8 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

1. Thermonuclear Lawsuit. Via Talking points memo.

   You probably know the basic contours of the story by now. Last Wednesday, Elon Musk endorsed an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory on X/Twitter. The next day the liberal watchdog group Media Matters produced a report that showed ads appearing on X/Twitter next to pro-Nazi content. Major avertisers began to flee the platform. Late in the week, Musk threatened to sue over the report. Yesterday, X/Twitter followed through with a federal lawsuit against Media Matters in the Northern District of Texas.

   Musk’s company’s essential claim is that Media Matters manipulated the X/Twitter algorithm to generate objectionable content next to high-value ads. In other words, no one (or a de minimis number of users) really saw such ad placements in the wild. In the lawsuit, X/Twitter calls what Media Matters reported “manufactured, inorganic, and extraordinarily rare.”

   What begins to tip this story into something more grave is that last evening Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton – yeah, him – launched his own investigation into Media Matters over its X/Twitter report. The tone and tenor of Paxton’s announcement tells you all you need to know: “We are examining the issue closely to ensure that the public has not been deceived by the schemes of radical left-wing organizations who would like nothing more than to limit freedom by reducing participation in the public square.”

   It leaves us with a situation where the world’s richest man is suing to silence critics of his lurch toward antisemitism and extremism and he’s being joined in the effort by partisan allies who actually control government functions. It’s a combination immediately recognizable as toxic threat to public discourse, a free press, and targeted minorities.

   Stay tuned.

   Log in to Reply

   1. From what I know about Paxton, he can't go 3 days without filing a suit about something stupid and unhinged so this is sadly not surprising.

      Log in to Reply

2. It is monthly FEC report [ https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C00033134/1736844/ ] time. In the first 10 months of the year (through 10/31/2023) the Colorado Republican Party summary is

   6. (a) Cash on hand, January 1, 2023………………………………………………………325747.68

   (b) Cash on hand at Beginning of Reporting Period….212793.27
   (c) Total Receipts (from line 19)………………………………66661.81……………300373.30

   (d) Subtotal (6(b) 6(c) for A, 6(a) 6(c) for B)……..279455.08……………626120.98

   7. Total Disbursements……………………………………………….54018.68……………400684.58

   8. Cash on Hand at Close of Reporting Period…………….225436.40…………….225436.40

   still no payroll or employee benefits. They are paying rent for an office, And “consulting”

   Fox Group Ltd………………….10/07/2023…………….6000.00 (in Jan. 2021, same address was listed for Rep. Dave Williams in the “Abstract of Votes Cast”

   Tactical Data Solutions, Inc. 10/07/2023……………7500.00

   [my apologies for format … the site still does not have a “clean” approach to importing existing tables.]

   Log in to Reply

3. I guess we don't need to worry about Jill Stein flipping Michigan to Trump next year.

   Cornel West plans a trip to Michigan to target voters softening on Joe Biden – POLITICO

    

    

   Log in to Reply

4. Colorado CREW 14th amendment case appeal update snippet  : 

   "Here are some key points from our just-filed appeal:

   • Page 7: “Based on a thorough review of the evidence and assessments of witness credibility, the district court found that the January 6, 2021 attack on the United States Capitol was an insurrection against the Constitution and that Trump engaged in that insurrection. Not only did the district court rule in favor of Petitioners on every factual issue necessary to disqualify Trump from the ballot, but it also found for Petitioners on every legal issue necessary to grant the Petition save for one.”
   • Page 3: “This holding was reversible error. The Constitution itself, historical context, and common sense, all make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s disqualification clause extends to the President and the Presidency."
   • Page 18: “We know that the Presidency is an ‘office . . . under the United States’ because the Constitution repeatedly says so. The Constitution refers to the President holding an ‘Office’ 25 times.”
   • Page 23: “The congressional debates over Section 3 likewise reveal a clear intent to cover the office of the Presidency.”
   • Page 39: “By the time the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, the phrase ‘officer of the United States’ was widely understood to include the President. This usage extends back to the founding, when George Washington was described as “the first executive officer of the United States.”  

   Log in to Reply

   1. It'll be interesting to see what the CO supreme court does with it.  If they rule him ineligible for the primary ballot, which I think is highly unlikely, then SCOTUS will almost certainly take the case.  SCOTUS could well rule that it's up to Congress to enforce section 3, and punt the matters as a nonjusticiable political question.  I'd rather beat trump at the ballot box. 

      Log in to Reply

   2. Fascinating coverage in of all places, the Denver Gazette: (Ruh Roh — the link tool is missing!)

      https://denvergazette.com/news/as-appeals-flow-into-colorado-supreme-court-judges-order-on-trump-disqualification-faces-scrutiny/article_633b3b54-e224-53d6-87be-15d25833230c.html?g2i_source=newsletter&utm_source=dg-news-alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert

      One prominent legal scholar has suggested Wallace issued a strategic decision by definitively characterizing Trump's conduct as an insurrection that would disqualify any other office holder, even as she identified narrow grounds to keep Trump eligible for office.

      "My suspicion is that having built a wall of fact and law so high that no appellate court can climb over it," said constitutional scholar Laurence H. Tribe on MSNBC, "she threw him a lifeline that was thin, so threadbare, so likely to fall apart, that although he could claim victory, no appellate court could uphold putting him on the ballot on that basis. So, she basically had it both ways."

      Log in to Reply

5. Two takes in the news on the outcome of the special session:

    * The Colorado Sun:  What the Colorado legislature passed during the special session and how it will affect your wallet    https://coloradosun.com/2023/11/20/colorado-special-session-bills-passed-2023/

    * Colorado Public Radio: Colorado’s special session on property taxes delivered bigger benefits for low-income families     https://www.cpr.org/2023/11/20/colorado-special-session-results/

   And should you be interested, here's a link to the Colorado Senate Republicans describing the session.

    * PRESS RELEASE: Democrats Reject Republican Tax Relief, Pass Bills That Still Raid TABOR  https://www.coloradosenaterepublicans.com/democrats-reject-republican-tax-relief-pass-bills-that-still-raid-tabor/

   I'm certain I should not be a concerned member of the grammar police, but I was surprised:

   The Senate GOP’s flagship bill, Senate Bill 23B-004, spearheaded by ranking Joint Budget Committee member Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer (R – Weld County) decreased the taxable value of property, expanded the rate reduction by roughly four times the democrats proposal, and included nonresidential property tax relief. 

   Later on in the same press release, I learned a different proposal on annual assessment rate increases was special: "This bill would have simply reigned them back in.”

    

   Log in to Reply