All posts tagged "republicans"

Trump's TikTok dealings should've set this GOP toady roaring. His silence speaks volumes

You're not going to believe this, but it appears the cat’s got Josh Hawley’s tongue.

The junior senator from Missouri — known for his unwavering ability to detect Communist infiltration in American tech companies from eight area codes away — has suddenly gone quiet.

Interesting timing, too.

Because on Friday, President Donald Trump announced progress on a deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping to block any U.S. sale or ban of TikTok in exchange for vague “national security commitments” that sound suspiciously like business as usual.

That would be the same TikTok that Hawley has passionately demanded be banned, or at least completely removed from Chinese involvement.

“TikTok — and its parent company ByteDance — are threats to American national security,” Hawley wrote in 2023, to then Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen. He’s repeated that theme dozens if not hundreds of times as a senator.

So, you can imagine Hawley’s indignation when the Washington Post reported this:

“A ByteDance spokesperson in a statement Friday thanked Trump and Xi and said the company would work 'to ensure TikTok remains available to American users through TikTok U.S.'”

Shockingly, you could hear a pin drop. Hawley — arguably second to none among U.S. politicians in garnering attention and air time on every subject imaginable — has gone dark. No tweets, no press releases, no rushing to Fox News, no nothing.

So in the spirit of filling the void, let’s revisit what Josh Hawley has been screaming from the mountaintops for several years about TikTok — before it became a Trump-friendly enterprise. Here are just a few of his greatest hits:

“TikTok is digital fentanyl that’s addicting our kids and stealing their data!”
— Hawley, 2023
“TikTok is a surveillance tool for the Chinese Communist Party.
— Hawley, 2022
“Every time you use TikTok, you're giving your information to Beijing.
— Hawley, 2021
“We are literally subsidizing the destruction of our children’s mental health.
— Hawley, 2023
“This is mind control by a foreign adversary — and Democrats won’t act.”
— Hawley, 2024

But now that Trump has personally intervened to compromise on TikTok’s Chinese ownership, Hawley apparently no longer thinks it’s all that big a deal, after all.

Just because he authored the No TikTok on Government Devices Act, which was successfully signed into law, and a broader No TikTok on United States Devices Act, doesn’t mean Hawley cannot mind “some TikTok.”

This is the same senator who once told Fox News that Democrats were “kneeling before Chairman Xi” for not banning the app. So what is that Trump’s doing?

Let’s put it this way. If President Joe Biden had done this, Hawley would have demanded a vote by this afternoon on Articles of Impeachment. He would have hosted a special tonight on Fox News.

Now, maybe not so much.

It turns out, according to the Post, sources are saying the deal Trump is working on with Xi would be hugely beneficial to Trump BFF Larry Ellison, “the billionaire co-founder of Oracle, a tech giant that will own a stake in the U.S. spin-off and provide it cloud-computing and technical services.”

Just can’t get wait to see Hawley teeing off in the Senate about this one.

In 2020, an Esquire writer aptly said, “The most dangerous place to stand in Washington D.C. is any place between Senator Josh Hawley and a live microphone.”

That was before we had a dictator.

There's still time to oppose these shameless grabs for power

Ohio politicians pressured by an openly corrupt president look to be doubling down on blatantly partisan gerrymandering to help them in the 2026 midterms by manipulating congressional district boundaries in 2025, to silence the voices of opposition.

That’s not normal. Neither is armed troops and tanks in American streets. Neither are unidentifiable, masked federal agents seizing people off the streets because they fit a racial profile.

None of this is normal. Not in a functioning constitutional republic.

But without effective, sustained pushback from fearless pro-democracy leaders and a resolute citizenry determined to keep its inalienable rights, the takeover happening now in Ohio and the country will become the accepted norm by default.

We are not there yet.

There is still time to dissent — loudly — about political dictates from the Ohio Statehouse and the Trump regime.

But the window of opportunity is short.

Ohio House Speaker Matt Huffman, the mastermind behind Ohio’s unconstitutionally gerrymandered legislative and congressional maps — who called the rule of law on redistricting reform in the state “aspirational” and basically ignored it — is already signaling that new congressional districts will be drawn by GOP fiat without buy-in from the minority party.

Even before the new joint committee on congressional redistricting was announced by Republican legislative leaders, Huffman judged that chances for a bipartisan deal — on GOP plans to grab at least two more congressional districts through gerrymandering — are “not looking good” for passing a map with Democratic support by Sept. 30.

That means the congressional map that gives unfair advantage to one party over the other (which the Ohio Constitution explicitly prohibits) will go the Republican-majority Ohio Redistricting Commission.

If the panel can’t convince the two Democratic commissioners to bless the GOP power grab for more U.S. House seats by the end of October, the process returns to the legislature where Huffman and the Republican supermajority can easily pass their congressional map with a simple majority.

The Speaker — who in 2022 thumbed his nose at the constitutional amendment Ohioans overwhelmingly approved to end congressional gerrymandering — figures he can screw voters again and get away with it by dispensing normalizing assurances to follow the “process voters approved” and “stick to the Constitution and make decisions based on that.”

Huffman presents as conventional and law-abiding as he takes gerrymandering to new extremes in Ohio — like Texas and other red states considering similar steps. But make no mistake: He is razor-focused on undermining the will of Ohio voters so his party can stay in power in Congress regardless of majority opinion.

Gerrymandering disconnects political power from the will of voters by letting the powerful choose their voters instead of voters choosing their politicians. The result is skewed, unrepresentative district maps where electoral outcomes are virtually guaranteed.

