Category Archives: Republican

During former President Donald Trumps second impeachment, even when Republicans insisted that the assault on the Capitol was an unfortunate consequence of heated rhetoric, most did not attempt to defend Trumps conduct on the merits. Instead, they relied on the absurd technicality that the president was no longer in office, and therefore could not be convicted.

That was the rationale of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who accused Trump of a disgraceful dereliction of duty and afterward voted to acquit. McConnell then suggested that Trump could be criminally prosecuted, comfortable in the suspicion that would never happen.

Other Republicans, including Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, insisted that seeking accountability for an attempted coup would be incredibly divisive, and was therefore not worth doing. The notion that were going to spend a week or two weeks on a trial on somebody whos not even in officeit sounds to me like a waste of time, Rubio told Politico in 2021.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas offered a more affirmative defense. After voting to acquit, Cruz said, Donald Trump used heated language, but he did not urge anyone to commit acts of violence. Whether they based their decision on the flimsy excuse that he was no longer president, or on the idea that he never meant to inspire the violence that followed his incitement, Trumps defenders have always insisted that the former president acted recklessly but not deliberately.

David Frum: Kevin McCarthy, have you no sense of decency?

I do not recall these excuses simply to point out how pathetic they seem in hindsight, given the gravity of the allegations and the clarity we now have about Trumps conduct. I raise them because the thinness of the Republican rationales for acquittal is strong evidence that any justification, no matter how strained, would have sufficed, and yesterdays revelations are unlikely to change the minds of many Republican legislators now. It is nevertheless crucial to establish for posterity what happened and why. But make no mistake: If those who collaborated with Trumps attack on American democracy escape accountability, the calculus of high-ranking administration officials next time will be that there is a greater price to pay for opposing a coup than supporting one.

Yesterdays sworn testimony of Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, before the January 6 committee, if sustained, would leave Trumps enablers without even a pathetic sliver of an excuse for refusing to punish an attempt to overthrow the constitutional order. Hutchinson is just one person, and her testimony could be contested by future witnesses or revelations. A certain level of caution is warranted; it is not unheard of for people to lie under oath. With that said, the picture Hutchinson painted is shocking, if not surprising. According to Hutchinson, not only did Trump understand his own conduct as encouraging acts of violence, but he hoped to make it easier for the mob to reach its targets equipped to carry out those acts.

The extent of Trumps campaign to overturn the 2020 election has been clear since long before the Hutchinson testimony. The mob was Trumps last resort, not his first. In the aftermath of his loss, Trump pressured GOP secretaries of state to not certify the election results; he pressed Republican state legislatures to overturn the election results; he demanded that the courts invalidate the results; and he tried to coerce Vice President Mike Pence to declare him the winner during a ceremonial counting of the votes. When all of that failed, Trump encouraged the mob that sacked the Capitol by telling its members they could fight to overturn the results, and that they had to do so, because if you dont fight like hell, youre not going to have a country anymore. The justification for this was baseless allegations of voter fraud that both the president and his entourage knew to be false, even as they inundated their supporters with them.

These actions amount to attempts to forcibly remain in power, and alone would have been sufficient reason to impeach him and bar him from office forever.

David A. Graham: The most damning January 6 testimony yet

Hutchinsons appearance before the committee adds to these already damning facts insight into the former presidents personal motives and behavior, which were so pivotal to Republican senators weak rationales for acquittal. She testified that Trump believed the mob would turn violent, knew it was armed, and urged the Secret Service to allow the mob through with its weapons. In short, Hutchinsons testimony indicates that Trump was not merely irresponsible or foolish at the rally; he deliberately riled up the mob with falsehoods of a rigged election in the hopes that it would successfully overturn the election results by force. Trump then refused to call off the mob, because he wanted it to complete its mission. Hutchinson also testified that she heard from a colleague that Trump physically assaulted a Secret Service agent in an attempt to get him to drive them toward the Capitol; the Secret Service later told the press that it would dispute that aspect of her testimony under oath.

Whether or not that outburst occurred, the more significant aspect of Hutchinsons testimony was Trumps awareness of the mobs capacity for violence and its intentions. I was in the vicinity of a conversation where I overheard the president say something to the effect of, You know, I dont even care that they have weapons. Theyre not here to hurt me, Hutchinson testified. When the mob began to chant Hang Mike Pence, Hutchinson recalled, she overheard Meadows tell White House Counsel Pat Cipollone that he thinks Mike deserves it. He doesnt think theyre doing anything wrong. Trump understood that the people the mob wanted to hurt were standing between him and power, and therefore did not want the mob sworn to place Donald Trump in power impeded by those who had sworn to defend the Constitution. As my colleague David Graham wrote, Trumps allies defense of his conduct has never been especially plausible, but Hutchinsons testimony demolishes it.

