There was an explosion of news this week with a theme: The increasing radicalization of the Republican Party.
First, we have the abortion pill mifepristone debacle in which a federal judge in Texas attempted to outlaw mifepristone for the entire nation. Here’s the timeline (I find that a bullet point timeline is the best tool for understanding a complex legal situation):
- Last year, a coalition of anti-abortion rights groups called the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine sued the FDA alleging that mifepristone should not have been approved. Note: Mifepristone was approved 20 years ago, has been proven safe, and is also used in miscarriage management.
- On Friday, April 7, U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Texas agreed with the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. He ruled that the Food and Drug Administration improperly approved the abortion pill mifepristone and issued a nationwide injunction pausing the FDA approval, set to take effect in 7 days.
- Hours after Kacsmaryk’s ruling, the DOJ appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
- A coalition of Democratic attorneys general in 17 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit to block the FDA from pulling the drug from the market.
- In response to that lawsuit, a federal judge in Washington state, Thomas O. Rice, blocked the FDA from “altering the status quo and rights as it relates to the availability of Mifepristone.”
- We thus had dueling federal district court rulings, creating an untenable situation for the FDA, which meant that SCOTUS would have to weigh in quickly.
- On Wednesday, April 12, the Fifth Circuit, in a late-night ruling, held that mifepristone can remain on the market, but with limited access. The order was riddled with problems, which I won’t go into here.
- On Friday, the DOJ and abortion pill distributor Danco Laboratories asked the Supreme Court to block the order limiting access to mifepristone.
- Late Friday, the Supreme Court issued a temporary stay maintaining the status quo while it hears the case.
Bottom line: As a practical matter, a federal judge doesn’t have the authority to intervene in the workings of the FDA and substitute his judgment for the judgment of the FDA. As Steve Vladeck pointed out, the case has other procedural problems such as standing (do the plaintiffs have the right to bring this lawsuit) and statute of limitations.
From my mail this week: “Teri, I would love to see a post on your views of how SCOTUS will rule.”
Because we have a few completely unhinged justices, it’s hard to say for sure, but I can’t see the Supreme Court twisting itself into knots to keep mifepristone off the market, which would involve overlooking standing and statute of limitations issues and allowing federal courts to usurp the role of the executive branch.
Also, even though the underlying issue here is different from the issue presented in Roe v. Wade, the Court overturned Roe partly on the grounds that federal courts shouldn’t be making those decisions. For federal courts to intervene now on thin pretense and make a ruling on abortion access would obviously smell of rank hypocrisy. A normal court would not consider agreeing with Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, but we have an increasingly radicalized Supreme Court.
If the Supreme Court does such a thing, the backlash against the Court (and Republicans) will be fierce.
More news:
- Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill that would ban abortion after six weeks of pregnancy (before most women know they are pregnant).
- We learned that Justice Thomas took large sums of money from Harland Crow and failed to report real estate sales and gifts from Crow.
- The Tennessee Legislature grabbed the national stage when, in an act of stunning racism, expelled two Black members for protesting gun violence while not expelling the white woman who also protested gun violence. (The expelled representatives have been returned to office.)
- Fox News was sanctioned for withholding evidence in the Dominion defamation case. (This is a big deal.)
- That was how we learned that there are recordings of Trump campaign officials basically admitting that they had no evidence (or very little evidence) of issues with the machines. (No wonder Fox didn’t want to turn over the evidence.)
- On Thursday, Merrick Garland announced that the FBI arrested Jack Douglas Teixeira, a 21-year-old employee of the US Air Force National Guard who apparently leaked more than 100 classified US documents on social media. Turns out, Teixeira is a radicalized Christian libertarian who has “doubts about America’s future” and who also exhibits racism and antisemitic behavior.
- Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) defended Teixeira on the ground that he is “white, male, Christian and antiwar. That makes him an enemy to the Biden regime.” [By “anti-war” she meant “anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia”).
- Alvin Bragg had to waste time responding to Jim Jordan’s attempt to turn the Manhattan Trump indictment into another Benghazi.
- Trump brought an unhinged lawsuit against Michael Cohen.
- Trump’s Truth Social postings have become increasingly unhinged and incoherent.
- Even as Trump is having a mental breakdown of some kind, the Republican Party continues to support him as a candidate for president.
