A trip to Mar-a-Lago taken by former President Donald Trump that aides allegedly “kept quiet” just weeks before FBI agents searched the property for classified materials in his possession raised suspicions among special counsel Jack Smith’s team as a potential additional effort to obstruct the government’s classified documents investigation, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.
The previously unreported visit, which allegedly took place July 10-12 in the summer of 2022, was raised in several interviews with witnesses, sources familiar with the matter said, as investigators sought to determine whether it was part of Trump’s broader alleged effort to withhold the documents after receiving a subpoena demanding their return.
MORE: Special counsel questioned witnesses about 2 rooms FBI didn’t search inside Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence: Sources
At least one witness who worked closely with the former president recalled being told at the time of the trip that Trump was there “checking on the boxes,” according to sources familiar with what the witness told investigators.
Trump pleaded not guilty last year to 40 criminal counts related to his handling of classified materials after leaving the White House, after prosecutors said he repeatedly refused to return hundreds of documents containing classified information and took steps to thwart the government’s efforts to get them back. His longtime aide, Walt Nauta, and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira pleaded not guilty to related charges.
Trump has denied all charges and denounced the probe as a political witch hunt.
Gathering evidence
Several witnesses who spoke to investigators described the trip as highly unusual, given that Trump typically spends the summer months at his Bedminster club in New Jersey, and because Trump’s living quarters at his Mar-a-Lago property were under construction at the time of the visit, sources said.
Other witnesses who were questioned by Smith’s team said they were led to believe that Trump returned to check on the status of the renovations, said sources.
In this June 9, 2017, file photo, President Donald Trump is shown at the White House in Washington, D.C.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images, FILE
Just weeks before the trip, as ABC News has previously reported, Trump allegedly had the lock on a closet in his residence changed while his attorney was in Mar-a-Lago’s basement searching for classified documents in a storage room that he was told contained all such documents. The FBI failed to check the locked closet in Trump’s residence when they searched the estate in August 2022, which some investigators later came to believe should have been done.
The trip came as investigators were gathering evidence that Trump continued to possess classified documents, and followed a separate subpoena in late June 2022 seeking surveillance footage from Mar-a-Lago that showed aides to Trump moving boxes between a storage room in the resort and his residence.
The trip also followed a similar instance of unplanned travel to Mar-a-Lago by Nauta, where, according to a superseding indictment, he is alleged to have conspired with Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira to attempt to delete security camera footage.
Contacted by ABC News, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung, without providing evidence, accused prosecutors of lying and illegally leaking material.
“The entire documents case was a political sham from the very beginning and it should be thrown out entirely,” Cheung said in comments to ABC News.
A spokesperson for the special counsel’s office declined to comment to ABC News.
‘Keeping this one quiet’
At the time of Trump’s trip in July 2022, some staff expressed confusion as to where Trump would even stay on the property, sources said, given the renovations that his living quarters were undergoing.
“They were keeping this one quiet … nobody knew about this trip,” one witness with direct knowledge of the trip told investigators, according to sources familiar with the witness’ statements.
Trump left New Jersey on July 9, 2022, for a campaign rally in Anchorage, Alaska, and was scheduled to return to New Jersey following that event, according to aircraft manifests described by sources to ABC News. But the plans changed in the days immediately leading up to the trip and he decided to fly to Florida instead, updated aircraft manifests of the trip show.
According to sources, investigators involved in the case identified what they believe to be a series of unusual steps taken by Trump and members of his inner circle to ensure the trip stayed under the radar.
Nauta, who traveled with Trump on the trip, sent a number of text messages to close staff members indicating that the Florida visit was to be kept quiet, according to sources familiar with the contents of the messages.
“I’m pretty sure [Trump] wants minimal people around on Monday,” Nauta texted one longtime Trump employee just one day before Trump arrived in Florida, according to a message sources detailed to ABC News.
And on July 8, when one Trump Organization employee reached out to Nauta wanting to confirm rumors of a Trump visit so proper preparations could be made, Nauta made clear he wanted the trip to remain “discreet,” sources familiar with the communications said. The sources said Nauta sent a text message to the employee that included emojis with zippers over the mouth, which is often used to convey a secret.
