The war in Ukraine is less “surprising” to some who’ve seen it raging since 2014. Although it escalated greatly in 2022, the Ukraine war timeline ultimately dates back all the way to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.
To understand the backstory — which is now inextricably intertwined with our own presidential history given the impeachment of Donald Trump over his phone calls with Zelensky to the Republican Party‘s current-day support of the aims of Vladimir Putin — we have to go back to a time when no one was stronger on anti-Russian policy than GOP darling Ronald Reagan.
1991 — Ukraine declares independence and becomes an independent entity after the fall of the Soviet Union
1994 — Ukraine agrees to give up its nuclear arsenal in exchange for a protection agreement with Russia, United States, Britain, and Ireland (Budapest Memorandum)
2004 — Viktor Yanukovich “wins” election under dubious circumstances and is deposed for a do over election, which he loses to Viktor Yuschenko (Orange Revolution)
2006 — Viktor Yanukovych begins working directly with Paul Manafort, in an effort to boost his image after his electoral loss. Manafort was known for his work helping the “Torturers’ Lobby” of brutal dictators around the world in the 1980s, with Roger Stone (another infamous dirty trickster best known for his role as a fixer for Richard Nixon).
2007 — Yanukovych’s Party of Regions does well in the Ukranian parliamentary elections, gaining a large number of seats credited to Manafort’s strategic advice about Western-style campaigning.
2010 — Yanukovych is elected President of Ukraine, again largely crediting Manafort’s strategies for his comeback.
Nov 2013 — Having promised a more European-style government in order to win the presidency in 2010, Yanukovych turned on his word and initiated more pro-Russian policies than the Ukranians had signed up for. Yanukovych is now beset by enormous public protests against the corruption of his regime, and his unilateral decision to abandon an association agreement with the EU in favor of a trade agreement with Russia (Maidan Revolution / Revolution of Dignity)
Feb 2014 — After a harrowing 93 days barricaded inside Kyiv’s Maidan Square, activists are victorious; Yanukovich is deposed and flees to Russia
Mar 2014 — Russian forces invade and annex the region of Crimea within Ukraine
Apr 2014 — Russian forces invade the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in eastern Ukraine, escalating a war that continues to this day and had already killed more than 14,000 people by the time the 2022 large scale invasion began
Apr 2014 — Hunter Biden and business partner Devon Archer join the board of Burisma
May 2014 — Candy magnate Petro Poroshenko succeeds Yanukovych as president of Ukraine
Right wing groups in America have long wielded disproportionate influence over political discourse, policy-making, and the judiciary — quietly but effectively steering the country toward a more authoritarian, corporate-driven agenda. Groups like the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation operate as power brokers in the conservative ecosystem, funneling money and influence to shape not just elections, but the ideological future of the nation.
The Federalist Society, for example, has become a judicial kingmaker, successfully installing justices on the Supreme Court who subscribe to its narrow view of constitutional “originalism”—leading to landmark decisions like Dobbs v. Jackson, which rolled back reproductive rights in America. Meanwhile, Heritage’s Project 2025 serves as a blueprint for a far-right authoritarian takeover of federal agencies, ready to gut progressive reforms and install Christian nationalist ideology in their place.
But these are just a few key players in an ever-expanding web of right-wing groups. The National Rifle Association (NRA) remains a force in stoking fears around gun rights to mobilize voters, while Fox News continues to manipulate public discourse with fear-mongering and disinformation to drive its viewers further into a reactionary worldview. Behind the scenes, the Council for National Policy (CNP) operates as a shadowy network of conservative elites pulling the strings, and groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) and Turning Point USA drive extremist policies at the state and grassroots levels.
Add to that the influence of organizations like the Family Research Council, Focus on the Family, and PragerU, and it becomes clear that right-wing power in America is deeply entrenched, feeding off the fear and division these groups systematically create. The stakes for democracy and the future of civil liberties couldn’t be higher.
One way to address the threat is to become familiar with it. Here is a cheatsheet to some of the most influential and notable right wing groups in operation today.
The Federalist Society
The Federalist Society is a powerful, right-wing legal organization that seeks to reshape the U.S. judiciary by advocating for originalism and textualism—the interpretation of the Constitution based on its supposedly “original” meaning (as interpreted by conservative judges, of course). Founded in 1982, this group has steadily gained influence by grooming conservative legal talent, promoting judges who share their philosophy, and challenging progressive legislation, with many of its members appointed to federal courts, including the Supreme Court.
Their ultimate goal is to roll back decades of civil rights protections, environmental regulations, and reproductive freedoms in favor of limited government (even ultra-limited government) and deregulated markets. Now led by conservative activist Leonard Leo, The Federalist Society’s growing clout can be seen in the success of getting their chosen justices onto the Supreme Court, paving the way for decisions like Dobbs v. Jackson, which overturned Roe v. Wade and set back reproductive rights in America by half a century. The organization’s influence has been particularly notable during Republican administrations, especially under former President Donald Trump, who appointed 3 of the Court’s 9 straight from the Federalist list.
