I screwed this up the first try. Figures - I call him a dumbass and then I can't get the right video clip embedded in the post.
PM Starmer hands him a letter from King Charles, Trump eyeballs it a little, and then has to ask Starmer what it says.
Mar 1, 2025
Make A Wish
— π§πΌπΊ π’ππ―πΌπΏπ» PhD, FRSA, etc! (@call_me_tomasso) March 1, 2025
The Mugging
Trump and Vance are too afraid to set foot in Ukraine because they're both cowards. And it's easier for the coward to bully everybody around him into doing what he wants, than it is for him to step up and lead from the front.
The War Is Here Now
That scene in the Oval Office yesterday was a declaration of division.
Putin gets Europe. Xi gets the Pacific. And we get the western hemisphere.
That was fiery and staged, and it had no substance other than what had been more or less rehearsed - it was the public announcement of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939.
We are The New Axis.
And there's no reason for me right now to believe it will end any differently, except for the number of dead.
THE TYRANTS HAVE EMBRACED
General Tubman
Born into slavery in Dorchester County, Maryland, Tubman was beaten and whipped by enslavers as a child. Early in life, she suffered a traumatic head wound when an irate overseer threw a heavy metal weight, intending to hit another slave, but hit her instead. The injury caused dizziness, pain, and spells of hypersomnia, which occurred throughout her life. After her injury, Tubman began experiencing strange visions and vivid dreams, which she ascribed to premonitions from God. These experiences, combined with her Methodist upbringing, led her to become devoutly religious.
In 1849, Tubman escaped to Philadelphia, only to return to Maryland to rescue her family soon after. Slowly, one group at a time, she brought relatives with her out of the state, and eventually guided dozens of other enslaved people to freedom. Tubman (or "Moses", as she was called) travelled by night and in extreme secrecy, and later said she "never lost a passenger". After the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was passed, she helped guide escapees farther north into British North America (Canada), and helped newly freed people find work. Tubman met John Brown in 1858, and helped him plan and recruit supporters for his 1859 raid on Harpers Ferry.
When the Civil War began, Tubman worked for the Union Army, first as a cook and nurse, and then as an armed scout and spy. For her guidance of the raid at Combahee Ferry, which liberated more than 700 enslaved people, she is widely credited as the first woman to lead an armed military operation in the United States. After the war, she retired to the family home on property she had purchased in 1859 in Auburn, New York, where she cared for her aging parents. She was active in the women's suffrage movement until illness overtook her and was admitted to a home for elderly African Americans, which she had helped establish years earlier. Tubman is commonly viewed as an icon of courage and freedom.
Feb 28, 2025
What They Built
Of course, not everything is great just because it's been around for a long time.
But there are old things we should protect and defend with our lives. Things that were built by great people - who, BTW, were mostly regular everyday folks who became giant historic figures by standing up and fighting for a new idea that had been around for centuries, but had only been enshrined in practical form for about 100 years.
They fought and they bled and hundreds of thousands of them died for an important concept that often meant something different to practically every one of them - like one guy said: "I'm fighting for my right to boo the Dodgers."
But there was always a common thread: an orderly world where at least the concept of the freedom of self-determination can be a dream within reach of everybody everywhere.
That order - that dream - is worth preserving. It's worth fighting for. It's worth the sacrifice we're going to have to make if we want the sacrifice of those other regular everyday people to stand for something more than a few extra bucks in some rich fuck's pocket.
The Politics Of Asshole Thugs
Eric Swalwell says threats to them and their families are stopping GOP officials from criticizing president
Republicans on Capitol Hill are shying away from criticizing Donald Trump’s policies over fears for their physical safety and that of their families, a Democratic member of Congress has said.
Eric Swalwell, a Democratic representative from California, said his Republican colleagues were “terrified” of crossing Trump not only because of the negative impact on their political careers, but also from anxiety that it might provoke physical threats that could cause personal upheaval and require them to hire round-the-clock security as protection.