Even without this information, the Senate should have convicted Trump. The plain facts are that the former president attempted to violently overthrow the government of the United States, and Senate Republicans ensured that he would face no consequences for doing so by acquitting him during his second impeachment. Their rationales for refusing to hold Trump accountable are laughable in hindsight, but also disturbing in their frailty, because history suggests that when attempts to seize power by force are not punished, they are both more likely to reoccur and more likely to succeed when they do. Attempting to seize power by violence was not sufficient to turn Republican senators against Trump when his influence was at its ebb; now that he has reasserted his grip on the party, there is little chance they will discover a reserve of courage. The only Republicans in elected office who were punished by the party in connection with Trumps overthrow attempt were those such as Representative Liz Cheney, who was censured for speaking out against it.

Anne Applebaum: The reason Liz Cheney is narrating the January 6 story

Hutchinsons testimony provoked the now tired ritual of Republicans soliciting favorable coverage from reporters by privately expressing their horror while publicly defending Trump; at this point, no one should be fooled by this. The truth is that Hutchinsons testimony, had it been given at Trumps second impeachment trial, may not have changed a single vote. Joining with Democrats to hold Trump accountable would have done too much damage to the party. Better to erode the foundations of American democracy than risk giving the rival party any advantage.

This is cowardice, but also ideology: Since liberals are not Real Americans, it is no sin to deprive them of power by undemocratic means. In this view, Trumps behavior might be misguided, but his heart remains in the right place, in that his mob sought to ensure that only those worthy to participate in American democracy can hold the reins of power, regardless of whom the voters actually choose.

Although seven Republican senators broke ranks and voted to convict Trump, most of the caucus remained loyal to a man who attempted to bring down the republic, because in the end, they would have been content to rule over the ruins.

More:

Don't Forget That 43 Senate Republicans Let Trump Get Away With It - The Atlantic

from the spam-spam-spam-spam dept

What a dumb news cycle. As we noted, mainly driven by the preferred political spam mongers for Republicans, a study from some computer scientists was completely misrepresented to argue (falsely) that Google was deliberately censoring Republican politician emails. As weve repeatedly noted, the study actually found that while a clean Gmail account would flag more Republican emails as spam than Democrats, (1) the reverse was true of the two other most popular web-based email providers, Yahoo and Outlook, and (2) the researchers found that if someone actively manages their spam flags, that this discrepancy disappears in Gmail.

But, Republicans and their favorite spammer cant let facts or accuracy get in the way of a moral panic. So they got Fox News to spin it into a bullshit, inaccurate story about Google censoring conservatives, then got some Republicans to file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission arguing that this was an unfair advantage that Google was giving Democrats. Finally, they got an incredibly stupid bill introduced in both the House and the Senate to basically say that email providers can no longer mark political emails as spam.

Apparently, this stupid misleading culture war, that anyone with even the slightest understanding of how spam filters work could have debunked for anyone, was apparently gaining steam. And in this ridiculous world we live in, once the narrative takes over, facts and any sense of reality go right out the window.

So, just after Google CEO Sundar Pichai visited Capitol Hill, where he was apparently yelled at by a bunch of Republicans, Google has announced a pilot program to whitelist candidate emails. The program is not live yet, but Google has first asked the FEC for the greenlight, to make sure that this program doesnt run afoul of any election laws.

Googles pilot program, per the June 21 filing, would be for authorized candidate committees, political party committees and leadership political action committees registered with the FEC.

Basically, because a bunch of Republicans (1) are bad at political emails, (2) cant take any personal responsibility at all, (3) love any kind of moral panic about big tech not liking them we all now will have to deal with more political spam in our inboxes.

What a stupid world.

Filed Under: elections, email, filtering, politics, spamCompanies: google

Go here to see the original:

Google Gives In To Republican Political Spammers: Launching Pilot Program To Whitelist Them Out Of Spam - Techdirt

The South Carolina Republican Party will meet Thursday to decide whether or not a Greenville County election should be overturned.It comes after the Greenville County Republican Party voted last week to overturn the results of the June Primary for Greenville County Council District 17, which longtime councilman Joe Dill lost by 132 votes to challenger Joey Russo. The Greenville County GOP voted to overturn the results after Dill voiced concerns with voting machines, poll workers and issues submitting ballots. "(A) lot of people have complained that their vote didn't get counted because the machines were torn up (and) machines were broken down," Dill said. Joey Russo's campaign said it wasn't properly served Dill's protest as required by law. Therefore, it said, the decision can't be valid. The Russo campaign appealed the decision to the state Republican Party, which set the hearing for Thursday at 6:30 pm in Columbia. In a statement, his campaign said the following. Last week's hearing was an orchestrated attempt to overturn the clear will of Republican primary voters in District 17. Among many other reasons, since Joey was not served with Mr. Dills protest as required by law, the committees decision is not valid and cannot stand. We have already appealed this ruling to the South Carolina Republican Party executive committee and have asked them to certify the original results and declare Joey Russo the winner. We anticipate that hearing taking place on Thursday. Joey looks forward to the general election and ultimately representing the citizens of District 17 on county council. But Dill and the Greenville County GOP believe that state law requires the SC Republican Party to have had the hearing by last Saturday, June 25. "The issue and problem for Mr. Russo, unfortunately, is the fact that (Chairman) Drew McKissick and the state party did not have the hearing as required by law by noon of last Saturday,'" said Jeff Davis, Chairman of the Greenville County Republican Party. "So whether we did anything wrong or improper or didn't dot all the I's and cross all the t's which, you know, we'll concede that we probably did not, nor did the state party in those four hearings that they had last Thursday on that same day. It's a moot point because as long as you don't have that hearing on the 25th it's moot." The South Carolina Republican Party disagrees and said that its upcoming hearing on the appeal is legal and in accordance with state law. The State Election Commission said it can only order another primary election under the guidance of the state party, which means only the SCGOP can call for a new election in this case.