A full two thirds of the current U.S. Supreme Court justices have been affiliated with or supported by The Federalist Society. These justices share the Society’s commitment to originalism and textualism, and many were recommended or championed by the organization during the judicial nomination process. The following 6 justices have ties to The Federalist Society:
John Roberts (Chief Justice) – Although not a formal member, Roberts has participated in Federalist Society events and has been described as ideologically aligned with the group’s principles.
Clarence Thomas – An advocate of originalism, Thomas has long been associated with the judicial philosophy promoted by The Federalist Society. He has spoken at their events and is widely seen as one of their intellectual leaders on the bench.
Samuel Alito – Like Roberts, Alito is not a formal member but has participated in Federalist Society activities and shares their conservative judicial outlook.
Neil Gorsuch – A formal member of The Federalist Society before his nomination, Gorsuch was strongly backed by the organization when he was selected to replace Antonin Scalia in 2017.
Brett Kavanaugh – Kavanaugh was supported by The Federalist Society throughout his career, and his nomination to the Supreme Court in 2018 was actively promoted by the group.
Amy Coney Barrett – A former member of The Federalist Society, Barrett was a professor at Notre Dame Law School, where she worked closely with the organization. She was nominated to the Supreme Court in 2020 to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The Heritage Foundation
The Heritage Foundation, founded in 1973, has long been a key architect of conservative policy in the United States. The Foundation’s efforts consistently push for policies that prioritize corporate interests, deregulation, and concentrated executive power, even at the expense of democratic institutions and processes.
Over the decades, The Heritage Foundation has become a significant force in shaping Republican legislative agendas, providing policy proposals to GOP lawmakers and conservative administrations since Ronald Reagan. However, this institutional influence has often facilitated the entrenchment of an authoritarian strain of right-wing ideology that has now metasticized into the body politic.
The social network formerly known as Twitter, now known as X, has been through some things — including a rocky change of ownership 2 years ago. At the time, the person who owns Twitter on paper was known to be tech billionaire and then-world’s richest man Elon Musk — but it was not fully known who was included in the full shadowy list of Twitter investors.
Thanks apparently to some terrible lawyering, the full list of Twitter investors via parent company X Corp has been unsealed during discovery for a legal case against Musk relating to non-payment of severance for employees he laid off after buying the company. In addition to the known in 2022 list below, we can now augment the Twitter investors list with more detail:
Joe Lonsdale — cofounder of Palantir with shadowy tech billionaire Peter Thiel, the primary financial backer of Trump’s VP pick JD Vance
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal
Jack Dorsey — one of the original founders of Twitter
Larry Ellison
Ross Gerber
Doug Leone
Michael Moritz
Changpeng Zhao
Security analyst and intelligence professional Eric Garland notes that beyond the notable billionaires on the list, the investor sheet can be largely read as “fronts for the dictatorships of Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, and others.” Tech pioneer turned investigative journalist Dave Troy’s take on the Twitter investor list reveal is that it shows “this platform is an instrument of information warfare.”
BREAKING: The full list of investors in X Corp has been unsealed. See them for yourselves. Some investors Include ownership stakes from Saudi Arabia and a slew of VC funds. pic.twitter.com/HIhLYxqBIJ
In half a decade we’ve gone from Jeb Bush making a serious run for president to Marjorie Taylor Greene running unopposed and winning a House seat in Georgia. QAnon came seemingly out of nowhere, but taps into a much deeper and older series of conspiracy theories that have surfaced, resurfaced, and been remixed throughout time.
Why do people believe in conspiracy theories? In an increasingly complex world of information bombarding us as blinding speed and high volume, the cognitive appeal of easy answers and turnkey “community” may be much stronger than ever before.
List of conspiracy theory books
It’s a deep topic so we’d best get started. If you’ve got an urgent issue with a friend or loved one, start here:
Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life is a sharp exploration of the recurring tension between intellectualism and populism in the United States. Hofstadter traces the roots of American anti-intellectualism, revealing how a distrust of intellectual elites has been woven into the fabric of American culture, often tied to religious fervor, educational systems, and political movements. He argues that this skepticism towards intellectuals has influenced public policy and shaped national identity, creating a persistent undercurrent that challenges the value of critical thinking and expertise in the public sphere. Through historical analysis, Hofstadter illuminates how this strain of thought has impacted American democracy, often in ways that prioritize emotional appeal over reasoned discourse.
Kurt Andersen’s Fantasyland: How America Went Haywire: A 500-Year History offers a sweeping narrative that traces America’s propensity for embracing fantastical thinking from the earliest settlers to the present day. Andersen argues that the American tendency to blur the lines between reality and fantasy has deep historical roots, driven by a unique blend of religious zeal, entrepreneurial spirit, and cultural escapism. He explores how this inclination has shaped everything from politics to entertainment, resulting in a culture where conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, and magical thinking thrive. Through sharp analysis and a broad historical lens, Andersen paints a vivid picture of how America’s love affair with fantasy has led to the current era of “alternative facts” and widespread distrust of objective truth.
Lee McIntyre’s On Disinformation: How to Fight for Truth and Protect Democracy is a concise yet powerful examination of the threat disinformation poses to truth and democratic values. McIntyre explores the origins and tactics of disinformation campaigns, revealing how they exploit cognitive biases and social media to sow confusion and distrust. He emphasizes that disinformation is not just a byproduct of misinformation but a deliberate weapon used to undermine public discourse and erode the foundations of democracy. The book provides a call to action, urging individuals and institutions to become vigilant defenders of truth through critical thinking, media literacy, and active resistance against the forces of disinformation. With a clear-eyed approach, McIntyre offers practical strategies for combating this growing menace in a time when truth itself is under siege.
