Being an agitator is now a crime worthy of an ICE takedown with guns drawn?

 Being an agitator is now a crime worthy of an ICE takedown with guns drawn? Right up there with migrants with criminal records are new targets of ICE: They will take down those they call agitators with no evidence that a person was doing any more than surveying ICE activities from her car  and that was "interfering" with ICE .. She was driving around tracking ICE activity. DHS itself called her an agitator.  This is the kind of stuff that happens in dictatorships, communist or fascist. Those demonstrating or protesting peacefully are considered enemies of the state and often are just "disappeared" with no trace or put on the docket with judges appointed by the State. In this case, technology, a dashcam, was a citizen's record. So here we have similar actions by a government paramilitary whose job is not to take down "agitators", but who do it anyway..First Amendment be damned. .St. Peter police chief intervened and got federal agents to release resident, sources say | MPR News

Concerns grow over federal agencies' use of facial recognition technology on protesters | Watch

 

 

Free speech got protection from government retribution in unanimous SCOTUS decision

The Trump administration's practice of punishing those who speak out against a policy or act against it is one of the most disturbing hallmarks of the regime's power grab, leading to autocracy and the subversion of democracy. Trump's rule by fear of revenge has received a blow. Those who are in the "keep democracy" movement have a reason for hope.The freedom of opponents to express themselves in words and deed without a government using its powers to suppress or punish them is a major difference between democracy and dictatorships (autocracy, Kings).

In the National Rifle Association vs Vullo, a 2024 case," the court ..said that it’s a clear violation of the First Amendment’s free speech provisions for government to force people to speak and act in ways that are aligned with its policies."This obscure Supreme Court decision could impact Trump's agenda — and restore faith in the court  In short, the use of the power of the federal government to forward Trump's campaign of "retribution" against his perceived enemies and governing by fear with such threats of suppressing speech and acts of opponents may indicate how the Court will vote in cases working their way through the system up to the SCOTUS level.  The decision may impact cases concerning theTrump regime's attempt to punish private law firms, multinational corporations, universities, or members of the media for being engaged in actions or speech that Trump does not like..

National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo - Wikipedia   summary: National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo, 602 U.S. 175 (2024), is a United States Supreme Court case which held that if Maria T. Vullo, the former director of the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS), attempted to coerce financial institutions in the state to refrain from doing business with the National Rifle Association of America (NRA), then such conduct would violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

Why the US does not, should not, have a national church

  ( Update: 6/26/2024 in a stand alone posting, too) I saw a posting saying that even though God and other Christian-related words do not appear in the Constitution, the signers of our historical documents used the term to date it: "in the year of our Lord." That is how date was expressed in those days. That was not a sign of those agreeing to permit a theocracy.  Now, please show me where the intent of the First Amendment was to establish a national religion or church, . You can't, and it was on purpose. Jefferson advocated the Age of Reason, when men had the freedom to come to their own conclusions. Madison because religion had caused centuries of bloody wars in Europe and England and did not want to repeat that. https://theconversation.com/how-jefferson-and-madisons... 

We would be much more unified as a country if religion would butt out of government and politics. Using the government to promote and evangelize your religion is extremely divisive. First amendment: no state religion...and our founders were so wise. I am a Christian, too, just not the  kind that Project 2025 promotes..

The GOP's embrace of Proect 2025, geared to go into practice in day one of a Trump presidency, has as its intent to establish a theocracy in America.  https://www.ncronline.org/opinion/guest-voices/project-2025-us-bishops-cant-stand-silently-political-sidelines#:~:t     From the piece: "Project 2025 operationalizes the tenets of white Christian nationalism on such issues as climate change, education, immigration, systemic racism, and abortion. Contrasting the scholars' policies with the bishops' positions on such high-profile concerns reveals what makes the Republican game plan so dangerous.)

The agreement of two adversaries on that issue is not the only reason, but experience as colonies showed the danger of having a national religion. There was already a great deal of diversity, and where a colony did attempt it, it was unwise and created problems, more often than not..  For example, Massachusetts was so puritan-dominated that a group led by Roger Williams split off and founded Rhode Island.   

So many wars had been fought over religion in England when our founders were contemplating what kind of a country this new land would be.  Some of our forefathers were protestant, and others were not.  When the country was first settled in the 1600s, it went through periods in some colonies that had established their own state religions.  We know the stories. Perhaps those who claim this was a Christian nation so, therefore, we should have a state religion has to face the fact that what was considered Christian in one colony was not the same church in another, and it is clear from the militancy today exhibited by the newly minted white Christian nationalists there is no room for those who are Christian, but not with the same interpretations of the scriptures or even with the same priories.  I have given this much thought and let me repeat some  excerpts from my prior blog postings.

How freedom of religion came to be in the Bill of Rights was because of the diversity of experiences in the original colonies. The pilgrims famously sought religious freedom to practice their own brand of Christianity, but it was freedom for them, not everyone. Some colonies like Massachusetts had established state religions with results we ought to remember, such as  Salem witch hunts, hanging or burning at the stake of heretics,  The Scarlet  Letter,  and Puritan overreach causing breakaway founding of Rhode Island by Roger Williams for religious freedom. The success of the Virginia and Pennsylvania colonies not having a state-sponsored religion had been triumphant in keeping internal peace. Fresh in the founders' knowledge of English and European recent histories were centuries of war between protestants and Catholics, the root of many conflicts. 

Christian Nationalists are waiting in the wings for the second coming of Trump as they seek to get even more political power to make their theocracy become a reality. https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/20/donald-trump-allies-christian-nationalism-00142086 They are already in positions of political power and are making plans to implement their movement by using the government to do their converting on their behalf.  They are already planning to ride on the skirts of MAGA into the White House which will give them access to all of the reins of power. Those part of the Christian Nationalist movement like Speaker Mike Johnson, were third in line to the presidency. advocates theology that has something in common with the Taliban of Afghanistan that sets medieval rules and uses government to enforce what they believe is acceptable and unacceptable behavior in all phases of citizens' lives, private or public,   MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: The GOP is becoming the American Taliban?

