Friday, May 15, 2026

We Weren't The Only Ones...

Having been added to the "terrorist list," many organizations are now feeling the wrath of the Trump administration.
The administration is increasingly attempting to scare activists into silence, but progressives are preparing instead.
Truthout
By Marianne Dhenin 
May 14, 2026


he White House’s 2026 Counterterrorism Strategy, published May 6, reveals startling new details about the Trump administration’s plans to target progressives. The new memo builds on one issued last September, called the National Security Presidential Memorandum 7 (NSPM-7) on “Countering Domestic Terrorism and Organized Political Violence.” Organizers warn the administration’s so-called “America First” counterterrorism strategy represents a threat to human rights, civil liberties, and the ongoing struggle for democracy and are shoring up their work to protect against its directives.

“NSPM-7 is a deliberate attempt to sow fear and intimidate and silence opposition to the president’s abuses,” wrote Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) National Security Project, in a blog post following NSPM-7’s release. But, she continued, “[as] chilling as NSPM-7 is, and painful and difficult though its implementation may well prove to be, it contains nothing that we have not seen before.”
It is worth noting that Truthout is a progressive media outlet. However, the NSPM-7 directive is overwhelmingly focused on what it describes as “violent left-wing extremism”, specifically anti-fascist (Antifa), anarchist, anti-capitalist, and pro-migration protest movements. Notably, it contains almost nothing regarding right-wing extremists.
The Trump administration has given some indications of who it plans to target with these memos, though their vague language casts a wide net. Days before NSPM-7 was issued, Donald Trump signed an executive order designating antifa a domestic terrorist organization, and in a leaked December memo, then-Attorney General Pam Bondi described “Antifa-aligned extremists” as anyone willing to use violence in the service of “extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment.”

As examples of supposed anti-American sentiment, Bondi offers opposition to law enforcement, anti-capitalist thinking, “anti-Christianity,” and “hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality.” Meanwhile, the latest memo promises to “prioritize the rapid identification and neutralization of violent secular political groups whose ideology is anti-American, radically pro-transgender, and anarchist.” Seemingly, anyone involved in struggles for the rights and safety of immigrants, religious minority groups, or LGBTQ+ people could be labeled anti-American using those descriptions and the Trump administration’s positions.
I have to wonder if I am on a list myself as a former head of a trans-rights organization. One also has to wonder: who exactly gets to decide these designations?

Back in December, before the release of NSPM-7, The Guardian reported:
Internal report shared with Guardian shows FBI has launched cases in 23 regions, some linked to Trump memo on thwarting ‘terroristic activities’
Sam Levin in Los Angeles
Fri 19 Dec 2025


The FBI has launched “criminal and domestic terrorism investigations” into “threats against immigration enforcement activity” in at least 23 regions across the US, according to an internal report shared with the Guardian.

The two-page FBI document, dated 14 November, says some of the investigations are related to the “countering domestic terrorism” memo issued by Donald Trump in September.

Released after the killing of Charlie Kirk, Trump’s memo, known as NSPM-7, called for a “national strategy” to thwart “violent and terroristic activities” associated with “anti-fascism”. It described “anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism and anti-Christianity” as threats and cited “riots” in Los Angeles and Portland, referring to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as examples of “political violence”.
The Trump administration labeled peaceful protests in Minneapolis as "violent" and categorized the murdered protesters as terrorists.
“[The FBI document] is infused with vague and overbroad language, which was exactly our concern about NSPM-7 in the first place. It invites law enforcement suspicion and investigation based on purely first amendment-protected beliefs and activities,” said Hina Shamsi, director of the ACLU National Security Project. “People who are entirely innocent of any wrongdoing can be subjected to surveillance or investigation. That imposes stigma. It can wrongly immesh people in the criminal legal system.”
We have already seen this administration go after television shows and news programs that do not cast the President in a favorable light. As Time magazine wrote:
The order, which directs the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) to investigate “networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence,” identifies ideological markers such as anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism and anti-Christianity as potential red flags. Rights groups say that language is so broad it risks sweeping in protest movements, advocacy organizations, and critics of the administration.
The First Amendment be damned!

Groups such as the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) have found that the majority of lethal extremist attacks and plots in recent years were linked to far-right ideologies. Examples include the Charleston church shooting, the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, the El Paso Walmart shooting, the Buffalo supermarket shooting, and, of course, the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol. Yet, we are the ones being targeted.

