The far right

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump ally Marjorie Taylor Greene can run for reelection, Georgia judge says

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election, Georgia official saysSecretary of state Brad Raffensperger accepts judge’s findings and says far-right congresswoman, a Trump ally, is eligible to run The Georgia secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, has accepted a judge’s findings and said the far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene is qualified to run for re-election.Georgia sees first major test for a Republican defending democracy | The fight to voteRead moreA group of voters filed a challenge saying Greene should be barred under a seldom-invoked provision of the 14th amendment concerning insurrection, over her links to the January 6 attack on the US Capitol by supporters of Donald Trump.A state administrative law judge, Charles Beaudrot, last month held a hearing on the matter and found that Green was eligible. He sent his findings to Raffensperger, who was responsible for the final decision.It was an awkward position to be in for the secretary of state who drew the ire of Trump after he resisted pressure to overturn Joe Biden’s victory in Georgia.Greene has been a staunch Trump ally and has won his endorsement for her reelection bid while continuing to spread unproven claims about the 2020 election being “stolen”.Raffensperger has defended the integrity of the election in Georgia but is facing a tough primary challenge from a Trump-backed US congressman, Jody Hice.Beaudrot held a day-long hearing last month that included arguments from lawyers for the voters and for Greene and questioning of Greene herself.During the hearing, Ron Fein, a lawyer for the voters, noted that in a TV interview the day before the attack at the Capitol, Greene said the next day would be “our 1776 moment”.“In fact, it turned out to be an 1861 moment,” Fein said, alluding to the start of the civil war.Greene has become one of the GOP’s biggest fundraisers by stirring controversy and pushing baseless conspiracy theories. During the hearing, she was defiant and combative under oath.She repeated the unfounded claim that fraud led to Trump’s loss, said she didn’t recall incendiary statements and social media posts and denied supporting violence.While she acknowledged encouraging a rally to support Trump, she said she wasn’t aware of plans to storm the Capitol or to disrupt the electoral count using violence.Greene said she feared for her safety during the riot and used social media to encourage people to remain calm.Marjorie Taylor Greene accused of lying in hearing in Capitol attack caseRead moreThe challenge is based on a section of the 14th amendment that says no one can serve in Congress “who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress … to support the constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same”.Ratified after the civil war, it was meant in part to keep out representatives who had fought for the Confederacy.James Bopp, a lawyer for Greene, argued that his client engaged in protected political speech and was herself a victim of the Capitol attack. He also argued the administrative law proceeding was not the appropriate forum to address such weighty allegations.The challenge amounted to an attempt “to deny the right to vote to the thousands of people living in the 14th district of Georgia by removing Greene from the ballot”, Bopp said.TopicsUS Capitol attackRepublicansGeorgiaUS politicsThe far rightUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesnewsReuse this content More

    • 113 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      The Right review: conservatism, Trump, regret and wishful thinking