MORE: Trump’s attorneys seek to invalidate appointment of special prosecutor Jack Smith
Nauta also wrote a message to De Oliveira on July 7 that said “Coming down to FL soon” with shushing emojis to indicate the visit be kept quiet, according to another text message described by sources.
De Oliveira initially told investigators that he had no knowledge of Trump’s trip to Florida — but the special counsel has evidence that supports the allegation De Oliveira was well aware of Trump’s travel plans, corroborated in part by security camera footage that shows Trump and De Oliveira together, according to sources familiar with De Oliveira’s meetings with investigators.
De Oliveira later told investigators he recalled seeing the former president very briefly during that trip, sources said.
Smith’s interest in the trip adds to the list of instances in which investigators appeared to suspect Trump was seeking to obstruct their probe.
Last month, a court filing from Smith’s team revealed additional steps prosecutors believed Trump and his associates had taken to obstruct their probe, alleging that after Trump was informed by his attorney of a government subpoena for video footage from Mar-a-Lago, Trump instructed aides to return several boxes they had previously removed from the storage room in the club’s basement — without being caught on camera.
The Cass report was a complete ideological bias hit job. Yes, it got great traction at first as the anti-trans haters ran with it. But like all hate driven junk science it withered on the vine. Hugs. Scottie
Many of the largest medical and psychological organizations have rejected the Cass Review’s recommendations on trans youth. The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is the latest.
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.
Subscribe
Two months ago, the Cass Review was released in the United Kingdom. This review, guided and advised by individuals with ties to SPLC-designated hate groups and who met with Governor Ron DeSantis’ medical board—handpicked to ban care in Florida—has led to severe restrictions in the U.K., including criminalizing the possession of puberty blockers. The response outside the U.K. has been much more critical, with numerous medical organizations and doctors worldwide rejecting its recommendations. The latest major medical body to speak out is the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), the leading organization for training psychiatrists in both countries.
The Cass Review, a highly criticized evaluation of transgender care, was developed in the United Kingdom by Dr. Hillary Cass, a pediatrician without direct experience in transgender care. Although it was presented as an unbiased and neutral review, intentionally excluding transgender individuals from the decision-making process, it was later revealed that advisors with ties to the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine, an SPLC-designated hate group, were involved. Dr. Cass has since controversially blamed being trans on pornography and labeled the American Academy of Pediatrics as a “left-leaning organization” due to its support for the medical care of transgender youth.
Last month, a handful of members of the RANZCP, some of which are notable figures in anti-trans activism in the country, wrote a letter to the organization stating that they had “serious concerns” about gender affirming care for transgender youth. They pointed to the Cass Review as justification for their concerns. The top signature on the letter is that of Jillian Spencer, who stated in an interview that she was fired for “being a danger to trans and gender-diverse children.” Now, the college has responded.
In a response posted to the RANZCP website, the college announced that the Cass Review is one of “a number of reviews,” and that it rejects the call for a “government inquiry” into trans care in the countries it represents. It further states that transgender care should be “patient centered” and individualized to a patient’s needs. Lastly, it expresses a full support for transgender youth and rejects claims that being transgender is a “mental health condition”:
“The College is committed to respectful, sensitive and appropriate mental health care being provided to individuals who identify as LGBTIQ+. Being Trans or Gender Diverse is not a mental health condition, and the RANZCP unequivocally supports the rights of trans and gender diverse people to have equal access to safe and effective mental health care that is underpinned by dignity, empathy and respect.
…
The College emphasises that assessment and treatment should be patient centred, evidence-informed and responsive to and supportive of the child or young person’s needs and that psychiatrists have a responsibility to counter stigma and discrimination directed towards trans and gender diverse people.”
The statement from the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is the latest in a series of rejections of the Cass Review’s findings by medical organizations worldwide. Last month, the American Academy of Pediatrics responded to the review, disagreeing with many of its claims and asserting that the organization supports “individualized health care for each patient, in consultation with their family and health care team” when it comes to transgender youth. The Endocrine Society also dismissed the recommendations, stating, “Medical evidence, not politics, should inform treatment decisions.”
In Canada, the Canadian Pediatric Society rejected the Cass Review’s recommendations, announcing that “current evidence shows puberty blockers to be safe when used appropriately, and they remain an option to be considered within a wider view of the patient’s mental and psychosocial health.” Children’s Healthcare Canada, which oversees the country’s children’s hospitals, concurred, stating, “Our position remains unchanged on the topic.”
