A few months ago, a friend proposed writing a book jointly about “creeping fascism” in the Trump era. I was already pursuing another book project—more on that later—so I took a pass. But I wondered—as I have over the past few years—about the application of the f-word to our current political situation. No doubt, Donald Trump is a narcissistic, fearmongering, demagogic authoritarian with no respect for democratic values and norms, and his success in flimflamming tens of millions of Americans has been alarming. His efforts to overturn the 2020 election—which led to his fanatics storming Congress—and his ongoing campaign to delegitimize it do pose a serious threat to the nation. But fascism? Would that be rhetorically hyperbolic? Does hurling that loaded word make one seem hysterical? Many Trump foes have compared his use of disinformation, propaganda, and hate to what occurred in Nazi Germany. But I’ve questioned whether that is an effective course. Does playing the Hitler card wake up those not paying attention or does it alienate people?

Enter Tucker Carlson. Pushing the racist "replacement theory"and vaccination resistance on his nightly Fox News show is apparently not a full-time job for him. He has started producing long-form pieces for the network. The first one, to be released on November 1, promises to reveal the “true story” behind the January 6 insurrectionist attack on the Capitol that Trump incited. Look at the trailer for this propaganda:

The 1/6 assault, the show suggests, was a “false flag” operation, meaning it was orchestrated by the US government to create a ruse to justify an outright Deep State war on conservatives—a “patriot purge.” Carlson features someone who claims that “the left is hunting the right and sticking them in Guantanamo Bay.” The “new” war on terrorism, he tells us, is aimed at white Americans, under the guise of combatting white supremacy. In other words, the Biden administration is coming for you. And it’s coming with attack helicopters—redeployed from Afghanistan—and guns.

This is what fascism looks like. Big lies, martial music, scare-‘em imagery, and the accusation that a corrupt elite is waging a secret war against the common folk and true patriots—including the 1/6 marauders and Fox viewers. This agitprop is even more dangerous than Carlson’s usual yapping. Anyone who buys his latest guff would certainly feel justified in resorting to violence. After all, if they’re hunting you, don’t you need to take extreme measures in response? (One prominent white supremacist now being sued for his role in organizing the deadly 2017 “Unite the Right” rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, has submitted court filings showing how he was encouraged by Carlson’s broadcasts.) As of Friday morning, this trailer had been viewed on Twitter at least 2.6 million times.

Carlson is not only playing with fire. He is attempting to detonate a bomb. Just as there is no bottom with Trump, there is no limit to the depths Fox will plunge to foment tribalism and terror. Carlson and the network are concocting a panic for profit and political gain. Leni Riefenstahl would be proud—and probably envious of the production values.

On Thursday, the Anti-Defamation League fired off a letter to Lachlan Murdoch, the CEO of the Fox Corporation, and blasted the upcoming Carlson show:

Let’s call this what it is: an abject, indisputable lie and a blatant attempt to rewrite history. As an organization committed to fighting antisemitism and all forms of hate, we remain deeply concerned that the false narrative and wild conspiracy theories presented by Carlson will sow further division and has the potential to animate violence.

Jonathan Greenblatt, the group’s CEO, blamed Carlson for having already triggered violent acts: “We have seen, over and over again, the consequences of such unhinged conspiratorial rhetoric—from Pittsburgh to Poway to El Paso. These heinous acts of violence were spurred, in part, by many of the same false grievances Carlson espouses each and every night.” And Greenblatt asked:

[W]here is the line for you and Fox? How many more people need to die or how many individuals must subscribe to groundless conspiracies before you say enough is enough? Inflammatory rhetoric of this sort is neither legitimate political discourse nor spirited debate. It is dangerous rhetoric that could catalyze violence.”

Greenblatt insisted that Fox and the Murdochs had a “moral responsibility” not to show this Carlson atrocity. Moral responsibility? That train left the station a long time ago for Lachlan and his father. In 2016, they decided that the best course for Fox was to become state television for Trump. Now they have steamed full speed into fascist territory. And everyone who works with Fox—every host, every reporter—is complicit. (I say this as someone who was on the Fox payroll in the late 1990s and early 2000s as a commentator.)

On Thursday, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) turned down a request to appear on Carlson’s show with a sharp reply from her spokesperson to Carlson’s top booker: “Tucker has had countless opportunities to explain to his viewers that the election was not stolen. Instead, he continues to promote dangerous conspiracies using the language that provoked violence against law enforcement and our Capitol on January 6th. Liz will not participate in that.” This is the model for responsible Republicans. The problem: there are almost no responsible Republicans.

It’s unlikely the Greenblatt letter will persuade the Murdochs. They and Carlson long ago demonstrated they are beyond shaming. And Cheney’s boycott won’t move the network or its most-watched fomenter. But it is time to recognize that Fox has gone far beyond serving merely as a purveyor of right-wing and pro-Trump spin. With this new Carlson joint, Fox is fully embracing the hallmarks of fascism. Any reluctance to call it that only assists the fascists.

Got a comment on this item? Anything else to tell me? A lead, a tip? Email me at thisland@motherjones.com.

