More stories

  • in

    If Trump wins, he’ll be a vessel for the most regressive figures in US politics | Katrina vanden Heuvel

    Fifty years ago, then governor Ronald Reagan headlined the inaugural Conservative Political Action Conference. He spoke of the US as a city on a hill, an example of human virtue and excellence, a divinely inspired nation whose best days were ahead.The speakers at last week’s conference were decidedly less inspiring. A lineup of extremists, insurrectionists and conspiracy theorists gathered for panels like “Cat Fight? Michelle v Kamala” and “Putting Our Heads in the Gas Stove”. At CPAC, you can drink “Woke Tears Water”, buy rhinestone-studded firearms and play a January 6-themed pinball machine.But it would be wrong to dismiss CPAC as a crackpot convention. It is also a harbinger of what a second Donald Trump presidency would bring, influenced by a consortium of self-proclaimed Christian nationalists and reactionary dark money groups like the Heritage Foundation who see Trump as their return ticket to relevancy.The Heritage Foundation has poured $22m into Project 2025, their plan to gut the “deep state” and radically reshape the government with a souped-up version of the unitary executive theory, which contends that the president should be allowed to enact his agenda without pesky checks and balances. To paraphrase one speaker at CPAC: “Welcome to the end of democracy.”The Heritage Foundation’s policy agenda is disturbingly radical, even by the standards of the modern Republican party. They want to dismantle the administrative state, ban abortion completely at the state and federal level, and, as always, cut taxes for the rich. They would put religious liberties over civil ones, and Christian rights over the rights of women, people of color, LGBTQ+ people and really anyone who does not look and think exactly like they do.As Trump himself said in an alarmingly theocratic speech last week: “No one will be touching the cross of Christ under the Trump administration, I swear to you.” And we have no reason to doubt him. Russell Vought, a radical involved with Project 2025 who speaks with Trump at least twice a month, is a candidate to be the next White House chief of staff.Vought works closely with the Christian nationalist William Wolfe, a former Trump administration official who has advocated for ending surrogacy, no-fault divorce, sex education in schools and policies that “subsidize single motherhood”. The Heritage Foundation has even called for “ending recreational sex”.Media coverage of Trump tends to focus on his mounting legal woes (nearly half a billion in damages and counting) and increasingly bizarre rants (magnets don’t work underwater). But such an approach misses the point. We can’t risk focusing on spectacle at the expense of strategy, and he has made his strategy perfectly clear.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionHe has said he will be a dictator on “day one” and “go after” and indict those who challenge him. He’s running on a 10-point “Plan to Protect Children from Leftwing Gender Insanity”. He’s promised to send federal troops into Democratic-run “crime dens”, by which he means New York City and Chicago.He will have advantages in the courts this time around, too. Groups such as the Article III Project – an advocacy group for “constitutionalist” judges – are making sure of it. A3P is led by Mike Davis, a Trump loyalist lawyer who has been floated for attorney general. (You know, the role that Jeff Sessions and Bill Barr weren’t extreme enough for?) He has promised: “President Trump’s next generation of judges will be even more bold and tough.” And in the meantime, his organization has taken out TV ads attacking the judges and prosecutors in Trump’s criminal trials as “activists” who have “destroyed the rule of law”.If the Article III Project gets what they want, judges hearing challenges to Trump’s proposals will be judges he appointed. Not only will his policies be more dangerous and dogmatic, they’ll be better designed to withstand judicial scrutiny, especially in a friendly court.Look no further than the Alabama supreme court, which ruled last week that frozen embryos are children, imperiling the legality of IVF and foreshadowing far worse. Trump, clearly panicking, has distanced himself from this decision, but as long as he continues to nominate radical activist judges – and he will – it is nothing more than posturing.As was the case during his first term, Trump will serve as a vessel for some of the most regressive figures in American politics. And unlike last time – when he was incentivized to get re-elected legitimately – he will be unencumbered by any notion that he should abide by democratic norms or heed moderating voices. January 6 was a purity test, and he’s since cleared his ranks of people who’ve even whispered disapprovingly.Despite all of this, Trump is leading Biden in many polls. Most projections put the race at 50/50 at best. If Trump and his extremist cronies prevail in 2024, Project 2025 will be under way this time next year, stripping millions of Americans of our freedoms. The end of democracy, indeed.
    Katrina vanden Heuvel is editor and publisher of the Nation and serves on the Council on Foreign Relations More