That is what Huffman has orchestrated repeatedly with Ohio’s congressional redistricting, but he frames it as good faith map-making in accordance with the law to put a sheen on stealing voter power at the ballot box — as if that were normal.

It is only normal in governments who do not answer to the people they claim to represent.

Same goes for the unprovoked, unwarranted military deployment of troops and armaments in a free society to police its citizens.

It is only normal under regimes flexing muscle at the expense of the constitution and the rule of law.

It is a show of force to intimidate the governed into submission. It is also illegal, ruled a federal judge recently in California about Donald Trump’s use of federal troops for domestic policing in Los Angeles this summer.

Yet the president plans to escalate his use of troops in U.S. cities saying he’ll deploy to Memphis next — one of several blue cities run by Black mayors Trump has targeted to “fix like we did in Washington.”

Nearly 2,300 National Guard troops were deployed to patrol the nation’s capital a month ago after Trump declared a “crime emergency” in D.C. — even though violent crime in the federal district was at its lowest level in 30 years.

Trump falsely claimed the city was the most unsafe in the U.S “and perhaps the world” to justify his militarized policing of Washingtonians.

Six red-state governors, including Ohio’s Gov. Mike DeWine, rushed hundreds of extra Guard troops to D.C. to sightsee with tourists and score points with Trump.

Bored soldiers, used as political props, were relegated to picking up trash, raking leaves, laying mulch, and taking selfies with onlookers startled to see soldiers with rifles and armored vehicles loitering outside Union Station.

DeWine could have declined to be complicit in the dress rehearsal of military used against his fellow citizens; others from his party did. But he chose to put more boots on the ground in an American city to support a bogus “emergency” and call it the “right thing to do.”

The governor said his decision to send troops against the wishes of D.C. officials was consistent with past deployments. How on Earth could it be?

Truth is DeWine just wanted Ohioans to think his armed reinforcements to appease a dangerous megalomaniac was normal.

It was not and can never be as long as democracy has breath in America.

  • Marilou Johanek is a veteran Ohio print and broadcast journalist who has covered state and national politics as a longtime newspaper editorial writer and columnist

Spineless Schumer must force a shutdown this time. Here's why

Given Republicans' breathtaking control of the federal government, there are precious few opportunities for Democrats to leave their mark. But a real opening lies just ahead, and Dems must be ready to go to the mat, forcing the GOP to shut the entirety of the government down on Sept. 30 if they don't honor Democratic demands.

Nothing less than the framing of the stakes for the 2026 elections, combined with longstanding expectations for subsidized health care and a minimal social safety net, is at stake. Last time, Dems cratered. They no longer have that luxury.

Back in March, as the current spending bill approached, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), along with Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), John Fetterman (D-PA), and a few others, made almost no effort before caving in to Republican demands, out of fear of what President Donald Trump and Elon Musk (and DOGE) might do with "emergency powers" that might flow from a shutdown.

The bill went through with nearly every Republican cut in place. Since then, and as Project 2025 unfolds, we've been given a masterclass in how fiercely Trump seizes shocking levels of executive power even absent an emergency.

Trump is going to Trump without regard to exigencies. Inaction in hopes of normalcy is dangerously naive.

The current Republican bill guarantees cuts to Obamacare subsidies, Medicaid funding, FEMA funding, and other cuts that hurt poor and middle-class Americans. If Republicans stay in line, the bill will pass the House. It must be stopped in the Senate.

This gives the Democrats a unique opportunity to invest heavily in the right messaging, starting now to get out in front.

This week, Rep. Rose DeLauro (D-CT) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), the leading Democrats on spending matters, said Republicans “walked away from negotiations and are now threatening a shutdown by trying to jam through a funding bill on their terms alone.”

That was a good start. From here, Team Blue must stand firm, with resolute focus on our increasingly expensive American lives.

It is the right time to do it. Trump is still polling poorly at about 43 percent approval and has been seen as "extreme" throughout his second term. Team Red on Capitol Hill is nothing more than a distribution center for Trump Inc., headquartered just down Pennsylvania Avenue. The GOP is Trump. The coming shutdown is about him, period — not Sens. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) or John Thune (R-SD), or House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA).

It is about "the Trump cuts" or the "Trump money grab." Brand it. Personalize it. He deserves it.

To be sure, one takes a massive risk in shutting the government down during a period of economic uncertainty. A shutdown could slow the economy further. Thus, Democrats must stand tall and say that they must stop cuts to these social programs precisely because the economy is slowing and may turn downward in the near future.

Lingering economic worries will make Trump's cuts that much more devastating. Hold the line.

What Democrats can't do is get into a fight that looks like they are shutting the government down over politics. Playing the usual politics, whether about issues such as Voter ID or just obstructing to obstruct, is a loser. Dems must singularly and clearly stand their ground over the cost of the Republican bill to ordinary Americans, and not get into the weeds.

The GOP "money grab" must be the sine qua non of the Blue.

It will not be easy. But this is the perfect opportunity to paint Trump as an extremist, one trying to tear every remaining shred of government support from Americans' hands. Note the economic risk by screaming that Trump is doing all he can to run the economy into the ground as it is, with tariffs, layoffs, inflation — especially grocery prices. Pound on the need to help Americans, "more now than ever."

What Democrats cannot do is fold again, as they did in March. Chances to really improve American lives are so rare in this political dynamic that they must be seized when presented.

It will take some real political skill, but it most certainly can be done. Simply message that Dems won't consider anything that hurts ordinary Americans. Don't even mention any potential riders. Color Trump as the bad guy, stealing from the poor, willing to shut the government down to grab even more.

