<keypusher: Since my last visit kibizing on this page has hit rock bottom, and started to dig. :)>

<Another day, another dramatic move in the state of Florida involving controversial governor Ron DeSantis and Florida Republicans. According to reports, Florida State Senator Jason Brodeur — a Republican — has proposed a bill that would require bloggers who write about certain politicians to register with the state. Brodeur’s bill also states that those bloggers would have to report how much they are being paid for those posts — positive or negative. Larger corporations, like newspapers, would be exempt from registering with the government.

According to the bill, a “blog” is defined as “a website or webpage that hosts any blogger and is frequently updated with opinion, commentary, or business content. The term does not include the website of a newspaper or other similar publication.”

Here is more on what the Florida bill would require, per Deadline:

Under the terms of the bill — read it here — “if a blogger posts to a blog about an elected state officer and receives, or will receive, compensation for that post, the blogger must register with the appropriate office” within “5 days after the first post by the blogger which mentions an elected state officer.”

It also requires that bloggers file monthly reports if a post is added to the blog. The reports must disclose the “individual or entity” that provided compensation for the blog post, the amount of compensation, the date of blog posts, and the website and website address. Fines are set at $25 per day per report for each day late, not to exceed $2,500.

The proposed legislation, if passed, would apply to those bloggers who write about the governor, the lieutenant governor, a cabinet official, or any member of the state legislature. Governor DeSantis and GOP lawmaker Jason Brodeur have not commented publicly on the bill.

Governor DeSantis has been in the headlines a lot recently, as he just signed a bill into law dissolving the Reedy Creek Special District, which operates Disney World. The state now controls the Board, and Disney will have to go through DeSantis’ appointees for anything they want to be done in Walt Disney World Resort. DeSantis has also said that the Central Florida Tourism Oversight Board — the new name for Reedy Creek — may pull the purse strings in order to influence the content that Disney makes.

It is unlikely that the bill would pass, and, even if it does, many experts doubt that it would hold up in court as it could be seen as a direct attack on free speech. Republicans in the state have already been accused of trampling free speech when they went after Disney’s autonomy when now-fired CEO Bob Chapek spoke out against Florida’s controversial Parental Rights in Education Bill.>

Another day in the life of DeSatan's world.

<Marjorie Taylor Greene’s video went viral for all the wrong reasons. In the clip, Greene claimed Putin never planned on invading Europe.

Greene said, “I've never seen Putin actually show in any detail his plans to invade Europe. No one has shown me that.”

She then increased her voice and blink rate, claiming, “I don’t believe the lies that I’m being told about this.”

The video posted by Ed Krassenstein surpassed 1.3 views [sic] since it was published four hours ago.

Ed Krassenstein is a journalist who lives in Florida and describes himself as “Anti-Trump.”

Greene is among Republicans who are not kind to Ukraine

Marjorie Taylor Greene is among many republicans who claimed that Ukraine “wants our sons and daughters to go die in Ukraine."

This was taken entirely out of context, as Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy merely tried to warn the world about what could happen next. Zelensky said that if Ukraine loses the war against Russia, Russia could go on to attack NATO member states. If that happens, the USA, as part of NATO, would become involved in the war.

However, no one ever apologized or corrected themselves.

Commentators went wild

Comments below the video differed. One person wrote, “She’s an ancient, leathery remnant thawed from an Alpine glacier.”

Another person wished more Americans paid attention to what transpired during the riots on January 6.

One person wondered, “What an embarrassment. What is she doing for her constituents in Georgia, by the way?”

Others wanted to know why Putin would share anything with her, as a person wrote, “Wait, why does MTG think that Putin has to share his plans with her or with anyone else? That’s not how any of this works.”

Another echoed this statement, “She actually thinks that Putin would share his plans for invading Europe with her?”

Some defended her, as this person wrote, “She’s not lying. Has Putin ever said he wants to invade Europe? Did you even listen to Putin’s speech at the start of the SMO? All the plans were laid out. Demilitarization and Denazification of Ukraine.”

Another person simply stated, “This lady is the worst America has to offer.”

The account shared another interesting tweet an hour later

An hour later, the same Twitter account shared its thoughts on politics in the USA, writing, “In most states with Republican legislatures, adults can marry children. In Alabama, a 74-year-old married a 14-year-old little girl at one point, and every year there are over 3,000 marriages in the U.S. in which the adult would be charged with rape had he/she had sex with the minor outside of marriage.”

It continued:

“So why do Republicans suddenly care about our kids when our kids want to feel more like themselves via gender-affirming care, but they are perfectly fine allowing children to have sex with adults through marriage? Who are the “groomers” now?”

Greene was called out for a sandball incident

Many Republicans heavily criticized President Biden’s visit to Ukraine. Some, like DeSantis, supported Ukraine in the past but now claim it is a “territorial dispute.”

In other Greene-related news, the Georgia congresswoman claimed agents had found an "explosive" near the southern border in January.

She shared a photo on her Twitter, claiming it a device made by "the Cartel" to "plant bombs" and "murder Americans every day through drugs and crime."

Border Patrol officials say the object was nothing more than a pile of sand and duct tape.

Greene refused to accept this explanation.>

<The Reedy Creek battle between the Walt Disney Company and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis continues, and it turns out that Disney’s prime witness is… Ron DeSantis.

The DeSantis/Disney feud began when the company spoke out against the controversial “Don’t Say Gay” Bill. The Governor then made motions to remove the board in charge of Walt Disney World’s special Reedy Creek Improvement District to ensure he controlled them.

Disney responded to the new board by creating a contract with the former board, giving the company control of the Reedy Creek Improvement District until the last living descendent [sic] of King Charles III passed away. Currently, said descendent [sic] is two years old.

This has since been followed by attacks from both sides, with DeSantis threatening to build a prison next to Walt Disney World, Disney suing the Governor and the state of Florida, and the newly named Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board counter-suing Disney.

This whole conflict has led to the potential Presidential nominee losing support within his own party. To make matters worse for the Florida Governor, the Walt Disney Company has found an unlikely ally: Republican Governor Ron DeSantis.

According to Nicolle Wallace on a recent episode of MSNBC’s Deadline: White House, Disney is using Ron DeSantis’ memoir, The Courage To Be Free, against the Governor.

Wallace said on the program, “Today, Disney’s lawyers are getting help making their case from a very unlikely person, and that is Ron DeSantis. More specifically, his recently published memoir in which he routinely flaunts the idea of a political retaliation campaign — that he thought of all by himself — against Disney. So much so that the actual lawsuit actually cites pages from his book.”

This prompted Wallace to ask her panel, “How dumb are they?”

Wallace then quoted the Washington Post: “DeSantis’s book brags about his rapid mobilization of the state legislature to target Disney’s tax district. The same passage declares that this happened because of the company’s support of indoctrinating young schoolchildren in woke gender identity politics.”

With this evidence, it is clear that DeSantis is attacking Disney purely for personal and political reasons. Charlie Sykes from The Bulwark further commented that this is a real “quagmire” for the Governor who promotes himself as “an anti-woke bully” and that “he won’t back down,” especially since DeSantis’ Super PAC is named “Never Back Down.”

