Nope. Sorry. Doug Mastriano Is NOT A Patriot.

There's a minor kerfuffle on the other side of the state regarding The Return of the American Patriot: The Rise of Pennsylvania, presumably a documentary in the Dinesh D'Souza epistemological school of right wing thinking.

Steve Turley, the producer of said documentary, went all WITB, complaining about "woke mobs" and "cancel culture" when not one but two venues cancelled the premiere of the movie.

Aw. Poor guy. Were his feelings hurt?

Of course the Alpha males (and females) supporting the movie cried out to deaf heaven about censorship.

Too bad they don't seem to understand what The First Amendment protects us from.

From Fox43:

“The movie theater is not a government agency, and the first amendment provides people the right to be free from restrictions on their speech when  those restrictions are imposed by the government," said Michael Dimino, a law professor at the Widener University Commonwealth Law School. "But the First Amendment provides no right to be free from restrictions imposed by private people or companies, including movie theaters, including employers and including each one of us."

But I don't want to take about this "documentary" as much as I want to talk about it's title. 

Obviously the "American Patriot" in the title is State Sen (and now GOP Candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano.

And that's where they're wrong.

Doug Mastriano is not a patriot.

A patriot would not participate in a scheme to stop the constitutionally defined peaceful transfer of power in order to help the candidate who lost.

A patriot would not spread misinformation about the security and integrity of the voting system as part of that scheme.

A patriot would not betray his oath of office to "obey and defend" the US Constitution and then seek to undermine one of it's most basic foundations: free and fair elections.

I have no idea what's in that movie but I do know that Doug Mastriano, ladies and gentlemen is not a patriot.

And These Are REPUBLICANS Saying This About Doug!

While we're all waiting on today's installment of The Trump Hearings, I thought I'd bring to your attention something I saw in The NYTimes:

Prominent conservatives who worked to oust Donald Trump in 2020 are back — with a plan to spend at least $10 million to defeat candidates who embraced the former president’s conspiracy theories about that election.

The group of conservatives, the Republican Accountability PAC, has identified G.O.P. candidates whose extreme views its leaders deem dangerous to the future of American democracy.

In 14 races across six key swing states — Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin — the group has decided to throw its weight behind those candidates’ Democratic opponents.

You saw "Pennsylvania" on that list, right? So you know where this is going, right?

It's going right here:

Elsewhere, the group expects to focus on portraying Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor of Pennsylvania, as well outside the mainstream of G.O.P. politics.

So, yea. Welcome aboard! Good to see you.

The PAC resides here and from its About Us page we can learn how they see themselves:

The Republican Accountability PAC (RAPAC) is run by Republicans, former Republicans, and conservatives who are fighting back against Donald Trump’s takeover of the GOP. We stand against any candidate who downplays the January 6 insurrection, lies about the 2020 election, or threatens our democracy.

RAPAC wants to elect responsible people who are not going to tell lies, spread conspiracy theories, or undermine our institutions. We will seek to hold today’s GOP accountable and defeat candidates at all levels of government that choose loyalty to Trump over their duty to the country.

So it's only natural that they'll eventually set their sights in PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano.

Oops, my mistake! They've already started:

Feel free to peruse the rest of the page and see what some Republicans (and former Republicans) are saying about Doug.

Things like:

Doug Mastriano is a radical conspiracy theorist and serial liar.
We can’t let him anywhere near the governor's office.

And in the event you want to hear the oldies, there's always The Lincoln Project:

I wonder if Doug Mastriano knows about the Republican Accountability PAC. And if so, does he care?

Shouldn't This Make Doug Mastriano MORE Nervious?

From the NY Times:

With his criminal trial for contempt of Congress approaching, Stephen K. Bannon, an ally of former President Donald J. Trump’s who was involved in his plans to overturn the 2020 election, has informed the House committee investigating the Capitol attack that he is now willing to testify, according to two letters obtained by The New York Times.

His decision is a remarkable about-face for Mr. Bannon, who until Saturday had been among the most obstinate and defiant of the committee’s potential witnesses. He had promised to turn the criminal case against him into the “misdemeanor from hell” for the Justice Department.

But with the possibility of two years in jail and large fines looming on the horizon, Mr. Bannon has been authorized to testify by Mr. Trump, his lawyer told the committee late on Saturday in a letter, which was reported earlier by The Guardian.

Let's backtrack a tad (or a skosh, if you will, or maybe even a smidge) and take a look-see at the subpoena the January 6 Committee sent to Bannon way back in September of 2021.

In it the press release that accompanied the letter, The Committee wrote:

Stephen Bannon reportedly communicated with former President Trump on December 30th, 2020, urging him to focus his efforts on January 6th. Mr. Bannon also reportedly attended a gathering at the Willard Hotel on January 5th, 2021, as part of an effort to persuade Members of Congress to block the certification of the election the next day. Mr. Bannon is also quoted as stating, on January 5th, that “[a]ll Hell is going to break loose tomorrow.” [Link in original.]

We also know that Bannon held PA State Sen (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano's Gettysburg meeting in high regard:

Before the [Adams County GOP Eisenhower Dinner], Bannon spoke with Adams County GOP Chair Charlotte Shaffer for his "War Room" news show.

The pair spoke about the 3 November movement, a Trump-centered Republican movement seeking to prove election fraud.

“One of the reasons I accepted the gracious invitation of Charlotte Shaffer, the chairman, was that this was the railhead of where 3 November started, the counter reaction, the great conference,” Bannon said on War Room.

Bannon was referring to an event in Gettysburg at which former Trump adviser Rudy Giuliani publicly protested the election results. Mastriano organized that event as a member of the Pennsylvania Senate Majority Policy Committee.

The date of the Gettysburg meeting was November 25, 2020 - well after Trump was first informed by his DOJ and his campaign that he'd lost the election:

Shortly after the 2020 election, as ballots were still being counted, the top data expert in President Donald J. Trump’s re-election campaign told him bluntly that he was going to lose.

In the weeks that followed, as Mr. Trump continued to insist that he had won, a senior Justice Department official told him repeatedly that his claims of widespread voting fraud were meritless, ultimately warning him that they would “hurt the country.”

Those concerns were echoed by the top White House lawyer, who told the president that he would be entering into a “murder-suicide pact” if he continued to pursue extreme plans to try to invalidate the results of the 2020 election.

