Golden Idols, CPAC, and the GOP -- "Gaining Votes and Selling Souls"

 

What a production at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Orlando this weekend. Idols and lawmakers honoring Donald Trump and his reality show presidency were on full display seemingly prepping Trump's return to run for president in 2024.

First, CPAC featured a six-foot-tall golden statue of former President Donald Trump. CNN called it the “indisputable star” of the conference. The statue has Trump wearing a suit jacket with white shirt and red tie plus American-flag shorts. Trump is also wearing sandals and is holding a magic wand, a reference to how former President Barack Obama once said Trump didn’t have a magic wand to bring back manufacturing jobs to the United States.

“He’s wearing a business suit because he’s a business man. The red tie represents the Republican party, the red white and blue shorts represent the fact that he’s a patriot,” the artist Tommy Zegan told the New York Post. The sandals is the way Zegan chose to represent that Trump was in his golden years and could be “on the beach” if he wanted to.

Zegan told Politico that the fiberglass statue was made in Mexico over a period of six months in the resort town of Rosarito. He then took it to Tampa, where it was painted in chrome and then got a U-Haul to transport it to CPAC. “If someone offered me $100,000 I’d take it,” Zegan said. “It is museum-quality, and that’s the one I’m eventually hoping to get in the Trump library,” Zegan told CNN. “It is literally priceless.”

(Daniel Politi. “The Golden Trump Statue Is the Talk of CPAC. It Was Made in Mexico.” Slate. February 27, 2021.)

Then, you could see Roger Stone dancing to a Trump rapper on the streets of Orlando – the same Roger Stone who was pardoned by Trump after he was indicted on charges of lying to Congress about what he and then-candidate Trump knew about Russian efforts to discredit Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential campaign, witness tampering and obstruction.

The unidentified rapper performed his song in front of a giant SUV with Donald Trump’s face painted on Sylvestor Stallone’s body from “Rambo.” The lyrics repeated Trump’s falsehood that he won the election and referred to the violent rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6 as “patriots pulling up, knocking at the Capitol.”

At the end of the video, Roger Stone can be heard saying something about his dancing skills before flashing a pair of peace signs.

(Daniel Goldblatt. “You Can’t Unsee Roger Stone Dancing to a Trump Rap at CPAC (Video).” The Wrap. February 27, 2021.)

And, of course, CPAC's speakers were staunchly behind Trump and the new Republican Party that emerged throughout his four-year tenure, and took direct swipes at the "establishment" wing of the party and Republicans who have come out against Trump.

The theme of CPAC 2021 is "America Uncanceled," but the pre-Trump GOP and establishment Republicans seemed to be "canceled" from the conference altogether.Throughout the day, speakers referenced the pandemic by decrying the restrictions officials put in place. Only about an hour into Friday's programming attendees had to be reminded to keep their masks on.

Speakers stood not only behind Trump but also behind some of his most inflammatory and false ideas. On Saturday, Arizona Rep. Paul Gosar, a Freedom Caucus member and one of the chief deniers of the results – who was the surprise keynote speaker at a conference Friday night in Orlando, Florida, where speakers spread white nationalist rhetoric – reignited conspiracies about the election being rigged.

But at CPAC, while there were few mentions of Jan. 6, several speakers' rhetoric was similarly inflammatory as they described political opponents in extreme terms and painted a dire picture of a nation led by Democrats.

(Quinn Scanlan andKendall Karson. “3 key takeaways from Friday's CPAC event: Speakers stand behind Trump.” ABC News. February 26, 2021.)

On Friday, multiple speakers minimized the attack or cast blame outside their party. Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas did not acknowledge the seriousness of the security breach and related security concerns in their attempts to inherit the former President’s supporters.

If anything, Hawley wore his involvement in the insurrection as a badge of honor. “I was called a traitor, I was called a seditionist, the radical left said I should [resign], and if I wouldn’t resign, I should be expelled from the United States Senate,”

Hawley, who was the first Republican Senator to announce he would object to the results, said. “I’m not going anywhere.” He received applause from the CPAC crowd. He did not mention the attack on the Capitol that followed his announcement that he would challenge the election results.

Cruz dismissed the security concerns stemming from the violence in January. “Let’s be clear, this is not about security at this point, this is about political theater,” he said. “Half the country, the ‘deplorables,’ are dangerous, and [Democrats are] going to turn the Capitol into a military outpost in Baghdad just to have the compliant media echo that message.”

(Lissandra Villa. “Here's How Republicans Downplayed the Capitol Riot at CPAC.” Time. February 26, 2021.)

During his speech, freshman Rep. Madison Cawthorn, R-N.C., delivered a line eerily similar to one Trump gave on Jan. 6, when the former president said, "If you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."

"If we sit on the sidelines, we will not have a country to inherit. If we do not get involved and say that it is our duty to make sure that our country is responsible, that our country doesn't take away our liberties, then my friends, we will lose this nation," Cawthorn said. "The Democrats, my opponents and adversaries on the other side are brutal and vicious and they are trying to take away all of our rights."

Adoration and Fidelity For the “Chosen One”

Golden statues, twerking felons, and insurrection denial – the GOP is busy putting its dedication to the cult of personality together once more. This is evident in Florida this weekend. 

Moreover, this worship of Trump is firmly established in prophetic religious fervor as well as in political power.

In a survey conducted last year (Religion and C19, 2020), two political scientists found that nearly half of America’s church-attending white Protestants believed Trump was anointed by God to be president – a portion of the population that other scholars have dubbed “prophecy voters.”

The share is likely higher among charismatic Christians, who skew more politically and theologically conservative than evangelicals as a whole. And although this population is only a subset of American Christianity, it’s a large one: Some estimates hold that as many as 65 million Americans could be counted as Pentecostals or charismatics.

As Republican Party marches toward the 2024 election, its direction points straight toward Trump and his divisive White nationalist agenda. The GOP has no stomach to oppose a narcissistic autocrat who can attract 74 million votes … even after Trump authored and led a deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol under false claims of a rigged election.

Police Say Shooting of LaToya Ratlieff, George Floyd Protester, "Justified"

 

On May 31, 2020, LaToya Ratlieff was at a George Floyd protest in Fort Lauderdale that turned violent. She was heading to her car to go home when a rubber bullet struck her face, a half-inch above her right eye, shattering her eye socket. Footage of the incident showed Ratlieff screaming and blood gushing from her wound. Requiring 20 stitches, the injury nearly cost Ratlieff her eye.

The officer who struck Ratlieff has been exonerated, Fort Lauderdale Police Interim Police Chief Patrick Lynn announced Thursday.

The officer "identified and targeted an individual who hurled a projectile at our officers with an intent to cause them harm" and it was not the officer's "intent" to hit Ratlieff, Lynn said at a news conference.

The department's office of internal affairs conducted an "extensive" review and an external review was conducted as well, Lynn said.

"The department has made every effort to learn from this incident. On behalf of the men and women of the Fort Lauderdale Police Department, I want to express my sincerest apology," Lynn said to Ratlieff.

(Emily Shapiro. “Woman shot with rubber bullet at protest said she's not surprised to see officer exonerated.” ABC News. February 26, 2021.)

The AP reported while the officer who shot Ratlieff wasn’t disciplined, two other officers were each suspended for a day for using obscene and vulgar language while shooting foam projectiles at the protesters.

