Michael Kruse at Politico Magazine:

WEST PALM BEACH — Susie Wiles, the people who know her the best believe, is a force more sensed than seen. Her influence on political events, to many who know what they’re watching, is as obvious as it is invisible. The prints leave not so much as a smudge. It’s a shock when she shows up in pictures. Even then it is almost always in the background. She speaks on the record hardly ever, and she speaks about herself even less. Last month, though, on the afternoon of the day of the Republican primary in Florida, here Wiles was — sitting outside a Starbucks, at a table with an umbrella she picked for protection from the glare, wearing sensible flats and a cream-colored top and the sunglasses she likes with the lenses like mirrors, not far from the campaign headquarters of Donald J. Trump.

Wiles is not just one of Trump’s senior advisers. She’s his most important adviser. She’s his de facto campaign manager. She has been in essence his chief of staff for the last more than three years. She’s one of the reasons Trump is the GOP’s presumptive nominee and Ron DeSantis is not. She’s one of the reasons Trump’s current operation has been getting credit for being more professional than its fractious, seat-of-the-pants antecedents. And she’s a leading reason Trump has every chance to get elected again — even after his loss of 2020, the insurrection of 2021, his party’s defeats in the midterms of 2022, the criminal indictments of 2023 and the trial (or trials) of 2024. The former president is potentially a future president. And that’s because of him. But it’s also because of her. Trump, of course, is Trump — he can be irritable, he can be impulsive — and this campaign is facing unprecedented stressors and snags. It’s a long six-plus months till Election Day. For now, though, nobody around him is so influential, and nobody around him has been so influential for so long. “There is nobody, I think, that has the wealth of information that she does. Nobody in our orbit. Nobody,” top Trump pollster Tony Fabrizio told me. “She touches everything.” “Certainly,” said former Florida Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo, “she’s one of the most consequential people in American politics right now.” “And nobody,” said veteran Florida lobbyist Ronnie Book, “even knows who she is.”

She’s a mother. She’s a grandmother — she turns 67 next month. She’s worked in politics for more than 40 years — for presidents, for mayors, for governors, for members of Congress. She’s a soft-spoken Episcopalian. She’s a self-described moderate. Over the last few months, I’ve talked about Wiles with more than 100 people, people who have worked with her, around her, for her and against her, and there is a surprisingly bipartisan consensus: She’s good at what she does. She’s a savvy operator, a capable manager, a spotter and cultivator of up-and-coming talent, a maker and keeper of relationships with reporters, and a sly, subtle shaper of stories that help frame the political currents that can determine the difference between a win and a loss. She’s helmed signature statewide campaigns in 2010, 2016, 2018 and 2020 — Rick Scott, Trump, DeSantis, Trump again — all of which could have been defeats but were not. “She was already the most successful, well-respected Republican operative in Florida by a long mile, and she’s now cementing that brand,” said Ashley Walker, a Democratic strategist who twice ran Barack Obama’s Florida campaigns and has worked in lobbying with Wiles. “She is,” said Joe Gruters, a former chair of the Florida Republican Party, current state senator and longtime Trump ally, “the most valuable political adviser in the country.”

But coursing, too, through my conversations were not just questions I had for these scores of people but questions these people had for me — earnest inquiries from types who are perhaps not so accustomed to such doubt. Why is she working for him? And why does it seem to be working so well? Republicans and Democrats alike who know her and respect her and respect her work — they struggle to explain it. People who have considered themselves confidants and friends — they talk and they text, not so much with her as with each other, perplexed. In her usually calm disposition, in what most of them consider her general good sense, some of them find some small solace — at least he, they say, is listening to her. For others, though, it’s that placid mien and level head that’s in some sense precisely the source of the confusion. Liberals and even anti-Trump conservatives sketch analogies to the most odious authoritarians and see Wiles therefore by extension as the kind of associate who’s smart enough and sane enough to know better — and without whom any would-be dictator would be unable to get or wield such potentially destructive power. They see her as an accomplice.

[...] She worked in the 1990s and 2000s for a pair of two-term, generally centrist mayors of Jacksonville — first John Delaney, then John Peyton. She was by then certainly no novice. She’d been on Capitol Hill as an entry-level staffer for Jack Kemp, on the campaign and in the White House as a scheduler for Ronald Reagan, and in Northeast Florida as the district director for congressmember Tillie Fowler — after she’d gotten married to Reagan advance man Lanny Wiles and they’d moved south to Ponte Vedra Beach. She was Delaney’s director of communications and intergovernmental affairs, then his deputy chief of staff, then his chief of staff — the city’s very first female chief of staff. Delaney at the time called her “essential to what we are doing.” He described her as “a soulmate.” Peyton, for his part, hired her as his chief of special initiatives and communications — even after she worked for an opponent of his in the primary. It was a sign of respect, but something like unease as well — it was safer, he decided, to have her inside and not outside City Hall, working for him and not against him.

[...] It took nearly two years, though, before her next big post in politics. In 2008, she was the Duval County co-chair for John McCain’s presidential campaign. In 2009, she was a regular panelist on a local talk show on Jacksonville TV. In 2010, in March, she gave $500 to establishment GOP gubernatorial candidate Bill McCollum — five and a half weeks before she signed on to manage the longshot campaign of a businessperson and political outsider. Rick Scott stuck in his bid to a catch phrase — “Let’s get to work” — and steadfastly refused to meet with editorial boards at newspapers around the state. “Why?” he was asked. “I’ll have to ask Susie,” he answered.

In 2011, instead of joining Scott in Tallahassee, Wiles joined lobbyist Brian Ballard’s Florida-based firm to open an office in Jacksonville. “I really needed somebody in Jacksonville,” Ballard told me, “and she had great reach across the board.” She was a brief, ill-fated campaign manager for Jon Huntsman’s brief, ill-fated presidential campaign — a faltering, frustrating few months that spring, others involved remember, in which she clashed with the chief strategist and cried in the office. As an ex-head of an in-cycle campaign, she was for reporters on the presidential beat an at-the-ready quote — criticizing businessperson Herman Cain (“the possibility that he is a philanderer and an abuser”), praising in the National Journal more moderate New Jersey governor Chris Christie (“the best foil” for Barack Obama) and eventually endorsing former Massachusetts governor and private equity investor Mitt Romney (“the stability, intellect and integrity that Republicans are looking for in their standard bearer,” she said). In 2012, she advised one of the losing candidates in a seven-candidate congressional primary running from Jacksonville down toward Daytona Beach — the winner of which was a newcomer named DeSantis. In 2014, she gave money to then-South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. And in 2015 — in August, a month in which she gave money to Jeb Bush — she went to New York, to Trump Tower, to meet with Donald Trump.

