The far right

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      California county recalls top official, giving militia-aligned group a path to government

      by

      California county recalls top official, giving militia-aligned group a path to governmentSupervisor Leonard Moty has been ousted after two years of threats and increasing hostility over pandemic health restrictions Voters in far northern California have solidified the ouster of a Republican county official, giving control of the Shasta county board of supervisors to a group supported by local militia members.Leonard Moty, a retired police chief and Republican with decades of public service, lost his seat in a recall election in one of California’s most conservative counties. The Tuesday recall came as tensions reached a high in the county after two years of threats and increasing hostility toward moderate Republican officials over pandemic health restrictions.California county on track to be run by militia-aligned groupRead more“I really thought my community would step up to the plate and they didn’t and that’s very discouraging,” Moty said in an interview with the Guardian earlier this week, warning the recall would shift the area to the “alt-right”.Updated polling numbers released on Friday showed about 56% of 8,752 voters supported recalling Moty. Cathy Darling Allen, the county registrar of voters, said there were about 121 ballots left to count. The results won’t be finalized until next month, but the two candidates in the lead to replace Moty attended a celebration on Tuesday with members of an area militia group, the Sacramento Bee reported.The recall is a win for the county’s ultra-conservative movement in their efforts to gain a foothold in local government in this rural part of northern California and fight back against moderate Republicans they felt didn’t do enough to resist state health rules during the pandemic.Though Shasta county was among the least restrictive in California amid Covid, residents unhappy about state rules and mask requirements have showed up to meetings in large numbers since 2020. Moty and others were subjected to what law enforcement has deemed “credible threats” and personal attacks in meetings – one person told him that bullets are expensive, but “ropes are reusable”.Experts have warned the pandemic and eroding trust in US institutions has fueled extremism in local politics and hostility against officials. In Shasta county, the successful recall campaign will likely set up more conflict between the local government and the state government, said Lisa Pruitt, a rural law expert at the University of California, Davis.Carlos Zapata, a local militia member who helped organize the recall efforts, in 2020 told the board there could be blood in the streets if the supervisors didn’t reject state health rules such as mask requirements.“This is a warning for what’s coming. It’s not going to be peaceful much longer. It’s going to be real … I’ve been in combat and I never wanted to go back again, but I’m telling you what – I will to stay in this country. If it has to be against our own citizens, it will happen. And there’s a million people like me, and you won’t stop us,” he said.TopicsCaliforniaUS politicsThe far rightCoronavirusnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans to field more than 100 far-right candidates this year

