Marjorie Taylor Greene questions whether US funding for Ukraine will fall 'into the hands of Nazis'
Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene questioned on Tuesday whether the US' nearly $14 billion in emergency aid for Ukraine will fall "into the hands of Nazis" and blamed Ukraine for Russia's invasion, echoing claims Russian leader Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin have used to defend the war.
"It's shocking to me that Congress is so willing to funnel $14 billion in military equipment over and over again into Ukraine and you have to ask, is this money and is this United States military equipment falling into the hands of Nazis in Ukraine?" Greene, who is from Georgia, told BKP politics, a local conservative talk show.
Putin defended his war by claiming it was aimed at "de-nazifying" Ukraine, which historians and experts have repeatedly debunked. It's true that Ukraine is home to some ultranationalist movements. But as Olga Lautman, a senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis, told NPR they make up a small fraction of the Ukrainian population. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is also Jewish and has family members who were killed in the Holocaust.
Lawmakers rushed to include the aid for Ukraine in a $1.5 trillion must-pass government spending bill. Before its passage, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell praised the news that lawmakers had significantly increased funding for Ukraine.
Greene said a slew of US officials, including the late-Sen. John McCain, are to blame for pushing Ukraine to move toward the west. She added that Ukraine would have been better off it had stayed neutral like Finland. Putin also said the invasion was necessary due to NATO's expansion. Greene said she wanted to make sure it's clear that she is not a Putin sympathizer.
"Now, you see Ukraine just kept poking the bear, poking the bear, which is Russia and Russia invaded," Greene said. "Russia is being very successful in their invasion even though we hear different things on television — the things we see and we know are actually happening there, I don't see a way out for Ukraine."
But Greene also ignored recent history in blaming the US for Ukraine's actions. Her comments come as other far-right figures express sympathy for some of Russia's views. Rep. Madison Cawthorn, a Republican from North Carolina, was widely admonished by top party leaders for calling Zelenskyy a "thug."
It was the Ukrainian people who rose up in 2014 and ousted a Kremlin-ally from power. Russia responded shortly thereafter by backing an invasion of Crimea. It was also Russia that told the world its troops in Belarus were there for training purposes before shelling Ukraine's largest cities. Zelenskyy applied for emergency admission to NATO and the European Union only after Russian troops began their invasion. Zelenskyy has even suggested taking NATO membership off the table.
Greene also repeated the Kremlin's claims about biolabs in Ukraine. As The Washington Post documented, Russia has for years alleged nefarious activities at US-supported labs that study diseases and pathogens. Russia's focus on the labs comes amid western fears of a potential chemical weapon attack. US officials have repeatedly stressed that the US backs medical research. This is fundamentally different than the development of offensive bioweapons, the existence of which is outlawed by international treaties. Moscow has been accused in recent years of deploying chemical weapons.
"I'm working on a bill to ban all US funding of bioweapons," Greene said. "After two years of COVID-19 ... we should be very cognizant of how US tax dollars are being spent on biolabs and be very, very persistent to be sure they're never being spent on bioweapons."
A spokesperson for Greene didn't immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.
Judges in Trump-related cases face unprecedented wave of threats
Judges and prosecutors are facing repeated threats of violence as they handle cases related to Trump, interviews and documents reveal. The wave of intimidation follows the ex-president’s attacks on judges as corrupt and biased – and some worry it threatens America’s long tradition of judicial independence.
U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth has been threatened by angry criminals. Drug cartels. Even al Qaeda.
But nothing, Lamberth says, prepared him for the wave of harassment after he began hearing cases against supporters of former President Donald Trump who attacked the U.S. Capitol in a bid to overturn the 2020 election.
Right-wing websites painted Lamberth, appointed to the bench by Republican President Ronald Reagan, as part of a “deep state” conspiracy to destroy Trump and his followers. Calls for his execution cropped up on Trump-friendly websites. “Traitors get ropes,” one wrote. After he issued a prison sentence to a 69-year-old Idaho woman who pleaded guilty to joining the Jan. 6, 2021, riot, his chambers’ voicemail filled with death threats. One man found Lamberth’s home phone number and called repeatedly with graphic vows to murder him.
“I could not believe how many death threats I got,” Lamberth told Reuters, revealing the calls to his home for the first time.
As Trump faces a welter of indictments and lawsuits ahead of this year’s election, his loyalists have been waging a campaign of threats and intimidation at judges, prosecutors and other court officials, according to a Reuters review of threat data compiled by the U.S. Marshals Service, posts on right-wing message boards, and interviews with more than two dozen law-enforcement agents, judicial officials and legal experts.
As the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination – and a defendant in four criminal cases alleging 91 felonies – Trump has fused the roles of candidate and defendant. He attacks judges as political foes, demonizes prosecutors and casts the judicial system as biased against him and his supporters.
These broadsides frequently trigger surges in threats against the judges, prosecutors and other court officials he targets, Reuters found. Since Trump launched his first presidential campaign in June 2015, the average number of threats and hostile communications directed at judges, federal prosecutors, judicial staff and court buildings has more than tripled, according to the Reuters review of data from the Marshals Service, which is responsible for protecting federal court personnel.
The annual average rose from 1,180 incidents in the decade prior to Trump’s campaign to 3,810 in the seven years after he declared his candidacy and began his practice of criticizing judges. In all, the Marshals documented nearly 27,000 threatening and harassing communications targeting federal courts from the fall of 2015 through the fall of 2022, a volume they consider unprecedented in their 234-year history. There is no national data collection for threats against state and local judges. Many states do not even track the problem.