She came home and told Delaney she was impressed. She told Ballard she “saw something” in him. She told her friend Rick Mullaney, an adviser to Delaney and Peyton, she thought he was going to be the next president. And she told her friend Paul McCormick, a longtime Jacksonville political consultant and P.R. man, a story. “She said she went in to sit for her interview,” McCormick told me. She said the chair that had been set up for her was some 20 feet from where Trump was, and Trump started talking, and Wiles found it awkward. “And long story short, wherever she was sitting, and exactly how many feet away, she moved,” said McCormick, “right up next to where he was.” [...]

Her father was Pat Summerall. A native of rural Lake City, Florida, he endured a brutal childhood, as he recounts in his memoir — a club foot a doctor was able to somewhat miraculously fix, abandoned by his parents, a stepfather who beat him with a rubber hose. He played professional football, for the Lions, Cardinals and most notably the Giants in New York, an end and a kicker who booted with what had been his deformed foot one of the most important field goals in National Football League history. He got rich and he got famous, though, as a broadcaster. With a relentless work ethic and a smooth, spare speaking style, Summerall was the mellifluous voice of the Masters of golf, the U.S. Open of tennis but first and foremost the NFL — “the voice,” in the words of his longtime partner John Madden, “of football.” He was also, because of his drinking, a mostly absent parent. His daughter was born in 1957. She was followed quickly by two brothers. He had an affair for 17 years before his wife divorced him and he married his mistress. “My children grew up without me,” he wrote. “I failed them as a father.” Her mother was the former Katharine Jacobs. Also from Lake City, she was, according to her daughter, “a fantastic gardener,” “a beautiful seamstress” and “the best cook there ever was.” She made all the meals. She set all the appointments. She bought all the Christmas gifts, one of her brothers once wrote on Facebook. She so often had to do so much on her own. And every evening around 5, in the big, tidy house in Saddle River, New Jersey, she went upstairs and took a warm bath. She coped, her observant daughter thought, with courage and with grace.

POLITICO Magazine has a detailed report on GOP political operative Susie Wiles, who is the daughter of the late sports announcer Pat Summerall.

Kyle Mantyla at RWW (04.26.2024):

Rick Wiles is a deeply antisemitic right-wing conspiracy theorist and End Times broadcaster who has dedicated countless episodes of his “TruNews” programs to railing against Israel and Jews. Now, Wiles is running for Congress. Wiles joined fellow antisemitic right-wing conspiracy theorist Stew Peters on “The Stew Peters Show” last night to say that he decided to run for office because he was outraged by seeing Republican Rep. Brian Mast of Florida, in whose district Wiles lives, appear on Capitol Hill wearing the uniform from his service in the Israeli Defense Forces.

Far-right antisemite Rick Wiles is running for Congress in #FL18 in the GOP Primary against incumbent Rep. Brian Mast.

Lee Moran at HuffPost:

Former President Donald Trump’s “God Bless the USA Bible” has been condemned as “disgusting,” “blasphemous,” and a “cheap ploy” by evangelical Christian pastor Loran Livingston. Livingston ripped Trump’s $59.99 Bible during a sermon at the Central Church of North Carolina in Charlotte on April 14. Footage of his comments recently went viral on social media. Livingston also made anti-LGBTQ+ comments, described abortion as “murder” and the “premeditated termination of innocent human life” and slammed people who “get politics mixed up with church” in the lead-up to his attack on the Trump-endorsed holy book. Then he said, “When you don’t read and pray. You say, ‘Wow, there’s a Bible out now that includes the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, isn’t that wonderful?’ No, no. It’s disgusting. It’s blasphemous. It’s a ploy.” “Are you kidding me? Some of you are so encouraged by that. Let me tell you something. The gospel is not an American gospel. It is the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ,” Livingston added. He didn’t name the Trump Bible explicitly, but his references were apparent.

Evangelical Pastor Loran Livingston nails it: Donald Trump's "God Bless The USA" Bible is "disgusting" and "blasphemous."

Jake Johnson at Common Dreams:

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is reportedly growing increasingly concerned that the International Criminal Court is preparing to issue arrest warrants for him and other top government officials for committing war crimes in the Gaza Strip. The Times of Israel reported Sunday that the Israeli government, in partnership with the U.S., is "making a concerted effort to head off" possible arrest warrants from the ICC, which first launched its war crimes investigation in the occupied Palestinian territories in 2021. Israel does not recognize the ICC's jurisdiction and has refused to cooperate with the probe. The ICC says it has jurisdiction over Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. Citing an unnamed Israeli government source, The Times of Israel reported that "a major focus of the ICC allegations will be that Israel 'deliberately starved Palestinians in Gaza.'" Other officials who could face arrest warrants are Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi.

The Times of Israel's reporting came shortly after Israeli journalist Ben Caspit wrote that Netanyahu is "under unusual stress" over the possibility of arrest warrants and is leading a "nonstop push over the telephone" to forestall ICC action. Like Israel, the U.S. is not a party to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC in 2002. The legal body is tasked with investigating individuals, not governments. The U.S., Israel's leading arms supplier, has opposed the ICC's Palestine investigation from the start, with Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying in a 2021 statement that the court "has no jurisdiction over this matter" because "Israel is not a party to the ICC."

But the Biden administration vocally supported the ICC's decision to issue an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over war crimes committed in Ukraine, even though neither Russia nor Ukraine are parties to the Rome Statute. The Israeli government has been accused of committing numerous war crimes in Gaza since the October 7 Hamas-led attack, including genocide, ethnic cleansing, and using starvation as a weapon of war. Late last year, the human rights group Democracy for the Arab World Now submitted to the ICC the names of dozens of Israeli military commanders who are believed to have been directly involved in violations of international law. Reports of potentially imminent ICC action have sparked alarm among conservatives in the United States.