Trump owns the GOP with a totality that takes one's breath away, but that allows the Dems to make this personal. Whatever happens, it will be them against "Trump" and his demands. Talk about hospital closures, rising health care costs, and disaster relief. Put it all in the context of a very uncertain and somewhat painful economy, the Trump economy.

Do not back down. If we have learned anything under Trump's rule, it is that he will make things worse. He will use every inch of rope, grab powers heretofore unknown to exist, and lash out at minorities, women, LGBTQ Americans, immigrants, and the poor. He will do that anyway. There is no reason to let that concern get in the way of stopping this bill.

Republican cuts are deeply unpopular, so make Trump eat them. Make it such that Trump has to take the hit. He is the one who wants to hurt Americans so badly that he's willing to shut the government down in order to do it. And then let all the consequences shower onto him.

But for the love of God, stand up and be counted for once. Hold the line. Force them to shut it all down, over "a bill that enables Trump's money grab."

  • Jason Miciak is a former Associate Editor at Occupy Democrats, author, and American attorney. He can also regularly be found on Politizoom

'Wicked and demonic': GOP attacks on left over Charlie Kirk fuel small-town tensions

President Donald Trump’s vow to crack down on the “radical left” over the murder of Charlie Kirk was amplified during a prayer vigil for the conservative influencer in Monroe, NC, on Monday, as the small city east of Charlotte showed how the president’s divisive rhetoric is reverberating through local communities.

Amid angry exchanges involving Monroe’s mayor and a Democratic leader, local Democrats have reported receiving death threats.

Kirk, 31 and the founder of Turning Point USA, was shot dead in Orem, UT last Wednesday, during an appearance on a university campus. Vigils and memorials have been staged throughout the U.S.

Trump and his supporters have blamed the political left. Though no evidence has emerged to indicate the 22-year-old suspect, Tyler Robinson, received broad-based support or encouragement from anyone, he appears to have been motivated by opposition to Kirk's anti-transgender rhetoric.

In Monroe on Monday, a crowd of about 1,000 gathered to remember Kirk.

William Wolfe, a Christian evangelical leader who served in the State Department and Department of Defense during the first Trump administration, read a statement from current White House advisor Stephen Miller.

“There is a vast domestic terror movement,” the statement said, “and with God as my witness we are going to use every resource we have throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks, and we will do it in Charlie’s name.”

To cheers, Wolfe added: “If you know what time it is, and if you’re a Christian, I don’t think you should say anything else to what Stephen said, but, ‘Amen. Get it done.’”

Asserting that the murder shows the left to be an implacable foe, Miller and others in the administration have claimed, without evidence, that Kirk’s suspected shooter received backing from an unspecified far-left network or “antifa.”

Wolfe, who is executive director of the Center for Baptist Leadership, an organization seeking to push the Southern Baptist Convention in a more hardline direction, went a step further — declaring the Democratic Party the enemy.

“The Democrat [sic] Party has been captured by a wicked and demonic ideology, and evil, and we cannot make peace with that,” Wolfe said.

“We should expect and even demand our elected officials at the local, state and federal level to do what they can to drive this wickedness out of our public square so that we can live in peace again.”

Wolfe also echoed a statement by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), a right-wing extremist in Congress.

“You cannot have unity with people who want to kill us,” Wolfe said. “And we cannot make peace with wickedness.”

Wolfe added: “I can’t think of anything better that we could do to honor the life and legacy of Charlie Kirk than be bold and courageous Christians in the public square — to tear down the false gods of abortion, and transgenderism, and homosexuality, and Marxism, and socialism.”

Reached by phone, Wolfe requested that Raw Story submit questions in writing, then did not respond.

Robert Burns, Monroe’s mayor who recently faced a 7-2 “no confidence” vote from his city council, hosted the Kirk vigil — and also promoted the view that Christians should hold dominion over the United States.

“Be strong and courageous, because God has given you over the land,” Burns said. “He’s already given it to us, 250 years ago almost. This is God’s country, and he will not forget it.”

Burns did not respond to a voicemail and email requesting comment.

‘Extreme racist’

The positions of mayor and city council in Monroe are nonpartisan, but North Carolina’s Republican-controlled legislature recently passed a law requiring municipal candidates to have a party affiliation, beginning next year.

In another sign of how tensions arising from Kirk’s death have spread rapidly throughout society, Burns has exchanged social media volleys with a local African American Democratic leader — who has reported receiving death threats.

After Kirk’s death, Burns singled out Parron Baxter, a member of the North Carolina Democratic Party State Executive Committee, for posts expressing disappointment in Black people who publicly mourned Kirk.

“PATRIOTS! LET’S HOLD THE NC DEM PARTY ACCOUNTABLE,” Burns posted on X on Sept. 11. “Here’s an extreme racist … cheering on and celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk.”

Baxter did not shrink from confrontation. An X account that appears to be owned by Baxter replied, “F--- Charlie Kirk,” then invoked the late Robert F. Williams, a former president of the Monroe NAACP who advocated for armed self-defense during the turbulent 1960s.

“Calling up racists Lynch Mob [sic] when a Black man uses his 1st amendment right to free speech is on the nose for Union County,” Baxter wrote. “A place where 55 percent of adult white people were member[s] of the Klan during the time of Robert Williams. [Robert Burns] is of that ilk.”

In a Facebook video posted on Sept. 12, Baxter said he had called the police in response to death threats.

‘Moral clarity’

Backlash after Kirk’s death also resulted in death threats against the Union County Democratic Party, Jen Sanders, the county chair, said in a statement on Facebook.