The South Carolina Republican Party will meet Thursday to decide whether or not a Greenville County election should be overturned.

It comes after the Greenville County Republican Party voted last week to overturn the results of the June Primary for Greenville County Council District 17, which longtime councilman Joe Dill lost by 132 votes to challenger Joey Russo.

The Greenville County GOP voted to overturn the results after Dill voiced concerns with voting machines, poll workers and issues submitting ballots.

"(A) lot of people have complained that their vote didn't get counted because the machines were torn up (and) machines were broken down," Dill said.

Joey Russo's campaign said it wasn't properly served Dill's protest as required by law.

Therefore, it said, the decision can't be valid.

The Russo campaign appealed the decision to the state Republican Party, which set the hearing for Thursday at 6:30 pm in Columbia.

In a statement, his campaign said the following.

Last week's hearing was an orchestrated attempt to overturn the clear will of Republican primary voters in District 17. Among many other reasons, since Joey was not served with Mr. Dills protest as required by law, the committees decision is not valid and cannot stand. We have already appealed this ruling to the South Carolina Republican Party executive committee and have asked them to certify the original results and declare Joey Russo the winner. We anticipate that hearing taking place on Thursday. Joey looks forward to the general election and ultimately representing the citizens of District 17 on county council.

But Dill and the Greenville County GOP believe that state law requires the SC Republican Party to have had the hearing by last Saturday, June 25.

"The issue and problem for Mr. Russo, unfortunately, is the fact that (Chairman) Drew McKissick and the state party did not have the hearing as required by law by noon of last Saturday,'" said Jeff Davis, Chairman of the Greenville County Republican Party. "So whether we did anything wrong or improper or didn't dot all the I's and cross all the t's which, you know, we'll concede that we probably did not, nor did the state party in those four hearings that they had last Thursday on that same day. It's a moot point because as long as you don't have that hearing on the 25th it's moot."

The South Carolina Republican Party disagrees and said that its upcoming hearing on the appeal is legal and in accordance with state law.

The State Election Commission said it can only order another primary election under the guidance of the state party, which means only the SCGOP can call for a new election in this case.

More here:

SC Republican Party to hear appeal after Greenville County GOP votes to overturn election results - WYFF4 Greenville

The political world is still collecting itself following the testimony of former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson on Tuesday to the committee investigating the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. The sheer volume of shocking details she provided, about what then-President Donald Trump knew in advance of the Capitol riot and his behavior that day, is such that it will take a while to assess its impacts.

Among the obvious questions, though, is just how bad this will be for Trump, politically, and how Republicans will react to it.

In conversations with a half-dozen Republican strategists who represent a spectrum of opinion within the party and were granted anonymity to speak frankly, there was a broad consensus that, yes, this might have an impact on Trump but probably not on Republicans in the midterms. There was a sense that this would inflict real damage on Trumps long-term ambitions, even if it did nothing to shift the needle for now.

What more do you need to believe crimes were committed? one Republican strategist asked, before also conceding that There have been a million times when people say Trump is finished, but this could be the millionth and one, but I dont see a way for him to come back from this testimony.

Another Republican operative noted that Hutchinsons testimony has the potential to make a big impact because of her rarefied level of access to the president, and compared her to Miles Taylor, the former Trump DHS official who wrote an anonymous op-ed for the New York Times in 2018.

That operative said while Taylor had The operative told me, This is someone who legit had tremendous daily access ... not some nobody trying to make a name for herself like Miles Taylor. This is a real person who was taken seriously.

Further, Trump has less goodwill among the political class inside the GOP than he did in the past. As one national strategist pointed out, there are a lot of people that feel burned by Trump this cycle because hes getting involved in so many different primaries. There are a lot of Republican consultants who were loyal and our candidates were loyal, and he picked somebody else, so its all interconnected. The national strategist added that they didnt know where the breaking point is. I felt like it was after January 6, but it didnt last as long. Every time you second-guess the guy, he rises like the phoenix from the ashes, but there is a breaking point.

As to where that breaking point was, the Republican operative noted the silence from most national Republicans. Its fascinating how little youre hearing from people like Ron DeSantis, they said, and marveled at how few members of Congress have stepped in to defend Trump since Hutchinsons testimony.