The most recent realization of the Christian Nationalist extremist to use government power to force the vast majority of women to bow down to their ideology is banning in-vitro fertilization. in the meantime, the state gets an F in infant and maternal mortality. https://www.marchofdimes.org/peristats/reports/alabama/report-card

So far as education is concerned, Alabama ranks near the bottom, number 45, as well, in the rankings of states. https://wallethub.com/edu/e/most-educated-states/31075

Alabama also ranks as the 49th lowest state in per capita income.  https://www.statsamerica.org/sip/rank_list.aspx?rank_label=pcpi1

Alabama ranks in the top ten states depending upon federal funding as part of their state budgets. https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/

 The Alabama ban on invitro fertilization is a backdoor attempt to say life begins with an embryo, not at viability. It lays to groundwork for banning any pills taken early in the abortion process and even to ban contraception. " In all, fewer than 15 percent of fertilized eggs will result in a birth..” per the National Institues of Health. Frozen eggs are potential human beings but rarely become actual ones until it is implanted in a human and develop successfully. Jul 14, 2020 per the National Institute of Health. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7670474/#:~:text  The logic escapes me: ban the potential of birth by those who supposedly treasure life. The assumed  purpose however, is  to get the Trump-dominated Supreme Court to rule their way to pave the way government to control even more of reproduction rights 

From a November 2. 2023 blog posting:    I am grateful I do not live in a theocracy. When we became a nation with the adoption of the Constitution, the separation of church from state was at the top of the list of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly says the government cannot establish a religion, the foundation statement of the separation of church and state. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ")  The Christian right has been active in narrowing the interpretation of the First Amendment, and the Christian nationalist movement has made it a goal to eliminate this separation altogether.  Even Jesus referenced separating loyalties from government and God on matters of taxation.: "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21 NASB). 

 

Thanksgiving thoughts: I am thankful we are not a theocracy (update 2/21/2024)

 Thanksgiving is a few days away, but events dictate me to ask the question of whether this is a Christian nation or not. Many citizens differ in various views of the role of Christianity in government and theology,  and I treasure my ability to express my views freely in our current form of Democracy in the USA. I am thankful we are not a theocracy. Update:   https://apnews.com/article/america-christian-united-states-conservative-beliefs-9286431a0ddde91c928e5d411795c1fe?user_email=2254787f2de6133291d8de56d5223ad0836fd31a4ba928a7dc8ea959298ab6f4&utm_medium=Morning_Wire&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_campaign=Morning%20Wire_Feb_21_2024&utm_term=Morning%20Wire%20Subscribers

  11/18/2023 The new House Speaker has called this country as "dark and depraved", mostly because of the permissiveness of abortion and tolerance of homosexuality.  It is a condemnation based on his devotion to his particular interpretation of the scriptures. House speaker Mike Johnson calls America 'dark and depraved,' laments LGBTQ+ youth   Mike Johnson, the new speaker of the House, is a gender extremist | Moira Donegan | The Guardian    MUFTIC FORUM BLOG: The GOP is becoming the American Taliban?  

     How did it happen we are not, by law, a Christian nation. When we became a nation with the adoption of the Constitution, the separation of church from state was at the top of the list of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly says the government cannot establish a religion, the foundation statement of the separation of church and state. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ")  The Christian right has been active in narrowing the interpretation of the First Amendment, and the Christian nationalist movement has made it a goal to eliminate this separation altogether.  Even Jesus referenced separating loyalties from government and God on matters of taxation.: "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21 NASB). 

 How freedom of religion came to be in the Bill of Rights was because of the diversity of experiences in the original colonies. The pilgrims famously sought religious freedom to practice their own brand of Christianity, but it was freedom for them, not everyone. Some colonies like Massachusetts had established state religions with results we ought to remember, such as  Salem witch hunts, hanging or burning at the stake of heretics,  The Scarlet  Letter,  and Puritan overreach causing breakaway founding of Rhode Island by Roger Williams for religious freedom. The success of the Virginia and Pennsylvania colonies not having a state-sponsored religion had been triumphant in keeping internal peace. Fresh in the founders' knowledge of English and European recent histories were centuries of war between protestants and Catholics, the root of many conflicts. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

A whole lot more :

The raising of a Christian nationalist to the Speakership made me personally appreciate the founders' wisdom in writing the separation of church and state into the First Amendment. .I am thankful we are not a theocracy, and church and state are mostly separated. However, the issue of using taxpayer money to fund religious-based private education is constantly challenged in the courts.  I am a protestant Christian, but I do not derive my politics from the same interpretations of the Bible Speaker Johnson proclaims as what guides him.   I do not want to live in a country that exists, favors,  and rules only for those who subscribe to his brand of Christianity or who support Johnson's and Christian Nationalists' particular interpretations of how the scriptures apply to modern life.  It differs from what I see as the fundamental message Christ delivered in the version of the Bible I read..  While abortion and same-sex love were practiced and well-known in the time of Christ, I find no direct reference to it in the New Testament. It takes books by theologians to derive an interpretation to rationalize a direction from Christ on these issues.  The Golden Rule and the Beatitudes, or forgiving those who trespass against us, have less importance in some modern Evangelical applications. Hate or denial of human rights of those one disapproves is not a Christian value. Ignoring and denying the needs of those who cannot help themselves in the name of freedom from government and taxes or fear of becoming powerless in a time of racial demographic changes are also not my Christian values..  Ending abortion has become going off on a specious tangent, overtaking everything else of Christ's message of caring about neighbors and the "least of these." A singular focus on saving the unborn while not caring for the thriving life of the born is not in my Christian value list. Other. public policy issues reflect these differences. . As we sit down to our feasts, let us also remember that the new Speaker supports the right-wing initiative to cut food stamps to the poor, which is not exactly a charitable policy for a professed Christian. Being a good steward should not be used to justify being cruel or ignoring hunger to get a better tax advantage. 14 GOP governors rejected federal money for summer nutrition programs for the poor. https://apnews.com/article/states-rejecting-federal-funds-summer-ebt-8a1e88ad77465652f9de67fda3af8a2d  Johnson's first act was to cut IRS funding to prosecute rich tax cheats before approving aid to Israel in the name of cutting the deficit. A tax collector is a low-hanging fruit to attack to get popular approval.  It was also a rooky mistake: failure to get the figures first before advocating a position.. The Congressional Budget Office figured that one would cost the treasury $90 million in lost revenues and add to the deficit much more than it would save. Here’s Exactly How Much House Republicans’ Israel Bill Would Cost | The New Republic    For an in-depth study of who is a Christian nationalist and what Christian nationalism is, go to PRRI. For how Mike Johnson fits into the definition: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/27/mike-johnson-christian-nationalist-ideas-qa-00123882  