Evidence continues to support the use of gender affirming care for transgender youth. A Cornell review of more than 51 studies found “gender transition is effective in treating gender dysphoria and can significantly improve the well-being of transgender individuals.” Numerous studies show lower suicidality, with as much as a 73% reduction in suicidality for trans youth who are allowed care. In a recent article that was not considered by the Cass Review in the Journal of Adolescent Health, puberty blockers reduced depression and anxiety significantly. In Germany, a recent review by over 27 medical organizations has judged that “not providing treatment can do harm” to transgender youth. Due to strong evidence around transgender care, the American Psychological Association released a historic policy resolution condemning bans on gender affirming care. Notably, they are the largest psychological association in the world, with representatives elected to represent 157,000 members.
The lack of credibility given to the Cass Review outside the United Kingdom, especially in the United States, has frustrated its proponents. In a recent article published in The BMJ titled “Gender medicine in the US: how the Cass review failed to land,” anti-trans writer Jennifer Block laments that Erin Reed, the author of this article, highlighted the review’s anti-trans political ties with DeSantis’ picks, which hampered its acceptance. Although Block incorrectly claims that only a single meeting took place (Cass advisor Dr. Kaltiala attended several meetings and even advocated for the ban as a primary witness), she accurately demonstrates that the document’s political roots have been detrimental to its acceptance among credible scientific organizations. These political roots were recently confirmed when Conservative Women and Equalities Minister, Kemi Badenoch, admitted that “gender critical” individuals were placed in health roles to facilitate the Cass Review—a mechanism remarkably similar to how Florida’s review led to the banning of care in the state, borrowing from DeSantis’ strategy.
Despite its lack of acceptance abroad, the Cass Review continues to do tremendous damage in places predisposed to targeting transgender healthcare. It has already been cited in the United States to ban care in South Carolina, a Republican-controlled state. In the United Kingdom, it has led to the criminalization of possessing puberty blockers. As more medical organizations reject its findings, politicians will undoubtedly use its conclusions to push forward with bans on gender-affirming care for transgender youth, despite having little evidence to justify such decisions.
Erin In The Morning is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a subscriber.
Why are we letting a few off the rails people ruin everything for the rest of us normal people. Can anyone tell me why these people are making decisions for everyone else kids when they don’t have children on those schools, that go to those libraries, or are in public office? See how they act behind the scenes to get a law past to “protect the children” so they can then exploit them to push their fundamentalist extreme agenda on everyone. I hate this. We need to find a way to fight back. Hugs. Scottie
A book about book bans has been banned in a Florida school district. Ban This Book, a children’s book written by Alan Gratz, will no longer be available in the Indian River county school district since the school board voted to remove the book last month.
Gratz’s book, which came out in 2017, follows fourth-grader Amy Anne Ollinger as she tries to check out her favorite book. Ollinger is told by the librarian she cannot, because it was banned after a classmate’s parent thought it was inappropriate.
In a peculiar case of life imitating art, Jennifer Pippin, a parent in the coastal community, challenged the book. Pippin is also the chair of the local Moms for Liberty chapter, a far-right organization that has been behind many of the book bans that have swept across the US in recent years.
Gratz, its author, called the Indian River County decision “incredibly ironic.” “They banned the book because it talks about the books that they have banned and because it talks about book banning,” he said in an interview. “It feels like they know exactly what they’re doing and they’re somewhat ashamed of what they’re doing and they don’t want a book on the shelves that calls them out.”
Board members Jacqueline Rosario and Gene Posca, who voted in the majority, were backed by Moms for Liberty during their campaigns, according to Treasure Coast Newspapers. The third “yes” vote came from Kevin McDonald, who was recently appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis.
“The title itself and the theme challenges our authority. And it even goes so far as to not only to mention books that are deemed inappropriate by school boards, including ours, it not only mentions them but it lists them,” McDonald said.
As you’ll see in the many tweets below, Ms. Pippin is as batshit crazy as you’d expect. She last appeared here in March 2023 when she successfully pressured the same school board to ban a book about a Holocaust survivor.
The @IRCSchools Board voted against the committee decision to retain @AlanGratz’s Ban This Book. They banned a book because it mentions other banned books.