Body camera footage shows Florida police officers laughing and celebrating after shooting rubber bullets at the protest. Fort Lauderdale police posted a video on its official YouTube channel in July 2020 taken from the body camera of Detective Zachary Baro, who was leading the department’s SWAT team unit on May 31. At one point in the video, Baro can be heard saying, “Beat it” and using a profanity, after officers shot the projectiles.

During another section of the video, Baro incorrectly tells another officer that his camera is not recording and the two officers begin laughing and joking about the people they had shot with rubber bullets.

(Kelli Kennedy. “Video: Florida police laugh after shooting rubber bullets.” The Washington Times. July 1, 2020.)

“I still have some vision issues, specifically some of my upper vision. I still have trouble driving at night. I’m still thankful because it could’ve been me losing my entire eye,” Ratlieff said.

The Excuse

On February 25, Fort Lauderdale police released their internal affairs case summary and the investigation from the Use of Force expert against Detective Ramos.

The internal affairs investigation determined Det. Eliezer Ramos had been aiming at another protestor who was attempting to pick up a tear gas canister that was still spewing gas.

Since the officer was not aiming at Ratlieff, but at a person he was justified in shooting, no department policy was violated, interim Fort Lauderdale Police Chief Patrick Lynn said.

“Detective Ramos identified and targeted an individual who had hurled a projectile at our officers with the intent to cause them harm. The internal affairs investigation has determined that it was not Detective Ramos’s intent to strike Ms. Ratlieff,” said Lynn.

Ratlieff said with all the smoke from tear gas, it would be difficult for the officer to actually target someone.

“Even if you’re standing in this corner it was difficult to see, so if you’re standing over there and tell me you have a vantage point to which you can accurately target someone is very interesting.”

Ratlieff and her attorney are calling for the release of the whole case file, not just the summary.

(Ted Scouten. “LaToya Ratlieff: Apology ‘Disingenuous and Disheartening’ After Detective Exonerated For Shooting Her In Face With Projectile During Black Lives Matter Protest.” 4 CBS Miami. February 26, 2021.)

LaToya Ratlieff,said her "heart dropped" when she learned the officer was exonerated but said she wasn't surprised. "It was expected," Ratlieff said at a news conference Friday. "We've seen this happen too many times ... when it comes to Black life."

“Interim Chief Patrick Lynn gets to give a very, very bland apology for my experience, as if I had a bad dinner at a restaurant. It’s disingenuous, it’s disheartening but if nothing else it’s invigorating because it reaffirms why we were in the streets marching ... and why this doesn't end today," said Ratlieff.

(Emily Shapiro. “Woman shot with rubber bullet at protest said she's not surprised to see officer exonerated.” ABC News. February 26, 2021.)

Michael Davis, an attorney for Ratlieff, said Thursday the police department’s investigation was a sham.

“This investigation has never been about finding out what actually happened,” Davis said. “This investigation has always been about trying to justify what happened. There is no reason to use rubber bullets against peaceful demonstrators who are choking on gas and they’re in a place they have a right to be.”

The Bottom Line

Ratlieff was attending a peaceful Black Lives Matter demonstration, exercising her right to demand better treatment of Black citizens by police – just like thousands of others were doing across the country in 2020.

The Miami Herald Editorial Board reported, “The bullet came without provocation, witnesses and Ratlieff have said, although in the days after the shooting the department, and even Fort Lauderdale Mayor Dean Trantalis, tried to paint Ratlieff as an instigator. She wasn’t, as video footage and still photos revealed.”

The Miami Herald reported on December 16, 2020 …

“Demonstrators have said that police were the aggressors that May night, with things heating up after one officer, identified as Steven Poherence, shoved a kneeling woman in the head. Demonstrators, outraged, hurled water bottles at officers, who responded by firing off tear gas.

“As Ratlieff urged a group of young men to kneel to show police – heavily armed – that they were not threats, one officer fired rubber bullets, one of which hit her 30 feet away. A bullet struck Ratlieff just above the right eye, fracturing her eye socket and swelling her eyes shut. She was the most seriously injured demonstrator — and the luckiest. Doctors told her it would have been a different story if the bullet had struck her in the eye.”

(Editorial Board. “Officer’s rubber bullet almost blinded peaceful protester. She’s owed an apology and an explanation | Editorial.” Miami Herald. December 16, 2020.)

The Miami Herald reported: “The police manual makes clear that a shot to the head with a rubber bullet, such as Ratlieff received, is potentially lethal and should not be fired unless deadly force is justified. Doesn’t seem that it was in this case.”

Consider the facts according to the Fort Lauderdale police:

In thick smoke from tear gas on May 31, 2020, Fort Lauderdale Detective Ramos, believing deadly force was justified, fired a rubber bullet at a person attempting to pick up a tear gas canister. Missing the target, the bullet instead struck LaToya Ratlieff, an innocent bystander and shattered her eye socket. And, since the officer was not aiming at Ratlieff, but at a person he was supposedly justified in shooting, no department policy was violated, and the officer who struck Ratlieff has been exonerated.

Consider you or your loved one to be LaToya Ratlieff. Consider her injuries, and consider justice. Then, consider the value of Black lives in the eyes of police officers who serve in a system in which systemic racism contributes to untold violence and death. Finally, consider that this injustice still occurs over and over in an America with a significant population that opposes the Black Lives Matter movement.

Postscript

On June 29, 2020, Ms. LaToya Ratlieff was part of a virtual briefing held by The House Oversight and Reform Subcommittee on Civil Rights and Civil Liberties. U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz and U.S. Representative Jamie Raskin both asked Ms. Ratlieff questions in reference to the May 31, 2020, protest in downtown Fort Lauderdale. This is part of what she said:

“As I sit here today, I have little to no vision in my right eye. Doctors don't know if that will change. Like hundreds of millions of people around the world, I was shocked and disgusted by the murder of George Floyd. I wanted to do something. I heard about civil demonstrations and I joined in. I first attended one in Miami on May 30^th. We exercised our first amendment rights without incident or violence from the police.

“Because of this experience, I decided to attend another demonstration the following afternoon. As I walked through Fort Lauderdale that day, I looked around. I saw a diverse group of people who shared a common goal. I saw young and old, wealthy and poor, black, white, Hispanic and every other demographic you could imagine. At one point we took a knee to show that we were no threat and meant the police no harm.

“At other demonstrations, the police actually joined the demonstrators. Not here. The police begin firing tear gas and shooting rubber bullets. I will forever be scared by the Fort Lauderdale Police shooting me in the head on May 31st. Officer Eliezer Ramos shot me, a peaceful demonstrator, an unarmed woman in the head with a rubber bullet while merely exercising my first amendment right to speak out against police brutality. I became the type of victim that I was there to support. Twenty-five (25) days after incident reports were filed, which make no claim I did anything unlawful or wrong. I still await an apology from Officer Ramos, Chief Maglione, or anyone in leadership in the city of Fort Lauderdale.”

The full report from the Fort Lauderdale Police Department, click here: https://miami.cbslocal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15909786/2021/02/internalreport.pdf

Republicans Support Radicalization and Trump in 2024

 

“Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Thursday that he would "absolutely" support Donald Trump if he's the 2024 GOP nominee for president, two weeks after declaring former President Trump "practically and morally responsible for provoking the events" of January 6. The Kentucky Republican said he will support any Republican who wins the nomination, even if that's Mr. Trump.”