Yet Mr. Trump — time and again — discounted the facts, the data and many of his own advisers as he continued to promote the lie of a stolen election, according to hundreds of pages of exhibits, interview transcripts and email correspondence assembled by the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack for a legal filing released late Wednesday.

During the meeting, Trump called in and then this happened:

Then, with Trump attorney Jenna Ellis holding a cell phone to a microphone, the president himself addressed the crowd from Washington.

“This election was rigged, and we can’t let that happen,” Trump said falsely. “This election has to be turned around because we won Pennsylvania by a lot and we won all these swing states by a lot.”

Trump had already been informed that none of that was true.

That's what Steve Bannon referred to as a "railhead" in the "counter movement" to November 3. 

State Senator Mastriano: Do you think your name will come up (as it already has) in testimony before The January 6 Committee?

Considering your involvement in Trump's attempted coup, doesn't that make you nervous?

And if not, shouldn't it?

In Praise of Jonathan E.

At lunch today, I learned that actor James Caan passed away. He was 82 and most of the obituaries I saw  contained something like this one from the NYTimes:

James Caan, who built a durable film career in varied roles across six decades but was forever identified most closely with one of his earliest characters, the quick-tempered, skirt-chasing Sonny Corleone in the original “Godfather” movie, died on Wednesday.

Don't get me wrong. That was a great performance.

But for my money, his most memorable part was Jonathan E in the movie Rollerball (1975). 

While "Rollerball" is the name of the movie, it's also the name of a game played in that movie. It's a violent bloody game and the society in which it thrives is described, in general terms, to Jonathan by Bartholomew, played by John Housman this way:

Jonathan, let's think this through together. 

You know how the game serves us. It has a definite social purpose. 

Nations are bankrupt, gone. None of that tribal warfare any more. Even the corporate wars are a thing of the past. 

So now we have the majors and their executives. Transport, food, communication, housing, luxury, energy. A few of us making decisions on a global basis for the common good.

The team is a unit. It plays with certain rhythms. So does an executive team, Jonathan. 

Now everyone has all the comforts, you know that. No poverty, no sickness. No needs and many luxuries, which you enjoy just as if you were in the executive class.

Corporate society takes care of everything. And all it asks of anyone, all it has ever asked of anyone ever, is not to interfere with management decisions.

And then he describes the need for the game itself:

The game was created to demonstrate the futility of  individual effort.

And:

If a champion defeats the meaning for which the game was designed, then he must lose.

And as the movie progresses, the rules of the game are changed to take out Jonathan, the champion whose abilities as a player threaten the social purpose of the game.

Until finally the last game of the season there are no rules, no substitutions.

And this happens:

In the end, he was better than the game.

Jonathan! Jonathan! Jonathan!

Well, THAT Was Quick (It's STILL A Lie, Doug)

Yesterday we learned that the AP fact-checked PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano:

Doug Mastriano, Pennsylvania’s Republican nominee for governor, has made a campaign staple out of the allegation that Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s policy of readmitting COVID-19 patients from hospitals to nursing homes caused thousands of deaths — a baseless claim for which no investigator or researcher has provided any evidence.

In fact, layers of inspections by researchers have pointed to entirely something different — nursing home employees ushering in the virus every day — while investigators found administrators flouting staffing requirements or infection-control procedures.

The date stamp on this at the AP is simply "July 5, 2022." 

However the writer of the piece (the "fact-checker" if you will) tweeted a link to it with a time stamp of 12:47 PM on July 5:

HARRISBURG, Pa. (@AP) — Doug Mastriano, Pennsylvania’s GOP nominee for governor, has made a campaign staple out of the baseless allegation that Gov. Tom Wolf’s policy of readmitting COVID-19 patients from hospitals to nursing homes caused thousands of deaths.

— Marc Levy (@timelywriter) July 5, 2022

One day, nine hours and forty-two minutes later, Doug Mastriano tweeted:

That "Thousands of nursing home deaths..." part? It's still a lie, Doug.

Morning Call posted the AP story.

Delco Times posted the AP story.

York Dispatch posted the AP story.

Harrisburg TV station ABC 27 posted the AP story.

Bedford Gazette posted the AP story.

Military News posted the AP story.

I posted the AP story.

PA State Senator (And GOP Candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano's IN THE NEWS!

Hey, you remember when this happened, right?

Doug Mastriano, the Republican nominee for governor in Pennsylvania, has appointed Jenna Ellis, a former lawyer for the Trump campaign who worked to overturn the 2020 election, as a senior legal adviser, his campaign announced on Monday.

Ms. Ellis campaigned vigorously during the primary for Mr. Mastriano, who played a key role in efforts in Pennsylvania to subvert the state’s 2020 results in favor of former President Donald J. Trump.

That was June 13, 2022. 

Well, things have just gotten a little more complicated in the Mastriano campaign.

Here's why:

As part of an ongoing investigation into Donald Trump’s potential criminal interference in the 2020 presidential election, several of the former president’s closest advisers — including Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani — are being subpoenaed to testify before a grand jury in Georgia’s Fulton County, according to court filings obtained by The Washington Post.

The subpoenas, which were approved July 5 by the judge presiding over the grand jury, summon senior members of Trump’s legal team, including Giuliani, Kenneth Chesebro, John Eastman, Jenna Ellis and Cleta Mitchell, all of whom are believed to have knowledge of Trump’s attempts to tamper with the election process in battleground states such as Georgia, according to the documents. The conservative pundit Jacki Pick Deason was also subpoenaed. [Emphasis added.]

You can read the subpoena here. It starts on page 21.

She'll now have to testify under oath about Trump's attempts to overturn the election results in Georgia. Does she throw Trump under the bus? Does she commit perjury? Does she cooperate? None of the above? All of the above?

Who knows?

What's certain is that her connections to Mastriano just got very complicated.

Then there's this from the AP:

Doug Mastriano, Pennsylvania’s Republican nominee for governor, has made a campaign staple out of the allegation that Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s policy of readmitting COVID-19 patients from hospitals to nursing homes caused thousands of deaths — a baseless claim for which no investigator or researcher has provided any evidence. [Emphasis added.]

Some facts:

The virus was largely introduced by asymptomatic workers in areas where the virus was heavily transmitted, researchers say.

“Our research has been pretty definitive that the most important factor in determining whether there’s an outbreak in the building is community prevalence, by far,” said Vincent Mor, a professor of health services, policy and practice at Brown University. “Nothing else comes close.”

