A lot of things happened. Here are some of the things. This is TPM’s Morning Memo.
Time For A Nice, Deep Breath
Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) announced on Thursday night that she had reached a deal with her Democratic colleagues and is ready to “move forward” on the reconciliation bill for climate investments, drug pricing and taxes, aka the Inflation Reduction Act.
The Democrats agreed to “remove the carried interest tax provision, protect advanced manufacturing, and boost our clean energy economy” in the legislation, according to Sinema.
The final version of the bill will be introduced on Saturday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer announced (D-NY).
Trump’s Legal Team In Talks With DOJ About Jan. 6 Probe
The ex-president’s lawyers are in communication with prosecutors at the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C. who are heading the Justice Department’s investigation into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, CNN reports.
Their discussions have reportedly focused on Trump’s claims of executive privilege and whether they could cover his communications with witnesses in the White House.
Trump’s lawyers have warned their client that he may face indictments, according to CNN.
Kari Lake Wins GOP Nod For Arizona Governor
Trump-backed Kari Lake, a Big Lie fanatic and voter fraud conspiracy monger, is now projected to win the GOP Arizona gubernatorial primary after several days of the race being too close to call.
Lake no longer sees voter fraud in her race, even though she was “already detecting some stealing going on” on Monday! Interesting! After her victory became official on Thursday night, Lake bragged that “Arizonans who have been forgotten by the establishment just delivered a political earthquake.”
We know there wasn’t any voter fraud in Lake’s primary because, as she told reporters on Tuesday, “If we don’t win, there’s some cheating going on.” So now we can safely say there was no cheating!
Biden Still Positive For COVID
White House physician Kevin O’Connor reported on Thursday that the President tested positive for COVID-19 again that morning in a case of rebound positivity. However, O’Connor also reported that Biden was feeling “very well” and that his “very occasional cough” was improving.
Kansas GOP Sens. Baffled By Abortion Vote
Sens. Roger Marshall (R-KS) and Jerry Moran (R-KS) are struggling to wrap their heads around the fact that a majority of voters in their red state flatly rejected Republicans’ effort to strip away abortion rights in the state constitution on Tuesday.
Marshall described the vote as “quite a gut punch” that left him “absolutely shocked.”
Moran admitted he “never can predict elections.” “I never know how they’re going to turn out,” he told Politico on Thursday.
Trump Offspring Finally Sit For Depositions In NY AG Probe
Ivanka Trump and Don Jr. have recently given depositions in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ (D) civil investigation into the Trump Organization, according to CNN and ABC News, after the family spent months fighting the subpoenas.
Their depositions were delayed after their mother, Ivana Trump, died.
Don Jr. answered the questions during his deposition and didn’t invoke the Fifth Amendment, according to CNN.
Monkeypox A Public Health Emergency
Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra declared the monkeypox outbreak a public health emergency on Thursday.
Hearing For Giuliani’s Potential De-Lawyering Scheduled
An attorney discipline panel in D.C. has scheduled Rudy Giuliani’s ethics hearing for Oct. 24, where the disgraced former New York mayor could potentially face law license suspension (his license in New York was already suspended) or even disbarment for using the courts to spew voter fraud lies about the 2020 election.
Giuliani apparently plans on defending himself by blaming the local lawyers he worked with in the B.S. election lawsuits. According to Giuliani’s attorney, those local lawyers had given the ex-mayor false info that he took at face value because he “came in at the 11th hour” to work on the cases and was too dang busy to do his own research.
This hearing is only the first step in disciplining Giuliani in D.C. From there, the proceedings will move up to the full discipline board and the D.C. Court of Appeals.
Senate Democrats appear to have a deal that all 50 members of the caucus will support — including Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ).
Here’s Sinema in a statement a few minutes ago:
We have agreed to remove the carried interest tax provision, protect advanced manufacturing, and boost our clean energy economy in the Senate’s budget reconciliation legislation. Subject to the Parliamentarian’s review, I’ll move forward.