Since late 2020, Trump has ramped up his criticism of the judiciary dramatically, first amid his dozens of failed lawsuits seeking to overturn his election loss and, more recently, amid a cascade of criminal and civil litigation. In that time, serious threats against federal judges alone have more than doubled, from 220 in 2020 to 457 in 2023, as Reuters reported on Feb. 13.
“Donald Trump set the stage,” retired Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a Republican who stepped down at the end of 2022, said in an interview. Trump “gave permission by his actions and words for others to come forward and talk about judges in terms not just criticizing their decisions, but disparaging them and the entire judiciary.”
Trump and his spokespeople did not respond to requests for comment. He has appeared defiant in public comments on the judiciary, saying in January that if the criminal cases against him hurt his election prospects, “it’ll be bedlam in the country.”
Despite the rise in threats, arrests are rare. The U.S. Justice Department says it does not track the number of people charged or convicted for threatening judges. Reuters identified just 57 federal prosecutions for threats to judges since 2020 in a review of court databases, Justice Department records and news accounts.
Whether to press federal charges is typically up to the Justice Department and its prosecutors based on evidence gathered by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Justice Department declined to comment on judicial threats and prosecutions. The FBI and Marshals would not comment on specific incidents. Marshals Director Ronald Davis told Reuters that the agency is dedicating unprecedented resources to judicial protection. The FBI said it “takes all potential threats seriously.”
In the case of Lamberth, the federal judge in Washington, D.C., U.S. Marshals found the culprit, who has not been identified, and warned the man to stop. No arrest was made. The Marshals upgraded Lamberth’s home security system. The calls stopped, but his concerns lingered about threats that now come from “ordinary people you wouldn’t suspect,” Lamberth said.
For judges, threats have always been part of the job. But traditionally they have come from aggrieved parties – a criminal angered by a long sentence, a spouse by a divorce ruling, a businessman by a bankruptcy decision. Today, a single politically charged case can generate hundreds of threats from people with no direct interest in the matter.
Those cases can generate rage across the political spectrum.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision to end the legal right to abortion stoked left-wing anger against the court’s conservatives, including an alleged assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh. After a draft of the ruling leaked, police arrested Nicholas John Roske outside Kavanaugh’s home, armed with a gun, a knife and tactical gear. He said he was enraged by the draft ruling and planned to kill the justice. He has pleaded not guilty to attempted murder and awaits trial.
Many of the threats against judges examined by Reuters echo Trump’s statements in social media posts and speeches, where he has attacked judges as “totally biased,” “crooked,” “partisan” and “hostile,” dismissed courts as “rigged” and called prosecutors “corrupt.” Threatening messages on pro-Trump online forums often repeat those terms or cast the former president as a heroic figure besieged by corrupt judges in secret “Democrat” plots.
“Hanging judges for treason is soon to be on the menu boys!” said one anonymous January post on the pro-Trump forum Patriots.Win. The post referred to federal judge Lewis Kaplan, who presided over writer E. Jean Carroll’s successful defamation suit against Trump in New York. Kaplan did not respond to a request to comment.
Judges at every level of the U.S. legal system have voiced alarm, saying the rising tide of threats jeopardizes the judicial independence that underpins America’s democratic constitutional order. Judges not only rule on criminal and civil cases, but also act as a check on the power of the U.S. president, Congress and state governments.
Trump has bristled at the rule of law. In 2022, he called for the “termination” of the U.S. Constitution if it would restore him to power. In December, he said he wanted to “be a dictator for one day,” his first back in office, so he can wall off the U.S.-Mexico border.
Reuters interviewed 14 sitting judges and four retired judges. Some were reluctant to share details about threats they’ve received or the security precautions they’ve taken. But all expressed worry about the growing volume of threats and their potential to undermine courts’ legitimacy.
“We can’t have a situation where judges are in fear that a ruling, an unpopular ruling, can lead to reprisals,” U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Richard Sullivan, who chairs a federal judiciary committee that oversees security for court personnel, said in an interview.
“We are coming to kill you”
Trump has derided the judiciary in intensely personal terms since his 2016 presidential campaign. Back then, he repeatedly attacked a federal judge handling a fraud lawsuit against the defunct Trump University. He accused Indiana-born Gonzalo Curiel of bias based on his Mexican heritage, called him a “hater” with a conflict of interest because of Trump’s hard-line immigration policies, and suggested investigating him. “They ought to look into Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace.” Curiel declined to comment.
The berating of Curiel established the tone for Trump’s subsequent attacks on the judiciary, which set him apart from other contemporary political figures.
In 2017, Trump excoriated federal Judge James Robart, a Republican appointee who blocked an executive order barring travelers from certain predominantly Muslim nations from entering the United States. Trump urged people to blame the “so-called judge” for opening a door to potential terrorists. Robart told Reuters he received thousands of hostile messages, including more than 100 threats serious enough to trigger Marshals Service investigations. He was not aware of any arrests related to the threats.
When Trump’s term ended, the threats continued as courts rejected dozens of lawsuits alleging electoral fraud filed by Trump and his allies.
Whenever a case against Trump was in court, “we would see a noticeable uptick in threats directed at whatever judge had the case,” said Jon Trainum, who headed the U.S. Marshals’ unit that investigated judicial threats for five years before retiring in 2021.
More recently, Trump has blasted judges and prosecutors involved in the multiple civil and criminal cases against him. He has described his jailed supporters from the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as patriots and political prisoners. And he has lashed out at state judges who have ruled that he should be disqualified from the 2024 presidential ballot based on the criminal charges he faces.
