Throughout his presidency, Donald Trump crossed lines that no other president has come close to. And if there was ever any doubt, the final months of his presidency put that to rest.

From the moment President Biden was declared the winner, Trump refused to accept the results of the election, repeatedly dismissing them as rigged or fraudulent, even going so far as to pressure Republican officials, like Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, to overturn them. This culminated in the events of Jan 6. At a rally that day, Trump told his supporters that the election was being stolen and said, Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, were going to walk down, and Ill be there with you, were going to walk down, were going to walk down. A few hours later, some of those supporters stormed the Capitol, threatening officials and destroying property. They also disrupted the certification of the Electoral College vote, usually a ceremonial affair. Five people died.

Nevertheless, Trump still commands considerable loyalty within the Republican Party. Only 10 of 211 Republicans in the House voted to impeach him over what happened at the Capitol, and even though Trump is now facing a second impeachment trial, a procedural vote forced by Senate Republicans in late January indicates that there will not be enough votes to convict him.

This lack of a clean break among Republicans with Trump despite being the only president to be impeached twice raises an important question about the future of the GOP: To what extent does it remain Trumps party?

Given the ways in which Trump defied the norms of the presidency, it can be hard to compare his track record to other presidents. However, its still worth looking at the role that former presidents have traditionally played in their party once theyve left the White House, and how Trump does and does not fit into that mold.

Arguably no president in the modern era has left office with quite as much baggage as Trump, perhaps aside from former President Richard Nixon, who resigned from office rather than face his own impeachment. But even Nixon was able to partially rehabilitate his image post-presidency, eventually establishing himself as a foreign-policy expert whose advice was sought behind the scenes by other leaders.

Other presidents who have left the White House with a bit less baggage, like George W. Bush or Bill Clinton, have also had some success continuing to wield influence in their respective parties. Bush left with record-low approval ratings amid an economic crisis, while Clinton departed with high approval ratings but also with the scandal of impeachment. But since leaving office, both have engaged in humanitarian activities, attempting to burnish their respective reputations (perhaps with mixed success). To be sure, other voices have emerged that have led and defined their parties, but neither man has disappeared entirely from the limelight, with both Bushs brother and Clintons wife later seeking the presidency. A career in politics is one possible avenue for some of Trumps children, with rumors already swirling.

And some former presidents have had a lot of success in establishing themselves as major players in their parties. After his second term ended in 1989, Ronald Reagan remained an iconic figure among Republicans. And in the 2020 election, the Democratic Party at times seemed more and more like Barack Obamas party than Bidens. Obama reportedly played a pretty significant behind-the-scenes role in the primary and was a central figure at the Democratic National Convention. Part of this was because his former vice president won the nomination. But Biden also explicitly campaigned on the accomplishments of the Obama-Biden administration and chose a running mate who also reflects the image of a diverse, pragmatic Obama-style Democratic Party.

Whats difficult to say with Trump, however, is the extent to which future generations of Republicans will want to claim his mantle. On the one hand, its not actually clear that Trump had a winning electoral formula. In 2016, he built a coalition of more traditional Republican voters as well as white voters without college degrees, and that coalition was adequate for an Electoral College victory. But even growing that voter base in 2020 wasnt enough to win reelection. When you combine this with the Republican Partys losses in 2018 and its narrow loss of Senate control in the Georgia run-off elections in January, there are some reasons to believe that the Trump brand hasnt been entirely good for Republican political fortunes. In fact, a number of reports suggest that congressional Republicans, as well as party donors, blame Trump for the partys losses in Georgia.

The thing is, Trump does represent an idea that has appealed to some of his partys voters: politics based on grievance, especially when linked to white identity. Trump has emerged as a powerful leader to this movement, claiming that the 2020 election was stolen, that the media and tech companies seek to silence voices on the right, and that institutions no longer work for ordinary (read: white) Americans. And while many establishment GOP members dont agree with some of Trumps more extreme words and actions, they have continued to defend him, or, at the very least, not really distance themselves from him. The upcoming impeachment trial and the fact that most GOP senators are likely to vote against his conviction speak to a long pattern left over from when Trump was still in office: criticize Trumps actions, but ultimately dont disavow him.

But while the party has maintained its steady, if uncomfortable, pattern of loyalty to Trump, the sheer number of ambitious politicians seeking to succeed Trump may leave little room for him in the party. Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene and Madison Cawthorn have already proven, for instance, that they can grab headlines with their extreme views and actions without Trump. (And as with Trump, the media coverage is not overwhelmingly positive, and they have drawn some criticism from within their own party.) Of course, there is still a key difference between them and Trump in terms of power and influence: A group of representatives can make up a faction of a party, but only the president serves as the partys mouthpiece.

There is another reason, though, to think that there might not be room for Trump in the Republican Party moving forward. Political science research has found that Republicans are actually quite successful in building a farm team in state and Congressional elections (compared to Democrats, who often struggle in this regard). This means that Republicans might not really struggle to find a replacement for Trump. Its not hard to imagine, for instance, that there will one day be other ambitious Republicans say, Sen. Josh Hawley or former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley seeking higher office while claiming that they are the real heir to Trumps legacy, even if they represent marked differences in style or approach. In fact, there are a number of signs that the party is already headed in this direction, trending away from more establishment GOP types and toward more Trump-style figures.

Yes, this speaks to Trumps continued influence on the party, but it also doesnt necessarily leave that much room for him. Its hard for a former president to both represent an idea and be involved in the daily politics of the party.

After the Capitol insurrection on Jan. 6, it seemed like some establishment GOP leaders were ready to make a break from the 45th president. But its telling that mainstream Republicans are still mostly reluctant to publicly criticize Trump or his actions leading up to that day. It may also be indicative of how the ideas Trump represents took hold before he was elected. His presidency gave new power to the anti-establishment wing of the party, even though the former president didnt create this faction. Right now, the GOP looks much more like Trumps party than that of any moderate or establishment GOP alternative. It may be up to other politicians not Trump to determine exactly what that means.

Read the original here:

The GOP Might Still Be Trumps Party. But That Doesnt Mean Theres Room For Him. - FiveThirtyEight

A pillow company CEO who has advised former US president Donald Trump has been cut off during an interview with one of the most Trump-friendly media networks in America.

