alternet--2020-12-25--The moral case for feeling extending equal empathy to strangers and family alike

Brendan Gaesser , University at Albany , State University of New York and Zoë Fowler , University at Albany , State University of New York The year 2020 has been no stranger to suffering .
In the midst of a global pandemic , widespread financial hardship and violence arising from systemic racism , empathy for others ' suffering has been pushed to the front and center in U.S. society .
As society grapples to find its moral compass in a time of such hardship and strife , a critical question emerges : Whose suffering should one care about ?
When @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for , friends , family members and children might come to mind .
But what about strangers , or people not connected to you through nationality , social status or race ?
As cognitive scientists , we wanted to understand what moral beliefs people hold about empathy and how these beliefs may shift depending on whom someone is feeling empathy for .
Evidence suggests that empathy – broadly defined as the ability to understand and share in someone else 's experience – can be a force for good .
Numerous studies have shown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Further , feeling empathy for a member of a stigmatized group can reduce prejudice and improve attitudes toward the entire stigmatized group .
But there has also been research suggesting empathy may contribute to bias and injustice .
Studies have shown that people tend to feel more empathy for the suffering of those who are close and similar to themselves , such as someone of the same race or nationality , than for those who are more distant or dissimilar .
This bias in empathy has consequences .
For example , people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money to help someone of a different nationality compared with someone of their own nationality .
Neuroscientists have shown that this bias is evident in how our brains process both firsthand and secondhand pain .
In one such study , participants received a painful shock and also watched another person receive a painful shock .
There was greater similarity in participants ' neural activity when the person they observed rooted for the same sports team as themselves .
Whether empathy has a positive impact on society or not has been the subject of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and psychology .
Some scholars have suggested empathy should be denounced as too narrow in scope and inherently biased to have a place in our moral lives .
Others have argued that empathy is a particularly potent force that can motivate many people to help others and can be expanded to be more inclusive .
What is largely left unconsidered is whether it could actually be our sense of what is right and wrong that limits our empathy .
Perhaps many of us believe that inequality in empathy is right – that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close and similar to us .
In other words , loyalty is a greater moral force than equality .
In 2020 , we ran a study to better understand the morality of empathy .
Three hundred participants from across the U.S. completed a study in which they were presented with a story describing an individual who is learning about global food scarcity .
The individual reads about the struggles of two people in the story , one who is socially close – a friend or a family member – and another who is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a distant country .
In different versions , the person in the story is described as feeling empathy for the stranger or for the friend or family member , or for both people equally , or for neither .
After reading the story , participants then rated how morally right or wrong they thought it was for this person to feel empathy in this manner .
When presented with stories in which the person feels either empathy solely for the friend/family member or the socially distant person , participants typically respond that it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the friend/family member .
But participants judged feeling equal empathy as the most moral .
Equal empathy was rated as 32 % more morally right than feeling empathy for just one person in the story .
Although this study suggested that people believed it more moral to have equal empathy , it left certain questions unanswered : What was behind the perceived morality of equal empathy ?
And would this pattern hold if people were judging their own feelings on empathy ?
So we ran a follow-up study with a new sample of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the story so that it was from the participants ' own perspective , and the two people in need were people they personally knew – one being someone close to them , the other an acquaintance .
We also added endings to the story , so that participants could now also feel empathy for both people but to different degrees .
The results were remarkably similar to the first study : Feeling more empathy for one 's close friend or family member was seen as more moral .
But most notably , feeling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judged as the most moral outcome .
Where to go from here ?
In a moment when fostering a culture of caring for those who are different seems challenging , our research may offer some insight and perhaps hope .
It suggests that most people believe we should care about everyone equally .
With the right approach , this belief in the morality of equal empathy may even translate to real changes .
Recent work has shown that empathy can be increased based on one 's motivation and personal beliefs .
For example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how empathy can be grown and developed showed improvements in their ability to recognize others ' emotions , a major part of empathy .
We are undoubtedly living through an age in which people are divided by race , nationality and political affiliation .
But we are all human beings , and we all deserve to be cared for on some level .
Our research provides evidence that this principle of equality in empathy is not some obscure ideal .
Rather , it is a tenet of our moral beliefs .
[ Get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekend .
Sign up for our weekly newsletter . ]
Brendan Gaesser , Assistant Professor of Psychology , University at Albany , State University of New York and Zoë Fowler , Graduate Assistant , University at Albany , State University of New York This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license .
Read the original article .

Brendan Gaesser, University at Albany, State University of New York and Zoë Fowler, University at Albany, State University of New York
The year 2020 has been no stranger to suffering. In the midst of a global pandemic, widespread financial hardship and violence arising from systemic racism, empathy for others' suffering has been pushed to the front and center in U.S. society.
As society grapples to find its moral compass in a time of such hardship and strife, a critical question emerges: Whose suffering should one care about?
When you ponder who is worth feeling empathy for, friends, family members and children might come to mind. But what about strangers, or people not connected to you through nationality, social status or race?
As cognitive scientists, we wanted to understand what moral beliefs people hold about empathy and how these beliefs may shift depending on whom someone is feeling empathy for.
Empathy as a force for good
Evidence suggests that empathy – broadly defined as the ability to understand and share in someone else's experience – can be a force for good. Numerousstudies have shown it often leads to altruistic helping behavior. Further, feelingempathy for a member of a stigmatized group can reduce prejudice and improve attitudes toward the entire stigmatized group.
But there has also been research suggesting empathy may contribute to bias and injustice. Studies have shown that people tend to feel more empathy for the suffering of those who are close and similar to themselves, such as someone of the same race or nationality, than for those who are more distant or dissimilar. This bias in empathy has consequences. For example, people are less likely to donate time or money to help someone of a different nationality compared with someone of their own nationality.
Neuroscientists have shown that this bias is evident in how our brains process both firsthand and secondhand pain. In one such study, participants received a painful shock and also watched another person receive a painful shock. There was greater similarity in participants' neural activity when the person they observed rooted for the same sports team as themselves.
Whether empathy has a positive impact on society or not has been the subject of a fierce debate spanning politics, philosophy and psychology. Somescholars have suggested empathy should be denounced as too narrow in scope and inherently biased to have a place in our moral lives.
Others have argued that empathy is a particularly potent force that can motivate many people to help others and can be expanded to be more inclusive.
What is largely left unconsidered is whether it could actually be our sense of what is right and wrong that limits our empathy. Perhaps many of us believe that inequality in empathy is right – that we should care more for those who are close and similar to us. In other words, loyalty is a greater moral force than equality.
The morality of empathy
In 2020, we ran a study to better understand the morality of empathy.
Three hundred participants from across the U.S. completed a study in which they were presented with a story describing an individual who is learning about global food scarcity. The individual reads about the struggles of two people in the story, one who is socially close – a friend or a family member – and another who is socially distant: for example, from a distant country. In different versions, the person in the story is described as feeling empathy for the stranger or for the friend or family member, or for both people equally, or for neither.
After reading the story, participants then rated how morally right or wrong they thought it was for this person to feel empathy in this manner.
When presented with stories in which the person feels either empathy solely for the friend/family member or the socially distant person, participants typically respond that it is more moral to feel empathy for the friend/family member. But participants judged feeling equal empathy as the most moral. Equal empathy was rated as 32% more morally right than feeling empathy for just one person in the story.
Friend or stranger?
Although this study suggested that people believed it more moral to have equal empathy, it left certain questions unanswered: What was behind the perceived morality of equal empathy? And would this pattern hold if people were judging their own feelings on empathy?
So we ran a follow-up study with a new sample of 300 people. This time we changed the story so that it was from the participants' own perspective, and the two people in need were people they personally knew – one being someone close to them, the other an acquaintance. We also added endings to the story, so that participants could now also feel empathy for both people but to different degrees.
The results were remarkably similar to the first study: Feeling more empathy for one's close friend or family member was seen as more moral. But most notably, feeling equal empathy for both people was again judged as the most moral outcome.
Where to go from here?
In a moment when fostering a culture of caring for those who are different seems challenging, our research may offer some insight and perhaps hope. It suggests that most people believe we should care about everyone equally.
With the right approach, this belief in the morality of equal empathy may even translate to real changes. Recent work has shown that empathy can be increased based on one's motivation and personal beliefs. For example, participants who wrote a letter about how empathy can be grown and developed showed improvements in their ability to recognize others' emotions, a major part of empathy.
We are undoubtedly living through an age in which people are divided by race, nationality and political affiliation. But we are all human beings, and we all deserve to be cared for on some level. Our research provides evidence that this principle of equality in empathy is not some obscure ideal. Rather, it is a tenet of our moral beliefs.
[Get the best of The Conversation, every weekend.Sign up for our weekly newsletter.]
Brendan Gaesser, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York and Zoë Fowler, Graduate Assistant, University at Albany, State University of New York
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