Mia Bloom and Sophia Moskalenko’s Pastels and Pedophiles: Inside the Mind of QAnon delves into the disturbing world of QAnon, unraveling the psychological and social dynamics that fuel its growth. The authors explore how this conspiracy theory, with its bizarre blend of pastel aesthetics and lurid allegations of pedophilia, has captivated a diverse array of followers. Bloom and Moskalenko dissect the movement’s appeal, showing how it taps into deep-seated fears, identity politics, and a longing for community in a time of uncertainty. They reveal the real-world consequences of QAnon’s spread, from fractured families to violent extremism, and highlight the challenges of deprogramming those ensnared by its false narratives. Through rigorous analysis and empathetic insight, the book offers a critical look at how conspiracy theories like QAnon thrive in a polarized society and the urgent need to address their dangerous influence.
Anna Merlan’s Republic of Lies: American Conspiracy Theorists and Their Surprising Rise to Power is an incisive exploration of the burgeoning influence of conspiracy theories in American life. Merlan takes readers on a journey through the diverse and often troubling world of conspiracy believers, from UFO enthusiasts to anti-vaxxers, exposing the cultural and political forces that have propelled these fringe ideas into the mainstream. She delves into how conspiracy theories have gained traction across the political spectrum, fueled by distrust in institutions and amplified by the internet’s echo chambers. With a keen eye for detail and a compassionate approach, Merlan uncovers the real-world impact of these theories, from shaping political movements to influencing national discourse. The book serves as a wake-up call to the power of misinformation and the urgent need to understand and counter the spread of dangerous ideologies in an increasingly fractured society.
Rob Brotherton’s Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories delves into the psychology behind why conspiracy theories are so compelling and why they persist in human societies. Brotherton examines the cognitive biases and psychological tendencies that make us prone to seeing patterns, connecting dots, and doubting official narratives, even when evidence is lacking. He explores the historical and cultural contexts that have given rise to various conspiracy theories, showing how they tap into deep-seated fears and uncertainties. By blending psychology with history, Brotherton provides a nuanced understanding of why conspiracy theories are not just fringe beliefs but a fundamental part of human thinking. The book challenges readers to recognize their own susceptibility to conspiratorial thinking and emphasizes the importance of critical thinking in a world where misinformation can easily take root.
Gustave Le Bon’s The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind is a pioneering work in social psychology that examines the behavior of crowds and the psychological mechanisms that drive collective action. Le Bon argues that individuals, when part of a crowd, lose their sense of individual responsibility and rationality, becoming susceptible to emotional contagion and impulsive behavior. He explores how crowds can be swayed by charismatic leaders, simplistic ideas, and the power of suggestion, often leading to irrational and sometimes destructive outcomes. Le Bon’s analysis extends to the ways in which crowds influence politics, culture, and social movements, offering insights into the dynamics of mass psychology that remain relevant today. His work lays the foundation for understanding how public opinion can be manipulated and how groupthink can override reason, making it a fascinating text for anyone interested in the psychology of collective behavior.
Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements is a profound exploration of the psychological and social forces that drive individuals to join and commit to mass movements. Hoffer examines the appeal of these movements to the “true believer,” a person often disillusioned with their current life and seeking purpose through collective identity. He argues that mass movements, whether religious, political, or social, provide a sense of belonging and certainty by offering simple, absolute answers to complex problems. Hoffer delves into the dynamics of fanaticism, showing how movements attract followers who are willing to sacrifice their individuality for the cause. His insights into the motivations behind mass movements remain strikingly relevant, shedding light on how charismatic leaders and unifying ideologies can mobilize people, often with profound and sometimes dangerous consequences. The book serves as a timeless analysis of the psychological underpinnings of social movements and the power they wield over the human psyche.
Jeff Sharlet’s The Undertow: Scenes from a Slow Civil War is a haunting and evocative exploration of the deepening political and cultural divides in contemporary America. Through a series of vivid, immersive narratives, Sharlet captures the voices and lives of people across the country who are caught up in the rising tide of polarization, extremism, and unrest. He paints a picture of a nation at a tipping point, where the fractures in society are widening, and the specter of a “slow civil war” looms ever larger. With his keen eye for detail and empathetic storytelling, Sharlet reveals how fear, anger, and a longing for belonging are driving forces behind the growing tensions, offering a powerful and unsettling portrait of a country on the brink.
Jesse Walker’s The United States of Paranoia: A Conspiracy Theory offers a comprehensive and insightful history of conspiracy theories in American culture, showing how they have been a persistent and influential force throughout the nation’s history. Walker categorizes these theories into five archetypes—enemy outside, enemy within, enemy above, enemy below, and the benevolent conspiracy—illustrating how each has manifested in different eras and contexts. He argues that conspiracy thinking is not just a fringe phenomenon but a fundamental part of American political and social life, shaping public discourse and policy. By tracing the evolution of conspiracies from the colonial period to the present, Walker reveals how they reflect deeper anxieties and cultural tensions, often serving as a means for people to make sense of complex and unsettling realities. The book underscores the idea that paranoia is woven into the fabric of American identity, influencing how people perceive power, trust, and truth.