But this has been known for some time as seen by this Opinion piece from two years ago by professors Mor, Konetska and Grabowski:

When the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) released its early summary of federal data on the novel coronavirus in nursing homes, the agency tried to convince the public that there was some light in the thicket of dark numbers. Yes, CMS acknowledged, the numbers of cases and deaths were grim. But, the agency suggested, an early analysis of the data showed that better nursing homes were less likely to be touched by the pandemic.

This is not true. All three of our research teams independently analyzed what determines whether a nursing home will see a coronavirus outbreak. And all of us found that what matters most is the community where the nursing home is located. No care facility, no matter how excellent, can keep covid-19 away if it’s widespread in the areas where staff members live and work. To protect our most vulnerable citizens, we have to protect everyone.

Notably:

Location matters because the coronavirus that causes covid-19 often spreads without causing symptoms. Visitors have not been allowed in most facilities since March, but staff members still go to work. If a covid-19 outbreak is underway in the community where staff members live, the pandemic will soon be in the nursing home where they work.

And finally:

It is also not true, as some Republican lawmakers suggested at a recent House briefing, that policies such as New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s since-rescinded mandate that nursing homes accept recovering covid-19 patients are largely to blame for coronavirus deaths in these facilities. Several states, including Massachusetts, never required nursing homes to admit covid-19 patients upon their release from the hospital and still experienced significant outbreaks in these facilities.

So the next time PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) makes any such statement, we can tell him to his face that it's a lie.

Independence Day Is The Day We Celebrate Our INDEPENDENCE From TYRANNY!

From The Opinion of The Court Dobbs V Jackson Women's Health:

We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” 

And from Justice Thomas' concurring opinion:

The Court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine’s application in other, specific contexts. Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives); Lawrence v. Texas, (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Obergefell v. Hodges, (right to same-sex marriage), are not at issue. The Court’s abortion cases are unique, and no party has asked us to decide “whether our entire Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence must be preserved or revised,”. Thus, I agree that “[n]othing in [the Court’s] opinion should be understood to cast doubt on precedents that do not concern abortion.”  

For that reason, in future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell. Because any substantive due process decision is “demonstrably erroneous,” we have a duty to “correct the error” established in those precedents. [Emphasis added.]

Happy Fourth of July, everybody!

(Note: If you can't see/hear/smell/taste the snark in the above, welcome. You must be new here.)

And Another Thing! (Medically Necessary Abortions And Doug Mastriano)

Earlier this week, we noted the dissonance between one medical condition (an ectopic pregnancy) and PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano's threatened complete abortion ban.

Today, we note another - placental abruption:

Placental abruption is a condition during pregnancy when the placenta separates from the uterus. Symptoms can include bleeding and abdominal pain, especially during the third trimester. A healthcare provider will diagnose and treat a placental abruption based on the severity of the separation and gestational age of the baby.

Again, I'm sticking very close to the medical professionals as I have absolutely no medical expertise myself. I'm letting the medical experts plead their case.

The Cleveland Clinic has more on placental abruption:

Placental abruption is a complication of pregnancy that happens when the placenta separates from your uterus before your baby is born. The placenta is a temporary organ that connects a growing baby to your uterus during pregnancy. It attaches to the wall of your uterus, usually on the top or side and acts as a lifeline that gives nutrients and oxygen to your baby through the umbilical cord. The placenta also removes waste from your baby’s blood.

In placental abruption, the placenta may completely detach or partially detach. This can decrease the amount of oxygen and nutrients to your baby and cause heavy bleeding in the mother. Placental abruption is a serious condition that requires medical treatment.

The Mayo Clinic posts: 

Placental abruption occurs when the placenta partly or completely separates from the inner wall of the uterus before delivery. This can decrease or block the baby's supply of oxygen and nutrients and cause heavy bleeding in the mother.

Placental abruption often happens suddenly. Left untreated, it endangers both the mother and the baby.

And then finally this from the NIH:

Placental abruption is a life-threatening disorder for both the mother and the fetus. If the bleeding is not arrested, then the lives of the mother and fetus are in jeopardy. If there is complete separation or near separation of the placenta, death is inevitable, unless an immediate cesarean section is performed. Fetal mortality rates of 1-40% have been reported, but this also depends on the age of the fetus and the extent of separation. Each year in the US, about 1 to 5% of maternal deaths are linked to placental abruption. 

So sometimes, it seems, terminating a pregnancy may be necessary to protect the life of the mother who was diagnosed with a severe placental abruption.

And yet, there's this from the Post-Gazette:

Mr. Mastriano has boasted himself as a pro-life candidate. He previously sponsored legislation to ban abortions at six weeks in a pregnancy, and said he believes life begins at conception. He does not support any exception to this ban, including for life of the mother or in cases of rape or incest.

How many women will die in Pennsylvania if Doug Mastriano is governor? 

This is not pro-life. This is utter cruelty.

No, Senator. Taking Away A Constitutional Right Is NOT "A Distraction."

There's a scene from Season 3 of "West Wing" that pops up every time the Christian Culture Crusaders win something regarding a woman's right to choose.

It's a conversation was between White House staffer Josh Lyman and political consultant Bruno Gianelli regarding Josh getting appropriations to the Justice Department for a tobacco lawsuit.

Josh was convinced it was a win.  Bruno knew it wasn't.

This is how Bruno convinced Josh it wasn't a win. He said:

You don't want the money, you want the issue.

This has echoed in my head ever since SCOTUS overturned Roe and it all falls under the adage: 

Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.

I realize that The SCOTUS-6 and their fellow travelers on the Evangelical Christian Right have done incredible damage to the society. There is no real way for it to be described.

Certainly not by someone who never had a uterus (and by that I mean me).

We'll start with a news frame from the Business Insider:

Doug Mastriano won the Republican nomination for governor in Pennsylvania by leaning into the culture war, using his Facebook live streams to rail against vaccine requirements, "Critical Race Theory," and members of his own party who failed to embrace conspiracy theories about the 2020 election.

But this avowed opponent of abortion — who welcomed last week's Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade — is now trying to pivot conversations away from the question of reproductive rights, admitting that the issue is a boon to Democrats.

