On November 18, HIDE/SEEK: DifferenceÂ and Desire in American Portraiture will open to the public at the BrooklynÂ Museum (BM). After it closes on FebruaryÂ 12, the exhibition will travel to the Tacoma Art Museum (TAM) where it can be viewed from March 17Â through June 10, 2012.
It wasnâ€™t until the controversy surrounding itÂ went viral moreÂ than a month after it opened,Â that I first heard about HIDE/SEEK , then showing at theÂ National Portrait Gallery (NPG). I considered traveling to Washington, D.C. toÂ see it, but the holidays were coming; a blizzard was predicted for D.C. and IÂ was familiar with the work of manyÂ of the artists. When I owned a gallery, I had even shown some of the same pictures being exhibited at theÂ NPG. And I had experienced the same issues as Jonathan Katz and co-curator David Ward when they wereÂ assembling the show.
Like them, I had been refused loans of art, often by closeted gay curators who were afraid of drawing attention to themselves. In factÂ my gallery, In a Plain Brown Wrapper,Â which I opened in Chicago less than a decade after Stonewall, had been visitedÂ by police in 1980 and threatened with closure when I held the first RobertÂ Mapplethorpe exhibition outside of New York and San Francisco.
This was not the first time thatÂ an exhibition that included LGBT or religious imageryÂ had been censored and undoubtedly not the last. So thinking I had been there, done that, I decided toÂ stay home with my partner in more temperate Seattle.
But I changed my mind over a post-Christmas brunch with ourÂ neighbors down the street. Pamm had given Pam a copy of the splendid catalogue,Â a stunning coffee-table size book which included images I had never seen before.Â Wow! After flipping through its pages, really just a quick perusal, I was ready
to pack my bag. And Iâ€™m really glad I decided to make the trip.
It was only after I had booked my flight that I learnedÂ my stay coincided with an organized protest by Art Positive at the annual meeting of The Smithsonianâ€™s Board of Directors.
In case you missed the uproar, Iâ€™ll explain. A four minute excerpt from the film A Fire in My BellyÂ by DavidÂ Wojnarowicz was on display when this landmark show first opened on October 30,Â 2010. It was removed December 1.
As Holland Cotter reported,Â NYT, 12-10-2010 thisÂ was not the first time Wojnarowiczâ€™s work had created a stir. â€œIn 1989, Donald Wildmon, founderÂ of the American Family Association, mailed a pamphlet reproducing details fromÂ collages by the New York artist David Wojnarowicz (1954-1992) to every memberÂ of Congress, to various news media outlets and to religious leaders across theÂ country. Mr. Wildmon, a Methodist minister, had prepared the pamphlet himself;Â he considered the images pornographic or blasphemous. He had copied them fromÂ the catalog for an exhibition partly supported by the National Endowment for the Arts, the real object of his protest. Wojnarowicz (pronounced voy-nah-ROH-vitch), furious at having his work selectively edited, sued Mr.Â Wildmon for misrepresenting his art and won the case.”
Twenty-one years later history repeated itself. BillÂ Donohue, president of the Catholic League, one of the icons of the Religious Right, took offence at an excerpt from A Fire in MyÂ Belly which included an image of ants crawling over a crucifix and RepublicanÂ leaders John Boehner and Eric Cantor suggested the entire exhibit be canceled and threatened the federal funding of the Gallery unless the Smithsonian pulled theÂ Wojnarowicz piece. Feeling pressured, G. Wayne Clough, theÂ director of the gallery unilaterally removed the video excerpt of the film, aÂ commentary on AIDS and spirituality.
The SmithsonianÂ wasÂ petitionedÂ to restore the video to the exhibit Â andÂ the film was projected on the side of the building, but it wasnâ€™t until Mike Blasenstein andÂ Michael Dax Iacovone brought the film backÂ into the NPG that the story of its removal and copies of the video went viral;Â the ensuing kerfuffle prompted institutions worldwide to protest the censorshipÂ and show the video.