      by

      Republicans to field more than 100 far-right candidates this yearAnti-Defamation League list includes at least a dozen with links to white supremacists, anti-government extremists and Proud Boys More than 100 far-right candidates are running for political office across the country as Republicans this year according to the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a non-profit that monitors hate groups.Aside from those expressing extremist rhetoric and far-right views, the ADL has found at least a dozen of the candidates had explicit connections to ‘“white supremacists, anti-government extremists and members of the far-right Proud Boys”. It includes primary challengers running to the right of some sitting Republicans.‘The most dangerous man in Congress’: how Paul Gosar became a darling of the far rightRead moreIn Arkansas’s third district Neil Kumar, who the ADL found has written for white supremacist publications, is challenging the incumbent congressman, Steve Womack, who broke with Republicans in voting in favor of creating the January 6 commission to investigate the Capitol attack. The openly racist views of Kumar prompted the Arkansas state Republican party to take the unusual step of declaring him a “non-recommended candidate” in the upcoming primary.The wave of far-right candidates includes sitting legislators like the Arizona state senator Wendy Rogers, who has admitted to being a member of the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia with 11 members currently under federal indictment for seditious conspiracy.Other militia groups have candidates running or already in local office. The Washington Three Percent militia claims members in dozens of elected offices throughout the Pacific north-west, the Washington Post found, “including a mayor, a county commissioner and at least five school board seats”.In Idaho the far-right anti-government activist Ammon Bundy – who led an armed standoff against federal agents at Malheur wildlife refuge in 2014 – is running for the governor’s office. Bundy’s group, the People’s Rights network, has now increased its national membership to 33,000 members and has at least 398 activists in 39 states, according to a report by Institute for Research & Education on Human Rights.Many far-right candidates have no direct links to violent extremist groups, but do support a range of far-right views. The ADL tracked at least 45 candidates running for office this year that have “lent credence in some way” to the QAnon conspiracy theory movement. Many more hold on to Donald Trump’s “big lie” – the false belief that the 2020 election was stolen.Nationwide there are 207 current elected officials who aided former president Trump in efforts to overturn the 2020, according to data compiled by the Insurrection Index, a project of the voting rights group Public Wise. The index includes senators like Ron Johnson from Wisconsin, who voted against certifying the 2020 election and spread misinformation including suggesting that the January 6 attack was carried out by “fake Trump voters”.While many candidates are seeking local or national legislative seats, some are purposely running for bureaucratic offices whose chief responsibility is to certify elections. Thirty are standing in contests for attorney general, according to tracking by the States United Democracy Center, a non-partisan group that monitors election races nationwide.Fringe political candidates are a part of every US election cycle, but while these 2022 candidates hold far-right views they are also part of a wave within the Republican party that is no longer fringe but increasingly represents a powerful – even dominant – wing in the party.“The real danger is not just the wave of extreme candidates, it’s their embrace, their mainstreaming by the Republican party,” said Steven Levitsky, a professor of government at Harvard University and the co-author of How Democracies Die. “The United States has always had nutty, extremist, authoritarian politicians around the fringe. What is new and really dangerous for democracy is that they’re increasingly running as Republican candidates.”Levitsky added: “At first you had a flirtation and tolerance with a handful of extremists at the fringes. We’re now seeing an army of extremists embraced by the former president. They’re marching in and taking over the Republican party at the state and local level.”In Oregon, Daniel Tooze, a prominent associate of the Proud Boys who has participated in street brawls with anti-fascists in Portland, is running for Oregon’s state legislature in the 40th district. Tooze ran for the same seat in 2020, failing to secure the Republican nomination in the primary, but he received 40% of the Republican vote in the primary. This year Tooze is the only Republican who has filed to run again.“When mainstream parties take onboard figures who deny the legitimacy of elections, refuse to accept electoral defeat, condone or even engage in political violence, you are putting democracy at risk,” said Levitsky.Tooze declined to be interviewed for this article but stated in correspondence: “I’m just a regular guy.”A review of Tooze’s campaign website and filing statement show no mention of affiliation with the Proud Boys. Tooze campaign messaging uses the language of mainstream Republican talking points. The Guardian has previously reported on far-right groups shifting their focus to local communities. Since the Capitol attack members of groups such as the Proud Boys have shown up to local venues including school board meetings to stand alongside mainstream conservatives, especially around issues such as Covid-19 restrictions.This month Tooze tweeted a video of Thomas Renz, a far-right anti-vaccine influencer, speaking at a panel convened by Senator Johnson that promoted misleading information about Covid-19 and vaccines. The video of Renz went viral in alt-tech platforms but also within mainstream social media. Tooze wrote of the video: “It’s time to hold the government accountable for what they’ve done to the people.”TopicsThe far rightRepublicansUS politicsUS midterm elections 2022newsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Who has more influence on supreme court: Clarence Thomas or his activist wife?