alternet--2020-12-25--Just another wacky weekend in Trump land

Even for Donald Trump and the Republican Tabernacle Choir of the Senate , this weekend was an all-star level of crazy-making .
The White House again ignored a pandemic killing 3,000 Americans a day , widespread misery and an attack on the nation while discussing the possibility of martial law over Trump 's election loss .
What saved it was the last-minute , roller-coaster deal in the Congress for a coronavirus aid bill , as ugly a compromise as possible , but an agreement nevertheless .
Stand by for the conflicting credits and new discoveries about what actually passes today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weekend made me , at least , feel as if I live on a different planet – with theirs being one in which it is impossible to separate the important from the inane .
We all can agree the White House continues to make seeing the news an emotionally exhausting experience .
Transition interruptus : Trump ordered halted any transition meetings between the Defense Department and the incoming Joe Biden team for the next few weeks .
In what universe other than the Trump ego-fantasy does it make any sense for incoming Pentagon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of military forces , the global danger signs that the Pentagon is tracking , even the Defense spending patterns .
Apparently , such meetings were halted because Trump was angered by seeing a Washington Post article that suggested the Biden team was looking at how many billions of dollars could be saved from re-routing money taken from the Pentagon for the border wall construction back to the military .
I would hope that is something they should be considering .
Screwing up coronavirus economic aid : Even to their own members , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ religion for relief from debts and deficits by blocking coronavirus aid to Americans reportedly was being seen as nuts .
The situation was fluid , but barely , as Sen. Pat Toomey ( R-Pa. ) , led a late charge to stop lending by the supposedly independent Federal Reserve for businesses that need credit to stay afloat .
A compromise finally got through around narrowing the proposal , setting Congress toward bill approval .
Once again it put hunger and evictions over non-payment of rent for millions on real display and requiring a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clock for the final votes .
Republicans had seen it as a fiscal necessity ; Democrats saw a bid to throttle the incoming Biden administration even before it takes office .
Though the participants will see it as a victory , it was politics at its worst .
Ignoring cybersecurity hacking : Even after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said it was the Russians who broke through software walls guarding the Pentagon , the Treasury and Commerce Departments and the nuclear areas of the Energy Department , Trump still insisted Saturday it could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they could have skewed voting in the election to account for his loss .
Trump thinks we are idiots .
Trump 's never-ending election challenges : More than six weeks after the election , Trump met in the White House on Friday night with the Sidney Powell , the lawyer who 's outlandish arguments about election fraud were considered too far out of line for him to even keep her on as a personal lawyer .
They discussed making her a special counsel investigating voter fraud , according to two people briefed on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ present by phone , said no , as did White House counsel Pat Cipollone .
Apart from all else , declaring a special counsel is the jurisdiction of the Justice Department , not the Oval Office .
Powell is the one arguing conspiracy theories about a Venezuelan plot to rig voting machines in the United States .
It was unclear if Trump will move ahead on it .
Meanwhile , Trump associate and the disgraced but pardoned former national security adviser , Michael T. Flynn , is going around the country telling Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ results .
The pending pardons : Politico reported that Trump is considering preemptively pardoning as many as 20 aides and associates before leaving office , even to the frustration of Senate Republicans who are arguing that strategy could backfire politically .
Again , pardons are supposed to move through the Justice Department and a review process , and again Trump is insisting on his own rules for family and friends .
Those under consideration include Giuliani , campaign staff and several members of his family .
Of course , accepting a pardon includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committed .
Perhaps the smartest move Trump might make is to offer Hunter Biden the same pre-criminal pardon he apparently is considering for his own kids .
Fast and loose money : It turns out Trump will be leaving with 10s of millions of dollars with few legal limits on how he can spend it .
And , records now show that his family members managed to interfere with campaign funds to direct hundreds of millions into slush funds controlled by Trump .
This brazen attempt to siphon reportable campaign money into accounts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questionable on lots of grounds .
The reports extend the pattern of loose financial ethics marking the Trump presidency .
It was common for Trump to use his official office and functions for personal money-making activities .
Everything occurred from spending his time golfing at Trump resorts to re-routing foreign trips to the benefit of his own properties .
Expanding Mining : Despite the timing , Trump is moving to open up vast amounts of federal land to widespread mining and drilling , The New York Times reported .
It is a move @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems for the Biden administration .
The new administration , for procedural reasons as well as political ones , is bound to challenge a number of the individual sites involved .
Again , whose interests are being served here ?
And in possibly the dumbest attack of the week : Trump supporters took up the challenge to knock the doctorate earned by Dr. Jill Biden , defending and outdoing a particularly sexist , silly and anti-intellectual column from a Wall Street Journal op-ed that asked her to drop the honorific unless she was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stuff it , kiddo .
Meanwhile , at far ends of the news worlds , both The New York Times and Lou Dobbs ran apologies for getting things wrong .
The Times said sorry for trusting a source on ISIS without proper investigation .
Under legal threat , Dobbs ( or his employer Fox News ) gave a mea culpa for allowing unsubstantiated lying about conspiracy theories about election fraud .
On the other hand , Trump and Vice President Mike Pence reached the enormously important and contentious decision to label members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather than airmen , sailors , soldiers or Marines .
Was n't that the name of the universe-traveling robot Gort in `` The Day the Earth Stood Still '' ?
You think we will miss these weekends after Jan. 20 ?

Even for Donald Trump and the Republican Tabernacle Choir of the Senate, this weekend was an all-star level of crazy-making. The White House again ignored a pandemic killing 3,000 Americans a day, widespread misery and an attack on the nation while discussing the possibility of martial law over Trump's election loss.
What saved it was the last-minute, roller-coaster deal in the Congress for a coronavirus aid bill, as ugly a compromise as possible, but an agreement nevertheless. Stand by for the conflicting credits and new discoveries about what actually passes today in the multi-hundred-page bill.
The whole weekend made me, at least, feel as if I live on a different planet – with theirs being one in which it is impossible to separate the important from the inane. We all can agree the White House continues to make seeing the news an emotionally exhausting experience.
Just a sampling:
Transition interruptus: Trump ordered halted any transition meetings between the Defense Department and the incoming Joe Biden team for the next few weeks. In what universe other than the Trump ego-fantasy does it make any sense for incoming Pentagon leadership not to know about the readiness of military forces, the global danger signs that the Pentagon is tracking, even the Defense spending patterns. Apparently, such meetings were halted because Trump was angered by seeing a Washington Post article that suggested the Biden team was looking at how many billions of dollars could be saved from re-routing money taken from the Pentagon for the border wall construction back to the military. I would hope that is something they should be considering.
Screwing up coronavirus economic aid: Even to their own members, the movement among Republican senators to find new religion for relief from debts and deficits by blocking coronavirus aid to Americans reportedly was being seen as nuts. The situation was fluid, but barely, as Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), led a late charge to stop lending by the supposedly independent Federal Reserve for businesses that need credit to stay afloat. A compromise finally got through around narrowing the proposal, setting Congress toward bill approval. Once again it put hunger and evictions over non-payment of rent for millions on real display and requiring a third, brief reset of the deadline clock for the final votes. Republicans had seen it as a fiscal necessity; Democrats saw a bid to throttle the incoming Biden administration even before it takes office. Though the participants will see it as a victory, it was politics at its worst.
Ignoring cybersecurity hacking: Even after Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said it was the Russians who broke through software walls guarding the Pentagon, the Treasury and Commerce Departments and the nuclear areas of the Energy Department, Trump still insisted Saturday it could have been the Chinese. He added they could have skewed voting in the election to account for his loss. Trump thinks we are idiots.
Trump's never-ending election challenges: More than six weeks after the election, Trump met in the White House on Friday night with the Sidney Powell, the lawyer who's outlandish arguments about election fraud were considered too far out of line for him to even keep her on as a personal lawyer. They discussed making her a special counsel investigating voter fraud, according to two people briefed on the discussion. Even Rudy Giuliani, present by phone, said no, as did White House counsel Pat Cipollone. Apart from all else, declaring a special counsel is the jurisdiction of the Justice Department, not the Oval Office. Powell is the one arguing conspiracy theories about a Venezuelan plot to rig voting machines in the United States. It was unclear if Trump will move ahead on it. Meanwhile, Trump associate and the disgraced but pardoned former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, is going around the country telling Trump to declare martial law over the election results.
The pending pardons: Politico reported that Trump is considering preemptively pardoning as many as 20 aides and associates before leaving office, even to the frustration of Senate Republicans who are arguing that strategy could backfire politically. Again, pardons are supposed to move through the Justice Department and a review process, and again Trump is insisting on his own rules for family and friends. Those under consideration include Giuliani, campaign staff and several members of his family. Of course, accepting a pardon includes the assumption that there was a crime committed. Perhaps the smartest move Trump might make is to offer Hunter Biden the same pre-criminal pardon he apparently is considering for his own kids.
Fast and loose money: It turns out Trump will be leaving with 10s of millions of dollars with few legal limits on how he can spend it. And, records now show that his family members managed to interfere with campaign funds to direct hundreds of millions into slush funds controlled by Trump. This brazen attempt to siphon reportable campaign money into accounts for which there is no accounting is questionable on lots of grounds. The reports extend the pattern of loose financial ethics marking the Trump presidency. It was common for Trump to use his official office and functions for personal money-making activities. Everything occurred from spending his time golfing at Trump resorts to re-routing foreign trips to the benefit of his own properties.
Expanding Mining: Despite the timing, Trump is moving to open up vast amounts of federal land to widespread mining and drilling, The New York Times reported. It is a move bound to create yet more consternation and problems for the Biden administration. The new administration, for procedural reasons as well as political ones, is bound to challenge a number of the individual sites involved. Again, whose interests are being served here?
And in possibly the dumbest attack of the week: Trump supporters took up the challenge to knock the doctorate earned by Dr. Jill Biden, defending and outdoing a particularly sexist, silly and anti-intellectual column from a Wall Street Journal op-ed that asked her to drop the honorific unless she was going to treat coronavirus patients. Go stuff it, kiddo.
Meanwhile, at far ends of the news worlds, both The New York Times and Lou Dobbs ran apologies for getting things wrong. The Times said sorry for trusting a source on ISIS without proper investigation. Under legal threat, Dobbs (or his employer Fox News) gave a mea culpa for allowing unsubstantiated lying about conspiracy theories about election fraud.
On the other hand, Trump and Vice President Mike Pence reached the enormously important and contentious decision to label members of Space Force as "guardians," rather than airmen, sailors, soldiers or Marines. Wasn't that the name of the universe-traveling robot Gort in "The Day the Earth Stood Still"?
Klaatu barada nikto.
You think we will miss these weekends after Jan. 20?


