Family of First Person Killed by State Abortion Ban Speaks Out at Harris Town Hall

The family of the first known person to have died due to a post-Roe abortion ban spoke publicly for the first time on Thursday night, alongside Democratic candidate for president Kamala Harris and famed television host Oprah Winfrey during a town hall event.

They shared the story about their daughter, Amber Nicole Thurman, whose 2022 death was entirely preventable.

Georgia's extreme ban on abortion allows exceptions to save a pregnant person's life, but such exceptions are rarely carried out due to the vagueness of the law failing to stipulate what constitutes a life-saving event (this is a regularly occurring problem throughout the U.S. where such bans are in place). Thurman waited 20 hours before receiving treatment -- had she been treated earlier, it's believed she would have lived.

Said Thurman's mother at the event:

Initially, I did not want the public to know my pain. I wanted to go through in silence, but I realized that it was selfish. I want you to know, Amber was not a statistic, she was loved by a family, a strong family.

It's unclear how many people have died because of such bans that right-wing states have instituted since the dismantling of Roe. While another death is known, such statistics aren't regularly posted, and the number who have perished because of these bans is believed to be much, much higher.

These abortion bans would not have been possible were it not for Donald Trump appointing three anti-abortion justices to the Supreme Court during his tenure in the White House. The overturning of Roe v. Wade, seen by many legal experts as extremely dubious legal reasoning, is directly responsible for Thurman's death, and for the deaths of others, not to mention the detrimental health outcomes many more have experienced.

Matt Hrkac/Flickr

Trump Said the Crowd at the Debate Cheered for Him. There Wasn't a Crowd There.

Image via Public Domain

Donald Trump claimed on Fox News last night that he received overwhelming support from the audience during his debate with Kamala Harris last week, saying the crowd "went absolutely crazy" when ABC News moderators fact-checked him over blatantly false assertions he made.

However, the debate had no audience present — it only included Trump, Harris, the moderators, and the TV crew. So what in the hell is Trump talking about?

Critics are questioning whether this, along with other recent statements he's made, suggests a decline in Trump's mental sharpness and if there should be more conversation about his fitness to serve as president, similar to the concerns raised about Joe Biden earlier this year.

From The New Republic:

Speaking in Long Island on Wednesday, Donald Trump was as bombastic and boastful as ever—but also slurred his words on several occasions.

Trump stumbled over words like “migrants” and “Russia” and had trouble stringing sentences together.

And from Salon, which quotes MSNBC's Chris Hayes's views:

MSNBC anchor Chris Hayes argued that the Republican candidate's remark validated concerns about his age and mental capacity.

"Trump talking about 'the audience' at the debate (where there famously was no audience) is more delusional and unsettling than any moment of Joe Biden misspeaking all year and it’s not close," Hayes wrote on social media.

Kamala Harris Sees Small "Bump" in Polls One Week Out From Debate

Image via WhiteHouse.gov/Public Domain

Polling data is showing a small "bump" in the polls for Kamala Harris just over a week after her debate with Donald Trump.

The Democratic candidate for president leads Trump by an average of 3.1 points, on average, according to the aggregate polling site FiveThirtyEight. That's a jump of more than half a point from September 10, the night of the debate.

That sounds like a minimal increase, but it's based on a pool of polls all put together. A better indication of the "bump" can be seen by observing changes in specific polls.

The Economist/YouGov survey that was taken before the debate showed the two candidates were tied at that time, at 45 percent support for each among registered voters. In their most recent poll, Harris has a 4-point lead, attaining 49 percent support to Trump's 45 percent.

Similarly, a Morning Consult poll from before the debate had Harris ahead by 3 points. A week out from the debate, that lead has doubled, expanding to 6 points, per the organization's latest polling.

The momentum is clearly on Harris's side, and early observations about her winning the debate appear to have been true, given the expansion of her national lead. Whether she can hold onto it, from here until November, and whether it will translate to an Electoral College win, has yet to be seen.

Vance Makes Hypocritical Demand for Dems to Stop Saying Trump Is Fascist (Psst...He Is)

J.D. Vance whined this week that Democrats use the word "fascist" too much to describe Trump.

Trump, of course, has used the word on multiple occasions to describe and deride Kamala Harris. Meanwhile, I don't think I've ever heard Harris use the word once against Trump, even though it is a correct descriptor for his views.

A search of Rev.com, an online transcription service that keeps up-to-date with the presidential candidates' speeches, finds no transcripts of Harris uttering the word during this past year. Conversely, it shows multiple times that Trump has used the word against her just this past week. 

Vance's complaints are hypocritical. Yes, there are plenty on the left that call Trump a fascist -- that's because Trump IS one (how else would you describe a guy who pushes false xenophobic lines of attacks, who wants to be a dictator, has called for the termination of the Constitution, isn't ruling out creating "camps" for certain people, etc.?). But if Vance wants to remonstrate against Dems for doing so, he should probably tell his boss to knock it off, too.

