If you thought we were done with the trademark bullying drama resulting from gas station and convenience store chain Buc-ee’s, you were wrong. While we’re still waiting for this corporation to take up John Oliver’s request to sue him for creating parody merchandize of the Buc-ee’s brand, the company has decided to do what bullies always do and pick on smaller entities instead.

Speaking of parody, over the summer Buc-ee’s sued Born United, a clothing and merch brand that specifically makes parody products of famous brands. Interestingly, one of the owners of Born United at the time was Tom Fernandez, a South Carolina state senator. Fernandez was pretty adamant that Born United would fight this suit and wouldn’t back down.

In the intervening months, two things that just might be related have occurred. First, Fernandez sold off his ownership stake in the company. Second, Born United settled the case with Buc-ee’s, agreeing to pay the bullying corporate giant nearly a million dollars.

A South Carolina apparel retailer has been ordered to stop selling clothing featuring an unauthorized version of Buc-ee’s beaver logo and to pay the Texas-based convenience store chain $850,000, according to WCIV. Born United, which operates stores in North Charleston, Summerville and Myrtle Beach, was sued by Buc-ee’s in 2025 along with owners Cameron Bechtold, Jared Williams and Josiah Bradley, WCIV reported.

The lawsuit centered on the company’s use of a design resembling Buc-ee’s trademarked beaver logo.

Some speculation on my end, but I’m going to ahead and assess this as cowardice across the board. Do I know that the lawsuit was at least part of the reason Fernandez dipped from his ownership stake in Born United? I don’t, but the timing makes me think that’s the case. And did his bailing out loosen the spine of the rest of the folks at Born United? That seems overwhelmingly likely as well.

Not that I can blame them. Buc-ee’s is big, has lawyers, and has plenty of money to throw around to power its bullying tactics. Born United wants to survive and without the implied imprimatur of a government official in ownership, things probably got a whole lot more dangerous.

It’s just too bad that the only vanguards against Buc-ee’s trademark abuse currently are a TV show host and a small convenience store in Ohio. This is a company in dire need of a legal smackdown.

This story was originally published by ProPublica and the Texas Tribune. Republished under a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 license.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton appears to have violated federal ethics law in significant ways when filing recent disclosures of his assets and liabilities, creating confusion about his net worth and holdings, a review by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune found.

Among them: Paxton, the Republican nominee for U.S. Senate, reported owning seven homes but said he earned no income from any. Yet all but one was listed for rent during the reporting periods, and some current residents and neighbors at those addresses confirmed that the properties were rented, the news organizations found. Receiving income and not reporting it is a violation of federal disclosure law, three ethics experts said. 

Additionally, Paxton did not disclose mortgages for three condos at a Utah golf resort that federal law requires him to list as liabilities if they are not personal residences. 

He also valued his stake in a vacant plot of Texas land at up to $50,000 on last year’s filing, but his business partner told the newsrooms Paxton’s share for years has been worth about $1 million. Federal financial disclosure law requires property to be listed at fair market value.

The apparent errors and omissions the newsrooms found obscure the extent of Paxton’s income streams, assets and debt, making it difficult for voters to make sense of his finances as they mull whether to support him in November’s election, the ethics experts said.

“It reflects either pure sloppiness on Paxton’s part or a deliberate effort to conceal some of his investments and property holdings,” said Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist for the nonpartisan good-government group Public Citizen.

In Paxton’s filings reviewed by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune, he valued an undeveloped plot of land as worth up to $50,000 in 2025, first image, but then listed it the following year at between $1 million and $5 million, second image. Obtained and highlighted by ProPublica and the Texas Tribune

If Paxton wins, an incomplete picture of his finances could prevent watchdogs from evaluating his conflicts of interest as a senator, Holman and others said.

The apparent omissions are part of a pattern for Paxton. Over three terms as attorney general, he has withheld financial information that could explain how he became a multimillionaire and had the resources to purchase more than a dozen properties in five states. He began including many of these on his state disclosures only after the Texas Ethics Commission closed a loophole in 2024 that Paxton had cited to leave them off. Most were acquired while Paxton earned a government salary of $153,750.

In the new federal disclosure, filed in August after Paxton received a three-month extension, he reported a net worth between $1 million and $27 million. That is a significantly higher range than the negative $1.9 million to $11.1 million net worth he reported a year ago, before he had secured the Republican nomination but after he had declared his candidacy for federal office.

The spike was driven not by Paxton’s acquisition of more assets but because the reported value on several of his properties soared. 

