Connect with us

A Right Wing Blogger Who Joked About ‘F*ggots’ Was Just Confirmed as a Federal Appeals Court Judge. Thanks, Republicans.

Published

on

John K. Bush’s Wife on Board of Group That Raised Millions for Senate GOP Majority Leader McConnell

Republicans in the U.S. Senate just confirmed John K. Bush as a judge to sit on the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Bush is a former right wing blogger who for over a decade penned fake news stories supporting Donald Trump’s birtherism and other far right wing conspiracies under a pseudonym on his wife’s blog. As an attorney he once said in a public speech he did not want to be mistaken for a “faggot.” It apparently was meant to be funny.

Bush thought it appropriate to say, quoting Hunter S. Thompson, “I come here every year, and let me tell you one thing I’ve learned—this is no town to be giving people the impression you’re some kind of faggot.” 

The final vote on his nomination was 51-47, entirely along party lines. Every Republican present voted for Bush. On the Republican side, only Senator John McCain, recovering from brain surgery and diagnosed with cancer, was absent. 

Bush frequently used an extremist website known as WND for his blogging material. That website is known for spreading false information, and was highly active during the height of birtherism. 

He also has equated abortion and slavery, and drawn parallels between Barack Obama and Monica Lewinsky, as Quartz reported last month. 

27 LGBTQ civil rights groups, led by Lambda Legal, joined together to oppose Bush’s lifetime appointment to the federal bench. Their call was ignored by Senate Republicans.

During the Judiciary Committee vote, Chairman Chuck Grassley admonished Committee Democrats, saying, “Democrats certainly set the standard that prolific bloggers who write with no holds barred are certainly eligible to be judges,” He added, “I don’t think we should change that standard now.”

One group that advocated tirelessly against Bush is the Alliance for Justice.

“While Bush pontificates on a broad swath of issues, one common theme runs throughout his writings: Bush displays a remarkable contempt for any issue he deems liberal or progressive, often launching into personal attacks on individuals he disagrees with,” the Alliance for Justice, opposing his nomination, noted in May.

Bush’s wife sits on the board of a group that raised $14 million for the re-election campaign of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a fellow Kentuckian, the AFJ also notes. 

Bush’s wife, Bridget Bush, who is also an attorney in Louisville, served on the board of directors of the Kentucky Opportunity Coalition. The Kentucky Opportunity Coalition is a 501(c) (4) organization that played a pivotal role in aiding Senator Mitch McConnell’s reelection bid in 2014. The group raised over $14 million during the course of the campaign, spending over $7 million on expenditures expressly advocating for McConnell. According to a news report at the time, “[c]ampaign  finance reformers say the Kentucky Opportunity Coalition is the epitome of ‘dark money’ nonprofit groups that have little or nothing to do with promoting social welfare, as their IRS designation would suggest.”

And it appears that bought him a seat on the federal bench.

“Bush’s nomination to the Sixth Circuit appears to have come at the behest of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Bush has been acquainted with Senator McConnell since at least 2002 when Bush authored an amicus brief on McConnell’s behalf in a case involving Kentucky’s campaign finance laws,” the Alliance for Justice writes.

In his paperwork to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Bush explains that in November 2016, presumably after the presidential election, he met with Senator McConnell in Louisville where Bush “expressed [his] interest in serving as a federal judge.” Bush says that he has “been in contact with Leader McConnell and representatives from his office since that time.”

The AFJ also notes, “Bush failed to make clear he would be an impartial judge. Senator Tillis questioned whether, given his blog posts, Bush could be impartial on the bench. Tillis asked Bush, ‘[d]o you think that impartiality is an aspiration or an absolute expectation?’ When Bush responded, ‘[i]t is an aspiration. I will do my best to be impartial,’ Tillis fired back, ‘I actually have a concern with someone who thinks impartiality is an aspiration. I think it’s an expectation.'”

The group also observes “Bush has advocated stripping First Amendment protections from the press,” which, given his decade of fake news blogging, seems ironic.

LGBT organizations and activists are outraged.

“While it is incredibly disappointing that a majority of the United States Senate would hand a lifetime appointment to someone who has such open disdain for so many Americans, we will not be deterred,” Sharon McGowan, Lambda Legal’s Director of Strategy said in a statement. “Lambda Legal will continue to resist, push back, and fight against any nomination this administration puts forward who does not believe in equality and dignity under the law, for all Americans. We are thankful to those Senators who held their ground in opposing this nomination, and will be shoulder-to-shoulder with you in future confirmation fights, particularly on nominees with anti-LGBT extremist positions and records.”

LGBTQ people now has every right to believe any case that comes before soon-to-be Judge Bush’s court will not receive a fair and impartial ruling. 

To comment on this article and other NCRM content, visit our Facebook page.

