Organized people can still defeat organized money

The results are quite delightful! Yes, the US elections ended yesterday and results were posted last night and this morning. I’d love to bask in every wonderful detail, but you can get most of the results from traditional news outlets. So I’ll mention the top numbers and then turn to results harder to find and to what some pundits are saying. Real Clear Politics (I learned about this site only recently) shows the top numbers. It also gives details on each race. As of 9:20 pm today it reported: Democrats gained 39 seats in the US House for 247 to 152 Republicans. There are 36 seats that haven’t been called yet. Democrats gained 7 seats in the US Senate for 54 to 44 with two seats too close to call. Those seven gains are almost all in red states. They are: Maine, not so red, but goodbye Susan Collins! Ohio. Both North and South Carolina, goodbye Darlene Graham, unqualified sister of the late Senator Lindsay Graham pushed into the position by the nasty guy. Iowa. Kansas, which hasn’t voted for a Democratic Senator since 1932, where pastor Adam Hamilton will take the seat. And Texas, where Seminarian James Talarico won. Democrats gained five governor’s mansions, in Ohio (I like this!), Iowa, Georgia (Jon Ossoff returning to the Senate has long coattails), Texas (even better!), and Nevada. Kalloli Bhatt of Michigan Public has the Michigan results. Democrats kept the governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, the two contested seats in the state Supreme Court, and elected Abdul El-Sayed as the first Muslim senator in Washington. His opponent didn’t succeed in trying to smear him as a terrorist. Two seats in the US house also flipped. The Michigan constitution requires citizens be asked every 16 years whether it should be rewritten. But we now have too many wonderful amendments (independent redistricting, voter rights, abortion protection) to risk a complete rewrite most likely controlled by billionaires. There was fear at the start of the campaign season when it polled at 47% for a rewrite. Thankfully, no rewrite got 73.8%. I had helped gather signatures (all together more than a half-million) on a proposal to get money out of politics, especially from utilities and government contractors. It passed decisively with 81.3% of the vote! Already, one provision is the target of a lawsuit. Democrats widened their hold on the state Senate (their majority had been a single seat) and retook the state House, giving Michigan a trifecta again. There are still a few seats too close to call. The Daily Kos staff posted a chart (as of this morning) showing the Senate races that were not rated as safe for either party. It’s good to see all that have a “DEM. FLIP” designation. Sarah Bricker Hunt of Pridesource has results for Michigan’s LGBTQ candidates:

State Sen. Jeremy Moss became the first out LGBTQ+ person Michigan has ever elected to Congress, and Joanna Whaley will be the first openly trans member of the Michigan House. All nine out LGBTQ+ candidates for the Legislature won.

Whaley was in the news back in July when a suit tried to require the use of her deadname on the ballot. Moss won the seat vacated by Haley Stevens when she ran for the US senate. I’ll have more on her downfall likely in another post. Other firsts in this election:

Michigan was part of a night of national firsts. Chris Pappas of New Hampshire will be the first out gay man elected to the U.S. Senate, Keisha Lance Bottoms will be the first Black woman to serve as governor of any state after winning in Georgia and New Mexico's Deb Haaland will be the first Native American woman governor.

The 9 LGBTQ candidates for state legislature are also listed. One is shown as too close to call. The others won, some getting as much as 71% of the vote. Emily Singer of Kos listed her ten most satisfying results. Here are some of them: Max Miller, Republican candidate for Congress in Ohio and accused of domestic violence, lost by ten points to Brian Poindexter. Vivek Ramaswamy lost the race for governor in Ohio. He had run an ad showing his opponent Amy Acton’s mother denouncing her while not mentioning Amy had been pulled from her mother’s home at age 12. The ever concerned Sen. Susan Collins of Maine was known for her “independence” from the nasty guy when her vote didn’t matter, lost by nearly 8 points. I had noted Texas had voted for Democrat James Talarico for Senate. The state also voted for Democrats for Governor (goodbye Greg Abbott!) and other statewide races and flipping the state House. Texas is no longer a Republican stronghold. Lauren Boebert, racist MAGA warrior of Colorado, is on track to lose her House seat. It hasn’t been officially called yet. Democrats won almost all seats Republicans gerrymandered to be in their favor. Wisconsin, perhaps the most gerrymandered state for Republicans, flipped its House, Senate, and governor for a Democrat trifecta. Oliver Willis of Kos reported that Elon Musk spent at least $440 million to help Republicans win. A big chunk of that went to Texas in hopes of preventing a Talarico win. Of the candidates Musk supported 20 lost, one won, and 20 are too close to call. Shares of Tesla and SpaceX dropped on the news because Musk’s contracts with the government will be scrutinized by incoming Democrat majorities. Musk moved company headquarters from California to Texas to avoid state oversight. And now Texas is controlled by Democrats. In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin had, of course, election commentary. A tweet by Chaz Nuttycombe:

Arkansas Republicans got absolutely nuked in the state legislative races. Seats where they had 80, 90% odds of winning, just gone.

A tweet by Drew Savicki

Dummymander moment: Democrats are going to win 10/14 congressional districts in North Carolina on map that was drawn to be 11-3 Republican.

A tweet by Jesse Ferguson:

Welp. Democrats have just flipped control of the City Council in Lynchburg, Virginia. That's the home of Jerry Falwell's Liberty University.