  • in

    CPAC: Noem and Stefanik lead charge of the wannabe Trump VPs

    On Saturday, the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC, will end with a straw poll. But given Donald Trump’s lock on the Republican nomination, attendees will not be asked who they want for president. They will be asked to choose between 17 possible vice-presidential picks.On Friday, four such names were on the speakers’ roster.“There are two kinds of people in this country right now,” the South Dakota governor, Kristi Noem, told an audience in general uninterested in non-binary choices.“There are people who love America, and there are those who hate America.”As an applause line, it worked well enough. Noem hit out at “agendas of socialism and control”, boasted of taxes cut and railroads built, and decried conditions at the southern border, claiming other countries were using it “to infiltrate us, and destroy us”.But she earned perhaps her loudest response with more simple red meat: “I’m just going to say it: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris suck.”Perhaps tellingly for her straw poll chances, Noem’s statement that “I’ve always supported the fact that our next president needs to be President Trump” also earned cheers. Bland at face value, the line was a dig at other possible vice-presidential picks such as Tim Scott, the South Carolina senator who challenged Trump then fawningly expressed his love.“I was one of the first people to endorse Donald Trump to be president,” Noem said. “Last year, when everyone was asking me if I was going to consider running, I said no. Why would you run for president when you know you can’t win?”That was a question for another VP contender, Vivek Ramaswamy. Having made a brief splash in the primary – clashing with Nikki Haley, a former South Carolina governor and Trump’s last remaining rival – the biotech entrepreneur landed the speaker slot at Friday night’s Ronald Reagan dinner.Before that came two more contenders from outside the primary, Elise Stefanik of New York, the House Republican conference chair, and JD Vance of Ohio, the US Marine Corps reporter turned venture capitalist turned Hillbilly Elegy author and populist firebrand senator.The author Michael Wolff once reported that Trump preferred women to wear “high boots, short skirts and shoulder-length hair”. Stefanik, a Harvard graduate, once a moderate, strode out as if in mid-Maga metamorphosis, long hair feathered and highlighted.Her speech was full of Trump-esque lines. The media were the “loyal stenographers of the left”; she hectored the Ivy League college presidents she grilled in a hearing on campus antisemitism, earning Trump’s approval; the “Biden crime family” was to blame for “Bidenflation”.View image in fullscreenNo mention, obviously, that the chief source of unverified allegations about the “Biden crime family” was this week charged with lying to investigators and said, by prosecutors, to have ties to Russian intelligence.Stefanik attempted a Trumpian move: changing the historical record. Finessing her experience of the January 6 Capitol attack, she said she “stood up for the election and constitutional integrity” – which could only be true under Trump’s definiton of those terms. With 146 other Republicans, Stefanik objected to key results.It was a stark departure from her statement at the time, when Stefanik lamented a “truly a tragic day for America”, condemned “dangerous violence and destruction”, and called for Trump supporters who attacked Congress to be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law”.That statement disappeared from Stefanik’s website. But such scrubbing may be unnecessary. Trump has little interest in truth. Perhaps Stefanik’s zealous speech, if a little flat compared with the sharp rabble-rousing of the Florida congressman Matt Gaetz shortly before, will prove persuasive. She was enthusiastically received.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionVance came next, making light of appearing for an interview, by the Newsmax host Rob Schmitt, rather than a speech of his own.Relentlessly, the senator communicated anger, mostly at elites and politicians of both parties he said were dedicated to their own profit at the people’s expense.“It’s a disgrace that every person here should be pissed off about,” he thundered.Vance was angry about the need to stop funding Ukraine in its war with Russia, angry about the need to boost US manufacturing, angry about the lack of border and immigration reform.Presenting himself as a proud “conservative knuckle-dragger” but also a foreign policy voice – a sort of global isolationist, just back from the Munich security conference – Vance was unrepentant over Senate Republicans’ decision to sink a bipartisan border deal and accused Democrats of using undocumented migrants for electoral ends. He said Google should be broken up, to combat leftwing bias, but also uttered a couple of lines he might hope Trump does not search up.Singing Trump’s praises as a Washington outsider, Vance appeared to suggest he thought Trump was older than Biden, the Methuselah of the executive mansion, saying: “He was born I believe in 1940.” That would make Trump 83 or 84, not a supposedly sprightly 77.Vance also said Americans were “too strong or too woken up” to be fooled by Biden again. Woken, not woke. But given Vance’s play-in video, in which Schmitt bemoaned the spread of “woke” ideas on the left, it seemed a half-bum note.Finally, late on, came Ramaswamy. He posed his own binaries: “Either you believe in American exceptionalism or you believe in American apologism … Either you believe in free speech or you believe in censorship.” Then he reeled off positions – end affirmative action, frack and drill, crack down on illegal immigration – now in service of Trump.It sounded more like a pitch for a cabinet job, say health secretary, than for vice-president. Maybe not commerce, overseeing the patent office. Hymning the founders, Ramaswamy said Thomas Jefferson “invented the polygraph test”. The third president used a polygraph, a machine for copying letters. He did not invent a test to see if a person is lying.On Saturday, Kari Lake, an election-denying Senate candidate from Arizona, will speak before Trump, Ramaswamy after. Then the CPAC attendees, dedicated conservatives pausing in their perusal of Maga hammocks and Woke Tears water, for sale at the CPAC market, will say who they want for VP. More