      by

      The Right review: conservatism, Trump, regret and wishful thinkingMatthew Continetti’s history of 100 years of the American right is ambitious, impressive and worrying America’s tribes frequently clash but they rarely intersect. Over the past 60 years, the Democratic party has morphed into an upstairs-downstairs coalition, graduate-degree holders tethered to an urban core and religious “nones”. Meanwhile, Republicans have grown more rural, southern, evangelical and working class.Overcoming Trumpery review: recipes for reform Republicans will never allow Read moreWithin the GOP, Donald Trump has supplanted the legacies of Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln. According to Matthew Continetti, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, being a conservative in 2022 is less about advocating limited government and more about culture wars, owning the libs and denouncing globalization.Subtitled The Hundred-Year War for American Conservatism, Continetti’s third book examines a century of intellectual and political battles. He seeks to explain how Trumpism became the dominant force within the Republican party. In large measure, he succeeds.The Right is readable and relatable, well-written and engaging. The author’s command of facts is impressive. For decades, he has lived around and within the conservative ecosystem.Continetti chronicles the tumult of 1960s, the emergence of Richard Nixon’s “southern strategy” and the migration of blue-collar ethnic Catholics to what was once the home of the white Protestant establishment. He also looks back, at the pre-New Deal Republican party and at conservatism after the civil war.Continetti is sensitive to the currents that swirl in and around this country and its people. He laments that in the 21st century blood, soil and grievance have overtaken the conservative orthodoxies of free markets, personal autonomy and communal virtue. He is discomforted by how contemporary conservatism acquired a performative edge.On the page, his dismay is muted but present. He wistfully recalls the collapse of the Weekly Standard, where he worked for Bill Kristol, his future father-in-law. George W Bush’s war in Iraq was one thing that helped do-in the magazine.Similarly, the Republican establishment’s call for immigration reform left many Americans feeling unwanted and threatened. The US immigrant population hovers near a record high, almost 14%. More than 44 million people living here were born elsewhere. Even before the pandemic, the fertility rate hit a record low. The populist impulse is not going to disappear.Trump’s inaugural address, replete with images of “American carnage”, is illustrative of the new conservative normal. Continetti quotes George W Bush: “That was some weird shit.” Nonetheless, on 20 January 2017, Trump struck a nerve.Continetti is mindful of broader trends, and the havoc assortative marriage has brought to society and politics. On that point, he gives Charles Murray his due. Continetti is pessimistic. Marriage predicated upon educational attainment has helped concentrate intellectual capital and financial advantage within a narrow caste.Twenty years ago, David Brooks, once Continetti’s colleague, described an idyllic urban existence, Bobos in Paradise. Those who can’t get in, however, face life in purgatory. The meritocracy got what it clamored for, only to discover it wasn’t loved by those it left behind.Continetti seemingly attempts to downplay similarities between Trump’s Maga movement and the hard-right in Europe. He omits all reference to Nigel Farage in Britain and Marine le Pen in France. Farage led Britain to Brexit and made a cameo appearance in Robert Mueller’s report on Russian interference in the US. Le Pen twice forced Emmanuel Macron into a run-off for president.On the other hand, Continetti does capture how part of the US right adores Vladimir Putin: his authoritarianism, his unbridled nationalism, his disdain for classic liberalism.“Putin held the same allure for the national populist right that Che Guevara held for the cold war left,” Continetti writes. “No wonder President Trump was a fan of the Russian autocrat.”Continetti also says conservatism “anchored to Trump the man will face insurmountable obstacles in attaining policy coherence, government competence, and intellectual credibility”. Here, he stands on shaky ground.In 2016, Trump assembled a winning coalition and beat Hillary Clinton. In power, he loaded the federal judiciary. Whether Jeb Bush could have replicated such success is doubtful. As for intellectual credibility, in 2008 Kristol, Continetti’s mentor, helped pluck Sarah Palin from obscurity. And we all know where that led.In 2009, Continetti himself wrote The Persecution of Sarah Palin: How the Elite Media Tried to Bring Down a Rising Star. He now says “attacks on Palin” caused him “to rally to her defense”. Intellectual slumming, more like it. Palin was unfit for the top job. She resigned as Alaska governor 18 months before her term expired.Continetti also argues that conservatism needs once again to embrace the Declaration of Independence, the constitution and the Bill of Rights.“One cannot be an American patriot without reverence for the nation’s enabling documents,” he says.January 6 demonstrates otherwise. Conservatism’s commitment to democracy and the constitution appears situational. Members of the conservative establishment provided intellectual sinew for America’s Caesar. It wasn’t just about Marjorie Taylor Greene, Lauren Boebert and folks dressed as Vikings.The Presidency of Donald Trump review: the first draft of historyRead moreJohn Eastman, a former clerk to Clarence Thomas; Ted Cruz, a former clerk to Chief Justice William Rehnquist; Mike Lee, son of Rex Lee, Ronald Reagan’s solicitor general. Together with Ginni Thomas, the justice’s wife, they played outsized roles around the Capitol attack. Fifteen months later, Eastman is in legal jeopardy, Cruz is under growing suspicion and Lee looks like a weasel. Ms Thomas merits our scorn.The reckoning Continetti hopes for may never arrive. Gas prices surge. Crime rises. Together, they portend a Republican midterm landslide. Such realities ushered in Reagan’s 1980 landslide over Jimmy Carter.A one-term Biden presidency looms. A second Trump term is a real possibility. The latest revelations surrounding Kevin McCarthy and Mitch McConnell teach us that inconvenient truths are quickly discarded. In politics, a win is a win.
      The Right is published in the US by Basic Books
      TopicsBooksPolitics booksUS politicsUS CongressDonald TrumpRepublicansThe far rightreviewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Proud Boys member pleads guilty for role in US Capitol attack

