Spring Sale: Get 1 Year, Save 58%

Omicron-targeted boosters could be here by fall. Here’s what we know

Last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration advised manufacturers to reformulate booster shots to specifically protect against the BA.4 and BA.5 Omicron variants.

“We have advised manufacturers seeking to update their COVID-19 vaccines that they should develop modified vaccines that add an Omicron BA.4/5 spike protein component to the current vaccine composition to create a two component (bivalent) booster vaccine, so that the modified vaccines can potentially be used starting in early to mid-fall 2022,” Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a statement. “Currently available vaccines have helped reduce the most serious outcomes (hospitalization and death) caused by COVID-19, but results from post-authorization observational studies have shown that effectiveness of primary vaccination wanes over time against certain variants, including Omicron.”

RELATED: FDA approves second booster for those over 50

The subvariants of Omicron — BA. 4 and BA. 5 — have become the dominant strains in the country, driving a majority of new coronavirus cases in less than six months since they were first discovered in South Africa.

Collectively, the subvariants of Omicron — BA. 4 and BA. 5 — have become the dominant strains in the country, driving a majority of new coronavirus cases in less than six months since they were first discovered in South Africa. As mentioned in the statement, the subvariants evade antibodies produced by coronavirus vaccinations and previous infections. Hence, the driver behind their unprecedented spread.

While vaccine manufacturers are gearing up to pivot due to the recommendation of the FDA to focus on targeting these two highly contagious strains of the coronavirus for a fall booster campaign, some public health experts are wondering if it will be too little, too late — or perhaps a waste of the manufacturers’ resources, considering how fast Omicron has mutated. Then, there’s the question of whether people will get boosted or not. Currently, about half of vaccinated Americans have received a single booster. Only a quarter of boosted people over the age of 50 who are eligible have received a second one. These boosters would likely be for people who are already fully vaccinated. 

“I think it’s an unsurprising decision that they made, but I don’t know that we have enough data on how to evaluate the decision, and I think it comes back to the point that there’s still a lack of clarity on the goals of a booster vaccination campaign— is it to prevent severe disease or prevent infection?” Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center, told Salon. “If the goal is preventing infection then there’s probably a better case for updating the boosters but again, we don’t have strong data yet.”


Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter The Vulgar Scientist.


Earlier this month, Moderna said its bivalent booster led to an eightfold increase in neutralizing antibody levels. The company announced its results from a Phase 2/3 clinical trial of 437 people in a news release. In the statement, Moderna’s CEO said that the data meant this vaccine is their “lead candidate for a Fall 2022 booster.” But as Adalja noted, more data is needed.

L.J Tan, chief strategy officer for the Immunization Action Coalition, told Salon he thinks the FDA’s advisory is a logical next step at this point in the pandemic.

“I think we have to continue to evolve our vaccine, right? So from the very highest level, it’s a good idea; we don’t want our vaccine technology to stagnate,” Tan said. “But it doesn’t mean that when they actually bring the product to the FDA for either authorization or licensure that it will get either, but I think it’s a necessary first step.”

Tan cautioned that people might “read too much” into this news though. For example, it might lead people to jump to conclusions that the current vaccines that target the original coronavirus strain are no longer effective.

“Definitely not [the case],” Tan said. “This simply means that they are wanting the manufacturers to bring to them for consideration — either for authorization or licensure — another [booster] vaccine for consideration.”

While studies have shown that BA.4 and BA.5 evade antibody responses from the vaccines or previous infections, they are holding up in protecting against severe disease and hospitalization.

Indeed, while studies have shown that BA.4 and BA.5 evade antibody responses from the vaccines or previous infections, they are holding up in protecting against severe disease and hospitalization.

While there are concerns about whether a booster targeting these subvariants will be needed in the fall — say, there’s a more transmissible that’s spreading around by then — Adalja told Salon that will always be the case when it comes to manufacturing booster shots.

“There’s always going to be a lead time to manufacturing,” Adalja said. “There is a chance that by the time these vaccines are available, that vaccines targeting BA.4 and BA. 5 won’t be very useful, so again, I think that there’s a much better case to be made for investing in better vaccines, rather than following this same kind of pattern.”

In this hypothetical situation, the country could end up with “suboptimal vaccines,” Adalja said, with companies who are facing sunk costs and time wasted. “Instead of spending the money and efforts on trying to come up with booster policies, why not put more into developing a universal coronavirus vaccine?” Adalja said, adding that this game of catch-up could be distracting manufacturers “from making better vaccines.”

However, Tan told Salon, he thinks it’s “unlikely” that in the fall there will be another variant that’s so dramatically different, the potential new boosters wouldn’t make some sort of an impact by fall.

“I don’t think that it’s going to drift so much that a vaccine that contains either of those existing Omicron epitopes is going to not work,” Tan said. “So for that reason, I don’t think that we’re going to get this horrible strain that’s going to evade everybody’s vaccine response, and that’s just because of the way the virus evolves.”

Read more about COVID-19:

Joe Rogan turned down Donald Trump as a podcast guest, calling him a “threat to democracy”

Comedian, sports pundit and controversial podcast host Joe Rogan said on Monday that he has turned down Donald Trump as a guest on his show. Speaking on Lex Friedman’s podcast, Rogan said: “I’ve had the opportunity to have him on my show more than once. I’ve said no every time.” Rogan repeatedly rejected Trump because “I don’t want to help him.”

RELATED: Spotify stands by Joe Rogan, despite latest N-word debacle and losing more artists and subscribers

The embattled Rogan would seem not to be in a place to pick and choose guests, but despite being in the spotlight repeatedly for unsavory behavior – using racial slurs on numerous occasions and spreading misinformation about COVID — Rogan has a deal with Spotify worth $200 million. Most recently, Rogan has mocked trans women athletes, part of his ongoing pattern of transphobia. After a public outcry about Rogan’s racism, Spotify removed 71 episodes of Rogan’s podcast “The Joe Rogan Experience,” including episodes where the host talked about race, yet has not dropped him from their roster. 

This despite Rogan spreading false information about COVID and giving air time to anti-vaccine talking heads. YouTube removed clips of Rogan’s show from its site, saying the clips violated “community guidelines.” Earlier in 2022, legendary musician Neil Young vowed to leave Spotify unless the platform got rid of Rogan, whom he said, in a statement, had turned Spotify into “the home of life- threatening COVID misinformation.” Joni Mitchell and other music giants, including Crosby, Stills, and Nash, joined Young, who did take his music off the site. (Crosby, Stills, and Nash did have their music recently reinstated by Spotify.) 


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


But Rogan remains. The host, who contracted COVID in 2019 and took ivermectin, which has been discredited for the use of COVID, called Trump “a polarizing figure” who is “an existential threat to democracy.” 

Though SiriusXM host Howard Stern has threatened a presidential run, as The New York Times reported: “Rogan, who endorsed Senator Bernie Sanders, the progressive from Vermont, for president in 2020, recently voiced his support on his podcast for Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, a Republican, if he were to run for president.”

More stories like this

 

Republicans react to another mass shooting with another round of deflection from guns

Following the mass shooting that took place at the Fourth of July Parade in Highland Park, Ill, which left seven people dead, far-right figures are reaching for their grab-bag of different things to blame the latest massacre on anything but guns. 

MAGA politician Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., suggested that the attack was part of Democrats’ plans to push forward gun reform. Along with blaming Democrats, Greene argued that recent mass shootings have been caused by mental health medications themselves, such as the commonly used anti-depressants like selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI).  

In a video posted on her Facebook Live series, Greene espoused a wholly unfounded theory that Democrats were involved in the planning of the Highland Park shooting.

“Two shootings on July 4th, one in a rich, white neighborhood and another at a fireworks display. It almost sounds like it’s designed to persuade Republicans to go along with more gun control,” Greene said. “We didn’t see that happen at all the Pride parades in the month of June, but as soon as we hit MAGA month, as soon as we hit the month that we’re all celebrating, loving our country, we have shootings.”

Greene’s conspiracy theory works in conjunction with the repeated right-wing trope that mental illness is the cause for mass shootings, not the guns themselves.

“Gun control won’t stop this epidemic of evil,” Greene tweeted on Tuesday. Fellow freshman Republican flamethrower Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., similarly dismissed the need for gun control.

The AR-15 that 21-year-old shooter Robert Crimo III used in the shooting was legally purchased despite previous police reports that he displayed signs of “clear and present danger.” Crimo has since been arrested and charged with seven counts of murder.

Instead of blaming the lack of gun regulations, Greene took to blaming Crimo’s mental health medication for the shooting. Reposting a clearly photoshopped image of Crimo in a jail cell, Greene tweeted “Is he in jail or rehab or a psychiatric center in this photo?…What drugs or psychiatric drugs or both does he use?” She has called on the Highland Park police to “Release his records.”

Fox News’ Tucker Carlson sang a similar tune hours later on his hit primetime show. 

Showing a graph of mass shootings since 1991, Carlson claimed that prescriptions for anti-depressants had increased 3,000 percent since, making no mention that the actual jump begins after the expiration of the federal ban on assault weapons.

The shooting came days after President Joe Biden signed into law the first major gun safety regulation passed by Congress in 30 years.The bill focuses on enacting incentives for states to pass “red flag” laws that allow courts to take guns away from individuals deemed a threat. Additionally, the bill pours more federal money into mental health resources.

But instead of commending President Biden on allocating money towards mental health, Greene accused the bill of targeting right-wing gun owners.

“Passing red flag laws was not a solution by Democrats to stop mass shootings,” Greene tweeted. “It will be a tool to disarm any gun owner that wants to stop abortion, the trans agenda on kids, mass illegal migration, & big government oppression suffocating our families, faith, & freedoms.”

“This is not a game”: Fulton County DA teases new round of subpoenas — and may target Trump himself

A Georgia prosecutor has said that she will not rule out calling former President Donald Trump before a special grand jury that is investigating his alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

Fulton County D.A. Fani Willis spoke to NBC’s Blayne Alexander about her plans to issue new subpoenas to Trump associates.

“Yes,” Willis replied, affirming that new subpoenas would be issued. “We’ll just have to see where the investigation leads us. But I think that people thought that we came into this as some kind of game. This is not a game at all. What I am doing is very serious, is very important work and we’re going to our due diligence in making sure that we look at all aspects of the case.”

According to Alexander, Willis would not rule out a subpoena for Trump.

“Anything’s possible,” Willis reportedly said.

A group of Trump associates, including Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., received subpoenas from the grand jury this week.

Watch the video below from MSNBC.

O’Reilly rages over “minority gangs” after white man shoots dozens at Highland Park July 4 parade

Former Fox News conservative pundit Bill O’Reilly threw a racist temper tantrum on Tuesday’s edition of his No Spin News and Analysis podcast in response to Illinois Democratic Governor JB Pritzker’s disaster declaration following the July 4th mass shooting in Lake County’s Highland Park.

“There are no words for the kind of evil that turns a community celebration into a tragedy,” said Pritzker. “As we mourn together, the State of Illinois will provide every available resource to Highland Park and surrounding communities in the days and weeks ahead as the community works to recover from this horrific tragedy.”

Illinois has retained a high firearm casualty rate in 2022 after experiencing its worst-ever tally in 2021. Crimes have particularly plagued Chicago, where weapons have been purloined, purchased on the underground market, or transported into the Windy City from neighboring states with few or zero safety rules.

A 2017 ProPublica report noted “that most of the guns police seize come from Indiana and other states where firearms laws are more lax, police and researchers have found. After they were purchased legally, most were sold or loaned or stolen. Typically, individuals or small groups are involved in the dealing, not organized trafficking rings,” ProPublica learned.

Last year, the nonpartisan journalism nonprofit InjusticeWatch stressed that despite those statistics, the narrative dictating whom to blame for the scores of shootings is to scapegoat non-white urban residents.

“Chicago remains one of America’s most economically and racially segregated cities,” InjusticeWatch wrote. “Amid the skyscrapers on The Magnificent Mile, wealthy tourists and residents shop at pricey retailers where a pair of sandals can easily cost $200. Just four miles west, in the shadow of that storied skyline, some of the city’s young people live in poverty and are surrounded by a pervasive sense of danger, where even a walk to school can feel perilous. These experiences can lead them to join cliques, which provide a sense of safety and community.”

InjusticeWatch explained that the guilty-by-association portrayal of those internal dynamics steadily distorts public opinion, metastasizes prejudice, and fosters systemic injustice.

“Saying the word ‘gang’ makes the victim less sympathetic, it makes the situation less sympathetic, it creates an ‘other,'” Andrew Papachristos, a professor and expert on gangs at Northwestern University, told InjusticeWatch. “The reality is, gang members are also neighbors, brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, [and] employees.”