Sykes closed his remarks, saying, “This is going to play out very differently in a federal court than it does on Twitter.”>

<The National Archives has notified U.S. Dept. of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith it has critical evidence proving Donald Trump knew his claims about being able to declassify classified and top secret documents just by declaring them declassified were false.

CNN in an exclusive report reveals the National Archives (NARA) says it has a set of 16 documents detailing communications between them and Trump’s top staffers, and Trump himself, that shows procedures required to declassify intelligence.

“The 16 records in question all reflect communications involving close presidential advisers, some of them directed to you personally, concerning whether, why, and how you should declassify certain classified records,” acting Archivist Debra Steidel Wall said in a May 16 letter to Trump.

The Special Counsel says those records are “not practically available from another source.”

Last September Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity a very different story.

“There doesn’t have to be a process, as I understand it,” Trump falsely claimed. “You’re the president of the United States, you can declassify just by saying it’s declassified, even by thinking about it.”

CNN reports the “16 presidential records, which were subpoenaed earlier this year, may provide critical evidence establishing the former president’s awareness of the declassification process, a key part of the criminal investigation into Trump’s mishandling of classified documents.”

The documents “may also provide insight into Trump’s intent and whether he willfully disregarded what he knew to be clearly established protocols, according to a source familiar with recent testimony provided to the grand jury by former top Trump officials.”

Special Counsel Jack Smith is investigating Trump on two fronts: his possibly unlawful mishandling of classified intelligence, including his possibly unlawful removal from the White House, retention, and refusal to return hundreds of classified documents, and Trump’s actions to overturn the 2020 election.

Last August, responding to news reports he was allegedly under FBI investigation for actions covered by the Espionage Act by making apparently false claims about his mishandling of classified documents and about former President Barack Obama, Trump said on his social media platform,“ Number one, it was all declassified.” That does not appear to have been true.

“Number two,” Trump continued, “they didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything,” he claimed, apparently referring to the FBI’s execution of a lawful subpoena on Mar-a-Lago last summer to retrieve the documents and thousands of other items taken from the White House.

Just last week at CNN’s highly-criticized Trump town hall, the ex-president again made false claims about classified documents and procedures required to declassify them.

“And, by the way, they become automatically declassified when I took them,” Trump said, which is false.

Trump also claimed he had “the absolute right to do whatever I want with” classified documents, and claimed he had never shown them to anyone.>

<On February 27, after a nearly year-long battle, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis officially dissolved the Reedy Creek Improvement Act, which stripped Disney of its right to self-govern. For years, Disney and the state of Florida had maintained a good relationship, with Disney paying millions in taxes, along with all the jobs Walt Disney World Resort brought to the state. That all changed when former CEO Bob Chapek spoke out against Florida’s controversial Parental Rights in Education Bill.

With the dissolution of the Reedy Creek Improvement Act, Governor DeSantis has appointed a board to oversee the area. The board is called the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. The Board consists of those appointed directly by DeSantis, including some who have donated to his campaign.

One of the board members is Ron Peri. With those on the board now coming into the spotlight, some of Peri’s past contentious comments are coming back into the light. Per reporting from CNN:

An appointee to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ new oversight board in control of Disney’s special tax district called homosexuality “evil” last year and shared a baseless conspiracy theory that tap water could be making more people gay.

On Monday, the Republican governor appointed Ron Peri, an Orlando-based former pastor and the CEO of The Gathering – a Christian ministry focused on outreach to men…

“So why are there homosexuals today? There are any number of reasons, you know, that are given. Some would say the increase in estrogen in our societies. You know, there’s estrogen in the water from birth control pills. They can’t get it out,” Peri baselessly said in a January 2022 Zoom discussion, later put on YouTube. “The level of testosterone in men broadly in America has declined by 50 points in the past 10 years. You know, and so, maybe that’s a part of it.”

“But the big part I would suggest to you, based upon what it’s saying here, is the removal of constraint,” he continued. “So our society provided the constraint. And so, which is the responsibility of a society to constrain people from doing evil? Well, you remove the constraints, and then evil occurs.”

In that same video — which has been deleted since the comments made headlines once again — Peri also called homosexuality “shameful” and said that there were diseases linked to it. He also said that the fall of the Roman Empire could be blamed on homosexuality.

“Homosexuality was praised,” Peri said. “LGBTQ today is being emphasized everywhere, even on children’s shows. And so ultimately the Romans had become weak.”

This is not the first time that Governor DeSantis and his appointees have been accused of targeting the LGBTQ+ community. DeSantis’ Parental Rights in Education bill was dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” bill, and Florida Republicans were accused of targeting LGBTQ+ citizens.

The other members of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District include Bridget Ziegler, Brian Aungst, Jr., Michael Sasso, and Martin Garcia. Ziegler is married to Christian Ziegler, the Chairman of the Florida Republican Party, who will oversee the 2024 election. Martin Garcia has donated tens of thousands of dollars to reelect the governor. None of the Oversight District board members have any experience with theme park operations.>

I tell ya, that dang oestrogen!!

<The cruelty is the point, New York Times editorial board member David Firestone said about the House Republicans' demands in budget negotiations.

"It’s not that there is some crisis or scandal gripping those federal programs; Republicans are making these demands simply because the debt ceiling gives them the opportunity to do so," he explained. "And they are going after the same group of people their party has demonized for decades."

The myth of lazy Black women on welfare dates back to Ronald Reagan's welfare fraud awareness campaign using racist and gendered stereotypes to justify cuts to safety net programs, Public Health Post characterized. The reality is that the largest group of people that use poverty assistance programs are the elderly, disabled and children, the Census cited.

Still, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), described them as loafers and losers: "I don’t think hard-working Americans should be paying for all the social services for people who could make a broader contribution and instead are couch potatoes,” he said.

Firestone pointed out that Gaetz's "deep concern about excessive spending didn’t stop him from requesting a $141.5 million earmark for a helicopter training hangar at Naval Air Station Whiting Field in his district."

It also ignores that most of those on assistance are already working.

"In 2021, 61 percent of the 25 million people on Medicaid were working in full- or part-time jobs," explained Firestone. "The rest were retired or disabled or taking care of small children or in school. Similarly, most food-stamp recipients work, and able-bodied adults younger than 50 are required to work in order to get more than three months of benefits in three years, unless they are taking care of children."

Still, it's one place where Republicans are looking to make cuts again.

“The House Republican wish list would put a million older adults at risk of losing their food assistance and going hungry. Rather than push Americans into poverty, we should reduce the deficit by making sure the wealthy and large corporations pay their fair share in taxes," President Joe Biden said about the requirements in the GOP budget.

"The existing work requirements don’t get discussed by the drill sergeants who want to whip the vast army of couch potatoes into shape; they want more people to work and to work longer hours," Firestone explained. "Mr. McCarthy’s bill would require adults 50 to 55 to work at least 20 hours a week to receive food stamps, no matter that people in that age bracket often find high barriers to employment."

At the same time, all of this is coming under this claim from Republicans that the budget must be cut because of deficits. They conceded that the deficits were significantly increased under Donald Trump, but now that Biden is in office, they want to cut the deficit. Those cuts don't make much of a difference because of the largest spending items like defense, medicare/health, and tax cuts over the last 20 years.