And:

"The Democrats and their friends in the traditional media want us to focus on this, and now on the Roe v. Wade decision, instead of dealing with life," Mastriano told the right-wing news outlet. "And most people in this country are concerned about inflation, gas prices, food not on the shelves, baby formula, and just on and on. So this is all a distraction."

No sir, it's not a distraction. It's life and death. And PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano is on the wrong side.

This is what he said after a draft of the Dobbs decision was leaked in May:

Our nation is now on the precipice of reversing this science-denying genocide. Thanks to President Trump, a conservative majority on the Supreme Court is set to right this historic wrong. Since I was elected to the Senate, there has been no more important issue to me than the right to life. [Emphasis added.]

And then there's this from the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Mastriano said he would allow no exceptions for rape, incest, or a danger to the life of the pregnant person. He also said he believes life starts at “conception” and “we’re gonna have to work our way towards that,” a signal that he would also support a total abortion ban.

This is the issue, Senator. It's not a distraction.

This is not pro-life. This is forced-birth and it's utterly cruel.

Be careful what you wish for.

Um, What?

Let me frame this for Pennsylvanians about State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano.

First, this:

Former President Donald J. Trump on Saturday endorsed Doug Mastriano, a retired colonel and state senator who has propagated myriad false claims about the 2020 election and attended the protest leading up to the Capitol riot, in the Republican primary race for governor of Pennsylvania.

Mr. Trump made his choice three days before the state’s Tuesday primary, a political blessing that serves to increase the former president’s standing as much as Mr. Mastriano’s.

“There is no one in Pennsylvania who has done more, or fought harder, for election integrity,” Mr. Trump said in a statement, adding that Mr. Mastriano would also “fight violent crime, strengthen our borders, protect life, defend our under-siege Second Amendment, and help our military and our vets.”

We all know about the Gettysburg meeting, Mastriano's Covid diagnosis in The White House and Doug being mentioned in that Trump/DOJ phone call.

As well as his wanderings around the Capitol on January 6 and the February 15 subpoena from the January 6 committee.

Yea, Doug's deeply embedded in this mess.

Just how deeply, is not yet been fully explained.

That being said, let's go to yesterday's testimony.

Cassidy Hutchinson, a former aide to President Donald J. Trump’s final chief of staff, delivered explosive testimony on Tuesday to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, providing a vivid minute-by-minute account of heated confrontations she witnessed play out in the White House.

Ms. Hutchinson testified that Mr. Trump knew the crowd he had amassed in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021, was armed and could turn violent but encouraged them to march on the Capitol anyway, and said she had heard that he had lunged at one of his Secret Service agents when he was told he could not join his supporters on Capitol Hill.

Of the events of that day, Hutchinson testified that about 10am on the morning of January 6:

Ms. Hutchinson and Anthony M. Ornato, the deputy White House chief of staff, met with Mr. Meadows to tell him that law enforcement was reporting that multiple individuals were arriving at Mr. Trump’s rally on the Ellipse carrying weapons including knives, guns, bear spray, body armor, spears and flagpoles.

“Tony relayed to me something to the effect of, ‘These f-ing people are fastening spears to the end of flagpoles,’” Ms. Hutchinson testified.

Mr. Meadows appeared unmoved, asking only if Mr. Ornato had relayed the information to the president. Mr. Ornato replied that he had, Ms. Hutchinson said.

And then:

Early that afternoon, Ms. Hutchinson texted Mr. Ornato that Mr. Trump was “furious” that rallygoers were being forced to pass through magnetometers, according to messages she provided to the committee. Backstage at the rally on the Ellipse, she overheard Mr. Trump angrily tell aides to let his supporters into the event space, concerned that the area looked empty.

Mr. Trump, she testified, said “something to the effect of, ‘I don’t f-ing care that they have weapons. They’re not here to hurt me. Take the mags away. Let the people in, they can march to the Capitol from here.’”

Members of the Trump's mob were armed. And by the end of his speech, they were moving to the Capitol.

Doug Mastriano was in that crowd, wasn't he?

Of course, I'm not saying he was armed. Not at all. Fair to say that Doug Mastriano was completely unarmed as he mostly likely had to get through "the mags" to get to the rally where he was an Invited Speaker & Featured Guest and a VIP.

But then he walked with the mob to the Capitol.

On the way, did Doug Mastriano see any of the knives, guns, bear spray, body armor, spears and flagpoles or spears fastened to the ends of flag poles? We already know they were there. Law enforcement had already told The White House. They must've been with the mob as it walked to the Capitol.

State Sen Mastriano is a retired US Army colonel with expertise in military intelligence. He served on the border of East Germany at the end of the cold-war and was deployed three times in Afghanistan.

Surely he could spot weapons being carried openly (or even concealed), right?

So, what did he see?

Mastriano is on record with this statement:

My position on lawlessness is equally as clear. When it was apparent that this was no longer a peaceful protest, my wife and I left the area and made our way out of the area.

Walking amongst thousands, some of whom reportedly armed with knives, guns, bear spray, body armor, spears and flagpoles, didn't send up a red-flag for our US Army Col (ret.) with expertise in military intelligence?

He must've seen something. What was it?

Some Reactions To Friday's Dobbs Decision

The American Medical Association:

The American Medical Association is deeply disturbed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to overturn nearly a half century of precedent protecting patients’ right to critical reproductive health care. This is an egregious allowance of government intrusion into the medical examination room, a direct attack on the practice of medicine and the patient-physician relationship, and a brazen violation of patients’ rights to evidence-based reproductive health services.

States that end legal abortion will not end abortion—they will end safe abortion, risking devastating consequences, including patients’ lives.

And:

State lawmakers who take the position that restricting or eliminating abortion under the pretense of “protecting women’s health” must realize that this claim has absolutely no basis in medical science. Evidence and experience show us conclusively that the risk of death during or after childbirth is approximately 14 times greater than the risk of death from abortion-related complications.

The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology:

Today’s decision is a direct blow to bodily autonomy, reproductive health, patient safety and health equity in the United States. Reversing the constitutional protection for safe, legal abortion established by the Supreme Court nearly fifty years ago exposes pregnant people to arbitrary, state-based restrictions, regulations, and bans that will leave many people unable to access needed medical care. The restrictions put forth are not based on science nor medicine; they allow unrelated third parties to make decisions that rightfully and ethically should be made only by individuals and their physicians.  ACOG condemns this devastating decision, which will allow state governments to prevent women from living with autonomy over their bodies and their decisions.  