Typical US doing its best to aid and abet Israel Apartheid with this move to protect war criminals such as Bibi.

Within the patriarchal, Christian, white supremacist structure that has perennially held power in the United States since colonial times, the issues that hold the highest sway among dominant group members in the 2024 election – even more than “it’s the economy stupid” – center on the so-called “cultural war” issues of God, Gays, Gates, and Guns (all connected to fears of invasion). [...] Male dominance is maintained by its relative invisibility (though for many of us, it stands as blatantly obvious), and with this relative invisibility, privilege and power escape analysis, scrutiny, interrogation, and confrontation by many. Cisgender, heterosexual, Christian, white male dominance is perceived as unremarkable or “normal,” and when anyone poses a challenge or attempts to reveal its true impact and significance, those in the dominant group brand them as “subversive” or even “accuse” them of “reverse discrimination.” White cisgender heterosexual Christians are claiming they are the objects of oppression, an argument used by members of the dominant class to reverse civil rights gains from past decades, including Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion programs in educational and business institutions.

Dr. Warren J. Blumenfield for LGBTQ Nation on Donald Trump using the 4Gs strategy to fuel right-wing culture war panic (04.28.2024).

Donald Trump is fueling a right-wing culture war using the 4Gs to get him back into the White House by stoking panic about God, Gays, Gates, and Guns.

God: Christians as “Innocent” and “Pure”

The increasing numbers of school districts clamping down on students’ access to books and other resources on sexuality, gender identity, race, and the “hard” history of the United States conforms directly with major foundational principles of patriarchal Christian white supremacy. [...]

Gays (Standing for all LGBTQ+ Folks)

What is patriarchy?

According to social scientist, Allan Johnson, “a society is patriarchal to the degree that it is male-dominated, male-identified, and male-centered. It also involves as one of its key aspects the oppression of women. Patriarchy is male-dominated in that positions of authority – political, economic, legal, religious, educational, military, domestic – are generally reserved for men.” Cisgender, white, heterosexual, Christian males grow up in the United States with the understanding – consciously or not – that they hold the power and that they are entitled to maintain and restrict this power from others. Atop this hierarchy we find the so-called “Alpha” male: the assumed “leader of the pack,” the dominant male, the independent self-sustaining male. Below the Alpha sits the “Beta” male, seen as weaker in courage and independence, unremarkable, and careful to avoid risk and confrontation. Beta males lack the physical presence, charisma, and confidence of the Alpha male. They are seen as the followers. “Omega” males are often loners who do not fit into the Alpha/Beta typology. They may be more introverted, shy, or socially uncomfortable. [...]

Gates: Closed to Immigrants

From the time he first descended the golden escalator in Trump Tower to announce his presidential run in 2015, Donald Trump continually demeaned, stereotyped, and scapegoated immigrants, especially Muslims and Latinx people. He initially stated: “The US has become a dumping ground for everyone else’s problems. [Mexico is] sending people that have lots of problems, and they are bringing those problems to us. They are bringing drugs, and bringing crime, and they’re rapists.” Not soon after his election, Trump ordered children of undocumented immigrants to be taken from their parents and placed into dehumanizing and horrifying cages. [...]

Guns

I understand why many people oppose and resist common sense firearms regulations. Regulations on firearms challenge the hegemonic promises of a patriarchal system based on notions of Alpha male hypermasculinity with the qualities taken to the extreme of control, domination over others and the environment, competitiveness, autonomy, rugged individualism, strength, toughness, forcefulness, and decisiveness, and, of course, never having to ask for help or assistance.

Lee Moran at HuffPost:

Bill Barr, who served as Donald Trump’s attorney general, admitted on CNN that Trump regularly ranted about executing those who crossed him when he was president. But in the next breath, Barr downplayed the former president’s threats. Instead, Barr told “The Source” anchor Kaitlan Collins that it was his “feeling” that Trump wouldn’t actually act on his chilling rhetoric. Collins brought up Trump’s reported rants and noted how former Trump White House communications director Alyssa Farah Griffin has claimed Trump suggested executing an unknown White House staffer who’d “leaked a story about him going to the bunker during the George Floyd protests.” “I remember him being very mad about that,” Barr told Collins. “I actually don’t remember him saying ‘executing,’ but I wouldn‘t dispute it.” Barr recalled how Trump “would lose his temper and say things like that” but said he doubted “he would’ve actually carried it out.” People “sometimes took him [Trump] too literally,” claimed Barr. Trump “would say things similar to that on occasions to blow off steam but I wouldn’t take them literally every time he did it,” he added.

[...] Barr became a critic of Trump following the latter’s 2020 election loss. He has repeatedly called out his former boss’s baseless claims of voter fraud. However, Barr last week said he’ll vote for the GOP ticket in November even if Trump is the nominee. The about-turn prompted a withering response from Trump.

Just spineless from William Barr, as he said that he'll vote for Donald Trump even though he admitted that Trump ranted about executing those who crossed him during his "Presidency."

From the 04.26.2024 edition of CNN's The Source:

Aldous J. Pennyfarthing at Daily Kos:

Just two weeks after Donald Trump urged radical leftists to vote for Robert F. Kennedy Jr. this November—because “he’s got some nice things about him” and “I happen to like him”—he’s suddenly taking a different tack.

In the wake of new polling suggesting RFK Jr. would siphon more votes away from Trump than President Joe Biden, Trump is stablin’ and geniusin’ up a storm, taking to his perpetual prevarication platform Truth Social to knock the wind out of the independent candidate’s campaign. His latest tirade comes just days after Trump claimed RFK the Lesser could hurt both major party candidates but “he might hurt Biden a little bit more.” On Friday night, as Trump dithered between wishing his wife a happy birthday or lauding South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem for her new and courageous puppy-murdering stance, he suddenly swung in an entirely different direction: claiming the guy he once praised as “very smart” and a “very good man” is actually a total disaster. And not because RFK Jr. would be forced to attend state dinners in a giant acrylic hamster ball to avoid infecting other world leaders with smallpox. No, it’s because Trump—and Republicans as a whole—are suddenly very nervous that Kennedy will loosen Trump’s once-reliable hold on the demon sperm vote. 