The Chicago Police Department bears a significant chunk of responsibility for exploiting the programmed confirmation bias of outside observers.

“CPD was more than twice as likely to label a shooting gang-related if the victim was Latinx,” InjusticeWatch’s research uncovered. “Detectives were also more likely to attribute a shooting to gangs if it resulted in a homicide. These shootings were largely concentrated in predominantly low-income communities. Even in cases where detectives knew enough to make an arrest — less than 3,000 in the past decade — they labeled only a third as gang-related. The motive and cause for 75 percent of nonfatal shootings and a quarter of fatal ones is either left blank or marked as ‘undetermined.'”

That unofficially sanctioned manipulation of data is the nuclear fuel fusing in the engine of contagious outrage that powers commentators such as O’Reilly while enriching and replenishing his radioactive rhetoric.

“You, JB, are not gonna stop loons! And you won’t stop crime, drug crime, drug gangs, because they are minority gangs! That’s why you won’t stop ’em!” seethed O’Reilly, who was fired from NewsCorp in April 2017 when he was named in a lawsuit and accused of multiple instances of sexual harassment.

“You aid and abet this murderer in Chicago every blanken’ day!” O’Reilly then hollered. “You! Don’t be sanctimonious with me!”

Watch below via Ron Filipkowski:

“Will not be public”: Pat Cipollone agrees to interview with Jan. 6 committee — behind closed doors

Former White House counsel Pat Cipollone has worked out a deal with the House Select Committee investigating the January 6th Capitol riots to testify on Friday for a transcribed interview.

The appearance before the committee “will not be public,” according to Haberman’s source. What’s more it’s likely that Cipollone has only agreed to discuss a limited range of topics that will not infringe upon executive privilege concerns related to his work as the official White House counsel.

However, Haberman also reports that Cipollone’s testimony is “expected to be videotaped, in the same way the committee has with other interviews, which they’ve then used during public hearings.”

Cipollone has emerged as a key witness in the investigation after former Mark Meadows aide Cassidy Hutchinson testified that he believed former President Donald Trump would be charged with multiple crimes if he followed through on his plans to march with supporters down to the Capitol building on January 6th, 2021.

What’s more, former Trump Department of Justice officials testified that Cipollone pushed back against a plan hatched by former Trump DOJ official Jeffrey Clark to send letters to state officials encouraging them to rescind their certifications of the 2020 election due to unspecified concerns about purported voter fraud.

Cipollone sat down for an informal interview with the J6 Committee this past April, but the committee has put more pressure on him to deliver formal testimony after several witnesses described key events where he was a central figure.

“Sabotage”: GOP colludes with autocrat Viktor Orban’s government to kill global corporate tax deal

News that GOP members of Congress are coordinating with the far-right Hungarian government in an attempt to block a proposed global minimum tax on multinational companies is drawing outrage from watchdog groups and Democratic lawmakers, with one U.S. senator accusing Republicans of doing “anything it takes to help their dark money corporate backers dodge taxes.”

Just ahead of the July 4 holiday weekend, the Washington Post reported that “senior Hungarian officials say they are working with Republican lawmakers in the United States to defeat a global minimum tax backed by the Biden administration, as European and American leaders struggle to enact a groundbreaking international accord targeting multinational corporations.”

The deal’s framework, agreed to by nearly 140 countries in October after years of negotiations, includes a 15% global minimum tax rate designed to stop companies from stashing profits overseas to dodge their tax obligations, a key driver of what’s been dubbed the “race to the bottom” on corporate taxation. The Tax Foundation notes that the average statutory corporate tax rate worldwide was 40.11% in 1980; in 2020, it was 23.85%.

In recent weeks, Hungary—led by autocratic Prime Minister Viktor Orbán—has raised objections to the European Union’s implementation of the minimum tax on corporations, holding up progress on the accord and prompting applause from Republican lawmakers in the U.S., which has also yet to enact the agreement. Each member of the European bloc has veto power over tax deals.

In a statement last month praising the Hungarian government’s obstruction, retiring Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., declared that the U.S. “should be leading” the race to the bottom on corporate taxes, “not trying to prevent it.”

As the Post reported Friday, “GOP Reps. Adrian Smith (Neb.) and Mike Kelly (Pa.), top members of the House Ways and Means Committee, sent a letter to the ambassador of Hungary last week commending that country for rejecting the global tax deal” and extending “an offer for a direct dialogue with congressional Republicans as you consider Hungary’s position on the global tax agreement.”

“The letter was released by Hungarian media and later confirmed by spokespeople for the lawmakers, who did not post it to their congressional websites or social media pages,” the Post noted. “Spokespeople for both lawmakers said they were not in contact with Hungarian officials beyond the letter.”

Morris Pearl, the chair of the Patriotic Millionaires—a progressive advocacy group that supports higher taxes on the rich and large corporations—said Tuesday that in their efforts to undercut the global minimum tax deal, “Republican lawmakers are siding with billionaire donors and corrupt foreign autocrats like Viktor Orbán over the American people.”

“By choosing to sabotage the United States’ ability to tax corporations effectively and conspire with foreign governments, the lawmakers working with Hungary have revealed how little they actually care about their own country,” said Pearl. “These lawmakers have chosen to do whatever it takes to keep the rich from paying their fair share, even if protecting foreign corporate wealth means undermining the wellbeing of the United States.”

“It’s fitting that news of this anti-American behavior broke on Independence Day weekend,” Pearl continued. “These are no patriots. They’ve betrayed their oaths of office, their constituents, and their country.”

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., tweeted Sunday that “siding with a right-wing autocrat is shameful, but that won’t stop them.”

“Money talks louder than morals,” the senator added.

While popular with the U.S. public, the Biden administration’s push to implement a minimum tax on the foreign profits of U.S.-based corporations faces long odds in Congress amid Republican obstruction and likely pushback from Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., right-wing lawmakers who have objected to corporate tax hikes.

Given the present composition of Congress, the only plausible way for Democrats to advance the global minimum tax would be through budget reconciliation, an arcane process that’s exempt from the Senate’s 60-vote legislative filibuster. Such an avenue would be blocked entirely if Republicans retake the House or the Senate in November.

“I am not surprised the Republicans are doing whatever they can to defend large multinational corporations, even if it means working against the interests of the U.S. government to work with a foreign government,” Frank Clemente, executive director of Americans for Tax Fairness, told the Post. “Their patriotism evaporates when it comes to protecting tax loopholes for multinational corporations.”

“Clearly irked” judge fines Trump real estate firm $10K a day over probe into inflated assets

New York Justice Arthur F. Engoron has imposed a daily $10,000 fine on real estate giant Cushman and Wakefield for failing to turn over documents to state investigators examining if Donald Trump inflated the value of his real estate holdings.

“On Tuesday afternoon, a clearly irked Justice Arthur F. Engoron signed an order ripping into the real estate behemoth for missing a deadline to turn over documents—after having two months to meet it,” The Daily Beast reported. “He criticized the company, which routinely helped Trump value properties in ways that benefited him directly, for dragging its feet.”

In April, the same judge ruled that Cushman & Wakefield lied and broke its own internal policies to help the Trump Organization.

“The massive, national real estate firm was supposed to deliver documents related to its valuations of all kinds of properties—so that state investigators could compare how the company treated other projects compared to Trump developments,” The Beast reported. “The office of New York Attorney General Letitia James issued subpoenas between September 2021 and February 2022 that the firm still hadn’t complied with, so the judge ordered the company to play ball in April. But the firm fought that in appellate court—and lost.”

The company had failed to comply with a June 29 deadline set by the judge.

“Time is of the essence. State investigators are set to interview former President Donald Trump and two of his children—Don Jr. and Ivanka—in closed-door depositions the week of July 18. And investigators have said they need to review the evidence from Cushman and Wakefield before those interviews,” The Beast noted.

Read the full report.

Top Trump aide who quit over Jan. 6 agrees to publicly testify before committee: report

Another top Trump White House aide has agreed to publicly testify before the House Select Committee Investigating the Jan. 6 Attack on the U.S. Capitol, CNN reported Tuesday evening.

“Sarah Matthews, who served as deputy press secretary in the Trump White House until resigning shortly after the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, has been subpoenaed by the House select committee investigating the insurrection and has agreed to testify at an upcoming hearing, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation,” Katelyn Polantz and Ryan Nobles reported. “Matthews has been subpoenaed to testify at a public hearing as early as next week, sources tell CNN.”

Also on Tuesday, the select committee announced it would hold its next public hearing next Tuesday, which CNN says is “expected to focus on the role of extremist groups on January 6.”

Matthews resigned on the night of Jan. 6, saying she “was deeply disturbed by what I saw” and that “our nation needs a peaceful transfer of power.”

She had previously served as a spokesperson for Trump’s unsuccessful 2020 presidential campaign.

Matthews defended Cassidy Hutchinson after her damning testimony before the select committee.

“Anyone downplaying Cassidy Hutchinson’s role or her access in the West Wing either doesn’t understand how the Trump WH worked or is attempting to discredit her because they’re scared of how damning this testimony is,” Matthews said. “For those complaining of ‘hearsay,’ I imagine the Jan. 6 committee would welcome any of those involved to deny these allegations under oath.”

“Necessary and material witness”: Georgia grand jury hits Graham, Giuliani with subpoenas

A Georgia grand jury issued subpoenas this week to seven Trump associates involved in the former president’s effort to overturn his loss in the state, including former attorney Rudy Giuliani and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

The Fulton County special grand jury convened by District Attorney Fani Willis to investigate potential criminal interference in the 2020 election issued subpoenas to Giuliani, Graham, and former Trump legal advisers John Eastman, Cleta Mitchell, Kenneth Chesebro, Jenna Ellis and Jacki Pick Deason, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution first reported.

The subpoenas were filed on July 5 and signed by Fulton Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney. The subpoenas said that each person is a “necessary and material witness” to the criminal probe.

“It means the investigation is obviously becoming more intense because those are trusted advisers, those are inner circle people,” former DeKalb County District Attorney Robert James told the Associated Press.

The 23-member grand jury has heard testimony from numerous witnesses in recent weeks, including those that were in contact with Trump and his associates as he pressed Georgia officials to “find” enough votes to reverse his loss in the state. The subpoenas signal that the investigation is closing in on Trump’s inner circle, though the attorneys could argue that they cannot testify due to attorney-client privilege. Eastman has tried to invoke the attorney-client privilege in his legal fight to keep documents from the House Jan. 6 committee, though a judge ordered him to turn over most of the documents sought by the panel while acknowledging that others were protected.

Graham during Trump’s effort to pressure Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to steal the election separately called Raffensperger and his office twice after the election about “reexamining certain absentee ballots cast in Georgia in order to explore the possibility of a more favorable outcome for former President Donald Trump,” the subpoena says. Graham last year denied that he did anything wrong and claimed he merely inquired about the ballot signature verification process.

Mitchell also participated in Trump’s call to Raffensperger.

Giuliani after the election testified to Georgia lawmakers, showing edited video of votes being counted in Atlanta’s State Farm Arena. The former New York City mayor, who faces defamation lawsuits and disbarment over his role in Trump’s attempt to steal the election, argued that the edited surveillance tape was a “powerful smoking gun” of election workers pulling out “suitcases” to count after dismissing Republican poll watchers. Raffensperger’s office shot down the allegations but Giuliani and Trump continued to falsely cite the video as evidence even as election workers involved in the counting faced harassment and death threats.

“There is evidence that the Witness’s appearance and testimony at the hearing was part of a multi-state coordinated plan by the Trump Campaign to influence the results of the November 2020 election in Georgia and elsewhere,” the filing says.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Eastman was the mastermind behind Trump’s strategy to have then-Vice President Mike Pence block the certification of President Joe Biden’s win in Congress, a plot a federal judge described as a “coup in search of a legal theory” that “more likely than not” violated federal law. Eastman also testified at the same legislative hearing as Giuliani, falsely arguing there was “more than enough” evidence of fraud to block Biden’s win and have the state legislature appoint an alternate slate of electors.

“I don’t think it’s just your authority to do that,” Eastman said, “but, quite frankly, I think you have a duty to do that to protect the integrity of the election here in Georgia.”

Ellis and Deason both spoke at the hearing as well. Deason, who presented the sham State Farm Arena video, “possesses unique knowledge concerning communications between herself, the Trump campaign, and other known and unknown individuals involved in the multi-state, coordinated efforts to influence the results of the 2020 election in Georgia and elsewhere,” the subpoena said.

