A Couple From Clay Jones

Stafford Tax Hike by Clay Jones

I thought Republicans didn’t raise taxes. Read on Substack

This was drawn for the FXBG Advance.

It seems Stafford County has always been staunchly conservative, but Joe Biden won the county in 2020 and 2024, barely…but he won. Blue Northern Virginia stopped at Stafford, but maybe that’s changing.

Yet, the Board of Supervisors is majority Republican, but it wasn’t that long ago when they held all the seats. But despite the board being majority GOP, taxes are still going up.

Hell, taxes aren’t just going up in Stafford. Donald Trump is raising our taxes while trying to cute them for billionaire assholes, such as himself. Trump is raising taxes while denying they’re taxes. They’re called tariffs, and Trump claims other nations pay them, not US taxpayers. If you’re not an idiot, you know that’s true.

The Board of Supervisors voted to advertise a one percent increase to the meals tax and a two percent increase to the transient occupancy tax. The three percent tax increase isn’t a bad thing, though, as it’s going to public schools. At least Republicans in Stafford are trying to help public schools, while Trump is trying to destroy them. Well, most of them. Not every member voted for the tax increase.

This three percent increase is a lower hike than the recent hikes to my Cox WiFi service, Netflix, Disney Plus, Peacock, Prime, and the giant increase in YouTube TV.

The County Administrator requested a five percent increase, but he only got three. To keep the increase low, the Board is cutting other things like new cars for the sheriffs department, delaying raises, and cutting $5,000 from the Christmas lights budget. Governments shouldn’t have Christmas budgets. We need more separation of church and state.

Creative note: I usually draw my cartoons for the Advance on Friday evenings or Saturday afternoons. I drew this one Thursday night.

Drawn in 30 seconds (turn up your volume): (Go see and listen!)

===============

Bluto by Clay Jones

The regime wants to make Harvard more like Trump University Read on Substack

Trump has been pushing everyone around, from the courts to law offices to corporations to governors to media outlets to fellow Republicans to world leaders to universities. Many of those, like The Washington Post, CBS, and Facebook, obeyed before he even started pushing. But two that pushed back are Janet Mills, the Governor of Maine, and Harvard.

During a meeting with governors in the White House, Trump asked, “Is Maine here?” He probably forgot her name.

Trump’s memory for grievances was calling back to a moment during the pandemic in 2020 when he referred to Mills as a “dictator,” and she replied, “I have spent the better part of my career listening to loud men talk tough to disguise their weakness.” She’s got his number.

Back to the White House (sic) meeting, Trump bullied Mills to ignore an anti-discrimination law in her state that allows transgender athletes to participate in girls’ and women’s sports. Trump threatened to cut off funding for Maine at the White House event with governors if the law persisted. Mills replied, “See you in court.”

When you listen to Republicans, you would believe that men are intentionally cutting their nuts off to play women’s volleyball.

Later, Trump claimed her talking back to him was…wait for it…”illegal.” This is probably the “nastiest” a woman has talked to him since that time a woman wouldn’t sell him Greenland, or that other time a woman in Puerto Rico told him, “No, you’re doing a shitty job with hurricane recovery, you bloviating fartknocker,” or that time a female Speaker out-negotiated him, or that time a woman said his penis looked like a cartoon mushroom, or that time a woman dared to run against him, or that other time a woman dared to run against him.

Since then, the federal government has barraged the state with investigations, declared its education system to be in violation of federal law, and frozen some of its funding. Maine sued the Trump administration on April 7, doubling down on its defiance as it began the legal fight that Governor Mills promised at the White House.

Governor Janet Mills has bigger balls than every male governor in this nation combined, and she cracked Trump’s little nuts like it was a Maine Lobster.

Trump is also waging war with universities, especially Ivy League schools. He’s demanding that schools ban “woke,” and the regime is revoking student visas and has sent goons to kidnap foreign students without pressing criminal charges, and holding them in detention facilities in the Deep South.

The Trump regime is accusing Harvard of violating students’ civil rights (which is ironic, coming from the regime that violates students’ civil and constitutional rights). The regime is also accusing its leaders of breaching Title VI, the federal law that bars federal funding to any school found to violate civil rights.

The regime claims that Harvard was failing to keep Jewish and pro-Israel students safe by allowing antisemitism on campus.

Most of the claims of antisemitism during the protests from last year are not true. I’m sure hatred and harassment happened here and there, and from both sides, but it wasn’t widespread or condoned by any university. I don’t believe Muslim students were beating up Jewish students outside a dean’s window at any university, and he said, “Eh, kids will be kids.”