We are still a nation of diverse religious beliefs and non-believers. Still, we have never knowingly had such an ideologue in that position of Speaker who is loyal to the most extreme form of  Christian Nationalism. If Johnson follows the ideology to a T, his allegiance is not to Democracy first but to his religion, whether it represents the majority (it doesn't) or should surpass Democracy as formalizing rules and laws governing the nation. (It shouldn't). Among those beliefs is one that is purely mysoginist.  Women are to be submissive to men.  Some women agree; most women do not when it takes two breadwinners to make it in a middle class home, and women cannot afford to abide by either the old Nazi phrase of kinder, kirche, and kuchen, or children, church, and kitchen.  In short, women, keep your nose out of  lobbying for equal pay and control over your reproductive functions and keep on making the coffee in the office. That's your place.  PRRI   The core goal of Christian nationalists is to establish this country as a Christian country. That flies in the face of democracy. Privilege in our country is for all, not just for those who show obedience to the same religion as the ruler or one religion set in stone in the federal laws. 

 In the meantime, while Johnson fiddles with theology, democracy burns with threats against the democracy as we know it, the same democracy that gives Johnson the freedom to express his theology..  )   How did it happen we are not, by law, a Christian nation. When we became a nation with the adoption of the Constitution, the separation of church from state was at the top of the list of the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly says the government cannot establish a religion, the foundation statement of the separation of church and state. ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ")  The Christian right has been active in narrowing the interpretation of the First Amendment, and the Christian nationalist movement has made it a goal to eliminate this separation altogether.  Even Jesus referenced separating loyalties from government and God on matters of taxation.: "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:21 NASB). 

 How freedom of religion came to be in the Bill of Rights was because of the diversity of experiences in the original colonies. The pilgrims famously sought religious freedom to practice their own brand of Christianity, but it was freedom for them, not everyone. Some colonies like Massachusetts had established state religions with results we ought to remember, such as  Salem witch hunts, hanging or burning at the stake of heretics,  The Scarlet  Letter,  and Puritan overreach causing breakaway founding of Rhode Island by Roger Williams for religious freedom. The success of the Virginia and Pennsylvania colonies not having a state-sponsored religion had been triumphant in keeping internal peace. Fresh in the founders' knowledge of English and European recent histories were centuries of war between protestants and Catholics, the root of many conflicts. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

A whole lot more :

The raising of a Christian nationalist to the Speakership made me personally appreciate the founders' wisdom in writing the separation of church and state into the First Amendment. .I am thankful we are not a theocracy, and church and state are mostly separated. However, the issue of using taxpayer money to fund religious-based private education is constantly challenged in the courts.  I am a protestant Christian, but I do not derive my politics from the same interpretations of the Bible Speaker Johnson proclaims as what guides him.   I do not want to live in a country that exists, favors,  and rules only for those who subscribe to his brand of Christianity or who support Johnson's and Christian Nationalists' particular interpretations of how the scriptures apply to modern life.  It differs from what I see as the fundamental message Christ delivered in the version of the Bible I read..  While abortion and same-sex love were practiced and well-known in the time of Christ, I find no direct reference to it in the New Testament. It takes books by theologians to derive an interpretation to rationalize a direction from Christ on these issues.  The Golden Rule and the Beatitudes, or forgiving those who trespass against us, have less importance in some modern Evangelical applications. Hate or denial of human rights of those one disapproves is not a Christian value. Ignoring and denying the needs of those who cannot help themselves in the name of freedom from government and taxes or fear of becoming powerless in a time of racial demographic changes are also not my Christian values..  Ending abortion has become going off on a specious tangent, overtaking everything else of Christ's message of caring about neighbors and the "least of these." A singular focus on saving the unborn while not caring for the thriving life of the born is not in my Christian value list. Other. public policy issues reflect these differences. . As we sit down to our feasts, let us also remember that the new Speaker supports the right-wing initiative to cut food stamps to the poor, which is not exactly a charitable policy for a professed Christian. Being a good steward should not be used to justify being cruel or ignoring hunger to get a better tax advantage.   Johnson's first act was to cut IRS funding to prosecute rich tax cheats before approving aid to Israel in the name of cutting the deficit. A tax collector is a low-hanging fruit to attack to get popular approval.  It was also a rooky mistake: failure to get the figures first before advocating a position.. The Congressional Budget Office figured that one would cost the treasury $90 million in lost revenues and add to the deficit much more than it would save. Here’s Exactly How Much House Republicans’ Israel Bill Would Cost | The New Republic    For an in-depth study of who is a Christian nationalist and what Christian nationalism is, go to PRRI. For how Mike Johnson fits into the definition: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/27/mike-johnson-christian-nationalist-ideas-qa-00123882  

We are still a nation of diverse religious beliefs and non-believers but we have never knowingly had such an ideologue in that position of Speaker who is loyal to the most extreme form of  Christian Nationalism. If Johnson follows the ideology to a T, his allegiance is not to Democracy first but to his religion, whether it represents the majority (it doesn't) or should surpass Democracy as formalizing rules and laws governing the nation. (It shouldn't). Among those beliefs is one that is purely mysoginist.  Women are to be submissive to men.  Some women agree; most women do not when it takes two breadwinners to make it in a middle class home, and women cannot afford to abide by either the old Nazi phrase of kinder, kirche, and kuchen, or children, church, and kitchen.  In short, women, keep your nose out of  lobbying for equal pay and control over your reproductive functions and keep on making the coffee in the office. That's your place.  PRRI   The core goal of Christian nationalists is to establish this country as a Christian country. That flies in the face of democracy. Privilege in our country is for all, not just for those who show obedience to the same religion as the ruler or one religion set in stone in the federal laws. 