alternet--2020-12-25--FBI conducting 'large-scale' investigation of Nashville explosion believed to be 'an intentional act

FBI conducting 'large-scale' investigation of Nashville explosion believed to be 'an intentional act': report

Early Christmas morning , Downtown Nashville was rocked by a major explosion that resulted in three people being taken to a hospital with non-critical injuries .
And according to the Daily Beast 's senior national security correspondent Spencer Ackerman , Nashville Police believe the explosion to be `` an intentional act . ''
After the explosion , Ackerman reports , Nashville residents saw `` black smoke shooting up from a burning car '' and `` knocked down trees . ''
According to Ackerman , the explosion `` blew out windows from multiple storefronts nearby the Cumberland River . ''
`` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ showed a terrifying blast that left businesses aflame and prompted wails from people in the area calling for help , '' Ackerman explains .
`` Law enforcement responded to a suspicious vehicle parked on 2nd Avenue and Commerce Street , near the AT & T Building , shortly after 6 a.m. '' Ackerman notes that although no information about a motive is available , the FBI is conducting what Don Aaron , a spokesperson for the Nashville Police , describes as a `` large-scale '' investigation . ''
And the Beast reporter quotes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` FBI Memphis , in coordination with our state and local partners , is taking the lead in the investigation of the explosion in Nashville , TN . ''
Buck McCoy , a Nashville resident , described the explosion to the Associated Press , saying , `` It felt like a bomb .
It was that big . ''
And Josh Breslow , an anchor for Nashville 's WKRN News 2 ( an ABC affiliate ) tweeted that `` the entire @ WKRN studio just shook . ''

Early Christmas morning, Downtown Nashville was rocked by a major explosion that resulted in three people being taken to a hospital with non-critical injuries. And according to the Daily Beast's senior national security correspondent Spencer Ackerman, Nashville Police believe the explosion to be "an intentional act."
After the explosion, Ackerman reports, Nashville residents saw "black smoke shooting up from a burning car" and "knocked down trees." According to Ackerman, the explosion "blew out windows from multiple storefronts nearby the Cumberland River."
"Video making its way across social media showed a terrifying blast that left businesses aflame and prompted wails from people in the area calling for help," Ackerman explains. "Law enforcement responded to a suspicious vehicle parked on 2nd Avenue and Commerce Street, near the AT&T Building, shortly after 6 a.m."
Ackerman notes that although no information about a motive is available, the FBI is conducting what Don Aaron, a spokesperson for the Nashville Police, describes as a "large-scale" investigation." And the Beast reporter quotes FBI spokesperson Manali Basu as saying, "FBI Memphis, in coordination with our state and local partners, is taking the lead in the investigation of the explosion in Nashville, TN."
Buck McCoy, a Nashville resident, described the explosion to the Associated Press, saying, "It felt like a bomb. It was that big." And Josh Breslow, an anchor for Nashville's WKRN News 2 (an ABC affiliate) tweeted that "the entire @WKRN studio just shook."


alternet--2020-12-25--A deepening democracy crisis: More than 70 percent of Trump voters distrust the best-run election in

A deepening democracy crisis: More than 70 percent of Trump voters distrust the best-run election in years