As Raw Story reported, the hits veterans would experience under the GOP's budget would cut housing for 50,000 veterans, the VA said. There are also deep cuts to mental health services for vets at a time the suicide rate among those that served hasn't changed much since 2018. It would cut funding to make more veteran health clinics to help with the long wait times, and cut staff and doctors for the VA.

The Republican plan would also mandate many adults 19 to 55 work 80 hours a month to get Medicaid. "As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities notes, this requirement would particularly hurt low-income beneficiaries in states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act and seems designed as a backdoor way of undermining the expansion," explained Firestone.

He said that the way that Republicans are trying to undermine the Affordable Care Act is through this back door using the debt ceiling, because they haven't been able to repeal it.

Firestone argues this is why the debt ceiling needs to be stopped altogether.>

<In an unexpected turn of events, Donald Trump, the former U.S. president, finds himself at the center of a spiraling scandal surrounding the handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence.

Information provided by an undisclosed employee

Federal prosecutors have acquired potentially significant information from an undisclosed employee at the estate, adding to the complexity of the ongoing investigation.

The identity of this source remains a secret, as does the nature of the information they’ve provided. However, according to The New York Times, the informer presented the investigators with a photograph of the storage room purported to house most of the classified documents.

Latest revelation intensifies Smith's investigation

This revelation has intensified the efforts of Special Counsel Jack Smith to ascertain whether Trump deliberately removed classified files from the storeroom after a subpoena was issued for their retrieval in May 2022.

Speculations are rife about the informant’s role. On his ‘Justice Matters podcast, Glenn Kirschner, a legal analyst, and former federal prosecutor, conjectured that the individual might have been wearing a wire.

He stated, “If you’re the target of a grand jury’s criminal investigation, the last words you ever want to hear are ‘prosecutors have obtained the confidential cooperation of a person who has worked for you.'”

Additionally, security footage from Trump’s Florida resort is being further scrutinized by federal investigators, as reported by CNN.

Amid the growing pressure, Trump seemed unphased during a recent golf game in Scotland, even as several of his top aides received new grand jury subpoenas relating to handling the security footage.

The case is further complicated by the involvement of high-level Trump Organization execs Matthew Calamari Sr. and Jr., who were summoned before the grand jury investigating potential crimes.

Investigators examining if Trump violated ‘Espionage Act'

Furthermore, Federal investigators are also examining whether Trump violated the Espionage Act by exposing a confidential map containing sensitive intelligence.

This map, which Trump reportedly took with him to Florida upon leaving the White House, is said to have been shown to at least one advisor and possibly a journalist writing a book.

The saga of the classified boxes first emerged in October 2022, two months after an FBI raid on Trump’s Florida home.

Boxes moved after the subpoena was issued
Walt Nauta, Trump’s valet, disclosed that Trump had requested the movement of boxes of records before and after the subpoena was issued. While Nauta initially denied moving sensitive information, he later admitted to relocating boxes from a storage room at Trump’s behest.

As the former president’s classified document scandal continues to evolve, the role of the unidentified Mar-a-Lago employee becomes increasingly significant.

DOJ and FBI conducting thorough examination of communication

The Justice Department and FBI are now conducting a thorough examination of communications from a former Trump aide, including emails and text messages.

This scrutiny has led to a more concentrated focus on the events following the subpoena’s issuance, the potential mishandling of national security documents, and whether sufficient evidence exists to bring the case before a grand jury.

In August 2022, the FBI reportedly recovered over 100 classified files from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. This operation resulted from information brought to light by Trump’s valet, Walt Nauta, who admitted to relocating several boxes from a storage room at Trump’s request.

Surveillance footage confirmed Nauta’s actions, capturing him on CCTV moving the boxes from the storage area.>

<Deutsche Bank has agreed to pay $75 million to settle a lawsuit claiming that the German lender should have seen evidence of sex trafficking by Jeffrey Epstein when he was a client, according to lawyers for women who say they were abused by the late financier.

A woman only identified as Jane Doe sued the bank in federal district court in New York and sought class-action status to represent other victims of Epstein. The lawsuit asserted that the bank knowingly benefited from Epstein’s sex trafficking and “chose profit over following the law” to earn millions of dollars from the businessman.

One of the law firms representing women in the case, Edwards Pottinger, said it believed it is the largest sex trafficking settlement with a bank in U.S. history.

“The settlement will allow dozens of survivors of Jeffrey Epstein to finally attempt to restore their faith in our system knowing that all individuals and entities who facilitated Epstein’s sex-trafficking operation will finally be held accountable,” the firm said in statement.

Deutsche Bank would not comment on the settlement Thursday but noted a 2020 statement from the bank acknowledging its mistake in taking on Epstein as a client, said Frank Hartmann, the German lender’s global head of media relations.

“The Bank has invested more than 4 billion euros ($4.3 billion) to bolster controls, processes and training, and hired more people to fight financial crime,” Hartmann said in a written statement.

The Boies Schiller Flexner law firm, which also represents plaintiffs, called the settlement an important step for victims' rights.

“The scope and scale of Epstein’s abuse, and the many years it continued in plain sight, could not have happened without the collaboration and support of many powerful individuals and institutions,” David Boies, the firm's chairman, said in a statement.

Deutsche Bank had previously joined JPMorgan Chase, which is also facing a lawsuit over its ties to Epstein, in fighting the allegations. Epstein killed himself in prison while facing federal criminal charges of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls.

The German lender said late last year that it provided “routine banking services” to Epstein from 2013 to 2018 and that the lawsuit “does not come close to adequately alleging that Deutsche Bank ... was part of Epstein’s criminal sex trafficking ring.”

The lawsuits — which also target the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where Epstein had an estate — are drawing in some high-profile figures.

A U.S. judge decided last month that JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon must face up to two days of questioning by lawyers handling the lawsuits.

The Virgin Islands government also is trying to subpoena billionaire Elon Musk as part of its own litigation against JPMorgan, accusing the banking giant of enabling Epstein’s recruiters to pay victims and helping conceal his decades of sex abuse.

JPMorgan has denied the allegations and in turn has sued former executive Jes Staley, saying he hid Epstein’s abuse and trafficking to keep the financier as a client. A lawyer for Staley had no comment on the lawsuit when it was filed in March.>

<The right-wing Wall Street Journal editorial page is warning Republicans against dismissing more troubling election results that resulted in the party losing mayor's offices in GOP strongholds including Jacksonville, Florida and Colorado Springs, Coloardo [sic].

"Three times in a row, since 2018, Republicans have been disappointed on election night in November, in large part because they lost the suburbs," the editorial begins. "More defeats Tuesday for the GOP in Pennsylvania, Colorado and Florida suggest the erosion is continuing."

The editors place the blame for the party's losses primarily on two factors: Its hardline stance on abortion rights and its continued embrace of former President Donald Trump.

On the abortion front, they note that Pennsylvania Democrat Heather Boyd used the issue to win her swing district with 60 percent of the vote, a margin that they said would make it impossible for Republicans to win Pennsylvania if it holds up in 2024.

