help–always tend to scare off the electorate in fairly predictable cycles. These aren’t eccentrics. These are people with serious issues that have managed to become successful despite their obvious need for some kind of help. George Will is an asshole. Michelle Bachmann needs help. There’s a distinct difference. Americans viscerally react to these people in the same way they react to folks that wander our streets and talk to themselves. We know there’s something off there. There’s some brain chemistry that needs correcting or some therapy that should be applied. Republicans, however, don’t get these people the help they need, they try to keep them below the camera as much as possible to help their coalition. The trouble comes when they sneak into the public view and become the latest Barnum act on You Tube or The Daily Show. Democrats send their Anthony Weiners off to rehab. Republicans let their persons with issues smolder and fester and work to subvert. They harness the crazy to plow the fields.
I turned on TV this morning long enough to see that there was the usual punditry hand wringing and pearl clutching going on about the future of the Republican Party. They actually think this will make the party change. This same conversation happened the last time Obama got elected, and yet, we did not see any course correction. We saw the nascent obstruction agenda.
Republicans got worse and they came back during the midterms to win back the House of Representatives at a time when they could gerrymander districts. West may be gone, but the underlying district structure is still there. The same agenda with a different mask and the toned-down approach of a different grifter just might keep the party from a much needed session on a couch. Fred Barnes has already shown that denial is a really potent ego defense and he’s in no mood to change the party platform.
As hard as Republicans tried, they were unable to upset the balance of political forces.
What’s their problem? In Senate races, it’s bad candidates: old hacks (Wisconsin), young hacks (Florida), youngsters (Ohio), Tea Party types who can’t talk about abortion sensibly (Missouri, Indiana), retreads (Virginia), lousy campaigners (North Dakota) and Washington veterans (Michigan). Losers all.
And those are just the Senate contests decided yesterday.
See those words I put in bold? This leads me to believe they just will not get it. The problem is the packaging. We just need a few more folks that know how to sell the flim flam without scaring teh good womenz and teh civilized brown people. So, mark my word. We’re about to get a new face on the same old package. We’re about to see the grand appeal to as many Hispanics as they can cull from what they perceive as a ‘herd’. The Republican party is basically a group of extremely old, rich white men that manipulate and use true believers in guns, gawd, jingoism, and white exceptionalism to get more money and assets. I wish I could believe they’ll change, but I don’t.
Know your Right Wing Christofascists!
Posted: October 3, 2012 Filed under: 2012 elections, religious extremists, right wing hate grouups, VAGINA Ralph Reed, VAGINA Rick Santorum, War on Women | Tags: Jerry Farwell, Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, religious hate speech, religious violence, right wing religious hate groups, theocracy 64 CommentsHere’s a list of the 10 Most Dangerous Religious Right Organizations in the country. These folks are determined to undermine the US constitution that prevents mixing of specific religious doctrines with US law. These people don’t want freedom for their religious practices. They want the US government to enshrine their petty theocratic agendas into law and to persecute the unbelievers.
1. Jerry Falwell Ministries/ Liberty University/Liberty Counsel
Revenue: $522,784,095
2. Pat Robertson Empire
Revenue: $434,971,231
3. Focus on the Family (includes its 501(c)(4) political affiliate CitizenLink)
Revenue: $104,463,950
4. Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly Alliance Defense Fund)
Revenue: $35,145,644
5. United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
Lobbying Expenditures: $26,662,111
6. American Family
Association
Revenue: $17,955,438
7. Family Research Council
Revenue: $14,840,036 (includes 501(c)(4) affiliate FRC Action)
8. Concerned Women for
America
Revenue: $10,352,628 (includes 501(c)(4) affiliate CWA Legislative Action Committee)
9. Faith & Freedom Coalition
Revenue: $5,494,640
10. Council for National Policy
Revenue: $1,976,747
The Christian Right has basically infiltrated the Republican Party and is most evident as “Teavanagelicals”.
ON AN INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL, the merger of Christian Right and Tea Party interests is remarkably advanced. The alliance has served as the very foundation stone of theFaith and Freedom Coalition, the latest venture of that intrepid politico-religious entrepreneur, Ralph Reed, which has sprouted chapters in many states, most prominently Iowa, where it sponsored the first candidate forum of the 2012 cycle. There is even a term to describe this new strain of conservatism: the “Teavangelicals,” a subject of a recent broadcast by Christian Right journalist David Brody, which, among other things, examined the conservative evangelical roots of major Tea Party leaders. Most recently, a host of organizations closely connected with the Christian Right and “social issues” causes have signed onto the “Cut, Cap and Balance Pledge,” the Tea Party-inspired oath that demands a position on the debt limit vote that is incompatible with any bipartisan negotiations.