Order on bookshop.org and thumb your nose at Amazon
In an age where history is often twisted into a pretzel to fit the political narrative du jour, Heather Cox Richardson stands out as a truth-teller. She’s not just another academic tucked away in an ivory tower; she’s a historian with her boots on the ground (often literally, as she travels the country speaking about what she sees), dissecting the American past with surgical precision and connecting it directly to the chaos we’re living through today. Heather Cox Richardson books are like tours through the deep history behind the seemingly recent developments in US politics.
Richardson isn’t content to let history gather dust in old textbooks. No, she’s dragging it kicking and screaming into the present, showing us that the battles we’re fighting now—over democracy, race, and who gets to call the shots—are just the latest skirmishes in a war that’s been raging since the country’s inception. She doesn’t just recount the past; she wields it like a spotlight, illuminating the dark corners of our current political mess.
Her “Letters from an American” newsletter has become a lifeline for many who feel lost in the swamp of today’s political discourse. With each entry, she lays out the facts, cutting through the noise and reminding us that the problems we face aren’t new—they’re the bitter fruit of seeds planted long ago. But Richardson isn’t just about doom and gloom. She’s also about hope, about understanding the past so we can navigate our way out of the storm.
Why does her work matter so much right now? Because as we teeter on the edge of what sometimes feels like the unraveling of our democracy, Richardson offers us a lifeline: context. She shows us that the currents pulling us under have been swirling for centuries and that understanding them is the first step to changing the tide.
Richardson’s books are more than just historical accounts; they’re roadmaps that guide us through the muck of the present by showing us where we’ve been. Whether she’s unpacking the economic machinations of the Civil War, tracing the GOP’s evolution from Lincoln’s party to today’s fractured entity, or exposing how Southern oligarchy seeped into the national bloodstream, she’s always making one thing clear: history is not a straight line. It’s a loop, and if we’re not careful, we’ll find ourselves back where we started.
In a time when facts are up for debate and democracy is under siege, Heather Cox Richardson’s voice is not just important—it’s essential. She’s not just telling us what happened; she’s showing us what’s at stake. I look forward to immersing myself in the first three, but I’ve read the last 3 and wholeheartedly recommend them to anyone seeking to understand this current political moment and what’s at stake.
Summary: The book examines how the Republican Party’s economic policies during the Civil War shaped the United States’ economy and political landscape. Richardson argues that these policies, including the establishment of a national banking system and the introduction of a national currency, laid the groundwork for the modern American economy and solidified the Republicans’ control over the national government.
Summary: Richardson explores the Northern perspective on the Reconstruction era, focusing on how Northern attitudes toward race, labor, and politics contributed to the failure of Reconstruction. She argues that the North’s retreat from Reconstruction was driven by concerns about class and labor rather than race alone, leading to the abandonment of African Americans in the South.
Summary: This book extends the traditional narrative of Reconstruction beyond the South, exploring how the Civil War and its aftermath reshaped the entire nation. Richardson connects the experiences of people across the country, showing how the Reconstruction era led to the creation of a new American identity and a modern national government.
Summary: Richardson provides a comprehensive history of the Republican Party from its founding in the 1850s through the early 21st century. She traces the party’s evolution from a force for emancipation and national unity to its modern incarnation, examining the ideological shifts and internal conflicts that have shaped its trajectory.
Summary: In this book, Richardson argues that although the South lost the Civil War militarily, its ideology of oligarchy and white supremacy continued to shape American politics and society. She traces the spread of this Lost Cause ideology from the post-war South to the West and its eventual influence on national politics, culminating in the rise of modern conservative movements.
Summary: Richardson reflects on the current state of American democracy, drawing on her expertise in history and her popular “Letters from an American” newsletter. She examines the challenges facing the country in the era of Trumpism, including political polarization, disinformation and misinformation, conspiracy theories, and the erosion of democratic norms, while also offering hope and a path forward based on historical lessons.
Kamala Harris is poised to break that glass ceiling that Hillary Clinton cracked and I am so here for it. She was my Senator when I lived in California and I appreciated her energy back then — and I would be thrilled for her service as the first woman president.
And I’m by no means the only one — from White Dudes for Harris to Republicans for Harris to Mormons for Harris, to Democratic groups up and down the spectrum, there is renewed energy in this election and momentum has been building even since Biden’s decision to step down from the race.
The selection of Tim Walz as her running mate adds yet another layer of awesomeness — with his folksy small town dad appeal, military service, midwestern charm, and zingy comebacks and catchy takedowns of Trump and Vance as “weird,” he seems to be bringing a hefty punching up vibe to the campaign.
Meanwhile, all the Orange Man and emo beardo seem able to do is sling racist and sexist insults at Kamala, or attempt a cheap knockoff of the swiftboating of John Kerry with Walz’s military service that’s been swiftly and resoundingly debunked. People aren’t falling for it.
Imagine if the momentum carries us all the way to a blue wave, and a Democratic Congress… we could perhaps have nice things! Time to put shoulders to the wheel. Give whatever time and money you can, if you can.
