Raw Story

The Texas Republican Party is in the middle of a purge of its own membership, at the direction of Gov. Greg Abbott — and out-of-state donors, according to a new report.

The Texas Republican governor, after a group of state legislators defied him over private school voucher funding, is mounting a campaign of retaliation that sets a new political precedent, Politico reported Wednesday.

"[Abbot] helped knock off seven incumbents in the Republican primary in March and is targeting a handful more contests at the end of the month by handpicking conservative challengers and collecting millions of dollars from donors in Texas and beyond," the report states.

"Another two anti-voucher incumbents lost even though they weren’t specifically blacklisted by Abbott."

Politico reports this turmoil is taking place as "enormous amount of money" pours into Texas Republican primaries from "national pro-school-choice groups."

"Abbott’s targeting of former allies has escalated a Republican civil war that is defining Texas politics today, all in pursuit of enacting a voucher law that stands to remake K-12 education in the nation’s second biggest state," the report states.

ALSO READ: 'Oh, come on!' Tommy Tuberville dismisses Trump connection to 'unified Reich' video

All of this is going on at the same time that scandal-plagued Attorney General Ken Paxton is separately targeting lawmakers who voted for his impeachment — including House Speaker Dade Phelan, who has been forced into a runoff to keep his job.

A number of familiar names have contributed to the effort to bump off disloyal GOP lawmakers, noted the report:

"Backed by deep-pocketed conservative figures like former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, and Republican megadonor Jeff Yass, the school-choice movement has leveraged Republican majorities in state legislatures across the country to pass laws that provide families with lump sums to spend on private school tuition. The efforts, according to supporters, are meant to bolster parental rights by giving families the financial freedom to choose a different option for schooling their children."

ALSO READ: Delay, delay: Lauren Boebert keeping personal finances secret until after GOP primary

In reality, voucher programs similar to the one proposed in Texas, which have their historical roots in attempts to maintain racial segregation, have broadly failed to improve student outcomes in other states, while worsening inequality and funding issues across the education system.

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani complained Tuesday after being ordered to put up collateral for a $10,000 secured bond in an Arizona case about "fake electors."

Soon after appearing remotely before a judge in Maricopa County, Giuliani spoke on his podcast about the requirement for a bond as he faces bankruptcy proceedings. Arizona officials alleged Giuliani participated in a scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election with fake electors.

"You don't bring a case like this if you're not crooked," he said of the prosecution. "You got to show I'm a, I'll cheat for Biden too. I mean, you did a pretty damn good job on the election of cheating and the next election too."

"The judge set a $10,000 bail for me because I'm going to run away," he told his audience. "No, it was to screw me because I made it difficult for them to find me."

ALSO READ: Trump campaign allegedly took ‘excessive’ contributions by the nickel and dime

Giuliani disputed the notion that he was challenging to find.

"Now think about the idiocy of it," he said. "I have been prosecuted in Atlanta, I've shown up every time. I'm sued by all kinds of people; I showed up for my trial, where the verdict took place. There's no history of any kind of bail risk."

"So they had to have a $10,000 bail just for punitive reasons," he added. "This, again, proof that this is a completely political prosecution."

Giuliani has said that he is not guilty of any crimes.

"These charges are essentially a cut and paste version of what they're attempting to use to interfere with the 2024 Election and to take down President Trump and anyone willing to take on the permanent Washington political class," Giuliani spokesperson Ted Goodman said in a statement. "Joe Biden and his allies continue to weaponize the criminal justice system in their quest to take down President Trump and hold on to power. Mayor Rudy Giuliani—the most effective federal prosecutor in U.S. history—looks forward to full vindication soon."

Watch the video below from The Rudy Giuliani Show or click here.

Former President Donald Trump had even more classified documents hidden away in his bedroom — four months after the FBI executed their search at Mar-a-Lago.

The revelation, spelled out in newly-released court filings, caused an eruption from observers on social media.

"Crimes on top of crimes," wrote music producer Shawn Patterson.

"In my observation, not even the anti-anti-Trumpers defend the 'documents case.' (The outright Trumpers, sure. With them, the Fifth Avenue Principle applies.)" wrote Jay Nordlinger, an editor for the conservative National Review.