Image credits: Vance image via Gage Skidmore/Flickr; Harris image via DoD/Public Domain; Trump image via Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Harris Calls First Abortion Ban-Related Death "Consequence" of Trump's Actions

Vice President Kamala Harris is blaming news of the first post-Roe death of a person being denied abortion care squarely on Donald Trump.

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

In 2016, Trump pledged to appoint Supreme Court justices that would overturn Roe v. Wade -- and that's exactly what happened in 2022. Now, people who have been denied abortion care and harmed by state bans are sharing their stories, urging people to not let Trump have another chance at the presidency, lest he restrict the procedure further at the urging of his far-right backers.

However, Amber Nicole Thurman, a Georgia resident was similarly denied abortion care because her state had a complete ban in place, cannot tell her story because it resulted in her death in 2022. Hers is the first documented case of an abortion ban causing someone to die.

At least one other death has been recorded, but it's likely that many more have occurred and haven't yet been reported on.

In a statement on Tuesday, Harris said Trump deserved the blame. From The Guardian:

“These are the consequences of Donald Trump’s actions,” Harris said in a statement.

...

“This young mother should be alive, raising her son, and pursuing her dream of attending nursing school,” said Harris, who has made abortion rights a prominent feature of her presidential campaign. “This is exactly what we feared when Roe was struck down.”

 

Trump Flip-Flops on More Debates With Harris -- He Calls It QUITS After Disaster on Tuesday

Image of Trump via Gage Skidmore/Flickr
Flip Flop image via Open ClickArt

Dubiously claiming victory in his debate with Kamala Harris earlier this week, Donald Trump announced on his Truth Social account that there will be no further debates between them in this election cycle.

Trump weirdly likened his performance at their first meeting to that of a champion boxer delivering a knockout punch. However, reliable polls (unlike the unscientific ones he's promoting) suggest that Harris fared much better in voters' minds than he had.

Trump's meandering on the issues and his ego got the best of him, and he was (rightly) fact-checked by moderators for promoting false and dangerous conspiracy theories during the event.

Meanwhile, the Harris campaign is pushing for another debate between the two.

From Harris campaign chair Jen O’Malley Dillon:

Under the bright lights, the American people got to see the choice they will face this fall at the ballot box: between moving forward with Kamala Harris, or going backwards with Trump. ... Vice President Harris is ready for a second debate. Is Donald Trump?

This is a big flip-flop from Trump, who had previously said he was open to debating "anytime, any place" when Joe Biden was the presumptive candidate for Democrats, and as recently as this month, Trump expressed interest in multiple debates with Harris, too. His change in heart on the matter appears to be wholly about him doing so poorly against her on Tuesday night -- no one, not even Donald Trump himself, can feasibly believe he "won" that debate.

Ohio City Receives Bomb Threats After False Xenophobic Attacks From Trump at Debate

It's really not surprising, but still infuriating, that Donald Trump's promotion of a well-debunked, xenophobic conspiracy theory relating to legal immigrants from Haiti in Springfield, Ohio -- alleging, falsely and without any evidence of any kind, that these individuals are stealing pets and eating them -- has resulted in threats of violence to the community. 

 From NBC affiliate station WDTN:

The Springfield Police Division confirmed to 2 NEWS that the building was evacuated due to an unspecified threat.

And from CBS affiliate WBNS:

City officials said they received a bomb threat via email at 8:24 a.m. The building was evacuated as a precautionary measure and local and regional law enforcement agencies responded.

"Our primary concern is the safety and well-being of our employees and residents. We are working to address this situation as swiftly as possible," the city said in a statement.

During the debate between Trump and Kamala Harris on Tuesday, Trump pushed the false and unfounded claims against immigrants in Springfield.

"They’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets of the people that live there," Trump said.

When corrected by debate moderators about the outlandish statement, Trump said it was true because he had seen it on television.

The claims are entirely baseless. They are false. And they are racist. 

National Archives/Public Domain

Harris Leads Trump, Baldwin Ahead of Hovde, in Latest Wisconsin Poll

The latest Marquette University Law School poll shows Democrats expanding their leads in races for this fall's general election.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D) leads Eric Hovde (R) by 5 points among likely voters. When "leaners" are included, that lead is maintained, with 52 percent saying they'd back Baldwin and 47 percent preferring Hovde.

In the presidential race, Harris is also leading Trump by 5 points among likely voters. With "leaners" included, the Harris edge falls by a single point, with her leading Trump 52 percent to 48 percent.

The poll was conducted before the presidential debate between Harris and Trump on Tuesday night.

Wisconsin is still considered a "swing" state, even if these numbers hold true to November. Remember, polls are just a snapshot in time -- they tell us how an electorate feels at a certain date before the election. Meaning, it's still important to vote on or before Election Day, as the only "poll" that matters is the final vote tally.

See more results of the Marquette Law School poll by clicking here.

Image via Dori/Wikimedia

Trump Uses Fake "Poll" to Weasel Out Second Debate With Harris

Harris image via Gage Skidmore/Flickr
Trump image via Gage Skidmore/Flickr

After his considerably disastrous debate performance against Kamala Harris on Tuesday night, Donald Trump shared a number of posts on his Truth Social page claiming he was the winner.