One of the characteristics of those subscribing to the Evangelical movement is that in the last quarter of the last century, they began the effort to use politics to advance their beliefs. There was a concerted effort by this Evangelical movement to get control of political organizations, local government, school boards, and control of party leadership from the precinct level up. They began by, ousting precinct chairs who were pro-choice or mostly pro-business, even if they were professed Christians. I watched how it happened to my moderate, non-racist, pro-choice Republican brother in Tulsa in the late 1970s-1980s and again in the late 1990s when he was a GOP precinct chair in northeastern Colorado.  Instead of separating church from state, Evangelicals joined politics and religion together and launched an effort to get the government to enforce their issues on their behalf, even enacting laws to criminalize those who did not comply regarding abortion and sexual orientation, enacting Don't say gay, rewriting the history of slavery in anti-CTR laws, defaming, defunding, and disapproving of  "woke" institutions, including the military and judiciary, and banning books and attacking media of which they disapproved for not conforming to their views of race and LGBTQ rights and reducing government social programs of social security, Medicare, and food stamps . . 

 In the past ten years, Evangelists allied themselves with Donald Trump's MAGA movement. Both share the same attitude that they are under attack by the liberal public, even though Evangelicals are in the driving seat in much of the GOP and the House of Representatives and, until 2021, in the White House.  This persecution complex permeates both the political right and its leader, Donald Trump, who channels this and his own personal anger against any authority standing in his way to his mostly White core MAGA supporters, giving this alliance a racist tinge as well. Along with the alliance came some members of their movement to equate Jews (personified by George Soros) to all evils of those left of center.  The persecution complex is part and parcel of the Christian nationalist  Speaker Mike Johnson, who is now in the driver's seat, an avowed Christian nationalist but mild-mannered and in a business suit.  Could his extreme views cause a backlash and a split in the GOP over issues he supports, including isolationism, anti 'globalists" regarding Ukraine and national security, science-denying in the environmental climate change actions,  and abortions and other women's rights? As an election denier, he became a bonafide  MAGA. Most of these issues are unpopular with the US population if not on a legislative district and district basis, gerrymandered so birds of a feather flock together.   Pushback and backlash will only add fuel to the Christian nationalist persecution complex.   The immediate test will be a denial of funding for what he and the MAGA caucus disapprove of in the looming budget fight. Unfortunately, as second in line for the presidency, his constituency is no longer like-minded religious believers but a very diverse nation amid demographic shifts.

 https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/mike-johnson-embodies-evangelicals-embattlement-strategy-it-may-be-backfiring/ar-AA1juyDH?ocid=socialshare&pc=DCTS&cvid=f88a334771844fe5e2edbdce6ad0123b&ei=14 

  https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/27/mike-johnson-christian-nationalist-ideas-qa-00123882  

55 Things to Know About Mike Johnson, the New House Speaker - POLITICO

PRRI  for Christian nationalist views about a woman's place in society:  "submissive"

 History of Rhode Island - Wikipedia

Johnson's brewing SNAP crisis - POLITICO

Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom - Bill of Rights Institute

https://www.bu.edu/articles/2011/the-bibles-contradictions-about-sex/

Private charity no match for federal poverty aid, experts say | The Seattle Times

Cutting food stamps has a long history, the goal of conservatives:      For updated data: What the data says about food stamps in the U.S. | Pew Research Center     Ignoring the data or reducing the numbers of eligibility is not a rational or humane approach to citing fraud as the reason to oppose such welfare programs which cannot be made up by private giving.    Fraud is always a concern, but estimates vary given who is estimating and the percent of the volume of the program so citing dollar figures are very deceptive. The bigger the need and program, the more the absolute fraud figures could increase. SNAP updates may increase fraud risk | Legal Blog (thomsonreuters.com)  The more effort that is put into enforcement, the percentage found may also make past comparisons warped.    Reducing the numbers eligible would reduce the total dollars of fraud, no doubt, and also increase those suffering from lack of access to nutrition.

What House Speaker Mike Johnson has said about Social Security and Medicare (msn.com)  These proposals need some deep scrutiny. It subjects all to needs tests since the levels of benefits are tied to income levels. It appears to me the losers will be the middle class and those under 80 years old. The inbetweeners just reaching eligibility for those beloved programs would see the age of eligibility increase and the cost of living adjustments go away in a stealth way of cutting their income in the face of inflation, which will always increase at a minimum of 2 to 3% a year.This is despite most of a lifetime of work paying into a system that they expected to remain the same.   At least the old GOP simplistic approach to fund Social Security with the casino of Wall Street is no longer the only path.  Making fixed-income retirees pay more deductibles may result from shifting all Medicare to the Obamacare exchanges. That needs to be offset in some way if that happens..    Biden's approach is to keep everything the same and just use taxpayer money to cover shortfalls.  Something must be done, for sure, because of looming shortfalls. 

Is it fair to stereotype the GOP as the party of white supremacists and neo-Nazis?

Updated 5/25/23

Is it fair to stereotype the GOP as the party of white supremacists, Christian nationalists, and neo-Nazis? It is not fair, but so long as those running for office do not disown them and tacitly or actively dog whistle to get their support, they are vulnerable to looking like it.  The leading contenders for the Republican nomination for president at this time, Trump and DeSantis, are in the active column, you say? The  NAACP just issued a travel warning to visitors to Florida that Florida is hostile to black people as the result of DeSantis' attempt to grab more of those that Trump had previously corralled. The prime reason Biden said he ran was Trump's calling fine people the neo-Nazis and other white nationalists in the Charleston tiki torch march, and Trump underlined his support by expressing his love for those similar participants on January 6. Recently he was heard saying if elected, he would pardon most of those who pleaded or were found guilty, some imprisoned for seditious conspiracy. 

 I agree with Charlie Sykes this AM on MSNBC that the more in the race that divides up the non-Trump votes and ensures Trump is the candidate in the primary. That was the lesson of 2016.  However, so long as candidates depend on the votes from these elements to win a contest and win the GOP primary too, and either dog whistle or tolerate them publicly, ..that will add fuel to anyone stereotyping the GOP.  They will leave others of are still loyal to the GOP and who object to the overt racism of some candidates sadly in a minority of their own party.. Some in my immediate and extended family are supporters of Pence and old-line Reagan Republicans (as were my parents and brother). They would be appalled at what the GOP has become dominated by Trump and fellow travelers. 