They also noted the continued failure of pro-Trump election-denying candidates, such as Judge Patricia McCullough, who this week lost the GOP primary for a state Supreme Court seat in a campaign where she ran on her efforts to derail certification of the 2020 election in the state.

"Electability matters," they argued. "That means giving up Mr. Trump’s 2020 conspiracy theories, looking to the future, and finding an abortion compromise that Republicans can sell to the voters they used to take for granted.">

<In the latest political scrum facing Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., the offense came from fellow New Yorkers in Congress and the defense came from Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The shouting match broke out Wednesday evening on the Capitol steps, with Democratic Reps. Jamaal Bowman and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez calling on Santos to resign after his recent indictment on federal charges for fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and making false statements to Congress.

Santos pleaded not guilty to the charges and vowed to "fight the witch hunt" and clear his name, but his fellow House representatives aren't making that easy.

"Kick him out! He’s gotta go!” Bowman yelled as reporters tried to interview Santos outside the Capitol. He continued to shout over the media's questions, urging Santos to resign and "have some dignity."

"New Yorkers need better," Bowman belted out above the mix of journalists pushing microphones and cellphones in front of Santos.

Meanwhile, Ocasio-Cortez was telling Santos, “You gotta go. You gotta give it up."

"I can’t continue to address you guys because there’s a deranged member here, so I’m gonna walk," he said.

Santos told reporters he couldn't hear the questions because of his colleagues "screaming here."

Greene − who has introduced articles of impeachment this week against U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves, FBI director Christopher Wray, Attorney General Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas − soon began chanting to "impeach Biden."

Bowman told her the Republican Party is "hanging by a thread" and implored her to "save the party."

"No more QAnon, no more MAGA, no more debt ceiling nonsense," he said.

Bowman told her to do something about guns, and Greene told him to close the border.

Earlier this year, Bowman got into a shouting match inside the Capitol with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., about gun control after the Nashville shooting.

The Wednesday night fray followed a Democratic resolution to oust Santos from Congress being referred to the House Ethics Committee.>

<California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday assailed Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) over what he described as “dangerous rhetoric” in comments that followed her tense exchange with a congressional colleague the previous day.

Greene and Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) engaged in a frenzied argument on the steps of the Capitol on Wednesday, video of which has since circulated widely on social media.

The exchange followed House Republicans winning a largely party-line vote (221-204) to refer a resolution to expel Rep. George Santos (R-NY) to the House ethics committee, effectively sidestepping a Democratic-led effort to expel the embattled congressman.

At the end of the video, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is shown whisking Bowman away and telling him “she ain’t worth it bro.”

Greene on Thursday addressed the exchange, accusing Bowman of acting aggressively and making her feel “threatened."

She alleged that Bowman “shoved” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) recently in a separate exchange.

“His physical mannerisms are aggressive,” she said.

“I felt threatened by him.”

Newsom called the far-right congresswoman’s comments “dangerous.”

“This is the kind of dangerous rhetoric that led to Emmett Till's death,” the California governor tweeted.

“Everyone should call this out for what it is: blatant racism.”>

<As school library book bans proliferate across the country, the resistance is becoming more organized. This week, a book publisher — the largest in the world — entered the fray. A lawyer for the publishing conglomerate Penguin Random House told The Times it was suing to stop "one of the most unsubtle attempts at viewpoint discrimination" ever seen.

Joined by free-speech advocacy group PEN America and several authors and parents, Penguin Random House filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the Escambia County School District and its school board, alleging they were violating the 1st Amendment by scrubbing library shelves of books based on a political or ideological disagreement with the ideas the books express.

They also allege a 14th Amendment violation citing the Equal Protection Clause, because the challenged books are disproportionately titles by nonwhite and/or LGBTQ+ authors and explore diverse stories and themes.

Penguin Random House has had two of its books, “The Bluest Eye” by Toni Morrison and “Push” by Sapphire, removed from some Escambia School District libraries. Numerous other books, including “The Kite Runner” by Khaled Hosseini and “Slaughterhouse-Five” by Kurt Vonnegut, were targeted for removal pending a review process that the suit claims is essentially bogus.

“For many instances there’s not even the attempt at a pretext," Dan Novack, Penguin Random House vice president and associate general counsel, told The Times. "These are being removed because there are depictions of [LGBTQ+] characters, there are depictions of racial identity, and that's the reasons why they are being flagged by individuals for removal.

“And on top of that," Novack continued, "when these titles do get flagged, what we're seeing is that there is a committee that it’s supposed to go to that's filled with actual members of the community, experts, etc., and they're saying these are educationally appropriate. And then the school district is just overruling their own people. So it's one of the most eye-popping fact patterns we've seen, and we think that when the court sees it, and certainly the public sees it, they'll understand the strength of the case.”

According to the lawsuit, the majority of the book bans in the county, which encompasses Pensacola in the Florida panhandle, stem from a single Northview High School language arts teacher, Vicki Baggett, who embarked on an aggressive campaign to remove student access to 116 books, stating the books “should be evaluated based on explicit sexual content, graphic language, themes, vulgarity and political pushes.”

Among the challenged titles were “Drama” by Raina Telgemeier; quotes from the book relating to one character’s identification as gay were listed as the sole ground for removal, according to the lawsuit. Baggett also petitioned for the removal of Duchess Harris' “Race and Policing in Modern America," a nonfiction resource guide intended for middle-school readers, arguing it was anti-police and written "to race-bait.”

The suit also alleges that Baggett admitted she’d never heard of “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” by Stephen Chbosky, which she petitioned to remove, until learning it was frequently targeted elsewhere. Many of her objections seemed to be copied and pasted (including typos) directly from the website Book Looks, which was founded by a member of the Brevard County, Fla., chapter of the group Moms for Liberty.

After a panel consisting of Northview leadership, faculty, staff and one parent voted in favor of “Wallflower” remaining on library shelves, Baggett appealed the panel’s decision with a letter to the school district’s assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, copying members of the school board, the superintendent and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The assistant superintendent responded by convening a “district review committee,” which echoed the initial panel’s vote in favor of "Wallflower."

Baggett appealed the decision again, which led to the school board overruling the committee’s decision and removing “Wallflower” from school district libraries.

Baggett did not immediately respond to The Times' request for comment....>

<....According to the lawsuit, the total number of books currently being challenged in the Escambia County School District has reached 197; 70% of these remained restricted as of Wednesday’s filing. Statewide, more than 500 books were permanently or temporarily removed between July 2021 and June 2022. And nationwide, according to PEN America’s Index of School Book Bans, 2,532 individual titles were banned during the same time period.

“We've been looking at this escalating pattern nationwide of censorship," Novack said. "And when we found out that our partners on the ground, PEN, and authors and parents were interested in formally and legally pushing back, the case was irresistible to us because they need the support, and we're here to provide it."

As for a nationwide legal strategy to fight book bans, Novack says publishers have a challenging road ahead: “These laws are like snowflakes, there's so many different variants, and they all work in slightly different ways.

“So while this is an important precedent to set thematically and legally, it doesn't work the same way in Tennessee versus Florida or Texas or Missouri or Utah. So we're really ... figuring out where we can have impact.”