As Daily Kos noted Tuesday, new polling from NBC News shows Kennedy support at 13%—but notably, he “picks up 15% of Trump's support in the head-to-head while attracting only 7% of Biden's original voters.” But that’s not all! In the Marist poll, Kennedy gains a point; and “17% of Trump voters threw their support behind Kennedy in this poll, compared to 11% of Biden voters.” [...] Trump’s latest rants represent a stark departure from what he was saying just last year, after it was revealed that former Trump adviser Steve Bannon had spent “months” recruiting RFK Jr. to run against Biden and serve as a “useful chaos agent.” In June of last year, when RFK Jr. was still running as a Democrat, Trump said he was a “very smart guy,” a “good guy,” and a “common sense guy.” He even lauded the Kennedy scion’s allegedly robust poll numbers, saying, “He’s a very good man and his heart is in the right place, and he’s doing really well! I saw a poll, he’s at 22. That’s pretty good.”

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has increasingly targeted his campaign to MAGA-curious messaging to appeal to disgruntled Trump voters, and that has Donald Trump shaking in his boots because indications that RFK Jr. will poach more from Trump than Joe Biden.

See Also:

Salon: RFK is now openly gunning for Trump voters — and Republicans are starting to worry

Jazmin Tolliver at HuffPost:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he’ll still support Donald Trump even if he’s convicted of felonies between now and the 2024 presidential election in November. Trump, who is juggling his presidential campaign, is currently on trial in Manhattan over accusations he covered up a hush-money payment to adult film star, Stormy Daniels, before the 2016 election. The hush money criminal trial against Trump is one of four criminal cases he’s facing.

While speaking with CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday, Graham told host Dana Bash that Trump will “absolutely” still have an ally in him if he gets slammed, adding “most people have written this off.” “They’re going to focus on their problems, not a bunch of cases brought by liberals against Trump,” Graham said.

Cowardly Trump shill Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) went on CNN's State Of The Union yesterday, and said that he'll still support Donald Trump even if he is convicted.

From the 04.28.2024 edition of CNN's State Of The Union:

Judd Legum at Popular Information:

In 2024, reliable access to high-speed internet is no longer a luxury; it is a basic necessity. From job applications to managing personal finances and completing school work, internet access is an essential part of daily life. Without an internet connection, individuals are effectively cut off from basic societal activities. 

But the reality is that many people — particularly those living around the poverty line — can not afford internet access. Without internet access, the difficult task of working your way from the American economy's bottom rung becomes virtually impossible.   On November 21, 2021, President Biden signed the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The new law included the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), which provided up to $30 per month to individuals or families with income up to 200% of the federal poverty line to help pay for high-speed internet. (For a family of four, the poverty line is currently $31,200.) On Tribal lands, where internet access is generally more expensive, the ACP offers subsidies up to $75 per month.  The concept started during the Trump administration. The last budget enacted by Trump included $3.2 billion to help families afford internet access. The FCC made the money available as a subsidy to low-income individuals and families through a program known as the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program. The legislation signed by Biden extended and formalized the program.  It has been a smashing success.

Today, the ACP is "helping 23 million households – 1 in 6 households across America." The program has particularly benefited "rural communities, veterans, and older Americans where the lack of affordable, reliable high-speed internet contributes to significant economic, health and other disparities." According to an FCC survey, two-thirds of beneficiaries "reported they had inconsistent internet service or no internet service at all prior to ACP." These households report using their high-speed internet to "schedule or attend healthcare appointments (72%), apply for jobs or complete work (48%), do schoolwork (75% for ACP subscribers 18-24 years old)." Tomorrow, the program will abruptly end.  In October 2023, the White House sent a supplemental budget request to Congress, which included $6 billion to extend the program through the end of 2024. There is also a bipartisan bill, the Affordable Connectivity Program Extension Act, which would extend the program with $7 billion in funding. The benefits of the program have shown to be far greater than the costs. An academic study published in February 2024 found that "for every dollar spent on the ACP, the nation’s GDP increases by $3.89." The program will lapse tomorrow because Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) refuses to bring either the bill (or the supplemental funding request) to a vote. The Affordable Connectivity Program Extension Act has 225 co-sponsors which means that, if Johnson held a vote, it would pass. 

[...]

The Republican attack on affordable internet

Why will Johnson not even allow a vote to extend the ACP? He is not commenting. But there are hints in the federal budget produced by the Republican Study Committee (RSC). The RSC is the "conservative caucus" of the House GOP, and counts 179 of the 217 Republicans in the House as members. Johnson served as the chair of the RSC in 2019 and 2020. He is currently a member of the group's executive committee.  The RSC's latest budget says it "stands against" the ACP and labels it a "government handout[] that disincentivize[s] prosperity." The RSC claims the program is unnecessary because "80 percent" of beneficiaries had internet access before the program went into effect. For that statistic, the RSC cites a report from a right-wing think tank, the Economic Policy Innovation Center (EPIC), which opposes the ACP. EPIC, in turn, cites an FCC survey to support its contention that 80% of ACP beneficiaries already had internet access. The survey actually found that "over two-thirds of survey respondents (68%) reported they had inconsistent internet service or no internet service at all prior to ACP."

[...] The RSC also falsely claims that funding for the precursor to the ACP, the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program (EBB), "was signed into law at the end of President Biden’s first year in office." This is false. Former President Trump signed the funding into law in December 2020. The RSC's position is not popular. A December 2023 poll found that 79% of voters support "continuing the ACP, including 62% of Republicans, 78% of Independents, and 96% of Democrats."

In 2024, access to the internet is a necessity and not just a luxury, and the Republicans are set to end the Affordable Connectivity Program if no action is taken. The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) provided subsidies to low-income people and families to obtain internet access.