Paxton’s report omitted listing as assets seven properties worth about $5.2 million collectively, including the Utah condos for which he did not disclose mortgages. He co-owns all of his known real estate holdings with his estranged wife, state Sen. Angela Paxton, property records show. The eight he reported are held by their blind trust, which is managed by a family friend.

Federal rules do not require candidates to report as assets personal homes or properties from which they don’t earn money, even if the properties are worth millions.

At a time when voters feel anxious about their own personal finances and dislike the idea of politicians getting rich in office, it would be wise for Paxton to be more transparent about his wealth, said Texas ethics and campaign finance lawyer Andrew Cates.

“If it were me trying to get people’s vote, I would err on the side of transparency rather than not,” Cates said.

Paxton declined to be interviewed and did not answer detailed questions about how he filled out the disclosure forms. Madison Cercy, a spokesperson for his campaign, said Paxton “has had a long and successful career outside of public service, including running his own small business as a lawyer. Stirring up partisan allegations is nothing more than a bad attempt to manufacture controversy where none exists.”

Before being elected to the state Legislature in 2002, Paxton worked at a law firm in the Dallas area and was a corporate attorney for JCPenney. His state financial disclosure for 2001 listed assets totaling no more than $170,000, a ProPublica and Tribune analysis found.

By 2015, his household net worth had grown to $5.4 million, according to financial records lawmakers subpoenaed in 2023 after impeaching Paxton on charges that he took bribes in exchange for helping an Austin real estate investor.

The records, few of which were admitted into evidence during the 10-day Senate trial that resulted in his acquittal, document how Paxton built a diverse portfolio that included investments in a cellphone tower, an HVAC company, a cement supplier and a police body camera manufacturer. He netted $2.2 million when Motorola acquired the body camera firm in 2019, according to his income tax return from that year. 

Shortly after, he went on a real estate buying spree, snapping up six properties in Oklahoma, Florida, Utah and Hawaii. His impeachment defense team said Paxton made a prudent shift toward real estate at a time of rock-bottom interest rates.

Questions about Paxton’s integrity have dogged him in the race for U.S. Senate. His opponent, Democratic state Rep. James Talarico, entered September with a narrow polling lead — uncharted territory in a state where Republicans have not lost a statewide race in 32 years. 

A University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll released last week found that just a third of respondents viewed Paxton as “honest and trustworthy.” The same day the statewide poll was published, a super PAC supporting Talarico hit the airwaves with an ad that labeled the attorney general as “the most corrupt politician in Texas.” The commercial included a reference to Paxton’s recently disclosed net worth.

Talarico’s net worth, according to his most recent personal financial disclosure, was between $67,000 and $305,000. The range changed little from the previous year. Like Paxton, Talarico did not include his single personal residence among his reported assets. 

James Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project, said the questions surrounding Paxton’s latest financial disclosures reinforce a longstanding narrative that the attorney general is secretive about his finances and may have leveraged his public position for personal gain.

“It’s his choice how much he explains or doesn’t explain,” Henson said. “But I think that comes with a potential cost, and we’re seeing that in public opinion.”

Paxton’s pivot to real estate appears to be a way to supplement his salary as attorney general. The newsrooms found recent rental listings for six of the properties he disclosed but for which he said he derived no income: two homes in Ocala, Florida; a home and a condo in Austin; a home in College Station, Texas; and a vacation lodge in Broken Bow, Oklahoma. 

A tenant confirmed to the newsrooms she’s living at one of Florida houses. At the Austin condo complex, a next-door neighbor said Paxton’s unit has a renter. And the five-bedroom, three-story Oklahoma lodge he owns is listed online as a short-term rental for up to $1,200 a night, with fall bookings filling up fast.

On his disclosure forms, which require real estate income to be reported, Paxton for each property selected the option “None (or less than $201).”

Federal law requires candidates who aren’t currently in Congress to report all loans exceeding $10,000, except those for personal residences. Paxton did not report three mortgages totaling $1.3 million for condos at the Black Desert Resort in southwest Utah, renowned for its world-class golf course. He purchased the properties in February; the reporting period for the most recent disclosure ran through mid-May. 

Reporters found the mortgage documents in local land records. Each contains an addendum to the mortgage that is used for rental properties, said New Jersey real estate lawyer Daniel M. Shlufman. That addendum removes a requirement that the unit be owner-occupied and allows the lender to collect rent directly from tenants if Paxton were to default on the loan.

Paxton purchased another condo at the resort in 2025, which he disclosed on his most recent report as an asset and a liability. The land records show he obtained a $640,000 mortgage for it. The resort advertises a program in which it leases units purchased by investors, but it declined to say if Paxton’s properties were enrolled in it.