Christian nationalism, a belief system that intertwines national identity with Christian faith, has been a significant force in American history — and the Christian nationalism timeline may go back further than you think. It erroneously asserts that the United States is fundamentally a Christian nation and should be governed by biblical principles.
This flawed ideology has influenced various aspects of American life, from politics to education, and continues to shape the discourse around national identity and public policy. Understanding the evolution of Christian nationalism provides critical insights into its current manifestations and implications for the future.
In recent years, the resurgence of Christian nationalism has become more visible and influential in American politics. The events of January 6, 2021, and the Big Lie rhetoric surrounding the 2020 presidential election highlighted the power and reach of this movement. With key figures like Russell Vought and organizations like Project 2025 advocating for policies that align with their interpretation of Christian values, it is essential to examine the timeline of Christian nationalism to grasp its roots, growth, and contemporary relevance.
Vote them out, while we still can
Then, get to the polls and take everyone you know with you. Do not allow the right-wing to establish a theocracy in this country — no matter what your faith (or lack thereof), we have common interest in preventing any one faith from informing the US government.
Just because they say the words “Christian nation” does not alter the actual history in which the founders were deists who were adamant about keeping the political and religious spheres separate — having seen the ills it can cause to entwine them. Is America a Christian nation? No. We rejected the divine right of kings, very consciously and loudly so at the time. It is easy to pick up this sentiment in the writings of the founders both inside and outside of the founding documents.
Christian nationalism timeline
1607 — The Jamestown Colony is established in Virginia. Early settlers bring a mix of Christian beliefs that will influence American culture.
1620 — The Pilgrims arrive on the Mayflower, establishing the Plymouth Colony. They seek religious freedom after being persecuted for their lack of conformity to the Anglican church in England, and establish a community based on their Puritan beliefs.
1630 — John Winthrop delivers his sermon “A Model of Christian Charity,” articulating the vision of America as a “city upon a hill,” influencing the concept of a Christian nation.
1730-1740s — The First Great Awakening, a series of religious revivals, sweeps through the American colonies, strengthening evangelicalism.
1776 — The Declaration of Independence is signed. The Founding Fathers, while influenced primarily by Enlightenment ideas, also incorporate some Christian principles.
The initiative seeks to undo over a century of progressive reforms, tracing back to the establishment of a federal administrative framework by Woodrow Wilson, through the New Deal by Roosevelt, to Johnson’s Great Society. It proposes a significant reduction in the federal workforce, which stands at about 2.25 million people.
Project 2025 plans
Essential measures include reducing funding for, or even abolishing, key agencies such as the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Departments of Education and Commerce. Additionally, Project 2025 intends to bring semi-independent agencies like the Federal Communications Commission under closer presidential control.
At its heart, Project 2025 aims to secure a durable conservative dominance within the federal government, aligning it closely with the principles of the MAGA movement and ensuring it operates under the direct oversight of the White House. The project is inspired by the “unitary executive theory” of the Constitution, which argues for sweeping presidential authority over the federal administrative apparatus — in direct contradiction with the delicate system of checks and balances architected by the Founders.
It is also inspired by religious fervor (and the cynical exploitation thereof) — and Project 2025 has brought together a pantheon of Christian nationalist organizations and groups to draft policy that could be implemented with alacrity, select potential appointees for the administration, build networks with GOP at the state and local levels — and with right wing groups and networks around the world.
Project 2025 goals
To realize their extremist, authoritarian goal, Dans is actively recruiting what he terms “conservative warriors” from legal and government networks, including bar associations and offices of state attorneys general. The aim is to embed these individuals in key legal roles throughout the government, thereby embedding the conservative vision deeply within the federal bureaucracy to shape policy and governance for the foreseeable future.
Biden gave a fiery speech in Detroit today and pitched his plan for his second term’s first 100 days, if given a Democratic Congress. Which would mean that by around May of 2025 we could have the following nice things:
Continue to lead the world in the climate change energy transition
It sure sounds like a far cry from whatever fiery white supremacist death zone backed by ravenous billionaires would be unleashed upon us in Trump‘s first 100 days (only 1 of which, we are led to believe, would be as a dictator… sure, Jan). It is the opposite direction of the literal End Times hellscape vision of Project 2025 and its Christofascist propagandists who have abused the American Evangelical church to the point of being unrecognizably distant from anything Christ himself taught.
Vote blue no matter who
I’m bored with the obsession over Biden’s age. He’s 81, he’s not 101. He certainly still passes the Turing Test to me — others apparently see something different. Superagers can go a long time these days — Charles Koch is 88 and leads both an oil empire and a conservative dark money juggernaut. Rupert Murdoch is 93 and only last year stepped down from leading one of the world’s largest media empires.
I don’t think there’s anyone in the world who can match Joe Biden’s foreign policy experience, having been at the table on major world events for decades now. He knows everybody — and has warm relationships with our allies. Unlike Trump, who has spurned everyone America has cherished and cozied up to (other) two-bit dictators with tiny hands syndrome. Biden is holding up the Western order against a revanchist Russia seeking to erode the post-Cold War consensus and spread the forces of authoritarianism widely around the globe — Trump would simply hand Ukraine to Putin and welcome the wave of illiberalism to wash over his slavering Project 2025 belligerents.
I think we urgently need Joe Biden’s unparalleled experience at this moment in history — no one else can match it. Although now Kamala Harris is no slouch in that regard either, given her 4 years of jetting around the globe as VP, years in the Senate before that, years as California AG, and a decade as the District Attorney of San Francisco before that. If Biden decides at some point in the next 4 years to stand down and hand the reins to Harris, that would be a fantastic outcome. In the meantime, why don’t we give the man some respect for his own self-assessment?
At least, not according to what Republicans promised when they passed them. The Trump tax cuts didn’t work to grow the economy, increase revenues, alleviate the debt, or benefit ordinary Americans as alleged.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) was introduced by then-Speaker of the House (and fiscal hawk) Paul Ryan and signed into law by then-President Donald Trump on December 22, 2017. It permanently reduced the corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, and lowered the overall tax for all brackets — seems fair, right? Except the wealthy walked away with 50 times the amount of tax benefit as the lower brackets.
Trump tax cuts add $1.5 trillion to the deficit
Not only did the tax cuts not raise revenue as promised — they became a liability on the balance sheet when almost immediately going into the red. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated the TCJA would add approximately $1.5 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years, after accounting for any temporary growth effects. The national debt will rise to accommodate as we borrow money to make up the shortfall between earnings and expenditures.
The Trump tax cuts reduced federal tax revenue, with significant declines in corporate tax receipts (surprise, surprise!). They did the exact opposite of what they promised to do — leaving our economy in a more precarious position even before the pandemic hit.
Who benefited from Trump’s tax cuts?
Conservatives and right-wing economists claim that tax cuts will help ordinary people by raising wages. In reality, however, corporations instead used their tax windfalls to do other things: stock buybacks, dividends, and executive pay. In fact, this happens over and over again each cycle of empty promises from so-called “fiscal conservatives” who in large part know exactly what they do.
They seem to believe they are entitled to the lion’s share of America’s money (as they have been since at least Mudsill Theory in 1858 and even before) and by gum, nothing is going to stop them — not democracy, not a sense of decency, not a sense of institutional preservation as used to be the very core pillar of Conservatism. No longer. Now it’s a will to power and to plunder. It’s not so much trickle down as it is hoover up.
Reaganomics, Trickle down, Laffer curve, Supply-side economics — it’s all the same
The magical revenue-generating power of tax cuts has been long promised and never delivered by right-wing Republicans. Since the 1980s edition, Reaganomics — the economic “theory” drafted on the back of a cocktail napkin dubbed the Laffer Curve for the slightly drunken man who scribbled it — has moved immense amounts of wealth upwards into the hands and coffers of the 1% and 0.1% at the expense of the masses.
The argument is that rich people will take the extra billions in returned tax money and use it to innovate and grow the economy — except that never happens. And why would they? They don’t have to earn revenue the old-fashioned way, through free market competition — they can just sit back on their laurels, buy a Senator or two, and rake in a huge windfall every few years that a GOP officeholder is in the White House. It is rock solid orthodoxy for the right-wing now, that tax cuts are almost the only policy initiative they care about — along with a side of deregulation and the slashing of the social safety net.
We’ve seen this movie before. The rich guys take the money and run — in many ways literally, into the arms of tax-free havens like the Cayman Islands or Seychelles. They do not return it to the American economy — although they do inject it into American politics, to skew the playing field even further in their favor despite already extracting extraordinary privileges and benefits to themselves from all aspects of their coziness with the political elite and their direct capture of various institutions.
As LBJ once said:
“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
President Lyndon Baines Johnson, 1960
The economic elites are dividing us over race and religion, in order to pick our pockets. This is why we can’t have nice things. We should boot them out and have nice things.
A historic day on Thursday, May 30, 2024 as the first former President in US history became a convicted felon. Found guilty on all 34 counts, Donald Trump finally faces the music for the first of his election-related criminal trials. Already the Trump trial disinformation machine is spinning up on the right, making wild claims about a politicized process.
The investigation into Trump’s fraudulent payments to Stormy Daniels actually began with Michael Cohen on July 18, 2017, when his bank First Republic Bank tipped off the FBI to some suspicious activity from the Trump’s fixer’s accounts. That investigation led to a 3-year sentence for Cohen for the same exact crime. Way back in 2018, we knew that “Co-conspirator 1” was Donald Trump — and now he has been convicted of that crime.
The federal case inspired an investigation into Cohen’s finances by the state of New York, where both he and the business were located. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg inherited the case from former prosecutor Cy Vance, who began investigating Trump way back in 2018 after Cohen’s guilty plea, when Cohen admitted in court to making the hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels during Trump’s 2016 campaign. Vance ultimately declined to make a decision on the case before leaving office in 2021, leaving it open for his successor Alvin Bragg.
Bragg, a graduate of Harvard Law School, focused on fraud and money laundering cases during his tenure as a prosecutor at the Southern District of New York. He also led the team at the NY Attorney General’s office that secured a $2 million judgment and the dissolution of the Trump Foundation in 2019 for misuse of Trump’s charitable foundation. After looking at the facts of the hush money case, he ultimately decided that it was much bigger than simply paying off a porn star: “it’s about conspiring to corrupt a presidential election.”
Stochastic terrorism is a term that has emerged in the lexicon of political and social analysis to describe a method of inciting violence indirectly through the use of mass communication. This concept is predicated on the principle that while not everyone in an audience will act on violent rhetoric, a small percentage might.
The term “stochastic” refers to a process that is randomly determined; it implies that the specific outcomes are unpredictable, yet the overall distribution of these outcomes follows a pattern that can be statistically analyzed. In the context of stochastic terrorism, it means that while it is uncertain who will act on incendiary messages and violent political rhetoric, it is almost certain that someone will.
The nature of stochastic terrorism
Stochastic terrorism involves the dissemination of public statements, whether through speeches, social media, or traditional media, that incite violence. The individuals or entities spreading such rhetoric may not directly call for political violence. Instead, they create an atmosphere charged with tension and hostility, suggesting that action must be taken against a perceived threat or enemy. This indirect incitement provides plausible deniability, as those who broadcast the messages can claim they never explicitly advocated for violence.
Prominent stochastic terrorism examples
The following are just a few notable illustrative examples of stochastic terrorism:
The Oslo and Utøya Attacks (2011): Anders Behring Breivik, driven by anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant beliefs, bombed government buildings in Oslo, Norway, then shot and killed 69 people at a youth camp on the island of Utøya. Breivik’s manifesto cited many sources that painted Islam and multiculturalism as existential threats to Europe, showing the deadly impact of extremist online echo chambers and the pathology of right-wing ideologies such as Great Replacement Theory.
The Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooting (2018): Robert Bowers, influenced by white supremacist ideologies and conspiracy theories about migrant caravans, killed 11 worshippers in a synagogue. His actions were preceded by social media posts that echoed hate speech and conspiracy theories rampant in certain online communities, demonstrating the lethal consequences of unmoderated hateful rhetoric.
The El Paso Shooting (2019): Patrick Crusius targeted a Walmart in El Paso, Texas, killing 23 people, motivated by anti-immigrant sentiment and rhetoric about a “Hispanic invasion” of Texas. His manifesto mirrored language used in certain media and political discourse, underscoring the danger of using dehumanizing language against minority groups.
Christchurch Mosque Shootings (2019): Brenton Tarrant live-streamed his attack on two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, killing 51 people, influenced by white supremacist beliefs and online forums that amplified Islamophobic rhetoric. The attacker’s manifesto and online activity were steeped in extremist content, illustrating the role of internet subcultures in radicalizing individuals.
Stochastic terrorism in right-wing politics in the US
In the United States, the concept of stochastic terrorism has become increasingly relevant in analyzing the tactics employed by certain right-wing entities and individuals. While the phenomenon is not exclusive to any single political spectrum, recent years have seen notable instances where right-wing rhetoric has been linked to acts of violence.
Right-wing media platforms have played a significant role in amplifying messages that could potentially incite stochastic terrorism. Through the strategic use of incendiary language, disinformation, misinformation, and conspiracy theories, these platforms have the power to reach vast audiences and influence susceptible individuals to commit acts of violence.
The advent of social media has further complicated the landscape, enabling the rapid spread of extremist rhetoric. The decentralized nature of these platforms allows for the creation of echo chambers where inflammatory messages are not only amplified but also go unchallenged, increasing the risk of radicalization.
Challenges and implications
Stochastic terrorism presents significant legal and societal challenges. The indirect nature of incitement complicates efforts to hold individuals accountable for the violence that their rhetoric may inspire. Moreover, the phenomenon raises critical questions about the balance between free speech and the prevention of violence, challenging societies to find ways to protect democratic values while preventing harm.
Moving forward
Addressing stochastic terrorism requires a multifaceted approach. This includes promoting responsible speech among public figures, enhancing critical thinking and media literacy among the public, and developing legal and regulatory frameworks that can effectively address the unique challenges posed by this form of terrorism. Ultimately, combating stochastic terrorism is not just about preventing violence; it’s about preserving the integrity of democratic societies and ensuring that public discourse does not become a catalyst for harm.
Understanding and mitigating the effects of stochastic terrorism is crucial in today’s increasingly polarized world. By recognizing the patterns and mechanisms through which violence is indirectly incited, societies can work towards more cohesive and peaceful discourse, ensuring that democracy is protected from the forces that seek to undermine it through fear and division.
Former Trump advisor Peter Navarro — who wrote a book claiming credit for the idea to try and overthrow the 2020 election and bragged about it as the “Green Bay Sweep” to MSNBC’s Ari Melber — reported to prison today after the Supreme Court ruled he cannot get out of answering to a Congressional subpoena. Peter Navarro prison time is set to be 4 months for an independent jury’s conviction for Contempt of Congress.
The sentencing judge refuted Navarro’s allegations that he was the victim of a political prosecition: “you aren’t,” Mehta said. “You have received every process you are due.”
Election denialism, the refusal to accept credible election outcomes, has significantly impacted U.S. history, especially in recent years. This phenomenon is not entirely new; election denial has roots that stretch back through various periods of American history. However, its prevalence and intensity have surged in the contemporary digital and political landscape, influencing public trust, political discourse, and the very fabric of democracy.