The Trump administration claims there has been a "massive surge" in left-wing violence, a point often echoed by conservatives. While this may be technically true in terms of percentage growth, there is a major "but" involved.

Over the last five years (2020–2025), there was an average of fewer than 10 violent acts per year attributed to the left. In contrast, there were between 30 and 70 incidents per year attributed to the right. More importantly, 90–100% of extremist-related murders typically originate from the far-right or white supremacist spectrum.
The most recent memo builds upon the Administration's efforts to crack down on left-wing ideology. Last week, the President designated “Antifa,” short for anti-fascist, as a domestic terror organization. Antifa, however, is an ideology, rather than a unified group.

Patel, of the Brennan Center, says the memo derives from the idea that there’s a rise of political violence on the left, “which includes everything from anti-immigration protests to racial justice protests to actual assassinations like that of Charlie Kirk.” The concerns with the order, she says, have to do with its conflation of actual criminal activity with Americans’ right to free speech and protest. 
It is worth noting that the alleged killer of Charlie Kirk was not a "left-wing assassin," but rather an individual with a personal and ideological grudge who stated he had "had enough of [Kirk's] hatred." The media described him as a "lone actor."

Ultimately, NSPM-7 ignores the reality of right-wing violence entirely to better fit the Republican political narrative.


History Repeats!

[Essay]

Us old-timers remember the "Dixiecrats." They were the Southern Democratic base—a solid, conservative, Christian, and pro-Jim Crow voting bloc. Led by figures like Strom Thurmond, they held a vice grip on the South. But when the national Democratic Party started moving toward the Civil Rights Act and school desegregation, the Dixiecrats had finally had enough. They weren't just fighting to keep schools segregated; they were fighting to keep the "old ways" alive against anyone who didn't fit their mold.

Even back then, people were fighting back. While the media focused on the big laws, there were protests at places like the Black Cat Tavern and Cooper Do-nuts where queer and trans people stood up against police harassment. Eventually, the Dixiecrats jumped ship to the Republican Party to protect their "traditional" values.

The South was notorious for using the "Poll Tax" to make it harder for Black citizens to vote, but the courts eventually struck that down. Now, the Republicans are trying to do something similar with Voter ID. In some states, you have to pay a fee just to get a copy of your birth certificate. For a low-income family, that’s a big burden—and if they have to take a day off work to get it, that’s an additional cost they can't afford!

Now the ol’ South is rising up again!

Back then it was Sen. Joseph McCarthy and the "Lavender Scare"; now it is the “Transgender Scare.” Instead of Senate hearings, it is Trump’s “Executive Orders!” And here is a twist: helping McCarthy was Roy Cohn. Does that name sound familiar? It should, he was Trump’s long-time mentor and advisor!

And now we have the threat of trans activists being put on the terrorist watch list!

What goes around comes around…

[/Essay]

Thursday, May 14, 2026

On The Road To Fascism

One-party control... A number of states are dominated by supermajorities in their legislatures, and one such state is Tennessee.
Minority leader says it’s like being ‘stabbed in the back’
Tennessee Lookout
By: Sam Stockard
May 13, 2026


Tennessee’s Republican House speaker is punishing Democrats for participating in a chaotic end to the special session lawmakers used to redraw congressional maps to bolster a GOP candidate in the midterm election.

House Speaker Cameron Sexton sent a letter Tuesday to House Minority Leader Karen Camper notifying her that Democratic Caucus members will be removed from all standing committees and subcommittees except in cases where their membership is required by House rules. Letters to individual members told them to contact Camper for information.

All 24 House Democrats are barred, including Reps. Justin Jones of Nashville and Justin Pearson of Memphis, a congressional candidate. They both were ousted, then reinstated, after  vocal Democratic pushback in 2023 following a House chamber protest over gun laws in the wake of The Covenant School shooting that claimed the lives of six people, including three children.
So what got the Republicans in a tizzy?
The Crossville Republican cited the incident in which House Democrats gathered at the front of the chamber as Republicans voted to redistrict the state’s congressional map last week and locked arms in a show of solidarity against the GOP plan.

Similarly, Senate Speaker Randy McNally is considering possible action against six Senate Democrats who locked arms in the well at the end of their session in a “blatant violation of civility and decorum,” according to spokesperson Adam Kleinheider.
Were they screaming and yelling? Nope.
Did they disrupt the session? Nope.

