Mark Zaid,
the D.C. attorney known for handling cases regarding national security,
security clearances, government investigations, freedom of speech
claims and whistleblowing, responded to President Donald Trump‘s
order not merely to cut all DEI initiatives in the federal government,
but also demanding that all federal employees expose any colleague who
remains involved with DEI-type programs in federal agencies, including
the Department of Homeland Security and NASA.
[NOTE:
“We are aware of efforts by some in government,” said Trump
administration emails sent to government employees, according to NBC News, “to disguise these programs by using coded or imprecise language.]
Commenting on the developments, Zaid wrote: “It goes beyond what happened at DHS & NASA today. CIA employees were told all resource & affinity groups are canceled. No black history month or MLK celebration, or any other ethnic recognition months. DEI folks are to be fired rather than allowed to rotate to former offices.”
Zaid
reported: “CIA is also apparently banning lanyards that have to do with
affinity groups. Women’s Council had to take down website & cancel
all events, incl women’s history month. They are also compiling lists of
members within affinity groups.”
I
blame the racist Chump, I blame his racist voters and I damn well blame
Red Amy Goodman who pretends to care about us -- Black people -- when
it fits her needs at the moment. She is to blame, Rashida Tlaib is to
blame, all of these people who worked to attack Kamala Harris are to
blame. Amy is a cheap and tacky harlot. We need to grasp that. We need
to say "DONE!" forever with that woman. Read C.I.'s "2024: The Year of Betrayal From Inside The Left" -- and Ava and
C.I. were talking about this in real time.
I
hate to type this because I know it freaks C.I. out but truth telling
wins readers. THE COMMON ILLS has always had big numbers. But they're
now posting numbers like never before. Clicks/hits have more than tripled. And
that's because a lot of us didn't see what was going on but C.I. did and
it's registering with a lot of people.
(Huge
numbers freak C.I. out. She sees it as too much pressure. Her site got established within its
first six months because it was noted by many outlets and programs. She
had to ask friends at NPR to stop noting it on air. She wanted to fly
under the radar and big numbers freak her out.)
But
these liars sold us out -- Amy Goodman, Katrina vanden Heuvel. And we
don't need to hear from them ever again. They'll only work, yet again,
to tank a Democratic Party presidential nominee. That cannot happen
again. They were a little cabal of disgruntled faux radicals who didn't
get everything from Santa that they wanted so they worked to destroy
Kamala and 'teach Democrats a lesson.'
Those spoiled brats need to be kicked out. Most of them didn't end up voting for Kamala.
But
what's worse? They used their programs like DEMOCRACY NOW and
magazines and websites like THE NATION and COMMON DREAMS to lie about
Kamala, to smear her, to attack her and all in effort to depress
turnout.
We can't afford
these freaks. And if you doubt that, look at the damage Chump's done in
less than week -- all the damage already and all in less than a week.
Thursday, January 23, 2025. Donald Chump's attacking Civil Rights, abortion rights, workers rights and so much more.
Let's start with this from Senator Patty Murray's office:
ICYMI:On
Roe Anniversary, Senator Murray, Democrats Hammer Republicans for
Pushing Anti-Abortion Lies and Dangerous Extremism Rather Than Lowering
Costs, Helping Families
ICYMI:Murray,
Senate Democrats Slam Republicans for Pushing Anti-Abortion Extremism
Instead of Legislation to Lower Costs and Help Families
Washington, D.C. — Today U.S. Senator Patty Murray
(D-WA), a senior member and former chair of the Senate Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, delivered the following
remarks in opposition to S.6
ahead of a Senate vote on the legislation, which would create a new
government mandate overriding the best judgment of grieving families
facing fatal fetal diagnoses, threaten providers, and create even more
barriers to reproductive health care in America. Earlier today, Murray
led a press conference with Leader Schumer and Senators Shaheen and
Smith highlighting how, in week one of the Trump administration,
Republicans are doubling down on anti-woman, anti-abortion extremism
instead of doing anything to help working families or lower costs.
Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered on the Senate floor ahead of the vote today:
“Earlier this week, we lost a friend and a champion for reproductive
rights—Cecile Richards. She helped countless women, and changed the
conversation around women’s health and abortion. And I know if she were
here, she would say the fight continues. And that is very clear given
what Republicans are choosing to focus on today.
“Of all the bills that we could be voting on—lowering the cost of
health care, expanding child care, helping our families—it’s an absolute
disgrace that Republicans are spending their first week in power
attacking women, criminalizing doctors, and lying about abortion.
“I am not going to let anyone perpetuate disgusting lies about people who have abortions and the providers who care for them.
