(Authoritarians always go too far before they’ve made sure what they’re doing is legal. It seems that Gov. DeSantis came the closest to figuring that out, and setting himself up, though courts won’t back him. Still, he’s going until they make him stop. Anyway, I hope Oklahomans do hold the entire Board accountable, especially the Superintendent, and make him restore the inappropriate charges for his trips, too.)
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) — Legal experts tell News 4 the events of Wednesday’s Oklahoma State School Board meeting are unprecedented, and should alarm anyone with power to hold State Superintendent Ryan Walters and the Oklahoma State Board of Education accountable.
Those events include Oklahoma State Superintendent Ryan Walters personally attacking multiple public officials by making verifiably false claims about them, and the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office alleging Walters and the Board may have violated state law.
At Wednesday’s meeting, the Oklahoma State School Board (OSBE) and Supt. Ryan Walters voted to table a decision on whether they would allow State Sen. Mary Boren (D-Norman) and other legislators to sit in on their executive session discussions, despite getting guidance from the Oklahoma Attorney General’s Office advising them they legally had to let the legislators in.
In comments made to reporters following Wednesday’s meeting, Walters seemed to be unaware the Attorney General’s Office had emailed him and all state school board members a letter with guidance on July 18.
Following the meeting, the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office released a statement suggesting Walters and the board may have willfully violated Oklahoma’s Open Meeting Act.
After the meeting, Walters also falsely claimed to reporters that Sen. Boren wants to “make it where we can’t remove pedophiles from classrooms.”
He also called Bixby Public Schools superintendent Rob Miller a “clown” when asked about claims Miller had made on social media.
Boren says she showed up to Wednesday’s meeting with one focus: to sit in on the second of two scheduled executive session discussions OSBE had on its agenda for the meeting.
The agenda indicated the board planned to use the first executive session to hold “confidential communications with board counsel concerning a request by Senator Mary Boren to observe all executive sessions of the Board on July 31, 2024.”
It said, in the second executive session, the board would “discuss possible action” on four separate issues involving the possible revocation of certain teachers’ teaching certificates.
The second executive session is what Boren said she wanted to observe.
According to the agenda, the board would first take a vote to enter the first executive session. After the board completed that session they were to vote to return to open session, and then discuss and take “possible action regarding the matters discussed” in the first session.
Boren expected, after the first session, the board would vote as to whether or not they would allow her to observe the second executive session.
Right wing Christians are always looking for things and ways to be aggrieved and insulted. They glorify in being the victims of crimes that exist only in their imagination. Not only are they sure only they only have a right to the Christian god, but they think only they control the Christian god and how he should be worshiped. Hugs. Scottie
“Monogamy, one per customer, is a really good basis for a society. However, it goes against the gorilla code, and the gorilla code is written into our DNA. We’re somehow related. I’m not saying we evolved from gorillas, but we’re related to them. We’re not that far away from them. The men want lots of women, so the strongest man wants all the women, and the women want the strongest man. That is the way evolution has designed us.
“So the strong have to take back the women. They want to take back the women from a system that is free. A system that is free is going to be a monogamous system. That’s the way that works because it is the best system for freedom. It means everybody gets something. Right? All the women get a man. All the men get a woman — as close as we can come to that.
“Women hate the idea that they can’t take care of themselves, but women cannot take care of themselves. They’re smaller, weaker. Men are stronger. Men are mean. They’re more aggressive. They will take them over. They’ll do it anytime they can, anywhere they can. They will abuse them. They will hurt them.
“Women have to come up with different strategies for survival than men do. Right? Men buff up, they get tough, they study karate, they learn how to fight. Women can do all those things, and they still there still is going to be a man who can take them down. Women have to find different ways of being safe, and one of those ways is finding a man to protect them.” – Daily Wire host Andrew Klavan.
Klavan first appeared here in 2014 when he declared that gays should “thank the Bible and Jesus Christ for the fact that you even conceive of yourself as creatures with rights.”
“One of the most shameful days in this nation’s history. They were attempting to stop the certification of an election that President Joe Biden won fairly.
“Three of Trump’s supporters died that day of apparent medical emergencies. One Trump supporter was fatally shot by police as she approached the floor of the House of Representatives along with a violent mob.
“A US Capitol police officer, Brian Sicknick, later died of his injuries withstood on that day and then four other officers who defended the Capitol that day and were traumatized, took their own lives.
“And it all began with this lie that the election was stolen. And here we are again in 2024 with just 99 days to go until the election, listening to Donald Trump’s stick with these same fabricated claims that he can only lose Minnesota if Democrats cheat. No.
“Now look, Donald Trump may very well win the election. He may well lose the election, but these lies, they literally have a body count.” – CNN anchor Jake Tapper, who is now facing new blowback for not calling out Trump’s lies during the debate.