– CBS News, February 25, 2021

"The nominee of the party? Absolutely," McConnell said on Fox News when asked if he would support Mr. Trump if he became the nominee.

To Democrats and others who believe Trump should be barred from holding future office, this hypocritical support comes as no surprise. Republicans are willing to accept or even defend the “Stop the Steal” insurrection and embrace a version of events on January 6 that has been debunked by independent fact checkers and law enforcement agencies.

In fact, a poll a week after the attack found that a majority of Republican voters still believe anti-fascist activists were responsible for the storming of the Capitol.

An Economist/YouGov poll shows more than two-thirds of the Republicans surveyed blame anti-fascist activists – colloquially known as antifa – for the violence, which was actually perpetrated by Donald Trump supporters and conspiracy theorists seeking to overturn the result of November's presidential election.

(David Brennan. “Most Republicans Still Believe Capitol Riot Antifa Conspiracies: Poll.” Newsweek. January 14, 2021.)

It is evident Republicans are not willing to cast Trump aside or move on to a new generation of leaders now that he is out of office.

A Morning Consult poll (reported in Forbes on January 27) found that 81% of Republican voters polled Jan. 23-25 had a positive view of Trump, up from 76% who said the same Jan. 10-12.

Another exclusive Suffolk University/USA TODAY Poll of 1,000 Trump voters reported Trump's support largely unshaken after his second impeachment trial in the Senate, this time on a charge of inciting the insurrection in the deadly assault on the Capitol January 6.

Asked to describe what happened during the assault on the Capitol, 58% of Trump voters call it "mostly an antifa-inspired attack that only involved a few Trump supporters." That's more than double the 28% who call it "a rally of Trump supporters, some of whom attacked the Capitol." Four percent call it "an attempted coup inspired by President Trump."

Mitch McConnell leads the charge to defend Trump; however, many other key Republican lawmakers are solidly in the corner of the ex-president. South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham believes that Trump is the key to the Republican Party’s success in the future. In a Fox News interview, he argued, “I hope people in our party understand the party itself. If you’re wanting to erase Donald Trump from the party, you’re gonna get erased.”

Moreover, Trump has threatened political retribution against those GOP members of Congress who supported impeachment. A Trump advisor told CNN that the former president's new focus is getting back at the ten Republicans who voted with Democrats in the House to bring about the impeachment trial.

CNN reported that Trump refers to the payback as "accountability" for what he views as "going against the people."

Trump has already created the “Office of the Former President,” which aims to “advance the interests of the United States and … carry on the agenda of the Trump Administration through advocacy, organizing, and public activism,” hinting that, no matter what, he will play an influential political role in the future, whether that be through starting a new media company, supporting political candidates, or eventually running for president in 2024 if he is not convicted and barred from running for federal office by the US Senate.

(Melissa Quinn. “Trump opens 'Office of the Former President' in Florida.” CBS News. January 27, 2021.)

Brookings evaluated the current situation …

“Over the course of four years as president, Trump masterfully consolidated Republican voters into a cult of personality. His hardcore supporters were willing to believe anything that left his lips, regardless of evidence to the contrary. They were willing to put their own lives at risk as he huddled them together at rallies and mocked those taking precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19. They were willing to commit insurrection against their own government, all in his name and to support his lies about election malfeasance.

“That non-trivial group of Republican and Republican-leaning voters is not going away, and they remain loyal not to the party but to Donald Trump. It remains to be seen exactly how large this group is, how much power they will wield in Republican primaries and whether a non-Trumpublican candidate can consolidate the remainder of the party.”

(John Hudak, Christine Stenglein, and Elaine Kamarck. “Trump’s future: Nine possibilities.” Brookings Institute. February 05, 2021.)

January 6th showed us that there is essentially nothing Republicans are unwilling to do in his name. Over his five-year career in politics, Trump has wriggled free from political predicaments that would sink most others.

Trump is now sitting on a huge pot of cash – well over $50 million – that he could use to prop up primary challenges against Republicans who backed his impeachment or refused to support his failed efforts to challenge the election results using bogus allegations of mass voter fraud.

Is barring Trump from office an option? Trump would likely need to be convicted first. Section 3 of the 14th Amendment could still be used to bar the former president from running for future office. This section bars any public official who swore an oath to protect the Constitution from holding office if they "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" against it or gave "aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

The long and short of it? The Republican Party could have taken an off-ramp from Trump himself and Trumpism. But, they did not want to take that turn in fear of losing power. Instead, they choose to remain loyal to a dangerous demagogue to maintain his voting base.

Julian Zelizer, a historian at Princeton University and author/editor of 19 books on American political history, says

“Trump is a product of many decades where the Republican Party has changed dramatically in terms of [embracing] extremism, and the embrace of a very aggressive, smashmouth approach to politics. Trump accelerated those trends. He exposed where the party was, but he didn’t create it. There were deep roots to what he did.”

(Daniel Bush. “The post-Trump identity crisis that’s fracturing the GOP.” PBS News Hour. February 05, 2021.)

A growing far-right faction in the party is deeply loyal to Trump. How can Republicans like McConnell repudiate the dark side of Trumpism without making a full break from him? They excuse the narcissist's criminal behavior and divisive actions because they also embrace the White nationalism he promotes.

This is evident by their widespread embrace of conspiracy and disinformation. Their support for Trump endorses the "mass radicalization" of Americans and increases the risk of right-wing violence from alt-right groups like the Proud Boys and armed militias.

Worst of all, the Republican Party has shown no stomach for responsibility and cleaning up the damage done by a president with no regard for truth and the U.S. electoral system. In general, Republicans still support disinformation because a considerable number in their party embrace conspiracies that feed their fragility and violent tendencies.

Donald Trump continues to be the leader of self-proclaimed "real Americans" cocooned in their own news outlets, in their own social media networks and, ultimately, in their own "truth." They still seek to follow Trump as their own “chosen one” to “make America first” after he has committed numerous treasonable acts and disgraced America in the eyes of the world.

Time To Think About Your Third Stimulus Check -- Tax Savings Too (Info For Filing Tax Returns)

 

“House lawmakers are set to vote Friday on President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package, which includes additional $1,400 stimulus checks.”

– ABC News, February 24, 2021

Congress has President Joe Biden's pandemic rescue package moving on a fast track in a race against time to get Americans the relief they need. A key vote is expected on Friday.

CNET reports, should the COVID-19 relief package pass through the House, it would be able to make its way to the Senate. After that, all it needs is to be signed by President Biden on or before March 14th in order to get the IRS printing that third round of Uncle Sam cash.

(Claudia Dimuro. “Third stimulus checks (2/25/21): Will they come in March, what’s the latest on another IRS payment, and how much could I get?” Pennsylvania Real Time News. February 25, 2021.)

The $1.9 trillion legislation would provide not only a stimulus check of up to $1,400, extended unemployment benefits, and more funding for the COVID vaccine rollout, but also some tax relief.

You may get more of your tax dollars back from the IRS to help you pay down debt or build up your emergency fund.

