Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Nevilledog
Nevilledog's Journal
Nevilledog's Journal
February 8, 2024
Why do people buy into conspiracy theories when they don’t necessarily believe them? In a recent paper, Macquarie University’s Professor of Philosophy, Neil Levy, looks at society’s complex relationship with evidence, the desire to suspend disbelief, and the role of gamification in conspiracy theory.
Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory – that the moon landing was faked, global warming is a Chinese hoax, Covid was a biological weapon, the mafia and/or the FBI assassinated John F. Kennedy.
Belief in conspiracy theories is widespread, says Neil Levy, Professor of Philosophy at Macquarie University. A recent Washington Post poll reports that more than one-third of Americans believe that Joe Biden stole the 2020 presidential election from Donald Trump.
“Observers often ask ‘How can people believe things like that, given how thin the evidence is?’
“And the evidence isn’t just thin. When we look at what people say in defence of their conspiratorial beliefs, they’re (literally) not even trying. They’re not citing real evidence at all: they cite memes and word games. For example, citing a still from a movie as evidence that Covid-19 was planned or that ‘Delta omicron’ is an anagram of ‘media control’.
“The explanation? People are playing a game.”
*snip*
Are conspiracy theories a cultural art form?
https://lighthouse.mq.edu.au/article/february-2024/are-conspiracy-theories-a-cultural-art-formWhy do people buy into conspiracy theories when they don’t necessarily believe them? In a recent paper, Macquarie University’s Professor of Philosophy, Neil Levy, looks at society’s complex relationship with evidence, the desire to suspend disbelief, and the role of gamification in conspiracy theory.
Everyone loves a good conspiracy theory – that the moon landing was faked, global warming is a Chinese hoax, Covid was a biological weapon, the mafia and/or the FBI assassinated John F. Kennedy.
Belief in conspiracy theories is widespread, says Neil Levy, Professor of Philosophy at Macquarie University. A recent Washington Post poll reports that more than one-third of Americans believe that Joe Biden stole the 2020 presidential election from Donald Trump.
“Observers often ask ‘How can people believe things like that, given how thin the evidence is?’
“And the evidence isn’t just thin. When we look at what people say in defence of their conspiratorial beliefs, they’re (literally) not even trying. They’re not citing real evidence at all: they cite memes and word games. For example, citing a still from a movie as evidence that Covid-19 was planned or that ‘Delta omicron’ is an anagram of ‘media control’.
“The explanation? People are playing a game.”
*snip*
January 25, 2024
Republicans are playing a dangerous game around the border. As I wrote about earlier this week, in a narrow 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court finally lifted an injunction that had prevented the Border Patrol from cutting and removing razor wire erected by Texas along the border at Eagle Pass. The wire was considered highly dangerous because it could trap bodies in flowing water, leading to drowning.
A mother and her two children recently died at Eagle Pass because, according to federal officials, border patrol agents had been prevented from reaching them due to the state of Texas’s occupation and fencing off of a surveillance and mission launch area.
In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, however, Governor Abbott decided he would grandstand, telling the Texas state guard to “hold the line” at Eagle Pass. He then issued a statement, announcing that the Texas guard and law enforcement were now acting under a right of “self-defense” for the state. But it still isn’t clear what this means in practical terms.
Meanwhile, in Washington it became increasingly clear that all efforts to actually try and fix the border, including a hard-fought bipartisan Senate plan, are likely being scuttled. Why? According to Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump wants to “kill” the deal because he doesn’t want Biden to chalk a political win before the election.
*snip*
Republicans are ratcheting up the very crisis at the border that they claim they want solved.
https://statuskuo.substack.com/p/the-border-gameRepublicans are playing a dangerous game around the border. As I wrote about earlier this week, in a narrow 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court finally lifted an injunction that had prevented the Border Patrol from cutting and removing razor wire erected by Texas along the border at Eagle Pass. The wire was considered highly dangerous because it could trap bodies in flowing water, leading to drowning.
A mother and her two children recently died at Eagle Pass because, according to federal officials, border patrol agents had been prevented from reaching them due to the state of Texas’s occupation and fencing off of a surveillance and mission launch area.
In response to the Supreme Court’s ruling, however, Governor Abbott decided he would grandstand, telling the Texas state guard to “hold the line” at Eagle Pass. He then issued a statement, announcing that the Texas guard and law enforcement were now acting under a right of “self-defense” for the state. But it still isn’t clear what this means in practical terms.
