Tag: donald trump
MAGA Push For Voter Suppression Splits Angry Senate Republicans

MAGA Push For Voter Suppression Splits Angry Senate Republicans

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has been forced into a "political pressure cooker" by MAGA members of the GOP, per a new report from Politico, as they push for him to go around the filibuster to pass an unpopular election reform bill demanded by Donald Trump.

According to the Wednesday morning report, Thune "is at the center of a relentless pile-on from prominent figures in the GOP’s MAGA wing" to pass the SAVE America Act, a bill that, among other things, would require voters to provide identification proving their citizenship at polling locations, an idea driven by Trump's debunked claims about widespread voter fraud committed by undocumented immigrants. Trump is so insistent on the passage of the bill that he has pledged not to sign any others until it is passed and sent to his desk.

MAGA Republicans such as Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) are pushing for Thune to invoke a "talking filibuster" to get around the typical "legislative filibuster" rules, which would require 60 votes for the SAVE Act to proceed, an impossibility given Democratic opposition. Under a talking filibuster, only a simple majority of 51 votes would be needed, and Democrats would have to physically hold the Senate floor and speak for hours to keep it from proceeding.

Thune has dug in his heels in opposition to this idea, arguing that there is not actually enough support for it. He has also previously stated that the plan could have more complicated consequences than its proponents realize, and could result in Democrats eating up valuable Senate time with talking.

“It just kind of comes with the territory,” Thune said in an interview on Tuesday. “You just roll with it, you know. It’s the times in which we live.”

Other non-MAGA-aligned Republicans have also begun to speak out against their colleagues' calls for a talking filibuster, including Sen. Thom Tillis, a prominent Trump critic who is set to retire soon.

“Spare me the insights,” Tillis said. “They’re worse than Democrats because they’re so-called Republicans that are trying to undermine Republicans.”The pressure campaign against Thune reached a "crescendo" this week, according to Politico, with Tesla CEO and one-time Trump ally Elon Musk joining the calls for him to be removed as majority leader. For his part, Thune does not appear to be bothered.

He added that lawmakers calling for a talking filibuster “have no earthly idea how unlikely it is we’ll be successful at the end of the day. And yet they want to pressure me into exposing some of our candidates to votes that make no sense, that are not going to succeed.”

Other GOP senators spoke to Politico anonymously about their frustrations, with one calling the antics of their MAGA colleagues "bulls——," and another saying that, "A lot of us are done."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet


Courage Over Fear: Will Americans Stand Strong For Free And Fair Elections?

Courage Over Fear: Will Americans Stand Strong For Free And Fair Elections?

Rep. James E. Clyburn (D-SC) is the go-to for both reassurance and resolve. That makes sense, since the South Carolina Democrat is a student of history — and has lived it.

He chronicles some of the country’s past, and his own, in his book The First Eight: A Personal History of the Pioneering Black Congressmen Who Shaped a Nation, published late last year.

It’s instructive to learn about the lives of these eight and the Jim Crow discrimination that thwarted Reconstruction and the political and civil rights progress of African Americans for nearly a century during and after their time.

But that doesn’t make what they accomplished meaningless. And it’s not as though the hard work stopped in the years between the post-Civil War eight and Clyburn’s election in the 1990s.

That’s the lesson Americans who fight for justice must never forget, even when the outlook is discouraging. Clyburn is a very real symbol of how risks can turn into rewards shared by those who follow — and as we witness the current retreat from those gains, initiated at the highest levels of government, his perspective couldn’t come at a better moment.

It is a week that has seen the 61st anniversary of what has become known as Bloody Sunday, the march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. On March 7, 1965, state troopers violently attacked peaceful citizens seeking equal rights, particularly the voting rights denied African Americans during decades of disenfranchisement.

Many gathered this past weekend in Selma, among them Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore — a Democratic presence when GOP representation at the event has been sadly shrinking with each passing year — and people from the original march.

One thing they all had in common was worry that the battle over voting rights is far from finished. “I’m concerned that all of the advances that we made for the last 61 years are going to be eradicated,” 78-year-old Charles Mauldin, beaten on Bloody Sunday, told the AP.