— Florida Freedom to Read Project (@FLFreedomRead) June 2, 2024
Oh, #Florida! School board bans book about school book bans, accusing it of "teaching rebellion of school board authority." The name of the book: "Ban This Book." https://t.co/ubQ4SSUN9p via @DouglasSoule
Jennifer Pippin, the chair of a FL chapter of Moms for Liberty, succeeded in getting Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation banned. She also appeared on TruNews, an antisemitic livestream, & has since refused to apologize for speaking on the show. https://t.co/FkPoH7FMaqpic.twitter.com/GbYXzp2Sx3
3. As a result, In The Night Kitchen was removed from school libraries. Jennifer Pippin, the local @Moms4Liberty chair who filed the challenge, says she then met with the district Superintendent. They agreed to resolve the complaint by adding clothes to Sendak's drawings. pic.twitter.com/1EqBHTE3QL
Hey look at IRC M4L boss Jennifer Pippin calling school shootings a hoax https://t.co/fTXrAvdwSM
— Jen Cousins 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️🇵🇸 (@JenCousinsFL) April 20, 2023
A Moms for Liberty chair who previously fought a library for having an adaption of Anne Frank’s diary recently promoted her organization on a network that warns viewers about “seditious Jews,” “Jewish tyrants,” and how Jewish people “have forsaken God” https://t.co/2010q1ogjFpic.twitter.com/kHCc7A72Ep
This @EducationFL library training meeting is wild. M4L Jennifer Pippin, who had her two kids out of wedlock, only wants books in schools that promote abstinence until marriage ☠️ pic.twitter.com/LHcqeMN0Z2
It’s true it’s ironic, to those of us on the outside. But according to the DeSantis appointee to the board, they felt the need to ban the book because it challenged their authority! So they have a completely political agenda, having nothing to do with religion or morality. One wonders if they will next ban the local newspaper that wrote about this incident.
Likewise, kids’ access to books and topics in school that make Christian nationalists and white supremacists uncomfortable, appropriate medical care including reproductive and gender-affirming care, and so on, and so forth, are not about parental rights. They’re about THE KIDS’ RIGHTS as people in their own right, whether or not their individual parents support them.
It should come as no surprise that Alan Gratz, whose book on book banning Pippin wants banned, has won a National Jewish Book Award. So like Anne Frank and Holocaust survivors, he has “forsaken God.”
I want to thank Zorba for the link, their post link below. We have to combat a very large problem with the conservatives fundamental Christians getting just enough power to force their minority views on the more progressive liberal majority. And once they get authority / power they cling to it desperately. Please read through to the end as the most important parts at the end and I have high lighted them. Hugs. Scottie
This discussion, led by Dahlia Lithwick of Slate, is the most important information you will read today, this week, this month. It explains the theocratic movement that is taking control of the seats of power, imperiling democracy. It describes who they are. You will learn about “dominionism,” about “the Seven Mountains,” about a distorted view of religion that seeks power. They play the long game, with the goal of controlling our society.
This is the only post today. We really have to focus on the root issue in American political life today, the one that makes it impossible to address any problems. Religious extremism is it.
Please open the link to Slate to read the arntire discussion. It’s terrifying.
Dahlia Lithwick: So Katherine, I think we’re going to start with you, and we’re going to talk about this movement. I would love to define it, because we put a lot under this rubric of white Christian nationalism.
Katherine Stewart: Let’s talk about what Christian nationalism is and what it isn’t. Christian nationalism is not a religion—it’s not Christianity. I think of it as a mindset, and also a machine. The mindset is this ideology, the idea of America as essentially a Christian theocracy or a Christian nation whose laws should be based on the Bible, and a very reactionary reading of the Bible. It’s also a political movement that exploits religion in this organized quest for power. As a political movement, it is leadership-driven and it’s organization-driven. It has this deeply networked organizational infrastructure that is really the key to its power. There has been five decades of investment in this infrastructure, and it’s the leaders of this network who are really calling the shots.
We can group their organizations into categories. I’ll throw out a few names, but this is by no means comprehensive. There are these right-wing groups like the Family Research Council. You have networking organizations like the Council for National Policy, which gets much of the movement’s leadership cadre on the same page, and brings them together with these very deep-pocketed funders. There are think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation. And there’s a vast right-wing legal advocacy ecosystem that includes groups like the Alliance Defending Freedom, with its $100-plus-million-per-year budget; also, the Becket Fund, Liberty Counsel, First Liberty Institute, Pacific Justice Institute—and they align with the aims of the Federalist Society and related organizations that mobilize enormous sums of money to shape the courts.
