The Weekly Sift

It is unfortunate that the Supreme Court dropped its Dodds decision reversing Roe v Wade on Friday, because it understandably eclipsed a week that was already heavy with important developments.

Two of those developments were other radical Supreme Court decisions: one blowing a hole in the wall between Church and State, and the other tossing out a century-old New York gun law, while casting doubt on just about any other gun regulation. I’ve grouped those three decisions together in “Three Supreme Court decisions with long-term consequences”, which should be out shortly.

Two other news stories would have dominated most weeks. Congress passed (and Biden signed) the first significant new gun-control legislation since the Clinton years. It’s far from what Biden wanted or the country needs, but it is something in an era when we’re used to getting nothing.

And then there were two more January 6 hearings, one detailing the ways Trump pressured everyone from local election officials to state legislatures and secretaries of state to help him stay in power after he lost the election, and one focusing on his attempt to corrupt the Justice Department, and how close it came to succeeding. Both included dramatic testimony (like Georgia election worker Shaye Moss describing how her life was ruined after Trump targeted her by name with false accusations of election fraud) and stunning revelations (like the six Republican congressmen who asked Trump for pardons).

I’ll cover most of that in the weekly summary, but there is one short thing I decided to pull out into a second featured post: I’ve been hearing a lot of pessimism about what the 1-6 hearings are accomplishing, with the assumption that they’re having no effect because Trump’s cultists aren’t watching them. I think that’s backwards, and shows a misperception of how conservatives change their minds. I’ll try to get that out around 10 or 11 EDT. The weekly summary should be out by 1.

It’s pretty obvious what this week’s Sift is going to be about: The January 6 hearings. The 1-6 Committee’s public hearings kicked off Thursday in prime time, and it’s clear the Committee is bringing the goods: They have a case to make, and they’re making it clearly and persuasively. I’ll review what they said, how Republicans countered, and where things go from here in this week’s featured post, which should be out by 10 EDT.

That’s also when the second public hearing starts. I’m going to be putting the weekly summary together then, so I’ll stream the hearing this afternoon rather than try to cover it in real time. (As I’ve often said, this isn’t a breaking-news blog.)

The weekly summary will pick up 1-6 odds and ends that didn’t fit into the featured post, cover the continuing Russian push into eastern Ukraine, discuss the ambiguous recent Covid numbers, and poke fun at the Republican outrage-of-the-week. (Kids are going to drag shows! They’ll see men in dresses! How will the Republic survive?) That should be out around noon.

Some weeks I get to choose what I write about, and some weeks events choose for me. This week it seems impossible to focus on anything but the Uvalde school shooting and the issues it raises.

But that leads to a challenge: Over the years I’ve written about guns and mass shootings several times. Has the situation changed since then? Have I decided I was wrong? Am I finding new ideas that I hadn’t considered? I went back and read my posts about guns from the last seven years, and decided the answers are no, no, and no.

So should I just rehash it all? Find some clever new spin to put a fresh face on the same ideas I told you several years ago? What about new readers who didn’t see those posts?

What I came up with begins a confession: I have no new ideas here. But I stand by the things I’ve written in the past, which I’m sure a lot of you either missed or have lost track of. (A peculiar kind of egotism is common among writers: We imagine that our readers have total recall of everything we’ve ever posted, including the pieces we’ve forgotten ourselves.) So the featured post links to and summarizes what I’ve written about guns in the past. It should be out shortly.

The weekly summary includes commentary on other people’s responses to the Uvalde shooting, and then covers last week’s primary elections, the apparent turn-around in the Covid surge, updates on the Ukraine War, and a few other things. It should be out around noon EDT.

Saturday we had yet another race massacre, this one in Buffalo. We don’t have to debate about the killer’s motives, because posting a manifesto about “white replacement” or “white genocide” has become a standard part of such killing sprees.

The mainstream media tends not to point out this trend, instead focusing on “troubled” young men with “mental health” issues. But it’s becoming clearer and clearer that the real issue is much simpler: The killers believe what Republicans are telling them.

I started putting this together after the El Paso shooting in 2019. I can’t say whether or not Robert Crusius was mentally ill when he targeted Hispanics at a WalMart, because his actions made perfect sense if you took seriously what Trump had been saying over and over: Mexicans are invading our country. If your country is being invaded, isn’t the most obvious response to take military gear to the border and kill the invaders? What’s mentally ill about that?

Same thing here. Payton Gendron has been told time and again that there’s a plot to take America away from the white race, and that this plot will eventually result in racial extinction. If he believes that, what’s the logical response?

High-profile people like Trump, Tucker Carlson, and Elise Stefanik may not explicitly tell people to go out and kill Blacks or Hispanics or Jews, but how does anything less deal with the problem they describe?

This would be a perfect time for Republicans to purge their ranks, to openly reject white replacement theory and the people who promote it. But they won’t, because WRT is the underground root system that connects all their issues. Without white replacement, the MAGA playbook is an incoherent mess.

Today’s featured post will flesh out that argument. I’m still working on it, so it’s hard to predict when it will appear.

That leaves a lot for the weekly summary to cover: America has had its one-millionth Covid death. Russia had a very bad week, both in Ukraine and diplomatically. Women (and the men who care about them) continued to react to the prospect of the Supreme Court taking their rights away. There’s an important primary in Pennsylvania tomorrow. John Durham’s endless political witch hunt is finally bringing someone to court this week. Texas got hot this weekend — who could have imagined? — and the electrical grid strained to cope.

The schedule is out the window today. Things will post when I get them done.

The most important thing I read this week was an article in Vox: “How Ron DeSantis is following a trail blazed by a Hungarian authoritarian“. The reason it’s so hard to make sense out of what DeSantis is doing is that he’s not imitating Trump or following any other American model; he’s translating a Hungarian model of fascism into an American context. This article fits well with a series that the New York Times is doing on another American Orbánist, Tucker Carlson. This week’s featured post ties the two together in “MAGA 2.0”. It should be out between 10 and 11 EDT.

The weekly summary has a lot to cover: the Russian offensive in Eastern Ukraine continues, the pandemic is now clearly on the upswing, Elon Musk’s bid for Twitter appears to be succeeding, the Supreme Court appears ready to knock a few more bricks out of the wall separating Church and State, and GDP shrank in the first quarter. Plus, a lot of insightful things were written about the future of American democracy, and I’ll link to the talk I gave during my week off.

The summary should appear by 1.