“This isn’t how abortion works; Republicans know it. All babies are
already protected under the law, regardless of the circumstance of their
birth. Doctors already have a legal obligation to provide appropriate
medical care. And we already know this sham bill from Republicans is not
going anywhere.
“We’ve been here, before. Last time we voted down this bill, I
actually spoke about something Republicans refuse to acknowledge in this
debate: the struggles, the struggles of a pregnant woman, who has
received tragic news that her baby had a fatal medical condition and
would not be able to survive, and who were able to make the choice that
was right for their family.
“But now, here we are, already hearing stories of women who were denied that choice by extreme Republican abortion bans.
“Can you imagine what it is like to go for months, pregnant with a
baby you know will not survive, and getting questions and comments like
“oh, is this your first child?” and “are you excited?”
“Do you know what it’s like fighting back tears as you try to decide
whether to nod politely somehow, or explain that actually your world is
falling apart? I can’t imagine that. But it happens.
“Mr. President, all the while, you know you have to go through this
against your will—because some politician decided they knew better than
you, and your family, and your doctor.
Now, Republicans have a bill today to take that issue nationwide.
That’s what we are voting on. That is their top priority now that Trump
is in office.
Shame on them. I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.”
###
Now let's stay with the US Senate and
think for a moment what it would mean to be a member. We are told that
they're noble, Jimmy Stewart-like film characters. But is that what you
see right now when you look at Joni Ernst?
We
all know she knows Pete Hegseth is not just unqualified to be Secretary
of Defense, he's also a threat to the office and to the safety of the
American people. But she's apparently going to vote for him. Because?
MAGA was mean to her online and because Donald Chump's threatened to
primary her.
She was elected to the Senate in 2014.
When does she take her brave stand. When does she follow her duties outlined in the Constitution she took an oath to uphold?
A
decade in the Senate and she's not willing to do the right thing
because she's afraid of losing her Senate seat? Why is the seat needed
when she's not going to do what she knows is right?
As
someone who's served, she knows his statements and views about women in
the military are repugnant, out of step and a threat to US service
members -- female and male. She knows that.
If
she weren't such a coward right now, she's grasp that doing the right
thing on this vote is how she easily wins elections. Elon starts
pouring money to some competitor? "Iowa, I have stood up for you and
plan to continue to stand for you. A man born in South Africa thinks he
can buy our votes just because of his vast wealth. Are we for sale?
No." You make that the rallying cry. Iowa's twice elected her to the
US Senate. She held offices in the state's government prior to that.
But she wants to be a coward right now.
And what's the worst that happens if she does lose next time (2026)?
She has to make her money on TV as a commentator?
She's not going to be poor. She's not going to be on welfare.
But she apparently would rather be a coward than do the right thing.
She's not alone in that by any means.
But
this vote has meaning to her that it doesn't for others. She served in
the military -- we've even noted that she'd be more than qualified to
be Secretary of Defense herself and that Trump should have nominated her
-- so she knows what's at stake.
And yet she'd
rather go along to stay in the Senate. Why? If you're not going to
stand up, why do you need to be in the Senate? She's been elected to it
twice, she's got her yearbook credit, if she's not going to do anything
of value, she doesn't really need to be in the Senate.
Democrats
should be personalizing these votes in 2026. The people who vote for
the unqualified, hang it around their necks. And if, like Hegseth
probably, they get into the post and they have a scandal, make it about,
"Even with all the warnings, Senator Ernst chose to vote for
Hegseth."
Mark Cuban makes a point on BLUESKY.
I understand what he's saying but he's wrong. He's also right.
The
hideous Kavenaugh would not be on the Court today were it not for
Senator Dianne Feinstein. As we've noted many times before, she never
knew what she was doing. That didn't come with advanced age. Back in
the '00s, as noted here in real time, she was screwing up on the
Judiciary Committee constantly as the late Ted Kennedy was pointing that
out to me and anyone else who would listen.
She
screwed up on Kavenaugh and if Teddy had been alive then, I think he
would have said her big mistake there was constantly feeding the press.
She miscalculated and it came off like a political hit job. I'd guess
that is what Cuban fears.
But that's not the same issue in this case. These charges and accusations?
When
former General David Petraeus was caught in an extramarital affair,
questions immediately began swirling about the timeframe of his
infidelity. According to Petraeus, his affair with biographer Paula
Broadwell did not begin until after he had retired as an Army general.
Why
is it an important distinction? While the scandal caused Petraeus to
resign his post as the Central Intelligence Agency Director, it is
unlikely he will be charged with a crime; on the other hand, had
Petraeus still been in the military at the of the affair, he could have
faced a criminal prosecution for adultery.