“It’s kind of mind-boggling to think about having four homes at one resort property and imagining those are for personal use,” said Cynthia Brown, a senior lawyer at the government watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.

The most significant changes between Paxton’s 2025 and 2026 reports were the valuations of the Oklahoma lodge and a plot of land outside of Fort Worth, whose value he said had increased by millions of dollars.

He appears to have switched from reporting the properties’ assessed values, which are set by the local county, to the loftier estimates of what they would fetch on the open market. 

Paxton’s initial use of the lowball values appears to defy federal rules aimed at bringing candidates’ disclosed property values in line with what they’re actually worth. While the Senate Ethics Committee instructs filers that they can use a recent tax assessment to set the worth of certain property, they must adjust it to market value if it is assessed below that. In these cases, valuations must be disclosed as a specific dollar figure rather than a range.

On both his annual reports as a Senate candidate, Paxton listed ranges for the value of each property he disclosed.

Last year, Paxton reported the Oklahoma lodge, just north of the Texas border, as worth between $100,001 and $250,000. The local county assesses the property at $176,000. Its estimated market value, meanwhile, is more than $1.5 million, according to real estate websites. This year, Paxton’s disclosure valued the property at between $1 million and $5 million. 

Likewise, Paxton valued a 42-acre plot of undeveloped land in Johnson County, south of Fort Worth, at between $15,001 and $50,000 last year. The county assesses the property as farmland worth $20,008, but estimates its market value is $2.9 million. This year, Paxton’s disclosure said the property was worth between $1 million and $5 million.

Paxton bought the property in 2006 with a group of investors including Rob Orr, with whom he served in the Texas House of Representatives. Orr, who manages the investment, said in an interview that Paxton’s 20% stake is worth about $1 million.

“It would have been around a million for quite a while, probably the last four or five years,” Orr said. “It has increased in value because of zoning and because of time.”

The group bought the plot to hold onto, Orr said, until creeping growth from the Dallas-Fort Worth area made it attractive for redevelopment. He said the group is negotiating a sale to a developer. Last year, Orr persuaded the City Council in Burleson to rezone the land, which had been restricted to agriculture, to permit retail and housing.

Paxton’s move to significantly revalue his assets without explaining why is “very strange,” said Margaret Dylus-Yukins, senior counsel for ethics at the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, which advocates for strong disclosure rules. Dylus-Yukins, who worked for six years analyzing executive branch officials’ financial disclosures for the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, said the agency would ask filers to explain major changes in writing.

“When you have public officials that appear to be fudging the numbers on their disclosure forms, and the Senate Ethics Committee is letting that slide, then you’re not only eroding trust in the committee but the candidate himself,” Dylus-Yukins said, referring to the significant differences between the filings. 

The ethics committee did not respond to requests for comment. Candidates or senators who willingly falsify financial disclosures can be fined up to $50,000 or prosecuted for making a false statement to the government, a felony. The committee rarely investigates senators and has not formally sanctioned a member in 19 years.

Candidates do not have to file any more federal financial disclosures before the November election.

As the federal U.S. government has given up on consumer protection and corporate oversight, states have filled the void with various degrees of success. That’s been particularly apparent in areas like telecom, where the corruption-fueled death of federal privacy and net neutrality protections have been replicated in a handful of states like California, which passed their own state-level laws.

Now California’s being told by the Trump administration that it can’t enforce any of its own consumer protection laws if it wants to receive $1.4 billion dollars Congress already earmarked for broadband expansion under the 2021 infrastructure bill.

I’ve explored at length (at several different outlets) how $42.5 billion was supposed to be headed to the states to address broadband improvements. Instead, the Trump administration has hijacked the program, driven billions of dollars of those funds to Elon Musk for inferior satellite service (he’d already planned to deploy without subsidy), and stripped the program of any requirement that these taxpayer funds be dispersed equitably or with an eye on affordability.

You know, because cheap, ultra-fast, fiber optic cable that challenges Comcast is woke.

The $42.5 billion in Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) money states were supposed to get for broadband upgrades was already effectively cut in half after the Trump administration engaged in Elon Musk favoritism. That meant a lot of money previously slated for cheap, future-proof fiber was instead redirected to Musk’s increasingly congested Starlink network.

Now states are being told they won’t get any money at all if they engage in policy choices big telecom giants don’t like, including enforcing net neutrality.

Stanford Law professor Barbara van Schewick explains the specifics:

“In July, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the federal agency that distributes BEAD money, approved California’s BEAD deployment plan. On August 31, it issued the award: $1.42 billion to connect about 270,000 homes and businesses.