In the comments, a tweet by Wendell Pierce:

THE NEW RECONSTRUCTION ERA FIRST BLACK HOUSE SPEAKER FIRST BLACK WOMAN GOVERNOR 3 BLACK WOMEN SENATORS 3 BLACK GOVERNORS CONCURRENTLY IN OFFICE FIRST MUSLIM SENATOR FIRST OPENLY GAY SENATOR

A tweet from Robert Reich:

The richest man in the world spent more money that most people will see in a lifetime, only to lose a Senate race and governor’s race in Texas by double digits. This is a reminder that we must overturn Citizens United. But it’s also a reminder that organized people can still defeat organized money.

A tweet from Armand Domalewski:

The mandatory sex change surgeries begin TONIGHT. All Republican voters, please report to your local abortion clinic voluntarily or a bisexual MS-13 member will be sent to your home. Somehow, pansexual org-es and shariah law are simultaneously in effect as of this moment.

Dan K of the Kos community commented on a New York Times report that at 10:30 last night the nasty guy said he would accept election results. He is looking forward to working with Democrats. Or maybe that’s a bit inside out. From the NYT

“I think they’re gonna want to work with me,” he said. “Otherwise I’d just veto everything and they’re not gonna want that.”

And from Dan K:

We’ve said all along we needed to win by so large a margin that trump couldn’t steal it away from us. We got that margin!!!!! (and we’re getting it bigger!!!!!), and it was enough to shock trump into a semblance of comity. For the moment.

Will his staff and cabinet allow him to not fight the results? Or maybe he is too old, tired, and sick to sustain a fight? I’ve been thinking a lot about not hearing anything in the news about putting in action the plan to contest the election, which I wrote about in my previous post last Friday. I’m delighted it doesn’t appear to be happening. Or maybe the nasty guy is content to turn his attention to his ballroom. This afternoon he held a news event inside the unfinished structure, as reported by Walter Einenkel of Kos. Dartagnan of the Kos community quoted a Republican strategist from mid October discussing polls showing a huge Democratic win.

It would be so historically unprecedented you’d have to presuppose we’re staring down the barrel of a generational national trauma that no one is aware of.

Dartagnan emphasized “no one is aware of” as evidence that conservatives live in a bubble. He explained:

They lost because they were living in a bubble. They were living in a media ecosystem that told them everything they were doing — everything that Trump was doing — was just peachy. The bubble was reinforced over and over on Fox News, and in all their social media feeds. That bubble brooked no dissent, not a hint of doubt or introspection. It was the same bubble all cult members live in. It was a big bubble, and it was an amazingly popular bubble (for them). They would go to bubbled events where they would only interact and talk to the people in the same bubble. They stared into their phones and read the same happy talk, tailored and curated for their bubble. And before too long — quite understandably — they all forgot about the bubble. No, they thought. This was reality. And Trump was happy to reinforce it for them, so much that acting– or even thinking — outside the bubble became unthinkable. But it wasn’t reality. It was still a bubble.

His win in the primary boosts his chance of loss in November

Since October I’ve been working behind the scenes to get a proposal on the Michigan ballot. The effort up to this point was to gather signatures. I mentioned being a part of this during the second and third No Kings rallies. The proposal is to get corporate money out of Michigan politics by banning utilities from donating to the politicians who regulate them and banning political donations to government entities they have contracts with. I mention all that because today was the day to turn in all those signatures to the Secretary of State office. We need about 356,000 signatures and the leaders say we turned in 500,000! Of course, there was a big press conference outside of the Secretary of State office building. Part of it was for the leader to say why we did it. Part of it is to show off the boxes of signatures. Here’s a screenshot from the presser.

Once it is on the ballot, of course the utilities will spend big to defeat it. I hear 80% of voters are for it. I recently wrote about the nasty guy’s phone and how he asked for deposits, but was taking a long time to actually produce it. A recent change to the agreement said the phone may never show up. Lisa Needham of Daily Kos reported the phone is now being delivered. Perhaps the bad press forced someone’s hand. Then again, a CNET tech reviewer has a phone. No word on whether regular people have one. The opinion of the reviewer is that this is not a recent model of phone. The only thing it has going for it is that the nasty guy’s Truth Social is already loaded. You may debate whether that’s a reason to get one. Also, the logo of the US flag is missing two stripes. And instead of being made in the US it was designed “with American values in mind.” There were claims there were preorders from 590,000 people. The real number may be only 10,000.

What all of this makes clear is that there’s no world where Trump Mobile is a real, viable company that stands on its own. Only 10,000 customers and one lone, crappy, outdated phone? Anyone who doesn’t have a daddy in the White House would have gone out of business months ago.

Emily Singer of Kos reported that Ken Paxton won the Republican primary for US Senate in Texas. He’s the one the nasty guy endorsed. His win means Sen. John Cornyn’s career ends with the year. Democrats are delighted because Paxton has a “laundry list of scandals” including an impeachment (but not removal) from his job of state Attorney General and alleged adultery leading to divorce. His win in the primary makes Democratic nominee James Talarico much more likely to win in the fall. Talarico claims Paxton is the most corrupt politician in America. Sorry, I reserve that spot for the nasty guy. I can agree that Paxton is the most corrupt in Texas. In this case we thank the nasty guy for his efforts. His win in the primary boosts his chance of his loss in November. In today’s pundit roundup for Kos Greg Dworkin included a tweet from Jamie Dupree and an article from NBC News saying the South Carolina attempt to gerrymander to eliminate the last Democratic seat has ended. The state Senate voted to reject the map, including 12 Republicans on the no side. Their concern was voting already started and that the map was created by outstate constultants and they didn’t have time to study what it meant. Thom Hartmann of the Kos community wrote of the results of a study released in Nature put hard numbers to the algorithms in the social media platforms and their effect on the 2024 election.