If Donald Trump returns to the presidency, he’ll have another shot at achieving a goal that eluded him last time: Changing the colors of Air Force One to his beloved red, white and dark blue.
And he’ll likely do it — even though replacing the traditional light-blue-and-white design with Trump’s preferred scheme would be complicated and expensive.
A former senior Trump White House official who remains close to him says it would be totally in character for the former president to insist on using his preferred colors on the planes.
“Absolutely. 100 percent,” said the former official, granted anonymity to discuss Trump’s thinking.
The Air Force is still modifying two Boeing 747-8s to replace the existing aircraft, and the two planes are on track to be delivered in 2026 and 2027, years late and well over budget. When they arrive, they’ll be sporting the traditional white-and-light-blue livery that has adorned presidential aircraft since the Kennedy administration.
But according to three people familiar with the program, there’s still time for Trump to order the color scheme back to his favored palette, similar to the pattern already on his private plane. In 2019, the then-president told ABC host George Stephanopoulos that he wanted to shake up the traditional pattern with a design he made himself.
“There’s your new Air Force One,” Trump said at the time, holding up mock-ups of the aircraft that at the time was supposed to be delivered by this year. “I’m doing that for other presidents, not for me.”
After POLITICO reported in 2022 that Trump’s preferred colors would lead to expensive design fixes, the Biden White House scrapped the plan and brought back the traditional palette.
The person familiar with Trump’s thinking said he expects him to change the colors back because of how proud the former president was of the design change.
“The model was on the coffee table in the Oval Office and he pointed it out many times to foreign and domestic visitors,” the person said. “He thought it represented America more and represented strength, the red, white and blue.”
Yet the cost of bringing back Trump’s favored shade hasn’t gone away.
At some point after Trump announced he was changing the colors in 2019, Boeing determined that the dark blue paint on the underside of the plane and its engines would likely contribute to excessive temperatures, a problem that Boeing would likely have to pay out-of-pocket to fix.
Specifically, the dark color would require modifications to cool some of its components, the three people familiar with the changes said. The people were granted anonymity to speak freely about the sensitive program.
The people said changing the color scheme this far in the process may require more engineering work, millions of dollars in cost overruns, and further delays.
“For example, Boeing would need to ensure antennas work with the new livery and that there is no interference,” one person said.
Boeing referred to the Air Force for comment. An Air Force spokesperson said the service does not speculate on hypotheticals. Asked for comment, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said “Sounds like Joe Biden hates the Red, White, and Blue.” He did not specifically answer whether Trump would change the color.
As president, Trump took pride in personally getting involved in the negotiations for the replacement aircraft once he learned of the cost. In February 2017, he said the Air Force was “close to signing a $4.2 billion deal” and “we got that price down by over $1 billion.”
The Air Force awarded Boeing a $3.9 billion contract in 2018 for the two modified 747-8s to replace the existing Air Force One aircraft, based on the 747-200B model that has been flying since the 1990s.
The company consented to a fixed-price contract with the Air Force, meaning any changes made to the airplane are at Boeing’s cost, not the government’s. The program is already more than $2 billion over budget.
Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun told investors in 2022 that company executives should never have agreed to Trump’s terms for the Air Force contract six years ago.
The program faced major problems when a subcontractor hired to furnish the cabin interior went bankrupt, and Boeing had to switch to a new supplier. The program also faced hurdles due to labor shortages and a lack of employees with the proper clearances to work on the sensitive program.
During Trump’s presidency, Democrats registered their opposition to his decision to change Air Force One’s paint scheme. After winning control of the House in 2019, Democrats pushed to limit changes to the paint job or interior decorations on the program.
Defense legislation that passed the House that year included language limiting changes to the aircraft’s livery and interior design to what was included in the contract.
Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), who sponsored the proposal, said at the time that Congress needed to rein in “less essential aspects” of the new planes and close a potential “backdoor for the program to hemorrhage” money.
“The president will have an opportunity to make some suggestions and changes to the plane,” Courtney said during the 2019 House Armed Services Committee deliberations on the defense bill. “But we do want to keep this within the parameters of the existing contract process so that, again, we’re not creating additional costs for the operation of the plane.”
“Additional paint can add weight to the plane,” he noted.
Republicans, however, accused Democrats of using the program to take a swipe at Trump. Then-Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.) criticized the effort as “an attempt to just poke at the president.”
“Prior to 2017, I don’t recall attempts to block things like paint colors,” he said.
The measure passed the House, but not the Senate. Lawmakers ultimately approved a compromise bill that required the Air Force to notify Congress before it undertook any “over and above” work on the aircraft.
Newsweek observed that the White Dudes for Harris X account had been suspended after the group held a star-studded virtual call on Monday night that raised more than $4 million.