These posts cited supposed "polls" that were taken after the event. But they weren't really polls -- they were surveys by right-wing websites that ask regular readers (not a random sample) to weigh in on who they thought won.

It'd be like a Chicago Bears Fans website asking readers who the greatest QB of week 1 was -- even though Caleb Williams did absolutely nothing to help his team win on Sunday, that fan site would still get a result of him being the greatest, due to who is voting or even knows that the "poll" exists.

Likewise, Trump used a fake poll to say that, since he did so great in the debate, a "rematch" against Harris was a dumb idea. But by all accounts (even Fox Frickin' News), Trump performed terribly, and Harris gave a master class on how to rile him while still discussing the issues that matter.

From Truth Social:

In the World of Boxing or UFC, when a Fighter gets beaten or knocked out, they get up and scream, “I DEMAND A REMATCH, I DEMAND A REMATCH!” Well, it’s no different with a Debate. She was beaten badly last night. Every Poll has us WINNING, in one case, 92-8, so why would I do a Rematch?

The poll Trump is specifically citing appears to be a Newsmax one, which, you guessed it, was highly skewed because most Newsmax viewers are huge Trump supporters.

Real snap polls showed Harris won the debate, by the way, although you don't really need polling data to see that.  

The bottom line here? Trump is scared to debate Harris again, and he's grasping at straws like these to try to hide how afraid he is.

It's Pretty Obvious That Kamala Harris Won the Debate. A Snap Poll Confirms It.

A "snap" (or flash) poll from CNN after last night's debate between Democratic candidate for president Kamala Harris and GOP candidate Donald Trump shows that, by nearly a 2-to-1 margin, Harris was the victor.

The network surveyed 605 registered voters both before and after the debate aired last night. Their favorability rating of Harris went up by 6 points after watching her, according to the poll.

If those results translate to even a small sliver of the electorate, it will be fantastic news for Harris, as the race as of right now between her and Trump, both nationally and among swing states within the Electoral College, was neck-and-neck before the debate. Even a fraction of voters basing their decision in November on this debate will help propel her to a win. 

That said, there are still about two months until the election and anything can happen between now and then...

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Purportedly "Pro-Life" States With Anti-Abortion Laws Aren't Pro-Life After All, Study Shows

A study published last week by Northwestern Medicine reveals that states with the strictest abortion restrictions tend to leave behind the very people they claim to protect. 

These states have lower participation in state-funded assistance programs, are less likely to adopt family-supportive policies, more often restrict access to other reproductive health services, and are less likely to permit pharmacists to prescribe birth control, according to the study's findings.

"Proponents of abortion restrictions, who identify as ‘pro-life,’ assert that these policies are essential to protect children, women and families," senior author Lynn Yee said. "It would seem in these states that the abortion-opponent, ‘pro-life’ attitude not only begins at conception but ends there as well."

The lack of services in these abortion-restrictive states hurts families, including children, with lower rates of state funding for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs. 

Read more at Northwestern Medicine.

wp paarz/Flickr

Vance Basically Says He Would Have Helped Trump Overturn 2020 Election

J.D. Vance announced on Tuesday — the day before Trump is set to debate Kamala Harris — that he would have "allowed" states to submit new electors for the Electoral College in 2020, rather than accept the presidential election results as they actually came into Congress.

The statement is essentially Vance stating he would have played along with Trump's then-plan to overturn the results of the election, which he legitimately lost — a move that Trump's former VP, Mike Pence, rightly refused to do.

Said Vance, to Politico:

I would have asked the states to submit alternative slates of electors and let the country have the debate about what actually matters and what kind of an election that we had.

The country had a debate about it. It was the election.

And Trump lost. End of story.

So if Trump loses again, his VP running mate, this time, will try to help him upend democracy in the U.S. Just thought you all deserved that heads up...

Vance image via Gage Skidmore/Flickr
Trump image via Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia

The Media Needs to Stop "Sanewashing" Donald Trump — and Start Reporting on His Madness

We really need to talk about the media's "sanewashing" of Trump more.

What is sanewashing? It's the practice of news organizations taking a wild rant from Trump — loaded with conspiracy theories, personal attacks against others, name-calling, and other childish behaviors (and, not to mention, signs of mental decline) — and reporting on it in a way that ignores all of those problems, and just focuses on some parts of his statements, resulting in making him seem more reasonable.

Parker Malloy at The New Republic explains it REALLY well, and her column is worth a full read, but here are some highlights: 

As Trump’s statements grow increasingly unhinged in his old age, major news outlets continue to reframe his words, presenting a dangerously misleading picture to the public.