Along with the much-discussed stimulus checks, additional proposals in the bill would offer the average household $3,100 in tax savings for 2021, according to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. When you file your taxes, the credits give you a dollar-for-dollar reduction in how much you owe in income taxes.

Families would see tax savings from four major provisions:

• A $1,400 stimulus check, which is actually just an advance on a tax credit.

• An expanded earned income tax credit.

• An expanded child tax credit.

• A bigger credit for those paying for child care.

Plus, some of those credits would be refundable for 2021. This means if your tax liability drops to zero, the IRS will send you a refund for a set amount — putting money directly back in your pocket.

Who would benefit from the tax savings?

Two-thirds of the tax savings will go to households earning less than $91,000 a year, according to the tax center’s analysis. That’s not to say higher-income households won’t also receive some relief: About 11% of the proposed benefits will go to families making more than $164,000.

Under the plan, the child tax credit not only gets a boost, but it also becomes refundable — meaning families would receive even more money. Low-income parents would be able to claim $3,600 (up from $2,000) for children under the age of 6 and $3,000 for children under 18.

Nearly 80% of those expanded benefits will go to low- to moderate-income families, according to the tax center’s analysis. The proposed changes to the child tax credit would help lift 11 million children out of poverty, says the Center for American Progress.

As for the earned income tax credit, the boost included in the bill would nearly triple the maximum credit for workers without children and extend eligibility to more people.

(Sigrid Forberg. “Biden's stimulus checks bill could cut your taxes by $3,100.” Yahoo Finance. February 25, 2021.)

If approved, the checks could go out as soon as next month. Extra federal unemployment benefits that have been in effect for months are due to expire on March 14. They must be extended, then, by March 13, and since that is expected to be taken care of as part of the enormous piece of legislation that would include a third stimulus payment to millions of eligible Americans, that is the deadline for the legislature and Biden to agree on whatever other elements of the package they must before it is signed, sealed, and delivered.

If approved by early-to-mid March, it should not take long for the IRS to start sending either checks, direct deposit payments, or prepaid debit cards out to anyone who qualifies, seeing that they’ve done it twice already. Most projections say it would take three days to a week to get going once Biden signs the bill, which will have a price tag that, at minimum, reaches the hundreds of millions and perhaps goes as high as $1.9 trillion. That means money could be in your pocket by the end of this year’s third month, and certainly by early April at worst.

What about filing your taxes as it relates to the third stimulus check? Kiplinger offers some good advice and even posts a “Third Stimulus Check Calculator” online. Here are some considerations (much more is available at https://www.kiplinger.com/taxes/tax-filing/602244/how-filing-your-tax-return-early-or-late-could-boost-your-third-stimulus-check.)

Filing your tax return earlier could mean a bigger third stimulus check. But before you do, there's another side to this story. For other people, filing early could result in a lower stimulus check– and you don't want that.

So, should you file early or file later? Which camp you're in generally depends on whether there were any significant changes to your family or financial situation last year. That's because your next stimulus check is likely to be based on either your 2019 tax return or your 2020 return – whichever one was most recently filed when the IRS starts processing your next stimulus payment.

If you expect your third stimulus check to be higher if it's based on your 2020 tax return (instead of your 2109 return), then you want to file your 2020 return as soon as possible. (Use our (Kiplinger) calculator to run the numbers –  https://my.kiplinger.com/kiplinger-tools/taxes/third-stimulus-check-calculator/index.php?_ga=2.199776747.475584824.1614280443-1577946394.1614280443

That way, there's time for it to be processed before the IRS starts sending out stimulus payments. Some of the things that could make your stimulus check higher if it's based on your 2020 return include:

Your income was lower in 2020;

• You had a child in 2020;

• You got married in 2020 (especially if there's a wide gap between each spouse's income); or

• You could be claimed as a dependent on someone's 2019 tax return, but not on anyone's 2020 return.

(Rocky Mengle. “How Filing Your Tax Return Early (or Late) Could Boost Your Third Stimulus Check.” Kiplinger. February 18, 2021.)

Post For Marjorie Taylor Greene -- Science and Two Genders

 

“There are TWO genders: MALE & FEMALE. “Trust The Science.”

– Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga put up this sign outside her office

The House of Representatives voted on February 4, 2021, to remove Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Greene from her assignments on the education and budget committees because of violent and incendiary comments she’s made, including her endorsement of the assassination of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi,

Ms. Greene has also falsely suggested that 9/11 was a hoax, President Barack Obama was a Muslim, and the Clintons were guilty of murder. She is a promoter of QAnon's baseless theories.

Well, Greene is back at it.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., placed a sign outside her office Wednesday, February 24, mocking Democratic Rep. Marie Newman, whose office sits across the hall, after Newman hung a transgender pride flag next to her door in protest over Greene's opposition to a LGBTQ rights bill.

Newman, who has a transgender daughter, tweeted a video of herself putting up the flag Wednesday after she said Greene tried to block the Equality Act on the House floor "because she believes prohibiting discrimination against trans Americans is ‘disgusting, immoral, and evil.’”

“Thought we’d put up our Transgender flag so she can look at it every time she opens her door,” Newman, of Illinois, wrote in the tweet.

Earlier in the day, Greene attempted to block the legislation, which is set for consideration Thursday, with a motion to adjourn. She tweeted that the move was “to give every Member of Congress time to rethink destroying #WomensRights and #WomensSports and #ReligiousFreedom before voting for the #EqualityAct!”

According to the bill’s sponsor, Rep. David Cicilline, D-R.I., the bill would amend existing federal civil rights laws and prohibit “discrimination against members of the LGBTQ community in the areas of employment, education, credit, jury service, federal funding, housing, and public accommodations.”

After Newman hung the transgender flag and posted her tweet, Greene retweeted a video of Newman speaking on the House floor in support of the legislation earlier in the week, in which she said, “I’m voting to pass the Equality Act for my daughter — the strongest, bravest person I know.”

Greene tweeted, “As mothers, we all love and support our children. But your biological son does NOT belong in my daughters’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports teams.”

A number of lawmakers immediately denounced Greene’s behavior on Twitter.

Rebecca Shabad. “Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene hangs sign mocking congressional neighbor's transgender pride flag in Twitter spat.” NBC News. February 25, 2021.)

In the eyes of Marjorie Taylor Greene and others who believe the International Dark Web, trans people and their advocates are destroying the pillars of our society with such free-speech–suppressing, postmodern concepts as: “trans women are women,” “gender-neutral pronouns,” or “there are more than two genders.” Asserting “basic biology” will not be ignored, the IDW proclaims. “Facts don’t care about your feelings.”

The irony in all this is that these “protectors of enlightenment” are guilty of the very behavior this phrase derides. They espouse unscientific claims that have infected our politics and culture. Especially alarming is that these “intellectual” assertions are used by nonscientists like Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene to claim a scientific basis for the dehumanization of trans people.

(Simón(e) D Sun. “Stop Using Phony Science to Justify Transphobia.” Scientific America. June 13, 2019)

For all too long, the government, the medical system, and even our parents have assumed that sex is binary. Based on science, this is not biologically or medically accurate.

Science keeps showing us that sex also doesn’t fit in a binary, whether it be determined by genitals, chromosomes, or hormones.