      by

      Who has more influence on supreme court: Clarence Thomas or his activist wife?Justice’s wife, Ginni Thomas, sits on the board of conservative group that backs lawsuit seeking to end affirmative action, raising concerns it could present potential conflict of interest Clarence Thomas, the hardline conservative supreme court justice, is facing calls for his recusal in the case over race-based affirmative action in college admissions that the court agreed to hear this week.US supreme court will hear challenge to affirmative action in college admissionRead moreThe case, which is being brought against Harvard and the University of North Carolina, is the latest potential conflict of interest involving Thomas and his wife Virginia Thomas. Ginni, as she is known, is a prominent rightwing activist who speaks out on a raft of issues that frequently come before the nation’s highest court.A one-person conservative powerhouse, she set up her own lobbying company Liberty Consulting in 2010. By her own description, she has “battled for conservative principles in Washington” for over 35 years.The challenge to the two universities’ race-conscious admissions policies is being brought by Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA). Its leader Edward Blum has been a relentless opponent of affirmative action and voting rights laws.His argument that race-based affirmative action is a quota system that discriminates against Asian students is framed with the supreme court’s newly emboldened rightwing majority in mind. A central player in that new six-justice conservative supermajority is Clarence Thomas, who is the longest-serving of the justices and at 73 will be the oldest once Stephen Breyer retires.Justice Thomas’s influence has soared in recent months with the rightward shift of the court following Donald Trump’s three nominations, to the extent that some pundits now dub him the unofficial chief justice of the court.SFFA’s lawsuit seeking to strike down affirmative action has received the enthusiastic backing of the conservative National Association of Scholars. It filed an amicus brief in support of the suit, accusing Harvard admissions officials of being prejudiced against Asian students and stereotyping them as “uninteresting, uncreative and one-dimensional”.Ginni Thomas sits on the advisory board of the National Association of Scholars. Observers are concerned that her position with a group that has intervened in the affirmative action case could present appearances of conflict of interest.Noah Bookbinder, president of the government ethics watchdog Crew, told the Guardian that while supreme court regulations may not legally require Thomas to recuse himself, there were serious questions to answer.“Ginni Thomas is an advisory board member of an organization that has taken a very specific position on a case in front of her husband. That will make it hard for the public to be confident that he’s going to be totally unbiased.”Bookbinder said that in the circumstances “the better course of action would be for him to recuse or for her to cease her involvement in that organization.”The potential appearance of a conflict of interest over the Harvard case was noted in a recent investigation by the New Yorker reporter Jane Mayer that takes a deep dive into the overlapping interests of the couple. The article chronicles in devastating detail the many instances where Ginni’s political activism appears to present problems for the image and integrity of the court.“Ginni Thomas has held so many leadership or advisory positions at conservative pressure groups that it’s hard to keep track of them,” Mayer concluded. “Many, if not all, of these groups have been involved in cases that have come before her husband.”In the most troubling recent instance, Ginni Thomas lent her voice to Trump’s big lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him. She was vocal on the subject in the buildup to the violent insurrection at the US Capitol on January 6 last year that led to the deaths of five people and left more than 100 police officers injured.On the morning of the January 6 itself, Mark Joseph Stern of Slate reported, Thomas posted on her Facebook page words of encouragement for the “Stop the Steal” marchers in Washington. “LOVE MAGA people!!!!”, she said., “GOD BLESS EACH OF YOU STANDING UP or PRAYING!”Soon after the insurrection, Thomas was forced to apologise to her husband’s former supreme court law clerks for comments she made privately to them that appeared to lament Trump’s defeat in the 2020 election. The remarks were sent to a private email list called “Thomas Clerk World”.In the emails, disclosed by the Washington Post, she wrote: “Many of us are hurting, after leaving it all on the field, to preserve the best of this country. I feel I have failed my parents who did their best and taught me to work to preserve liberties.”An even more direct intervention in the politics surrounding Trump and the big lie was made last December when Thomas joined 62 other influential conservatives in signing an open letter to the leader of the Republicans in the House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy. It urged him to expel the Congress members Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger from the Republican party.Their sin, the letter writers opined, was to serve on the House committee investigating the January 6 insurrection. They described the committee as an “overtly partisan political persecution that brings disrespect to our country’s rule of law [and] legal harassment to private citizens who have done nothing wrong”.Since the Capitol insurrection, the Department of Justice has arrested more than 725 defendants in relation to the storming of the building. Federal prosecutors have charged 225 with assaulting, resisting or impeding police officers, including over 75 charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily harm to an officer.Last week the supreme court rejected attempts by Trump to block the January 6 committee from acquiring his White House records from the time of the attack. There was only one dissent from the bench to that 8-to-1 decision: it came from Clarence Thomas.“Ginni Thomas’s activities are unprecedented in supreme court history in terms of a spouse engaging in issues that are constantly before the court,” said Gabe Roth, executive director of Fix the Court, a non-partisan group which advocates supreme court reform. “The appearance of impropriety is in itself impropriety – all the supreme court has is the trust of the public, and once you chip away at that you are in trouble.”Roth added that Thomas’s comments in the days before January 6 were clearly problematic given her husband’s vote on the Trump documents. “It’s possible that the January 6 committee has emails between Ginni Thomas and administration officials from that day or the days leading up to it given how vocal she was. That’s definitely a place where Justice Thomas should have recused himself.”Should the rightwing majority around Thomas use its newfound muscle to ban affirmative action, as is widely predicted, it would mark the negation of more than 30 years of settled constitutional law on the matter. What lies ahead bears strong resemblance to Roe v Wade, the landmark 1973 ruling that made abortion legal which the court is probably poised to weaken or even overturn outright.Mayer points out in the New Yorker that an amicus brief was filed in the supreme court case challenging Roe by Robert George who also sits on the advisory board of the National Association of Scholars alongside Ginni Thomas.Roth told the Guardian that a simpler solution to the full recusal of Clarence Thomas from the affirmative action case might exist. That would be to remove the National Association of Scholars’ amicus brief.“There is an easy way to deal with this perceived conflict of interest – strike the amicus brief,” he said.It is established practice in all federal appeals courts, though not in the supreme court, that amicus briefs brought by anybody with a connection to a judge hearing a case are routinely thrown out.The president of the National Association of Scholars, Peter Wood, told the Guardian that he knew of no conflict of interest relating to Thomas’s position on the advisory board. “Ms Thomas’s role is to provide advice to NAS in response to questions I put to her about NAS policy and initiatives. I have never discussed with her any NAS matter that was likely to come before the supreme court,” he said.TopicsUS supreme courtUS politicsLaw (US)The far rightRacefeaturesReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Man who wore ‘Camp Auschwitz’ shirt admits joining US Capitol rioters

