Orange County bans “divisive” Pride flags as anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes rise

https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/06/orange-county-bans-divisive-pride-flags-as-anti-lgbtq-hate-crimes-rise/

Here is a guy pushing hate but too cowardly to be upfront about it.   He prefers to be sneaky and do the right wing gaslighting.   He calls the pride flags divisive, but who are the ones making them that way?  Not the LGBTQ+, the fundamentalist religious right wing conservatives are the ones drumming up the hate and anger.   He is doing what the right always does, blame the victim of their hate and abuse.  Just like a domestic abuser often blames the victim by saying “look at what you made me do”, he blames the flags that I just posted a group made little boys stomp on!   Hugs

 
Two American flags waving just above a Pride flag
Photo: Shutterstock

Orange County, California has banned the Pride flag from being flown outside of any county offices or on county government properties. The banning follows a recent increase in anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes in the county.

In a meeting last Tuesday, the county’s Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to ban the flag. Republican supervisor Andrew Do requested the ban, Q Voice News reported, citing his desire to stop any “divisive” flags from potentially creating community disruptions at future board meetings.


RELATED STORIES

Do’s resolution only allows the flying of the Orange County, state, and federal flags, as well as a flag for U.S. military soldiers who are prisoners of war and missing in action (POW-MIA). He said he supports the LGBTQ+ community, pointing to his efforts to help transgender people get vaccinated against COVID-19 and his hiring of a gay man to the county’s top public health leadership role, Voice of OC reported.

Do said his proposal wasn’t motivated by opposition to any specific social issue. However, Wagner disagreed, noting that Do issued his proposal at the beginning of Pride Month.

“It is not a coincidence that this policy is in front of us right now,” Wagner said. “It is not a coincidence that we’re considering it today for the first time in the more than 100 years of this County’s existence. We’re considering it today, in response to the divisive effort to fly one particular flag. So yes, there absolutely is a connection.”

Foley asked Do if his proposal would ban a recent sheriff’s flying of a police appreciation flag, one that doesn’t fall under Do’s list of pre-approved flags. Do responded, “You’re free to ask, and I’m free to ignore you.”

Foley said, “By taking the stance today of banning the Pride flag, which is what this is tantamount to, at all of our county buildings, our county board offices, other than in our internal offices, our parks, our airport, our harbors, our beaches, it sends the wrong message to America and to the world.”

The OC Human Relations Commission’s September report on annual hate crimes said anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes had increased by 83% in 2021.

In February, the conservative-led city council of Huntington Beach (13 miles southwest of Orange County) voted 4-3 to ban Pride flags from flying outside of its City Hall. Supporters of the policy said it was necessary to stop future battles over which group’s flags are allowed and which ones aren’t.

Councilmember Dan Kalmick denounced the vote, saying, “It’s of course a ban on the city flying the Pride flag. Call it what it is… We’ve flown the pride flag for two years, and the world didn’t end.” The city previously flew the flag for six weeks during Pride Month.

Huntington Beach resident Gretchen Dawson told the council that the ban “sends a signal that we’re not safe here,” adding, “Safety is the biggest reason why we fly the Pride flag … by taking it away – not flying it – you are communicating to me that we don’t deserve safety.”

Frank Rodriguez, who called himself an executive member of the anti-LGBTQ+ group Gays Against Groomers, said the Pride flag doesn’t represent him. He destroyed one while making his public comment to the council.