 Both Trump and DeSantis may not be white nationalists, Christian nationalists, or neo-Nazis, but they are skillful demagogues and invite, tolerate, or welcome their support. Any vote is a vote they might need. The rest of the field so far has failed to raise a voice against them, Trump, DeSantis, or the white nationalist dog whistles they utter. In that sense, their silence is complicit.  I am waiting to see any GOP aspirants speak out or attack Trump or DeSantis for appealing to these elements. It will take courage and possibly risk a certain loss in the primaries. Tell me this is not true.

A word about Christian Nationalists. They are theocrats. They want a government controlled by their religions and religious leaders. I call them theocrats because they want the government to force their citizens to comply with their interpretation.  There is no room in their world for those who follow the words of Jesus instead of those who make up or revise what He said.  There is no room for Jews, Buddhists, or atheists.  It is an exclusionary view of their democracy that is twisted to mean the priority of granting rights is for their groups of believers, and the rest should not apply, or they should just keep quiet and comply.   

It is particularly disturbing for practicing Christians like me when the theocrats of the extreme religious right go off on tangents that are not even discussed in the New Testament.  I recall growing up in the Bible Belt dominated by Southern Baptists in my youth, where only those who were baptized by dunking were considered by them to be saved or real Christians, condemning to hell or some second-class status not only my Jewish friends but those who got sprinkled such as  Presbyterians like me and Episcopalians and Catholics.  The greatest debate theological debate among my Baptist friends in the dying days of the Jim Crow South was whether Christians should go to movies on Sunday. 

 I am trying to find where Christ discussed homosexuality and abortion.   Both were practiced in His time.    In Jerusalem, the theocracy and the money changers at the Temple ruled while Caesar's appointees washed their hands of interference when Jesus preached against the corruption of the locally reigning Jewish officials and claimed He was the Son of God..a blasphemy,  paving the way to His crucifixion.  In instances where the government did play a role as a lawgiver and an enforcer, such as tax collection, as Christ said, render unto Caesar what was Caesars, but unto God that is God's. 

 The founders of our Constitution wrote the First Amendment (no establishment of a state church) in their revolt against the Church of England being the English government's "established" religion.  Examples of theocracies in today's world are in Iran, the current Afghanistan of the Taliban, and Saudi Arabia, where the mullahs or men only are the rulers and enforcers of both the temporal and religious laws.

An example of a particular theocracy-run amuck is Afghanistan.  Years ago, I saw an American version of the Taliban on the horizon and wrote a column about it. It was reposted with a note about the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade in 2022.  https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2022/05/the-gop-is-becoming-american-taliban.html

From the theological standpoint, Christ did say the two most important Jewish laws to obey (when asked by a Temple scribe) were "Love your God with all your heart" and the Golden Rule, treat your neighbors as you would like to be treated yourself. Matt. 22:37-40 He also preached, "We are our brothers' keeper'"Amen to this remarkable opinion piece that appeared in the New York Times recently.  A Wyoming Republican revolted against Christian nationalism and asked: Are we our brother's keeper? The correct answer is "yes", the writer said..    The meaning of this dating to Genesis is long debated, but I stand with this: Christ Says We Are Our Brother’s Keeper | The News and Times Politics  It is a sin to ignore this by not addressing related issues, and the writer of this piece felt so called to do so.  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/21/opinion/wyoming-republicans-christian-nationalism.html?unlocked_article_code=7LWh8WY5ZLab6-0OI43IWcqNb0Tv74ReOU2QxN0YRcnoiMky90949LkCyYbfxDZAaWYLPWN4F_2O0tcLt4axtOG3jpqURwRn3zDkgZoHGUQoSneMROQuEUV2LF85usbpslIQnTvc8-tvMHhRFqEwnEr8V9WkVGpHQvLACbeHTUw1Mbt3uv9D3WHD6tTA07QETLBDZHxTxuuwASPKDQaTXDcRu3VeulwbtIfD5gyjKzcb4NNs3FxD2NvJQM53ieMNM157PJyapwNsldF3k5QOiirln8YvXx24wwKYzaPNJpz-kj4U_eDa6b-26EmkiymzKmhVqPDMP66FHmznGycUpGsdzC8qqf9w8ua5YYiRNAkWh4A&smid=url-share

An example of a particular theocracy run amuk is Afghanistan.  Years ago I saw an American version of the Taliban on the horizon and wrote a column on it: https://mufticforumblog.blogspot.com/2022/05/the-gop-is-becoming-american-taliban.html

NAACP Issues Travel Warning In Florida - Bing News

Trump Said He Would Pardon Jan 6 Participants - Bing News

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/09/us/capitol-hill-insurrection-extremist-flags-soh/index.html

Thanksgiving thoughts updated 2023

Update: November 2, 2023, Thanksgiving is a few weeks away, but events dictate I repost a blog that deals with whether this is a Christian nation or not. How did it happen we are not.  The First Amendment to the Constitution clearly says the state cannot establish a religion, the foundation statement of the separation of church and state.   The newly elected, Trump-approved House Speaker is Mike Johnson. We have never knowingly had such an ideologue in that position who is governed by the most extreme form of  Christian Nationalism. His allegiance is not to Democracy first but to his religion, whether it represents the majority (it doesn't) or surpasses democracy as rules and laws governing the nation (it does not).   Privilege in our country is for all, not just for those who demand obedience to the same religion as the ruler. This country is not a theocracy; it is a democracy, and we must keep it that way.   I am a protestant Christian, but I do not derive my politics from the same interpretations Speaker Johnson proclaims as what guides him. I do not want to live in a country that exists, favors,  and rules only for those who subscribe to his brand of Christianity or support his interpretation of how it applies to modern life. The Golden Rule or the Beatitudes have no meaning or importance in his interpretation, but they are the fundamental message Christ delivered in the version of the Bible I read.   For an in-depth study of who is a Christian nationalist and what is Christian nationalism is, go to PRRI.

