User:Darknipples/sandbox

test




template
1 Types

1.1 Self-directed violence 1.2 Collective violence 1.3 Warfare 1.4 Non-physical 1.5 Interpersonal violence 1.6 Targeted violence 1.7 Every day violence

2 Factors

2.1 Child-rearing 2.2 Psychology 2.3 Media

3 Prevention

3.1 Interpersonal violence 3.2 Collective violence 3.3 Criminal justice 3.4 Public health 3.5 Human rights 3.6 Geographical context

4 Epidemiology

4.1 Self-directed violence 4.2 Interpersonal violence 4.3 Collective violence

5 History

5.1 The Better Angels of Our Nature

6 Society and culture

6.1 Economic effects 6.2 Religion

GV
1 Gun ownership

1.1 Self-protection

2 Suicides involving firearms

3 Violent crime related to guns

3.1 Homicides 3.2 U.S. presidential assassinations and attempts 3.3 Other violent crime

4 Accidental gun injuries

5 Offenders

5.1 Vectors

6 Victims

7 Public policy

7.1 Access to firearms 7.2 Firearms market 7.3 Federal legislation 7.4 State legislation 7.4.1 Right-to-carry 7.4.2 Child Access Prevention (CAP) 7.5 Local restrictions

8 Prevention programs

8.1 Hotline 8.2 Gun safety parent counseling 8.3 Children 8.4 Community programs

9 Intervention programs

9.1 Gun buyback programs 9.2 Operation Ceasefire 9.3 Project Exile 9.4 Project Safe Neighborhoods 9.5 Americans for Responsible Solutions

10 Research limitations

just a comment
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Graeme_Bartlett#Just_a_comment

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Amanda_Rosenberg&action=edit&redlink=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGodsy&type=revision&diff=687022936&oldid=686836941 WP:REMOVED

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gun_show_loophole&type=revision&diff=686819782&oldid=686819109

Waco & OKC
p. 262 "The VPC study points out that both convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh as well as Branch Davidian leader David Koresh frequented gun shows and were able to stock-pile weapons by making such legalized purchases at gun shows. Opponents to gun show legislation point to a Justice Department study in which arrested persons were asked where they had obtained their guns." "Weapons owned by Branch Davidian leader David Koresh and Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh were traced to gun shows. And three of the four firearms used in the Columbine High School massacre were bought at a gun show."    "That redefinition of what it meant to be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms opened up what came to be known as the "gun show loophole," in which private sellers ultimately were able to circumvent paperwork and background-check requirements imposed on licensees."  "(The main reason for the growth in gun shows in the last decade and a half is that the Firearm Owners Protection Act provided for licensed firearms dealers to conduct business at gun shows in addition to selling from their storefronts.)"-''"The indictment of gun shows is as follows: Guns shows are a major source of criminal guns, a place where people deal firearms without a license, and a place where people buy illegal "assault weapons." Because gun shows are a "loophole" in the federal gun laws, gun shows allowed Timothy McVeigh and David Koresh to arm themselves. In truth, every one of the charges against gun shows is false."'' Darknipples (talk) 06:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

casual sale exception
http://www.nashvillescene.com/pitw/archives/2013/01/14/the-loophole-on-the-wide-open-secondary-gun-market

images
http://totalpict.com/florida%20law%20enforcers%20of%20alcohol

The Iron Pipeline
"These effects at the individual level, taken together, would interfere with the operation of criminal firearm markets and disrupt firearm trafficking operations. 74,76 It would likely become more difficult to move firearms in bulk along the Iron Pipeline from the Southeast to the Middle Atlantic and New England, from Mississippi to the upper Midwest, and from the United States to Mexico and Canada." (page 34) http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/vprp/CBC%20White%20Paper%20Final%20Report%20022013.pdf

http://216.92.216.199/index.php/new_york_city/entry/iron_pipeline_i_95

Section D "Conclusion" page 7 http://leg2.state.va.us/dls/h&sdocs.nsf/fc86c2b17a1cf388852570f9006f1299/60ab93d32c1eeac0852562b7007995a7/$FILE/HD28_1996.pdf

Up the 'iron pipeline' DiDonato said the case against the three men is all too common. McFadden and Pickett allegedly used relatives and friends to legally buy weapons in South Carolina. Those guns would then be driven up the "iron pipeline" - a stretch of Interstate 95 - and sold for five times their cost in tough Brooklyn neighborhoods. http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/final-bust-officer-slain-s-arrest-3-gun-probe-article-1.517624

" The fatal shootings of two city cops at the end of 2005 prompted stiffer state gun laws: Now illegal possession of three guns is a felony drawing two to seven years in prison. Previously, possession of up to 20 guns was a misdemeanor with a one-year sentence. The deaths have also spurred an outcry from political officials to stanch the so-called Iron Pipeline of guns. But every day, federal agents and cops quietly go about intercepting illegal guns. The Joint Firearms Task Force was formed in 1990 when recovered crime guns numbered 20,000, flooding in from southern states to outfit crack gangs. William McMahon, special agent in charge of the ATF's New York office, said now the number of crime guns recovered is under 6,000, meaning fewer guns are getting in. http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/battling-merchants-death-city-streets-deadly-game-cat-mouse-cops-hunt-illegal-guns-coming-state-article-1.641184

FLUDD IS FAR from the only trafficker to use the “iron pipeline,” as prosecutors sometimes call the I-95 corridor. http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2006/05/boston-magazine-the-ways-of-the-gun/

It’s called the Iron Pipeline. Interstate 95 and its connector highways earned that nickname as the favored route of gun smugglers who bring inexpensively purchased firearms from East Coast states with lax gun-control laws into strict states like New Jersey. http://www.northjersey.com/news/smugglers-flood-n-j-with-guns-1.922581

“We need a comprehensive federal policy about guns in all aspects because 90% if the guns we confiscate in NYC come from out of state. We call it the Iron Pipeline, up I-95 coming from southern states to a great extent.” Raymond Kelley NYC Police Commissioner. He went on to point out that the states that provided the most weapons were (in order) Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Florida, Ohio, Alabama, Texas and West Virginia. Their ultra liberal gun laws allow for a flood of weapons into cities across the country. For that reason Commissioner Kelly said “We need a new comprehensive federal policy about gun in all aspects of it……..until we do that we will have an ineffective patchwork approach.” http://blog.timesunion.com/guns/the-iron-pipeline-of-illegal-guns/2295/

"The largest gun seizure in NYC history". For years, Bloomberg and NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly have decried what is known in law-enforcement circles as the "iron pipeline" - a gun smuggling route on the U.S. East Coast, moving guns from states with more lax firearms laws, such as those in North Carolina and South Carolina, up to New York and other Northeast states, where black-market guns fetch at least three times their retail price. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/8/19/nyc-authorities-seizeillegalgunssmuggledfromcarolinasironpipelin.html

In a state like New York, with some of the toughest gun laws in the country, guns might come through the so-called iron pipeline, in which guns are bought in states with lax gun laws — often in the South — and taken North to sell at inflated prices. In 2013, New York City authorities seized more than 250 guns and arrested 19 people involved in a gun smuggling ring from North and South Carolina, the largest gun bust in history. http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/12/22/illegal-guns-brinsley.html

As good as the NYPD is at tracking illegal weapons, it’s impossible to catch everyone. The stark reality is that 90% of all crime-related guns recovered in New York City come from out of state. The illegal firearms that flow north on the so-called Iron Pipeline from states like Georgia with lax gun laws routinely end up in the hands of criminals here — all too often, with deadly results. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/death-rides-iron-pipeline-article-1.1801004

Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced last week that 90 percent of the guns used to commit crimes were purchased in other states, according to the latest data from 2011, compared with 85 percent in 2009. This “iron pipeline,” as this illegal trade is called, is a booming and deadly business. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/07/opinion/the-iron-pipeline-thrives.html

Man pleads guilty in Rock Hill-to-New York City ‘Iron Pipeline’ case: A Rock Hill man charged in connection with what police call the largest seizure of illegal guns in New York City’s history has pleaded guilty in the “Iron Pipeline” scheme that resulted in 19 arrests in South Carolina and North Carolina. http://www.heraldonline.com/2015/01/14/6703748_man-pleads-guilty-in-rock-hill.html?rh=1

"Somebody coined I-95 'the iron pipeline,' " said Mike Campbell, a spokesman for the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which released the report yesterday. "There's a lot of traffic moving up and down 95." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/20/AR2007082002010.html

New York and the data collection centers of the six primary states for illegal weapons to New York - Virginia, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina - could mobilize and form an interstate gun trafficking pact. This "I-95 Compact," named for the interstate we all share and shamefully dubbed the Iron Pipeline, would exchange uniform gun data that are collected at each participating state's data center. http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/states-unite-put-illegal-gun-trafficking-article-1.331489

Incidents
| posted oct - resolved jan 29th

posted jan 24 - resolved jan 26th


 * 2.14.15 (What ifs)

Hi, Scalhotrod. I'm here because of the notations in these two diffs &. Please clarify what you mean by them. Thanks. Darknipples (talk) 00:04, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

4.13.15 user name issue - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AUsernames_for_administrator_attention&diff=656224842&oldid=656224027

The lead section
The lead section may contain optional elements presented in the following order:
 * 1) Disambiguation links (dablinks)
 * 2) Deletion tags (CSD, PROD, and AFD notices)
 * 3) Maintenance tags
 * 4) Infoboxes
 * 5) Foreign character warning boxes
 * 6) Images
 * 7) Navigational boxes (navigational templates)
 * 8) Introductory text
 * 9) Table of contents moving to the heading of the first section

(pages 95-96-97) With regard to private sellers, the secondary market, and FOPA - "The secondary market consists of transfers by unlicensed private parties such as the individual attendees at gun shows (Cook, Molliconi, and Cole 1995 et al. 2002)" - "Even if the purchaser is a prohibited person, let alone a non-prohibited person with criminal intent, a private party may sell him a firearm without committing a crime. The key is that while it is always illegal for a prohibited person to buy a firearm, it is only illegal to sell a firearm to a prohibited person if the seller knows or has “reasonable cause to believe” that he is doing so (U.S. Code) How did this come to pass? The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act apply only to those who are “engaged in a business” of selling firearms. Any clear understanding of what “engaged in a business” might mean was abolished by the 1986 Firearm Owners’ per style sheet Protection Act (U.S. Code). FOPA specifically excluded from the scope of engagement in a the business a person who makes “occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms” (U.S. Code). The practical result was to make it much more difficult to set an upper limit to the number of firearms sales that an individual could make without being required to have a license and comply with the safeguards described above (Braga and Kennedy 2000, Wintermute 2007, 2009b). ATF summarized the situation this way in a 1999 study of gun shows: “Unfortunately, the effect of the 1986 amendments has often been to frustrate the prosecution of unlicensed dealers masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons” (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 1999b" http://books.google.com/books?id=sQxNVhV-W7oC&lpg=PA95&ots=M-5qgFGSgC&dq=%22gun%20show%20loophole%22&lr&pg=PA95#v=onepage&q&f=false

GSL Definition
Encyclopedic definition: https://books.google.com/books?id=aiQ09D7nWxYC&pg=PA810&lpg=PA810&dq=encyclopedia+gun+show+loophole&source=bl&ots=95qQxphFF3&sig=ZAdDjirhglcy6bYVd5eX5A-8_us&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hU-4VMqKL5GNgwT15IJg&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=encyclopedia%20gun%20show%20loophole&f=false

Political definition (quotes): http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-1838600015.html

SS commentary
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southern_strategy&diff=602065270&oldid=594282500

Sorry, as we discussed at the other article, it's clear there are a number of scholars who do not buy into the earlier theory that the south went to the GOP because GOP candidates appealed to some sort of inner racist that southerners happen to have.

Claiming that this is some sort of FRINGE view is something that you need to prove.

To counter your claim we have several scholars who have put forth the bottom up narrative with evidence (Lassiter, Shafer, Johnston). We have Glen Feldman saying this is a narrative which (as of about 10 years ago) was gaining traction among scholars.

You simply don't make a compelling case that this is a fringe view as opposed to one that is newer thus not as well known.

If you think it is really a fringe POV (say held by less than 2%, 5%? of serious scholars) vs a significant minority POV (up to 49%) then I think the burden is on you to prove it.

I suspect Rjensen is the only one here who is actually a published historian. I would be interested to know his opinion on your view this is a fringe matter.

The simple fact that we need to debate this point should be obvious justification for removal from the lead of the GOP article.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.844.6647&rep=rep1&type=pdf

https://addletonacademicpublishers.com/search-in-ghir/2738-the-new-southern-strategy-immigration-race-and-welfare-dependency-in-contemporary-us-republican-political-discourse

p39 https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/9780472099672-ch2.pdf

https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9185&context=etd

https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1511&context=faculty_articles;The

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/emerging-republican-majority/595504/

https://newrepublic.com/article/130039/southern-strategy-made-donald-trump-possible

https://www.statehousereport.com/2018/09/07/news-southern-strategy-now-50/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/a-grand-bargain-that-secured-the-south-for-the-gop/2019/08/16/64166948-976a-11e9-830a-21b9b36b64ad_story.html

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/kuziemko/files/south_dems_5sept2016.pdf

https://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190265960.001.0001/oso-9780190265960-chapter-2

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/books/long-southern-strategy-how-chasing-white-voters-south-changed-american-politics-angie-maxwell

https://www.jstor.org/stable/4129605?seq=1

https://journals.openedition.org/miranda/2243

http://inside.sfuhs.org/dept/history/US_History_reader/Chapter14/southernstrat2.htm

https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt130hp7d

https://pennstate.pure.elsevier.com/en/publications/neoliberal-racism-the-southern-strategy-and-the-expanding-geograp

https://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/35645/what-is-the-evidence-for-a-top-down-southern-strategy

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=oKMeBgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=southern+strategy+evidence&ots=I05eqDOcaf&sig=NcUEaVhocH8zSWX1UShwrTVr0ug#v=onepage&q=southern%20strategy%20evidence&f=false

https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark%3A/67531/metadc5264/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.pdf

https://www.newspapers.com/clip/18000851/southern_strategy/

https://fulbright.uark.edu/departments/political-science/directory/index/uid/amax/name/Angie+Maxwell/

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-policy-history/article/nixons-southern-strategy-revisited/700408B092EAAF23A4980969E1E40CE0

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1964/10/03/the-campaign-goldwater

https://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=pa

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2520634##

May 2023
"The Republican Party is a huge big topic." 04:47, 11 March 2024 "The Republicans is such a huge big topic 13:58, 15 March 2024 "No need to reprint what I just wrote. I am not a Democratic Party leader who has difficulty with short term memory. 05:09, 18 March 2024 "the Republican Party is a huge big topic" 05:20, 18 March 2024

That's subjective.

the long SS

Toward a modern SS

Political Tropes and Institutionalized Racism

SL Williams dissertation

Kuziemko Washington Princeton American economic policy review

Valentino Sears JSTOR

THE CENTRALITY OF RACE IN AMERICAN POLITICS

DN (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

AP News GOP echoes racial code of Nixon’s 1968 campaign

UALR:The Racist Roots of the War on Drugs and the Myth of Equal Protection for People of Color In addition, the War on Drugs dovetailed with the “Southern Strategy.” 68 Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” sought to attract “white southerners away from the Democratic Party” through exploitation of “fear of black power” and hostility toward “the civil rights movement.” 69 The Southern Strategy successfully “transformed the GOP’s image” from the “country-club” set to “defender of working[-class] whites.” 70 Nixon and his advisors developed a GOP electoral strategy that still operates today. 71 Three GOP Chairs ultimately admitted that their party pursued the Southern Strategy. 72 Fundamentally, the Southern Strategy and the WOD exploited civil rights fatigue and took aim at Nixon’s enemies: African Americans and youth war protesters.73 The Southern Strategy sought to pit rural white Americans against black and brown Americans politically by painting communities of color and anti-war protesters as criminals, drug-addicted, and receivers of government largesse (i.e. welfare), all at the expense and exclusion of rural whites. While President Nixon declared his racist War on Drugs, despite scientific evidence contravening his claims, it was Ronald Reagan who took the racist torch and set fire to communities of color by federalizing, militarizing, and internationalizing the drug war. (p.465)

GSL title not in content
http://swampland.time.com/2013/01/31/understanding-the-nra-skittishness-over-the-gun-show-loophole/

Environmentalist activism
http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/know/read.php?itemid=9314

student activism
http://www.collegiatetimes.com/news/article_4a1d5964-f6dc-5265-a073-8cfc891e92f0.html

http://dailycollegian.com/2010/02/16/how-a-umass-student-bought-a-gun-without-i-d/

Legislation
S. 443 feb 23rd 1999 The gun show safety and accountability ACT http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-1999-01-07/html/CREC-1999-01-07-pt1-PgE49.htm

S. 767 Apr 24, 2001 Gun Show Background Check Act of 2001 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/s767

S. 890 MAY 15, 2001 gun show loophole closing and Gun Law Enforcement Act of 2001 http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-107s890is/pdf/BILLS-107s890is.pdf Consumer fed of america Top Ten Reasons Why the McCain-Lieberman Gun Show Bill Would Open More Loopholes Than it Would Close http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/top_ten_reasons.pdf

http://books.google.com/books?id=dpzN711aYlQC&pg=PA126&lpg=PA126&dq=FOPA+created+gun+show+loophole+in+Gun+Control+Act&source=bl&ots=asFcrUtwKM&sig=_UK-qSC7Wco2r_uVcOxBJwmDjTA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FFG3U9qpENiYqAb3yYDwDQ&ved=0CHoQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=FOPA%20created%20gun%20show%20loophole%20in%20Gun%20Control%20Act&f=false Can Gun Control Work? By James B. Jacobs Warren E. Burger Professor of Law and Director of the Center for Research in Crime and Justice New York University (FOPA)

In November 1998, President Clinton directed the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General to make recommendations responding to the reports that criminals and other prohibited persons could obtain firearms at gun shows without Brady Law background checks. Under current law, large numbers of firearms are sold anonymously at the more than 4,000 gun shows held each year. Most sellers at gun shows do not seek background checks on purchasers to find out if the buyer is a felon or otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm. In January 1999, the Departments of the Treasury and Justice responded with a report describing the gaps in current law and recommending by extending the Brady Law to "close the gun show loophole.