For instance, last week, Trump posted the following to his Truth Social account: 

I have reached an agreement with the Radical Left Democrats for a Debate with Comrade Kamala Harris. It will be Broadcast Live on ABC FAKE NEWS, by far the nastiest and most unfair newscaster in the business, on Tuesday, September 10th, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The Rules will be the same as the last CNN Debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone except, perhaps, Crooked Joe Biden. The Debate will be “stand up,” and Candidates cannot bring notes, or “cheat sheets.” We have also been given assurance by ABC that this will be a “fair and equitable” Debate, and that neither side will be given the questions in advance (No Donna Brazile!). Harris would not agree to the FoxNews Debate on September 4th, but that date will be held open in case she changes her mind or, Flip Flops, as she has done on every single one of her long held and cherished policy beliefs. A possible third Debate, which would go to NBC FAKE NEWS, has not been agreed to by the Radical Left. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

CNN described that rambling, insult-laden, conspiracy-riddled wall of text—itself a pretty good example of what he spends his time off the campaign trail doing—by writing, “Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced he has ‘reached an agreement’ to participate in a September 10 debate with Vice President Kamala Harris, noting that ‘the rules will be the same as the last CNN debate, which seemed to work out well for everyone.’”

Does that really capture what Trump posted? 

Malloy goes on to say that the "'sanewashing' of Trump’s statements isn’t just poor journalism; it’s a form of misinformation that poses a threat to democracy."

"By continually reframing Trump’s incoherent and often dangerous rhetoric as conventional political discourse, major news outlets are failing in their duty to inform the public and are instead providing cover for increasingly erratic behavior from a former — and potentially future — president," Malloy adds.

It is especially important to address Trump's mental ability (or rather, inability) to serve as president again, as we saw a different candidate for president, Joe Biden, drop out of the race over similar concerns about his mental status. 

Why was the media willing to report on the flubs and mistakes Biden made while speaking, but won't properly report on Trump's "old man yelling at cloud" persona that clearly shows he's not ready/capable to be president again? It's not only hypocrisy, but it's dangerous, considering what kind of president Trump has promised to be -- a dictator who would be willing to suspend the Constitution in order to get what he wants.

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Shameless Ron Johnson Pushes Conspiracy Theory About Trump Assassination Attempt

Without any evidence whatsoever, Ron Johnson, Wisconsin's Republican U.S. Senator, believes that the attempt on Donald Trump's life earlier this year was a government operation.

From The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

“To what extent has the federal government been involved in these things?” Johnson said. “We’ll probably never know because there’s a reason you call it the deep state. It’s very deep. It’s very pervasive.”

The comments from the Oshkosh Republican are the latest in a string of fringe theories that the “deep state” was behind the shooting that wounded Trump and killed a rally attendee. There is no evidence the government was involved in the shooting, and the FBI has said the 20-year-old shooter, Thomas Matthew Crooks, acted alone before he was shot and killed moments after he fired on Trump.

This is deeply irresponsible of the senator. It riles up his base to believe a fake conspiracy, and thus perpetuates the possibility of political violence.

Sen. Ron Johnson should be ashamed of himself. But we already know, the man has no shame.

Hey, remember that time Johnson faked a phone call to avoid answering questions about his involvement in overturning the 2020 presidential election?

DonkeyHotey/Flickr

Dick Cheney Is Voting for Kamala Harris, Not Donald Trump

Dick Cheney, the former vice president who served for two terms under former President George W. Bush, is hardly a person whose opinion should hold much weight these days, given his role in pushing the U.S. into a long and unnecessary war against Iraq, among other problematic parts of his lengthy, far-right political career. 

The guy's a bum, as far as I'm concerned.

But it says something about the current state of the Republican Party when even Cheney — Darth Vader himself — cannot vote for the GOP's current nominee for president, Donald Trump.

Per C-SPAN:

Mark Leibovich, staff writer for The Atlantic: "Dick Cheney, your father...do you know who he will be supporting or who he will be voting for?"

Former Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyoming): "Dick Cheney will be voting for Kamala Harris."

Leibovich: "Wow. Words I never expected to hear."

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

J.D. Vance: School Shootings a "Fact of Life," Tells Americans to "Deal With It"

Days after the first major school shooting of the 2024-25 school year, J.D. Vance, the Republican Party's vice presidential candidate, suggested that strengthening security at schools would stop gun violence in them, and rejected gun reform as a means to lower the frequency of such shootings. (Of note: the latest school shooting, where four individuals were killed in Apalachee High School in Winder, Georgia, had security in the form of a school resource officer who was able to minimize the violence, but importantly, their presence did not deter the shooting, either. In other shootings where SROs were present, they weren't as effective as this latest instance.) Said Vance, per USA Today:

"If these psychos are gonna go after our kids, we've got to be prepared for it. We don't have to like the reality that we live in, but it is the reality we live in, and we've got to deal with it," Vance said.

Tim Walz, the Democratic Party's vice presidential nominee, decried Vance's comments as "pathetic." "We can’t quit on our kids — they deserve better," Walz said.

Gage Skidmore/Flickr

Post Debate Analysis: For Democrats, the Clock is Now Ticking

The headlines following the debate SHOULD be about how much disinformation Trump spread. They SHOULD be about how he refused to take accountability for January 6. They SHOULD be about how he was convicted of 34 felony crimes…so far.