Former President Trump’s attorneys are reportedly in touch with Justice Department officials for the first time as the DOJ’s Jan. 6 probe expands into Trump’s orbit, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.
Attorney General Merrick Garland on Thursday announced that the Justice Department has charged four former and current Louisville police officers in connection to the death of Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old Black woman who was shot and killed by officers carrying out a search warrant in her home.
An attorney representing the parents of Sandy Hook shooting victims on Thursday confirmed that the Jan. 6 Select Committee is requesting two years-worth of records from the phone of far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, and claimed other federal entities were also interested in the records. The news comes a day after Rolling Stone reported on the development.
Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) on Wednesday maintained her belief that President Joe Biden won’t run for reelection in 2024 days after setting off a firestorm during a primary debate when she first expressed doubt about a potential Biden reelection bid.
Yesterday TPM Reader NN wrote in to ask what exactly it makes sense to say if you’re calling a Senate office about Roe and Reform. I thought others might be interested too. So here’s the gist of what I told her.
First, whenever I’m operating in this mode there’s always a balance between journalism and advocacy, one in which I’m leaning a bit out of my comfort zone. In a case like this I’m not trying to convince you to do one thing or another. It is rather one of a handful of cases over the last couple decades where I believe my experience and knowledge of American politics gives me some insight into how a lot of people’s very strongly held beliefs can be applied successfully to the mechanics and idiosyncrasies of American politics. There’s no shortage here of passion or intensity of belief. But how to work the levers of our political and electoral structure can be less clear.
This story first appeared at ProPublica. ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Even before the COVID-19 vaccine was authorized, there was a plan to discredit it.
Leaders in the anti-vaccination movement attended an online conference in October 2020 — two months before the first shot was administered — where one speaker presented on “The 5 Reasons You Might Want to Avoid a COVID-19 Vaccine” and another referred to the “untested, unproven, very toxic vaccines.”
But that was only the beginning. Misinformation seeped into every corner of social media, onto Facebook feeds and into Instagram images, pregnancy apps and Twitter posts. Pregnant people emerged as a target. A disinformation campaign preyed on their vulnerability, exploiting a deep psychological need to protect their unborn children at a moment when so much of the country was already gripped by fear.
“It’s just so powerful,” said Imran Ahmed, the founder and chief executive officer of the U.S. nonprofit Center for Countering Digital Hate, which tracks online disinformation.
A majority of the disinformation came from a group of highly organized, economically motivated actors, many of them selling supplements, books or even miracle cures, he said. They told people the vaccine may harm their unborn child or deprive them of the opportunity to become parents. Some even infiltrated online pregnancy groups and asked seemingly harmless questions, such as whether people had heard the vaccine could potentially lead to infertility.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate found that nearly 70% of anti-vaccination content could be traced to 12 people, whom they dubbed The Disinformation Dozen. They reached millions of people and tested their messaging online, Ahmed said, to see what was most effective — what was most frequently shared or liked — in real time.
“The unregulated and unmoderated effects of social media where people are allowed to spread disinformation at scale without consequences meant that this took hold very fast,” Ahmed said. “That’s had a huge effect on women deciding not to take the vaccine.”
Some people, such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., seized on the initial dearth of research into vaccines in pregnant people. “With no data showing COVID vaccines are safe for pregnant women, and despite reports of miscarriages among women who have received the experimental Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, Fauci and other health officials advise pregnant women to get the vaccine,” Kennedy posted in February 2021 on Facebook. Kennedy did not respond to requests for comment.
Disinformation flourished, in part, because pregnant people were not included in the vaccine’s initial clinical trials. Excluding pregnant people also omitted them from the data on the vaccine’s safety, which created a vacuum where disinformation spread. Unsure about how getting the shots might affect their pregnancy — and without clear guidance at the time from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — pregnant people last year had some of the lowest vaccination rates among adults.