      by

      Proud Boys member pleads guilty for role in US Capitol attackPlea agreement filed in federal court calls for Louis Enrique Colon to admit to a single felony charge and cooperate with prosecutors A member of the far-right Proud Boys group on Wednesday pleaded guilty to obstructing police officers when he joined the 6 January 2021, insurrection at the US Capitol by supporters of then-president Donald Trump, in their attempt to overturn his election defeat.The plea agreement filed in federal court in Washington, DC, calls for Louis Enrique Colon of Missouri to admit to a single felony charge and cooperate with prosecutors.Colon admitted to crossing police barricades during the riot before climbing a wall to gain access to a higher level of the Capitol.While inside the Capitol building, Colon used his hands and a chair to obstruct police officers who were trying to lower retractable doors to stop rioters from streaming into the building.The attack followed a rally led by Trump near the White House, in which he urged thousands gathered to advance to the Capitol and “fight like hell” while both chambers of the US Congress were convening to certify Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 election.Biden’s win was certified in the early hours of the following day after lawmakers, staff and journalists had fled for their lives during the deadly riot at the Capitol.Colon, 45, was charged in February 2021, along with four other members of the Kansas City metro chapter of the Proud Boys group. He is the first defendant in that case to plead guilty.A judge had imposed monitoring conditions on Colon while he awaited trial. Colon will be sentenced later this year, and he faces a statutory maximum of five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.He will probably receive a reduced sentence because of his admission of responsibility and cooperation.Colon was not charged in the same conspiracy case as Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys chairman and one of the most high-profile of the 800 people facing criminal charges relating to the riot.Colon’s plea comes two weeks after a Proud Boys leader, Charles Donohoe, pleaded guilty to obstructing an official proceeding, and assaulting and impeding police officers.Meanwhile, in a different criminal case, one of the dozens of police officers injured during the insurrection testified on Wednesday that he didn’t punch or pick a fight with a retired New York police officer charged with attacking the officer.Thomas Webster, whose trial on an assault charge started this week, claims he was acting in self-defense when he tackled Metropolitan police department officer Noah Rathbun outside the Capitol on 6 January 2021.Rathbun said he reached out with an open left hand and pushed Webster in the face after the New York man shoved a bike rack at him. Rathbun said he was trying to move Webster back from a security perimeter that officers were struggling to maintain behind rows of bike racks.“It’s unfortunate to be in the nation’s capital and be treated like that by another citizen,” Rathbun said during the second day of Webster’s trial.Videos shown by prosecutors depict Webster shoving a bike rack at Rathbun before swinging a flag pole at the officer in a downward chopping motion, striking a metal barricade in front of the officer.After Rathbun grabbed the broken pole and retreated, Webster charged at the officer and tackled him to the ground.Rathbun said he started choking and couldn’t breathe when Webster grabbed his gas mask and the chin strap pressed against the officer’s neck.Separately from the hundreds of criminal prosecutions, a special House of Representatives committee is investigating any links between Trump, his White House team, congressional Republicans and the insurrection.TopicsUS Capitol attackThe far rightLaw (US)US politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Biden: Republicans’ Disney law shows ‘far right has taken over party’