The party sent staff home early and contacted the police and FBI, Sanders said.

Sanders said she had attempted to speak to Bob Dunn, chairman of the Union County Republican Party, in order to defuse tensions, but said he “chose to escalate by attacking me personally and attacking the Democratic Party.”

The county Republican Party issued its own statement, urging Democrats to “expressly condemn” the Kirk killing “and demonstrate moral clarity” by removing Baxter from leadership.

County and state Democrats did not respond to calls and emails. Baxter could not be reached for comment.

But in a video posted on Facebook on Sept. 12, he explained his stance.

“When news broke of Charlie Kirk’s passing, I reacted like most Black people with a conscience: We just didn’t care,” he said. “Because Charlie Kirk was a bigot, sexist, homophobe, racist, transphobic, you name it.”

There's much worse about to come than just silencing Jimmy Kimmel

The FCC chairman just threatened to pull ABC’s license because of a comment Jimmy Kimmel made about Charlie Kirk, and ABC just indefinitely took him off the air. This is the sort of thing you’d expect in Russia, not America.

But let’s back up a minute.

First, those who use violence come for the politicians. Then they come after the pundits and reporters. And finally they encourage average people to turn their guns on each other.

The dark story we’re living — this rise of fascism and destruction of civil order — fits a pyramid, not a straight line. And it explains why the killing of Charlie Kirk, aside from the right’s incessant amplification of their outrage, actually is a big deal and very dangerous sign for today’s political moment.

At the apex of the pyramid of people first targeted for violence are politicians, people who choose to live in the blast radius of public power.

When the taboo against political bloodshed cracks, it often cracks there first, with, for example, the attempted assassinations of Mike Pence and Nancy Pelosi by Trump’s mob, the murder of Minnesota State House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, the bombs Trump fanboy Cesar Sayoc send to President Obama and other elected Democrats, and our history of political assassinations.

The second tier down from the apex is the world of thought leaders, editors, and reporters, the people who interpret events for the rest of us. In healthy times they’re noisy, sometimes infuriating, and very much alive.

The brutal assassination of conservative activist and organizer Charlie Kirk in Utah wasn’t just another awful headline, it was America making the transition into that second tier on the way toward civil war or a police state. You don’t have to like Kirk's views to see that this is part of the transition from public debate to public violence.

I really wish we didn’t have to be having this conversation, to be considering the possibility that our politicians, our thought leaders, and eventually each one of us ourselves could be the victims of violence incited by political conflict. But that’s where we are.

And instead of trying to bring the nation together or heal it, Trump and those around him appear committed to turning the heat up.

When countries are sliding into fascism, after politicians are cowed, this middle level of the pyramid — the thought leaders and reporters — become targets.

We’re already tracking a surge of assaults on journalists in the United States this year, recorded by nonpartisan monitors, and the warnings from press freedom groups are growing louder as we head into another supercharged election cycle.

It’s why Trump threatening Jonathan Karl this week was such a big deal.

At the base of the pyramid is everyone else, the broad foundation of ordinary citizens who expect to disagree without fear of dying for it. In the last stage of democratic decay, the taboo collapses here too.

Conflict trackers that normally study civil wars abroad are now publishing monthly briefs on our own streets, and their July readout flagged spikes tied to political flashpoints and the growing risk of lone-wolf attacks.

That’s the tremor you feel underfoot; it’s a warning that a nation has been seized by authoritarians and could be on the verge of civil war.

This is not an abstract model that I just came up with this week: it’s American history.

In the 1850s the pattern first announced itself in Washington when rightwing Congressman Preston Brooks walked into the Senate chamber and nearly beat Senator Charles Sumner to death for denouncing slavery.

The attack wasn’t just an assault on a man, it was a public declaration that the rules had changed and that violence could now answer argument. The country was shocked, and then it was hardened. That moment signaled that the apex of the pyramid had been breached.

From there the target set widened into the second stage, the “killing pundits and reporters phase.” In Kansas, proslavery posses sacked the Free State stronghold of Lawrence, destroyed printing presses, and burned the Free State Hotel while waving banners that proclaimed “Southern Rights.”

Across the Deep South, meanwhile, newspaper publishers and editors who called out the Confederate oligarchs or opposed slavery were lynched, shot, or driven out of town.

The point was terror and silence. Smash the presses, you smash the story. The attack was part of the cycle we remember as Bleeding Kansas, when political dispute metastasized into raids and reprisals across towns and farms. Once the middle layer began to break, the base wasn’t far behind.

We can see the rhyme today.

Minnesota mourned Speaker Emerita Hortman and her husband, Mark Hortman, after a stalker hunted them down. Federal prosecutors have indicted the suspect. You don’t get a clearer sign that the apex is under fire than a state’s senior legislative leader and her spouse being killed.

We’re now seeing a loosening of the bolts on that middle tier with the Kirk assassination. Political leaders sneer at reporters and pundits, crowds chant for punishment of the press, and too many people decide that a camera and a notebook are acts of war.

And then comes the revenge. After our Attorney General, Pam Bondi, threatened to prosecute people for what she called “hate speech” (which is not a crime: remember the Nazis in Skokie, Illinois?), Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor was blunt:

“Every time I listen to a lawyer-trained representative saying we should criminalize free speech in some way, I think to myself, that law school failed.”

The data points stack up, each incident small enough to shrug off, all together large enough to chill a newsroom and make a young journalist, podcaster, or influencer think twice about showing up. Which is exactly what the authoritarians want.

If we want to keep the base of the pyramid steady, we must keep that middle standing, because when people can’t trust that their words will be heard without violence or censorship, some will reach for other tools.