Angela Clark-Smith , a lawyer , started learning about the intricacies of observing elections when she was a member of the same sorority as Vice President-elect Kamala Harris .
In 2020 , three decades later , she was deployed by the Georgia Democratic Party to observe the presidential election and , most recently , the processing of returned absentee ballots in its Senate runoffs .
`` There 's a process .
It is very straightforward , '' Clark-Smith said during a break at an early voting center in an Atlanta suburb , where she praised poll workers and the process @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flagging problems for follow-up with voters .
`` Watching it was like watching a work of art . ''
Elections in Georgia are better run than those in many blue states .
But as the state has become a national battleground following Joe Biden 's narrow win there and during Senate runoffs that could return control of Congress to the Democrats , the artful process that Clark-Smith has seen and praised has become a `` circus , '' she says .
Clark-Smith witnessed the turmoil that is tearing apart American democracy : where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not know what they are seeing as they view election administration up close for the first time ; and are part of a tidal wave—nearly three-fourths of Republicans , according to an NPR poll conducted in early December—who do n't trust that the 2020 election results are accurate .
`` It went from a really dignified process to feeling it was like a circus , '' Clark-Smith said , referring to the Republican observers who came to watch the initial processing of the runoff 's absentee ballots .
`` You had people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accusations .
There was this one man who said , 'We should count this vote ! '
And I 'm like , 'Sir .
It 's a write-in vote for Mike Pence .
He 's not on the ballot !
Relax… Sit down… Come on ! ''
American politics and elections have always had dark sides : Suspicions versus inquiries .
Fictions versus facts .
Conspiracies versus realities .
Yet the darker impulses seem to be worsening .
In every close presidential election since 2000 , growing numbers of partisan activists and voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2020 election stands apart because the president has been leading this truculence by making false claims to rally his base , raise hundreds of millions of dollars and dangle extremist courses to stay in power , such as recently floating a declaration of martial law .
Trump 's anti-democratic antics and sowing of wide distrust of electoral institutions are in a class by themselves .
No foreign power has made as persistent an attack on American democracy .
There are other differences between 2020 and recent presidential elections that roiled voters .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 , voting rights reformers called out structural deficiencies—not fantasies .
It was a real problem that all-electronic voting systems meant that ballots could not be recounted .
It was a valid concern that central counting nodes could be tweaked by local election officials or their contractors to tilt outcomes , or theoretically infiltrated by computer hackers .
By 2020 , some of these top criticisms had been addressed .
Russian interference in 2016 's presidential election was an unanticipated impetus to replace or shore up voting systems .
Reformers ' demands , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vote count audits , were adopted .
Other demands , mostly from progressives who could not accept that Republicans had again won , fell on deaf ears .
Those demands , such as abandoning electronics in voting systems , have been seized by Trump backers .
What is more ironic from an election administration perspective , however , is that 2020 's general election has been one of the best-run elections in years .
The same can be said of the early voting for Georgia 's Senate runoffs , which culminate in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the 2020 elections is supported by facts , which Trump and his supporters ignore as they make baseless claims to the contrary .
No election is flawless .
That 's especially true of presidential contests , such as this fall 's election where 158.2 million people cast ballots in a national exercise staffed by 900,000-plus citizen poll workers .
There are always poll worker errors , uncounted votes and some people voting illegally .
Most lapses are due to human error and do not affect the outcomes in major races .
Those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presidential battlegrounds this fall .
Yet consider the objective measures about the larger contours of the 2020 general election .
Record numbers of voters participated—even in a pandemic .
Automatic and online voter registration has never been as widespread .
Voters had more options to cast ballots than ever : by mail , voting early or on Election Day .
Never before have as many voters cast mailed-out ballots or voted early .
Almost everyone cast paper ballots .
More vote counts were double-checked by audits and recounts than ever .
The counting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never been as public .
Georgia 's presidential ballots were counted three times each using a different methodology—including an unprecedented manual count .
Each count reaffirmed that Biden won .
This catalog of election administration achievements is remarkable .
But it is also indisputable that these facts barely matter in some important circles .
More than a few Americans , possibly tens of millions ( if recent polls accurately represent the rest of the nation 's 74 million Trump voters ) , will wince when Biden puts his hand on the Bible on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some voters still expect that Trump will serve a second term .
How these Trump supporters will react in the short and long run is not a trifle .
Their response will impact what follows every major election , which are the lessons learned and the reform agendas for states and Congress .
When multitudes believe that elections can not be trusted , democracy is in trouble .
Those believers in 2020 include scores of Republican members of Congress , state attorneys general and legislators , all who signed onto pro-Trump lawsuits seeking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state—or more outrageously , in other states .
Those lawsuits were filled with fabrications , shoddy analyses and lies that were overwhelmingly rejected by dozens of state and federal judges .
Some of these same assertions have been recurring in GOP-led lawsuits targeting Georgia 's runoffs .
They are being rejected there as well .
But these narratives have not disappeared from the court of public opinion , especially in right-wing media , whose audiences grow in response to baiting and fanning their fears and fantasies .
Many constitutional scholars believe that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ overplayed their post-election cards .
Had the 2020 election hinged on a single state , legal experts believe that the country could now be in a constitutional crisis .
They doubt that a single state 's laws and top officials could have withstood this White House 's pressure to select—not elect—Trump as its Electoral College winner .
Some Republicans in Congress , nonetheless , are still expected to challenge ratification of Biden 's Electoral College victory on January 6 .
But a continuing Democratic majority in the House ensures that Biden will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ January 20 .
The incompetence of Trump 's legal team and its allies is one thing .
Their power-hungry guile and ongoing effort to subvert the electoral process is another .
And the willingness of more than 70 percent of Republicans to distrust the results , according to NPR 's poll , is most disturbing of all .
Polls are imperfect snapshots of a slice of voters in any given moment .
One can hope that the Trump team 's ongoing failures to win election lawsuits will sink in and shrink the numbers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they probably will not , because these court defeats address false claims , not deeper feelings .
For example , in Georgia , the Republican lawsuits targeting the Senate runoffs have tried to disqualify hundreds of thousands of voters .
The lawsuits cite a government database to posit that these voters are no longer state residents—rendering them ineligible to vote .
But that database , the post office 's national change of address file , was never intended to track voters .
It mostly lists heads of households and addresses , not every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voter .
Judges and county election boards have been rejecting the illegal voter claims .
One result has been that the early voting turnout in the Senate runoffs has rivaled the general election .
Accommodating high voter turnout is a sign of a well-run election .
But there 's a disconnect .
On one hand , those attacking the process in Georgia and disparaging the presidential results say that the electoral sky is falling .
But quieter multitudes have found that it has been easier to vote in 2020 , even during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more voting options in 2020 : in person or via a mailed-out ballot , early or on Election Day .
( Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger , a rare Republican who has stood up to Trump , said on December 23 that local officials are `` overwhelmed '' and called on the state 's GOP-led legislature to reinstate the requirement that Georgia voters need an excuse to get a mailed-out ballot .
Democrats wo n't be pleased if that proposal gains traction in 2021 . )
Normally , in years when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early November 's Election Day and late January 's Inauguration Day is a time when experts seek to influence a new administration .
In the election fold , however , some of the biggest players have been notably quiet .
Some privately say that the attacks by Trump and his allies are still a big and unfolding crisis—a bonfire that wo n't disappear until he leaves office .
The harms being unleashed , at least among the voters who backed Trump , may take years to undo .
Nonetheless , there has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 3 about what to do next in Congress and state capitals .
Many of these experts from different disciplines have suggestions on how to fine-tune the voting process .
Constitutional scholars say that holes in 19th-century law must be filled so that another president can not overrule a popular vote and have state legislatures select him for a second term .
Voting rights lawyers want to ward off efforts to shrink voting options , such as Raffensperger 's move to reel in Georgia 's absentee ballot program .
Those talks are happening as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ electoral process .
But the full damage Trump has done to America 's elections has yet to emerge .
Way Beyond Seeds of Doubt Why do so many people believe elections are stolen if their presidential candidate loses ?
There 's no one answer .
From an election reform perspective , the fact that the intricacies of election administration are not readily apparent—or self-evident to untrained observers—does not help .
But when so many partisans have a predisposed view that ranges from suspicious , to paranoid , or even conspiratorial , it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to trigger these assumptions and impulses .
Brené Brown , one of America 's best-known trauma experts , recently said in a New York Times podcast that the most aggressive Trump campaign t-shirts—those saying , `` Fuck your feelings '' —are overly defensive and are a reflection of people who are struggling rather than embracing some high-minded cause .
Apart from how that emotional dynamic unfolds politically , it means that election officials and experts seeking to improve America 's elections are facing hurdles that can not be cleared solely by emphasizing facts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better evidence of vote counts .
If the mistrust of elections is as deep as polls suggest , one must ask what solutions can address the underlying triggers , so elections are not collateral damage in a wider societal or cultural schism .
American elections are not perfect .
In the 21st century , they are privatized as never before .
They are overly complex , meaning that impassioned citizens who race to election centers to observe can not readily grasp what they are seeing .
The many stages of the process , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the finish line of certifying the vote count , take years to learn , appreciate and unwind .
These steps and stages are not sufficiently self-evident , which fans conspiracies .
One might like to think that there is a silent majority of Americans who have figured out how to ignore the noise and vote in a pandemic—even in numbers that have not been seen before .
One can look to Georgia and see such turnout in its presidential election and in the early voting in the Senate runoffs .
One might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Georgia 's secretary of state and governor , who said `` no '' to Trump 's demand that they select him as their state 's Electoral College slate winner—ignoring the results of the 5 million votes cast by Georgians .
But elections will always be about power .
There is usually more than one reason why political leaders do anything .
Raffensperger might be saying that he wants to end no-excuse absentee voting in Georgia because county officials can not handle the extra workload .
That policy , should it be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , could undermine turnout .
That impact may help a fellow GOP incumbent , Gov .
Brian Kemp , who will be seeking reelection .
Is that an unduly cynical take ?
Perhaps .
Or perhaps it shows why elections can become mirrors of societal distrust .
Even if the process met challenges in 2020 and empowered record numbers of Americans to vote , some of the candidates seeking high office were less honest and less straightforward than the electoral process was .
In 2020 , the democratic process , if viewed apart @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than ever .
But American elections can not be divorced from the candidates , especially not in the Trump era .
When America faces a leader with totalitarian impulses who thinks he can will his way into another term , it is also facing its greatest democratic crisis in decades .
The passage of time always heals wounds , including political wounds .
But what can be done to revive public trust in elections in the meantime is not just an open-ended question .
Democracy 's fragile skin has been stretched as never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters say that they do n't trust the results from the best-run election in years .