Blasenstein strapped an iPad around his neck and stood in the gallery withÂ the video playing on the screen. He offered flyers about the Smithsonian’s censorshipÂ to visitors. In less than 10 minutes security guards removed him from theÂ exhibit and he and Iacovone, who filmed the encounter, wereÂ barred for life from returning to any of the Smithsonian museums. ProhibitedÂ from displaying the film inside, Blasenstein and Iacovone parked a trailerÂ around the corner, called it the Museum of Censored Art and showed the film for the duration of theÂ exhibition.
Last April whenÂ I learned the Brooklyn and Tacoma Art Museums were exploring theÂ feasibility of re-mounting Hide/Seek, I askedÂ Lisa McKeown, the Communications Coordinator, at the Tacoma Art Museum if any objections had beenÂ made to mounting the exhibition. She responded, â€œJust to clarifyâ€¦ There hasnâ€™t been an organized movement that weâ€™ve hadÂ to deal with (yet) as far as people objecting to bringing the exhibition toÂ Tacoma. We have received some letters, emails, and phone calls from individualsÂ who do not want us to bring the exhibition, for various reasons. On the flipÂ sideâ€¦ we have had many more letters and emails in support of our bringing theÂ exhibition here.â€
And in May, when IÂ began a letter-writing campaign to lend the two museums additional support for mounting the exhibition, Charles Desmarais, then DeputyÂ Director for Art at the Brooklyn Museum responded that unlike the NPG or TAM,Â â€œwe have received nothing but support and encouragement.â€
Not anymore! An article in yesterdayâ€™s New York Daily News was headlined, “Another unholy controversy atÂ Brooklyn museum: Video of ants skittering over crucified Jesus is enragingÂ Christians.”
Erin Durkin, Mark Morales andÂ Katie Nelson wrote, â€œAn avant-garde video of ants skittering over the crucified Jesus is enraging Christians who say an upcoming Brooklyn Museum artÂ exhibit is sacrilegious. â€˜Ants were crawling on the image of the crucified Christ,â€™Â said Msgr. Kieran Harrington, a spokesman for the Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn,Â which sent a letter asking for the video to get yanked from the exhibit. â€˜CertainlyÂ we donâ€™t think this would be tolerated if this was the image of the ProphetÂ Muhammed [sic] or any other religious symbol.â€™ â€˜What is the point?â€™â€™ said PastorÂ A. R. Bernard, who leads Brooklynâ€™s Christian Cultural Center. â€˜I think this isÂ the piece in the Hide/seek collection they really need to hide.â€™
Itâ€™s far from the first timeÂ the art museum has stirred the pot: The museum drew ire from then-Mayor RudyÂ Giuliani in 1999 for an exhibitÂ featuring a painting of the VirginÂ Mary decorated with elephant dung and images of female genitalia.
Giuliani tried to cut the museums funding because of the painting, part of a provocative exhibit called Sensation. Â Giuliani and Catholic advocates also slammed the museum for featuring [Renee Coxâ€™s â€œ] Yo Mamas Last Supperâ€ which depicts Christ as a nude woman in 2001. â€œA Fire in My Bellyâ€ is creating a similar stir. But Brooklyn Museum Director Arnold Lehman defendedÂ the entire exhibit. â€˜For a city that prides itself on diversity and creativity,Â there couldnâ€™t be a better exhibition,â€™ Lehman told the Daily News.â€
There are more than a hundred good reasons to travel to Brooklyn this winter or to Tacoma
this spring; viewing theÂ 10 second segment of
Â a 4 minute excerpt from the 30 minute A Fire in My
Belly is only one of them.
The websiteÂ of the Brooklyn Museum, puts the exhibition in perspective. “Hide/Seek is the first major museumÂ exhibition to focus on themes of gender and sexuality in modern AmericanÂ portraiture bringing together â€œmore than one hundred works in a wide range ofÂ media, including paintings, photographs, works on paper, film, and installationÂ art. The exhibition charts the underdocumented role that sexual identity hasÂ played in the making of modern art, and highlights the contributions of gay andÂ lesbian artists to American art. Beginning in the late nineteenth century with Thomas Eakinsâ€™ Realist paintings, HIDE/SEEK traces the often codedÂ narrative of sexual desire in art produced throughout the early modern periodÂ and up to the present. The exhibition features pieces by canonical figures inÂ American artâ€”including George Bellows, Marsden Hartley, Alice Neel, and
Berenice Abbottâ€”along with works that openly assert gay and lesbian subjects inÂ modern and contemporary art, by artists such as Jess Collins and Tee Corinne.”