  • in

    The Republican party wants to turn America into a theocracy | Robert Reich

    In a case centering on wrongful-death claims for frozen embryos that were accidentally destroyed at a fertility clinic, the Alabama supreme court ruled last Friday that frozen embryos are “children” under state law.As a result, several Alabama in-vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics are ceasing services, afraid to store or destroy any embryos.The underlying issue is whether government can interfere in the most intimate aspects of people’s lives – not only barring people from obtaining IVF services but also forbidding them from entering into gay marriage, utilizing contraception, having out-of-wedlock births, ending their pregnancies, changing their genders, checking out whatever books they want from the library, and worshipping God in whatever way they wish (or not worshipping at all).All these private freedoms are under increasing assault from Republican legislators and judges who want to impose their own morality on everyone else. Republicans are increasingly at war with America’s basic separation of church and state.According to a new survey from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Brookings Institution, more than half of Republicans believe the country should be a strictly Christian nation – either adhering to the ideals of Christian nationalism (21%) or sympathizing with those views (33%).Christian nationalism is also closely linked with authoritarianism. According to the same survey, half of Christian nationalism adherents and nearly four in 10 sympathizers said they support the idea of an authoritarian leader powerful enough to keep these Christian values in society.During an interview at a Turning Point USA event last August, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (a Republican from Georgia) said party leaders need to be more responsive to the base of the party, which she claimed is made up of Christian nationalists.“We need to be the party of nationalism,” she said. “I am a Christian and I say it proudly, we should be Christian nationalists.”A growing number of evangelical voters view Trump as the second coming of Jesus Christ and see the 2024 election as a battle not only for America’s soul but for the salvation of all mankind. Many of the Trump followers who stormed the Capitol on 6 January 2021 carried Christian symbols and signs invoking God and Jesus.An influential thinktank close to Trump is developing plans to infuse Christian nationalist ideas into his administration if he returns to power, according to documents obtained by Politico.Spearheading the effort is Russell Vought, who served as Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget during his presidential term and remains close to him.Vought, frequently cited as a potential chief of staff in a second Trump White House, has embraced the idea that Christians are under assault and has spoken of policies he might pursue in response.Those policies include banning immigration of non-Christians into the United States, overturning same-sex marriage and barring access to contraception.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn a concurring opinion in last week’s Alabama supreme court decision, Alabama’s chief justice, Tom Parker, invoked the prophet Jeremiah, Genesis and the writings of 16th- and 17th-century theologians.“Human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God,” he wrote. “Even before birth, all human beings have the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory.”Before joining the court, Parker was a close aide and ally of Roy Moore, the former chief justice of the Alabama supreme court who was twice removed from the job – first for dismissing a federal court order to remove an enormous granite monument of the Ten Commandments he had installed in the state judicial building, and then for ordering state judges to defy the US supreme court’s decision affirming gay marriage.So far, the US supreme court has not explicitly based its decisions on scripture, but several of its recent rulings – the Dobbs decision that overruled Roe v Wade, its decision in Kennedy v Bremerton School District on behalf of a public school football coach who led students in Christian prayer, and its decision in Carson v Makin, requiring states to fund private religious schools if they fund any other private schools, even if those religious schools would use public funds for religious instruction and worship – are consistent with Christian nationalism.But Christian nationalism is inconsistent with personal freedom, including the first amendment’s guarantee that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.We can be truly free only if we’re confident we can go about our private lives without being monitored or intruded upon by the government and can practice whatever faith (or lack of faith) we wish regardless of the religious beliefs of others.A society where one set of religious views is imposed on those who disagree with them is not a democracy. It’s a theocracy.
    Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and the author of Saving Capitalism: For the Many, Not the Few and The Common Good. His newest book, The System: Who Rigged It, How We Fix It, is out now. He is a Guardian US columnist. His newsletter is at robertreich.substack.com More

