Pausing for a while Having some trouble keeping up with the blog maintenance......
Saturday, February 3, 2024
Thursday, February 1, 2024
Opinion | The Republicans’ Border Crisis
Opinion by Daniel Henninger • 21h The Wall Street Journal
The United States, an alleged superpower, may soon join Italy, Greece and Russia as validation of Adam Smith’s cautionary maxim: There is a great deal of ruin in a nation. The irony is that America’s slow disintegration is occurring in perhaps its most robust state, Texas, where the southern U.S. border essentially no longer exists.
In December alone, the U.S. Border Patrol reported 302,000 encounters with illegal migrants at the southwest border. Total encounters for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 were an almost incomprehensible 4.7 million.
To endure, great nations find their way to solving large problems. Migration may turn out to be the issue that swallowed America’s democratic order.
Other than Joe Biden and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, no one in the past year has disagreed that the “situation” at the southern border is a crisis. Until they were forced to respond by overwhelmingly unfavorable opinion polling about the border last month—even in New Hampshire’s primary—the Biden-Mayorkas see-no-problem pose was the nadir of political cynicism. But now come Donald Trump and his congressional followers, chasing the presumed political rewards of doing absolutely nothing about a serious national problem.
Oklahoma’s very conservative Republican senator, James Lankford, has spent weeks attempting to shape a compromise on illegal migration with Democrats that would permit passage as well of a supplemental bill that has funding for embattled Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan. This isn’t the unto-eternity discussion of reforming Social Security. These are national-security matters that needed addressing yesterday by the people elected to prevent the U.S. from being crushed by unsolvable problems.
About a week ago, Mr. Trump told congressional Republicans via his Truth Social platform to oppose any Lankford compromise: “I do not think we should do a Border Deal, at all, unless we get EVERYTHING.” He elaborated: “A Border Deal now would be another Gift to the Radical Left Democrats. They need it politically.” Mr. Trump ended his input by offering a solution to the current border crisis: “If you want to have a really Secure Border, your ONLY HOPE is to vote for TRUMP2024.” Amid these statements, House Speaker Mike Johnsonwrote that the Lankford compromise would be “dead on arrival.”
Opinion by Daniel Henninger • 21h The Wall Street Journal
In December alone, the U.S. Border Patrol reported 302,000 encounters with illegal migrants at the southwest border. Total encounters for fiscal years 2022 and 2023 were an almost incomprehensible 4.7 million.
To endure, great nations find their way to solving large problems. Migration may turn out to be the issue that swallowed America’s democratic order.
Other than Joe Biden and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, no one in the past year has disagreed that the “situation” at the southern border is a crisis. Until they were forced to respond by overwhelmingly unfavorable opinion polling about the border last month—even in New Hampshire’s primary—the Biden-Mayorkas see-no-problem pose was the nadir of political cynicism. But now come Donald Trump and his congressional followers, chasing the presumed political rewards of doing absolutely nothing about a serious national problem.
Oklahoma’s very conservative Republican senator, James Lankford, has spent weeks attempting to shape a compromise on illegal migration with Democrats that would permit passage as well of a supplemental bill that has funding for embattled Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan. This isn’t the unto-eternity discussion of reforming Social Security. These are national-security matters that needed addressing yesterday by the people elected to prevent the U.S. from being crushed by unsolvable problems.
About a week ago, Mr. Trump told congressional Republicans via his Truth Social platform to oppose any Lankford compromise: “I do not think we should do a Border Deal, at all, unless we get EVERYTHING.” He elaborated: “A Border Deal now would be another Gift to the Radical Left Democrats. They need it politically.” Mr. Trump ended his input by offering a solution to the current border crisis: “If you want to have a really Secure Border, your ONLY HOPE is to vote for TRUMP2024.” Amid these statements, House Speaker Mike Johnsonwrote that the Lankford compromise would be “dead on arrival.”