How the Nazi Regime’s Pink Triangle Symbol Was Repurposed for LGBTQ Pride

https://time.com/5295476/gay-pride-pink-triangle-history/

Is history repeating itself?  Are the Nazi fascist rising again, using their favorite targets again?    You know the gays, the non-whites, the Jewish people.   Look what is it the fundamentalist Christian nationalist racist bigots want so badly? To return to a time when the white people were given automatic privilege and superiority in the country.   A time socially where white men were automatically assumed to be in charge and women were subservient as well as dependent on men.   When society catered to the white cis heterosexual people with no mention in public of those others.   All they are doing with these ban laws is to return to those days by banning all advancement in society, in our culture.    Here is the most important paragraph in the article, I think.   Hugs

According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM), that changed when the Nazis came into power in the 1930s. Hitler saw gay men as a threat to his campaign to purify Germany, especially because their partnerships could not bear children who would grow the Aryan race he wanted to cultivate. During that period, gay-friendly bars and clubs started being shut down, authorities burned the books at a major research institution devoted to the study of sexuality, and gay fraternal organizations were shuttered. These efforts only increased after the Night of the Long Knives, the 1934 purge of Nazi leaders who were accused of trying to overthrow Hitler; they included Storm Troopers leader Ernst Röhm, whom the SS murdered, later citing his homosexuality as justification for his murder. A Nazi revision of the 1871 law took effect in September of 1935, outlawing anything as simple as men looking at or touching one another in a sexually suggestive way, and enabled authorities to arrest people even if they had only heard rumors that people had been engaging in such behavior. (Lesbians, however, didn’t face the same criminal penalties.) The Gestapo began to keep “pink lists” of violators.

 

Prisoners wearing pink triangles on their uniforms are marched outdoors by Nazi guards at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Germany on Dec. 19, 1938. (CORBIS/Corbis—Getty Images)

Prisoners wearing pink triangles on their uniforms are marched outdoors by Nazi guards at the Sachsenhausen concentration camp in Germany on Dec. 19, 1938. 
CORBIS/Corbis—Getty Images
 
 

With LGBTQ Pride Month beginning June 1 — a month chosen to honor the history of activism epitomized by the Stonewall Riots of June 1969 — celebrants around the world will be getting ready for parades and other tributes. Symbols such as the rainbow flag and the pink triangle will abound; for example, Nike has announced a new line of LGBTQ history-themed sneakers, including two that boast pink triangles.

The brightly colored symbol is now often worn proudly, but it was born from a dark period in LGBTQ history and world history.

 

Just as the Nazis forced Jewish people to wear a yellow Star of David, they forced people they labeled as gay to wear inverted pink triangles (or ‘die Rosa-Winkel’). Those thus branded were treated as “the lowest of the low in the camp hierarchy,” as one scholar put it.

The roots of the Nazi persecution of gay people are deep. Since German unification in 1871, a section of the country’s criminal law widely known as “paragraph 175” had said that men who engaged in acts of “unnatural indecency” could go to jail. In 1877, the German Supreme Court of Justice clarified that to mean evidence of an “intercourse-like act.” But the law was only enforced sporadically. And the fact that it was almost impossible to convict anyone unless he confessed to such a crime in court meant that police just kept a watchful eye on gay bars and events, and Germany ended up becoming home to a vibrant gay community. Historian Robert Beachy argues that, ironically, the law spurred scientific interest in the study of sexual preferences, and that research tended to encourage a more scientific understanding of human sexuality, which further allowed the idea of gay rights to flourish.

According to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM), that changed when the Nazis came into power in the 1930s. Hitler saw gay men as a threat to his campaign to purify Germany, especially because their partnerships could not bear children who would grow the Aryan race he wanted to cultivate. During that period, gay-friendly bars and clubs started being shut down, authorities burned the books at a major research institution devoted to the study of sexuality, and gay fraternal organizations were shuttered. These efforts only increased after the Night of the Long Knives, the 1934 purge of Nazi leaders who were accused of trying to overthrow Hitler; they included Storm Troopers leader Ernst Röhm, whom the SS murdered, later citing his homosexuality as justification for his murder. A Nazi revision of the 1871 law took effect in September of 1935, outlawing anything as simple as men looking at or touching one another in a sexually suggestive way, and enabled authorities to arrest people even if they had only heard rumors that people had been engaging in such behavior. (Lesbians, however, didn’t face the same criminal penalties.) The Gestapo began to keep “pink lists” of violators.