Buried in the award’s terms and conditions is a clause known as Condition 50. By signing the award, California would agree not to enforce its affordability, net neutrality, and public-safety protections against any internet service provider (ISP) that receives BEAD money.”

Nearly 70% of California’s share of BEAD money will be headed to Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, Amazon, and SpaceX. This is a state, I’ll remind you, where Verizon was caught trying to upsell firefighters to more expensive wireless plans while they were fighting the Mendocino Complex Fire.

All five would be shielded from consumer protection enforcement for the next fourteen years unless the California CPUC rejects the Trump NTIA guidance (which could risk the state getting any money at all), or challenges the Condition 50 restrictions in court:

“If California wins, it gets the full $1.42 billion without the condition, and can connect the 270,000 households without giving up its power to protect all Californians.

But timing is everything: California has to challenge the condition before it accepts the award.”

The CPUC was slated to vote to confirm its final BEAD funding agreement Thursday, September 17 (so it may have already happened by the time you read this). It’s unclear if California Governor Gavin Newsom will have the backbone for this sort of fight.

Having gutted federal consumer protection and corporate oversight, telecoms like AT&T have been working hard to kill off any state oversight of telecom monopoly business practices. That’s included multiple lawsuits against the CPUC (falsely claiming they have no authority to do anything), having AT&T-friendly Dem lawmakers push new laws gutting what authority the CPUC does have, and working with Brendan Carr to pretend that FCC apathy trumps state good intentions.

As always, this is all being framed by telecoms (and the various think tanks paid to parrot them) as some sort of noble protection of “free market competition.” In reality it’s just ordinary corruption. Corruption that’s already hollowed out federal corporate oversight, and is now taking aim at states’ autonomy.

The telecoms and Trump administration are operating on shaky legal ground here (for whatever that’s worth anymore). Courts have previously ruled that the federal government can’t abdicate its authority over broadband consumer protection, then tell states what to do. The infrastructure bill also specifically states that $42.5 billion must be used for broadband access in fairly specific ways.

There’s also growing, bipartisan anger as the public, press, and lawmakers realize that the Trump administration has hijacked this program, driven billions to Elon Musk, and instituted all manner of annoying new delays. All this despite the fact Republicans spent much of last election season demonizing the BEAD program and insisting they alone could fix it.

Public furor is hard to maintain. It takes a concerted effort from people who have a lot to lose. Not only do they not have anything to gain (financially or otherwise) from engaging in protests, but they face the real possibility of arrests, job losses, beatings, or actual death.

On the other hand, the Trump administration has nothing to lose. It’s not only playing with house money, but it’s infested with racist psychopaths willing to sacrifice an entire nation and its constitutional ideals if that means it might be able to forcibly eject anyone who looks a bit Mexican.

The “worst of the worst” claim made to justify ICE’s violent, unconstitutional tactics was always a dodge. Even before Trump took office for the first time, the data showed migrants committed criminal acts at rates much lower than US citizens. Racists then tried to claim that throwing Black people out of the data would show migrants crossing the border from the south would prove them right. It didn’t, even when those studying the data decided to meet racists halfway and factor in race, rather than citizenship.

In recent weeks, the administration has managed to get somewhat close to the arrest quotas set by resident ghoul Stephen Miller and new ICE boss Markwayne Mullin. What hasn’t changed are the facts: the people being arrested, detained indefinitely, denied access to their civil rights, and summarily ejected to whatever hellhole wants cash in exchange for new government violence victims simply are not criminals, especially not of the violent variety.

This report from the New York Times breaks down the numbers. We’ll start with this chart, which shows the violent crime rates have remained consistent throughout Trump’s second White House residency. The only thing that has changed is how many people are being swept up by ICE’s roving kidnapping squads.

That nearly-flat line at the bottom is the violent crime rate. Everything else is the escalation of the Trump administration, which continues to pretend it’s the best at hunting down migrant criminals.

The Trump administration is deliberately wrong about the migrant crime rate. The DHS social media feeds are filled with narratives about arresting individuals who have committed serious crimes, but it’s the most extreme form of cherry-picking. For every social media blast about some person ICE has picked up and deported, thousands of arrests of people who are, in most cases, either trying their best to follow the legal path to residency or have lived here for years, if not decades, and done nothing more than work their asses off in hopes of securing the American Dream.

What’s worse is that ICE is back to generating negative press on a daily basis due to its proclivity for engaging in excessive force. But this indirect pressure isn’t working. Neither are the multiple efforts being made around the nation to disrupt opportunistic arrests by ICE officers. The administration has the upper hand.