How Politics Really Works

I assume that readers of this newsletter believe they know a fair bit about politics. That’s how I would characterize myself. But while working on a recent article, I realized that I knew damn little about one of the most important aspects of modern campaigns: data. Yet over the course of a months-long investigation of the most influential data company in the Democratic and progressive universe, I learned a great deal about the vital role of big data in today’s political campaigns. I also discovered that this firm, TargetSmart, dominates the data game for Democrats and progressive organizations.

TargetSmart vows to only work for Democrats and progressives—which, given the sensitivity of data and its usage, is an important promise. But, as I revealed, the two men who own the company spun off a consulting company that earns millions helping to elect far-right Republicans. This includes Stop the Stealers and January 6 apologists. That’s right: these guys are working both sides of the aisle. For example, TargetSmart aided Democrat Stacey Abrams’ voter registration effort in Georgia, but its sister company helped Republican Brian Kemp—who tried to thwart that voter registration drive—become governor. As far as I can tell, no one in the Democratic and progressive community outside of TargetSmart was aware of this corporate arrangement before my story was published a few days ago. I’m reliably informed my piece has caused a ruckus within the small but significant world of Democratic and progressive data operatives. This is inside baseball but fascinating stuff. I hope you’ll give the story a read.

Dumbass Comment of the Week

There are always too many to choose from. But one of the more absurd moments of this week occurred when Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) grilled Attorney General Merrick Garland during a congressional hearing. He took multiple potshots at Garland. He pushed the AG to address conspiracy theories about Dr. Anthony Fauci. He accused the Justice Department of looking to prosecute parents over school mask mandates—which is not happening. And he barked this question at Garland: “Have you started an investigation into the harassment of Sen. Kyrsten Sinema in a bathroom, in a bathroom because she won’t go along with the Democratic Party’s big tax and spend agenda?”

Why are Republicans always obsessed with bathrooms? And don’t conservatives like Cotton tell us that the federal government ought to have limited powers? You know, state’s rights? So it was rather curious that Cotton was now encouraging the feds to descend upon Arizona to investigate an incident in which a few activists followed Sinema into a bathroom to ask her about her opposition to the $3.5 trillion social infrastructure bill—an incident already under investigation by local police. Could this be an instance of a senator grandstanding? On the way into the hearing room, Cotton told reporters, “Get your popcorn ready.”

The Mailbag

There was a lot of reaction to the behind-the-scenes account of my scoop reporting that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) had told associates he was considering leaving the Democratic Party if he didn’t succeed in cutting President Joe Biden’s $3.5 trillion social infrastructure bill in half.

Suzanne Cloud wrote:

For the life of me I cannot understand why Dems are not playing up the intense conflicts of interests between Manchin's stated position and the businesses propping up his family. Can you ask any prominent Dems why this isn't being done? Are they that afraid of making him mad? Glad to join your followers. I've been watching you for years and years (early on on C-SPAN).

Thanks, Suzanne. The basic problem is that the Democrats and Biden have little leverage over Manchin. Or Sinema. There have been stories about his coal industry connections and other corporate interests—and he still wins elections in West Virginia. The Democrats are not afraid of angering him. But with the Republicans in lockstep opposition to the package, Democrats have no choice but to deal with him and Sinema—and Manchin did make it clear he was willing to vote against the package. My assumption is that the Ds believe calling Manchin out on these conflicts would not lead to a smoother negotiation and a better resolution. Manchin and Sinema have been able to hold their party and Biden hostage because the Dems are constrained by the structural challenges posed by a 50-50 Senate—and there’s not much they can do about that during the negotiations. Ultimately, if they do pass the current version of the package, Biden and the Democrats need to make sure the story is what’s within the bill, not the messy process that led to it.

Jean Gold emailed:

I have long admired your integrity and your magazine's investigative reporting. I can't help but suspect that both Manchin and Sinema are being rewarded by Trump or some wealthy Republican for sabotaging President Biden's Build Back Better agenda. I have also questioned why so many Republican members of Congress are "devoted" to Trump and are afraid to cross him. I have rationalized that Trump's friendship with Putin, who was head of the KGB, has used Putin's capabilities to dig up dirt on every Republican in Congress to use as a blackmail tactic to keep them loyal to Trump. I cannot believe that the Republicans' anti-American behavior can be attributed to anything but personal fear. Am I really off-base in my thinking, or do you think my suspicions are correct?

Thanks to you, too, Jean. I do not believe your suspicions are correct. Manchin, Sinema, and the Republicans are all taking these positions for their own reasons—not because they have been compromised. If you believe their stances to be anti-American, then you just must accept that’s who and what they are. Thanks to my reporting, I have a good idea of what’s propelling Manchin, and to a large extent it is his conservative opposition to the much-needed social programs in the bill. (He, of course, is also trying to protect the coal and gas industry, for reasons mentioned above.) He truly believes—or has convinced himself—that paid family leave, better Medicare coverage, and other provisions would push the United States toward an “entitlement mentality.” I know you disagree. The obstacle is not Putin-ish blackmail; it’s wrongheadedness and greed.