Dean Obeidallah at The Dean's Report:

Today’s GOP controlled Supreme Court is nothing more than an arm of the Republican Party focused on imposing their right-wing agenda upon us--from ending fundamental rights like abortion and marriage equality to undermining voting rights and more.  That is why we must work to win control of the Supreme Court the same way we work to win control of the House, Senate and White House. That means going forward every Democratic presidential candidate must commit to “winning the court” (aka “reform of the Supreme Court”) or we should not support that person. The latest example of this grotesquely partisan court came Thursday in the oral argument of Donald Trump’s appeal that he has absolute immunity to commit all the crimes he wants as President. The six GOP Justices—who were all active in Republican politics or administrations before being picked by GOP presidents to serve—showed zero concern that Trump was charged with crimes for attempting to wage a coup to remain in power despite losing.  Instead, it was clear that the Republican justices are focused on protecting Trump by delaying his Jan 6 trial beyond Election Day.

If these justices were truly concerned with protecting our Republic, they would have agreed to hear this case in December 2023 when Special Counsel Jack Smith asked the court to fast track Trump’s appeal of the trial judge’s decision denying him immunity in the Jan 6 case.  But that was rejected by the GOP controlled court to help Trump delay his trial. And in the end, the Republican justices may render a decision that makes it all but impossible to prosecute Trump for his crimes in the Jan 6 case. In reality, no one should be surprised that the Republican justices would protect the presidential nominee of their party in an election year. That is especially true given that three of those justices were appointed by Trump. [...]

And the GOP Supreme Court is helping Republicans impose these women killing abortion bans. We saw this on Wednesday when the court considered a challenge from Idaho Republicans to a federal law that mandates doctors to provide an abortion to a woman who is faced with an medical emergency.  It’s clear from the oral argument that GOP justices support the Idaho state law that makes it illegal for doctor to perform an abortion--even if a woman is suffering horribly or could suffer permanent injuries. Only if a woman is literally on the doorstep of death after suffering extensively and begging for help would these Republican justices allow an abortion. This is barbarism—and it’s also the mainstream GOP position. The GOP controlled court has also repeatedly chipped away at the wall between church and state to pave the way for a theocracy consistent with their right-wing religious views. For example, in 2023, the GOP justices rolled back anti-discrimination protections for the LGBTQ community in the name of “religious freedom.”

In addition, these same GOP justices weakened the Voting Rights Act and greatly restricted the ability of the EPA to address climate change. And in a case that will literally result in more Americans being killed by gun violence, these same six Justices struck down in 2022 a century old New York state law that limited who can carry a concealed weapon.  Justice Thomas—in between lavish gifts from his billionaire benefactor—wrote in that case that modern gun control laws must be “consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical understanding.” This decision has resulted in courts striking down a wide range of modern gun laws—including prohibitions on guns in mass transit, guns in post offices, guns with obliterated serial numbers and gun possession by certain felons. Whatever the GOP wants, this court will deliver. That means—as Justice Thomas has vowed—the court will, when given a chance, limit access to forms of birth control that right wing theocrats oppose, roll back marriage equality and more. The reason the GOP Supreme Court is so acutely dangerous to our freedoms and rights is that there are no checks on their power. These justices don’t answer to the voters. There is no way to directly defeat them in an election. (We can’t even force Thomas to recuse himself from Jan 6 cases despite his obvious conflict of interest!)

[...] That is why Democrats going forward must make reforming this court a priority. That could mean—by way of a federal law--expanding the court to say 13 justices to match the number of federal court of appeals. It could mean rotating judges from Supreme Court to lower federal courts after a set number of years. Reform can also mean “term limits” for justices—which polls show is supported by 67 percent of Americans. There is no greater threat to our freedoms, rights and democratic Republic than today’s corruptly partisan Supreme Court. That is why every Democratic presidential candidate and those seeking a House or Senate seat must make “reforming the court” a priority. It’s time to transform the US Supreme Court from an arm of the GOP back to a real a court!

Dean Obeidallah nails it: The Supreme Court must be expanded and reformed to counter the ill-gotten GOP edge on the court.

Trudy Ring at The Advocate:

Megan Rapinoe, Sue Bird, and other sports stars are urging the National Collegiate Athletic Association to allow transgender athletes to compete under their gender identity. The NCAA last revised its policy on trans athletes in 2022. For a decade previously, it allowed trans women who’ve completed a year of testosterone suppression treatment to compete alongside cisgender women. The change in 2022 let the governing body for each sport to set standards on testosterone levels. Now, after another college athletic association barred all trans women from participating in women’s sports, the star athletes and others are calling on the NCAA to stand up for inclusion. More than over 400 current and former NCAA, professional, Olympic, and Paralympic athletes sent an open letter expressing that sentiment to the NCAA Board of Governors, which is having a virtual meeting Thursday. It’s not clear if the trans policy is on the agenda, but “the end of April and beginning of May is typically a key rules-making period for the NCAA,” The Washington Post reports. The NCAA will also hold its annual inclusion forum this week.

“To deny transgender athletes the fundamental right to be who they are, to access the sport they love, and to receive the proven mental and physical health benefits of sport goes against the very principles of the NCAA’s Constitution,” says the letter. Its more well-known signers include WNBA coach Cheryl Reeve, soccer champion Megan Rapinoe, trans male swimmer Schuyler Bailar, and WNBA players Bird, Layshia Clarendon, and Brianna Turner.

Rapinoe, an ambassador for Athlete Ally, a group that advocates for LGBTQ+ equality in sports, also issued a statement through the organization: “The time is now for the NCAA and the nationwide athletic community to speak up and affirm that sports should be for everyone, including transgender athletes,” she said. “To my fellow cis women athletes: the time is now to say loud and clear that bans against trans athletes framed as ‘protecting women’s sports’ do not speak for us and do nothing to protect us. To the trans athletes fearing that they may be sidelined from the sport they love: I see you and hear you and I am WITH YOU. “ The letter continues, “Within the context of broad legislative attacks on the rights of trans people in the United States, opposition to trans athletes is driven by certain politicians who seek to control our bodies, not by science or data. Although trans exclusionary efforts claim to ‘protect women’s sports,’ in reality, they fail to address any of the real, documented threats to women in sports, namely unequal pay, failure to uphold Title IX, rampant sexual abuse and harassment of women and girl athletes, and a lack of equal resources for men’s and women’s teams (as we saw in March Madness tournaments just three years ago).”