General
Petraeus' case serves as a powerful reminder that those serving in the
U.S. Armed Services are legally held to a higher standard of behavior
than members of the general public. Many military crimes would not be
punishable in the civilian world, and even for those military criminal
offenses that do have a civilian counterpart, military sentences can be
far more severe.
Discipline is the focus of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
Unlike
civilians, military members are subject to the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. The Uniform Code is a federal law enacted by Congress. The
President is authorized under the Uniform Code to establish rules and
procedures for implementation.
A
primary objective of the Uniform Code of Military Justice is to maintain
discipline in the ranks. Adultery is one example of a crime in the
Uniform Code that remains an offense for military members even though it
has been decriminalized in many American jurisdictions.
The
reasoning behind the military's adultery prohibition is twofold. First,
it is meant to reduce distraction and the potential morale impact that
such interpersonal behavior can have on soldiers who need to bond
effectively to work together. Second, it is especially important for
military subordinates to respect their superiors, and discouraging
adultery as much as possible helps the military preserve the moral
stature of its leaders. Commanders have great discretion in deciding
whether to prosecute adultery, and only tend to do so when it occurs
between people in the same unit, between ranks, or otherwise has the
potential to detract from military order.
Adultery
is far from the only way standards for military members differ from
those for civilians. For example, if an enlisted soldier is issued a
traffic ticket or falls behind on personal loan payments, his or her
commanding officer will be informed; domestic violence charges are often
career-ending for soldiers; and, drug use is typically punished far
more harshly in the military world.
The people under him are going to have to follow the Uniform Code of Military Justice -- something Pete Hegseth cannot do.
Senator
Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq War veteran, yesterday on MSNBC, discussed
Hegseth's nomination. She's exactly right that he would not get
advanced in the military for his actions.
Let's turn the focus to Convicted Felon Donald Chump. Tabitha noted his attack on the Civil Rights in a video yesterday.
President Trump issued a sweeping executive order revoking decades of diversity and affirmative action practices in federal government.
Why it matters:
This takes the current pushback on diversity, equity and inclusion into
the next stratosphere — abolishing decades of government standards on
diversity and equal opportunity, and seeking to crackdown on the same in
the private sector.
Zoom out: Trump's
order revokes one that President Johnson signed on September 24, 1965,
more than two years after the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. gave his "I
Have A Dream" speech at the Lincoln Memorial.
LBJ's
order gave the Secretary of Labor the authority to ensure equal
opportunity for people of color and women in federal contractors'
recruitment, hiring, training and other employment practices.
It
required federal contractors to refrain from employment discrimination
and take affirmative action to ensure equal opportunity "based on race,
color, religion, and national origin."
The
order came more than a year after Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act
of 1964 and just months after he signed the Voting Rights Act following
violent attacks on voting rights advocates in Selma, Ala.
The intrigue:
The reversal comes after five GOP presidents—including Trump during his
first term—kept the Johnson executive order in place, while others
expanded it through amendments.
As Tabitha concludes in her video, "Elections have consequences and, here we are, the consequences of your actions."
Where's
the grifter Jill Stein now? We know where Rashida Tlaib is -- making
tiny gestures on Chump's deportation plans but never owning that she
helped put him into office.
Her job was to
defend her country which is the United States of America. She failed to
do that. She voted twice to impeach Donald Chump during his first term
because she thought he was a grave threat to the country. But four
years later, he's running for re-election and she's telling people to
vote for Jill or not vote or vote for Trump.
She
can't walk away from this and she shouldn't be allowed to. She has
destroyed the safety of so many communities with her actions,
immigrants, those who look like they might be immigrants, LGBTQ+ people,
women, Black people, the disabled and so many more.
She didn't defend the country. She helped put a known threat back into the White House.
That doesn't go away.
We don't get a do over. We're stuck with that she did.
And unlike Rashida, let's not forget the very real threat to climate, to the health of our planet, that Chump is. Matthew Rozsa (SALON) explains:
On Monday, President Donald Trump opened his second term with an inaugural address declaring that America has a “national energy emergency.” Vowing to tap into the country’s vast oil and gas reserves,
Trump dismisses the overwhelming majority of climate scientists who say
burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases that overheat the
planet.
Instead
of trying to curb emissions on those gases, Trump signed executive
orders withdrawing the United States from the 2015 Paris climate deal.
He also announced initiatives promoting Alaskan oil and gas development
and reversing outgoing President Joe Biden’s policies protecting Arctic
lands and U.S. coastal waters from drilling and encouraging the adoption
of electric vehicles.