WJIL Ch 11 reported that,
I just got an official letter from Speaker Cameron Sexton stripping me of all my committee assignments for protesting their white supremacist agenda.

Just as my white Republican colleagues chose racial retaliation against Tennessee’s Black voters, the Speaker of the House is now choosing retaliation against a Black lawmaker for standing up against their Jim Crow racial gerrymander. This is not new. This is the same pattern of racial discrimination and authoritarian abuse we have come to expect. His assault on our democracy is not about me, but silencing the voices of the people who democratically elected me, the 70,000 people who call District 52 home.

This will not deter us from the fights ahead, but instead strengthen our resolve to keep pushing. As my mentor Diane Nash taught me, “we can judge the effectiveness of our opposition by the response of our opponents.” The white supremacist Speaker is terrified that people around the country have seen through their lies, and that their attempts to drag us backwards in history have drawn nationwide rebuke.

We will not stop fighting.
We will not stop getting in good trouble.
We will not go back!

State Rep. Justin Jones (D-Nashville)
Jim Crow is back!

So now, in Tennessee, the Republicans have disenfranchised half of the voters in the state—let that sink in.

Because the Democrats are no longer on any committees, all those who voted for these legislators no longer have a functional say in government. This isn't just punishing the Democrats; it is punishing the voters.

This is what fascist governments do.

Royalty!

No not that royalty as in King Charles, but rather for the use of a name.

Miami International Airport is getting a new name! There is a bill in the Florida legislature to rename it Donald J. Trump International Airport!
The Trumps won’t profit from airport-branded merchandise sold on site. But the agreement doesn’t prevent them from profiting off such items sold elsewhere.
The New York Times
By Patricia Mazzei
May 5, 2026


Commissioners in Palm Beach County, Fla., approved a trademark and licensing agreement with President Trump’s family business on Tuesday, a step required to rename Palm Beach International Airport as President Donald J. Trump International Airport.

Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed legislation in March to rename the airport that Mr. Trump flies in and out of on his way to and from his nearby Mar-a-Lago estate. The Trump family business had filed to trademark the airport name in February, raising questions about whether the family would profit from the renaming.

Under the new agreement, the Trump family won’t profit from branded merchandise sold at the airport. But the agreement does not prevent the family from profiting off any such merchandise sold outside the airport’s premises, according to Josh Gerben, a trademark lawyer.

It also gives the Trump family control over any biographical material presented at the airport, or on airport materials. And it requires the airport to pick a vendor to provide any branded merchandise from a list approved by the Trump family business.

Mr. Gerben called the agreement “extremely unusual when it comes to an honorary naming of an airport.” He noted that other airports named after presidents, such as Kennedy in New York and Reagan in Washington, do not have licensing agreements with private businesses benefiting those presidents’ families.
So, when you see the new name of the airport, will you also see a trademark symbol... (™)?

A Win From Montana

The court has spoken and the legislature went too far in trying to harass us!
Vanguard News
By Joseph Franzese
April 20, 2026


The ACLU of Montana published a report highlighting a recent Montana Supreme Court decision blocking enforcement of policies that bar transgender people from updating identity documents, ruling that such policies likely violate constitutional protections against discrimination.

According to the ACLU of Montana, the court “upheld a District Court order temporarily preventing the State of Montana from enforcing policies that bar transgender people from obtaining accurate sex designations on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses,” preserving access for transgender people to obtain accurate identification documents.

[...]

The ACLU of Montana also highlighted advocates’ views on the broader significance of the ruling. Executive Director Akilah Deernose stated, “This is a good day not just for transgender individuals but for all Montanans,” adding that “our Constitution exists to protect all of us from government overreach,” and that the court “faithfully interpreted our Equal Protection Clause to protect against unlawful discrimination.”

The ACLU of Montana also reported legal advocates’ framing of the decision within a national context. Malita Picasso, staff attorney for the ACLU’s LGBTQ and HIV Project, stated, “Today’s ruling is an important victory for transgender people across the state of Montana,” and described it as “perhaps even a glimmer of relief to transgender people across the country who are enduring a relentless effort to strip away their rights.”
There sure has been "over reach" by the states and the federal governments! The Daily Montanan wrote that,
The court blocked the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services as well as the Department of Justice (which operates the Motor Vehicle Division) from refusing to update those documents to match a resident’s gender identity. The majority’s decision led to charges from two of the court’s more conservative members, Chief Justice Cory Swanson and Justice Jim Rice, to accuse the majority of disregarding science, rewriting history, meddling in political debate and deepening rifts between lawmakers and the courts.

