Dispatches

HOUSE GOP HELLBENT ON TANKING ECONOMY—ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy met (5/22) for further talks on the impending debt ceiling crisis, following another warning from Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen that June 1 is the “hard deadline” for avoiding a default. Don’t expect much in the way of progress with this meeting: McCarthy set the tone early, saying before the meeting, “It’s very hard to get [Democrats] off that spending spree that they’re addicted to.” McCarthy has rejected any form of increasing revenue, like repealing the “fundamentally flawed” tax cuts Republicans handed billionaires in 2017, insisting on spending cuts that economists say will cause a recession. It’s either that or default, which would result in economic catastrophe. Republicans don’t seem to care who gets hit by the shrapnel, Joan McCarter noted at Daily Kos (5/22).

The “who” starts with veterans and seniors, who are pretty much going to be screwed either way. As NPR reports, two big bills come due on June 1 and 2, and the first days of every month: $12 billion for veterans benefits and $25 billion for Social Security benefits. The best case after default is that the Treasury would be able to figure out some way to pay these obligations, albeit delayed. And delayed benefits for veterans and seniors could mean rent and mortgages and utilities not getting paid, prescriptions going unfilled, and cupboards and fridges going empty.

“These are people on very low, sometimes fixed incomes that rely on these payments as a lifeline to pay for housing, to pay for food, to pay for expenses for children and other family members,” Cole Lyle, a Marine Corps veteran and executive director of the veterans advocacy group Mission Roll Call, told NPR. “So it could be potentially very crippling.”

Even if Biden and McCarthy come to some agreement to avoid default and the drastic cuts Republicans are insisting on are implemented, there will still be pain for these two groups in particular. On paper, Republicans say they’re holding Medicare, Social Security and veteran health care sacred. They won’t let those programs be cut. But adhering to the level of cuts Republicans are demanding means that housing, food assistance, and utility help all get cut. It means that federal employees who staff the agencies that help them are cut, too, which means delays in all sorts of services, including benefit claims.

The vulnerable will obviously get hammered first and hardest—either in a default or in the austerity budget Republicans are insisting on. The pain will ripple out from them—every person who becomes unemployed, or can’t buy food, or pay their rent means another job lost at a grocery store or apartment complex. That’s a feature of the Republican strategy, if not the whole point: Pain.

That pain will hurt Biden’s and the Democrats’ electoral prospects in 2024. Why else would Donald Trump be egging them on? Yes, the same Trump who couldn’t “imagine anybody ever even thinking of using the debt ceiling as a negotiating wedge” in 2019 is now saying, “Republicans should not make a deal on the debt ceiling unless they get everything they want (Including the ‘kitchen sink’).”

So that’s what Republicans, with the Freedom Caucus calling all the shots, are doing. May 18, the Freedom Caucus called for an end to talks, and on May 19 the McCarthy team decided to “press pause” on the talks that were supposed to continue later that day. Then the Freedom Caucus upped the ante by demanding that the racist, xenophobic immigration bill—the border bill the White House has said Biden will veto—be included in the debt ceiling deal. That would be Trump’s “kitchen sink” approach.

On May 20, Biden offered a freeze in spending on a wide array of domestic programs, which would amount to cuts because of inflation. Republicans rejected that, and countered with a demand that more money be spent on defense, their fig leaf of veterans’ health care, and border security. Oh, and they totally ruled out repealing the tax cuts they pushed through in a middle-of-the-night vote back in 2017. The Freedom Caucus, with their de facto chairman Donald Trump pushing them, is gunning for a default, and so far, McCarthy is dancing to their tune.

PROGRESSIVES CALL FOR SWIFT CONFIRMATION OF ANNA GOMEZ TO FCC. Eager to end more than two years of deadlock at the Federal Communications Commission, digital rights advocates expressed relief at President Joe Biden’s nomination of former FCC legal adviser Anna Gomez to the commission and called on the Senate to confirm her appointment as quickly as possible, Julia Conley reported at Common Dreams (5/22).