Please Read the Memo

Dear Ms. Greene,

Trust me. “Science” tells us that sex determination – the way we are “coded” into a biological sex – is complicated in and of itself. There are far more options than just “male” or “female,” and countless instances of species that can actually transition from one sex to another within a single lifetime.

Katherine J. Wu Ph.D. in microbiology and immunobiology from Harvard University, a reporter for The New York Times covering science and health, says …

“Science tells us that gender is certainly not binary; it may not even be a linear spectrum. Like many other facets of identity, it can operate on a broad range of levels and operate outside of many definitions.

“And it also appears that gender may not be as static as we assume. At the forefront of this, transgender identity is complex – it’s unlikely we’ll ever be able to attribute it to one neat, contained set of causes, and there is still much to be learned. But we know now that several of those causes are biological. These individuals are not suffering a mental illness, or capriciously “choosing” a different identity. The transgender identity is multi-dimensional – but it deserves no less recognition or respect than any other facet of humankind.”

(Katherine J. Wu. “Between the (Gender) Lines: the Science of Transgender Identity.” Harvard University. October 25, 2016.)

Unfortunately for those who believe in a gender binary like you, your position is not scientifically or medically correct. Gender can’t be binary because it is a personal identity and is socially constructed.

Sex—which refers to one’s biological characteristics – also exists as a spectrum because intersex people do exist.

Now, it might be more convenient for the U.S. federal government to have a binary system for determining legal sex; many U.S. laws and customs are built on this assumption. But just because it’s a convenient system of classification doesn’t mean it’s right.

Some countries, such as Canada, and some states in the U.S., including Oregon, now allow people to declare a nonbinary gender identity on their driver’s license or other identification documents. Where anti-discrimination laws apply to sex or gender, it is a step in the wrong direction to be writing either into law as a strictly binary phenomenon.

Alexandra Kralick writes in Slate …

“The famous cases of strong, athletic, and audacious female athletes who have had their careers derailed by the Olympic 'gender tests' exemplify how misguided it is to classify sex or gender as binary. These women are, like all of us, part of a sex spectrum, not a sex binary. The more we as a society recognize that, the less we will humiliate and unnecessarily scrutinize people – and the less discriminatory our world will be.”

(Alexandra Kralick. “We Finally Understand That Gender Isn’t Binary. Sex Isn’t, Either.” Slate. November 13, 2018.)

My impressionable and misinformed Ms. Greene, I ask YOU to “trust the science” and to realize that whether you define sex based on chromosomes, gametes, gonads, or genitals, two categories doesn't work. The sex categories of “male” and “female” are social constructs.

Many – like you – who oppose transgender rights believe that gender is determined solely by biological sex. But, biological sex isn’t as straightforward as they likely think, and there is no one parameter that makes a person biologically male or female. In fact, many conditions make assigning a biological sex quite difficult.

Ms. Greene, I understand you would like sex to be “black or white,” yet there exists a substantial gray area you prefer to ignore and even consider taboo.

Dr. Eric Vilain, director of the Center for Gender-Based Biology at UCLA, where he studies the genetics of sexual development and sex differences, says …

“People tend to define sex in a binary way — either wholly male or wholly female — based on physical appearance or by which sex chromosomes an individual carries. But while sex and gender may seem dichotomous, there are in reality many intermediates.”

“Understanding this complexity is critical; misperceptions can affect the health and civil liberties of those who fall outside perceived societal norms. Society has categorical views on what should define sex and gender, but the biological reality is just not there to support that.”

(Veronica Meade-Kelly. “Male or female? It's not always so simple.” UCLA Newsroom. August 20, 2015.)

Kim Elsesser Ph. D., author of Sex and the Office: Women, Men and the Sex Partition that's Dividing the Workplace and a regular Forbes.com contributor, says …

“The biology of sex is extremely complicated, and there is sometimes no easy way to draw a line between the biologically male and female. According to the BBC documentary, Me, My Sex and I, 'There are about a dozen different conditions that blur the line between male and female. They’re known as disorders of sexual development or DSDs…. Altogether, DSDs occur as frequently as twins or red hair.'”

(Kim Elsesser. “The Myth Of Biological Sex.” Forbes. June 15, 2020.)

And, Ms. Greene, just in case you think this scientific view is fabricated, you can review the works cited by Jessica J Cameron and Danu Anthony Stinson in “Gender (mis)measurement: Guidelines for respecting gender diversity in psychological research” published in Social and Personality Psychology Compass: Volume13, Issue11, November 2019.

Works Cited:

Ainsworth, C. (2015). Sex redefined. Nature, 288, 288– 288, 291.PubMed Web of Science®Google Scholar

• American Psychological Association (1977). Guidelines for nonsexist language in APA journals. American Psychologist, 32, 487– 494.

• American Psychological Association (2010a). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association ( 6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

• American Psychological Association. (2010b). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct (2002, amended June 1, 2010). , from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/principles.pdf

• American Psychological Association (2015). Guidelines for psychological practice with transgender and gender nonconforming people. American Psychologist, 70, 832– 864.

• Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 797– 811.

• Bauer, G. R., Braimoh, J., Scheim, A. I., & Dharma, C. (2017). Transgender‐inclusive measures of sex/gender for population surveys: Mixed‐methods evaluation and recommendations. PLoS One, 12, e0178043.

• Bem, S. L. (1993). The lenses of gender: Transforming the debate on sexual inequality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

• Bhabha, H. K. (1983). The other question: The stereotype and colonial discourse. Screen, 24, 18– 36.

• Bockting, W. O., Miner, M. H., Swinburne Romine, R. E., Hamilton, A., & Coleman, E. (2013). Stigma, mental health, and resilience in an online sample of the US transgender population. American Journal of Public Health, 103, 943– 951.

• Busby, M. (2017, August 31). Canada introduces gender neutral ‘X' option on passports. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/31/canada‐introduces‐gender‐neutral‐x‐option‐on‐passports

• Cameron, J. J., & Stinson, D. A. (2019). Reactions to Binary Gender Measurement. Unpublished data.

• Denmark, F., Russo, N. F., Frieze, I. H., & Sechzer, J. A. (1988). Guidelines for avoiding sexism in psychological research: A report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Nonsexist Research. American Psychologist, 43, 585– 585.

• Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 37, 451– 463.

• Eich, E. (2014). Business not as usual. Psychological Science, 25, 3– 6.

• Eisenberg, M. E., Gower, A. L., McMorris, B. J., Rider, N., Shea, G., & Coleman, E. (2017). Risk and protective factors in the lives of transgender/gender nonconforming adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health, 61, 521– 526.

• Factor, R., & Rothblum, E. (2008). Exploring gender identity and community among three groups of transgender individuals in the United States: MTFs, FTMs, and genderqueers. Health Sociology Review, 17, 235– 253.

• Fast, A. A., & Olson, K. R. (2017). Gender development in transgender preschool children. Child Development, 89, 620– 637.

• Flores, A. R., Herman, J. L., Gates, G. J., & Brown, T. N. T. (2016). How Many Adults Identify as Transgender in the United States? Los Angeles, CA: The Williams Institute.

• Gannon, L., Luchetta, T., Rhodes, K., Pardie, L., & Segrist, D. (1992). Sex bias in psychological research: Progress or complacency? American Psychologist, 47, 389– 396.