Nadine Farid Johnson, managing director of PEN America Washington and Free Expression Programs and lead counsel on the lawsuit, told The Times that PEN hopes this suit will help turn the tide against the current wave of book bans.

“PEN America has been documenting and analyzing these bans for the better part of two years, and the numbers are continuing to grow,” Johnson said. “We have upwards of 4 million students across the U.S. affected by these decisions, and our lawsuit is looking at this through the constitutional lens, which I think is the correct lens, because ultimately what is at stake here are the fundamental rights that are in our Constitution.”

DeSantis is not named as a defendant in the suit, but the Republican governor, who is expected to announce his 2024 presidential campaign this month, has championed policies that embolden book-banning efforts, specifically in relation to cultural divides on race, gender and sexual orientation.

“Thirty-two different states have experienced a ban of some sort, and Florida really is a leader in this realm," Johnson said. "And Escambia County in particular, it truly epitomizes what is happening around the country. And for that reason we chose to go into this district."

On Wednesday, Macmillan Publishers CEO Jonathan Yaged released a statement expressing support for the suit. “Macmillan staunchly supports our author, George M. Johnson, PEN America, and all the plaintiffs in their lawsuit," Yaged said in the statement. "... As future leaders of our democracy, children need and deserve access to the full breadth of who we are as Americans. The censorship of books is a direct attack on the founding principles of our country and our constitutional rights as citizens.”

Escambia County school officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment.>

<Republican Florida Governor Ron DeSantis lost access to 200,000 supporters after a district court ruled against a political action committee (PAC) created to encourage the governor to run for presidency next year.

Ready for Ron (RFR) was launched by the governor's supporters who aimed to gather 1 million signatures from voters wanting DeSantis to announce his 2024 presidential bid. The group secured 200,000 petitions, according to a court document.

The PAC wanted to send the petitions, along with the email addresses of the signatories, to the governor's office to urge him to run in 2024, but the Federal Election Commission (FEC) found that the contact list could be a source of potential donors that might be used to send fundraising solicitations surpassing federal campaign finance limits, Florida Politics reported on Thursday.

Judge Randolph Moss of the Washington, D.C., U.S. District Court upheld the FEC's conclusion after the PAC appealed the commission's ruling in court.

"The Court agrees with the Commission that what RFR calls a petition is, in fact, a contact list and, more importantly, an in-kind contribution," Moss wrote in a memo filed Wednesday. "As such, the list is subject to the contribution limits contained in the Federal Election Campaign Act ("FECA" or the "Act") ... and it is now well-trod ground that those limits satisfy constitutional dictates."

The court document read: "The Commission unanimously concluded that RFR was, in all but name, seeking permission to provide Governor DeSantis with an in-kind contribution—that is, a contact list in the guise of a petition. Based on that conclusion, the Commission further held that were Governor DeSantis to begin to test the waters for a run, and similarly were he to become a candidate, the campaign finance laws would preclude RFR from delivering that contact list to him because the market value of the list exceeds the relevant contribution limit and because RFR funded its drive with a combination of regulated funds (hard money) and unregulated funds (soft money)."

The RFR petition argues that America is in "grave danger" because of "woke" policies pushed by the "radical" left and that DeSantis is the solution.

"The America-First agenda MUST be revived. Governor Ron DeSantis is the next Great American President – like Ronald Reagan – who will turn our country around. We must organize NOW – we cannot wait and let the Left take another election. I am Ready for Ron! Let Ron know I'm behind him and want to join his team!" the petition read.

RFR said in January that it plans to spend over $3 million to support DeSantis and organize a campaign in case the Republican decides to seek the GOP presidential nomination, Fox News reported at the time.

DeSantis is not affiliated with the PAC and efforts by RFR could possibly harm the governor, according to DeSantis' political team. His campaign reportedly pointed to a memo from last year, before he was reelected in the 2022 midterms, that stated contributions to the non-affiliated PAC "do not benefit Governor DeSantis or his re-election."

"In reality, the PAC is actively taking financial resources away from Governor DeSantis and his re-election efforts. While possibly well-intentioned, these types of organizations tend to cannibalize support that would normally be offered to the candidate directly," DeSantis' 2022 reelection campaign legal counsel Benjamin Gibson argued in a memo cited by Fox News.

The governor's team also said RFR "is apparently engaging in an aggressive media campaign to promote itself, running political ads and actively soliciting contributions from supporters of Governor DeSantis.">

Nice try, sport, but no dice--have to find another way to try gaming the system.

<Who is going to trust the Department of Justice now? In the wake of Special Counsel John Durham’s long-awaited report, Americans now know there was widespread political collusion and deliberate deception from the very top of the Obama administration, the Clinton campaign, the corporate media and the Department of Justice (DOJ), all in favor of the Democrats.

Not only did they abuse their power and lie to the public, they seem to be proud of it.

With these facts now added to the long list of formerly crazy conspiracy theories come true, former president Donald Trump is essentially inoculated from any future prosecution by virtue of the public mistrust in an obviously weaponized federal government. Even if prosecutors somehow manage to get a partisan jury to convict, the public will see it as a political witch hunt predicated primarily on partisan politics.

For this reason, both Democrats and Republicans should fear what could come next if they don’t clip the wings of this rogue federal agency and institute serious systemic changes. If they can do it to Trump, and they did, then they can do it again to anyone.

One thing has become crystal clear: the Justice Department cannot and will not police itself. DOJ is unwilling and unprepared to discipline let alone prosecute its own. That’s one reason the work of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government is so vital.

To restore its position as a coequal branch of government, Congress must lose its reluctance to wield the heavy tools available in the law and the Constitution. It can and must develop an independent means of enforcing congressional subpoenas.

The threat of impeachment of Senate-confirmed bureaucrats must become more feared. The House of Representatives must unite to implement what is perhaps the most powerful tool – the power of the purse. And Congress should reconsider and expand the role of independent offices of inspectors general (OIG) to ensure the Justice Department can no longer ride above the law.

Republicans have been bafflingly reluctant to wield impeachment power. Getting support to impeach IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in 2015 was a heavy lift. It shouldn’t be. If Congress doesn’t hold administration officials accountable, who will? Under the advise-and-consent clause of the Constitution, the Senate was given a co-equal voice to confirm a bureaucrat and remove them, but they do not.

Likewise, Congress has failed to secure its own subpoena power. For too long, the body has been content to rely on the DOJ to enforce congressional subpoenas. But now that we clearly see the DOJ applying a political litmus test to such requests, the American people need a new solution. For Democrats, subpoenas are enforced in record time with guns drawn. For Republicans, the DOJ will only enforce "legitimate" subpoenas based on their own whims after months of review.

Congress can also leverage the power of the purse to play hardball by denying agency funding until the government produces requested documents and witnesses. But they don’t.

While all of those options are on the table, perhaps the most effective solution could come from empowering the government’s independent inspectors general. Most everyone in government is currently subject to review by an office of Inspector General (OIG).

The ability of these investigators to subpoena documents, interview witnesses and expose wrongdoing has yielded important evidence and numerous criminal referrals. But they don’t have authority to make any prosecutorial decisions – and they probably should.