[...] The lawsuit in question was filed in March by several current and former college athletes, alleging that the NCAA violated their rights by allowing swimmer Lia Thomas, a trans woman, to compete against cisgender women. One of the plaintiffs is Riley Gaines, who has been particularly outspoken in her opposition to trans inclusion. Gaines and Thomas tied for fifth place in the 2022 NCAA National Championships. The letter points out that four cis women beat Thomas.

The letter from athletes was accompanied by a separate letter from Athlete Ally, 53 other LGBTQ+ advocacy, gender justice, and sports organizations and 56 PFLAG chapters nationwide, plus a letter from more than 300 scholars and academics.

Megan Rapinoe, Sue Bird, and Cheryl Reeve are among the 400+ signatories to a letter via Athlete Ally urging the NCAA to stand up for trans inclusion in sports.

Paige Skinner at HuffPost:

Over the weekend, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said that calling in the National Guard to contain students on college campuses protesting the war in Gaza would be a “very, very bad idea” — and referenced the 1970 Kent State University massacre in Kent, Ohio, as an example. During an appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, host Kristen Welker asked Kaine if he supported the idea of the National Guard responding to the protests. While visiting Columbia University last week, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) suggested that the National Guard may need to intervene if the protests at the school continued. “Calling in the National Guard to college campuses for so many people would recall what happened when that was done during the Vietnam War, and it didn’t end well,” Kaine said. “The National Guard going to college campuses, Kent State and elsewhere, did not end well, and I think that would be a very, very bad idea. I think there are other ways — using campus security — but also, again, offering students more opportunities to have dialogue that is civil and constructive where people hear one another. That’s by far preferable.”

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) went on NBC's Meet The Press Sunday. Kaine rightly stated that calling in the National Guard to deal with campus protests against Israel's genocidal campaign on Gaza would cause more problems than it solves.

From the 04.28.2024 edition of NBC's Meet The Press:

Nicole Narea at Vox:

Protests against the war in Gaza have spread to college campuses across the country in the days since students at Columbia University were arrested last week, evoking images of historical student protests that were met with similar backlash.

Recent protests have not yet reached the scale of the major student protests of the late 1960s against the Vietnam War or the 1980s against South African apartheid. But on campus, they may be “the largest student movement so far” of the 21st century, said Robert Cohen, a professor of social studies and history at New York University who has studied student activism. In recent decades, there were mass protests against the Iraq War, as part of the Occupy Wall Street movement, and after the killing of George Floyd, but they were primarily happening off campus. Just like the protesters that came before them, the students who are now being arrested, and in some cases suspended, for setting up encampments on their campuses in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza have been demonized by politicians. The vast majority are peaceful protesters who have been overshadowed by a minority of bad actors, some potentially not even affiliated with the universities where these demonstrations are taking place.

Some of their demands, including divestiture from firms that support Israel’s war and occupation, mirror demands that past protesters made to divest from South Africa’s apartheid government. And their discontent has similarly intensified in the face of police crackdowns. But there are key differences as well. Besides their smaller size, the present-day protests have faced swifter suppression than their predecessors dealt with. In perhaps the most extreme example at the University of Texas-Austin, administrators quickly dispatched police with horses and riot gear absent any signs of violence at a pro-Palestinian protest; charges were later dropped against all 57 arrested. And that signals a deterioration of schools’ commitment to protecting free speech that emerged in the 1960s. “I think that the fact that this has happened so quickly is unprecedented. And the call for suppression of speech is much more public,” Cohen said.

[...]

What today’s protests do and don’t have in common with the antiwar protests of the 1960s

Columbia students famously occupied university buildings in 1968 in protest against segregation and the Vietnam War before the police forcibly removed them. They wanted Columbia to end the construction of a segregated gymnasium nearby in Morningside Park and to cut ties with the Institute for Defense Analyses, which was researching weapons development for the US government’s war effort.

This all happened against a backdrop of broader anti-war and anti-racism protests across the US, both on and off campuses, that helped energize the student movement. Student protests swept college campuses in the 1960s, involving thousands of students and hundreds of universities. Those protests remain the biggest in history; the current protest movement is “clearly growing, but it’s nowhere near that scale,” said Angus Johnston, an adjunct professor at the City University of New York studying student protests. The tactics employed by protesters in the 1960s were also vastly different. While many started and remained peaceful, at their most extreme, students rioted, barricaded themselves in buildings, fought with police, burned down ROTC buildings, and raided draft boards to steal or destroy files. They culminated in the Kent State massacre in 1970, when members of the Ohio National Guard shot at a crowd of unarmed student protesters, killing four and injuring nine.

The recent protests, on the other hand, have not gone anywhere near as far. “What we are seeing in this spring’s wave of protest is students who are not engaging in property damage. They are not for the most part occupying buildings. They are certainly not initiating physical altercations on any large-scale level,” Johnston said. “In the late ’60s, what we were seeing was protests that were much more aggressive in their tactics than the ones that we’re seeing today.”

Some students vocally opposed these tactics in the 1960s. Notably, Donald Trump’s former attorney general Bill Barr was among a group of Columbia students, known as the Majority Coalition, who banded together to defend the university buildings from protesters and were incensed that they could not attend class. Student opposition to today’s protests has highlighted antisemitic incidents at or around some protests, raising concerns about their safety. For instance, one student at Columbia wrote an op-ed in Haaretz with the headline, “Jewish Students are No Longer Safe at Columbia University.” He wrote that a masked student on campus showed him a Hamas insignia and said he was “with them,” and that another protester near campus shoved him against a wall. At the same time, Jewish students have also participated in the protests, which have been largely peaceful.

[...] One way today’s protests resemble those of the 1960s, however, is that they’ve escalated when university administrators have sent in the police to break them up. Both now and then, students who did not participate in the initial or more radical elements of the protests resented being characterized as confrontational and disruptive. [...]