  • in

    Trump warns of enemies ‘within our country’ to Christian media gathering

    Donald Trump told a warmly receptive gathering of religious broadcasters on Thursday that “it’s the people from within our country that are more dangerous than the people outside”, in his latest effort to mobilize Christian fundamentalists who have swung dramatically behind him in recent years.Trump’s speech in Nashville, Tennessee, to the National Religious Broadcasters presidential forum gala offered him a chance to pitch himself to hundreds of Christian media figures whose approval – and willingness to carry his message on air – could drive huge turnout in November.“The greatest threat is not from the outside of our country – I really believe it is from within,” said Trump, whose fire-and-brimstone speech focused largely on his political enemies. “It’s the people from within our country that are more dangerous than the people outside.”The former president’s relationship with the religious right has shifted since his unlikely bid for the presidency in 2016, when his campaign was met with deep skepticism from conservative Christian leaders who had initially thrown their support behind Ted Cruz.Trump has since consolidated support among Christian fundamentalists. In 2016, in exchange for the support of prominent conservative pastors, he offered them a direct hand in policymaking through an evangelical advisory board, giving rightwing Christian religious leaders unprecedented access to the White House.“In my first term I fought for Christians harder than any president has ever done before,” said Trump. “And I will fight even harder for Christians with four more years in the White House.”In his speech, Trump promised to create a new taskforce to counter “anti-Christian bias” by investigating “discrimination, harassment and persecution against Christians in America”. He vowed to appoint more conservative judges, reminded the audience of his decision to break with decades of international consensus and move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, and assured them a future Trump administration would take particular aim at transgender people – for example, by endorsing policies to restrict access to gender-affirming healthcare.The event brought together key figures in the former president’s coalition, from the president of the Heritage Foundation to the hard-right former head of the Alliance Defending Freedom, Michael Harris.A non-profit and tax-exempt organization, National Religious Broadcasters (NRB) is prohibited from campaigning directly for any candidate for public office, a fact that its president, Troy Miller, mentioned during his opening remarks. Trump was nevertheless the star of the show, with speakers lavishing him with praise in an atmosphere similar to one of his campaign rallies.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Appearing on a stage before Donald Trump is like opening for the king himself, George Strait,” said the Heritage Foundation’s president, Kevin Roberts, to laughter and applause. “If you do well, everyone will be very nice. If you do poorly, no one will remember anyway.”The event spotlighted the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, a “presidential transition project” that envisions reshaping the executive branch to maximize the president’s power. Many fear Trump’s first acts should he win office would be to enact revenge on his political enemies, deport immigrants en masse and roll back legal protections for LGBTQ+ people.It also highlighted the central role that Christian fundamentalism would play in Trump’s second term in office, with Miller declaring: “One of the most dangerous falsehoods spread today is the separation of church and state.” More