• GLAAD (2017). Accelerating acceptance. , from https://www.glaad.org/publications/accelerating‐acceptance‐2017

• Grady, K. (1981). Sex bias in research design. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 5, 628– 638.

• Graham, S. (2004). It's like one of those puzzles: Conceptualizing gender among Bugis. Journal of Gender Studies, 13, 107– 113.

• Hegarty, P., & Buechel, C. (2006). Androcentric reporting of gender differences in APA journals: 1965 – 2004. Review of General Psychology, 10, 377– 389.

• Hofler, M. (2005). The effect of misclassification on the estimation of association: A review. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 14, 92– 101.

• Hyde, J. S., Bigler, R. S., Joel, D., Tate, C. C., & van Anders, S. M. (2018). The future of sex and gender in psychology: Five challenges to the gender binary. American Psychologist. Advanced online publication. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000307

• IPSOS (2018). Global attitudes toward transgender people report. Retrieved July 10, 2018, from https://www.slideshare.net/IpsosPublicAffairs/global‐attitudes‐toward‐transgender‐people‐87314479

• Kitiyama, S. (2017). Editorial. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 357– 360.

• McHugh, M., Koeske, R. D., & Frieze, I. N. (1986). Issues to consider in conducting nonsexist psychological research. American Psychologist, 41, 879– 889.

• Meerwijk, E. L., & Sevelius, J. M. (2017). Transgender population size in the United States: A Meta‐Regression of Population‐Based Probability Samples. American Journal of Public Health, 107, e1– e8.

• Nanda, S. (2015). Hijras. In P. Whelehan, & A. Bolin (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Human Sexuality (pp. 501– 581). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.

• National Institute of Health (n.d.). History of women's participation in clinical research. Retrieved from https://orwh.od.nih.gov/toolkit/recruitment/history

• Olson, K. R., Key, A. C., & Eaton, N. R. (2015). Gender cognition in transgender children. Psychological Science, 26, 467– 474.

• Spence, J. T. (1993). Gender‐related traits and gender ideology: Evidence for a multifactorial theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 624– 635.

• Spencer, B., & Cantano, E. (2007). Social class is dead. Long live social class! Stereotype threat among low socioeconomic status individuals. Social Justice Research, 20, 418– 432.

• Spencer, S. J., Logel, C., & Davies, P. G. (2016). Stereotype Threat. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 14.1– 14.23.

• Tate, C. C., Ledbetter, J. N., & Youssef, C. P. (2013). A two‐question method for assessing gender categories in the social and medical sciences. Journal of Sex Research, 50, 767– 776.

• Tate, C. C., Youssef, C. P., & Bettergarcia, J. N. (2014). Integrating the study of transgender spectrum and cisgender experiences of self‐categorization from a personality perspective. Review of General Psychology, 18, 302– 312.

• The Associated Press (2017). The Associated Press Stylebook ( 48th ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.

• Tobin, D. D., Menon, M., Menon, M., Spatta, B. C., Hodges, E. V. E., & Perry, D. G. (2010). The intrapsychics of gender: A model of self‐ socialization. Psychological Review, 117, 601– 622.

• Westbrook, L., & Saperstein, A. (2015). New categories are not enough: Rethinking the measurement of sex and gender in social surveys. Gender & Society, 29, 534– 560.

• Wilson, A. (1996). How we find ourselves: Identity development and two‐spirit people. Harvard Educational Review: July, 1996(66), 303– 318.

• Yoder, J. D., & Kahn, A. S. (1993). Working toward an inclusive psychology of women. American Psychologist, 48, 846– 850.

Oregon Republicans Hoist "False Flags" and Rebel Chairman Dallas Heard

 

“The Oregon Republican Party said the violence at the U.S. Capitol was a “false flag effort” designed to discredit Trump, his supporters and all conservative Republicans. The Oregon Republican Party said that they 'condemn the betrayal' of the Republicans who voted to impeach and encouraged voters in their districts to elect 'dedicated and courageous conservatives' in their place.

– Jordan Lancaster; Daily Caller; January 25, 2021

In a resolution condemning the ten House Republicans who voted to impeach former President Donald Trump, the Oregon GOP said that the Capitol riot was a “false flag” designed to discredit Republicans.

The Capitol riot provided the “sham motivation” for lawmakers to move forward with impeachment in order to advance Democrats’ goal to seize “total power,” the Oregon GOP wrote. They said that the situation is “a frightening parallel to the February 1933 burning of the German Reichstag.”

The “false flag effort,” they claim, will support President Joe Biden’s plans to re-introduce themes from the Patriot Act. These themes could include “codifying putting conservatives on a secret no-fly list without recourse to due process and restricting free speech.”

(Jordan Lancaster. “Oregon GOP Refers To Capitol Riot As ‘False Flag’ In Rebuke Of Republicans Who Voted To Impeach. Daily Caller. January 25, 2021.)

And now, the Oregon GOP has their huckleberry. Dallas Heard, a far-right senator who has rebelled against coronavirus restrictions and supported protesters who stormed the Oregon Capitol has been elected chairman of the state Republican Party, showing how the Republicans are taking a harder-line shift in some states and continuing to support former President Donald Trump. 

Heard has burnished quite a reputation as a conservative rebel and has backed some swarthy characters, railed against mask mandates, and been active in right-wing groups.

Against the advice of his colleagues and GOP leadership, Oregon State Rep. Dallas Heard visited with militants illegally occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January 2016.

In 2016, as a state representative, Heard traveled to the headquarters of the federal Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon, which was at the time being occupied by an armed right-wing militia led by Ammon Bundy, son of the anti-government figure Cliven Bundy.

Heard met with the younger Bundy against the advice of law enforcement and expressed sympathy for the group's demand that federal lands be turned over to the states.

(Oliver Willis. “New Oregon GOP Chair Tied To Violent Right-Wing Extremists.” The National Memo. February 24, 2021.)

Following the surrender of the last militants, the FBI labeled the entire refuge a crime scene and canvassed the buildings in search of explosives and any previously existing hazardous materials. A collection of firearms and explosives were found inside the refuge. Safes were found to have been broken into, with money, cameras, and computers stolen by the militants. They were also found to have badly damaged tribal artifacts

(Maxine Bernstein. "Firearms, explosives and trench of human feces found at Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, feds say.” The Oregonian. February 18, 2016.)

During the occupation, the militants illegally dug a new road using a government-owned excavator, expanded a parking lot, dug trenches, destroyed part of a USFWS-owned fence, and removed security cameras. Some of the refuge's pipes broke, after which the militants, officials said, defecated "everywhere."

(Jes Burns. "Northwest Volunteers Want To Help Restore Malheur Refuge.” Portland, Oregon: Oregon Public Broadcasting. February 04, 2016.)

On Dec. 21, Heard encouraged a demonstration where far-right protesters stormed the state Capitol, which was closed to the public during an emergency session to deal with the pandemic. Protesters also pepper-sprayed police, smashed windows and assaulted journalists..

“I’m in full support of your right to enter your Capitol building,” Heard told the crowd.

The capitol break-in was promoted by the far-right Patriot Prayer. In January 2021 evidence came to light that Representative Mike Nearman (Republican from Independence)) had opened doors to the Oregon Capitol "allowing violent demonstrators who were protesting immediately outside the door to illegally enter the building" and cause damage.

