NYT: She Was A Black Election Official in Georgia. Then Came New GOP Rules.

[FelineOverlord]

This is trending wildly on Twitter.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[FelineOverlord]

1. NYT: She Was A Black Election Official in Georgia. Then Came New GOP Rules.

Link to tweet

[Docreed2003]

2. K&R for visibility

[FoxNewsSucks]

3. Does Joe Manchin care yet?

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

11. No. He's either stupid, gullible, or corrupt.

My bet is on number three. Some enterprising investigative journalist will get the answer to this question someday: "Who's paying off Joe Manchin?"

[KS Toronado]

14. Koch brothers

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

22. You may be right.

From CNBC:

Joe Manchin is opposing big parts of Biden’s agenda as the Koch network pressures him

The political advocacy group backed by billionaire Charles Koch (Americans for Prosperity) has been pressuring Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to oppose key parts of the Democratic agenda, including filibuster reform and voting rights legislation.

That lobbying effort appears to be paying off. Manchin, in a recent op-ed, wrote that he opposed eliminating the filibuster and that he would not vote for the For the People Act, which, advocates say, would limit the influence of big donors on elections.
- - -
Americans for Prosperity launched a website titled West Virginia Values, which calls on people to email Manchin “to be The Voice West Virginia Needs In D.C. — Reject Washington’s Partisan Agenda.”

It then lists all of the items Manchin has promised to oppose, including the idea of eliminating the filibuster, the For the People Act and packing the Supreme Court. It then shows everything the group believes Manchin should oppose, including Biden’s infrastructure plan and the union-friendly PRO Act.

Americans for Prosperity leaders took part in one of their video series with their West Virginia state director in May where they praised Manchin for voicing his opposition to abolishing the filibuster. Both Americans for Prosperity and Manchin have said they believe eliminating the filibuster would exacerbate partisanship.

* * *

They only need to keep him under control until the 2022 elections, when the GQP will steal enough Senate seats that he won't be of anymore use to them and they'll kick him to the side of the road. Right now they're playing by Putin's playbook -- have people (Republicans and "grass root W. Virginians" ) praise his wisdom and strength to stand up for "what's right" in the face of enormous pressure. It worked with T***** for four years, so why not Manchin?

[ShazzieB]

41. How about "all of the above"?

Those things are not mutually exclusive after all.

[Captain Zero]

42. Corrupt is most likely.

Dark Money Corrupt.

[LenaBaby61]

45. Does Joe Manchin care yet?

[secondwind]

4. K&R

[Scrivener7]

5. As with everything else they do, "Stop the Steal" was a projection.

[Solly Mack]

6. K&R

[KentuckyWoman]

7. NYT article requires subscription.

Fyi

[FelineOverlord]

8. Georgia removes 100,000 names from voter registration rolls

Link to tweet

[CrispyQ]

9. K&R

We need a massive postcard campaign to Manchin. Deluge his DC office with postcards from around the nation, to save our democracy.

[peppertree]

10. A Fujimori-style self-coup in plain sight

"THIS is what I should've done from the beginning!" Trump must be squealing.

[Crunchy Frog]

12. And Manchin wants to just let it happen because "bipartisan". nt

[jalan48]

13. The Republicans are getting things lined up in order to take back the House and Senate in 2022.

It's a soft coup this time around.

[KS Toronado]

17. That's why passing HR1/S1 is so important

If passed, just by getting rid of gerrymandering should insure more seats in the House & Senate for us.

[jalan48]

18. It's a must and we can't even get all Democrats to support it. Pretty sad and dangerous for our

democracy.

[jaxexpat]

26. Probably wouldn't be in time for 2022 even IF it gets passed.

The existing gerrymandered federal, state and local voting precincts can't be "un-gerrymandered" without a clumsy, time-consuming, courtroom/judges process. We already see how GQP appointed judges are already aligned against these progressive goals. Things thought impossible to be taken seriously are actually given a hearing. Neither Powell nor Giuliani are in jail awaiting trial. It's also a process which will be fought by current GQP at every turn and on every level in statehouses across the country.

[KS Toronado]

33. re: GQP appointed judges

I've often felt like what this country needs when appointing Federal Judges is that they have to pass a test
by the American Bar Assn. to prove they are unbiased against D's & R's. In other words any decisions they
make will not be based on whether this case is good or bad for D's or R's. If we're not careful our judicial
system is headed towards the first question a judge wants answered is "Are you a D or R?" Middle of the
road Judges are what our Founding Fathers envisioned.