In all, at least 10 judges and four prosecutors have received threats and harassment, according to interviews with court officials and a review of police records, federal court files, social media and news reports.
In a Feb. 26 court filing, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg blamed Trump’s “inflammatory remarks” for a series of death threats he received while prosecuting a case alleging Trump paid hush money to cover up an affair with a porn star. One letter contained white powder and a note: “Alvin: I am going to kill you.” Another warned he would “get assassinated” if he didn’t “leave Trump alone.” Citing a surge in threats to 89 in 2023 from one the year before, Bragg sought a judge’s order to limit Trump’s public statements.
Another frequent Trump target is New York Justice Arthur Engoron, who ordered the ex-president this month to pay $454 million in penalties for fraudulently overstating his net worth to dupe lenders to his real-estate business. A security officer in Engoron’s court testified in a November filing that the judge and his staff had received “hundreds of threats, disparaging and harassing comments and antisemitic messages” linked to the case. “Trust me when I say this. I will come for you,” one message promised. “Trump owns you,” another warned. No one has been arrested.
Tanya Chutkan, a federal judge in Washington assigned to Special Counsel Jack Smith’s criminal election-subversion case against Trump, also has been targeted. On Trump’s social media platform, Truth Social, the ex-president has called her a “biased, Trump-hating judge” incapable of giving him a fair trial.
On Aug. 4, the day after Trump was formally charged in the case, Trump posted on Truth Social: “If you go after me, I’m coming after you!” The next day, Chutkan, who is Black, received an alarming voicemail. “You stupid slave n—” a woman’s voice said, using a racist slur, according to an affidavit filed by prosecutors in court. “If Trump doesn’t get elected in 2024, we are coming to kill you. So tread lightly, bitch.”
Chutkan’s office declined a request for comment from the judge.
A Trump spokesperson said at the time that his social media comments were “the definition of political speech” and targeted interest groups, not judges. But Special Counsel Smith highlighted Trump’s post in a Sept. 15 court motion. Trump was trying “to undermine confidence in the criminal justice system” through “inflammatory attacks” on those involved in the case, he said.
Federal agents arrested the woman who threatened Chutkan, Abigail Jo Shry, 43, of Texas. She pleaded not guilty to a federal felony of threatening a judge and is awaiting trial. Her lawyer declined to comment.
“Dox this judge”
Shry’s case is unusual. Few people face charges for threatening judges and the federal courts, according to a Reuters analysis of legal databases and other public records.
Over the last four years, the Marshals investigated more than 1,200 threats against federal judges that they considered serious, according to the data provided to Reuters. Among the 57 federal prosecutions Reuters identified during that period, 47 involved threats against federal judges, six involved threats against state judges, and four involved threats against both. There is no national data on state-level prosecutions for threats against judges.
Judges tell of the shock of suddenly being besieged with threats, and some express frustration that most of their harassers remain unpunished.
In March 2017, after a federal court in Hawaii blocked Trump’s second attempt to ban travelers from some Muslim countries, Trump said to applause at a Tennessee rally that the decision was “political.” Within 24 hours, at least one website published the home address of the presiding judge in that case, Derrick Watson. Demands to execute Watson and his fellow judges appeared online. “We need to start hanging these traitors,” one person wrote on a right-wing website. Thousands of angry calls poured into Watson’s office, the judge told Reuters in his first interview on the experience.
Marshals deemed dozens of the messages serious death threats and assigned Watson a 24-hour security detail for nearly a month, he said. His family traveled for over a week in an armed three-car convoy for daily routines, including grocery shopping and picking up his sons from school.
“When those threats involve our family, it’s on another level,” he said.
Marshals questioned a New Jersey man and an Arizona woman who had made particularly alarming threats, warning them of potential charges if they didn’t stop, Watson said. No one was arrested, he said, but the worst threats stopped. Since then, he remains a target on Patriots.Win, the pro-Trump message board. “Dox this judge, go to his house,” said one post last year that remains on the site.
Patriots.Win did not respond to a request for comment.
Watson said he worries that the climate of intimidation will deter people from serving on the bench. Without better enforcement of existing laws and the passage of new ones to safeguard judges, would-be jurists “will be chilled by their concerns over physical safety,” he said.
In Washington D.C., federal Judge Reggie Walton says he received one or two threats in his first 18 years on the bench, handling major criminal cases. But since Walton, who is Black, began hearing cases against Jan. 6 Capitol attackers, people enraged by the prosecutions routinely leave threatening and racist messages on his office phone, including one chilling threat targeting his family.
“An individual from Texas called and left two messages – the first one threatening me personally, and the second one making a threat against my daughter,” Walton told Reuters. The caller knew his daughter’s name, and his address. “That was very disconcerting,” he said. “I surely would not want something to happen to a family member.”
Walton said he turned the calls over to the Marshals Service, which contacted the FBI. Federal agents visited the man in Texas, Walton said, but decided not to file charges. “They were of the view that he was apologetic and contrite about what he had done,” he said. The incident has not been previously reported. Walton said he was disturbed by the decision not to arrest the man but felt it “should be independently made,” without pressure from him.
Threats against judges can be prosecuted under multiple federal statutes, some punishable by up to 10 years in prison and a maximum $250,000 fine. But many menacing messages don’t meet the standard for a criminal offense – generally defined as a direct threat that puts a person in fear of death or violence – because of the U.S. Constitution’s sweeping free-speech protections. Drawing the line can be difficult, say former Marshals and judges. Federal agents often look for language reflecting a clear intent to act, rather than simply suggesting a frightening outcome.