Researchers at New York University Abu Dhabi created hundreds of “sock puppet” TikTok accounts in New York, Texas, and Georgia (via VPN), uploaded to them either pro-Democratic or pro-Republican videos to show their political leanings, and then watched what TikTok’s algorithm fed back to them every day over the 27 weeks leading up to Election Day. Across more than 280,000 recommendations, Republican-seeded accounts received about 11.5 percent more “party-aligned content” than their Democratic counterparts, while the pro-Democratic accounts were force-fed 7.5 percent more attacks from the other side.

No, the algorithms were not giving people what they want. They were giving people what the tech bros wanted them to see. Hartmann reviewed the bias the tech bros have for the nasty guy. He then gave some recommendations: 1. Require algorithmic transparency – platforms must disclose how they weight political content and they must submit to independent audits. There is a bill to do this and it needs sustained public pressure. 2. Repeal or reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, “so that algorithm-driven platforms are treated legally like the publishers they are, rather than like the telephone wires they used to travel over.” 3. The Justice Department must treat these companies as monopolies and break them up. The 2024 election was not free and fair. Back on May 1 NPR show Marketplace included an excerpt that is part of their series My Economy, in which individuals describe the money issues they face. The audio is under four minutes. This is about the economy of Lois Moore, retired. She inherited a big chunk of money from her mother and a rising stock market added much more. She saw that like billionaires, she had more money than she could ever use. So she decided to put a cap on her net worth and start making big donations to charities. She thinks she will adjust the limit downward in the coming years. Yes, this can be scary because so much was of her life was geared towards accumulating. Friends ask her whether she might regret giving so much away. Maybe. But she can’t foresee a lot of things. The market is based on fear and greed. She doesn’t want her life based on that. She wants contentment instead.

Serving as stooges of the Kremlin

Mark Sumner of Daily Kos reported that Biden has asked his campaign staff to increase the attention of the crazy stuff the nasty guy says in public. He requested that because media is so willing to give the nasty guy a pass, no matter how dangerous his words. Sumner wrote: “If the media won’t do its job, Biden will have to do it for them.” Another aspect of the media not doing its job:

There’s a frequent refrain, even in comments on Daily Kos, that people don’t want to hear about Trump. They’re tired of seeing his face. Tired of hearing his threats. The New York Times insists that there is an “anti-Trump burnout” with progressive voters all crisised out. It’s a perfect excuse to go even harder on … going softer on Trump.

But we can’t do that and can’t let that happen because the nasty guy is “planning to end democracy, abandon America’s allies, and create a fascist regime that draws from the worst of North Korea meets ‘Handmaid’s Tale.’ ” So Biden is correct in asking his campaign staff to keep the nasty guy’s worst statements before the public, whether or not the media catches on. Sumner asks us to do the same. A few days before the South Carolina primary former SC governor Nikki Haley gave a press conference on the “state of the race.” Just before a big defeat is a good time to drop out of the race for president. Kerry Eleveld of Kos reported Haley didn’t do that. Instead, she spent most of the press conference taking shots at the nasty guy.

In any normal presidential primary contest in any normal party, Haley would have been forced to drop out shortly after New Hampshire because she can't show donors any reasonable path to victory. But Haley continues to defy political gravity because her virulently anti-Trump donors can't get enough of her shredding Trump. Forget the delegate math: The money keeps rolling in. Haley started 2024 with roughly $14.5 million cash on hand and, earlier this month, her campaign reported bringing in another $16.5 million despite a lackluster third-place finish in the first-in-the-nation caucus in Iowa. Haley's fundraising strength is yet another data point demonstrating the electorate's visceral hate for Trump, even among voters who lean conservative.

Another round of highlighting the horrible things Republicans are doing. Joan McCarter of Kos reported shortly after the news of the death of Russian dissident Alexi Navalny American Republicans started their condemnation of Putin.

But so far it’s only Democrats who are talking about actually opposing Putin through assistance to Ukraine in fighting off his invasion. They’re pointing out that Republicans are doing Putin’s dirty work. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania was characteristically blunt: “House members blocking critical aid to Ukraine can revel in another high-five for Putin who just murdered his most vocal and visible critic.”

Put up or shut up. Walter Einenkel of Kos reported that 13 Republican senators released a letter demanding that when they get back from their holiday next week they want the Senate to promptly take up the trial of impeached Homeland Security secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. That’s even though a few federal departments run out of money on March 1. Also, it’s all political theater. Sumner wrote that much of the Republican platform is act on every whim of the nasty guy, as in short of ideas. But they do have a few ideas. A few terrible ideas. There’s book banning that even DeathSantis is beginning to realize is a disaster. They want to make a stink about pronouns, pride flags, and transgender people. And all that nonsense over being anti-“woke.” Sumner reported one problem: The 2022 and 2023 elections showed voters, even many conservative voters, don’t like those ideas. Voters were interested in the economy and national security, not in anti-“woke.” But since “woke” can be defined as anything they want it to be some Republicans will keep trying. A state rep. in Idaho is against federal funds for rural internet because it is woke.

If they can't win on woke, Republicans can always go back to their sure winners, like the 14 states that refused money to feed hungry school children, the 26 states that refused additional federal unemployment benefits during the pandemic, a push to raise drug prices, and the brilliant idea to eliminate not student loan debt, but student loans. Join Republicans in keeping Americans broke, hungry, uneducated, and unable to buy the medications they need! That’s a little long to fit on a yard sign, but they can workshop it. If that’s not too woke.