“The majority today has blown through all of these prudential instructions to issue a political decision dressed up in constitutional garb,” Swanson wrote in his dissent. “Now that we have spoken from the judicial mountaintop, where is the incentive toward continued public debate, mutual respect, and accommodation? Each side is in fact incentivized to stake out maximalist positions and then rush to the courthouse so the least democratic branch can settle political disputes better left to policy makers.”
No good sirs, it is you who are ignoring science, it is you good sirs that want to persecute a whole community because of your belief. As KPAX points out, this is just a court order blocking the law, the case can now be heard on the policy.
The Montana Supreme Court’s ruling is preliminary.

A full trial remains pending.

Passed Down Through the Generations

[Editorial]

You hear a lot about family values, but sometimes those family values started with the enslavement of human beings, and they have been passed down through the generations.

The Supreme Court just stripped protections from the Voting Rights Act by allowing states to redistrict. The defendants in court claimed that the redistricting was not about race.

What was the first thing those states did?

They did away with Black districts… but (wink, wink) it supposedly was not about race.

So look at the states that redistricted.


They are the same states that opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. They are the same states that enforced Jim Crow laws. They are the same states that broke away from the Union. They are the same states that believed it was acceptable to own people.

Harvard Kennedy School in two book reviews about on how slavery still is affecting the states, the first article, Slavery, Politics, and Causality...
Abstract
How has slavery shaped the politics of the United States over the last century and a half since emancipation? Our book, Deep Roots (Acharya, Blackwell and Sen, 2018), tackled this question using a combination of quantitative, historical, and theoretical tools. Building on our earlier article published in The Journal of Politics (Acharya, Blackwell and Sen, 2016), our book shows a clear, persistent correlation between the proportion of enslaved people in a Southern county in 1860 and the political attitudes of whites living in those counties in the 20th and early 21st centuries, especially on issues related to race. The book employs various identification strategies and falsification tests to establish these relationships as plausibly causal. It presents evidence that these patterns cannot easily be explained by theories of racial threat or by antebellum attitudes on race, but, rather, that the political economy of the post-Civil War period generated incentives for whites of all social strata to adopt strongly anti-Black views, which have been passed down in local communities over time.
Abstract
We show that contemporary differences in political attitudes across counties in the American South trace their origins to slavery’s prevalence more than 150 years ago. Whites who currently live in Southern counties that had high shares of slaves in 1860 are more likely to identify as a Republican, oppose affirmative action policies, and express racial resentment and colder feelings toward blacks. These results cannot be explained by existing theories, including the theory of racial threat. To explain these results, we offer evidence for a new theory involving the historical persistence of racial attitudes. We argue that, following the Civil War, Southern whites faced political and economic incentives to reinforce racist norms and institutions. This produced racially conservative political attitudes, which in turn have been passed down locally across generations. Our results challenge the interpretation of a vast literature on racial attitudes in the American South.
They values of bigoty and discrimination are passed down through the generations! And they're not my family values.

[/Editorial]

Wednesday, May 13, 2026

See The Difference

People say there is no difference between political parties. Well I am going to prove them wrong with one sentence. A state just passed a law that mandates insurance coverage for healthcare for trans people.

You know the answer, so don't tell me there is no difference!
Bill sees movement after two-year stasis in Trenton
New Jersey Monitor
By: Lilo H. Stainton
May 11, 2026


New Jersey lawmakers voted along party lines Monday to approve legislation aimed at protecting transgender patients and their healthcare providers, advancing the bill after nearly two years of lobbying by the trans community and its allies. 

The Democratic-led bill to enshrine civil and criminal protections for those who treat and those who receive care for gender dysphoria drew hours of passionate testimony from supporters, who say the protections are essential given the Trump administration’s push to curtail access to gender-affirming care, and emotional pushback from a handful of opponents.  

The measure, which would also expand protections for reproductive healthcare providers, was approved by the Senate’s health committee by a 5-2 vote.