“In addition to revealing connections betweenÂ sexual identity and formal developments in modern art, HIDE/SEEKÂ presents artistsâ€™ responses to the Stonewall Riots of 1969, the AIDS epidemic,Â and postmodern themes of identity, highlighted with major pieces by artistsÂ such as AA Bronson, FÃ©lix GonzÃ¡lez-Torres, and Annie Leibovitz.â€
Yes, there are more than a hundred good reasons to go toÂ Brooklyn between November 18 and February 12. And if you manage to get there beforeÂ January 29Â you can also catch the exhibition, Youth and Beauty: Art ofÂ the American TwentiesÂ Â which includesÂ this splendid painting of gay icon, Paul Cadmus.
Another not-to-be-missed exhibition, Seeing Gertrude Stein: Five Stories isÂ presently at the NPG, throughÂ January 22, 2012. It was originally shown at San Franciscoâ€™s Contemporary Jewish MuseumÂ where ironically a lesbian couple was asked to leave theÂ exhibition because they were holding hands.
From the dayÂ they met, September 8, 1907, Stein and Toklas lived as an openlyÂ Lesbian couple. Seeing Gertrude Stein: Five Stories features more than 25 artifacts and 100 works by artistsÂ from across Europe and the U.S., detailing Steinâ€™s life and work as an artist,Â collector and distinctive style-maker. Â The NPGÂ websiteÂ informs us that the exhibition â€œshares an in-depthÂ portrait of Stein that knits together her many identities: literary celebrity;Â life-long partner of Alice B. Toklas; arts networker whose famous friendshipsÂ included some of the most prominent artists of her time (Picasso, Matisse, Braque, Hemingway); Jewish-American expatriate; and muse to artists of severalÂ generations. Stein is considered by many to be an inventor of Modernism whoseÂ reach across the arts was extraordinary. She wrote novels, poems, essays,Â literary and art theory, opera libretti, ballets, memoirs and childrenâ€™s booksÂ and was also an arts networker, bringing creative people together in legendaryÂ salons and gatherings in her homes. Her originality as a thinker, along withÂ her interdisciplinary approach to projectsÂ in dance, music and theater, continue to inspire artists today.â€
Despite todayâ€™s politicalÂ climate with its resurgenceÂ of intolerance and incivility; the directors and curatorsÂ in Brooklyn and TacomaÂ haveÂ defied attempts at censorship and instead defended freedom of expression. At aÂ time when funding for the arts is problematical at best they have risked the disapprobation of patrons, donors and politicians. These institutions deserve our supportÂ – the easiestÂ and best way to demonstrate it is to simply go see these shows.
YouÂ wonâ€™t regret the time you take or the effort you make to journey to theseÂ museums. Each of these exhibitions offers theÂ opportunity to understand the human experience from an historical LGBT perspective.Â The pictures are as moving and as relevant today as when they were first made.
AndÂ if you want to try your hand at a little subversive activism while you areÂ enjoying the art, how about holding hands with a person of the same sex as youÂ stroll through the museum?
Stuart Wilber believes that living life openly as a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender or Allied person is the most powerful kind of activism. Shortly after meeting his partner in Chicago in 1977, he opened a gallery named In a Plain Brown Wrapper, where he exhibited cutting edge work by leading artists; art that dealt with sexuality and gender identification. In the late 1980’s when they moved to San Clemente, CA in Orange County, life as an openly gay couple became a political act. They moved to Seattle 16 years ago and married in Canada a few weeks after British Columbia legalized same-sex marriage. Although legally married in some countries, they are only considered domestic partners in Washington State. Â Equality continues to elude him.
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
‘Heist’: Ginni Thomas Tells J6 Committee Election Was Stolen, Says She Never Discussed Efforts to Overturn With Spouse
Appearing behind closed doors in person for four hours with investigators from the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, far right wing activist and lobbyist Ginni Thomas reiterated her false claims the 2020 presidential election was stolen, calling it a “heist.” Thomas also insisted she has never discussed her work to overturn the election results with her husband, the person she publicly refers to as her “best friend,” U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has resisted calls to recuse himself from any cases surround the January 6 insurrection.
