Doug Mastriano, a far-right 2020 election denier, is Pennsylvania Republicans’ choice for governor. May 17, 2022 Reid J. Epstein NYT

Doug Mastriano, a central figure in former President Donald J. Trump’s efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, won the state’s Republican primary for governor on Tuesday, making the general election a referendum on democracy in the place where American representative government was born.

The Associated Press declared Mr. Mastriano, a retired Army colonel and two-term state senator, the winner over a crowded field of Republican candidates. In the campaign’s final days, his opponents mounted an unsuccessful last-ditch effort to consolidate support around a rival, former Representative Lou Barletta.

 In his short time in public office, Mr. Mastriano, 58, has emerged as Pennsylvania’s leading far-right figure.

He funded buses to shuttle supporters to the rally on Jan. 6, 2021, that preceded the attack on the Capitol. During his run for governor, he has barred the news media from attending his campaign events and has appeared with proponents of the QAnon conspiracy theory.

 

At the start of the coronavirus pandemic, Mr. Mastriano proposed a public registry of people who had tested positive for the virus, but he later campaigned against mask-wearing and vaccines.

On Saturday, after public and private polling showed Mr. Mastriano with a sizable lead over Mr. Barletta and the rest of the Republican field, Mr. Trump endorsed him, citing his fight to overturn the election.

 We’re going to win on May 17,” Mr. Mastriano said at a rally last week in Erie, Pa. “And to quote a friend of ours, it’s going to be huge.”

In Pennsylvania, the Republican primary for governor played second fiddle to the state’s Senate contest, into which far more money flowed. Only one of the candidates for governor, Bill McSwain, a former U.S. attorney, had enough money to air television advertising in the final weeks of the campaign.

Mr. Mastriano, Mr. Barletta and the others were left to grapple for limited attention from the news media.

 Mr. Trump’s late endorsement of Mr. Mastriano infuriated some of the former president’s earliest supporters in Pennsylvania. Former Representative Tom Marino, who along with Mr. Barletta stumped across the state for Mr. Trump’s 2016 campaign, condemned the endorsement at an event for Mr. Barletta on Saturday.

“Where in the hell is the loyalty?” Mr. Marino said. “I am very disappointed in the president, the former president. Because apparently the loyalty does not go as far as he says his loyalty does.”

 If Mr. Mastriano were to win the general election in November, he would have enormous power over how the 2024 presidential election is conducted in Pennsylvania. The governor appoints the secretary of state, who oversees the state’s elections. Mr. Mastriano has already said he would seek to decertify the 2020 results in the state. 

 Democrats nominated Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania’s attorney general, who has planned a campaign for governor for years. Mr. Shapiro ran unopposed for the Democratic nomination.

In the final weeks before Tuesday’s primary, Mr. Shapiro’s campaign aired advertising across Pennsylvania saying “if Mastriano wins, it’s a win for what Donald Trump stands for,” a not-very-subtle attempt to lift Mr. Mastriano’s financially struggling campaign among Republican primary voters. Officials in both parties in Pennsylvania believe Mr. Mastriano would be the weakest possible opponent against Mr. Shapiro in the general election.

 

Southern Baptist Convention leaders mishandled sexual abuse allegations, report says

Leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) mishandled allegations of sexual abuse, intimidated victims and their advocates, and resisted attempts at reform over the course of two decades, according to an explosive report released Sunday by a third-party firm.

"Survivors and others who reported abuse were ignored, disbelieved, or met with the constant refrain that the SBC could take no action," the report found, "even if it meant that convicted molesters continued in ministry with no notice or warning to their current church or congregation."

 

 According to the report on the investigation conducted by Guidepost Solutions, survivors of abuse and other persons within the Southern Baptist community contacted the SBC Executive Committee (EC) to make them aware of child molestation and other forms of abuse committed by people employed by the church as well as those who were at the pulpit, but were met with inaction.

In a statement, the SBC said in part: "To the members of the survivor community, we are grieved by the findings of this investigation. We are committed to doing all we can to prevent future instances of sexual abuse in churches, to improve our response and our care, to remove reporting roadblocks."

 

The SBC is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States, with an estimated 14 million members across more than 47,000 Baptist churches. Last year, its members voted during the organization's convention in Nashville to approve a task force to supervise an independent investigation following accusations and stories of abuse that had been featured in the media.