Natalie Baker, a psychotherapist who is also parent of a transgender child, said the kinds of policies pushed by the bill “have very real impacts on families and providers.”

“Families are making difficult life decisions based on whether their children feel safe and protected. Families are paying attention to this. Providers are paying attention to this. And businesses are too,” Baker said. 

According to LGBTQ advocacy group Garden State Equality, 18 states have already passed similar shield laws.




Yesterday, the Colorado General Assembly passed HB26-1322, legislation that updates Colorado’s longstanding prohibition on conversion therapy to be viewpoint-neutral, directly responding to the concerns raised by the U.S. Supreme Court in Chiles v. Salazar. The new law preserves Colorado’s ban on this discredited and harmful practice while bringing the statute into alignment with the Supreme Court’s First Amendment guidance. 

[...]

Under HB26-1322, the definition of conversion therapy is amended to prohibit a licensed mental health professional from seeking to impose a predetermined outcome on a minor patient with respect to sexual orientation or gender identity, regardless of the direction of that outcome. A therapist may not steer a young person toward any predetermined identity — the prohibition applies evenhandedly. This change ensures the law regulates a category of substandard professional conduct rather than any particular viewpoint, squarely addressing the basis for the Supreme Court’s ruling. 


The 101-100 vote came after the bill had been pulled from a vote in March.
Fox 43
Author: James Corrigan
April 28, 2026


After a controversial delay, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives passed the Fairness Act on Tuesday, just over a month after House Democratic leaders were forced to cancel a vote on the bill aimed at adding protections for LGBTQ+ Pennsylvanians.

State Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta’s (D-Philadelphia) second attempt to move the legislation through the chamber this year proved successful, as the bill passed by a narrow 101-100 vote. 

[...]

No Republicans voted for the bill after two GOP lawmakers had supported a previous version in 2023.

Rep. Frank Burns (D-Cambria) was the only Democrat to vote against the measure. Republican Rep. Alec Ryncavage, of Luzerne County, also voted "no" after previously voting "yes" in 2023.
So you still think that there is no difference between the parties?

This November will either be heaven or hell for us.


This Is What He Is Doing!

Creating fear in our community!

Trump's policies have created shivers; all his edicts against us have our heads rolling, and that is exactly what he wants.
WBUR
Nirvani Williams and Phil Bishop, New England Public Media
May 06, 2026


Smith College students are reacting to a recently-opened Title IX investigation into the school, over the admittance of students who are transgender women.

The Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights argues that Smith violated Title IX gender protections by admitting transgender women and allowing them access to spaces like dorms and locker rooms.

“As a trans woman in the United States, I don't feel safe at all," said a Smith student who asked not to be identified because she says she feels targeted under this administration. She said she’s still processing the news that her college is under investigation for admitting trans students like her.

“It's just one thing added to the mix of like the stressful climate, political climate that we're living in and we're all just trying to come here to get our degrees to study," she said, adding that she feels like the Trump administration is targeting what is already a small minority of trans students on campus.

“They're just causing that sort of emotional pressure on like the hearts and the minds of the students that are trans that go here. We're just a scapegoat in this administration's aims to just outlaw anyone that's different.”
Do you think the White House doesn't want to create fear and uncertainty in our community? This goes deeper than politics with Trump... this attack on the trans community is punitive!

One Ruling Went Our Way

A judge blocked a witch hunt against WPATH.
Chief Judge James Boasberg said the Trump administration showed “wafer-thin justifications” in targeting WPATH and the Endocrine Society.
The Advocate
Christopher Wiggins
May 08, 2026


President Donald Trump suffered a pair of legal setbacks Thursday after a federal judge in Washington, D.C., blocked the Federal Trade Commission from enforcing investigative demands against two of the nation’s most influential medical organizations involved in transgender health care guidance.

Chief Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia granted preliminary injunctions to both the World Professional Association for Transgender Health and the Endocrine Society, temporarily halting FTC investigations that the groups argued were politically motivated and unconstitutional.

[...]

In separate lawsuits filed in D.C., WPATH and the Endocrine Society accused the administration of weaponizing federal investigative powers to intimidate organizations that support evidence-based medical care for transgender patients.

The complaints argued the FTC was not conducting ordinary consumer protection oversight, but instead attempting to chill scientific debate, suppress protected medical speech, and deter physicians and researchers from participating in discussions about health care for transgender people.