“Finally!” tweeted media and technology advocacy group Free Press when the nomination was announced. “The agency has been deadlocked since January 2021 and this delay has harmed millions of people.”

Gomez currently serves as a senior adviser for international information and communications policy at the State Department and worked for more than a decade at the FCC as a senior legal adviser to then-Chairman William Kennard.

She also worked in leadership roles at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, whose work addresses broadband and internet policy.

The American Prospect’s David Dayen noted that he recently wrote about Gomez’s career, detailing her work within the telecom industry—which the FCC regulates—as well as her work in government.

“Gomez has plenty in her background to interest industry,” wrote Dayen. “She was the vice president of government affairs (a nice term for lobbyist) at Sprint Nextel. She was an associate early in her career at corporate law firm Arnold & Porter, and more recently she spent several years as a partner at Wiley Rein, the biggest and most influential law firm that represents clients at the FCC.”

Communications on unmanned aerial systems, or drones, were a large focus of her work at Wiley Rein, Dayen reported.

Gomez’s nomination comes two months after longtime public advocate Gigi Sohn withdrew her nomination, which had been championed by progressives, after months of attacks by the telecom lobby.

More than 60 digital rights groups wrote to Biden after Sohn’s withdrawal, calling for another nominee who would fight forcefully at the commission for net neutrality rules, the rights of low-income and rural communities, and privacy rights.

“We’re now approaching two-and-a-half years without a fully functional Federal Communications Commission. Never before has the American public had to wait so long for a commissioner’s seat to be filled,” Jessica Gonzalez, co-CEO of Free Press, which signed the letter, said on Monday after Gomez’s nomination was announced. “In addition to her corporate experience—which has often entailed working for competitive carriers instead of incumbents—Gomez has a long track record of public service, including high-ranking positions at the FCC and Commerce Department. She is eminently qualified for this role at the FCC.”

Dayen noted that some of Gomez’s positions on communications issues have not been publicized, including her views on congressional rules that punish internet service providers (ISPs) for underinvestment in low-income communities and on net neutrality rules, which prevent ISPs from creating internet “fast lanes” for companies that can pay for them and throttling other content by slowing down speeds.

“We expect Gomez to help restore the proper legal framework for broadband and the net neutrality protections that the FCC repealed during the Trump administration,” said Gonzalez. “In poll after poll, people in the United States of all political stripes say they want enforceable rules for an open internet. We’re confident that Gomez will give weight to this overwhelming public support and be responsive to public input on the full range of issues before the agency.”

The 2-2 deadlock at the FCC has made it impossible for the commission to stop ISPs from “digitally redlining” low-income communities with slower service for the same rates as wealthier customers, as Common Cause said last October, and to restore net neutrality rules.

PUTIN ISSUES MAGA-APPROVED SANCTION LIST. There’s a new list of 500 Americans Vladimir Putin has banned from traveling to or having business in Russia, and it’s a who’s who of Donald Trump’s enemies. Putin is using American sanctions over its invasion of Ukraine as an excuse for the travel bans, but his real reason seems clear: to strengthen his alliance with Trump and MAGA Republicans, Joan McCarter noted at Daily Kos (5/22).

From Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who refused to find those 11,780 votes for Trump in 2020, to New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is currently prosecuting Trump, to MSNBC commentator Rachel Maddow, former NBC and MSNBC anchor Brian Williams and late-night variety show hosts Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, and Seth Meyers, who ridiculed Trump on a nightly basis. Oh, and former President Barack Obama.

It sounds like Trump wrote the talking points, as the list cites “those in government and law enforcement agencies who are directly involved in the persecution of dissidents in the wake of the so-called storming of the Capitol,” including special counsel Jack Smith, who is investigating Trump’s hoarding of classified documents and his efforts to steal the 2020 election, and Lt. Michael Byrd, the Capitol Police officer who shot insurrectionist Ashli Babbitt.