Congressional record May 2000 "We have a Gun Show Loophole" www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&sqi=2&ved=0CGEQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newyorker.com%2Freporting%2F2012%2F04%2F23%2F120423fa_fact_lepore%3FcurrentPage%3Dall&ei=SIeuU9WnFYWfqAbL6oDgDg&usg=AFQjCNEHOA5B1bvO0BIiecUWFminvVT5UQ&sig2=4XFSunfM52Y-e3ZGApCKiA&bvm=bv.69837884,d.b2k

http://library.jmls.edu/pdf/ir/lr/jmlr38/37_38JMarshallLRev955%282004-2005%29.pdf

S. 49 and H.R. 945 define 'engaged in the business' in terms of 'the principal objective of livelihood and profit' whose underlying intent is 'predominantly one of obtaining livelihood and pecuniary gain' (emphasis added) (S. 49, sec. 101(b), pages 3-5) and 102(1); H.R. 945, sec. 101(6)). This definition, which does not follow the case law, is likely to have a serious weakening effect on the GCA. Current law permits ordinary firearms owners to sell their firearms but not to 'engage in the business' of selling firearms without a license. These provisions expand the number of persons who can engage in firearms transactions or importation without needing a license or having to comply with the record keeping requirements of the law. This definition has loopholes for a person, believing the public ought to be armed for self-protection, who sells large volumes of firearms at no markup or a price which does not make a profit, who would not be 'engaged in the business.' Unfortunately, this new definition does not solve the ambiguity that confronts an active collector. http://armsandthelaw.com/gunlaw/FOPA/house_report.html

https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/Library/Forms/Firearms/atf-f-5310-12.pdf

"Generally speaking, as one would expect, felons are prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms. However, there are two gaping loopholes. I call them the guns for felons loopholes." - Senator LAUTENBERG (page 2.) May 5th 1992 SAFE ACT Hearing https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/149070NCJRS.pdf

https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F3/403/403.F3d.1263.04-11658.html

BATF rogue agency http://firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=629:1979-batf-senate-oversight-hearings&catid=54:fopa

FOOTNOTES - The Government suggests that this creates a loophole which is not consistent with congressional intent in enacting FOPA. The Court disagrees. It was the express intent of Congress to give effect to state reforms with respect to the status of an ex-convict. U.S. v. Cassidy, 899 F.2d 543, 549 (6th Cir.1990). Moreover, Congress clearly anticipated this so-called loophole. The legislative history suggests that Senator Durenberger urged delaying the effective date of FOPA in order to allow states to reexamine their civil rights restoration laws and state statutes regulating possession of firearms by convicted felons. He stated that, in states where civil rights are automatically restored, "under the new federal law, it will no longer be a violation ... for ... a[n] [individual] convicted of a felony to possess a firearm...." See, Cassidy, 899 F.2d at 548-549. http://www.leagle.com/decision/19921110784FSupp326_11071.xml/U.S.%20v.%20STUMP

FOPA FFL
http://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0213.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Shift_to_politics

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-03-10/opinion/ct-perspec-0310-guns-20130310_1_gun-show-big-clips-array-of-gun-legislation

http://conservativeread.com/how-the-nra-became-atfs-biggest-enemy/

http://www.cfr.org/society-and-culture/us-gun-policy-global-comparisons/p29735

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-targets-gun-shows.html

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot0213.htm

http://www.governing.com/gov-data/safety-justice/gun-show-firearms-bankground-checks-state-laws-map.html

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/gun-policy/

http://humanevents.com/2013/07/07/gun-rights-activists-split-on-gun-show-loophole/

http://www.ncpa.org/media/sheriff-bailey-chief-monroe-close-gun-show-loophole

http://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1360&context=lclr Darknipples (talk) 22:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

http://books.google.com/books?id=dpzN711aYlQC&pg=PA126&dq=gun+show+loophole&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ivm6U6L3JcK2yASNu4DIDQ&ved=0CBsQ6AEwADgU#v=onepage&q=gun%20show%20loophole&f=false Darknipples (talk) 00:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

(pages 95-96-97) (With regard to gun show loophole, private sellers, the secondary market, and FOPA) - "The secondary market consists of transfers by unlicensed private parties such as the individual attendees at gun shows (Cook, Molliconi, and Cole 1995 et al. 2002)" - "Even if the purchaser is a prohibited person, let alone a non-prohibited person with criminal intent, a private party may sell him a firearm without committing a crime. The key is that while it is always illegal for a prohibited person to buy a firearm, it is only illegal to sell a firearm to a prohibited person if the seller knows or has “reasonable cause to believe” that he is doing so (U.S. Code) How did this come to pass? The provisions of the federal Gun Control Act apply only to those who are “engaged in a business” of selling firearms. Any clear understanding of what “engaged in a business” might mean was abolished by the 1986 Firearm Owners’ per style sheet Protection Act (U.S. Code). FOPA specifically excluded from the scope of engagement in a the business a person who makes “occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms” (U.S. Code). The practical result was to make it much more difficult to set an upper limit to the number of firearms sales that an individual could make without being required to have a license and comply with the safeguards described above (Braga and Kennedy 2000, Wintermute 2007, 2009b). ATF summarized the situation this way in a 1999 study of gun shows: “Unfortunately, the effect of the 1986 amendments has often been to frustrate the prosecution of unlicensed dealers masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons” (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms 1999b" http://books.google.com/books?id=sQxNVhV-W7oC&lpg=PA95&ots=M-5qgFGSgC&dq=%22gun%20show%20loophole%22&lr&pg=PA95#v=onepage&q&f=false

UNITED STATES CODE CONGRESSIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE NEWS - 99th Congress-Second Session 1986 Volume 4 - legislative history - public laws 99-272 Cont’d to 99-449 (page 11) - "Determining Who Needs A License" – A feature with major impact is the change in defining who is required to obtain a license as a dealer, manufacturer or importer. This is an area that has many who use firearms very upset. Persons who are “engaged in the business” of manufacturing, importing, or buying and selling firearms are required to obtain a license. S. 49 and H.R. 945 define “engaged in the business” in terms of “the principal objective of livelihood and profit” whose underlying intent is “predominantly one of obtaining a livelihood and pecuniary gain” (emphasis added) (S. 49, sec. 101(6), pages 3-5) and 102(1); H.R. 945, sec. 101(6)). This definition, which does not follow the case law, is likely to have a serious weakening effect on GCA. Current law permits ordinary firearms owners to sell their firearms but not to “engage in the business” of selling firearms without a license. These provisions expand the number of persons who can engage in firearms transaction or importation without needing a license or having to comply with the record keeping requirements of the law. THIS DEFINITION HAS LOOPHOLES for a person, believing the public ought to be armed for self-protection, who sells large volumes of firearms at no markup price which does not make a profit, who would not be “engaged in the business.” Unfortunately, this new definition does not solve the AMBIGUITY that confronts an active collector. http://harrislawoffice.com/content/areas_of_practice/federal_firearms/legislative_history/FOPA%20House%20Report%2099-495.pdf

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/23/120423fa_fact_lepore?currentPage=all

http://armsandthelaw.com/gunlaw/FOPA/house_floor_debates.html

In 1993, ATF estimated that 46% of all FFLs conducted no business at all, but used their licenses to buy and sell firearms in violation of state and local zoning or tax laws.

ATF has found that FFLs who violate federal laws are a major source of trafficked firearms. In June of 2000, ATF issued a comprehensive report of firearms trafficking in this country. That report analyzed 1,530 trafficking investigations during the period July 1996 through December 1998, involving more than 84,000 diverted firearms.31 ATF found that FFLs were associated with the largest number of trafficked guns – over 40,000 – and concluded that “FFLs’ access to large numbers of firearms makes them a particular threat to public safety when they fail to comply with the law.”32 Random inspections by ATF have uncovered that a large percentage of FFLs do violate federal law and that this percentage is growing

Finally, according to a 1998 ATF random sample of FFLs nationwide, 56% of all dealers operated out of their homes.34 Of the remaining 44%, 25% operated out of commercial premises that were gun shops or sporting goods or hardware stores.35 The rest of the dealers were located in businesses that are not usually associated with gun sales, such as funeral homes or auto parts stores http://smartgunlaws.org/federal-law-on-dealer-regulations/

The most dangerous gap in federal firearms laws today is the “private sale” loophole. Although federal law requires licensed firearms dealers to perform background checks on prospective purchasers and maintain records of all gun sales, it does not require unlicensed “private” sellers to do so. An estimated 40% of all firearms sold in the U.S. are transferred by unlicensed sellers

According the U.S. Department of Justice, because federal law does not require universal background checks, “individuals prohibited by law from possessing guns can easily obtain them from private sellers and do so without any federal records of the transactions.”2 “The private-party gun market,” one study observed, “has long been recognized as a leading source of guns used in crimes.”3  Although the private sale loophole is frequently referred to as the “gun show” loophole (because of the particular problems associated with gun shows), it applies to all private firearm sales, regardless of where they occur. http://smartgunlaws.org/universal-gun-background-checks-policy-summary/

UBC Closing GSL
http://ylpr.yale.edu/inter_alia/restricted-firearms-license-proposal-preserve-second-amendment-rights-and-reduce-gun

http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/14/us/universal-background-checks/

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/118286/facts-about-gun-control-and-universal-background-checks

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/10/17689167-background-checks-for-guns-what-you-need-to-know?lite

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/polling-may-presidents-call-to-strengthen-background-checks-on-gun-sales/

Richard Feldman, a former NRA lobbyist and president of a gun-rights group called the Independent Firearm Owners Association, insists that the gun show loophole could be closed at little cost by requiring show operators — rather than individual dealers — to conduct NICS checks on all gun sales. http://www.publicintegrity.org/2013/02/11/12155/current-gun-debate-may-not-help-beleaguered-atf

The College supports requiring criminal background checks for all firearm purchases, including sales by gun dealers, sales at gun shows, and private sales. The “gun show loophole” should be closed to ensure that prohibited purchasers, such as felons, persons involuntarily committed for mental illness or otherwise “adjudicated mentally defective,” and others prohibited from owning firearms cannot make purchases. Such a system will only be successful if records are complete and submitted in a timely manner.

In 2010, according to the FBI and state officials (66), more than 14 million persons submitted to a background check to purchase or transfer possession of a firearm and 153 000 persons were denied purchase. However, in the United States, it is estimated that up to 40% of gun transfers take place without a licensed dealer, including online and at gun shows. From that calculation, it can be estimated that 6.6 million guns were sold to a buyer with no background check (67).

Evidence suggests that states with laws to address the gun show background check loophole export fewer guns later used in crime. States with laws limiting or eliminating the gun show loophole have an average export rate (controlled for population) of 7.5 crime guns per 100 000 inhabitants. In contrast, 34 states that do not require background checks for all handgun sales at gun shows have an average export rate of 19.8 crime guns per 100 000 inhabitants (68). http://annals.org/article.aspx?doi=10.7326/M14-0216&an_fo_ed

)

Media Coverage
NRA flip flop http://mediamatters.org/research/2013/01/31/major-newspapers-overlook-nra-leaders-flip-flop/192472

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/20/us/politics/other-proposals-taking-precedence-in-congress-over-gun-ban.html?_r=0

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/26/nation/la-na-gunshow-loophole-20130226

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-study-finds-vast-online-marketplace-for-guns-without-background-checks/2013/08/05/19809198-fd73-11e2-9711-3708310f6f4d_story.html

Controversy
http://csgv.org/issues/universal-background-checks/gun-show-loophole-faq/

James Holmes, the man charged with gunning down a dozen people in a Colorado movie theater, was able to buy 6,000 rounds of ammunition over the Internet in a relatively short period of time. No questions asked. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0730/Colorado-shooting-If-not-gun-control-then-bullet-control-lawmakers-say/%28page%29/2

http://www.asianweek.com/2000/10/12/the-oregon-gun-show-controversy/

http://www.thefogofpolicy.com/specialfeature/special-feature-the-truth-and-doubts-about-gun-control/

Court Rulings
http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/06/supreme-court-affirms-narrow-reading-of-gun-straw-purchase-rules/

Straw Purchase
On May 19, 1998, Hank Earl Carr, 30, killed his girlfriend's 4-year-old son with a rifle shot to the head. Before the day was done, he would also shoot to death two Tampa detectives who tried to arrest him, Rick Childers and Randy Bell, and a Florida Highway Patrol trooper, James Crooks. He ended by taking his own life.

Carr had done prison time on charges including assault, burglary and violently resisting police, and was barred under federal law from owning guns. However, police determined through weapons traces that he bought many guns through private sales. http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/gun-show-loophole-laws-on-the-books-in-florida-but-ignored/2113376

It is called the gun show "loophole" and as it exists, anyone can buy a gun from a private dealer without a background check. http://abcnews.go.com/WN/gun-show-loophole-closed/story?id=10404727

Sources and Citations
2008 - (PDF) Starting at the bottom of page 34 - Titled: Gun Shows and Private Firearm Sales. To some, this may appear to be an incongruity in the law. Why, they ask, should licensees be required to conduct background checks at gun shows, and not nonlicensees? To others, opposed to further federal regulation of firearms, it may appear to be a continuance of the status quo (i.e., non-interference by the federal government into private firearm transfers within state lines). On the other hand, those seeking to increase federal regulation of firearms may view the absence of background checks for firearm transfers between nonlicensed/private persons as a “loophole” in the law that needs to be closed. A possible issue for Congress is whether federal regulation of firearms should be expanded to include private firearm transfers at gun shows and other similar venues. http://file.wikileaks.org/file/crs/RL32842.pdf - Darknipples (talk) 17:39, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

1999 - http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Work/051499.html

2001 - http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0430/p8s2.html

2013 - http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/08/blocked_by_congress_on_ending.html

[House Hearing, 110 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Printing Office] HEARING before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC POLICY of the COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM - "LETHAL LOOPHOLES; DEFICIENCIES IN STATE AND FEDERAL GUN PURCHASE LAWS" - "Even if this reporting improves, there remains the gun show loophole. The Brady Act's instant background check only applies to Federal-licensed firearm dealers and not to private sales, including sales by unlicensed dealers at gun shows. These private sales are largely unregulated and many guns involved in firearm violence have been traced to gun show sales. Instant background checks are not the only avenue to enforce gun control and the Brady Act." http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-110hhrg35771/html/CHRG-110hhrg35771.htm

2013 "Unlicensed Dealer"? p. 591 - http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7451&context=jclc -- Darknipples (talk) 04:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

1990 - http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/16/us/us-company-eluding-assault-rifle-import-ban.html

(baltimoresun.com - 1991-09-15)| Gun law loophole lets some felons get firearms - "Many of the criminals on the list were convicted of non-violent offenses -- tax evasion, forgery, even moonshining. But the total also includes an untold number of violent felons, most of whom only became eligible to own guns as a result of a little-noticed clause in a 1986 law backed by the National Rifle Association." "But criminals who had used a firearm in the commission of a felony were not allowed to apply for exemptions until Congress undertook a broad rewrite of gun control laws in 1986." -- Darknipples (talk) 06:59, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

| "Gun Law Loophole" - 1993 LA Times - Darknipples (talk) 22:07, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

1993 loophole at gun show - http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-03-31/news/1993090070_1_gun-lobby-buy-guns-gun-shows

1993 Gun Sale Loophole - http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-03-24/news/1993083193_1_gun-dealers-loophole-gun-shows

1992 Stop arming felons Act - FOPA LOOPHOLES - http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000021244889;view=1up;seq=42

2010 quaker lobby columbine - http://fcnl.org/issues/gunviolence/close_the_gun_show_loophole/

controversial provisions - http://library.cqpress.com/cqalmanac/document.php?id=cqal86-1149712

1989 - http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1989/Bar-Association-President-Calls-For-Waiting-Period-For-Gun-Purchases/id-6945aedffca99ae56e662685a3fa799d

1990 - http://www.nytimes.com/1990/09/16/us/us-company-eluding-assault-rifle-import-ban.html

1992 - http://www.tulsaworld.com/archives/loophole-in-gun-law-allows-felons-to-own-firearms/article_9d34af7f-b62e-5b38-96bc-ef614dac5a1f.html

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/gun-show-loophole-closed/story?id=10404727 - Gun Show Loophole Still Not Closed

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20100121/the-war-on-gun-shows - First, FOPA allowed federally licensed firearm dealers to do business at gun shows. (Until then, a dealer could only operate at the address on his license.) Second, FOPA ended abusive prosecutions of gun collectors by making clear a person does not need a license to occasionally sell firearms to reduce or improve a personal gun collection. And third, FOPA eliminated the GCA`s record-keeping requirement on sales of handgun ammunition. (For more on that issue, see p. 50.) During the Clinton administration, however, two developments gave gun control supporters new hope of reducing gun sales.

First, the 1993 Brady bill increased dealer licensing fees significantly. Second, and more important, the 1994 Clinton crime bill included language that let the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms deny license renewals on the basis of local zoning ordinances. As a result of that and other Clinton administration policies, the number of FFLs in the country was reduced by 75 percent within just a few years.

Once again, though, things didn`t go the way anti-gunners hoped. Gun sales actually increased at a faster pace than the increase in the U.S. population. And as gun control supporters are sorely aware, the nation`s thousands of gun shows each year are among the main reasons for that trend.

That`s why, in the 1990s, anti-gun groups and politicians began claiming a so-called "gun show loophole" gives criminals "easy access" to guns by letting people other than dealers sell guns at shows without running their transactions through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS).

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/10/17689167-background-checks-for-guns-what-you-need-to-know - What kinds of gun purchases don’t require background checks under current law? That depends on where you live. In the wake of the Newtown school shooting, President Obama asked for a federal law that would require universal background checks, including at gun shows. Right now, only California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island require background checks at gun shows, according to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. But most states have looser restrictions. While local laws can vary widely, 33 states do not have a law addressing what is commonly referred to as the “gun show loophole.” Similarly, regulations on sales between private parties or transfers between family members can be very different from state to state, where they exist at all.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E8B58EA3-FBD7-401D-8710-6345674882CC Closing gun show loophole is right way to go

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/faq/licensees-records-required.html#variance-responsibility Q: May a licensee who has firearms in his or her private collection sell any of these firearms without making firearms record entries?