Meanwhile, in Washington it became increasingly clear that all efforts to actually try and fix the border, including a hard-fought bipartisan Senate plan, are likely being scuttled. Why? According to Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump wants to “kill” the deal because he doesn’t want Biden to chalk a political win before the election.
*snip*
January 18, 2024
Executive Summary
Putting the authoritarian threat in context
Since June 16, 2015, the day that Donald Trump descended an escalator in Trump Tower and announced his run for the presidency, the American body politic has struggled to figure out how to treat him, his rhetoric, and the threat he poses to our system of government. A similar pattern plays out repeatedly: Trump makes a seemingly outlandish promise that upends conventional understandings of politics. Then, those who help Americans make sense of current events — the media, other politicians, pundits, and influencers — dismiss, distort, or deny the very promise Trump has made. And few then know quite what to make of it all or how to respond — a state of confusion that has enabled Trump to shatter democratic norms in previously inconceivable ways.
We now have more than eight years of experience with this phenomenon and a full presidential term as a track record proving that Trump’s pledges should be taken both seriously and literally. He has, for the most part, sought to do the extreme things that were dismissed as mere rhetoric when first promised, from enacting a “Muslim ban” to refusing to accept the results of an election. And yet, here we are again, with Trump making even more extreme promises to “terminate” the Constitution, seek “retribution” against political opponents, and be a “dictator” (just on day one), only to see people unsure what to make of or how to respond to these threats.
This report aims to alter these dynamics by clearly showing how Trump would follow through on his most extreme anti-democratic pledges for a second term and then offering expert recommendations for how to mitigate that danger.
The bulk of the report looks specifically at three things: Promises, Powers, and Plans.
*snip*
The Authoritarian Playbook for 2025
https://www.authoritarianplaybook2025.org/Executive Summary
Putting the authoritarian threat in context
Since June 16, 2015, the day that Donald Trump descended an escalator in Trump Tower and announced his run for the presidency, the American body politic has struggled to figure out how to treat him, his rhetoric, and the threat he poses to our system of government. A similar pattern plays out repeatedly: Trump makes a seemingly outlandish promise that upends conventional understandings of politics. Then, those who help Americans make sense of current events — the media, other politicians, pundits, and influencers — dismiss, distort, or deny the very promise Trump has made. And few then know quite what to make of it all or how to respond — a state of confusion that has enabled Trump to shatter democratic norms in previously inconceivable ways.
We now have more than eight years of experience with this phenomenon and a full presidential term as a track record proving that Trump’s pledges should be taken both seriously and literally. He has, for the most part, sought to do the extreme things that were dismissed as mere rhetoric when first promised, from enacting a “Muslim ban” to refusing to accept the results of an election. And yet, here we are again, with Trump making even more extreme promises to “terminate” the Constitution, seek “retribution” against political opponents, and be a “dictator” (just on day one), only to see people unsure what to make of or how to respond to these threats.
This report aims to alter these dynamics by clearly showing how Trump would follow through on his most extreme anti-democratic pledges for a second term and then offering expert recommendations for how to mitigate that danger.
The bulk of the report looks specifically at three things: Promises, Powers, and Plans.
* It collects a set of promises Donald Trump has made, in his own words, for what he would do in a second term. It places them in their proper context, coming amidst a resurgence of similar authoritarians worldwide that Trump has openly admired and modeled himself after.
* It examines the powers of the presidency and how they could be used to implement those promises. It explains the legal mechanisms that will be applied to turn Trump’s campaign promises into government policy and programs. And, it assesses the previously available guardrails that could constrain or prevent these abuses of power and the extent to which they will still hold.
* It explores the plans Trump and his allies have drafted to circumvent or override the checks in our system that otherwise have or could restrain his most extreme intentions. Based on expert input, it describes how these policies will play out in practice and negatively impact American life upon implementation.
*snip*
January 12, 2024
No paywall link
https://archive.li/LTzJt
Children had a “great time” at the first meeting of an after-school Satan club at a Tennessee elementary school this week, organizers said, despite dozens of protesters who condemned the meeting.
On Wednesday, the After School Satan Club (ASSC), a federally recognized non-profit organization and national after-school program, held its first meeting at Chimneyrock elementary school in Memphis.