A rowdy on-air argument ensued after Mike Lindell of MyPillow kept repeating baseless claims related to voting machines, leading the host of the segment to walk off the set.

It happened during a segment meant to discuss Mr Lindell being banned from social media platforms for expressing those exact same views.

Who would have thought he'd bring them up on air?

Newsmax, a minor cable news channel, which has risen to prominence after becoming more pro-Trump than Fox News, was suddenly faced with a very predictable predicament.

In a world that is post-Trump, post-inauguration of President Joe Biden and post-Capitol riots, how do Trump-aligned media networks like Newsmax deal with the stories they once gave air time to?

At two of America's fringe news organisations, Newsmax and One America News Network, covering a Biden presidency presents a huge challenge, when at times they promoted an alternate reality.

But the 'MAGA'-aligned cable news upstarts will be keen to find a way to continue the spectacular growth in audience and influence they've seen in the past 12 months.

In March last year, there was an extraordinary question asked to then-president Trump in the White House Press Briefing room:

"Is it alarming that major media players, just to oppose you, are siding with foreign state propaganda, Islamic radicals, and Latin gangs and cartels, and they work right here out of the White House with direct access to you and your team?"

This question, asked by a journalist holding a legitimate press pass, brought a smile to the face of Mr Trump.

It was not, however, a surprise to him, given the source: Chanel Rion, White House correspondent for OAN.

At the time she was building a reputation for taking Trump's side on every issue, and providing the President with opportunities to sound off at his political enemies while he was meant to be answering questions.

At a subsequent briefing she asked Mr Trump this question:

"Two-thousand, four-hundred and five Americans have died from coronavirus in the last 60 days. Meanwhile, you have 2,369 children who are killed by their mothers through elective abortions each day. That's 16-and-a-half thousand children killed every week... Do you agree with states who are placing coronavirus victims above elective abortions?"

It was the first time many Americans had heard of OAN, which launched in 2013.

Despite its low budget, it had distinguished itself by amplifying every pro-Trump conspiracy theory it could find.

Subscribe to Matt Bevan's ABC News podcast about how Donald Trump changed the United States and the world.

Listen

Mr Trump assisted their reach by amplifying their stories on Twitter at any opportunity.

He also took a particular interest in Newsmax, which despite a history of being a reputable news network had become known as a landing ground for news personalities unable to find work at Fox.

By 2020, they were running shows by ex-Fox News host Bill O'Reilly and ex-ABC News America political editor Mark Halperin, who were both exiled due to sexual misconduct scandals.

They were also the home of Spicer & Co, hosted by the bumbling former Trump press secretary Sean Spicer.

As the 2020 election approached, Mr Trump began tweeting regularly that his followers should abandon Fox News for Newsmax and OAN, who up until this point had mainly found audiences on YouTube.

It wasn't particularly effective.

Fox News has an average primetime audience of 3.6 million Americans, meanwhile Newsmax was struggling to break 100,000 viewers (OAN has said it can't afford to sign up to get viewership data from TV ratings companies).

Though their content leaned further to the right than Fox News, they struggled to differentiate themselves enough to gain an audience.

While Fox News remained tethered in some sense to the reality that Joe Biden had defeated President Trump, OAN and Newsmax attached themselves to the conspiracy theory spread by Mr Trump and his attorney, Rudy Giuliani, that the election had been stolen by massive fraud.

Newsmax's top host, Greg Kelly, reached an audience of more than a million in his primetime slot, briefly out-rating Fox News.

OAN claimed to have seen a 40 per cent rise in viewership following the election.

It wasn't confined to traditional linear television though.

Their web content reached an even larger audience, posted on outlets like YouTube and Facebook and shared farther and wider than ever before.

Their reach became so significant that YouTube decided to censor some of their reports, arguing that they were spreading dangerous misinformation.

While the frenzy of post-election conspiracy theories seems to have cooled, bringing down their audience penetration with it, they successfully announced themselves as the home of unabashedly pro-Trump news content.

For years there has been speculation about whether a post-presidency Donald Trump may seek to gain a more permanent foothold in news media.

With his significant following across America, a Trump-branded TV network has been discussed, with the idea floated of a takeover or partnership between Mr Trump and either OAN or Newsmax.

Robert Herring Sr, the owner of OAN, denied the Trump family had been in talks with him about a partnership or acquisition.

Chris Ruddy, the owner of Newsmax, said that he has not closed the door on such a possibility.

But Mr Trump may be more interested in going it alone, reportedly suggesting that a Trump-branded subscription streaming service may be the best way of capitalising on his enormous national support.

Since leaving office, Mr Trump has been uncharacteristically quiet.

Despite his permanent ban from Twitter, he still has the option of calling friends at Fox, OAN or Newsmax to give his perspective on politics yet he has largely resisted flooding the airwaves just yet.

OAN and Newsmax may or may not be looking to do a deal with Mr Trump to give them exclusive access to his thoughts, feelings and supporters, but they are almost certainly hoping that he will break his silence soon.

They need something to talk about.

See the rest here:

The US media organisations loyal to Donald Trump could struggle to find the same oxygen under President Joe Biden - ABC News

Millions of Americans 88.7 million of them, to be precise have been waking up for the last three weeks with an unfamiliar sense of emptiness. Reaching for their phones for their accustomed fix of outrage and bemusement, an erratically capitalized, eccentrically punctuated guide to the obsessions and grievances that would drive the days news cycle, they are forced to acknowledge that the once unthinkable has occurred: @RealDonaldTrump is really gone for good from Twitter.

And not just Twitter: The man whose office refers to him as 45th President Donald J. Trump has been almost entirely silent in public since Jan. 20, when he became what the rest of the country knows as former President Trump. No raucous rallies featuring two-minute hates against the media. No impromptu tarmac question-and-answer sessions with reporters. No rambling phone chats with Fox News hosts, the ones that sometimes went on so long the interviewers had to gently cut him off by reminding him of how busy he must be. Even the 2024 campaign that he was widely expected to launch on Jan. 21 hasnt gotten off the ground, except for the part that involves raising money.