Today’s protests have a lot in common with anti-apartheid protests of the 1980s

A better analogy for today’s protests might be the anti-apartheid protests of the 1980s. Students built up their power in university governance and assembled lobbying groups throughout the 1970s. They also became more of a political force when the voting age was lowered from 21 to 18 in 1972. That meant that, by the time protests against South African apartheid gained steam in the 1980s, they had accumulated more political influence and were better organized. Their demands of university administrations were practically identical to what protesters are asking for today. They wanted their universities to divest from firms that supported or profited from South African apartheid. And they were effective: 155 universities ultimately divested. And in 1986, the US government also bowed to pressure from protesters and enacted a divestment policy. Along with increasing protests within South Africa led by organizations including the African National Congress, the Pan Africanist Congress, and trade unions, that kind of international pressure helped force the white South African government to begin negotiations that ultimately ended apartheid, at least officially.

But protesters also didn’t face much pushback in the ’80s because there was a “certain embarrassment among elites in the United States that there was complicity with South Africa’s white government,” Farber said. “It was kind of pushing against an open door,” he said. “It wasn’t really a polarizing issue.” That differs from today, when the Gaza war has revealed a major generational divide and there doesn’t exist the same kind of consensus among Americans.

The divestment movement against the apartheid government — which started with universities and then was adopted by the US federal government — also arguably packed a bigger punch due to vulnerabilities in South Africa’s economy, including the fact that many of its goods could be substituted with products from elsewhere. Assuming that divesting from Israel would be possible (and some say it is not), the scholarship on such divestment movements’ effectiveness is mixed. It would be very difficult to effectively boycott or ban imports of all Israeli goods, many of which do not have substitutes or at least would be hard to replace. That includes computer technology, medical devices, drugs, and advanced machinery in heavy industry. That doesn’t necessarily mean that divestment from Israel would not have a significant impact on public perception of the war in Gaza and the Israeli occupation. But the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement — which predates the current protests — has so far had a negligible economic impact.

Vox analyzes the comparison and differences between the current college campus protests against Israel's genocide campaign targeting Gaza and past protests.

See Also:

The Guardian: US faculty speak up and stand alongside student Gaza protesters

Shruti Rajkumar at HuffPost:

Last week, students at Columbia University set up an encampment on the campus green to protest Israel’s war in Gaza, kicking off what would quickly become a national mobilization of student activists. Similar encampments and demonstrations at more than 50 other colleges erupted this week against the Israeli offensive, which has killed over 34,000 people in Gaza, caused famine and displaced most of the population. Online, scenes of peaceful solidarity were quickly intertwined with reports of mass arrests, punditry and misinformation. More than 100 demonstrators were arrested at Columbia’s demonstration, and more than 500 have been arrested nationwide as of Friday, according to Axios and The New York Times. [...]

Divestment From Companies Funding Israel

One of the top demands that students across the country have is for their universities to divest from companies linked to Israel or businesses which profit off of its war with Hamas — and, by proxy, the deaths of tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians, they argue. “I’m a member of this community, and I don’t want this particular community to be profiting from apartheid, from war, from genocide,” Ariela Rosenzweig, a senior at Brown University, told The New York Times. Several colleges have refused or ignored this demand.

[...] Colleges and universities receive large endowments that are spread across an array of investments and assets. According to USA Today, the biggest university endowments in the U.S. total nearly $50 billion and make up thousands of funds. Columbia University holds a spot among the top 15 largest endowments in the country, with more than $13 billion. Colleges are required to report gifts and contracts from foreign sources to the Department of Education. The department found that about 100 colleges and universities in the U.S. have reported $375 million in gifts or contracts from Israel over the past two decades, the Associated Press reported. Students are calling for transparency on these investments, as well as divestment from Israeli weapon manufacturers and other companies that are profiting from the war in Gaza. [...]

Transparency On Ties To Israel

Several students have called for greater transparency on their colleges’ financial ties to get a better sense of their overall investment in Israel. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, has been scrutinized for its holdings in weapons manufacturers by students at the University of California, Berkeley and Columbia University, who believe that their colleges should divest from it, The New York Times reported. [...]

Denouncement Of Genocide, Call For Cease-fire

Student protesters across the country are calling for Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territory and for their colleges to show support for a cease-fire. The United States, a staunch ally of Israel, has repeatedly voted against a widely supported cease-fire resolution put before the U.N. Israel and its allies have argued that it has the right to defend itself against Hamas through a military offensive. But a United Nations human rights report last month argued that Israel is committing a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Students have called for their colleges to openly denounce the assault in Gaza as a genocide. “We would like Northeastern [University] to denounce the genocide that is happening in Palestine. We think that would be a very powerful gesture from the university, and we think it would be very in line with the university’s values,” August Escandon, a senior at Northeastern University, told NBC Boston.

The Response

Most of the protests thus far have been peaceful, Al Jazeera and CNN reported. But colleges have cracked down hard on encampments and demonstrations, arguing the protests endanger students’ safety, particularly that of Jewish students. Heavily armored police have been sent in to arrest the protestors on some campuses. [...]

Many pro-Palestine student groups — which often also include Jewish students and organizations — have come forward to denounce antisemitism and affirm that the individuals making such inflammatory remarks don’t represent their groups or their values concerning the war in Gaza, ABC News reported. [...] Jewish students who have joined pro-Palestinian efforts have warned the dangers of conflating criticisms of Israel to antisemitism or labeling all pro-Palestinian protestors antisemitic. The progressive group Jewish Voice for Peace has argued that such assumptions are dangerous and actively harms both Palestinian and Jewish students. “We build a new community, and as we built it, we committed to fighting all forms of oppression together, knowing that antisemitism, Islamophobia, racism, in particular racism against Arabs and Palestinians, are all cut from the same cloth,” Barnard student protester Soph Askanase said at a press conference last week. [...] Some politicians and groups, such as Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, have expressed support for students protesting on their college campuses this week, and have called out aggressive responses from police.

The anti-Gaza Genocide student protesters that are launching protests at colleges across the country have a few basic demands:

Divestment from companies funding Israel Apartheid

Transparency on college financial ties to the Israel Apartheid State.

Calling for permanent ceasefire and a condemnation of the genocide in Gaza.