      by

      Man who wore ‘Camp Auschwitz’ shirt admits joining US Capitol rioters Robert Keith Packer of Virginia pleads guilty to parading, demonstrating or picketing in Capitol building A Virginia man who wore a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt at the US Capitol during last year’s riot pleaded guilty on Wednesday to joining the mob of people who stormed the building. Photographs of Robert Keith Packer wearing the sweatshirt with the antisemitic message went viral after the 6 January 2021 insurrection. The words “Camp Auschwitz” were above an image of a human skull. Packer’s sweatshirt also bore the phrase “work brings freedom”, a rough translation of the German words above the entrance gate to Auschwitz, the concentration camp in Poland where Nazis killed more than 1 million men, women and children.Packer’s guilty plea came one day before Holocaust Memorial Day.Packer, 57, of Newport News, Virginia, pleaded guilty to parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment. The US district judge Carl Nichols is scheduled to sentence him on 7 April. FBI agents arrested Packer a week after the riot. He remains free pending his sentencing hearing. A witness who contacted law enforcement recognized Packer as a regular customer at a store near Newport News. A surveillance camera captured an image of him wearing the same sweatshirt in the store in December 2020. Packer’s sweatshirt “appears to be a symbol of Nazi hate ideology”, an FBI agent wrote in an affidavit. The assistant US attorney Mona Furst said Packer entered the Capitol despite seeing broken glass and police officers using teargas. Packer was in the area where a police officer shot a rioter, Ashli Babbitt, and he left the building after that fatal shooting, Furst said. A photograph of Packer inside the Capitol shows him near people holding a broken nameplate from the office of the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. More than 730 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the Capitol riot. About 200 of them have pleaded guilty, mostly to misdemeanors.TopicsUS Capitol attackUS politicsThe far rightnewsReuse this content More

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘The most dangerous man in Congress’: how Paul Gosar became a darling of the far right