The once ubiquitous Trump has been plotting out his political future, Politico wrote not long after he went into his Florida exile. But without a social media loudspeaker through which to tease his plans, few know what to expect next, including his own former aides.

One person who has heard from Trump is the QAnon congresswoman, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., who bragged about receiving a GREAT call from Trump on Saturday, as she faced calls for her resignation or removal from Congress in light of conspiratorial and anti-Semitic rantings that keep coming to light. She didnt specify what was great about the call, and Trump hasnt commented publicly.

The obvious explanation for Trumps unaccustomed reticence is that he is busy preparing his defense for his upcoming impeachment trial in the Senate. Part of his preparations involved replacing one set of lawyers over the weekend with new ones, including a former Pennsylvania district attorney best known for declining to prosecute actor Bill Cosby over allegations he drugged and sexually assaulted a woman, allegations that resurfaced years later and resulted in Cosbys conviction.

Story continues

Consistent with his refusal to concede defeat, Trump reportedly wants to base his defense on his own bogus claims that he actually won reelection, rather than the procedural argument that his impeachment was mooted when he left office. That is a claim that 45 Republican senators have already signaled they accept, which would give him an automatic acquittal. The case that the election was stolen from him by Democrats was raised in dozens of lawsuits filed by his campaign and other Republican officials in November and December and has been uniformly rejected in the courts. He will almost certainly be acquitted anyway it takes 67 senators for a conviction but for Trumps lawyers to try to make the case could just as easily call attention to how flimsy it was in the first place.

But theres not much evidence of activity on that front. Where are the investigators fanning out across the country looking for the legendary hordes of deceased citizens who cast votes on Nov. 3? The subpoenas for the Dominion voting machines that in Trumps fantasies were rigged against him? (His bulldog defender, Rudy Giuliani, has been sued for defamation by Dominion for an eye-catching $1.3 billion, which might largely have foreclosed that line of inquiry.) Indeed, Trumps insistent claim that the election was stolen from him which his supporters took as signifying license to steal it back by invading the Capitol is central to the case against him. Raising it as a defense runs the paradoxical risk of making the accusation seem more credible.

Another possible explanation for Trumps silence is that he is, belatedly, discovering the virtues of discretion particularly now that he no longer enjoys the immunities and perks of office, such as having the Department of Justice to do his bidding. The writer E. Jean Carroll, who claims Trump raped her in a New York department store dressing room years ago, is suing him for defamation because in denying her accusation he called her a liar. Under Attorney General William Barr, the Department of Justice undertook to defend the suit, but the Biden administration might not be so compliant.

Or maybe its just that Trump hasnt yet found a form of expression as convenient and congenial as Twitter. It is no exaggeration that Trumps political career owes as much to Twitter as to The Apprentice. He understood, better than any other political figure, that he could use that platform to reach voters directly, without the expense of buying TV commercials or the inconvenience of media fact-checkers or the awkward constraints of grammar or logic. It was a venue for him to feed his insatiable desire for approval (Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend? he tweeted on June 18, 2013) and to boast about his television ratings, approval ratings, IQ, money, golf game (Just won The Club Championship at Trump International Golf Club in Palm Beach) and even his hair (retweeting a fan who wrote that his hair is magnificent. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.)

But above all, Twitters staccato, telegraphic style is the perfect medium for Trumps preferred form of discourse, the insult that gains force by sheer repetition, rather than, say, plausibility. Trump gleefully pursued grudges and resentments against enemies including Barack Obama, who was the subject of fully 1,686 of his posts nearly one out of 30 as recently as Dec. 30; Hillary Clinton (887, of which 366 refer to her as Crooked Hillary); Rosie ODonnell (66); and Fox News (348, which sequentially chart his delight at being interviewed on air, appreciation for their obsequious coverage and, more recently, outrage toward anchors he considered insufficiently fawning). The New York Times has compiled a comprehensive list of the hundreds of people, organizations, places and ideas Trump insulted on Twitter from when he declared his candidacy, in 2015, through Jan. 19, 2021, running alphabetically from ABC News (knowingly have a sick and biased AGENDA) through Kim Jong-un (I would NEVER call him short and fat), to media proprietor Mort Zuckerman (a dopey clown). You cant put out a press release under the letterhead of 45th President Trump just to insult Whoopi Goldberg (never had what it took), or maybe you can, but it lacks the emotional satisfaction of sending out a tweet and watching the likes and retweets pile up by the thousands.

In fact, as with so many things about Trump, an explanation rooted in the mans personality may be the simplest and closest to the truth, the implicit point of Mary Trumps biography of her estranged uncle, Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the Worlds Most Dangerous Man. Mary Trump, a mental health professional herself, describes the 45th president as unstable, cruel, vain, greedy and as numerous armchair psychologists have discerned narcissistic, a personality type that reacts with rage and/or hurt withdrawal to any form of rejection. And what could be a greater rejection than losing a presidential election?

Author Laurence Leamer, a Palm Beach resident who wrote the 2019 book Mar-a-Lago: Inside the Gates of Power at Donald Trumps Presidential Palace, told the Associated Press that Trumps interest since leaving Washington is having sycophants stroke his ego.

He goes through his days and people tell him hes fantastic, hes great, hes unbelievable thats what he wants, Leamer said.

Its worth remembering that during the campaign Trump promised that if he lost, youll never see me again. Not many people believed him, but maybe we should have taken him at his word.

____

Read more from Yahoo News:

See more here:

When will we hear from Donald Trump again? - Yahoo News

SportsPulse: USA TODAY Sports' Nancy Armour asks Tom Brady if he thinks Black athletes have an equal amount of leeway when broaching political and controversial topics as white athletes do. USA TODAY

Tampa Bay Buccaneers quarterback Tom Brady evaded a question about whether he's gotten a pass from criticism forsporting a Donald Trump hat in his locker in 2015 because he is white.

In a Jan. 26segment on Fox Sports, analyst Shannon Sharpe was critical of Brady's brief support of Trump. The six-time Super Bowl champion later backpedaled on his support of Trump, dismissing any political-oriented questions during the former president's campaign trail and presidency over the last four years. But Sharpe said Brady was given a pass as a white athlete that a Black athlete like LeBron James wouldn't have gotten.