We are essentially being hit with a firehose of insanity. I could spend a full blog post on any one of the above, but I think it’s better to back up and take a bird’s eye view to ask how has the Republican Party became so unhinged and radicalized.
The Republican Cycle of Radicalization
While the title of Let Them Eat Tweets by Yale political scientist Jacob Hacker, and Berkeley political scientist Paul Pierson feels a bit dated, the book succinctly explains what we might call the Republican cycle of radicalization whereby the party leaders are locked into accepting increasingly extreme and unhinged positions.
The authors begin with what Harvard Prof. Daniel Ziblatt calls the “Conservative dilemma,” which goes like this:
- Conservatives represent the interests of a few wealthy people.
- Their economic policies are unpopular.
- So when more people are allowed to vote, conservatives have a problem.
Plutocracy is incompatible with democracy for two reasons: (1) most people will not knowingly vote to keep a plutocrat in power when that plutocrat is essentially robbing them, so plutocrats have trouble winning elections the normal way, by putting forward their policies and plans. (2) As more money becomes concentrated in the hands of a few people, power, too, becomes increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few people.
Plutocracy is not new in the United States. Slavery, after all, was a plutocracy, as was the era of robber barons. (Heather Cox Richardson in her book To Make Men Free refers to these as our first two oligarchies. We are now heading toward a third.) The Civil War got us out of the first oligarchy. Roosevelt’s New Deal got us out of the second.
To win elections with unpopular economic positions, plutocrats can either:
- Move to the center by agreeing to implement economic policies that benefit more people, or
- Consolidate minority power so they don’t have to compromise on economic issues.
Beginning with Nixon, guess which the Republicans chose.
To win elections with unpopular policies, the Republicans formed an alliance with Fox, the NRA, and white Evangelical groups. The alliances worked like this: Fox, the NRA, and Christian nationalist groups turned out voters. In exchange, the Republican candidates and elected officials gave them the social policies they wanted: Get rid of abortion, deregulate guns, etc.
You see, plutocrats don’t care about things like guns and abortions, but they needed the votes, so they made a deal with organizations that could turn out voters.
At first, outsourcing voter mobilization was a boon to Republican candidates, but to please their audiences, talk show hosts like Tucker Carlson swung farther to the right. Meanwhile, because Republican elected officials needed Fox to turn out voters, Fox began exerting more influence on Republican candidates, creating a radicalization cycle. As these organizations moved farther to the right to accommodate their readership, Republican officials had to similarly move to the right to win their votes. Even so-called moderates like Mitt Romney were forced to make deals with Fox and other right-wing groups.
The difference between so-called Republican “moderates” and crazies like Marjorie Taylor Greene is that the moderates made a deal with right-wing extremists and Greene is a right-wing extremist.
Before Trump, Republican candidates would position themselves far to the right to win primaries, and then adopt a more moderate stance in the general election. By 2016, the base had enough of that. They were tired of voting for candidates who they felt gave their issues lip service in the primaries and then, in the general election, promised to govern from the center-right. So they went for Trump. No more Mitt Romneys. No more candidates making deals with the far right. They wanted someone who was far right.
What looked like a 2015-2016 Republican civil war (moderates v. far right wing) was simply the Republican Party officials, including people like Lindsay Graham, panicking because Trump refused to hide his racism and extremism behind euphemisms and dog whistles. But when Trump won the nomination, the Republican leadership fell in line.
Another way to say the same thing: To win elections, Nixon and Reagan invited white Supremacists and Christian nationalists into the party. Now the white Supremacists and Christian nationalists have taken control.
Yet another way to say the same thing: To stay in power, plutocrats have employed strongman psychology: They promise to protect their supporters from their “enemies” (woke Democrats who want access to abortion and gun regulations, and who refuse to lie about American history).
Plutocrats offering “protection,” leads to what Timothy Snyder calls sadopopulism, which works like this:
- Plutocratic leaders enact policies designed to protect their own wealth. For example, they lower taxes on the wealthy and remove access to healthcare for those who are not wealthy.
- These policies inflict suffering on the people.
- The leader blames their pain on the “enemies” (immigrants, minorities, migrants seeking asylum, Democrats, etc.)
- The richer the plutocrats become, the more general suffering exists in the population, so there is more anger to direct against the “enemies”, thereby creating a need for a strongman to “protect” the “victims.”