  • in

    Ron DeSantis ally Chris Rufo has close ties with ‘dissident right’ magazine

    Chris Rufo, a rightwing culture-war celebrity and close Ron DeSantis ally, has maintained a close relationship with IM-1776, a “dissident right” magazine that regularly showers praise on dictators and authoritarians, puffs racist ideologues, and attacks liberal democracy.The outlet’s editors and writers – many of them so-called “anons” working under pseudonyms – have variously advocated for the repeal of the Civil Rights Act; celebrated figures such as the “Unabomber” Ted Kaczynski and the proto-fascist Italian nationalist Gabriele D’Annunzio; and advanced conspiracy theories about the Covid pandemic, and what they term the “regime”, a leftist power structure that they imagine unites the state, large corporations, universities and the media.Rufo and IM-1776The Guardian has previously reported on Rufo’s links with an outlet that experts described as pushing scientific racism; with a Danish data scientist who had previously co-authored scientific-racist papers; and on co-hosting an audio stream on X in which one participant advocated cooperating with a hypothetical white nationalist leader.Rufo, who played a leading role in the downfall of Harvard president Claudine Gay, has said such reporting is “guilt by association”, but his relationship with IM-1776 is explicitly collaborative and supportive, and the association is apparently mutually beneficial.Last month a “manifesto” written by Rufo – The New Right Activism – ran in the online and print versions of IM-1776, and Rufo has publicly urged his audience to buy and subscribe to the outlet. He has also co-hosted a series of Twitter spaces with the magazine’s editors, beginning in July last year.In one of them, recorded in October, he indicated an interest in incorporating the “dissident right” more fully in mainstream political discourse, saying: “I think there is a room for engaging the dissident right and the establishment right. I think we need to have a bridge between the two and and engage in thoughtful dialogue.”More recently, he has expressed a personal interest in expanding the range of acceptable political discourse.On the Pirate Wires podcast earlier this month, he told host Mike Solana of his own activism: “I try to play that game, I try to lay traps, I try to provoke certain reactions, I try to launder certain words and phrases into the discourse.”The Guardian emailed Rufo detailed questions about his relationship with IM-1776, what if any concerns he had about content on the site, and which words or phrases he had laundered into the discourse, but received no response.Dr Julian Waller, a research analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses and a professorial lecturer at George Washington University, said: “Rufo is very intentionally acting as a bridging actor between people to his right – in a variety of dimensions and different ideological segments – and the more institutional establishment world: the harder right of American politics.”He said: “In the American context, the closest thing we have to a post-liberal government – and I won’t say dissident right, I’ll say post-liberal – is the DeSantis administration in Florida, and Chris Rufo’s activist legislative packages have been used by that state forthrightly.”Mark Granza, by his own account an Italian national living in Hungary, is the founder and editor-in-chief of IM-1776. He has returned Rufo’s public admiration. Granza was interviewed in February last year by the conservative Rod Dreher in the Hungarian Conservative, an outlet aligned with the authoritarian government of Viktor Orbán where Dreher writes as a fellow of the state-funded Danube Institute.Granza said of Rufo that “he doesn’t care about convincing the other side, or battling in the ‘marketplace of ideas’. He’s going to tell you what he’s going to do, and then do it, whether you agree with him or not.”Granza added: “That’s what I believe conservatives should do: use whatever power they have or can get and impose their views on to society.”Authoritarian sympathiesAuthoritarian sentiments like this also feed into IM-1776’s political enthusiasms.The magazine has been especially supportive of El Salvador’s president Nayib Bukele, who suspended civil liberties in 2022 as part of a crackdown on alleged gang members that has seen about 75,000 people arrested without charge – more than 1% of the country’s total population.The Guardian previously reported warnings from Salvadoran opposition figures, human rights groups and journalists that Bukele’s populist, bitcoin-fueled presidency is in danger of developing into an authoritarian state: Bukele has referred to himself as the “world’s coolest dictator”.On Twitter in September 2022, Granza characterized Bukele and Orbán’s authoritarian moves on crime and immigration as reminders of “the existence of the deep state in the west”. In March last year he posted: “America needs its own Bukele. Build massive prisons and start by throwing in every single regime apparatchik.”Political figures who receive regular praise in IM-1776 include the Italian proto-fascist D’Annunzio, who was the subject of a three-article “symposium” on the site in 2021.D’Annunzio, a poet and a first world war pilot, led Italian nationalists in seizing the city of Fiume after it had been given to Croatia in the Versailles settlement. In the months in which he governed it as an independent regency, D’Annunzio’s innovations included the use of Roman salutes, balcony speeches to crowds, and deploying black-shirted followers to repress opponents. All of these and more were later taken up and used by Mussolini’s fascist regime.Another favorite is Russian president Valdimir Putin, of whom a pseudonymous author asked at IM-1776 this week: “Is this the last real statesman?”RehabilitationsIM-1776 regularly runs articles that attempt to rehabilitate lesser known far-right thinkers and even convicted terrorists.Benjamin Braddock bylined a May 2022 interview with Renaud Camus, the French novelist, white nationalist and conspiracy theorist who coined the “Great Replacement” as a book title and as description of a purported plot by “replacist elites” to substitute immigrants for white Europeans.Camus’s slogan inspired white nationalist chants at Charlottesville, Virginia; was borrowed as the title of the manifesto written by the man who massacred 52 Muslims in two mass shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, in March 2019; and also motivated the man who killed 10 Black people in the car park of a market in Buffalo in May 2022.In Braddock’s deferential interview, Camus characterizes these “replacist” elites as “Davos, bankers, international finance, multinational companies, pension funds, hedge funds, big five, and all kind of more or less private powers”.Last June, IM-1776 published an obituary of Ted Kaczynski by another pseudonymous author calling themselves “The Prudentialist”.Kaczynski died in a federal prison last year at the conclusion of a life sentence he received for a 17-year mailbombing campaign that killed three of his targets and injured 23 others.Describing Kaczynski as “allegedly a lone wolf terrorist, but also a mathematical genius”, the IM-1776 author relativized his crimes and explained that Kaczynski’s “iconic status on the contemporary right can be partly attributed to the devastating critique of the left included in his famous manifesto, Industrial Society and Its Future”.Charles HaywoodOther IM-1776 contributors go even further in rhetorical attacks on the left.One regular contributor to and apparent funder of IM-1776 is the former shampoo manufacturer and would-be “warlord” Charles Haywood. Haywood is bylined in six articles published on the IM-1776 website.In several of these articles, he uses eliminationist language in relation to his perceived enemies.In one, a dialogue with fellow IM-1776 regular Daniel Miller, Haywood writes that the goal of the right must be “the total, permanent defeat of the left, of the ideology at the heart of the Enlightenment”, and later that “our society is commanded to excise the limitless, satanic evils brought on us by the left”.Elsewhere, in a glowing review of Rufo’s book, America’s Cultural Revolution, Haywood says that it shows that “we might have to accept we can’t live with these people, the five or ten percent of our nation who lead or are most active in supporting the left”, and goes on to demand the repeal of the “so-called Civil Rights Act”.Waller, the political analyst, included Haywood as one of three case studies in a working paper on writers providing “advocacy in favor of genuine authoritarian regimes – ones which outright reject the basic structural and constitutional premises of modern electoral democracy”.In conversation he said that he included Haywood in the paper as one of the writers who “ … think democracy is bad, and that actually an authoritarian regime is good … it’s rare in the contemporary period for someone to be that open about these sorts of things.”In a separate review of First Do No Harm, a book on Covid by a pseudonymous author who claims to be a doctor, Haywood claims that Covid “‘vaccines’ aren’t vaccines at all, but prophylactic/therapeutic drugs of very limited efficacy”.In October 2022, Granza was interviewed on the YouTube channel of the Afrikaner nationalist activist Ernst van Zyl. In the interview, Granza indicated that beyond writing for IM-1776, Haywood stepped in at a crucial moment to keep IM-1776 alive.During the pandemic, Granza said, he was “completely incapable of continuing to fund the project. I had to find another job, and Charles Haywood pitched in.”Donations via ClaremontBeyond asking for subscriptions, IM-1776 solicits donations on a page on their website, but potential donors who click on the “tax deductible donations” are routed to a form on the rightwing Claremont Institute’s website, where Claremont advises: “The Claremont Institute is serving as a fiscal sponsor of IM-1776/the Art & Literature Foundation until they get fully established as a non-profit. Their commitment to the promotion of cultural work that draws on and promotes the beauty and truth of the natural order is well within the Claremont Institute’s mission.”The Guardian emailed Mark Granza with questions about content on the site and his own political sympathies. He did not respond directly but sent a reply email with an attached image of a hackneyed meme.The Guardian also emailed Charles Haywood with questions about funding arrangements at IM-1776, content on the site, and their own public pronouncements, but received no response. More