The decision to delay or avoid vaccination, often made out of an abundance of caution and love for the baby growing inside of them, had dire consequences: Unvaccinated women who contracted COVID-19 while pregnant were at a higher risk of stillbirths — the death of a fetus at 20 weeks or more of pregnancy — and several other complications, including maternal death.
Although initial clinical trials did not include pregnant people, the Food and Drug Administration ensured that vaccines met a host of regulatory safety standards before authorizing them. Citing numerous studies that have since come out showing the vaccine is safe, the CDC now strongly recommends that people who are pregnant, breastfeeding or planning to become pregnant get vaccinated. The major obstetric organizations, including The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, also urge pregnant people to get vaccinated.
But two and a half years into the pandemic, misinformation is proving resilient.
A May 2022 Kaiser Family Foundation poll found more than 70% of pregnant people or those planning to become pregnant believed or were unsure whether to believe at least one of the following popular examples of misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine: that pregnant people should not get vaccinated; that it’s unsafe to get vaccinated while breastfeeding; or that the vaccine has been shown to cause infertility. None of which are true.
Dr. Laura Morris, a University of Missouri, Columbia family physician who delivers babies, has heard all those falsehoods and more from her patients. She has long relied on science to help encourage them to make well-informed decisions.
But when officials rolled out the vaccine, she found herself without her most powerful tool, data. The disinformation didn’t have to completely convince people that the vaccine was dangerous; creating doubt often was sufficient.
“That level of uncertainty is enough to knock them off the path to accepting vaccination,” Morris said. “Instead of seeing vaccines as something that will make them healthier and improve their pregnancy outcomes, they haven’t received the right information to make them feel confident that this is actually healthy.”
Before COVID-19, Morris typically saw one stillbirth every couple of years. Since the pandemic started, she said she has been seeing them more often. All followed a COVID-19 diagnosis in an unvaccinated patient just weeks before they were due. Not only did Morris have to deliver the painful news that their baby had died, she also told them that the outcome might have been different had they been vaccinated. Some, she said, felt betrayed at having believed the lies surrounding the vaccine.
“You have to have that conversation very carefully,” Morris said, “because this is a time where the people are feeling awful and grieving and there’s a lot of guilt associated with these situations that’s not deserved.”
In December 2021, the Federation of State Medical Boards found a proliferation of misinformation about COVID-19 among health care workers. Two-thirds of state medical boards reported an increase in complaints about misinformation, but fewer than 1 in 4 of them reported disciplining the doctors or other health care workers.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, an osteopath, was the speaker at the October 2020 conference who called the COVID-19 vaccine “toxic.” She later testified at an Ohio state House Health Committee hearing on the Enact Vaccine Choice and Anti-Discrimination Act. She falsely claimed that the vaccine could magnetize people. “They can put a key on their forehead, it sticks,” she said. “They can put spoons and forks all over them, and they could stick.” She also questioned the connection between the vaccine and 5G towers.
Despite her statements, the State Medical Board of Ohio has not taken any disciplinary action against her. Her medical license remains active. Tenpenny did not respond to requests for comment.
It’s difficult to know exactly how many doctors were disciplined, a term that can mean anything from sending them letters of guidance to revoking their license. State medical boards in some cases refused to disclose even the number of complaints received.
Some records were made public if formal disciplinary action was taken, as in the case of Dr. Mark Brody. The Rhode Island physician sent a letter to his patients that the state medical board determined contained several falsehoods, including claims that “there exists the possibility of sterilizing all females in the population who receive the vaccination.” The Rhode Island Board of Medical Licensure and Discipline reprimanded him for the letter, then suspended his medical license after other professional conduct issues were uncovered. He surrendered his license in December.
Brody said in an interview that he stands by the letter. He said the word “misinformation” has been politicized and used to discredit statements with which people disagree.
“This term doesn’t really apply to science,” he said, “because science is an ever-evolving field where today’s misinformation is tomorrow’s information.”