"Utter disregard shown for US security," wrote Doug Thompson of the Northwest Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

ALSO READ: Trump campaign allegedly took ‘excessive’ contributions by the nickel and dime

Other commenters took aim specifically at U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, the jurist overseeing the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case against the former president.

A Trump-appointee, Cannon caused outrage when she punted the case indefinitely, beyond the election, citing the large number of unresolved issues to rule on — many of which critics say she sat on for months without action.

Cannon in a recent filing also expressed her "disappointment" in special counsel Jack Smith for asking for redactions to protect witnesses and grand jurors.

"Reminder that the MAL docs case was and will always have been the cleanest, most straightforward criminal prosecution of the four against the former president," wrote national security lawyer Bradley Moss. "That the public won't see it brought to fruition before they go to the voting booth is a stain on the judicial system."

"Trump was still keeping classified documents in his bedroom AFTER the Mar-a-Lago search but according to Judge Cannon, what they were, why he had them & what he did with them are simply not questions the American people should have answers to before casting our votes in November," wrote political commentator @JoJoFromJerz.

"Cannon is a f---ing accomplice and you can't convince me otherwise," wrote former Ohio Democratic congressional candidate Aaron Paul Godfrey.

Donald Trump did not testify Tuesday before his defense rested in the Manhattan hush money trial, despite him vowing to take the stand to clear his name of the 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a hush-money scheme that he's accused of.

One of his former lawyers suggested it could be due to exhaustion.

Trump has spent much of the trial falling asleep or closing his eyes during proceedings. But several times he's said that he wants to defend himself and pledged to testify.

Critics have accused him of cowardice for reneging on that promise.

Even when speaking to the press outside the courtroom Tuesday, Trump claimed he might still speak out — despite his chance to take the stand now having passed.

ALSO READ: Trump’s Manhattan trial could determine whether rule of law survives: criminologist

"Why would I take the chance? But we do want to defend our Constitution. So, at some point, maybe I will take a chance," Trump told the reporters.

It sent MSNBC hosts to ask former Trump lawyer William Brennan why he declined to address the jury.

"I mean, number one, he doesn't have to. That's what the constitutional protections are all about," he said.

But the anchors were curious not about why he refused to testify, but why he wouldn't give a reason when the press asked.

"I mean, it's easy to come up with bombast before the trial," Brennan said. "But when you're in the midst of — this was a fairly long trial for misdemeanors and possibly a felony. He's probably tired at this point and he just doesn't have to is the short answer."

Trump has frequently made fun of President Joe Biden, calling him "sleepy Joe" and implying that he is too old to be in office. Comedians and pundits rushed to mock Trump as he fell asleep in his own criminal trial.

See the comments below or at the link here.

'He's probably tired': Ex-Trump lawyer comes up with excuse why he didn't testify www.youtube.com

Four years ago, during the United States' 2020 presidential race, supporters of then-President Donald Trump accused "Real Time" host Bill Maher of "Trump derangement syndrome" when he predicted that Trump would not accept the election results if he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

But Trump, just as Maher predicted, refused to acknowledge that he lost the election. Now, in 2024, Trump is the presumptive GOP presidential nominee, and Congress — according to the Associated — is full of Republican lawmakers who have either falsely claimed that the 2020 election was stolen or won't commit to accepting the election results if Trump loses to Biden a second time in November.

In a report Tuesday, States United Action — a group that goes after election deniers — found that almost one-third of Congress members supported, in some fashion, Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

READ MORE: The most important litmus test: Every election denier must pledge to certify the 2024 results

According to States United Action, that includes "151 election deniers" in the U.S. House of Representatives and "19 election deniers" in the U.S. Senate.

States United Action's Lizzie Ullmer told AP, "The public should have a real healthy dose of concern about the real risk of having people in power who've shown they're not willing to respect the will of the people."

Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University is sounding the alarm as well.

Weiser told AP, "This is deeply alarming. A democracy can only function if the participants commit to accepting the results of popular elections. That is it. That's the entire political system."