Another feature of this movement that is often overlooked is the pastor networks like Watchmen on the Wall and Church United, or groups like Faith Wins, that draw together and then mobilize tens of thousands of conservative or conservative-leaning pastors as movement leaders. If you can get the pastors, you can get their congregations. Often pastors are the most trusted voices in their congregations. So they reach out to these pastors, draw them into networks, and give them tools to turn out their congregations to vote for the far-right candidates that they want.
And then, of course, there’s this information sphere—or propaganda sphere—of the type that the Alitos, with their “Appeal to Heaven” flag, are clearly tied into. It’s a kind of messaging sphere that outsiders often simply don’t know about, but it’s incredibly self-contained and repeats over and over again a certain core set of messages.
Rachel, I think we know about the ways in which these movements and groups have targeted Congress and targeted the executive branch. We have seen the laying on of hands of the clergy when Donald Trump assumed office. We know a lot about Mike Johnson, we know a lot about Marjorie Taylor Greene, and the ways in which these religious ideas have embedded themselves in the other two branches of government.
But it’s harder and murkier to understand how it intersects with the courts. I would love for you to explain when this movement really turns its attention to the courts, and how this movement manages to bring this sprawling network to making change at the federal judiciary.
Rachel Laser: I think we have to start with the Federalist Society, which was founded in 1982. That was around the time when all of the religious-right groups were getting active. They were intentionally shifting their focus from school segregation to abortion. In the late ’80s and early ’90s, we saw this shadow network of legal groups forming. That accompanied what the Federalist Society was doing with the judiciary. The Alliance Defending Freedom was founded in the early ’90s, the Becket Fund in the early ’90s, First Liberty in 1997, Jay Sekulow’s American Center for Law and Justice back in 1990, Liberty Counsel in 1989. So when we were seeing the “moral majority,” and this sort of burgeoning religious extremist movement in the country, they got really smart and decided to focus on the courts, and, boy, are we seeing the rewards of that today.
Stewart: And the movement is extremely strategic. Very patient. I think the key to their success is that long-range thinking and their strategy.
From the very beginning, they set about picking the right cases to bring to the right courts and they created these novel legal building blocks that would sideline, and in some cases obliterate, the establishment clause. They’ve turned civil rights law on its head, and expanded the privileges of religious organizations substantially, including the right to taxpayer money.
Katherine, you wrote a piece in 2022 describing how the movement gets supercharged. You flagged three things that happened after Dobbs: First, the rhetoric of violence among movement leaders appears to have increased significantly from the already alarming levels I had observed in previous years. Second, the theology of dominion—that is the belief that right-thinking Christians have a biblically derived mandate to take control of all aspects of government and society—is now explicitly embraced. And third, the movement’s key strategists were giddy about the legal arsenal that the Supreme Court had laid at their feet as they anticipated the overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Can you talk about how those three themes are playing out now? I mean, we live in that world. That’s mifepristone, that’s EMTALA, that’s the in vitro fertilization decision out of the Alabama Supreme Court.
Stewart: By acknowledging the legitimacy of a state interest in zygotes and blastocysts and fetuses, they really provide a legal system with a set of purely religiously grounded rights that can be used to strip women of all kinds of rights and basically turn our bodies and lives over to federal and state authorities.
But Dobbs is really just the inevitable consequence of this movement’s power. They’re not stopping here. The movement leaders are determined to end all abortion access everywhere. When they say abortion, they also mean some of the most effective and popular forms of birth control, as well as miscarriage care that’s necessary to save women’s lives and health. We’re seeing the consequences of this all over the country, where women are suffering devastating health consequences when they can’t get the miscarriage care that they need.
I’ve been attending right-wing conferences and strategy gatherings for 15 years for my research, and they tell us over and over again what they intend to do, and then they do it, and then they boast about what they’ve done. They’re really not hiding, and their aims are not hard to discern if you’re paying attention.