The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project, an independent non-profit that tracks political violence and political protests around the world, found that 97 percent of campus demonstrations over the war in Gaza have been peaceful. It analyzed 553 US campus demonstrations nationwide and found that fewer than 20 resulted in any serious interpersonal violence or property damage.

Republicans lie about the Gaza protests like they lie about Black Lives Matter protests (who was that who brought a gun to a BLM protest and shot people? Oh, yeah. Kyle Fucking Rittenhouse).

The non-profit also documented at least 70 instances of forceful police intervention against students, including the arrest of demonstrators and the use of physical dispersal tactics, including the deployment of chemical agents, batons, and other kinds of physical force.

Last Monday, Harvard refused to submit to extensive government oversight while overhauling its governance, admissions, and hiring practices, calling the orders illegal and unconstitutional.

According to Harvard’s President, Alan Garber, those demands include requirements to ‘audit’ the viewpoints of the student body, faculty, staff, and to “reduce the power” of certain students, faculty, and administrators targeted because of their ideological views.”

The Trump regime retaliated by freezing $2.2 billion in federal funding to the university and threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status.

This is bullshit. The Trump regime doesn’t care about antisemitism on college campuses any more than they care about it coming from within the Trump regime. When Trump was elected in 2016 (sic), hate crimes increased substantially. We never heard Trump express outrage about that. Instead, he defended it. When tiki-torch Nazis chanted “Jews will not replace us” and “Blood and soil” shortly before they murdered Heather Heyer, an anti-racism protester in Charlottesville, Trump defended the Nazis (they had a permit!) Maybe he got a free tiki torch out of it. Who knows?

Trump doesn’t hate antisemites. Instead of condemning them, he invites them to lunch at MAGA-Lardo. Trump dined with racists and antisemites Ye and Nick Fuentas at one of his shitty golf resorts. That kinda sets a bad example for Harvard to follow, doesn’t it?

Republicans have always pushed the narrative that education is bad somehow, and people who went to college should be spited, condemned, spit on, and treated like polo-loving foie gras eaters. They push the narrative that people with higher education look down on the rest of America. They often talk about the “East Coast Elite,” or “elitists.”

Some people do act like that.

I was recently kinda seeing a woman who is as liberal as I am, and during a conversation about how members of both of our families are Trumpers, she mentioned that some of her family members, who live in the Midwest, considered her to be among the “East Coast Elite.” You know, a snob who looks down on people. When I told her I kinda get the same thing, she became quickly annoyed, and said I couldn’t be considered a member of the “East Coast Elite” because I didn’t have a PhD, which she has. I was just some bum who dropped out of college to go surfing and draw cartoons, and it wasn’t even a snooty college I dropped out of. She started off criticizing the notion that there is an “East Coast Elite,” and then started acting as if she were a bona fide member of it. Later, she took me to a party and was “called out,” as she put it, that it was only for “serious people,” and I haven’t seen her since. As you can tell, I still have a little attitude about that.

Maybe it is all my fault. Someone at the party told me they had season tickets to the orchestra, and I told them that was awesome and to let me know if they make the playoffs. See? I’m not a serious person.

While I don’t like stuck-up obnoxious boring assholes who look down on people as if they’re better than them, I also don’t like hypocrites. Who am I talking about?

The vice president (sic), JD CouchFucker Vance, is all in on this attack on Ivy League schools, but it should be noted that he’s a graduate of Yale, an Ivy League school. Another Yale man is Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth went to Princeton and Harvard. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum didn’t go to an Ivy League school, but he did go to Stanford, which is private and snooty enough. Howard Lutnick, Commerce Secretary, also went to a private school, Haverford College. RFK Jr, secretary of health and weird conspiracy theories, also went to Harvard and three other universities. The Secretary of Energy, Chris Wright, went to MIT and Berkeley, which is a hippy school. Right? John Ratcliffe, head of the CIA, went to Notre Dame. Jamieson Greer, Trump’s trade rep, went to Brigham Young, which is another private school (and founded by a guy with 56 wives and 52 more kids than Donald Trump has).

Where did Donald Trump matriculate? Trump went to the Wharton School, which is not a daycare but the business school of the University of Pennsylvania, and the last time I checked, it is an Ivy League school.

Trump is like one of those people who travels the world and somehow fails to take any of it in, and returns home still a knuckle-dragging moron with an inability to comprehend simple thoughts. Donald Trump went to an Ivy League school and came out still behaving like Donald Trump. That gives me the impression he only “went” there. It’s like that guy who visits France and complains that the croissants aren’t croissandwiches.

Turning a croissant into a croissandwich would be like turning Harvard into Trump University.