The militia-inflamed "chaos in Oregon over the past year [was] a prologue to the insurrection at the U.S Capitol," in one account.

(Katie Shepherd, "Rioters stormed the Oregon Capitol in December: Video shows a Republican lawmaker let them in," Washington Post. January 12, 2021.)

This all led to tension when Heard objected to statewide mask requirements on January 21. He accused his colleagues of being involved in a "campaign against the people and the children of god." Heard expressed anger at the mask mandate in the state Capitol, ripped his mask off and left the floor.

"If you had not done such great evil to my people and had simply asked me to wear my mask, I would have," he said. "But you commanded it, and therefore I declare my right to protest against your false authority and remove my mask."

(“Far-right protesters disrupt Oregon legislature special session.” Portland Tribute. December 21, 2020.)

During a Jan. 6 unlawful assembly by Trump supporters outside the Oregon Capitol, Heard pointed at the building and shouted through a megaphone: “Don’t let any of these punks from that stone temple over there ever tell you that they are any better than you. Trust me, I work with these fools.”

“Don’t be violent, take action, trust in God and take down these fools in 2022,” Heard said.

A number of Oregon Republicans like Dallas Heard and R-Roseburg, condemned their party for being complicit with Democratic "elitists."

"I am a Republican, but I am an American first, and there are some Republicans that need to go, frankly," Heard said.

(Tim Gruver. “'This is war': Oregon pro-Trump protest descends into 'unlawful assembly' at state Capitol.” The Center Square. January 7, 2021.)

Heard also belongs to a group called Citizens Against Tyranny, which claims Democratic Gov. Kate Brown is infringing on their rights by ordering businesses to shut down, people to wear masks and follow other safety measures.

The “Citizens Against Tyranny” effort seeks to not only expose whistle blowers but also ban them from local businesses. The movement threatens a recall for any elected officials who don’t sign on. Heard told the Garden Valley Church in December:

“There’s going to be stuff in it that might make you pause for a second, like when we discover that someone has betrayed their community, betrayed their own freedom and turned in their neighbor for nothing but going to work and earning a living the most basic of rights, we’re going to expose them. We’re not going to return evil for evil though. But their faces and their names and what they did must be known.”

(Carisa Cegavske. “Citizens Against Tyranny movement, backed by Sen. Heard, seeks to expose people who make OSHA complaints.” The News-Review. Roseburg, Oregon. January 09, 2021.)

The group posted the names of people who reported violations of the rules to state authorities, calling them “filthy traitors.” Heard has since said the group’s leaders had never decided to publish the names, and the list was taken down.

(Andrew Selsky. “Far-right lawmaker takes over Oregon GOP in larger US shift.” ABC News. February 22, 2021.)

Other states with internal GOP struggles include North Carolina, where the Republican Party unanimously approved a resolution to censure Sen. Richard Burr over his vote to convict Trump during his second impeachment trial. Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Fred Upton of Michigan and Tom Rice of South Carolina have faced similar scolding at home. So did Cindy McCain, who is the late Sen. John McCain's widow, Gov. Doug Ducey and former Sen. Jeff Flake in Arizona.

Oregon Republicans now have state chairman Heard. However, more than 6,000 Oregonians left the Republican Party in January 2021, the same month that pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol and the state party passed a resolution describing the insurrection as a “false flag” operation.

As of February 1 there are now 753,195 registered Republicans and 1,048,511 registered Democrats in Oregon. The remaining 1,149,795 voters are either unaffiliated with a political party or a member of a minor party.

Sister Dianna Ortiz Obit -- Survivor of Guatemalan Brutality

 

Sister Dianna Ortiz, 62, died while in hospice care in Washington early February 19, 2021 after a return of cancer.

Friends reported that Ortiz had tested positive for the coronavirus in the fall while on a trip to New Mexico. Although she had mild symptoms and was able to return to Washington, she continued to feel ill for weeks afterward. Medical tests February 12 discovered inoperable cancer.

“She was unfailingly good. Dianna walked through the very worst of hell and came out with love.

“It’s hard to believe that bad things happen to good nuns, but they do. The only sense I can make out of it is that evil is threatened by the love it cannot bear. Her legacy is for us to be nonviolent. Her legacy is a witness to nonviolence and to love in the face of evil and to redemption. That’s her legacy, to teach us that that’s possible.”

– Ursuline Sister Larraine Lauter, who became friends with Ortiz when they were seniors in high school. They entered the Ursuline Sisters of Mount St. Joseph in Maple Mount, Kentucky, a year apart.

Dianna Ortiz's parents, who were Mexican immigrants, tell her that at age six she stated that she wanted to be a nun. For a decade she taught kindergarten in Kentucky before deciding that she felt called to follow Jesus' example and work with the poor. Since the late 1960s, progressive nuns had been in the forefront of movements for social justice, and many who had once served the poor now lived among them. Dianna knew sisters who lived on mission in developing countries, some of whom had been radicalized by their work under repressive regimes. And she, too, wanted to become a missionary.

Ortiz entered the Ursuline Order. And, in September 1987, she left for a remote Mayan village in the Guatemalan highlands. San Miguel Acatan had been hard-hit during the country's civil war. The Guatemalan Army had killed more than one-hundred-fifty thousand in an attempt to "cleanse" the rural areas of people they suspected of sympathizing with the guerrillas and to instill fear in the community.

"Every family in San Miguel had people who had been tortured, disappeared or killed," said Ursuline Sister Mary Elizabeth (Mimi) Ballard, who had arrived a year earlier. "No family was untouched."

Still, Dianna adjusted easily to missionary life. The poverty in San Miguel was startling, and she had a tough time learning the indigenous Kanjobal language. But her sisters remember Dianna's delight when local women gave her hand-woven blouses and strung ribbon through her long brown hair. It was what nuns call the honeymoon of mission life, when newly arrived missionaries are overjoyed by the warmth of the local people and the simplicity of their lives, before fully realizing the long-term effects of scarcity and war.

Although the sisters avoided activities that could be construed as political, in September of 1988 the local bishop told them that he had received a letter accusing the sisters of working with the guerrillas. Four months later the sisters received a letter addressed to Madre Dianna: "Be careful. People want to hurt you." Two similar ones followed. Ballard suspected that the intent was to frighten church people into abandoning their work with the poor, or perhaps it was a case of mistaken identity, but no one was sure why Dianna was targeted when she returned to San Miguel.

The local priest assured the sisters the letters were idle threats and that the military left foreigners alone. But when Dianna went to Guatemala City to study Spanish, a man grabbed her on the street. "He said, 'We know who you are,'" Dianna told the sisters. "And he told me to leave the country."

Shaken, Ortiz flew to the Ursuline motherhouse in Maple Mount, Kentucky. Some sisters hoped that she would stay in the United States, but Dianna was determined to return to San Miguel. She felt his was a call, and she couldn't turn her back on the call.

She returned to San Miguel where she received two more letters, more ominous in tone: "Eliminate Dianna, assassinate, decapitate, rape," the first one said. "The army knows you are here. Leave the country," the second warned. But Dianna insisted on staying. In her journal she asked God to immerse her more fully into the lives of the Guatemalan people.