This chart was included in Let Them Eat Tweets:
The Republican Party has moved even farther to the right since 2019. If the Republican Party continues on its course (and there is no reason to think it won’t) we can expect the Republican Party to keep shrinking. As it shrinks, it will become more desperate and dangerous.
Obviously one of two things will happen:
- The Democrats will win elections and make it harder for right-wing extremists to hold power or
- the Democrats will lose the upcoming elections and the right-wing extremists will win.
There are no magic bullets. The only way to contain the threat of right-wing extremism is for Democrats to win the upcoming elections, which can put into motion another cycle that would favor the expansion of liberal democracy.
In this lecture, Harvard professor Steven Levitsky (who talks about “white Christians” as the base of the Republican Party) offers these statistics:
In 1994, white Christians were 74% of the electorate.
By 2014, they were down to 57%.
By 2024, they’re projected to be less than 50%.
In other words, the Republican Party represents a shrinking demographic group. Meanwhile, the Democratic Party has morphed into a party of urban intellectuals, minority communities, and young people—and this demographic is growing.
The Cycle Created By Changing Demographics
If the Democrats do nothing more than continue to hold the White House and Senate, they can contain the threat of right-wing extremism by gradually replacing the federal judiciary, controlling national enforcement, other federal agencies, etc.
But a trifecta, particularly with large margins, will allow for rapid change. Franklin Roosevelt, after all, got us out of an oligarchy through regulations. (He also experienced severe pushback from a reactionary Supreme Court, but that’s another story.)
A trifecta in 2024 with wide enough majorities to pass election reform legislation, for example, would allow Democrats to pass legislation making it easier for everyone to vote in federal elections. (The Constitution gives Congress the power to regulate federal elections.) Making it easier for more people to vote makes it harder for plutocrats and extremists to win elections, thereby helping the Democrats expand their majorities, which in turn will allow for the kinds of changes that will move us closer to a true multi-racial representative democracy.
Do you want a Democratic trifecta in 2024? Get busy. For ideas, click here.
I’ve had a few complaints from readers that JJ hasn’t made an appearance for a few weeks.
Turns out, this week was a perfect time to take his picture: He came back from the groomer all dressed up. He immediately returned to duty at his guard post by the window to keep a sharp eye on the neighborhood. I’m afraid the bow tie may not do much to enhance his image as a ferocious guard dog.
(I used to try to give him a bath and haircut myself, but it never went well. His groomer has magical powers.)
ALL groomers have magical powers! Or maybe valerian root.
Thanks again for the sanity check!
Barbara
Hi Teri, don’t now if you’ll see this or not, the thread’s old, but it just occurred to me: I’m out of my depth here, but is there any way the algorithms of social network platforms can be regulated somehow to hold back waves of disinformation generated by troll farms etc.? (In most cases the disinformation is protected free speech, but could the way in which it’s disseminated be regulated? Similar to keeping guns out of the hands of crazy people, for instance?) Presumably algorithms are somehow intellectual property and therefore owned by the social media co., e.g. Twitter, that uses them, but … is there a legal remedy here?
thanks again for everything you do!
I see everything! I have the setting on “approve.”
I am not an expert on algorithms. I assume it can be done, but there is no incentive because rage sells.
Worthwhile read, as always! I would love to hear you weigh in on the Disney/DeSantis death match. Can Ron really cancel Disney (circumvent the protections they provided for themselves)?
His unforced errors will be his own undoing, politically. (I’m beginning to think that Trump campaign operatives have infiltrated his circle of advisors.)
I would have to research the legalities of it, but what he is doing is just plain stupid. It seems clear that he’s playing to Republican primary voters in the hopes of getting traction should Trump implode, another sign in how radicalized the Republican Party has become.
Oh, forgot to say that JJ is one dapper dude! How old is he?
In August he will be 9 years old. Little terriers, though, look like puppies all their lives 🙂
Thank you for the timeline of insanity of the GOP. I haven’t seen it laid out so clearly.
Re mifepristone: Here is what I don’t understand about these new abortion restrictions.
The entire anti-choice movement is based upon the Christian contention that life begins at conception. This is an opinion based upon religion. Other faiths have a different view. Jewish law states that life begins at first breath.
So how is it not a violation of the Constitution for Christian legislators to enact laws for all Americans based upon their personal religious beliefs?
All other arguments, anti or pro-choice seem to me to be secondary to this. Our government and laws cannot favor one religion over another.