 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/10/27/mike-johnson-christian-nationalist-ideas-qa-00123882  

Reposting of a November 2018 blog post________________________________________________________________________________This Thanksgiving, we should give our thanks to the Pilgrims, who have become an icon of what made the New World so unique in the civilizations that preceded them. They left England and the old world to seek freedom to practice their own religion, free from a government-backed state religion that oppressed them. It was a beginning. There was a rocky road ahead to laws guaranteeing religious freedom for everyone, not just one group.

 Some colonies adopted laws with limited forms of freedom of religion, while others established state-sponsored religions, hung heretics, and launched witch hunts. Pennsylvania and Virginia had enacted their own laws effectively protecting freedom of religion. The Constitution authors adopted those concepts in the First Amendment, ""Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." Congress later passed civil rights and hate crimes legislation that protected religious practitioners and punished those who interfered with their practice.

Terrorism, insurrrection, and violence are the greatest threats coming from the right (revised, updated)

Updated: 2 22 21: Feds now say right-wing extremists responsible for majority of deadly terrorist attacks last year (yahoo.com) and this report was about 2020 before January 6, 2021

and March 10, 2021 https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/lauren-boebert-pelosi-ad-sound-effect-101255495.html

Updated 11/15/20 : what happened post Nov 3,  Trump continued fanning the flames of violence by right wing political thugs: https:righ//www.newsweek.com/trump-encourages-dc-police-not-hold-back-violence-erupts-after-million-maga-march-1547539

Updated/revised 9/27/20 and updated again 10/26/20.  So why not stop angry mobs from demonstrating, a reader asks? She is tired of angry mobs in the streets and just wants me to stop quibbling over  the semantics, that I contend there is a difference between peaceful and violent demonstrations. concern about whether there will be violence post-November 3 if Trump defies democracy, uses every trick in the book, including poorly justified challenges to throw the people's vote out the window and depends on his three appointees to the Supreme Court to keep him in office.  Losing that battle, he then refuses to leave the Oval Office January 20. The stretch of time between Nov. 3 until the inauguration may see more angry demonstrations. The issue motivating them would not be racial bias and demands that African Americans be treated fairly and equally by law enforcement, but saving democracy from a wannabe dictator.  The  like we have seen this summer sparked by issues protesting police brutality and racial discrimination is an alarming recent addition to some voters' concerns. In part, it is due to the specter of peaceful and violent demonstrations in urban areas sparked by video coverage of racial bias of law enforcement that resulted in the death of per capita more African-Americans than others, a pattern verified by data.   In part, it is because.  Donald Trump, himself, the self-proclaimed law and order president,   has promoted and praised threats and acts of violence in response to the civil unrest.  The red flags of potential violence rose to top media attention when. President Trump refused to commit a peaceful transfer of power if he lost. The outrage resulted in fear of turmoil post-Nov. 3. . voters away from hearing more about his fast track forcing through his appointment to the Supreme 

 What Donald Trump did accomplish with his violence threatening speech is to steer attention away from his Court that will result in an ideological lopsidedness and his failure to deal with COVID-19.  His nomination to fill Ruth Bader Ginsburg's seat on the Supreme Court has increased focus on  the repercussions of a 6-3 conservative-dominated Court. With that makeup comes  a restrictive view of civil and gender identification rights,  and the eventual demise of Roe v Wade.  What should be of enormous concern is Trump's efforts to do away with Obamacare with no effective replacement after four years of promises. Trump's nominee is' on the record for her strong condemnation of Justice Roberts upholding Obamacare (ACA). Here is what is at stake .Along with the ACA's demise, not only would affordable coverage of pre-existing conditions be in jeopardy for those getting insurance from the ACA, but no longer would affordable coverage of pre-existing conditions be required of any insurance and protections against women being charged more than women than men would also disappear.  Annual caps on the dollar amount of coverage could be reinstated. Trump administration will be arguing before the Supreme Court a week after the election that the ACA should be trashed, though the Court's decision will not be announced until Spring. 

  So why not stop angry mobs from demonstrating, a reader asks? She is tired of angry mobs in the streets and just wants me to stop quibbling over the semantics, that I contend there is a difference between peaceful and violent demonstrations.Back to my reader's objecting to "mob rule", I take her to mean mobs of angry people marching or demonstrating, whether peaceful or not, and calling separating peaceful protests from violent ones as a semantics problem  There is a reason for the "semantics'.  It is called the Constitution. The First Amendment reads:" Congress shall make no law .... abridging the freedom of speech.... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." There is no quibble there. The first amendment supports the right of those angry of any race or background to gather and present their complaints peacefully. So long as the angry' mob ' is peaceful, they have the protection of the Constitution. When they turn violent, they don't. 

 Joe Biden, unlike Donald Trump, condemns both the right and the left for bringing violence to an otherwise peaceful demonstration and he has been consistent about this from the beginning of civil unrest ..On June 1 in response to the George Floyd unrest and Donald Trump's emptying Lafayette Square of peaceful, Biden said" there is no place for violence.No place for looting or destroying property or burning churches, or destroying businesses —..... Nor is it acceptable for our police — sworn to protect and serve all people — to escalate tensions or resort to excessive violence.  We need to distinguish between legitimate peaceful protest — and opportunistic violent destruction......." On August 31 in Pittsburgh Biden was even more specific with " I want to make it absolutely clear, so I’m going to be very clear about all of this, rioting is not protesting. Looting is not protesting. Setting fires is not protesting. None of this is protesting. It’s lawlessness, plain and simple. And those who do it should be prosecuted"  By contrast, Trump praised neo-Nazis, and white supremacists marching with torches as some fine people, as a counter-demonstrator was killed. Armed militias in camo threatening violence are called "patriots" as was a 17-year-old militia member who killed two demonstrators. Threats and acts of violence spawn more violence especially when weapons are carried. People on either side get killed. There is an immediate assumption by many on the right that the main perpetrators of violence are angry black demonstrators. Guess again. The FBI recently released a memo sent to local law enforcement that most violence comes from right-wing extremists. The FBI also reported that most acts of domestic terrorism also come from right-wing extremists. In September, under oath, FBI director Chris Wray testified that" there is not such an organization as Antifa. It is an ideology." Trump followers tend to lump all angry black demonstrators into "Antifa" as the force behind violence either in an attempt to scare white folks in suburbs to vote for Trump or it reflects their own attitudes toward other races. Those most frequently arrested for committing arson and window-smashing this summer were right-wing group affiliated members.