The 2020 president election was not stolen, there has never been any proof to support that false contention, more than 60 court cases claiming fraud brought by the Trump team or their supporters have been thrown out or lost, and even Donald Trump’s own Attorney General and Dept. of Homeland Security officials have said there was no significant fraud, with the later issuing a statement that reads: “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.”
And yet, despite mountains of evidence President Joe Biden won the election, despite the election being certified with him winning 81,268,924 votes against Trump’s 74,216,154 votes – a margin of more than 7 million, and despite him winning the Electoral College 306 to 232, Ginni Thomas for hours on Thursday insisted Donald Trump was the rightful president.
“During her interview, Ms. Thomas, who goes by Ginni, repeated her assertion that the 2020 election was stolen from President Donald J. Trump,” The New York Times reports, citing remarks made by the Committee’s chairman, Bennie Thompson. The Times called it “a belief she insisted upon in late 2020 as she pressured state legislators and the White House chief of staff to do more to try to invalidate the results.”
And yet to reporters Thomas’ attorney called her actions merely “minimal and mainstream activity focused on ensuring that reports of fraud and irregularities were investigated.”
“Beyond that, she played no role in any events after the 2020 election results,” he added, despite press reports that Thomas held a months-long text message exchange with White House chief of staff Mark Meadows, urging him to find a way to overture the election.
“As she wrote in a text to Mark Meadows at the time, she also condemned the violence on Jan. 6, as she abhors violence on any side of the aisle.”
“Ms. Thomas,” The Times adds, “exchanged text messages with Mr. Meadows, the White House chief of staff, in which she urged him to challenge Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s victory in the 2020 election, which she called a ‘heist,’ and indicated that she had reached out to Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, about Mr. Trump’s efforts to use the courts to keep himself in power. She even suggested the lawyer who should be put in charge of that effort.”
Despite earlier reports Thomas did appear in person, but refused to answer reporters’ questions.
NEW: Ginni Thomas met with Jan 6 committee IN PERSON. She did not answer my questions pic.twitter.com/5z6pypr0S9
— Annie Grayer (@AnnieGrayerCNN) September 29, 2022
‘No Shame’: Trump Judge Overrules Special Master – Stuns Legal Experts
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon on Thursday overruled the special master Donald Trump’s legal team chose and she installed, deciding to change the deadlines he set, delaying the case and DOJ’s work for months, and overruling his decisions.
Specifically, Judge Cannon ruled Trump and his attorneys do not have to make any statements to support the former president’s baseless claims that the FBI “planted” documents or other evidence.
“Judge Cannon overrules the order by her special master that would have forced Trump’s lawyers to lodge objections to the accuracy of the DOJ’s inventory, effectively forcing him to prove his ‘planting claims,'” Law & Crime managing editor Adam Klasfeld reports. “Trump doesn’t need to do that any more, she rules.”
“Upon review of the matter,” Cannon writes in her order Thursday, “the Court determines as follows. There shall be no separate requirement on Plaintiff [Trump] at this stage, prior to the review of any of the Seized Materials, to lodge ex ante final objections to the accuracy of Defendant’s Inventory, its descriptions, or its contents. The Court’s Appointment Order did not contemplate that obligation.”
Legal experts are stunned by Cannon’s latest move.
The Nation’s justice correspondent Elie Mystal writes: “Trump Judge Cannon trying to preserve the white wing talking point without forcing Trump to prove it. She’s in too deep now. She has to ride Trump all the way and hope he wins and promotes her.”
Civil liberties and national security journalist Marcy Wheeler says, “Judge Cannon unilaterally rewrites HER OWN deadlines to make sure that her Trumpy doesn’t have to commit until after the election. Holy hell this woman has no shame.”
Over at her site, Wheeler expands her thoughts.
“Aileen Cannon, without explaining why she was intervening, just rewrote Judge Raymond Dearie’s work plans regarding the Special Master review,” Wheeler says, calling it “an obvious power grab to ensure her own intervention doesn’t backfire on Trump.”
“With no justification (particularly given the way Dearie has ceded to multiple issues Trump has raised), and after having been scolded by the 11th Circuit for her improper claims of jurisdiction, she effectively just eliminated any claim that the Special Master Trump picked and she appointed is a neutral observer.”