  • in

    ‘An extreme agenda’: could a recall end far-right control of a California county?

    In 2022, 5,000 voters, angry about Covid-era health restrictions, ousted a moderate Republican official in Shasta county, California. The vote helped put the rural region, in the state’s north, on the map for extremist far-right politics.In the two years since, the ultra-conservative majority that controls the county’s governing board has attempted to upend the voting system and spread conspiracy theories that elections were being rigged. They moved to allow people to carry firearms in public buildings in violation of state law and offered the county’s top job to the leader of a California secessionist group.Now, residents frustrated by the county’s recent governance hope another recall will force a change. They’re aiming to oust Kevin Crye, a far-right county supervisor who has been in office for just a year.The election could be a turning point for the county, said Jeff Gorder, a spokesperson for the recall group and retired county public defender.View image in fullscreen“We’re seeing an extreme agenda coming here that we don’t think people want,” he said. “The [far-right supervisors] see themselves as having the ability to disregard laws that have been enacted by the state. They’re taking it upon themselves to disregard the normal workings of the rule of law.”Shasta has long been one of California’s most conservative counties, but it became a hotbed for far-right politics during the pandemic as residents raged at moderate Republicans they felt weren’t doing enough to resist state health rules.The anger grew into a thriving anti-establishment movement that – with unprecedented outside funding from a Connecticut millionaire and support from local militia – targeted the board of supervisors. In February 2022, voters recalled Leonard Moty, a retired police chief and Republican, from his role as a county supervisor, a move that gave the far right effective control over the board of supervisors. The body of five elected officials oversees the county as well as its roughly 2,000 workers and nearly $600m budget.Crye was voted into office in November of that year, beating a moderate candidate by less than 100 votes. He pledged to unite the county and tackle government corruption.View image in fullscreenWeeks after taking office, Crye, along with the rest of the board’s hard-right majority, voted to cut ties with Dominion Voting Systems, the company at the center of baseless conspiracy theories about election fraud. The county embarked on an ill-fated and costly effort to do away with its voting machines – before establishing a replacement – and to craft a hand-count system.The move drew national attention to the region, bringing in support from key figures in the election denial movement while offering a blueprint for them on how to advance their agenda across the US.Crye was an enthusiastic supporter, even traveling on the county’s dime to meet with Mike Lindell, the chief executive of MyPillow and one of the leading promoters of falsehoods about election fraud. Lindell said he would offer financial and legal support to the county if it faced lawsuits as it enacted its hand-counting plan.The supervisors continued creating controversy. In March, the board majority made a preliminary offer for its top job, the role of chief executive, to the vice-president of a group that advocates for rural California to split off and become the 51st state. The board ultimately withdrew its offer.“There was a tidal wave of bad decisions,” said Gorder, the spokesperson for the recall group.In the spring, Gorder and a group of about 50 residents gathered to decide how to push back against the county board. They decided on a tried and true route in Shasta county: a recall.“He’s doing things he said he wouldn’t do. He violated his campaign promises. He wasn’t listening to his constituents,” Gorder said. “We took it very seriously. He was freely and fairly elected. But a recall, in our view, is appropriate when someone misrepresents who they are.”The group gathered signatures from roughly 5,000 voters in the area Crye represents. The county’s election office certified the signatures in September, moving the recall forward.Crye and his supporters have criticized the recall as an attempt by Democrats to override the will of the voters, describing it on an anti-recall website as “Gavin Newsom’s attempt to control Shasta county” and pointing to the fact that California’s Democratic governor could pick a replacement for Crye. (Newsom could pick Crye’s temporary replacement if voters opt to remove him from office. He has done so in some cases, but other times left seats vacant. The recall committee sent a letter to the governor, which was also signed by a moderate county supervisor and local business leaders, asking him not to appoint a replacement.)View image in fullscreenIn an interview with One America News, a far-right media outlet, Crye said: “You have Democrats in a very red county that are trying to usurp local control and the vote of the people here in Shasta county to get me out of office. They are lying and saying anything under the sun they can to get people to jump on.”Crye said in his official response to the recall that as supervisor he had prioritized “awareness of homelessness” and public safety and sought to protect youth.Crye did not respond to a request for comment.Outside far-right figures including Kari Lake, a Donald Trump ally who unsuccessfully ran for governor in Arizona, have urged Shasta residents to vote no on the recall.Gorder said the pro-recall group includes Democrats, Republicans and independent voters frustrated by decisions they say are at odds with the image Crye presented while running for office. For example, Gorder said, Crye said he valued fiscal responsibility but risked the county paying millions of dollars in expenses to replace its voting system with a hand-count system.Gorder is hopeful the recall will be successful, but he pointed out that Crye’s campaign is well-funded. Crye has the support of Reverge Anselmo, a Connecticut millionaire who has funded the area’s far-right movement. He’s donated $2m in Shasta county since 2020, the Redding Record Searchlight reported, including $250,000 to a political action committee supporting Crye. Still, the recall group has raised enough money – $306,000 as of Thursday – to pose a formidable challenge.“There’s a lot of enthusiasm here,” Gorder said. “We’ve had a tremendous amount of support and I’m hoping that will show itself at the polls.” More