Creative note: This cartoon is dedicated to John Belushi. I believe his work is an influence on my cartoons.

This was interesting: Last night, I ran into an ex (of sorts) who is involved in the local theater scene. She invited me to audition for a part in an upcoming play, saying she thinks I would be a good fit for it. I haven’t acted since the sixth grade, but I was the lead (there hasn’t been a better Pecos Bill since). I was intrigued and wanted to audition this morning, but not to get the part, but just to see if I could do it. I didn’t go because I had to draw this cartoon.

I just want you readers to know that I gave up being the next Brad Pitt for you.

Drawn in 30 seconds: (snip-go see)

Trade deal won’t happen unless UK removes protections for the LGBTQ+ community

It was never about protecting women

Reblogging, and Joining in This Message

Holy Saturday Message For Those Troubled, Oppressed and Suffering

Justice Department wants to step in for Trump in E. Jean Carroll appeal

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-e-jean-carroll-defamation-case-justice-department/

Talk about weaponizing the government. tRump seems to think that the DOJ and all agencies work for him personally. The Department of Justice was founded not to be the presidents personal lawyer but the peoples attorneys to protect the rights of the public. The FBI was founded as the countries police not the private cops of tRump to do his dirty work. How far the US has fallen due to these people who think they are the superior race and that they are so great. Hugs

Graham Kates,

Katrina Kaufman

April 17, 2025 / 1:08 PM EDT / CBS News

The Department of Justice wants to stand in for President Trump in his ongoing appeal of a defamation case that could cost him tens of millions of dollars.

Lawyers for the taxpayer-funded agency and Mr. Trump’s personal attorneys said in a filing on April 11 that the Justice Department believes the federal Westfall Act shields Mr. Trump in the case, which has pitted him against the writer E. Jean Carroll.

A federal jury awarded Carroll $83.3 million in January 2024, after concluding that Mr. Trump made defamatory statements when denying that he sexually abused Carroll. That award came less than a year after a separate federal jury concluded Trump was liable for sexual abuse, and instructed him to pay her $5 million.

Mr. Trump has denied all of Carroll’s allegations and appealed both cases.

The Justice Department asserts that Mr. Trump was acting in his official capacity as president when he made the allegedly defamatory statements about Carroll in 2019, and therefore the court is required to substitute the United States for Mr. Trump in the case. Under the Westfall Act, federal employees are entitled to absolute immunity from personal lawsuits for conduct occurring within the scope of their employment.

Legal scholar James Pfander said Mr. Trump still needs to show that his actions, publicly denying Carroll’s claims, were within the scope of the presidency.

“As a legal issue ultimately for the courts, the [Justice Department’s] certification alone does not decide the question,” said Pfander, a Northwestern School of Law professor.

Pfander noted that the Westfall Act says it permits government employees to petition courts to certify they were acting within the scope of their office “at any time before trial.”

“By allowing an employee to pursue certification but limiting the time to ‘before trial,’ the statute would seem to suggest that a motion to substitute at the appellate stage of the litigation comes too late,” Pfander said.

A longtime advice columnist, Carroll published a book excerpt in New York magazine in 2019 accusing Mr. Trump of sexually assaulting her in a department store dressing room in the mid-1990s. Mr. Trump denied the allegations and called Carroll a “whack job.” He claimed he had never met Carroll, accused her of “totally lying” and said, “she’s not my type.”

Mr. Trump would go on to repeat similar denials in public appearances, social media posts and depositions.

The Justice Department initially supported Mr. Trump’s effort to have the case dismissed, arguing the Westfall Act protected Mr. Trump from liability because he was acting as a federal employee when he denied Carroll’s allegations.

A lawyer for the department argued in 2021 — while Mr. Trump was out of office after losing the 2020 election to former President Joe Biden — that even though Mr. Trump “made crude and offensive comments in response to the very serious accusations of sexual assault” the law protecting employees from such a suit should be upheld.

The agency reversed its position in July 2023. An official for the Justice Department wrote at the time that the decision factored in the jury’s conclusion in the $5 million case that Mr. Trump was liable for sexual abuse.

“The allegations that prompted the statements related to a purely personal incident: an alleged sexual assault that occurred decades prior to Mr. Trump’s Presidency,” former Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian Boynton wrote. “That sexual assault was obviously not job related.”

Paul Figley, a former deputy director of the Justice Department’s Torts Branch, said Boynton’s decision was unexpected.

“I was very surprised by the withdrawal because we always viewed the president as behaving within the scope of office for anything he did,” said Figley, an American University professor emeritus who worked at the Justice Department for more than three decades.