Chesebro, an attorney involved in the post-election plotting, worked behind the scenes with Republican state legislative leaders to coordinate the alternate slate of electors, according to his subpoena. Chesebro wrote at least two memos backing the plan and provided template documents for the state party to hold a bogus ceremony at the Capitol in December 2020, according to the subpoena.

The grand jury in recent weeks has heard testimony from Raffensperger and his top aides, as well as Attorney General Chris Carr. Gov. Brian Kemp, a longtime Trump ally who refused to go along with his plan to steal the election, is expected to give a video statement to the grand jury later this month, according to the Journal-Constitution.

Willis is investigating potential solicitation of election fraud, making false statements, conspiracy, racketeering and threats to election administrators. The grand jury is expected to issue a report on whether Trump or his allies should face charges, though Willis will ultimately have the final say.

“We’re going to look at anything connected with interference with the 2020 election,” Willis told CNN last month, adding that her probe has led to an influx of threats and harassment. “I can tell you that in recent days I’ve turned up on white supremacist pages often with my face and very derogatory names,” she said. “Those kind of things bring great concern to the security that has to protect us.”

Read more

about the Georgia criminal probe

Trump’s “get out of jail free” card: A second presidential run

If there’s one thing former president Donald Trump knows very well, it’s the fact that the Department of Justice has a hard and fast policy against indicting a sitting president. He heard it hundreds of times during the Mueller investigation from every TV lawyer in the country as well as his own, including the White House counsel. And even though the Mueller Report laid out several possible counts of obstruction of justice, clearly intended to be triggered once Trump was out of office, nothing ever happened. It’s pretty clear that Trump understands the presidency to be a “get-out-of-jail-free” card. Right now he probably could use one.

On Tuesday, the special grand jury convened by the Fulton County Georgia’s District Attorney’s office issued a number of subpoenas to Trump’s Kracken election team to testify about the Trump campaign’s post-election pressure to overturn the election in 2020. Lawyers Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, Jenna Ellis, Cleta Mitchel, Jacki Pick Deason and Kenneth Chesbro were called along with Senator Lindsey Graham.

Giuliani, you’ll recall, testified at a hearing after the election in which he claimed he had proof that Georgia election workers pulled suitcases full of ballots out from under a table to pad Biden’s vote count, a charge which was investigated and totally refuted by the Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office. That didn’t stop Giuliani and others, including Trump, from spreading the lie anyway, resulting in death threats to the election workers they targeted with their bogus story, Ruby Freeman and her daughter Shaye Moss, both of whom movingly testified before the January 6th Committee. Giuliani has never backed off his claims to this day.

RELATED: Shaye Moss’ ordeal and the Texas GOP platform: Trump’s Big Lie was always about white supremacy

It’s pretty clear that Trump understands the presidency to be a “get out of jail free” card.

John Eastman, the constitutional scholar most responsible for the plot to have Mike Pence single-handedly reject the electoral college votes on January 6th, also appeared at a hearing and told Georgia officials that they had the power to simply appoint new electors for Donald Trump, which is, of course, crazy. Ellis wrote some memos passing on the same rationales and she and Deason spoke at the same hearing. Chesbro is alleged to have worked with a local GOP chairman to get fake electors to meet secretly in the state capitol. Last, but not least, Sen. Graham called up Geogia’s Secretary of State twice to see if there wasn’t some way they could throw out absentee votes for Biden.

Trump himself wasn’t subpoenaed but since Raffensperger has reportedly already testified and they may have introduced the audio recording of Trump attempting to coerce him into “finding” one more vote than he needed to overturn the election, perhaps it’s unnecessary. There’s plenty of evidence of his attempts to strong-arm Georgia officials into cheating on his behalf without hearing a word from him.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


These subpoenas come on the heels of a flurry of activity in recent days by the Justice Department in which John Eastman and former DOJ official Jeffrey Clark were served search warrants and various GOP activists and officials around the country who were involved in the fake elector scheme were served with federal subpoenas.

The fake elector scheme is of particular interest to the feds for the simple reason that there is a paper trail showing that in Wisconsin, Nevada Georgia, Arizona, and Michigan they signed certificates which claimed they were their states’ “duly appointed electors.” (In two other states, someone had the presence of mind to add language which said those votes would only be counted if the courts determined that the original count was invalid.) According to various legal observers, these false statements could easily lead to charges of defrauding the United States.

They tried to fraudulently cast votes in the electoral college. It truly is the most egregious example of election fraud in U.S. history. The irony of that is so thick you can only cut through it with a chainsaw.  

It truly is the most egregious example of election fraud in U.S. history.

Meanwhile, we have the January 6th Committee making news every week with more evidence of Trump and his henchmen organizing the attempted coup from the White House. The last hearing, featuring testimony by Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to the White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, showed that Trump was aware of the potential for violence on January 6th and even knew there were armed people in the crowd when he riled them all up and told them to go to the Capitol. Trump was particularly perturbed by this testimony and had been engaged in hysterical character assassination every since, posting insult after insult on his Truth Social account day after day.

RELATED: Trump has a meltdown on Truth Social after Cassidy Hutchinson’s bombshell Jan. 6 testimony

All of this coming to a head, with reports that big donors are spending heavily on some of his potential rivals for the nomination who smell blood in the water, has Trump and his people putting out the word that he may be planning to announce his candidacy for 2024 before the midterms, perhaps any day now. It may be that he wants to crush these nascent candidacies and there are good reasons for him to want to get the money flowing away from such upstarts as Ron DeSantis, who is almost certainly preparing a bid. According to the New York Times, Republican officials are ambivalent about this early announcement because they don’t want to relitigate his false claims of election fraud and give Democrats a chance to use Trump as a foil during the midterm elections.

But Trump doesn’t care about that. His personal needs are far more urgent. The Guardian, reports that “Trump has reportedly told advisers that declaring a run for the White House now would allow him to strengthen his argument that other criminal investigations against him in New York and Georgia are politically motivated.”

It’s also possible that he believes that the DOJ, being burned by the scandal with James Comey and the Hillary Clinton email debacle of 2016, simply cannot indict a former president, presidential candidate and front runner for the nomination before an election, even if it’s years in advance. He would certainly make hay out of it if they tried. The sooner he announces the safer he believes he will be. Sadly, he may be right.

“White life” and the fascist movement: Hey, at least they’re being honest

Maya Angelou famously counseled, “When people show you who they are, believe them the first time.” Her wisdom remains undefeated.

If the American people — especially white people — along with the news media and political elites had heeded that wisdom, perhaps our country would not now be teetering on the edge of a fascist abyss.

The contemporary Republican Party has become the world’s largest white supremacist organization, and now also explicitly supports the use of political violence and terrorism to advance the goal of ending multiracial democracy. Donald Trump’s coup attempt, culminating in the Capitol attack of Jan. 6, 2021, was the literal embodiment of those values, beliefs and goals.

The foundational premise of the Trump coup attempt and the Big Lie about the 2020 election that fueled it was that the votes of Black and brown people essentially do not count, or at least should not have equal weight with votes of white people, especially white “conservatives” in the former slave-owning Confederacy and other parts of “red state” America.

RELATED: Christian fascism is right here, right now: After Roe, can we finally see it?

White supremacy is violence; white supremacist violence is personal, structural and institutional. It is through violence, and the threat of violence, that a society organized around maintaining white privilege across all areas of life is created, maintained, expanded, protected and enforced.

Those who fail to understand Jan. 6 as an act of white supremacist violence effectively deny the reality of what happened that day, along with its genesis, meaning and long-term implications. For today’s Republican Party and the “conservative” movement, the racist “dog whistles” or “coded appeals” required by the “Southern strategy” of the ’60s, ’70s and ’80s are now almost totally obsolete. Those things belong to an earlier moment when white supremacy had to be cloaked in plausible deniability because majority society increasingly viewed it as shameful.

As the 2022 midterms and then the 2024 presidential election draw closer, the Republican Party and the larger white right will both literally and figuratively drop their masks. They have showed us who they are; we should believe them.

During a speech at a Trump rally in Illinois two Saturdays ago, Rep. Mary Miller, a Republican who represents a district in rural southeastern Illinois, spoke in celebration of the Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. “President Trump, on behalf of all the MAGA patriots in America,” she said, “I want to thank you for the historic victory for white life in the Supreme Court yesterday.”

That statement did not appear to be a gaffe or an error. Miller was reading from a prepared text and did not pause, attempt to correct herself or look embarrassed in any way. Subsequently her campaign has claimed that she intended to say “the right to life.” Such a defense lacks any credibility. 

For one thing, Miller’s remark about “white life” fits into a larger pattern. Consider what she said at a rally on Capitol Hill in January 2021:

Each generation has the responsibility to teach and train the next generation. You know, if we win a few elections, we’re still going to be losing, unless we win the hearts and minds of our children. This is the battle. … Hitler was right on one thing: He said, “Whoever has the youth, has the future.” 

Miller belongs to the large majority of Republicans in Congress who voted to reject electoral votes from states Joe Biden had won in the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack. Last Tuesday, to no one’s surprise, she was renominated by Republican voters in her district in the Illinois primaries. 

Claims about the need to protect “white life” by banning abortion are a key element of the racist “great replacement” conspiracy theory. Within that worldview, “white life” is uniquely sacred and white women play a special role in saving or protecting the future of the white race, which is locked in an existential struggle against Black and brown “invaders” who are trying to conquer or destroy majority Christian nations or “Western civilization” as a whole.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


This set of toxic fictions has now entered the political mainstream: Public opinion polls show that more than half of Trump voters and Republicans believe in the central claims of the “great replacement” theory. Last weekend in Illinois, no one booed Mary Miller’s reference to “white life.” There was no moment of uncomfortable silence or awkwardness. The crowd cheered.

The need to protect “white life” is a key element of the “great replacement” theory, in which white women have a sacred duty to protect the race in its existential struggle.

Donald Trump certainly did not look uncomfortable. He looked on approvingly as Mary Miller spoke glowingly of the importance of “white life.” While Trump typically speaks in more coded terms, he has repeatedly shown himself to be a white supremacist who traffics in race-war fantasies, white victimology, and both explicit and implicit calls for violence to protect “real America” (meaning white people who support him) from those who are un-American and dangerous, a category that includes nearly all Black and brown Americans as well as liberals and progressives, feminists and LGBTQ people, among others. 

Consider the tone of recent fundraising emails from Trump’s PAC. Here is one: 

Now is OUR time.

It is time to STEP UP and STAND BY PRESIDENT TRUMP. If we don’t, the CORRUPT, RADICAL Left will destroy our beloved Country and forever change our American way of life and, ultimately, the American Dream.

We must DISCREDIT, EXPOSE and DEFEAT their TOXIC plans.

It is CRUCIAL that ALL Patriots from across the Country work together to help President Trump SAVE AMERICA.

It’s NOT possible without our TOP defenders, like YOU, Friend.

And another:

The Radical Democrats will do anything to line their pockets and destroy our great country. They’ve attacked OUR values, destroyed OUR economy, put America Last, called us racist and deplorable. It’s disgusting really. If we’re going to win in 2022 and 2024, we need to do something NOW. 
Democrats won’t stop until AMERICA IS UNRECOGNIZABLE. 

That same weekend, also in response to the Supreme Court’s ruling overturning Roe vs. Wade, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas posted a now infamous tweet: “Now do Plessy vs Ferguson/Brown vs Board of Education.”

Officially, according to his own explanation, Cornyn was criticizing those who argued that long-standing Supreme Court decisions should not be overturned. “Thank goodness some SCOTUS precedents are overruled,” he subsequently tweeted after his first statement was met with public outrage.

In reality, Cornyn was clearly suggesting that Black Americans should once again become second-class citizens by reinstating the Jim Crow white supremacist terror regime epitomized by the Plessy v. Ferguson decision — a regime under which tens of thousands of Black Americans were murdered by white people in “race riots,” pogroms, lynchings and other targeted killings from the end of the Civil War all the way through to the civil rights movement more than 100 years later.

Whatever Cornyn’s expressed intention, the evidence is clear: The Republican Party supports, advocates for and enables policies and outcomes designed to maintain the dominance and control of white people over all areas of American society. Furthermore, it endorses and uses violence to achieve its goals, as public opinion polls make clear and the Capitol attack of Jan. 6 so vividly illustrates. 