“Cannon is shamelessly acting as Trump’s defense attorney. If you are a reporter, that’s what your story is. If you’re not a reporter, that’s also what your story is,” she warns. “At the very least fact check this woman.”
Slate senior writer Mark Joseph Stern, who has authored a book on the Supreme Court, says, “Cannon was shameless enough to overrule the special master, because she is not a real judge.
Former General Counsel of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and well-known MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann calls Cannon “a disgrace.”
“Oy- Judge Cannon tinkers badly with (and with typos) Judge Dearie’s scheduling order, relieving Trump of obligation to say whether docs were planted, even though she had wanted a clear inventory of what was found. She is such a disgrace.”
‘Tarnished Image’: Gallup Releases Devastating SCOTUS Poll – as Conservative Justices Snipe at Kagan’s Warning
Ever since December of 2021, when the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in the case that six months later would overturn Roe v. Wade, a 49-year old precedent – “settled law,” Americans were assured by the Court’s Justices in their confirmation hearings – ensuring women have the constitutional right to abortion, Chief Justice John Roberts has been accused of losing control of his justices.
On Thursday, just days before the high court begins its new term, as one of the Justices’ spouses delivers testimony on her role in the coordinated efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, amid sniping by the Chief Justice and a conservative justice at their liberal colleague, and anger across the nation so virulent the midterm elections appear to be rapidly swinging back to Democrats, the right-leaning Gallup organization has released a new poll that’s absolutely devastating for the Chief Justice and the Court he was entrusted to lead – not to mention American democracy itself.
“Supreme Court Trust, Job Approval at Historical Lows,” Gallup’s damning headline reads.
“47% trust the judicial branch; previous low was 53%,” “40% job approval of U.S. Supreme Court is tied for record low,” and “Record-high 42% say Supreme Court is too conservative.”
Translated, that means the legitimacy of the court is in question, despite entreaties from Justice Samuel Alito, who authored the Dobbs opinion that discarded nearly five decades of settled law to achieve a desired goal: rescinding the constitutional right to abortion, and with it, quite possibly not far down the road, the constitutional right to contraception, same-sex intimacy, and same-sex marriage.
“‘Less than half of Americans say they have ‘a great deal’ or ‘a fair amount’ of trust in the judicial branch of the federal government, representing a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago, including seven points since last year,'” Politico reports, quoting an advanced copy of Gallup’s findings.
“This represents a 20-percentage-point drop from two years ago,” Gallup’s own report reveals, “including seven points since last year, and is now the lowest in Gallup’s trend by six points. The judicial branch’s current tarnished image contrasts with trust levels exceeding two-thirds in most years in Gallup’s trend that began in 1972.”
Respect for the Supreme Court was such a non-question that from 1976, when Americans’ “trust and confidence” in the nation’s highest court stood at 63%, Gallup, it appears, did not even ask the question again in polls again until 1997, when the answer came back at 71%.
Today, under Chief Justice Roberts, it is a mere 47%.
Also today, Ginni Thomas, the far right wing activist spouse of one of the Court’s most right-wing jurists, Clarence Thomas, is testifying before the U.S. House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack regarding her role in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.
This week Justice Alito, also a far-right conservative, delivered a thinly-veiled attack against Justice Elena Kagan, a liberal, in a rare public forum.
So did the Chief Justice, just weeks earlier.
“The very worst moments [in the court’s history] have been times when judges have even essentially reflected one party’s or one ideology’s set of views in their legal decisions,” Justice Kagan said recently, sparking anger from the right. “The thing that builds up reservoirs of public confidence is the court acting like a court and not acting like an extension of the political process.”
“Judges create legitimacy problems for themselves when they don’t act like courts,” she also said, and “when they instead stray into places that looks like they are an extension of the political process or where they are imposing their own personal preferences.”
“If, over time, the court loses all connection with the public and with public sentiment, that is a dangerous thing for democracy,” Kagan warned.
Chief Justice Roberts later delivered a terse retort.
“Simply because people disagree with an opinion is not a basis for questioning the legitimacy of the court.”
Bloomberg Law columnist Vivia Chen, citing the well-respected constitutional scholar and retired Harvard Law professor of law, Laurence Tribe, recently wrote: “Chief Justice Roberts Is Officially Irrelevant.”