To the shock of most people, the IGs are prohibited from investigating wrongdoing by attorneys at the DOJ. Nor can they compel testimony once someone leaves federal service, and both of these need to change.

Before the Durham report, there were two IG reports on the Russia collusion hoax that combined for more than 1,000 pages. They included discipline and criminal referrals that DOJ ignored. Consequences for wrongdoing by federal law enforcement have been minimal.

Even ex-FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, who pleaded guilty to making a false statement after altering a document in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, received only probation and community service for his crime. He forged documents to effect [sic] an election and he didn’t even lose his law license!

Sadly, the American people have lost trust in some of the most important institutions, the Centers for Disease Control and the Department of Justice. And this may very well propel Trump back into the White House.>

<Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., is seeking to impeach President Joe Biden, a move the White House immediately slammed as a "political stunt" on Thursday.

Greene’s articles of impeachment against Biden target his handling of the southern border and immigration policies. The Republican lawmaker in a press conference accused Biden of having “deliberately compromised our national security by refusing to enforce immigration laws and secure our border.”

She accused Biden of depriving border law enforcement of “necessary resources and policies” to protect the country, allowing fentanyl to spread into the United States over the southern border, among other allegations.

“His policies, directives and statements surrounding the southern border have violated our laws and destroyed our country,” Greene told reporters. “Biden has blatantly violated his constitutional duty, and he is a direct threat to our national security.”

Greene this week has also introduced articles of impeachment against U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves, FBI director Christopher Wray, Attorney General Merrick Garland and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

If a federal official commits a crime “or otherwise acts improperly,” the House of Representatives can impeach the official, the Senate’s website explains. The official would then need to be convicted in a trial in the upper chamber to be removed from office.

Greene in a press conference on Thursday said she has discussed the push with Republican leadership. She said party leaders “didn’t tell me not to do it, they just asked me questions about the method, the legality and things pertaining to the Constitution.”

‘Shameless sideshow political stunt’

The White House quickly criticized Greene’s push on Thursday, calling the impeachment articles “silly political attacks.”

“Is there a bigger example of a shameless sideshow political stunt than a trolling impeachment attack by one of the most extreme MAGA members in Congress over ‘national security’ while she actively demands to defund the FBI and even said she ‘would’ve been armed’ and ‘would have won’ the January 6 insurrection if only she’d been in charge of it?” Ian Sams, the White House’s spokesperson for oversight and investigations, said in a statement to USA TODAY.

Greene has repeatedly called for defunding the FBI, in addition to targeting the Department of Justice and other government agencies. Greene last year claimed she would have “won” the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection had she been involved.

Sams added that Biden is “focused on what’s important to the American people,” and “not silly political attacks.”>

<Famous and influential American attorney Laurence Tribe is defending fellow Harvard Law graduate Adam Schiff from an attack by MAGA Republican Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, who has filed a motion to expel Rep. Schiff, a California Democrat, from the House of Representatives.

Tribe is vituperative in backing Schiff and excoriating his enemies, writing that the effort to expel Schiff “is too stupid and sick for words.”

Tribe lambastes Schiff’s political opponents, saying that the GOP congress members “attacking him, taken together, have less brains and heart among them than he has in his little finger. It'd be a joke if it weren't so evil and dangerous.”

Tribe’s influence particularly in the area of American Constitutional Law is unmatched. His biography at Harvard, from which he graduated summa cum laude in mathematics before entering the law school, attests to his deep knowledge and influence in constitutional law, reading in part:

[Tribe’s] treatise, American Constitutional Law, [has been]cited more than any other legal text since 1950. Former Solicitor General Erwin Griswold wrote: "No book, and no lawyer not on the [Supreme] Court, has ever had a greater influence on the development of American constitutional law," and the Northwestern Law Review opined that no one else "in American history has… simultaneously achieved Tribe's preeminence… as a practitioner and… scholar of constitutional law."

Rep. Luna’s allegation that Schiff lied and wasted taxpayer money relies on a MAGA-held belief that Special Counsel John Durham’s report disproved all allegations arising in the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane investigation of Russian election meddling. Schiff and others have a different interpretation of Durham’s findings, which were four years in the making.>

<It lasts no more than a second, but it is a moment for the ages. Interviewed on BBC Newsnight on Monday, Nigel Farage made a confession that, by rights, should end the debate that has split this country down the middle for much of the last decade. A month ahead of the seventh anniversary of the 2016 vote that took Britain out of the European Union, Farage said three words of striking simplicity and truth: “Brexit has failed.”

You can watch the clip over and over, for it is something to behold. Here is the arch-Brexiter himself, the man who dedicated his life to the cause of rupture from the EU, admitting it has been a disaster. Of course, as we shall see, he and his fellow Brexiters do not blame that failure on the idea itself, but it’s the admission that counts. It offers grounds for modest celebration: now, at last, the contours of an emerging national consensus are visible, as remainers and leavers alike can join in agreement that this thing has not worked. And yet it comes at a price, one that also became darkly visible this week.

Start with the facts that even Farage can no longer duck. During the referendum campaign, he and his allies promised that Brexit would be a boon for the UK economy, unshackling it from Brussels red tape and releasing it into a roaring future. Seven years on, we can see the reality: a country in the grip of a cost of living crisis that means millions can no longer afford what they once regarded as the basics. Britain is becoming poorer and falling behind its peers. Ours is now forecast to be one of the worst performing economies in the world, not merely seventh in the G7 but 20th in the G20 – behind even a Russia under toughening international sanctions – according to the International Monetary Fund.

The consequences of being poorer are seen and felt everywhere, whether it’s in the 3m food parcels delivered by food banks last year, the family who can’t get a mental health appointment for a troubled child, or in courts that are jammed and backlogged for years. For a while, the Brexiters could blame all our woes on anything but Brexit: Covid or Ukraine. But there’s no hiding place now.

This week came a warning that post-Brexit trading arrangements with the EU threaten the very existence of the entire UK automotive industry, which employs some 800,000 people. Ford, Jaguar Land Rover and the owners of Vauxhall called on the government to renegotiate the Brexit deal. Such demands are getting louder. Next month, a thousand businesses, alongside representatives of farming and fishing, will gather in Birmingham for the Trade Unlocked conference, called to discuss a post-Brexit landscape most say has made commercial life infinitely harder and more bureaucratic. “Business is beginning to find its voice,” one organiser tells me.

But it’s not just the economic numbers. Remember, Farage and the others argued that a hit to GDP would be worth it, so long as Brexit fulfilled its other promises – most cherished among them, a reduction in the number of immigrants to the UK. Yet if you were among those persuaded, against the evidence, to see immigration as a cost, rather than a benefit, to the country, Brexit has failed on even that measure. Immigration has gone up, not down, since we left the EU, with one analysis suggesting net annual migration figures published next week could see a rise to 700,000 or even 1 million. Turns out Britain needs migrants – but now they have to come from far away, rather than in reciprocal movement between us and our nearest neighbours.....>

<....Given all this, what are the Brexiters to do? Some still deny reality altogether, insisting that we should disbelieve the evidence of our own eyes. The rest admit that Brexit has failed, and then face one of two options. Either they can atone for their role in visiting this calamity upon the nation and move to correct it. Or they can blame others for not doing it right.

