The Supreme Court directly attacks honest governance and democracy

Various sources are reporting that about a USSC decision that, Snyder v. United States, as far as I can tell, has legalized bribery of government officials at least at the state level. In my opinion, this constitutes what amounts to a lethal blow to democracy and honest governance in the states. (I don't know if this applies to the federal government) It opens the door and paves the path for further progress of authoritarian kleptocracy to obliterate what is left of our democracy and honest governance. Vox reports:

On a 6-3 party-line vote, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that state officials may accept “gratuities” from people who wish to reward them for their official actions, despite a federal anti-corruption statute that appears to ban such rewards.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the opinion in Snyder v. United States for the Court’s Republican-appointed majority. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the dissent on behalf of the Court’s three Democratic appointees.

Snyder turns on a distinction between “bribes” and “gratuities.” As Kavanaugh writes, “bribes are payments made or agreed to before an official act in order to influence the official with respect to that future official act.” Gratuities, by contrast, “are typically payments made to an official after an official act as a token of appreciation.”  

It’s also notable that neither Justice Clarence Thomas nor Justice Samuel Alito, both of whom have accepted expensive gifts from politically active Republican billionaires, recused themselves from the case. Thomas and Alito both joined Kavanaugh’s opinion reading the anti-corruption statute narrowly.

It does not take a genius to see the massive hole in corruption laws that this decision has made. Bribery is now a gratuity, not bribery. In this decision, the USSC made bribery legal unless the briber or bribe taker explicitly writes down or is recorded saying “I’m taking/offering a bribe to do X in the future.” Otherwise it’s not corruption. This decision knowingly and purposefully enables vast corruption by ignoring how corruption works. In my opinion, this is the most insane shit possible. It basically makes corruption non-prosecutable.

The poison here

Clarence Thomas commented on at least one occasion, was that there is an constitutional absolute right of people and corporations to (i) spend unlimited amounts of money on politicians, judges or anything else, and (ii) that right includes the right do spend the cash in absolute secrecy. This decision in Snyder is the embodiment of Thomas' sentiment. Perplexity comments:

Clarence Thomas argued for a right to anonymous political spending in his concurring opinion in the 2010 Citizens United case. Specifically:

• In his concurring opinion in Citizens United v. FEC in 2010, Thomas pushed to invalidate all political spending disclosure laws, insisting that donors have a constitutional right to anonymously influence politics with unlimited amounts of cash.

• Thomas wrote in his concurring opinion: "This court should invalidate mandatory disclosure and reporting requirements". He argued that donors could face retaliation and "ruined careers" when they disclose their political spending.

• Thomas contended that there exists an "established right to anonymous speech" and that transparency requirements enable private citizens and officials to implement strategies against "peaceful exercise of First Amendment rights".

I think that what Thomas articulated is where this is ultimately going to go.

Current invite list comparison:

FYI, did a check.  In case you want to invite.  I hope I did it right. Sorry for the double spacing.  Didn't do that on the Create screen. 🤷‍♀️ People you have that I don't: @jbmoorpark:disqus @newestbeginning:disqus @disqus_vDsBtBJWlh:disqus @BestInMod:disqus @epicureanpariah:disqus @disqus_D0gqaX8WRE:disqus @NomoremisterWiseguy:disqus @disqus_E1KLACY6oS:disqus @Blueflower0:disqus @disqus_91ei8YG4OJ:disqus @guymendez:disqus @vkcmo:disqus @disqus_ix4TzGA9m3:disqus @Adina_Efimovna:disqus @disqus_53LNX3Us2Q:disqus @flyingjunior:disqus @disqus_ZxBIBupCJD:disqus @guy_mendez:disqus @disqus_fAOjGxR18w:disqus   People I have that you don't: @disqus_g9Sxbb2tL2:disqus @skeptistics:disqus @brmckay:disqus @Country_Kat:disqus @Avantiman:disqus @dgunther123:disqus @dntkch:disqus @davideisemann:disqus @disqus_mkwzdumS7o:disqus @enlyghten:disqus @disqus_ceIQpt8HDd:disqus @disqus_rFxGwbDGog:disqus @lostonarig22:disqus @disqus_zesPi9lpDb:disqus @disqus_kW88wbUzMt:disqus @JPBunny:disqus @disqus_diKJ0EZ6xj:disqus @jamie_bobini:disqus @jnfrcrpic:disqus @disqus_kXuJ5xzklT:disqus @Kieran13:disqus @guy_mendez:disqus @KipSmithers:disqus @disqus_vDsBtBJWlh:disqus @Meepestos:disqus @vkcmo:disqus @disqus_ZHnAbibTCy:disqus @unclepatrick:disqus @pithywititude:disqus @disqus_oe08Kvu5Da:disqus @Peter1491:disqus @pwod:disqus @ravenssong:disqus @RedSeaRobinHood:disqus @lantanalane:disqus @TheOriginalSnowflake:disqus @sophiasadek:disqus @Stardust4U:disqus @strontidog:disqus @indiananights:disqus @guymendez:disqus @PTreeFan1:disqus @disqus_ZHnAbibTCy:disqus

Thoughts about the debate

Is it just me, or was Joe disappointing? DJT lied constantly and just made stuff up. But there was no fact checking. DJT's lies stand mostly unrebutted because the format didn't permit extended commentary to rebut lies and Joe was not good at rebuttal most of the time.

I suspect Joe is going to take a hit in the polls, maybe ~3% drop at least initially. Polls will come out in the next couple of days. Maybe this will not have a long term-impact, but it does not feel that way at the moment.

Any other thoughts?

Current invite list

1

@disqus_GCHC27FxPX:disqus

@SvdH:disqus

@ellabulldog:disqus

@e_monster:disqus

@jbmoorpark:disqus

@ronsons:disqus

@roam85:disqus

@newestbeginning:disqus

@disqus_vDsBtBJWlh:disqus

@disqus_2WLwBzuGTJ:disqus

@disqus_fR0TSz3rla:disqus

@BestInMod:disqus

@amytalk:disqus

@epicureanpariah:disqus

@disqus_cVSBvWF8Zb:disqus

@disqus_acdYWH93ek:disqus

@larrymotuz:disqus

@ausvirgo:disqus

@KidChaos_74656:disqus

@disqus_D0gqaX8WRE:disqus

@disqus_VyZaxprCcp:disqus

2

@dcleve:disqus

@NomoremisterWiseguy:disqus

@disqus_E1KLACY6oS:disqus

@Blueflower0:disqus

@suzieseller:disqus

@Jenny231:disqus

@disqus_91ei8YG4OJ:disqus

@guymendez:disqus

@homebuilding23:disqus

@vkcmo:disqus

@Alexthekay:disqus

@disqus_1Jjgee5bqr:disqus

@disqus_ix4TzGA9m3:disqus

@TopCatDC:disqus

@okpulot_taha:disqus

@imperatormachinarum:disqus

@Cats_Paw:disqus

@Adina_Efimovna:disqus

@heatrocc:disqus

3

@glenglish:disqus

@disqus_53LNX3Us2Q:disqus

@flyingjunior:disqus

@Meepestos:disqus

@km234:disqus

@disqus_ZxBIBupCJD:disqus

@guy_mendez:disqus

@disqus_8nQILL8Lja:disqus

@disqus_fAOjGxR18w:disqus

@disqus_QrOme5x4pq:disqus

@Thundersrealm:disqus

@FunGussy:disqus

@jnfrcrpic:disqus

@jaegirl:disqus

@disqus_rq4oCqeARr:disqus

Tonight's the NIGHT!

 

Any predictions?