Names on the list also include Reps. Glenn Ivey (D-Md.) and Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Sen. Katie Britt (R-Ala.), CNN anchor Erin Burnett, California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) and US Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves.

Raffensperger, for one, isn’t too bothered by the prospect of not getting to go see the wonders of Putin’s Russia. He retweeted this from his chief aide, Gabriel Sterling.

“A great honor for @GaSecofState Raffensperger. He is one of the hundreds of Americans banned from Russia by Vladimir Putin. That means Brad is doing it right ...”

Russia also is denying US consular access to Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who was charged with spying.

RAIL WORKERS UNION WINS ‘TRAILBLAZING’ PAID SICK LEAVE DEAL WITH NORFOLK SOUTHERN. A leading railroad workers’ union struck a landmark deal with industry giant Norfolk Southern to provide more than 3,300 employees up to seven days of paid sick leave each year, Jessica Corbett reported at Common Dreams (5/19).

“This is a big day for the BLET,” declared Scott Bunten, a Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen general chairman. “Our members are the heart of the railroad, and this agreement is a major win in our tireless efforts to improve the quality of their experience on and off the job.”

Similarly describing the union’s engineers as “the hardest-working folks on the railroad,” fellow BLET chairman Jerry Sturdivant said the agreement “recognizes the critical contributions our members make to keep the railroad and the American economy running.”

Under the deal, Norfolk Southern engineers will get five paid sick days annually, plus they will be able to use up to two additional days of existing paid time off as sick leave. The new policy will take effect once union members ratify an accompanying quality-of-life agreement, which they are expected to vote on within the next month.

“We are proud to be the first to have reached a paid sick leave agreement for our dedicated BLET membership,” said Dewayne Dehart, another union general chairman. “This trailblazing new deal ensures that engineers finally have access to the time they need and deserve to manage their personal well-being.”

Although Norfolk Southern president and CEO Alan Shaw refused to commit to seven paid sick days for all employees while testifying before Congress in March, he also highlighted the historic nature of the new agreement, saying it “continues our industry-leading effort to enhance quality of life as we become the first railroad to reach an engineer sick leave deal.”

According to a joint statement from the company and union, “With this agreement, almost all Norfolk Southern craft employees—approximately 98%—have entered into paid sick leave deals.”

As the Associated Press reported, the deal follows the model established by the conductors union in its first sick-time deals with Norfolk Southern and CSX. Those train crew workers are getting better deals, with five days of sick time, than the other smaller rail unions that received four days of sick time. But train crews work much more unpredictable and demanding schedules than other rail workers.

The railroads have also agreed to pay workers for any unused sick time at the end of the year.

BIG WIN FOR ANTITRUST, AS JUDGE BLOCKS JETBLUE, AMERICAN AIRLINES ALLIANCE. A Massachusetts-based federal judge sided with the Biden administration plus six states and the District of Columbia, which launched an antitrust challenge to American Airlines and JetBlue Airways’ “de facto merger” for Boston and New York City.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) along with attorneys general of Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Virginia and D.C. filed a civil lawsuit over the airlines’ Northeast Alliance (NEA) in September 2021 and US District Court Judge Leo Sorokin ordered the alliance dissolved (5/19), Jessica Corbett reported at Common Dreams (5/20).

“This case turns on what ‘competition’ means,” Sorokin, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, wrote. “To the defendants, competition is enhanced if they join forces to unseat a powerful rival. The Sherman Act, however, has a different focus.”

“Federal antitrust law is not concerned with making individual competitors larger or more powerful. It aims to preserve the free functioning of markets and foster participation by a diverse array of competitors,” the judge added. “Those principles are generally undermined, rather than promoted, by agreements among horizontal competitors to dispense with competition and cooperate instead. That is precisely what happened here.”