In fact, the end of Roe v. Wade and the assault on women’s reproductive rights and freedoms is the result of a decades-long pressure campaign that has used intimidation, arson, bombings, physical assault and even murder to achieve its goals. Kathy Spillar summarizes this at Ms. Magazine:

For nearly 50 years, as anti-abortion legislators in states around the country have chipped away at the constitutional right to a safe and legal abortion, they have done so with the steady drumbeat of violence at their back. …

Though violence and threats of violence directed against abortion providers have been a prominent aspect of abortion in the United States since Roe was decided, anti-abortion legislators would like to ignore this history. Instead, they try to frame the history of post-Roe abortion as a “hard issue” and one of mere “controversy” that should be settled by these same state legislators. But decades of violence make clear that the debate over abortion in America isn’t a matter of some “civil disagreement.” It is the subject of unrelenting attacks by those who have no regard for the rule of law.

In the decision expected within the next few months, if the Supreme Court overturns or severely guts Roe v. Wade, it will send an unmistakable and dangerous message: that the violence against abortion providers has worked…

Spillar was writing before the Dobbs decision, but predicted that a decision overturning Roe would “send an unmistakable and dangerous message: that the violence against abortion providers has worked.” She also suggests that the decision will “further embolden extremists to engage in violence in their crusade to end abortion in the United States”:

After all, extremist violence has not been confined to those jurisdictions that would be expected to curtail abortion rights if Roe is overturned. Six of the murders committed by anti-abortion extremists occurred in jurisdictions that would likely preserve access to abortion: Colorado, Massachusetts and New York. If anti-abortion sentiments are unable to sway legislators in some states to ban abortion outright, there are very real reasons to be concerned that extremists — who for decades have disregarded the rule of law and legitimate political process — will take matters into their own hands.

As documented by historian Nancy MacLean in her book “Democracy in Chains,” the leaders of today’s “conservative” movement have utter disdain for democracy, the Constitution, human rights, human freedom, the common good and the rule of law. This anti-democracy movement also wants to impose a type of Christian fascist regime on the American people.

In a recent essay for ScheerPost and Salon, Chris Hedges argues that the “Christian fascists are clear about the society they intend to create”:

In their ideal America, our “secular humanist” society based on science and reason will be destroyed. The Ten Commandments will form the basis of the legal system. Creationism or “Intelligent Design” will be taught in public schools, many of which will be overtly “Christian.” Those branded as social deviants, including the LGBTQ community, immigrants, secular humanists, feminists, Jews, Muslims, criminals and those dismissed as “nominal Christians” — meaning Christians who do not embrace this peculiar interpretation of the Bible — will be silenced, imprisoned or killed. The role of the federal government will be reduced to protecting property rights, “homeland” security and waging war. Most government assistance programs and federal departments, including education, will be terminated. Church organizations will be funded and empowered to run social welfare agencies and schools. The poor, condemned for sloth, indolence and sinfulness, will be denied help. The death penalty will be expanded to include “moral crimes,” including apostasy, blasphemy, sodomy and witchcraft, as well as abortion, which will be treated as murder. Women, denied contraception, access to abortion and equality under the law, will be subordinate to men. Those who practice other faiths will become, at best, second-class citizens. The wars waged by the American empire will be defined as religious crusades. Victims of police violence and those in prison will have no redress. There will be no separation of church and state. The only legitimate voices in public discourse and the media will be “Christian.” America will be sacralized as an agent of God. Those who defy the “Christian” authorities, at home and abroad, will be condemned as agents of Satan.

Today’s “conservative” movement is now in revolutionary mode, determined to destroy the expansion of freedom, human rights and democracy that took place from Reconstruction through the New Deal, the civil rights movement, the feminist revolution, the gay pride movement and other progressive movements throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries.

At its core, fascism is always revanchist and seeks to impose an old order (which is often imaginary or invented) on a new world. That new-old world for today’s Republican-fascists goes back at least to the 19th century, if not before. In a recent essay at the Daily Beast, David Rothkopf explains the role of the Supreme Court in that revolutionary political project:

History may look back at the period in which we are living and call it the Great Regression. It is a time in which on issue after issue, we are seeing decades and sometimes centuries of progress reversed.

If the term regression feels too academic, we may just as easily call it the Great Leap Backwards. If it continues at its current pace, it may end up being known as the American Dark Ages … or worse, to borrow from another historical saga, the Decline and Fall of the United States. …

Do not call this band of reckless revisionists on the court conservatives, by the way. Nothing about what they are doing is “conservative,” nor should you call them “strict constructionalists” or “originalists,” as their decisions disregard legal precedent, the spirit of the Constitution, and often craft citations for their decisions from whole cloth….

These are huge regressions for American society. … And the scariest part is that they are proof the right wing’s campaign to obliterate social progress over the past four decades has thus far been scarily successful. If they are not stopped at the polls, they may someday turn back the clock so far that we and the world wonder once again whether the United States is an idea that can long survive.

Today’s Republican-fascists imagine a world of rules and hierarchies: White people over Black and brown people, men over women, right-wing Christians over all other faiths and non-believers, and the rich over everyone else.

The world imagined by today’s Republican Party and the larger neofascist movement is a world of rules and hierarchies. White people rule over Black and brown people. Right-wing Christians will rule over other religious groups and non-believers. Men will rule over women. The rich and moneyed classes will have total power over the poor, the working class and the middle class, most likely all of those outside the top 5 percent. Lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and trans people will be virtually erased from American society, and perhaps literally disappeared. Other marginalized groups, including people with disabilities and undocumented immigrants, will face similar fates. The “rights” of property, corporations and guns will fully supersede those of human beings, the natural world and the commons. “Democracy” will exist in name only, and in practice will be what political scientists call “competitive authoritarianism” or perhaps even an outright authoritarian state adapted to fit the mold of American exceptionalism.

None of this should be a surprise to anyone. Republicans and “conservatives” have been publicly announcing and telegraphing their plans to end American democracy — and to reject pluralism and human rights more broadly — for decades. In their own fashion, they have been direct and polite: They have told us what they would do, and then they have done it. 

Too many Americans — especially leading Democrats and mainstream liberals, along with the guardians of approved public discourse in the national media — have continued to tell themselves comforting lies. Republicans are “exaggerating” or being “hyperbolic” because “we are all Americans” who have “the same fundamental values”. Those comforting lies were always cowardly, now they are just contemptible. In fact, the Republican-fascists and their allies told us clearly who and what they were from the beginning. The question now becomes whether it is too late for the majority of Americans to take them at their word, and use the precious time remaining to defend, preserve and rebuild our democracy.

Read more on the Republican Party and American fascism:

Progressives: Take the fight to the states, right now. It’s the only way to win

States are growing in power. This fact has never been clearer than after last week’s Supreme Court decisions. Most obviously, Dobbs overturned Roe v. Wade and returned abortion laws back to the states. But now we also have decisions in Castro-Huerta, ruling that states can prosecute crimes on tribal land, which will shift prosecutions from federal to state governments, and West Virginia v. EPA, which will shift the frontlines of the climate battle back to the states.

Looking forward, just before the Fourth of July holiday the court announced it would take up the Independent State Legislature theory in the fall. The court may have the votes to endorse this theory, which would hand state legislatures complete and unfettered control over election administration. That could be a near-certain checkmate for Democrats in the 2024 election, given Republicans’ gerrymandered control of state legislatures in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and elsewhere.

These decisions should shock no one. Eviscerating federal civil rights protections, dismantling the regulatory state and rigging election rules mark the culmination of a century of strategic power-building on the right — and the expansion of state power is at its core. 

RELATED: After Roe v. Wade: Now the fight for reproductive justice moves to the states

For decades progressives have over-invested in federal strategies, including legislation, advocacy and litigation. While conservatives have been consistent and ruthless in their efforts to build power at different levels of government, progressives have almost entirely neglected state-level power. Now, with state power dramatically expanding, progressives are structurally and rhetorically unprepared.

It’s time for progressives to challenge their thinking about state power. It’s time to reject outdated and ahistorical nostalgia for a Supreme Court that stands on the side of rights and justice — something that only briefly and intermittently existed. It’s time to embrace the fight for state power as a necessary part of the progressive project, and it’s time to commit to reallocating energy and resources downward to political and policy battles in the states.

States are ascendant — but progressives aren’t ready

Dobbs, Castro-Huerta and West Virginia v. EPA are examples of a broader trend: the ascendancy of state power. Gridlock in Washington, an arch-conservative Supreme Court, and broad regulatory trends away from strong central control are all converging to enlarge the power of state government and state legislatures. 

This confluence is not accidental. It has been decades in the making, the work of a strategic conservative project that has always been strongly connected not just to building state power, but to the idea of state power as a concept consistent with right-wing political ideology.

Conservatives have spent generations building an entire political apparatus designed to stack the courts with ideological judges. At the same time, they have focused on winning state legislative races, knowing that these overlooked venues of power are the key to redistricting and voting rights, and that once the judiciary had been captured by conservative ideology, it would give states more discretion to write regressive laws. Republican power in state capitals accelerated dramatically after the post-2010 gerrymandering strategy known as Project REDMAP, which resulted in Republican control of 25 state legislatures. There’s a direct line between that state-level power and this wave of Supreme Court decisions, including the fall of Roe.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


But while the right has woven state-level strategies into the very fabric of its efforts, the left has been almost exclusively preoccupied with federal strategies and an aversion to state-level power. For decades, Democrats prioritized federal elections over state-level races, and left-leaning interest groups — including national abortion advocacy organizations — often focused on federal strategies and institution-building, to the near exclusion of local and state ones. 

Democrats have invested too much in unwinnable federal elections, and ceded control of the states to their opponents. That was always dumb, and now it’s disastrous.

Democrats routinely invest far too much money in unwinnable federal elections, while underinvesting in state and local candidates who actually have a chance. FEC filings for federal candidates show that Democrats running in noncompetitive Senate races have raised more than $119 million for their 2022 races so far. To gain some perspective on that, in 2020 Arizona Democrats fell just four seats shy of flipping the state legislature, and raised less than $10 million. This year, Arizona’s Republican trifecta — both houses of the state legislature, plus the governor — passed and enacted an abortion ban.

Progressives have long been wary of “states’ rights” and federalism, for understandable historical reasons. As scholar Heather Gerken has explained, the idea of states’ rights has repeatedly been invoked to defend abhorrent institutions, including slavery and Jim Crow. Therefore, progressives have looked to rights derived under the U.S. Constitution as the benchmark for establishing civil rights and other protections. 

But by ceding both institutional and narrative control about the importance and value of state power to their opponents, progressives have directly aided the conservative cause. Progressives’ staunch unwillingness to recognize the interdependence between state and federal power has created a false mutual exclusion between state and federal power-building efforts. That was never a good choice, and now it’s disastrous. We have to build power, sustain it and wield it at both levels of government. We’re behind, and we’ve got to work fast. 

Progressives must build state power

A different approach is necessary: Progressives now have to push beyond the false choice between building federal and state power. We can organize and advocate for electoral, policy and doctrinal victories at the federal level, and celebrate them. At the same time, we can also build state power, which is just as important. We can understand that both federal and state power are necessary to achieve progressive goals. That understanding can and must fuel a massive redistribution of progressive efforts, strategy and resources toward our states — beginning immediately. 

Dobbs, Castro-Huerta and EPA are not the end of the Supreme Court’s plans to reshape American law and life. If, as Justice Alito claims, the right to abortion is not “deeply rooted” in tradition, then the right to contraception, to marriage equality, and even to engage in consensual adult sexual activity are on the chopping block next. Limiting regulatory agencies’ abilities to address pressing issues to the letter of Congress’ enabling legislation — in a moment when gridlock makes any federal legislation nearly impossible — will slow or halt federal progress in climate change, health care, worker safety and more. As state power grows more important, we must embrace its positive potential to achieve the protections and conditions we desire. 

As we prepare for battle at the state level, let’s be clear-eyed about the work ahead. Let’s embrace the fight for state power as a vital and necessary part of the progressive project. State and federal power exist in interdependence, and we must pledge to build power at both levels. Let us reimagine what our states could do for us, envision them as expansive and transformative venues of positive power, and demand that our states create the conditions in which reproductive justice, climate justice and so much more can be achieved. 

Read more on state legislatures and the fight for the future:

House progressives call for Supreme Court reform: “Hold these rogue justices to account”

After the Supreme Court’s deeply unpopular reactionary majority spent its latest term carrying out an assault on fundamental constitutional rights, Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Tuesday reiterated House progressives’ demands to reform the nation’s chief judicial body, including by adding seats.

“Last week, the Supreme Court finished one of the most consequential and destructive terms in recent decades,” Jayapal, D-Wash., chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said in a statement. “The list of precedents nullified and democratic institutions and principles this Supreme Court gutted or fully overturned this term is horrifying.”

