Connect with us

UPDATED! Election Results: What Was GOOD For LGBT, Progressive Voters



Here’s a rundown of major “good” results — the good, as in, good for progressives and the LGBT community. I’ll update this throughout the day, but stay tuned also for “the bad” list for progressives and the LGBT community, and the just plain wrong, bad, and ugly.

Here goes.

The Good


The Victory Fund reminds us that “more openly LGBT candidates won election to public office in the U.S. in 2010 than in any year in America’s history. At least 106 of the group’s record-breaking 164 endorsed candidates were winners as of Wednesday morning, including Providence, R.I., Mayor David Cicilline.”

In a close race, Vermont’s Peter Shumlin is now its Democratic Governor-elect. This is excellent news for the LGBT community, as a state senator, Shumlin has been central to vermont’s support first of civil unions, then, seven years later, of same-sex marriage. It is critical to note that Shumlin was elevate to the Governorship after helping to usher in same-sex marriage.

As a reader notes in the comments below, “One other pro-equality governor: Here in Colorado, we elected John Hickenlooper!” Awesome!

# # #

In important symbolism, Harry Reid kept his Senate seat –  and Senate Majority Leader Chair — over Tea Party bigot and immigrant-hater Sharron Angle. Angle’s loss, along with Delaware Tea Party “candidate” Christine O’Donnell’s loss, are important wins not only for the LGBT community, but for the integrity of American politics.

Marriage equality advocates are heartened to see pro-equality governors win in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island. New York’s Andrew Cuomo won handily over bigoted, anti-gay, pro-pornography, pro-bestiality, pro-racism, anti-Mosque, etc., Carl Paladino. Former Stamford, Connecticut Mayor and pro-gay rights advocate Dan Malloy squeaked by to a projected gubernatorial win. In Rhode Island, Lincoln D. Chafee will become that state’s first Independent Governor. A former Republican, Chafee actually is one of the few who has supported marriage equality in the past.

More good news coming from Rhode Island. The openly-gay mayor of Providence, R.I., David Cicilline, won his Congressional race. He will join three other openly-gay Representatives in Congress, Democrats Tammy Baldwin, Jared Polis, and Barney Frank.

Massachusetts’ Barney Frank did indeed keep his seat, much to the chagrin of GOProud, who spent a great deal of money, foolishly, attempting to hide their self-contempt.

In honor of GOProud’s efforts, Massachusetts went “all-blue!” Take that, GOProud!

As of this writing, Minnesota Democrat and marriage-equality advocate Mark Dayton is beating Target and Tea Party-supported Republican Tom Emmer in the Minnesota governor’s race. Expect a recount.

California, perhaps, decided to offer equality a payback after Prop 8. They have elected former Governor Jerry Brown back into that office. He roundly beat anti-immigrant and former eBay CEO Meg Whitman. Brown will not challenge the federal court’s Prop 8 ruling. We’re still waiting the results of the Attorney General’s race there, but it looks like the Democrat, Kamala Harris, has a slim lead. Also in an important win for Democrats, Barbara Boxer beat former HP CEO Carly Fiorina.

In other California news, equality-advocate Gavin Newsom appears to have won the lieutenant governor’s race, and California now ties with Maryland as having seven openly-gay state legislators.

Colorado’s Senator, Michael Bennett has defeated the Tea Party’s anti-gay homophobe, Ken Buck. Also in Colorado, voters defeated an anti-abortion “personhood” amendment that would have established constitutional rights “at the beginning of biological development.”

In New Hampshire, pro-marriage equality Governor John Lynch, whom NOM spent millions trying to defeat, kept his seat.

Tea Party homophobe Joe Miller is losing in Alaska to write-in Republican Lisa Murkowski. Murkowski may be a Republican, but I’ll take her over Miller any day of the week.

What did I miss? Add it in the comments below, or email me. I’ll update this later today, and release “The Bad and The Ugly” list shortly.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

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.


Trump Could Face 20 Years Behind Bars for ‘Serious Felonies’ at Mar-a-Lago: Legal Analyst



A legal analyst for ABC News pointed out that former President Donald Trump is potentially facing 20 years in prison for “serious felonies” after the search of his Mar-a-Lago home.

Dan Abrams told ABC host Jonathan Karl that the Department of Justice could indict Trump for multiple crimes after finding classified documents during the search.

“They’re very serious,” Abrams said of the charges. “And the one that’s being talked about most is this espionage act because it has the word espionage in it. But the truth is that when it comes to potential criminal sentences, the obstruction of justice statute is the one with the most potential prison time.”