Is no one making this case before the courts?
Religion isn’t the rationale given in the courts, although that is the motivation.
Not all Christians believe life begins at conception, just the extremists, both Protestant and Catholic. As well, the current Catholic doctrine was not the doctrine elaborated and stated by St Thomas Aquinas (life begins between 6 and 12 weeks after conception); and in any case, so far as I’m aware, the position is doctrinal, that is, there’s no scriptural support for it. The passages which extremists like to cite are not specifically about abortion at all. I think it’s important to emphasize that the extremist Christians are a minority of all Christians, existing mostly within another minority, white Evangelicals.
I personally believe it comes more from a desire to control women and keep them in the home. The whole barefoot and pregnant thing. I’m old enough to remember when women were fired from their jobs after becoming pregnant. Keeping women out of the professions cuts down on the competition.
Thank you Teri. Calming word are your wheelhouse. The situation is pretty depressing but I think we are pulling up from a nosedive. I certainly see and feel the effort. The media outrage machine gets me so frazzled making a bad situation seem unsolvable as in the potential drug ban.
Really here to say JJ is a heart stealer.
There are lots of encouraging takes from all kinds of lawyers regarding the weak case about Mifepristone. It seems good that it’ll end up at the Supreme Court soon…but this court? Yikes. They just made up – literally – facts about a case so they could get the ruling they wanted. Hard to trust a court that will just change the actual facts of a case. (Kennedy v Bremerton School District).
Thank you for the great timeline and background. The US needs two functioning parties to have a Democracy, not just the Democrats. I’m hoping that the Republican party implodes and begins a new with something more balanced. Its hard to predict the future of that party, and it may mean that the Democratic party keeps winning in elections and splits instead and the hard right faction of our country becomes irrelevant.
What do JJ’s intials stand for ? He’s very dapper in that photo.
1. Who needs to be ferocious when handsome has all the advantages.
Good boy, JJ!
2. Thank you for the weekly recap. The pace of the unfolding insults is astonishing. Personally, I’m past being invigorated, but your voice is a soothing balm.
This round-up and summary/list of details is outstanding. Thanks so much for it.
I have a question about the defense of former pres. T re: one of his lawyers. “The WaPo reports that attorney Evan Corcoran, who recently was forced to testify by special counsel Jack Smith about conversations he’d had with Trump about the documents, is no longer representing the former president in this particular matter.”
Why is Corcoran allowed to defend former pres. T in the other cases where T is a defendant?
I think he has now recused himself from representing Trump.
EVP, the Environmental Voter Project, is making a definite difference in elections! This is a research based project that contacts infrequent voters whose number one concern is the environment. Through postcards and phoning, this project’s goal is to turn infrequent voters into every time voters, and they are succeeding! Getting people out to vote is key, and this project succeeds by changing election results by 1%, which is HUGE!
Contact EVP to volunteer or donate. Living in the reddest county in California, it is a way for me to feel like I make a REAL difference!!
I need to add that to my to-do list. Thanks.
Thank you, Julie. I live in a red part of California too. I will contact them to volunteer.
Thank you so much for helping me cut through the clutter of clusterful!
> [By “anti-war” she meant “anti-Ukraine and pro-Russia”).
😀 That is absolutely correct. If she’s not an agent of Russia, then it’s a distinction without a real difference.
> Beginning with Nixon, guess which the Republicans chose.
It’s fair to argue that Joe McCarthy and Barry Goldwater were indications that not all was well. Tricky Dicky’s Southern Project made it pretty clear, too. Watergate made it indisputable. (viz. Tricky wasn’t disavowed until supporting him became untenable.)
> Timothy Snyder calls sadopopulism
Perfect.
Nitpick: Murdoch has outlets in Australia. It would amuse to have their parties on the chart.
> There are no magic bullets. The only way to contain the threat of right-wing extremism is for Democrats to win the upcoming elections
Amen!
> A trifecta in 2024 with wide enough majorities to pass election reform legislation, for example, would allow Democrats to pass legislation making it easier for everyone to vote in federal elections.
And prevent the Republican Party (as currently led and as is currently beholden to V. Putin) from ever winning another election. #TheRepublicanPartyMustDie
Teri, thank your for your excellent summary of this past week’s madness. It is indeed a firehose…
You mentioned FDR and his challenges with the Supreme Court. Do you have any recommendations for a good history book that covers the topic?
