Author: Admin

  • Can Trump Mobilize the Military Without California’s Consent?

    Can Trump Mobilize the Military Without California’s Consent?

    Melissa, Kate, and Leah can smell the fascism in the air as President Trump forces troops on California protesters. They discuss how he is (yet again) pushing the boundaries of authoritarianism, provide an update on the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case, and unpack another flurry of Supreme Court Opinions. Then, they talk trans rights with Chase Strangio, deputy director for transgender justice and staff attorney with the ACLU. Finally, a bit of fun with a game about iconic breakupspolitical and otherwise. This episode was recorded live from Sony Hall in New York City. 

    Hosts’ favorite things:

     

    Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 

    Learn more: http://crooked.com/events

    Order your copy of Leah’s book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad Vibes

    Follow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky



    Fonte

  • GOP senator slammed for disgusting tweets about Minnesota shooting

    Utah Republican Sen. Mike Lee is facing a torrent of criticism after he sent a disturbing tweet about the Minnesota gunman who murdered Democratic state former House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, and shot Democratic state Sen. John Hoffman, and his wife, Yvette.

    On Sunday, as law enforcement officers were searching for the alleged murderer Vance Boelter, Lee tweeted an image of Boelter in the rubber mask he wore when he opened fire on the lawmakers. In text alongside the disturbing image, Lee wrote, “Nightmare on Waltz Street”—a misspelled reference to Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz, who was also on a list of Democratic officials Boelter wanted to kill.

    The booking photo, provided by the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, of alleged murderer Vance Boelter in Green Isle, Minnesota, on June 16.

    An hour earlier, Lee had also tweeted another image of Boelter in the rubber mask with the text, “This is what happens/When Marxists don’t get their way”—a message he was so proud of he pinned it to the top of his page.

    Lee sent the disturbing messages—which try to further the false GOP narrative that is painting Boelter as a Democrat rather than the President Donald Trump-supporting, anti-abortion zealot he is—as other politicians were calling for politicians to tone down the rhetoric in order to avoid encouraging more radicalized people to commit violence against elected officials.

    “Today we speak with one voice to express our outrage, grief, and condemnation of this horrible attack on public servants,” the entire Minnesota congressional delegation wrote in a joint bipartisan statement. “There is no place in our democracy for politically-motivated violence.”

    Criticism of Lee’s response was swift.

    “When there’s political violence in western democracies it’s traditionally treated as a somber event for everyone to come together. That’s disappeared. The victims were gunned down just over a day ago and a US Senator is mocking the event and hinting at a deranged conspiracy,” independent journalist Lee Fang wrote in a post on X.


    Related Right-wing media manufactures false connections in Minnesota shooting


    Even Republicans condemned Lee for his horrifying response to the shooting.

    “What happened to Mike Lee? He went from the Thinking Man’s Conservative to fringe-internet-troll-comma-US-Senator in a matter of just a few years,” Alyssa Farah Griffin, a former Trump administration staffer, wrote on X. “Two parents are dead. Stop and have some humanity.”

    Ultimately, it’s sick the lengths Republicans are going—including a sitting U.S. senator—to gin up a false narrative absolving the Republican Party of responsibility in radicalizing Americans who commit violence in the name of furthering their right-wing agenda. If anything, it’s a tell that they may feel guilt because they do not want to be associated with the kind of monsters they’ve created, but that they are too irresponsible to accept that they are at fault for causing the climate that leads to political violence. 

    At the end of the day, however, this is what happens when someone like Trump is the leader of a political party.

    Trump, for his part, has yet to call Walz after the horrific incident, and even attacked Walz when commenting on the shooting.

    “Well, it’s a terrible thing. I think he’s a terrible governor. I think he’s a grossly incompetent person. But I may, I may call him, I may call other people too,” Trump told an ABC news reporter.

    The moral rot starts at the top. 

    Campaign Action

    Fonte

  • “An Outstanding Leader”: Minnesota Mourns Assassinated Lawmaker Melissa Hortman as Suspect Is Arrested

    After the biggest manhunt in Minnesota history, authorities have detained 57-year-old Vance Boelter, who is accused of fatally shooting democratic lawmaker and former House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark in their Minnesota home early on Saturday in what authorities say were politically motivated assassinations. He is also accused of wounding state Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette at their home in a separate shooting.

    “Melissa Hortman was an outstanding leader that was very loved and respected by many people, and what this means for us is that we lost a leader that was very important to us,” says Patricia Torres Ray, a former Minnesota state senator and a former colleague of both Hortman and Hoffman.