Between 1933 and 1945, by the USHMM’s count, an estimated 100,000 men were arrested for violating this law, and about half went to prison. It’s thought that somewhere between 5,000 and 15,000 men were sent to concentration camps for reasons related to sexuality, but exactly how many died in them may never be known, between the scant documentation that survived and the sense of shame that kept many survivors silent for years after their ordeal.

From the few survivors and prison guards who have shared their stories, it’s been learned that those sent to concentration camps were segregated, for fear that their sexual preference was contagious. Many were castrated. Some were used as guinea pigs in various medical experiments to find a cure for typhus fever and a cure for homosexuality, the latter of which led the SS to inject them with testosterone to see if it would make them straight. At the same time, some Kapos (prisoners selected by the SS to keep fellow prisoners in line) are said to have demanded sexual favors from prisoners, who were known as “doll boys,” in exchange for extra food or protection from hard labor.

Yet in the post-war years, fear of arrest and imprisonment didn’t go away. The Nazi law stayed in place until a 1969 West German law decriminalized gay relationships among men over 21. As one of the USHMM’s curators has pointed out, even as the Allied powers carefully worked to scrub Nazism from Germany, they left that part alone — perhaps because they had anti-gay and anti-sodomy laws of their own. Paragraph 175 wasn’t repealed until 1994.

As the gay liberation movement grew in America in the ’70s and the ’80s, so did awareness of the persecution of gays during the Holocaust, as books and data about period started being published.

Former “doll boy” Heinz Heger’s 1972 memoir The Men With The Pink Triangle described SS guards torturing prisoners by dipping their testicles in hot water and sodomizing them with broomsticks. Data on these victims started to be cited in 1977, after a statistical analysis by sociologist Rudiger Lautmann of Bremen University claimed that as many as 60% of the gay men sent concentration camps may have have died. The first reference to pink triangles in TIME also appeared that year, in a story about gay-rights activists in Miami who attached the symbols to their clothes as a show of solidarity while protesting a vote to repeal a law protecting gay people from housing discrimination. When the magazine noted that the symbol was “reminiscent” of Nazi-era yellow stars, a reader wrote in to note that they were in fact analogous, not “reminiscent,” as both the star and the triangle were real artifacts of that time. “Gay people wear the pink triangle today as a reminder of the past and a pledge that history will not repeat itself,” he added.

And while the Miami effort did not succeed, the activists did succeed in bringing national attention to the way they had reclaimed the pink triangle as a symbol of solidarity. In 1979, Martin Sherman’s play Bent, inspired by Heger’s memoir, opened on Broadway; in the play, one of the characters trades in his pink triangle for a yellow star, “which gives him preferential treatment over the homosexuals,” as TIME’s review put it. The magazine called the play “audacious theater” and a “gritty, powerful and compassionate drama.” Sherman later said that he had also based the play on research by Holocaust scholar Richard Plant, who was having trouble finding a publisher who would turn it into a book, as the topic was still considered taboo. It was later published as The Pink Triangle: The Nazi War Against Homosexuals.

By that time, the gay community was facing a very different threat: HIV and AIDS. The activists who formed the organization ACT-UP to raise awareness about this public health crisis decided to use the pink triangle as a symbol of their campaign and alluded to its history when they declared, in their manifesto, that “silence about the oppression and annihilation of gay people, then and now, must be broken as a matter of our survival.” Avram Finkelstein is credited with designing the campaign’s pink triangle — which is right-side up, instead of the Nazi-era upside-down pink triangle — after conservative pundit William F. Buckley suggested that HIV/AIDS patients get tattoos to warn partners in a 1986 New York Times op-ed. Earlier this year, Finkelstein said that the op-ed was a “galvanizing moment,” at a time when there was “public discussion of putting gay men into concentration camps to keep the epidemic from spreading.” This bolder stance required a more boldly colored triangle. He explained that the triangle in the middle of the campaign’s signature “Silence=Death” poster was fuchsia instead of pale pink, as a nod to the punk movement’s adoption of the “New Wave” color. (He said the background of the poster is black because “everyone in lower Manhattan wore black.”)