“If somebody says, ‘Judge, you should be hung from a gallows in front of the courthouse,’ that’s different than, ‘Judge, I am coming to your courthouse and I’m going to hang you’,” said Carl Caulk, a former assistant director of the Marshals Service who retired in 2015.
“Like drinking through a fire hose”
The most serious threats lead to criminal investigations, typically by the FBI. Agents sometimes warn threateners of prosecution if they do it again, rather than arrest them, according to judges and prosecutors. But the volume of emails, phone calls, social media posts and other communications that contain threatening language is so enormous that law enforcement has struggled to keep up, judges and prosecutors say.
“It’s like drinking through a fire hose, and you know we only have so much bandwidth,” said Trainum, the former senior Marshals official. “We have to go through all of the ones that we receive and triage them to some degree. All of that takes time. All of that takes resources. All of that takes personnel.”
State judges also face politically inspired threats.
Arizona’s Maricopa County, an epicenter of unfounded election conspiracy theories, logged more than 400 cases of threats and harassment targeting judges, their staff and the courts between 2020 and 2023, according to previously unpublished county data reviewed by Reuters. Maricopa officials didn’t track threats until noticing a spike in 2020, a county official said.
In Wisconsin, a presidential battleground state, lawmakers are considering stronger protections for judges following 142 threats made against state judges in the last year, according to data from the Wisconsin Supreme Court Marshal’s Office.
In Colorado, after the state’s seven supreme court justices ruled in December to disqualify Trump from the state’s 2024 presidential ballot, the ex-president blasted the court in speeches and social media posts. The judges faced multiple incidents of threats and harassment, including four “swatting” attempts, or hoax calls intended to draw police to their homes, said the Denver Police Department. The department tightened security for the justices. No one has been arrested, a police spokesperson said.
While there is no national data on intimidation of state judges, serious threats against them are growing, according to a survey of 398 mostly state judges, completed in 2022, by the National Judicial College, a judicial education group. Nearly 90% expressed some worry over their safety, and one in three reported carrying a gun at some point for protection, the previously unreported survey found.
Despite the torrent of threats, physical attacks against judges remain relatively rare. Since 2000, at least three state judges and one federal judge have been killed in connection with their work.
But the 2020 killing of the son of New Jersey federal Judge Esther Salas highlighted the risks. The shooter, a self-described “anti-feminist” lawyer, blamed Salas for moving too slowly on a case he was involved in. He dressed as a postal delivery driver, shot her 20-year-old son when he opened the door, and wounded her husband. The shooter later killed himself.
Following her son’s murder, Salas campaigned for new laws to better shield judges’ personal information in public records, and prevent them from being revealed by internet data brokers. In 2022, Congress passed a federal version, named for Salas’ son, Daniel Anderl. New Jersey also passed a strong version of that law, Salas said, but most other states have not. “We need to make sure that judges are safe and are able to do their jobs without feeling like targets in target practice,” she said in an interview.
The Salas case “was a wake-up call for the entire country,” said Davis, the Marshals Director.
An earlier killing offered a powerful lesson for Lamberth, the judge whose sentences for Jan. 6 Capitol rioters have drawn death threats. Seven months after he took the bench in 1987, his close friend Richard Daronco, a federal judge in New York, was murdered at home by the enraged father of a woman whose sexual discrimination suit was dismissed in Daronco’s court.
“We had never even contemplated that one of us could get killed in this job,” Lamberth said.
Soon after, Lamberth, a Vietnam War veteran, received his first death threat. A letter to his chambers said he would be murdered if he did not free a drug dealer he had jailed. Marshals had briefed his family on security precautions, but they were nervous, Lamberth said. “We had to adjust to the fact we could be a target.”
Another scare came after al Qaeda’s September 2001 attacks. The U.S. government feared that Lamberth, then chief judge on the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, might be an assassination target because he had authorized the first wiretaps on the Islamist militant group in the 1990s.
“I went everywhere with Marshals protection for a couple of years,” he said.
Still, Lamberth said, he was unprepared for the sheer volume of threats he’s received in connection to the Jan. 6 riot cases. Many are from people on the right enraged by the sentences he’s issued, but he has also received some threats from the left. While many of them are idle, Lamberth said, the Marshals have left the judge with little doubt that some are “dangerous,” and he and his family remain on constant alert.
Whenever he receives a delivery at home, he remembers what happened to Judge Salas’ family in New Jersey.
“Living this way, it does change your life,” he said.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
US Republican Kari Lake tells supporters: 'Strap on a Glock' as election nears
WASHINGTON, April 16 (Reuters) - Republican U.S. Senate candidate Kari Lake, an ardent supporter of former president Donald Trump, urged supporters in Arizona to "strap on a Glock" pistol as they prepare for what she called an intense six months leading up to the Nov. 5 elections.
"We are going to put on the armor of God. Then maybe strap on a Glock," Lake told a cheering audience at an Arizona rally on Sunday.
"You can put one (Glock) here," she said, touching her right hip. "And one in the back, or one in the front, whatever you guys decide."
Her campaign did not respond to queries seeking comment.
Lake, 54, is seeking the Republican nomination in the race to replace retiring U.S. Senator Kyrsten Sinema, a Democrat-turned-independent. The Arizona contest will play a key role in determining whether Democrats hold their narrow 51-49 Senate majority. A former local news anchor, Lake made an unsuccessful bid for Arizona governor two years ago.
Arizona, a swing state which narrowly went for Democrat Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election, could also play a crucial role in this year's presidential election.
Lake's comments came the day before Trump went on trial in New York on criminal charges stemming from alleged hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels. Trump has pleaded not guilty.