A licensee may sell a firearm from his or her personal collection, subject only to the restrictions on firearm sales by unlicensed persons, provided the firearm was entered in the licenseeâs bound book and then transferred to the licenseeâs private collection at least 1 year prior to the sale. When the personal firearm is sold, the sale must be recorded in a “bound book” for dispositions of personal firearms, but no ATF Form 4473 is required. [27 CFR 478.125a]

http://www.thefogofpolicy.com/specialfeature/special-feature-the-truth-and-doubts-about-gun-control/ What about the infamous gun-show loophole? That’s a tougher nut to crack. The truth is that the evidence regarding the origin of illegal firearms is almost as bad as the data on illegal gun prevalence. Survey data, and the same price argument made above, seem to indicate that gunshows are also a small part of the story – though it’s hard to say much with confidence. What is clear is that, in most states, gunshows provide an easy opportunity for a determined person, who is disqualified from owning a firearm, to purchase one. Whether that actually translates into easier gun availability for dangerous criminals is something we simply don’t know.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/guns-background-checks-do-they-work-86755_Page3.html

Loyola consumer law review 2000 Arrested! How gun control issues have placed a halt on juvenile justice reform - http://lawecommons.luc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1360&context=lclr

"We have eliminated a number of sources for crime guns but loopholes still exist which allow criminals to "lie and buy." We need to institute a national one-gun-a-month law to reduce gun trafficking to criminals even further. We need to close the gun show loophole which allows so-called "private collectors" at gun shows to sell their wares to anyone without doing a criminal background check.http://www.commondreams.org/pressreleases/jan99/010499a.htm

President Clinton announced today that he had ordered the Treasury and Justice Departments to recommend ways to stop gun shows from exploiting a loophole in the Brady gun control law.http://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/08/us/clinton-calls-for-closing-big-loophole-in-gun-law.html

Page 104 http://jhupress.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/1421411113_updf.pdf

The reality is that closing the gun-show loophole and expanding a simple system that works will respect, not encroach, on our Second Amendment rights. Ninety-one percent of background checks are completed instantaneously and records are kept by the folks who run them, not by the government. And we’re not looking to limit private transfers — proposed legislation should and will take into account transfers between family members, for example, and the needs of citizens in rural locations. http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=E8B58EA3-FBD7-401D-8710-6345674882CC

http://www.nyc.gov/html/om/pdf/2009/pr442-09_report.pdf (page 11)

"On November 6, 1998, President Clinton determined that all gun show vendors should have access to the same information about firearms purchasers. He directed the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General to close the gun show loophole. President Clinton was particularly concerned that felons and illegal firearms traffickers could use gun shows to buy large quantities of weapons without ever disclosing their identities, having their backgrounds checked, or having any other records maintained on their purchases." -

"The gun show loophole results both from the existing legal framework governing firearms transactions and the limits on the application of existing laws to gun shows. Gun shows themselves are not subject to Federal regulation. Instead, only transfers by FFLs at gun shows are regulated. Few limitations apply to sales by non-licensees at gun shows or elsewhere."

"United States Attorneys offered a wide range of proposals to address the gun show loophole. These include the following: (1) allowing only FFLs to sell guns at gun shows so that a background check and a firearms transaction record accompany every transaction; (2) strengthening the definition of “engaged in the business” by defining the terms with more precision, narrowing the exception for “hobbyists,” and lowering the intent requirement; (3) limiting the number of private sales permitted by an individual to a specified number per year; (4) requiring persons who sell guns in the secondary market to comply with the recordkeeping requirements that are applicable to FFLs; (5) requiring all transfers in the secondary market to go through an FFL; (6) establishing procedures for the orderly liquidation of inventory belonging to FFLs who surrender their license;(7) requiring registration of nonlicensed persons who sell guns; (8) increasing the punishment for transferring a firearm without a background check as required by the Brady Act; (9) requiring the gun show promoters to be licensed and maintain an inventory of all the firearms that are sold by FFLs and non-FFLs at a gun show;(10) requiring that one or more ATF agents be present at every gun show; and (11) insulating unlicensed vendors from criminal liability if they agree to have purchasers complete a firearms transaction form." https://www.atf.gov/files/publications/download/treas/treas-gun-shows-brady-checks-and-crime-gun-traces.pdf

Private sale loophole - Requiring background checks for private-party sales only at gun shows is known as closing the “gun show loophole.” There is no such loophole in federal law, in the limited sense that the law does not exempt private-party sales at gun shows from regulation that is required elsewhere. The fundamental flaw in the gun show loophole proposal is its failure to address the great majority of private-party sales, which occur at other locations and increasingly over the Internet at sites where any non-prohibited person can list firearms for sale and buyers can search for private-party sellers. http://jhupress.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/1421411113_updf.pdf

"forty per cent of the guns purchased in the United States are bought from private sellers at gun shows, or through other private exchanges, such as classified ads, which fall under what is known as the “gun-show loophole” and are thus unregulated." http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/23/120423fa_fact_lepore?currentPage=all

"The ethical issue raised by “The gun-show loophole” is that the federal statutes to control the selling of firearms to those deemed “unsafe” are being violated." "The gun-show loophole does not abide by these regulations, nor is the safety of the regulations being applied." "Reinforcing the current laws would improve the situation but bring greater attention to the gun-show loophole for those looking to acquire firearms that are prohibited to do so by the GCA." http://www.projectcensored.org/gun-show-loophole-allows-anyone-purchase-gun/

In most states, a private gun owner may legally sell his or her gun without proof that the buyer has passed a criminal history check, whereas federally licensed gun dealers must perform Brady background checks on all gun sales. The discrepancy between licensed dealers and private sellers has been highlighted recently by the “gun-show loophole” debate. Current law exempts private individuals who sell at gun shows from performing a background check while licensed dealers selling at gun shows must comply with the background check requirement. This loophole has made gun shows a key source of crime guns. http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/industry.pdf

http://photo.pds.org:5012/cqresearcher/getpdf.php?id=cqresrre2013030800

"In order to close the gun show loophole effectively, the following five principles must be upheld:" - "There is general agreement about the need to close the gun show loophole. However, closing the current gun show loophole by creating new and bigger loopholes in federal law will not protect the public." http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/dontjust.pdf

The NRA has pushed back claiming that there is no gun show loophole. This denial is based on semantics. Perhaps it should be called “the private seller” loophole (because private sellers aren’t under the same standards as federally-licensed firearm dealers). Nevertheless, these private sellers/occasional dealers often sell specifically at gun shows. http://www.factandmyth.com/gun-laws-restrictions/yes-the-gun-show-loophole-is-real-nra-lies-exposed

--"Under existing law, federally licensed firearms dealers are required to use an instant, computerized background check system whenever they sell a gun, whether at their shop or at a gun show. The exception to this -- the so-called Brady law loophole -- involves gun show transactions by nonlicensed collectors and others, who are free to rent a table at a gun show and sell firearms without background checks." - "Last night, the White House released a statement from Clinton condemning the House vote. "Instead of closing the deadly gun show loophole, the House of Representatives voted in the dead of night to let criminals keep buying guns at gun shows," the president said. "This vote will not stand the light of day." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/june99/house18.htm

"Closing the gun show loophole isn't an extension of anything; it's just enforcing the existing background checks to include all gun sales. This is a very minor and common-sense change to gun laws.  Nobody is trying to take anybody's gun away; it's about trying to make it harder for guns to get in the wrong hands." "There's not really going to be a way to enforce this all the time, say if you want to buy a gun from your cousin or whatever, but for those 'official' outlets, like "Gun Shows", for example, enforcement would be possible. And it would help.   Closing the gun show loophole makes sense, unless of course, you're a terrorist; in that case the gun show loophole is awesome.  You don't even have to show ID. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_shows_in_the_United_States)" http://cjonline.com/blog-post/matsofatso/2013-04-18/closing-gun-show-loophole - Darknipples (talk) 22:14, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

About.com Weapons - http://weapons.about.com/od/gunlaws/a/Federal-Gun-Control-Laws.htm About.com Civil Liberties - Gun Shows:The Purported Gun Show Loophole and State-by-State Regulation of Gun Shows - Gun Show Loophole - "In 33 states, private gun owners are not restricted from selling guns at gun shows. Buyers who purchase guns from individuals are not required to submit to the federal background checks in place for licensed dealers. Critics say that firearms can be obtained illegally as a result, calling it the “gun show loophole.” Proponents of unregulated gun show sales say that there is no loophole; gun owners are simply selling or trading guns at the shows as they would do at their residence." Darknipples (talk) 22:08, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Federal legislation has attempted to put an end to the so-called loophole by requiring all gun show transactions to take place through FFL dealers. Most recently, a 2009 bill attracted several co-sponsors in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. However, Congress ultimately failed to take up consideration of the legislation." - http://civilliberty.about.com/od/guncontrol/a/Gun-Shows.htm Darknipples (talk) 21:57, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

"Pub.L. No. 99-308, section 103(4). Concerned that the statute as written might contain a loophole through which licensees could dispose of firearms from their personal collections without leaving any records, Congress amended the statute on July 8, 1986, by appending the following language to the end of the prior formula- tion of the statute:" [Cite as National Rifle Ass'n v. Brady, 914 F.2d 475 (4th Cir. 1990)] - http://www.constitution.org/2ll/bardwell/nra_v_brady.txt Darknipples (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

"In January 1999, the Departments of the Treasury and Justice responded with a report describing the gaps in current law and recommending by extending the Brady Law to "close the gun show loophole."" [APPENDIX C HISTORY OF FEDERAL FIREARMS LAWS IN THE UNITED STATES | GUN VIOLENCE REDUCTION:NATIONAL INTEGRATED FIREARMS VIOLENCE REDUCTION STRATEGY] - http://www.justice.gov/archive/opd/AppendixC.htm Darknipples (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Congressman - "we have a gun show loophole" http://books.google.com/books?id=MGt2cPUtKXAC&pg=PA8264&lpg=PA8264&dq=congressman+%22we+have+a+gun+show+loophole%22+Congressional+Record,+V.+146,+Pt.+6,+May+10,+2000&source=bl&ots=0HzL0b5QN_&sig=JHk7k7cy2q5MhN-zLN6nDRMDpDU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=L4muU8PaIpCXqAbhqYHICQ&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=congressman%20%22we%20have%20a%20gun%20show%20loophole%22%20Congressional%20Record%2C%20V.%20146%2C%20Pt.%206%2C%20May%2010%2C%202000&f=false

"Fully 85% of Americans favor making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks, with comparable support from Republicans, Democrats and independents." Pew Research Jan. 14th 2013 - http://www.people-press.org/2013/01/14/in-gun-control-debate-several-options-draw-majority-support/ - Darknipples (talk) 07:00, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2013-02-13/html/CREC-2013-02-13-pt1-PgH481-3.htm

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/dec/16/opinion/la-ed-guns16-2009dec16

"So, if 69 percent of NRA members favor closing the gun show loophole, that's an issue where there's really not as much controversy as some might want us to believe."

http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2010-09-07/gun-violence-prevention/gun-show-question-stirs-controversy-at-mn-state-fair/a15829-1 Darknipples (talk) 07:08, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

United States Code Congressional and Administrative News - 99th Congress - Second Session - Jan. to Oct. 1986 - http://harrislawoffice.com/content/areas_of_practice/federal_firearms/legislative_history/FOPA%20House%20Report%2099-495.pdf Darknipples (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.bradycampaign.org/sites/default/files/no-check-no-gun-report.pdf Darknipples (talk) 05:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Sellers defend gun show loophole 2013 - http://www.standard.net/stories/2013/01/22/sellers-defend-gun-show-loophole Darknipples (talk) 05:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Brady law played part in GSL http://harvardmodelcongress.org/sf/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Senate-Judiciary-Gun-Control.pdf

CSMONITOR - The Gun Show Loophole - http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0430/p8s2.html Darknipples (talk) 07:45, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2012a/commsumm.nsf/b4a3962433b52fa787256e5f00670a71/5de089825c00843e872579b80079912d/$FILE/SenState0305AttachB.pdf

http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2012a/commsumm.nsf/b4a3962433b52fa787256e5f00670a71/5de089825c00843e872579b80079912d/$FILE/SenState0305AttachB.pdf Darknipples (talk) 08:01, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

april 2019
In regard to your most recent edit Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing.

You are obviously mistaken. This is some random IP address, not me. My account is verified. DN (talk) 08:00, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

feb 2022
In February 2022, the Republican National Committee voted to censure two Republicans for serving on the House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack, asserting they were participating in the "persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse." Since then, certain House Republicans and Trump allies defended the censure resolution while others refuted the description. An RNC official has stated the GOP is referring to the "legitimate political discourse that had nothing to do with violence at the Capitol" and claims that January 6th Committee is a "Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens"

Pence feb 18

Tag test
POV section

POV Section

✅



LPD
foreign policy Today, Trump’s decision to incite a violent mob to disrupt an electoral certification process no longer looks like a high-risk gamble but one of several carefully planned steps to consolidate the false narrative of a rigged election among his followers and maintain control of the Republican Party. Indeed, while the Democratic Party is currently in power at the national level, Trump retains de facto control of the GOP and its agenda. On Feb. 4, the GOP declared the Jan. 6, 2021, riots “legitimate political discourse” and censured Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for taking part in Congress’s inquiry into the attacks.

roll call During a tense colloquy on the House floor last week, Republican Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana urged Majority Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland to bring up a reopening resolution, much as the Senate had done. As the two sniped back and forth, Hoyer implied that Republicans themselves are giving him reason to fear. “If we are telling people in this country that Jan. 6 was ‘legitimate political discourse,’ we’re going to have great concerns about opening up this Capitol for the safety of our members, for the safety of the public who wants to visit, for the safety of our staff,” Hoyer said, referring to a recent resolution from the Republican National Committee that described the events of that day as “legitimate political discourse.”

buzzfeed In February, the Republican Party declared that the Jan. 6 insurrection and the preceding events that led to it constituted “legitimate political discourse.” At best, this is a direct attempt to minimize the events of that day. At worst, the Republicans’ declaration implies that the US’s political institutions are fraudulent and that any form of protest — including insurrection — is valid. This may get the party votes in the upcoming midterm elections, but it’ll cost more than money: It’ll come at the price of further deterioration in public trust. DN (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

May 2022
cbpp: Only a Few of the 2001 and 2003 Tax Cut Provisions Benefit Families with Modest Incomes

politico: How past income tax rate cuts on the wealthy affected the economy

TaxPolicyCenter.org The Vast Gulf Between Democrats And Republicans Over Tax Legislation

census.gov majority of 2016-2020 households make under $68k

[https://time.com/5570679/trump-tax-cuts/ time: Trump Gave Americans a Massive Tax Cut. Few Are Noticing]

Forbes: Trump Tax Cuts Helped Billionaires Pay Less Taxes Than The Working Class In 2018

[https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20190522_R45736_8a1214e903ee2b719e00731791d60f26d75d35f4.pdf CRS The Economic Effects of the 2017 Tax Revision: Preliminary Observations]

cnbc: Here’s who is saving the most money from Trump’s tax cuts

cbpp: New Tax Law Is Fundamentally Flawed and Will Require Basic Restructuring ....DN (talk) 23:18, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

The Piketty phenomenon and the future of inequality

degruyter When Reputation Trumps Policy: Party Productivity Brand and the 2017 Tax Cut and Jobs Act...DN (talk) 01:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

June
whither dixie

Southern opposition to civil rights

lance selfa

Byrd NYT

Tom_White_-The_US_and_Racism_essay..."The Dixiecrats (Southern Democrats) seceded from the party in 1948 in opposition to the policy of extending civil rights. In classic racist projection, one Texas representative kicked off his winning Senate campaign by arguing that civil rights were “an effort to set up a police state in the guise of liberty.”97

the atlantic

carnegie

FR cas mudde

jon eagerton

david love on Byrd

harry byrd

Jan 2023
Dixiecrat Dixon, Perez, Heflin, Conner, KKK Chalmers, Wright, Bilbo, Spann EC KS EC, confed at convention, Birmingham convention, TIME convention, kkk political legacy, kkk supports strom, TIME victory for extremists, 1955 dixiecrat movement, kkk politicians, 1972 The Dixiecrat Movement of 1948: A Study in Political Conflict...DN (talk) 17:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

"As the movement became an active third party, Senator Eastland of Mississippi and John U. Barr of Louisiana were identified as Dixiecrat strategists." 

List of Dixiecrats 1972

kkk supports strom "My introduction to raw Florida politics came a few nights before the Nov. 2 election when the klan mounted a big rally in Cross City intended to frighten African-Americans and keep them from going to the polls. On election eve the klan also paraded in the town of Wildwood, burning crosses and proclaiming support for the third party candidate, J. Strom Thurmond of the Dixiecrats."

TIME victory for extremists Electing their 72-man state executive committee the Democrats gave a narrow (39 to 33) edge to the states' rights extremists. The new committee promptly repealed the loyalty oath by which state party candidates, including presidential electors, are pledged to support the candidates of the national party. Purpose: a warning to Northern Democrats and everybody else that the Alabama party is ready to go Dixiecrat again on the civil rights issue.

BETTY B. CHAMAJ Atlantic archive PDF The activities of Southern politicians like Eastland and Thurmond reflect the multiple facets of the right-wing movement. Eastland, as chairman of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, has fallen heir to McCarthy’s role as chief investigator of Communist infiltration. Thurmond, symbol of Dixiecrat sentiment, has led the attack upon the alleged muzzling of such military officers as General Edwin A. Walker. Also of significance has been the emergence of Barry Goldwater as the acknowledged political leader of the far right in the nation as a whole.

1949 Strom Thurmond requests police protection for KKK meeting

McLAURIN, Ann Mathison, 1941- THE ROLE OF THE DIXIECRATS IN THE 1948 ELECTION. The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1972 History, general

Dixiecrats in Birmingham Led by Birmingham‘s Bull Connor, the southern delegates agreed to meet in the steel city to outline their platform and elect a new democratic nominee to send to the White House. Leading up to the meeting, Frank Dixon proclaimed that the national party drove ―a knife into the heart of the South.‖ He promised that the delegates in Birmingham would send a clear message to the Party that the Solid South could no longer be taken for granted.114 His statement proved prophetic.