RELATED: Supreme Court ends on a low note: Why we should now be more frightened for their next term

As Jayapal noted, the high court attacked the separation of church and state, legal protections in the 100-mile border zone, the rights of death row inmates, state-level concealed carry laws, Miranda rights, the authority of federal agencies to safeguard public health and the environment, and the constitutional right to abortion.

“The court denied Social Security benefits to the residents of Puerto Rico, blocked a federal vaccine-or-test requirement, denied detained immigrants bond hearings, undermined tribal sovereignty, allowed the CIA to withhold information about torture at black sites, and entrenched Louisiana’s racially gerrymandered electoral maps,” Jayapal continued.

“They won’t stop here,” she added. “The justices have already agreed to hear cases next term that could weaken our electoral process, allow discrimination against same-sex couples, and end affirmative action.”

Jayapal argued that “these extreme decisions are the result of a decades-long project to stack the bench with adherents to a right-wing agenda and overrule precedent and the will of the American people.”

The court’s majority “has made clear it has no concern for ethics,” said Jayapal. “There is evidence that a sitting justice’s wife was involved in efforts to overturn a free and fair presidential election, and when legal challenges on that very issue came before the court, the justice did not recuse himself,” she pointed out, referring to Clarence and Ginni Thomas.

“Three others appear to have misled the Senate Judiciary Committee about Roe v. Wade being settled precedent,” Jayapal continued, echoing Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., both of whom called for impeachment probes last week.


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


“The Supreme Court has overreached its authority and destroyed its legitimacy,” said Jayapal, but “we do not have to simply accept the devastation of these rulings.”

“The constitution created three co-equal branches of government, vesting the people’s elected representatives with the broad authority to check and balance a judiciary that oversteps its mandate,” she stressed. “That’s why Congress has an obligation to respond, and do so quickly.”

Jayapal called for the swift passage of three key pieces of legislation to prevent the Supreme Court from further “wreaking havoc on our country”:

  • The Judiciary Act — introduced by Reps. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., Hank Johnson, D-Ga., and Mondaire Jones, D-N.Y., in the House and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., in the upper chamber — would expand the number of seats on the high court from nine to 13;
  • Johnson’s Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency (SCERT) Act, would establish an ethics and recusal standard for members of the nation’s chief judicial body and require disclosure of lobbying and dark money interests; and
  • The Judicial Ethics and Anti-Corruption Act — introduced by Jayapal and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. — would prohibit all federal judges from owning individual stocks, commercial real estate, trusts and private corporations, among other measures.

“In the Judiciary Committee, we must continue our critical oversight obligations and hold additional hearings on the violations of ethics and transparency the Supreme Court has committed,” Jayapal added. “We must hold these rogue justices to account.”

Read more on the Supreme Court’s history-changing term:

How the end of Roe and the Uvalde school shooting could reshape the race for Texas governor

How the end of Roe and the Uvalde school shooting could reshape the race for Texas governor” was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

 

A school shooting in Uvalde that left 19 children and two teachers dead. The end of a nearly 50-year-old constitutional right to an abortion.

A history-making spring in Texas is laying the groundwork for a contentious final four months in the race to lead the state, where Republican incumbent Gov. Greg Abbott remains the favorite but is confronting his toughest Democratic opponent yet in Beto O’Rourke.

While O’Rourke works to harness the anti-incumbent energy spurred by the seismic events of the past few months, Abbott is banking on a general election centered on stronger issues for him: the economy and the border. But even as the national environment looks bleak for Democrats, O’Rourke has been able to keep the race competitive in Texas — and Abbott’s campaign is not taking any chances.

“People are energized right now, but you know, our job is going to be to keep them that way up until Election Day on Nov. 8,” said Kim Gilby, chair of the Democratic Party in Williamson County, a battleground county north of Austin that in 2018 went for both O’Rourke for U.S. Senate and Abbott for governor. “We can’t just lose sight — there’s so much at stake right now.”

Gilby added she was not worried about O’Rourke’s ability to keep people engaged, calling him the “Energizer bunny” of the campaign trail.

Beto O’Rourke listens to demonstrators in front of the Federal Courthouse hours after the Supreme Court ruled to overturn Roe v. Wade on June 24, 2022, in Houston. Credit: Briana Vargas for The Texas Tribune

Abbott still carries most of the advantages in the race — money, for one, and a midterm election that is expected to favor Republicans across the country. The governor’s allies argue that voters are more worried about the skyrocketing inflation and illegal immigration — and that O’Rourke cannot separate himself from President Joe Biden, who is very unpopular in Texas.

“First and foremost, those [social] issues won’t overcome the reality of Biden’s economy and when you ask Texans what are their biggest issues, their answers are inflation, the economy and the border,” said Dennis Bonnen, the former Texas House speaker, adding he doesn’t think attitudes in Texas about abortion and guns are enough to move the needle. “Those are issues that have been around forever. The lines have been drawn … and I don’t see significant movement either way.”

Abbott himself has downplayed the political impact of Roe v. Wade getting overturned, arguing that his gubernatorial race in 2014 against then-state Sen. Wendy Davis was a “referendum on the issue of abortion” and he won resoundingly.

To O’Rourke and his supporters, though, this spring has been game-changing. His campaign said it has had 52,000 volunteer shift sign-ups in the five weeks since the Uvalde shooting, a 300% increase over the five weeks prior. After the Roe v. Wade ruling, which came on a Friday, the campaign set out to knock on 30,000 doors over the following weekend and hit 30,279 through 87 separate block walks statewide.

“For us to do that four months away from when this election is decided just shows you how energized the people of Texas are,” O’Rourke said on a Facebook Live afterward.

He also touted a Quinnipiac University poll in mid-June that showed him trailing Abbott by 5 points. The same pollster found O’Rourke behind by 15 points in December.

“The momentum, the speed at which we are catching up and closing the gap, is amazing,” O’Rourke said. “And that was before the Dobbs decision [that overturned Roe v. Wade], that was before it was reinforced that Greg Abbott signed legislation that outlawed abortion in the state of Texas with no exceptions for rape or incest.”

To be sure, O’Rourke has continued to talk about issues that have animated his candidacy from the start — like the 2021 power-grid failure — but the headlines of recent months have given his campaign a new trajectory.

After both the mass shooting in Uvalde and the Supreme Court decision, O’Rourke capitalized by hosting rallies where huge crowds swarmed despite the sweltering weather. And shortly after the shooting, O’Rourke confronted Abbott at a news conference that led to an uproarious scene.

O’Rourke is expected to return to the road with regular events through Election Day after appearing at the state Democratic Party convention later this month in Dallas.

“The wind is blowing our way,” said Cynthia Ginyard, the Democratic Party leader in another battleground county, Fort Bend, in suburban Houston. “We have a little less convincing to do. The state of affairs is helping us do that, and I am very glad that Beto is capitalizing on these current situations.”

One measure of the momentum O’Rourke has received lately could come later this month, when the candidates will have to report their fundraising for the first time since February.

O’Rourke successfully met a goal of raising $4 million online in the final week of the fundraising period, which ended Thursday. But Abbott’s campaign spent recent days rolling out plans for nearly $20 million in ad buys, reminding observers of his towering financial advantage over O’Rourke. As of their last fundraising report in mid-February, Abbott had roughly $50 million cash on hand compared to $7 million for O’Rourke.

Public opinion is generally on O’Rourke’s side when it comes to two major issues that have galvanized Texas Democrats more than ever lately: abortion and guns. Polls regularly show that at least pluralities of Texans want stricter gun laws and oppose totally banning abortion.

But the economy and border have ranked as more important issues for voters, and Abbott has the advantage on them. In the Quinnipiac poll, voters chose the border and economy as the two most urgent issues facing the state, and they said they trusted Abbott more than O’Rourke on them by 15- and 14-percentage-point margins, respectively.

Immigration continues to dominate headlines, and it did so tragically this past week after over 50 migrants died in connection with an abandoned tractor-trailer in San Antonio. Abbott quickly blamed the deaths of Biden and later announced new truck checkpoints, while O’Rourke said the United States needs to “dismantle human smuggling rings and replace them with expanded avenues for legal migration.”

Still, in the Quinnipiac poll, gun policy was a close third among the most urgent issues facing Texans, and Abbott’s advantage there over O’Rourke was a much narrower 4 percentage points. On abortion, voters gave O’Rourke a 2-percentage-point edge.

After a primary season during which Abbott lurched to the right, the governor has done little outwardly to try to win back more moderate voters.

He has, however, tread more lightly on the Roe v. Wade news than some fellow Texas Republicans, who have responded with jubilance — like Attorney General Ken Paxton, who declared the historic day an annual office holiday. Abbott, however, was slow to react when the draft opinion was leaked in April, and when the ruling came out earlier this month, he issued a single mild statement that said the court “correctly overturned” the case.

Whatever the impact of the ruling, his supporters believe the economy will reign supreme in November. Cat Parks, the former vice chair of the Texas GOP, said it will “undoubtedly” be the No. 1 issue in the race, not social issues like abortion.

“I think you’re seeing all of the added energy they’re putting behind it because they don’t have anything else,” Parks said. “They have a president who’s incompetent, they have a gubernatorial candidate who’s aligned themselves with Biden.”

Glenn Hammer, the head of the pro-Abbott Texas Association of Business, said the state’s economy is the “healthiest it’s ever been by really any metric.” TAB, he added, “would love to see a continued focus on the meat-and-potato issues that have made Texas the best place in the world to do business.”

Abbott has big ambitions for November. He not only wants to beat O’Rourke but wants to defeat him by a large enough margin to doom any future political run in Texas. Speaking on the sidelines of the Texas GOP convention earlier this month, Abbott rallied supporters with a call to “beat the hell out of Beto.”

Abbott also wants to win the Hispanic vote, though recent polls have shown O’Rourke still leads with those voters. The Quinnipiac survey gave O’Rourke a 9-percentage-point advantage with Hispanic voters.

The fight for Hispanic voters — especially in South Texas — has only intensified in recent weeks after Republican Mayra Flores flipped a congressional seat in the Rio Grande Valley. O’Rourke largely stayed out of that contest, where the main Democratic candidate, Dan Sanchez, held an election-eve rally with three other statewide candidates.

As part of the almost $20 million in ad buys that Abbott’s campaign has announced, $2.75 million has been dedicated to Hispanic media.

Differences with 2018

The race is shaping up to be different from O’Rourke’s 2018 U.S. Senate race against Sen. Ted Cruz in some key ways. For starters, Abbott’s campaign has proven far more aggressive in working to define O’Rourke than Cruz’s was, pumping out news releases and videos every week loaded with opposition research.

Bonnen said Abbott is “taking nothing for granted” and that the governor’s approach to O’Rourke has been a “night and day” difference with Cruz’s campaign at this point four years ago.

For his part, O’Rourke has openly talked about how he is running this campaign differently from 2018. He has said he is investing more in data; driving a message centered on jobs, schools and health care; sharing more resources with fellow Democratic candidates; and making more of a case against the incumbent.

O’Rourke’s focus on the incumbent this time has especially stood out to his supporters.

“He famously did not draw the contrast with Ted Cruz,” said U.S. Rep. Colin Allred, D-Dallas, who recently endorsed O’Rourke as part of a statewide slate. “You can go back and forth about what you think about that strategy. It’s immaterial at this point, really, but in this campaign, he is clearly drawing the contrast on every issue and also being specific on what he would do.”

Democrats believe O’Rourke’s hammering of Abbott is especially helpful due to the governor’s shift to the right over the past two years — a shift that has only been reinforced by the recent headlines on guns and abortion.

“Whatever version of Greg Abbott you voted for previously,” Allred said, “that’s not the version you’re considering on the ballot this November.”

Disclosure: Texas Association of Business has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

 


Join us at The Texas Tribune Festival, happening Sept. 22-24 in downtown Austin, and hear from 300+ speakers shaping the future of Texas including Joe Straus, Jen Psaki, Joaquin Castro, Mayra Flores and many others. See all speakers announced to date and buy tickets.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/07/05/beto-orourke-greg-abbott-roe-wade-uvalde/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Buying into conspiracy theories can be exciting – that’s what makes them dangerous

Conspiracy theories have been around for centuries, from witch trials and antisemitic campaigns to beliefs that Freemasons were trying to topple European monarchies. In the mid-20th century, historian Richard Hofstadter described a “paranoid style” that he observed in right-wing U.S. politics and culture: a blend of “heated exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy.”

But the “golden age” of conspiracy theories, it seems, is now. On June 24, 2022, the unknown leader of the QAnon conspiracy theory posted online for the first time in over a year. QAnon’s enthusiasts tend to be ardent supporters of Donald Trump, who made conspiracy theories a signature feature of his political brand, from Pizzagate and QAnon to “Stop the Steal” and the racist “birther” movement. Key themes in conspiracy theories – like a sinister network of “pedophiles” and “groomers,” shadowy “bankers” and “globalists” – have moved into the mainstream of right-wing talking points.

Much of the commentary on conspiracy theories presumes that followers simply have bad information, or not enough, and that they can be helped along with a better diet of facts.

But anyone who talks to conspiracy theorists knows that they’re never short on details, or at least “alternative facts.” They have plenty of information, but they insist that it be interpreted in a particular way – the way that feels most exciting.

My research focuses on how emotion drives human experience, including strong beliefs. In my latest book, I argue that confronting conspiracy theories requires understanding the feelings that make them so appealing – and the way those feelings shape what seems reasonable to devotees. If we want to understand why people believe what they believe, we need to look not just at the content of their thoughts, but how that information feels to them. Just as the “X-Files” predicted, conspiracy theories’ acolytes “want to believe.”

Thinking and feeling

Over 100 years ago, the American psychologist William James noted: “The transition from a state of perplexity to one of resolve is full of lively pleasure and relief.” In other words, confusion doesn’t feel good, but certainty certainly does.

He was deeply interested in an issue that is urgent today: how information feels, and why thinking about the world in a particular way might be exciting or exhilarating – so much so that it becomes difficult to see the world in any other way.

James called this the “sentiment of rationality“: the feelings that go along with thinking. People often talk about thinking and feeling as though they’re separate, but James realized that they’re inextricably related.

For instance, he believed that the best science was driven forward by the excitement of discovery – which he said was “caviar” for scientists – but also anxiety about getting things wrong.

A black and white photograph shows two men posed next to each other in suits.

Psychologist William James, right, next to his brother, the famous novelist Henry James. Bettmann/Bettmann via Getty Images

The allure of the 2%

So how does conspiracy theory feel? First of all, it lets you feel like you’re smarter than everyone. Political scientist Michael Barkun points out that conspiracy theory devotees love what he calls “stigmatized knowledge,” sources that are obscure or even looked down upon.

In fact, the more obscure the source is, the more true believers want to trust it. This is the stock in trade of popular podcast “The Joe Rogan Experience” – “scientists” who present themselves as the lone voice in the wilderness and are somehow seen as more credible because they’ve been repudiated by their colleagues. Ninety-eight percent of scientists may agree on something, but the conspiracy mindset imagines the other 2% are really on to something. This allows conspiracists to see themselves as “critical thinkers” who have separated themselves from the pack, rather than outliers who have fallen for a snake oil pitch.

One of the most exciting parts of a conspiracy theory is that it makes everything make sense. We all know the pleasure of solving a puzzle: the “click” of satisfaction when you complete a Wordle, crossword or sudoku. But of course, the whole point of games is that they simplify things. Detective shows are the same: All the clues are right there on the screen.

Powerful appeal

But what if the whole world were like that? In essence, that’s the illusion of conspiracy theory. All the answers are there, and everything fits with everything else. The big players are sinister and devious – but not as smart as you.

QAnon works like a massive live-action video game in which a showrunner teases viewers with tantalizing clues. Followers make every detail into something profoundly significant.

When Donald Trump announced his COVID-19 diagnosis, for instance, he tweeted, “We will get through this TOGETHER.” QAnon followers saw this as a signal that their long-sought endgame – Hillary Clinton arrested and convicted of unspeakable crimes – was finally in play. They thought the capitalized word “TOGETHER” was code for “TO GET HER,” and that Trump was saying that his diagnosis was a feint in order to beat the “deep state.” For devotees, it was a perfectly crafted puzzle with a neatly thrilling solution.

It’s important to remember that conspiracy theory very often goes hand in hand with racism – anti-Black racism, anti-immigrant racism, antisemitism and Islamophobia. People who craft conspiracies – or are willing to exploit them – know how emotionally powerful these racist beliefs are.

It’s also key to avoid saying that conspiracy theories are “simply” irrational or emotional. What James realized is that all thinking is related to feeling – whether we’re learning about the world in useful ways or whether we’re being led astray by our own biases. As cultural theorist Lauren Berlant wrote in 2016, “All the messages are emotional,” no matter which political party they come from.

Conspiracy theories encourage their followers to see themselves as the only ones with their eyes open, and everyone else as “sheeple.” But paradoxically, this fantasy leads to self-delusion – and helping followers recognize that can be a first step. Unraveling their beliefs requires the patient work of persuading devotees that the world is just a more boring, more random, less interesting place than one might have hoped.

Part of why conspiracy theories have such a strong hold is that they have flashes of truth: There really are elites who hold themselves above the law; there really is exploitation, violence and inequality. But the best way to unmask abuses of power isn’t to take shortcuts – a critical point in “Conspiracy Theory Handbook,” a guide to combating them that was written by experts on climate change denial.

To make progress, we have to patiently prove what’s happening – to research, learn and find the most plausible interpretation of the evidence, not the one that’s most fun.

 

Donovan Schaefer, Assistant Professor of Religious Studies, University of Pennsylvania

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

“Living in fear of mass shootings is not freedom”: Dems push for action after July 4 parade shooting

Sen. Bernie Sanders said late Monday that Congress must take far more ambitious legislative action to combat the scourge of gun violence in the United States in the wake of the mass shooting at a Fourth of July parade in Highland Park, Illinois.

“Today’s terrible shooting in Highland Park is the latest reminder of our nation’s deadly gun violence epidemic,” Sanders, I-Vt., wrote on Twitter. “Grocery stores. Schools. Churches. Fourth of July parades. Places everyone should feel safe. Congress must do more NOW to protect our people.”

The shooting, which left at least six people dead and dozens more wounded, came just over a week after President Joe Biden signed into law a compromise bill that does not contain an assault-weapons ban, universal background checks, and other popular measures that advocates and experts say are needed to meaningfully reduce gun violence.

Passage of the bipartisan legislation was spurred by the horrific massacres in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas in May—among the hundreds of mass shootings that have taken place across the U.S. this year. While some Democratic lawmakers pushed for more aggressive action, the National Rifle Association and the Republican lawmakers it bankrolls objected, as they’ve done for the past decade following mass shooting after mass shooting.

Right-wing Democrats such as Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., have thus far refused to support calls to eliminate or reform the 60-vote filibuster, meaning the Democratic majority needs GOP support to get most legislation through the upper chamber.

“The Bipartisan Gun Law was a first step,” Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., said Monday, “but Congress must do more to stop this deadly epidemic and save lives.”

Rep. Karen Bass, D-Calif., echoed that message, writing on Twitter that it is “our patriotic duty to do more in Congress to keep Americans safe and get guns off our streets.”

“Living in fear of mass shootings is not independence,” Bass wrote. “Living in fear of mass shootings is not freedom.”

Robert Crimo, 22, has been taken into custody as a “person of interest” in the Chicago suburb shooting. Authorities said the gunman, perched on a rooftop near the parade route, used a high-powered rifle to open fire on the crowd gathered in Highland Park to celebrate the Fourth of July.

“Unfortunately, it is the natural consequence of allowing the proliferation and unregulated use of semi-automatic weapons which can be used to shoot indiscriminately into crowds and kill and maim dozens, as happened today,” Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., said in a statement Monday. “This scene has repeated itself over and over again because of the unfettered access to weapons of war.”

“What was supposed to be a celebration of our freedom and unity today turned into yet another bloody massacre,” he added. “This reminds us that until we have the sensible, nationwide regulation of firearms, nowhere and nobody is truly safe.”

While Illinois has some of the most stringent gun laws in the U.S.—and Highland Park banned assault weapons in 2013, overcoming opposition from the Illinois Rifle Association—neighboring states have far more lax regulations in place.

As Everytown for Gun Safety noted in a report published earlier this year, “Illinois is surrounded by states with much weaker laws, and an outsized share of likely trafficked guns recovered in Illinois are originally purchased out-of-state—especially in Indiana, just across the border from Chicago.”

Michael Daly, special correspondent for The Daily Beast, wrote in a column Monday that Highland Park’s assault-rifle ban “offered little protection as long as so many other jurisdictions make assault weapons easy to acquire.”

“Salvador Ramos of Uvalde, Texas, legally acquired two assault rifles—both advertised as ‘modern sporting rifles’—the day after his 18th birthday, and another two days later. He proceeded to murder 19 students and two teachers at a local elementary school,” Daly noted. “In the aftermath, there were calls for an assault weapons ban, but the U.S. Senate could come up with nothing more than an enhanced background check for gun buyers between 18 and 21. A kid too young to drink can still buy all the ‘modern sporting weapons’ he wants.”

Language is flexible, unlike Bette Midler and Jordan Peterson

A hot 4th of July weekend, which saw yet another deadly mass shooting, brought out the worst in some people. On the holiday, singer, actor and environmental activist Bette Midler tweeted that inclusive language eradicates women. A few days previously, Twitter suspended psychologist Jordan Peterson for tweeting derogatory remarks about “Umbrella Academy” actor Elliot Page, who is trans. 

Peterson reminisced about when Pride was a “sin,” referenced a “criminal physician” who performed surgery on Page and deadnamed the actor. (Deadnaming is referring to a person by a name they have asked to no longer be called.)

“The Rubin Report” host Dave Rubin was then also suspended by Twitter for sharing a screenshot of Peterson’s inflammatory tweet, a tweet conservative commentator Ben Shapiro shared as well, along with adding his own derogatory comments. Twitter stated that Peterson could have his account restored if he deleted the offending tweet. Peterson said he “would rather die” than delete it. Then, he deleted it.

Finally, on July 4, musician Macy Gray also made transphobic remarks on Fox Nation’s “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” where she said: “Just because you go change your parts, doesn’t make you a woman, sorry.”

All this was in the span of only a few days, and only a few weeks after the monumental decision by the Supreme Court that reversed Roe v. Wade, leading many to fear that marriage equality and other rights for queer people may be next. It’s unclear why celebrities continually feel the need to comment, but the remarks of the aging Midler, Gray, Peterson and others fail to take into account a key facet of language: it’s flexible. Throughout time, language changes and will continue to change whether or not public figures acknowledge it.

RELATED: Stevie Nicks’ abortion and the freedom to choose you

The sudden rash in derogatory comments regarding trans people is in response to the push to use inclusive language when talking or writing about reproductive rights, which are urgently in the spotlight again. The media is reporting story after story — and Americans are writing social media post after social media post — about abortion. But some of the stories and many of these posts leave out key people in the debate.

Not only women are impacted by the Roe v. Wade reversal. Not only women need abortions or are affected by issues around abortion, including infertility.  

Girls need abortions. Children do. Trans people, intersex people, nonbinary people and a whole host of people do. People is the operative word here — a simple word, yet one some feel uncomfortable using. As the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) writes, “When conversations about abortion reduce it to a ‘women’s issue‘ or an issue only for people who can carry pregnancies, we exclude a wide swath of people.”

Yet that’s exactly what Midler did, writing in her tweet: “We are being stripped of our rights over our bodies, our lives and even of our name! They don’t call us ‘women’ anymore; they call us ‘birthing people’ or ‘menstruators,’ and even ‘people with vaginas’! Don’t let them erase you!”

The only people in danger of being erased in Midler’s tweet are the very people she runs over. As writer Roxanne Gay responded: “No one is trying to erase women with inclusive language about people who need abortion care. No one is calling you anything but what you prefer. You should extend that courtesy in return.”

Excluding people from the conversation is another way to make things harder for them, to make people forget about them and stop seeing them as human, deserving of care — or of rights. 

That’s triggering for conservative pundits like Shapiro, who have long made Page a target in tantrum-y videos. But the Midler tweet has been especially disappointing for some fans, given how the actor-singer has historically been a very vocal supporter of gay rights. With her tweet, Midler, like writer J.K. Rowling before her, takes a stance that aligns with that of trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFS), who exclude the rights of trans women in their women’s rights advocacy. 

According to the ACLU, “The fight for abortion rights and LGBTQ+ rights go hand in hand because they are both ultimately about protecting our bodily autonomy. But they’re also intertwined because lesbians, bisexuals, trans people, queer people and yes, some trans gay men, can experience pregnancy and deserve control over if, when, and how we become pregnant, and whether or not we stay pregnant.”

What’s the big issue with leaving out people in the abortion debate? It’s already very difficult for trans people, queer people and others to receive medical care. It’s already difficult for children to receive life-saving abortions. Excluding people from the conversation is another way to make things harder for them, to make people forget about them and stop seeing them as human, deserving of care — or of rights.  