      by

      Biden: Republicans’ Disney law shows ‘far right has taken over party’Florida strips company of self-governing power for opposing Governor Ron DeSantis’s ‘don’t say gay’ law For Joe Biden, the vote by Florida Republicans on Thursday to strip Disney of its self-governing powers was a step too far.“Christ, they’re going after Mickey Mouse,” the president exclaimed at a fundraiser in Oregon, in apparent disbelief that state governor Ron DeSantis’s culture wars had reached the gates of the Magic Kingdom.The move, Biden asserted, reflected his belief that the “far right has taken over the party”.By voting to penalize Florida’s largest private employer, lawmakers followed DeSantis’s wishes in securing revenge on a company he brands as “woke” for its opposition to his “don’t say gay” law.DeSantis is a likely candidate for the Republican presidential nomination in 2024. He has pushed his legislature on several rightwing laws in recent weeks, including a 15-week abortion ban, stripping Black voters of congressional representation and preventing discussion of sexual orientation and gender identity issues in schools.On Friday, the governor signed the anti-Disney law as well as a measure banning critical race theory in schools and the controversial new electoral map. Voting rights groups including the League of Women Voters of Florida, the Black Voters Matter Capacity Building Institute and the Equal Ground Education Fund filed suit against the new electoral map, in state court in Tallahassee.“This is not your father’s Republican party,” Biden said at the fundraiser in Oregon.“It’s not even conservative in a traditional sense of conservatism. It’s mean, it’s ugly. Look at what’s happening in Florida: Christ, they’re going after Mickey Mouse.”Analysts are still grappling with the likely effects of the Disney law, which will disband an entity officially known as the Reedy Creek improvement district.The body, which was approved by Florida legislators in 1967, gives Disney autonomous powers, including generating its own tax revenue and self-governance as it built its hugely popular theme parks.Ending the 55-year agreement, Democrats says, will leave local residents on the hook for the functions Reedy Creek was responsible for paying for, including police and fire services, and road construction and maintenance.The state senator Gary Farmer, a vocal opponent of DeSantis, said families in Orange and Osceola counties that straddle the 25,000-acre Disney World resort could each face property tax raises of $2,200 annually to cover the shortfall. His claim is so far unsubstantiated.Republicans have been unable to point to any financial advantage to the state, and appear to be relying instead on the political argument that the concept of the “special taxing district” was outdated and in need of reform.“Aside from maybe taking away the company’s ability to build a nuclear plant, we have yet to hear how this benefits Florida, and especially the local residents in any way,” Nick Papantonis, a reporter who covers Disney for Orlando’s WFTV, said in a Twitter analysis.“The residents, by the way, had no say in this vote, no say in their property taxes going through the roof, and no desire to have their communities staring at financial ruin.”If in practice DeSantis’s goal is to punish Disney, some say the move could backfire, at least financially. Reedy Creek’s abolition on 1 June next year would give it an immediate tax break. The $163m it taxes itself annually to pay for service and pay off debt becomes the responsibility of the county taxpayers.“The moment that Reedy Creek doesn’t exist is the moment that those taxes don’t exist,” the Orange county tax collector Scott Randolph, a Democrat, told WFTV. “[And] Orange county can’t just slap a new taxing district on to that area and recoup the money that was lost.”Most of Disney’s estimated 77,000 cast members, as its workers are known, live in those two counties, so would effectively end up paying their employer’s taxes as well as their own, critics say.Disney has remained silent, its most recent comment on the entire affair being the hard-hitting statement that upset DeSantis in the first place. The company, which has a notably diverse cast, promised to work to overturn the “don’t say gay” law, and added it was halting all political donations.Disney contributed almost $1m to the Republican party of Florida in 2020, and $50,000 directly to DeSantis, records show.Whatever it decides to do, Disney has options. In a probably tongue-in-cheek offer, the Colorado governor, Jared Polis, is offering “asylum” to Mickey Mouse in his state. But he was critical of DeSantis’s stance.“Florida’s authoritarian socialist attacks on the private sector are driving businesses away. In CO, we don’t meddle in affairs of companies like Disney or Twitter. Hey @Disney we’re ready for Mountain Disneyland,” he said in a tweet.Legal challenges are expected once DeSantis signs the Reedy Creek abolition into law, and Republicans point out they could revisit the issue next year before it takes effect.Democrats are dismissive: “Let’s call this what it is, it’s the punitive, petulant political payback to a corporation who dared to say the emperor has no clothes, but if they behave this way next election cycle, maybe we’ll put it back together,” Farmer, the state senator, said.Some political analysts, meanwhile, believe DeSantis is walking a tightrope.“The base is demanding of the Republican party these culture war elements, at least that’s what these politicians are thinking, so they’re using these attacks on ‘woke’ corporations as a way of energizing their base so they can win in 2022 and 2024,” Charles Zelden, professor of humanities and politics at Nova Southeastern University and a longtime Florida Disney watcher, told the Guardian.“The downside is it’s bringing them into conflict with corporations they had a very comfortable relationship with for a lot of years, who have donated a lot of money to their campaigns.”TopicsFloridaRon DeSantisRepublicansJoe BidenLGBT rightsUS politicsThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were in touch before US Capitol attack, texts reveal