    Police say they found three AK-47 assault rifles, a 9mm handgun and a hit list written by the gunman that contained the names of about 70 people, including prominent Democratic lawmakers and abortion providers and advocates. Flyers for Saturday’s No Kings rallies were also found, prompting many organizers in Minnesota to cancel their protests.

    Fonte

  • For law firms that appeased Trump, the consequences go from bad to worse

    After Donald Trump launched an unprecedented offensive against prominent law firms, four of the firms chose to fight back against the president’s authoritarian-style assault. Given that the quartet filed separate lawsuits against the White House, and they’re undefeated in court so far, it appears they made the smart decision.

    As The New York Times recently noted after one of the four firms’ court victories, “The ruling seemed to validate the strategy, embraced by a minority of firms, of fighting the administration instead of caving to a pressure campaign and making deals with Mr. Trump to avoid persecution.”

    For the rest of the targeted firms, the consequences of their misjudgment have gone from bad to worse. Reuters reported:

    A group of seven partners is leaving Willkie Farr & Gallagher, which struck a deal with U.S. President Donald Trump in April to avert an executive order targeting its business, to join Cooley, which is representing one of the law firms fighting Trump’s orders. … There was widespread dissatisfaction in Willkie’s San Francisco office over the firm’s agreement with the administration, according to a source familiar with the matter who said as many as 15 associates have expressed interest in leaving.

    Other firms that chose a Trump appeasement strategy are facing similar problems: Damian Williams, the former top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, recently announced that he’s leaving Paul Weiss (one of the firms that struck a deal with the White House) and joining Jenner & Block (one of the firms that fought back).

    Indeed, it’s been difficult to keep up with the number of partners who’ve abandoned Paul Weiss in recent weeks as a result of its Trump agreement.

    In case that weren’t enough, The Wall Street Journal recently reported that at least 11 big companies “are moving work away from law firms that settled with the administration or are giving — or intend to give — more business to firms that have been targeted but refused to strike deals.”

    The article added, “In interviews, general counsels expressed concern about whether they could trust law firms that struck deals to fight for them in court and in negotiating big deals if they weren’t willing to stand up for themselves against Trump.”

    Let’s also not forget that some of these same firms are also starting to realize that their deals with the president are worse than they first realized.

    The entire strategy has backfired spectacularly. From the firms’ perspective, appeasement was supposed to guarantee relative tranquility and client satisfaction. Instead, these firms are losing clients, partners, associates and credibility within the industry.

    If that weren’t quite enough, The New York Times reported that the firms that have already prevailed against the White House have noticed that Trump and his lawyers haven’t even appealed their defeats in court.

    W. Bradley Wendel, a law professor at Cornell who is an authority on legal ethics, told the Times, in reference to White House officials, “They knew that these were losing positions from the beginning and were not actually hoping to win in court, but rather to intimidate firms into settling, as many firms did. Now that they have racked up the four losses in district courts, it is not surprising that they are not appealing, because I don’t think they ever thought these were serious positions.”

    The firms that tried to placate and pacify the president must be kicking themselves right about now. All they had to do was defend themselves, their profession, the law and the integrity of the system itself, and they could’ve avoided all kinds of problems.

    But it’s also worth remembering that it might not be too late for the firms to course-correct. I’m reminded anew of a recent NBC News report about a progressive group that launched a media campaign targeting the firms that reached deals with the president.

    ‘Big law, stop bending the knee,’ reads a poster from the ‘Big Law Cowards’ campaign by the liberal nonprofit group Demand Justice. The group says the ads will be wheatpasted strategically around Washington on Thursday near the locations of the firms that have reached deals with the administration. The group will also have a mobile billboard circulating with ads criticizing the firms, along with a broader digital campaign.

    The underlying point of these efforts isn’t to chastise the firms for making the wrong decision; it’s to remind those firms that it’s not too late to reverse course and join the ranks of the firms resisting Trump’s gambit.

    Will any of the firms abandon their existing deals? If one firm does it, will others follow? Watch this space.

    This post updates our related earlier coverage.

    Fonte

  • Why the FCC has delayed a plan for emergency alerts in multiple languages : NPR

    False evacuation alerts went out to millions of people during the Los Angeles wildfires earlier this year. However, people who speak a language other than English and Spanish may not have understood what was happening.