      by

      ‘The most dangerous man in Congress’: how Paul Gosar became a darling of the far rightOnce fringe, now dominant in the party, rightwing Republicans are strategizing for minoritarian rule The Arizona Republican congressman Paul Gosar had a simple message for the crowd when he recently addressed a packed Donald Trump rally in his home state – a gathering that had focused on promoting the baseless lie that Trump had been cheated out of a second term as president.“This is where it all began,” Gosar said in a speech before Trump came on stage. “This is where we questioned: ‘Was there fraud? Absolutely. Was it enough to overturn the election? Absolutely.’”Republican resistance to Trump rings hollow as ‘moderates’ say no on voting rightsRead moreThe far-right congressman is one of Trump’s most loyal backers in Congress, earning him one of more than 90 endorsements made so far by the former US president ahead of this year’s crucial midterm elections. Gosar is the kind of politician that Trump – who is embarking on a series of rallies to try to cement his allies’ power in the Republican party – is increasingly seeking to support.But Gosar has extensive links to white nationalists and Capitol rioters and, many observers say, represents a dangerous new breed of Republican politician, who would have once been considered fringe, but whom Trump is increasingly making central to Republican party politics.“I’m considered the most dangerous man in Congress,” Gosar told the crowd, briefly touching on popular rightwing talking points – critical race theory in schools, disrespect for the military, and “empty shelves” in stores – before focusing on the central theme of the rally: elections.In the Arizona desert the fervor among supporters huddled against the wind was a clear sign of the size of a constituency more loyal to Trump than to the party, and even as some lawmakers distance themselves from the former president amid the January 6 fallout, the far right is doubling down.In his first public appearance since the anniversary of the January 6 attack, Trump’s appearance was marked with a reaffirmation of election denial, conspiracy theories and anti-democratic ruminations. “I ran twice, and I won twice,” Trump told his supporters gathered in the windy Arizona night.At the rally the “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander moved through the crowd while on stage three members of Congress, who all voted against certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential election victory, gave speeches affirming their support of the “big lie”.Gosar’s allegiance to Trump and his false claims extends beyond speaking the shibboleth of the big lie: on January 6 Gosar voted against certifying the election even as rioters penetrated the Capitol.“We no longer have an ability to make a clear delineation between the right and far-right in the Republican party,” said Joe Lowndes, professor of political science at the University of Oregon and co-author of Producers, Parasites, Patriots: Race and the New Right-Wing Politics of Precarity.“The Trumpist wing of the Republicans isn’t just ascending – it’s the dominant wing of the Republican party. It’s the dominant wing not just in national politics, but in state and local politics as well,” said Lowndes. “The Republican party has committed itself to a party of minoritarian rule, figuring out ways to rule in the long term without having majority support of voters.”Gosar’s involvement with the January 6 Capitol insurrection has come under scrutiny from lawmakers. A House select committee investigating the deadly Capitol attack has been working for six months, in meetings mostly closed to the public, interviewing more than 300 witnesses and collecting more than 35,000 pages of records, according the Washington Post.Information has surfaced that link Gosar to one prominent Capitol riot organizer.A lawsuit filed by Alexander to block the release of his phone records, subpoenaed by the House committee, reveals testimony that discloses contacts with Republican members of Congress before the Capitol riot. The lawsuit states Alexander testified that he “had a few phone conversations” with Gosar and spoke to the Arizona congressman Andy Biggs “in person”.Lawmakers are debating whether sitting members of Congress can be subpoenaed to appear before the committee.Gosar also has longstanding links to far-right and white nationalist groups.Last year Gosar was the keynote speaker at an America First Political Action Conference (Afpac) organized by white nationalist Nick Fuentes, whom the Department of Justice in a court filing calls a “white supremacist” and who marched in the deadly Charlottesville “Unite the Right” rally. The January 6 committee is also seeking testimony from Fuentes, who has praised Gosar as supporting his agenda.“There is some hope, maybe, for America First in Congress, and that is thanks almost exclusively to representative Paul Gosar,” said Fuentes in a video message to his supporters last year.Gosar distanced himself from Fuentes after outcry over his appearance alongside the white nationalist in a promotion for a fundraising event. But he has also appeared to defend him. Gosar once tweeted: “Not sure why anyone is freaking out. I’ll say this: there are millions of Gen Z, Y and X conservatives. They believe in America First. They will not agree 100% on every issue. No group does. We will not let the left dictate our strategy, alliances and efforts. Ignore the left.”That was not the first time Gosar has incorporated white nationalist themes into his politics.Last year Gosar and the extremist Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene were linked to an “America First Caucus” that imploded in disarray after planning documents reported by Punchbowl News revealed language that included recruiting people based on “Anglo-Saxon political traditions”.Gosar was also censured and stripped of his committee posts late last year after tweeting a Photoshopped video of a violent anime sequence depicting him killing congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and attacking President Biden.“I do not espouse violence towards anyone,” Gosar said during the House debate on his censure. “I voluntarily took the cartoon down, not because it was itself a threat, but because some thought it was. Out of compassion for those who genuinely felt offense, I self-censored.”But Gosar has a history posting of far-right content, including retweeting a QAnon conspiracy theory and a now-deleted tweet of a meme popular in white nationalists circles.Yet it is now in the area of election integrity that Gosar is becoming most prominent, helping to lead a charge across the US by Republicans claiming that elections in America are vulnerable to fraud and manipulation.“There’s a comfortable embrace of anti-democratic sentiment,” said Lowndes. “The Republican party hasn’t just opened the door to the far right, but it now relies on the far right.”At the Arizona rally Gosar told supporters to campaign locally on the election fraud issue. “Take it upon yourself that in your county you go to your county recorder and ask them what your ballot does. Make them walk you through it. That’ll tell them one thing: that you’re watching them. That you’re not going to let this happen, what happened in January of last year.”Gosar was among the Arizona Republican officials pushing for an audit of the election results of Maricopa county, the state’s most populous county. Before the Trump rally, the Maricopa elections department released a 93-page report rebuking each of the 76 claims about the 2020 elections made by elected Arizona Republican officials.The report found “the November 2020 General Election was administered with integrity and the results were accurate and reliable.” The report also found “despite all evidence to the contrary, false allegations continue to persist and damage voter confidence.”But there is at least one group of people close to Gosar who are not fooled – some of his own family.Three of Gosar’s siblings have publicly called for their brother to be expelled from Congress, the Arizona Republic has reported. “We know him to be an extremist and we took that very seriously,” his sister, Jennifer Gosar, told the newspaper. His brother, Dave Gosar, told NBC News: “I consider him a traitor to this country. I consider him a traitor to his family.” In the 2018 election six of Gosar’s nine siblings endorsed his opponent.TopicsThe far rightRepublicansDonald TrumpUS politicsfeaturesReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Recruitment of veterans by extremists may increase, top Democrat warns