Daniel Villarreal at LGBTQ Nation:

Alabama’s legislature is advancing two censorious anti-LGBTQ bills: H.B. 130 would ban LGBTQ+ flags in classrooms and expand the state’s “Don’t say gay” law to include grades 6-8; H.B. 385 would jail librarians for giving “sexual or gender-oriented material” to minors without parental consent. Both bills were approved in the Alabama House of Representatives this week and now head to the state’s Republican-led upper legislative chamber.

Alabama’s current “Don’t Say Gay” law says that K-5 classrooms “shall not engage in classroom discussion or provide classroom instruction regarding sexual orientation or gender identity in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” H.B. 130 would also remove the section “in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards,” banning LGBTQ+ discussions completely. The H.B. 130 expansion, which passed the state House on Tuesday, would expand the law to include grades 6-8 and also prohibit “flags symbolizing sexual orientations or gender identities” in all grade school levels. [...]

On Thursday, the Alabama House also passed H.B. 385, a bill would expand the state’s definition of “sexual conduct” to include conduct that “knowingly exposes minors to persons who are dressed in sexually revealing, exaggerated, or provocative clothing or costumes, or are stripping, or engaged in lewd and lascivious dancing, presentations, or activities in K-12 public schools, public libraries, and other public places where minors are expected and are known to be present without parental consent.”

The law would place libraries in the same category as “adult-only” stores, movies, and entertainment” in order to criminalize librarians who provide “sexual or gender-oriented material” to minors without parental consent. The bill would force school and public librarians to remove any books that other people find “obscene” or “harmful” to minors — though the law doesn’t specify who would determine what’s “obscene” or “harmful.” After filing a written objection to the library director or principal, librarians would then have seven days to remove the book from shelves. Librarians who fail to do so could initially face a misdemeanor criminal charge and a fine of up to $10,000 and a county jail or hard labor sentence of up to one year. If a librarian is convicted of a second or subsequent violation, they could face a class C felony charge punishable by up to 10 years in prison, The Alabama Reflector reported.

Alabama is getting closer to passing two anti-LGBTQ+ extremist and censorious pieces of legislation: #HB130 bill that bans LGBTQ+ Pride Flags in classrooms and expands the Don't Say Gay or Trans law to cover grades 6-8.

HB385 bill would expand the definition of "sexual conduct" to include K-12 public schools, public libraries, and other public places in a setting where minors are expected to be entering.

Both of these bills are based on the right-wing myth that exposure to LGBTQ+ content "sexualizes" and "indoctrinates" children.

Audrey McCabe at MMFA:

Multiple Arizona Republicans and members of former President Donald Trump’s inner circle were indicted for election interference during the 2020 presidential election, and right-wing media figures have responded by arguing that their scheme was lawful.  Other right-wing figures have twisted the complicated rules of the Electoral College to make false comparisons to previous elections and pretend that the fake elector scheme was within the bounds of the system.

On April 24, a grand jury charged 11 Arizona Republicans and seven of Trump’s former top aides in connection with a scheme to submit fake electors in the 2020 election. The indictments allege that following his loss in the 2020 election, Trump and his team “devised a plan to recruit fake electors to replace legitimate presidential electors in key battleground states and reverse Trump's loss,” as USA Today explained it. Trump and his then-lawyer Rudy Giuliani reportedly pressured the Republican speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives to swap in electors for Trump based on unfounded claims of voter fraud. [USA Today, 4/25/24; PBS, 4/25/24]

Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced the indictment, which alleges that the fake electors and Trump aides were trying to prevent “the lawful transfer of the presidency of the United States, keeping President Donald J. Trump in office against the will of Arizona voters, and depriving Arizona voters of their right to vote and have their votes counted." [Arizona Republic, 4/24/24]

Right-wing media make faulty comparisons to support those indicted in the Arizona fake electors scheme.

David Smith at The Guardian:

Joe Biden has shown no mercy to Donald Trump with a series of barbed jokes about his election rival, telling a gathering of Washington’s political and media elites: “I’m a grown man running against a six-year-old.”

The White House Correspondents’ Association (WHCA) dinner on Saturday night provided the ideal platform for Biden to continue a recent run of taking the fight to Trump with more aggressive rhetoric, cutting humour and personal insults. But the jovial mood inside the room contrasted sharply with raucous demonstrations outside the Washington Hilton hotel. Hundreds of protesters shouted “Shame on you!” at White House officials, journalists and celebrities as they arrived at the dinner, condemning Biden’s handling of the war in Gaza and the media’s coverage of it. As speculation about a debate between the two men intensifies, Biden – wearing tuxedo and black tie – opened his roast with a direct but joking focus on Trump, calling him “sleepy Don”, in reference to a nickname Trump had given the president previously. “The 2024 election is in full swing and yes, age is an issue,” noted Biden, 81. “I’m a grown man running against a six-year-old.” The president also skewered Trump over a recent speech in which he described the civil war battle at Gettysburg as “interesting, “vicious”, “horrible” and “beautiful”. Biden said: “Speaking of history, did you hear what Donald just said about a major civil war battle? ‘Gettysburg – wow!’ Trump’s speech was so embarrassing, the statute of Robert E Lee surrendered again.”

Biden then made a reference to Trump’s falling out with his former vice-president, Mike Pence, who defied him over the 2020 election result. The president said: “Age is the only thing we have in common. My vice-president actually endorses me.” Vice-president Kamala Harris, sitting nearby on stage, laughed and applauded. The president moved on to Trump’s criminal trial in New York, where he is accused of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to adult film performer Stormy Daniels. Biden said: “Donald has had a few tough days lately. You might call it Stormy weather.”

And then he brought up Trump’s new scheme to sell “God Bless the USA Bibles” for $59.99. “Trump’s so desperate he started reading those Bibles he’s selling. Then he got to the first commandment: ‘You shall have no other gods before me.’ That’s when he put it down and said: “This book’s not for me’.” Biden also poked fun at his own age and delivered some one-liners at the expense of the media. “Some of you complained that I don’t take enough of your questions. No comment.”

President Joe Biden delivered a masterclass at last night's WHCD, including quips about "stormy weather" in reference to Stormy Daniels and naming Donald Trump "Sleepy Don" and referring to him as a "six-year-old."

See Also:

HuffPost: 'Rise Up': Biden Issues Urgent Call On Trump Threat At White House Correspondents' Dinner