Climate
scientists, as well as other experts on environmental and energy
policy, say that Trump's emergency doesn't actually exist. They
emphasize that the president's desire to ramp up fossil fuel use is
a self-destructive move, as Earth’s temperature is already 1.5 degrees
Celsius above pre-industrial levels, one that will hurt both the planet
and the economy.
“There
is no national energy emergency — and certainly no emergency as
President Trump has defined it,” Julie McNamara, deputy policy director
with the Climate & Energy program at the Union of Concerned
Scientists, told Salon. “President Trump is simply doing the bidding of
fossil fuel executives, attempting to slash critical climate and public
health protections and basic project accountability to boost their
bottom lines.”
Donald Trump was continuing to ask fossil-fuel executives to fund his presidential campaign on Wednesday, despite scrutiny of his relationship with the industry.
The former president attended a fundraising luncheon at Houston’s Post Oak hotel hosted by three big oil executives.
The
invitation-only meeting comes a day after the defense rested its case
in Trump’s criminal hush-money trial, and a week after Houston was
battered by deadly storms. The climate crisis, caused primarily by the
burning of fossil fuels, has created the conditions for more frequent
and severe rainfall and flooding, including in Texas.
“Houstonians
are staring at Trump in disbelief as he flies in to beg big oil for
funds just days after the city’s climate disaster,” said Alex Glass,
communications director at the climate advocacy organization Climate
Power, and a former Houston resident.
It also follows a fundraising dinner at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club last month, where the former president reportedly asked more
than 20 oil executives for $1bn in campaign donations from their
industry and promising, if elected, to remove barriers to drilling,
scrap a pause on gas exports, and reverse new rules aimed at cutting car
pollution.
The FBI and Department of Justice should investigate whether
Donald Trump violated the law by promising political favors, if
re-elected, to the oil and gas industry in exchange for $1 billion in
campaign donations, according to a complaint filed today by Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. In a closed door meeting in
April, Trump reportedly told a group of oil and gas executives that they
should raise $1 billion for his campaign and promised that he would
take specific actions, including issuing drilling and export permits
that some oil and gas companies have pursued for years, on “day one” of
his next presidential term.
Trump reportedly described the offer as a “deal,” and public
reporting shows that since this meeting, Trump’s fundraising from the
oil and gas industry has picked up substantially and that the industry
has been drafting executive orders that its members hope Trump would
quickly implement as president.
“We
cannot have government officials making important policy as a result of
corrupt exchanges that benefit them, rather than what is in the
interest of the American people. That’s why the law is clear that a
request for a benefit, including campaign contributions, in exchange for
an official act is a bribe,” said CREW President Noah Bookbinder.
“Donald Trump’s actions here follow a pattern of Trump opening himself
up to corrupt influence, courting conflicts of interest, and using
official positions to enrich himself–and in this case may run afoul of
the criminal law.”
Should
he regain the presidency, Trump will be in a position to lead and
pressure the federal agencies responsible for regulating the oil and gas
industries and to issue executive orders that will directly affect
those industries.
“It is crucial that we have a quick and thorough investigation to
determine whether Donald Trump’s conduct with oil and gas executives
violate core corruption laws which are meant to protect the government
from undue influence and corruption,” said Bookbinder. “The public
deserves to know whether Trump’s request for $1 billion went beyond
merely epitomizing our system of excessive corporate influence on
politics and in fact crossed the legal line.”
These
are not new or suppressed details. They were reported well ahead of
the election. There was no reason for Rashida and her sister to work to
defeat Kamala Harris other than they just didn't care what happened to
the American people.
She's going to be held
accountable for this and all her fans can lie all the want but she is
responsible and she will be held accountable.
Others
who need to be held accountable include Amy Goodman (DEMOCRACY NOW) and
Karina vanden Heuvel (THE NATION) who used their outlets to attack
Kamala over and over for three months. Don't give money to them. THE
NATION should go under for its efforts to tank the campaign of what
should have been the first Black woman president. That's 100% against
the aims and goals of the people who started the magazine over a century
ago.
Amy Goodman is nothing but
a thief. Not a petty thief. She takes millions from PACIFICA RADIO
and the sweetheart deal her buddy Community Leslie Cagen set up for her
results in the fact that PACIFICA doesn't even own the show that they
started. No, Amy retains rights to every program. But she siphons off
millions from PACIFICA every year. It's amazing no one wants to report
on that story just like it's amazing how people disappear from the
PACIFICA airwaves when they touch just a little bit on this story.
So she had no ethics.
And those are the people who created the culture of hate around Kamala as actual Democrats were working to turn out the vote.