      by

      Oath Keepers and Proud Boys were in touch before US Capitol attack, texts revealThe messages could strengthen a theory being explored by the House committee that January 6 included a coordinated assault Top leaders in the Oath Keepers militia group indicted on seditious conspiracy charges over the Capitol attack had contacts with the Proud Boys and a figure in the Stop the Steal movement and may also have been in touch with the Republican congressman Ronny Jackson, newly released text messages show.Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge saysRead moreThe texts – which indicate the apparent ease with which Oath Keepers messaged Proud Boys – could strengthen a theory being explored by the House January 6 committee and the US justice department: that the Capitol attack included a coordinated assault.Oath Keepers text messages released in a court filing on Monday night showed members of the group were in direct communication with the Proud Boys leader Enqrique Tarrio in the days before the Capitol attack.In an exchange on 4 January 2021, the Oath Keepers Florida chapter leader, Kelly Meggs, indicates an attempt to call Tarrio after learning of his arrest.“I just called him no answer,” Meggs texted a group chat. “But he will [call if] he’s out.”That close relationship is certain to be of interest to the House committee as it zeroes in on whether the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys coordinated an attack on the Capitol in an attempt to stop certification of Joe Biden’s election win over Donald Trump.As the Guardian first reported, the committee has amassed deep evidence of connections between the far-right groups which could play a role in establishing whether Trump oversaw a criminal conspiracy as part of his attempt to hold on to power.The newly released text messages also show a new link between the Oath Keepers and an unnamed figure from the Stop the Steal movement, which has ties to the pro-Trump operative Roger Stone and to Ali Alexander, a prominent Trump ally and activist.On the evening of 1 January, Stewart Rhodes, the national leader of the Oath Keepers, texted to say he was adding an unidentified person affiliated with Stop the Steal to the group chat, to help them prepare for January 6.The name was redacted in the released texts but Rhodes described an “event producer for Stop the Steal. He requested I add him here. He can sort out who is doing what in the creative chaos that will be Jan 5/6.“He’s a good egg.”It was not clear whether Rhodes misattributed an affiliation to Stop the Steal, given the January 6 rally at the Ellipse was a Save America event. Neither Alexander nor Stone appeared to message the group chat or were otherwise involved.New Republican connectionThe Oath Keepers text messages also show a connection to Ronny Jackson that allowed one of its members to learn that the Texas congressman – Trump’s former White House doctor – needed protection as the Capitol attack unfolded.The potential connection between the Oath Keepers and a Republican member of Congress could mark a new investigatory direction for the committee and the justice department: whether Jackson or others might have had advance knowledge of the Oath Keepers’ plans.In the exchange on January 6, an unidentified Oath Keeper texts the group chat that “Ronnie Jackson (TX) office inside Capitol – he needs OK help. Anyone inside?”The same Oath Keeper provides an update less than 10 minutes later: “Dr Ronnie Jackson – on the move. Needs protection. If anyone inside cover him. He has critical data to protect.”Rhodes quickly responds: “Give him my cell.”In a statement to the Guardian, a spokesperson said Jackson “is frequently talked about by people he does not know. He does not know nor has he ever spoken to the people in question”.Asked if Jackson was never in contact with the Oath Keepers, the spokesperson did not answer.The House committee has not given any indication that Republican members of Congress were connected to a potential conspiracy overseen by Trump that would connect his plan to have then-vice president Mike Pence overturn the election with the Capitol attack.The Oath Keepers texts were included in a motion for release from pre-trial detention by Ed Vallejo, one of 11 group members facing charges of seditious conspiracy. On January 6, prosecutors say, Vallejo was at a Comfort Inn in Virginia with a cache of weapons, meant to act as a quick reaction force.The messages show the Oath Keepers discussed providing security for prominent Trump allies including Stone, Alexander, Alex Jones, Lin Wood and Mike Flynn, Trump’s former national security adviser.‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieRead moreOne week before January 6, Rhodes, the leader of the Oath Keepers, mentioned requests to provide security for Bianca Garcia, president of the group Latinos for Trump, for which Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader, was also chief of staff.The next day, Meggs, the Florida Oath Keepers leader who would ultimately lead Stone’s security detail, boasted that he had spoken to Stone the night before. Jessica Watkins, another member of the Oath Keepers, said she was also in touch with Stone.“Roger Stone just asked for security,” Watkins texted the group chat on 1 January, to which Meggs responded: “Who reached out to you? I [spoke] to him Wednesday.”Meggs – using the alias “OK Gator 1” – added: “I just texted him.”Though the Oath Keepers discussed providing security for other Trump allies, the extent of their voluntary services remains unclear. Alexander said in a recent statement that the Oath Keepers did not perform security duties for him on January 6.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge says