The Supreme Court seems primed to obliterate what remains of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, passed after the bloody sacrifice of that day shocked the national consciousness. If given the green light, Republican-led efforts could eliminate majority-minority districts that have given Black and Hispanic citizens representation and a voice in Washington.

President Donald Trump, amid an unpopular war with Iran, has found plenty of time to demand that Congress pass stricter federal voting requirements to fight nonexistent fraud.

The federal government has embarked on what seems like another wild-goose chase in Arizona, seeking records related to the 2020 election, where numerous audits and reviews have proven Trump lost — a truth the president of the United States refuses to accept.

Critical midterm elections are around the corner, with the first primary elections a week old. How certain are free and fair elections, without interference or intimidation?

It was my question during a press conference preceding Trump’s State of the Union address last month. Clyburn was joined by fellow Congressional Black Caucus member Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove of California to offer insight that might be missing that evening.

Does the congressman fear a weakened Voting Rights Act would spell doom for Black voters?

“A lot of things went against us before we ever got the right to vote.”

He offered a reminder of what was happening in Alabama and a host of states in the South when John Lewis and the rest of the brave men, women and children marched. Many African Americans then did not have the right to vote.

“It wasn’t lack of desire, but obstacles placed in their way,” Clyburn said, noting poll taxes, literacy tests, “the violence and intimidation meted out to anyone who would even think of trying to vote, or registering a Black person to vote.”

“Yet there they were on that bridge, fighting injustice for themselves, of course, but mostly for those who would follow.”

No matter what the Supreme Court rules, “it will not take the vote away.” And one vote could make the difference, he said.

Maybe it does take people who have lived the fight to supply a call to action to those who might be scared away by state election laws designed to confuse or by poll watchers whose goal is intimidation rather than assistance.

Folks like Clyburn and Mauldin, who remembered what it took that day in 1965: “It wasn’t that we didn’t have fear, it’s that we chose courage over fear.”

Mary C. Curtis has worked at The New York Times, The Baltimore Sun, The Charlotte Observer, as national correspondent for Politics Daily, and is a senior facilitator with The OpEd Project. She is host of the CQ Roll Call “Equal Time with Mary C. Curtis” podcast. Follow her on X @mcurtisnc3.

Reprinted with permission from Roll Call

Fox Hosts Urge Flooding Iran With Small Arms To Incite Regime Change (Or Civil War)

Fox Hosts Urge Flooding Iran With Small Arms To Incite Regime Change (Or Civil War)

Fox News hosts Sean Hannity, Brian Kilmeade, and Jesse Watters have suggested flooding Iran with small arms to incite regime change, a reckless proposal that even some of their guests have rejected.

The United States and Israel last week launched an unprovoked war on Iran with shifting stated goals, one of which is regime change — or, perhaps more accurately, regime collapse. That could take several forms, including a mass uprising of the population in Iran or possibly the introduction of proxy forces, such as Kurdish militias, whom the CIA is reportedly working to arm. (The United States has a decadeslong history of encouraging Kurds across several countries to rise up and then betraying them.)

The risks of such a development are numerous, the most obvious being the threat of sending Iran into a spiral of violence that could turn into a civil war like in Syria after the Arab Spring or Iraq during the U.S. occupation. The United States poured weapons into both of those countries, helping to fuel the violence and worsen the internal conflicts.

Although such an outcome would appear disastrous on its face, there is ample evidence that the United States and Israel want to turn Iran from a regional power into a failed state incapable of countering their influence. Flooding the country with weapons could do that, and Fox News personalities are leading the charge.

Host Sean Hannity is the network’s most vocal supporter of the idea, both on his Fox prime-time show and on his radio program, which airs on Premiere Radio Networks.

“I already know” that arming Iranians is “part of the plan,” Hannity said on his March 2 radio show, telling a caller that “if you have millions of Iranians that, in fact, do have weapons and they rise up against the remnants of this regime — and there's not a lot — or for those Revolutionary Guard forces that will not put their weapons down, there's only one way to get rid of them.” (Whether Hannity’s claim to “already know” President Donald Trump’s war plans was bluster or not, the administration has been leaking insider information to its allies in right-wing media.)