Eleanor Klibanoff and William Melhado, in an article for the Texas Tribune posted on Kos, reported that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton wants to test the legal principle of “extraterritoriality — when and whether a state can impose its laws beyond its borders.” There is also the well-established right to travel. The laws against it are enforced through private lawsuits. That’s a legal loophole the Supremes have allowed to stand. What Paxton is doing is demanding medical records from at least two clinics in other states that provide gender-affirming care to minors. Even if the demands are refused – and they are – it is a way to intimidate those clinics and the Texas families seeking their services. A big attempt at extraterritoriality was the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which demanded free states return escaped slaves. That pushed the nation to the Civil War, and didn’t end well. There are differences in state laws. Most of the time states work together for a common solution. Or, as in the case of casino’s across the state line, they ignore it. There are also laws common to all states – all prohibit murder and child abuse. But only recently have states disagreed so sharply. Some states say abortion is murder. Others don’t. Some states say gender-affirming care is a life-saving way to help a person be who they are. Other states call it a “social contagion.” States do not have to help other states with investigations. And some, like Washington state, now have “shield laws” that say health care workers (for abortions or gender care) do not have to help with investigations from other states and are prohibited from sharing patient info even when given a subpoena. An issue is that freedom to travel and extraterritoriality are well established principles, but they haven’t been before courts very often, so there isn’t a lot of precedent. Hard to tell what a conservative court will do. Sumner reported the attempt to dig up enough dirt on Biden to enable impeaching him continues. Yesterday, the president’s brother James sat for a closed door hearing (did he learn nothing from his nephew Hunter?). The reason for the hearing is Joe loaned $200K to James. Two months later James paid Joe back. That’s it. I haven’t heard what lies Republicans are spinning from that. Sumner reviews the whole history of this impeachment attempt, including the latest developments. I’ll give just the highlights. Back in 2019 Giuliani went to Ukraine to dig up dirt. He did but only the New York Times would publish it. Bloomberg dispatched a reporter and quickly saw it was all lies. The FBI had an FD-1023 form that supposedly validated Giuliani’s story. Except an FD-1023 is not evidence and was contradicted by public records. Last week Alexander Smirnov, the guy behind the FD-1023, was charged with lying and creating false records. He also admitting to having recent contacts with Russian spies.

So, Republicans have not only spent the last year pressing an investigation of the president’s son largely instigated by a document that turns out to have been tailor-made for them by Russian intelligence, they opened an impeachment inquiry with a Russian agent as the “heart” of their investigation.

But Republicans claim finding their source is a liar doesn’t alter the “fundamental facts.” Lev Parnas, a Giuliani buddy, is saying that Republicans knew way back in 2020 the FD-1023 was a lie. An old question has come back: What did they know and when did they know it? Another part of this investigation has to do with Hunter and claims of cocaine. But the photo shows sawdust near a table saw.

A Russian agent. A fake document. A pile of sawdust. That’s what Republicans have to show for their big investigation.

Eleveld added a summary. First is a tweet by Asha Rangappa:

For real, can we recap: Sitting members of Congress initiated IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS against a U.S. President based on information passed to them by an agent of Russian intelligence. Same members refuse to pass aid to Ukraine. Same members defend Trump.

Then Eleveld:

It's not just that congressional Republicans like House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer and veteran GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa spouted disinformation from a Russian mole: It's that the claim made by the Russian mole was laughable on its face. ... But now that Smirnov has been indicted and revealed as a Russian agent, Republicans are trying to triage their impeachment inquiry instead of backing away from their disgraced probe of an American president whom they are smearing for political gain. ... Totally absent from this Republican debacle is any sense of contrition for their roles serving as stooges of the Kremlin in spreading a mountain of lies about a sitting U.S. president. Comer, Grassley, and others should be fighting off calls for their resignations after betraying the country. Instead, the impeachment show must go on for Republicans. Otherwise they will have no means by which to uncover and spread more Russian disinformation about their political rival, Joe Biden.

In a pundit roundup for Kos Chitown Kev quoted Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo. That whole Hunter Biden laptop story was absurd and obviously a Russian influence operation. So why did everyone fall for it? So they’re now shocked that yes, it was from Russian intelligence services. Kev also quoted Aidan Quigley of Roll Call who shows us how little time there is to avoid a government shutdown. Kev quoted Elizabeth Wellington of The Philadelphia Inquirer about the nasty guy and his golden sneakers. It seems he’s trying to cash in on black sneaker culture. And, since the first batch sold out, perhaps it’s working (though that does not imply black people bought them). Down in the comments there are several cartoons about the nasty guy and his golden sneakers. There’s also a tweet by BMB Empower Network with a Fox News clip with white people declaring how smart the nasty guy is in coming out with sneakers and thus getting black people to vote for him. Black people responded, saying to think we’ll fall for that is pretty dumb. Mike Luckovich posted a cartoon showing a boy in bed with a green monster labeled “GOP” under it. The boy says, “You used to protect me from monsters under my bed...”