[jaxexpat]

34. It gets to the question, "which set of facts do you support".

The issue is how could anybody accept that there are more than one set of facts? Yet even our best efforts toward judgeships have rewarded us with federal courts wherein there is a 180 degree difference of facts. It's why we have an odd number of USSC judges. So that one set of facts weighs can more than another.

They're called opinions but they're so much more because the law which comes clear from them very tangibly effects very real events in the lives of people. Facts are inexorable, they are the bedrock of existence, of reality, whether we like it or not. They're "pesky" that way.

In the world of facts, someone's "opinion" is meaningless. Further, if their "opinion" contradicts the facts it's plainly proof that they're delusional, insane. If this is all the case then the concept of "middle of the road" judges describes those learned legal types who are the most anchored to reality. They're drawn from that set of people who are the "least" insane.

Could Antonin Scalia have passed a psychological screening? Clarence Thomas? Samuel Alito? Kavanaugh or Barrett? Or are they not simply highly functional, yet dangerously flawed, characters, masquerading as worthies?

[BadgerMom]

15. How do these aberrations they call laws get overturned within the judicial system?

Appeals to Manchin and to Republicans accomplish nothing and waste time. What legal challenges are there? Who has standing? Who can file suit? IANAL.

[Dan]

16. We can thank that shithead Chief Justice Roberts....

[Lonestarblue]

19. In Republican-led states, only Republicans can serve as election officials.

So much for bipartisanship! Manchin’s new version of a voting bill needs to ensure that both Democrats and Republicans serve on election boards, just as both are required to be on the USPS Board of Governors. That bill also needs to do something about these voter nullification laws,,not just the access laws.

I hope Justice Roberts is satisfied with his handiwork of gutting the part of the Voting Rights Act that has made these laws possible. If these laws are not overturned, we will never have another fair election in a Republican-led state.

[sinkingfeeling]

20. Hey, Justice Roberts, what do you think of your Voting Rights Act comments now?

[spanone]

21. This anti-democracy shit needs to end.

Don't know how, but left unchallenged democracy dies

[Stuart G]

25. I honestly believe that this shit will be challanged, not once, but over and over again..

Yes, there are lots of stupid idiots here in this country, but there are lots of good people too. ...

Those of us who are ..."good people"...(we are included) ...will never give up this fight to save our democracy..


It is not an easy fight, and this fight goes on and on, but we will never give up,... and there will be others to fight
this fight in the future. And we will win.!!!

[spanone]

27. 👍🏼

[Faygo Kid]

23. We are in DEEP trouble if this stands

There used to be honorable Republicans, but there are none now.

[-misanthroptimist]

24. Republicans are going to be very sorry that they're doing this.

Extremely sorry.

[Stuart G]

30. Far more sorry then Republicans can imagine..This one idea...will encourage some

Republicans...(I said some) to fight this) Yes, there are some who will fight this..and that will be a temporary
destruction of the Republican Party..When new leaders take charge, they will expel these idiots who propose this,
and we will start all over again......

Yes, the "...Names will be changed to protect the innocent people.., but the show will be almost the same.."

...................New actors and writers, same show as we have always seen.......................

[GoodRaisin]

28. It's getting pretty clear what Republican strategy is for future elections.

Bury democracy.

They don't even try to hide it from the general public anymore.

[Faygo Kid]

29. We are in DEEP trouble if this stands

There used to be honorable Republicans, but there are none now.

[Stuart G]

31. I believe there are some honorable Republicans left.. We will see them appear soon...Some will be...

people we expect, and others will be unexpected. We will all watch the show, and hope for the very best!!

[Blue Owl]

32. But, but, but Ted Cruz says there's no racism in the USA...

[ananda]

35. Lawsuits -- now!

!!!

[FelineOverlord]

36. Lawsuits -- now!

Many lawsuits have been filed.

Link to tweet

[FelineOverlord]

37. NYT: She Was A Black Election Official in Georgia. Then Came New GOP Rules.

Link to tweet

[FelineOverlord]

38. NYT: She Was A Black Election Official in Georgia. Then Came New GOP Rules.

Link to tweet

[Cha]

39. Damn the Magats to Rot in Burning Hell.

[Rebl2]

40. File lawsuits

And keep them tied up for years in court if possible

[oldsoftie]

43. Paywall; cant read the article.

[Rhiannon12866]

44. Twitter followup:

Link to tweet

[UCmeNdc]

46. K&R

They are taking black and brown people out of positions of power. It is all planned out.

[thesquanderer]

47. Circular defense: "The commissioners are all elected officials and will face the voters...

...to answer for their actions” if they don't behave properly, said the person defending these moves. How does voting out the bad actors work when the people you're trying to vote out are in charge of the voting??