More recently, pink triangles have been visible during gay rights demonstrations worldwide that were sparked by reports that gay men were being persecuted in Chechnya. For example, outside of the Russian embassy in London on April of 2017, protesters scattered pink triangles with messages written “Stop the death camps.” Three months later, the German parliament voted unanimously to pardon gay men convicted of homosexuality during World War II, awarding €3,000 to the 5,000 men still living, and €1,500 for each year they were imprisoned. The vote came about 15 years after the issuing of an official apology and almost a decade after the unveiling of a memorial to gay Holocaust victims in Berlin. Another well-known memorial is the Pink Triangle Park in the Castro district in San Francisco, which calls itself “the first permanent, free-standing memorial in the U.S. to gay Holocaust victims.”

The last death of someone forced to wear the pink triangle during the Nazi era is believed to have come in August of 2011, with the death of Rudolf Brazda at the age of 98. The symbols of pride that will be proudly worn around the world this month are a reminder of both what he survived and the pride that came after.

College Board says it won’t alter AP courses to comply with Florida’s laws

The pushback is beginning.   The public is not going to accept nor tolerate the bigotry and racism of a small minority of fundamentalist conservatives who demand that only history that shall be taught is propaganda that shows the US is the best light, shows the greatness of white people, and minimizes any injustice or harm to black people.   I cannot understand how DeathSantis got as much racism and bigotry passed into law as he did.   I remember a few years ago in a Texas state education board meeting, the leader of the board said basically it was much better that students learn the made up history and believe it than that they learn the true history and act on it.   The LGBTQ+ community exists and always has, even before we had the words we now use to describe it.  There are LGBTQ+ kids in every school, most families, and history is full of contributions from gay people that the fundamentalist Christian nationalists want never mentioned, never taught, and deleted forever.  But what is worse is that these laws as written would also prevent the use of heterosexual sexual orientation and heterosexual gender roles.   The laws don’t just ban gay sexual orientation or gender identity different from assigned at birth as they are written but that is how they are being used.    But the bigots that wrote them just wink it away.  Look to separate bathrooms for boys from girls is gender.   Miss teacher or Mr teacher is gender.   Mrs teacher who is married to Mr teacher is OK to show pictures and talk about family which pushes heterosexual orientation, but Mrs teacher married to Mrs teacher is totally banned.   But the law is written to ban all mention of gender or orientation.   That is why they are called don’t say gay bills.   Hugs  

 

The College Board released a letter Thursday putting its foot down on further demands from Florida to change any of its Advanced Placement (AP) classes, the latest development in the ongoing feud between the company and the administration of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R).

“[College Board] will not modify our courses to accommodate restrictions on teaching essential, college-level topics,” the company told the Florida Department of Education Office of Articulation.

“Doing so would break the fundamental promise of AP: colleges wouldn’t broadly accept that course for credit and that course wouldn’t prepare students for careers in the discipline,” it added. 

The College Board says the Florida office recently asked it to modify any courses that conflict with the new Florida rule restricting teaching on sexual orientation and gender identity in the classroom through 12th grade.

In a May 19 letter to College Board, Florida demanded the company do an audit of its courses and relay which ones would need to be modified to comply with the new rule by June 16. 

DeSantis, a 2024 presidential candidate, had said in January that the AP African American Studies course would not be allowed in his state. Although the company says changes were in the works before the governor’s comment on the class, the course was regardless amended, causing outrage from those who believe the College Board bowed to DeSantis’s demands. 

“We have learned from our mistakes in the recent rollout of AP African American Studies and know that we must be clear from the outset where we stand,” the College Board said.

Although Florida did not directly mention the AP Psychology course, that is the one the company focused on in its rebuttal Thursday. 

It noted the American Psychological Association says college-level courses need to have a foundation on topics such as sexual orientation and gender identity. 