Trump has at times used violent imagery in his campaign events, particularly when lambasting immigrants and his opponents.
Lake warned supporters that Trump was facing "lawfare," which refers to an alleged strategic use of legal proceedings intended to intimidate and hinder a candidate.
"The next six months are going to be difficult," she said, adding that Trump is "willing to continue to fight for us."
"This is the moment we have to save our country. He's willing to sacrifice everything. I am, that's why they're coming after us," Lake said.
Trump faces multiple criminal cases, including charges involving his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Biden on false claims of widespread election fraud.
Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in a bid to stop the certification of Biden's election, after he told them in a fiery speech nearby to "fight like hell."
Her comments do sound eerily familiar to the things that led up to January 6th. But according to some, people don't listen to things like this. I guess that's why all the judges in the trump trials are being threatened so much.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
TRASH MAGA GOPers trying like hell to block aid packages to Ukraine. I hope when we’ve finally dealt with all these traitors that a few get the rope the deserve.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I’ve put most of the politics on ignore the last few weeks. Too many real world things going on for me right now to care if Trump craps the bed or if REpTARDS got their panties in a wad over some fake protestors staged by MAGA turds…
But I do like to pop in every few days to stir the pot and call a swastika a swastika. MGT is a walking talking Swastika Kremlin Style. She’s so stupid, you know she took talking point notes on the call with Trump and Putin, it’s just a matter of time before we have them. Either that other bimbo will bust her out, or her flavor of the week will spill the beans… I’ve never wanted to see a woman’s head dribbled like a basket ball until MGT. And in this season of setting the country right, I see no way she escapes eventual justice.
Popcorn is ready.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
It's unbelievable to me that a few republicans can run this country into the ground the way that Matt Gaetz and MTG have done. I mean do they really want Russia and Putin to win? Really? Reagan would run them out of town in a flash.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
The Republican Ghost That Won’t Stop Haunting MAGA Dreams Matt Lewis Thu, April 18, 2024 at 5:07 PM PDT·5 min read
If you are a MAGA Republican who is hoping to remake the party in Donald Trump’s image, you might be tempted to look at Speaker Mike Johnson’s recent comments and observe (as Barack Obama infamously did a few years ago) that the 1980s called, and they want their foreign policy back.
In case you missed it, Johnson—who is taking heat for saying he now supports funding bills for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan—recently invoked Ronald Reagan to buttress his support for foreign aid. “I’m a child of the ‘80s,” Johnson told CNN’s Jake Tapper. “I regard myself as a Reagan Republican. I understand the concept of maintaining peace through strength. That’s one of our guiding principles...it’s a big part of our party and our worldview.”
Not everyone is happy about Johnson’s support for Ukraine (to fend off Russia’s invasion). In fact, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) are threatening to oust him from his speakership over it, and another hardliner was overheard calling Johnson “tubby” during a heated exchange on Thursday.
Mike Johnson Should Tell Marjorie Taylor Greene to Bring the Smoke
Johnson’s Republican adversaries are so distrustful of him that, according to Politico’s Olivia Beavers, they have created something called the Floor Action Response Team (FART), which “aims to guard against a voice vote or unanimous consent vote where action could be stealthily taken against them and their members.”
As Semafor’s David Weigel quipped, “The Floor Action Response Team operates in silence—but its actions can be deadly.” There’s no telling if Republicans will be able to clear the air.
It’s not just what Johnson said that has riled the MAGA right, but how he said it. The normally mild-mannered Johnson has suddenly become defiant in the face of adversity.
That, coupled with him sounding like a committed internationalist, has sparked attention from his detractors and newfound fans, alike.
As a backbench congressman, Johnson opposed funding Ukraine—a position that put him in the same category as that of his current tormentors.
Indeed, Johnson’s ascension to speaker was largely premised on the notion that he would be the vessel for Trumpism in the House leadership. Based on his record, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) even dubbed him “MAGA Mike Johnson.”
So what explains Johnson’s change of heart regarding Ukraine? One theory holds that, upon being elevated to power, some people suddenly mature as they recognize the awesome responsibility of leadership, à la Thomas Becket.
Reagan’s Republican Party Wouldn’t Think Twice About Aid to Ukraine
There may be some element of that phenomenon at work here. But I think it is combined with something else: the enduring power of Reaganism.
On one hand, it’s not surprising. From 1980 until 2016—a 36-year span—Reagan’s optimistic conservative philosophy dominated the Republican Party. (Sure, other leaders and voices—Newt Gingrich, the Bushes, Rush Limbaugh—were prominent, but they all existed in the context of the Reagan era.)
On the other hand, Trump has dominated the GOP for the last nine years, as Reaganism was in full retreat on the right.
During this time, seeds have been planted that will impact future generations. There are 18-year-olds today who really haven’t known a pre-Trump Republican Party. These young Republicans have, no doubt, internalized Trump’s style and (to the extent he has a coherent philosophy) policies. In this regard, Trump’s legacy will surely outlive him.
Likewise, Reaganism abides, even while mostly dormant these last few years. For an earlier generation of Americans (Johnson was born in 1972—just eight years before Reagan won the first of his two presidential terms), Reagan’s worldview was deeply embedded in their psyches at a formative time.
“For Johnson to say he’s a Reagan Republican is—it’s not redundant—but it’s prima facie self-evident,” Reagan biographer Craig Shirley told me, “because the Republican Party still is Reagan’s party, because [the issues that animate today’s GOP] are Reagan’s issues… It’s still an internationalist party.”
As to the growing chorus of isolationist voices in today’s GOP? “They’re prominent, but they are still lonely voices in the wilderness,” Shirley noted.