Would it be rude to suggest mine? I don’t like to ask people to buy my books so maybe next week I’ll put the pages on my blog next week. My book is YA so super easy to read. You should be able to get it from your library. Only about 15 pages are dedicated to the SCOTUS stuff.
Phil Williams, a Tennessee reporter that I respect a lot, has pushed back on Judd Legum’s reporting about the TN House Speaker – as House Speaker, there are rules that allow him to use his per diem for any kind of housing in Nashville, and according to Williams, when you examine what the Speaker was charging for, it was in line with the norms. Of course all of this has highlighted this politician’s choices to his constituents, which hopefully will make a difference.
Interesting, thanks. I’ll delete that entry.
Thank you for your clarity on the current situation – I am aware and try to keep up, but sometimes it is numbing and I have to take a mental health break, read a book, go for a walk!
On the contrary, I think JJ looks quite distinguished and dashing (and precious), and as some wise soul pointed out above, as long as he’s vocal, his sartorial choices won’t hurt his effectiveness as a guardian against delivery folk, or anyone daring to walk down the street! (My little old dog barked at any other dogs daring to walk by…)
Your posts are always calming, lucid and informative, thank you.
Excellent analysis as always. JJ looks spectacular.
A very easy to understand explanation of our political dynamics, thank you. Now as far as dog haircuts go, our bichon/poodle (bpoo) never knows he’s having a bad hair day once I’m done cutting his hair and maintains his guard position in the living room overlooking the neighborhood.
Thank you so much, Teri. Wish this could be a public service announcement on every media channel. And JJ looks great in his bowtie!
> There was an explosion of news this week with a theme: The increasing radicalization of the Republican Party.
My first reaction to that leader: What took so long?
The ascension of Goldwater was certainly a hint, as was institutionalizing the Southern Project, but it became pretty obvious with:
* standing behind Nixon & Watergate until that was impossible
* the Iranian hostage mess resolving the day after Reagan’s inauguration
* the Iran/Contra affair
* the ensuing coverup via pardoning everyone involved
* Newt Gingrich’s campaign of scorched earth to keep Democrats from power & eject Clinton
After that, only real ostriches get to claim ignorance.
Excellent article. Thank you. Would like to ask a favor. Guns are devastating our Country. I suggest that bold parents begin posting pics of their precious children who have been slaughtered. I believe that if the American public at large sees these horrific images that there will be a groundswell of support for gun regulations. Also, if a public official were to leak photos of a crime scene, e.g. a schoolroom with blood and guts on the walls and mangled children’s bodies on the floor, that this heroic action would also awaken us to this unspeakable tragedy. Am I wrong thinking? Our Country must see this mayhem to believe!
I could ask no individual parent to do so, yet have hoped one might. Still, I can’t help but worry whether our society has changed so much that it wouldn’t have the impact that it did in Mamie Till’s day.
Someone told me this week that some Uvalde parents offered pictures of their children’s shredded bodies.
On the subject of the medication (I won’t even try to spell it), won’t big pharma have a LOT to say about whether or not it will remain as a safe abortion method? After all, they’ll lose a LOT of money, and isn’t that what SCOTUS is really about — protecting big business???
Some may say that your reply is jaded. But in past eras, SCOTUS decisions have protected the rights of individuals and groups of people, as I believe they should. Unfortunately, in several recent decisions, SCOTUS has shown more regard and deference to powerful corporate interests and the rich “liberal elite,” who are so often derided by right wing hypocrits to fuel voter angst and grievance. It really has become the norm in the Republican party to elect right wing candidates for office in many red states, who then control state legislatures to make laws that endanger our democracy by restricting the rights and freedoms of individuals. Since it takes obscene amounts of money to fund a campaign, they need to be in bed with corporate interests to get elected. When people decide they’ve had enough, hopefully they will return the Democrats to power with a working majority large enough to reverse this trend (I am hoping that outraged Americans aged 18-50 will vote in overwhelming numbers for Democrats in 2024.) If not, businesses will begin to see the economic down side of GOP restrictive policies as more people leave red states where they feel unsafe and can’t retain qualified teachers and medical professionals to other locales where they feel supported and their rights are protected. This will accelerate and deepen the labor issues many companies are now experiencing. When the corporations AND individuals begin voting with their feet, perhaps the policies of the insane anti-democratic GOP will finally be forced to change.