Overall, immigration arrests rose to record highs with 43,000 ICE arrests in June and 49,000 in July. Two fatal shootings involving Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, in Texas and Maine, drew outrage but did not meaningfully slow the pace of arrests.

Unofficially (lest it be accused of setting quotas), Trump wants 2,000 arrests per day. The inhumane ghoul currently d/b/a White House advisor, Stephen Miller, has been calling for 3,000 arrests since day one of Trump’s second administration.

The numbers are getting up there, and even a number of murders committed by immigration officers hasn’t managed to slow this down. Neither has the lack of evidence of criminal activity by the people arrested, detained, denied rights, and deported by the Trump administration.

What’s been happening since Trump took office for a second time is a decimation of the US workforce and the ejection of people who pay more taxes and use fewer social services than US citizens. And that’s before you factor in the violent crime rate, which is far lower than the numbers generated by people Trump pretends he’s trying to protect by authorizing opportunistic raids of any place day laborers might be found.

This administration pretends it’s the last hope for law and order, even though it routinely violates laws and disrupts public order. The GOP party made political hay for years by pretending Democrats would bankrupt America financially, if not morally. But while ICE officers kill people and get away with it, Trump’s party has managed to run up a $40 trillion tab, taking us past the watershed mark of the national GDP.

Meanwhile — as the NYT report points out — the administration is leveraging its relationships with red state politicians to juice its arrest stats. The largest increases in arrests in July occurred in Florida, Wyoming, Texas, and Arizona. Blue states saw a drop but only because ICE finds it much easier to engage in bigoted enforcement in states that are run by MAGA-loving bigots.

There’s nothing in this effort that even slightly suggests Trump’s mass deportation efforts have anything to do with making this country safer. It’s always been about making this country whiter and more supportive of whatever Nazi-esque efforts Trump 2.0 decides to pursue next.

The Ultimate Guitar Lessons Bundle has 9 courses teaching you everything from reading tablature and basic fingering to more advanced skills. You can start at the very beginning and work your way through lessons on strumming, ear training, and jamming, to learning about Jazz, Blues, and Bluegrass techniques. It’s on sale for $30.

Note: The Techdirt Deals Store is powered and curated by StackSocial. A portion of all sales from Techdirt Deals helps support Techdirt. The products featured do not reflect endorsements by our editorial team.

Being a GOP politician in the Trump era is defined by two things: publicly embarrassing yourself to show support for Trump’s most dangerous policy ideas, and lying to your constituents about what those ideas will do to them. It is an inherently pathetic situation. And yet not one of them seems capable of showing even the slightest hint of principle or backbone. The latest example is Senator Katie Britt, whose previous claim to fame was giving the Republican response to Joe Biden’s 2024 State of the Union speech. Her response won a bunch of descriptive accolades from “deeply weird,” to “creepy as fuck,” to “scary mom,” to just plain “strange.”

But she showed she’s a good Trumpian MAGA soldier, and thus she does what a good Trumpian MAGA soldier does, which is lie to the public while sucking up to Trump in private to try to get him not to put in place the disastrous policy proposals that will obviously hurt America (and her constituents).

In this case, it’s Trump’s bizarrely stupid obsession with tariffs, based on his impressive unwillingness to understand that trade deficits aren’t inherently bad (we get actual goods; they get dollars that mostly come right back into the US economy). Britt has dutifully done the loyal soldier bit, publicly insisting that tariffs are great for the US and for the state she represents, Alabama. Here’s what she said:

That’s her tweeting — right after the Supreme Court said that Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs exceeded the authority Congress gave him under the IEEPA — that:

What the media won’t tell you is that President Trump’s tariffs work, and that’s why even the Biden Administration left them in place.

Today’s ruling was disappointing, but as POTUS made clear, we are not going to return to the status quo of allowing American jobs and manufacturing to be sidelined in exchange for cheap junk from foreign adversaries.

I will continue working with President Trump and his team to bring manufacturing back home.

So apparently “tariffs work.” Except, as (of all places!) the WSJ’s Editorial Board noted, via a FOIA request, they found that when Trump announced these tariffs, Britt went groveling to Trump asking for exemptions for businesses in Alabama.

What Ms. Britt won’t tell you is that she was privately seeking exemptions 10 months earlier. That’s when her legislative director wrote an email, “Sen. Britt Alabama Trade Priorities,” seeking help for “specific Alabama manufacturers.” We obtained the email from the U.S. Trade Representative’s office via the Freedom of Information Act. The email begins by saying Ms. Britt “is supportive” of rebalancing trade. Then it moves to “four pressing issues,” each a plea for an Alabama company.