The automated message when the account was suspended read: “X suspends accounts which violate the X rules.” Mike Nellis, who is involved in the organization, shared an update on Tuesday explaining that while the X account is live again, it still remains suspended.
He said the account is “permanently in read-only mode,” meaning it cannot post. When contacted by Newsweek for comment, X’s press office responded: “Busy now, please check back later.”
Classic. @elonmusk puts false video smearing VP Harris with lies in an AI generated audio/video of statements never made. He violates his own rules but because he’s on the wrong side of history now is reduced to muzzling honest support for #Kamala4President2024 . https://t.co/VTCxKDixLL
Technically not GOP, but definitely a platform for white racist bigots, Nazis, and other hate-filled bigots. Which, I suppose, is pretty much the same thing nowadays.
I like to combine the old name into the new: Xitter, with the X pronounced as /sh/, because that is exactly what it has become since Musk took over. In a similar fashion, the messages are now xits, with x pronounced the same way
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis addresses the crowd before publicly signing “Stop W.O.K.E” bill in Hialeah Gardens, Florida, on April 22, 2022. (Daniel A. Varela/Miami Herald via AP)
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis often says the Sunshine State is the place where “woke goes to die.” But a federal judge on Friday killed part of the Stop W.O.K.E. Act championed as standing up against “indoctrination.”
Judge Mark Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida issued a permanent injunction, saying the law that bans diversity training in private workplaces “violates free speech rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.” The ruling follows a three-judge appeals court panel’s March decision that upheld Walker’s original injunction. The State of Florida did not oppose the motion to make the ruling permanent.
Florida honeymoon registry company Honeyfund.com and Primo Tampa, a subsidiary of a Ben & Jerry’s ice cream franchisee, were among those who filed the lawsuit after the Legislature passed the law in 2022. Shalini Goel Agarwal counsel for Protect Democracy which filed the lawsuit on their behalf said the ruling is “a powerful reminder that the First Amendment cannot be warped to serve the interests of elected officials.”
“Censoring business owners from speaking in favor of ideas that politicians don’t like is a moved ripped straight from the authoritarian playbook,” she said in a statement.
“We have every right as a state to provide protections for employees and businesses to say if they are doing woke training which is basically discriminating against folks on the basis of race, you have a right to opt out,” he said. “It’s not a question of what the company can say. They can say whatever they want. But you have a right to not self flagellate. You have a right to not sit there and listen to that nonsense.”
Sara Margulis, CEO of Honeyfund.com, hailed the appeals court decision from March.
“We moved Honeyfund to Florida in 2017 because it was known as a business-friendly state,” she said in a statement. “Passing laws that seek to squash free speech like HB7 is not only a violation of The First Amendment but is also a losing strategy because businesses serve people of all backgrounds, walks of life, and political views. Therefore the law would have effectively hampered the ability of Florida businesses to grow and serve their market. I don’t think that’s what Florida really wants. It’s clearly not in line with American values. I couldn’t be happier that we stood up for free speech and business in the state of Florida.”
The legislation — HB 7, formally called the “Stop Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees Act” — is also aimed at blocking school teachers and college professors from offering their opinions on what DeSantis described as “pernicious ideologies” that could potentially make students, because of their race, feel personally responsible for past racism, sexism, or other discrimination in the U.S. That part of the law also has an injunction and is awaiting a ruling from a higher court.
Critics have said it’s an attempt to stop meaningful discussion of the ongoing effects of longstanding systemic discrimination and topics including critical race theory and privilege. A slew of lawsuits were filed against the legislation including by professors, students and the ACLU. Courts have repeatedly blocked portions of the law.
According to the bill’s text, “[i]t shall constitute discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex under this section to subject any student or employee to training or instruction that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such student or employee to believe” the following:
1. Members of one race, color, national origin, or sex are morally superior to members of another race, color, national origin, or sex.
2. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.
3. A person’s moral character or status as either privileged or oppressed is necessarily determined by his or her race, color, national origin, or sex.
4. Members of one race, color, national origin, or sex cannot and should not attempt to treat others without respect to race, color, national origin, or sex.
5. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex bears responsibility for, or should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment because of, actions committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin, or sex.
6. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, national origin, or sex should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment to achieve diversity, equity, or inclusion.
7. A person, by virtue of his or her race, color, sex, or national origin, bears personal responsibility for and must feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress because of actions, in which the person played no part, committed in the past by other members of the same race, color, national origin, or sex.
8. Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial colorblindness are racist or sexist, or were created by members of a particular race, color, national origin, or sex to oppress members of another race, color, national origin, or sex.
Matt Naham and Marisa Sarnoff contributed to this report.
Scottie's Playtime 