Hannity returned to the topic several times during that show. “The Iranian people need to have elections, and they need to get armed, and they need to be able to fight back” against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, he said. Later, he added, “I’m hoping that the students, the people in Iran, I’m hoping that they get the arms for any remaining Revolutionary Guard forces that won't lay down their weaponry.”

“You can't win a revolution with a slingshot — at some point they are going to need to be armed to take out the remaining loyalists,” he said the following day.

That evening, Hannity broached the idea on his Fox show during an interview with network contributor and retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, one of the war’s most vocal cheerleaders outside the Trump administration.

“Do we need to arm the civilians that had taken to the streets, that were being mowed down by the tens of thousands?” Hannity asked.

“In terms of arming the people themselves, I would pause on doing that,” Keane said. “I wouldn’t rush into that.” He added, “I don’t think just arming them and creating that — upgunning that level of violence is what we need.”

Seemingly unsatisfied with that answer, Hannity later in the same show asked retired Army Gen. David Petraeus, who oversaw the arming of U.S.-backed “death squads” in Iraq during the so-called surge, what he thought of the idea.

“Should part of the plan be to arm the people that have been slaughtered on the streets that were looking for freedom and change, so that it won’t take any American or Israeli forces?” Hannity asked. “I’ve got to believe there is going to be holdovers that are loyal to the former regime.”

“Well, I agree with my old boss and mentor and friend, Gen. Jack Keane, who earlier said that he’s not certain about that given there’s no organization there.”

Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade has floated the idea too.

“I just wonder at some point is the CIA or Mossad going to be able to arm the people?” Kilmeade said on March 3. “If you arm the people so they're not slaughtered in the streets, that would begin to get the IRGC’s attention.”

“We've got to find a way to arm that population and open up these prisons,” Kilmeade said on March 4, referring to Kurds in Iran.

His colleague Jesse Watters made a similar suggestion.

“Trump has even been on the phone with the Kurds," Watters said on March 3. “We might be able to arm them and use them as boots on the ground.” (Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, formerly a co-host of Fox & Friends’ weekend edition, said on March 4 that “none of our objectives are premised on the support of the arming of any particular force.”)

The Trump administration has done such a poor job explaining its war on Iran that even right-wing media allies are having a hard time articulating the conflict’s larger strategy and goals. Predicting the direction any war will take is a fool’s errand, but it doesn’t take a crystal ball to know that flooding Iran with weapons is a recipe for disaster and potentially state collapse. For Fox News hosts, that appears to be an acceptable outcome.

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

Toddler Trump Goes To War, With No Concern For The Consequences

Toddler Trump Goes To War, With No Concern For The Consequences

We are now six days into Trump’s war on Iran, and his team is still trying to figure out the reason. We started with regime change, but Trump quickly decided that he might be okay with leaving someone from the current government in charge.

Then he went with the need to keep Iran from having nuclear weapons. That one didn’t work very well either since he was still boasting about having obliterated Iran’s nuclear weapons program in his attacks last summer.

Team Trump then shifted to the need to strike preemptively. This story went that Israel was about to attack, and we knew that if Israel attacked Iran would retaliate against U.S. forces in the region. Therefore, we had to attack first, along with Israel.

That one may be closest to reality, but it does put Trump in the embarrassing position of admitting that he allowed Netanyahu to drag the United States into a war that doesn’t make much sense from the standpoint of the United States. As Marjorie Taylor Greene and other MAGA stalwarts are pointing out, this is not very America First!

War Without Warning or Planning

Trump not only lacked a reason to go to war; it seems his team didn’t bother to do any planning. Three days after the war began and Iran started sending drones and missiles around the Middle East, it suddenly occurred to Team Trump that they should try to evacuate U.S. citizens from the region.

That is likely a good idea, but the sort of thing competent governments plan before they go to war. It is truly amazing that Trump apparently was completely unprepared for what was almost a certain outcome of his war.