The New England Journal of Medicine:

Experience around the world has demonstrated that restricting access to legal abortion care does not substantially reduce the number of procedures, but it dramatically reduces the number of safe procedures, resulting in increased morbidity and mortality. Millions of persons in states lacking protections for abortion care are also likely to be denied access to medication-induced abortions. It may be difficult for many Americans in 2022 to fully appreciate how complicated, stressful, and expensive, if even attainable, their most private and intimate decisions will become, now that Roe has been struck down. A recent New York Times article recounted the experiences of women, now in their 60s and 70s, who sought abortions before Roe. They described humiliating circumstances, unsafe procedures literally performed in back alleys, and the deep shame and stigma they endured. Common complications of illegal procedures included injury to the reproductive tract requiring surgical repair, induction of infections resulting in infertility, systemic infections, organ failure, and death. We now seem destined to relearn those lessons at the expense of human lives.  [HTML links from footnotes in original.]

The American Society of Pediatrics:

Today’s Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade means that the once Constitutionally protected right to access an abortion is no longer guaranteed nationwide. This decision carries grave consequences for our adolescent patients, who already face many more barriers than adults in accessing comprehensive reproductive healthcare services and abortion care.

The Association of American Medical Colleges: 

We are deeply concerned about the impact of the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson on patients nationwide. The court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, rescinding the protection of the right to safe and effective abortions for nearly five decades, will leave women’s reproductive health under the purview of various state laws. Laws and policies that restrict or otherwise interfere with the patient-physician relationship put a patient at risk by limiting access to quality, evidence-based care.

The American Bar Association:

The American Bar Association remains committed to doing all it can to support reproductive choice. Limiting this choice can have devastating consequences for those who are pregnant and can adversely affect their physical and mental health, their lives and the lives of their families.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health that overturns Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey will deny millions of people in our country what has been a protected right for half of a century. In an amicus brief filed in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the ABA had urged the Court to uphold Roe v. Wade and its subsequent line of decisions. The brief cited the extensive legal precedent, the irreparable harm that reversing Roe would cause women and the disproportionate effect of a change in the law on women of color.

Joint Statement from The American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, and American Psychiatric Association:

Our organizations, representing over 400,000 physicians and medical students, condemn the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, striking down the protections afforded to people in need of abortion care for five decades. Our organizations have consistently opposed any legislation or regulation that interferes in the confidential relationship between a patient and their physician and the provision of evidence-based patient care for any patient—and this decision will allow states to gravely interfere in that relationship by penalizing and even criminalizing the provision of evidence- based medical care. This ruling will curtail access to critical reproductive health care for millions of people across the country, will grow the health inequities that already exist in the medical system, and will set a dangerous precedent for legislative interference across medicine.

What they did was not pro-life. It's forced-birth and it's utterly cruel.

Pictures? Videos? Didn't Mastriano's Subpoena Ask For Such?

Yes, I know there are other atrocities in this fair land of ours.

The GOP, the self-proclaimed party of freedom and limited government, has begun to utilize the vast resources of the US Government to dismantle freedom in the USA.

First they came for the uteri and now it's been telegraphed that they'll punish any sex (or gender) they find icky.

In the meantime there are other, less-existential, problems facing us.

And as long-term readers of this blog know, PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov.) Doug Mastriano is one of them.

Let's back up a moment to take another look at the subpoena the January 6 Committee sent him earlier this year.

This part, specifically:

Based on your public statements, we understand that you were present during the attack on the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, and that you witnessed “agitators...getting in the face of the police” and “agitators...start pushing the police up the [Capitol] steps.”

We would like to better understand these statements and expenditures, events that you witnessed or in which you participated, and communications we believe you may have had with national, state, and local officials about the outcome of the November 2020 election.

Accordingly, the Select Committee seeks documents and a deposition regarding these and other matters that are within the scope of the Select Committee’s inquiry.

So the committee is looking for documents related to agitators at The Capitol on January 6. Got it.

Take a look at this picture:

The gentleman on the left is Doug Mastriano.

(That's a funny because in a different context, none of those nouns are correct.)

Anyway look at what he's wearing - the hat and the scarf.

Now look at this:

Look at the gentleman in the image, center left (ha! the same funny applies!!). Notice the hat and the scarf on the man holding up what looks to be a camera.

Isn't that PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano? And isn't he taking pictures of an event described by GOP activist Mike Coudrey as "Crowds have broke through 4 layers of security"?

Did he release to the January 6 Committee whatever images he may have taken that day?

Doesn't look like it.

In fact:

A national group dedicated to electing Democratic governors is pressuring Pennsylvania’s Republican nominee for governor to turn over any video footage he may have recorded while in Washington, D.C. on the day of the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

The Democratic Governors Association, citing a photo recently unearthed of Mastriano in Washington on Jan. 6, called on him to release any photos or video he may have taken while on the Capitol grounds. The screenshot referenced by the organization appears to show Mastriano taking photos or video with his cellphone as supporters of former President Donald Trump began to storm the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

What say you, Senator? Did you take any pictures that day? Did you turn them over to the committee like the subpoena asked you to?

Can we see them?

Ectopic Pregnancies and Doug Mastriano

So what is an "ectopic pregnancy" anyway?

Since I am not a medical professional, I'll stick very close to the professionals.

First off, Cleveland Clinic:

An ectopic pregnancy happens when a fertilized egg implants outside of the uterus, most commonly in the fallopian tube. The fallopian tube is not made to hold a growing embryo and can’t stretch like a uterus. This condition can lead to bleeding in the mother. An ectopic pregnancy is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency treatment.

And so if a woman finds herself in this situation, what are the medical treatments?

Again, Cleveland Clinic:

There are several ways that an ectopic pregnancy can be treated. In some cases, your provider may suggest using a medication called methotrexate to stop the growth of the pregnancy. This will end your pregnancy. Methotrexate is given in an injection by your healthcare provider. This option is less invasive than surgery, but it does require follow-up appointments with your provider where you hCG levels will be monitored.

In severe cases, surgery is often used. Your provider will want to operate when your fallopian tube has ruptured or if you are at a risk of rupture. This is an emergency surgery and a life-saving treatment. The procedure is typically done laparoscopically (through several small incisions instead of one bigger cut). The surgeon may remove the entire fallopian tube with the egg still inside it or remove the egg from the tube if possible.