An exhibit included with the case’s latest filing shows that the Justice Department, now under the purview of Mr. Trump, has again reversed course.

“I find that Donald J. Trump was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incidents out of which the plaintiff’s claims arose,” wrote Kirsten Wilkinson, the director of the agency’s Torts Branch Civil Division.

Columbia Law School professor Caroline Polisi said she believes the decision fits a pattern within the Trump administration.

“This is not at all a surprising move for this Justice Department. Trump has shown time and time again that he considers this DOJ to be his personal attorney,” said Polisi, a federal criminal defense attorney

“On their face, the comments at issue were purely personal in nature, and therefore outside of his scope of duties as president, thus excluding him from governmental immunity,” said Polisi. “However, the fact that the former administration took the same position – at least initially – shows that the argument is not entirely frivolous, and that a court may entertain arguments on the issue.”

The highest ranks of the Justice Department are filled with lawyers who just last year were Mr. Trump’s personal attorneys, but Figley said Wilkinson does not fit that description. He noted she’s risen steadily while serving through multiple administrations, before being appointed director in January.

“That appointment was an obvious choice, she’d been the deputy director in that office for many years, and the previous director retired,” Figley said.

A lawyer for Mr. Trump also argued last year that the case should be dismissed due to a Supreme Court ruling granting presidents immunity from criminal prosecution for “official acts”while they are in office.

Roberta Kaplan, an attorney for Carroll, argued in a January brief that the Supreme Court’s ruling did not apply to Carroll’s claims.

“If there were ever a case where immunity does not shield a president’s speech, this one is it,” Kaplan wrote.

Kaplan declined to comment Wednesday on Mr. Trump’s latest move, telling CBS News her response was forthcoming in opposition papers she expects to file next week.

Peace & Justice History for 4/19

https://www.peacebuttons.info/E-News/peacehistoryapril.htm#april19

Share Liberally

The Biggest Union …

Good morning, Scottie’s Playtime!

From jeff tiedrich:

In The Republican War On Libraries

This came in email a few days ago. The email has a few stories in it that are pertinent to our interests. This was going to be a snippet post of those, but as I read this, I realized everyone needs to read it all, because there’s not much opinionating in it, but/and the actual information does not stop.

The Institute for Museum and Library Services Was Just Gutted

The Institute for Museum and Library Services Was Just Gutted

Kelly Jensen Mar 31, 2025

Today, members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gutted the Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS). As of this afternoon, all staff members have been placed on administrative leave. They received a letter from the Director of Human Resources that the leave would be paid for 90 days and that no one will be allowed on IMLS property during that time.

Image of the letter all IMLS staff received about administrative leave.

The union representing IMLS staff, AFGE Local 3403, indicated that the decision to fire staff came after a short meeting between DOGE and IMLS leadership. Everyone working at IMLS was required to return government property before exiting the workplace.

Email addresses for all IMLS staff were being disabled today. Those with questions or concerns over IMLS funding will no longer be able to reach the individual or individuals with whom they’d been working.

Letter from AFGE Local 3403 stating that IMLS staff were no longer in the building and their emails were being shut down.

Further, all processing work on 2025 funding applications is over and there is no information about the status of awards that have already been granted for the year. The union believes most grants will simply be terminated.

IMLS makes up .0046% of the federal budget.

Two weeks ago, President Trump issued an Executive Order targeting funds allocated to libraries and museums nationwide. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) is a federal agency that distributes fund approved by Congress to state libraries, as well as library, museum, and archival grant programs. IMLS is the only federal agency that provides funds to libraries. The Executive Order states that the functions of the IMLS have to be reduced to “statutory functions” and that in places that are not statutory, expenses must be cut as much as possible.

One week later, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) entered the IMLS offices. Many at IMLS were prepared to see their jobs disappear, but that didn’t quite happen. Instead, DOGE installed a new Acting Director of the agency, Deputy Secretary of Labor Keith E. Sonderling.

It wasn’t just a new Acting Director, though. The IMLS took on a new direction thanks to the Executive Order and DOGE. It would now operate “in lockstep with this Administration to enhance efficiency and foster innovation. We will revitalize IMLS and restore focus on patriotism, ensuring we preserve our country’s core values, promote American exceptionalism and cultivate love of country in future generations.”

The new goal of the administration with the IMLS is for it to function as a propaganda machine. This wouldn’t be the first nor the last federal cultural institution to see its mission shift from serving the needs and interests of all of America. On March 28, the administration would issue another Executive Order, this time demanding that the Smithsonian, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, and other federal museums stop the “revisionist movement” through displays and installations that showcase American history and culture as “racist, sexist, oppressive, or otherwise irredeemably flawed.”