To be sure, a political realignment has begun; however, Reaganism remains an enduring force with deep roots. MAGA loyalists who want to transform the GOP into an isolationist, nationalist party will have to contend with Reagan’s influence for years to come.
Trump’s minions are well aware of this. Initiatives like The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 have been inaugurated to identify and place fellow cult members (and blackball mainstream conservatives).
But this is a project that is best aimed at young people. For Republican politicians of a certain age who try to pose as Trumpy to capture the zeitgeist—from Mike Johnson to Mike Pence—it’ll be hard for MAGA to ever fully trust them with power.
The Joy of Making Trump Listen to Mean Tweets About Himself
One senses that most rank-in-file Republican members of Congress today, given the choice, would want to fund our allies. They may lack the courage of their convictions, and they may support the MAGA culture wars, but they are not deeply committed isolationists.
This presents a problem for MAGA’s attempt to replace old school Republicans and install new leaders. Upon being elevated to a leadership position, there is always the danger that their vestigial Reaganism will awaken, and some percentage of them will revert.
“Don’t trust anyone over 30” was once a maxim espoused by 1960s radicals and hippies. It might become yet another erstwhile leftist notion that gets co-opted by the Trumpian right.
Killing off Reaganism won’t happen overnight. If MAGA ever succeeds, it will have to be the result of a generational project.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
lol a group of people really walked out of the meeting and went ‘yea, this is a good team name’. Anyways,
More evidence the right on right civil war popping off that could turn violent, as I mentioned in the previous thread. There’s a ton of MAGA faithful absolutely ticked at Mike’s complete 180 and it’s getting more and more hostile. And, I can’t really blame em. He definitely promised one thing and did another, just like McCarthy did which got him ousted in the first place. Obviously I’m a lib so I support the funding, but if you’re a conservative who doesn’t support it, I get it.
But it’s definitely MAGA vs Reaganites right now. It sucks but, I can’t stop watching.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
It says something too when a guy who is a former member of the far right caucus actually considers the intelligence briefings and goes "Oh crap, we have to do something about this." Like...maybe he's onto something if he takes that kind of a turn while also putting his career in jeopardy to do so????
By the way, I normally hate pejorative names, but since the group created it sua sponte, I think we have to refer to them now as the FART caucus.
Last edited by dawglover05; 04/19/2401:15 PM.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
As Semafor’s David Weigel quipped, “The Floor Action Response Team operates in silence—but its actions can be deadly.” There’s no telling if Republicans will be able to clear the air.
Didn't want anyone to miss this part of the article Now all we need is a dutch oven reference
Don't blame the clown for acting like a clown. Ask yourself why you keep going to the circus.
MAGA is gonna have a hard time accepting that they are a minority. Either there’s a ton of RINOs, or MAGA country just won’t accept that the majority of the country - maybe even conservative America? - doesn’t share their views with geopolitical situations.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
New York man pleads guilty to sending threats to state attorney general and Trump civil case judge
NEW YORK (AP) — A New York man has pleaded guilty to sending death threats to the state attorney general and the Manhattan judge who presided over former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud case, prosecutors said Thursday.
Tyler Vogel, 26, of Lancaster, admitted to one felony count of making a terroristic threat and one misdemeanor count of making a threat of mass harm on Wednesday in state Supreme Court, according to Acting Erie County District Attorney Michael Keane’s office.
Vogel had sent text messages late last month threatening New York Attorney General Letitia James and Judge Arthur Engoron with “death and physical harm” if they did not comply with his demands to “cease action” in the Trump case, according to a complaint filed in a court in Lancaster, a suburb east of Buffalo.
State police said in the complaint that Vogel used a paid online background website to obtain private information about James and Engoron and that this “confirmed intentions to follow through with the threats were his demands not met.”
Keane’s office said Thursday that Vogel, in entering the guilty plea, will be allowed to participate in interim probation and must comply with the mandates of state mental health court.
Once the court and probation requirements are completed, Vogel will be permitted to withdraw his plea to the felony charge and be sentenced on the misdemeanor charge, according to Keane’s office.
He was released from custody and is due back in court April 23, but a temporary protection order issued on behalf of the two victims remains in effect, prosecutors said.
Vogel was initially charged with two felony counts of making a terroristic threat and two misdemeanor counts of aggravated harassment and faced a maximum of seven years in prison if convicted, prosecutors said at the time.
His lawyer didn’t respond to an email seeking comment Thursday and a spokesperson for James’ office declined to comment.
Trump, meanwhile, is again on trial in Manhattan this week.
The former Republican president, who is seeking a return to the White House in this year’s election, faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records as part of a scheme to bury stories about his sex life that he feared could hurt his 2016 campaign.
Trump has also appealed Engoron’s Feb. 16 finding that he lied about his wealth as he fostered the real estate empire that launched him to stardom and the presidency.
The civil trial focused on how Trump’s assets were valued on financial statements that went to bankers and insurers to get loans and deals.
Republican Wisconsin Senate candidate says he doesn’t oppose elderly people voting
MADISON, Wis. (AP) — The Republican candidate in Wisconsin’s closely watched U.S. Senate race emphasized this week that he doesn’t oppose elderly people voting after initially saying that “almost nobody in a nursing home” is at a point in life where they are capable of voting.
Eric Hovde faces Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin in the race that is essential for Democrats to win in order to maintain their majority in the Senate. A Marquette University Law School poll this week showed the race is about even among likely voters.