"Lets just say for sake of argument, LeBron James says my friend is Minister (Louis) Farrakhan," Sharpe said, referring to the controversial Nation of Islam leader."How would America react? Blacks have always had to be very, very quiet about who our friends are. ...LeBron James can never say, a prominent black athlete can never say, Minister Farrakhan is just my friend. Theyd try to cancel anybody with the just mere mention of Mister Farrakhans name. Because we like Tom Brady."

Tampa Bay Buccaneers quarterback Tom Brady playing against the Kansas City Chiefs in November.(Photo: Kim Klement, USA TODAY Sports)

Brady, in response to a question by USA TODAY Sports columnist Nancy Armour on a Super Bowl news conference Monday, dodged a direct answer.

"I'm not sure how to respond to hypothetical like that," Brady said over Zoomduring Super Bowl media availability. "I hope everyone canwe're in this position like I am to, again, try to be the best I can be every day as an athlete, as a player, as a person in my community, for my team and so forth, so yeah, I'm not sure what else."

In Sharpe's initial comments on Fox Sports, he said: "I understood what Tom was for a very, very long time. He put that hat in there for a reason. 'Letting you know that I support my friend, Donald Trump, and no matter what he says, I support him.' ... If we like somebody, were more forgiving of their actions. Were more forgiving of their words, their deeds. If we dont like you, we will go to heaven and earth, well go back 15 years."

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

See the article here:

Tom Brady dodges question about getting pass for supporting Trump because he is white - USA TODAY

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) Complaining about what he called indoctrination in schools, former President Donald Trump created a commission that promoted patriotic education and played down Americas role in slavery. But though hes out of the White House and the commission has disbanded, the cause hasnt died. Lawmakers in Republican states are now pressing for similar action.

Proposals in Arkansas, Iowa and Mississippi would prohibit schools from using a New York Times project that focused on slaverys legacy. Georgia colleges and universities have been quizzed about whether theyre teaching about white privilege or oppression. And GOP governors are backing overhauls of civic education that mirror Trumps abandoned initiatives.

Republicans behind the latest moves say theyre countering left-wing attempts in K-12 schools and higher education to indoctrinate rather than teach students. Teachers, civil rights leaders and policymakers are fighting back, saying students will suffer if states brush over crucial parts of the nations history.

The idea of simply saying youre not going to use certain materials because you dont like what theyre going to say without input from professionals makes no sense, said James Grossman, executive director of the American Historical Association.

Statehouse fights over whats taught in public schools are nothing new. Arkansas lost a court battle over a 1981 law that required the teaching of creationism in its classrooms, and in recent years conservatives have waged battles over how evolution, climate change and other topics are taught. But the latest efforts show just how much Trumps rhetoric on race continues to resonate in the mostly rural and white states he won.

The proposals primarily target The New York Times 1619 Project, which examined slavery and its consequences as the central thread of U.S. history. The project was published in 2019, the 400th anniversary of the first arrival of African slaves. The project was also turned into a popular podcast and materials were developed for schools to use.

A measure pending in Arkansas Legislature criticizes the project as a racially divisive and revisionist account of history that threatens the integrity of the Union by denying the true principles on which it was founded.

Republican Rep. Mark Lowery, who sponsored the measure, called slavery a dark stain, but said the project minimizes the Founding Fathers and cited criticism from some historians about parts of it.

It should not be taught as history, he said.

Republican U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas has also been a frequent critic of the project.

Nikole Hannah-Jones, who won a Pulitzer Prize for the lead essay in the project, called it a work of journalism that wasnt intended to replace whats being taught in schools. Born and raised in Iowa, one of the states looking to prohibit the projects use, Hannah-Jones said its clear the project is being used to whip up political fears.

Its one thing to not like a particular piece of journalism, its another thing to seek to prohibit its teaching, she said.

The Pulitzer Center, which partnered with the Times to develop 1619 Project lesson plans, said its heard from more than 3,800 K-12 teachers and nearly 1,000 college educators who planned to use them. Of those, only about two dozen were from Arkansas.

Jonathan Rogers, a journalism teacher at Iowa City High School, said hes used the projects podcast in his classes.

(Students) definitely responded to thinking about using different sources or alternative storytelling, Rogers said. Also, just hearing Black voices is so important when were talking about diversity and perspectives, whether its historical events or current events.

Other measures would go even further than targeting the 1619 Project, including a broader bill Lowery said hes reworking that currently calls for banning courses that promote social justice for one racial group. In Oklahoma, one bill would allow teachers to be fired for teaching that the U.S. is fundamentally racist, or other topics deemed divisive.

Critics say that, besides eating away at local control, the proposals show an unwillingness to address the countrys shortcomings as well as its successes.

This country does have a history that we have to reckon with and that sometimes our education system glosses over, said Rep. Emily Virgin, the top Democrat in the Oklahoma House.

After taking office, President Joe Biden revoked the report submitted by the commission Trump formed in response to the 1619 Project. Widely mocked by historians as political propaganda, Trumps 1776 Commission glorified the countrys founders and played down the role of slavery.

American parents are not going to accept indoctrination in our schools, cancel culture at work, or the repression of traditional faith, culture and values in the public square, Trump said when he announced the panel last year.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a close ally of Trumps, last month proposed $900,000 to ramp up her states civics curriculum to emphasize the U.S. as the most unique nation in the history of the world. Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves is proposing a $3 million Patriotic Education Fund to combat what he called revisionist history.

Across the country, young children have suffered from indoctrination in far-left socialist teachings that emphasize Americas shortcomings over the exceptional achievements of this country, Reeves said when he announced it.

In Texas, where academics have long clashed with the states GOP-controlled education board on controversies that include lessons exploring the influence Moses had on the Founding Fathers, Gov. Greg Abbott last week told lawmakers that students must learn what it means to be an American and what it means to be a Texan. But Abbott hasnt elaborated on what changes he may seek.

Its unclear how far these proposals will go, even in solidly red states. Two Mississippi Senate committees ignored, and killed, the 1619 Project ban.