But can the fertilized egg that's implanted in the fallopian tube perhaps be moved to the uterus?

No, not according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists:

An ectopic pregnancy cannot move or be moved to the uterus, so it always requires treatment. There are two methods used to treat an ectopic pregnancy: 1) medication and 2) surgery. Several weeks of follow-up are required with each treatment.

So if I am reading this correctly, and I'd like to think that I am, there are only two options in dealing with an ectopic pregnancy and both entail ending the pregnancy, one chemically and the other surgically.

Well, there's a third option if you're willing to risk the life of the woman.

In summation: 

• In an ectopic pregnancy, the fetus cannot survive.
• When an ectopic pregnancy ruptures, women often have abdominal pain and vaginal bleeding, which, if not treated, can be fatal.  

And so why is this important?

When asked during the GOP gubernatorial debate on April 27, 2022, if Roe v Wade were overturned  whether he'd support abortion exceptions for rape, incest or the life of a mother PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano answered (after meandering until his last few seconds) with:

I won't give way for exceptions, either.

A week or so later, the Philadelphia Inquirer reported:

Mastriano said he would allow no exceptions for rape, incest, or a danger to the life of the pregnant person. He also said he believes life starts at “conception” and “we’re gonna have to work our way towards that,” a signal that he would also support a total abortion ban.

Giving Mastriano more than enough time to correct the record, which he has not.

So in Mastriano's Pennsylvania a woman who finds herself diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy may very well die an awful, painful, avoidable death. 

This is not pro-life. This is forced-birth.

It's also a war on women.

Trump And Those "R. Congressmen" (Scott Perry Edition)

Trump - “Just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen”. This is the smoking gun. Coupled with other testimony demonstrates both Trump’s substantive involvement and corrupt intent, requisite state of mind.

— Eric Holder (@EricHolder) June 23, 2022

This is what former AG Holder was talking about:

This is from the notes Richard Donoghue took during the DOJ/Trump phone call when Trump was trying to pressure The Department to help him overturn the election he lost.

From The Deadline:

Richard Donoghue, who was acting deputy attorney general, also spoke with and met with Trump multiple times. He told the committee today that at one time, after he told the president that the election fraud claims were false, Trump told him, “Just say the election is corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressmen.” At the time, Donoghue took notes of the quote, and he told the committee those were Trump’s exact words.

In a 90-minute conversation with Trump on December 27, Donoghue said that he went through fraud allegations one by one and explained how they had been investigated and was “very blunt” that they were without merit. “I wanted to cut through the noise,” he said.

Rosen said that Trump suggested the DOJ appoint a special counsel to investigate election fraud, that he meet with his campaign counsel Rudy Giuliani and that they merely hold a press conference, essentially to sow doubt on the results of the election.

The idea, as I understand it, was to sow enough doubt about the results of the election (even though there was no evidence to doubt the results) for the doubt itself to be used. The fact that there was lotsa doubt about the election to then turn around and overturn the election.

Even though, let's remember, there was no evidence to doubt the election.

And let me say again. Among those "R. Congressmen" undoubtedly was PA's own Representative Scott Perry.

Perry's in this deep.

From CNN:

US Rep. Scott Perry pushed for then-Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Clark to take over the department during meetings at the White House in late December 2020 and early January 2021, according to taped testimony by a former aide to White House chief of staff Mark Meadows played during Thursday’s House Jan. 6 committee hearing. 

“He wanted Mr. Clark – Mr. Jeff Clark to take over the Department of Justice,” Cassidy Hutchinson, the former Meadows aide, says about Perry in the clip. 

Hutchinson’s testimony underscores how Perry acted as a conduit between Clark and former President Donald Trump as he sought to enlist the Justice Department in his bid to overturn the 2020 election. 

From NBC:

Rep. Scott Perry, the Pennsylvania Republican now heading the House Freedom Caucus, was intimately involved in the effort to replace acting Attorney General Jeff Rosen at the Justice Department with Jeff Clark, text messages presented by the committee as well as testimony from Richard Donoghue showed.

On Dec. 26, 2020, Perry messaged White House chief of staff Mark Meadows asking him to "call Jeff, I just got off the phone with him and he explained to me why the principal deputy won't work with the FBI."

Clark messaged again two days later: "Did you call Jeff Clark?"

The day of Perry's Dec. 26 outreach to Meadows, he called Donoghue "at the behest" of Trump, Donoghue testified, adding that Perry made false fraud claims during that conversation including that more votes were counted in Pennsylvania than were actually cast.

And then there's this from Governor Tom Wolf:

.@January6thCmte findings are clear: Rep. Perry drove a brazen attempt to corrupt @TheJusticeDept.

He fueled election lies for months leading up to the insurrection.

That very night, he dismissed the will of PA voters.

I encourage Rep. Perry to do the right thing and resign.

— Governor Tom Wolf (@GovernorTomWolf) June 23, 2022

Of course if PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano wouldn't resign for his participation in Trump's attempted coup, I can't see Scott Perry resigning over this.

But he, reportedly, did do this:

The committee also showed testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson, a former special assistant to Trump, and several other former Trump White House officials stating that Perry was among several members of Congress who sought a preemptive pardon from Trump for their activities in the run-up to the Jan. 6 violence.

Of course Scott Perry, who actually believed that Italian satellites transmuted Trump votes to Biden votes
denies asking for a pardon.

Of course he did.

January 6 Committee Hearing - What To Listen For (Pennsylvania Editition)

From the AP:

The Jan. 6 committee will hear from former Justice Department officials who faced down a relentless pressure campaign from Donald Trump over the 2020 presidential election results while suppressing a bizarre challenge from within their own ranks.

The hearing Thursday will bring attention to a memorably turbulent stretch at the department as Trump in his final days in office sought to bend to his will a law enforcement agency that has long cherished its independence from the White House. The testimony is aimed at showing how Trump not only relied on outside advisers to press his false claims of election fraud but also tried to leverage the powers of federal executive branch agencies.

The witnesses will include Jeffrey Rosen, who was acting attorney general during the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol. Three days earlier, Rosen was part of a tense Oval Office showdown in which Trump contemplated replacing him with a lower-level official, Jeffrey Clark, who wanted to champion Trump’s bogus election fraud claims.