On Newsnight, Farage made the latter choice. Yes, it was true that Britain had “not actually benefited from Brexit economically” but that was because “useless” politicians had “mismanaged this totally”. It’s the manoeuvre perfected in an earlier era by western communists confronted by the brute realities of the Soviet Union: nothing wrong with the communist idea, they insisted, it just hadn’t been implemented properly.

But that logic is tricky for the Brexiters, because it’s they who have been in charge. The exit deal was signed, sealed and pushed through parliament by one of their own, Boris Johnson, and a conviction Brexiter is in Downing Street now, in the form of Rishi Sunak. So there has to be someone else to blame, other shadowy forces who betrayed the cause.

Some point to Sunak himself, aided by Kemi Badenoch, who this month halted the planned shredding of thousands of EU-tainted regulations. For others, it’s the Blob or the “remoaner elite”, made up of the civil service, the BBC, the universities, the unions: anyone who, along with desperate refugees in small boats, can be blamed for standing between Britain and the promised Brexit nirvana.

This is hardly a new dynamic. Nationalism, with its impossible promise of a perfect future, always has to have a traitor to blame for perfection’s delayed arrival. That is the process we are witnessing now: the steady nurturing of a stab-in-the-back myth for Brexit. History suggests that this hunt for the wielder of the treacherous dagger will only get nastier.

Which is why many were rightly alarmed by this week’s gathering in the name of “national conservatism”, where the writer Douglas Murray declared that nationalism need no longer hide its face just because the Germans had “mucked up” in the last century – a novel way to describe the murderous record of national socialism. That conference was a three-day search for those whose betrayal could be blamed for the failure of the Brexit project.

The quest will intensify as the damage caused by Brexit piles up. The worse the economy gets, the higher interest rates rise, the tighter incomes are squeezed, the louder and more vitriolic the attacks on the supposed true culprits will have to be – if only to quieten the obvious thought: namely that it is Brexit itself that is to blame.

It means those who opposed this madness from the start now have two reasons to break the understandable, if still bizarre, omertà on Brexit that prevails in Westminster. The first is the need to point to the source of our national ailing: if the patient is losing blood, you cannot keep ignoring the wounds where he shot himself in both feet. Less obvious, but no less urgent, is the need to acknowledge that Brexit’s failure is injecting a new toxin into the system, one that will spread the more apparent that failure becomes – and spread faster if we refuse to name its actual cause.>

<Oregon has long been seen as a quirky state whose main city was satirized in a TV comedy, where rugged country folk and urban hipsters could get along and political differences could be settled over a pint or two of craft beer.

But with a Republican walkout in the Democrat-controlled Oregon Senate in its third week, Oregonians these days are wistfully recalling "The Oregon Way,” when politicians of different stripes forged agreements for the common good. Famous examples include establishing the nation's first recycling program, ensuring public beach access for the entire coastline and limiting urban sprawl in a pioneering land-use program.

A quarter-century ago, former Republican U.S. Sen. Gordon Smith and current Democratic U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden championed legislation together in Congress and even jointly appeared at town halls across the state, said Kerry Tymchuk, who was Gordon’s chief of staff back then. That spirit of cooperation was mirrored in the Legislature, he said.

“There were moderate Republicans in the Legislature who represented suburban Portland. There were conservative Democrats who represented some of the rural districts,” said Tymchuk, currently the executive director of the Oregon Historical Society. “And now there are no more Democrats in the rural districts. There are no more moderate Republicans.”

The crisis in Oregon's statehouse is a microcosm of the deeply partisan politics playing out nationwide, often pitting urban against rural areas, and the growing divide in Oregon shows the Pacific Northwest state is not immune.

The gridlock in the state Capitol in Salem comes as Oregon grapples with homelessness, mental health issues, a fetid open-air drug market in Portland and gun violence in the state's main city, where some businesses are fleeing, including outdoor gear retailer REI.

Elsewhere, a campaign by conservative activists in rural eastern Oregon counties to secede and join neighboring Idaho has gained steam amid growing complaints about the state's progressive politics.

"There is no turning back now,” Republican Sen. Daniel Bonham said of the GOP boycott.

“We are in it for the long haul. Oregon is in a leadership crisis,” he emailed his constituents, who live mostly east of Portland along the Columbia River and along the flanks of snow-capped Mount Hood.

The drumbeat of political discord has been building in Oregon for some time: Republicans walked out in 2019, 2020 and 2021. A breach of the state Capitol in December 2020 was an eerie predictor of the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection.

In 2001, Democrat House members, then in the minority, walked out over redistricting. There was even a walkout in 1860, a year after statehood, with six senators hiding for two weeks in a barn to prevent a quorum.

The departure this year of an unpopular governor and the success of several bipartisan bills on affordable housing, homelessness and mental health funding early this session buoyed hopes that this year, things might be different — until this month.

The GOP boycott, which began May 3, now threatens to derail hundreds of pending bills, approval of a biennial state budget and the boycotters' own political futures. Neither side seems willing to give an inch over a bill on abortion rights and transgender health care and another measure on guns....>

<....This year's standoff has disqualified nine Republican senators and one Independent from serving as lawmakers in the next term under a ballot measure approved overwhelmingly by boycott-weary voters last November. After 10 or more unexcused absences, a lawmaker can't take office in the Legislature, even if the secretary of state's elections division allows them on the ballot and they win.

A disqualified lawmaker running for reelection could disrupt Oregon's election system, already shaken by the resignation of Secretary of State Shemia Fagan this month for secretly moonlighting as a highly paid consultant to a marijuana business. Striking Republican lawmakers have pointed to Fagan's actions as a sign of corruption among Democratic politicians.

Senate President Rob Wagner, new to the job after his predecessor, Peter Courtney — the longest-serving Senate president in Oregon history — retired last year, accused GOP lawmakers of undermining democracy.

“This walkout must end," Wagner said from the rostrum Thursday as he gaveled closed another session because of a lack of quorum. "The people of Oregon desire it. Democracy demands it.”

In Oregon, two-thirds of the 30 members of the Senate must be present for a quorum for floor sessions. In recent days, 18 senators showed up but most Republicans and the lone Independent didn't.

Democratic and Republican leaders in the statehouse have met to end the boycott, but talks have repeatedly failed amid social media sparring, grandstanding to supporters and emailed accusations.

Republicans accuse Democrats of ignoring a long-forgotten 1979 law that says summaries of bills need to be written at an eighth-grade level — a law resurrected this month by the GOP. The boycotters also say they won't return unless “extreme” bills, like the ones on abortion, gender-affirming care and gun safety, are scrapped.

Wagner has said House Bill 2002 on abortion and gender-affirming care is nonnegotiable. Republicans object, in particular, to a provision that would allow doctors to provide an abortion to anyone regardless of age and bar them in certain cases from disclosing that to parents.

The last day of Oregon's legislative session is June 25. Democratic Gov. Tina Kotek has signed a bill to keep funds flowing to state agencies until September if no budget has become law by July 1 and says she doesn't think the state “is in crisis mode yet.”