“We don’t know if the state of Florida will ban this course. To AP teachers in Florida, we are heartbroken by the possibility of Florida students being denied the opportunity to participate in this or any AP course. To AP teachers everywhere, please know we will not modify any of the 40 AP courses—from art to history to science—in response to regulations that would censor college-level standards for credit, placement, and career readiness,” the College Board said. 

The Hill has reached out to the Florida Department of Education for a response.

 

 

The Nixon Papers: The Latest Ugly Turn in an Old Story

http://hnn.us/articles/1788.html

This is what trump is referring to when he says the government had to buy Nixon’s papers and they should be buying his.  I did not know of this and had to look it up and I figured maybe others might not know of this also.   Hugs

Mr. Kutler is the author of The Wars of Watergate.

Reports circulated recently that Congress is considering a proposal to give former President Richard M. Nixon’s Yorba Linda museum possession of his presidential materials, including some 46 million pages, hundreds of video tapes, and the unique cache of 4000 hours of taped conversations. Such legislation could close off public access, and allow for the destruction of millions of valuable, still-unprocessed, primary sources.

After Nixon resigned in August 1974, the Ford Administration acknowledged his ownership of the materials — including the right to destroy them. Congress objected, however, and passed the Presidential Recordings and Materials Act in 1974, taking control of the materials, insuring their deposit in the Washington area, and providing that the records be opened and made available to the public.

During his lifetime, Nixon successfully resisted various efforts to implement the law. He devised a maze of delaying tactics, and even secured the cooperation of the National Archives to keep the tapes sealed. When the Archives was sued to force compliance with the law, Nixon intervened. His death in 1994 seemingly ended the matter, as his family and estate no longer could afford the expense of further challenges. The lawsuit was settled, with the tapes opened, access secured, and matters of ownership, possession, and control finally resolved. Or so we thought.

Now, Nixon’s heirs and designees have resorted to stealth tactics to reverse settled laws and practices of thirty years and have his papers and tapes shipped to California. The proposed legislation has been promoted by a “bi-partisan,” well-connected, firm of lobbyists, which contends that “it’s in everyone’s interest to get all the records in one place, and in the hands of the archivist.” They are in one place, in “his hands,” in College Park, Maryland. If the Nixon people want the material in Yorba Linda, they can copy it, and do what they want with it, including maintaining their own peculiar vision of the Nixon presidency. That undoubtedly would be a lot cheaper than sending everything to California.

Richard Nixon’s heirs and friends continue to battle for control of his presidential records, just as vigorously as he did. The victory they seek would enable them to determine what may or may not be seen by historians and the public. And not incidentally, they would gain the considerable advantage of having the government provide housing for the material and maintaining their museum.

The Nixon Museum has not proven worthy of our trust. Listen to the so-called “smoking gun” tape on display at Yorba Linda. As played there, it is virtually impossible to understand the subject of discussion, and the extent of Nixon’s criminal actions. Will the curators play any new tapes, ones in which Nixon bluntly and openly speaks of his hush money payments to the burglars? Not likely. At Yorba Linda materials are used to resurrect Nixon’s familiar ploy of re-writing his own history, as he wished it to be. Only open, unbiased access to documents will get us closer to historical truth.

Why is this being done so secretly and swiftly? Where is the input by other interested parties, particularly archivists and historians? Important public policy decisions should be made with public scrutiny and participation. History is too important to be left to the Nixon Foundation, their lobbyists, and friends.

This issue should not be settled behind closed doors by lobbyists and fixers. The public is entitled to open hearings, hearings that will consider the financial costs and the sanctity of historical records for the proposed move.

Let the National Archives complete the processing of the President’s papers and tapes. The Archives is our national repository for national records, records that speak for themselves to our history and our understanding of the past. We need no political intervention to determine such matters.

Several years ago, the Nixon Foundation received $18 million as a payment for the government’s alleged “taking” of the Nixon Papers. That was a questionable concession — one largely arranged in a manner similar to the present undertaking. But all agree that the $18 million was a form of compensation for the papers. Now, the Nixon people want control of the papers. Can we at least have the $18 million paid back to the government?