Sorokin stressed that “American and JetBlue are two of the four largest carriers operating in New York, and two of the largest three in Boston. Delta Air Lines is the only other carrier with a large presence in Boston. Besides Delta and United Airlines, no other carrier matches or approaches in size the defendants’ respective positions in New York.”

After noting that the pair established the “first-of-its-kind alliance” in 2020, he explained:

“This was a sea change in the relationship between two airlines that were direct and aggressive competitors with decidedly different business models and cost structures. There is no doubt that savvy executives representing both defendants earnestly believe the NEA promotes the interests of their respective shareholders and will strengthen American and JetBlue in their rivalry against Delta (and, to a lesser extent, United) in New York and Boston. It is similarly beyond dispute that the NEA involves substantial coordination by two powerful competitors in an industry that, on a domestic level, is closely regulated, highly concentrated, and often volatile.”

Reuters reported that after Sorokin ordered the end of the alliance within 30 days, “JetBlue shares fell 1.8% for the day, while American closed down 1.5%,” and both airlines said “they were evaluating their next steps.”

Meanwhile, the DOJ, its state partners, and other critics of consolidation celebrated the initial court victory.

“Today’s decision is a win for Americans who rely on competition between airlines to travel affordably,” said Attorney Gen. Merrick Garland in a statement. “The Justice Department will continue to protect competition and enforce our antitrust laws in the heavily consolidated airline industry and across every industry.”

American Economic Liberties Project senior fellow for aviation and travel William McGee agreed that the DOJ Antitrust Division’s successful challenge of the NEA “is a win for passengers and the public.”

WIND AND SOLAR ENERGY SAVED TEXANS $11 BILLION IN 2022. REPUBLICANS WANT TO CURB IT. In 1999 with George W. Bush in the governor’s chair, Texas enacted a law boosting renewable energy in the state. Since then, renewables there have expanded to the point that Texas generates more electricity from renewables than any other state. Most of this comes from 15,000 wind turbines, with a generating capacity of 38,000 megawatts. The total installed US wind capacity is 141,000 megawatts. In 2021, 33% of electricity in Texas was generated by renewables. There’s no reason it couldn’t soon be 100%—except that today’s Texas Republicans are a far cry from those in 1999.

Meteor Blades notes at Daily Kos (5/19) Texas lawmakers are on the cusp of passing legislation to shackle wind and solar projects and boost coal, natural gas, and nuclear. The state Senate has already passed SB 624 and a companion bill was awaiting committee action in the state House of Representatives as this was written. If it passes and Gov. Greg Abbott signs it, the state will impose tight permitting restrictions and fines on solar and wind energy projects. Such projects will need permits from the state’s Public Utility Commission, but fossil fuel projects won’t. All current PUC members were appointed by Abbott, who has always favored fossil fuels. Worst of all, the bill applies operating permit requirements retroactively on existing renewable energy sites, allowing the PUC to remove installed clean energy capacity if it cannot meet the new permit rules.

This is a screw job for the climate and for Texas consumers. How much so? A new study from Ideasmiths on the Texas wholesale electricity market found that wind and solar power generation saved residents $11 billion in 2022 alone. From 2010 to the end of 2022, wind and solar generation produced $31.5 billion in such savings. The report projects that doing what Republicans clearly don’t want—further expanding wind and solar capacity—could save Texans $15.2 billion annually.

STATES AGREE TO REDUCE COLORADO RIVER USE, BUT MORE CUTS NEEDED, EXPERTS SAY. California, Arizona, and Nevada struck a deal with the Biden administration in which the states agreed to take less water from the dangerously overdrawn Colorado River—an agreement cautiously welcomed by conservationists, who warned that the cuts are insufficient to stabilize a system upon which tens of millions of people rely, Brett Wilkins reported at Common Dreams (5/22).