And for any other candidate running for president, this debate SHOULD have been a "gimme." Trump did what he always does: he lied, he pushed an authoritarian agenda, he avoided answering questions he should been made to answer...and he smirked through all of it.

But Joe Biden isn't just any other candidate. And he's certainly not the same Joe Biden that ran for president four years ago. 

These are not the words I want to write. I wish I could say that it's clear and obvious for whom anyone should give their vote to in November. And honestly? It's still clear to me whom I'm going to vote for.

But I really wish I had another viable choice.

Joe Biden's performance on Thursday night didn't just leave more to be desired for — it left many people's jaws dropped, myself included. 

I heard every excuse in the book tonight from the apologists. Biden overprepared and simply tried to say too much, saying too little in the process. Biden had a cold, and so of course he couldn't say what he meant to say. And so on, and so on.

The fact of the matter is this: Biden didn't do what he does best, which is call Trump out, and explain, in clear terms, why he's the better choice. 

Instead, at various points tonight, I saw the current president try to "keep pace" with Trump, who meandered and waded into multiple different topics that had nothing to do with the questions he had been asked. Had Biden simply slowed his pace down, said his piece, and point out how off-topic Trump was, he'd have looked great.

He'd have looked like the mature choice for president. The right one. The only reasonable one.

But that's not what Biden did.

He'd have been better off skipping the debate entirely — which is what he suggested he was planning to do in March. Biden even had the perfect response as to why he would skip the debate: that Trump's "behavior" wouldn't warrant him worthy of debating. The notion rightfully frames Trump for exactly who he is, as a child, an immature imbecile.

But alas, that's not what went down. And now, Democrats have to ask themselves, late in the game: is Biden really their guy?

The clock is ticking to make a decision.

Featured image credit: U.S. Secretary of Defense/Flickr

[VIDEO] Louisiana Students Don't Need 10 Commandments Lurking Behind Them in Classrooms

Transcript of video appears below...

Louisiana Students Don't Need 10 Commandments Lurking Behind Them in Classrooms#10Commandments #churchandstate #FirstAmendment #religiousfreedom #politics #uspolitics #Louisiana #JeffLandry #TenCommandments pic.twitter.com/medz4jq1h6

— Chris Walker (@thatchriswalker) June 23, 2024

Louisiana has become the first state in the country to mandate the Ten Commandments be posted in every public school classroom.

This is a clear infringement on First Amendment religious freedom rights. Now, I consider myself a Christian, but I don't believe that my faith or anybody else's for that matter should be endorsed by government in this way. By the way, the Bible feels this way, too (Matthew 6:5-7, Luke 20:20-26).

The state's governor, Republican Jeff Landry, justified the new law by stating the Commandments were a part of this country's history. That may be, to some extent, but so is Voodoo or Vodou in his home state. Somehow, I'm guessing he's not advocating for any literature from those faiths be required reading in every classroom.

And that justification from Landry doesn't make any sense to begin with. How does the historical relevance of a religious text matter in a science or math classroom? This law goes all the way up to colleges and universities, too. Why do we need the Ten Commandments in a class that focuses on molecular biology? Even in a history class, the presence of the Commandments lurking over the shoulders of students isn't exactly educational.

This law is nothing more than an attempt to get the Supreme Court to upend decades of precedent that clearly states the separation of church and state extends to public schools. The scary thing is, with this current, conservative version of the High Court, Landry and his cohorts may just succeed.

Featured image credits: Gage Skidmore/Flickr; Chris Walker

Showing Fealty to Trump, PA Republicans Boo & Hiss at Jan. 6 Capitol Police Officers

TWO FORMER U.S. CAPITOL POLICE OFFICERS who helped to defend Congress during the January 6, 2021, Trump-inspired attack were invited guests to the Pennsylvania House of Representatives earlier this week. Although they were meant to be honored guests, that's not exactly what happened...

From The Associated Press:

Witnesses said the appearance Wednesday by former U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and his ex-boss, former Sgt. Aquilino Gonell, triggered a distinctly negative response from some Republicans, with someone even shouting that they were cowards.

...

"The GOP members’ shameful behavior was unbecoming of our institution for any guest, let alone two of the men responsible for defending our democracy during a dark day in our nation’s history," [Democratic House Speaker Joanna McClinton] said. "The Republicans’ disrespect, lack of patriotism and even common decency, epitomizes the poor behavior that so many in the MAGA movement have adopted."

And from The Washington Post:

As the two men — both of whom were injured by rioters on Jan. 6 — were introduced, the House floor descended into chaos. According to Democratic lawmakers, several GOP lawmakers hissed and booed, with a number of Republicans walking out of the chamber in protest.

It's incredibly disheartening to see Republican lawmakers, or anyone at all, act this way toward people who put their lives at risk to defend out democracy. But when your fealty is to Trump and not the country, what can you expect? The GOP is no longer a party of any principles or beliefs, other than "Trump" and "MAGA" — a telling sign that indicates a growing love of fascism and authoritarianism within the party's ranks.