Swalwell’s comments came in a webinar chaired by the journalist Sidney Blumenthal in response to a question on whether Republicans might be driven to rebel against or even impeach Trump.
“I have a lot of friends who are Republicans,” he said. “They are terrified of being the tallest poppy in the field, and it’s not as simple as being afraid of being primaried and losing their job. They know that that can happen.
“It’s more personal. It’s their personal safety that they’re afraid of, and they have spouses and family members saying, ‘Do not do this, it’s not worth it, it will change our lives forever. We will have to hire around-the-clock security.’ Life can be very uncomfortable for your children.
“That is real, because when [Elon] Musk [Trump’s most powerful ally] tweets at somebody, or Trump tweets at somebody, or calls somebody out, their lives are turned upside down.
“When he tweets at you, people make threats, and you have to take people at their word. And so that is a real thing that my colleagues struggle with.”
Swalwell warned that fear of Trump was likely to further weaken support for Ukraine among GOP House members following his recent attacks on the country’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and his public praise for the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin.
“I thought that the numbers that we’ve showed to be unified around Ukraine would hold, and it’s not holding,” he said.
Swalwell’s comments come at a time when some Republican members of Congress are encountering pressure from constituents to push back against the attacks on federal government workers by Musk’s “department of government efficiency” (Doge) unit, which critics say is usurping the powers of Congress.
Swalwell, a member of the House judiciary committee, said he had spent more than $1m on security in the past two and a half years, after arousing Trump’s enmity by serving as a manager in his second impeachment trial and by filing a lawsuit against him and his eldest son, Donald Jr, seeking damages for their role in inciting the 6 January attack on the US Capitol by a violent mob.
His portrayal of Trump-inspired intimidation was supported by Bradley Moss, a lawyer for the FBI Agents Association, which has filed a lawsuit to prevent the Trump administration from publicly naming agents and bureau employees who worked on the 6 January criminal investigation.
Moss recalled Trump publicly attacking his boss, Mark Zaid, a Washington lawyer who represented the whistleblower who disclosed details of a call Trump made to Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, in 2019 that eventually led to his first impeachment.
“Donald Trump literally held up a photo of my boss, called him out by name, said he was scum, was a liar, etc,” Moss said during the webinar. “Next day, I woke up to, like, 150 voicemails. Texts were flooded throughout my inbox. We were getting death threats like crazy, and there was actually at least one gentleman who went to prison for making threats against my boss.”
He added: “We publicly called him out during that impeachment, when he was threatening the whistleblower in public statements, saying you are putting this person’s life in jeopardy. He made clear he doesn’t care. He’ll say it’s not my fault if something happens to that person.
“He knows full well the intimidation factor he can bring through his bully pulpit.”
Most Republicans who voted to impeach Trump during his first presidency are no longer in Congress. Liz Cheney – who played a leading role in the House committee investigating the 6 January insurrection – lost her Wyoming seat after being defeated in a GOP primary by a Trump supporter.
Cheney told CNN that some of her Republican colleagues had voted against impeaching Trump because “they were afraid for their own security – afraid, in some instances, for their lives”.
Her comments were backed up by Mitt Romney, the former Republican senator and presidential candidate, who told his biographer, McKay Coppins, of a senior Senate colleague who intended to vote for Trump’s conviction at his Senate trial only to change course when a colleague told him: “Think of your personal safety. Think of your children.”
Musk, the billionaire Tesla and SpaceX entrepreneur, has threatened to use his vast wealth to fund primary challenges against any House or Senate Republicans who vote against Trump’s agenda or oppose his cabinet nominees.
The tactic appeared to be effective in the case of Joni Ernst, a Republican senator for Iowa, who reversed her initial opposition to Pete Hegseth’s nomination as defence secretary on the basis of sexual assault allegations that had been made against him after Musk funded adverts extolling a rightwing radio host who had vowed to challenge her in a primary.