      by

      Attempt to bar Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress can proceed, judge saysFederal judge cites ‘whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests’ in allowing 14th-amendment challenge to far-right Republican An attempt to bar the far-right Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene from Congress over her support for the January 6 attack can proceed, a federal judge said.‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lieRead moreCiting “a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import”, Amy Totenberg of the northern district of Georgia sent the case on to a state hearing on Friday.A coalition of liberal groups is behind the challenge, citing the 14th amendment to the US constitution, passed after the civil war.The amendment says: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”Supporters of Donald Trump attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, seeking to stop certification of his defeat by Joe Biden. A bipartisan Senate committee connected seven deaths to the riot. About 800 people have been charged, some with seditious conspiracy.Trump was impeached for inciting an insurrection. Acquitted, he is free to run again.Organisers of events in Washington on January 6 have tied Greene to their efforts. Greene has denied such links and said she does not encourage violence.In October, however, she told a radio show: “January 6 was just a riot at the Capitol and if you think about what our Declaration of Independence says, it says to overthrow tyrants.”In the immediate aftermath of the Capitol attack, Greene was one of 147 Republicans in Congress who objected to results in battleground states, an effort inspired by Trump’s lies about electoral fraud.An effort to use the 14th amendment against Madison Cawthorn, an extremist from North Carolina, was unsuccessful, after a judge ruled an 1872 civil war amnesty law was not merely retroactive.In her ruling on Greene’s attempt to dismiss her challenge, on Monday, Totenberg said: “This case involves a whirlpool of colliding constitutional interests of public import. Upon a thorough analysis of each of the claims asserted in this case, the court concludes that [Greene] has not carried her burden of persuasion.”Even if a state judge rules against Greene, she could challenge the ruling. The Georgia primary is on 25 May, cutting time short. Greene seems likely to win re-election.Writing for the Guardian this month, the Georgetown University professor Thomas Zimmer said: “Greene’s position within the Republican party seems secure … in fact, Greene is the poster child of a rising group of rightwing radicals … [not] shy about their intention to purge whatever vestiges of ‘moderate’ conservatism might still exist within the Republican party.”Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party | Thomas ZimmerRead moreOne of the groups behind the challenge to Greene is Free Speech for the People. In January, the group’s legal director, Ron Fein, told the Guardian the group aimed to set “a line that says that just as the framers of the 14th amendment wrote and intended, you can’t take an oath to support the constitution and then facilitate an insurrection against the United States while expecting to pursue public office”.On Monday, Fein said: “We look forward to asking Representative Greene about her involvement [in January 6] under oath.”Mike Rasbury, an activist with the Bernie Sanders-affiliated Our Revolution group and a plaintiff in the lawsuit against Greene, said he was “elated” by Totenberg’s ruling.Greene, Rasbury said, “took an oath of office to protect democracy from all enemies foreign and domestic, just as I did when I became a helicopter pilot for the US army in Vietnam. However, she has flippantly ignored this oath and, based on her role in the January 6 insurrection, is disqualified … from holding any future public office”.TopicsRepublicansThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS CongressHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsUS constitution and civil libertiesnewsReuse this content More

    • 188 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican party | Thomas Zimmer