Such institutions are now to engage in “igniting the imagination of young minds, honoring the richness of American history and innovation, and instilling pride in the hearts of all Americans.” The Executive Order specifically notes that the Independence National History Park see time and energy poured into these pro-patriotic efforts in order to be prepared for the 250th American anniversary events in 2026.

The defunding and gutting of the IMLS did not happen without strong support shown for public library and museum resources across the country, both on the ground and in congress.

On March 24, the board of the Institution of Museum and Library Services drafted a letter that went to Sonderling as their new Acting Director. The letter outlines the essential functions of the agency, making it clear that any cuts to the IMLS would have a direct and long-lasting impact on public museums and libraries nationwide. It emphasized that an Executive Order alone is not enough to change the functions or services provided by the IMLS.

From the letter:

All such statutory obligations may not be discontinued or delayed under an Executive Order or other executive action. Sections 9133 and 9176 of the Act affirm IMLS’s duty to obligate and disburse funds to grantees, subject only to the availability of appropriations, not to executive discretion. Any failure to fulfill these legal obligations or to reduce staffing or program operations below the minimum required to meet statutory mandates would place the agency in noncompliance with Congressional intent.

Several members of Congress also pushed back against the Executive Order. On March 26, a bipartisan coalition consisting of Senators Jack Reed, Kirsten Gillibrand, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski sent a letter to Sonderling as well. The letter again defines the role of the IMLS and its obligation when it comes to funding institutions across the US.

From their letter:

Libraries and museums play a vital role in our communities. Libraries offer access for all to essential information and engagement on a wide range of topics, including skills and career training, broadband, and computing services. IMLS grants enable libraries to develop services in every community throughout the nation, including people of diverse geographic, cultural, and socioeconomic backgrounds, individuals with disabilities, residents of rural and urban areas, Native Americans, military families, veterans, and caregivers. Museums serve not only as centers for education but also as drivers of local economic development. The IMLS Office of Museum Services is the largest dedicated source of investment in our nation’s museums, which typically support more than 700,000 jobs and contribute $50 billion annually to the U.S. economy. IMLS funding plays a significant role in this economic impact by helping museums reach more visitors and spur community development.

While that letter circulated, another was passed around the House of Representatives. Led by Representatives Dina Titus (NV-01) and Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01), the letter was shared among House members. It urged them to sign on in asking for the administration to reconsider its Executive Order related to IMLS funding and structure.

Public libraries and public library associations nationwide have spoken loudly about how potential cuts to IMLS could impact state and local level services. Among the services that could most quickly and directly impact library users would be the end of digital resource availability through apps like Libby.

It is worth noting that despite some viral claims made online in the wake over fears of IMLS funding cuts, OverDrive’s Libby app and other similar digital resource programs are not funded by IMLS directly. They are, however, sometimes made available in individual states via funding received via IMLS. This is a crucial distinction. Libby and other eresources are not creations of libraries themselves by third-party systems that license access to materials. Libraries pay for that access.

Ebook and digital audiobook services are not funded by IMLS money in every state, and because of how many different types of ebook and digital audiobooks are available–indicative of how many different audiences and needs are being met–essential services without the Libby name recognition are being overlooked. In states where such services are made available through IMLS money, many times the apps and resources are not explicitly named by state funding, making it difficult to determine where such impact would be felt immediately. For example, Indiana libraries use IMLS funding for the Indiana Digital Library, which among its many databases and services provides access to Libby.

Find below a roundup of state library associations, local-level libraries, social media library workers/advocates, and/or local/regional news sources who have identified where and how IMLS cuts would directly impact their state libraries. This isn’t a comprehensive list, but you’ll see within the states here, many rely on IMLS funds to help acquire, fund, and maintain essential digital resources:

Alabama
Alaska
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina (the reddit post is from a verifiable news source)
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

The future of IMLS remains uncertain, and with ongoing efforts to rewrite the truth of America via Executive Orders and whitewashing cultural institutions funded and respected by American taxpayers, it’s essential to continue speaking up on behalf of your local library, as well as one of your local library’s most crucial federal agencies.

Those which stand to be most devastated by potential cuts are rural and small libraries, who are also most impacted by the administration’s dismantling of the Department of Education and the United States Postal Service.

Whether or not Trump and his DOGE team have the legal authority to shut down the IMLS completely remains to be seen. Eliminating all staff and pausing all funding certainly defies the administration’s own order that only activities outside of “statutory requirements” be touched. Expect a lawsuit to be filed in the courts, much as we’ve seen with the other slash-and-burn efforts taken by an executive branch overstepping its constitutional authority.