The lesson from the 1850s isn’t that violence always walks in a single file, but that it climbs down the side of the pyramid. Once elites normalize it, once opinion-makers are bullied or bloodied into silence, the next stop is the rest of us.

That’s why the response must be immediate and nonpartisan. Every decent official, left and right, should make it crystal clear that assassination is not politics, that stalking is not activism, that censorship or threatening a reporter or a comedian isn’t patriotic.

And that the worst response to violence is to blame an entire political party, the people who make up half of America, calling them “crazy,” “lunatics,” and “terrorists.”

Tragically, that’s exactly the path Trump and the GOP are following. They’re trying to turn Charlie Kirk into America’s Horst Wessel, the martyr that Hitler used to successfully rally people around the Nazis’ shared sense of victimhood.

We still have time to shore up the apex, protect the middle, and keep the base from cracking, if only Democratic leadership (talking about you, Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries) would find the courage to speak out loudly every day against the explosion of blame and hate being promoted now by Trump and the rightwing media that brought him into power.

The few Republicans of good conscience left must reach out to the Trump administration and demand they dial down their own violent and provocative rhetoric. And stop throwing people off television for exercising their First Amendment rights.

We don’t have time to pretend the pyramid will hold itself together without our intervention and that of our political leadership.

Trump's latest bullying frenzy has set him up for a mortifying defeat

If Donald Trump’s skin gets any thinner, the US will have its first translucent president.

Trump, who relishes belittling people with unpresidential insults, like calling Democrats “scum” and “the enemy within,” can’t take it when his slurs boomerang back at him.

Instead of accepting that jokes, jabs and insults come with the territory — satirizing presidents is an American tradition — Trump reacts like an enraged teenager when anyone insults him.

Whenever the media fail to fawn, or worse, accurately report Trump’s unprecedented corruption or ineptitude, Trump’s first instinct is to use federal resources to seek retribution against them. He’s like a schoolyard bully who punches and punches and punches down. When his victim finally hits back, he runs away terrified.

Strongmen can’t handle ridicule

While Trump works to silence media outlets that cover him truthfully, comedic ridicule seems to sting him most acutely.

As authoritarian expert Ruth Ben-Ghiat points out, “humor has long been one of the most effective weapons of anti-authoritarian politics. Behind the facade of their omnipotence, most strongmen are brittle and insecure personalities. They don’t mind being called evil, but being ridiculed is a different matter.”

Trump personifies that observation:

Kimmel on the block

Kimmel’s show was suspended after Kimmel talked about the horrific Charlie Kirk murder during his comedic monologue.

Kimmel said, “We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”

Whether Kimmel’s remarks were funny or not, anyone who spent five minutes online after Kirk was shot knows that statement to be largely true: right-wing commentators, Trump, and Trump supporters were salivating over the prospect that Kirk’s shooter was from the left, even before his identity was known.

Then, after the shooter was identified as coming from a pro-Trump MAGA family, the right rejected that narrative and insisted the crime was attributable to Democrats, using it to foment and harness political hatred.

Nice network you got there…

Trump’s Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair, Brendan Carr, decided to escalate matters, threatening ABC over Kimmel’s joke, apparently not understanding that what he was delivering was an admission of liability.

Flexing legal muscle he doesn’t have, Carr doesn’t seem to understand that neither he, nor Trump, nor the Attorney General can use federal resources to silence Trump’s critics, because political speech is strictly protected under the First Amendment.

Since the famous New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964), political speech has enjoyed strong protection from the courts, arguably the most rigorous legal protection of any category of speech.

In a statement that should go directly into Kimmel’s First Amendment complaint, Carr said Kimmel’s joke that Kirk’s shooter “was somehow a MAGA or a Republican-motivated person” — clear political speech — would be punished.

Expressly threatening ABC’s broadcast license over the statement, Carr stated, “I've been very clear from the moment that I have become chairman of the FCC … what people don't understand is that the broadcasters … are entirely different than people that use other forms of communication. They have a license granted by us at the FCC, and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest.”

Reflecting Trump’s mob-boss mentality, Carr then threatened ABC and its parent company, Disney, over Kimmel’s joke, stating, “Look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct, to take action, frankly, on Kimmel, or, you know, there's going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

How the First Amendment works

Just after Trump AG Pam Bondi was widely panned by legal critics on both sides of the political aisle for her threat of a government “crackdown” on hate speech, Trump’s FCC chair demonstrated similar ignorance of the First Amendment.

Carr and Bondi, like their boss, seem to enjoy threatening coercive government action to silence voices they don’t like. They could all use competent counsel to explain the limits of their own authority.

At first blush, it looks as if Kimmel has no First A claim because Kimmel is a private party working for a private company, and the First Amendment does not protect private speech.

However, his employer, ABC is subject to regulation by the FCC. It has been the law for decades that under the First Amendment, government agencies cannot coerce a private employer to restrict, censure or control someone's speech by threatening legal action. When an FCC official like Chairman Carr threatens a broadcast network for political speech he doesn’t like, he is using government resources to coerce silence, a clear violation of the First Amendment.

The First Amendment prohibits the government from censoring or threatening private media outlets for political speech, because threats of government sanction, retribution or punishment have a direct chilling effect on that speech. Just last year, the Supreme Court ruled in National Rifle Association v. Vullo that government officials cannot use coercive tactics to suppress disfavored speech, stressing that government officials cannot achieve indirect censorship by threatening private companies (like ABC) to punish certain viewpoints (like Kimmel’s).

