SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
trump coup
'And Then What?' Asks Cori Bush After MTG Boasts About Armed Insurrection
GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed over the weekend that the January 6 insurrectionists "would've been armed" and "would have won" had she and Steve Bannon been in charge.
Dec 12, 2022
Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia asserted over the weekend that former President Donald Trump's right-wing mob would have pulled off a successful coup had she and erstwhile Trump adviser Steve Bannon organized the January 6, 2021 assault on the Capitol.
"I want to tell you something, if Steve Bannon and I had organized that, we would have won. Not to mention, we would've been armed," Greene said Saturday night at the annual New York Young Republican Club dinner, during which the club's president instructed a throng of white nationalists and other far-right figures, including Donald Trump Jr., to prepare for "total war."
U.S. Rep. Cori Bush (D-Mo.), who has called for the expulsion of Greene and other congressional Republicans accused of helping to plot the deadly insurrection, responded on social media by asking, "And then what?"
\u201cTell us more\u2026and then what?\u201d— Cori Bush (@Cori Bush) 1670820931
As Rolling Stonereported Sunday:
Greene's comments about that day seem to imply that she was not involved with the planning of Jan. 6. Two anonymous sources who organized the pro-Trump rally that preceded the Capitol attack have told Rolling Stone they recalled working with Greene on the rally. "I remember Marjorie Taylor Greene specifically," one organizer said.
"I remember talking to probably close to a dozen other members at one point or another or their staffs." Greene's communications director told Rolling Stone in October of last year that the congresswoman was involved only in planning to object to the electoral certification on the House floor, not the rally.
But in testimony she gave under oath this year, when Greene was asked if she recalled hearing anyone mention there would be potential violence on Jan. 6 or if she talked to fellow House Republicans or the White House about Jan. 6 protests, she answered repeatedly, "I don't remember."
Greene is among the GOP lawmakers accused of giving reconnaissance tours of the Capitol to insurrectionists before the deadly attack. She has also been a staunch defender of the rioters jailed for violently attempting to prevent Congress from certifying President Joe Biden's 2020 election victory, referring to them as "political prisoners."
More than 950 people have been arrested so far. That includes nearly 300 individuals who have been charged with assaulting or obstructing law enforcement as well as two leaders of the far-right Oath Keepers militia who were recently convicted of seditious conspiracy. In the immediate aftermath of Trump's failed coup, Greene and 146 other congressional Republicans voted to reverse Biden's decisive win.
"Very soon," historian Harvey Kaye warned Monday morning, House Democrats "hand over power to the likes of her."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Military Contractors Quietly Boost Donations to GOP Backers of Trump's Coup Attempt
One critic of the weapons industry called it "another example of how our system for awarding money to contractors is often pay-to-play."
Jun 24, 2021
After a brief lull in political spending following the January 6 insurrection, military contractors are ramping up PAC donations to members of Congress on committees with influence over the distribution of Pentagon funds, including dozens of GOP lawmakers who voted to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
In the wake of former President Donald Trump's failed coup attempt, "nearly every major defense firm paused political contributions... and many expressed disgust at the sight of rioters storming the Capitol," The Hillreported Thursday.
BAE Systems described the incident as "deeply disturbing," and Boeing denounced the "violence, lawlessness, and destruction" that transpired.
"We will continue to carefully evaluate future contributions to ensure that we support those who not only support our company, but also uphold our country's most fundamental principles," Boeing said in a January statement.
Despite their professed aversion to the right-wing attack on the halls of Congress and vows to suspend donations to anti-democratic politicians, The Hill noted, BAE Systems, Boeing, General Dynamics, Leidos, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman "have quietly resumed" political giving to Republicans who--just hours after the deadly mayhem on Jan. 6--objected to the certification of President Joe Biden's Electoral College victory.
In May, weapons manufacturers even increased their spending on the GOP lawmakers who abetted the insurrection, the news outlet reported. Raytheon is alone among top U.S. military contractors in maintaining its pause on PAC donations.
According to The Hill's analysis of the latest Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings, arms dealers last month contributed to more than one-third of the 147 Republicans who endorsed Trump's anti-democratic revolt.
"The companies' reversal is another example of how our system for awarding money to contractors is often pay-to-play," Mandy Smithberger, director of the Center for Defense Information at the Project on Government Oversight, told the news outlet. "The size of agency budgets and programs should be based on performance, but too often it's clear that even these companies see it's based on access and corruption."
The timing of the military industry's change of heart was notable. "Defense firms resumed giving through their political action committees as Congress began work on the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which is expected to go through initial markups before the August recess," The Hill reported.
Biden has requested a $753 billion military budget for 2022, a slight increase over the current amount of funding Congress approved last year during the Trump administration. Weapons manufacturers, meanwhile, are heavily dependent on massive levels of government spending, which generates a substantial portion of their revenue.
According toSludge's David Moore, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman each "received more than 85% of their 2019 revenue from government contracts." Moreover, he wrote, "some 50-60% of the Pentagon's budget goes to the weapons contractors who often make maximum PAC contributions to the campaigns of congresspeople who approve funding for and oversee their contracts."
Lockheed Martin--the nation's biggest military contractor and recipient of nearly $76 billion in government contracts in 2020--last month contributed to "political action committees affiliated with 25 of the congressional Republicans who objected to the Electoral College vote after bankrolling only a few of them in April," The Hill reported. The company said in a statement Wednesday that it would "continue to observe long-standing principles of non-partisan political engagement in support of our business interests," the news outlet added.