'Twas the morning of the debate

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2024/06/27/debate-biden-trump-abortion-election-covid-space-paris-olympics-paris-hilton/74217164007/

Debate expectations are low. But it could still upend the 2024 race.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/27/debate-low-expectations-00165184

Yup, my expectations are indeed low AND it will upend the 2024 race.

                                                            Any predictions?

AIPAC involvement in Democratic Primaries: Implications of Jamal Bowman's Loss

Jamal Bowman (D-NY), an outspoken critic of Biden's genocide in Gaza, was successfully ousted by AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups yesterday. AIPAC spent an unprecedented $15 mil on the Democratic Primary in NY's District 16. Including other pro-Israel groups,  BBC reported that, "Overall, $24.8m was spent by various groups in the race, making it the most expensive House of Representatives primary in history." There are many lessons and takeaways. Here I emphasize 3 of them by excerpting 2 articles on the significance of the election.

 1) The manner in which the Israel-Palestine issue has brought the internecine conflicts between progressive Democrats and moderates to the fore and stoked internal party divisions by supporting members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Progressive Caucus** who adopt pro-Israel policies, while  isolating those who refuse to support the now-bi-partisan policy of unconditional support for Israel-- esp. "the Squad"  

 2) The stealthy nature of the policy support, as many of the  ads and rhetoric against Bowman did not even mention Israel, much less any particular policy preference related to it. 

3) The important fact that much of the money that went into defeating Bowman (and Cori Bush is next on the hit list) came from the GOP.  

The following articles (and links contained therein) discuss these 3 and other serious implications of yesterday's primary in District 16, NY, which  looks like a template of things to come. The first piece is from The Intercept and the second from Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

**Fr. AP article linked above: "AIPAC has defended its track record, telling The Associated Press last month that 'it is entirely consistent with progressive values to stand with the Jewish state' and that the group has a history of supporting members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus."

Fr. Intercept (6/26/24):

Progressives on AIPAC’s Defeat of Bowman: “Now We Know How Much It Costs to Buy an Election” 

Rep. Jamaal Bowman’s Tuesday upset defeat by Westchester County Executive George Latimer generated many perspectives on what exactly precipitated his downfall.

The New York Times published the headline “Bowman Falls in House Primary, Overtaken by Flood of Pro-Israel Money” — before swapping it out for “Bowman Falls to Latimer in a Loss for Progressive Democrats.” Other coverage emphasized that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s spending wasn’t the only factor in the race and that Bowman’s flaws made him particularly vulnerable, as did changed district lines that made his reelection even tougher. 

Progressive strategists, however, had a much more clear takeaway from the results. 

“You don’t drop $15 million on an election if your positions are popular,” said Eva Borgwardt⁩, national spokesperson for the Jewish advocacy group IfNotNow, which endorsed Bowman. “This was an act of desperation from a pro-war lobby that is at odds with the majority of Americans, including American Jews.”

Borgwardt⁩ was referring to nearly $15 million spent on the race by AIPAC, the Israel lobby’s flagship in the U.S. Millions more poured in from AIPAC-aligned groups and donors, bringing the outside spending total to around $25 million.

Bowman’s supporters emphasized that AIPAC attacked him not only because of his criticism of human rights abuses in Israel, but also because he has supported progressive policies that are popular among the party’s base.

“Congressman Bowman’s progressive platform — which includes defending Palestinian rights and halting weapons to the Israeli military — is popular among Democratic voters,” said Beth Miller, political director for Jewish Voice for Peace Action, which endorsed Bowman. “AIPAC had to spend a truly unprecedented amount of money in order to buy NY-16.” 

“It is noteworthy that many of AIPAC’s ads did not even mention Israel,” she said. “AIPAC understands that they are losing on the issues, because voters and constituents do not want to fund a genocide.”  

The amount of spending on the race should be alarming to everyone who cares about democracy, said Sophie Ellman-Golan, director of strategic communications at Jews for Racial and Economic Justice.