The FCC cannot punish broadcasters that disparage Trump, or use its authority to pressure private employers to suppress objectionable opinions. The Supreme Court has ruled consistently that using coercive tactics to suppress disfavored views is unconstitutional censorship, even if the government doesn't directly target the speaker, but, as here, targets his employer by threatening their FCC license.

Here's hoping Kimmel sues. If Carr is going to run the Federal Communications Commission, he ought to take a minute to study some First Amendment basics.

  • Sabrina Haake is a columnist and 25+ year federal trial attorney specializing in 1st and 14th A defense. Her Substack, The Haake Take, is free.

'Fog of war': GOP senators excuse Kash Patel's FBI bungles in Charlie Kirk case

WASHINGTON — FBI Director Kash Patel was back on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, for a second straight day of grilling by unfriendly Democrats.

In the aftermath of the murder of Charlie Kirk, Patel’s many clashes with lawmakers were splashed all over cable news and social media. But the controversial FBI director was welcomed by Republicans, who rolled out an array of excuses to protect President Donald Trump’s top cop.

While Patel faced criticism from Democrats and the far right for bungling the investigation into the assassination of Kirk — prominently including tweeting out false information regarding an arrest within hours of the shooting in Utah last Wednesday, at the start of a manhunt that would last more than 24 hours — Republicans on Capitol Hill stayed behind their man.

“I don't know that it was a mistake,” Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) told Raw Story, of Patel spreading bad information on social media.

“I know that Kash Patel is doing a wonderful job, and that guy I support to the end.”

Mullin was far from alone — and that has dumbfounded Democrats.

"What every law enforcement agent in America would say is [Patel committed] a massive bungle,” Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) told Raw Story. “In the midst of an investigation he released incorrect information. That is unfortunate.”

Raw Story asked if this could be seen as “a teachable moment” for Patel.

"He was recalcitrant,” Booker said, after clashing with Patel Tuesday. “He was combative. He refused to answer basic, simple questions.

“We have a constitutional obligation for oversight — he undermined that constitutional check and balance … It's the Trump way, right? Not to work within the bounds of the Constitution but to assault, attack, demean and denigrate.”

‘So heartbroken’

Since Patel’s combative confirmation in January, Democrats have warned the public defender turned far-right troll is unfit to lead the FBI. After Kirk’s murder, they claim to have proof.

But the GOP controls Congress and though Patel has faced criticism from some inside Trump’s White House and among Republicans on Capitol Hill — let alone frustrated FBI agents — Kash remains all but king.

Despite being confirmed by the bare minimum number of senators, 51-49, Patel has cover from the GOP, including when he tweets out misinformation in the midst of a nationwide manhunt.

“Oh, you know, the fog of war,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), the former Senate Republican whip, told Raw Story. “I thought he did fine.”

Other Republicans are seemingly going out of their way to make up excuses.

“I suspect Kash probably knew Charlie,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) told Raw Story. “And he was so heartbroken that he wanted to make sure that the perpetrator was caught right away.

“So, at least, I understand, he might have jumped the gun a little on whether the guy had been actually apprehended or not. I get it. You know, people were just kind of hyper-emotional.”

As information about suspect Tyler Robinson fills headlines, Patel stands by the misinformation he initially spread. Nonetheless, other Republicans are blaming his aides.

“He was just going by the people that worked for him,” Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) told Raw Story. “Somebody made a mistake, obviously, but I mean, no harm, no foul.”

“But some folks say Patel and [FBI Deputy Director Dan] Bongino are politicizing the agency?” Raw Story pressed.

“‘Politicizing’?” What does that mean?” Tuberville asked.

“Going after what Democrats call the president's enemies list or [Patel’s] enemies list,” Raw Story explained.

“I don't listen to all that stuff,” Tuberville said.

Other Republicans aren’t listening to Patel either, but that doesn’t mean they’re not standing by him.

“He's trying to be transparent,” Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) told Raw Story.

“When you're transparent, you're providing information that ends up not being 100 percent correct. I'm sympathetic from that standpoint. Investigating crimes is not easy.”

“Overall you're pleased with him?” Raw Story pressed. “And the direction of the FBI?”

“I haven't had much contact with him, quite honestly,” Johnson said. “I know all these people have enormous challenges. They're trying to ferret out the partisans in their ranks and still have an awful lot of work to do.”

Johnson must not have gotten the memo on rooting out “partisans,” because throughout two days of testimony before the Senate and House Judiciary Committees, Patel denied targeting FBI personnel over personal politics.

‘Not familiar with the case’

Despite a torrent of reporting on Patel’s misinformation-laced tweets, some Republicans claim to remain blissfully unaware of the steady stream of negative headlines.

“Where do you see false information?” Mullin asked.

“He said someone was in custody when it wasn't accurate,” Raw Story explained.

“I'm not familiar with the case,” Mullin said.

“You didn't hear that?” Raw Story asked.

“I don't know what you're talking about,” Mullin said, “but if you're going to talk about purposely misleading people, let's talk about the White House and the last administration.”

“It wasn't purposeful,” Raw Story explained.

“But then it wasn't misleading. Information may have been a mistake,” Mullin said. “You and I make mistakes all the time. I don't know that it was a mistake. I know that Kash Patel is doing a wonderful job, and that guy I support to the end.”

‘Everybody needs to calm down’

Patel verbally scrapped with Democrats this week, even amid worries that rhetoric is out of control in Washington — and thus spilling out in states like Utah and Minnesota, where in June Democratic state representative Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark Hortman, were killed and state senator John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette Hoffman, were wounded.

Still, tensions remain high in Washington, with lawmakers from both parties braced for further violence as members keep pointing fingers.