The Washington Medical Commission has received more than 50 complaints about COVID-19 misinformation since the start of the pandemic, a spokesperson there said. California does not track misinformation complaints specifically, but a Medical Board of California spokesperson said that, in that same time period, the group received more than 1,300 COVID-19-related complaints. They included everything from fraudulent promotion of unproven medications to the spreading of misinformation.
“We were certainly surprised that more than half of boards said they had seen an increase in complaints about false or misleading information,” said Joe Knickrehm, vice president of communications for the Federation of State Medical Boards, which in April adopted a policy stating that “false information is harmful and dangerous to patients, and to the public trust in the medical profession.”
Other groups, including The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, warned doctors about spreading misinformation. In October, the organization asked its members to sign a letter endorsing the COVID-19 vaccine, writing that “the spread of misinformation and mistrust in doctors and science is contributing to staggeringly low vaccination rates among pregnant people.” But the letter was never published. “We didn’t achieve the numbers we had hoped,” a spokesperson for the organization said, “and did not want to release it if it was not going to be compelling to patients.”
The fact that some medical professionals have been spreading disinformation or failing to engage with their patients about the vaccine is profoundly disappointing, said Dr. Rachel Villanueva, a clinical assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine and president of the National Medical Association, which represents Black doctors.
Research has shown that hearing directly from a health care provider can increase the likelihood that patients get vaccinated. And doctors, Villanueva said, have a responsibility to tell their patients the benefits of getting vaccinated and the risks of choosing not to. She has explained to her patients that although the vaccine development program was named Operation Warp Speed, for example, manufacturers followed proper safety protocols.
“Before COVID, there already existed a baseline distrust of the health care system, especially for women of color, feeling marginalized and feeling dismissed in the health care system,” she said. “I think that just compounded the already lack of confidence that existed in the system.”
After passing the House with the support of 47 Republicans, the Respect for Marriage Act, which would protect marriage rights for same-sex couples if the Supreme Court were to overturn its 2015 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, faces much dimmer prospects in the Senate. There is one reason why: the Christian right still controls the Republican Party. Movement leaders know it took 50 years to reverse Roe, and are committed to a similar strategy to undermine and eventually overturn Obergefell. With abundant clues in the Supreme Court’s June decision overturning Roe that LGBTQ rights could be next on the chopping block, it is unimaginable that movement leaders would sink that goal by allowing this bill to become law.
Republican senators are keenly aware of this. That is why South Dakota’s John Thune and Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy accused Democrats of introducing the bill to distract from inflation. It is why Florida’s Marco Rubio called it “a stupid waste of time,” and claimed gay Floridians are “pissed off” about something else — high gas prices. And it is why Maine’s Susan Collins, who was one of the bill’s four original Republican supporters, came up with the laughing-crying emoji argument that, because Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) had struck a surprise deal on Democratic legislative priorities late last month, she would struggle to win fellow Republicans’ support for the marriage bill. “[I]t was a very unfortunate move that destroys the many bipartisan efforts that are under way,” she told HuffPost.
These were opportune but risible excuses. The reality is these Republicans were already seeing an avalanche of opposition from Christian right political advocacy organizations. Family Research Council Action, the political arm of the Family Research Council church, began calling the bill the “(Dis)Respect for Marriage Act” before it reached the House floor. The group reminded Republican lawmakers that their party platform states, “[t]raditional marriage and family, based on marriage between one man and one woman, is the foundation for a free society and has for millennia been entrusted with rearing children and instilling cultural values.” In an email blast, FRC Action sowed fear among its supporters that the bill would be used to persecute them and take away their religious freedom. It reminded them that in the 1970s, the IRS revoked the tax exemption of the segregationist, fundamentalist Christian Bob Jones University over its racist policies, suggesting, despite the fact that it hasn’t happened in the seven years since Obergefell, that universities and nonprofits that oppose marriage equality could face a similar fate. The American Family Association called the bill “an Orwellian attempt to pretend that the Court’s very recent discovery of a constitutional right to same-sex marriage is not controversial and offensive to many people around the country.” The Heritage Foundation called it a “publicity stunt” aimed at “tak[ing] the spotlight off progressives’ radical policies and paint conservatives as bigots — and all this conveniently before the midterm elections.”