Historical context
Historically, disputes over election outcomes are as old as the U.S. electoral system itself. For instance, the fiercely contested 1800 election between Thomas Jefferson and John Adams resulted in a constitutional amendment (the 12th Amendment) to prevent similar confusion in the future. The 1876 election between Rutherford B. Hayes and Samuel J. Tilden was resolved through the Compromise of 1877, which effectively ended Reconstruction and had profound effects on the Southern United States.
Yet these instances, while contentious, were resolved within the framework of existing legal and political mechanisms, without denying the legitimacy of the electoral process itself. Over time, claims of election fraud would come to be levied against the electoral and political system itself — with dangerous implications for the peaceful transfer of power upon which democracy rests.
The 21st century and digital influence
Fast forward to the 21st century, and election denialism has taken on new dimensions, fueled by the rapid dissemination of disinformation (and misinformation) through digital media and a polarized political climate. The 2000 Presidential election, with its razor-thin margins and weeks of legal battles over Florida’s vote count, tested the country’s faith in the electoral process.
Although the Supreme Court‘s decision in Bush v. Gore was deeply controversial, Al Gore’s concession helped to maintain the American tradition of peaceful transitions of power.
The 2020 Election: A flashpoint
The 2020 election, marked by the COVID-19 pandemic and an unprecedented number of mail-in ballots, became a flashpoint for election denialism. Claims of widespread voter fraud and electoral malfeasance were propagated at the highest levels of government, despite a lack of evidence substantiated by multiple recounts, audits, and legal proceedings across several states.
The refusal to concede by President Trump and the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, marked a watershed moment in U.S. history, where election denialism moved from the fringes to the center of political discourse, challenging the norms of democratic transition. Widely referred to as The Big Lie, the baseless claims of election fraud that persist in the right-wing to this day are considered themselves to be a form of election fraud by justice officials, legal analysts, and a host of concerned citizens worried about ongoing attempts to overthrow democracy in the United States.
Implications, public trust, and voter suppression
The implications of this recent surge in election denialism are far-reaching. It has eroded public trust in the electoral system, with polls indicating a significant portion of the American populace doubting the legitimacy of election results. This skepticism is not limited to the national level but has trickled down to local elections, with election officials facing threats and harassment. The spread of misinformation, propaganda, and conspiracy theories about electoral processes and outcomes has become a tool for political mobilization, often exacerbating divisions within the American society.
Moreover, election denialism has prompted legislative responses at the state level, with numerous bills introduced to restrict voting access in the name of election security. These measures have sparked debates about voter suppression and the balance between securing elections and ensuring broad electoral participation. The challenge lies in addressing legitimate concerns about election integrity while avoiding the disenfranchisement of eligible voters.
Calls for reform and strengthening democracy
In response to these challenges, there have been calls for reforms to strengthen the resilience of the U.S. electoral system. These include measures to enhance the security and transparency of the voting process, improve the accuracy of voter rolls, and counter misinformation about elections. There’s also a growing emphasis on civic education to foster a more informed electorate capable of critically evaluating electoral information.
The rise of election denialism in recent years highlights the fragility of democratic norms and the crucial role of trust in the electoral process. While disputes over election outcomes are not new, the scale and impact of recent episodes pose unique challenges to American democracy. Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach, including legal, educational, and technological interventions, to reinforce the foundations of democratic governance and ensure that the will of the people is accurately and fairly represented.
Strong economic messages of the Keynesian buttressing of the middle class that is Bidenomics were everywhere in evidence at last night’s State of the Union address, Biden’s third since taking office in 2021. In SOTU 2024 he spoke about stabbing trickle-down economics in its gasping heart as a repeated failure to the American people. Instead of giving another $2 trillion tax cuts to billionaires, Biden wants to give back to the people who he says built America: the middle class.
The President delivered strong, sweeping language and vision reminiscent of LBJ’s Great Society and FDR‘s New Deal. He also delivered a heartwarming sense of unity and appeal to put down our bickering and get things done for the American people.
“We all come from somewhere — but we’re all Americans.”
This while lambasting the Republicans for scuttling the deal over the popular bipartisan immigration bill thanks to 11th hour interference from TFG (“my predecessor” as JRB called him). “This bill would save lives!” He is really effective at calling out the GOP‘s hypocrisy on border security with this delivery.
“We can fight about the border or we can fix the border. Send me a bill!”
He is taking full advantage of being the incumbent candidate here. He has the power and the track record to do all these things he is promising, and he’s telling the exact truth about the Republican obstructionism preventing the American people from having their government work for them.
I love that he calls out Trump in this speech, without naming names — almost a kind of Voldemort effect. He who must not be named — because giving him the dignity even of a name is more than he deserves.
He says that Trump and his cabal of anti-democratic political operatives have ancient ideas (hate, revenge, reactionary, etc.) — and that you can’t lead America with ancient ideas. In America, we look towards the future — relentlessly. Americans wants a president who will protect their rights — not take them away.
“I see a future… for all Americans!” he ends with, in a segment reminiscent of the great Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, with its clear vision of power and authority flowing from what is morally right and just, instead of what is corrupt and cronyish. It gave me hope for the future — that Americans will make the right choice, as we seem to have done under pressure, throughout our history. 🤞🏽