Baldwin and Democrats have been attacking Hovde over comments he first made April 5 on a Fox News radio show about nursing home voting. Who can vote in a nursing home, and how they cast their ballots, has been a hot issue in Wisconsin since 2020 when supporters of former President Donald Trump alleged that people were voting illegally.
No charges were brought, and President Joe Biden’s victory over Trump has withstood a nonpartisan audit, numerous lawsuits, a partial recount and a review by a conservative law firm.
But Hovde has been raising the issue of nursing home voting when discussing what he said were problems with the 2020 election.
“We had nursing homes where the sheriff of Racine investigated, where you had 100 percent voting in nursing homes,” Hovde said.
That claim of 100% voting in nursing homes, first made by former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Michael Gableman in a discredited report, has never been verified. Voting data has shown that participation in nursing homes across the state was much lower than 100%.
“If you’re in a nursing home, you only have a five, six-month life expectancy,” Hovde said last week on the “Guy Benson Show.” “Almost nobody in a nursing home is in a point to vote.”
Baldwin, in reaction to Hovde’s comments, said last week that “thousands of Wisconsinites live in nursing homes.”
“Eric Hovde does not have a clue what he’s talking about,” she said on MSNBC.
In two subsequent interviews this week, when asked to clarify his comments in the wake of Democratic criticism, Hovde accused his opponents and the media of “political hits.”
“They tried to say I didn’t want elderly people to vote,” Hovde said Monday on WISN-AM. “I don’t even know how they came up with that.”
Hovde reiterated that his issue was based on reports of people who questioned how their severely ill relatives in nursing homes had voted.
Racine County Sheriff Christopher Shmaling, a Trump backer, said in 2021 that the families of eight residents told investigators they believed their love ones did not have the capacity to vote but ballots were cast for them.
Hovde this week said “a large percentage” of nursing home residents “are not in the mental capacity to (vote).”
But he said that does not mean he thinks elderly people should not be allowed to vote.
“I think elderly should absolutely vote,” he said Wednesday on WSAU-AM.
Nursing home voting became a focus for Trump supporters following his narrow loss in Wisconsin in 2020.
State law requires local election clerks to send so-called special voting deputies to nursing homes to give residents an opportunity to vote.
The Wisconsin Elections Commission, in a bipartisan 5-1 vote in March 2020, determined that poll workers could not be sent into nursing homes to help with voting due to a safer-at-home order issued by Gov. Tony Evers early in the COVID-19 pandemic. The order came at a time when nursing homes were severely limiting who could come into their facilities, often not even allowing immediate family members inside.
An audit by the nonpartisan Legislative Audit Bureau determined that the elections commission broke the law when it told clerks not to send or attempt to send deputies into nursing homes.
Schmaling, the sheriff and a Trump backer, called for criminal charges against the commissioners who voted not to send in voting deputies. But the Racine County district attorney declined to charge, citing lack of jurisdiction. The Milwaukee County district attorney also declined to charge two commissioners in his county, saying there was a lack of evidence that a crime was committed.
Republicans in the Legislature have tried to tighten rules about voting in nursing homes, but the measures have either failed to pass or been vetoed by Evers.
MAGA is gonna have a hard time accepting that they are a minority. Either there’s a ton of RINOs, or MAGA country just won’t accept that the majority of the country - maybe even conservative America? - doesn’t share their views with geopolitical situations.
No I missed it.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
The rule to pass the funding bills the way Johnson wanted passed 316-94, with only 39 republicans voting against it.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
So are you and Oob officially libs or do I still need to hide the weed when y’all come over?
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Where have you been??? I am a certified libtard per Eve. All the back and forth you and I have had for a decade plus is water-under-the-bridge. Apparently you and I are on the same team now.
Blaze it up!
Last edited by dawglover05; 04/19/2411:06 PM.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Only in the deep south can people think they can convince you that their heritage is based on a small, four year slice of this nations entire history and not based on racism.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
It says something too when a guy who is a former member of the far right caucus actually considers the intelligence briefings and goes "Oh crap, we have to do something about this." Like...maybe he's onto something if he takes that kind of a turn while also putting his career in jeopardy to do so????
By the way, I normally hate pejorative names, but since the group created it sua sponte, I think we have to refer to them now as the FART caucus.
Well Johnson seems to be one of the few labeled MAGA that can actually read, so there is that to consider. We all know MTG COULDN’T COMPREHEND ANYTHING ABOVE AN ADOLESCENT JOKE. MTG the national embarrassment… fitting words for her political headstone.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
Only in the deep south can people think they can convince you that their heritage is based on a small, four year slice of this nations entire history and not based on racism.
A celebration of the last traitorous trash to take up arms against our nation… Only n the era of Trump.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
Actually it's been going on long before trump was ever in politics. But it may give us a hint of how long the current stench we're witnessing will remain.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Ok, got it. It’s more a deep south klan-ish thing to celebrate those traitors. The Jim Crow and MAGA movements are pretty much in lock step on the hate crap.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week
CLAIM: New York Judge Juan M. Merchan told former President Donald Trump on the first day of his hush money case that he can’t attend his son Barron’s May 17 high school graduation because he must be in court that day.
THE FACTS: Merchan said on Monday that he was not prepared to rule on a request that court be adjourned on May 17 so that Trump can attend the ceremony. He said his decision will depend on how the trial proceeds. Despite that, Trump said as he left court following the trial’s first day, “it looks like the judge will not let me go to the graduation of my son.” Moments later, he expressed displeasure because the trial made it so “that I can’t go to my son’s graduation” and a number of other events, including a U.S. Supreme Court hearing and campaign stops.