Wednesday, January 31, 2024
Tuesday, January 30, 2024
DOJ issues mysterious grand jury subpoena to House of Representatives
Story by David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement • 19h Alterne
House Speaker Mike Johnson in in Las Vegas in October 2023© provided by AlterNet
Story by David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement • 19h Alterne
The U.S. Dept. of Justice has issued a subpoena requesting unknown documents from the U.S. House of Representatives for a grand jury, according to a memo the House Sergeant at Arms sent Speaker Mike Johnson, which was announced by the clerk formally on Monday.
“The House is notified that the Office of Sergeant at Arms has been served a grand jury subpoena issued by the Justice Department for documents and that the office will comply,” the clerk stated (video below). “After consulting with the Office of General Counsel, I have determined that compliance with the subpoena is consistent with the rights and privileges of the House. Signed, Sincerely, William P. McFarland, Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives.”
That video is going viral, with more than two million views in two hours, and some legal experts are now attempting to gather information.
MSNBC host and legal contributor Katie Phang said on social media that she has not seen the document but she’s trying “to hunt down some more info before folks start speculating.”
The speculation has already begun, with many pointing fingers at House Republicans they believe were somehow involved in the January 6, 2021 insurrection. There is currently no indication what the subpoena is related to, or how serious, if at all, it is.
Meanwhile, journalist Jamie Dupree, called “the most connected man in Washington” several years ago by Fox News’ Sean Hannity asked: “Who at DOJ is running a grand jury right now?”
vv
'He is lying': Ted Cruz slammed as Fox News host Sean Hannity reports on Texas senator unloading on Biden admin over border crisis
Cruz slammed President Joe Biden and blamed him for the worsening situation at the southern border.
Following this news, Fox News host Sean Hannity took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to report on Cruz bashing the Biden administration.
However, Cruz faced backlash as several people on the internet called out the senator.
Story by Samridhi Goel • 7h Meaww
'He is lying': Ted Cruz slammed as Fox News host Sean Hannity reports on Texas senator unloading on Biden admin over border crisis© Provided by Meaww
NEW YORK CITY, NEW YORK: During Monday's broadcast of ‘America Reports' on Fox News, Senator Ted Cruz discussed the border standoff between Texas Governor Greg Abbott and the White House.Cruz slammed President Joe Biden and blamed him for the worsening situation at the southern border.
Following this news, Fox News host Sean Hannity took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to report on Cruz bashing the Biden administration.
However, Cruz faced backlash as several people on the internet called out the senator.
And then MEAWW posts this at bottom of article.....WHY DID THEY EVEN PUBLISH THIS IF THEY CANNOT CONFIRM IT ??
This article contains remarks made on the Internet by individual people and organizations. MEAWW cannot confirm them independently and does not support claims or opinions being made online.
THIS IS WHY WE HAVE
MISINFORMATION !!
Monday, January 29, 2024
Biden Can Stop the Flow of Illegal Immigration Now. He's Refusing. Katie Pavlich | January 29, 2024
Here are five things he can do, today, to blunt the current invasion.
1) Reinstate remain in Mexico for those claiming asylum, which would immediately cut down on millions of false asylum claims and years long immigration court backlog.
2) End catch-and-release into American towns, cities and communities.
3) Use the Immigration and Nationality Act to "suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
4) Restart construction on the border wall (miles of wall are currently sitting stacked up and rotting in lots, ready to be put up).
5) Reinstate asylum cooperative agreements with El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras, which force "asylum seekers" to file claims in their home countries.
There's a long list of things Biden can do, today, to protect the sovereignty of the country and help himself politically. He's refusing.
