340 Comments
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

The rank depravity of Republicans and those who fund them continues to surprise me. These people are plumbing depths of turpitude that seem boundless. May they somehow be brought to justice.

Expand full comment

"The Supreme Court read that interpretation into law in the 2010 Citizens United decision, but the increasingly obvious links between money, politics, and national security suggest it might be worth revisiting."

Here's the problem: The politicians who benefited from the Citizens United decision will not be willing to give up those benefits. And let me know when those who benefited from Trump's tax cuts will vote to rescind those cuts. Revisiting may sound like a good idea, but don't hold your breath!

Expand full comment

Heather, thanks for highlighting these people and events. This seems to be a year - if not a decade - of whack-a-mole. Grift, enabled by greed and gullibility, seems to be the guiding principle of way too many people. I hope the rest of us can stay vigilant and politically active.

Expand full comment

Again the attacks on women and women’s rights are in the news. Thank you, Professor, for continuing to keep the “Abortion Question” alive when there are courts or lawyers or elected “leaders” that would like to skip judicial oversight, laws, regulations, and mandate the end of all Abortion. All. Abortion. Silence women and allies. From today’s letter: “Kacsmaryk was appointed by Trump and is well known for his right-wing views on abortion and same-sex marriage. Initially, he kept the hearing over a nationwide ban on the key drug used for medicated abortion off the docket, and in a phone call last Friday he asked lawyers not to publicize today’s hearing, saying he was concerned about safety.” His safety? Who’s safety? Does he believe there will be no controversy or conflict with these laws that take us back to the dark ages of back alley and dangerous Abortions? Most shocking, if we can be shocked by the far right or the repubs, is the idea of making Abortion a crime that would bring homicide charges. From the Guardian March 10: “The bills being introduced in Arkansas, Texas, Kentucky and South Carolina look to establish that life begins at conception. Each of these bills explicitly references homicide charges for abortion. Homicide is punishable by the death penalty in all of those states.”https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/10/republican-wave-state-bills-homicide-charges

Expand full comment

"saying that political donations are simply a form of free speech. The Supreme Court read that interpretation into law in the 2010 Citizens United decision, but the increasingly obvious links between money, politics, and national security suggest it might be worth revisiting."

That's the driest understatement I have heard in a while.

Expand full comment

It would be interesting to see which news outlet representatives and others were allowed into the Kacsmaryk hearing. Does anyone know them?

Expand full comment
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

The Guo/Bannon corruption story is mindboggling in its blatency. So is Truth Social being funded by Putin cronies--again not that it happened but that it was so blatent--there are not 16 layers of intermediaries and shell companies.

Venture capitalist Peter Thiel did much to start the bank run on SVB and backed J.D. Vance. JD Vance wants to cut support for Ukraine unless it is tied to sourthern border protection spending. During his campaign he said he didn't care what happened in Ukraine.

Add in stirring the pot on Credit Suisse by the Saudi's and I would say that there is a new Russian/Chinese/Saudi/Iranian bloc looking to destroy Western democracies economically and via a vast disinformation campaign.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jd-vance-washington-dont-trust-you-demands-white-house-release-audit-report-ukraine-spending

Expand full comment

I must say, the GOP is very good at projecting its own crimes onto others

Expand full comment

You go, Heather! END Citizens United! When will we quit enabling bad actors whose greed knows no bounds? When will we learn the meaning of ENOUGH? Time to lock up some crooks and tax some billionnaires.

Expand full comment

Thank you again professor for your detailed summation. How do you do this night after night? I am truly nauseated by the greed and deception, collusion and more greed. Will someone please charge and convict these people. Is there no other charges that can be brought against the despicable Bannon. Yet I continue to hold on to hope that Justice will be served.

Expand full comment

Did George Santos pay income tax on his $200k to $400k referral fee? If not, that could be a problem for him.

Expand full comment

Please visit this link if you feel the need to have a laugh. Randy Rainbow has George Santos in the crosshairs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQ5F7fve4N0

Expand full comment

I want to add one more thing. This money, politics, discussion.

It needs to be put into law that a person can’t spend more on his campaign than his salary is for one year of the office he’s attempting to be elected for. The president’s salary is $400,000 a year, I think. It might be higher now, but I’ll use that as an example.

The presidential candidates would not be allowed to dorms over $400,000 on their campaigns. That’s it. Donations couldn’t be over $1,000, and all donations must be reported to the election commission.

This should be the law for every public office an election is held for, right down to city councilmen.

Expand full comment
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

I believe that the chances of a ‘balanced budget’ in 2033 are, and should be, zero. The proper concern should be how we can have a fairer tax system to provide for the appropriate physical and social infrastructure of the United States.

The Republicans are again in their ‘dance of stupid storks’ (only performed in Democratic administrations).They oppose any new taxes on the wealthy and are awaiting another Republican administration to again reduce such taxes consonant with their fraudulent ‘trickle down’ pee pee policy.

In their false budgetary bloviating, they focus on the imperativeness of slashing ‘social expenditures’ to prevent budgetary suicide.

Meanwhile, President Biden is proposing a robust 2023 budget with a panoply of recommended new taxes and much needed social expenditures.

It seems likely that few, if any, of these new taxes will be enacted. Indeed, with the Kevin Crazies in the Animal House, it is uncertain whether a stalemate on the budget might lead to a failure to raise the national debt limit. A debt default could make the current Silicon Valley Bank fiscal dust up seem like a gentle walk in the park.

What is lacking is a serious discussion of national debt. The only time that America had no national debt was in the mid-1830s. The last time the budget was balanced was in President Clinton’s final year in office.

We are going to continue to have an annual budget deficit indefinitely. The appropriate issue is how much. Typically America’s national debt is calculated as a proportion of our Gross Domestic Product. During WW II this became humongous. High taxes were enacted and maintained for years and the debt/GDP ratio dropped substantially.

Assuming that our total economy will increase annually by 2-4% over the coming decade, then we have considerable wiggle room for increasing our total national debt.

Meanwhile the ‘debate’ over the budget deficit and the national debt is sprinkled with Republican foo foo dust.

Expand full comment
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

I very seldom got a hot meal while in the army. Sometimes I ate my ice cream first before the siren went off on the rare occasions we actually made it to a mess hall. My roast water Buffalo sat forlornly on my abandoned trey. I think I will become a Republican now so I can also steal from the government. I have my heart set on getting a hamburger milk shake and French fries by whatever means necessary to exact my revenge. I don’t care if it breaks the bank! Maybe I could team up with Dartannon or whatever his name is. I would like it served on the yacht.

Expand full comment
Mar 16·edited Mar 16

Once again the Federalist Society rears its ugly head. The Federalist Society is a right-wing organization formed 40 years ago to install judges in US courts who will rule according to conservative Christian principles*, instead of the Constitution or the rule of law. The six judges of the right-wing cabal on the Supreme Court that outlawed abortion are all Federalist Society members. And, no surprise, Kacsmaryk is a Federalist Society judge as well, who was specifically chosen by the right-wing Christians suing to make mifepristone illegal. It would be astounding if Kacsmaryk does not outlaw plan B. Welcome to Gilead.

* https://newrepublic.com/article/166993/leonard-leo-christian-right-future

Expand full comment