 If we can say phrases like “vibes” and “cringe,” we can certainly say “people” when we talk about abortion. 

Calling someone what they want to be called, including them in conversations that do concern and impact them, is a simple thing and one people have had no problem with for generations. No one raises a fuss when a woman goes by a different name after marriage (though some still raise antiquated eyebrows at people going by a wife’s last name or not changing names at all after marriage). No one protests immigrants who sometimes use American-ized versions of their names. No one throws a pundit-level fit about a nickname.

Language is fluid. It’s ever-shifting and growing as we grow as people. We learn some words are hateful and stop using them. We add new words into our usage all the time; so does the Oxford English Dictionary, which has recently added words like “unvaxxed,” and Merriam-Webster, which last year added “deplatform” and “super-spreader,” among others. If we can say phrases like “vibes” and “cringe,” we can certainly say “people” when we talk about abortion. We can certainly call trans and all people by their names.  


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Inclusive language does just that: it includes. It doesn’t push people out or negate them: it simply makes room for those who have been shoved aside, ignored and abused for generations. It doesn’t hurt to use. It hurts to leave out. 

More stories like this 

Will Byers on “Stranger Things” was always going to be gay

Fans who completed Volume 2 of “Stranger Things” Season 4 will know Will Byers (Noah Schnapp) has finally, in a roundabout way, come out as gay. The show doesn’t actually say he’s gay outright. But this shyness is pretty faithful to the 1980s, a time when coded language was often employed to identify someone as queer. The 1980s was also a time when cisgender boys and men considered “too feminine” (i.e. not conforming with society’s strict views of masculinity) were unfairly linked with the monstrous. And it’s this latter fact especially that paved the way for Will Byers’ coming out.

But first, let’s take a look back at the instances of coded language. While fans may have missed these brief moments, they certainly were there in prior seasons. Way back in the very first episode, after Will first disappears, his mom Joyce Byers (Winona Ryder) seeks local police chief, Hopper’s (David Harbour) help. Though Hopper thinks Will might be off playing hooky, Joyce disagrees: “He’s not like you, Hopper. He’s not like me, he’s not like . . . most.” She then adds, “Look, he’s a sensitive kid.” In the ’80s, “sensitive kid” usually signaled someone wasn’t being heteronormative in terms of their performance of stereotypical gender roles.

If this clue wasn’t enough, the scene at the police station then becomes more heavy-handed in foreshadowing Will’s sexuality. In a hushed tone, Joyce says that her ex-husband used to call the boy “queer,” almost mouthing the word so no one would hear her. Hopper asks if the boy is, and Joyce, exasperated, shouts: “He’s missing! Is what he is.” Later on in Season 3, Will is peeved that his friends’ girlfriends have distracted the boys from their Dungeons & Dragons play, and Mike hollers at Will, “It’s not my fault you don’t like girls!”

Beyond these hints subtle or big, fans of the horror genre might have known Will Byers was always going to be gay. In Carol Clover’s seminal 1992 study, “Men, Women, and Chain Saws,” she writes that in occult and paranormal films, those who are “open” to being in tune with the paranormal are always gendered as being more “feminine.” “Occult films code emotional openness as feminine, and figure those who indulge in it, male and female, as physically opened, penetrated,” she writes.

To be clear, Will’s sexuality should not be conflated with being female or feminine; rather his character’s arc is following a pattern set forth by characters who were not the stereotypical macho heroes of the era. Clover’s idea of openness and breaking through barriers is also why such films deal in open portals and gateways that shouldn’t be crossed but always are. Will in “Stranger Things” is pulled into the Upside Down in Season 1 and becomes possessed by the Mind Flayer in Season 2, where much of the season’s plot revolves around freeing him from this possession, a trauma that’s remarkedly sexualized. When he’s first possessed, the Shadow Monster enters his mouth and presumably other orifices — Will later confides in his best friend Mike (Finn Wolfhard) that he can feel the Shadow Monster, disturbingly, “everywhere.” 

Stranger ThingsFinn Wolfhard as Mike Wheeler and Noah Schnapp as Will Byers in “Stranger Things” (Ursula Coyote/Netflix)But after this possession, Will gains the ability of “Truesight” and can likewise peer into the Shadow Monster’s mind, making Will one with the Shadow Monster but also simultaneously gifted and open to the paranormal like Eleven (Millie Bobby Brown) is. The connection between Will and Eleven becomes so strong that the characters work as stand ins for each other. In Season 1, Hopper realizes he’s been chasing the wrong kid the entire time — both Will and El had short cut hair and witness descriptions of either kid could easily describe the other. 

Moreover, in Season 4, both El and Will are represented as equally possible loves for Mike. At one point all three go on a group hang at a local roller rink in California. Will and El also experience emotionally fraught scenes with Mike this season and vent through tears their disappointments over his supposed lack of interest.

Plus, like El, Will expresses the feeling that he doesn’t belong. In Volume 2, he indirectly refers to himself as “a mistake.” He’s seemingly talking about Eleven’s experiences at the time, of course, but this was his way of sharing with Mike his true, romantic feelings without opening himself up to rejection. “She’s been so lost without you — she’s so different from other people. And when you’re different sometimes you feel like a mistake . . . but you make her feel like she’s not a mistake at all.” 

Throughout the series Eleven has famously grappled with the feeling that she is a monster for having special powers, for being different. A lot of the time the characters strive to keep her identity a secret. Yet all the while, it appears that Will has been struggling with keeping his true identity hidden too. 

It makes sense at a time when the AIDS crisis helped spur greater depictions of gay men and trans characters as monsters in film. In fact, many cultural and film critics suggest that Anne Rice drew from the real-life horrors of the AIDS crisis (imagined as the “gay man’s cancerinitially by doctors) when crafting her groundbreaking gay characters in “Interview with the Vampire,” as she had always supported the LGBTQ community and wanted to address the decade’s rhetoric that espoused gay people as monsters. 

Stranger ThingsNoah Schnapp as Will Byers in “Stranger Things” (Netflix)But whether or not the vampires were humanized, the feeling during the decade was that a single mingling of tainted blood might make one the “living dead” — someone with an incurable disease that would eventually destroy the person. In 1984, real-life Indiana born and raised Ryan White, although not himself gay, was diagnosed with AIDS after contracting the disease from a blood transfusion. Parents of the kids he attended school with fought to keep him barred from returning to the school, and he experienced other significant forms of discrimination. 

Is it any wonder, then, that characters like Will and Robin (Maya Hawke) must be so circumspect in revealing to others their true identities?


Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.


Although a melding of sci-fi and fantasy as well, “Stranger Things” pulls from a horror tradition that codes boys or men who are open to the paranormal or supernatural as being gendered in more feminine terms. Vecna (Jamie Campbell Bower), the latest monster in “Stranger Things” – who has incredible psychokinetic powers and now lives in the Upside Down – was once described as a sensitive boy by his father as well. 

And so perhaps viewers shouldn’t be surprised if it’s eventually revealed that Vecna, in his human form, might have come out as queer. Like Freddy Krueger (who has a gay fandom of his own), he is also a monster capable of slipping into the minds of his victims. With the predicament Max is in at the end of Season 4, we are left pondering if she will be possessed in Season 5, along with what else may lie ahead for the characters at the hands of Vecna.     

Read more

about this topic

Your cleaning routine just got way cleaner

I’ve written about homes and housekeeping for my entire career, and I’ve seen cleaning products and trends come and go with the seasons. But the latest trend in home care is one I hope will be more than just a passing phase. Over the last two years, I’ve watched an increasing number of powdered and minimally packaged cleaning products come to market.

There’s no catch-all phrase to describe this new category — not all are 100% plastic-free, not all are zero-waste, but they all feature powdered or dry tablet formulations and an overall theme of less waste. These new products have less packaging, and because they come in powdered and tablet forms, their manufacturers use less fuel to ship them and produce less emissions, as a result. These low-waste products also often have fewer potentially toxic chemicals in their minimalist ingredients list, aka a win-win for us consumers.

Joe Giallanella, the team lead for Seventh Generation‘s Growth Incubator, says it’s the consumer driving this trend towards powdered formulations and away from plastic packaging. “We were motivated by a 2020 study that showed that one in three consumers were shopping the aisles of their grocery stores hoping to buy the products that they know in something other than single-use plastics,” he says. The company, which is known for its sustainable bonafides, first tested the market with a small launch of powdered Zero Plastic products through Grove Co. in 2020. Next month, the line will get a full roll-out in grocery stores and big-box stores like Target. Smaller brands like BluelandBranch Basics, and Meliora have all debuted lower-waste powder-based cleaning products, as well. Here’s what’s driving this trend and what you need to know shopping for low-waste products:

How powders became passé

Powdered cleaning products and detergents were popular for most of the 20th century, but starting in the 1980s liquids began to take hold of the market, and along with this shift came a transition from cardboard boxes to single-use plastic bottles. Consumers like that liquid detergents, dishwasher soap, and other cleansers were easier to dispense, plus they dissolved more readily in cooler water — and the companies making them could charge a premium for this convenience, giving them incentive to push the liquid market.

Our love of liquids contributes to the single-use plastic crisis

By now, you’ve probably heard about the many problems with single-use plastics, including the ever-growing Great Pacific Garbage Patch in the Pacific Ocean. But when it comes to cleaning, it can be hard to kick the single-use plastic habit. “When I started the Sustainability Concierge in 2017, there were no good low-waste, non-toxic cleaning products to recommend to my clients, so I told everyone to clean with castile soap, baking soda, and vinegar,” says Friday Aplaski, a consultant who helps homeowners green their homes in the Bay Area. “However, today brands are slowly joining the zero-waste movement.”

They’re not your grandma’s powders

Of course, consumers seeking to lessen their plastic consumption could seek out old-school powdered cleansers (and I for one still love the original, eco-friendly Bon Ami Powder Cleanser), but these products are increasingly hard to find in the U.S. Additionally, many of the zero-waste-aspiring customers are also skeptical of the long ingredients list on some traditional cleansers. “Consumers want easy, convenient, and uncomplicated cleaning solutions. Currently, sustainability is at the forefront, and consumers want to avoid plastics, but more and more people are asking for non-toxic products too,” says Branch Basics co-founder Marilee Nelson.

The pros and cons of tablets vs. powders

Different brands have taken different approaches to creating powdered formulations. Blueland‘s founder Sarah Paiji Yoo, opted for powdered tablets for her start-up because she saw that it was a sustainable and customer-friendly option. “The dry tablet form factor enables more sustainable packaging options, like compostable paper, as opposed to non-recyclable plastic pouches and cartridges or resource-intensive and heavy glass,” Paiji says. “It also delivers an incredible and simple customer experience with no messy pouring or powder.” Seventh Generation has opted for loose powders for its new line, preferring to give the consumer the ability to dose the product and avoiding the issue of tablets that get crushed in transit.

The problem with plastic films

One solution to the problem of crumbling tablets is to encase the cleanser in a dissolvable plastic film, an option popular for dishwasher soap and laundry detergents. However, “Even though the film is said to be soluble in water, the plastic film is not totally biodegradable,” cautions Branch Basics’s Nelson. “It contaminates our water systems and enters the food chain.” Indeed, writing for Plastics Ocean International, Dr. Charlie Rolsky, the organization’s director of science explains, “Dissolve does not mean disappear. Salt is technically soluble in water, but if you pour a bunch of salt in a glass of water, you very much taste it. It’s still there,” and studies suggest those plastic films are still very much in our water system, and we lack a complete understanding of the subsequent consequences of its presence.

That pesky packaging!

Even with the plastic-free powder or tablet formation, brands still need to get their product to the consumer in something. Branch Basics has stuck with a plastic pouch for its new dishwasher tablets (much to zero-waste advocates like Aplaski’s chagrin), Seventh Generation wanted to be truly plastic-free for its new line, so they opted for steel containers. “One reason we chose the material was because it has a better chance of being recycled and re-entering the recycling stream,” says Giallanella. “You can recycle this steel an infinite amount of times without the metal losing its strength over time.” Blueland will sell you a metal container for its tablets too, but they’ll ship your refill in a “compostable” bag, but . . . it’s only compostable in a commercial-scale composting facility, not a home bin. Meliora recently rejiggered their packaging to be 100% paper.