• TNT Fireworks: “Unfortunately, there is no domestic firework manufacturer, and over 99% of firework products are produced in China,” it says. While TNT has tried other sources, “the quality and safety is not close,” and imported fireworks “pose no threat to America’s broader trade or national security interests.” Also, be patriotic, since TNT was then “preparing for the United States Semiquincentennial.”

• Novelis: This aluminum company was “currently building a $4.1 billion recycling and rolling plant,” expected to “create 1,000 new direct jobs.” At the time, however, it relied on imports from Canada, South Korea and Brazil, and Mr. Trump’s tariffs posed “cash flow problems” to “finish their new plant in Alabama.”

• Kronospan: A maker of wood panels, it was “undertaking a $600 million expansion,” requiring “highly specialized equipment that is not available from domestic manufacturers.” The extra tariff cost? About $60 million, threatening the project’s viability: “Senator Britt is concerned about the potential loss of this transformative economic development.”

• Airbus: The plane maker was “building its third final assembly line” in Mobile, leading to 1,000 jobs. “We’ve recently learned that this expansion has been suspended indefinitely,” the email says. “Trade policy has made the project financially unviable,” and “Senator Britt is deeply concerned about the potential loss of high-quality American jobs.”

Yeah, so apparently “tariffs work” except… they harm businesses in Alabama so pretty pretty pretty please will you make special exceptions in a backroom deal for some of the biggest companies I represent?

The USTR responded that “there is no exclusion process” for products covered under the tariffs. Now, a real Senator, actually representing her constituents, might go public with the simple facts that the tariffs were bullshit and harmful to Americans and American companies. She could have easily pointed out that Congress — where she is one of 535 members who could actually vote on this — is the branch the Constitution hands the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and to lay duties. She could have easily pointed out that Trump’s tariffs would be inflationary and damaging to people in Alabama and across the country.

But, no. Publicly criticizing the MAGA god king isn’t an option. So instead she praises his disastrous, inflationary policies in public, while privately begging for a special dispensation for a handful of large Alabama companies.

As the editorial board of the WSJ points out:

The point isn’t that Ms. Britt made bad arguments against these four tariffs. It’s that she made good ones, which show why blunderbuss trade wars are an economic mistake, along with how tariffs deepen the D.C. swamp. Big company CEOs facing tariff harm know how to get a U.S. Senator to plead their case. But who speaks for the little guy being walloped?

It’s a rare day that I’m in agreement with the editorial board over there, but on this they are right. And it appears they’re hunting more hypocritical GOP senators as well:

Tariffs for thee, exemptions for me. Join the GOP club: In Mr. Trump’s first term, Sen. Josh Hawley lobbied for a carveout on saw blades, Rep. Mark Meadows on furniture wood, Rep. Andy Biggs on patio screens. Who else? When more records arrive, we’ll let you know.

None of this is particularly surprising. But that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be called out. The Republican Party used to be against trade protectionism. These days, it’s simply for Donald Trump and all his delusions.

Last week comedian Jimmy Kimmel said Jimmy Kimmel Live! and ABC wouldn’t be airing an interview with Texas Democratic Senate hopeful James Talarico on broadcast because they were worried it would anger Trump’s top censorship czar, FCC boss Brendan Carr.

Kimmel and ABC had cause to worry; we’ve outlined in detail how Carr has manufactured several phony investigations — and even begun proceedings to revoke ABC’s local broadcast licenses — for the crimes of journalism and platforming comedians that make fun of the president.

So instead of airing the Talarico interview on ABC broadcast TV over public airwaves, Jimmy Kimmel Live! aired the interview on YouTube, where it currently has over 10 million views.

As it turns out, even doing what Brendan Carr wants — purportedly not using public airwaves to broadcast interviews with politicians Trump is afraid of — upsets Brendan Carr. Carr went on Elon Musk’s right wing propaganda website to call Kimmel’s choice a “hoax,” and ironically complain about “partisan lemmings.”

Carr was apparently triggered by this post by an Austin-based Democratic group, University Democrats:

In response, Carr then went on a very long (and factually incorrect) lecture where he tries to pretend his censorship campaign against ABC is supported by logic, reason, and the law (it’s not):

That screenshot is Carr tweeting:

Ok, fine. I’ll weigh in.

1. The Equal Time statute doesn’t apply to GameDay for several reasons.
   For one, when it passed the statute, Congress applied it to broadcast tv stations-not cable programs like GameDay. For another, Congress stated that the statute only applies to legally qualified candidates. The Senator is not one.
2. The Equal Time statute does not prohibit anyone from interviewing anyone on broadcast tv. It is about more speech, not less. Congress wanted to ensure that voters would decide elections, not media gatekeepers picking winners and losers by providing preferential airtime to some candidates and not others.
   Indeed, when the statute applies, it simply requires broadcast stations to offer comparable time and placement. And comparable does not necessarily mean an interview by the same person on the same program either.
3. This ties back to Talarico. He’s just running the same hoax he did a few months ago on Colbert for the purpose of getting clicks and donations-he’s banking on people not understanding the statute or operating as partisan lemmings.