Even if Tuesdays revelations further dent Trumps potential to mount a political comeback, dont expect Republicans to publicly say so. There still is a tribal industrial complex that wont let people go out and speak against this president, the strategist said.

Not all agreed. The Republican strategist who was, of all those Vox spoke to, the most dubious of the hearings impact simply thought anything Hutchinson said was discredited by what they considered a tainted and partisan process. The persuasive potential of the committee died when [Speaker Nancy] Pelosi threw [Republican Rep.] Jim Banks off, and not just [Republican Rep.] Jim Jordan. ... At that point, it was clear Nancy wanted a partisan show trial, not an investigation. So Republicans checked out.

The skeptical Republican added, Look, Soviet show trials sometimes turned up evidence of real shit, but we dont take them seriously because it was mixed in with a huge amount of theatrics. Cassidy Hutchinson will be seen the same way, both because her story about grabbing the wheel is unraveling, and because shes testifying in a ludicrous forum. (Anonymous pushback to one of the most explosive parts of Hutchinsons testimony appeared in reports shortly after it, when Secret Service sources disputed to several outlets that Trump ever tried to grab the steering wheel of the presidential SUV to go directly to the Capitol on January 6 and assaulted an agent in the process. Hutchinson never claimed to have witnessed that event, simply that that story was relayed to her shortly after it took place by deputy chief of staff Tony Ornato.)

Whatever the impact on Trump, none of the Republicans I spoke to thought the testimony would damage Republicans in the midterms. As one veteran operative pointed out, people right now are really focused on $5 to $6 a gallon gas and I think thats where peoples heads are at. By and large people have tuned this out. ... Maybe this would be different if the economy was better but people are focused on their own welfare right now.

That was echoed by another Republican working on 2022 races, who said, No one is going to vote based on something that is happening within Washington regarding something that occurred a year and a half ago.

View post:

Trump and Republicans: Will Cassidy Hutchinsons testimony be a breaking point? - Vox.com

After Donald Trump took office in 2017, one of his first major decisions was nominating Neil Gorsuch to fill the high courts vacancy, effectively completing the theft of a Supreme Court seat. Senate Republicans patted themselves on the back. Alleged moderates, including Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, went along with the scheme, expressing confidence that Gorsuch would leave the Roe v. Wade precedent intact.

As regular readers may recall, it was a year later when Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the nations highest court. Maines senior senator went out of her way to vouch for the conservative jurist and his commitment to precedent. The New York Times reported at the time:

Protecting [the right to an abortion] is important to me, said Ms. Collins, who said a two-hour, face-to-face session with Judge Kavanaugh and an hourlong follow-up call, as well as an exhaustive review of his opinions, had persuaded her that he would not overturn Roe v. Wade. His views on honoring precedent would preclude attempts to do by stealth that which one has committed not to do overtly.

Kavanaugh received 50 votes. Collins was one of them. She said at the time, I do not believe hes going to repeal Roe v. Wade.

This morning, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh joined with four other Republican-appointed justices to overturn Roe. Collins was wrong. The consequences of her mistake have the potential to change the direction of the nation.

But to focus solely on the Maine senator would be to miss the forest for the trees.

As Collins vouched for Kavanaugh, other Republican proponents of reproductive rights followed suit. Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, for example, ended up opposing Kavanaughs nomination, but she declared on the Senate floor, I do not think that Judge Kavanaugh will be a vote to overturn Roe v. Wade.

After Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgs passing, as Republicans scrambled to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the high court, Democrats told voters the future of reproductive rights was on the line in the 2020 elections. As weve discussed, Republicans, well aware of public opinion, furiously pretended otherwise.

In one of the presidential debates, for example, after Joe Biden said the Roe v. Wade precedent was on the ballot, Donald Trump immediately pushed back. Why is it on the ballot? the Republican asked. Why is it on the ballot? Its not on the ballot.

The same day, Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa insisted the likelihood of Roe being overturned was very minimal. She added, I dont see that happening. Republican Sen. Thom Tillis used similar rhetoric during his re-election campaign in North Carolina.

The deception at least made tactical sense: The more voters realized how much damage an even-more-conservative Supreme Court was likely to do, the more Republican officials and candidates risked an electoral backlash.

Its precisely why so many in the GOP simply pretended that reproductive rights werent on the line, Roes future was sound, and Americans could count on the status quo remaining in place.

Just keep voting for Republicans, the party effectively said. There wont be dramatic changes. Roe has been around for a half-century and its not going anywhere. Trust us. Democrats are just trying to scare you. Dont listen to them.

As a strategic matter, the messaging worked. Voters were lulled into a false sense of security. The week after the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the Dobbs case, a Politico/Morning Consult poll found that nearly two-thirds of the public either said they didnt know how likely the court was to overturn Roe or said the court isnt likely to overturn the precedent.

Much of the public assumed that everything would remain the same indefinitely. They thought wrong.

Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MSNBC political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "The Impostors: How Republicans Quit Governing and Seized American Politics."