In late October, a member of the right wing extremist group, Boogaloo Boys, was charged for inciting violence and firing on police officers in the Minneapolis distuirbance.  This member was from Texas, not from Minnesota. https://www.startribune.com/charges-boogaloo-bois-fired-on-mpls-precinct-shouted-justice-for-floyd/572843802/?fbclid=IwAR0BUoxwZfhSOr8SS2FETn2jpiOKyQb7l6Qy9y

The takeaway of issues of race relations and matters that affect access to health care and so many other issues is that elections matter to day-to-day lives, sometimes for years to come.  Vote. This is a country with a democracy that gives people a say through the ballot box. Since 2013 Colorado voters have had a system where all registered voters get a ballot automatically, but still have a choice to drop it in a mailbox or a secure official drop-off box or vote in person.  It has a history of fair and honest elections with many layers of bi-partisan eyes, bar codes, and computer cross-checks. The ballots go in the mail October 9 and around 4 days later you should get it delivered to you. You can track it like a UPS package if you wonder if it got to the election clerk on time to be counted. For election information in Colorado:   https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/mailBallotsFAQ.html

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Can the president invoke the insurrection act to force the active military to put down post-election demonstrations? President Trump recently called for that. This apprentice dictator had better be able to tell the difference between protest riots and insurrection because the difference is already established case law. If he has fantasies of a military coup to keep him in office, he may be asking the military to commit an illegal act to overturn a constituted government. Ironically,  what is possible is that the insurrection act could be applied to organized militias and established right-wing terrorist groups who would foment violence if Donald Trump lost and tried to stage a "coup".  That would turn supporters of right-wing advocates calling for insurrection on its head, making them vulnerable to being charged with insurrection instead of left-wing demonstrators. Advocates of invoking the insurrection act ought to be careful what they wish. Riots and peaceful protests are not the same as acts of insurrections that could justify active military intervention per https://definitions.uslegal.com / "insurrection refers to an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government. It is a violent revolt against an oppressive authority. Insurrection is different from riots and offenses connected with mob violence. In insurrection, there is an organized and armed uprising against authority or operations of government whereas riots and offenses connected with mob violence are simply unlawful acts in disturbance of the peace which do not threaten the stability of the government or the existence of political society. The following is a case law defining Insurrection: Insurrection means “a violent uprising by a group or movement acting for the specific purpose of overthrowing the constituted government and seizing its powers. An insurrection occurs where a movement acts to overthrow the constituted government and to take possession of its inherent powers.” [Younis Bros. & Co. v. Cigna Worldwide Ins. Co., 899 F. Supp. 1385, 1392-1393 (E.D. Pa. 1995)]" I note proven or unproven claims of voter fraud are not cited as a justification for an insurrection in the definition. 

There is an immediate assumption by many on the right that the main perpetrators of violence are angry black demonstrators. Guess again. The FBI recently released a memo sent to local law enforcement that most violence comes from right-wing extremists. The FBI also reported that most acts of domestic terrorism also come from right-wing extremists. In September, under oath, FBI director Chris Wray testified that" there is not such an organization as Antifa. It is an ideology." Trump followers tend to lump all angry black demonstrators into "Antifa" as the force behind violence either in an attempt to scare white folks in suburbs to vote for Trump or it reflects their own attitudes toward other races. Those most frequently arrested for committing arson and window-smashing this summer were right-wing group affiliated members. This is like we have seen this summer sparked by issues protesting police brutality and racial discrimination is an alarming recent addition to some voters' concerns. In part, it is due to the specter of peaceful and violent demonstrations in urban areas sparked by video coverage of racial bias of law enforcement that resulted in the death of per capita more African-Americans than others, a pattern verified by data.   In part, it is because.  Donald Trump, himself, the self-proclaimed law and order president,   has promoted and praised threats and acts of violence in response to the civil unrest.  The red flags of potential violence rose to top media attention when. President Trump refused to commit a peaceful transfer of power if he lost. 

…

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/fbi-director-antifa-ideology-organization-73077727

https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/06/11/fbi-memo-says-white-supremacists-racist-terrorists-are-now-greatest-domestic-violence-threat-933137

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-is-ignoring-rightwing-extremists-who-want-to-start-a-race-war-former-dhs-official-says-231127636.html

https://www.newsweek.com/bipartisan-group-predicts-violence-if-trump-loses-election-refuses-leave-white-house-1520561

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/31/portland-protest-shooting-kenosha-whats-patriot-prayer-trump-visit/5677539002/?fbclid=IwAR22biYy8RUpwPulkg0Z-SDWKeXuEtKhrQBH4CY6b0fVCFJgfF6JfYnJO1Y

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-transfer-of-power/2020/09/23/be6954d0-fdf0-11ea-b555-4d71a9254f4b_story.html

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/02/politics/biden-philadelphia-transcript/index.html

NEWS.YAHOO.COM

news.yahoo.com

More, earlier comments and sources:

. https://news.yahoo.com/trump-is-ignoring-rightwing-extremists-who-want-to-start-a-race-war-former-dhs-official-says-231127636.html

From https://definitions.uslegal.com/i/insurrection/."