“There you’re talking about up to 20 years behind bars,” he added. “So these are not sort of minor crimes we’re talking about here. We’re talking about the potential for serious felonies with regard to all three of the crimes being investigated.”

But Abrams threw cold water on the idea that a Trump prosecution would be easy.

“The fundamental question is going to be intentionality,” he opined. “How much do they believe that they did this on purpose? Were they intentionally ignoring subpoenas? Were they literally destroying documents?”

Watch the video below from ABC.


Continue Reading


New Analysis Breaks Down GOP’s Flawed Response to the Mar-a-Lago Search



Republican lawmakers are reportedly at an impasse on whether or not they should be defending former President Donald Trump amid his latest flurry of legal woes. The party is also facing challenges with navigating some lawmakers’ critical assessments of law enforcement over the Trump investigation.

A new analysis is breaking down Republicans’ seemingly flawed response and how it underscores the cracks in the political party’s foundation.

According to Axios, the analysis comes shortly after documents released on Friday, August 12, offered details about the search which reportedly involved “highly classified materials believed stored in violation of the law at the ex-president’s private residence.”

Prior to the release of those documents, Republicans serving on the House Intelligence Committee participated in a press conference where they continued to criticize the investigation, describing it as being politically motivated.

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) scrutinized the investigation deeming it a “complete abuse” of authority as she suggested it was being conducted because the former president is considered to be “Joe Biden’s most likeliest political opponent in 2024.”

However, some Republicans on the committee have offered a more leveled approach to the situation. Per The New York Times, “Trump allies have told top Republicans to tone down their criticism of the Justice Department ‘because it is possible that more damaging information related to the search will become public.'”

“It’s incumbent upon everybody to act in a way that’s becoming of the office they hold,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), a former FBI agent, “And that’s not casting judgment on anything until you know all the facts.”

Others have attempted to defend the former president. Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio) said, “You can say nuclear weapons, but there are things that are highly, highly classified, there are things that are not extremely classified.”

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) is now selling merchandise on her website in support of a call to “defund the FBI” while Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) tweeted, “I will support a complete dismantling and elimination of the democrat brown shirts known as the FBI.”


Image: Elise Stefanik with Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago via Facebook

Continue Reading


Trump Makes False Claims About Classified Documents – And Obama



Donald Trump is responding to news reports he is under FBI investigation for actions covered by the Espionage Act by making apparently false claims about his mishandling of classified documents and about former President Barack Obama.

“Number one, it was all declassified,” Trump says in a post on his Truth Social site, a claim legal experts say is incorrect. For any president to declassify documents, experts say, there is a process that involves actions being taken on each individual document. They also say the president does not have legal authority to declassify documents related to nuclear weapons.

“Number two,” Trump continues, “they didn’t need to ‘seize’ anything. They could have had it anytime they wanted without playing politics and breaking into Mar-a-Lago. It was in secured storage, with an additional lock put on as per their request.”

READ MORE: FBI Agents Searched Mar-a-Lago for ‘Classified Documents Relating to Nuclear Weapons’: Report

Again, according to reports, that too is false. DOJ issued a subpoena after the National Archives tried to get all the documents back and Trump still did not comply.

“They could have had it anytime they wanted—and that includes LONG ago,” he continues in a separate post on Truth Social. “ALL THEY HAD TO DO WAS ASK.”

Again, multiple reports say they did, numerous times.

READ MORE: DOJ Served Trump With Grand Jury Subpoena for Classified Documents Months Before FBI Raid: Report

None of his responses explain why he had at Mar-a-Lago what we now know were at least 35 cartons – 20 retrieved on Monday and 15 earlier this year – of items including confidential, classified, and top secret documents that were required by law to have been handed over to the National Archives.

“The bigger problem is,” Trump says, “what are they going to do with the 33 million pages of documents, many of which are classified, that President Obama took to Chicago?”

That is also false.

The National Archives on Friday issued a statement after Trump repeatedly spread the false claim that former President Barack Obama had 33 million documents in his possession.

“President Barack Hussein Obama kept 33 million pages of documents, much of them classified. How many of them pertained to nuclear? Word is, lots!” was one of Trump’s false attacks on his Truth Social site.

“The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) assumed exclusive legal and physical custody of Obama Presidential records when President Barack Obama left office in 2017, in accordance with the Presidential Records Act (PRA),” the Archives said in a statement posted to its website Friday.

“NARA moved approximately 30 million pages of unclassified records to a NARA facility in the Chicago area where they are maintained exclusively by NARA,” the Archives added. “Additionally, NARA maintains the classified Obama Presidential records in a NARA facility in the Washington, DC, area. As required by the PRA, former President Obama has no control over where and how NARA stores the Presidential records of his Administration.”

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.