A quarter century ago, during one of President Nixon’s periodic battles to gain control of his presidential papers and tapes, the Supreme Court rejected his claim. Justice John Paul Stevens noted that after three years it already was clear that the President had proven to be an “unreliable custodian” of his papers. Nothing has changed.

Yes, Bill Clinton kept tapes in his sock drawer. Here’s why Trump’s case is different

https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/jun/12/why-the-bill-clinton-sock-drawer-case-is-not-compa/

President Bill Clinton gestures while giving his State of the Union address Jan. 19, 1999, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP)

President Bill Clinton gestures while giving his State of the Union address Jan. 19, 1999, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP)

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT

  • President Bill Clinton was interviewed by a historian while he was in office. Clinton kept the audiotapes in his sock drawer.

  • Judicial Watch, a conservative group, asked the court in 2010 to declare the tapes presidential records under the Presidential Records Act. The group wanted the National Archives to assume custody of the tapes and put them in the Clinton presidential library.

  • U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson ruled against Judicial Watch. She wrote that the act distinguishes official presidential records from personal records. 

 

As former President Donald Trump defended himself against federal charges involving classified documents, he described what sounded like a case of political hypocrisy. 

President Bill Clinton kept audiotapes in a sock drawer and a court said it was OK, Trump said a day after being indicted on federal charges that he mishandled classified documents.

“They also don’t mention the defining lawsuit brought against Bill Clinton,” he told a Columbus, Georgia, crowd June 10, “and it was lost by the government — the famous socks case that says he can keep his documents. They don’t mention that. These are minor details. And that’s the ruling law.”

Trump has commented about the so-called Clinton socks case for months, recently writing on his social media platform, Truth Social, “Under the Presidential Records Act, I’m allowed to do all this. Under the Clinton socks case, the decision is clear.”

Trump’s description distorts the facts. The case was not “lost by the government” — the government didn’t file the case — it was filed by a private group, Judicial Watch.

But Trump is making a faulty comparison. The judicial ruling in the Clinton socks case does not give Trump permission to keep hundreds of classified documents after his presidency ended at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

Trump was indicted on 37 counts June 9, including the “willful retention of national defense information” relating to his unauthorized possession and storage of federal documents, including classified documents.

Judge ruled against group seeking access to audiotapes of Clinton

When Clinton was president, he was interviewed dozens of times by historian Taylor Branch to create an oral history of his presidency from 1993 to 2001. 

CBS, GQ and USA Today wrote that Clinton kept the audiotapes in his sock drawer. In 2009, Branch published a book titled, “The Clinton Tapes: Wrestling History with the President.” 

Judicial Watch, a conservative group, sued the National Archives and Records Administration in 2010, asking the court to declare the audiotapes presidential records under the Presidential Records Act. The group wanted the court to order the National Archives to assume custody of the tapes and deposit them in the Clinton Presidential Library. Clinton left office in January 2001.

The National Archives had told Judicial Watch that the materials were personal records that did not fall within the Presidential Records Act’s purview.

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson, an Obama appointee, dismissed the case in 2012. Jackson said the law distinguished the tapes as “personal records,” distinct from “official” records. She wrote that the National Archives does not have the authority to designate materials as presidential records and lacked authority to seize control of them.

The Presidential Records Act requires that all “official” documents be returned to the National Archives upon a president’s departure. Former President Jimmy Carter signed the act in 1978, building upon legislation by Congress to stop former President Richard Nixon from destroying tapes linked to the Watergate scandal.

But Jackson wrote that the act described “personal records” as including documentary materials, diaries or journals that don’t relate to carrying out official duties.

The act requires that materials produced or received by the president “to the extent practicable, be categorized as Presidential records or personal records upon their creation or receipt and be filed separately.” Jackson wrote that the act “assigns the Archivist no role with respect to personal records once the Presidency concludes.”