Glen Feldman Overlap existed between the klan and the dixiecrat movement.

Chalmers While Birmingham lawyer and local Elks leader G. D. Esdale was the titular head of the of the Alabama Klan until he was replaced in a coup by Birmingham garage man Bert Thomas in 1931, the real power was Horace Wilkinson. Returning from World War I, Wilkinson successfully prosecuted the members of a lynch mob and initially stood with reform Governors Thomas Kilby and Bibb Graves against Alabama’s powerful “Big Mule/Black Belt” industrialist-planter oligarchy. As local leader, he fashioned the Klan takeover of Birmingham city government, handled the defense of Klan floggers, persuaded the Alabama Supreme Court to overturn convictions, and ran the state campaigns against the Roman Catholic Al Smith and for Klansmen who would be governor or U.S. Senator. By 1948, he had joined the oligarchy and organized the Strum Thurman’s Dixiecrat Party as he had led the revolt against Al Smith twenty years before. Students of the Klan will find that Alabama has been favored by the ability of her historians, particularly notably Dan Carter, Glenn Eskew, Glenn Feldman, Wayne Flynt, Virginia Van der Veer Hamilton, Jeff Norrell, William Snell, J. MillsThornton, Steve Suitts, and Diane McWhorter.

March 2023
Spann EC

The Dixiecrats reasoned that by shifting the field of battle from the ballot box to the House of Representatives, they could harness factors such as southern nationalism and the era’s Conservative Coalition to either elect one of their own or force concessions from the eventual winner of a contingent election (McCorvey, 1960, p. 93 and 98)

The unpledged elector strategy was first pursued by anti-New Deal Southern Democrats during the 1944 presidential contest to limited success, only securing ballot access in one state. The strategy was associated with Senator Harry Byrd (D-VA) during the 1956 and 1960 election cycles, with the strategy only producing electoral votes in 1960. Alabama Governor George Wallace was the last to experiment with the ploy to little fanfare during the 1964 presidential election. Following 1964 Dixiecrat types abandoned unpledged electors, and no other political faction has revived the tactic.

As conservative Southern Democrats, referred to as Dixiecrats from here forward, became increasingly at odds with their national counterparts, specifically on matters of civil rights, a variety of strategies were explored to maximize their political power.

The unpledged elector strategy emerged as the perfect middle ground where Dixiecrats could keep one foot in the party while hoping for the opportunity to maximize their interests. This is why unpledged delegates have virtually never appeared on the ballot in a state outside of the South. After the South became genuinely competitive at the presidential level, the Dixiecrats died out or melded into one of the two major parties. Unpledged electors have thus ceased to be a factor in presidential elections.

In speeches and campaign materials, the Dixiecrats considered simply blocking Truman’s reelection to be a partial victory. If their efforts proved sufficient to kneecap Truman’s candidacy but insufficient to gain concessions from Republicans in a contingent election, Dixiecrats boasted that this would force the national Democrats to once again cater to southern priorities (States’ Rights Democrat, 1948). Other Dixiecrat leaders did not universally share these assessments.

Seemingly bothered by the blatant racism on display at the Dixiecrat Convention, Thurmond stressed that he was a progressive southerner in early interviews. Additionally, Thurmond was eager to point out the tepid advances African Americans had made under his administration (Karabell, 2000, p. 54 and 169). These overtures garnered him faint praise among the more progressive southern publications as a sincere advocate of state’s rights, but Thurmond’s rhetoric did little to distract from the Dixiecrats having the public support of the vast majority of Klan chapters and the regions other extremist groups (McGill, 1948, p. 16)

Dixiecrat's organizational ability and control of the party machinery in Deep South states like Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina, allowed them to replace Truman with Thurmond as the official Democratic candidate. In Alabama, Truman’s name was completely removed from the ballot, while in South Carolina and Mississippi, Truman was classified as the nominee of the National Democratic Party. Beyond these few strongholds, the Dixiecrats' institutional power was minimal.

In Louisiana, Dixiecrats were initially successful at removing Truman’s name from the ballot and labeling Thurmond as the official Democratic candidate. Governor Earl Long responded to this development by calling a special session of the state legislature to restore Truman’s presence (Bass and Thompson, 1998, p. 112). What resulted was a compromise in which Truman would regain the Democratic ballot line, and Thurmond would be listed under the States Rights moniker. Thurmond was also allowed to have the rooster mascot used by the Louisiana Democratic Party placed beside his name. This compromise was seen as a great victory for Thurmond. Dixiecrats assumed that illiterate and semi-literate voters would simply vote for the candidate who shared the familiar southern mascot (Karabell, 2000, p. 223).

Fundraising was another issue for the Dixiecrats financing was often a truly nickel and dime affair. Aside from small donations, much of the fundraising came from sponsored luncheons and the sale of paraphernalia like campaign buttons. That said, the group enjoyed the largesse of the southern oil industry and some of the business community. Southern oil interests were bitter toward the Truman administration over the issue of ownership of tideland oil off the coast of the Gulf States, with the Supreme Court recently ruling in favor of the federal government. As these oilmen had limited connections with the Republican Party, they opted instead to support the Dixiecrats. Governor Thurmond was often accompanied on the campaign trail by a prominent oil executive or two. This funding likely hurt the Dixiecrats as much as it helped them, as unsympathetic news reporters and Democratic loyalists were able to write off Thurmond as being little more than a tool of big business. Unfortunately for historians, the Dixiecrats bookkeeping was haphazard to the point that staff worried about being investigated under the Federal Corrupt Practices Act (Karabell, 2000, p. 172-174 and 226).

votes in Congress to estimate specific parameters by utilizing maximum likelihood estimation. The procedure establishes ideal points representing members’ most preferred outcomes based on observed behavior in roll call votes. Ideologically similar legislators are then separated from their opponents. Representatives’ observed ideology based on roll call behavior is arranged on a plane ranging from negative one to positive one. Furthermore, the policy issues of roll call votes are organized into two dimensions, with the first dimension relating to economic issues and the second dimension often capturing disputes involving race relations. Political observers have typically interpreted scores to the left of zero as conveying a politician’s liberalism, scores to the right of zero as conveying conservatism, and scores clustered closer to zero as representing centrism (Poole and Rosenthal, 1997). During the period in question, the first dimension is understood to refer to economics, while the second is associated with civil rights (Poole and Rosenthal, 2009, p. 59)
 * To shed light on the viability of Dixiecrats' contingent election strategy the ideological preferences of members of Congress must first be determined. DW-NOMINATE will be employed in order to approach this question. The system estimates members of Congress ideology by tracking patterns in roll call votes. The parametric scaling procedure uses aye or nay

Congress contained 289 Cross Pressured members with positive or negative scores along one of the dimensions, 13 Conservative Republicans, 3 Rockefeller Republicans, 20 Centrists, 39 Dixiecrats, and 66 Liberal Democrats (Figure 1). (GRAPH)
 * During the highlighted period, most members of Congress were negative on one dimension and positive on the other. The bulk of Republicans earned conservative scores on economics and liberal civil rights scores, with the reverse being the case for most Democrats. Only a small number of New England Republicans were liberal on both dimensions and will be referred to as Rockefeller Republicans. Meanwhile, a slightly larger number of mostly Southern Democrats earned conservative scores on both dimensions and will be referred to as Dixiecrats. The Republican ranks also contained a cohort of ultra-conservatives with positive scores along both the economic and civil rights dimensions. Representatives with scores ranging between 0.2 and -0.2 have lastly been labeled as Centrists. Per their DW-NOMINATE scores, the 81st

May 2023
RWP

NIH

Oxford public research

MDPI

Far-Right Online Radicalization: A Review

NEO CONFED

freespeechlaw.org

The KKK and Terrorism
Terrorism in the US

June 2023
Operation red dog

MNIalive.com

Time-Bayou of Pigs-1981

Wolfgang Droege White Supremacist who Tried to Overthrow Dominica's Government is Shot to Death-thedominican.net-2005

David Duke

NBC:Who is DD?

TX Observer-1992 Ronnie Dugger

DD:A Nazi in Politics-1991 Kenneth S. Stern

SPLC general

Unite the right

BBC DD

joseph wood UNC This thesis seeks to answer how and why the early distrust between the Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Movement developed, as well as how this was overcome through the near-universal adoption of a fringe, conspiracy-minded branch of Protestant Christianity. By tracing the biographies of these organizations and movements during key moments in history, this thesis will answer the question of how and when the movements prior to 2001 came together and laid the groundwork for modern, nebulous partnerships during the twenty-first century. (abstract)

On September 22, 1979, a cadre of KKK members and American Nazis met at a farm in Louisburg, North Carolina. The aim was to strengthen the position of stringently racist, anti-communist groups throughout the Carolinas in the face of a direct challenge by the Worker’s Viewpoint Organization. Among the members present were Grand Dragon Virgil Lee Griffin of Mount Holly’s Invisible Empire of the KKK and Harold Armstead Covington, one of the only members of the NSWPP in the area. (p.32)

Virgil Lee Griffin

Greensboro massacre

Harold Covington, though widely mocked and reviled even by his American Nazi contemporaries towards the end of his life, would provide a prototype of the kind of leadership that would unite the ANM and the KKK. (p.58)

Following the rise and development of these so called Christian Identity churches during the 1960s and 1970s, widespread distribution of Christian Identarian literature to KKK and American fascist circles aided in the armament and spread of the conspiratorially-minded sovereign citizen movements. It was from these movements that the late 20th century would see its most drastic displays of domestic terrorism throughout the 1990s (p.62)

[https://apnews.com/article/ku-klux-klan-us-news-ap-top-news-birmingham-ky-state-wire-c3f13fe5903c4f6caa0b4c0e6512a584 AP White-power groups banding together, but for how long? 2017]

Guardian 2017 NN KKK

Gaurdian-2017-KKK

In 2017 Unite the Right was a white supremacist rally that took place in Charlottesville, Virginia that included members of the alt-right, neo-Confederates, neo-fascists, white nationalists, neo-Nazis, Klansmen, and far-right militias. David Duke attended the rally. SPLC AP and was also a scheduled speaker at Unite the Right 2 in DC the following year. 

FOXNEWS
CNN 4-23 "Fox denies wrongdoing and is fighting the Smartmatic lawsuit, which is unfolding in New York state courts."

CNN 4-23 “Fox Corp. CEO Lachlan Murdoch said there will be no change in strategy at the company’s top rated right-wing network, despite the firing of its top rated anchor Tucker Carlson and a massive $787.5 million settlement to Dominion Voting Systems that resulted in the company swinging to a loss in the just completed period. “There is no change to our programming strategy at Fox News,” Murdoch said in response to an analyst who asked about Carlson’s ouster during the investor call Tuesday to discuss its financial results."

NPR 4-23 "In speaking with investors on Tuesday, Fox Corp. executive chair and chief executive Lachlan Murdoch did not apologize for the network's repeatedly broadcasting bogus claims that Dominion Voting Systems conspired to cheat then-President Donald Trump of victory in 2020." - "Texts and emails disclosed in the Dominion case showed most Fox journalists, executives and corporate officials did not believe the claims of election fraud from Trump and his allies. The network aired them anyway to win back viewers who peeled away after the conservative network was the first to project that Joe Biden would win Arizona. How a civil war erupted at Fox News after the 2020 election What happened at the time and since represents a dual failure, the network's critics argue.

First, executives did not act to prevent Fox's hosts from amplifying and, in some cases, endorsing false claims that Dominion committed election fraud, despite knowing those claims to be untrue. These observers note the company also failed to apologize afterwards publicly or on its programs.

Most news outlets hold that correcting the record on fatally flawed stories is fundamental to retaining public trust. CBS News retracted a story about the deadly debacle at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, based on claims from an unreliable source. The Washington Post corrected accounts of allegations against Trump that did not hold up. Fox has not retracted or appended editors' notes to any of the segments in question. By design, Fox's power rests in the Murdochs

The Hill 4-23

The Independant 4-23 "Despite the settlement, there will be no retractions or on-air apologies on Fox, a source with knowledge of the agreement told The Independent."

Fortune 4-23 Murdoch said viewers, and investors, should expect no change in direction from Fox News. “We made the business decision to resolve this dispute and avoid the acrimony of a divisive trial and multiyear appeal process, a decision clearly in the best interests of the company and its shareholders,” he said. Fox still believes it was properly exercising its First Amendment rights to report on newsworthy fraud allegations made by former President Donald Trump, even though that defense was shot down in a pretrial court ruling in the Dominion case, Murdoch said.

That’s important, since Murdoch said Fox intends to use the same defense against a similar lawsuit by another elections technology company, Smartmatic. That case is not expected to go to trial until at least 2025, he said.

Fortune 4-23 That response aligns with principles widely touted by professional news organizations and established in the ethical practice of journalism. Although journalism scholars and practitioners vary in their definitions of what a news organization is and who can claim to be a journalist, there is firm agreement that reporting facts, or at least making a good faith effort to do so, is an indispensable mandate for both. Yet Murdoch has not indicated an intention to discipline en masse Fox News employees who violated that ethical principle. Nor is he required to.

Even the Society of Professional Journalists, the nation’s foremost advocate for ethical journalism, rejects punishments for those who violate its principles. Its ethics code says in part: “The code is entirely voluntary. … It has no enforcement provisions or penalties for violations, and SPJ strongly discourages anyone from attempting to use it that way.” The organization concedes that news outlets can discipline their own journalists. Because journalists and their employers may be considered to be one entity, any disciplinary action is voluntary self-discipline. Neither journalists nor the news organizations they personify have to be truthful unless they want to. Lying in the press is unethical but does not necessarily strip liars of the protections provided by the First Amendment.

There is an exception to this: the defamatory lie, one that injures a person or organization’s reputation. That is what got Fox News sued.

Reuters 4-23 The Hill 4-23 "Shareholder sues Murdoch, Fox board members over 2020 election coverage"

KKK & Neo Nazi Alliances
Former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan David Duke, who was considered by the SPLC as instrumental in the Klan resurgence of the 1970s, was one of the first neo-Nazi and Klan leaders to stop the use of Nazi and Klan regalia and ritual, as well as other traditional displays of race hatred. Duke enrolled at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge in 1968, and by 1970 formed a white student group called the White Youth Alliance that was affiliated with the George Lincoln Rockwell's National Socialist White People's Party (NSWPP), also known as the American Nazi Party. (p.3) After Duke graduated LSU in 1974, he founded the Knights of the Klu Klux Klan (KKKK) in Louisiana. By 1976 he was the youngest ever grand wizard of the KKKK and while leader of the new organization, recruited NSWPP members such as Don Black. During this time Duke created a shift in targeting, from blacks to Jews. The Nazification of the KKK became apparent in the obsession with Jews found in the KKKK organ Crusader, which began to share bylines with the NSWPP's White Power. In the summer of 1979, Duke decided he was going to eventually hand control of the Knights of the KKK over to Don Black, because he needed a less radical approach to move forward with other aspirations and fall-outs with other Klan members. He left the Klan in 1980, however by then Duke had already become instrumental in connecting participants in a 1981 plot to overthrow the government of Dominica, in what later became known as Operation Red Dog     (p. 97-99) He also just founded a new organization in 1981, called the National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP). "A Klan without the sheets," in the words of Duke biographer Tyler Bridges. In building up the NAAWP, he would woo old Klansmen into his new organization. Author Lawrence Powell reiterated that while Duke’s ideology and political associations regularly shifted, he is most readily identifiable as a neo-Nazi who saw the Klan as tool ‘to mainstream Nazism. (p.11 cite 69)

On November 3, 1979 in North Carolina, members of the Ku Klux Klan working together with Neo-Nazis, killed five participants of the Communist Workers Party (CWP) and wounded several others in what became known as the Greensboro Massacre. This event also involved Frazier Glenn Miller Jr., one of Harold Covington's acolytes and a former Green Beret, who rode in the Greensboro caravan. Miller founded the Carolina Knights of the Ku Klux Klan in 1980. By merging Klan and Nazi symbolism while instilling paramilitary discipline in his followers, Miller built one of the strongest white-power groups in the state at the time. Before Greensboro, America’s far-right extremists largely operated in separate, mutually distrustful spheres. Greensboro became an event where the the KKK and Neo Nazis worked together. By 1980, membership in Klan-Nazi fusion groups began to outnumber that of old-school Klans. The increasing unity of far-right factions was more than tactical. By transfusing “blood and soil” into American racism, it led to what historian John Drabble called in a 2007 study “the Nazification of the Ku Klux Klan.” After Greensboro it was no longer unimaginable to see Confederate flags flying alongside swastikas as they did at the Unite the Right rally in 2017 in which the KKK, Neo-Nazis and David Duke attended. Or, for mass murderers like Dylann Roof to hoard Nazi drawings as well as a Klan hood. When the Associated Press, which published a report about the event called “North Carolina United Racist Front Forms.” a Klansman stated "You take a man who fought in the Second World War, it’s hard for him to sit down in a room full of swastikas,” then added; “But people realize time is running out. We’re going to have to get together.”

The common goal, as these alliances see it, is protecting the white race at a time when the Census Bureau projects whites will be a minority within three decades. A spokesman for the Nationalist Front (United States), Matthew Heimbach, said U.S. white nationalists are trying to follow the example of far-right European groups that have learned to work together rather than bicker over ideology, theology and organizational structure. A spokesperson for the SPLC said she is less worried about new supremacist alliances than free-standing extremist entities like The Daily Stormer, and that such single hate-based websites can reach millions. In 1995, Don Black and Chloê Hardin, the ex-wife David Duke, began a small bulletin board system (BBS) called Stormfront, which has become a prominent online forum for white nationalism, Neo-Nazism, hate speech, racism, and antisemitism in the early 21st century. Duke also became a selected speaker for Unite the Right 2 in D.C. for 2018 by Jason Kessler.