Speaker Mike Johnson
@SpeakerJohnson
No, Mr. President, your policies DID create this crisis. Here are 64 times you and your administration undermined America’s border security. https://speaker.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Biden-Admin-Actions-Undermining-Border-Security.pdf…
Michelle Hackman
@MHackman
·
Jan 19
Per WH pool, Biden was asked if he thinks the border is secure. "No," he said. Asked if his admin's policies have caused any of the problems, he also said no
6:26 PM · Jan 19, 2024
·
@SpeakerJohnson
No, Mr. President, your policies DID create this crisis. Here are 64 times you and your administration undermined America’s border security. https://speaker.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Biden-Admin-Actions-Undermining-Border-Security.pdf…
Michelle Hackman
@MHackman
·
Jan 19
Per WH pool, Biden was asked if he thinks the border is secure. "No," he said. Asked if his admin's policies have caused any of the problems, he also said no
6:26 PM · Jan 19, 2024
·
THEY never want to tell the whole story....like how In the first 11 months of 2023, at least 2,953,676 migrants crossed over our borders. Despite the fact that Gov. Abbott requested support 3 times from the federal government (Biden admin.) The Feds have violated their oath of office, all of them! So as I see it, Gov Abbott had no choice but to defend Texas the best he could (w/o Fed support) and now THEY want to condemn him for it...HOW ABOUT THIS...Suppose the Federal Government do their job and CLOSE our southern border and get things under control instead of worrying about sending BILLIONS of dollars to other countries (like they do for the Ukraine) CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME !! CLOSE THE SOUTHERN BORDER!!
Supreme Court Overturns Appeals Court Rule, Says Texas Can’t Restrain Federal Agents With Razor WireStory by GistFest • 5h GistFest
It has long been established that federal laws surpass all state laws that are in conflict with them. And states have no right to prevent federal officials from carrying out their official duties.
This principle is in the Constitution. It says federal law “shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby.” However, Texas seems to believe it is special and has been defying that principle.
Last month, a federal appeals court granted the state permission to erect razor wire barriers. The barriers prevent federal border patrol officers from doing their jobs. However, the Court also ordered the border patrol not to cut these wires except in very limited circumstances.
The United States Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit, a far-right court dominated by MAGA judges, passed the decision. They are famous for frequently handing down decisions that conflict with existing law.
On Monday, the Supreme Court responded by handing down a brief order in Department of Homeland Security v. Texas blocking this Fifth Circuit order. The order drew a 5-4 vote. This means four justices seem to believe that Texas can use razor wire to restrain federal officials.
The four justices who voted for Texas include Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, both Republican appointees, voted with the Court’s three Democratic justices.
The Texas case was borne of the state’s attempt to limit border crossings in Eagle Pass, Texas. They did this by lining almost 30 miles of the US-Mexico border with razor wire.
The barrier is one of several steps Texas’s government has taken in an attempt to limit migration, often in defiance of the Biden administration and federal law. Texas also enacted a law that allows state judges to issue deportation orders, a fundamental power of the federal government.
The state is also in the middle of another court fight regarding a floating barrier of buoys it erected in the Rio Grande. The immediate issue for the Supreme Court is not whether Texas has permission to construct such a barrier against the wishes of the federal government.
Rather, the question in this case is whether the state of Texas may obtain a court order forbidding federal agents from cutting the razor wire barriers when they need to do so in order to perform their official duties.
Despite the Fifth Circuit’s decision, Texas’s arguments in favor of the order are too weak. The Constitution is also against them, so this case is an open-and-shut case for the federal government. Texas will conform for as long as it is a part of the United States.
Governor Abbott’s remarks came in the wake of a Supreme Court decision that sanctioned the Border Patrol’s action to dismantle or trim the razor wire placed by Texas along the border with Mexico.
Abbott articulated his position, stating, “The federal government has reneged on its foundational agreement with the States. The United States’ Executive Branch is constitutionally obligated to enforce federal laws that safeguard States, including existing immigration statutes.” He further accused President Joe Biden of neglecting his presidential duty to enforce immigration laws as set by Congress.
Mediaite reported that Abbott criticized President Biden for directing his administration to disregard federal laws mandating the detention of undocumented immigrants. Abbott referenced the foresight of U.S. Constitution framers like James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, who anticipated scenarios where States would need protection from a noncompliant president failing to address external threats, such as the illegal immigration facilitated by cartels.
For nearly two years, Governor Abbott has been pushing the limits of state versus federal jurisdiction in matters of border control and immigration enforcement. This initiative, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, began hinting at a formal declaration of a “border invasion” as early as April 2022. In September, following a November letter to President Biden, Abbott officially declared this invasion, citing Texas’ constitutional right to engage in war in such circumstances.
Since this declaration, Abbott has been progressively expanding the border enforcement roles of both the Texas Department of Public Safety and the Texas National Guard. He emphasizes that this expansion is grounded in constitutional authority for a state to defend itself against invasion.
In his latest statement, Abbott firmly asserted, “This authority is the highest law in the country, overriding any conflicting federal laws.”
This escalation of state-level action has led to numerous legal disputes, particularly regarding Operation Lone Star, Abbott’s initiative to bolster Texas’ authority over immigration enforcement. While the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the removal of the razor wire installed by Texas, it did not delve into other contentious aspects of the ongoing tension between state and federal agencies.
Recently, Texas authorities took control of a public park along the Rio Grande in Eagle Pass, utilizing Texas National Guard troops to restrict Border Patrol access. In response, Democratic Representatives Joaquin Castro and Greg Casar from Texas have urged President Biden to assume command of the Texas National Guard, particularly if Governor Abbott defies the Supreme Court’s rulings.
What Happens If Greg Abbott Expands Texas State Guard?
Story by Ewan Palmer • 3h Newsweek
Abbott has vowed to defy the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling that said razor wire installed along stretches the Texas side of the U.S.-Mexico border were illegal,(I read the article... the SCOTUS didn't say the wire was illegal, just that the Feds could cut it down) and that Border Patrol agents should be allowed to remove them. The wire had been put in place by Texas law enforcement at Abbott's direction.
In response, the Republican governor declared that Texas was under an "invasion" from migrants, invoked the state's constitutional right to defend and protect itself, as well as order the Texas National Guard—which is under the direct command of the governor, rather than the president—to continue to install the razor wire.
There previously were calls from Democrats for President Joe Biden to federalize the state's National Guard, essentially putting them under the command of the White House, to allow Border Patrol agents to remove the razor wire following the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on January 22.
As the debate continues, Daniel Miller, president of the Texas Nationalist Movement, which campaigns for the Lone Star State to declare independence from the U.S., suggested that Abbott should expand the powers of the TXSG, the volunteer military agency that provides response during incidents such as the aftermath of a natural disaster.
Sunday, January 28, 2024
As Iran-backed militias attack Americans, Biden tries to save Tehran terrorists
Story by John Bolton • 3h New York Post
Many words describe President Biden’s Iran policy. “Craven,” “weak,” “obsequious” and “embarrassing,” among others, come readily to mind.
But there are no words to describe adequately the recent White House decision, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, to warn Tehran about a possible terrorist attack.
Sunday’s serious American casualties in Jordan, at the hands of an Iran-backed militia, tragically underscore Biden’s folly.
Anonymous administration sources justified sharing intelligence with a US enemy by citing a “duty to warn” policy applicable to both citizens and noncitizens.
Although the Journal story mentions “exceptions” to this policy, its administration sources were less than candid.
I have experienced duty-to-warn personally.
Starting in 2020, the FBI, pursuant to the policy, has warned me of Iran’s efforts to assassinate me and other current and former American officials.
I’m sure Tehran is pleased to know President Biden nonetheless still has its best interests at heart.
Story by John Bolton • 3h New York Post
But there are no words to describe adequately the recent White House decision, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, to warn Tehran about a possible terrorist attack.
Sunday’s serious American casualties in Jordan, at the hands of an Iran-backed militia, tragically underscore Biden’s folly.
Anonymous administration sources justified sharing intelligence with a US enemy by citing a “duty to warn” policy applicable to both citizens and noncitizens.
Although the Journal story mentions “exceptions” to this policy, its administration sources were less than candid.
I have experienced duty-to-warn personally.
Starting in 2020, the FBI, pursuant to the policy, has warned me of Iran’s efforts to assassinate me and other current and former American officials.
I’m sure Tehran is pleased to know President Biden nonetheless still has its best interests at heart.
Georgia rep moves to impeach DA Fani Willis, accuses her of ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’
Story by Selim Algar • 2d New York Post
LINK>>VIDEO.
A Georgia lawmaker filed a resolution to impeach beleaguered Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis on Friday.