In the last 15 years, the rhetoric of violence has become more extreme. Fifteen years ago, the religious right sometimes wanted to portray itself as just wanting a seat at the table in the noisy forum of American democracy, saying, “We just want to have our voices heard and be counted.” But the calls for dominion, the calls for total domination, have become louder and more explicit. And part of that is a consequence of the rise of a spirit-warrior style of religion, embodied in movements like the New Apostolic Reformation, which is a sort of charismatic Christian evangelical movement. It’s a relational network, rather than a formal denomination, and it’s grown enormously in recent years. It has deep roots in Christian Reconstructionism and Calvinism, but it didn’t really get going until Loren Cunningham and Bill Bright, these two Christian-right leaders, both said they had a dream.
They both seemed to have the same dream that God told them that they needed to take over the seven “mountains,” or spheres, of culture, which they identified as things like government, education, business, media, and the like. They shared these ideas with some figures like Lance Wallnau and Peter Wagner. Wagner was a key figure in the “church planting” movement—a movement of establishing or planting new churches. Wagner ran with the idea of taking over the seven mountains as taking back dominion from Satan.
That notion of “Seven Mountains” dominionism has spread very quickly—not just among networks like the New Apostolic Reformation and other charismatic networks, but the language and style of “Seven Mountains Dominion” and this sort of spirit-warrior religion has spread to other sectors of the movement that are not remotely identified with the NAR or charismatic Christianity.
NAR churches often cite the Watchman Decree, a very theocratic prayer, which references the seven mountains. They often fly the “Appeal to Heaven” flag. Now you have people like Mike Johnson, who’s affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention, displaying an “Appeal to Heaven” flag outside his office and appearing on podcasts run by very overt “Seven Mountains” dominionists, and you have a lot of white-power and militia groups that were not particularly religious before—they were more focused on race—but now they’re adopting the language and style of “Seven Mountains” dominionism. So when you see Mike Johnson’s “Appeal to Heaven” flag, when you see the Alitos flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag, it doesn’t mean that they are necessarily affiliated with the New Apostolic Reformation, or that they’re members of these militias at all, but it really tells us who they’ve been talking to.
Most people in the mainstream, at the center right, really don’t know anything about this flag. They wouldn’t think to fly it. It’s like a relic of the revolutionary period. And it’s been revived now, and it’s being promoted by people on the extreme far right. So when they fly it, they’ve reinterpreted it as taking a stand for the idea of America as a Christian theocratic nation rather than a pluralistic democracy. They see it as a call for profound, and even violent, revolution. It’s really astonishing to see it flying over the Alitos’ beach house. Again, it doesn’t mean that they’re paid-up members of militia groups or charismatic Christian groups. It just means they spend their time in the same information and propaganda bubbles where this flag stands for God and country and armed insurrection.
Laser: If you believe that rights are God-given, instead of given by the people, then you can see how you can jump quickly to “and I can use violence to protect those rights.” That’s what has shown up in the polls.
PRRI [Public Religion Research Institute] did a poll on Christian nationalists, and they found Christian nationalists are about twice as likely as the rest of us to believe in political violence. That’s what we saw on Jan. 6 with the parading “Appeal to Heaven” flags that were at the insurrection. I think another important point to make here is the authoritarian nature of this Christian nationalist movement. This movement is rooted in the belief that America is a country given to European Christians, and that our laws and policies must reflect the same. If you believe that, you are antidemocratic, because democracy is rooted in equality. So the end goal of this Christian nationalist movement has to be the toppling of democracy to achieve their goal. And that’s why we saw so many of them fueling the insurrection.
The antidote to Christian nationalism is the separation of church and state, because it refuses to let Christian privilege into the law, it refuses to let conservative Christianity be the guiding principle in America. It insists that America keep to its promises that are embedded in our Constitution, of religious freedom as a basic human right.And that’s why Christian nationalists have gone after the separation of church and state, and that’s why their allies at the Supreme Court are on a crusade to eradicate church–state separation—because they are in lockstep with a movement that must get rid of church–state separation in order to accomplish its goals.
#########################
My comment:
Will we be a theocracy or a society struggling to improve democracy? Please open the link. After reading this, you can understand why it is so important to the theocrats to destroy the separation of church and state and to funnel public money into religious organizations. That’s one of the crucial issues on the ballot in November. If you don’t want to be controlled by these power-hungry zealots, get active.