More:

Seeing Republican assurances that Roe was safe in a new light - MSNBC

We tragically fool ourselves if we believe that the televised hearings of the January 6 committee will change the Republican party or end Trumps attempted coup.

The Republican party is becoming ever more divorced from reality, and Trumps attempted coup continues unabated.

The first four hearings of the committee have demolished the myths of voter fraud repeated incessantly by Trump.

Yet the Republican response to those hearings has ranged from indifference to hostility. Representative Kevin McCarthy, the Republican leader of the House, tweeted that the members of the committee will not stop lying about their political opponents, and called the committee despicable.

On Friday, speaking at the Faith and Freedom Coalition conference in Nashville, Trump repeated his big lie as if the hearings never happened.

The lie is now so deeply entrenched in the Republican party that it has become a central tenet of Republican dogma.

It is now the vehicle by which Republican candidates signal their fealty both to Trump and to a broad range of grievances (some imaginary, some derived from the so-called culture wars) that now constitute the Republican brand.

So far, at least 108 Republican candidates who embrace the big lie have won their nominations or advanced to runoffs, and there is no sign that the hearings have reduced the intensity of their demagoguery.

Republican voters have chosen eight big liers for the US Senate, 86 for the House, five for governor, four for state attorney general and one for secretary of state.

These big lie candidates feel no pressure to respond to the findings of the committee because their districts or states already lean Republican, and most voters in them have dismissed or arent paying attention to the committee hearings.

Recall that the 2020 election was mainly about Trump you were either for him or against him. Voters in districts and states that voted largely for him wont easily change their minds.

The cognitive dissonance required to shift from believing Trumps big lie to accepting the reality of what occurred is simply too formidable. In addition, few of their sources of news Fox News, rightwing radio, and rightwing social media have questioned the big lie.

An even more troubling reality is that because these districts or states lean Republican, these big lie candidates are likely to win the offices they are seeking. In an open primary in a safely Republican Georgia district, for example, all nine candidates questioned the 2020 result.

Many of these Republican candidates will hold positions with the power to interfere in the outcomes of future elections to block the certification of election results, change the rules around the awarding of their states electoral votes or to acquiesce to litigation attempting to set aside the popular vote.

Meanwhile, the Republican partys biggest backers such as billionaire Peter Thiel, who has donated tens of millions of dollars to the campaigns of big lie candidates JD Vance and Blake Masters show no sign of reducing their backing in light of the committees findings.

Big corporations continue to write fat checks to big lie candidates. In April alone (the last month for which data is available) Fortune 500 companies and trade organizations gave more than $1.4m to members of Congress who voted not to certify the election results, according to an analysis by the transparency group Accountable.US. AT&T led the pack, giving $95,000 to election objectors.

Money from corporations like Boeing, Koch Industries, Home Depot, FedEx, UPS and General Dynamics continues to flow to politicians who reject the 2020 election results based on the big lie, according to a tally kept by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, known as Crew.

In his closing statement before the January 6 committee, former US appellate court judge J Michael Luttig one of the most conservative judges in the federal system, whom George W Bush passed over for the supreme court because Bush thought him too conservative called Trump and his allies and supporters a clear and present danger to American democracy.

By not divesting itself of the big lie and embracing the truth of what the January 6 committee is revealing, the Republican party has lost its last shred of moral authority to function as one of Americas two governing parties.

Read more:

When it comes to January 6, Republicans are entirely divorced from reality - The Guardian

Rusty Bowers, the speaker of the Arizona house of representatives, wanted Donald Trump to win the 2020 election. He worked hard to elect him and, when the time came, cast his ballot for the president.

What he wasnt willing to do was cheat for him.

In searing and at turns emotional testimony, Bowers, a rock-ribbed conservative from battleground Arizona, recounted for the House select committee investigating the January 6 assault how he resisted a relentless campaign by the then president of the United States and his allies to do just that.

You are asking me to do something against my oath and I will not break my oath, Bowers said he responded, when pressured repeatedly by Trump and his allies to overturn Joe Bidens victory in the state.

Bowers comments helped reveal how much of a threat to American democracy Trumps attempt to block Joe Bidens win was and how it was defeated by the actions of officials like Bowers. But, amid a continuing attempt by Trump and his Republican allies to peddle lies and control election races in 2024 battleground states, it also revealed the threat to the US is not over.

The presidents lie was and is a dangerous cancer on the body politic, said the California congressman Adam Schiff, who led the hearing. If you can convince Americans that they cannot trust their own elections, that anytime they lose, it is somehow illegitimate, then what is left but violence to determine who should govern.

Trump lost the state of Arizona by less than 11,000 votes votes that were legally cast and fairly counted, Bowers said. But Trump refused to accept his loss and in his denial concocted a plot to try to stop the state from certifying the election results based on groundless conspiracies that Bowers likened to a tragic parody.

In perhaps his most damning disclosure, Bowers recalled a conversation in which Trumps personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani told him: Weve got lots of theories. We just dont have the evidence.

Bowers said the comment was so absurd that he and his staff wondered if it was a gaffe and laughed about it. But he found little reason for levity during Tuesdays hearing.