State Rep. Charlice Byrd (R-Woodstock) said Willis is using her office “not for justice but for political gain” in her prosecution of former President Donald Trump and others over election interference.
In addition, the Georgia Senate on Friday voted to approve the formation of a committee to investigate potential wrongdoing on Willis’ part after her alleged affair with the special prosecutor appointed to oversee the Trump case emerged.
The panel will have the power to compel testimony from key witnesses and subpoena records.
Byrd accused Willis of violating the First Amendment by hunting down and indicting conservatives for scrutinizing the 2020 electoral results.
Diagnosing the DA with “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Byrd also ripped Willis for a potential conflict of interest in light of her alleged relationship with Nathan Wade, who stands accused of using the funds the county paid him to take Willis on luxury romantic leisure trips.
Willis assigned Wade to the high-profile proceeding despite his limited legal resume and lack of experience with the complex RICO indictments being prosecuted.
Story by Selim Algar • 2d New York Post
State Rep. Charlice Byrd (R-Woodstock) said Willis is using her office “not for justice but for political gain” in her prosecution of former President Donald Trump and others over election interference.
In addition, the Georgia Senate on Friday voted to approve the formation of a committee to investigate potential wrongdoing on Willis’ part after her alleged affair with the special prosecutor appointed to oversee the Trump case emerged.
The panel will have the power to compel testimony from key witnesses and subpoena records.
Byrd accused Willis of violating the First Amendment by hunting down and indicting conservatives for scrutinizing the 2020 electoral results.
Diagnosing the DA with “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Byrd also ripped Willis for a potential conflict of interest in light of her alleged relationship with Nathan Wade, who stands accused of using the funds the county paid him to take Willis on luxury romantic leisure trips.
Willis assigned Wade to the high-profile proceeding despite his limited legal resume and lack of experience with the complex RICO indictments being prosecuted.
I'm always concerned with polls because we hardly ever know how many people were polled and from where. (I wouldn't beleive any poll from Ca.) and how many were asked and since this was about republicans, were they ONLY republicans that were asked?? What I mean...See remarks in text (in red)
Story by Zeleb.es • 13hThe Daily Digest
©Provided by The Daily Digest
New research has shown that there is one political faction in America much more willing to endorse the use of political violence than other groups in the country, and it's probably easy to guess which partisans believe violence is okay. REALLY...How about ANTIFA and BLM Weren't most demoRats ??
MAGA Republicans and violence©Provided by The Daily Digest
Published in the journal PLOS One, the new research revealed that MAGA Republicans are much more likely to endorse the use of political violence than other Republicans and non-Republican groups. But how bad were the findings? Violence Has Long Been a Feature of American Elections....
...2016 More than 200 arrested at Trump inauguration protests in DC Don't think these protests were REPUBLICANS
Thousands were surveyed©Provided by The Daily Digest
In order to understand the survey’s results it's important to first understand how the new research was conducted. Ipsos conducted a survey of 8,620 people between May 2022 and June 2022 that represented the makeup of the US.
Democracy, society, and violence©Provided by The Daily Digest
PsyPost reported that important measures were taken into account and questions about the country’s democracy, society, and ethnicity as well as thoughts on the use of political violence were added to the survey to examine various views.
Understanding the survey process©Provided by The Daily Digest
Specific questions about self-defense, the protection of democracy, and the response were asked to gain more insight into the minds of participants so that they could be divided into four groups based on their answers.
The four groups of the survey©Provided by The Daily Digest
The four groups included MAGA Republicans, strong Republicans, other Republicans, and non-Republicans. MAGA Republicans were defined as those who voted for Donald Trump and strongly disagreed with 2020 election results.
Over half think violence is justified©Provided by The Daily Digest
When questioned about using violence as a means to advance political objectives, 58% of survey respondents who were identified as MAGA Republicans said using violence was justifiable—which was far larger than other groups.
Political violence and other groups©Provided by The Daily Digest
Only 38.3% of those identified as strong Republicans said that using violence to achieve political goals was fine while 31.5% of other Republicans and 25.1% of non-Republicans endorsed violence as a tool to achieve political objectives.