  • in

    How to Steal a Presidential Election review: Trump and the peril to come

    The Trump veepstakes is under way. Senator JD Vance and Representative Elise Stefanik prostrate themselves. Both signal they would do what Mike Pence refused: upend democracy for the sake of their Caesar. The senator is a Yale Law School alum and former US marine. Stefanik is the fourth-ranking House Republican. He was once critical of the former president. She was skeptical. Not anymore.“Do I think there were problems in 2020? Yes, I do,” Vance recently told ABC. “If I had been vice-president, I would have told the states, like Pennsylvania, Georgia and so many others, that we needed to have multiple slates of electors … I think the US Congress should have fought over it from there.”Last month, Stefanik said: “We will see if this is a legal and valid election. What we saw in 2020 was unconstitutional circumventing of the constitution, not going through state legislators when it comes to changing election law.”From the supreme court down, the judiciary has repeatedly rejected that contention.As the November election looms, Lawrence Lessig and Matthew Seligman offer How to Steal a Presidential Election, a granular and disturbing examination of the vulnerabilities and pressure points in the way the US selects its president. Short version: plenty can go wrong.Lessig is a chaired professor at Harvard Law School. He views a second Trump term as calamitous. “He is a pathological liar, with clear authoritarian instincts,” Lessig writes. “His re-election would be worse than any political event in the history of America  –  save the decision of South Carolina to launch the civil war.”Seligman is a fellow at the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford, focused on disputed presidential elections. He too views Trump uncharitably.“Former president Trump and his allies attempted a legal coup in 2020 – a brazen attempt to manipulate the legal system to reverse the results of a free and fair election,” Seligman has said. “Despite all the attention on 6 January 2021 [the attack on Congress], our legal and political systems remain dangerously unprotected against a smarter and more sophisticated attempt in 2024.”The open question is whether forewarned is forearmed. On the page, Lessig and Seligman spell out seven roads to ruin, the “inverting” of an election to force a result that thwarts voters’ expressed intentions. The authors discount the capacity of a vice-president to unilaterally overturn an election result. But they warn of the potential for havoc at state level.As they see it, the danger of pledged but not legally bound electors being coerced to vote for Trump when the electoral college convenes is “significant”. They also hypothesize a state governor “interven[ing] to certify a slate of electors contrary to the apparent popular vote”. Another path to perdition includes making state legislatures the final judges of election results. There is also the “nuclear option”, according to the authors, which is stripping the right to vote from the voters.“A state legislature cancels its election before election day and chooses the state’s electors directly,” as Lessig and Seligman put it, a potential outcome they call a “very significant” possibility under the US constitution.“State legislators are free to deny their people a meaningful role in selecting our president, directly or indirectly,” they write. “Is there any legal argument that might prevent a legislature from formally taking the vote away from its people? We are skeptical.”To say US democracy is at risk is not to indulge in hyperbole. Trump’s infamous January 2021 call to Brad Raffensperger, the Georgia secretary of state, is a vivid reminder. “What I want to do is this. I just want to find, uh, 11,780 votes, which is one more than … we have, because we won the state.” Such words continue to haunt.In an episode that casts a similar pall, Trump and Ronna McDaniel, the Republican National Committee (RNC) chair, urged election officials in Michigan’s Wayne county to block the release of final results.“Do not sign it … we will get you attorneys,” McDaniel told the officials, regarding certification.“We’ll take care of that,” Trump said.Now, as he has for so many former enablers, Trump has taken care of McDaniel. She will shortly be gone from the RNC.Among Trump’s supporters, discontent with democracy is no secret. During the 2016 campaign, Paul LePage, then governor of Maine, thought Trump needed to show some “authoritarian power”. In 2019, Mike Johnson, then a Louisiana congressman, declared: “By the way, the United States is not a democracy. Do you know what a democracy is? Two wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for dinner. You don’t want to be in a democracy. Majority rule: not always a good thing.”Johnson is now House speaker. For good measure, he claims God told him “very clearly” to prepare to become “Moses”.“The Lord said step forward,” Johnson says.On the right, many openly muse about a second civil war.“We’ve already had one, so we know it’s within the realm of possibility,” James Pinkerton, a veteran of the White Houses of Ronald Reagan and George HW Bush, recently wrote in the American Conservative.“In fact, by one reckoning, the English speakers have had two other civil wars in the last four centuries, spaced out every hundred or so years. Is there some sort of deep cycle at work here? With, er, implications for our own troubled times?”The election won’t be pleasant. In late December, 31% of Republicans believed Joe Biden’s win in 2020 was legitimate. That was eight points lower than two years before. Trump’s criminal trials loom. Through that prism, Lessig and Seligman’s work serves as dire warning and public service.
    How to Steal a Presidential Election is published in the US by Yale University Press More