Featured image created by Chris Walker. Image of Pennsylvania Capitol building by Wally Gobetz/Flickr. Image of Trump by Gage Skidmore/Flickr.

RNC Used Ho Chi Minh City as Image of Milwaukee on Its Convention Website

A BOSTON GLOBE REPORTER noted something peculiar about the Republican National Committee's (RNC) website, featuring its convention set to occur in Milwaukee this July.

Up until today, the skyline the organization decided to use on its page for the convention didn't even depict Milwaukee, but rather Ho Chi Minh City, the capital of Vietnam.

"Was on the 2024 GOP convention website and saw it used a background image that... does not look like Milwaukee. Which makes sense because it's actually a photo of Ho Chi Minh City," national political reporter Sam Brodey said on X.

Upon Brodey's catch of this error, the RNC changed its banner image to show the actual city on its website. But apparently, Republicans had the image up since as far back as February.

Quick advice for any political party out there listening: If you're trying to impress the host city of your nominating convention — and if you're trying to win the Electoral College votes of the swing state that city is within — it's probably best to do more than just the bare minimum amount of work, like picking a random skyline picture from another country, to show you actually give a crap about the place.

Bfkenney/Wikimedia 

Reports: AG Kaul Files Charges Against "Fake Electors" Schemers in Wisconsin

Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul has reportedly filed criminal charges against two former lawyers for Donald Trump as well as an aide for the former president for their involvement in the 2020 fake elector scheme in the state. 

The two lawyers, Kenneth Chesebro and Michael Dean, along with Trump aide, Robert Oswell, are accused of orchestrating and executing the fake elector scheme, which aimed to manipulate and interfere with the electoral process in Wisconsin. Chesebro, who is from Wisconsin, was the architect of the scheme in this state and several others where the Trump campaign attempted to overturn the election results.

Notably, the former president was not among those charged by Kaul on Tuesday.

Read more at JSOnline

Paywall free option at HuffPost

Featured image credit: Susan Ruggles/Flickr

"Wear Orange Day" Event Happening in Madison on Friday

This Friday is "Wear Orange Day," a nationwide event dedicated to raising awareness about gun violence through rallies and other calls to action. 

Coinciding with National Gun Violence Awareness Day, there are hundreds of "Wear Orange Days" happening across the country. Participants are encouraged to wear orange to show their solidarity and support for reforms to gun laws, to reduce gun violence across the U.S.

In Madison, the event and rally will take place at Galaxy Park, located at 132 Milky Way on the city's east side. Scheduled from 5 pm to 7 pm on Friday evening, the event is hosted by Public Health Madison & Dane County (PHMDC) and co-hosted by Moms Demand Action, Focused Interruption, and Dane County Human Services.

The rally will offer a range of activities, including food, music, and speeches from various community leaders. 

Join the Madison community at Galaxy Park this Friday evening to support this important cause. Your presence and participation help amplify the message that gun violence must be addressed with immediate and effective solutions.

If you have a community event or announcement you would like to see shared on Political Heat, please contact Chris at thatchriswalker@gmail.com.

Trump Demands SCOTUS Overturn His New York State-Based Conviction

ON HIS FLEDGLING TRUTH SOCIAL WEBSITE, former President Donald Trump demanded that the United States Supreme Court intervene to overturn his recent conviction in New York state, alleging various conspiracy theories and questioning the impartiality of Judge Juan Merchan, who is set to determine his sentencing on July 11. 

Last week, Trump was found guilty by a jury of his peers of 34 counts relating to his making hush-money payments to women he had affairs with, then using his personal business to hide the payments, concealing them from American voters in the run-up to the 2016 election. 

Trump made several false assertions, including calling Merchan "HIGHLY CONFLICTED" (the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics had determined Merchan was not). Such notions are part of a broader (and obvious) plot by him to undermine the judicial process and to escape being held to any accountability.

Trump's plea to the Supreme Court is not only highly unusual but also legally tenuous. The Supreme Court typically refrains from intervening in state judiciary matters unless there is a clear federal question regarding a violation of constitutional rights. 

Former acting Solicitor General Neal Katyal emphasized this point while speaking on MSNBC recently, suggesting that while there might be an attempt to frame a federal issue, the likelihood of success is slim.

"Maybe they’ll find some federal issue here and maybe there will be an appeal that will get there. But I think it’s tough," Katyal said.

Notably, the Supreme Court has involved itself in Trump's other election interference case, which is a federal matter. Legal experts have questioned why the Court would entertain Trump's claims of "presidential immunity," but at least in that situation, they have a relevant (and federal) question to answer. 

The situation in Trump's New York case diverges significantly from that, as it revolves around state-level judicial processes. The Supreme Court's intervention here would set a problematic precedent, potentially undermining the principle that former presidents, like all citizens, should be held accountable under state laws.

While Trump's strategy will undoubtedly appeal to his supporters, it poses a severe threat to the integrity of the American legal system. If the Supreme Court were to acquiesce to his demands and intervene in the New York case, it would further erode public confidence in the judiciary's impartiality. 