Marcia L. Meyer was quite enthusiastic:

If you weren't a married man, and I was twenty years younger, I'd hug the stuffings out of you, for sure! Great story [on Manchin]. Way to go. Who says shoe leather reporting doesn't pay off. Get away from behind those texting phones and actually mix-and-mingle-and-listen-and-write-the-story! As dear Molly Ivins would say, "Good on ya', David Corn, good on ya!"

First, I have to say that story came to me through a phone call. On to Molly Ivins: she was a dear friend, and I miss her much. I can only imagine how disheartened she would be to see how stupidity and ignorance has so shaped American politics in recent years.

Charles Niessner asked, “Anyway to get back issues of This Land newsletters?” And Joanna Rives had a similar query: “Is there a subscriber link to This Land archives. I’ve been using the links at the bottom of the newsletter but I would like to start at issue one and work my way back to where I started my subscription.”

I’m flattered. I keep thinking of this newsletter as a new project, but I suppose after a few months, there’s a body of back issues that has grown. We’re working on how best to make this material available. Currently, as Joanna notes, there’s a list of recent issues at the end of each newsletter with links to click on. Only premium subscribers receive this portion of the newsletter (after the free trial ends). That’s one of the perks that comes with helping us with the monthly fee of five bucks. I hope that we will soon have an easy-to-access archive for subscribers. In the meantime, please help This Land grow by forwarding it to friends and frenemies, colleagues, and kin, and ask them to sign up. I’d truly appreciate that.

Paul Raetsch reported:

Sarafina saw Moxie and ordered me to subscribe. Thanks to you both, I can keep up with your informed journalism.

That’s one smart pooch. And speaking of perceptive canines….

Got anything to ask or say to me for the Mailbag? A photo of a dog to share? Email me at thisland@motherjones.com.

MoxieCam™ (Special Whoodle Edition)

“Moxie,” I said. “We have a new friend who’s visiting for a night. Her name is Ruby. And she’s a three-month-old Whoodle from Rhode Island.”

“What’s a Whoodle?” Moxie asked. I explained: “A cross of a poodle and a Wheaton terrier.”

“Well,” she replied, “Whoodle me this: why would anyone not just want a poodle? We’re athletic, smart, and empathetic. And we don’t shed. Why mess with that?” I didn’t have the heart to tell her.

Read Previous Issues of This Land

October 23, 2021: Joe Manchin, “bullshit,” and me; Dumbass Comment of the Week; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

October 19, 2021: Who’s the most dangerous House Republican and why you might not know his name; why Squid Game hooks us; a new book on the history of xenophobia; Rock ’n’ Roll Flashback: a young and angry Elvis; and more.

October 16, 2021: Crunch time for Merrick Garland; Bannon, QAnon, and the Virginia governor race; Dumbass Comment of the Week; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

October 12, 2021: How Donald Trump betrayed Trump country; one of the best books about survival and isolation ever; the disappointments of The Many Saints of Newark; and more.

October 9, 2021: Can Trump and the GOP be stopped from shoving 1/6 into a memory hole?; how you can join a This Land online salon; the world premiere of Jill Sobule’s new song, “You Better Not F*ck in Texas”; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

October 5, 2021: The Democracy Crisis: Could this be Joe Biden’s big mistake?; kicking Pat Robertson on the way out; Skyfall vs. Casino Royale; a Velvet Underground tribute; and more.

October 2, 2021: How we almost got that big Lewandowski scoop; Dumbass Comment of the Week; MoxieCam™; and more.

September 29, 2021: Note to Greta Van Susteren: The road to hell is paved with both-siderism; the value of Netflix’s Worth; a crazy CIA story; and more.

September 25, 2021: What do Common, Leonard Bernstein, and Dwight Eisenhower have in common?; Dumbass Comment of the Week; the Mailbag; MoxieCam™; and more.

September 21, 2021: The Trump-Russia scandal denialists are taking another desperate stab at gaslighting you; Netflix’s The Chair nails the assignment; and more.

September 18, 2021: Hey Marco Rubio and Glenn Greenwald, this is the real problem with Milley, Trump, and nuclear weapons; Dumbass Comment of the Week (did Barack Obama really kill rock ’n’ roll with racial politics?); the Mailbag; MoxieCam™ (a new toy!); and more.

September 14, 2021: Will the new Bill-and-Monica television series spur a reappraisal of the Clinton scandal?; a stunning new Holocaust movie you can’t see—yet; one of the best articles ever about a family and its dog; and more.

September 11, 2021: How Trump’s conspiracy theories are killing people in West Virginia and elsewhere; more 9/11 reflections; Dumbass Comment of the Week (Special Confederacy Edition); a look at HBO’s very odd White Lotus; MoxieCam™; and more.

September 8, 2021: 9/11 plus 20: a remembrance and a thank-you; the chilling climate crisis warning in HBO’s Reminiscence; and more.

September 3, 2021: Texas shows how Trumpism has become fascistic vigilantism; Dumbass Comment of the Week; Rock ’n’ Roll Flashback (how I was popped by Iggy Pop); MoxieCam™; and more.