“I'm totally for free speech — even speech I don't like,” Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) told Raw Story.

“That being said, I mean, it's just sad, because I think that we've seen kind of an explosion of it. I think we're going to see more of it.”

The Trump White House continues pointing fingers at the left, which it blames for incendiary political rhetoric and deepening division, even as more moderate Democrats urge their base to give the GOP time to grieve.

“I don't care, you know, if you think someone's extreme,” Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) told Raw Story. “So what? It's just like, that's democracy, that's free speech. And now I'm not going to make it any more complicated than just that. It’s terrible.”

Many Democrats say the Kirk assassination highlights the peculiarly American problem of easy access to high-powered weapons. But the GOP has rebuffed calls for new gun control measures as a response to Kirk’s death.

“Everybody just needs to calm down,” Rep. Lois Frankel, a Florida Democrat, told Raw Story. “We have to have debates with words, not with guns. That's how I feel about the whole thing.

“Really, debate with words.”





One senator's ignorant Charlie Kirk whine shows how far the GOP has fallen

Eric Schmitt tried to present himself as an intellectual at a hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday.

He came off like a little boy trying on his father’s clothes in the mirror.

It was all swagger and no fit.

Schmitt thoughtfully entitled his remarks, “There Can Be No Unity Between Good and Evil.” Even the subject of the hearing — smarmy FBI Director Kash Patel — must have been wondering to himself about how that could possibly be helpful.

The problem wasn’t merely with the content of Schmitt’s falsehood-laden messaging. His role, after all, was to parrot Donald Trump’s reprehensible words dividing the nation at a time of national strife, as no American president ever has before.

But Schmitt’s speech — which you can watch here or read here — was nothing more than a faux-intellectual diatribe delivered with the gravitas of Daffy Duck doing a TED talk.

Early on in his remarks, Schmitt sounded like a U.S. Senator:

Over the past week, leaders from across the political spectrum have come out and condemned Charlie [Kirk]'s murder and political violence more broadly. For that, we’re all very grateful. We should be grateful. There have been calls together to come together in the wake of Charlie’s murder and I want to do that. Someday, I pray we can be united as a country again and go forward again as one people under one flag.

That sounded fine to me. My reaction in this space had been that “we should all as Americans deplore — without qualification — Kirk’s murder. It’s a moment that could bring us all together in revulsion, across the great political divide.”

Unfortunately, Schmitt’s gratitude lasted just a few paragraphs. He cited some random polling which he claimed showed that liberals are fine with political violence and conservatives aren’t. That junk doesn’t deserve further mention here, much less — with no vetting or validation — at a U.S. Senate proceeding.

As for “coming together,” it was probably not all that helpful for the senator to spew lies like this one:

The George Soros empire has financed a vast ecosystem of radicals all working together — dropping off bricks at riots — to unleash a tidal wave of violent anarchists on our streets and prop it up with an army of researchers and experts and journalists and propagandists who downplay political violence.

Nothing like serving up propaganda to call out propaganda. It might soothe the sensibilities of MAGA faithful, but Schmitt’s just another politician making stuff up.

But what sets Schmitt apart is his veneer of solemnity while delivering such truly unserious drivel. With no self-awareness, Schmitt persists in trying to dress up the basest political tripe in a wardrobe of make-believe intellectualism.

Behold the philosopher Eric Schmitt holding forth with large words:

Upstream from the dehumanization and demonizing political violence and rhetoric tearing apart our country, is a divide on how we view America and Americans. Are we good? Are we evil? Is there something inherently special about Western civilization or is this 2,000-year project rotten to the core? And if it is something worth fighting for, which I believe it is, how do we do it?”

What?

Now, I’ve written quite a few clunky paragraphs in my day — and mixed more than my share of metaphors — but I’m not certain how to decode Schmitt’s gibberish.

We’ve all heard our nation described as a grand “experiment,” but arguably not one spanning 2,000 years. With apologies to those who maintain Jesus was an American.

And who describes “Western civilization” as a “2,000-year project?” Mind you, this wasn’t a slip of the tongue: it’s in his speech text and was faithfully repeated in his live remarks.

Are we good? Are we evil? Does dehumanization flow upstream? Were the Dark Ages part of Western civilization? Is this the sort of work product you’d get if Plato impregnated Laura Loomer?

I’m not so sure about those questions, but I am about this one:

Does Eric Schmitt truly not comprehend the outrageous hypocrisy of viciously attacking people’s character and motives who disagree with him — and calling them “evil” — and then whining like this?

And I would point out we’ve heard years of the left — their loudest voices — calling anyone on the right an extremist MAGA Republican, a fascist, a Nazi, an existential threat to democracy.

Check yourself. And don’t give me this both sides bullshit!

It’s hard to counter such eloquence from such a towering intellect.

Still, here’s a thought: If you truly hold the worldview that in American politics, everything comes down to good versus evil — and that you’re good and those of us who disagree with you are evil — say it all you want. It’s a free country.

But don’t bother pretending to be smart about it.

(Note: this is the first of a two-part post. Tomorrow’s installment will examine Schmitt’s premise that political violence in America is not a “both sides” matter.)

Trump's bizarre crime blitz is an absurd waste of time — here's clear proof

When Gov. Mike DeWine decided to send Ohio National Guard members to Washington D.C. to participate in President Donald Trump’s militarized crime crackdown, he took a national issue and made it a state issue. Why he decided to do so is perplexing.

Ohio’s violent crime rate has hovered between three and four times the violent crime rate of D.C. over the past four years. So the idea that resources should be sent from Ohio to Washington to quell violent urban crime is a strange one.