Trump then furthered his criticism of the judge on his Truth Social platform, writing in one post both that he “will likely not be allowed to attend” and that “the Judge, Juan Merchan, is preventing me from proudly attending my son’s Graduation.” He wrote in another post less than two hours later that he is “being prohibited from attending.”
Social media users quickly parroted Trump’s claims.
“Leftist NYC Judge won’t allow President Trump to attend Barron’s high school graduation,” reads one X post that had received approximately 23,000 likes and 11,200 shares as of Thursday. “This is going to backfire huge. The American people are sick of this Marxist tyranny.”
Some posts also said that Trump will be arrested if he attends the graduation anyway.
But Merchan has not yet ruled on the matter.
Trump’s lawyers requested on Monday that the trial not be held on May 17 so that the former president may be at the ceremony. A Trump lawyer also requested the trial not be held June 3 so that he can attend his own son’s graduation.
Merchan said he was not prepared to issue a decision on either request, but noted that if the trial proceeds as planned he’s willing to adjourn for one or both days. “It really depends on how we’re doing on time and where we are in the trial,” he said.
The judge will require Trump to attend court in New York next Thursday, while the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments about whether, as a former president, he is immune from prosecution in another of his four criminal cases. Trump is not required to be at the Supreme Court for the arguments.
Merchan read Trump his so-called “Parker warnings” on Monday, informing him that his right to be present at the trial could be revoked if he acted out and that he could be sent to jail for disruptive behavior. Trump said that he understood a warrant for his arrest will be issued if he deliberately fails to appear for the trial, according to a court transcript. This is standard criminal procedure law in New York.
Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records as part of a scheme to bury damaging stories that he feared could hurt his 2016 campaign, particularly as Trump’s reputation was suffering at the time from comments he had made about women.
Trump is facing charges in three other criminal cases, including two related to the 2020 election. He was ordered on Feb. 16 to pay $335 million in penalties in a civil case for a scheme to dupe banks, insurers and others by inflating his wealth on financial statements, a decision he is appealing.
NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week
No, immigrants did not storm New York City Hall in pursuit of luxury hotel rooms
CLAIM: Immigrants in the U.S. illegally on Tuesday stormed New York City Hall, demanding housing in luxury hotels rather than city shelters.
THE FACTS: Social media posts misrepresented the actions of the participants and the reason they had gathered at City Hall.
Hundreds of Black immigrants assembled peacefully in City Hall Park during a hearing about racial inequities in New York’s shelter and immigrant support systems. They gathered there after it became clear that only around 100 people would be allowed into the hearing, The Associated Press reported.
The New York Police Department told the AP that no arrests were made in relation to the gathering. Attendees said they came for a variety of reasons, such as to support City Council members at the hearing or to see if they could get information about jobs and housing.
Many shared videos from the gathering that showed large groups of people calmly standing, milling about or waiting in line. Other footage showed people cheering outside City Hall.
“Illegals have just swarmed NYC City Hall and have surrounded it,” reads one X post that had received approximately 32,000 likes and 20,600 shares as of Thursday. “They’re trying to occupy the building and are demanding luxury hotel rooms provided to illegals instead of the shelters that NYC has provided. This is only going to get worse.”
A caption on a TikTok video of people in line reads: “TODAY IN BIDEN’S AMERICA… illegals in NYC stormed City Hall because they are being moved into shelters and out of their luxury hotels.” It was viewed approximately 67,300 times.
But the gathering of more than 1,500 immigrants, mostly from Guinea, was peaceful and there was no indication they had arrived en masse at City Hall to demand luxury hotel accommodations.
They were at City Hall for a hearing held by the City Council’s Committee on Immigration to examine racial inequities in the city’s shelter and immigrant support systems. Relatively minor proposals were on the day’s agenda. For example, a set of bills that would require administrators to collect better data on migrants receiving city services, as well as a resolution for the federal government to eliminate or reimburse immigration application fees. Immigrants also testified about their own experiences.
A press conference was held on the steps of City Hall prior to the hearing. It featured speakers including Council Member Alexa Avilés, chair of the Committee on Immigration, Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, and representatives of advocacy and support groups.
Emmet Teran, a spokesperson for Avilés, told the AP that groups represented at the conference invited immigrants that they work with to attend, though other early arrivals were also allowed beyond security barriers. He added that another impromptu press conference was held for those who could not get in.
“It’s disgusting, but not surprising from the people that are saying these things,” Teran said of the claims spreading online. “I think we were very clear in our messaging about the hearing, about what we wanted to cover, which was the experiences of Black immigrants in New York City.”
Teran described the crowds as “incredibly calm” and said that people were understanding even though some were frustrated about waiting in line or not getting into the hearing. They assembled in City Hall Park after realizing that only about 100 people would be allowed into the hearing, the AP reported. Many attendees said they had learned about the event by word of mouth, often on WhatsApp groups with fellow immigrants.
An AP reporter present at the gathering observed that it was calm and orderly. When asked, immigrants were largely concerned about obtaining authorization to work in the U.S. Some also complained about lack of access to halal food in shelters. Others were worried about being evicted from shelters or had come to support City Council members.
Meanwhile, back in reality, the good people on both sides of the house of representatives hand MAGA MARGE and the clown show a huge L by passing numerous aid packages including the funding of the defenders of democracy in Ukraine. Suck it Marge. Suck it Donald.
Last edited by OldColdDawg; 04/20/2402:36 PM.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
On a less deserving but still very important point, I’d like to offer a moment of silence for the victims in and of MAGA. And yes, we will follow those few seconds with hours of belly-roll laughing at the stooges de Trump. Fascism is falling/failing and I love it.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