Thom Tillis, a Republican senator for North Carolina, told people that he received FBI warnings of “credible death threats” when he was publicly considering voting against Hegseth, Vanity Fair reported. Tillis, who had spoken at length to witnesses who raised concerns about Hegseth’s behavior, ultimately voted in favor of his confirmation.
Vanity Fair cited an unnamed source as quoting Tillis advising people who wished to understand Trump to read Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, a 2006 book by Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. A spokesperson for Tillis denied that he had recommended the book in that context.
Most Republicans who voted to impeach Trump during his first presidency are no longer in Congress. Liz Cheney – who played a leading role in the House committee investigating the 6 January insurrection – lost her Wyoming seat after being defeated in a GOP primary by a Trump supporter.
Cheney told CNN that some of her Republican colleagues had voted against impeaching Trump because “they were afraid for their own security – afraid, in some instances, for their lives”.
Her comments were backed up by Mitt Romney, the former Republican senator and presidential candidate, who told his biographer, McKay Coppins, of a senior Senate colleague who intended to vote for Trump’s conviction at his Senate trial only to change course when a colleague told him: “Think of your personal safety. Think of your children.”
Musk, the billionaire Tesla and SpaceX entrepreneur, has threatened to use his vast wealth to fund primary challenges against any House or Senate Republicans who vote against Trump’s agenda or oppose his cabinet nominees.
The tactic appeared to be effective in the case of Joni Ernst, a Republican senator for Iowa, who reversed her initial opposition to Pete Hegseth’s nomination as defence secretary on the basis of sexual assault allegations that had been made against him after Musk funded adverts extolling a rightwing radio host who had vowed to challenge her in a primary.
Thom Tillis, a Republican senator for North Carolina, told people that he received FBI warnings of “credible death threats” when he was publicly considering voting against Hegseth, Vanity Fair reported. Tillis, who had spoken at length to witnesses who raised concerns about Hegseth’s behavior, ultimately voted in favor of his confirmation.
Vanity Fair cited an unnamed source as quoting Tillis advising people who wished to understand Trump to read Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work, a 2006 book by Paul Babiak and Robert Hare. A spokesperson for Tillis denied that he had recommended the book in that context.
Seriously Silly
Another Tik Tok - it's chock full today.
@kara01944 #familyguy #famliyguyclips #familyguymeme #fgy #familytime #family ♬ original sound - kara
Big Sky
Fun Fact Friday for the Ladies:
In Montana, it is illegal for married women to go fishing alone on Sundays, and illegal for unmarried women to fish alone at all.
Transporting "an unborn child" from Montana to another state "with the intent to obtain an abortion that is illegal" in Montana, or assisting anyone in doing so, would be illegal under House Bill 609.
A new Montana bill "establishing the criminal offense of abortion trafficking" could criminalize pregnant women who cross state lines to get an abortion. Under House Bill 609, from state Rep. Kerri Seekins-Crowe (R–Billings), anyone convicted of "abortion trafficking" would face up to five years in prison, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.
You are reading Sex & Tech, the newsletter from Elizabeth Nolan Brown on sex, technology, bodily autonomy, law, and online culture. Want more on sex, technology, and the law? Subscribe to Sex & Tech. It's free and you can unsubscribe any time.
The bill defines abortion trafficking as purposely or knowingly transporting "an unborn child that is currently located in this state either to a location within this state or to a location outside of this state with the intent to obtain an abortion that is illegal in this state."
Aiding or assisting someone else in such transportation would also make one guilty of abortion trafficking.
Criminalizing driving someone else out of Montana to do something that's legal in another state is itself ridiculous. But the language of this bill would very clearly criminalize some pregnant women who transport themselves out of state too.
But Wait… Isn't Abortion Legal in Montana?
Per a constitutional amendment voters passed in 2024, Montana allows abortion up until fetal viability and provides an exception to this limit if the mother's life or health is at risk. This fact may give pause to people who think that's an acceptable limit—after all, it's only criminalizing folks who are getting the bad kind of abortions, right?