He discovered his laws affect real people

In a Ukraine update Kos of Daily Kos discussed an in-depth story in the Washington Post about the Battle of Kyiv in the first 36 days of the war. A few things Kos mentioned: Ukraine knew what Russia was planning and had plans of their own to keep Russia from mowing them over. Those plans were so tightly held that Western assessments thought there was no plan and that Russia would be in Kyiv in days. Zelenskyy was told by an aide not to expect much international help in the first few days of the invasion. The West would want to see how well Ukraine would defend itself. Maybe they don’t want weapons to get in Russian hands. Kos added that US and NATO just had a frantic retreat from Afghanistan, so didn’t want to engage unless there was a chance of success. It is a puzzle why Russia didn’t shell the Ukrainian government buildings. It’s also a puzzle that Russia still hasn’t done so. We’re glad they haven’t. Kos is also mystified by Russia’s efforts to create a new army corps. These are people who are signing up because of an offer of a hefty bonus. Kos lists some of the problems. They tend to be older men – in their 50s and older. They’re also way out of shape. They are being given a month of training – in the US Army basic training is 22 weeks and further training is several months or years beyond that. They aren’t being used to fill out crews that are incomplete because of deaths, where they would be overseen by experienced leaders. They’re formed into a new corps where no one has experience. While the current front lines are now using equipment from the 1960s some of the good modern equipment has been kept aside for this group. Well, Russia, if that’s what you want to use for cannon fodder, that’s fine with us. Keep going. Kos linked to a thread by Kamil Galeev, who has been explaining a lot of Russian culture behind this war. This thread explains why those older men are joining up – they probably have chronic indebtedness and see no way out. It seems that bonus may be the only money these recruits see. Existing soldiers are complaining about not being paid. Dartagnan of the Kos community reported that South Carolina state Rep. Neal Collins had a change of heart. He voted to enact an abortion ban for the state, then discovered it affects real people in tragic situations. In this case it was a 19 year old woman forced to continue to carry a non-viable pregnancy that might lead to infection, the loss of her uterus, or death. If Republicans hadn’t already killed irony we might use that term to describe Collins relating the woman’s plight and his change of heart as the SC legislature debated passing a more restrictive ban. That harsher ban passed one chamber and will likely pass the other and be signed into law. During the vote Collins ... abstained. Didn’t even vote no. It is good to see a legislator realize what he passes affects real people. Most Christian white males in the legislature don’t notice, or are indifferent to, the people harmed by what they do. Or maybe the harm is intentional. One reason why they don’t see who is affected by their laws is because they and their constituents have been told by the church for a long time that abortion isn’t health care, it’s murder. To say anything other than being pro-life means risking being shunned by church and community. Only bad people have to worry about such gut-wrenching decisions. This view is not going to fade quickly. In a post from last Saturday Mark Sumner of Kos included an image of the front page of that day’s New York Times, which has a headline of “U.S. Feared Trump Files Put Spies at Risk.” In the buildup to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine Biden had accurate info about what Russia was planning. That’s an example of a well placed informant. And it looks like the nasty guy betrayed several informants around the world. Sumner reviewed that the nasty guy has always had disdain for the intelligence services and whistleblowers. He’s also had disdain for protecting classified info. That’s a recipe for catastrophe. Sumner reminded us that about a week before the 2016 election James Comey, head of the FBI, announced an investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails. That severely cut Clinton’s lead and she lost the Electoral College to the nasty guy. Now he is admitting that Comey’s announcement was fake, but because of it he won. Yesterday I wrote about a couple essays in the NYT saying prosecuting the nasty guy will bring about domestic unrest, to put it mildly. Greg Dworkin, in a pundit roundup for Kos, quoted Nicholas Grossman of the Daily Beast. Here’s a bit of that quote.

Whatever the Department of Justice (DOJ) decides, it will set precedent, provoke public reactions, and shape history. ... If prosecuting Trump would set a dangerous precedent, so would letting his crimes slide. We can’t know what will happen, so we should follow the law and let the chips fall where they may. But even if we say U.S. law enforcement should prioritize political impact, the “domestic tranquility” argument fails on its own terms.

Barbara Morrill of Kos reported that Sen. Lindsay Graham declared there would be riots in the streets if the nasty guy is prosecuted – essentially calling for riots. Yeah, Graham has no concern for the crimes the nasty guy committed or the resulting damage to national security or the injuries and deaths that would come from that violence.

Asking them for advice?

Yay! The Confederate flag will be removed from the South Carolina Capitol grounds in a ceremony tomorrow morning. The vote in the House was a delightful 94-20. Gov. Nikki Haley quickly signed the bill. Bye!



Chris Jobe is clerk in Lawrence County, Kentucky and president of the Kentucky Clerks Association. He sent a letter to Gov. Steve Beshear saying that 57 county clerks, nearly half of those in the state, face conflict between religious beliefs and job duties over issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Jobe asked Beshear to (according to the Louisville Courier-Journal) "call a special session of the state legislature to address the issue of gay marriage licenses." Beshear responded, what is there to address? The Supremes have spoken.



Attention has been so focused on Texas, Louisiana, and elsewhere in the South there hasn't been much news about Kansas. Same-sex couples have been marrying in the state since November, but other things that go with it have been made difficult to impossible. Only a couple days ago did Gov. Sam Brownback finally tell state agencies they have to provide marriage benefits to same-sex couples and to allow marriage-related name changes. As part of his executive order he also added,

Today's Executive Order protects Kansas clergy and religious organizations from being forced to participate in activities that violate their sincerely and deeply held beliefs.

Equality Kansas says that sentence and the few that follow are one part scare tactic and one part suggestion that religious based social services my discriminate against gays and lesbian couples.



In Alabama 13 counties have stopped issuing marriage licenses to anyone, gay or straight. In other state news, the Alabama Supreme Court asked two conservative advocacy groups for advice. I'll pause here a moment to ask, Huh? The state's highest justices are asking a policy institute and a think tank (likely not made up of lawyers or legal scholars) for advice? Then again, these groups are peddling what the justices want to hear: a state court has the power to refuse to accept what the Supremes have ruled, and they have a constitutional duty to protect state officials with religious objections. Hey, guys, there is only one place this case can go: the US Supreme Court. Have fun!

We're being victimized

Over much of June my readership in Russia has jumped. For the last month the number of page views from Russia is more than double the count from America. On some individual days the count from Russia has been 3 and up to 4 times the count here in the US. Alas, my readers don't leave comments. Friends, I'd be delighted to hear from you and what you find in my blog.