Related Topics:
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.

News

Senator Suggests Unusual Interpretation of ‘Advice and Consent’ Responsibility

Published

2 hours ago

on

January 13, 2025

By

A freshman Republican Senator is promoting an unusual interpretation of the Senate’s role in the constitutionally mandated “advice and consent” responsibility.

U.S. Senator Katie Britt, elected in 2022, is the first woman Alabama voters have sent to the U.S. Senate. She gained national attention, and bipartisan criticism, after delivering the Republican response to President Joe Biden’s 2024 State of the Union Address. During her speech, Britt criticized President Biden’s immigration policies and referred to an incident involving human trafficking, suggesting in her remarks a woman had been sexually trafficked because of Biden’s policies. However, as NBC News reported, the incident occurred two decades earlier, in Mexico, not in the United States.

READ MORE: Wildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting

At the time, even Republicans were outraged and mystified by her speech. One GOP strategist told The Daily Beast it was “one of our biggest disasters ever.” A Trump advisor told Rolling Stone, “What the hell am I watching right now?” as The Guardian reported.

This weekend, Britt spoke with CNN’s Jake Tapper about President-elect Donald Trump’s cabinet nominees. Senate Republicans are beginning hearings this week, CBS News reports.

Senator Britt, an attorney, told Tapper that Trump’s “great nominees” will be on Capitol Hill, where they will “have the opportunity not only to make their case” to the members of various committees, “but they’ll have their opportunity to make their case to the American people of why they are best, where they are best suited to move President Trump’s agenda forward.”

In contrast, Senator Angus King (I-ME) recently outlined his view of the Senate’s role in evaluating cabinet nominees. In an op-ed last week, he wrote that a president’s “advisors, and especially Cabinet Members, must be qualified for the sake of the people they represent.”

“My position on Cabinet nominees has always boiled down to two priorities: the candidate needs to be experienced and capable, and not have a stance that is hostile to the department or bureau they would be leading,” Senator King added. “The framers of our Constitution set up a Senate confirmation process as a check on the executive branch to make sure that all parts of government are working by the people and for the people.”

READ MORE: ‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts

Senator Britt appeared to suggest alignment with Trump’s goals should be a key qualification, telling Tapper that she and the Senate will see if they “are best suited to move President Trump’s agenda forward.”

Tapper continued to press her.

“Why would you think somebody who’s willing to lie about the election results in Pennsylvania is going to restore integrity in the Justice Department the way that you are calling for?” Tapper asked.

After a brief pause, Britt replied: “Look, Jake, I’ve had very direct conversations with each and every one of these nominees that I’ve had the opportunity to sit down with. I take my duty as a United States senator seriously, Article Two, Section Two, mandates that I do.”

“We have an obligation both to the American people and to the president, to ask these tough questions. I asked that question very directly. And with each and every nominee, the answers that I have been given with them, has satisfied me that they’re gonna move forward in that direction.”

Watch the video below or at this link.

READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Wildfire Relief Tied to Debt Ceiling? Trump, GOP Spark Outrage After Mar-a-Lago Meeting

Published

4 hours ago

on

January 13, 2025

By

House Republicans, especially the California delegation, are facing sharp criticism after spending portions of the weekend with President-elect Donald Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort and residence. They reportedly discussed ways to take the unprecedented approach of tying passage of relief funds—for the Golden State’s historic wildfire disaster—to raising the debt ceiling, as the fires continue to burn and the death toll rises to 24 people.

“Of the nearly two dozen House Republicans who attended the Sunday dinner at Mar-a-Lago, where this option was discussed, several are caucus leaders and appropriators with major influence in upcoming budget reconciliation and government funding negotiations,” Politico reports. “Trump also discussed the wildfires Saturday night with a group of House Republicans from California, New York and New Jersey.”

According to J.D. Wolf of MeidasTouch News, the California GOP members of Congress “chose to leave the state at its most vulnerable moment,” and “have drawn criticism for abandoning their … state during the crisis, opting instead to join Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago.”

READ MORE: ‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts

“California [GOP] Representatives Jay Obernolte, Tom McClintock, Kevin Kiley, Doug LaMalfa, Darrell Issa, Ken Calvert, Vince Fong, and Young Kim were spotted in a photo with Trump this weekend when they could have been back home seeking ways to help even if the fire isn’t in their district,” he declared. “Instead, these lawmakers have prioritized meeting with Trump over exercising leadership in their home state. Their absence sends a troubling message to their state.”

In a stern rebuke, Wolf added: “In doing so, they have not only abandoned their duty to Californians but also cast doubt on their priorities and dedication as elected officials.” He also wrote: “Californians are left wondering if these leaders will ever prioritize their needs over political maneuvering.”