      by

      Recruitment of veterans by extremists may increase, top Democrat warnsChair of House veterans affairs committee holding hearings on issue highlighted by veterans’ participation in US Capitol attack A top US lawmaker who heads a congressional committee investigating the targeting of veterans by extremist groups has warned that the problem is a serious one and could get bigger unless it is effectively combated.In an interview with the Guardian Mark Takano, a Democratic congressman from California, said he was concerned about the recruiting strategy being deployed by violent rightwing extremist groups, especially in America’s increasingly fraught political climate in the wake of the 6 January attack on the US Capitol.Leader of Oath Keepers militia group faces sedition charge over Capitol attackRead moreTakano is the chairman of the House veteran affairs committee, which has begun hearings into the rising threat to veterans. The first of three hearings occurred in October last year, but Takano has been concerned about the threat for years.“Targeting of veterans by violent extremist groups is a problem and it could become a bigger problem if we don’t understand what’s involved and the dimensions of it,” Takano said.Takano said the issue was bipartisan and the definition of extremism did not favor liberal or conservative. “We define extremism not by the content of the ideology of the group, but whether a group espouses, advocates, endorses or promotes violence as a way to achieve their ends,” said Takano.But he was clear the current threat of veteran recruitment comes more from the extremist right.“We are seeing that this violence is occurring to a far greater degree among rightwing groups, especially within the last six years,” said Takano. “As far as we can tell, rightwing extremist groups are the ones targeting veterans for recruitment. And there’s not really any evidence that we’re seeing that leftwing groups are targeting veterans,” said Takano.Data shows violent attacks from rightwing groups in the United States are significantly more prevalent than from leftwing or international or Islamist terrorist groups. An analysis by the Center for International Strategic Studies, a non-partisan thinktank, looked at 893 terrorist plots and attacks in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020.It found that “far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda.”The report also found that “‘rightwing extremists perpetrated two-thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90% between January 1 and May 8, 2020.”The 738 defendants charged in the 6 January attack on the Capitol include 81 with ties to the military, while five were active-duty service members. Air force veteran Ashli Babbitt was shot dead by police while attempting to break into the House chamber. Recently, three retired army generals wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post warning of the threat of a coup in the 2024 US election, saying it could succeed with the aid of rogue military elements.Takano’s committee conducted its first hearing in October. “We looked into how and why veterans were being recruited by violent, extreme groups: at the history and the track record of groups like the Proud Boys, Three Percent militia, Oath Keepers, Boogaloo Boys and others,” said Takano.Takano said extremist groups see an advantage in having veterans in their ranks. “In that sense they are a greater target for recruitment than non-veteran Americans,” said Takano.Takano described friction in addressing the problem among some Republican lawmakers on his committee. “At least two members … wouldn’t even engage the subject,” said Takano. “When it came for their turn, they didn’t ask the witnesses any questions, including the witness that was chosen by the Republican team.“The two members instead just used their five minutes to attack me for holding the hearing,” said Takano.Takano sees the issues that leave veterans vulnerable to extremism as being the same as for the general population. “The things that contribute to veterans being vulnerable are the same things that affect all Americans: social isolation, addictions, mental health issues and emotional trauma,” said Takano.“We need to recognise that there is a problem that we have politically motivated violent extremist groups that are targeting veterans. We need to look at ways that we can protect veterans,” he added.TopicsUS militaryThe far rightUS Capitol attackHouse of RepresentativesUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      The Next Civil War and How Civil Wars Start reviews – US nightmare scenarios