Bowers was joined in the cavernous Cannon Caucus Room by the Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, a Republican, and his deputy, Gabe Sterling, also a Republican, who testified about the pressure Trump and his legal team put on elections officials in their state.

In a phone call after the November election, Trump asked Raffensperger to find 11,780 votes just enough to flip Bidens election victory in the state.

Their refusal to obey Trumps demands was met with a barrage of online harassment and intimidation. Raffensperger said all of his personal information was made public. His wife began receiving sexually explicit threats and someone broke into the home of his daughter-in-law, a widow with two children. Bowers at the time was caring for his dying daughter who he said was troubled by the menacing crowd that gathered outside his home, pelting taunts and threats. During the hearing, Bowers read a passage from his journal.

It is painful to have friends who have been such a help to me turn on me with such rancor, he wrote in December. I do not want to be a winner by cheating. I will not play with laws I swore allegiance to.

Sterling became a standout figure when he called on Trump to stop riling up his supporters during a televised press conference held in the tumultuous post-election period while Georgia carried out a series of recounts. Death threats, physical threats, intimidation its too much, its not right, Sterling said in his remarks, parts of which the committee showed during the hearing. He told his committee he lost it that day after being told that a young election contractor with Dominion Systems was receiving death threats from purveyors of the QAnon conspiracy theory.

I tend to turn red from here up when that happens. And that happened at that time, he said.

Lives and livelihoods were disrupted and destroyed as a result of Trumps lies, the committee heard. Wandrea Shaye Moss, a former Georgia election worker, testified on Tuesday that she no longer felt safe, secure or confident since becoming the subject of one of Trumps most pernicious fraud claims one involving suitcases that both federal and state officials said was baseless.

Tuesdays witnesses were all that stood between what the chairman of the committee, Congressman Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, described as a close call and a catastrophe for American democracy, during its fourth public hearing. It also revealed new details in the brazen, if ill-conceived, scheme to put forward fake slates of electors in seven states as part of a last-gasp attempt to keep Trump in power.

Again and again the committee has sought to show that the violent insurrection on 6 January, horrible as it was, isnt the whole story. Nor is it the end of the story. Its part of a coordinated and continuing plot by the former president and his allies to remain in power by any means possible.

Focus on the evidence the committee will present. Dont be distracted by politics, the committees vice-chair, the Republican congresswoman Liz Cheney of Wyoming, urged viewers. This is serious. We cannot let America become a nation of conspiracy theories and thug violence.

Trumps big lie, the committee said, was a dangerous precursor to the deadly insurrection on 6 January. But it remains an urgent threat to democracy.

Trump continues to claim that he won the 2020 election and polls suggest millions of Republicans believe him. Indeed, before the hearing he claimed Bowers had said the Arizona election was rigged and he actually won the state. Under oath, Bowers said Trumps recollection of their conversation was categorically false.

Nevertheless, embracing the lie has become a requisite for his endorsement, which has delivered mixed results in Republican primaries. In Georgia, Raffensperger overcame a Trump-backed challenger to win re-election as the states attorney general.

But elsewhere, election deniers are winning primaries in an attempt to seize control of elections administration in key states across the country. In Pennsylvania, where the governor appoints the secretary of state, Republicans chose a nominee who helped organize the rally that preceded the attack on 6 January and has openly mused about fraud in future elections.

And across the country, election workers like Moss are being driven out by threats of violence and intimidation. In some instances, election watchdogs have warned, they are being replaced by partisans and conspiracy theorists.

Look no further than New Mexico, Thompson said on Tuesday, where a Republican commission refused to certify the results of the states primary election, citing unfounded claims about the security of the voting machines. The commission ultimately bowed to an order by the states supreme court and certified the election but the committee said it was a blinking red warning sign ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections.

The system held, but barely, Schiff said. And the question remains, will it hold again.

Link:

A few good Republicans stopped Trump but his threat to democracy isnt over - The Guardian US

On Tuesday the Senate cleared the first procedural step in passing a new gun safety bill, just hours after a bipartisan group of Democrats and Republicans released the 80-page bill text.

The bill, called the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, could become the first gun violence legislation to pass Congress in decades. It was backed in the Senate by all 48 Democrats, two allied independents and 14 Republicans, in a 64 to 34 vote.

These are the 34 Republican senators who voted against the bill:

These two Republican senators did not vote:

The bill was strongly opposed by the National Rifle Association, which said on Tuesday evening that "it falls short at every level" and "does little to truly address violent crime while opening the door to unnecessary burdens on the exercise of Second Amendment freedom by law-abiding gun owners."

Some of the Republican senators who voted against the bill declared to share this sentiment. Sen. Hawley tweeted that the bill "ignores the national crime wave & chips away instead at the fundamental rights of law abiding citizens."

Sen. Cotton said it would "restrict the freedoms of law-abiding Americans and put too much power in the hands of politicians and political officials." Sen. Blackburn also tweeted about opposing the bill because it would "infringe on law-abiding Americans' Second Amendment rights."