And CNN:

Thursday's hearing before the House select committee investigating the January 6, 2021, insurrection turns the panel's focus toward how former President Donald Trump tried to use the Justice Department to bolster his attempts to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Three top officials who led the Justice Department in the final days of the Trump administration will testify at Thursday's hearing about how the then-President and his allies sought to enlist the department to give their baseless fraud allegations credibility and how Trump considered replacing the acting attorney general with an official who bought into his claims of fraud, according to committee aides.

And:

Former acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen, former acting Deputy Attorney General Richard Donoghue and the head of the Office of Legal Counsel Steven Engel will testify on Thursday.

These are names here are important:

• Jeffrey Rosen 
• Jeffrey Clark
• Richard Donoghue

When have we seen them before?

Well, they all show up in the subpoena issued to Rep Scott Perry in May: 

Among other topics, we are examining issues relating to an effort by former President Trump and others to install Mr. Jeffrey Clark in the days before January 6, 2021, as acting Attorney General of the United States. In the weeks before January 6th, then-President Trump’s appointees at the Justice Department informed the President repeatedly that his claims of election fraud were not supported by the evidence, and that the election was not, in fact, stolen. Then-President Trump considered appointing Jeffrey Clark as acting Attorney General, as Mr. Clark pressed his Department of Justice superiors to use agency authorities to challenge the election results.

And:

We have received evidence from multiple witnesses that you had an important role in the efforts to install Mr. Clark as acting Attorney General. Acting Attorney General Rosen and acting Deputy Attorney General Donoghue have provided evidence regarding these issues, and we have received evidence that others who worked with Mr. Clark were aware of these plans. We are also aware that you had multiple text and other communications with President Trump’s former Chief of Staff regarding Mr. Clark—and we also have evidence indicating that in that time frame you sent communications to the former Chief of Staff using the encrypted Signal app. Mr. Clark has informed us that he plans to invoke his 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination in anticipation of a deposition to be conducted by the Committee. When Mr. Clark decided to invoke his 5th Amendment rights, he understood that we planned to pose questions addressing his interactions with you, among a host of other topics.

Scott Perry, in case you didn't know, represents Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District in the House of Representatives.

The Hill reported sometime ago that:

An otherwise little-known figure in the Justice Department, Clark was introduced to Trump by Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.), another person the Senate Committee recommended the House focus on. [Emphasis added.]

And as we're on the subject of Trump's pressure campaign on DOJ, we should note that these names (Rosen, Clark, Donoghue AND Perry ) show up in that now-infamous Trump/DOJ phone call. 

That's the call, memorialized in Donoghue's notes where Trump said:

Don't expect you do do that, just say the election was was corrupt + leave the rest to me and the R. Congressmen.

This was a response to DOJ saying that it couldn't just snap its fingers and overturn the election.

The "R. Congressmen" in this exchange included Rep Scott Perry, the man who introduced Jeffrey Clark to Donald Trump.

But in that phone call Donald Trump also mentions another Pennsylvania politician.

State Senator (and GOP candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano.

My transcript of Donoghue's notes:

DAG Call - on w/ POTUS + wants to conference me in

P - Country is up in arms over the corruption

Scott Perry (PA) + Senator from PA - Guy Mastriano - some of the (many?) calling

At the time I noted that:

Since the reference is to a "Senator from PA" it's easy to assume Trump meant State Senator Doug Mastriano rather than Pennsylvania Representative Guy Reschenthaler.

What to listen for in today's January 6 Committee hearing. (Among many other things) the names:

• Scott Perry
• Doug Mastriano

 So just how deeply are they involved in Trump's plot?

Each Took An Oath - (Rusty Bowers And Doug Mastriano)

This is the Oath of Office Arizona Speaker of the House Rusty Bowers took when he took office:

I, _____do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Arizona, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and defend them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of the office of _____(name of office)_____ according to the best of my ability, so help me God (or so I do affirm).

He was asked what his reaction was he was asked to by Trump's attorney Rudy Giuliani to participate in an electoral vote switch. This is what he said:

[Giuliani] said, well, we have heard by an official high up in the Republican legislature that there is a legal theory or a legal ability in Arizona that you can remove the — the electors of President Biden and replace them. And we would — we would like to have the legitimate opportunity through the committee to come to that end and — and remove that. 

And I said that's — that's something I've — that's totally new to me. I've never heard of any such thing. 

And he pressed that point. 

And I said, look, you are asking me to do something that is counter to my oath when I swore to the Constitution to uphold it, and I also swore to the Constitution and the laws of the state of Arizona.

And this is totally foreign as a — an idea or a theory to me, and I would never do anything of such magnitude without deep consultation with qualified attorneys. And I said I've got some good attorneys and I'm going to give you their names, but you are asking me to do something against my oath, and I will not break my oath. [Emphasis added.]

And this is the oath of office that State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Gov.) Doug Mastriano took when he became State Senator:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support, obey and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of this Commonwealth and that I will discharge the duties of my office with fidelity.

And yet Mastriano took a very different path than AZ House Speaker Bowers. Mastriano participated in an legislative attempt to replace Pennsylvania's real electors with some Trump fake electors even though the factual basis for the need of this switch (a rigged election) has been shown to be utterly false.

Rusty Bowers:

As a conservative Republican, I don’t like the results of the presidential election. I voted for President Trump and worked hard to reelect him. But I cannot and will not entertain a suggestion that we violate current law to change the outcome of a certified election. 

Doug Mastriano:

At the request of Senator Doug Mastriano (R-Adams/Cumberland/Franklin/York), the Senate Majority Policy Committee is holding a public hearing Wednesday to discuss 2020 election issues and irregularities. The hearing will feature former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

Two republicans. Two conservative republicans. Two men of deep faith.

One upheld his oath of office and remained loyal to the rule of law.

And the other one is PA State Senator (and current GOP Candidate for PA Gov) Doug Mastriano.

 

 

 

Um, Brock? I Think Your Boss Wendy Bell Just Questioned Your Manhood

On her FB page yesterday, here's what award-winning journalist Wendy Bell wrote:

On Father’s Day… it’s good to see a man get his inner Rambo on. Thanks to my friend Brock Schneider for always having my six and becoming armed and masculine!! [Emphasis added.]

Um, what?

What did the noxious Wendy Bell think of Brock before he "became" armed?

And what's that "inner Rambo" crap? Has she not actually seen the movie or read the book it's based on?