So while it is not impossible for the Supreme Court to intervene, doing so would be a profound misstep, to put it lightly. The Supreme Court — particularly its far-right members of the bench — must resist the temptation to heed Trump's call. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be surprised if they took the alternative, Trumpian view instead, further demonstrating why the Court itself is in dire need of reforms.

Featured image credits: Image of Trump via Gage Skidmore/Flickr; image of Supreme Court via Marielam1/Wikimedia

Justice Alito’s Refusal to Recuse Is A Threat

SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO'S refusal to recuse himself from cases relating to former President Donald Trump and the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack is deeply troubling, indicative of the right-wing bloc of justices' continued problems with a basic understanding of ethics and proof-positive of the need for more regulation and real changes at the High Court.

Featured image credit: Italy in US/Flickr

The flags flown over two of Alito’s residences over the past few years — an upside-down U.S. flag that flew just days after the deadly Capitol riot and Trump's second impeachment; and an "Appeal to Heaven" flag that flew as recently as last summer outside his vacation home — signal support for Trump and Christian nationalism, raising serious questions about the associate justice's impartiality.

Alito’s defense that “My wife is fond of flying flags — I am not,” fails to address the core issue here: the standard that applies (or is supposed to apply) is that "a justice should disqualify himself or herself" when their "impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Reasonably speaking, Alito appears to harbor biases that would make him an improper figure to rule on these cases. Indeed, he offers no proof that these were even his wife's flags at all, other than his own saying so, which should cause any reasonable person to still question whether he's telling the whole story or not.

But unreasonably, the Court's rules allow him to decide for himself whether he's fit to hear cases still or not — a completely backward and, crooked and dishonest way of how things like this should be handled. 

By refusing to step aside, Alito shows that he doesn't think the standards he's supposed to abide by matters — and without an enforcement mechanism of the rules he's supposed to follow, he'll be free to do whatever he wants until his retirement, without consequence or reprisal, in this situation and future ones, resuming a disastrous precedent that shouldn't be allowed to stand.

Justice Alito’s actions are more than a misjudgment or a small error on his part; they are a direct challenge to the ethical standards that the Supreme Court must uphold, and a dismantling of a once-revered institution in this country. 

For the sake of preserving public trust in the judicial system, Alito must recuse from any cases related to Trump and the January 6 insurrection. The Court must make changes to ensure justices cannot be the regulators of their own ethical miscues. And failing that happening, Congress must create new standards and rules for them.

Poll: A Significant Number of GOP Voters Might Not Back Trump, Post Conviction

FOLLOWING DONALD TRUMP'S RECENT CONVICTION in his Manhattan-based hush-money and election interference trial, new polling data from a Reuters/Ipsos survey reveals a shift in attitudes among registered voters, including a small but significant portion of Republicans who now may not back the former president in his upcoming rematch with President Joe Biden. 

Trump was found guilty on 34 charges related to making hush-money payments to women he had extramarital affairs with, and using his business to cover them up, thus concealing their existence from voters during the 2016 election. 

Trump has long suggested that a guilty conviction would actually help him in the 2024 presidential race. But while the immediate reaction might demonstrate some Republicans are hardening their support of him, a deeper look into the numbers tells a more nuanced story.

Looking at Republican voters alone, the majority, 56 percent, indicate that the trial's outcome will not affect their voting intentions. Thirty-five percent say they are more likely to vote for Trump following his conviction. 

However, 10 percent of Republicans report they are less likely to vote for him now. 

As noted by Reuters:

The potential loss of a tenth of his party's voters is more significant for Trump than the stronger backing of more than a third of Republicans, since many of the latter would be likely to vote for him regardless of the conviction.

The impact is even more pronounced among independent voters, which Trump will also need to court if he hopes to defeat Biden. The poll found that, while 56 percent of independents say the conviction will not affect their vote, a quarter (25 percent) are less likely to support Trump. Eighteen percent said they are more likely to back Trump because of the trial. 

This shift among independents could be pivotal in a tightly contested race.

Trump’s legal woes could thus be a double-edged sword. While they may galvanize a segment of his base, they also risk alienating a critical fraction of Republican and independent voters. The upcoming election could hinge on how these dynamics play out, especially in key battleground states where independents often decide the outcome.

What are the polls saying right now? In a hypothetical three-way race including Trump, Biden, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr., polling aggregates from FiveThirtyEight show Trump and Biden in a statistical tie, with Trump holding a slight 1.3-point lead over Biden. This margin is within the error range of the polls, indicating an exceedingly close race. Importantly, this data is mostly from before Trump's conviction on Thursday — indeed, the only two post-conviction polls that have occurred after his trial's conclusion (as of the publication of this blog post) show Biden ahead of Trump. 

Republicans Just Aren't Into Appealing to Hispanic Voters (Probably Because of MAGA)

The Republican National Committee (RNC) has shuttered multiple Hispanic outreach centers across the country, and is scrapping plans to open more in the months leading up to the presidential election.