READ MORE: 'Unified Reich': Biden campaign slams Trump for German slogan embedded in campaign video

The AP cites specific examples of GOP lawmakers who haven't fully committed to accepting the 2024 presidential election results if Trump loses, including Sen. Marco Rubio (R-F:), Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC). And House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), the AP reporters note, "helped organize Trump's failed legal challenge to Biden's win."

"States United's report details how successful election deniers have been in bolstering their congressional ranks," the AP report states.

"It examines the results of congressional party primaries in the 10 states that have held them this year and found that in each state, at least one election denier has made it to the general election for a House or Senate seat. The report defines election deniers as people who falsely claimed Trump won in 2020, spread misinformation about that election or took steps to overturn it, or refused to concede a separate race."

The AP report adds, "It finds that at least 67 will be on the ballot in the House in November, including 50 incumbents. Three will be running for the Senate — one of whom, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, is an incumbent."

READ MORE:The Alito flag controversy 'makes an ugly situation worse': analysis

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito opened the door to Congress issuing a subpoena to his wife after he implicated her in the display of an upside-down American flag that may have violated his statutory duties, a New York Times writer said Tuesday.

The conservative justice told reporters that his wife displayed the symbol of Donald Trump's "stop the steal" movement in the days between the Jan. 6 insurrection and president Joe Biden's election, when the court was considering the former president's election challenges, and a member of the New York Times editorial board called that out as a potential crime.

"In a statement to The Times, Justice Alito placed the blame for the hoisting of the flag on his wife, Martha-Ann Alito, in response to a dispute with some neighbors," wrote editorial board member Jesse Wegman, who specializes in the Supreme Court, law and politics. "He said nothing about any attempt to remove it, nor did he apologize for the glaring ethical violation. To the contrary, he has failed to recuse himself from any of the several Jan. 6-related cases currently before the court, including Mr. Trump’s claim that he is absolutely immune from prosecution for his role in the Capitol assault."

Alito was obligated to recuse himself from Trump's election challenges and likely his pending claim to broad immunity for inciting the insurrection under the federal recusal law, which Wegman said was clear about his responsibility: “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Justice Clarence Thomas might be even more conflicted in Jan. 6 cases, because his wife Ginni Thomas actively participated in the wide-ranging effort to keep Trump in power despite losing the election, and Wegman said both justices should be investigated by Congress to determine whether they broke federal law by sitting on cases involving the former president and his attempt to subvert the 2020 election.

ALSO READ: Federal Election Commission kills anonymous donor proposal

"In short, Justices Alito and Thomas appear to be breaking federal law, tanking what remains of the court’s legitimacy in the process," Wegman said. "The challenge is whether anyone is willing to do anything about it."

The Judicial Conference chaired by chief justice John Roberts is statutorily obligated under Ethics in Government Act to refer to the Justice Department any case where there's reason to believe a judge willfully broke the law, although attorney general Merrick Garland doesn't have to wait for a referral, and Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Dick Durbin could convene hearings.

"So what is Congress so afraid of?" Wegman wrote. "Committees can and should hold hearings and subpoena witnesses to answer questions before the nation. They can subpoena Justice Alito himself. If he declines to show, subpoena his wife. He implicated her, after all, and she certainly has no separation-of-powers claim."

"Then subpoena Chief Justice Roberts, who declined to testify last year when he was asked politely," Wegman added. "If he still doesn’t show up, Congress should remember it has the power of the purse and can reduce the court’s nonsecurity budget."

Although those two justices may be in their mid-70s, Wegman said Congress must take action against them to warn a younger generation of even more extreme ideologues that the Supreme Court remains accountable to its co-equal branches and to help restore credibility to the court.

"Young Americans who are voting for the first time this year were born after Bush v. Gore; some were not even in high school when Senator Mitch McConnell stole a Supreme Court seat from Barack Obama," Wegman wrote. "For all they know, this is how the court has always been, and always will be."

"That’s why now is the time to show future generations that the nation needs a court that can be trusted to be fair, a court whose justices have the capacity for shame," he added. "The Supreme Court is an institution that we depend on as much as it depends on us."