“Having had both John Roberts and Elena Kagan as my brilliant students in constitutional law, and having watched each of their careers unfold, I can’t help thinking that one of them, Justice Kagan, has grown into her role as a wise jurist,” Tribe told Chen in response to the Roberts-Kagan flap.
“Chief Justice Roberts has dwindled in stature as his cliches have lost their power and even their relevance,” Tribe added.
Justice Alito entered the sparring match this week, telling The Wall Street Journal: “It goes without saying that everyone is free to express disagreement with our decisions and to criticize our reasoning as they see fit. But saying or implying that the court is becoming an illegitimate institution or questioning our integrity crosses an important line.”
It was a clear swipe at Justice Kagan.
“It’s embarrassingly obvious that recent decisions rendered by the conservative supermajority hew to a certain political agenda,” Bloomberg’s Chen noted, asking: “where does one start? I guess Dobbs was a biggie because it destroyed almost 50 years of reproductive rights for women.”
“Then,” she added, “there’s the decision that crippled New York’s gun-control law and the one that severely cut back climate change regulations. And let’s not forget how the court keeps siding with religion, as if the separation of church and state is an optional part of the Constitution.”
“That the Supreme Court lurched so far to the right in less than a year is breathtaking,” Chen observes. “It’s like we’re suddenly transported to a country where Wayne LaPierre, Christian fundamentalists, corporate polluters, and the ghost of Phyllis Schlafly are calling the shots.”
(For those looking fore even more justification of how the Supreme Court is undermining its own legitimacy, this video clip offers an additional answer.)
All this turmoil, turbulence, and trouble comes days before the Court begins its new term.
“The Supreme Court will return to work on the first Monday of October, after a three-month summer break, with all the determination of a Renaissance-era explorer looking for new lands to conquer,” snarked – or warned – The Nation‘s Elie Mystal. “Last term, the court’s conservative supermajority showed it was willing to ignore precedent (overturning Roe v. Wade), reality (issuing rulings that will lead to more gun violence and climate pollution), and facts (making up evidence in the praying-football-coach case) to arrive at its preferred judicial outcomes.”
“This term, the high court will cement its grip on political life in America, overturning affirmative action and other critical protections along the way,” he says.
“The conservative Supreme Court has been willing to suppress the vote or let Republican-controlled state legislatures gerrymander district maps to the point where the popular vote is all but meaningless, but so far, the court has been unwilling to throw away enough votes after the fact to change the outcome of an election. We’ll see if there’s a first time for everything.”
How bad could it be?
A picture’s worth a thousand words.
Affirmative Action. Tribal Sovereignty. LGBTQ+ Rights. Voting Rights. They’re all on the chopping block this coming Supreme Court term—and this is just what we know so far. In this essential SCOTUS preview, @ElieNYC lays out what’s at stake this term. https://t.co/i3C1vHntmY
— The Nation (@thenation) September 29, 2022
- News3 days ago
Embattled Trump-Appointed DHS Inspector Was Given Phones of Secret Service Agents in July, Raising ‘New Questions’: Report
- News2 days ago
Watch: Cruz Only ‘No’ Vote After Railing Against Bipartisan Bill to Prevent Another Coup
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM2 days ago
‘Bright-Red, Ear-Splitting Alarm Bell’: Former Top GOP Congressman Blasted for ‘Normalization’ of Fascism (Video)
- RIGHT WING EXTREMISM1 day ago
Don’t Call Us ‘Fascists’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Blasts News Media After Criticism Over Her Feral Hog Hunting Stunt
- CRIME2 days ago
Trump Mocked for ‘Sidelining’ His New $3 Million Attorney: ‘Must Have Given Him Actual Legal Advice’
- News2 days ago
Trump Uses Crude Anti-LGBTQ Language – Aides Stunned by Obsession With Staffers’ Sexuality: New Book
- CRIME1 day ago
Watchdog Reports Trump ‘Credibly Accused’ of ‘Staggering’ List of 55 Criminal Offenses – Urges DOJ to Prosecute
- BREAKING NEWS2 days ago
Highly-Anticipated J6 Committee Hearing Likely Postponed