It is worth comparing this failure to the problems associated with Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan. Biden managed to get almost 130,000 people out of Afghanistan as the regime we had supported there was collapsing. This was a very impressive accomplishment. These were people who had worked with the U.S. military. Their lives and the lives of their family members would be endangered if they were not able to get out of the country. There were 13 U.S. soldiers who will killed in a terrorist incident near the airport from which most people were being evacuated.

That was a tragic event, but in the larger context, the withdrawal went remarkably smoothly given the extraordinary circumstances. And just to be clear, it was Trump who put Biden in this situation, having already negotiated a withdrawal with the Taliban before Biden came into office. Nonetheless, news outlets like the New York Times, Washington Post, and National Public Radio felt obligated to refer to the withdrawal as “disastrous” when referring to it in their news stories for the rest of his presidency.

It will be interesting to see how they refer to this incredible mess-up by the Trump administration. Presumably Trump knew in advance that war was likely. The State Department could have issued warnings to U.S. citizens in the region. They also should have developed contingency plans to withdraw people once the war started, recognizing that it was likely airports in the region would be closed.

None of this happened. Now they are in the situation of telling hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens you’re on your own in trying to make travel arrangements to get to safety in the middle of a war zone. The level of incompetence is orders of magnitude greater than any failures by the Biden administration in the Afghanistan withdrawal.

The United States Screws Its Former Allies

When George W. Bush attacked Iraq in 2003, he made his plans very clear to U.S. allies, and in fact to the whole world. The attack may have been unjustified, but it was not a secret to anyone. The same was true of his father’s attack on Iraq in the first Gulf War. In both cases U.S. allies knew what to expect well in advance and could plan accordingly.

That is not the case with Trump’s war on Iran. The U.S. was apparently unprepared for Iran’s military response and so are U.S. allies. This is a huge deal for East Asian countries that are heavily dependent on oil from the region and European countries that badly need liquid natural gas from the Persian Gulf countries, especially as they have mostly cut imports from Russia. The jump in the price of oil and natural gas is yet another shock to these countries’ economies, after the earlier shock from the Trump tariffs.

If it wasn’t already completely clear, with the exception of Israel, none of the United States’ traditional allies can count on the United States support, either militarily or economically. The Trump administration is at best indifferent, if not outright hostile, to countries that are committed to democracy and the rule of law.

The fact that a blockage of the Straits of Hormuz might be a serious economic hit to much of the world seems to have not weighed into Trump’s decision to go to war at all. If the blockage is only for a few days, the impact will end up being limited, but if it lasts for months, the hit will be comparable or even larger than the impact of the sanctions most rich countries imposed on Russian oil and gas after the invasion of Ukraine.

As far as whether the blockage of the Straits is likely to continue for long, part will depend on Iran’s ability to fire missiles and drones, but part will depend on Trump’s decision as to whether to continue the war or seek a negotiated settlement. On that point, he is again playing reality TV show host, telling the world to stay tuned and we’ll see what he feels like.

One positive outcome from this war is that it should further accelerate the shift to clean energy. Now that the world recognizes how fragile its access to traditional fossil fuels is, it has become a huge natural security matter for them to quickly shift to sources of energy that can’t be turned off. It was already the case that renewable energy accounted for the vast majority of new energy being added in most countries, even the United States. But the war should prompt countries to accelerate the pace at which they add wind and solar, allowing them to retire facilities relying on fossil fuels.

The same story applies with electric vehicles. They already account for the bulk of vehicle sales in China and some other markets. This is in large part because they are as cheap as gas-powered vehicles to buy, and much cheaper to operate. Countries are likely now to push quickly to get towards 100% electric vehicles among new sales and replacing many of the older gas-fueled cars still on the road.

Those of us in the United States who lived through Donald Trump’s first presidency know that he is not a person who thinks carefully about his actions and their long-term consequences. Trump began to demonstrate this point to the world clearly with his hare-brained tariff scheme where he sought to punish countries for trading with us. This war without reason removes any doubt that Trump is a threat to world peace and economic stability. The world needs to move away from any dependence on the United States as quickly as possible and now they all know this.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Dean Baker.

Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World