The Presidential Records Act “does not confer any mandatory or even discretionary authority on the Archivist to classify records. Under the statute, this responsibility is left solely to the President,” Jackson wrote.

Trump and his allies point to the judge’s ruling

Bradley Moss, a Washington-based lawyer who works on national security cases, said Trump’s allies have misconstrued the Clinton socks case.

The socks ruling addressed whether a private party — Judicial Watch — could get a court to order the archivist to determine whether Clinton had improperly designated the audiotapes recorded during his presidency as personal.

​​”The court concluded that the Presidential Records Act did not give the judiciary that authority to require that of the Archivist,” Moss said in an email to PolitiFact. “This alternate dimension Mr. Trump thinks exists because of the case in which he can do whatever he wants with records from his presidency insulated from other statutory provisions like the Espionage Act is the stuff of lunacy.”

Trump was indicted under a provision of the Espionage Act that prohibits unauthorized possession of information related to national defense that could be used to injure the U.S. 

Jason R. Baron, former litigation director at the National Archives and Records Administration, also told PolitiFact that the Clinton recordings fit the definition of a “personal record.” 

“In contrast, the boxes of records taken to Mar-a-Lago appear to overwhelmingly contain records pertaining to the official business of the White House, and therefore should have been transferred immediately into the legal custody of NARA as presidential records,” Baron said.

Baron said, “No prior case has held that a president has absolute discretion to designate official government records — classified or unclassified — as his own personal records.”

Jackson’s ruling cited a prior appeals court opinion that said, “We did not hold (in a prior case) that the President could designate any material he wishes as presidential records, and thereby exercise virtually complete control over it notwithstanding the fact that the material does not meet the definition of ‘presidential records.’” 

Baron said, “it would contravene the very reason Congress created the Presidential Records Act were a court to allow a president to designate official records as his own personal records to do with what he pleases.”

There is no requirement that a subsequent federal district court judge must follow Jackson’s socks ruling. District court opinions are not binding on other district courts.

PolitiFact Senior Correspondent Louis Jacobson contributed to this report.

Illinois Gov Signs Bill Outlawing Book Bans By Libraries

Yes yes yes, we need more laws like this.   Here are some great quotes from the https://abc7chicago.com/illinois-book-ban-bill-public-library-libraries-near-me/13373993/ article.  Hugs

“Book bans are about censorship, marginalizing people, marginalizing ideas and facts. Regimes ban books, not democracies,” Pritzker said.

“Parents and only parents have the right and responsibility to restrict their children and only their children’s access to library resources,” said Secretary Giannoulias.

“Those pushing book banning say they are doing it to protect people. Well that’s just not true. Book banning is most frequently used to silence the voices of the LGBTQ+ community as well as people of color,” said State rep. Anne Stava Murray (D-Downers Grove).

Chicago’s ABC affiliate reports:

Governor JB Pritzker signed historic legislation Monday that would ban libraries from banning books. The law is the first of its kind in the nation, and would cut off funding to any libraries that remove books currently on the shelf.

The law was pushed by Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias, who is also the state’s librarian, and is a response to the backlash in many local school districts against controversial books, particularly some championed by the LBGTQ community.

“Book bans are about censorship, marginalizing people, marginalizing ideas and facts. Regimes ban books, not democracies,” Pritzker said.

Read the full article.

 

 

Thumbnail
 

And yes, in blue state Illinois, we have had library meetings interrupted and harassed by the outside groups, just like the rest of the country

Skokie and Lincolnwood both border the north edge of Chicago

https://abc7chicago.com/lin…

Matt Walsh DEVASTATED over Tennessee Drag Ban being ruled UNCONSTITUTIONAL (HUGE VICTORY for LGBTQ+)

I love how when Matt Walsh compares fully dressed drag queens reading to kids as obscene and sexual, lance reminds everyone about a place in public that many people of different sexes go wearing hardly anything, men in speedos and thongs, women in string bikinis all with kids around.   Yet no outcry from the maga conservative religious right.  Why because it is the beach or a pool and there is no association with the LGBTQ+ who are the real targets of the right.   Hugs

Steve Schmidt reacts to Donald Trump being indicted for multiple felonies | The Warning

Steve Schmidt reacts to the latest charges filed against former President Trump. He discusses that while Trump is presumed innocent until proven guilty, his indictment creates a dangerous hour for the Republican party and our nation as a whole.