I am delighted at the speed at which many governments in the South are realizing the Confederate flag no longer belongs on gov't buildings. William Danaher, an Episcopal priest and professor of theology and ethics, wrote a commentary about the Confederate flag in last Sunday's Detroit Free Press. He wrote about the background of the flag, how it started out before the Civil War as an emblem of the belief that the South was about to be overrun by the North. The South believed this was to be done both "materially and culturally, primarily through industrialization and urbanization." After the war honoring the soldiers of the South included a "sacred narrative of victimization."

Perhaps I'll paraphrase: We're being victimized because we're being prevented from enslaving and oppressing black people. Sound familiar? Let me change just a few words: We're being victimized because we're being prevented from oppressing gay people. What is it in the culture of the South that makes so many people so insecure they need to oppress someone else to feel good?



In the same issue Nancy Kaffer of the Freep's editorial board has an important question. Her topic is the recently enacted law that lets adoption agencies refuse service to same-sex couples. Her question: What about the sexual minority kids in the foster care system? An example is a kid who had been adopted as an infant, but was rejected by the mother when he came out as transgender. Refuse to welcome same-sex couples to your agency and what happens to this kid? A hard life is now even harder.

Montana and South Carolina!

The same-sex marriage ban in South Carolina was struck down at the district court level. The 4th Circuit denied an appeal. The Supremes didn't grant a stay. Even before that stay was officially denied, a judge began issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.



A district court in Montana declared that state's same-sex marriage ban to be unconstitutional. The state AG has vowed an appeal, though he probably won't get very far – the 9th Circuit has already ruled that such bans are unconstitutional. Marriages have begun.



So, yeah, South Carolina is getting same-sex marriage before Michigan – where the AG has filed briefs saying that because of the 6th Circuit decision to uphold the state's ban he wants to declare those 300 same-sex marriages from last March to be voided. Which makes this cartoon appropriate. I'm sure we'll get same-sex marriage before Mississippi – won't we?



The National Organization for Marriage has seen its fundraising plummet (only 50% of what they took in last year) and appear to be near death. Yay! Alas, since they are losing traction in America they are looking for friendly countries to set up shop – like Russia.

Kansas! South Carolina in process

A District Court judge struck down the Kansas same-sex marriage ban. The state asked the Supremes for a stay. The Supremes denied the stay. Marriages have begun.

There is an interesting bit on the reply from the Supremes: "Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas would grant the application for stay." That caught a lot of attention. Why did the two justices feel the world should know how they voted? Do they want to make it clear how anti-gay they are? Does that mean Alito and Roberts refused the stay? And does that imply when the 6th Circuit cases are decided the vote will be 7-2 or at least 6-3 instead of the expected 5-4?

Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback vows to fight on with an appeal to the state Supremes. The AG claims the ruling applies only to the two counties named in this particular suit, not the entire state. So most county clerks are being cautious.



In South Carolina a District Judge struck down the states same-sex marriage ban. Surprising nobody the AG has filed an appeal with the 4th Circuit, which had previously overturned Virginia's ban. This time the AG has the 6th Circuit ruling to claim that South Carolina's ban is different enough to warrant "their day in court."



A complaint was filed against another United Methodist pastor over same-sex marriage ceremonies. This one has a twist. Detail at my brother blog.

Never piss off the judge

Now that I have time to get to the marriage news of the week...

A judge in Wyoming will issue a ruling on Monday on whether the 10th Circuit rulings for Utah and Oklahoma for same-sex marriage apply to Wyoming as well.

By today the AG of Arizona was to file a brief with the 9th Circuit on whether or not the 9th Circuit's rulings on same-sex marriage should apply. The Arizona AG seems to concede that it does.

The AG in South Carolina rants that "I'm only for the rule of law." Well, since the 4th Circuit has declared bans on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, isn't that now law? Lambda Legal has filed a suit to hurry things along.

The ACLU asked for summary judgment in Montana. That's a request for a ruling when the facts are so obvious no trial (or lengthy proceedings) are needed.

Lots of same-sex couples were married in Idaho. Photos here. There's still a bit of fear their joy might be taken away because the Gov. said marriages may take place "for now."

The GOP Gov. in North Carolina says he'll now defend the right for same-sex couples to get married. Commenters note the other nasty things he has done – cut unemployment, opt out of Obamacare, etc. – and aren't impressed.

The 9th Circuit issued a temporary stay of same-sex marriages in Alaska to give the state time to appeal to the Supremes.

The AG of Florida had asked that the various cases in that state be put on hold until the Supremes have their say. Well, the Supremes decided to say nothing (in a rather loud voice). So the AG has asked the state Supremes to rule on the issue "once-and-for-all." Some speculate that means she sees her crusade against same-sex marriage coming to an end. And, yes, the state Supremes can rule against an article in the state constitution. Does it conflict with the national constitution? Does it conflict with other clauses in the state constitution?

The Coalition for the Protection of Marriage in Nevada filed suit against the 9th Circuit. The three judges for any particular case are supposed to be selected randomly. The CPM analysis says that one particular judge has appeared on way too many 3-judge panels for cases involving sexual minority rights for it to be purely random. Therefore the ruling in the Nevada same-sex marriage case should be thrown out and the case heard again with a panel of all of judges of the circuit. Those versed in statistics say the analysis is wacky. Those versed in legal matters say this suit violates the first rule of litigation: Never piss off the judge.

In an article printed in Between the Lines Lisa Keen asks why the Supremes refused to hear those same-sex marriage cases on the first day of the term? That court doesn't need to rush. They could have waited until the 5th or 6th Circuits ruled to see if there was a conflict in the rulings. But they didn't. If the Supremes were seriously thinking of taking another case down the road with the possibility of the mess of all these marriages happening in the meantime, they would have waited for the right case. That rush to refuse these cases is what prompted Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker to declare the issue "resolved."



