Trump and team accuse Democrats of relatively minor corruption based on weak evidence and then Trump and his family and his allies make ludicrous amounts of money while abusing power and no one cares.
“many of Kirk’s most ardent fans are now engaged in one of the largest mass cancellation efforts of all time: Some Republican legislators, MAGA activists, and conservative media figures are assembling watchlists with the explicit aim of silencing, firing, expelling, and perhaps even criminalizing any and all anti-Kirk sentiment.
…
There is also a big difference between canceling someone for justifying violence against Kirk and canceling someone who merely objects to his views, behavior, and political project. Furthermore, there’s a major difference between canceling someone in a public-facing communications role and canceling someone who is otherwise obscure.
…
Opposing cancel culture does not mean there should be zero accountability for anyone in a public role. It only means that those of us who denounced the excesses of woke enforcement during the late 2010s should similarly reject a rightwing counterreaction that seeks to unperson anyone who does not hold Kirk in sufficient esteem.
It’s also worth keeping in mind that Kirk disdained cancel culture and loved debate—seriously, he relished the fray more than most, and enjoyed mixing it up with people who obviously disliked him. Launching a vast and unscrupulous campaign to silence everyone who shares an unkind thought about Kirk is a poor way to honor his legacy.”
““The MAGA Gang (is) desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.””
If this is all he said, then this is a political cancellation that goes against everything many on the right used to say they stand for. Kimmel’s statement is not totally accurate, but is hardly beyond the pale.
There’s an active organized effort to find, report, and spread widely messages and posts that are perceived as negative toward Charlie Kirk’s death, and then try to get people fired. This makes concerns about cancellation look terribly hypocritical. Many of the people are now being harassed and threatened.
“When Democrats pushed the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) through Congress in 2021—with hardly any bipartisan support—Donald Trump warned Republicans not to vote for it. “Patriots will never forget!” said Trump, who described the bill as “a loser for the USA, a terrible deal, and makes the Republicans look weak, foolish, and dumb.”
Patriots may never forget, but it appears that Trump—who is now taking credit for projects funded by the bill—has.”
People get mad when you quote some of what Charlie Kirk said because a lot of what he said was misleading or false. People praise Charlie Kirk for being for free speech and then demand others stop exercising their free speech because they pointed out that Kirk had some bad ideas.
Some on the right are using Kirk’s death to encourage further violence. They often cherry-pick examples of violence that exclude violence done by people more on the right, and blame all “the left” or all “Democrats” even though almost no one on the left had anything to do with Kirk’s death.
MAGA Republicans ranted and raved about a deep state they mostly imagined, and then created a real one…
“at the same time that he’s focused on dismantling the deep state, Trump seems to have built his own undemocratic, unaccountable executive apparatus.
How else should we view the incident that The Washington Post reported on last week involving Elon Musk, the unofficial head of the White House’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and Secretary of State Marco Rubio?
As DOGE was slashing its way through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), Rubio issued a waiver ensuring that “existing life-saving humanitarian assistance programs” should continue, despite the announced shutdown of USAID. “Several times, USAID managers prepared packages of these payments and got the agency’s interim leaders to sign off on them with support from the White House,” the Post reported. “But each time, using their new gatekeeping powers and clearly acting on orders from Musk or one of his lieutenants, [Luke] Farritor and [Gavin] Kliger would veto the payments—a process that required them to manually check boxes in the payment system one at a time, the same tedious way you probably pay your bills online.”
As a result, USAID clinics that were supposed to be protected by Rubio’s order were shuttered.
That is an almost perfect illustration of how conservatives used to believe the deep state operated—with unelected, unofficial back-channel operatives overruling the plainly stated instructions of those who are nominally in power.”
…
“this should be worrying to anyone who takes seriously the threat of the deep state or values the rule of law.
Whatever your views of Musk and Rubio as individuals, it simply cannot be that the Senate-confirmed secretary of state is having his decisions overruled by a man (or his lieutenants) who still lacks any official place in the White House’s organizational chart and who runs a rebranded version of the U.S. Digital Service, an agency meant to streamline the executive branch’s digital outreach efforts that has no statutory authority to make spending decisions.”
…
“while the situation with USAID and Rubio is the most high-profile, it is not the only example of DOGE and Musk operating like the very deep state Republicans used to criticize.”
…
“Overruling the decisions made by legally appointed officials. Dodging transparency. Refusing to identify who is running the show. Are Musk and the DOGE just the deep state by a different name?”