      by

      Extremists like Marjorie Taylor Greene are the future of the Republican partyThomas ZimmerIt’s impossible to understand American politics without grappling in earnest with why Greene’s extremism is widely seen as justified on the right Ever since entering Congress, Marjorie Taylor Greene has been making headlines for her long history of peddling conspiracy theories, her blatant embrace of anti-Muslim bigotry and white Christian nationalism, and her aggression against political opponents. The latest escalation came last week, when she smeared her Republican colleagues in the Senate, Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins and Mitt Romney, as “pro-pedophile” after they voted to confirm Ketanji Brown Jackson to the US supreme court; Democrats, she added, “are the party of pedophiles.”There is a calculating quality to Greene’s polemics. Last fall, for instance, she recorded a campaign video in which she used a military-grade sniper rifle to blow up a car that had the word “socialism” written on it, promising to do the same to the “Democrats’ socialist agenda.” It was over-exaggerated campaign nonsense. But Greene knew the unsubtle insinuation of using violence against a political opponent would demand attention.The fact that Greene’s antics are so clearly designed to keep herself in the spotlight has prompted calls for the media and commentators to stop paying attention to her rather than be complicit in the amplification of far-right propaganda. And if what’s on display here were just the extremist behavior of a fringe figure, it would indeed be best to simply ignore her. This, however, isn’t just Greene’s extremism – it is increasingly that of the Republican party itself. Greene and the many provocateurs like her are not just rightwing trolls, but elected officials in good standing with their party. Ignoring them won’t work, nor will making fun of them: These people are in positions of influence, fully intent on using their power.In any (small-d) democratic party, Greene’s extremism should be disqualifying. In today’s Republican party, she’s not being expelled, she’s being elevated. Greene is undoubtedly one of the rightwing stars in the country, and that’s not just a media phenomenon. Republican candidates crave her endorsement. Democrats stripped her of her committee assignments against the vote of nearly all of Greene’s Republican colleagues; if the Republicans capture the House in November, she’ll probably get those assignments back.It is true that occasionally, Greene’s most egregious actions have led to some measure of symbolic distancing from Republican leadership. After she spoke at the white supremacist America First Political Action Conference (Afpac) in February, where she was enthusiastically introduced and embraced by the well-known far-right activist and Nazi sympathizer Nick Fuentes, minority leader Kevin McCarthy gave her a good talking to – but no serious consequences followed.Overall, Greene’s position within the Republican party seems secure. That’s partly because the Republican leadership is surely aware that most of the energy and activism in conservatism is in the far-right wing that stands behind Greene. In fact, Greene is the poster child of a rising group of rightwing radicals: in Congress, she likes to present herself and like-minded allies such as representatives Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz as the future of the Republican party, and they aren’t shy about their intention to purge whatever vestiges of “moderate” conservatism might still exist within the Republican party.Greene’s rise is indicative of a more openly militant form of white Christian nationalism inserting itself firmly at the center of Republican politics. “America First” candidates like Greene are representing the Republican party all over the country. In Arizona, for instance, state senator Wendy Rogers proudly declared herself to “stand with Jesus, Robert E Lee, and the Cleveland Indians” back in December – all of them supposedly “canceled” by “satanic communists”; and at the aforementioned AFPAC in February, Rogers suggested building gallows to hang political enemies. In Georgia, gubernatorial candidate Kandiss Taylor runs on a platform of “Jesus, Guns, and Babies” and openly advocates for the establishment of a Christian theocracy.The Republican party doesn’t just tolerate such extremists in an attempt to appease the fringe – this isn’t simply a matter of acquiescence out of convenience or cowardice. What we really need to grapple with is the fact that this sort of radicalism is widely seen as justified on the right. The exact language someone like Greene uses might be slightly crasser than what some conservatives are comfortable with, and some Republicans might disagree with specific aspects of the public image she projects. But it’s obviously not enough for them to break with her, or with any of the Christian nationalist extremists in their ranks.If anything, most of what Greene is saying actually aligns with the general thrust of conservative politics. Republicans are currently all in on smearing anyone who disagrees with their assault on LGBTQ rights as “groomers” and declaring any progressive social position adjacent to pedophilia. And it’s really hard to tell the difference between Greene’s propaganda and what much of the reactionary intellectual sphere has been producing. Rod Dreher, for instance, one of the Religious Right’s best-known exponents, has called the Democrats the “party of groomers” and “the party of child mutilators and kidnappers” lately. Or take the gun-toting militancy that was on display in Greene’s campaign video. Republicans have long embraced the gun cult and made it a key element of their political identity. Now candidates up and down the country have the whole family, including young children, pose for heavily armed photos, reveling in the imagery of using guns to fight off those insidious Democrats and their assault on America.That’s precisely the key to understanding why so many Republicans are willing to embrace political extremism. Greene’s central message is fully in line with what has become dogma on the right: that Democrats are a radical, “Un-American” threat, and have to be stopped by whatever means. Everyone suspected of holding liberal or progressive positions is a “fellow traveler with the radical left,” as senator Ted Cruz put it; as part of the “militant left,” Democrats need to be treated as the “the enemy within,” according to senator Rick Scott; and Florida governor Ron DeSantis declared that Stacey Abrams winning the Georgia gubernatorial election would be akin to a foreign adversary taking over and lead to a “cold war” between the two neighboring states.It doesn’t matter to the right that Greene’s pedophilia accusations lack any empirical basis. What matters is that they adhere to the higher truth of conservative politics: that Democrats are a fundamental threat to the country, to its moral foundations, its very survival. “How much more can America take before our civilization begins to collapse?” Greene asked last week. There aren’t many conservatives left who disagree with her assessment. That’s how they are giving themselves permission to embrace whatever radical measures are deemed necessary to defeat this “Un-American” enemy. Once you have convinced yourself you are fighting a noble war against a bunch of pedophiles hellbent on destroying the nation, there are no more lines you’re not justified to cross. Greene and her fellow extremists are perceived to be useful shock troops in an existential struggle for the survival of “real” America. The right isn’t getting distracted by debates over whether Greene’s militant extremism or Mitch McConnell’s extreme cynicism are the right approach to preventing multiracial pluralism. They are united in the quest to entrench white reactionary rule.I fear that four years of Trumpism in power so inundated us with political stunts and outrageous political acts that we might have become a bit numb to how extreme and dangerous these developments are. Let’s not be lulled into a false sense of security by the clownishness, the ridiculousness of it all. Some of history’s most successful authoritarians were considered goons and buffoons by their contemporaries – until they became goons and buffoons in power.What we are witnessing is one party rapidly abandoning and actively assaulting the foundations of democratic political culture. Every “Western” society has always harbored some far-right extremists like Greene. But the fact that the Republican party embraces and elevates people like her constitutes an acute danger to democracy.
      Thomas Zimmer is a visiting professor at Georgetown University, focused on the history of democracy and its discontents in the United States, and a Guardian US contributing opinion writer
      TopicsUS politicsOpinionRepublicansThe far rightcommentReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Marjorie Taylor Greene: judge mulls move to bar Republican from Congress