In Arkansas, Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson has said he believes such issues are usually better addressed locally. Hes asked the states top education official to work on alternative legislation that would allow parents to challenge instructional material at the local level.

The proposed limits especially strike a nerve in Arkansas, where divides over race remain more than six decades after the 1957 integration of Little Rock Central High School. Until 2018, the state commemorated Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lees birthday on the same day as Martin Luther King Jr.

One member of the Legislative Black Caucus said she was worried about the proposals effect on the states image.

It will have an economic impact because it will seem as if this state is running from its own history, said Democratic Sen. Linda Chesterfield, a Black retired history teacher.

___

Associated Press writers Sean Murphy in Oklahoma City, Ryan Foley in Iowa City, Stephen Groves in Pierre, South Dakota, Paul Weber in Austin, Texas, and Emily Wagster Pettus in Jackson, Mississippi, contributed to this report

Continue reading here:

GOP states weigh limits on how race and slavery are taught - Associated Press

Re Opposing views on whether Joe Biden should pardon Donald Trump (Jan 20): As a Republican, I accept that Joe Biden is our president. Biden says he is going to unite us as a nation. I want him to succeed just as I did for past presidents. Trump lost the election. He had every right to challenge up until Jan. 6 just as others did before him.

Why is it that those on the left wanted to impeach Trump for a second time? He did not incite by his speech and the radicals had an organized goal planned. How does a second impeachment of a now-private citizen Trump unite us as a nation today?

What a colossal waste of time for the American people and President Biden. Biden should take a stand, carpe diem and just say no.

Derrick HaunValley Center

Opinion resources

The U-T welcomes and encourages community dialogue on important public matters.

Perhaps the ultimate oxymoron can be summarized by glancing at the San Diego Union-Tribune headlines of Jan. 23, Senate agrees to begin impeachment trial Feb. 9 and Jan. 24, How does a nation heal?.

Daniel CollinsSan Diego

Go here to see the original:

Opinion: Punishing Donald Trump wont bring nation together - The San Diego Union-Tribune

For years, CarltonF.W. Larson, a treason scholar and law professor at the University of California, Davis, has swatted away loose treason accusations by both Donald Trump and his critics. Though the term is popularly used to describe all kinds of political betrayals, the Constitution defines treason as one of two distinct, specific acts: levying War against the United States or adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. Colluding with Russia, a foreign adversary but not an enemy, is not treason, nor is bribing Ukraine to investigate a political rival. Ordering the military to abandon Kurdish allies in Syria, effectively strengthening ISIS, is not treason, eitherthough that is getting warmer. During Trumps Presidency, Larson told me, his colleagues teased him by asking, Is it treason yet? He always said no. But the insurrection of January 6th changed his answer, at least with regard to Trumps followers who attacked the Capitol in an attempt to stop Congresss certification of the election. Its very clear that would have been seen as levying war, he said.

Both of Trumps impeachments, in 2019 and 2021, were for high crimes and misdemeanors, but the Constitution also names treason as an offense for which a President can be impeached. Individuals, including a former President, may also be criminally punished for treason, perhaps the highest offense in our legal system, carrying the possibility of the death penalty. Fearing abuse of treason charges, the Framers gave treason a narrow definition and made it extremely difficult to prove.

The Treason Clause dictates that a conviction can rest only on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. Partly as a result, there have been around forty treason prosecutions. No American has been executed for treason against the U.S., although Hipolito Salazar (a Mexican who officials thought was American) was federally executed for treason during the Mexican-American War, and some states have executed people for treason, including the abolitionist John Brown.

Larson wrote in his book On Treason: A Citizens Guide to the Law, from 2020, that the Framers had a very specific image in mindmen gathering with guns, forming an army, and marching on the seat of government. Few events in American history, if any, have matched that description as clearly as the insurrection of January 6th, which, court documents suggest, was planned by milita members who may have intended to capture elected officials. The American most associated with treason was one who did not levy war but rather gave aid and comfort to the enemy: Benedict Arnold. He at first fought heroically in the Revolutionary War but then attempted to aid the British; he fled to the enemy when his betrayal was discovered, and so was never punished. Treason prosecutions for levying war were brought against some individuals who took part in the Whiskey Rebellion of 1794, in which armed men burned down a tax collectors house, and the Fries Rebellion of 1799, in which armed men stormed a prison and forced the release of tax resisters. Both resulted in conviction followed by pardon. The Jefferson Administration prosecuted the former Vice-President Aaron Burr, in 1807, for allegedly conspiring with a group of armed men to overthrow the U.S. government in New Orleans, but he was acquitted. In connection with that planned rebellion, the Supreme Court held that a mere conspiracy to levy war does not count as actually levying war. Another treason case resulted from the Christiana Riot, in which dozens of men fought the return of slaves to their owners as required by the Fugitive Slave Act. Supreme Court Justice Robert Grier, presiding at trial (as Justices did in those days), held that levying war had to involve an intent to overthrow the government or hinder the execution of law.

Southern secessionists who waged war against the United States were treasonous under any reading of the Treason Clauses levying war standard. Jefferson Davis, the former U.S. senator turned President of the Confederacy, was indicted for treason in 1866. Before trial, however, Chief Justice Salmon Chase made clear his view that the Fourteenth Amendment, which had been ratified a few months earlier, precluded any other treason penalties for Confederates. Section 3 of the amendment bars from holding public office anyone who took an oath to support the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection against or gave aid or comfort to the enemies of the United States. Because of the Chief Justices interpretation, President Andrew Johnson gave up on the prosecution of Davis and granted amnesty to all former Confederates if they swore an oath to defend the Constitution and the Union.