The character John Rambo was a decorated Vietnam veteran, a Green Beret, who's tormented by his experiences in Vietnam and is only pushed back into brutal blood soaked violence by the harassment of local law enforcement. They draw first blood and he kills lots of police officers.

Is that what she's celebrating in Brock?

Does The Angel of Death really think that Brock (or any man for that matter) becomes more masculine simply by shooting an AR-15 into a target? On Fathers' Day??

Does she not realize that that's part of the problem?

Meanwhile, Outside

From the weather scientists at NOAA:

The May global surface temperature was 1.39°F (0.77°C) above the 20th-century average of 58.6°F (14.8°C). This ranks as the ninth-warmest May in the 143-year record, 0.30°F (0.17°C) cooler than the warmest May months (2016 and 2020). It was the coolest May since 2013, but it still marked the 46th consecutive May and the 449th consecutive month with temperatures, at least nominally, above the 20th-century average. The ten warmest May months have all occurred from 2010 to present.

And:

The March-May 2022 global surface temperature was 1.53°F (0.85°C) above the 20th-century average. This ranks as the sixth-warmest March-May period in the 143-year record, 0.49°F (0.27°C) cooler than the warmest March-May period (2016). The ten warmest March-May periods have all occurred from 2010 to present.

The March-May period is defined as the Northern Hemisphere’s meteorological spring and the Southern Hemisphere’s meteorological fall. The Northern Hemisphere spring 2022 temperature was the fifth warmest on record, and the Southern Hemisphere autumn temperature was the 10th warmest on record.

Asia had its fourth warmest spring on record.

That's what the science says.

 

A Clear And Present Danger To American Democracy

That's what he said.

That's what J. Michael Luttig, a very conservative former U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the Fourth Circuit, said yesterday.

In his opening statement, Judge Luttig talked about a "war on democracy" - that "we Americans are at war over our democracy" and that that democracy is now on a "knife's edge."

He explained:

The war on democracy instigated by the former president and his political party allies on January 6 was the natural and foreseeable culmination of the war for America. It was the final fateful day for the execution of a well-developed plan by the former president to overturn the 2020 presidential election at any cost, so that he could cling to power that the American People had decided to confer upon his successor, the next president of the United States instead. Knowing full well that he had lost the 2020 presidential election, the former president and his allies and supporters falsely claimed and proclaimed to the nation that he had won the election, and then he and they set about to overturn the election that he and they knew the former president had lost.

The treacherous plan was no less ambitious than to steal America’s democracy.

And then there's this:

Over a year and a half later, in continued defiance of our democracy, both the former president and his political party allies still maintain that the 2020 presidential election was “stolen” from him, despite all evidence -- all evidence now --that that is simply false. All the while, this false and reckless insistence that the former president won the 2020 presidential election has laid waste to Americans’ confidence in their national elections. More alarming still is that the former president pledges that his reelection will not be “stolen” from him next time around, and his Republican Party allies and supporters obeisantly pledge the same.

False claims that our elections have been stolen from us corrupt our democracy, as they corrupt us. To continue to insist and persist in the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen is itself an affront to our democracy and to the Constitution of the United States -- an affront without precedent.

He said that, "To continue to insist and persist in the false claim that the 2020 presidential election was stolen is itself an affront to our democracy and to the Constitution of the United States."

So sending a memo to all the members of the PA Senate announcing legislation disputing the 2020 General Election would be such an affront, wouldn't it? 

Especially if it contains:

THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED that the Pennsylvania Senate —
 
1. Recognizes substantial irregularities and improprieties associated with mail-in balloting, pre-canvassing, and canvassing during the November 3, 2020 election; and

2. Finds, based on the facts and evidence presented and our own Board of Elections data, that the Presidential election held on November 3, 2020, in Pennsylvania is irredeemably corrupted; and 

3. Disapproves of the infringement on the General Assembly’s sole authority pursuant to the United States Constitution to regulate the selection of Electoral College delegates; and
 
4. Disapproves of and rejects the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s premature certification of the results of the November 3, 2020 election regarding presidential electors; and
 
5. Declares that the selection of presidential electors and other statewide electoral contest results in this Commonwealth is in dispute; and

6. Directs that, pursuant to our authority granted in Article II of the United States Constitution and the numerous illegal acts committed, encouraged and ignored by the Governor, Secretary of State, and certain election officials, we hereby take back and reserve to the Pennsylvania General Assembly the power to designate Presidential electors for the State of Pennsylvania for the December, 2020 meeting of the Electoral College and withdraw any prior statement or direction to the contrary given by us or any other official or body; and
 
7. Directs the Secretary of the Commonwealth and the Governor to withdraw and vacate the certification of presidential electors and to delay certification of results in other statewide electoral contests voted on at the 2020 General Election; and

8. Commands all Presidential electors and other officials to act in conformity with this resolution and not interfere with the authority of the Pennsylvania General Assembly under Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 and under Article I, Section 4, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution; and
 
9. Urges the United States Congress to recognize and count as the State of Pennsylvania’s electoral votes for President and Vice-President only such electoral votes as are certified directly by the Pennsylvania House of Representatives and the Pennsylvania Senate by subsequent resolution.

Remember PA's fake electors? Remember how they changed this:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Wisconsin, do hereby certify the following... 

Into this:

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, on the understanding that if, as a result of a final non-appealable Court Order or other proceeding prescribed by law, we are ultimately recognized as being the duly elected and qualified Electors for President and Vice President of the United States of America from the State of Pennsylvania, hereby certify the following...[Emphasis added.]

In those fake filing documents? What do you think "or other proceeding prescribed by law" meant to them? This resolution, of course.

Guess who was among the crew who sent out that memo?

If you guessed PA State Senator (and now GOP candidate for PA Governor) Doug Mastriano, you'd be 100% correct.

We already know about his wanderings around The Capitol on January 6. We already know about Doug's deep involvement in Trump's attempt to pressure DOJ. We already know about how Steve Bannon praised Doug's election denial conference.

All these were threats to American democracy.

Then there's this threat from Mastriano:

On March 30, Mastriano told WPIC’s Eric Bomback radio show that “I get to appoint the secretary of state who’s delegated from me the power to make the corrections to elections, the voting logs and everything. I could decertify every machine in the state with the stroke of a pen via the secretary of state.”

Trump political ally Doug Mastriano is a clear and present threat to American Democracy.