“Now we know how much it costs to buy an election,” she said. “That price tag was nearly $25 million.”

AIPAC invested historic amounts of money in the race because it saw that unconditional support for Israel was unpopular among Democratic voters, Ellman-Golan said. “They would not have spent this much money if they were not scared,” she said. “You don’t spend $25 million — an unheard of amount in a primary — if you’re feeling confident in your candidate.”....

 

“Republican billionaires just bought a safe Democratic seat through a Democratic primary,” said WFP National Director Maurice Mitchell. “That’s something that should alarm everyone in the coalition, not just progressives.”

Justice Democrats’ communications director, Usamah Andrabi, said the takeaway from Tuesday’s race is that Democrats are allowing big money — and Republican donors — to shape elections. (Full article here) 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fr. Quincey Institute of Responsible Statecraft (6/26/24):

Bowman crushed by GOP-fueled AIPAC cash:

The pro-Israel lobby is effectively laundering campaign funds for Republican megadonors into Democratic primaries

Last night’s defeat of Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) by Westchester County Executive George Latimer in the Democratic primary was an undeniable victory by moderate Democrats who sought to retake Bowman’s seat — particularly in light of his alignment with the progressive wing of the party, and his sharp criticism of Biden’s material support for Israel’s war in Gaza.

But Latimer’s win also provided the most dramatic proof of concept for a controversial new strategy by AIPAC, the country’s biggest pro-Israel lobby: using its super-PAC, United Democracy Project, to funnel millions of dollars in Republican donor funds into a Democratic primary.

Put another way, AIPAC effectively acted to launder campaign funds for Republican megadonors into the Democratic primary, where the spending was generally identified in media as “pro-Israel,” not “Republican.”

By election day, Latimer-aligned groups had outspent Bowman’s backers by a margin of over seven-to-one, with UDP leading the spending, injecting approximately $15 million to support Latimer.

Most of UDP’s money didn’t come from Bowman’s district and much of it didn’t even come from within the Democratic Party.

WhatsApp founder and billionaire Jan Koum donated $5 million to the UDP in this cycle, making him the UDP’s single biggest funder, and the only instance in which Koum’s money appears to have funded a super PAC active in Democratic primaries. Other than the UDP, Koum is a down-the-line Republican donor over the course of his political giving.

In the less than three years he’s been an active political donor, Kloum has spent over $18 million, including $10 million to a super PAC supporting Nikki Haley’s presidential primary campaign and $1.35 million to the Republican Jewish Coalition.

Other seven-figure UDP donors include Home Depot founder Bernard Marcus and hedge fund manager Paul Singer, two of the Republican Party’s biggest donors.

While Koum, Singer, and Marcus are all supporters of hawkishly pro-Israel U.S. policies — reflected in their philanthropy as well as political contributions — UDP’s identity as a pro-Israel, AIPAC aligned, group has largely overshadowed the fact that Republican donors spent heavily to defeat Bowman.

While Bowman’s loss was clearly a setback for critics of AIPAC and for those questioning how providing largely unconditional military aid to Israel benefits Americans, it opens new uncertainties about the future of AIPAC’s influence within the Democratic Party.

If AIPAC must continue to rely so heavily on Republican megadonors to boost pro-Israel candidates, particularly within the Democratic Party’s own primaries, it may be symptomatic of a weakening pro-Israel consensus on the left side of the U.S. political spectrum requiring increasingly desperate attempts by AIPAC to assert influence, even going so far as to funnel Republican donor money into Democratic races.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I highly recommend the following documentary on civilian deaths in Gaza, and US complicity. It was released this week. It's about 80 minutes, so you may want to bookmark it to watch later if you are interested. It is called "The Night Won't End: Biden's War on Gaza," and is an Al Jazeera Fault Lines Documentary. Because it has been labeled "age- restricted" by youtube, you can only view it there by clicking on the link on the screen below.