Monday’s breakthrough agreement follows nearly a year of negotiations and missed deadlines and involves the Biden administration, the three states, Indigenous tribes, water management districts, and agribusinesses. Under the plan, the federal government will distribute around $1.2 billion worth of Inflation Reduction Act funds to cities, tribes, and water districts if they cut back on water use. The three states agreed to use 3 million acre-feet less water between them by the end of 2026. This would amount to 13% of their total Colorado River allocation.

“There are 40 million people, seven states, and 30 tribal nations who rely on the Colorado River Basin for basic services such as drinking water and electricity,” U.S. Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said in a statement. “Today’s announcement is a testament to the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to working with states, tribes, and communities throughout the West to find consensus solutions in the face of climate change and sustained drought.”

Last August, amid extreme drought driven by the climate emergency and warnings of a possible “catastrophic collapse” of the Colorado River, the US Interior Department announced the first-ever tier 2 shortage for the waterway, triggering water-use cuts in Arizona, Nevada, and the country of Mexico for 2023.

US Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Camille Calimlim Touton called the agreement “an important step forward towards our shared goal of forging a sustainable path for the basin that millions of people call home.”

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, a Democrat, hailed the “partnership with our fellow Basin states and historic investment in drought funding,” while asserting that “we now have a path forward to build our reservoirs up in the near-term.”

“From here, our work must continue to take action and address the long-term issues of climate change and overallocation to ensure we have a sustainable Colorado River for all who rely upon it,” Hobbs added.

Luke Runyon, president of the Society of Environmental Journalists, noted on Twitter that “the agreed-to cuts are significantly less than what federal scientists and officials had said were necessary to stabilize the river system on which tens of millions in the Southwest rely.”

John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority, told E&E News that “the plan set forth by the Lower Basin states is not a panacea for the river, but rather a consensus solution that will help manage near-term water demands while serving as a bridge to negotiate the post-2026 operating criteria.”

“The Colorado River Basin has a warmer and drier future ahead and reducing water use, increasing water efficiency, and maximizing water recycling and reuse is paramount to a sustainable future for the 40 million people that depend upon this critical water supply,” he added.

The Colorado River runs about 1,450 miles from its headwaters high in the Rocky Mountains of northern Colorado into Utah, through the Grand Canyon in Arizona, and then along Nevada and California’s southeastern borders before flowing toward the Gulf of California in Mexico, though the river no longer empties into the sea, and models predict that by the year 2100 its flow could be further reduced by more than half.

GIULIANI GOES BALLISTIC ON WOMAN SUING HIM FOR RAPE … THEN QUIETLY BACKTRACKS. Just days after facing a 70-page lawsuit accusing him of rape and numerous other sexual abuses, disgraced former NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani made several explosive claims about the woman on a right-wing conspiracy blog site. A few hours later, he (or his legal team) seems to have quietly backtracked, Walter Einenkel noted at Daily Kos (5/19).

This was the original Giuliani quote in the Gateway Pundit blog:

“I dated Noelle for approximately 2 months in early 2019. I found out she was kicked out of several luxury hotels for suspicion of prostitution. I also found out that she scammed, elderly men by claiming rape. I broke up with her, and she continued to try to reach out to me. Even following me to several events and asking to take pictures.

“She was absolutely never employed. She illegally taped me and illegally went in my email.”

A few hours later, that was changed to this:

“I dated Ms. Dunphy for several months in early 2019. I ended the relationship because she continued to reach out and attempt to make contact with me. I discovered she was banned from several luxury hotels and also found out that she brought forward two prior cases, but never submitted a police report. I look forward to full vindication.”

Can you spot the difference?

Law&Crime first noticed the changes. In the original quote Giuliani claimed Dunphy accessed his email “illegally,” and that “She was absolutely never employed.” Those are left out of the edited version.

Giuliani also claimed in the original quote that Dunphy had been “kicked out of several luxury hotels for suspicion of prostitution. I also found out that she scammed, elderly men by claiming rape.” The second version says Giuliani “discovered she was banned from several luxury hotels and also found out that she brought forward two prior cases, but never submitted a police report.”

Less open to slander, possibly?

Law&Crime contacted Giuliani representative Ted Goodman, who “suggested that The Gateway Pundit’s original statement may not have been genuine.” After making this perplexing suggestion, he then refused to answer any more questions or provide another statement on the record.

This is interesting, since Goodman gave a statement to Rolling Stone, two days earlier that “Mayor Rudy Giuliani unequivocally denies the allegations raised by Ms. Dunphy and every news outlet covering this story must include the fact that an ex-partner accused her of being, ‘an escort that fleeces wealthy men.’” That was the exact slander edited out of Giuliani’s Gateway Pundit quote.

The Gateway Pundit and Goodman also omit the line assertion that “she was absolutely never employed. She illegally taped me and illegally went in my email.” For whatever reason, his lawyers are telling him to back off that claim. There could be innocent reasons to do so, or it could very well mean that Dunphy’s accusations are real and provable.

Indeed, Dunphy claims to have extensive recordings of her conversations with Giuliani, as the two talked about her putting together his memoir at some point. This doesn’t mean Giuliani is guilty of rape, of course. But here are some of kinds of things Giuliani is reported to have said:

• Rudy and Donald Trump had a scheme going to sell presidential pardons for $2 million

• Saying “Jews want to go through their freaking Passover all the time, man oh man. Get over the Passover. It was like 3,000 years ago. The red sea parted, big deal. It’s not the first time that happened.”

• Disparaging Jewish men’s penises

• Saying Black and Hispanic men “hit women more than anybody else does.”

In 2021, the New York Times reported that John Kiriakou, a former C.I.A. officer convicted of illegally disclosing classified information, claimed Giuliani had approached him saying he could get a pardon for [drumroll] $2 million. If there is tape of Giuliani admitting to such a scheme, it would add a serious level of corroboration to a potential investigation into Trump and Giuliani.

RON DESANTIS JUST COST FLORIDA 2,000 JOBS. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has gotten some weird mileage by feuding with one of his state’s biggest employers and global ambassador: Walt Disney and the eponymous resort in Orlando, Markos Moulitsas noted at DailyKos.com. (5/18) .

With billions in business on the line, Disney made it clear to DeSantis that if the governor didn’t back off his culture war attacks on the company, it wouldn’t just rely on the courts—it would take its business elsewhere. The first show of that threat has now taken place, with reports that Disney has canceled a nearly $1 billion office project near the resort.

The Lake Nona Town Center office complex would’ve employed 2,000, including the relocation of 1,000 Disney employees currently based in southern California—the conservative movement’s biggest boogeyman. In other words, Disney has just gifted California with jobs it was slated to lose. This doesn’t include construction jobs that will no longer be needed in Florida.

This will be music to California’s ears. Just a couple of days ago, California Gov. Gavin Newsom said, “Disney, the door is open to bring those jobs back to California — the state that actually represents the values of your workers.” He ain’t wrong.

According to the New York Times, Disney has another $16 billion in planned Florida infrastructure spending, so perhaps Disney will pull these one by one until DeSantis relents. Who knows. But with DeSantis’ presidential campaign foundering, it seems bizarre to tank your own state’s economic fortunes for a quixotic fight against a popular company with the resources to make his life a living hell. If the fight were righteous, then great! There’re plenty of valid reasons to criticize Disney, but crying about Disney being “woke” for supporting LGBTQ rights isn’t one of them.

TRUMP & R’S ARE TERRIFIED OF THEIR SIGNATURE ISSUE — ABORTION BANS. North Carolina Republicans cemented their legislative supermajority in April when Rep. Tricia Cotham, who ran as a Democrat on a pro-choice platform, unexpectedly switched parties, giving Republicans veto-proof majorities in both chambers. By mid-May, Tar Heel Republicans had unveiled their 12-week abortion ban, passed it, and jammed Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper’s veto of it, despite the fact that four Republicans who voted yea (including Cotham) had pledged during their campaigns to protect abortion access, Kerry Eleveld noted at Daily Kos (5/20).