      by

      Marjorie Taylor Greene: judge mulls move to bar Republican from CongressJudge to rule on challenge from Georgia voters that says far right congresswoman should be disqualified under the 14th amendment A federal judge has indicated that an attempt to stop the far-right Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene running for re-election will be allowed to proceed.Liz Cheney disputes report January 6 panel split over Trump criminal referralRead moreThe challenge from a group of Georgia voters says Greene should be disqualified under the 14th amendment to the US constitution, because she supported insurrectionists who attacked the US Capitol on 6 January 2021.A similar challenge in North Carolina, against Madison Cawthorn, another prominent supporter of Donald Trump, was blocked.But on Friday Amy Totenberg, a federal judge in Georgia, said she had “significant questions and concerns” about the ruling in the Cawthorn case, CNN reported.Totenberg said she was likely to rule on Greene’s attempt to have her case dismissed on Monday, two days before a scheduled hearing before a state judge.The 14th amendment was passed by Congress in 1866, a year after the end of the civil war, and ratified in 1868.It says: “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”Congress can reverse any such prohibition.In March, the challenge to Cawthorn was shut down by a Trump-appointed judge with reference to a civil war amnesty law passed by Congress in 1872. According to CNN, Totenberg said she thought that law was retroactive and not meant to apply to future insurrectionists.A bipartisan Senate committee connected seven deaths to the Capitol riot, in which Trump supporters sought to stop certification of Joe Biden’s election victory.Greene has been widely linked to events on January 6. In one example, an organiser of pro-Trump events in Washington that day told Rolling Stone Greene was among a group of far-right Republicans who coordinated with protesters.“I remember Marjorie Taylor Greene specifically,” the anonymous source said. “I remember talking to probably close to a dozen other members at one point or another or their staffs.”A spokesperson for Greene said she and her staff “were focused on the congressional election objection on the House floor and had nothing to do with planning of any protest”.In the immediate aftermath of the storming of Congress, in the last legalistic gasp of Trump’s attempt to stay in power, 147 Republicans voted to object to results in key states.Greene has said she does not encourage violence. Her attorney in the Georgia case is James Bopp Jr, who cited the 1872 amnesty law in his successful attempt to have the Cawthorn challenge dismissed.Like the challenge to Cawthorn, the challenge to Greene is backed by Free Speech for People, a group which seeks election and campaign finance reform.Is Trump in his sights? Garland under pressure to charge ex-presidentRead moreResponding to the Cawthorn dismissal, Ron Fein, legal director of Free Speech for the People, told the New York Times: “According to this court ruling, the 1872 amnesty law, by a trick of wording – although no one noticed it at the time, or in the 150 years since – completely undermined Congress’s careful decision to write the insurrectionist disqualification clause to apply to future insurrections.“This is patently absurd.”In January, Fein told the Guardian his group aimed to set “a line that says that just as the framers of the 14th amendment wrote and intended, you can’t take an oath to support the constitution and then facilitate an insurrection against the United States while expecting to pursue public office”.He added: “The insurrection threatened our country’s entire democratic system and putting insurrectionists from any state into the halls of Congress threatens the entire country.”Writing for the Guardian, the Princeton academic Jan-Werner Muller said: “Whether a heavily right-leaning US supreme court will uphold disqualifications is a very open question indeed – but there is every reason to try enforcing them.”TopicsRepublicansThe far rightUS politicsDonald TrumpnewsReuse this content More