As we’ve noted previously, Carr is claiming to use a dated rule called the “equal opportunity” rule, or “equal time” rule, to claim that ABC’s The View violated the law by airing an interview with Talarico last February, but not airing a counter-interview with a Republican.

But more importantly, The View had struck very clear agreements with the FCC that it has been exempt from this rule since 2002. Carr knows this. But he still falsely claims The View violated the law. Carr’s so desperate to make this whole thing seem like a real violation of the public trust, Carr even worked closely with right wing broadcast affiliates to try and make it look like ABC’s Houston affiliate broke the law (something that will resurface in ABC’s lawsuit against the FCC).

Carr’s post to Elon Musk’s right wing propaganda website is very long, suggesting that Carr put a lot of time and effort into trying to make his censorship campaign against ABC sound cogent. But he continues to cling to this idea that harassing companies specifically when they air politicians Trump doesn’t like somehow serves the public interest. Carr even had his staffers make him a meme!

Again, The View was documentably exempt from the rule Carr is talking about. He just keeps babbling on as if everybody doesn’t know it. And as we’ve noted previously, Carr’s claims that he’s interested in “protecting the public interest” are undermined by the fact he only engages in this kind of harassment when it involves broadcasting people critical of this president.

For example, Carr’s fine with AM radio endlessly airing right wing propaganda, despite it also being under purported (and never enforced) FCC “equal time” provisions.

Most of the people responding to Carr on Elon Musk’s right wing propaganda website (why are people still using Elon Musk’s right wing propaganda website?) weren’t having it:

Given the ham-fisted First Amendment violations Carr is engaged in, he’s going to have a bad time in court. And his overly verbose defense of his historically shitty censorship choices suggests he knows it.

As Pennsylvania continues to endure the worst of the current measles outbreaks ravaging the country, a fourth measles-associated death has now been confirmed. As of the time of this writing, the CDC’s public website tracking case counts and deaths has still not acknowledged a single one of these fatalities, reportedly at the direction of RFK Jr. himself (more on that later). And that came after Kennedy went full-blown conspiracy loon on reports of the first two deaths, which he went so far as to suggest may not even have occurred. This isn’t an exaggeration. Here is what he said at the time.

The key part:

The announcement appears to have been premature, and the deaths may even have been altogether fabricated by one of the Governor’s hopeful staffers. The Lancaster County Coroner says that it has no record of any measles deaths. State law requires that all measles deaths be reported to the coroner.

Governor Shapiro shattered tradition and violated standard public health policy by refusing to share information with the County Health Department or CDC.

As we found out later, those two deaths, both children, were very real. Then a 40 year old woman who was unable to be vaccinated due to other health concerns also died, a victim of the lack of herd immunity. That itself is an outcome of Kennedy’s years of anti-vaxxer conspiracy peddling. The CDC never counted that woman’s death, nor that of the children. The latest death is that of an unvaccinated 18 year old. As is common in deaths associated with measles, the acute cause of death was a secondary disease brought on due to the measles infection. The coroner has determined the death would not have occurred but for the deceased being infected with measles.

According to the Mifflin County coroner, Andrea L. Alcalde, the 18-year-old’s cause of death was determined to be acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM), which is a rare but known severe complication of measles. The condition is characterized by a rapidly progressing autoimmune disorder in which aberrant inflammation from an infection strips away the protective coverings of nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord. Before measles vaccines were widely used, ADEM was commonly associated with measles, though other viral infections can also spur its development.

In a new release posted to the coroner’s Facebook page Tuesday, Alcalde said the death determination was made after a review of medical records and all available information. Alcalde said no other information would be released about the deceased.

This is not another post about a tragic death from measles as a result of Kennedy and his followers’ anti-vaxxer bullshit. It’s a post about how Kennedy and HHS are spitting in the cold faces of the dead by not bothering to even acknowledge their passing. Instead, Kennedy is choosing to play political games while accusing state officials of doing the same. Here is a statement released from Governor Josh Shapiro on ExTwitter.

Here it is in text:

Today, the Pennsylvania Department of Health confirmed two more measles-associated deaths after local coroners reported these individuals died from complications associated with measles. That’s four total measles-associated deaths in our Commonwealth and the first Pennsylvania has seen in 35 years. These are tragedies, and four families are grieving.