When I was researching my book on anti-democratic politics,
I found a striking pattern in modern incarnations of it — that these
movements, almost uniformly, claim their most aggressive anti-democratic
policies are actually defenses of democracy.
While
Donald Trump worked to overturn the 2020 election, for example, he
insisted that he wasn’t trying to steal an election — but rather to
“stop the steal” Joe Biden had already pulled off.
When
Trump returned to power this year, I expected to see the same
rhetorical maneuver deployed to justify his inevitable power grabs. And
indeed, many of Trump’s Day 1 executive orders did exactly this.
Take,
for example, Trump’s revival of Schedule F — a move that, in theory,
could allow Trump to fire tens of thousands of nonpartisan civil
servants and replace them with MAGA cronies. Such a move would be a
serious threat to democracy, in that it would consolidate key powers of
state in the executive’s hands in a manner that proved crucial to the
rise of elected authoritarians like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán.
Yet in the text of the order,
Trump sells the move as a vindication of democratic principles. Because
the president and vice president are the only executive branch members
“elected and directly accountable to the people,” they must be able to
assert greater control over civil servants “to restore accountability to
the career civil service.”
The same is true of other executive orders that might aid in Trump’s efforts to consolidate power.
An executive order on
“restoring freedom of speech and ending federal censorship” does not
provide any concrete protections against abusive surveillance or
internet control practices. It does, however, order the attorney general
to set up an inquiry into Biden administration policies that could serve as a pretext to harass and dismiss federal employees who don’t share Trump politics.
An order claiming to combat the “weaponization” of the federal government similarly
does very little to prevent Trump from, for example, ordering the
attorney general to investigate his political enemies or the IRS to
audit them. In fact, it lays the groundwork for two separate probes into
Biden administration policies that could end up targeting both federal
employees and private citizens.
Another personnel order,
billed as a means of making the government “properly accountable” to
“the American people,” imposes greater political controls on the Senior
Executive Service (SES) — an upper rung of the civil service. Among
other things, it dismisses everyone currently serving on the executive
resources boards that oversee hiring into these positions, and requires
that the boards be restaffed with a “majority” of “noncareer officials”
— meaning, most likely, Trump political appointees.
Going
forward, Trump will almost assuredly not do anything as blatant as
abolishing elections. Instead, every move will be given a democratic
defense, every power grab described as a victory for the American people
against the “deep state.”
The
aim is to make the reality of the situation into just another partisan
debate, where Trump says one thing while Democrats (and the media) say
another. The erosion of core democratic principles, like separation of
powers and political noninterference with government functions, will
appear to many like a perfectly normal part of democracy.
We opened with Senator Patty Murray's office, let's wind down with it:
Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior
member and former Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and
Pensions (HELP) Committee, issued the following statement on President
Donald Trump’s Executive Order
attempting to eliminate the Office of Federal Contract Compliance
Programs’ (OFCCP) authority to fight discrimination based on race,
color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national
origin in federal contracting. OFCCP is an agency within the Department
of Labor (DOL) that was established in 1965 and plays a unique and vital
role in combating unlawful employment discrimination for federal
contract workers. Federal contract workers make up about one-fifth of
the entire U.S. labor force, doing essential work in nearly every sector
imaginable—from construction, to research, to IT, to radioactive and
toxic waste cleanup, including at the Hanford site in Washington state.
“Donald Trump wants taxpayer funding to go to employers who
illegally discriminate—that’s the clear message from his Week One move
to try and gut core civil rights protections and eliminate the core
authority of an agency to protect the rights of federal contract workers
and combat illegal employment discrimination. It makes no sense to
hamstring an agency that has, for six decades, played an essential role
in upholding American workers’ basic civil rights and holding
corporations accountable for illegal discrimination—and it’s a dark
signal to working people about where the Trump administration’s
priorities lie.”
Throughout her career, Senator Murray has championed workers’ rights
and fought to combat employment discrimination, including as the top
Democrat on the Senate labor committee from 2015-2022—among other
things, Senator Murray fought backagainst
a proposed DOL rule by the Trump administration that would allow
federal contractors and subcontractors to justify discrimination against
women, LGBTQ+ people, and members of certain religious groups on
ideological grounds. Senator Murray first introduced the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act—comprehensive
labor legislation to protect workers’ right to stand together and
bargain for fairer wages, better benefits, and safer workplaces—in the
116th Congress, and also leads the Bringing an End to Harassment by Enhancing Accountability and Rejecting Discrimination (BE HEARD) in the Workplace Act,
comprehensive legislation to prevent workplace harassment, strengthen
and expand key protections for workers, and support workers in seeking
accountability and justice.