Hi Teri, love your reporting of events and helpful insight as always! Can’t wait to read each week. Thank you! JJ a bonus! Cyd
Best explanation I’ve read on plutocracy. Everybody should read this one.
If congress would pass federal legislation to put an and to gerrymandering on the state level, e.g. by setting standards for how states draw their district boundaries, such as requiring districts to be compact and contiguous, and prohibiting the use of partisan data in redistricting, would that be constitutional? Or would redistricting be seen as a pure state responsibility, also by a political neutral Scotus?
It’s a good question. I believe they can. Certainly they can with a liberal Supreme Court, which is why winning elections with majorities can get us anywhere.
Why not just use the “counties?” If a state has 50 counties and 10 reps, just use the counties next to each other and by population to figure out where the reps are?
If you are talking about how to apportion representatives in the House, it has to be done by population, otherwise a state can create hundreds of counties.
Thank you for educating us!
A sol8d summary, as usual. One thing you touched on is that more and more elected Republicans are true believers, meaning they talk and act as though they believe the basic Fox narrative of existential war with Democrats for the survival of America is real. To ask if they are sincere missies the point, they act as though they are. The recent leak of private conversation between Republican Tennessee Congressmen has them reciting this same story to each other. If Democrats take over in Tennessee, the Republic is finished. More Republicans are refusing to concede elections. People who believe this story see themselves as embattled heros, fighting Evil for God, freedom, and the soul of America. People who believe this will not, cannot compromise with Evil, allow unborn babies to be murdered, allow children to be brainwashed, perverted, and turned into freaks, allow the government to take away their religion, their families, their guns, put them in camps..They are delusional and dangerous, and the entire conservative ecosystem is constantly hammering this message into them. This doesn’t end well.
Democrats will not take over Tennessee but getting rid of the supermajority might be do-able.
There used to be reasonable Republicans in Tennessee. I could support non-corrupt Rs if there are any hiding in the woodwork. Historically Rs were the union sympathizers around here. But some districts can be won by democrats.
As Gloria says: sunlight is the best disinfectant. I’m making a list of the vermin I will work passionately to put on the street. I’ll leave Sexton to on his own petard because he doesn’t live in his district.
In daily life we are reminded constantly that the propaganda is all of a type, from a singular source, but you have connected the threads, and for that, thank you.
Fascinating piece, Teri! I love reading your work, thank you for posting.
Outstanding as always. Thank you, Teri.
I follow from the UK for a while now. Sensible commentary makes your situation easier to understand. We have a similar situation here. The right made terrifying predictions about immigration and scared the elderly hence Brexit. Plus voter ID is about to become a thing this coming local elections. Of course, no evidence at all of voter fraud. Hopeful for better outcomes in both our countries..
Awesome, Teri, thank you.
And don’t worry about JJ’s image not looking tough enough. We all know he’s a high-level operator. He’s like the Phil Coulson of guard dogs.
Phil Coulson is one of my favorite characters. He sure could rock a conservative dark suit and tie. Who would expect such a buttoned-down guy to have the super-spy cool abilities he did?
JJ’s adorable! Thanks for your insightful analysis, Teri!
JJ looks professorial. Where’s the tweed jacket and the pipe?
Great piece Terry! (&JJ looking good )
While any sane person would want to see a Democratic trifecta in 2024, with the level of voter suppression being legislated in GOP controlled states, how likely is that to happen? We need it, and there certainly are non-MAGA voters in those states despite the cracking and packing of non-GOP leaning districts and the purging of the voter rolls.
I’m glad that JJ is on the job. He doesn’t need to be fierce from his perch, only vocal and stylish.
Ah, that J.J.
I just learned via NPR that Shasta County is barring use of Dominion voting machines based on the big lie. Pretty good evidence that damage isn’t just claimed. Doubt anyone would have noticed if not for the lawsuit against the fair board and I think law enforcement in that county for driving 500 miles to seize and slaughter a 4-H girl’s goat that she and her parents wanted to save because it was her pet. Shasta County has been taken over by radicalized militia types, which we are fighting in our corner of Oregon at the moment.
wow, I didn’t know that. Thank you for pointing it out. There are unfortunately many right wing, people who bought into the Big Lie in Oregon. I’m glad I live in Bend, which is a little, blue oasis, but is not far from those who became empowered by the Trump administration. Our work is cut out for us.