The anti-gay mob is furious that "unelected judges" can overrule the will of the majority. As part of that fury Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (a fancy name for a hate group) pulled out the old slogan that children do best with a mom and a dad. John Greenberg of PunditFact tackles that and the ten claims the FRC uses to support it.

Five of the ten claims have nothing to do with children. They say opposite-sex marriage promotes domestication of men, paternal commitment, sexual fidelity, "gender-typical" roles, and links between marriage and procreation. Ah, a guide to fathering, which is rather nice of them (though that "gender-typical" roles thing sets off some red flags), but not related to any scientific study.

A sixth claim is about how children conceived through artificial insemination "hunger" to know about their fathers. Likely true, but not proven and not a reason to ban same-sex marriage.

A seventh claim cites studies where a father is absent. But those studies examine single parent households, not same-sex households. An eight claim says children need mothers. But the studies cited don't compare same-sex and opposite-sex households.

Claims nine and ten say that studies of children growing up in same-sex households are flawed – were not "conducted according to generally accepted standards of scientific research." This is called cherry-picking of findings.

There is a great deal of research that shows kids of same-sex parents do just as well as those raised by straight parents. Therefore the claim that Perkins made is rated as false.

But we knew all that and are rather tired of going through it all again.

We may not need the Supremes

t seems the marriage equality map is changing daily, and maybe more often than that.

Apparently a court ruling comes in two parts. One is the ruling, a declaration that a law is unconstitutional. The other is the mandate, what the losing side has to do about it. It also seems that both of these are rarely issued together. When the 9th Circuit ruled on Tuesday that the bans on same-sex marriage in Idaho and Nevada were unconstitutional it issued the ruling and mandate together. It also combined the mandates for the two states.

While Nevada officials said same-sex marriage is just fine with them, Idaho balked. They asked for a stay. Though the Supremes may not take the case, Idaho wants the entire 9th Circuit to rule in what is known as en banc, not just the usual three judge panel that heard the case and issued the ruling.

So Justice Kennedy, the one to oversee the 9th Circuit, issued the stay. But he didn't separate out the two states, so Nevada was affected too. Kennedy later removed Nevada's stay. Then Nevada's Coalition for the Protection of Marriage popped up and requested a stay. So no marriages until that got sorted out. Last year's Calif. case showed they won't have standing when a court takes a closer look.

Another complication: The federal judge, the one handling the Coalition's request, says he can't sign an order to allow same-sex marriage in Nevada because, well because he has a strong bias against it. So he stepped aside to let another judge take over, That next judge is being chosen. There is an important question: If that judge is that biased, why didn't he say so and step aside when the Nevada case was first decided? That sounds like judicial activism.

The Coalition has now withdrawn their motions. Marriages in Nevada have begun.

At least one gay couple in Idaho was able to get married before Kennedy issued the stay.

In other states:

West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin, under guidance of AG Patrick Morrissey sees where the issue is heading and thus has no reason to be defiant. He has directed state agencies to comply with the 4th Circuit ruling. It will take a few days to withdraw their defense of same-sex marriage cases and for the Dept. of Health to get the forms ready. Gay couples across the river in Ohio had always considered their state more progressive than West Virginia. Not this time.

The GOP lawmakers in North Carolina have decided their state is special and the 4th Circuit ruling doesn't apply. If that gambit doesn't work they'll ask for an en banc hearing.

A lawmaker in Utah wants to officially rename same-sex marriages as "pairages" to avoid redefining marriage.

Some counties in South Carolina are taking applications for same-sex marriages – there is a waiting period before licenses can be issued. And that waiting period was enough to allow the state Supremes to stop the process. There is a case that will soon go before a federal district court to overturn SC's ban and the state Supremes are halting marriages until that case can be heard.

A federal distsrict judge in Kansas has ordered the Johnson County Clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. This county includes the southwest suburbs of Kansas City.

Mike Huckabee has threatened to leave the GOP and become independent because the GOP has been so silent on same-sex marriage. Oh goody! Though I hear independents don't want him.

The 5th Circuit agreed to expedite a same-sex marriage case from Texas. One of the couple is pregnant and they don't want to go through the hassle of the other woman adopting the baby. So this case will be combined with a case from Louisiana. Even so, hearings may not happen until December (which means the 6th Circuit, which heard the Michigan case two months ago, is the closest to a ruling).



Ari Ezra Waldman of Towleroad takes a look at what the action by the Supremes means.

* There is no definitive ruling on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage or bans of marriage.

* There is no explicit legal precedent beyond the particular seven cases the Supremes refused to hear.

* In those seven cases there are no more appeals. Also, appeals aren't possible in the other states covered by the affected Circuits.

Waldman then explains why he thinks the Supremes did what they did.

* The conservatives didn't take the cases because they don't believe same-sex marriage is a federal right (they don't like federal rights in general). Allowing all the action to take place at the state and Circuit level (as distasteful as that may be) means the Supremes don't have to declare another federal right.

* The moderates, Kennedy and Breyer, may not want to take these cases until they absolutely have to. Part of it is judicial humility and part of it is a feeling the nation isn't ready for such a ruling (but, sheesh, this action affected South Carolina).

* The progressives may not want to take these cases because they don't want a slim majority, they want a decisive majority. And waiting may allow Roberts to stew over the idea for a few years.

Waldman also says we may not need the Supremes. We may get to all 50 states through the Circuit Courts. His reasons:

1. Marriage equality already exists in all states covered by the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Circuits (well, not Puerto Rico and US Virgin Islands).