Sen. Rubio tweeted arguing that senators were "being asked to vote tonight to begin debate on a gun proposal whose legislative text was only made available less than an hour ago."

These 14 Republican senators voted in favor of the bipartisan gun safety bill:

The bipartisan bill is a tamer version of the measures Democrats have unsuccessfully pushed for for years, but the compromise is still a breakthrough in decades of political stalemate in Congress for passing gun safety legislation.

The new proposed measures aim at toughening background checks for the youngest firearms buyers aged 18 to 21, fixing the so-called "boyfriend loophole" by prohibiting domestic abusers from owning guns, and supporting states that have or will implement "red flag" laws, allowing for the swift, temporary removal of firearms from individuals considered dangerous.

"Some think it goes too far, others think it doesn't go far enough. And I get it. It's the nature of compromise," said Sen. Cornyn of Texas, who voted in favor of the bill on Tuesday.

"I believe that the same people who are telling us to do something are sending us a clear message, to do what we can to keep our children and communities safe. I'm confident this legislation moves us in a positive direction."

Senate Minority Leader McConnell called the bill "a commonsense package of popular steps that will help make these horrifying incidents less likely while fully upholding the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens."

With the support gathered on Tuesday, it's possible that the bill could be passed by the Senate by the end of the week, as Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said he expected.

See the article here:

Every Republican Senator Who Voted Against Gun Safety Bill - Newsweek

There might have been a time when fellow Republicans would have shown some restraint about publicly mocking a veteran like Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), who was injured in war. No longer. (Chip Somodevilla / Associated Press)

Many may know that Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) lost his right eye after he was hit by an IED blast in Afghanistan. What may not be as well known is that he also temporarily lost sight in his left eye. Or that once he regained sight on the left, a miracle in and of itself, he returned to military service.

And yet, Tucker Carlson mocks that injury on Fox News with little resistance from its conservative viewers or from elected officials.

What a time: Watching Republicans shift away from a platform defined by support the troops is tripping me up more than Drakes foray into house music. And this isnt just about Crenshaw or even President Trumps rivalry with the late Sen. John McCain, though that was certainly a flashpoint. This is something much bigger: a sign that the Republican Party isnt just in transition. Its lost.

Growing up in the Reagan era wasnt great, but at least most everyone understood what the rules were. Democrats painted Republicans to be the party for some combination of rich, old and white. Conservatives accused liberals of being godless, big spenders and weak on crime. Political absolutes are rarely productive, but they do make for great TV.

Anyway, for the most part since the Reagan era, liberal messaging hasnt changed unfortunately. On the flip side, since the rise of the tea party in 2010 conservatives have been in the midst of the biggest ideological shift since Reagan and the Christian Coalition coalesced their powers 40 years ago.

Before we dig into the substance, I must say the style isnt changing so radically. Even today, as the nation continues to grieve the victims of the mass shootings in Buffalo, N.Y., and Uvalde, Texas, many conservatives employ Reagans brand of disingenuous problem solving to avoid talking about gun laws. Although nearly 12% of the nation was living under the poverty line in 1976, Reagan was out testing his welfare queens rhetoric on the campaign trail. When his conservative heirs are asked about a school shooting in Texas, they say, What about Chicago? in an effort to talk about urban street crime instead. But we all know that hammering Democratic mayors on crime is less about being thoughtful and more about using racist tropes to change the subject.

Story continues

The left could borrow that same style to redirect any conversation toward a tempting target. Imagine what that would look like: No matter what the reporters at a news conference asked Biden, hed point out that most of our poorest states are run by Republicans. Mississippi, for example, has more than a fifth of its population living below the poverty line, and conservatives have controlled that state since 2012. Republicans have run South Carolina since 2003, and its in the top 10 as well. I could go on, but that would be petty (Tennessee) and unproductive (Alabama). Besides (Oklahoma, Arkansas and West Virginia), you get the point: Changing the subject and oversimplifying to score cheap points doesnt solve problems.

For Republicans, the reflex to pivot like this has finally turned in on itself. Theyre attacking their own. Even those hailed as military heroes.

Crenshaw faced taunts of eyepatch McCain last week from attendees at the Texas State Republican Convention, echoing the jab Carlson made last month. This is not politics as usual. Neither is the Republican response to the Jan. 6 hearings.

We are not used to seeing conservatives behave so indifferently toward the sound of police officers pleading for help. It was less than two years ago when the countrys largest police union endorsed Donald Trump for president. The Fraternal Order of Police said it was proud to endorse a candidate who calls for law and order across our nation. We now know that on Jan. 6, 2021, Trump called for no such thing, leaving the overwhelmed Capitol police officers to fight for their lives for hours.

Thats not the behavior of someone whos leading the law-and-order party. In fact, congressional Republicans are treating the officers who were wounded in the Capitol attack like pariahs.

Seems like the gender of a gingerbread cookie was met with more concern than the deadly attack on police.