But even if DeWine were to deploy National Guard troops in Ohio to quell violent crime, is that the way to do it?

Research out of Brown University finds that military policing is not an effective tool for reducing crime rates.

At best, this sort of approach is a band-aid: long-term military occupation of cities is not a feasible strategy in a democratic country. At worst, it can be a distraction from solutions that actually could reduce crime rates.

So what actually could reduce crime rates in Ohio?

The evidence shows there are strategies that can be used to reduce violent crime.

One is a suite of strategies called “focused deterrence.”

Basically this approach amounts to identifying groups like gangs that are responsible for a large share of violence, calling them in and offering services if people leave the gangs, and delivering swift punishment if further violence takes place.

Meta-analysis of dozens of studies on these techniques show they are effective at reducing crime rates.

Another is “hot-spot policing,” a strategy that concentrates resources towards geographic areas where crime occurs most often.

Cost-benefit analysis by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy shows that deployment of one police officer in a hot spot leads to nearly half a million dollars in net social benefits realized in lower property crime rates.

This amounts to over $5 in social benefits for every $1 in costs.

A third strategy is more mundane but nonetheless effective: street lighting.

A randomized controlled trial that placed lighting in New York City housing developments found areas that received lighting saw reductions in index crimes, felony crimes and, to a lesser degree, assault, homicide, and weapons crimes when compared to places that did not receive them.

Similarly, restoration of vacant lots have been found to lead to reductions in overall crime, gun violence, burglaries, and nuisances.

Another promising program is targeted cognitive behavioral therapy.

Whether this is deployed with at-risk youth in conjunction with summer jobs programs or as a part of correctional programs, cognitive behavioral therapy has been shown to reduce propensity to commit crime among people who undergo it.

By giving people control over their own decision-making, they often opt not to take part in criminal activity.

These are just four approaches that are effective at reducing crime.

If the governor or federal lawmakers wish to make a dent on crime in major cities, deploying these strategies is the way to do it.

But I guess these would probably get fewer headlines than what they are doing now.

  • Rob Moore is the principal for Scioto Analysis, a public policy analysis firm based in Columbus. Moore has worked as an analyst in the public and nonprofit sectors and has analyzed diverse issue areas such as economic development, environment, education, and public health. He holds a Master of Public Policy from the University of California Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy and a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy from Denison University.

'Don't care if someone's extreme': Fetterman tells Dems to let GOP grieve Charlie Kirk

WASHINGTON — Sen. John Fetterman is cautioning his fellow Democrats to ease up on their rhetoric in the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk.

“It's horrific. It's absolutely horrific. I mean, I've seen the video multiple times,” the Pennsylvania Democrat told Raw Story outside the U.S. Capitol, of the killing of Kirk at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah last week.

Kirk was speaking to a large crowd when was shot in the neck.

In the seven days since the killing, debate has been intense.

Republicans have blamed the political left, with President Donald Trump, Vice President JD Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi and other senior figures promising a legal crackdown on groups they say promote violence against political opponents.

Some Democrats and progressives have pushed back, pointing to the prevalence of right-wing groups among perpetrators of politically motivated violence.

The full motivations of the 22-year-old suspect, Tyler Robinson, remain unclear.

But Republican Utah Governor Spencer Cox has said Robinson’s views shifted left after he spent time in “dark corners of the internet.”

Authorities have said they will seek the death penalty.

Fetterman insisted: “I'm not going to talk about the politics. I'm not going to talk about who's right or who was this or that. It's just like: Don't shoot [and] kill people if they have different political views.”

The first-term senator is warning fellow Democrats that the murder of Kirk, who was 31 and the founder of youth-oriented rightwing group Turning Point USA, is different to other high-profile instances of gun violence.

“This isn't like ‘thoughts and prayers,’” Fetterman said, referencing a common, evasive response to mass shootings from gun rights supporters that often stokes fierce debate.

“This is not about trying to use that to argue your own positions.

“I don't care, you know, if you think someone's extreme. So what? It's just like, that's democracy, that's free speech. And now I'm not going to make it any more complicated than just that. It’s terrible.”

Saying it wasso sad it’s become predictable” that partisan debate should break out after high-profile instances of gun violence, Fetterman expressed concern for Kirk’s wife, Erika Kirk, and two young children.

“It’s just, like, they lost their father, they lost their husband,” the senator said.

“And it has traumatized our nation, having someone’s neck torn apart by a bullet … someone that has his different political views.

“It’s like, I mean, don't do that. Condemn that.”

‘That’s free speech’

Raw Story asked if Fetterman’s thoughts had turned this week to the assassination attempt against Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania during the election last year, after which “we saw people dancing.”

Fetterman said: “Well that’s turned into one thing … It's just like, don't shoot anyone. Especially for having different political views. It's always wrong.

“I don't care, you know, if you think someone's extreme. So what? It's just like, that's democracy, that's free speech. And now I'm not going to make it any more complicated than just that. It’s terrible.

"I mean, you know, like if someone murdered my … I mean, when [Kirk’s] kids grow up, that will live forever on the internet.

“Not everything has to turn into the next political argument. It's like, you condemn that and just allow people to grieve. And, you know, for the Republicans, that was part of their big point. Like, give it to them. Allow them the space to grieve.”

Prayers for Kirk were said on the House floor, followed by a congressional vigil. Some Republicans have called for further memorializations, including a likeness of Kirk in Statuary Hall.

“Like, give them the opportunity to [grieve],” Fetterman said. “I'm not going to hold them accountable for everything that they say if they’re upset or whatever.

“Just let them have their space with that.”