Proud Boys join with the Trump supporters and get themselves arrested Labor Day weekend. When anyone comes to protests with long guns, baseball bats, and other weapons, to turn peaceful demonstrations into violent ones, someone will either get hurt or arrested or even killed as happened in Wisconsin.. https://www.yahoo.com/news/multiple-people-arrested-trump-supporters-012703607.html   Joe Biden, unlike Donald Trump, condemns both the right and the left for bringing violence to an otherwise peaceful demonstration. By contrast, Trump praises violence threatening white militias as patriots, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists marching with torches as some fine people, and heaps praise on a 17-year-old inspired by him and militias who killed two people with his long gun as the heroic victim. In Portland, a right-winger wearing his affiliation hat was killed.  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/31/portland-protest-shooting-kenosha-whats-patriot-prayer-trump-visit/5677539002/ 

1https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/blame-abc-news-finds-17-cases-invoking-trump/story?id=58912889

Joy Reid, MSNBC host,  found herself in the uncomfortable position of being criticized by friends, Muslim members of Congress, for even using the word "terrorism" because Americans usually associate that term with scary Muslims.  They have a point, but the answer should be coupled with the fact that most acts of terrorism are not committed by Al Qaeda sympathizers,  greenies,  and anarchists, but by right-wingers. Yes. Right-wingers.  https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states    The reference to Al Qaeda types has been made because of rhe use of the internet to recruit extremists and terrorists.   Perhaps a broader category name could be "extremists".which would also include those groups that encourage acts of terror and violence. Boogaloo Boys, Proud Boys, and others both fall in that broader definition, sometimes disguising themselves as Antifa. The boogaloo movements purpose is to promote civil war and its adherents are both white nationalists and some extreme libertarians. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/19/what-is-boogaloo-movement/3204899001/

The famous video in George Floyd  Minneapolis demonstrations of a covered and disguised umbrella man wielding arsonist bashing windows was found to be a member of a right-wing motorcycle gang, not an "antifa" member, which is neither an organization or has a membership structure.  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/28/us/umbrella-man-identified-minneapolis.html

"This analysis compiles and analyzes an original data set of 893 terrorist plots and attacks in the United States between January 1994 and May 2020. per the FBI.

This analysis makes several arguments. First, far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced terrorism from other types of perpetrators, including from far-left networks and individuals inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda. Right-wing attacks and plots account for the majority of all terrorist incidents in the United States since 1994, and the total number of right-wing attacks and plots has grown significantly during the past six years. Right-wing extremists perpetrated two thirds of the attacks and plots in the United States in 2019 and over 90 percent between January 1 and May 8, 2020. Second, terrorism in the United States will likely increase over the next year in response to several factors. One of the most concerning is the 2020 U.S. presidential election, before and after which extremists may resort to violence, depending on the outcome of the election. Far-right and far-left networks have used violence against each other at protests, raising the possibility of escalating violence during the election period."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/08/31/portland-protest-shooting-kenosha-whats-patriot-prayer-trump-visit/5677539002/

  Perhaps a broader category name could be "extremists".which would also include those groups that encourage acts of terror and violence. Boogaloo Boys, Proud Boys, and others both fall in that broader definition, sometimes disguising themselves as Antifa, which no one with that "antifa"  affiliation was arrested in connection in the George Floyd demonstrations, but one was arrested in Pottland https://nypost.com/2020/09/02/antifa-commander-with-flamethrower-cried-when-he-was-arrested/

From an earlier blog posting:

Trump's inflammatory tweets have urged deadly violence to fight violence. " When the looting starts, the shooting starts.", he exhorted, drawing on a 1967' statements by a racist Miami mayor, and advocating shooting the "thugs".  https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/864818368/the-history-behind-when-the-looting-starts-the-shooting-starts  He even called for an insurrection by militants against Michigan and two other states not opening up quickly enough for business. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/04/17/liberate-michigan-trump-constitution/ ,
The outrage is that Trump and Trump's loyal attorney general Bill Barr says that only the leftist anarchists were involved as the instigator of violence in the protests, providing no evidence.https://www.businessinsider.com/fbi-no-intelligence-antifa-weekend-violence-george-floyd-protests-2020-6
In fact, right wing militants pose as Antifa to advocate violence while Trump seeks to designate Antifa as a terrorist organization. The FBI found no evidence of Antifa involvement in the violence.VXPWUic_srGifEojnJi9Crx7vXIWRcrlY6Hjs7qtS3c81qPq0a_sM https://www.click2houston.com/news/national/2020/06/02/white-supremacists-pose-as-antifa-online-call-for-violence/. It is the Trump racist play book, his ticket to a win in November. Fear works for him. Violence works for him.We do not know yet the identity of all of the perps of flame, looting and violence. However, there is evidence that right-wing militias and extremists groups like the Boogaloo Boys were also involved, wearing their identifying Hawaiian shirts. and other insignia. Boogaloo Boys say they are preparing for the next civil war. Boogaloo Boy members were charged with killing a federal agent and wounding another in an ambush during the Floyd demonstrations, as mentioned above.
Also seen were armed men. in pickup trucks bearing extremist militia insignia of the Three Percenters. . Barr also controls the FBI but we can also depend on other sources to confirm who was doing the infiltrating. Barr and Trump were contradicted by officials and witnesses on the ground. 20% arrested for arson, vandalism, violence were from out of state. and there were reports of people unknown to the local demonstrators. " Department of Public Safety Commissioner John Harrington confirmed evidence of white supremacist groups trying to incite violence ;Many posted messages online that encouraged people to go loot in Minneapolis and cause mayhem". https://www.mprnews.org/story/2020/05/30/outsiders-extremists-are-among-those-fomenting-violence-in-twin-cities
The incriminating evidence of intent was their own social media summoning their fellow travelers to come and be violent.
Reality is that most domestic terrorism is committed by the right. Even in the past two months, terrorism charges have been levied against a militia connected person threatening the life of the Michigan governor and in the George Floyd protests, 3 Boogaloo boys were the only ones charged with terrorism. There was no evidence that Antifa groups or persons were the perps of violence, per the FBI.

Searching for the best data, this was in Wikipedia: According to the Government Accountability Office of the United States, 73% of violent extremist incidents that resulted in deaths since September 12, 2001 were caused by right-wing extremist groups.[83][84] A 2019 report found that 50 people in the United States were killed in murders by domestic extremists (including both ideologically and non-ideologically motivated homicides) during the previous year. Of these killings, 78% were perpetrated by white supremacists, 16% by anti-government extremists, 4% by "incel" extremists, and 2% by domestic Islamist extremists.[85] Over the broader 2009 to 2018 time period, there were a total of 313 people in the United States killed by right-wing extremists (including both ideologically and non-ideologically motivated homicides), of which 76% were committed by white supremacists, 19% by anti-government extremists (including those affiliated with the militia, "sovereign citizen," tax protester, and "Patriot" movements), 3% by "incel" extremists, 1% by anti-abortion extremists, and 1% by other right-wing extremists.[85]"