This is a rough draft, and I am aware there may be some errors. It still needs some tweaking as not to plagiarize...DN (talk) 21:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

DRN
There is confusion among some people that the breaching of the Capitol Building was planned as part of an attempt to seize power, and the conspiracy convictions prove this. If this were true, then terms such as attempted coup would be appropriate. But no evidence has been found that the breach was planned or was part of any wider plan. It's important to be clear on what happened before describing it. TFD (talk) 05:13, 10 July 2023

"But no evidence has been found that the breach was planned or was part of any wider plan."...Says who? This has already been refuted multiple times by multiple RS. As I tried to explain earlier, at this point, to try and reduce this event down to some "spontaneous" chain of events is unreasonable...at best. DN (talk) 07:09, 10 July 2023

"None of your sources say the breach was planned or part of a wider conspiracy. Can you please provide a single quote that says otherwise. I suggest you read the seditious conspiracy indictment to see what was actually alleged in the courts. TFD (talk) 01:28, 11 July 2023

Perhaps I misunderstood your previous statement. I was not attempting to claim that all attendees were taking part in the planning of the breach, only that sources have stated that (according to prosecutors) there was planning involved regarding the breach, not just on internet message boards, but also by the Proud Boys...Hopefully, that helps clear things up a little. DN (talk) 22:08, 13 July 2023

How is that supposed to clear things up? No one has questioned that the FBI made that claim and proved it in court. The only issue is whether before 1/6 the conspirators had planned to storm the building. TFD (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2023

Each of these sources (above) seem to claim they (PB) did, as did the prosecutor. Hence, it had been affirmed. Is that still somehow unclear in your view? They were found guilty, were they not? Cheers. DN (talk) 23:05, 14 July 2023

TFD -- apologies, but I thought I understood your complaint, and I am once again confused (my fault). Is it your position that not even those convicted of seditious conspiracy formed the intent to storm the building before January 6? How else would they oppose the electoral count by force? Dumuzid (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2023

The indictment says the Oath Keepers plan to stop the lawful transfer of power "included multiple ways to deploy force." (para. 4.) It then refers to statements made by the leaders beginning Nov. 5, 2020. I don't have access to these documents so can only rely on the indictment and news media for what they said. One way was, "Bringing and contributing firearms, ammunition, and related equipment to the QRF staging areas outside Washington D.C." (para. 17f.) They thought that by fighting antifa outside the Capitol, Trump would be forced to declare a state of insurrection existed and the QRF teams would then help the armed forces restore order. Note that the QRF teams were outside Washington when the building was breached. They planned road blocks and ambushes (para. 24). They thought that their very presence "a few hundred feet away" from the senators would scare them into declaring Trump the winner (para. 34). There was also discussion of preventing members from entering the Capitol building. Just the fact that they encouraged a group of angry people to come to Washington prepared for violence and revolution is sufficient to prove seditious conspiracy, even if it was unclear what they would do once they arrived. But no evidence has ever been provided that there was a plan before 1/6 to enter the Capitol and no such allegation has been made in any indictment. If people believe there was, it's because of flawed logic. The Oath Keepers conspired to disrupt Congress, entering the Capitol Building disrupted Congress, therefore it must have been part of the original plan. The Oath Keepers believed that a million people would show up to take orders from them. Although we know that could not happen, it doesn't mean that they were not guilty of conspiracy by including this in their plan. TFD (talk) 12:08, 15 July 2023

I can agree in regards to the OK militia that a planned breach is not apparent, but multiple RS, indictments and subsequent convictions of the Proud Boys do seem to indicate a pre-planned breach by PB militia. I'm not saying this affects the title of the Wiki-article at this point, but here's another quote from POLITICO. "A week before Jan. 6, Tarrio received an email from a girlfriend with a document titled “1776 Returns,” which contained an outline of a plan to assemble a large crowd in Washington and storm government buildings. Prosecutors had no evidence that Tarrio shared the proposal with anyone, but they noted that he appeared to reference it in multiple conversations with associates, using the phrase “The Winter Palace,” which the document used as a euphemism for the Capitol — as well as an allusion to the Russian Revolution." DN (talk) 22:11, 15 July 2023

There's a Wikipedia article about it, 1776 Returns, which has an external link to the original document. The plan involves storming and occupying the Supreme Court, six congressional office buildings and CNN. There is no mention of attacking the Capitol Building. While one of the sections of the document is called "Storm the Winter Palace," it is a reference to the Bolshevik seizure of power during the Russian Revolution rather than a code word for the Capitol. Your source is the only one I have seen that says it is a code word and even then as a code word for the Capitol (where the targeted office buildings were located), not the Capitol Building itself. The cold reality is that there is no evidence that the breach of the Capitol Building was planned before 1/6. That's not surprising, because they probably thought that the Capitol would be adequately protected and hence could not be breached at least without bringing sufficient fire power, almost all of which was left in hotels outside Washington. TFD (talk) 10:09, 16 July 2023

Cold reality? It seems you are only looking at this through the eyes of the defense attorneys instead of the sources, which would violate WP:NPOV if we did not present both the prosecution and defense equally. The bar you seem to be setting would require what amounts to a literal confession. Ignoring RS (aside from the defense's argument) to say it was not planned would not be neutral. To further clarify, we are not limiting ourselves simply to the contents of the 1776 returns document. It is relevant in it's use as evidence in part of the conviction, as proof of planning. For us to claim it was proof there was no plan to storm the capitol would be to take the side of the defense, thus WP:NPOV and WP:OR. It is a factor amongst evidence of pre-planning of the breach used by the prosecutors. The reference to "Bolshevik seizure" obviously isn't the point. Text messages show PB members celebrating storming "the Winter Palace". This has been shown by court docs and reliable sources to clearly be a reference to the capitol building. To claim it is "only a historical reference", seems like non-neutral POV in favor of the story the defense used. "From 1776 Returns... "The Capitol itself, which was the ultimate target of the January 6 insurrection, is not specifically included on the list of targeted buildings, but the document uses the phase "Storm the Winter Palace" as an apparent reference to the Capitol, and the plan outlined by the document contains similarities to the actual attack on the Capitol on January 6." Here's another court filing in regards defendant Donohoe who pleaded guilty, stating..."At least as early as January 4, 2021, and prior to Donohoe’s decision to travel to D.C., Donohoe was aware that members of MOSD leadership were discussing the possibility of storming the Capitol. Donohoe believed that storming the Capitol would achieve the group’s goal of stopping the government from carrying out the transfer of presidential power. Donohoe understood that storming the Capitol would be illegal."(p. 4) Donohoe understood from these discussions that a tactical plan for January 6, 2021, was being discussed at least among Tarrio, Nordean, and Biggs.(p. 6) "Tarrio and his four allies — Ethan Nordean, Joe Biggs, Zachary Rehl and Dominic Pezzola — are set to go to trial on allegations that they spearheaded the violent assault on the Capitol, pinpointing weak points around the Capitol and using the cover of the mob to help overwhelm police lines. Prosecutors cited “1776 Returns” in Tarrio’s indictment. The document describes plans to “Storm the Winter Palace”... The indictment also notes that in celebratory text messages with Tarrio, an associate referenced 1776 and Tarrio responded with “The Winter Palace.”" "The second witness, Matthew Greene, told the jury he did not initially understand why the Proud Boys marched from the Washington monument to the Capitol to be among the first people at the barricades surrounding Congress, instead of going to Trump’s speech near the White House. Once the Proud Boys led the charge from the barricades to the west front of the Capitol, Pezzola using a police riot shield to smash a window, Greene said he realized there may have been a deliberate effort to lead the January 6 riot." Perhaps the source below will be explicit enough? "Ultimately, Proud Boys leadership decided the plan was too impractical, federal prosecutors allege — and the target was narrowed down to the storming of a single building, the Capitol. If you still want to disagree that's your choice, I just can't figure out why. DN (talk) 02:28, 22 July 2023

our source (The Guardian) says, "Lacking evidence in the hundreds of thousands of texts about an explicit plan to storm or occupy the Capitol, the prosecution used two cooperating witnesses from the Proud Boys to make the case that the defendants worked together in a conspiracy to stop the peaceful transfer of power." Your position seems to be that because there is no proof the Capitol attack was not planned, that is proof it was. As I said your source (Kyle Cheney) was the only one that said Winter Palace was code for the Capitol. You then provide a quote from Wikipedia that is sourced to Cheney. What is the purpose of that? FBI prosecutors may be correct that the 1776 Returns plan was "narrowed down" to the Capitol, although elsewhere they concede they don't know whether the plan was ever discussed at all. But they don't explain when that decision was made. Most likely it was made moments before the building was breached. The best argument you have is Donoghue's agreed statement of fact, where he concedes "being aware of" discussions among Proud Boy leaders. That has no evidential value. And no, I am not defending the Proud Boys. I am instead defending the facts that were established by the courts. I'll compare it to UFOs. I have no proof UFOs do not exist, but there is no proof they do. That does not mean they don't exist, but it doesn't mean they do. At the risk of being accused of straying off topic, the relevance is whether the courts have established that storming the Capitol was planned as part of an attempted coup or was opportunistic. Which one it was determines how it should be described, for example, "attempted coup" or merely "illegal incursion." We must be guided by the evidence that was tested in court rather than our own personal conclusions. You should read about the trial of the Chicago 7. Nixon's DOJ tried to prove that the disorder at the Democratic Convention of 1968 had been carefully planned by the eight original defendants. We now know that it wasn't and that Nixon was a paranoid conspiracy theorist who hired people like Gordon Liddy and Roger Stone. TFD (talk) 04:44, 22 July 2023

(TFD) Your personal requirement for burden of proof should not be confused with the standard requirement for WP:V. "Your position seems to be that because there is no proof the Capitol attack was not planned, that is proof it was." It's fine if you disagree, but please don't make misleading statements like this. All anyone has to do is look at the discussion to see that myself and others have already presented reliable sources that explicitly say that not only did prosecutors allege planning by PB to storm the Capitol, but even without a confession, verbal or written, they won. At the risk of BLUD, here's a recap... "Prosecutors alleged, (NORDEAN) led them with the specific plans to: split up into groups, attempt to break into the Capitol building from as many different points as possible, and prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the Electoral College results." "A new affidavit filed Tuesday by the FBI described preparations by the right-wing Proud Boys to storm the Capitol" "Ultimately, Proud Boys leadership decided the plan was too impractical, federal prosecutors allege — and the target was narrowed down to the storming of a single building, the Capitol" DN (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2023 (UTC) TFD your claim that "Most likely it was made moments before the building was breached." would require a citation, if you have one. DN (talk) 08:10, 22 July 2023

Nothing in what you have presented says that the Proud Boys planned to attack the Capitol Building before 1/6 or that anyone has made that claim. Why not just say that despite no evidence, it's what you believe? And please don't present any more sources that don't support your position. TFD (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2023

I am not claiming sources state when exactly it was planned, only that reliable sources have stated..."Prosecutors alleged that the Proud Boys planned to breach the capitol."...That's it...Nothing more and nothing less. I do not subscribe to WaPo, but here's a report that appears to be taken from them that states prosecutors alleged this as far back as 2021. "U.S. prosecutors alleged for the first time that a Washington state leader of the Proud Boys was nominated by members of the group to take charge of the U.S. Capitol breach on Jan. 6 and carried out a plan to split into groups to break into the building from as many points as possible." As you now know, in 2022 a DOJ release stated... "as early as Jan. 4, 2021, Donohoe was aware that the Ministry of Self Defense’s leaders were discussing the possibility of storming the Capitol" Here's an article excerpt from Aljazeera on Jan 12th 2023. "Communications cited in court papers show the Proud Boys discussing storming the Capitol in the days before the riot. On January 3, someone suggested in a group chat that the “main operating theater” be in front of the Capitol. “I didn’t hear this voice note until now, you want to storm the Capitol,” Tarrio said the next day in the same chat." I'm not trying to interpret it or take anything out of context. I am surprised and a bit frustrated at your lack of acknowledgment, but I'm not trying to waste our time as evidenced by my disinterest in arguing about UFOs or what amount of time before an event it takes to constitute a "plan", or the "quality" of evidence presented. I'm just here to reflect what these sources explicitly say. That's all. We can take it to DRN if you prefer, because I think we are both tired of this back and forth. Or, we can just agree to disagree, and see where it goes from there. Either way, please enjoy the rest of your weekend. Cheers. DN (talk) 05:15, 23 July 2023

(TFD Talk) Another misleading statement? It seems like you are taking this personally, and you really shouldn't. DN (talk) 05:29, 23 July 2023

You are just repeating what you said before. You have no source that says what you believe so you are providing me with lots of stuff that together should persuade me. But the only relevant issue is what conclusions were reported in reliable sources. TFD (talk) 19:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

DRN it is...DN (talk) 21:36, 23 July 2023

(TFD Talk) Since you are essentially accusing me of WP:OR on an article talk page, and have continuously ignored my requests to avoid making misleading statements I plan on taking this to DRN. Cheers. DN (talk) 21:40, 23 July 2023

DN (talk) 22:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Cites & Indictment
(March 2021)

Federal investigators have begun piecing together evidence that some of the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 were executing well-laid plans, deploying communications systems and issuing marching orders to rioters as they battled police. A new affidavit filed Tuesday by the FBI described preparations by the right-wing Proud Boys to storm the Capitol, including using earpieces and walkie-talkies to direct movements throughout the building and a discussion about wearing black to dupe people into blaming antifa for any trouble.

WASHINGTON -- U.S. prosecutors alleged for the first time that a Washington state leader of the Proud Boys was nominated by members of the group to take charge of the U.S. Capitol breach on Jan. 6 and carried out a plan to split into groups to break into the building from as many points as possible. “By blending in and spreading out, Defendant and those following him on January 6 made it more likely that either a Proud Boy - or a suitably-inspired ‘normie’ [nonmilitant Trump supporter] - would be able to storm the Capitol and its ground in such a way that would interrupt [Congress’s] Certification of the Electoral College vote,” prosecutors said.

“By blending in and spreading out, Defendant and those following him on January 6 made it more likely that either a Proud Boy — or a suitably-inspired ‘normie’ [nonmilitant Trump supporter] — would be able to storm the Capitol and its ground in such a way that would interrupt [Congress’s] Certification of the Electoral College vote,” prosecutors said. Prosecutors have cast Nordean as a key link in their investigation, saying his communications before Jan. 6 indicate that he and other Proud Boys were planning in advance to organize a group that would try to overwhelm police barricades and breach the Capitol.

(March 2022)

WASHINGTON — A federal grand jury indictment filed Tuesday accuses the former chairman of the Proud Boys of joining with other leaders of the group in discussing a plan to attack the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. The new charges, against Enrique Tarrio, are the closest federal prosecutors have come to answering a lingering question: Was there actually a plan well in advance to storm the Capitol, or was it a case of seizing the moment?..... The revised indictment filed Tuesday includes a host of new details. On Dec. 20, 2020, it says, a member of the Proud Boys leadership sent a message to a small group: “I am assuming most of the protest will be at the capital building given what’s going on inside,” the message said, according to the indictment. Ten days later, a person Tarrio was communicating with sent him a nine-page document titled “1776 returns,” prosecutors said. The file outlined a plan to occupy the House and Senate office buildings near the Capitol. The indictment says discussions among a small group of Proud Boy leaders shifted in the days before the riot to focus on the Capitol itself. “On January 3, as efforts to plan for January 6 intensified,” the document says, “Tarrio stated ... that he wanted to wait until January 4 to make final plans.” That prompted a person, who was not identified in court documents, to send the group this voice message: “The main operating theater should be out in front of house of representatives ... based around the front entrance to the Capitol building.” Tarrio responded, “I didn’t hear this voice note until now, you want to storm the Capitol,” the indictment says. On Jan. 6, prosecutors said, members of the Proud Boys led rioters to the Capitol from a pro-Trump rally near the Washington Monument. They charged past police barricades, and one member of the group used a riot shield taken from a Capitol Police officer to break a window, allowing the first members of the mob to enter the Capitol, prosecutors said.

As alleged in the indictment, from in or around December 2020, Tarrio and his co-defendants, all of whom were leaders or members of the Ministry of Self Defense, conspired to corruptly obstruct, influence, and impede an official proceeding, the certification of the Electoral College vote. On Jan. 6, the defendants directed, mobilized, and led members of the crowd onto the Capitol grounds and into the Capitol, leading to dismantling of metal barricades, destruction of property, and assaults on law enforcement. Although Tarrio is not accused of physically taking part in the breach of the Capitol, the indictment alleges that he led the advance planning and remained in contact with other members of the Proud Boys during their breach of the Capitol. Tarrio was arrested on Jan. 4, 2021, on a warrant charging him in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia with destruction of property in the Dec. 12, 2020, burning of a Black Lives Matter banner. He was released at approximately 5 p.m. on Jan. 5, 2021. As a condition of his release, he was ordered by the Court to stay out of Washington. The indictment alleges that Tarrio nonetheless continued to direct and encourage the Proud Boys prior to and during the events of Jan. 6, 2021, and that he claimed credit for what had happened on social media and in an encrypted chat room during and after the attack.

(June 2022)

Prosecutors alleged the Proud Boys had plotted to prevent Congress from certifying Biden’s victory, saying evidence showed that Tarrio had been involved in discussions about storming the US Capitol and occupying government buildings in advance of January 6, 2021.

Ultimately, Proud Boys leadership decided the plan was too impractical, federal prosecutors allege — and the target was narrowed down to the storming of a single building, the Capitol.

Top leaders of the far-right Proud Boys group, including its national chairman, Enrique Tarrio, have been charged with seditious conspiracy for plotting to storm the US Capitol to obstruct the certification of Joe Biden’s election win over Donald Trump on 6 January 2021.