A club flyer said that the Satanic Temple was a non-theistic religion that views Satan as “a literary figure who represents a metaphorical construct of rejecting tyranny and championing the human mind and spirit”.
“After School Satan Club does not attempt to convert children to any religious ideology. Instead, the Satanic Temple supports children to think for themselves. All After School Satan Clubs … emphasize a scientific, rationalist, non-superstitious world view,” it added.
*snip*
Tennessee after-school Satan club holds first meeting despite protests
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/jan/11/tennessee-after-school-satan-club-satanic-templeNo paywall link
https://archive.li/LTzJt
Children had a “great time” at the first meeting of an after-school Satan club at a Tennessee elementary school this week, organizers said, despite dozens of protesters who condemned the meeting.
On Wednesday, the After School Satan Club (ASSC), a federally recognized non-profit organization and national after-school program, held its first meeting at Chimneyrock elementary school in Memphis.
A club flyer said that the Satanic Temple was a non-theistic religion that views Satan as “a literary figure who represents a metaphorical construct of rejecting tyranny and championing the human mind and spirit”.
“After School Satan Club does not attempt to convert children to any religious ideology. Instead, the Satanic Temple supports children to think for themselves. All After School Satan Clubs … emphasize a scientific, rationalist, non-superstitious world view,” it added.
*snip*
December 23, 2023
No paywall link
https://archive.li/VRCfE
THE SUPREME COURT announced last week that it would take up a case considering restrictions on the most widely-used method of abortion in the United States: the abortion pill. Under a worst-case scenario for American women, that case could have triggered a full reversal of the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, cutting off access to the medication across the country. That didn’t happen. The Supreme Court said it would only consider a more narrow set of questions about regulatory changes that have made the abortion pill more accessible in recent years. It could significantly limit access to mifepristone, but won’t end it altogether.
But it may not matter how the high court rules if Republicans win the presidency next November. That’s because GOP operatives have already crafted an expansive blueprint, 887 pages long, laying out in painstaking detail how they intend to govern, including plans to leverage virtually every arm, tool and agency of the federal government to attack abortion access. The document explicitly names their intention not just to rescind FDA approval for the abortion pill if they regain control of the White House in 2024, but to revive a 150-year-old law that criminalizes sending or receiving through the mail any “article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine or thing” that could be used to facilitate an abortion. That law, the Comstock Act, is viewed as a de facto federal abortion ban by reproductive rights advocates and anti-abortion activists alike.
Those plans — and many more, including proposals to attack contraception access, use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to increase “abortion surveillance” and data collection, rescind a Department of Defense policy to “prohibit abortion travel funding,” punish states that require health insurance plans to cover abortion, and retool a law that is currently protecting pregnant women with life-threatening conditions — are outlined in Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership.”
Project 2025 is an initiative of the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing think tank that has helped staff and set the agenda for every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan. It describes Project 2025 as “the conservative movement’s unified effort to be ready for the next conservative administration to govern at 12:00 noon, January 20, 2025.”
*snip*
Inside the MAGA Plan to Attack Birth Control, Surveil Women and Ban the Abortion Pill
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/maga-plan-attack-birth-control-surveil-women-ban-abortion-pill-1234934807/No paywall link
https://archive.li/VRCfE
THE SUPREME COURT announced last week that it would take up a case considering restrictions on the most widely-used method of abortion in the United States: the abortion pill. Under a worst-case scenario for American women, that case could have triggered a full reversal of the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of mifepristone, cutting off access to the medication across the country. That didn’t happen. The Supreme Court said it would only consider a more narrow set of questions about regulatory changes that have made the abortion pill more accessible in recent years. It could significantly limit access to mifepristone, but won’t end it altogether.
But it may not matter how the high court rules if Republicans win the presidency next November. That’s because GOP operatives have already crafted an expansive blueprint, 887 pages long, laying out in painstaking detail how they intend to govern, including plans to leverage virtually every arm, tool and agency of the federal government to attack abortion access. The document explicitly names their intention not just to rescind FDA approval for the abortion pill if they regain control of the White House in 2024, but to revive a 150-year-old law that criminalizes sending or receiving through the mail any “article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine or thing” that could be used to facilitate an abortion. That law, the Comstock Act, is viewed as a de facto federal abortion ban by reproductive rights advocates and anti-abortion activists alike.