The truly zero-waste future

Giallanella concedes that Seventh Generation’s powdered Zero Plastic line and its competitors are just a step towards a truly zero-waste cleaning products market. “This is the journey that we’re on; we recognize that in order to make a zero-plastic line and lessen the environmental impact as much as we want to, it’s going to require an option for refills.” He hopes that one day people will be able to go to their grocery store and refill their canisters with cleansers right there. For now, Giallanella and the other experts I spoke to point out that any option that reduces the number of single-use plastics and shipping fuel you use is a good one. As Anne-Marie Bonneau, aka “The Zero Waste Chef,” famously tweeted: We don’t need a handful of people doing zero waste perfectly. We need millions of people doing it imperfectly. So, if you’re looking for a way to reduce your cleaning-related waste, give powdered formulations a try!

On growing the beautiful, flavorful curry leaf plant

You can Grow Your Own Way. All spring and summer, we’re playing in the vegetable garden; join us for step-by-step guides, highly recommended tools, backyard tours, juicy-ripe recipes, and then some. Let’s get our hands dirty.


It was an especially cold and sunless April in Chicago this year when Margaret Pak brought home her young curry leaf plant, so she decided to take it into the bathroom a few times when she showered to mimic the tropical air it’s used to (in India and Southern Asia), based on a tip from a local nursery.

“This is my second curry leaf plant,” sighs Pak. She’s the co-owner with husband and Kerala, India native, Vinod Kalathil, of forthcoming Chicago restaurant Thattu, which specializes in Kerala cooking. Pak suspects her first plant died due to insufficient care. This time, she’s determined to succeed. “It’s important for me to see it grow before my eyes, to smell and touch it,” she says. “The flavor is so transportive, like being at home in Kerala when Amma (mother) goes in front and picks curry leaves, brings them into the kitchen, crushes, and feels them to get oils out to make fish for lunch.”

Pak spent months asking around at local nurseries and scouring her social networks for leads on curry leaf plants or seeds. Indeed, across much of the U.S., if there’s one thing trickier than caring for a potted curry leaf plant (also called kadipatta or kariappala), it’s getting hold of one. She finally nabbed a propagate from Instagram friend Jes Thomas, a Knoxville, Tenn.-based chef-instructor and culinary assistant on Food Network’s “Chopped.”

Since procuring a cutting from her in-laws some twenty years ago, Thomas has doggedly coaxed her potted kariappala plant to maturity through issues ranging from spider mites to sticky and yellowing leaves, and even one “horror film”-esque incident when an ant colony took up residence beneath the plant. She’s also given away a dozen or more propagates throughout the Midwest and South — to everyone from chefs to botanists — with mixed results. But she keeps at it, and not just for the subtle aromas of kaffir lime and anisey basil that the leaves impart on quintessential dishes like sambar and pachadi.

“I see people from other parts of India around my age reclaiming their heritage,” says Thomas, whose parents emigrated from Kerala, likely with a few kariappala cuttings in their suitcase. “Growing and sharing the curry leaf, to me, feels like I’m doing that.”

What makes the curry leaf plant so finicky, Thomas says, owes to forcing it outside its native tropical climate into colder and drier ones where it must live indoors for part of the year: “In hot and humid places like Florida and Texas, and India, of course, it grows like a weed, so there’s not much need to care for it.”

Grow it like a shrub

As such, those in areas with a frost can’t treat curry leaf plants like a “regular vegetable plant or lemon or orange tree,” says Zainab “Zee” Husain, co-founder of Sacramento-based heritage plant nursery Cultural Roots. “Instead, I advise people to grow them to be more like a shrub.”

Lately, Husain has been dispensing tips to some 430 new kadipatta plant owners who bought them through a collaboration Cultural Roots did this spring with ethical spice trader Diaspora Co., around the same time Pak was on the hunt. (The plants sold out in four hours; next year’s collab already has an almost 900-person waitlist.) She says a hard pruning every spring and regular pinchings will help the curry leaf plant’s skeleton develop like a shrub, “which keeps it healthy, keeps the height down, and really helps with more leaf production.”

Pinching also helps stave off common ills like spider mites; “if you allow it to grow into a tall, skinny tree like it wants, it’s more susceptible to disease,” she adds. Should your plant get those pesky spider mites, by the way, Husain suggests giving it a healthy dousing of water, then individually removing the mites using neem oil or soapy water.

The curry leaf plant’s penchant for humidity explains the stickiness Thomas and others often encounter on the leaves and floor surrounding the pot. Taking a page from her parents (and their enviably 4-ft.-tall curry leaf plant), she treats it by mixing diluted dishwashing soap with a drop of olive oil and rubbing the solution on every single leaf. Husain’s similar, if more scientific, approach involves mixing 1 tbsp. biodegradable soap (like Dr. Bronners) per gallon of water, spraying each leaf, then wiping them with a moist paper towel — a ritual she repeats weekly until the stickiness is gone.

The stickiness is also preventable, by always watering the plant from the top (“a good bathing!” Husain cries), and misting the leaves about once a week during the growing season. Or, you know, simply taking it in the shower with you.

Other problems, like yellowing leaves, aren’t so easily diagnosed, however. During summer, this probably indicates overwatering, though it can also, irritatingly, mean underwatering. In winter, it more likely owes to iron chlorosis (inability to absorb iron into the roots) or magnesium deficiency. For the former, Husain suggests spraying the leaves with chelated liquid iron; for the latter, epsom salt spray.

“More often than not though, you can kind of ignore (yellowing leaves),” she adds. “By the time spring comes, the plant will shoot out new growth.”

Indeed, in the three years Husain has cultivated the curry leaf plant on a large scale (it was the first seed she ever sowed at Cultural Roots), she’s come to appreciate its hardiness despite its susceptibility to many issues. “I’ve seen them thrive indoors in cooler climates. It can be done.”

Thomas echoed this sentiment of resiliency to Pak. Even in the direst times when the woody stems have appeared all but bare, a reddish hue near the top was enough to indicate new growth would return in spring — meaning Pak possibly didn’t kill her first plant after all, Thomas says. Armed with this (tentative) peace of mind, Pak repotted her young plant and is so far seeing slow growth on two of the three stems.

“The point is, don’t throw it away,” Pak says (almost more to herself). “Give it a year; it can restart again. I think that’s amazing.”

Zee Husain’s tips for kadipatta care

  • Soil type: Use fast-draining soils like organic potting soil with perlite or cactus mix.
  • Between waterings, let the soil dry out almost two inches below top of the soil line to prevent overwatering.
  • Come summer, give your curry leaf plant plenty of outdoor time: As soon as the overnight low climbs to 50 degrees Fahrenheit, set your plant outside; when it falls below 50 in the fall, bring it in.
  • To fertilize or not to fertilize? Use a low-strength fertilizer, like fish emulsion, every other week during the growing season
  • If your winters are cold and dark, consider buying a heat mat at a nursery supply store. Set the temperature to 65 or 70 degrees Fahrenheit, and place the plant (and any other tropical houseplants) on top next to a sunny window. Faced with long stretches of gray winter days? Buy a small plant light, set it to four to six hours, and place the plant at least 6 inches away.

Video shows Capitol rioters denying Trump’s message to go home was real: “It looks prerecorded!”

A video posted on Tuesday by NBC News’ Ryan Reilly shows that some supporters of former President Donald Trump who stormed the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021 seemed reluctant to believe that he really wanted them to go home.

Roughly three hours after rioters breached the Capitol, Trump put out a video urging his followers to vacate the building, although not without once again inflaming their anger with false claims about the 2020 election being “stolen” from him.

“This was a fraudulent election, but we can’t play into the hands of these people,” Trump said. “We have to have peace. So go home. We love you. You’re very special.”

The video posted by Reilly shows several Trump supporters at the Capitol standing around a phone held by Jacob Chansley, a.k.a., the “QAnon Shaman,” and watching the twice-impeached former president’s plea to leave.

After watching the video, one Trump supporter immediately expressed skepticism that it was real.

“That looks prerecorded!” she yelled, which prompted Chansley to tell her to “chill the f*ck out.”

“When did he record that?!” the woman demanded to know. “I don’t see where he recorded that!”

“Calm down and go home, sweetheart,” Chanlsey said again.

According to Reilly, the video was recorded by Pam Hemphill, who was sentenced to 60 days in prison for her actions on January 6th.

Watch the video below or at this link.

House Republican publishes compilation of violent and threatening phone calls from Trump supporters

On Tuesday, Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Il, posted a video on Twitter compiling some of the threatening phone calls that his office has been receiving from angry constituents. The calls reflect the frustration that Trump supporters feel towards Kinzinger, one of just two Republican congressmen serving on the Jan. 6 committee.

“Threats of violence over politics has increased heavily in the last few years. But the darkness has reached new lows. My new interns made this compilation of recent calls they’ve received while serving in my DC office,” Kinzinger wrote.

The calls feature incredibly graphic language and threats of violence against Kinzinger, his mother, and his wife.

“I hope you naturally die as quickly as f****** possible,” one caller yells.

Kinzinger notes that the video was put together by his school-age interns, who are the ones responsible for receiving such violent calls.

Most callers attack Kinzinger for his participation in the Jan 6. committee to investigate the role that former President Donald Trump played in the attack on the Capitol.

“You go against Trump y’all know y’all m************ are sitting up there lying. Like a damn dog,” a caller said.

Along with Kinzinger, Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo, the other Republican on the Jan. 6 committee, has faced outrage from the pro-Trump mob.

“We’re going to get you and Liz Cheney,” another caller warned.

Kinzinger, who was first elected to Congress in 2010, has been an opponent of Trump since the 2016 Republican National Convention. Last year, Kinzinger was among one of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump for “incitement of insurrection.” In the months after, Kinzinger announced that he would not be seeking re-election.

Kinzinger’s active role in the Jan. 6 hearings has made him a target of the far-right. Last month, he shared that amid constant threats of violence, he has been forced to increase his own security.

But Kinzinger sees these increased threats of violence as a sign that Republicans are scared.

After last week’s testimony by Cassidy Hutchinson, a former White House aide, Kinzinger believes that Trump and his allies are starting to panic. “They’re all scared,” Kinzinger tweeted, “They should be.”

Republican states are trying to siphon COVID relief aid to cut taxes — and it may be illegal

Republican leaders in nearly two dozen U.S. states are attempting—potentially in violation of federal law—to use coronavirus relief funds approved by Congress last year to finance tax cuts instead of devoting the money to combating the ongoing pandemic and its economic consequences.

The Washington Post reported Tuesday that GOP officials are working to subvert a provision in the American Rescue Plan (ARP) that bars states from using money from a $350 billion Covid-19 aid program “to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in the net tax revenue.”

Last March, just days after President Joe Biden signed the ARP into law, 13 Republican state attorneys general sued the Biden administration over that provision, decrying it as an “unconstitutional assault on state sovereignty.” In the nearly year and a half since the GOP officials filed suit, numerous Republican states have moved to slash taxes—often in ways that primarily benefit rich households and profitable businesses.

Whitney Tucker and Coty Novak of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted earlier this year that Iowa—one of the states that joined the legal action against the Biden administration—replaced its “graduated personal income tax with a flat 3.9% tax while retaining credits and deductions that would allow wealthy Iowans to pay even less.”

“Lawmakers in multiple states are pushing deep tax cuts as states see stronger-than-expected revenues driven largely by the federal government’s robust fiscal response to the Covid-19 recession,” Tucker and Novak observed. “Iowa, Mississippi, South Carolina, and West Virginia are pushing for income tax cuts that would deliver outsized gains to wealthy residents and profitable corporations.”

The Post‘s Tony Romm reported Tuesday that “as gas prices climbed toward record highs this May, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) secured a pause on the state’s fuel taxes—a $200 million plan he helped pay for with a pot of federal funds awarded earlier in the pandemic.”

“More than a year after Congress approved a $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package, Republicans in nearly two dozen states have ratcheted up efforts to tap some of those funds for an unrelated purpose: paying for tax cuts,” Romm wrote. “The moves have threatened to siphon off aid that might otherwise help states fight the pandemic, shore up their local economies, or prepare for a potential recession.”

The Biden Treasury Department has emphasized that the ARP only prohibits states from using federal funds to pay for tax cuts, not from pursuing tax cuts at all.

But as Romm pointed out, Republican attorneys general are still fighting the law, claiming that it limits their states’ fiscal flexibility.

“In a flurry of court filings, many of the states argued for the ability to move money around freely—plugging federal dollars into various parts of their budgets, for example, then using the savings to pay for state tax cuts,” Romm reported. “Republicans have won nearly every federal lawsuit, convincing judge after judge that the rules are unconstitutional. The Treasury Department repeatedly has appealed, but the decisions for now have left the Biden administration unable to enforce the rules in much of the country.”