Look, I don't love the idea of late-term abortions either. But let's step back here for a moment.
First, there are what many would consider justifiable reasons for getting an abortion after about 24 weeks, including fatal fetal conditions that aren't discovered until later in a pregnancy. "Had a bill like this been law at the time, I wouldn't just be a grieving mother, I'd be a felon," Anne Angus told Jessica Valenti of Abortion, Every Day:
The 35-year-old left Montana for an abortion in 2022, after her fetus was diagnosed with a fatal condition. She was 24 weeks pregnant—which was past the legal abortion window at the time. Under HB 609, she could have faced years in prison. "All for fleeing the state to give my son the compassion and dignity he deserved," she says.
What's more, you needn't cheer on unconstitutional, travel-limiting measures like this just because they might stop a few abortions that don't meet your moral standards. There are other solutions—like pushing for changes to laws in states with no limits—that could address abortion-after-viability concerns without implicating other rights.
It's also possible that Montana voters will someday topple the recent constitutional amendment and the state will ban abortion much earlier in pregnancy or ban it entirely. In that case, a woman leaving the state for a first-trimester abortion could still be found guilty of abortion trafficking.
Perhaps most importantly, we should keep in mind that this is unlikely to stop with Montana. In fact, it's possible that Montana is seen by some as the perfect test ground for this sort of thing precisely because it currently allows abortions until viability.
"By starting in a state where abortion is legal until 'viability,' it gives Republicans a certain amount of PR cover. They can pretend this isn't about restricting women's right to travel—just about stopping 'late' abortion," suggests Valenti. "It's no accident that HB 609 targets later abortion patients… just like it's no coincidence that earlier 'trafficking' laws focused on teens."
That's just speculation, of course. But it wouldn't surprise me if backers of abortion trafficking laws like Montana's H.B. 609 may be counting on people to let this one slide, since it would only implicate post-viability abortions (for now). Meanwhile, they get to test out messaging and legal arguments before moving on to a state where abortion is banned earlier or entirely.
The Politics of 'Trafficking'
For now, H.B. 609 has been referred to the Montana House Judiciary Committee and had an initial hearing this morning.
Whatever happens with this bill, it surely won't be the last we'll hear about abortion trafficking, a term Republicans have begun to use and favor more frequently in recent years.
It's a handy framing trick. Calling something "abortion trafficking" sounds a lot more nefarious than "driving out of state for an abortion." The latter implicates Americans' right to freedom of movement and might give some moderate people pause. But trafficking means to deal or trade in something illegal and is used in other criminal statutes (drug trafficking, sex trafficking, labor trafficking). For those not paying close attention, abortion trafficking may seem to mean something worse than it does. And even for those who know the definition, it may unconsciously prime expectations of shiftiness and criminality, even when it's being used to refer to someone who leaves the state to get a legal abortion somewhere else.
This is a well-worn strategy. As Mistress Matisse pointed out on X, "They tested 'self-trafficking' charges on sex workers first." Sex workers have sometimes been charged with "sex trafficking" themselves. In addition, sex work customers or prospective customers are sometimes described as sex traffickers and charged with sex trafficking. Because sex trafficking can also refer to terrible crimes, like forcing someone else to sell sex, the term is a muddled mess that allows authorities to invoke evil criminals and heroic rescues when what they're doing is arresting people for trying to have consensual sex.
Some Republicans seem intent on pulling a similar trick with abortion trafficking.
The term is being defined differently in the various states that have considered abortion trafficking legislation. In Idaho and Tennessee, abortion trafficking laws ban helping a minor get an out-of-state abortion.
Regardless of precise definition, invoking trafficking suggests some sort of coercion—a girl or woman being ferried across state lines for an abortion against her will—or the involvement of a black-market abortionist, when the reality is usually people taking advantage of freedom of movement and federalism in order to have abortions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)