Boeing, which declined to comment on its change in policy, "resumed its donations last month as well, shelling out around $900,000 to political action committees," the news outlet noted. "The company donated to several of the 147 Republicans, giving $5,000 each to House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.)."
Five thousand dollars is the maximum amount that corporate PACs, which are funded by executives and employees, are allowed to donate per election cycle to lawmakers' campaign accounts and leadership PACs. "While that's a relatively small figure in pricey modern-day elections," The Hill pointed out, "company executives and lobbyists have credited PAC donations for helping them get their message across to lawmakers."
Other arms dealers "made their first donations to election objectors in April then increased their contributions the following month," according to the news outlet. While Leidos said in a statement that its renewal of PAC donations in the second quarter of 2021 was accompanied by the introduction of new criteria that considers recipients' "integrity" and "character," BAE Systems, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman declined to comment on their decisions to resume handing out tens of thousands of dollars to Republican lawmakers, including ones who supported Trump's coup attempt.
The Hill detailed which of the GOP's insurrectionist lawmakers have benefitted the most from weapons manufacturers' revival of PAC donations:
Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.) is the biggest recipient of defense PAC donations among lawmakers who voted against certifying President Biden's victory over former President Trump. Calvert is the top Republican on the powerful House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, which determines funding levels for defense contractors. His campaign account and leadership PAC took in a combined $31,000, according to FEC filings.
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.), the top Republican on the House Armed Services Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee, was the No. 2 recipient of PAC money, with $22,500. Her subcommittee manages contracts for pricey fighter jets that compete for funding, such as Lockheed Martin's F-35 and Boeing's F-15EX.
Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), a member of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, also received significantly more than other lawmakers who voted to overturn the election.
According to OpenSecrets.org, the military industry's 52 PACs gave approximately $14.4 million to candidates in the 2020 cycle, with about $7.8 million going to Republicans and $6.6 million going to Democrats. Those donations, The Hill noted, "outpaced other influential industries, including pharmaceutical manufacturers, oil and gas companies, commercial banks, and law firms."
Keep ReadingShow Less
One Group Who Knew All Along How Dangerous Trump Was: Mental Health Experts
From the perspective of his psychopathology, Trump's coup attempt last week was wholly predictable.
Jan 16, 2021
Of course, the media environment was set up for the likes of Trump. America is filled with racism, sexism, and hatred, and with mass media outlets like Rupert Murdoch's Fox News that have no responsibility to the truth. The Fairness Doctrine, which used to protect us, was repealed decades ago by the Federal Communications Commission under Ronald Reagan, and in place of fairness jumped right-wing extremism. Social media platforms, including Twitter, Facebook, and Parler, also played a major role.
Yet Trump posed a special challenge. Into the brew of hatred and racism came a mentally disordered individual with a knack for self-promotion. Trump was not merely conniving, and that's the point. He suffers from severe impairments, including characteristics of sociopathy, pathological narcissism, and sadism. A mentally disordered leader in a country filled with inequalities and a mass media environment promoting extremism led to a terrifying situation.
"Trump was not merely conniving, and that's the point. He suffers from severe impairments, including characteristics of sociopathy, pathological narcissism, and sadism. A mentally disordered leader in a country filled with inequalities and a mass media environment promoting extremism led to a terrifying situation."
Mental health professionals started to warn Americans about Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, but they were shut down by none other than a professional organization of their own, the American Psychiatric Association. The APA was unique among mental health associations to adopt the so-called Goldwater Rule, which resulted from Barry Goldwater's 1964 presidential campaign, when some psychiatrists questioned Goldwater's mental health fitness for office. After that, the APA decreed that it was unethical for mental health professionals to diagnose public figures without a personal examination and without consent.
With the arrival of the Trump administration, however, the APA expanded the Goldwater rule dramatically. Originally, the rule applied to diagnoses. Now, according to the APA, any offer of professional comment regarding the mental health of a public figure was deemed to be unethical. When some mental health professionals started to warn specifically about Trump, the APA pushed back hard, invoking the Goldwater Rule. There were reports that the APA may have acted to protect its federal funding. Whatever was the actual motivation, the APA revisions under the Trump administration troubled many mental health professionals.
Several psychiatrists convened at Yale School of Medicine in early 2017 and published the proceedings in a book, "The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 37 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President," which raised the topic of Trump's mental unfitness in public discussion.
The mental health experts correctly predicted that the dangers of Trump's presidency were greater than the public and the politicians suspected, that the dangers would grow over time, and that they would possibly become uncontainable. Of course, these experts did not predict the coronavirus pandemic, but they recognized right away that the US death toll from COVID-19 -- now at nearly 390,000 -- would depend more on the president's mental state than on characteristics of the virus. Well before the 2020 election, they warned that Trump would refuse to concede, declare the results a fraud, and refuse to leave office. They warned that the post-election transition would be the most dangerous days of this presidency. Though they were correct in these predications, many political leaders continued to treat Trump as a normal, albeit highly manipulative and unprincipled politician, not as dangerously disordered.
Trump's coup attempt last week was predictable from the perspective of Trump's psychopathology. Convicting him in the upcoming Senate impeachment trial is also important to keep Trump from running for office again. Yet we must draw further lessons.
We must find formal ways to incorporate psychological insights into political discourse. This would involve, among other measures, correcting the Goldwater Rule, adjusting the 25th Amendment to ensure that it can be applied to dangerous psychological disorders, and taking steps to reduce the powers of the presidency so that the nation is not vulnerable to the whims of one mentally unbalanced individual.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular