Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Wednesday, September 20, 2023

Bits: DJT is a fibber; DJT getting jittery about time in jail; Racist USSC can undermine voting rights

Salon writes about what all of us already know, i.e., DJT is a chronic liar to tells whoppers all the time. The gigantic lie he is spewing now is that he is a "moderate" when it comes to abortion, despite him being the one responsible for getting rid of nationwide abortion rights:   
Trump is lying about his "moderate" abortion stance — he will ban it nationwide

Trump lies constantly, and history shows he and the GOP will repay evangelicals with a national abortion ban

This should be obvious, and yet, somehow, many in the press are being fooled by Trump's latest public posture about abortion, even though it's transparently dishonest. During his recent NBC News interview with Kristen Welker, Trump tried to strike a "moderate" pose on abortion. Referring to what the press misleadingly calls a "six-week" ban (it's really a two-week ban) on abortion in Florida, Trump said it was "a terrible mistake" for Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis to sign the draconian legislation.  
"We're going to agree to a number of weeks or months or however you want to define it," he said, boldly claiming, "Both sides will come together. And for the first time in 52 years, you'll have an issue that we can put behind us."  
The pomposity of that statement should have been a reminder that Trump should be assumed to be lying about his abortion position, just as he lies about most things. And yet, much of the press took his statements at face value, even going so far as to report that he had angered anti-choice activists, which of course, only helps bolster Trump's false claims of moderation.
Once again, the cluelessness and/or subversion-complicity of most of the MSM is on display. The MSM is betraying us to deeply corrupt radical right authoritarianism. At least this reporter for Salon, Amanda Marcotte, sees and speaks actual truth.
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________

Rolling Stone reporting suggests that DJT is getting a bit nervous about a possible taxpayer paid vacation in prison:
IN THE PAST several months, Donald Trump has had a burning question for some of his confidants and attorneys: Would the authorities make him wear “one of those jumpsuits” in prison?

As the criminal cases against him have piled up, the former president and 2024 GOP frontrunner has wondered aloud in recent months about what life would be like if he’s convicted, and if appeals fail. While Trump publicly professes confidence [lying to the public, as usual], privately, three sources familiar with his comments say, he’s been asking lawyers and other people close to him what a prison sentence would look like for a former American president.  
Would he be sent to a “club fed” style prison — a place that’s relatively comfortable, as far these things go — or a “bad” prison? Would he serve out a sentence in a plush home confinement?
One can only hope for a “bad” prison, all appeals failed and no pardon.
_________________________________________________
_________________________________________________

Radical right authoritarian Republican USSC 
continues attacks on voting rights and free and fair elections 
The USSC (US Supreme Court) is going to hear for the 2nd time a lawsuit about an illegal districting map in Alabama. The state lost in federal courts, including the USSC, and was ordered for the 2nd time to draw a 2nd voting district that would give black voters a chance to elect a black politician. The state legislature redrew the map, but it still contained only one district where a black could be elected. The case is now back to the USSC for a second hearing on the 2nd map.

Slate describes how the authoritarian radical right Republican USSC can now sanctify and bless the Alabama map with just one black district:
In last June’s Allen v. Milligan, the court explicitly upheld a lower court ruling ordering that a second such district be created. Alabama—led by Republicans in the statehouse—spent the last few months declining the court’s explicit instructions. The new maps were drawn with a single majority-Black district. The district court issued a furious rebuke. Now Alabama has come back to the Supreme Court in an emergency posture requesting a green light to use their still-illegal maps, claiming that the decision in Milligan didn’t in fact mean what it said it meant.

Why? Because in his concurrence in Milligan, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the determinative fifth vote in the case, signaled to the lawmakers that he’d be open to deciding the matter in their favor on a different theory that was neither briefed nor argued: Things might come out differently, he wrote, winkingly, if they came back armed with the argument that “even if Congress in 1982 could constitutionally authorize race-based redistricting” under the Voting Rights Act “for some period of time, the authority to conduct race-based redistricting cannot extend indefinitely into the future.” (He called the Voting Rights Act a form of “race-conscious redistricting” because it forbids states from diluting the votes of racial minorities, and measuring dilution requires consideration of race.) Alabama legislators reasonably think Kavanaugh’s in the bag based on “intelligence” that’s either an inside source or a straightforward reading of his Milligan concurrence. So they refused to follow the directives of the court in the hopes that in this go-round, they win.
Like with the climate deniers saying, “it's not climate change, it's just the weather” radical right Republican racists can say things like “it's not racism, it's just legal, rough and tumble politics.” 

I cannot understate how inimical and effective this USSC is and has been in gutting voting rights and free and fair elections. This is clear racist authoritarianism. Democracy with civil liberties, including voting rights, and a meaningful rule of law are high priority targets to be obliterated. People who cannot see the seriousness and urgency of the threat are far beyond sorely mistaken. Words fail me here.

The decision in this emergency filing should come fairly soon, maybe in the next month or two. For the 2024 elections, Alabama needs time to implement whatever map the radical authoritarians consider legal.

No comments:

Post a Comment