Let North Carolina serve as a cautionary tale for the nation: As soon as Republicans have the power to enact an abortion ban, they will, regardless of what they tell voters. (Just as several Supreme Court nominees leapt at the chance to strike down Roe v. Wade despite previously testifying that it was settled law.) After pulling a bait-and-switch, Tar Heel Republicans are already strategizing about enacting tighter restrictions if they gain legislative seats or reclaim the governor’s mansion next year.

On the national level, powerful anti-abortion groups and evangelical activists have settled on getting 15-week ban pledges from Republican presidential candidates. Here’s where the field of prominent Republican hopefuls, announced and unannounced, stands right now:

Donald Trump: Supported a 20-week ban as president, hasn’t committed to signing ban as a ‘24 candidate, but bragged at the CNN town hall about how “proud” he was being able to “terminate Roe v. Wade”

Ron DeSantis: Signed a 6-week ban into law in April

Mike Pence: Wants to ban all abortions nationwide, period

Nikki Haley: Signed a 20-week ban into law as governor of South Carolina. Now she’s arguing for building a national “consensus,” saying, “If we want to protect more moms and save more babies, we need more Americans to join with us.”

Vivek Ramaswamy: Has called abortion “murder” but also said he does not believe it should be regulated at the federal level.

Tim Scott: Said he would sign a 20-week abortion ban but also “the most conservative pro-life legislation” Congress could pass.

South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott’s position, in particular, matches exactly what North Carolina Republicans rushed to do as soon as they had the votes. They went as conservative as they could, as fast as they could and they plan to go back for more bites at the apple as they become available.

At the CNN town hall, Trump assiduously avoided pledging to sign a national abortion ban while signaling that something as strict as 2 weeks might be on the table, which was wild.

TRUMP: Some people are at six weeks; some people are at three weeks, two weeks.

COLLINS: Where’s President Trump?

TRUMP: President Trump is going to make a determination what he thinks is great for the country and what’s fair for the country.

A contingent of anti-abortion groups were thrilled with Trump’s performance after they had lobbied him to be more aggressive on the issue, reported the Washington Post. They had been alarmed by the Trump campaign’s original stance that restrictions “should be decided at the state level.”

This came after Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins, and Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina traveled to Mar-a-Lago last week to apprise Trump of polling supposedly showing majority support for banning the procedure after 15 weeks.

The groups specifically sought to stymie the idea that abortion should be left to the states, lest Trump set that standard for the GOP field in front of a live national audience. “The worst answer is the states’ rights issue,” Graham told the Post. “We tried that with slavery. It didn’t work very well.”

In other words, forced birther groups are laser-focused on enacting a federal abortion ban. And they didn’t rig this court to let this golden opportunity pass by.

During the Mar-a-Lago meeting, they reminded Trump of the gruesome language he had used in 2016 to describe some type of imaginary late-term abortion, and indeed, two days later, Trump revisited that demented description in the town hall, nodding to their zealotry.

“Remember the debate with Hillary Clinton?” Trump asked CNN moderator Kaitlan Collins. “And I said, ‘Rip the baby out of the womb at the end of the ninth month, they will kill the baby in the ninth month.’”

Trump’s non-specific signaling to the anti-abortion groups is reminiscent of his Proud Boys shout out during a 2020 debate for them to “stand back and stand by” just several months before they became an integral part of the conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government.

“Some people are at three weeks, two weeks,” Trump said at the town hall. Actually, no one is talking three or two weeks—unless one counts Pence’s total abortion ban. But Trump knew exactly what to say to thrill the anti-abortion zealots, just like he knew exactly what to say to thrill the Proud Boys.

From The Progressive Populist, June 15, 2023

Populist.com