    Chris Delmas/AFP


    hide caption

    toggle caption

    Chris Delmas/AFP

    Two years ago, the Federal Communications Commission unanimously voted to require that wireless emergency alerts reach people in 13 languages and American sign language. Those are the alerts people get during climate disasters such as wildfires and hurricanes, as well as Amber Alerts. As of now, wireless emergency alerts only go out in Spanish and English. Yet, nearly 68 million Americans speak another language other than English at home, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

    But some Democratic Congress members and nonprofits say since the Trump administration came into office, the FCC has delayed sending what’s called a report and order to the Federal Register. That starts a 30-month window for participating wireless providers, such as AT&T and Verizon, to update wireless emergency alerts in the 13 most common spoken languages in the U.S. (Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Arabic, French, Korean, Russian, Haitian German, Creole, German Hindi, Portuguese, Italian and American sign language.)

    California Congresswoman Nanette Barragán, a Democrat, says the FCC has already approved this change, which she notes FCC Chairman Brendan Carr backed in 2023.

    “So as we go forward with this, I think there’s a lot that we can do to improve this, particularly around accessibility and making sure the system continues to work for everyone, so this item has my support,” Carr said right before the vote happened in April of that year.

    Only one step remains: to publish the report and order in the Federal Register. That would require wireless providers such as AT&T and Verizon to install a template in each of the languages.

    “ When an emergency alert comes in, people should be able to understand what it says and the instructions are being given on what to do,” Barragán says. “This is about saving lives, it’s about safety.”

    It’s unclear why the FCC has delayed updating the wireless emergency alert system.

    NPR reached out to FCC Chair Brendan Carr’s office and the agency’s Office of Media Relations for comment multiple times, but did not get a response.

    But Barragán and nonprofits, like the AAPI Equity Alliance, point to one executive order signed by President Trump on his inauguration day called “Regulatory Freeze Pending Review” as the reason for the delay. The order prohibits executive departments and agencies from sending reports to the Office of the Federal Register until a designated Trump administration official approves the rule.

    “ This is an independent agency,” says Barragán, who represents South Los Angeles. “There shouldn’t even be a requirement that somebody in the Trump White House has to review and approve any kind of action by an independent agency like the FCC.”

    NPR reached out multiple times to the White House for comment, but did not receive a response.

    FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez — nominated to the body by President Joe Biden — says the commission has adopted other rules and orders that have been published in the Federal Register since Trump took office.

    “ So it’s not clear to me why there is a delay in getting this one published,” Gomez says.

    When NPR asked if Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order is holding up the process, Gomez says it’s possible. “ It’s past time for the FCC to allow this process to move forward so that more people can receive the critical information they need in a language and format they understand,” she says.

    Congress established the Warning Alert And Response Network (WARN) Act in 2006. That gave the FCC the ability to adopt technical standards, protocols and procedures so that mobile providers could send out emergency alerts during climate disasters and Amber Alerts.

    The protocols allow federal, state and local governments to use wireless emergency alerts to send warnings to the public through their mobile devices through FEMA-approved software. Once that emergency alert is authenticated and validated, it goes through a distribution channel to wireless providers.

    During the wildfires in Los Angeles earlier this year, wireless providers sent out evacuation messages to subscribers as long as they did not opt out of receiving emergency alerts.

    However, a UCLA study found that over 12,000 Asian Americans in the four evacuation zones didn’t understand the evacuation alerts they were getting through their mobile providers.

    Paul Ong is one of the study’s authors and directs UCLA’s Center for Neighborhood Knowledge. He says having multilingual wireless emergency alerts during the wildfires would have been extremely beneficial to the Asian community in L.A.

    “Among Asian Americans, we find a huge diversity in languages,” Ong says. “Even among language groups such as Chinese, you have many, many different dialects.”

    The Congressional Hispanic, Asian Pacific American and Black caucuses called on FCC Chair Brendan Carr to publish the report and order to start updating the multilingual wireless emergency alerts in a letter sent on May 26.

    “Failing to implement this rule means denying millions of Americans access to potentially life-saving emergency alerts — whether for wildfires, earthquakes, hurricanes, active shooters, or other disasters — in a language that they understand. That is unacceptable,” the tri-caucuses wrote in the letter.

    Hotter temperatures are already drying out vegetation in the west — making wildfires more likely. Hurricane season is already underway along the Atlantic coast. That’s why AAPI’s Equity Alliance’s executive director Manjusha Kulkarni hopes the FCC moves forward with implementing its updated emergency alert system.

    “The language that any individual speaks really shouldn’t keep them from receiving necessary information to keep their families safe,” Kulkarni says.

    Fonte