Those plans — and many more, including proposals to attack contraception access, use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to increase “abortion surveillance” and data collection, rescind a Department of Defense policy to “prohibit abortion travel funding,” punish states that require health insurance plans to cover abortion, and retool a law that is currently protecting pregnant women with life-threatening conditions — are outlined in Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership.”
Project 2025 is an initiative of the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing think tank that has helped staff and set the agenda for every Republican administration since Ronald Reagan. It describes Project 2025 as “the conservative movement’s unified effort to be ready for the next conservative administration to govern at 12:00 noon, January 20, 2025.”
*snip*
December 1, 2023
I had never seen a sanctuary so full on a Tuesday night.
The people packed into FloodGate Church in Brighton, Mich., weren’t here for Bill Bolin, the right-wing zealot pastor who’d grown his congregation tenfold by preaching conspiracy-fueled sermons since the onset of Covid-19, turning Sunday morning worship services into amateur Fox News segments. No, they had come out by the hundreds, decked out in patriotic attire this October evening in 2021, to hear from a man who was introduced to them as “America’s greatest living historian.” They had come for David Barton. And so had I.
It would be of little use to tell the folks around me — the people of my conservative hometown — that Barton wasn’t a real historian. They wouldn’t care that his lone academic credential was a bachelor’s degree in religious education from Oral Roberts University. It wouldn’t matter that Barton’s 2012 book on Thomas Jefferson was recalled by Thomas Nelson, the world’s largest Christian publisher, for its countless inaccuracies, or that a panel of 10 conservative Christian academics who reviewed Barton’s body of work in the aftermath ripped the entirety of his scholarship to shreds. It would not bother the congregants of FloodGate Church to learn that they were listening to a man whose work was found by one of America’s foremost conservative theologians to include “embarrassing factual errors, suspiciously selective quotes, and highly misleading claims.”
All this would be irrelevant to the people around me because David Barton was one of them. He believed the separation of church and state was a myth. He believed the time had come for evangelicals to reclaim their rightful place atop the nation’s governmental and cultural institutions. Hence the hero’s welcome Barton received when he rolled into FloodGate with his “American Restoration Tour.”
Throughout his decades of public life — working for the Republican Party, becoming a darling of Fox News, advising politicians such as new House Speaker Mike Johnson, launching a small propaganda empire, carving out a niche as the American right’s chosen peddler of nostalgic alternative facts — Barton had never been shy about his ultimate aims. He is an avowed Christian nationalist who favors theocratic rule; moreover, he is a so-called Dominionist, someone who believes Christians should control not only the government but also the media, the education system, and other cultural institutions. Barton and his ilk are invested less in advancing individual policies than they are in reconceiving our system of self-government in its totality, claiming a historical mandate to rule society with biblical dogma just as the founders supposedly intended.
*snip*
Tim Alberta: The Bogus Historians Who Teach Evangelicals They Live in a Theocracy
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/01/evangelicals-american-politics-tim-alberta-book-excerpt-00129319I had never seen a sanctuary so full on a Tuesday night.
The people packed into FloodGate Church in Brighton, Mich., weren’t here for Bill Bolin, the right-wing zealot pastor who’d grown his congregation tenfold by preaching conspiracy-fueled sermons since the onset of Covid-19, turning Sunday morning worship services into amateur Fox News segments. No, they had come out by the hundreds, decked out in patriotic attire this October evening in 2021, to hear from a man who was introduced to them as “America’s greatest living historian.” They had come for David Barton. And so had I.
It would be of little use to tell the folks around me — the people of my conservative hometown — that Barton wasn’t a real historian. They wouldn’t care that his lone academic credential was a bachelor’s degree in religious education from Oral Roberts University. It wouldn’t matter that Barton’s 2012 book on Thomas Jefferson was recalled by Thomas Nelson, the world’s largest Christian publisher, for its countless inaccuracies, or that a panel of 10 conservative Christian academics who reviewed Barton’s body of work in the aftermath ripped the entirety of his scholarship to shreds. It would not bother the congregants of FloodGate Church to learn that they were listening to a man whose work was found by one of America’s foremost conservative theologians to include “embarrassing factual errors, suspiciously selective quotes, and highly misleading claims.”
All this would be irrelevant to the people around me because David Barton was one of them. He believed the separation of church and state was a myth. He believed the time had come for evangelicals to reclaim their rightful place atop the nation’s governmental and cultural institutions. Hence the hero’s welcome Barton received when he rolled into FloodGate with his “American Restoration Tour.”