Then on November 2, 1989, Sister Ortiz was abducted by military security forces and taken to a compound where she was gang raped, hung by a rope over rotting corpses being eaten by rats, and burned with cigarettes. Her torturers also forced her to hold a knife while they plunged it into the body of a female victim.

“According to Dianna's accounts …

“On the morning of November 2, two men abducted her from an enclosed garden at the retreat center and forced her to board a bus for a nearby town. There they took an unmarked police car driven by a uniformed policeman to the Antigua Escuela Politacnica, an old military academy in Guatemala City.

“In a dark room, the men questioned her, burning her with cigarettes however she answered. They asked her to identify 'subversives' in photographs, claiming she was among them. When she protested, her assailants knocked her to the ground, poured wine over her body, and took turns raping her.”

(Julia Lieblich. “Pieces of Bone.” Agni Literary Review. http://www.webdelsol.com/AGNI/asp98-jl.htm)

What happened next, Ortiz acknowledges, has been toughest for people to believe …

“Her assailants, she says, took her outside and lowered her into a pit filled with rats, decomposing bodies, and half-dead prisoners, their limbs flailing in pain. She passed out and awoke in a room where a female prisoner lay bruised and bloodied on a cot.

“An assailant then handed Dianna what she thought was a small machete or knife and, placing his hands on hers, forced her to thrust it into the other woman's chest.

“After 24 hours of torment, the men were about to begin raping her again when a tall, fair-skinned man, whom she had heard them refer to earlier as Alejandro, or 'the boss,' arrived. He ordered them to stop, saying that she was a North American nun and her disappearance had become public. He told her in unaccented English that the abduction had been a mistake and they had confused her with guerrilla leader Veronica Ortiz Hernandez. And he said that she should forgive them for what they had done. He told her he would take her to a friend at the nearby American embassy, who would help her leave the country. When his jeep stopped in traffic, however, she opened the door and fled and she eventually found sanctuary in the Vatican Headquarters.”

(Julia Lieblich. “Pieces of Bone.” Agni Literary Review. http://www.webdelsol.com/AGNI/asp98-jl.htm)

“The Boss” also said that they had tried to prevent this with the letters. Although "Alejandro" continued to speak in Spanish, he understood Sister Ortiz when she spoke in English, and he spoke Spanish with a North American accent. In Sister Ortiz's statements, she indicates that she believes that this man was from the United States.

Back in the United States, Sister Ortiz remained badly traumatized. She could not remember much about her past and was overwhelmed by feelings of shame, filth, fear, humiliation, and anger. Sleep-deprived and troubled by nightmares, she flinched in the presence of men in uniforms or anyone with a cigarette. Sister Ortiz decided to abort the fetus that resulted from the gang rapes, and this only intensified her feelings of 'contamination' in the presence of other nuns.

After returning to the U.S., Ortiz demanded answers about U.S. involvement in her kidnapping specifically and in Guatemala’s civil war generally. She began a hunger strike and vigil outside the White House, and her efforts eventually led to the release of classified documents about U.S. involvement in Guatemala.

Soon after Dianna's abduction, the documents show, the ambassador began questioning "the motives and timing behind [her] story." A debate on U.S. aid to Guatemala was scheduled in Congress-aid the Bush Administration strongly supported-and in a November 1989 cable to Secretary of State James Baker, the ambassador suggested that the abduction could have been "a hoax" to pressure the U.S. to cut off funding.

Guatemalan officials went further. Defense minister Hector Gramajo said that Dianna had invented the story to cover up her involvement in a violent "lesbian tryst," according to the 1996 Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. ABC News tracked the lesbian rumor to U.S. Embassy Human Rights Officer W. Lewis Amselem, who vehemently denied the charge.

The former U.S. Ambassador to Guatemala, Thomas Stroock said that he didn't place much stock in Gutierrez's conclusions because he "examined her after several months." In fact, Gutierrez's medical report was dated November 8, 1989, just six days after her abduction. (Dr. G.R. Gutierrez of Grants, New Mexico attested to "one-hundred-eleven second-degree circular burns approximately one cm. across" on the sister's back.)

One of the saddest dimensions of her difficult and arduous healing journey is the way in which she was often humiliated and betrayed by those closest to her who were supposed to serve her best interests: health care officials, lawyers, members of her religious community, and friends. Sister Ortiz had to steel herself against other formidable enemies as well, including Guatemalan officials who called her abduction a "self-kidnapping" and a "hoax."

Even worse, she was vilified and slandered by American officials as she spoke her mind against torture in a series of interviews, speeches, vigils, lawsuits, and investigations by six agencies. The search for those who kidnapped continues as does the stonewalling by governmental representatives. As a start, she has called for a declassification of U.S. government documents containing information on human rights abuses in Guatemala.

(Frederic and Mary Ann Brussat. Book review The Blindfold's Eyes: My Journey from Torture to Truth. https://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/)

Surprisingly few of the declassified State Department documents discuss Alejandro. A March 19, 1990 cable states: "We need to close the loop on the issue of the 'North American' named by Ortiz. . . . THE EMBASSY IS VERY SENSITIVE ON THIS ISSUE."

Officials would become even more sensitive as public support for Ortiz in the United States grew. Soon embassy officials were professing sympathy for the tortured nun.

And on April 10, 1990, in what looked like a dramatic turnaround, Stroock wrote the following to Ortiz's lawyer:

"I know, from my own personal observation, that she was seriously beaten and mistreated. She suffered a horrible, traumatic experience. As a fellow human being and the father of four daughters, I have suffered for her and prayed for her. No one in this Mission has any reason to disbelieve [her] sworn affidavit."

Still, Stroock went on voicing doubts about her story long after the abduction. "If you write a story that says it happened, you're liable to be in big trouble. There's not one shred of evidence to prove that it happened,” he said.

But the seriousness of her claims, and the suggestion of possible U.S. complicity in human rights abuses, demanded a more thorough look at the plausibility of her allegations.

Clearly the U.S. Embassy had its own agenda. But even some of her supporters admitted privately that they doubted Dianna's depiction of the pits, which sounded too fantastic to be believable, and wondered whether Dianna's torturers would force her to assist in the killing of another woman. Were there any precedents for such behavior? And in such a traumatized state, could any survivor be trusted to tell the truth?

(Julia Lieblich. “Pieces of Bone.” Agni Literary Review. http://www.webdelsol.com/AGNI/asp98-jl.htm)

Only after years of extensive therapy at the Marjorie Kovler Center in Chicago for survivors of torture did Ortiz start to recover, at which point she began to hunt down information about her case.

Sister Dianna Ortiz wrote the memoir, The Blindfold’s Eyes: My Journey From Torture to Truth, which was published in 2004. She went on to become a global champion for people subjected to torture, and her case would help compel the release of classified documents showing decades of US complicity in human rights abuses in Guatemala during its 36-year civil war, in which 200,000 civilians were killed. Sister Ortiz became the director of the Torture Abolition and Survivors Support Coalition International (TASSC) in Washington, D.C.

“Guatemala, a country where
hard-working men and women live
in harmony,
in those mountains and forests,
smiling like the flowers in the
gardens, just like the birds with their
songs in the mountains; but one day
they killed those human beings
without knowing what they had done
Why did they have to die this way?”

– Untitled. Ana Luisa Catalino (Mam), Stereo Acodim, Nampix Ixtahuacán, Huehuetenango