In the past century, federal treason prosecutions generally have been aid and comfort cases. After the Second World War, a Japanese-American woman named Iva Toguri DAquino, better known as Tokyo Rose, was convicted of treason for broadcasting anti-American propaganda on Radio Tokyo; she was pardoned in 1977, after witnesses recanted. The poet Ezra Pound was famously prosecuted for Fascist propaganda broadcasts on Italian radio; the case was dropped in 1958, when he was found incompetent to stand trial. During the Cold War, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were convicted and executed for conspiracy to commit espionage, not treason; the Soviet Union was not technically an enemy. After a half century of no federal treason cases, the indictment of the Al Qaeda spokesman Adam Gadahn, in 2006, was the first to concern giving aid and comfort to an enemy that was not a nation. Had Gadahn ever been tried, the defense might have argued that a terrorist group such as Al Qaeda isnt an enemy as envisioned in the Treason Clause, though a federal district court assumed, in 2013, that it was. Gadahn was killed in Pakistan in 2015, by a C.I.A. drone strike.

Since the Capitol insurrection, there has been little talk of treason charges. Carlton Larson suggested that this was because everybody now tends to think of treason as mostly aiding foreign enemies. In his book On Treason, he even states that levying war is arguably archaic, of interest only to historians, and that, in the twenty-first century, armed rebellions to overthrow the government are simply not going to happen. But, to the Framers, such an insurrection was a paradigmatic case of treason. The founding-era Chief Justice John Marshall held in the treason trial of Aaron Burr that levying war entails the employment of actual force by a warlike assemblage, carrying the appearance of force, and in a situation to practice hostility. If some of those who attacked the Capitol assembled in order to incapacitate Congressperhaps even by kidnapping or killing lawmakersthen their actions could be construed as an attempt to overthrow the government, and federal prosecutors could plausibly consider treason charges. As Larson put it, At some point, you have to say, if thats not levying war against the United States, then what on earth is?

Last Tuesday, Mitch McConnell, who is now the Senate Minority Leader, said that the attackers tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government which they did not like, offering a narrower purpose than government overthrow. Investigators examining the emerging evidence on the scope of the plot might disagree. Federal law also makes it a separate felony for anyone who owes allegiance to the U.S. and knows of the commission of any treason to conceal it or not tell authorities. That vastly widens the net of those who could potentially be charged, including friends, acquaintances, and co-workers of the attackers. (Since the attack, many such individuals have, in fact, come forward to give information to law enforcement.)

The Treason Clauses strict evidentiary rule of two witnesses to the act makes it exceedingly difficult to convict anyone of treason, even with so much conduct captured on video. But a treason case against Trump himself might conceivably be built, if prosecutors could establish that he knew in advance that his supporters planned to violently assault the Capitol, rather than peacefully protest; that he intended his speech urging them to fight harder to spur them to attack Congress imminently; and that he purposely didnt do anything to stop the insurrection while it was unfoldingor, worse, intentionally contributed to a security failure that led to the breach. Then Trump would have engaged in treason along with supporters who attempted, in his name, to overthrow the U.S. government. At a minimum, it appears that Trump, along with top government officials, was aware that his followers were planning acts of violence. Trump did, however, say, in the midst of his incendiary speech, I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

Short of treason, a related federal law prohibiting rebellion or insurrection states that a person who incites any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, has committed a serious felony and is disqualified from holding federal office. This description is similar to the current article of impeachment against Trump: for inciting violence against the Government of the United States. If two-thirds of senators vote to convict Trump, a majority of the Senate could then vote to bar him from future federal office. But a Senate conviction requires the votes of at least seventeen Republicans and, so far, looks unlikely. A federal criminal conviction for inciting rebellion or insurrection may offer an alternative route to disqualifying Trump from holding office.

For the time being, the government has indicted more than a hundred and fifty people for crimes related to the insurrection, including unlawful entry, disorderly conduct, theft, destruction of property, firearms offenses, assault on police, conspiracy, obstruction of an official proceeding, obstruction of justice, and even curfew violation. Ongoing investigations will likely produce more indictments. In addition to potential homicide and terrorism charges, prosecutors have pledged to pursue the charge of seditious conspiracy. That crime overlaps with but covers more than treason; federal law defines it as any conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States.

While federal prosecutors could charge some of the leaders of the riot with treason, seditious conspiracy would be far easier to prove. It is clear that the rioters goal was, at a minimum, to delay Congresss legally mandated counting of electoral votes. Prosecutors would need to prove that two or more people had agreed to undertake the seditious conduct, but, with respect to the rioters who were explicit about their aims and cordinated their actions, the evidence may well be sufficient, particularly given the violent result. More evidence might even enable charges against individuals who conspired to attack the Capitol but didnt take part in the events. Some of those individuals might be elected officials. Representative Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat of New Jersey, has alleged that unnamed members of Congress had groups coming through the Capitol that I saw on January 5th, a reconnaissance for the next day. Soon afterward, the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Capitol Police opened investigations into what roles members might have played in the siege.

If evidence were to emerge that members of Congress intentionally aided or incited the attack, they may face criminal consequences. Its more likely, however, that Republicans who amplified Trumps election-fraud lies will be sanctioned by their colleagues. Seven Democratic senators have filed an ethics complaint against the Republican Senators Ted Cruz, of Texas, and Josh Hawley, of Missouri, who led the effort to overturn the election in Congress. Representative Cori Bush, a Democrat of Missouri, has introduced a House resolution to investigate and potentially expel members of Congress who challenged states electoral votes. Bush said, in a tweet, that they incited this domestic terror attack through their attempts to overturn the election. Mitch McConnell may agree. He has pointedly acknowledged that the mob was provoked by the President and other powerful people, implying that fellow-lawmakers might bear responsibility. But, whatever moral condemnation or political remedy is appropriate, criminal charges cannot be brought against congresspeople such as Hawley and Cruz solely for using a legal process to challenge electoral votes in Congress. It is unlikely that any Republican politician thought theyd succeed in overturning the election, and it may be hard to distinguish their moves in Congress, at least legally, from a few Democrats challenges to states electoral votes in 2001, 2005, and 2017.

Even if Congress doesnt censure or expel any of its members, the Senate declines to convict Trump, and federal prosecutors decline to bring charges against any of them, Trump and lawmakers who tried to overturn the election could still be held accountable through Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the same provision that was intended to prevent former Confederates from holding office. If Trump and the officials tried to run for office again, a lawsuit could claim that they engaged in insurrection or rebellion within the meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, and, if the evidence bears it out, some could be disqualified from holding office. But, apart from any of these remotely possible legal remedies, Republicans who helped foment the attack are facing political repercussions: in the weeks since the riot, Hawley has had a fund-raiser and a book contract cancelled, and Missouris two biggest newspapers have called for his resignation. But, alas, in our divided country, Republican officials who denounced the insurrection or voted to impeach Trump may also face the ire of many Republican voters.