.

responses

 * Dumuzid, I appreciate that you are trying to help, but you have already given your summary, you've made your views clear, and I would prefer to let the moderator ask the questions, no offense. I don't feel it's appropriate to comment about whether or not the evidence is "scant", as you put it. That seems to have more to do with personal opinions about evidence, rather than what RS states. That said, here is a citation from NBC News in 2022, in regards to what seems to be evidence alleged by prosecutors in regard to "conspiring/planning the capitol breach "before" 1/6.
 * "The indictment says discussions among a small group of Proud Boy leaders shifted in the days before the riot to focus on the Capitol itself. “On January 3, as efforts to plan for January 6 intensified,” the document says, “Tarrio stated ... that he wanted to wait until January 4 to make final plans.” That prompted a person, who was not identified in court documents, to send the group this voice message: “The main operating theater should be out in front of house of representatives ... based around the front entrance to the Capitol building.”"
 * "Tarrio responded, “I didn’t hear this voice note until now, you want to storm the Capitol,” the indictment says."
 * "At least as early as January 4, 2021, and prior to Donohoe’s decision to travel to D.C., Donohoe was aware that members of MOSD leadership were discussing the possibility of storming the Capitol. Donohoe believed that storming the Capitol would achieve the group’s goal of stopping the government from carrying out the transfer of presidential power. Donohoe understood that storming the Capitol would be illegal."(p. 4) Donohoe understood from these discussions that a tactical plan for January 6, 2021, was being discussed at least among Tarrio, Nordean, and Biggs.(p. 6)
 * Prosecutors alleged the Proud Boys had plotted to prevent Congress from certifying Biden’s victory, saying evidence showed that Tarrio had been involved in discussions about storming the US Capitol and occupying government buildings in advance of January 6, 2021. Aljazeera 1/12 2023
 * Prosecutors before have suggested Proud Boys members played an outsize role in the violence. But for the first time in a 90-minute argument punctuated by the defendants’ own recorded words, videos and photographs on social and encrypted media, the government asserted that the successful breach of the Capitol was not the product of a spontaneous, misguided mob but the result of a preplanned assault by dedicated extremists. [Prosecutors before have suggested Proud Boys members played an outsize role in the violence. But for the first time in a 90-minute argument punctuated by the defendants’ own recorded words, videos and photographs on social and encrypted media, the government asserted that the successful breach of the Capitol was not the product of a spontaneous, misguided mob but the result of a preplanned assault by dedicated extremists. WaPo 1/12 2023]
 * In the Proud Boys case, however, prosecutors say they have communications showing that members did discuss storming the Capitol before Jan. 6. A week before the riot, prosecutors say Tarrio received a document with the title “1776 Returns” from an acquaintance that laid out plans for occupying certain government buildings in Washington on Jan. 6. The document made no mention of the Capitol itself. But days later, Proud Boys were focusing their attention there, prosecutors allege. AP News 1/4 2023


 * Cheers. DN (talk) 16:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

refining context
I took another stab at it...

Some observers and historians posit that the far-right influence of the Tea Party, and the broader conservative movement within the Republican Party can be traced back to the John Birch Society,

The Republican Party's far-right faction emerged as a result of entrenchment and increased partisanship within the party since 2010, fueled by the rise of the Tea Party movement. Far-right Republicans are a pro-Trump faction of the party.

They generally reject compromise within the party and with the Democrats, and are willing to oust fellow Republican office holders they deem to be too moderate.

In January 2015 conservatives and Tea Party movement members in the GOP formed the House Freedom Caucus, with the aim of pushing the Republican leadership to the right.

Along with members of the Freedom Caucus,  far-right faction members include Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz, who led the 2023 rebellion against then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy. The Republican far-right faction has supported U.S. aid to Israel and cuts to spending.

According to sociologist Joe Feagin, political polarization by racially extremist Republicans as well as increased attention from conservative media has perpetuated the near extinction of moderate Republicans and created legislative paralysis to numerous government levels in the last few decades." Joseph Lowndes, a professor of political science at the University of Oregon, argued that while current far-right Republicans support Trump, the faction rose before and will likely exist after Trump.

Condense
The Republican Party's far-right faction emerged as a result of entrenchment and increased partisanship within the party since 2010, fueled by the rise of the Tea Party movement, which has also been described as far-right. Far-right Republicans are a pro-Trump faction of the party. The Republican far-right faction supports U.S. aid to Israel and cuts to spending. They generally reject compromise within the party and with the Democrats, and are willing to oust fellow Republican office holders they deem to be too moderate.

The party's far-right faction includes members of the Freedom Caucus,  as well as Lauren Boebert, Marjorie Taylor Greene and Matt Gaetz, who led the 2023 rebellion against then-Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy,

Observers and commentators have noted that while power within the GOP has shifted to the far-right, studies and surveys have shown mainstream far-right voters and extremists tend to be more likely to believe conspiracy theories such as the 2020 election being illegitimate or in the great replacement. Many far-right Trump supporters believe the Jan 6th defendants are victims of a conspiracy. GOP leadership has maintained that attendees who did not participate in the attack were engaged in legitimate political discourse.

Joseph Lowndes, a professor of political science at the University of Oregon, argued that while current far-right Republicans support Trump, the faction rose before and will likely exist after Trump. According to sociologist Joe Feagin, political polarization by racially extremist Republicans as well as their increased attention from conservative media has perpetuated the near extinction of moderate Republicans and created legislative paralysis at numerous government levels in the last few decades."

The thompson memo
Justice.gov

JBS
Notable GOP associations with the JBS movement also include... Barry Goldwater “Every other person in Phoenix is a member of the John Birch Society,” Goldwater told Buckley and Kirk. “I’m not talking about commie-haunted apple pickers or cactus drunks. I’m talking about the highest cast of men of affairs.” After considering Goldwater’s concerns, Buckley and Kirk agreed to a compromise. They would challenge Welch without directly criticizing the John Birch Society’s members, creating an opening for Goldwater to do likewise. Gingerly at first, but more forcefully as the 1960s went on, the conservative thought leaders began to distance themselves from the Birchers’ paranoid denunciations of the U.S. government." Ron Paul "In the interview, Mr. Paul said he parted ways with the John Birch Society over its emphasis on conspiracy theories — “that 12 or 15 people for hundreds of years get together and plan the world.” "The factual record on Ron Paul and the John Birch Society is clear, and his association with the fringe organization that made itself famous by alleging that Dwight Eisenhower was "a dedicated conscious agent of the communist conspiracy" cannot be so easily brushed aside. In October, Paul delivered the keynote address at the Society's 50th anniversary dinner; prior to his speech he released a statement praising the "great patriotic organization." Nor is his involvement limited to this one address. When I reported my story last year, a Birch Society spokesman told me that Paul had spoken to the group about a half dozen times over the past decade." Phyllis Schlafly a notable American attorney, conservative activist, author, anti-feminist spokesperson for the national conservative movement, and 1952 Republican party nominee.

The JBS was a co-sponsor of the 2010 CPAC and attended in 2023

JBS had a hundred delegates at the 1964 Republican National Convention.

According to the bottom third paragraph in the lead on the John Birch Society page...

In the 2010s and 2020s, several observers and commentators argued that, while the organization's influence peaked in the 1970s, Bircherism and its legacy of conspiracy theories began making a resurgence in the mid-2010s, and had become the dominant strain in the conservative movement. In particular, they argued that the JBS and its beliefs shaped the Republican Party, the Trump administration, and the broader conservative movement. (Edward H. Miller is an associate teaching professor at Northeastern) (Professor Matt Dallek)

In the JBS section Influence on conservatism


 * "The historian D. J. Mulloy wrote in 2014 that the JBS has served as "a kind of bridge" between the Old Right (including the McCarthyites) of the 1940s–50s, the New Right of the 1970s–80s, and the Tea Party movement right of the 21st century.

More citations..
 * The Conversation Christopher S Parker, Associate Professor, Political Science, University of Washington
 * The Conversation Chris Towler, Assistant Professor of Political Science, California State University, Sacramento
 * WaPo Matt Dallek
 * Time Matt Dalek
 * WaPo via E. J. Dionne
 * The Hill Professor John Kenneth White, Ph.D. in Politics - Catholic University
 * Rick Perlstein & Edward H. Miller
 * David Barstow via NYT
 * Sean Wilentz via NPR
 * Harvard.edu "Several of these organizations, along with right-wing think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute, have been bankrolled by a small number of far-right businessmen, most notably the libertarian Koch brothers, sons of Fred Koch, a founding member of the John Birch Society. (p 28-29)
 * John Cassidy (journalist) via The New Yorker
 * Thomas Mallon via The New Yorker
 * David Leonhardt "In the mid-20th century, tens of thousands of Americans joined the John Birch Society, a far-right group that claimed Dwight Eisenhower was a secret Communist. Today, however, falsehoods can spread much more easily, through social media and a fractured news environment.

(added) https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2022/07/13/the-history-of-far-right-populism-from-the-john-birch-society-to-qanon

https://www.riamco.org/render?eadid=US-RPB-ms2013.003&view=biography

https://www.nytimes.com/1964/06/04/archives/5-birch-members-win-on-the-coast-gain-gop-nominations-for-us-and.html

EM
With the advice at NPOVN and North8000, I have a revision that hopefully addresses any issues...
 * A peer-reviewed research study by Geoffrey Supran and Naomi Oreskes released in 2021 says that over previous decades ExxonMobil has been shaping the public narrative on climate change in ways that de-emphasize the urgency of moving away from fossil fuels and places the onus of combating climate change onto consumers.

Poll
To determine if there is a consensus to remove this from the info-box.
 * predecessor     = Whig Party (de facto)

Since there have been no alternatives suggested on the edit in question, simply indicate whether to Keep, or Revert. Cheers. DN (talk) 18:43, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

RT
A fear of an “invasion” of people of color has also been a longtime Republican talking point that has gained prominence during the Trump administration. The New York Times analyzed right-wing media—including Fox New shows like Tucker Carlson Tonight—and found “hundreds of examples of language, ideas, and ideologies that overlapped with the mass killer’s written statement.” President Trump and officials in his administration have used it, and Republican members of Congress have used similar racist language. Below are some examples we found. Mother Jones Aug 2019

Versions of the theory have been promoted by Fox News' Tucker Carlson and Republican members of Congress, most notably House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. Most frequently, arguments about replacement theory are framed in terms of voter power, with Republicans arguing that Democrats want to use immigration to dilute Republican votes. Business Insider May 2022

As majorities of Republicans express belief in the tenets of the far-right white nationalist "great replacement" theory and Democrats fail to lead on immigration, analysts and voters said worries over surging prices, gun violence and more are crowding out a vital issue for much of the country. USA Today June 2022

It may not be immediately obvious how the fight over abortion rights is tied to the “great replacement” theory — the debunked conspiracy theory promoted by some Republican politicians who claim that Democrats support more immigration to “replace” white American voters. But the explanation for, say, an alleged gaffe that overturning the constitutional right to an abortion is a “historic victory of white life” or a concern that not enough white babies are being born in the U.S. can be found in the history of the anti-abortion movement. Fivethirtyeight July 2022

Lawrence Douglas Shift our attention to Congress, and there we find Republican extremists intent on shutting down the federal government and punishing their own party leadership for the crime of voting to briefly fund its continued operation. Leading the extremists, all passionate Maga loyalists, is Matt Gaetz, a Florida congressman who continues to insist that fraud cost Trump victory in 2020; and Andy Biggs, an Arizona congressman who voted against honouring members of the police who risked their lives defending the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Other leading extremists include Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Georgia congresswoman who has claimed that forest fires in California were triggered by Jewish-owned space lasers (TLS, September 8, 2023); Paul Gosar, an Arizona congressman who has cultivated ties with white nationalists and called the January 6 insurrectionists “peaceful patriots”; and Lauren Boebert, a gun-toting Colorado lawmaker who has trucked in the “great replacement” and QAnon conspiracy theories. Alas, the lunatic fringe of the GOP can no longer be easily distinguished from its more mainstream members. Times Literary Supplement

Since the shooting, several Republican politicians and commentators have used language that echoes this idea. For example, Missouri Senate candidate Eric Schmitt, the state attorney general, said in May that Democrats are “fundamentally trying to change this country through illegal immigration.” As scholars of white supremacy, white nationalism and extremism, we think it is important to understand what replacement theory means and how it shapes various white supremacist conspiracies, which motivate violent extremism. UDayton magazine May 2022

LePage, Isgro, Savage and their allies are not being inconsistent about housing policy; they are being very consistent about something else – the alleged threat to white power posed by immigration, as described in the “Great Replacement” or “White Genocide” conspiracy theory. “We keep being told that we need more workers at the same time that we’re expanding and giving massive subsidies, now, to the abortion industry so we can kill our own people, but we have to import all these people so that we can continue to have a stream of cheap labor.” Oh, I see. The Great Replacement. My only question is this: Is this what all Republicans believe these days? If not, it would be nice to hear a few of them speak up. Portland Press Herald June 2019

Clarence Lusane The Nation Oct 2023

Republican lawmakers claiming immigrants are part of a “great replacement” of White voters has been in the news for months. “Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the No. 3 House Republican, and other GOP lawmakers came under scrutiny. . . for previously echoing the racist ‘great replacement’ theory that apparently inspired an 18-year-old who allegedly killed 10 people while targeting Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo,” reported the Washington Post (May 16, 2022). “The baseless conspiracy theory claims that politicians are attempting to wipe out White Americans and their influence by replacing them with non-White immigrants.” The immigration group America’s Voice has tracked election-year ads and found inflammatory rhetoric about immigrants from Republican candidates. “Almost all the Republicans running statewide in Arizona have made ‘replacement’ and ‘invasion’ conspiracies a central part of their campaigns,” according to an America’s Voice report. Forbes Oct 2022

Joel Rose The word invasion has a long history in white nationalist circles. For years, it was used widely by supporters of the "replacement theory" — the false conspiracy theory that says Jews or elites are deliberately replacing white Americans with immigrants and people of color. Until recently, you rarely heard it from Republican officeholders or candidates. In this election cycle, it's moved squarely into the mainstream..."Before these ideas might have been seen as outliers. But now, it is really troubling," said Vanessa Cárdenas, the deputy director of America's Voice, an immigrant advocacy group that's been tracking political ads. It's found dozens of ads that use the word invasion by Republicans campaigning all over the country. NPR Aug 2022

NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump is seizing on his party’s frustration with the recent surge of illegal crossings at the southern U.S. border to churn up fears around another top GOP concern — voter fraud. In the final stretch before Iowa’s caucuses next Monday, the former Republican president has repeatedly suggested that Democrats are encouraging migrants to flow into the country illegally in order to register them to vote in the 2024 election. The unsupported claim, which Trump and other Republicans have carted out in past election years, is resonating with voters who agree that security is lacking at both the border and the polls. Experts say it also can be damaging, giving undue traction to false stereotypes and extremist ideologies such as the racist “great replacement theory.” Meanwhile, public confusion around border policy leaves room for false claims to spread, said Jared Holt, a senior analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a London-based think tank that tracks online hate, disinformation and extremism. He said false noncitizen voting claims over the years have helped build support for a more sinister conspiracy theory about a grand plot to diminish the influence of white Americans by replacing them with minorities. “It’s sort of a tongue-in-cheek way of pushing the great replacement theory, but in a way that has been understood to be less morally repugnant or perceivably more defensible,” Holt said. “I don’t think you have to scratch very far below the surface to understand what is really being said.” AP News Jan 2024

Rafael Bernal The once-fringe immigration proposals pushed by former President Trump are now the backbone of the GOP’s immigration and border security platform. Trump, who is leading the race for the 2024 Republican nomination, launched his 2016 candidacy with a speech denigrating Mexican immigrants that at the time was panned as sorely out of touch with the party and the general electorate. Yet in the 2024 race, GOP candidates are scrambling to outdo each other with statements and proposals ideologically aligned with Trump’s golden escalator speech. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis on Monday launched his official immigration and border security platform titled “Stop the Invasion” — a term civil rights organizations associate with the Great Replacement Theory. The Hill June 2023

As racially conservative whites became a majority within the GOP, the party's primary system and the influence of right-wing media further pushed Republican leaders towards white grievance politics. Donald Trump capitalized on this sentiment, using white identity politics to gain support from Republicans who felt their status was threatened. His presidency further radicalized the GOP, leading to the widespread adoption of his tactics and the marginalization of any of any significant anti-Trump voices within the party. The "great replacement theory", a white supremacist belief that a conspiracy is underway to replace white Americans with immigrants, gained traction with Trump supporters and was amplified by right-wing media figures like Tucker Carlson. This narrative has been linked to act of white supremacist terrorism and reflects the deep entrenchment of white resentment politics in the Republican party. (bottom paragraph) Tyranny of the Minority by Harvard political scientists Daniel Ziblatt and Steven Levitsky in their 2023 best NYT best selling book "Tyranny of the Minority"

I'm listing additional sources for a few reasons. One of them being there are so many of them over such a long period of time. It is already about halfway through the 10 year test. Another reason is because of the attention by experts and academics. The significance of a white supremacist conspiracy theory going from being a far-right fringe trope to being adopted by a political party's "mainstream" was given given prominence by historians that say while the notion of GRCT has been around for a long time, it's found new popularity and prominence in politics.

A consensus by only 2 or 3 experts on a subject like this may or may not be rare or very significant, however, from what I've been finding and sharing here, historians and experts in their fields give opinions that share new and similar views on this topic, not including multiple organizations like the National Immigration Forum that are tracking this. All of them seem to be studying, commenting and or writing about this repackaging of white supremacist rhetoric to fit within the planks of the republican party on things like immigration and abortion.

There's obviously over a dozen or so academics that have all spoken about the relevance of this trend in the GOP in regard to their respective fields of expertise or vocation, including historians, academic authors and political scientists like Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt, Sara Kamali, Joseph Lowndes, Mark Pitcavage, Cas Mudde, Philip Gorski, Samuel L. Perry, Nicole Hemmer, Sophie Bjork-James, Kathleen Belew, Larry A. Rosenthal, Jason Stanley, Heidi Beirich, Joseph Chamie, Clarence Lusane, Adam Serwer etc..etc..etc...

Trump supporters are considered by many to have become the largest faction of the United States Republican Party. Pundits and experts have certainly noticed the polls (UMass at Amherst or PRRI for example since you disapproved of AP-NORC and SPLC) that say a significant portion of them agree with this sanitized version of a white supremacist conspiracy theory. One might argue Trump supporters aren't the same as MAGA, but if that's the case there should be RS that confirms it.