Throughout his decades of public life — working for the Republican Party, becoming a darling of Fox News, advising politicians such as new House Speaker Mike Johnson, launching a small propaganda empire, carving out a niche as the American right’s chosen peddler of nostalgic alternative facts — Barton had never been shy about his ultimate aims. He is an avowed Christian nationalist who favors theocratic rule; moreover, he is a so-called Dominionist, someone who believes Christians should control not only the government but also the media, the education system, and other cultural institutions. Barton and his ilk are invested less in advancing individual policies than they are in reconceiving our system of self-government in its totality, claiming a historical mandate to rule society with biblical dogma just as the founders supposedly intended.
*snip*
November 22, 2023
“MOM, I DON’T THINK YOU SHOULD SEE THIS. You should leave the room.”
That was my younger son, age 7 or 8, purportedly trying to “protect” me years ago from a risqué music video on MTV.
We were relatively permissive parents. The boys watched MTV and The Simpsons from an early age—so many episodes of the latter so many times each that even now, in their thirties, both of them can spout the perfect bit of dialogue to fit any occasion, no matter how surreal. I see now they were right—that show was hilariously and cuttingly on the nose about everything.
I thought of all this while reading a Washington Post account of a Donald Trump rally in Iowa. I thought I knew what these rallies were like: I watched one start to finish back in 2016 and since then I’ve read many verbatim transcripts of Trump rallies and speeches. And I thought I knew Iowa and its unique political culture: I spent much of the 1990s and 2000s covering its liberal peaceniks, conservative Christians, caucuses and straw polls. I figured that, like many journalists and Americans in general, I was shockproof after eight years of Trump, though I’ve tried hard to avoid becoming numb or bored or exhausted.
Hannah Knowles has proved I am not shockproof. Her Post story about Trump’s rally in Fort Dodge on Saturday is, in fact, a continuing series of new shocks. That’s because her focus is not only on Trump but on the people who came to see him, and their children. Brace yourself:
*snip*
Trump Rallies are Tutorials in Hate, Vulgarity, and Disrespect
https://plus.thebulwark.com/p/trump-rallies-hate-vulgarity-disrespect?utm_campaign=post“MOM, I DON’T THINK YOU SHOULD SEE THIS. You should leave the room.”
That was my younger son, age 7 or 8, purportedly trying to “protect” me years ago from a risqué music video on MTV.
We were relatively permissive parents. The boys watched MTV and The Simpsons from an early age—so many episodes of the latter so many times each that even now, in their thirties, both of them can spout the perfect bit of dialogue to fit any occasion, no matter how surreal. I see now they were right—that show was hilariously and cuttingly on the nose about everything.
I thought of all this while reading a Washington Post account of a Donald Trump rally in Iowa. I thought I knew what these rallies were like: I watched one start to finish back in 2016 and since then I’ve read many verbatim transcripts of Trump rallies and speeches. And I thought I knew Iowa and its unique political culture: I spent much of the 1990s and 2000s covering its liberal peaceniks, conservative Christians, caucuses and straw polls. I figured that, like many journalists and Americans in general, I was shockproof after eight years of Trump, though I’ve tried hard to avoid becoming numb or bored or exhausted.
Hannah Knowles has proved I am not shockproof. Her Post story about Trump’s rally in Fort Dodge on Saturday is, in fact, a continuing series of new shocks. That’s because her focus is not only on Trump but on the people who came to see him, and their children. Brace yourself:
Children wandered around in shirts and hats with the letters “FJB,” an abbreviation for an obscene jab at President Biden that other merchandise spelled out: “Fuck Biden.” . . .
One of Trump’s introductory speakers from the Iowa state legislature declared anyone who kneels for the national anthem is a “disrespectful little shit,” quickly drawing a roaring response. And outside the packed venue, vulgar slogans about Biden and Vice President Harris were splashed across T-shirts: “Biden Loves Minors.” “Joe and the Ho Gotta Go!” One referred to Biden and Harris performing sexual acts.
*snip*
November 12, 2023
No paywall
https://archive.li/XfJ7e
A WEEK AFTER THE MASSACRE in Lewiston, Maine, left 18 dead, 13 wounded, and a swath of New England terrorized and on lockdown, the gun industry was thinking about its bottom line.