Excerpt from:

Did Donald Trump and His Supporters Commit Treason? - The New Yorker

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Rocky River Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez was walking to his Capitol Hill office from the House of Representatives floor when the commotion began on Jan. 6.

Rioters were storming the U.S. Capitol. Everyone had to shelter in place. He barricaded himself in his office with staffers, and watched the chaos unfold on television and social media. He changed from his suit to workout gear, in case he needed to make a run for it. He called contacts in the administration of outgoing President Donald Trump in an effort to secure aid for overwhelmed Capitol Police officers.

As the rampage persisted, Gonzalez was appalled when Trump posted a Twitter statement that aggravated tensions by attacking Vice President Mike Pence based on what Gonzalez calls a perverted reading of the Constitution. Trumps posting said Pence didnt have the courage to reject the electoral votes that Congress was tallying to formalize Joe Bidens victory over Trump. Rioters at the Capitol chanted Hang Mike Pence throughout the disturbance, even though Pence lacked authority to do Trumps bidding and courts throughout the nation rejected Trumps claims that Bidens win was fraudulent.

I like to think that no matter who is the perpetrator, whether its a foreign actor or domestic actor, if somebody is attacking the United States Congress, the President of the United States will step up and do everything to stop it and stop it immediately, Gonzalez said. Instead, we saw what amounted to escalation, indifference for a period of time and then a sort of ham-handed attempt at calming the situation that didnt happen until hours into the insurrection.

A week later, Gonzalez was among 10 Republicans in the House of Representatives who voted to impeach Trump on an incitement of insurrection charge for his role in provoking the mob that attacked Congress and caused five deaths, including that of a Capitol Police officer. Since then, some Trump loyalists have turned their fury on Gonzalez and other Republicans who backed impeachment. Gonzalez has increased security for himself and his family due to threats.

Its concerning, but were managing it, says Gonzalez, who declined to further discuss the threats.

In an interview with cleveland.com/The Plain Dealer, Gonzalez talked about the riot and its aftermath, the impeachment vote, his political future and the future of the Trump and the Republican Party.

Pushback, praise on impeachment vote

Among those who have conveyed their displeasure with Gonzalez vote is Trump himself. Gonzalez says Trump - whose policies he supported in 88.6% of votes during his first congressional term - indirectly let him know hes unhappy. He says Republican leaders in Ohio also conveyed their vexation to him in different ways.

Members of his party in the House of Representatives havent tried to sanction him the way theyre trying to oust House Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney of Wyoming from her leadership post for backing impeachment. Gonzalez calls the effort to sanction Cheney silly and petty, since Republican leaders told their members to vote their conscience on impeachment, and thats what he and Cheney did.

He says a handful of his GOP colleagues in Congress told them they would have liked to vote to impeach Trump, but their districts wouldnt allow it.

I dont know if my district will allow it for me, but I think were supposed to be here to do what we think is right, says Gonzalez. And your commitment to your oath should be far stronger than your commitment to your job.

Among constituents in Gonzalez current V-shaped district that includes parts of Cuyahoga, Medina, Summit, Portage and Stark counties and all of Wayne County, Gonzalez says theres a faction that enthusiastically agrees with his stance. A a second group disagrees with his vote but understands why he did it, and a third group is furious with him. Gonzalez says hes been trying to explain his vote to as many people as he can, and will have a tele-townhall on Thursday where he can communicate his reasoning to thousands of constituents and hear their concerns.

One of the things thats become obvious to me is, no matter where you are on it, theres a lot of emotion around the vote, says Gonzalez. And theres a lot of emotion around changes that were seeing in the country. One of my goals is to provide as many forums as possible for voters to engage with me and engage with each other, so that we can hear where the community is on on this issue. Were going to keep doing that across the district, as long as it takes. And I think that ultimately will be healthy, because people have a lot to get off their chests right now. And Im hearing it day to day in our conversations.

What the political future holds

Gonzalez did not face a primary contest in 2020 and won the general election with 63.2 percent of the vote. He thinks theres a good chance hell face a primary challenge in 2022 but believes it wont materialize until after the states congressional maps are redrawn and his districts geography is reset. He won the 2018 general election with 56.7 percent of the vote after winning 53 percent in a three way Republican primary with former state legislator Christina Hagan and physician Michael Grusenmeyer. Hagan, who lost a 2020 bid for Congress against Democrat Tim Ryan in a neighboring district, says she wont rule out a rematch with Gonzalez in 2022.

I dont live my life in fear of primaries, says Gonzalez, who had $564,935 left in his campaign account at the end of 2020, after raising $2,393,597 and spending $1,895,208 on his reelection. I didnt do it for the first two years, and Im not going to do it for the next two years.

Gonzalez says its very, very, very unlikely that hell pursue the U.S. Senate seat that will be vacated by Republican Rob Portmans decision to not seek re-election next year, but he doesnt want to disqualify the possibility. He said some people are urging him to run, and others say hed be a fool to do so. He says he hopes whoever gets the seat can be as effective on behalf of Ohio as Rob Portman was.

I never close the door on anything, says Gonzalez, who was a wide receiver for Ohio State University and the Indianapolis Colts before he entered politics. When coaches are having a good season, the media will ask about rumors theyre taking a job with the Miami Dolphins. Theyll say absolutely not, and then three weeks later they take the Miami Dolphins job. That looks silly, so Im not going to play those games. You never say no. Thats my answer.

Rejecting extremism

Gonzalez says he expects Trump will try to stay engaged in Republican politics for as long as he can, but he cant predict Trumps role or whether hell seek the White House again. Gonzalez does not think it would be a good idea for Trump to start a third political party, as Trump has discussed. Gonzalez thinks it would be a better idea for the Republican Party to retain Trumps successful policies but make sure that some of these extremist fringe movements that have attached themselves to the GOP umbrella know that there is no home in this party for anti-Semitism or extremism or political violence or QAnon conspiracy theories.

I think we all have a responsibility in elected office for when we see it, to call it out for what it is, says Gonzalez, adding that Democrats also have their fringe adherents in the Antifa movement.

He says he is still reviewing past behavior by his newly elected Republican colleague from Georgia, Marjorie Taylor Greene, whom Democrats have suggested should be expelled from Congress or removed from her assignment on the House Education and Labor Committee after making controversial statements that include espousing conspiracy theories and contending that several school shootings were hoaxes.

If youre advocating for political violence against anybody, if youre harassing teenagers and telling them that they werent involved in a shooting or that it was a false flag, this is just disgusting behavior, frankly, and it is nothing I want to associate myself with, says Gonzalez. And I hope others feel the same way.

Because Greenes constituents were aware of her views before she was elected, Gonzalez says he does not think she should be ejected from Congress but said removing her from committees should be looked at because participation on congressional committees is an honor that you earn.

The Republican agenda

Gonzalez argues that Trumps stances on issues like trade, taxes, energy independence and foreign policy were spot on for Ohio, which is why the states voters supported him by eight percentage points in the 2016 and 2018 presidential elections. He says the Republican Party needs to retain the goodness associated with these policies and what they represented for Ohio, which was a strong, robust economy and get rid of some of the more extremist rhetoric and behavior that attached itself, wrongly I would argue, to this movement and make sure that were very clear that things like political violence, and the mobs and the insurrections and some of these conspiracy theories just have no place in conservatism.

He said the Republican Party in Ohio is controlled by voters, rather than Trump, and is as strong as it has ever been. Republicans hold nearly all Ohios statewide elected offices, and Gonzalez says he doesnt know of any QAnon or militia believers among Ohio Republicans in the state party or in elected office.

You see a lot of good, honest people who are doing a great job, and are representing traditional conservative Republican values, says Gonzalez.

During his initial two years in Congress, Gonzalez passed legislation including a bill that blocks national cemeteries from banning battlefield cross memorials, another to help the government fight realistic-looking fraudulent videos and photographs called deepfakes that could be used for scams, to sow public discord and endanger national security, and several bills that target misbehavior by China such as intellectual property theft. Over the next two years, he says hell focus on efforts to defeat the coronavirus and reduce prescription drug costs.

Currently, the United States subsidizes drug prices all around the rest of the world, Gonzalez says. Drug companies do the overwhelming majority of their research and development here, funded by the taxpayer. We get the drugs developed and then they sell them overseas at a fraction of the cost that they sell them here in the U.S.. Thats not fair.

He thinks it will be difficult for Republicans to pursue their agenda with Democrats controlling the White House and Congress for the next two years, and says Republicans will need to win back suburban voters by letting them know what we stand for, who we are, what we believe and what we reject.

He feels that ultimately, history will harshly judge those who supported rejecting the electoral votes of states that Trump contested on Jan. 6, because the point of doing so was to overturn a presidential election.

I hope we can all, over time, come to understand how dangerous it truly was, says Gonzalez. Theres a lot of people who are just never going to agree with the impeachment vote. But my hope is that over time, we will all look and say, You know what? The vice president cant pick the president. The Congress cant pick the president. The people in the states pick the president, and thats how it works in the United States. And the peaceful transition of power isnt some quaint idea thats nice to have. It is actually essential to a functioning democracy. Thats what I hope, more than anything else, that people think about these last three weeks.

Read more:

Sen. Rob Portman hopes for coronavirus compromise with Biden administration

Nina Turner takes big fundraising lead in congressional race to succeed Marcia Fudge; her donors include actress Susan Sarandon and entrepreneur Andrew Yang

Sherrod Brown hopes Senate can pass $15 hourly minimum wage and coronavirus aid for local governments with or without Republican support

Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan wont run for U.S. Senate next year

Senators grill Ohios Rep. Marcia Fudge at her confirmation hearing to be Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

Sen. Rob Portman backs measure to question constitutionality of impeaching former President Donald Trump

Rob Portman talks about his future plans and whats ahead for the Republican Party

Sen. Rob Portman announces he wont seek re-election

U.S. Capitol riot prompts Democrat Jeff Sites to seek Rep. Jim Jordans congressional seat

Ohio Congress members at President Joe Bidens inauguration hope for new era of cooperation

Several Ohio Congress members will skip Joe Bidens inauguration amid unprecedented security measures

Rep. Bob Gibbs and other Ohio Republican Congress members object to metal detectors to access House floor

Rocky River Republican Anthony Gonzalez votes to impeach President Donald Trump

House votes to impeach President Trump after last weeks U.S. Capitol riot, with all Ohio Democrats and one Ohio Republican in the majority

Read the rest here:

Rocky River Republican Rep. Anthony Gonzalez gets flak for voting to impeach President Donald Trump but doesn - cleveland.com

Country music icon Dolly Parton has revealed why she twice turned down former President Donald Trumps offer of the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nations highest civilian honor.

In an interview on the Today show on Monday, the Jolene singer and lifelong philanthropist said it was just a case of bad timing. She also explained why shed be hesitant to accept the accolade now from President Joe Biden.

I couldnt accept it (from Trump) because my husband was ill and then they asked me again about it and I wouldnt travel because of the COVID, she recalled.

So now, I feel like if I take it, Ill be doing politics, so Im not sure, Parton continued. I dont work for those awards. Itd be nice, but Im not sure that I even deserve it. But its a nice compliment for people to think that I might deserve it.

I think everyone thinks you might deserve it, Today host Hoda Kotb responded. (Watch the video above).

Parton has contributed to a slew of charitable projects. She was cheered last year after it emerged she had donated $1 million to fund a vaccine for COVID-19. Its prompted calls for a statue of the singer at the Tennessee state Capitol in Nashville.

Former President Barack Obama admitted last year that not awarding the medal to Parton had been a screw-up of his administration.

Calling all HuffPost superfans!

Sign up for membership to become a founding member and help shape HuffPost's next chapter

Go here to see the original:

Dolly Parton Rejected The Medal Of Freedom From Donald Trump Twice. Here's Why. - HuffPost