Angela Clark-Smith, a lawyer, started learning about the intricacies of observing elections when she was a member of the same sorority as Vice President-elect Kamala Harris. In 2020, three decades later, she was deployed by the Georgia Democratic Party to observe the presidential election and, most recently, the processing of returned absentee ballots in its Senate runoffs.
"There's a process. It is very straightforward," Clark-Smith said during a break at an early voting center in an Atlanta suburb, where she praised poll workers and the process of verifying signatures on ballot envelopes and flagging problems for follow-up with voters. "Watching it was like watching a work of art."
Elections in Georgia are better run than those in many blue states. But as the state has become a national battleground following Joe Biden's narrow win there and during Senate runoffs that could return control of Congress to the Democrats, the artful process that Clark-Smith has seen and praised has become a "circus," she says.
Clark-Smith witnessed the turmoil that is tearing apart American democracy: where partisans do not understand the process; do not know what they are seeing as they view election administration up close for the first time; and are part of a tidal wave—nearly three-fourths of Republicans, according to an NPR poll conducted in early December—who don't trust that the 2020 election results are accurate.
"It went from a really dignified process to feeling it was like a circus," Clark-Smith said, referring to the Republican observers who came to watch the initial processing of the runoff's absentee ballots. "You had people who were jumping on tables and making accusations. There was this one man who said, 'We should count this vote!' And I'm like, 'Sir. It's a write-in vote for Mike Pence. He's not on the ballot! Relax… Sit down… Come on!"
A Deepening Democracy Crisis
American politics and elections have always had dark sides: Suspicions versus inquiries. Fictions versus facts. Conspiracies versus realities. Yet the darker impulses seem to be worsening. In every close presidential election since 2000, growing numbers of partisan activists and voters whose side lost are angrier.
The 2020 election stands apart because the president has been leading this truculence by making false claims to rally his base, raise hundreds of millions of dollars and dangle extremist courses to stay in power, such as recently floating a declaration of martial law. Trump's anti-democratic antics and sowing of wide distrust of electoral institutions are in a class by themselves. No foreign power has made as persistent an attack on American democracy.
There are other differences between 2020 and recent presidential elections that roiled voters. In 2000 and 2004, and then in 2016, voting rights reformers called out structural deficiencies—not fantasies. It was a real problem that all-electronic voting systems meant that ballots could not be recounted. It was a valid concern that central counting nodes could be tweaked by local election officials or their contractors to tilt outcomes, or theoretically infiltrated by computer hackers.
By 2020, some of these top criticisms had been addressed. Russian interference in 2016's presidential election was an unanticipated impetus to replace or shore up voting systems. Reformers' demands, such as using paper ballots and better vote count audits, were adopted. Other demands, mostly from progressives who could not accept that Republicans had again won, fell on deaf ears. Those demands, such as abandoning electronics in voting systems, have been seized by Trump backers.
What is more ironic from an election administration perspective, however, is that 2020's general election has been one of the best-run elections in years. The same can be said of the early voting for Georgia's Senate runoffs, which culminate in a January 5 election. The positive outlook on the 2020 elections is supported by facts, which Trump and his supporters ignore as they make baseless claims to the contrary.
No election is flawless. That's especially true of presidential contests, such as this fall's election where 158.2 million people cast ballots in a national exercise staffed by 900,000-plus citizen poll workers. There are always poll worker errors, uncounted votes and some people voting illegally. Most lapses are due to human error and do not affect the outcomes in major races. Those issues were seen in isolated instances in presidential battlegrounds this fall. Yet consider the objective measures about the larger contours of the 2020 general election.
Record numbers of voters participated—even in a pandemic. Automatic and online voter registration has never been as widespread. Voters had more options to cast ballots than ever: by mail, voting early or on Election Day. Never before have as many voters cast mailed-out ballots or voted early. Almost everyone cast paper ballots. More vote counts were double-checked by audits and recounts than ever. The counting process was widely streamed online and has never been as public. Georgia's presidential ballots were counted three times each using a different methodology—including an unprecedented manual count. Each count reaffirmed that Biden won. This catalog of election administration achievements is remarkable.
But it is also indisputable that these facts barely matter in some important circles. More than a few Americans, possibly tens of millions (if recentpolls accurately represent the rest of the nation's 74 million Trump voters), will wince when Biden puts his hand on the Bible on January 20 to be sworn in. Some voters still expect that Trump will serve a second term. How these Trump supporters will react in the short and long run is not a trifle. Their response will impact what follows every major election, which are the lessons learned and the reform agendas for states and Congress.
When Mobs Are Swayed
When multitudes believe that elections cannot be trusted, democracy is in trouble. Those believers in 2020 include scores of Republican members of Congress, state attorneys general and legislators, all who signed onto pro-Trump lawsuits seeking to overturn the popular vote in their state—or more outrageously, in other states. Those lawsuits were filled with fabrications, shoddy analyses and lies that were overwhelmingly rejected by dozens of state and federal judges. Some of these same assertions have been recurring in GOP-led lawsuits targeting Georgia's runoffs. They are being rejected there as well. But these narratives have not disappeared from the court of public opinion, especially in right-wing media, whose audiences grow in response to baiting and fanning their fears and fantasies.
Many constitutional scholars believe that the country was lucky that Trump's lawyers overplayed their post-election cards. Had the 2020 election hinged on a single state, legal experts believe that the country could now be in a constitutional crisis. They doubt that a single state's laws and top officials could have withstood this White House's pressure to select—not elect—Trump as its Electoral College winner. Some Republicans in Congress, nonetheless, are still expected to challenge ratification of Biden's Electoral College victory on January 6. But a continuing Democratic majority in the House ensures that Biden will be sworn in as the next president on January 20.
The incompetence of Trump's legal team and its allies is one thing. Their power-hungry guile and ongoing effort to subvert the electoral process is another. And the willingness of more than 70 percent of Republicans to distrust the results, according to NPR's poll, is most disturbing of all.
Polls are imperfect snapshots of a slice of voters in any given moment. One can hope that the Trump team's ongoing failures to win election lawsuits will sink in and shrink the numbers who distrust 2020's results. But they probably will not, because these court defeats address false claims, not deeper feelings.
For example, in Georgia, the Republican lawsuits targeting the Senate runoffs have tried to disqualify hundreds of thousands of voters. The lawsuitscite a government database to posit that these voters are no longer state residents—rendering them ineligible to vote. But that database, the post office's national change of address file, was never intended to track voters. It mostly lists heads of households and addresses, not every person living at an address and every voter. Judges and county election boards have been rejecting the illegal voter claims. One result has been that the early voting turnout in the Senate runoffs has rivaled the general election. Accommodating high voter turnout is a sign of a well-run election.
But there's a disconnect. On one hand, those attacking the process in Georgia and disparaging the presidential results say that the electoral sky is falling. But quieter multitudes have found that it has been easier to vote in 2020, even during the pandemic. This is because there were more voting options in 2020: in person or via a mailed-out ballot, early or on Election Day. (Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a rare Republican who has stood up to Trump, said on December 23 that local officials are "overwhelmed" and called on the state's GOP-led legislature to reinstate the requirement that Georgia voters need an excuse to get a mailed-out ballot. Democrats won't be pleased if that proposal gains traction in 2021.)
Normally, in years when the presidency changes party, the period between early November's Election Day and late January's Inauguration Day is a time when experts seek to influence a new administration. In the election fold, however, some of the biggest players have been notably quiet. Some privately say that the attacks by Trump and his allies are still a big and unfolding crisis—a bonfire that won't disappear until he leaves office. The harms being unleashed, at least among the voters who backed Trump, may take years to undo.
Nonetheless, there has been some talk among elections experts since November 3 about what to do next in Congress and state capitals. Many of these experts from different disciplines have suggestions on how to fine-tune the voting process. Constitutional scholars say that holes in 19th-century law must be filled so that another president cannot overrule a popular vote and have state legislatures select him for a second term. Voting rights lawyers want to ward off efforts to shrink voting options, such as Raffensperger's move to reel in Georgia's absentee ballot program. Those talks are happening as Trump and his allies keep attacking the electoral process. But the full damage Trump has done to America's elections has yet to emerge.
Way Beyond Seeds of Doubt
Why do so many people believe elections are stolen if their presidential candidate loses? There's no one answer. From an election reform perspective, the fact that the intricacies of election administration are not readily apparent—or self-evident to untrained observers—does not help. But when so many partisans have a predisposed view that ranges from suspicious, to paranoid, or even conspiratorial, it is clear that something deeper is going on to trigger these assumptions and impulses.
Brené Brown, one of America's best-known trauma experts, recently said in a New York Times podcast that the most aggressive Trump campaign t-shirts—those saying, "Fuck your feelings"—are overly defensive and are a reflection of people who are struggling rather than embracing some high-minded cause. Apart from how that emotional dynamic unfolds politically, it means that election officials and experts seeking to improve America's elections are facing hurdles that cannot be cleared solely by emphasizing facts, instituting best practices, and producing better evidence of vote counts. If the mistrust of elections is as deep as polls suggest, one must ask what solutions can address the underlying triggers, so elections are not collateral damage in a wider societal or cultural schism.
American elections are not perfect. In the 21st century, they are privatized as never before. They are overly complex, meaning that impassioned citizens who race to election centers to observe cannot readily grasp what they are seeing. The many stages of the process, from the starting line of voter registration to the finish line of certifying the vote count, take years to learn, appreciate and unwind. These steps and stages are not sufficiently self-evident, which fans conspiracies.
One might like to think that there is a silent majority of Americans who have figured out how to ignore the noise and vote in a pandemic—even in numbers that have not been seen before. One can look to Georgia and see such turnout in its presidential election and in the early voting in the Senate runoffs. One might hope that there were more Republicans, such as Georgia's secretary of state and governor, who said "no" to Trump's demand that they select him as their state's Electoral College slate winner—ignoring the results of the 5 million votes cast by Georgians.
But elections will always be about power. There is usually more than one reason why political leaders do anything. Raffensperger might be saying that he wants to end no-excuse absentee voting in Georgia because county officials cannot handle the extra workload. That policy, should it be enacted before the 2022 governor's race, could undermine turnout. That impact may help a fellow GOP incumbent, Gov. Brian Kemp, who will be seeking reelection.
Is that an unduly cynical take? Perhaps. Or perhaps it shows why elections can become mirrors of societal distrust. Even if the process met challenges in 2020 and empowered record numbers of Americans to vote, some of the candidates seeking high office were less honest and less straightforward than the electoral process was. In 2020, the democratic process, if viewed apart from some candidates, might be better than ever. But American elections cannot be divorced from the candidates, especially not in the Trump era.
When America faces a leader with totalitarian impulses who thinks he can will his way into another term, it is also facing its greatest democratic crisis in decades. The passage of time always heals wounds, including political wounds. But what can be done to revive public trust in elections in the meantime is not just an open-ended question. Democracy's fragile skin has been stretched as never before, when tens of millions of voters say that they don't trust the results from the best-run election in years.


alternet--2020-12-25--Trump campaign suffers yet another humiliating legal defeat — this time, on Christmas Eve

President Donald Trump 's 2020 campaign has suffered yet another humiliating post-election defeat — this time , on Christmas Eve , which found a three-judge panel for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals throwing out a lawsuit challenging the election results in Wisconsin .
Wisconsin was among the five states that Trump won in 2016 but lost to President-elect Joe Biden in 2020 ; the others were Georgia , Pennsylvania , Michigan and Arizona .
Trump 's legal team has been claiming , without evidence , that he was the victim of widespread voter fraud in all of those states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has disagreed , and the 7th Circuit panel saw no reason to believe that Biden did n't win Wisconsin fairly .
`` In essence , the judges unanimously ruled that Wisconsin 's election was conducted correctly and that Trump waited too long to complain about the procedures employed , '' according to Law & Crime reporter Aaron Keller .
The 7th Circuit panel consisted of three judges who were appointed by Republican presidents .
While the 84-year-old Judge Joel Flaum was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983 , Judge Ilana Rovner @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Bush .
And Judge Michael Y. Scudder was appointed by Trump himself .
Flaum , Rovner and Scudder , in their Donald J. Trump v. Wisconsin Elections Commission ruling , wrote , `` We agree that Wisconsin lawfully appointed its electors in the manner directed by its legislature and add that the president 's claim also fails because of the unreasonable delay that accompanied the challenges the president now wishes to advance against Wisconsin 's election procedures . ''
According to Keller , `` Trump 's complaint was rooted in the Electors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clause allows each state 's legislature to choose how to appoint presidential electors .
The 7th Circuit rubbished Trump 's moaning and groaning about how the legislature delegated the specifics to various state officials .
Trump 's lawyers argued those officials overstepped the authority granted to them and conducted an out-of-control election . ''

President Donald Trump's 2020 campaign has suffered yet another humiliating post-election defeat — this time, on Christmas Eve, which found a three-judge panel for the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals throwing out a lawsuit challenging the election results in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin was among the five states that Trump won in 2016 but lost to President-elect Joe Biden in 2020; the others were Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Arizona. Trump's legal team has been claiming, without evidence, that he was the victim of widespread voter fraud in all of those states.
One judge after another, however, has disagreed, and the 7th Circuit panel saw no reason to believe that Biden didn't win Wisconsin fairly.
"In essence, the judges unanimously ruled that Wisconsin's election was conducted correctly and that Trump waited too long to complain about the procedures employed," according to Law & Crime reporter Aaron Keller.
The 7th Circuit panel consisted of three judges who were appointed by Republican presidents. While the 84-year-old Judge Joel Flaum was appointed by President Ronald Reagan in 1983, Judge Ilana Rovner was an appointee of President George H.W. Bush. And Judge Michael Y. Scudder was appointed by Trump himself.
Flaum, Rovner and Scudder, in their Donald J. Trump v. Wisconsin Elections Commission ruling, wrote, "We agree that Wisconsin lawfully appointed its electors in the manner directed by its legislature and add that the president's claim also fails because of the unreasonable delay that accompanied the challenges the president now wishes to advance against Wisconsin's election procedures."
According to Keller, "Trump's complaint was rooted in the Electors Clause of the U.S. Constitution. That clause allows each state's legislature to choose how to appoint presidential electors. The 7th Circuit rubbished Trump's moaning and groaning about how the legislature delegated the specifics to various state officials. Trump's lawyers argued those officials overstepped the authority granted to them and conducted an out-of-control election."


alternet--2020-12-25--'Shameful': Trump golfs as 14 million set to lose unemployment benefits just after Christmas

After threatening to blow up a $ 900 billion coronavirus relief package over several eleventh-hour demands—one of which is being blocked by his own party—President Donald Trump spent Christmas Eve golfing in Florida and tweeting election lies as millions of desperate Americans were left worrying that they will soon be deprived of their few remaining economic lifelines .
If Trump does n't sign the newly passed relief measure , an estimated 14 million jobless Americans will lose unemployment aid on Saturday , a federal eviction moratorium will expire at year 's end , and billions of dollars in nutrition aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the balance as fresh economic metrics make clear that the recession is nowhere near over .
`` Congress must pass $ 2,000 in direct payments and Trump must sign the Covid-relief bill .
If not , tens of millions of Americans will lose their unemployment benefits , go hungry , and face eviction . ''
—Sen .
Bernie Sanders '' Are we going to have to suffer longer ?
You just pray somebody comes to their senses , '' Samara Crockett , a 43-year-old single mom who was laid off in September , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 'm in survival mode .
Do I get gas or food ?
What do I do ?
That 's what my days are like . ''
Emergency unemployment benefits were already set to lapse temporarily due to months of obstruction by the Republican-controlled Senate , but Trump 's last-minute objections to the legislation—which he did not raise during negotiations over the measure—imperil the bill 's extension of and $ 300 weekly increase in jobless aid .
Should Trump wait until Sunday or later to sign the relief legislation , the delay `` will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unemployment programs to 10 weeks from 11 , '' Ben Casselman of the New York Times noted .
`` Here 's why : The bill says that the benefits wo n't be available for 'any week of unemployment commencing before the date of the enactment of this Act , ' '' Casselman wrote .
`` So if Trump does n't sign the bill until next week , people ca n't get benefits until the following week .
But the end date of benefits does n't change : March 14 ( with a phase-out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers would effectively lose a week of benefits .
Note this applies to the $ 300 supplement as well . ''
Sen. Ron Wyden ( D-Ore. ) , who fought unsuccessfully for larger weekly unemployment payments in the new bill , told the Times that `` Trump 's temper tantrum is threatening to cost millions of jobless workers a week 's worth of income . ''
`` The ability of millions of Americans to pay rent and buy groceries hangs in the balance , and Donald Trump spent the day golfing , '' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
On Thursday , congressional leaders signed the sprawling 5,600-page package—which includes both the coronavirus relief measure and a $ 1.4 trillion omnibus government funding bill—and the White House sent it to Florida for the president 's possible approval .
Trump has reportedly not decided whether he will sign the legislation , which will die on January 3 with the end of the current Congress .
The government is set to shut down on December 29 .
In Washington , D.C. , meanwhile , House Republicans on Thursday blocked a Democratic attempt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Trump claimed to want in a video address released earlier this week , a day after Congress approved the coronavirus relief package .
Trump has not publicly criticized members of his party for blocking the $ 2,000 payments , which progressives have been advocating for months .
`` This holiday season , families are being forced to make incredibly difficult decisions , such as whether they should keep their lights on or buy groceries , '' Rep. Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) said in a statement Thursday .
`` It 's time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the members of his party in line so that the government can provide this long overdue relief to people across the country during this time of great need . ''
House Democrats are planning to hold a floor vote Monday on stand-alone legislation that would replace the $ 600 direct payments currently in the relief bill with $ 2,000 checks .
While the measure is expected to pass the House , it is unclear whether Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R-Ky. ) would even allow a vote on the increased payments .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ direct payments and Trump must sign the Covid-relief bill , '' Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I-Vt. ) tweeted Thursday .
`` If not , tens of millions of Americans will lose their unemployment benefits , go hungry , and face eviction .
This would be a level of governmental cruelty not seen in our lifetimes . ''

After threatening to blow up a $900 billion coronavirus relief package over several eleventh-hour demands—one of which is being blocked by his own party—President Donald Trump spent Christmas Eve golfing in Florida and tweeting election lies as millions of desperate Americans were left worrying that they will soon be deprived of their few remaining economic lifelines.
If Trump doesn't sign the newly passed relief measure, an estimated 14 million jobless Americans will lose unemployment aid on Saturday, a federal eviction moratorium will expire at year's end, and billions of dollars in nutrition aid and rental assistance will be left in the balance as fresh economic metrics make clear that the recession is nowhere near over.
"Congress must pass $2,000 in direct payments and Trump must sign the Covid-relief bill. If not, tens of millions of Americans will lose their unemployment benefits, go hungry, and face eviction."
—Sen. Bernie Sanders
"Are we going to have to suffer longer? You just pray somebody comes to their senses," Samara Crockett, a 43-year-old single mom who was laid off in September, told the Washington Post. "I'm in survival mode. Do I get gas or food? What do I do? That's what my days are like."
Emergency unemployment benefits were already set to lapse temporarily due to months of obstruction by the Republican-controlled Senate, but Trump's last-minute objections to the legislation—which he did not raise during negotiations over the measure—imperil the bill's extension of and $300 weekly increase in jobless aid.
Should Trump wait until Sunday or later to sign the relief legislation, the delay "will effectively cut the extension of the expiring unemployment programs to 10 weeks from 11," Ben Casselman of the New York Timesnoted.
"Here's why: The bill says that the benefits won't be available for 'any week of unemployment commencing before the date of the enactment of this Act,'" Casselman wrote. "So if Trump doesn't sign the bill until next week, people can't get benefits until the following week. But the end date of benefits doesn't change: March 14 (with a phase-out lasting until April 5). So workers would effectively lose a week of benefits. Note this applies to the $300 supplement as well."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who fought unsuccessfully for larger weekly unemployment payments in the new bill, told the Times that "Trump's temper tantrum is threatening to cost millions of jobless workers a week's worth of income."
"The ability of millions of Americans to pay rent and buy groceries hangs in the balance, and Donald Trump spent the day golfing," said Wyden. "It's shameful."
On Thursday, congressional leaders signed the sprawling 5,600-page package—which includes both the coronavirus relief measure and a $1.4 trillion omnibus government funding bill—and the White House sent it to Florida for the president's possible approval. Trump has reportedly not decided whether he will sign the legislation, which will die on January 3 with the end of the current Congress. The government is set to shut down on December 29.
In Washington, D.C., meanwhile, House Republicans on Thursday blocked a Democratic attempt to pass the $2,000 direct payments that Trump claimed to want in a video address released earlier this week, a day after Congress approved the coronavirus relief package. Trump has not publicly criticized members of his party for blocking the $2,000 payments, which progressives have been advocating for months.
"This holiday season, families are being forced to make incredibly difficult decisions, such as whether they should keep their lights on or buy groceries," Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said in a statement Thursday. "It's time for Trump to stop bluffing and get the members of his party in line so that the government can provide this long overdue relief to people across the country during this time of great need."
House Democrats are planning to hold a floor vote Monday on stand-alone legislation that would replace the $600 direct payments currently in the relief bill with $2,000 checks. While the measure is expected to pass the House, it is unclear whether Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would even allow a vote on the increased payments.
"Congress must pass $2,000 in direct payments and Trump must sign the Covid-relief bill," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) tweeted Thursday. "If not, tens of millions of Americans will lose their unemployment benefits, go hungry, and face eviction. This would be a level of governmental cruelty not seen in our lifetimes."


alternet--2020-12-25--'An idiocracy based on a digital prophet': QAnon longs for a fascist military dictatorship — and the

'An idiocracy based on a digital prophet': QAnon longs for a fascist military dictatorship — and they want it now

Reporter Ben Collins , in an article published by NBC News ' website on December 22 , takes a disturbing look at QAnon supporters who are yearning for President Donald Trump to impose a fascist military dictatorship and end liberal democracy in the United States .
President-elect Joe Biden enjoyed a decisive victory in the 2020 presidential election , winning 306 electoral votes and defeating Trump by over 7 million in the popular vote .
But QAnon supporters view Democrats as their enemy and have been promoting the hashtag @ CrossTheRubicon — which , in QAnon terminology , means imposing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Collins reports , are urging Trump to `` cross the Rubicon '' and become a full-fledged dictator .
`` With Trump 's days in office dwindling , '' Collins explains , `` QAnon influencers have become increasingly restless and militant — urging him to # CrossTheRubicon , a reference to Julius Caesar 's crossing the Rubicon River after the Roman Senate explicitly told him not to , effectively kickstarting the Roman Civil War and Caesar 's dictatorship . ''
To understand why QAnon believes that Trump deserves to be a full-fledged dictator @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bizarre and outlandish conspiracy theories .
QAnon believes that the United States ' federal government , especially the Democratic Party , has been infiltrated by an international cabal of Satanists , child sex traffickers , pedophiles and cannibals and that Trump has been put in the White House to fight the cabal .
`` Q , '' according to QAnon , is an anonymous figure who is providing updates about Trump 's battle .
Claiming , without evidence , that the election was stolen from Trump because of widespread voter fraud , some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ president to declare martial law in order to prevent Biden from being inaugurated on January 20 , 2021 — including former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn , Atlanta-based attorney Lin Wood and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell .
`` Flynn , a hero in the mythology of the QAnon conspiracy theory who once took a QAnon 'oath ' on video , has said in appearances on the conservative media channel Newsmax that Trump should use the military to 'rerun ' the election , '' Collins observes .
QAnon terminology , Collins points out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For example , Kelli Ward , who chairs the Arizona Republican Party , has used the # CrossTheRubicon hashtag .
And attorney Sidney Powell , who has been working with Wood on election-related lawsuits , has used the QAnon hashtag # TheStormIsComing , which , Collins notes , is `` a QAnon phrase that refers to the extrajudicial roundup of Democrats at the heart of the theory . ''
According to Collins , `` Some QAnon followers believe Trump is left with no choice but to declare martial law — a belief @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wildly false news articles that have claimed that Trump is in a secret , ongoing land war with China in parts of the U.S. A series of fake news articles , YouTube videos and tweets that went viral among QAnon acolytes last week led followers to believe Trump was conducting clandestine military operations on U.S .
soil . ''
Ron Watkins , who formerly ran the QAnon hub 8kun , recently tweeted : Rep. Denver Riggleman , a Republican with libertarian leanings , has been warning about how dangerous QAnon is .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replaced by far-right wingnut Rep.-elect Bob Good in January , told NBC News , `` I 'm losing friends and family over a straight-up cult based on anti-Semitism , fantasy and just bizarre made-up tripe .
It 's an idiocracy based on a digital prophet . ''

Reporter Ben Collins, in an article published by NBC News' website on December 22, takes a disturbing look at QAnon supporters who are yearning for President Donald Trump to impose a fascist military dictatorship and end liberal democracy in the United States.
President-elect Joe Biden enjoyed a decisive victory in the 2020 presidential election, winning 306 electoral votes and defeating Trump by over 7 million in the popular vote. But QAnon supporters view Democrats as their enemy and have been promoting the hashtag @CrossTheRubicon — which, in QAnon terminology, means imposing a military dictatorship. And QAnon supporters, Collins reports, are urging Trump to "cross the Rubicon" and become a full-fledged dictator.
"With Trump's days in office dwindling," Collins explains, "QAnon influencers have become increasingly restless and militant — urging him to #CrossTheRubicon, a reference to Julius Caesar's crossing the Rubicon River after the Roman Senate explicitly told him not to, effectively kickstarting the Roman Civil War and Caesar's dictatorship."
To understand why QAnon believes that Trump deserves to be a full-fledged dictator, one needs to know about their bizarre and outlandish conspiracy theories. QAnon believes that the United States' federal government, especially the Democratic Party, has been infiltrated by an international cabal of Satanists, child sex traffickers, pedophiles and cannibals and that Trump has been put in the White House to fight the cabal. "Q," according to QAnon, is an anonymous figure who is providing updates about Trump's battle.
Claiming, without evidence, that the election was stolen from Trump because of widespread voter fraud, some far-right Trump supporters have been urging the president to declare martial law in order to prevent Biden from being inaugurated on January 20, 2021 — including former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, Atlanta-based attorney Lin Wood and MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell.
"Flynn, a hero in the mythology of the QAnon conspiracy theory who once took a QAnon 'oath' on video, has said in appearances on the conservative media channel Newsmax that Trump should use the military to 'rerun' the election," Collins observes.
QAnon terminology, Collins points out, is being used by some prominent Republicans. For example, Kelli Ward, who chairs the Arizona Republican Party, has used the #CrossTheRubicon hashtag. And attorney Sidney Powell, who has been working with Wood on election-related lawsuits, has used the QAnon hashtag #TheStormIsComing, which, Collins notes, is "a QAnon phrase that refers to the extrajudicial roundup of Democrats at the heart of the theory."
According to Collins, "Some QAnon followers believe Trump is left with no choice but to declare martial law — a belief based in part on a series of wildly false news articles that have claimed that Trump is in a secret, ongoing land war with China in parts of the U.S. A series of fake news articles, YouTube videos and tweets that went viral among QAnon acolytes last week led followers to believe Trump was conducting clandestine military operations on U.S. soil."
Ron Watkins, who formerly ran the QAnon hub 8kun, recently tweeted:
Rep. Denver Riggleman, a Republican with libertarian leanings, has been warning about how dangerous QAnon is. The outgoing Virginia congressman, who will be replaced by far-right wingnut Rep.-elect Bob Good in January, told NBC News, "I'm losing friends and family over a straight-up cult based on anti-Semitism, fantasy and just bizarre made-up tripe. It's an idiocracy based on a digital prophet."


alternet--2020-12-25--Trump met with Pence before calling on the vice president to thwart the Electoral College: report

Just before President Donald Trump shared a tweet calling for Vice President Mike Pence to `` act '' against the Senate 's coming ratification of the Electoral College vote , he reportedly met for more than an hour with his second-in-command , CNN reported .
While a person familiar with the events told CNN that the Oval Office discussion was `` entirely unrelated '' to the demand in the tweet , the person declined to say if the ratification issue came up .
Trump soon left town for Mar-a-Lago , reportedly still obsessed with overturning his loss to President-elect Joe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Beach , accompanied by his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani — the former spokesperson for LifeLock brand identity theft protection services — Trump retweeted a demand for Pence to refuse to certify the Electoral College results on Jan. 6 , an impossibility that arose from baseless chatter in right-wing internet crawlspaces .
Giuliani will spend the holidays at the outgoing president 's Mar-a-Lago club , where the two men will likely discuss the limited post-election actions that may still be available to them .
Trump and his GOP allies have gone one-for-sixty so far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to victory ahead of the Electoral College 's vote .
Giuliani now faces a defamation suit from an executive at a voting machine company who was forced into hiding following threats on his life stemming from some of the former New York mayor 's remarks in those efforts .
Trump has recently griped that his vice president , who as President of the Senate will formally preside over the ratification of his loss , has not gone to bat for him .
CNN reported that Trump has raised the issue with Pence , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vice president ca n't use his role to overturn the election .
Speaking this Tuesday at an event in Florida for the young conservative group Turning Point USA , Pence did not mention the ratification , but promised to fight `` until every legal vote is counted '' and `` every illegal vote is thrown out . ''
That same day , the conservative Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit against Pence and the entire Electoral College , claiming that Pence should not be allowed to count the votes because states have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Presidential electors '' — despite the fact that the electoral college has already voted .
The court filing includes Pence due to what the plaintiffs describe as his `` legal obligations under the Constitution and federal law '' to preside over ratification .
`` I ca n't even describe it , '' election law attorney Marc Elias wrote on Twitter .
`` It 's really dumb . ''
The vice president is not constitutionally bound to ratify the final vote .
For instance , in 1969 , when then-Vice President Hubert Humphrey declined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nixon , the role fell to the Senate president pro tempore — a post currently held by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa .
In a parallel fit of absurdity , Rep. Mo Brooks , an Alabama conservative , has volunteered to lead a floor debate on Jan. 6 , and claims he has the support of `` multiple Senators . ''
Brooks recently discussed the plan at a meeting with Trump and a number of GOP representatives , and claimed Pence had made an appearance .
The debate as planned would last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be ratified as the next President of the United States .
A Pence spokesperson in a lengthy email exchange refused to reply to Salon 's request for comment .

Just before President Donald Trump shared a tweet calling for Vice President Mike Pence to "act" against the Senate's coming ratification of the Electoral College vote, he reportedly met for more than an hour with his second-in-command, CNN reported.
While a person familiar with the events told CNN that the Oval Office discussion was "entirely unrelated" to the demand in the tweet, the person declined to say if the ratification issue came up. Trump soon left town for Mar-a-Lago, reportedly still obsessed with overturning his loss to President-elect Joe Biden. On the flight to Palm Beach, accompanied by his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani — the former spokesperson for LifeLock brand identity theft protection services — Trump retweeted a demand for Pence to refuse to certify the Electoral College results on Jan. 6, an impossibility that arose from baseless chatter in right-wing internet crawlspaces.
Giuliani will spend the holidays at the outgoing president's Mar-a-Lago club, where the two men will likely discuss the limited post-election actions that may still be available to them. Trump and his GOP allies have gone one-for-sixty so far in their efforts to sue their way to victory ahead of the Electoral College's vote. Giuliani now faces a defamation suit from an executive at a voting machine company who was forced into hiding following threats on his life stemming from some of the former New York mayor's remarks in those efforts.
Trump has recently griped that his vice president, who as President of the Senate will formally preside over the ratification of his loss, has not gone to bat for him. CNN reported that Trump has raised the issue with Pence, but appears "confused" about why the vice president can't use his role to overturn the election.
Speaking this Tuesday at an event in Florida for the young conservative group Turning Point USA, Pence did not mention the ratification, but promised to fight "until every legal vote is counted" and "every illegal vote is thrown out."
That same day, the conservative Thomas More Society filed a lawsuit against Pence and the entire Electoral College, claiming that Pence should not be allowed to count the votes because states have not "affirmatively voted to certify the Presidential electors" — despite the fact that the electoral college has already voted. The court filing includes Pence due to what the plaintiffs describe as his "legal obligations under the Constitution and federal law" to preside over ratification.
"I can't even describe it," election law attorney Marc Elias wrote on Twitter. "It's really dumb."
The vice president is not constitutionally bound to ratify the final vote. For instance, in 1969, when then-Vice President Hubert Humphrey declined to preside over his loss to Richard Nixon, the role fell to the Senate president pro tempore — a post currently held by Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
In a parallel fit of absurdity, Rep. Mo Brooks, an Alabama conservative, has volunteered to lead a floor debate on Jan. 6, and claims he has the support of "multiple Senators." Brooks recently discussed the plan at a meeting with Trump and a number of GOP representatives, and claimed Pence had made an appearance. The debate as planned would last 12 hours, after which Biden would be ratified as the next President of the United States.
A Pence spokesperson in a lengthy email exchange refused to reply to Salon's request for comment.


alternet--2020-12-25--'Merry Christmas': Watch Rep. Debbie Dingell drop House gavel in gisgust Over GOP's COVID relief cru

'Merry Christmas': Watch Rep. Debbie Dingell drop House gavel in gisgust Over GOP's COVID relief cruelty

Rep. Debbie Dingell made no effort on Thursday to hide her contempt for House Republicans ' decision to obstruct the approval of $ 2,000 relief checks for Americans , nine months into a pandemic that has left more than 300,000 Americans dead , hundreds of thousands of small businesses permanently shuttered , an estimated 50 million people facing food insecurity , and tens of millions facing possible eviction .
`` It is Christmas Eve , but it is not a silent night .
All is not calm .
For too many , nothing is bright . ''
—Rep .
Debbie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adjourned the U.S. House after Majority Leader Steny Hoyer ( D-Md . )
requested unanimous consent for an amendment that would increase $ 600 direct payments in the coronavirus relief package passed on Monday , to $ 2,000 .
Though the sum was endorsed by President Donald Trump this week , House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy ( R-Calif. ) objected to the measure .
`` So we do not have unanimous consent , '' Dingell said in a disbelieving tone before announcing , `` The House stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` Merry Christmas , '' the congresswoman said with an emotional pause and discernible disgust after banging the gavel .
Dingell 's closing remark was `` about the most disgusted , sarcastic I 've heard in awhile , '' tweeted congressional reporter Michael McAuliff .
Another observer noted that it appeared Dingell `` wanted to insert a choice expletive in the middle of that . ''
After adjourning the House , Dingell spoke angrily at a press conference about the suffering she has seen in her own district and across the country and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ help alleviate it .
`` It is Christmas Eve , but it is not a silent night , '' Dingell said .
`` All is not calm .
For too many , nothing is bright .
And for too many , they are not sleeping peacefully .
I gave a town hall last night that had people crying , people terrified of what is going to happen ...
I 've been talking to people who are scared they 're going to be kicked out from their homes during the Christmas holiday , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign this bill . ''
JUST IN : Top Democrat SHREDS Trump for vetoing relief bill in FIERY remarks

Rep. Debbie Dingell made no effort on Thursday to hide her contempt for House Republicans' decision to obstruct the approval of $2,000 relief checks for Americans, nine months into a pandemic that has left more than 300,000 Americans dead, hundreds of thousands of small businesses permanently shuttered, an estimated 50 million people facing food insecurity, and tens of millions facing possible eviction.
"It is Christmas Eve, but it is not a silent night. All is not calm. For too many, nothing is bright."
—Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.)
The Michigan Democrat adjourned the U.S. House after Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) requested unanimous consent for an amendment that would increase $600 direct payments in the coronavirus relief package passed on Monday, to $2,000. Though the sum was endorsed by President Donald Trump this week, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) objected to the measure.
"So we do not have unanimous consent," Dingell said in a disbelieving tone before announcing, "The House stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on Monday, December 28, 2020."
"Merry Christmas," the congresswoman said with an emotional pause and discernible disgust after banging the gavel.
Dingell's closing remark was "about the most disgusted, sarcastic I've heard in awhile," tweeted congressional reporter Michael McAuliff.
Another observer noted that it appeared Dingell "wanted to insert a choice expletive in the middle of that."
After adjourning the House, Dingell spoke angrily at a press conference about the suffering she has seen in her own district and across the country and condemned the Republicans for their refusal to help alleviate it.
"It is Christmas Eve, but it is not a silent night," Dingell said. "All is not calm. For too many, nothing is bright. And for too many, they are not sleeping peacefully. I gave a town hall last night that had people crying, people terrified of what is going to happen... I've been talking to people who are scared they're going to be kicked out from their homes during the Christmas holiday, and still might be if we don't sign this bill."
Watch:


alternet--2020-12-25--Pennsylvania isn't letting Dan Patrick forget he owes the state $3 million in 'fraud' bounties

Pennsylvania Lt. Gov .
John Fetterman is n't going to let the good state of Texas forget that it owes his state $ 3 million in reward money .
After the November elections did n't go Donald Trump 's way , crackpot Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick jumped to the great orange whiner 's aid with an announced $ 1 million reward for proof of voter fraud .
Pennsylvania 's lieutenant governor was the one to deliver , pointing Patrick to not just one but three instances of devious voter enfraudulence .
Two of them involved Trump voters trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some mysterious reason , however , Dan Patrick is n't paying up .
So Fetterman is reminding his Texas counterpart , yet again , that the people of Pennsylvania want their promised dough .
Dough now , please .
Small bills are fine .
Fetterman also cheekily reminded Patrick that if lawsuits need to fly on this one , his case is `` exponentially stronger than that pile of hot garbage lawsuit TX tried with SCOTUS . ''
This is really just a shameful story , especially at Christmas .
Christmas is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on their best behavior , so that Jesus and Santa do n't come down the chimney to punch them in the throat .
Can you imagine a world in which you ca n't trust a Texas Republican ?
It 's shocking , really .
And we 're pretty sure Texas has the money because , as Fetterman noted , they seem to have a lot of throwin'-around cash when it comes to suing to block other states from having a say in presidential elections .
Patrick is n't the state 's attorney general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for securities fraud .
That 's Ken Paxton .
You did n't ... you did n't give the money to Ken Paxton for safekeeping , did you , Dan ?
Please tell me the reason Texas is n't paying it 's promised bounty on voter fraud information is because Ken Paxton `` lost '' the cash .
Ken Paxton has been shopping hard for a presidential pardon in recent weeks .
If Ken Paxton was the guy holding the money , you can bet all $ 3 million has already been stuffed into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
You say it 's not Paxton 's fault ?
Well then pay up already , you big baby .

Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. John Fetterman isn't going to let the good state of Texas forget that it owes his state $3 million in reward money. After the November elections didn't go Donald Trump's way, crackpot Texas Lt. Gov Dan Patrick jumped to the great orange whiner's aid with an announced $1 million reward for proof of voter fraud.
Pennsylvania's lieutenant governor was the one to deliver, pointing Patrick to not just one but three instances of devious voter enfraudulence. Two of them involved Trump voters trying to vote multiple times for Trump.
For some mysterious reason, however, Dan Patrick isn't paying up. So Fetterman is reminding his Texas counterpart, yet again, that the people of Pennsylvania want their promised dough. Dough now, please. Small bills are fine.
Fetterman also cheekily reminded Patrick that if lawsuits need to fly on this one, his case is "exponentially stronger than that pile of hot garbage lawsuit TX tried with SCOTUS."
This is really just a shameful story, especially at Christmas. Christmas is a time when everyone is supposed to be on their best behavior, so that Jesus and Santa don't come down the chimney to punch them in the throat.
Can you imagine a world in which you can't trust a Texas Republican? It's shocking, really. And we're pretty sure Texas has the money because, as Fetterman noted, they seem to have a lot of throwin'-around cash when it comes to suing to block other states from having a say in presidential elections. Patrick isn't the state's attorney general, the Republican heel still under indictment for securities fraud. That's Ken Paxton.
You didn't ... you didn't give the money to Ken Paxton for safekeeping, did you, Dan? Please tell me the reason Texas isn't paying it's promised bounty on voter fraud information is because Ken Paxton "lost" the cash. Ken Paxton has been shopping hard for a presidential pardon in recent weeks. If Ken Paxton was the guy holding the money, you can bet all $3 million has already been stuffed into the Mar-a-Lago mailbox.
What's that? You say it's not Paxton's fault? Well then pay up already, you big baby.