She could call a special legislative session in the summer to get a budget approved and hasn't ruled out ordering the Oregon State Police to haul the protesters to the Senate. Such an order was issued in 2019 but not carried out.

Despite all the rancor, Tymchuk doesn't believe The Oregon Way is dead.

“I still remain hopeful and optimistic that Oregon will find its way back,” he said.>

<If there’s anyone congressional Republicans should find credible in the ethics controversy surrounding Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, it’s Judge Mark L. Wolf. As The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus explained in her latest column, Wolf “has spent his career fighting against corruption and for the rule of law — as a public corruption prosecutor, as a federal judge, as a crusader against international kleptocracy.”

What’s more, he’s done so with a partisan pedigree that should bolster his credibility with GOP lawmakers: Wolf got his start in the Ford administration, before ultimately being nominated for the federal bench by Ronald Reagan.

But in 2011 and 2012, during his tenure on the Judicial Conference of the United States, which is responsible for reviewing jurists’ financial disclosure reports, Wolf examined complaints about Thomas, which he deemed credible, and which led to a series of questions about possible ethics lapses and how they were handled.

Wolf’s efforts were largely ignored. His term on the panel expired before he could get answers.

It was against this backdrop that the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing this week on ethics rules and judicial financial disclosures. Not surprisingly given his lengthy career and background, members invited Wolf to testify.

It was there that Wolf, now a senior judge, heard outrage from Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana — not because he Wolf failed to get answers, but because he dared to ask questions. From Marcus’ column:

The Post editor also noted that as Wolf began to defend himself, the Louisianan left the room.

During the same proceedings, Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah kept the slander going, insisting that he considers the allegations surrounding Thomas to be “a political witch hunt, which may be in the process of being aided and abetted by a member of the judiciary,” referring to Wolf.

Lee, of course, is the same GOP senator who recently tried to defend the controversial Supreme Court justice, not by addressing the specific ethics allegations, but rather by insisting that Thomas is “decent,” well liked by people who know him, and not the kind of guy who does bad things.

Years ago, in “Arrested Development,” viewers were introduced to an attorney named Bob Loblaw, who pitched a memorable message in television ads: “Why should you go to jail for a crime someone else noticed?”

The Republican defense of Thomas is similar: They’re not bothered by Thomas’ alleged misconduct; they’re bothered by anti-corruption officials like Wolf who noticed Thomas’ alleged misconduct.

If politicians such as Kennedy and Lee believe the status quo is flawless, and there are no need for reforms — policies that would apply to all judges, not just Supreme Court justices popular with the GOP — they’re welcome to make that case. But for them to slander Wolf as part of a desperate and substance-free defense of Thomas says more about the senators than the senior judge.>

<The Manhattan district attorney’s office — which already has charged Donald Trump with 34 felony counts in relation to the Stormy Daniels hush money scheme — has upped the ante against a potential cooperator in that case, according to a New York Times report on Friday that cited people with knowledge of the matter.

Because former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg apparently has not signaled any willingness to testify against Trump, the DA’s office has turned “in recent weeks” to exploring perjury charges against him, two of the people with knowledge of the matter told the Times.

Those charges would be in addition to, not in lieu of, any insurance fraud charges, which the DA’s team has been investigating for several months, if not longer. Indeed, prosecutors already have warned Weisselberg’s lawyers that such charges could be forthcoming and that they focus on Weisselberg’s alleged lies to an insurance company “by claiming that the value of the Trump Organization’s real estate holdings had been assessed by an independent appraiser, when in fact they had not been,” the Times reported.

The potential perjury charges, by contrast, “would center on Mr. Weisselberg’s 2020 interview with [Attorney General Leticia] James’s investigators,” during which he was “questioned about some significant errors in Mr. Trump’s financial statements,” the Times reported, citing the people with knowledge of the matter.

But what exactly could Weisselberg have potentially lied about during that interview? After all, the Times notes that Weisselberg “acknowledged that the Trump Organization had overvalued Mr. Trump’s penthouse apartment in Trump Tower by ‘give or take’ $200 million,” but that statement has been understood as an admission of the truth, not a lie in and of itself.

Let’s start with the fact that Weisselberg was interviewed by the attorney general’s office three times in 2020: on July 16, July 17, and September 24. The transcripts of those depositions are at least partially public through filings in the attorney general’s civil fraud lawsuit against the Trump Organization, Trump himself, three of his children, and Weisselberg, among others.

The Manhattan DA’s office has a colorable argument that Weisselberg lied under oath during his July 17, 2020, deposition.

And even a cursory read of those transcripts, coupled with other filings by the attorney general, suggests at least one potential avenue for a perjury charge: Weisselberg’s involvement in the overvaluation of Trump’s triplex apartment in Trump Tower and at what point he knew that valuation was false.....>

<....Specifically, on July 17, 2020, Weisselberg was asked by the attorney general’s office about the valuation of Trump’s apartment, as included in Trump’s 2015 statement of financial condition. Weisselberg agreed that the valuation was premised on the apartment having square footage nearly three times the size of the actual apartment. And as the Times indicated on Friday, he further agreed the apartment was overvalued because of that mistake by “give or take” $200 million.

Weisselberg was then asked if he had ever “advised any financial institutions that the 2015 statement of financial condition contains this error.” His response? “Well, we didn’t find out about the error until the Forbes article came out, and we just issued statements year over year, we don’t make phone calls during the course of the year or send out letters during the course of the year for a situation like this. It gets adjusted the following year.”

That all seems reasonable — until you see how the attorney general portrays the facts in a brief filed last fall. That brief clearly states, “Weisselberg admitted that the Statements overvalued Mr. Trump’s apartment by ‘give or take’ $200 million — and evidence later revealed he was provided with the true facts regarding the apartment’s square footage before certifying as accurate the inflated apartment value based on false information.” A related filing that same day — an affirmation prepared by a lawyer in the attorney general’s office — details more precisely what Weisselberg knew about the Trump Tower apartment and when:

Tripling the size of the apartment for valuation purposes was intentional and deliberate fraud, not an honest mistake; documents demonstrating the true size of Mr. Trump’s triplex (most notably the condominium offering plan and associated amendments for Trump Tower) were easily accessible inside the Trump Organization, were signed by Mr. Trump, and were sent to Mr. Weisselberg in 2012.

By contrast, “the Forbes article” Weisselberg referenced in his deposition, according to the attorney general’s filings, was not provided to Weisselberg until March 2017, when he, as well as Donald Trump, Jr. and Eric Trump, were alerted that while Trump told Forbes his apartment was roughly 33,000 square feet, the magazine found property records and “concluded it was less than one third that size.”

Put another way, at least according to the attorney general’s version of events, Weisselberg didn’t learn the valuation was false after the fact, as he testified. Instead, he received documents reflecting the “true size of the triplex” years before he certified the 2015 financial statement.

Therefore, the Manhattan DA’s office has a colorable argument that Weisselberg lied under oath during his July 17, 2020, deposition. The DA’s office declined to comment for this post.

Whether that specific testimony or other statements made under oath to the attorney general’s office will result in an entirely new indictment of Weisselberg on perjury and/or insurance fraud counts is another story. Watch this space.>