But this convergence between the two groups goes well beyond coalition politics and reflects a radicalization of conservative evangelical elites that is just as striking as the rise of the Tea Party itself. Indeed, the worldview of many Christian Right leaders has evolved into an understanding of government (at least under secularist management) as a satanic presence that seeks to displace God and the churches through social programs, to practice infanticide and euthanasia, to destroy parental control of children, to reward vice and punish virtue, and to thwart America’s divinely appointed destiny as a redeemer nation fighting for Christ against the world’s many infidels.
As an illustration of this phenomenon, it’s worth unpacking a few lines from a recent missive by televangelist James Robison, the convener of two recent meetings of Christian Right leaders in Texas to ponder their role in 2012, and also of a similar session back in 1979 that helped pave the way for Reagan’s conquest of conservative evangelicals. Says Robison:
There are moral absolutes . No person’s failure reduces or redefines the standards carved in stone by the finger of God and revealed in His Word. We must find a way to stop judges and courts from misinterpreting the Constitution and writing their own laws.
“Activist judges” who have developed and applied protections for abortion rights, non-discrimination, and church-state separation have long been a bugaboo for the Christian Right. But Robison appears to be extending this traditional list of evangelical grievances, adding his blessing to the Tea Party’s objection to the string of Supreme Court decisions that enabled the federal government to enact New Deal programs like Social Security that protect people afflicted by personal “failure” from the consequences of their actions.
They have more impact than just trying to deny the civil rights of GLBT, the reproductive rights of women, and the suppression of religious minorities in the US. They have a global agenda that is as much of a terrorist movement as any religious extremist movement abroad. They support governments that believe in not only persecuting but killing GLBT citizens with money and other resources. They actively support militia’s that kill and maim GLBT citizens and non-believers and work to keep women’s status as property and breeding chattel.
In recent weeks, police have descended on the Harare offices of Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ), seizing the group’s publications and computers as evidence, they claimed, in an ongoing investigation. The police sought to also arrest staff, but the organization’s lawyer has kept them free for now.
The gay rights activist organization is — absurdly — accused of seeking to overthrow President Robert Mugabe’s government and teaching people to commit acts of sodomy.
This police activity underscores the effort of the Mugabe-led ZANU-PF ruling political party to incite anti-LGBT hatred in mobilizing its base for elections next year. Mugabe faces a challenge from Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirayi, who recently adopted a pro-LGBT rights position.
In one raid, police forcibly entered GALZ premises and began arresting advocates gathered to discuss the draft constitution under debate. The draft includes anti-gay provisions shaped with help from the US-based Christian right group American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) through its Zimbabwe office. The proposed provisions explicitly prohibit homosexuality and, mimicking American efforts, define marriage as between a man and woman.
Some activists were injured trying to escape over a security fence armed with an electric razor wire. Those caught — 31 men and 13 women — were arrested, bundled into police vehicles, and kept in filthy cells for what GALZ staffer Miles Rutendo remembers as “a night in hell.” Police beat and stomped on the backs of gay rights advocates forced to lie on the wet floor. One victim passed out and was rushed to the hospital.
The physical and mental abuse did not end with their release. In a country where LGBT people suffer brutal harassment, these activists’ sexual preference was exposed to neighbors, families, and workplaces. Their families forced some from their homes. Whether any lose their jobs remains to be seen.
Additional, rallies have been held through out the US that are well within in the boundaries of first amendment free speech rights but definitely fall into the hate speech realm.
Religious broadcaster Pat Robertson and Family Research Council president Tony Perkins topped a full day of speakers at “The America for Jesus 2012” prayer rally.
Robertson, a former Republican candidate for president, called the election important, but didn’t mention either major political party or candidate by name.
“I don’t care what the ACLU says or any atheists say. This nation belongs to Jesus, and we’re here today to reclaim his sovereignty,” said Robertson, 82, who founded the Christian Coalition and Christian Broadcasting Network, and ran for president in 1988.
Organizers plan another prayer rally Oct. 20 in Washington, D.C., two weeks before President Barack Obama faces Republican Mitt Romney in the presidential election.
Perkins asked the crowd to pray for elected officials including Obama.
“We pray that his eyes will be open to the truth,” Perkins said.
A number of event organizers, though, have been vocal critics of the Democratic president.
Steve Strang, the influential Pentecostal publisher of Charisma magazine, which was distributed at the rally, recently wrote in a blog post that America is under threat from a “radical homosexual agenda.” He also said Obama “seems to be moving toward some form of European socialism. Speaker Cindy Jacobs has blamed a mysterious Arkansas bird-kill last year on Obama’s repeal of the policy known as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which allows gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
Speakers throughout the day condemned abortion, gay marriage and population control as practiced by Planned Parenthood. Christian rock music filled the historic mall as speakers challenged the crowd to overcome the seven deadly sins: pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath and slothfulness.
Yup, these are the same folks we’ve been fighting since the 1980s. It’s going to be a continual fight to keep theocracy out of our state, local, and federal government and to stop the hate-filled agendas of these religious extremists.
Recent Comments