He did this to himself, we have never had such a corrupt openly greedy president willing to use the office / the country for his own personal gain.

He could have done what Biden and Pence did, along with other innocent people, they gave them back to the government. Instead, Trump kept claiming they are his, and he was so importantly powerful that he could do anything he wants while people not him go to prison for doing this. Look at the other cases of this, and those people went to prison asap. Hugs

Trans Vaush Fan BANNED From Speaking In Montana

This is a very important short video because it shows both what I have been saying about these dressing as drag bans and the goal of the fundamentalist driven right.  A trans woman was to give a talk, a presentation, at a library.  But due to the new ban on dressing in drag in Montana the library had to cancel the talk because the person was trans.   

Governor Greg Gianforte signed the extreme, vaguely worded drag ban just last week. The law bans drag performers, which are defined as “a male or female performer who adopts a flamboyant or parodic feminine persona with glamorous or exaggerated costumes and makeup,” from performing where children are present. It is also the first measure to specifically ban drag story hours in public libraries, meaning it does not only restrict performances that might be more openly sexual.

Jawort is not a drag queen, and the lecture was intended for adults, although children could have attended if they wanted. The library’s decision is a sign that the drag bans are having their intended effect: forcing LGBTQ people out of public view. The law is so confusing, and the punishments are so high, that many people and organizations are trying to avoid the risk.

Notice two things, the law doesn’t say the person or act has to be sexual or have exaggerated sexual characteristics and that even reading to kids is considered a performance.    People have tried to argue with me that these drag bans are only to stop kids from seeing burlesque type sex shows.  You know, events that could sexualize kids, what ever that means.   But reading to kids dressed in a costume in a public library with adults present with parental consent is considered sexual under this ban.   How?  Well it is a guy dressed in what is thought to be the clothing of the female gender.  A person dressed in the other genders clothing would defy or break the strict gender stereotypes from the 1950s that these people are desperately trying to regress the country back to.  

This is the goal of the fundamentalist Christian nationalist that have taken over the Republican Party and controls the right, to return to the expected gender norms of the past, and to keep the strict gender roles of the past that they love.  No men dressing like a woman or acting womanly, and the same in reverse, no woman dressing or acting manly.   It basically outlaws trans people.   

Read that last paragraph again please.   It outlaws trans people.  Next will be to remove the rights from gay people such as same-sex marriage and anti-discrimination laws.   The goal as I keep repeating is to drive the country back to the society and social standards of the 1950s.  Churches were automatically considered good (Christian churches only of course) and had automatic authority in society.  White males were always in charge and could act is what ways they wished towards women and minorities.   Women were second class to men and needed a man’s approval in most things and kept the home for the comfort of the man while raising the expected brood of children.  Women couldn’t get a divorce without exceptional circumstances, and were stuck in marriages that they did not want and maybe being abused in.  Blacks knew their place and kept themselves there.   But most important to these people the LGBTQ+ had no rights, gays / lesbians / trans people were not seen or heard from, staying hidden while scared of being found out.  When found out, the white males could make their life hell and face no negative consequences. 

This is the society these people crave and have obsessively worked for decades. A place with no freedoms or civil rights except for white males, more for those who gave a glancing nod to the Christian church.   Oppressive to everyone else, with no personal freedoms to live your life freely if you differed from the church doctrines strict norms and dress codes.  For those that have said these laws won’t target cross-dressing and were for protecting kids from being sexualized are not true and never were.   Great informative video, I strong hope you will all view it.     Hugs