Pennsylvania is experiencing the worst measles outbreak in the country. To date, we have 693 recorded cases of measles in 38 of our 67 counties. This disease was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000- yet decades later, we are seeing it surge due to lower vaccination rates.

This serious situation continues to be made worse by RFK Jr. playing games with public health and safety. It’s long past time for @SecKennedy to stop stoking vaccine skepticism and misinformation and compromising the serious mission of the nation’s public health agencies. It is also deeply concerning to learn that the Secretary personally intervened in an otherwise administrative process to direct the CDC to not report these Pennsylvania deaths, presumably because it doesn’t fit his phony narrative.

Measles is preventable. I continue to urge all Pennsylvanians to speak with your trusted health care provider and get the best possible information to protect yourself and your family against this deadly disease.

Every single word of that is true. Kennedy’s response is to attack Shapiro for not letting him help manage an outbreak he had a heavy hand in creating. And, you should note, his response doesn’t even acknowledge the death of one of the American citizens he’s supposed to keep safe. He also lies about a change in how CDC is counting measles deaths publicly, taking no responsibility for a reporting change at an agency that he is ultimately in charge of.

In text:

Governor Shapiro has chosen to politicize this outbreak instead of implementing a unified public health response. He continues to point the finger at me and the federal government and to malign the Amish while refusing the federal assistance that might help end the outbreak.

I have offered the Governor CDC Epi-Aid, which would put CDC epidemiologists on the ground to help the state respond. Texas, South Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, New Mexico, and Wisconsin requested Epi-Aids and worked alongside CDC teams to help bring their outbreaks rapidly and successfully under control.

Governor Shapiro’s claim that I directed CDC to suppress Pennsylvania deaths is false. CDC is applying a consistent national standard rather than allowing politicians to decide which deaths appear in federal mortality statistics. CDC will report measles-caused deaths when the National Center for Health Statistics reports measles as the underlying cause based on death record information submitted by the states.

CDC’s MMR recommendation remains unchanged. I have repeatedly stated that MMR vaccination is the most effective way to prevent measles infection.

Pennsylvanians deserve accurate, evidence-based public health information-not political grandstanding.

This is sociopathic behavior. There is no concern expressed, nor sympathy, for the family of the deceased. The focus is solely on Kennedy’s own reputation and smearing Shapiro with the accusation that he is the one politicizing this latest death in Pennsylvania.

Once again, the CDC’s public site has not acknowledged even one of the four measles-related deaths that have occurred in Pennsylvania, or anywhere else should any exist. Where those deaths are to be reported, there is merely an asterisk. It appears that four dead Pennsylvanians don’t even amount to enough importance in Kennedy’s mind to be a statistic. They’re less than that to him.

The CDC’s lack of acknowledgement of these deaths are due to a change in how they report them. A change that reads like something you’d see out of the Soviet Politburo, so layered in obfuscating bureaucracy that it makes the mind spin.

The deaths are unlikely to be quickly included in national data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which is under the tight control of anti-vaccine Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Amid Pennsylvania’s deadly outbreak, Kennedy has disputed deaths, spread misinformation about the MMR vaccine, and reportedly ordered the CDC director to exclude reports of the two babies’ deaths.

The CDC has also changed how it counts measles deaths in national reporting. The agency previously relied on determinations and reporting from state and local health officials. Now, it says, it will only report death records received by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which is a system designed not to monitor ongoing outbreaks but to track death trends over long periods. The US Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the CDC, did not respond to questions from Ars Technica about the new rule.

That reporting change appears to have occurred shortly after the first two measles deaths in Pennsylvania, at nearly the exact moment Kennedy was first claiming Shapiro may have just made the deaths up entirely. The CDC is an agency under Kennedy’s rule as head of HHS. This isn’t so much putting puzzle pieces together as it is just observing plain facts. Whatever direct discussions Kennedy has had with the CDC over reporting these deaths, and I firmly believe he’s had those direct conversations, the reporting change still ultimately rolls up to his responsibility.

People are dying of measles and Kennedy doesn’t want to acknowledge that fact. Measles is spreading rapidly and it’s because of the decades of anti-vaxxer bullshit Kennedy has peddled combined with his abdication of responsibility as Secretary of HHS. He wants to fight online with a Governor dealing with an outbreak rather than even mentioning the dead.

It’s sociopathic. It’s dismissive. It’s disrespectful of the dead. And it needs to fucking stop. I’m going to keep saying it: Kennedy needs to be removed from office by any and all peaceful and legal means possible.

Or else more people will die.