 * Britannica The MAGA movement is also known for having an antagonistic relationship with mainstream news media, which are thought by a majority in the movement to be biased against MAGA views, at best, and to be lying on behalf of the movement’s enemies, at worst. This belief has resulted in a vulnerability among MAGA members to false news stories and particularly far-fetched conspiracy theories circulated by MAGA-supporting media outlets and repeated by MAGA leaders. Examples include charges that Democratic former president Barack Obama is not a native-born U.S. citizen (“birtherism”), that Democrats’ immigration policies aim to replace white Americans with nonwhite immigrants (see replacement theory), that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Trump by Democrats through massive voter fraud, and that the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, in which a mob of Trump supporters attempted to halt Congress’s certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, was actually staged by left-wing forces...In the aftermath of the election, there was a rush to understand and respond to the new political power that the MAGA movement represented. The media ran numerous articles and television reports analyzing the development and makeup of the movement. Within the Republican Party, Trump became a kingmaker, his endorsement all but necessary to anyone who wished to win a Republican primary election for a major office (see Republican politicians all over the country have repeated the GRCT USA Today May 2022)...The MAGA movement remains a powerful force in American politics. In late 2022 an estimated 4 in 10 Republicans identified themselves as “MAGA Republicans.” Shortly after the midterm elections of 2022, Trump declared his candidacy for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. In view of the strength of the MAGA movement, other candidates for the Republican nomination have been forced to adopt strategies (see Why is Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy doubling down on conspiracy theories? BBC Dec 2023) that limit direct or serious criticisms of Trump and emphasize their acceptance of at least some of the extremist views of MAGA members.

(I added links in Bold from previous citations)

Dr. Sara Kamali: The “great replacement theory” is one such baseless belief that is playing a role in the anti-immigration rhetoric that is central to the 2022 strategies of many Republican candidates who are running for seats at all levels of government. The Conversation Sept 2022

In addition to the amount of coverage, good examples are the length of time and the spread of it's use among GOP leaders and candidates, as well as Republican voters.

Randall Balmer Republican-dominated state legislatures have nevertheless used the big lie as a pretext for limiting access to the ballot box, but one of the more persistent conspiracy theories is the so-called replacement theory, which has gained traction in some precincts of the Republican Party. Let’s set aside for a moment that the composition of the Senate and the structure of the Electoral College ensure Republicans wield outsized influence in American politics; Wyoming, with a population of 581,000, has the same number of senators as California, population 39-plus million. Nevertheless, the replacement theory conspiracy clearly resonates with many Americans, and right-wing politicians are more than willing to wield it as a political cudgel. SantaFeNewMexican Aug 2022

Heidi Beirich, PhD One is the “great replacement” conspiracy theory — this white supremacist idea that’s often antisemitic, that Jews are replacing white people in their homelands with people of color, immigrants, refugees — but the other thing they tend to believe is QAnon. Trump knows this makes up part of his base. He knows, or at least people around him know, that it’s a force in the Republican Party. Politico 2022

Seven in ten Republicans believe in the racist Great Replacement theory, which posits that white Americans are being intentionally “replaced” with non-white immigrants for various nefarious reasons. Crucially for understanding the speaker fiasco, seven out of 10 Republicans also believe the Big Lie that Trump won the 2020 election. Washington Monthly Oct 2023

The Anti-Defamation League called for Fox News to fire pundit Tucker Carlson last year because he espoused the “great replacement” theory so aggressively and so often, but the racist trope has now become normalized within the Republican Party. The Intercept January 2022

Miles Taylor (security expert) Look no further than how Republicans have pushed the conspiracy theories of QAnon, the 2020 stolen election myth and, chillingly, the “great replacement” lie that hangs over the tragic events in Buffalo. An Associated Press poll in December found that nearly 50 percent of Republicans agree to some degree with the sentiments of the “great replacement theory” NBC News May 2022

That conspiracy, known as “replacement theory,” has a long history at the fringes of American politics, reverberating for decades within the underground worlds of white nationalism and white supremacy. But it gained a recent mainstream foothold under former President Trump, whose “Make America Great Again” campaign launched with a blanket attack on Mexican immigrants, won legions of followers across the country and remains the single most animating force in the GOP even more than a year after Trump’s departure from public office. The Hill May 2022

Now, this theory appears to be moving in sanitized forms toward the center of GOP ideology. So, we’ll need a fuller understanding of what Americans really think of these ideas. WaPo May 2022

What’s different is the careful mainstreaming of fantasies about a deliberate plot to replace native-born Americans. That puts a new spin on garden-variety nativism or even on various forms of racial nationalism that envision Whiteness as central to American identity, notes Yale professor Philip Gorski, an expert in these movements. “It’s been gradually moving from the fringes into the mainstream,” Gorski told me. “First it was the entertainment wing of the GOP. Now it’s the political wing as well.” WaPo May 2022

Whether for ratings or votes, these ideas are now central to the Republican Party’s political messaging: that they are the one thing holding the country back from total chaos; that voting for Democrats will inevitably lead to policy shifts that will, in quick succession, lead to the downfall of the white race. This is the brunt of the political message that half of Republican voters have adopted, thanks in large part to the efforts of figures like Carlson and other Republicans: Ideas that were once shunned are now the foundation of the party’s platform; the best way to turn voters out in November is to ensure that they’re scared out of their minds. The great replacement theory is here to stay. It’s practically a plank in the GOP platform. The New Republic May 2022

It is becoming a trend: More and more Republicans have been signing on to “great replacement theory.” Because this worldview posits various versions of a nefarious liberal scheme to replace native-born Americans with non-White outsiders, it’s often analyzed through a racial prism. It is becoming a trend: More and more Republicans have been signing on to “great replacement theory.” Because this worldview posits various versions of a nefarious liberal scheme to replace native-born Americans with non-White outsiders, it’s often analyzed through a racial prism. The “great replacement” nonsense is yet another example of exactly that sort of derangement, and this mental habit is becoming dogma in the GOP. WaPo Sept 2021 cited by Political theology, discovery and the roots of the ‘great replacement’ https://colinbossen.com/biography/

NYT Kathleen Belew May 2022 - That “The Camp of the Saints” was recommended by Stephen Miller, who later became an architect of the Trump administration’s cruelest immigration policies, reveals that replacement theory is known, if not embraced, by some in the Republican Party.

Kent is not the only Republican to repeat the central themes of the racist and antisemitic Great Replacement theory. All over the country, sitting members of Congress, candidates, state politicians and former officeholders have been doing the same, bringing a white supremacist conspiracy theory to the forefront. They often try to distance themselves from the conspiracy theory’s antisemitic origins – a baseless belief that Jews are behind a systematic replacement of white people with immigrants and Black people – and instead say Democrats are trying to import nonwhite voters to take over American elections. They often denounce racism and bigotry in general, but not replacement theory. Sophie Bjork-James, an anthropology professor at Vanderbilt University and an expert in the white nationalist movement, said the theory has been a key tool for white supremacists working since school integration in the 1970s to recruit white conservative Republicans to their cause. A major reason the theory is so popular, she said, is that people can adopt the anti-immigrant and anti-Black parts of the conspiracy theory and instead of blaming Jews, blame the Democrats USA Today May 2022

Gang of Eight (immigration) In 2013, a group of eight bipartisan senators, colloquially known as the “Gang of Eight,” introduced the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013. The bill, which passed the Senate in June of that year, was an effort to comprehensively reform the immigration system. It included a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, increased border security measures, and changes to various visa programs. The bill was never taken up by the House. This lack of success in fixing the system opened the door to more extreme voices that oppose immigration of any kind, whose concerns are often based in racism and bigotry, and who have infiltrated the debate under the guise of representing mainstream conservative points of view. In 2015, then-candidate Trump adopted the language and policy prescriptions of these groups. In his speech announcing his candidacy, he famously said, “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best..." This introduction opened the door to a series of policy prescriptions throughout the campaign that came directly from the anti-immigrant movement. The recent mainstreaming of anti-immigrant movement rhetoric by and within the Trump administration, and the creeping impact of fringe anti-immigrant ideas on mainstream discourse, now occurs within the context of ongoing, heated debates over this administration’s controversial anti-immigrant policies.

In October 2018, a caravan of Central American migrants fleeing violence and poverty began making their way toward the United States, where they hoped to seek asylum. The caravan quickly became the target of anti-immigrant pundits and politicians (as did an April 2018 U.S. bound caravan). In October 2018, President Trump also took on the issue of birthright citizenship, which is enshrined in the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. During an interview with “Axios on HBO,” the President falsely claimed that the United States is “the only country in the world where a person comes in, has a baby, and the baby is essentially a citizen of the United Stated for 85 years with all of those benefits.” The President’s announcement was met with approval by anti-immigrant activists like Rep. Steve King (R-IA)15 and with skepticism and criticism from some lawmakers, including Speaker of the House Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). In addition to the anti-immigrant movement, there are four other segments of the far right that have significant anti-immigrant sentiments. These are 1) the white supremacist movement, including the alt right, which consists of a loose network of racists and anti-Semites who reject mainstream conservatism in favor of politics that embrace implicit or explicit racist, anti-Semitic and white supremacist ideology; 2) the alt lite, a loosely-connected movement whose adherents generally shun white supremacist thinking, but who are in step with the alt right in their hatred of immigrants, among others; 3) the militia movement; and 4) anti-Muslim extremists.

Some of these groups attempt to conflate their anti-immigrant ideology with popular issues, such as the environment, education, jobs and the economy, making the claim that immigrants, particularly those who are undocumented, use up the country’s resources in these areas—claims which have been debunked. Not only does this help shield them from public scrutiny for their extremist views, but also gains them support, as they link their xenophobic philosophies to causes mainstream audiences care about.

Additionally, the Trump administration has hired people with ties to groups like FAIR and CIS. FAIR’s former executive director, Julie Kirchner, currently serves as the ombudsman of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services at the Department of Homeland Security. She was previously at FAIR for 10 years, serving first as their Government Relations Director and then as Executive Director. In 2015, Kirchner left FAIR to join the Donald Trump presidential campaign as an immigration advisor. Kirchner was then appointed to the Customs and Border Protection Agency, and in April 2017 she moved into her current position as ombudsman.

Virulent Anti-Immigrant Sentiment Alt –Right Groups at the Forefront of Anti-Immigrant Activity While white supremacist groups remain on the fringes of society, they share certain beliefs with anti-immigrant groups, and often feed off of the anti-immigrant sentiment of groups like FAIR and CIS, which tend to be more nuanced in their language about immigrants. Meanwhile, white supremacists explicitly talk about preserving a white majority in the United States. They believe that non-white immigration threatens white American society and culture. They often talk about demographic changes in America and assert that the country is experiencing “white genocide.” They blame Jews for encouraging non-white immigration to this country. Before the extreme ideas of the anti-immigrant movement fully take root, the government, media and general public must take the necessary steps to make sure that the demonization of immigrants and the bigotry that underlie it do not become further entrenched in our society. These ideas should not become part of the acceptable discourse in America’s diverse and pluralistic society. ADL

Ronald Brownstein, has discussed an economic argument against republicans pushing GRCT in a 2021 CNN article

Far right White supremacist groups, conservative media personalities and now Republicans in Congress are trying to inflame nativist feelings among conservative Whites by warning that liberals want immigrants to “replace” native-born Americans in the nation’s culture and electorate...In polling by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute, about three-fifths of Republicans in both 2019 and 2020 agreed with the harshly worded statement that “immigrants are invading our country and replacing our cultural and ethnic background.” Among Whites who described themselves as very favorable toward Trump, more than three-fourths in each year endorsed that idea, according to detailed results provided by the institute.

Already the Public Religion Research Institute polling shows that Republicans who receive most of their information from Fox News are more likely than others in the GOP to embrace the “invading” argument. The economic realities facing the nation suggest that the “replacement theory” has the equation almost exactly backward. Carlson, Johnson and other proponents of the theory are telling their audience centered on older and working-class Whites that they should fear being “replaced” by immigrants. But the real threat to those constituencies, as more of them step into retirement, is that they won’t be replaced by immigrants in the workforce and the tax base. Without more immigrants, those culturally anxious Whites face the virtual certainty of more financial pressure on their federal retirement benefits and slower economic growth for American society overall. “You talk about ‘replacement,’ well, they need to be replaced in the workforce – that’s the issue,” Frey says. “Growing the younger age groups and particularly the younger workforce age groups is essential for us to not get into a situation of accentuated age dependency.” It’s far from the first time, but in pushing the racist “replacement theory,” the voices of the populist right are stirring cultural anxieties to mobilize their blue-collar and older White constituencies behind economic policies that harm their own interests.

According to RS it's the same thing, just repackaged for mainstream consumption. "In moving away from white nationalist terms like "white genocide" and "Jewish cabal," they have repackaged the conspiracy as one driven by political partisanship." NPR

Of course calling certain data factual is one thing, but GRCT is not just about said data. Adherents of GRCT have used statistics like that in conflation with GRCT to say that Democrats are "invading" the US with immigrants to replace/destroy white American culture and it's electorate, ie Republicans, but the point is that many of these adherents are high profile GOP members, ranking leaders and Republican voters according to RS.


 * "The theory’s first inaccurate assumption is that white Americans will soon become a minority population. But using any nuanced reading of the data, that’s not true. Yes, in 2015, the U.S. Census Bureau published a population projection that by the year 2044, non-Hispanic white Americans would no longer be a numerical majority in the country. But not being the majority is not the same as being a minority: Even in that projection, non-Hispanic white Americans would still make up a plurality of the population compared with any other race. And non-Hispanic white Americans are not the only white Americans."


 * "Another plot hole in the mainstream replacement narrative is the assumption that immigrants will solely support the Democratic party...Carlson, too, has repeatedly warned of a so-called Democratic plot to “import an entirely new electorate from the Third World and change the demographics of the U.S. so completely they will never lose again.” But even he concedes that this narrative is flawed, pointing out in his show last week that many non-white and immigrant voters are, in fact, Republican. In the 2020 election, roughly 2 in 5 Latino voters cast a ballot for then-President Donald Trump." fivethirtyeight.com

There has been at least one major civil lawsuit...


 * Amy Spitalnick, the executive director of Integrity First for America, a group that waged a successful civil suit against organizers of the 2017 Charlottesville rally, argued that the broader promotion of replacement rhetoric normalized hate and emboldened violent extremists. “This is the inevitable result of the normalization of white supremacist Replacement Theory in all its forms,” Ms. Spitalnick said. “Tucker Carlson may lead that charge — but he’s backed by Republican elected officials and other leaders eager to amplify this deadly conspiracy.” NYT

Legislation by Democrats... | H.Res.1152 & | H.Res.413...and by Republicans H.R.2737 — 118th Congress (2023-2024) & H.R.7118 - Halt the Invasion Act


 * "Condemning the atrocity that occurred in Buffalo, New York, on May 14, 2022, in which 10 Americans were killed and 3 were injured, and in which 11 of the 13 victims were Black Americans, condemning the Great Replacement Theory as a White supremacist conspiracy theory, and reaffirming the House of Representatives commitment to combating White supremacy, hatred, and racial injustice."

and studies...


 * "This report focuses on one specific group that may be at increased risk for political violence: so-called MAGA (Make America Great Again) Republicans. In speeches on August 25, 2022, in Bethesda and Rockville, Maryland [10, 11], and September 1, 2022, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania [12], US President Biden used that term in reference to Republicans who supported Donald Trump and denied the results of the 2020 election. He asserted that MAGA Republicans endorsed political violence, implying that they did so more than others or that others did not. He emphasized his belief that his characterization applied to only a minority of Republicans [13–16]. Critics nonetheless accused him of maligning half the country, apparently referring to persons who had voted for Donald Trump [13, 17–20]. These critics were asserting, in essence, that MAGA Republicans were indistinguishable from other Republicans.


 * "This study applies a public health approach to political violence. It uses standard methods to investigate variation in self-reported support for and willingness to engage in political violence, which are plausible proximate markers of risk for committing political violence [33]. It also assesses variation in prevalence of extreme beliefs—including the QAnon delusion and great replacement thinking, that have been linked to political violence in specific cases [34–36] and can be considered as potential indicators of risk for political violence. NCBI.NLM.NIH


 * "Perpetrators of conspiracy theories warp scientifically oriented data, like official surveys, studies, and statistics, and present an incomplete analysis of demographic changes in America (Craig & Richeson, 2014b; Stefaniak & Wohl, 2022). Historically, conspiracies like WRT are not new (Wood, 2012; Barkun, 2013; Van Prooijen & Douglas, 2017; Van Prooijen et al., 2020), but this fringe idea is gaining momentum in American politics. Individuals who subscribe to WRT now believe that there is an organized conspiratorial effort by the upper echelons of political society to replace White citizens, White culture, the White majority, and White civilization in the United States. There is reason to believe that the popularity of WRT will grow in America (Reyna et al., 2022), particularly due to the normalization of illiberal attitudes in American politics (Miller-Idriss, 2022) The “Great Replacement” conspiracy: How the perceived ousting of Whites can evoke violent extremism and Islamophobia


 * FAIR, CIS and NumbersUSA are all part of a network of restrictionist organizations conceived and created by John Tanton, the "puppeteer" of the nativist movement and a man with deep racist roots. As the first article in this report shows, Tanton has for decades been at the heart of the white nationalist scene. He has met with leading white supremacists and associated closely with the leaders of a eugenicist foundation once described by a leading newspaper as a "neo-Nazi organization." He has made a series of racist statements about Latinos and worried that they were outbreeding whites. At one point, he wrote candidly that to maintain American culture, "a European-American majority" is required SPLC SPLC


 * Bellware WaPo
 * L. Perry & Philip Gorski Over the last year or so, White Christian nationalism has become intertwined with the “great replacement” theory, which holds that a corrupt elite made up of Jews and Democrats is carrying out a plot to replace “real” Americans by engineering mass immigration from the Third World. Since 2015, that theory has captured the fringes and some in the mainstream on the right, from angry young men bearing tiki torches in Charlottesville; to pundits like Ann Coulter, Charlie Kirk, Matt Walsh and Tucker Carlson; to at least a half-dozen prominent Republican candidates and lawmakers, including Sen. Ron Johnson (Wis.), Reps. Elise Stefanik (N.Y.) and Scott Perry (Pa.), Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers, and J.D. Vance, Ohio’s GOP nominee for the Senate. WaPo
 * Jason Stanley The massacre by a white supremacist gunman of Black shoppers at a Buffalo grocery store has drawn renewed scrutiny of Republican figures in the US who have embraced the racist “great replacement theory” he is alleged to have used as justification for the murders. In a study of the history of great replacement theory in Republican circles, Vice notes that it “isn’t new to American politicians”. In 2017, the Iowa congressman Steve King, a fierce Trump loyalist, said in a tweet: “We can’t restore our civilization with somebody else’s babies.” The Guardian


 * Nicole Hemmer But because the conspiracy theory has become a major theme on Tucker Carlson’s popular prime-time show, as a recent New York Times investigation carefully detailed, the Buffalo massacre has also raised questions about what role a show like Mr. Carlson’s plays in the ecosystem of white-power violence...In the case of the great replacement conspiracy theory, the ideas are far older than Mr. Carlson’s show, or even the Fox News Channel, on which it appears. It repackages the mass of reactionary ideas and anxieties that have fed nativism, racism and antisemitism in the United States and Europe for centuries. While “The Turner Diaries” has largely remained an obsession of white-power groups, “The Camp of the Saints” found new popularity in right-wing political circles in the 2010s. Steve Bannon, who was the executive chairman of the right-wing website Breitbart News and a senior counselor to President Donald Trump, regularly invoked the book to describe the flow of migrants and refugees in both Europe and the United States. “It’s not a migration,” he said in 2016. “It’s really an invasion. I call it the Camp of the Saints.” Stephen Miller, the hard-line nativist who served as a senior adviser to Mr. Trump throughout his presidency, also favored the book as a framework for talking about immigration to the United States...Part of the strategy was to present white-power ideas as more palatable. Another was to draw in new recruits attracted, or at least intrigued, by the ideas they heard...All of this has had an effect. In the years since Mr. Carlson began talking about the conspiracy theory, it has spread rapidly on the right, not just in the dark hollows of the violent white-power movement, but also among Republican politicians and voters. Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, and Representative Elise Stefanik, the No. 3 Republican in the current House, have echoed the theory, and a recent Associated Press-NORC poll showed that nearly a third of Fox News viewers believe in the tenets of the great replacement conspiracy theory (for viewers of the far-right cable channels Newsmax and OANN, that number is even higher).