One such center in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, is particularly noticeable, as it's been closed since mid-2022 and is in the city where the RNC plans to hold its political convention later this year. The RNC doesn't appear to even be trying to reopen it.

From Wisconsin Public Radio:

Earlier this year, the Republican National Committee said it planned to reopen the center, and in a statement issued this week, RNC Chair Michael Whatley said the party would still organize in communities that are not traditionally Republican.

But RNC spokespersons did not respond to questions from WPR about whether Milwaukee’s center would reopen, and a visit to the building Friday revealed it was still shuttered. Nearby business owners said they haven’t seen any activity in the building recently.

Republicans are trying to make Latinx voters a priority this election cycle. Polling shows that Latinx voters are split, with more just slightly more leaning toward backing President Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee for president, over Republican nominee Donald Trump.

But with the GOP nominee comparing immigrants to "animals," it's becoming more likely that small split will widen even further in the months ahead. The closure of RNC-based Hispanic outreach centers is simply more indication that the party isn't really interested in appealing to Latinx voters, and is more concerned about placating a base of MAGA supporters that harbor xenophobic views.

Indeed, according to Reuters, the plan to open more resource centers to appeal to voters of color is being axed by none other than the Trump campaign itself. 

It's really not hard to comprehend why.

(Still, Democratic candidates aren't doing much to prove they're the better option, either...)

Mohamed_hassan/Pixabay, with edits

Trump Promises "Bloodbath" If He Loses 2024 Election

During a rally in Ohio over the weekend, Donald Trump told his supporters that violence would erupt if he lost the upcoming presidential election to President Joe Biden.

Trump didn't indicate if he'd be leading the impending "bloodbath" as he described it, in the event of his loss, but he didn't say he wouldn't be supportive of it, either.

Per The New York Times:

While discussing the U.S. economy and its auto industry, Mr. Trump promised to place tariffs on cars manufactured abroad if he won in November. He added: “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it. It’s going to be a blood bath for the country.”

Trump also degraded immigrants coming to the U.S., denigrating their status as even being human beings.

"I don't know if you call them people ... these are animals," Trump said during the rally.

("Oh, but the CONTEXT!" some Trump fans are yelling, defending his choice of words...yeah, about that...)

Trump White House Archives/Public Domain

Dissecting a Presidents Day Truth Social Post from Ex-President Donald Trump

It's Presidents Day. Former President Donald Trump's social media posts don't get as much scrutiny as they have in the past, likely due to his posting exclusively on his fledgling Truth Social website. But since he's running for president again, it's important to examine just how wrong and misinformative his posts really are.

Americans should know the truth about Trump, including how he's spreading falsehoods about himself and the criminal charges he faces. So here, briefly, is an examination of a Truth Social post he recently made:

Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers Signs New Legislative Maps, Ends GOP's Gerrymandering

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers has signed new legislative maps for Wisconsin, hopefully ending the redistricting debate in Wisconsin, at least for the remainder of this year.

Evers's maps were considered by Republicans, who run the state legislature, as the better option between accepting his redrawing of legislative districts and the possibility that the state Supreme Court might adopt maps that would produce worse outcomes for them. They passed his maps last week.

There was some speculation over whether Evers would sign the bill or not — he could have vetoed them, and allowed the state Supreme Court to issue a ruling on which of the several maps submitted to them should be enacted. But doing so would have been odd, and potentially seen as political, as the legislature sent him the very same maps he had proposed.

So the governor signed them, flanked by supporters who held signs that read, "Doing the Right Thing."

"Wisconsinites want fair maps, and Wisconsinites deserve fair maps," Evers said as he signed the legislation into law.

Even though Evers, a Democrat, drew the maps, analyses that Republicans will still likely win the state legislature under them, although by a much slimmer margin and with more districts likely to be competitive, thus allowing at least the possibility that the maps could result in Democrats winning, either in 2024 or in the future.

Under the older maps that are now gone, Republicans enjoyed robust, nearly veto-proof majorities in both houses of the state legislature — despite the fact that Wisconsin is a "purple" state, where most of the statewide elections in the past decade were within just a few points of the top two candidates running. Evers won reelection to the governorship in 2022, for example, with over 51 percent of the vote. However, Republicans carried the state Assembly, winning 64 of the 99 seats within the chamber.

Democrats and stewards of good democracy alike should be happy with Monday's outcome — these new maps are more competitive, and will allow voters, not lawmakers, to decide who wins or loses. 

What's needed next, however, is reform of how district maps are drawn in the future. We came close to that, when Republicans drew up legislation mirroring the "Iowa Model" for map-drawing, but did so with a means of allowing them to still draw boundaries benefiting themselves (as they did in 2011 and 2022) without bipartisan input, if the maps from an independent commission were twice rejected. As Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause Wisconsin, told the Wisconsin Examiner last year, the plan was never a serious reconsideration from Republicans to reform the process:

Say it’s voted down twice, the Legislature can do what they normally do, which is just amend the legislation and pass whatever version they want. And so that would allow the Republicans in Wisconsin to just vote down the nonpartisan maps twice and then put forward their own plan.