      by

      The Next Civil War by Stephen Marche; How Civil Wars Start by Barbara F Walter – review How far will America’s disintegration into irreconcilable factions go? Two authors gaze into the near future of a failed state, at times enjoying their doomsday prophecies a little too muchZonked on patriotic zeal, Americans believe that their country is an exception to all historical rules. The land of the free, however, is currently hurtling towards a predetermined, apparently unavoidable crack-up. Its governmental institutions are paralysed, and a constitution devised for an agrarian society in the 18th century obstructs reform; its citizens, outnumbered by the guns they tote, have split into armed, antagonistic tribes. Given these conditions, the riot at the Capitol last January may have been the rehearsal for an imminent civil war.Looking down at this hot mess from chilly Toronto, the Canadian novelist and essayist Stephen Marche grimly predicts: “The United States is coming to an end.” Such a declaration could only be made by an outsider. To Americans, the idea of civil war remains unthinkable, the words unspeakable: at his inauguration Biden vowed to end “this uncivil war”, which implied that the only missiles being exchanged were harmlessly verbal. As Marche sees it, the impending war will be a continuation of the earlier one between Union and Confederacy, which broke off in 1865 without closing the gap between races, regions and economic prospects. To these human-made iniquities Marche adds the intemperance of nature: New York is likely to be inundated by a forthcoming hurricane, and Californian forests are already burning. In 1776 the founding fathers envisaged an egalitarian renewal of humanity. Now the decline of the US warns that the anthropocene era may be doomed. Marche, doubting that the walls erected by Fortress America can keep out refugees, the poor and the rising oceans, suspects that this is “how a species goes extinct”.The Next Civil War is fatalistic yet somehow elated as Marche vividly imagines the “incredibly intense events” that lie ahead. He has done the required historical research and conducted interviews with officials and academic experts, but he can’t resist elaborating scenarios for conflagration and collapse which he offers as examples of “the genre of future civil war fantasy”. One of these, narrated with sour amusement, concerns an explosive dispute in a western state where local protesters, riled up by a wily, cynical sheriff, do battle with federal bureaucrats who have closed down an unsafe bridge. Another, which resembles the plot of the disaster movie The Day After Tomorrow, follows an evacuee from flooded Brooklyn who pauses to reflect that a sunken highway looks “almost beautiful”. A third “thought experiment” tracks a nerdy loner who guns down the US president in a Jamba Juice outlet, after which a commentator solemnly describes the motive of misfits like this as a “desire for transcendence”.As Marche says, “the power of spectacle is driving American politics”, and his “cultural scripts” turn terror into lurid entertainment. He takes his cue from movies such as Independence Day or Olympus Has Fallen, which stage the apocalypse as an adventure ride; the difference is that this time no superhero flies or rides in to rescue the republic. Marche awards “iconic status” to the atrocities of 9/11 but mocks the agitators in his own fable about the bridge as “ludicrous fanatics” who seem to be dressed for Halloween or a rock festival: is he daring them to do better? There is a tempting, titillating danger to this, because sooner or later such prophecies will be fulfilled in action. Marche may be enjoying his novelistic nightmares a little too much, possibly even smirking from the safety of Canada as the US dismembers itself.The next US civil war is already here – we just refuse to see itRead moreA similarly excited anticipation of the end briefly disrupts Barbara Walter’s study, How Civil Wars Start and How to Stop Them. Walter teaches political science in San Diego, and she writes with dutiful academic sobriety as she compares her disintegrating country to failing states in the Balkans and the Middle East. She studies graphs, fiddles with data sets and deploys nonsensical jargon, classifying the US as an “anocracy” because it is midway between democracy and autocracy. But her droning lecture flares into life when she, like Marche, sets herself to imagine what an American civil war would look like. Projected ahead to 2028, the result resembles a hyped-up Hollywood pitch, with the synchronised detonation of dirty bombs in state legislatures, a botched presidential assassination bid, freelance militias patrolling the streets, and – worst of all! – assaults on big-box stores. Like Marche, Walter is aware that political warriors need the support of a “mythic narrative”, and she notices that some of the insurrectionists at the Capitol carried Bibles: in the absence of a sacred text, will the garbled synopsis of a disaster movie do just as well? After these dramatic flurries, Walter calms down as she suggests ways of averting conflict. Most of her proposals require constitutional change, which she must know will never happen or will come too late; she also recommends reintroducing the study of civics in American schools, as if those pious courses in communal engagement could be an antidote to civil war.Walter admits that following the last election, when Trump refused to concede defeat, she and her husband considered emigrating. They flicked through their flotilla of available passports – Swiss, German and Hungarian as well as American and Canadian – and decided on driving north to cross the border into British Columbia. Ultimately they chose to remain in California, as Walter announces after ritually reciting the national creed and thanking the US for “the gift to pursue our dreams”. Marche concludes his book with a more guarded tribute to the perhaps naive American “faith in human nature” and the constitution’s risky “openness to difference”. He then explains why he is glad to live in Toronto: Canadians, he says, “talk placidly and exchange endless nothings” rather than bragging, ranting and abusing each other like their southern neighbours, and they only have the weather’s “cold snaps” to contend with, not incendiary social convulsions. In times such as ours, to be snugly domiciled in a boring country is surely the best bet. The Next Civil War: Dispatches from the American Future by Stephen Marche is published by Simon & Schuster (£20). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may applyTopicsPolitics booksObserver book of the weekUS politicsThe far rightreviewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiry

      by

      Stewart Rhodes: how his arrest signals a new chapter in January 6 inquiryOath Keepers leader is one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection The arrest this week of Stewart Rhodes, the founder and leader of the Oath Keepers militia, marks one of the most significant moments thus far in the federal investigation into the January 6 Capitol attack.Rhodes, along with ten other associates, is charged with seditious conspiracy for plotting to violently overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election – the first sedition charges prosecutors have brought related to the insurrection.Rhodes is the one of the most high-profile arrests yet in the year-long investigation into the insurrection, which has charged more than 700 people and counting with crimes related to the attack. Many of these cases have involved minor charges and the majority of suspects have received light sentences, but the sedition charges facing militia members could carry up to 20 years in prison and signal a shift towards more complex cases targeting organized extremist groups.Guns, ammo … even a boat: how Oath Keepers plotted an armed coupRead moreThe conspiracy charges against Rhodes and other Oath Keepers members, as well as separate conspiracy to obstruct Congress cases involving Oath Keepers and Proud Boys extremists, are additionally significant because they may reveal the extent of planning that went into the attack. What level of prior coordination and plotting pro-Trump groups conducted prior to January 6 remains a key question, and one that is set to become a focal point of trials in the coming months.“We’ve had such a good unfolding and narrative of what folks on the ground were doing, but we’ve not yet had a definitive narrative emerge about the people in power behind it and who was organizing it,” said Melissa Ryan, CEO of CARD Strategies, a consulting firm that researches online extremism and disinformation.“Between what we see over the next few months from the justice department and whatever comes out of the select congressional investigation, hopefully a story is going to start to emerge.”Who are Rhodes and the Oath Keepers?Rhodes has been a prominent figure in the far-right for over a decade. Easily distinguishable by his dark eyepatch – the result of dropping a loaded handgun and shooting himself in the left eye during his 20s, according to an Atlantic investigation – Rhodes positioned himself at the forefront of the anti-government militia movement amid its resurgence after the 2008 election of Barack Obama.A former Army paratrooper and Yale Law School graduate, Rhodes announced the creation of the Oath Keepers at a 2009 rally on the site of a Revolutionary War battle. The group, which Rhodes marketed towards former and current law enforcement and military personnel, claimed to stand for defending the constitution and advocated for disobeying certain laws such as gun control legislation. Rhodes was careful to create a broad appeal for the organization, initially trying to distance it from more openly violent extremism and claiming that it wasn’t officially a militia.But the Oath Keepers soon became a leading group in the anti-government extremist militia movement, growing to thousands of members across the country. It became a visible presence at anti-government and anti-gun control rallies, while promoting far-right conspiracies about a totalitarian New World Order. Rhodes frequently told his followers that the US was entering a state of civil war and to arm themselves, a claim that became more frequent during the nationwide protests against racism and police killings in 2020. The Oath Keepers also became ardent supporters of Donald Trump and gained a foothold in the modern Republican party, including providing security for Trump’s longtime ally Roger Stone one day before the Capitol attack.In September of 2021, hackers released a membership list for the Oath Keepers that revealed the extent that the group had become embedded in state institutions. Its members included dozens of law enforcement, armed forces members and elected officials – some of whom used their government emails when signing up for the militia.“The Oath Keepers have just been building more and more political power within the GOP, taking positions at the local level, running for office,” Ryan said. “You have state senators who identify proudly as Oath Keepers. I would not be surprised if they had a member of Congress in the next couple cycles.”A shift in the investigationThe charges against the Oath Keepers are some of the most serious to date in the investigation, alleging a well-armed plot to undermine the democratic elections. Investigators also lay out a series of events that contradict the dominant narrative of January 6 among rightwing media figures and many Republican politicians, who have claimed the attack was a mostly peaceful political protest and pushed conspiracy theories that leftists or government agents were behind any violence.The charging documents involving Rhodes and ten associates accused of seditious conspiracy portray a group intent on overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election and willing to use violence to achieve their goals. Prosecutors allege the Oath Keepers conducted extensive planning and coordination, with encrypted messages between the members discussing government overthrow prior to the attack and making plans to form “quick reaction force” teams to move into the Capitol area with firearms.“They coordinated travel across the country to enter Washington DC, equipped themselves with a variety of weapons, donned combat and tactical gear, and were prepared to answer Rhodes’s call to take up arms,” the court documents state.In the weeks leading up to the attack, Rhodes allegedly spent more than $20,000 on weapons and tactical equipment, including on night vision goggles, a shotgun and cases of ammunition. Court documents state that on the morning of the insurrection, Rhodes suggested to other Oath Keepers in an encrypted group chat that armed quick reaction force teams were standing by. (As part of a plea deal last year, one Oath Keeper admitted to stashing an M4 rifle at a Comfort Inn hotel just outside the Capitol.)“We will have several well equipped QRF’s outside DC,” Rhodes texted the Oath Keepers’ group chat.Federal investigators had been circling Rhodes for some time, filing court papers in March that alleged he was in direct communication with Oath Keepers involved in the Capitol attack and then several months later using a warrant to seize his cell phone. Rhodes stated last year that, against the advice of his legal counsel, he sat for a three-hour interview with federal agents to discuss the role that he and the Oath Keepers played in the attack. He continually claimed that he had done nothing wrong.“I may go to jail soon, not for anything I actually did, but for made-up crimes,” Rhodes said in March of last year at a speech in Texas.None of the government’s conspiracy cases related to the Capitol attack have gone to trial yet, and researchers say sedition charges can be hard to prove. The government has charged a number of militia members with seditious conspiracy in the past only for those defendants to go free after the cases went to trial. In the late 1980s, a jury acquitted 13 white supremacists who prosecutors had charged with seditious conspiracy involving a plot to kill a federal judge and overthrow the government. More recently, nine Michigan militia members were acquitted in 2012 after authorities charged them with plotting to start an armed uprising against the government.It also remains unclear what Rhodes’ arrest and the charges facing numerous Oath Keepers means for the extremist organization as a whole. Since the insurrection, some members of the group have advocated for further engagement in local government and political activism. Meanwhile, researchers say they have benefited from a Republican whitewashing of the Capitol attack that has allowed them to continue operating with a degree of impunity.“A lot of us assumed that they would be weakened by January 6,” Ryan said. “It seems like the opposite has happened.”TopicsThe far rightUS Capitol attackUS politicsUS crimeUS justice systemfeaturesReuse this content More