 * pundit Nicholas Confessore NYT


 * In the same month that Trump won the election, the network elevated Tucker Carlson to host a prime-time show. Carlson, like Bannon, spoke the language of the fringe right, even if it wasn’t as apparent at the outset. He and his team (which included several people later linked to white nationalism) increasingly elevated framing and stories that were popular in fringe-right, anti-immigrant conversations. That framing would trickle up to the White House. It was Carlson who made “great replacement theory” — the idea that nefarious actors were intentionally trying to bring immigrants to the United States to shift the country’s demography — a subject of national conversation. The idea quickly gained traction with Republican voters and, by extension, with Republican officials eager to appeal to that base. WaPo


 * "Political dynamics are shifting in America (Fortunato et al., 2022), and WRT is increasingly reflected in the right-wing rhetoric common to the Republican Party. When faced with information about demographic changes and diversification, individuals who identify as White are more likely to respond to conservative policies (Fox, 2004; Craig & Richeson, 2014a; Wetts & Willer, 2018; Abascal, 2020), conservative parties (Craig & Richeson, 2014a; Abrajano & Hajnal, 2015; Willer et al., 2016; Abascal, 2020), and conservative politicians (Major et al., 2018; Abascal, 2020; Knowles & Tropp, 2022) (p22)


 * "This paper argues that ‘The Great Replacement’ conspiracy is a flexible political strategy, encompassing various explanatory frameworks and elements. These can be used strategically by far-right actors in order to induce fear in native populations, by feeding off social and economic insecurity and by relying on ideas of ethnic and/or cultural homogeneity. However, it can also be used by mainstream right-wing political actors in more ‘civil’ versions of similar argumentative frameworks (cf. Ekman and Krzyżanowski, 2021, for a discussion on civil and uncivil argumentation).


 * "Although scholars have dismissed the demographic projections propagated by the “Great Replacement” as erroneous and nonscientific (see Alba, 2018; Alba et al., 2005), some warn that this conspiracy may have tremendous potential to lead to violent extremism (see Davey & Ebner, 2019)" https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/13684302211028293


 * President Donald Trump was among the ten most influential figures referenced in English-language Twitter conversations surrounding the “great replacement” theory. Time Julia Ebner


 * "Examining whether and how the prevalence of extreme anti-immigrant attitudes is impacted by rhetoric adopting aspects of the “Great Replacement” conspiracy (i.e., the argument that White populations are being replaced at an ethnic and cultural level through mass migration; Davey & Ebner, 2019) is of great theoretical and practical interest for several reasons. First, such ideas are no longer limited to the outer fringes of the public discourse, as the proponents of this conspiracy can now be found in mainstream politics, the media, and the general public (Bellware, 2019)"


 * "It has been suggested that immigration-related conspiracy theories trafficked by right-wing groups may nurture hate and violence against immigrants and asylum seekers in the West. Moreover, recent FBI documents predict that right-wing, conspiracy-driven extremism will increase in the next few years (Steinbuch, 2019). Indeed, new reports indicate that far-right terrorism has significantly outpaced other forms of terrorism (Jones et al., 2020). More specifically, right-wing terrorist incidents in the West have increased by 320% over the past 5 years (Institute for Economics & Peace, 2019). One of the most potent conspiracy theories evoked by right-wing extremists, politicians, and commentators is the “Great Replacement”—the conspiracy arguing that there is an attempt to replace the White autochthonous population with non-Western immigrants. Yet, to our knowledge, the present paper is the first to investigate the impact of perceiving that one’s ethnic group may be replaced by non-Western immigrants on negative outgroup sentiment (e.g., Muslim persecution, violent intentions, and Islamophobia). Importantly, the perception of being replaced is distinct from perceptions of outgroup size in that it refers to the extinction of one’s group, whereas outgroup size is mainly related to a zero-sum game that the majority is losing..."


 * "As the writer Rosa Schwartzburg puts it “the ‘Great Replacement’ is spreading like a virus” and seeping into mainstream, conservative, right-wing political discourse (Schwartzburg, 2019). For instance, the idea of being “replaced” by immigrants is a recurring feature on some Fox News programs (e.g., hosts such as Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham).


 * Indeed, a The New York Times review of popular right-wing media platforms found a striking degree of overlap between the language used by the El Paso shooter and the incendiary language of right-wing media personalities that echo the fear of invasion and replacement (Peters et al., 2019) NYT “It’s a bit of a vicious cycle,” said the conservative writer William Kristol, a Republican critic of Mr. Trump’s who has worked at Fox News and other networks. “Something is said on Fox News, and Trump repeats it, and that legitimizes it — and then someone else goes a little further.” He added, “The use of what once would have been viewed as really extreme and inappropriate and sometimes conspiratorial, sometimes dehumanizing language is really striking.” While the notion of immigrants as a national threat was a feature of the conservative Patrick Buchanan’s unsuccessful bids to win the Republican presidential nominations in 1992 and 1996 (he used the phrase “illegal invasion” then), they ran counter to the Republican Party’s efforts to make itself more appealing to Hispanics and other minorities in the two decades before Mr. Trump became its front-runner.


 * Lawrence Rosenthal, a professor at the Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, said that the shared vocabulary of white nationalists and many prominent conservatives was chilling. “Where that intersects with the Republican Party today,” he added, “is the Republican argument that the Democrats are in favor of immigration because that will give them a permanent majority.”


 * As our results show, such incendiary language portraying Westerners under invasion by immigrants has far-reaching implications for violent extremism. For instance, recent analyses identified fear of “the Great Replacement” as the root cause of the Capitol attack; these analyses concluded that the second biggest driver for the attack was the significant traction that such conspiracy theories have on social media (Pape, 2021)."

The great replacement: Strategic mainstreaming of far-right conspiracy claims In the United States, the idea of replacement has been propagated by Fox News star host Tucker Carlson. Carlson has repeatedly expressed the idea that ‘white Anglo-Saxons’ are being replaced by immigrant populations (Åsard, 2020). Moreover, Republican senators such as Ron Johnson have also tapped into ‘The Great Replacement’ theory when addressing questions on (new) voter cohorts. Johnson claimed that immigration policies are a way for Democrat elected representatives to ensure political support: ‘[T]his administration wants complete open borders. And you have to ask yourself why? Is it really, they want to remake the demographics of America to ensure their – that they stay in power forever? Is that what’s happening here?’ (Benen, 2021) MSNBC "It wasn't long before a toxic echo reverberated in some Republican circles. The Washington Post noted, for example, that Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa.) spoke up at a congressional hearing on Central American migrants, delivering rhetoric that sounded awfully similar to Carlson's..But as important as those relevant details are, it's the degree to which Johnson's suggestion dovetails with Tucker Carlson's "replacement" rhetoric that's especially jarring. The wording obviously wasn't identical, but the similarities in sentiments are hardly subtle, and they reinforce larger concerns about the poison spreading, both on Capitol Hill and in conservative media...". WaPo Obaldi


 * NYT Yet in recent months, versions of the same ideas, sanded down and shorn of explicitly anti-Black and antisemitic themes, have become commonplace in the Republican Party — spoken aloud at congressional hearings, echoed in Republican campaign advertisements and embraced by a growing array of right-wing candidates and media personalities.

"Actually you don't have plenty of sources that discuss the GOP and make the GRCT claim. You have many sources that say some right wing or racists etc believe this or this politician said something associated with the the GRCT."

So you've counted them all already? I haven't even had time to find them all... Even going back to when Trump was was pushing GRCT over 5 YEARS ago...

Rosenthal told ABC News that there are various "manifestations" of this ideology across the spectrum of the right in the U.S., but that in recent years those expressions have become more "explicit" and have "assumed rhetorical predominance" in the Republican Party. "The magnitude of how much replacement theory has infiltrated [the] spectrum of the right in this country is something we haven't seen before," he added. ABC News

"Replacement" theory began in white supremacist circles, but has since moved more mainstream on the political right in this country and among many Republicans, explicitly or implicitly. We explore that and how former President Donald Trump used it for political gain in a Q&A with an expert below, but, first, some background. NPR

The “great replacement” theory describes a supposed elite conspiracy to change the demographics of America, replacing and disempowering white people – and their influence – with people of color, immigrants and Muslims. In recent years the lie has gone from far-right fringe to Republican party mainstream. The Guardian

Some of the Republican campaigns denied that their statements amounted to replacement theory, but among the experts, there is little question. PBS

Instead, many on the right are doing the opposite: They’re doubling down on the great replacement. As a result of the horror in Buffalo, this rancid idea might become even more central to Republican ideology.

Far right White supremacist groups, conservative media personalities and now Republicans in Congress are trying to inflame nativist feelings among conservative Whites by warning that liberals want immigrants to “replace” native-born Americans in the nation’s culture and electorate. But that racist “replacement theory”

How many dozens of reliable sources per organization (besides SPLC) do we need here, or do you also want a certain number of historians, sociologists and political scientists on top of the half dozen or so I've already listed?

.
According to the current lead in the article, As of 2024, Trumpists are the dominant faction within the GOP. When we speak of Trumpists, some also refer to them as part of the MAGA movement. We have an entire section on the Trump era, not to mention the Trumpist faction. We also have a section called the Gingrich revolution.

"In just the past year, Republican luminaries like Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and Georgia congressman, and Elise Stefanik, the center-right New York congresswoman turned Trump acolyte (and third-ranking House Republican), have echoed replacement theory. Appearing on Fox, Mr. Gingrich declared that leftists were attempting to “drown” out “classic Americans.”" NYT May 2022

I'm still listing sources for a number of reasons. One of them being there are so many of them over such a long period of time. It is already about halfway through the 10 year test. I'm also adding them with context for those those with limited access and time to more accurately and efficiently address and discuss. My apologies for taking up so much space or if it is not appreciated, but hopefully it improves participation and perspective.

I am of the view that whether or not the Trump wins in Nov is irrelevant, per WP:CRYSTAL, and the odds are that for the next 7-8 months (minimum) there will likely be more articles and research about the Republican party's MAGA-version of GRCT. There's over a dozen or so fairly notable experts (IMHO) that are paying attention to this trend in the GOP with regard to their respective fields, including professors, historians and political scientists like Steven Levitsky, Daniel Ziblatt, Sara Kamali, Joseph Lowndes, Cynthia Miller-Idriss, Mark Pitcavage, Cas Mudde, Philip Gorski, Samuel L. Perry, Nicole Hemmer, Sophie Bjork-James, Kathleen Belew, Larry A. Rosenthal, Jason Stanley, Heidi Beirich, Joseph Chamie, Clarence Lusane, Adam Serwer etc..etc..etc...Some of these scholars have suggested that GRCT also fall in line with other aspects of the MAGA/Trumpist agenda, such as restricting abortion and loosening gun laws.


 * Britannica The MAGA movement is also known for having an antagonistic relationship with mainstream news media, which are thought by a majority in the movement to be biased against MAGA views, at best, and to be lying on behalf of the movement’s enemies, at worst. This belief has resulted in a vulnerability among MAGA members to false news stories and particularly far-fetched conspiracy theories circulated by MAGA-supporting media outlets and repeated by MAGA leaders. Examples include charges that Democratic former president Barack Obama is not a native-born U.S. citizen (“birtherism”), that Democrats’ immigration policies aim to replace white Americans with nonwhite immigrants (see replacement theory), that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from Trump by Democrats through massive voter fraud, and that the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol, in which a mob of Trump supporters attempted to halt Congress’s certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 presidential election, was actually staged by left-wing forces...In the aftermath of the election, there was a rush to understand and respond to the new political power that the MAGA movement represented. The media ran numerous articles and television reports analyzing the development and makeup of the movement. Within the Republican Party, Trump became a kingmaker, his endorsement all but necessary to anyone who wished to win a Republican primary election for a major office (see Republican politicians all over the country have repeated the GRCT USA Today May 2022)...The MAGA movement remains a powerful force in American politics. In late 2022 an estimated 4 in 10 Republicans identified themselves as “MAGA Republicans.” Shortly after the midterm elections of 2022, Trump declared his candidacy for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination. In view of the strength of the MAGA movement, other candidates for the Republican nomination have been forced to adopt strategies (see Why is Republican candidate Vivek Ramaswamy doubling down on conspiracy theories? BBC Dec 2023) that limit direct or serious criticisms of Trump and emphasize their acceptance of at least some of the extremist views of MAGA members.


 * NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump is seizing on his party’s frustration with the recent surge of illegal crossings at the southern U.S. border to churn up fears around another top GOP concern — voter fraud. In the final stretch before Iowa’s caucuses next Monday, the former Republican president has repeatedly suggested that Democrats are encouraging migrants to flow into the country illegally in order to register them to vote in the 2024 election. The unsupported claim, which Trump and other Republicans have carted out in past election years, is resonating with voters who agree that security is lacking at both the border and the polls. Experts say it also can be damaging, giving undue traction to false stereotypes and extremist ideologies such as the racist “great replacement theory.” Meanwhile, public confusion around border policy leaves room for false claims to spread, said Jared Holt, a senior analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a London-based think tank that tracks online hate, disinformation and extremism. He said false noncitizen voting claims over the years have helped build support for a more sinister conspiracy theory about a grand plot to diminish the influence of white Americans by replacing them with minorities. “It’s sort of a tongue-in-cheek way of pushing the great replacement theory, but in a way that has been understood to be less morally repugnant or perceivably more defensible,” Holt said. “I don’t think you have to scratch very far below the surface to understand what is really being said.” AP News Jan 2024


 * Joel Rose The word invasion has a long history in white nationalist circles. For years, it was used widely by supporters of the "replacement theory" — the false conspiracy theory that says Jews or elites are deliberately replacing white Americans with immigrants and people of color. Until recently, you rarely heard it from Republican officeholders or candidates. In this election cycle, it's moved squarely into the mainstream..."Before these ideas might have been seen as outliers. But now, it is really troubling," said Vanessa Cárdenas, the deputy director of America's Voice, an immigrant advocacy group that's been tracking political ads. It's found dozens of ads that use the word invasion by Republicans campaigning all over the country. NPR Aug 2022


 * Republican lawmakers claiming immigrants are part of a “great replacement” of White voters has been in the news for months. “Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the No. 3 House Republican, and other GOP lawmakers came under scrutiny . . . for previously echoing the racist ‘great replacement’ theory that apparently inspired an 18-year-old who allegedly killed 10 people while targeting Black people at a supermarket in Buffalo,” reported the Washington Post (May 16, 2022). “The baseless conspiracy theory claims that politicians are attempting to wipe out White Americans and their influence by replacing them with non-White immigrants.” The immigration group America’s Voice has tracked election-year ads and found inflammatory rhetoric about immigrants from Republican candidates. “Almost all the Republicans running statewide in Arizona have made ‘replacement’ and ‘invasion’ conspiracies a central part of their campaigns,” according to an America’s Voice report. Forbes Oct 2022


 * Dr. Sara Kamali: The “great replacement theory” is one such baseless belief that is playing a role in the anti-immigration rhetoric that is central to the 2022 strategies of many Republican candidates who are running for seats at all levels of government. The Conversation Sept 2022


 * A fear of an “invasion” of people of color has also been a longtime Republican talking point that has gained prominence during the Trump administration. The New York Times analyzed right-wing media—including Fox New shows like Tucker Carlson Tonight—and found “hundreds of examples of language, ideas, and ideologies that overlapped with the mass killer’s written statement.” President Trump and officials in his administration have used it, and Republican members of Congress have used similar racist language. Below are some examples we found. Mother Jones Aug 2019


 * Versions of the theory have been promoted by Fox News' Tucker Carlson and Republican members of Congress, most notably House Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik of New York. Most frequently, arguments about replacement theory are framed in terms of voter power, with Republicans arguing that Democrats want to use immigration to dilute Republican votes. Business Insider May 2022


 * As majorities of Republicans express belief in the tenets of the far-right white nationalist "great replacement" theory and Democrats fail to lead on immigration, analysts and voters said worries over surging prices, gun violence and more are crowding out a vital issue for much of the country. USA Today June 2022


 * It may not be immediately obvious how the fight over abortion rights is tied to the “great replacement” theory — the debunked conspiracy theory promoted by some Republican politicians who claim that Democrats support more immigration to “replace” white American voters. But the explanation for, say, an alleged gaffe that overturning the constitutional right to an abortion is a “historic victory of white life” or a concern that not enough white babies are being born in the U.S. can be found in the history of the anti-abortion movement. Fivethirtyeight July 2022

Please notify me if there is any duplication of previous citations, so I may strike. Cheers.