During a Nov. 1 quarterly-earnings call, Ruger CEO Christopher Killoy touted the company’s profits, and the sales boost from new products like its SFAR — a “small-frame auto-loading rifle,” chambered to fire devastating, high-caliber bullets.
The firearms press is enamored with this new assault rifle, touting it as “easy to carry, fast to the shoulder, and packing the punch of an old-school .30-caliber battle rifle.” But had that deadly punch just been turned on civilians at a bowling alley and billiards bar in Lewiston? Law enforcement recovered a Ruger SFAR from the getaway vehicle of the military-trained shooter, Robert R. Card II, and the arrest warrant for Card highlighted “numerous rifle cartridges” scattered “throughout the premises” of both murder scenes.
Killoy did not mention the killings, directly. But he did address analysts who wanted to know if the company was picking up signals of a buying surge, based on the events of “the last 30 days” — encompassing both Lewiston and the Hamas assault on civilians in Israel. “There may be some good demand signals coming,” Killoy advised shareholders. “For all the wrong reasons, perhaps.”
*snip*
Mass Murder Is a Choice. The Gun Industry Made It
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/mass-shootings-gun-industry-greed-ravaging-america-1234874423/No paywall
https://archive.li/XfJ7e
A WEEK AFTER THE MASSACRE in Lewiston, Maine, left 18 dead, 13 wounded, and a swath of New England terrorized and on lockdown, the gun industry was thinking about its bottom line.
During a Nov. 1 quarterly-earnings call, Ruger CEO Christopher Killoy touted the company’s profits, and the sales boost from new products like its SFAR — a “small-frame auto-loading rifle,” chambered to fire devastating, high-caliber bullets.
The firearms press is enamored with this new assault rifle, touting it as “easy to carry, fast to the shoulder, and packing the punch of an old-school .30-caliber battle rifle.” But had that deadly punch just been turned on civilians at a bowling alley and billiards bar in Lewiston? Law enforcement recovered a Ruger SFAR from the getaway vehicle of the military-trained shooter, Robert R. Card II, and the arrest warrant for Card highlighted “numerous rifle cartridges” scattered “throughout the premises” of both murder scenes.
Killoy did not mention the killings, directly. But he did address analysts who wanted to know if the company was picking up signals of a buying surge, based on the events of “the last 30 days” — encompassing both Lewiston and the Hamas assault on civilians in Israel. “There may be some good demand signals coming,” Killoy advised shareholders. “For all the wrong reasons, perhaps.”
*snip*
October 30, 2023
Almost immediately after Jan. 6, 2021, legal commentators began debating whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment could be used to disqualify former President Donald Trump from running in the 2024 presidential election. They discussed, in particular, whether or not Section 3 applied to a former president, whether it is self-executing, and whether Jan. 6 could be considered an insurrection or rebellion.
Since then, the issue has become less abstract. In February 2021, the U.S. Senate acquitted Trump of an impeachment article for inciting insurrection, but with a bipartisan majority of the Senate voting to convict. Section 3 challenges have been mounted against several legislators, and one state-level county commissioner who participated in the attack was successfully ousted from his post under that provision. In addition, the House Select Committee on the Jan. 6 Attack on the Capitol made the argument that Trump did inspire an insurrection, referring him to the Justice Department for prosecution under multiple criminal statutes, including one prohibiting insurrection. The Special Counsel’s Office has since brought a criminal case in Washington, D.C. charging Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 attack. In addition, some prominent legal conservatives have argued for a strong, originalist reading of Section 3 that they argue would apply to Trump, immediately disqualifying him from office.
Beginning with a case in Florida in February 2023, voters and advocacy groups have brought many Section 3 challenges in state and federal courts across the country, attempting to block Trump’s name from appearing on ballots for state primaries and caucuses before the national election begins. This page is intended to track which states have active Section 3 litigation to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot. At the bottom is a selected reading of Lawfare's coverage on the issue. Note that the procedural posture and legal theories behind these challenges vary greatly, and a dismissal in any particular action does not necessarily bar other challenges from being brought in that same state.
*snip*
Tracking Section 3 Trump Disqualification Challenges (Lawfare)
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/current-projects/the-trump-trials/section-3-litigation-trackerAlmost immediately after Jan. 6, 2021, legal commentators began debating whether Section 3 of the 14th Amendment could be used to disqualify former President Donald Trump from running in the 2024 presidential election. They discussed, in particular, whether or not Section 3 applied to a former president, whether it is self-executing, and whether Jan. 6 could be considered an insurrection or rebellion.