Despite the Christian right’s protestations that same-sex marriage is unpopular, it is actually extremely popular, with Gallup earlier this year finding 71 percent of Americans — a record high — supporting it. What’s more, most religious people do not think protections for same-sex marriage infringe on their religious freedom. According to the Public Religion Research Institute, “Majorities of most major religious groups support same-sex marriage,” with one significant outlier: white evangelicals. Only 35 percent of white evangelicals support marriage equality — and their views drive the Republican Party. In the Senate, the filibuster rules reinforce this tyranny of the minority.
There are two reasons for the Christian right’s dominance of the GOP. One is that while white evangelicals make up just 15 percent of the population, they are highly enthusiastic voters; they made up 28 percent of the 2020 electorate, and 76 percent of them voted for Donald Trump. They make up large swaths of the electorate in red states, and are likely to be motivated to engage in backlash against a Republican senator seen to betray the cause.
The second reason is that the Christian right — made up of white evangelical activists along with other conservative white Protestants and Catholics — has built a formidable political and legal machine designed to position themselves as defenders of the true faith and the real Christian America. A well-funded constellation of legal and political organizations has been inordinately successful in amassing power, both in Republican Washington, red state legislatures, and the federal judiciary. It is designed to flex its muscles at moments like these.
The opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act is an object lesson in how the Christian right’s power works.
That network’s strength has been on full display in recent weeks. The legal powerhouse Alliance Defending Freedom took the lead on a letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell opposing the bill, signed by more than 80 religious right leaders. The letter denounced the bill “in the strongest possible terms,” characterizing it as “an attack on millions of Americans, particularly people of faith, who believe marriage is between one man and one woman and that legitimate distinctions exist between men and women concerning family formation that should be recognized in the law.”
As I reported for TPM in 2019, ADF has not only led the way in transforming our jurisprudence against church-state separation and reproductive and LGBTQ rights, it has cultivated and cemented relationships that ensure its proximity to power. It counts among its compatriots Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Senator Josh Hawley, who have both been faculty speakers for its training program for aspiring Christian lawyers. In 2019, Hawley single-handedly killed the appointment of a federal judge, nominated by Trump, because he had once litigated a case against ADF. Hawley’s wife, also a lawyer, now works for ADF, and played a key role in the strategy to overturn Roe.
After the House vote, FRC Action pledged to support primary challengers to any Republicans who voted for the bill. Some won’t face this blowback since they are retiring or have already lost their primaries. FRC Action’s first target was Michigan’s Peter Meijer, who did lose his August 2 primary, but likely would have anyway because of his vote for Trump’s impeachment. Nonetheless, the message certainly is not lost on Republicans in the Senate where, unlike the House, GOP votes are necessary to get the bill past a filibuster. No one wants to be the one who tips the scales in favor of the bill, and incurs the wrath of Christian right operatives and the get-out-the-vote machine at the disposal of a primary challenger.
Lately the media has taken a greater interest in exploring and reporting on Christian nationalism. It is, however, crucial not only to understand what Christian nationalism is as an ideology, but to understand how right-wing operatives have attained the power to subvert democratic structures and democratic values in order to make it the core of anti-majoritarian rule. The opposition to the Respect for Marriage Act is an object lesson in how that power works. Christian right operatives and lawyers argue that America is a Christian nation, that Christians’ right to practice their religion must be protected from secular, progressive incursions like constitutional rights for LGBTQ people, and that it is the duty of judges and government officials to ensure that these “biblical” values are secured. With a sympathetic majority on the Supreme Court and a razor-thin Democratic majority in the Senate with filibuster rules favorable to conservatives, the Christian right has every incentive to deploy this power. And because Republicans no longer have an alternative base upon which to build a coalition, they will continue to relent.