Belief that a strong leader was needed©Provided by The Daily Digest
However, these weren’t the only worrying beliefs that the researchers found about MAGA Republicans. Nearly one-third (31%) believed that having a strong leader was important to maintain democracy in the United States.
Backing armed citizens at polling stations©Provided by The Daily Digest Moreover, 19.2% of MAGA Republicans backed the idea that armed citizens should be patrolling polling stations, and 26.7% strongly or very strongly believed in the conspiracy theories put forth by QAnon regarding US institutions.
Worried White America is being replaced©Provided by The Daily Digest MAGA Republicans were also far less likely to believe that White Americans had more societal advantages than Black Americans, a view which was endorsed by 62.6% of non-Republicans survey respondents.
Belief in the great replacement theory©Provided by The Daily Digest
Over half of MAGA Republicans reported they believed in the great replacement theory with 51% either strongly or very strongly agreeing with the idea that native-born White Americans were being replaced by immigration.
A serious threat to American democracy©Provided by The Daily Digest Finally, and maybe most worrying of all, 90% of MAGA Republicans believed there was a serious threat to democracy, and while high, all groups also perceived a rather larger level of perceived threat to the nation’s democracy.
All groups were worried about democracy©Provided by The Daily Digest For example, 74.4% of strong Republicans, 61.7% of other Republicans, and 70.1% of non-Republicans all reported that they perceived a threat to democracy in the US. It is likely, however, that the perceived threat differed among each group.
Endorsing racism and delusional beliefs©Provided by The Daily Digest
“The study’s findings suggest that MAGA Republicans, as defined, are a distinct minority — more likely than other Republicans to endorse racist and delusional beliefs, sometimes by very wide margins,” the study's authors wrote in their research paper.
MAGA Republicans and political violence©Provided by The Daily Digest One of the most interesting aspects of the research found that while MAGA Republicans are a lot more likely to endorse violence as a means to achieve political objectives, they are also less likely to engage in it themselves.
Not more willing to engage in violence©Provided by The Daily Digest
“Concern about the potential for political violence among MAGA Republicans appears to be justified, but it is noteworthy that they were not more willing than others to engage in violence themselves,” the study’s authors wrote in their conclusion.
A caveat to the good news©Provided by The Daily Digest
“There is good news in the lack of willingness to engage in violence, but it comes with a caveat: support for violence by the unwilling may enable the willing to proceed.” study author Garen Wintemute told PsyPost.
Thousands were surveyed©Provided by The Daily Digest
In order to understand the survey’s results it's important to first understand how the new research was conducted. Ipsos conducted a survey of 8,620 people between May 2022 and June 2022 that represented the makeup of the US.
Democracy, society, and violence©Provided by The Daily Digest
PsyPost reported that important measures were taken into account and questions about the country’s democracy, society, and ethnicity as well as thoughts on the use of political violence were added to the survey to examine various views.
Understanding the survey process©Provided by The Daily Digest
Specific questions about self-defense, the protection of democracy, and the response were asked to gain more insight into the minds of participants so that they could be divided into four groups based on their answers.
The four groups of the survey©Provided by The Daily Digest
The four groups included MAGA Republicans, strong Republicans, other Republicans, and non-Republicans. MAGA Republicans were defined as those who voted for Donald Trump and strongly disagreed with 2020 election results.
Over half think violence is justified©Provided by The Daily Digest
When questioned about using violence as a means to advance political objectives, 58% of survey respondents who were identified as MAGA Republicans said using violence was justifiable—which was far larger than other groups.
Political violence and other groups©Provided by The Daily Digest
Only 38.3% of those identified as strong Republicans said that using violence to achieve political goals was fine while 31.5% of other Republicans and 25.1% of non-Republicans endorsed violence as a tool to achieve political objectives.
Belief that a strong leader was needed©Provided by The Daily Digest
However, these weren’t the only worrying beliefs that the researchers found about MAGA Republicans. Nearly one-third (31%) believed that having a strong leader was important to maintain democracy in the United States.
