TNCRM’s Scott Rose Asks California Commission To Prosecute NOM
The National Organization for Marriage‘s “Yes on 8” — the group responsible for getting Prop 8 on the ballot and getting it passed — has admitted guilt in 18 counts of violating California state election finance laws.
NOM now is hoping that the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) will accept NOM’s offer to settle on NOM’s rampant law breaking for only $49,000.
This reporter sent the FPPC the message below, explaining why strict deterrent penalties must be imposed on the malevolently anti-gay NOM bigots who have admitted to breaking laws.
FPPC officials to whom this e-mail (below) was sent include Commission Chair Ann Ravel, Executive Director John Wallace, Chief of the Administration Division Tina Z. Bass, General Counsel Zackery P. Morazzini, Chief of the Technical Assistance Division Lynda Cassady, and Chief of the Enforcement Division Gary Winuk.
From:
Scott Rose
Minorities Anti-Defamation Professional
To the Entire California Fair Political Practices Commission:
This regards your case against the anti-gay-rights group “Yes on 8,” which is part of The National Organization for Marriage.
NOM is to American LGBTers what the KKK is to blacks and Jews.
NOM wants to settle your case against it, in order to evade full criminal justice accountability for its law-breaking ways.
Meanwhile, the organization is spending umpteen millions upon tens of millions around the country and the world, demonizing sexual minorities on the basis of known falsehoods (i.e. demonizing lies), hate-mongering and inspiring to violence against us.
In state after state, NOM has apparently violated election finance laws, and then tied up the courts bringing apparently frivolous challenges to the laws, not caring about the waste of tax payers’ resources in pursuing those apparently frivolous cases through appeals. If all of these NOM election law violations-related cases had been brought in a single court system, instead of the court systems of many different states, a court almost surely would already have barred NOM from filing any such cases in the future.
NOM must now be given an effective deterrent penalty for having broken at least 18 of California’s state campaign finance laws.
As stated above, NOM hate-mongers and incites to violence against sexual minorities.
NOM sponsors anti-gay hate rallies where its hand-selected speakers yell through megaphones that homosexuals are “worthy to death.”
To see a video of one such NOM anti-gay hate rally, go here.
NOM also incites people to believe that gays are not human. For example, NOM’s Wiliam Duncan led a symposium in an all-day anti-gay hate fest titled “Homosexuals or Homo Sapiens; Who Deserves Protected Class Status?” You can see documentation for NOM’s William Duncan having done that, here.
To spell this out for you: NOM says that homosexuals are not human and deserve to die.
We are sick and tired of these arrogant, tyrannical, hateful heterosupremacists believing that they are above the law.
Many top NOM officials also are top officials with other anti-gay hate groups. NOM founder Robert George, for example, is a board member of the Family Research Council, a Southern Poverty Law Center-certified anti-gay hate group. The SPLC classifies groups as hate groups when they continually promulgate demonizing lies against a minority. The SPCL 2012 Intelligence Report on NOM is titled “National Organization for Marriage Continues to Spread Lies Against Gays.” You can view that SLPC report here.
NOM founder Robert George also is senior fellow of The Witherspoon Institute, whose president Luis Tellez is a NOM board member.
The Witherspoon Institute funded a sociological “study” from the University of Texas at Austin’s Mark Regnerus, booby-trapped with malice aforethought to make gay parents look bad. First, Witherspoon/NOM gave Regnerus a $55,000 “planning grant” for a study on gay parents’ child outcomes. After seeing Regnerus’s “plan,” booby trapped to make gay parents look bad, Witherspoon/NOM arranged for Regnerus to have a known minimum total of $785,000 in study funding; a jaw-dropping amount for a sociological study that only surveyed 2,988 total people, only 250 of which were labelled, inappropriately and unscientifically, as having been raised by “same sex parents.”
Witherspoon/NOM have now fully weaponized that scientifically invalid study, and are deploying it pitilessly against gay people and their rights. You can read a letter signed by over 200 Ph.D.s and M.D.s, complaining about the study’s lack of intellectual integrity as well as about the suspicious circumstances under which it got published, here.
To read about the circumstances of the corrupt peer review through which the Witherspoon/NOM commissioned anti-gay hate speech got published in a scientific journal, go here.
Whereas Witherspoon and NOM share top officials in common, NOM is a 501(c)4 while Witherspoon is a tax exempt 501(c)3. There is a strong appearance that in its funding of the Regnerus “study,” Witherspoon and NOM were playing a tax laws shell game, paying for the Regnerus study through the 501(c)3 Witherspoon Institute, even though the study was conceived primarily for use as a NOM weapon to defeat President Obama. To read details about Witherspoon/NOM’s possible violations of IRS tax laws, go here.
As you see, NOM knows no boundaries for its violations of human decency in attacking its LGBT victims.
NOM now wants to settle with the Fair Political Practices Commission on its 18 counts of campaign finance law violations — for only $49,000 — Â so it can move ahead as though nothing had happened, continuing to violate laws in its hateful and unwarranted attacks against gay human beings. As mentioned above, in state after state, NOM has apparently violated election finance laws, and then tied up the courts bringing apparently frivolous challenges to the laws, not caring about the waste of tax payers’ resources in pursuing those apparently frivolous cases through appeals. If all of these NOM election law violations-related cases had been brought in a single court system, instead of the court systems of many different states, a court almost surely would already have barred NOM from filing any such cases in the future.
NOM must now be given an effective deterrent penalty for having broken at least 18 of California’s state campaign finance laws.
A wrist-slap, easy-does-it settlement of $49,000 does not faze the malicious anti-gay bigots of NOM one iota. The “planning grant” they gave for a weaponized, fraudulent study booby trapped against gay parents was $55,000, leading to a full study grant of $785,000. And as mentioned above, NOM meanwhile is spending umpteen millions upon tens of millions around the country and the world, demonizing sexual minorities on the basis of known falsehoods (i.e. demonizing lies), hate-mongering and inspiring to violence against us.
NOM is laughing in advance at the California Fair Political Practices Commission, believing that the Commission will settle with NOM instead of referring NOM to appropriate authorities for criminal prosecution.
The California Fair Political Practices Commission absolutely must not allow NOM to have the last laugh in their 18 violations of state campaign finance laws.
Sincerely,
Scott Rose
New York City-based novelist and freelance writer Scott Rose’s LGBT-interest by-line has appeared on Advocate.com, PoliticusUSA.com, The New York Blade, Queerty.com, Girlfriends and in numerous additional venues. Among his other interests are the arts, boating and yachting, wine and food, travel, poker and dogs. His “Mr. David Cooper’s Happy Suicide†is about a New York City advertising executive assigned to a condom account.
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.
 |
Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.
Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”
“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”
In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”
He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”
“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”
“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”
“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”
The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.
“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”
Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”
Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.
Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.
— Graham Platner for Senate (@grahamformaine) July 6, 2026
President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.
“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”
The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”
Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”
TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”
Critics blasted Trump.
“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.
One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”
Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”
The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.
U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”
Image via Reuters
President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.
According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.
Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”
“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”
Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”
Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.
Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.
The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.
“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.
The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.
“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”
Image via Reuters
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