One House Republican from California was “not invited,” according to Politico’s Meredith Lee Hill.

“But all the talk of unity at Mar-a-Lago this weekend only went so far – Trump did not invite David Valadao (R-Calif.), 1 of the 10 House Rs who voted to impeach after Jan. 6, to the mtg of CA, NY and NJ GOP members.”

READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports

Valadao’s presence would have made sense. Hill reports he is a caucus chief and senior appropriator.

Trump, who has a history of trying to withhold relief aid to California, has been accused of politicizing the tragedy, which Politico notes, “could become the costliest natural disaster in U.S. history.”

It may become even more costly.

The Associated Press reports, “firefighters are preparing for a return of dangerous winds that could again stoke the flames on Monday.”

Over the weekend, on his social media website, Trump reposted this:

View the social media post above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

‘Slashing Welfare’: GOP Eyes Chopping $5 Trillion to Pay for Trump Priorities—Like Tax Cuts

Published

3 days ago

on

January 10, 2025

By

House Republicans are circulating a “menu” of options that Speaker Mike Johnson’s conference could chose from—reportedly a massive $5 trillion worth of federal government programs to put on the chopping block to pay for the President-elect’s promised priorities, including tax cuts and border security.

According to Politico, there is an “early list” of proposed cuts (below) that “includes changes to Medicare and ending Biden administration climate programs, along with slashing welfare and ‘reimagining’ the Affordable Care Act.” Also, in addition to suggesting cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare), “the document floats clawing back bipartisan infrastructure and Inflation Reduction Act funding.”

Politico also reports that Republicans appear to be considering cuts to “the country’s largest anti-hunger program”—or, SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program formerly known as food stamps.  This would “spark massive opposition from Democrats and would also face some GOP resistance.”

There is far more, including siphoning about $2.3 trillion from Medicaid, a federal government program that has been providing critical health insurance for low-income adults and children for six decades.

READ MORE: Trump Trying to Buy Back His DC Hotel Seen as ‘Magnet’ for Conflicts of Interest: Reports

The early list, published by Politico, has positive-sounding categories like “Making Medicaid Work for the Most Vulnerable,” but within that are proposals like “Medicaid Work Requirements.”

Republicans have for years been trying to institute work requirements for Medicaid recipients, despite the fact that about two-thirds of recipients who are able to work are already employed.

“An analysis from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that a national Medicaid work requirement would result in 2.2 million adults losing Medicaid coverage per year (and subsequently experiencing increases in medical expenses), and lead to only a very small increase in employment,” KFF (formerly the Kaiser Family Foundation) reported in 2023.

The list also proposes “Ending Cradle-to-Grave Dependence,” which, among other items, suggests “Reduce TANF by 10 Percent.”

According to the federal government, “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) is a federally funded, state-run program. Also known as welfare, TANF helps families pay for” items including food, housing, home energy, and child care.

Republicans also suggest they can save $152 billion in the section titled, “Reimagining the Affordable Care Act.”

Politico got a hold of a leaked list of GOP plans to cut federal spending on Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act
www.politico.com/news/2025/01…

[image or embed]

— Cynthia Cox (@cynthiaccox.bsky.social) January 10, 2025 at 2:01 PM

Politico adds that Republicans are “also eyeing repealing significant Biden administration health care rules, which could include ending a rule requiring minimum staffing levels at nursing homes.” It is unclear how that would provide cost savings to the federal government.

READ MORE: ‘45, 47, Felon’: Trump Sentenced But Expert Warns ‘Now the Gloves Could Come Off’

They also suggest they can pull $468 billion in savings by putting President Joe Biden’s climate policies “on the chopping block.”

Politico’s Meredith Lee Hill on social media noted: “Huge cuts to SNAP – the country’s largest anti-hunger program – proposed in here…would quickly hit +40 million low-income Americans…it’s already triggering immense backlash among some GOP centrists + even more conservative Rs.”

“Speaker Johnson can’t afford any GOP defections,” she added.

Vanity Fair’s Molly Jong-Fast characterized the proposals as “Taking food stamps away from hungry children to pay for tax cuts for wealthy people.

Salaam Bhatti, the director of the Food Research and Action Center, remarked: “Cutting & gutting SNAP and kicking millions of poor people off the program at a time when people voted because they can’t afford to put food on the table is the most out of touch thing I’ve ever seen.”

“Trump voters in red states who rely on those programs are going to love this,” quipped Alex Gonzalez, a political analyst and editor-in-chief for Latino Public Policy Foundation. “Trump wants to cut $5.6 trillion from federal programs to fund $10 trillion in tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations. Ironically, red states depend more on these programs than blue states.”

READ MORE: ‘Bananas’: Congressman Asks How Trump’s ‘Insane’ Threats Benefit Americans Economically

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.