Since then, the issue has become less abstract. In February 2021, the U.S. Senate acquitted Trump of an impeachment article for inciting insurrection, but with a bipartisan majority of the Senate voting to convict. Section 3 challenges have been mounted against several legislators, and one state-level county commissioner who participated in the attack was successfully ousted from his post under that provision. In addition, the House Select Committee on the Jan. 6 Attack on the Capitol made the argument that Trump did inspire an insurrection, referring him to the Justice Department for prosecution under multiple criminal statutes, including one prohibiting insurrection. The Special Counsel’s Office has since brought a criminal case in Washington, D.C. charging Trump for his role in the Jan. 6 attack. In addition, some prominent legal conservatives have argued for a strong, originalist reading of Section 3 that they argue would apply to Trump, immediately disqualifying him from office.
Beginning with a case in Florida in February 2023, voters and advocacy groups have brought many Section 3 challenges in state and federal courts across the country, attempting to block Trump’s name from appearing on ballots for state primaries and caucuses before the national election begins. This page is intended to track which states have active Section 3 litigation to remove Trump from the 2024 ballot. At the bottom is a selected reading of Lawfare's coverage on the issue. Note that the procedural posture and legal theories behind these challenges vary greatly, and a dismissal in any particular action does not necessarily bar other challenges from being brought in that same state.
*snip*
October 26, 2023
On Wednesday, after weeks of chaos, House Republicans unanimously selected Congressman Mike Johnson (R-LA) as the new Speaker. Compared to the previous Republican candidates for Speaker, Johnson has kept a relatively low profile in Congress. He was first elected to the House in 2016, and previously served as GOP deputy whip, a relatively junior leadership position. Johnson, 51, spent most of his career working as an attorney for far-right religious advocacy groups. Before joining Congress, he had a brief but eventful tenure as a member of the Louisiana legislature.
Here is some information you should know about Johnson, now that he has been abruptly elevated to one of the most powerful political positions in the nation.
Johnson advocated for the inclusion of controversial Bible course in public schools
In 2002, a course created by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools was offered in eight Louisiana parishes. The course, according to an April 2002 report in the Sunday Advocate, called "for students to read the Bible as a history book." It was criticized for being "skewed toward Protestant evangelical Christianity," for treating "the Bible as an accurate record of history," and for being a "thinly veiled" attempt to push Christianity on public school students.
The Supreme Court allows for the Bible to be taught in public schools, but only "objectively as a part of a secular program of education." Johnson defended the Bible course on behalf of the Louisiana Family Forum. He argued that the "Supreme Court did not say you have to discuss everybody's view on the Bible." Requiring that public schools treat all religious traditions equally, Johnson said, was "the height of political correctness."
*snip*
What everyone should know about the new House Speaker, Mike Johnson
https://popular.info/p/what-everyone-should-know-about-theOn Wednesday, after weeks of chaos, House Republicans unanimously selected Congressman Mike Johnson (R-LA) as the new Speaker. Compared to the previous Republican candidates for Speaker, Johnson has kept a relatively low profile in Congress. He was first elected to the House in 2016, and previously served as GOP deputy whip, a relatively junior leadership position. Johnson, 51, spent most of his career working as an attorney for far-right religious advocacy groups. Before joining Congress, he had a brief but eventful tenure as a member of the Louisiana legislature.
Here is some information you should know about Johnson, now that he has been abruptly elevated to one of the most powerful political positions in the nation.
Johnson advocated for the inclusion of controversial Bible course in public schools
In 2002, a course created by the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools was offered in eight Louisiana parishes. The course, according to an April 2002 report in the Sunday Advocate, called "for students to read the Bible as a history book." It was criticized for being "skewed toward Protestant evangelical Christianity," for treating "the Bible as an accurate record of history," and for being a "thinly veiled" attempt to push Christianity on public school students.
The Supreme Court allows for the Bible to be taught in public schools, but only "objectively as a part of a secular program of education." Johnson defended the Bible course on behalf of the Louisiana Family Forum. He argued that the "Supreme Court did not say you have to discuss everybody's view on the Bible." Requiring that public schools treat all religious traditions equally, Johnson said, was "the height of political correctness."
*snip*
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayMember since: Fri Jan 14, 2005, 11:36 PM
Number of posts: 51,057