Must show that they’re actually willing to take on corruption

Grace Panetta, in an article for The 19th posted on Daily Kos, reported that Graham Platner, running for US Senate in Maine is saying, “We will take back our government from the Epstein class.” He’s one of many Democrats using the phrase that Rep. Ro Khanna created. They use it because it connects with voters.

“I’ll give the survivors credit, but I did coin the phrase ‘Epstein class’ because they’re a group of rich and powerful people who are not playing by the rules, and it offends the sense that we have one tier of justice,” Khanna told The 19th.

The phrase connects because it encapsulates two ideas – high level corruption and rich people rigging the system for their own interests.

“I think it directly fits in with voters’ top concern of cost of living right now,” [Ryan] O’Donnell [executive director for Data for Progress] said. “Broadly, Democrats, if they want to fight their way out of this, have to show that they’re actually willing to take on corruption in that way, and I do think that the Epstein class language is one way to do that.”

Oliver Willis of Kos, in his series Explaining the Right, discussed “Why Republicans suck ad being patriotic.”

As a whole, Republicans don’t understand the idea of American patriotism, which is far more complex and unifying than bellicose virtue signaling about being “strong” and “powerful.” ... Republicans are of limited scope—they can’t understand America as anything but the story of faux macho men. They don’t understand America at all.

Lisa Needham of Kos reported on the latest method the nasty guy is using to rig the election.

If they can’t win on the law, they’ll win with the purse strings and illegally withhold money from states that won’t comply with Trump’s conspiracy-addled demands. The money the administration is threatening to withhold, however, only highlights how little Trump cares about the country’s safety and security and how far he will go to get his way. States that refuse to bend the knee and let Trump dictate how their elections work could face losing 20% of Department of Homeland Security grant money that is intended to be used to protect infrastructure, combat terrorism, and prepare for disasters. Sure seems like a weird move for an administration that constantly claims that we are awash in terror and DHS needs infinite funding to keep us safe.

The nasty guy wants to add state voter rolls to a database so non citizens can be flagged. However, that database frequently incorrectly flags citizens. And state election officials (well, some of them) know that. Dion Nissenbaum, in an article for Votebeat posted on Kos discussed getting new voting rules in place faces a race against time. Changes to the voting system don’t happen quickly. First, there will be court challenges. Then there is the logistics of turning the nasty guy’s demands into an actual, workable system in time for election day. Votebeat included a discussion of how to election fact from fiction. The suggestions fit many types of claims. What was the original source? Is there evidence beyond screenshots and that it “just seems weird”? Do independent observers and credible sources said anything? Also, isolated irregularities, a tiny part of every election, are not proof of widespread fraud. Anna Maria Barry-Jester, in an article for ProPublica posted on Kos discussed yet another way the nasty guy is defying Congress. The budget that Congress passed for this fiscal year has specific amounts the State Department is to spend in particular ways. An example is the $5 billion to be spent on emergency humanitarian aid. Another is money designated for USAID, though Elon Musk and DOGE closed it last year But the administration isn’t spending the money according to what Congress put into law. All the money goes through the Office of Management and Budget (as is normal, as far as I can tell). Russel Vought is the head of OMB and a top supporter of the nasty guy. When the money reaches him he classifies a great deal of it as “unallocated” in defiance of Congress. All unallocated money needs his approval and he isn’t approving very much, leaving money unspent. Or the money is held up so the nasty guy can make a deal with the target country that favors himself.

As ProPublica has chronicled, Vought takes an expansive view of presidential power and has moved to give the executive branch dramatically greater authority to not spend legally appropriated money. Foreign aid has been a clear focus; after USAID was razed last year, Vought was made acting administrator and tasked with overseeing the closeout of the agency.

Emily Singer of Kos reported Congress has passed a bill with several provisions to eventually make housing more affordable. It even had broad bipartisan support! The nasty guy was set to sign it. Then he said he wouldn’t until Congress also passed his SAVE Act, the one that demands verification of citizenship to vote. Enough Republicans refuse to vote for it so it won’t pass. And they need something to show their constituents that they’re working on affordability. Amazingly, according to a tweet by Jake Sherman, Speaker Mike Johnson might finally be defying the nasty guy.

SPEAKER MIKE JOHNSON is sending the housing bill to President DONALD TRUMP. Starts a 10-day clock for him to take action -- or it becomes law.

A tweet from Telegraph Football with a link to an article in the Telegraph:

Fifa will not stop fans from bringing rainbow flags into the stadium when Iran face Egypt in the controversial “Pride Match” in Seattle. Egypt and Iran have both lobbied Fifa demanding they have no association with Seattle’s PrideFest.

Bill in Portland, Maine, in his Cheers and Jeers column for Kos included a few quotes (not necessarily recent) appropriate for the end of Pride month.

“Pride is both a celebration and a protest, and in the last few years pride marches have become big business, raking in millions of dollars for their host cities. And when corporations heard all those ch’chings, they jumped in. But ever since Donald Trump started viciously attacking the LGBTQ community, corporate sponsors are now pulling back their pride support. As one corporate insider said: they ‘never know if day-to-day they’ll be targeted.’ Wow—not knowing if you’ll be targeted must be so hard for those companies. I can’t imagine how difficult it must have been for them to come out to their parents…as companies.” —Stephen Colbert