And the outcry against Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) must truly mark the end of Republicans support the troops era. This Air Force veteran dared to back the Jan. 6 investigation and stand up for truth even as his wife and baby are threatened with execution and for that sort of integrity he is accused of treason.

Democrats and Republicans have both consistently supported first responders and the military, but until recently the GOP had made that position central to its identity. Now the party is identifying itself in other ways, and Im not quite sure where thats going. More concerning, I dont think they are either. There is a campaign video featuring a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, Missourian Eric Greitens, and a team of men carrying guns, dressed in tactical gear, breaking down a door and using smoke bombs as they tell you they are hunting faux Republicans.

This feels more substantial than just convenient positions taken by followers of one former president who hope hell have a political future. When the most popular host on Fox News makes fun of a Republican soldier who lost an eye fighting for the U.S., and viewers side with the host, that blue line might as well be fuchsia.

When Trump and McCain exchanged barbs, that seemed unique, perhaps just a little tremor inside the party. What the Capitol Police, Kinzinger and Crenshaw are encountering feels more like shifting and colliding of tectonic plates.

@LZGranderson

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Read the original post:

Granderson: Today's Republican Party is not about 'support the troops' or 'law and order' - Yahoo News

Published

2022-06-21 18:04

6:04

June 21, 2022

pm

Mayra Flores was sworn in on Tuesday, becoming Texas first Republican Latina to join Congress. Flores victory also sets a new milestone: A historic high of 147 women overall and a record 41 Republican women now hold congressional seats, according to data from the Center for American Women and Politics (CAWP) at Rutgers University.

Born in Mexico to migrant farmworkers, Flores is a first-time candidate who defeated her Democratic opponent this month in Texass 34th congressional district, which is historically Democratic. Flores addition to Congress underscores the growing visibility of Republican Latinx candidates and rising numbers of GOP women in the legislative branch.

That number has seen a sharp increase from 2018, when the number of Republican women in Congress dropped from 23 to 13. The gains women candidates have made since then reflect greater support and investments among Republican party leadership and outside conservative groups, experts told The 19th.

I think 2018 was a bit of a yet another wake-up call to the Republican Party about womens under-representation within the party, CAWP Director Debbie Walsh told The 19th. Republican women are following the playbook in many ways that weve seen on the Democratic side of women raising money for women candidates.

Flores swearing-in comes on the heels of newly elected Republican Rep. Connie Conway, who won the open seat special election to replace former Republican Rep. Devin Nunes in Californias 22nd congressional district. Conway, whose election set the previous record for the number of women in Congress at 146, was sworn in on June 14. The rapid gains Republican women have made in just a few short years could be a signal for this years midterms when historically the presidents party loses seats.

Two groups founded within the last six years Winning for Women and E-PAC, founded by New York Rep. Elise Stefanik have helped to boost conservative women candidates alongside VIEW PAC, a more established organization for Republican women. These groups, in addition to growing enthusiasm from the Republican establishment, are helping Republican women candidates get critical support early on in their races.

After 2018, candidates experienced challenges winning their primaries, but they saw more success in 2020.

In 2020, the party saw that of the seats that they won, especially the seats that they took away from Democrats, most of them were won by a woman, a person of color or both, said Michele Swers, a professor of American government at Georgetown University who focuses her research on womens representation in politics.

Those 2020 victories include Michelle Steel and Young Kim, Korean American women who both flipped House seats in California. That same year Maria Elvira Salazar, the daughter of Cuban immigrants, defeated Democratic incumbent Donna Shalala in Floridas 27th congressional district.

Democratic groups have more robust infrastructure for funding women candidates with organizations like the PAC Emilys List, though Democratic women of color have still struggled to gain access to party and financial support during their political campaigns. Democratic party leaders and voters have also historically demonstrated more interest in diversity among candidates, Swers said.

Flores victory in a Democratic stronghold captures another nuance: an increase in Latinx candidates running as Republicans. Other Republican Latinas are getting national attention in their races, including Monica De La Cruz-Hernandez, who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump will compete in November for Texas 15th congressional district, and Cassy Garcia, who is running in the fall for Texas 28th congressional district, facing off against nine-term Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar.

In this cycle, you are seeing more women stepping up, particularly more Latina women that were seeing run on the Republican side, and they have a good amount of party resources behind them, Swers said.

Flores June victory came during a special House election after the 34th congressional seat became vacant when incumbent Democratic Rep. Filemon Vela Jr. resigned in March. Flores significantly outraised her Democratic opponent and focused ads on her marriage to a border patrol agent and the need for border security and legal immigration.

Flores will serve an abbreviated term until January, but she is also the Republican nominee for the 34th district in November the race Vela Jr. would have competed in had he run for reelection. But that race wont be an exact repeat of the special election: In November the 34th congressional district will fall under newly redrawn district parameters that make it much more friendly to Democrats, and Flores will face a different opponent.

View post:

Mayra Flores victory set a record for women in Congress. It also reflects the growing visibility of Republican Latinas - The 19th*