2. The recent Supreme (in)action covered the 4th, 7th, and 10th Circuits. Actions by the 9th Circuit pretty much mean equality is coming to all of its states.

3. In spite of the GOP Obama has done pretty good at rebalancing the federal courts. The 11th Circuit has become quite progressive.

4. Lots of judges appointed by GOP presidents have sided with equality.

5. Circuit judges who haven't ruled yet (5th, 6th, 8th, 11th) are aware of the pro-equality rulings issued around them and of the growing public support.

6. Those same judges have a pretty good idea how Justice Kennedy will rule, based on the Defense of Marriage case a year ago.

A commenter suggests one reason why the Supremes didn't take any cases is there are no compelling arguments for a ban that the justices thought didn't get a thorough hearing in lower court proceedings.

Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, and... !

The Supremes issued a great piece of news today. They had seven marriage equality cases before them – and denied to review all of them. No explanation was given. I took a look at the order document. It is 89 pages. A good chunk of it – pages 8 to perhaps 60 – is a long list of cases that were not accepted for review. I think I heard 2,000 cases arrive at the Supreme Court every year and they have time to hear maybe 40 of them.

That means the same-sex marriage issue goes back to the 4th, 7th, and 10th Circuit Courts and all of them had previously ruled in our favor. They are, at various speeds now removing the stays that prevented same-sex marriage in Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Quite an important non-decision by the Supremes.

The next question is how, or perhaps how soon, does marriage equality come to the other states in those circuits? The affected states are:

4th Circuit: North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia (Maryland already has equality).

5th Circuit: (Illinois already has equality)

10 Circuit: Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming (New Mexico already has equality)

According to Ari Ezra Waldman of Towleroad an additional step is needed to bring equality to these six states. The attorney general or governor of the state could say that since their Circuit Court is about to issue an order, we might as well start allowing same-sex marriages. Or they could wait for the actual order. Or they could be defiant – and as soon as a same-sex couple was denied a license the resulting lawsuit would be resolved swiftly.

Waldman also supplies some meaning to these denials:

* If a majority of the Supremes were against equality they would have taken one of the cases. So the Supremes are saying indirectly they are on our side.

* Since there is no split decisions between circuits there is no need for the Supremes to get involved, so they won't.

* C'mon, 6th Circuit, we dare you to be that dissenting voice! The 6th Circuit equality cases – including Michigan's case – were heard two months ago but no ruling given. Is the 6th Circuit waiting for the Supremes? Well...

The reaction:

Virginia: We're ready to go! The state AG was one who declined to defend the ban in court.

Wisconsin: A couple counties will issue licenses. AG: We made every effort to defend the ban, but we'll support same-sex marriage now. Gov: We'll evaluate the impact and determine next steps. He sounds mighty reluctant.

Oklahoma and Utah: The 10th Circuit has lifted the stays.

The Oklahoma governor is pouting that with this ruling human rights trump states rights.

The Mormon leaders say alright, fine, but God only accepts man-woman marriages.

Indiana: The clerk for Marion County has started issuing licenses. The urgency is over so we won't offer immediate civil ceremonies.

Colorado: We're just waiting for formalities to be resolved and then we'll start issuing licenses.

North Carolina: ACLU is getting ready to ask a federal judge to strike down the state's ban.

South Carolina: AG is defiant: We will fight on to protect marriage until there is an actual ruling against our ban!

Kansas: As in North Carolina, the ACLU will prod things along.

Marriages have indeed begun in all five states named in the lawsuits. And some clerks in Colorado aren't waiting for the formalities.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage has issued his screech and condemnation of the Supremes – if you really need to read it. A leader of the Southern Baptist Convention warns members that even though this doesn't have the "shock and awe" of a ruling, it is still momentous. Is this a white flag?

Texas Senator Ted Cruz is in a snit, complaining of the worst judicial activism. But, Ted, wasn't it only 3 months ago you were praising the Supremes for their Hobby Lobby decision? It seems, though, that he and Utah Senator Mike Lee are the only two GOP senators who had anything to say. The rest of the party is quite silent. Perhaps John Boehner is too busy – he's in San Diego raising money for a gay GOP congressional candidate. As for the rest, perhaps they're disappointed the issue isn't over – there's still 20 states to deal with.

A judge in Missouri ruled last Friday that the state must recognize same-sex marriages from other states. Since Missouri borders Iowa, Oklahoma, and Illinois, all now offering same-sex weddings, the AG has decided not to appeal this decision. How soon will the wedding business in Missouri be clamoring for a piece of the action?

Alas, delving into more of the analysis and reaction that's out there will have to wait for another day.

Woefully underinclusive

I wrote yesterday that the 4th Circuit ruling in Virginia's same-sex marriage case prompted the AG in North Carolina to stop defending his state's ban. Not so in South Carolina. The AG there has essentially said full steam ahead. No need to change course until the Supremes rule.

Jim Burroway of Box Turtle Bulletin delves into the ruling from the 4th Circuit. The state had said the vote of the people matters. The court replied that the people's will does not warrant depriving same-sex couples of a fundamental right. The state brought forth history and tradition as good reasons. The court replied, nope. The state pulled out safeguarding the institution of marriage. The court said that allowing committed same-sex couples to marry strengthens marriage. The state tried "responsible procreation." The court replied the current law is "woefully underinclusive" – you let straight sterile couples marry. The state claimed that straight couples offer "optimal childrearing." The court said that claim has "overbroad generalizations" and the law must have a means that corresponds to its end. Therefore denying marriage to same-sex couples is a violation of the 14th Amendment.