Backing armed citizens at polling stations©Provided by The Daily Digest Moreover, 19.2% of MAGA Republicans backed the idea that armed citizens should be patrolling polling stations, and 26.7% strongly or very strongly believed in the conspiracy theories put forth by QAnon regarding US institutions.
Worried White America is being replaced©Provided by The Daily Digest MAGA Republicans were also far less likely to believe that White Americans had more societal advantages than Black Americans, a view which was endorsed by 62.6% of non-Republicans survey respondents.
Belief in the great replacement theory©Provided by The Daily Digest
Over half of MAGA Republicans reported they believed in the great replacement theory with 51% either strongly or very strongly agreeing with the idea that native-born White Americans were being replaced by immigration.
A serious threat to American democracy©Provided by The Daily Digest Finally, and maybe most worrying of all, 90% of MAGA Republicans believed there was a serious threat to democracy, and while high, all groups also perceived a rather larger level of perceived threat to the nation’s democracy.
All groups were worried about democracy©Provided by The Daily Digest For example, 74.4% of strong Republicans, 61.7% of other Republicans, and 70.1% of non-Republicans all reported that they perceived a threat to democracy in the US. It is likely, however, that the perceived threat differed among each group.
Endorsing racism and delusional beliefs©Provided by The Daily Digest
“The study’s findings suggest that MAGA Republicans, as defined, are a distinct minority — more likely than other Republicans to endorse racist and delusional beliefs, sometimes by very wide margins,” the study's authors wrote in their research paper.
MAGA Republicans and political violence©Provided by The Daily Digest One of the most interesting aspects of the research found that while MAGA Republicans are a lot more likely to endorse violence as a means to achieve political objectives, they are also less likely to engage in it themselves.
Not more willing to engage in violence©Provided by The Daily Digest
“Concern about the potential for political violence among MAGA Republicans appears to be justified, but it is noteworthy that they were not more willing than others to engage in violence themselves,” the study’s authors wrote in their conclusion.
A caveat to the good news©Provided by The Daily Digest
“There is good news in the lack of willingness to engage in violence, but it comes with a caveat: support for violence by the unwilling may enable the willing to proceed.” study author Garen Wintemute told PsyPost.
Deepfake of President Biden Urging Voter Suppression Triggers Investigation
Story by Brenda Kanana • 12h Cryptopolitan
ElevenLabs, the technology provider behind the creation of the deepfake audio, has taken immediate action by suspending the user responsible for generating the malicious content. Pindrop Security Inc., a voice-fraud detection company, confirmed that ElevenLabs’ technology was used to produce the deepfake.
Upon learning of Pindrop’s findings, ElevenLabs launched an internal investigation into the incident. The startup, which recently secured an impressive $80 million in financing from investors including Andreessen Horowitz and Sequoia Capital, now faces questions about the potential misuse of its AI-driven voice-cloning technology.
Alarming implications for election security
The deepfake robocall featuring President Biden has raised significant concerns among disinformation experts and elections officials. Not only does this incident underscore the relative ease with which audio deepfakes can be created, but it also highlights the potential for bad actors to leverage this technology to deter voters from participating in elections.
Perspective: The Supreme Court has opened Pandora’s box in Texas
Story by Valerie Hudson • 12h Deseret News
The Supreme Court case most associated with the first move — reinforcing the power of the legislative branch vis a vis the executive — was West Virginia v. EPA, and there is an important new case pending that is liable to go in the same direction. The court has argued that the agencies of the executive branch are not free to make important policy decisions and regulations without explicit legislative approval. While on the one hand, I’d argue that this is an overdue correction by the Supreme Court, we have begun to see the unforeseen problem is that the executive branch might decide to simply ignore the rulings entirely.
President Joe Biden’s dismissal of federal student loan debt, despite the Supreme Court ruling blocking the same, is a harbinger of the real threat here. In a context where there is a divided Congress, what power is there to enforce this ruling of the judicial branch against the executive branch? None, apparently. There appears to be absolutely nothing stopping the executive branch from plowing ahead in the face of Supreme Court opposition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