  • in

    Proud Boys member gets six years in prison for Capitol riot after insulting judge

    A man who stormed the US Capitol with fellow Proud Boys far-right extremist group members was sentenced on Wednesday to six years in prison after he berated and insulted the judge who punished him.Marc Bru repeatedly interrupted chief judge James Boasberg before the sentence was handed down, calling him a “clown” and a “fraud” presiding over a “kangaroo court”.The judge warned Bru that he could be kicked out of the courtroom if he continued to disrupt the proceedings.“You can give me 100 years and I’d do it all over again,” said Bru, who was handcuffed and shackled.“That’s the definition of no remorse in my book,” the judge said.Prosecutors described Bru as one of the least remorseful rioters who assaulted the Capitol on 6 January 2021 when extremist supporters of Donald Trump, encouraged by the then outgoing US president broke into the Capitol to try to stop the certification by a joint session of Congress of Joe Biden’s victory over Trump in the 2020 presidential election.Lawmakers were chased out of the Capitol amid threats to their lives, as law enforcement came under siege and were physically attacked. Biden’s win was certified in the early hours of 7 January 2021, after the Capitol was cleared, and he was sworn in as president, peacefully, later that month after Trump left the White House but refused to attend the inauguration of his successor.Prosecutors said Bru planned for an armed insurrection – a so-called “January 6 2.0” attack – to take over the government in Portland, Oregon, several weeks after the deadly riot in Washington DC.“He wanted a repeat of January 6, only he implied this time would be more violent,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing ahead of his sentencing.Bru has been representing himself with an attorney on standby. He has spewed anti-government rhetoric that appears to be inspired by the sovereign citizen movement. At the start of the hearing, Bru demanded that the judge and a prosecutor turn over five years of their financial records.The judge gave him a 10-minute break to confer with his standby lawyer before the hearing resumed with more interruptions.“I don’t accept any of your terms and conditions,” Bru said. “You’re a clown and not a judge.”Prosecutors had warned the court that Bru intended to disrupt his sentencing. On Tuesday, he called in to a nightly vigil outside the jail where he and other rioters are being held. He told supporters of the detained January 6 defendants that he would “try to put on a good show” at his sentencing.Trump has taken to calling such defendants “hostages”, while out on the campaign trail as he aims to win the Republican nomination and take on Biden again in the 2024 presidential election.Boasberg convicted Bru of seven charges, including two felonies, after hearing trial testimony without a jury in October.Bru flew from Portland, Oregon, to Washington a day before Trump’s “Stop the Steal” rally near the White House. Before Trump’s speech, he joined dozens of other Proud Boys in marching to the Capitol and was one of the first rioters to breach a restricted area. Bru grabbed a barricade and shoved it against police officers. He later joined other rioters inside the Capitol and entered the Senate gallery, where he flashed a hand gesture associated with the Proud Boys as he posed for selfie photos. He spent roughly 13 minutes inside the building.More than 1,200 people have been charged with Capitol riot-related crimes.
    The Associated Press contributed reporting More