The investigative firm combed through documents and interviewed current and former EC staff, trustees, witnesses and sexual abuse survivors. In total, approximately 330 people were interviewed, the report noted. The investigation targeted the period between January 1, 2000, and June 14, 2021. Here's what it found. 

 

Report: Top priority was avoiding liability

The report lays out a timeline of the SBC Executive Committee's response to sexual abuse issues from 2000 to 2021.

The EC is governed by 86 trustees who serve limited terms. During the SBC's own internal investigation, decisions regarding sexual abuse were "largely left to the discretion" of the executive committee president and chief executive officer as well as his closest advisors on staff, with "high-level issues" brought to the SBC president, according to the report. It said the trustees were not informed nor involved in the decision-making process. 

 

 

As a result, the report says, the SBC's response to sexual abuse allegations over the course of two decades was largely driven "by a small cadre of staff" as well as its outside lawyers.

"Abuse allegations were often mishandled in a manner that involved the mistreatment of survivors," the report said, adding that the primary concern of the staff and SBC's law firm "was avoiding any potential liability for the SBC." 

 The report highlighted that a list started as early as 2007 was maintained by an EC staff member who had been documenting reports of abuse for more than a decade; however, there was no indication that EC staff "took any action to ensure that the accused ministers were no longer in positions of power at SBC churches." 

 

The most recent list that was prepared by the staff member "contained the names of 703 abusers, with 409 believed to be SBC-affiliated at some point in time," according to the report. As part of its review, the Guidepost Solutions investigative team found nine people accused of abuse remain in active ministry or connected to active ministry, two of whom appear to be associated with an SBC church.

Numerous accounts included in the timeline indicate some within the EC leadership tried to minimize or ignore the allegations to protect SBC's reputation and "avoid the risk of legal liability for sexual abuse" at its churches. 

 

 

The victims who sought to shed light on the issues were considered "opportunistic," or having a "hidden agenda of lawsuits," or "acting as a 'professional victim,'" the report went on to say.

The organization's communications arm, Baptist Press, also aided in shunning accusers to make them appear in an "unflattering light and mischaracterize allegations of abuse," the report said.

One of the senior leaders named in the investigation was former SBC President Johnny Hunt, who was reported by a SBC pastor and his wife to have sexually assaulted her on July 25, 2010, according to the report.

Hunt responded to the report's claim on Twitter by saying in part, "To put it bluntly: I vigorously deny the circumstances and characterizations set forth in the Guidepost report. I have never abused anybody."

 

 

The report said investigators found the sexual assault allegation credible, in part because it was corroborated by witnesses. CNN has reached out to Hunt for further comment.

The timeline of events shows, the report says, how "the derogatory attitude to survivors by some EC members continued into 2021." 

 

 

Changes will require 'significant amount of work'

Guidepost Solutions proposed recommendations to improve how the SBC responds to sexual abuse and misconduct allegations.

"Some recommendations will require a significant amount of work, while other elements recognize the need for education and cultural change. A comprehensive implementation of these recommendations should help to create safe spaces for children and all members of the Convention," the report said. 

 

The recommendations include:

• Creating and maintaining an "Offender Information System" database to alert communities to known offenders.

• Establishing an independent commission and, later, a permanent administrative entity to oversee comprehensive reforms.
• Providing a "Resource Toolbox" that includes protocols, training, education and practical information.
• Restricting the use of nondisclosure agreements and civil settlements that require confidentiality.
• Acknowledging those affected through a sincere apology and tangible gesture, accompanied by dedicated survivor advocacy support and a compensation fund.
• The SBC's EC will hold a meeting Tuesday to address the report.
  "We have requested the members and staff of the SBC Executive Committee to closely examine the findings and recommendations of this report and begin formulating how they might be incorporated into Southern Baptist Convention polity and structure," the SBC statement said.
  The 2022 SBC Annual Meeting will be held next month in Anaheim, California. 
   By Joe Sutton, Keith Allen and Emma Tucker, CNN

More mass shootings are happening at grocery stores – 13% of shooters are motivated by racial hatred, criminologists find

An apparently racially motivated attack at a supermarket in Buffalo, New York, resulted in 10 deaths on May 14, 2022, with the teenage suspect allegedly targeting Black shoppers in a prominently African American neighborhood.

Mass public shootings in which four or more people are killed have become more frequent, and deadly, in the last decade. And the tragedy in Buffalo is the latest in a recent trend of mass public shootings taking place in retail establishments.

 

We are criminologists who study the life histories of public mass shooters in the United States. Since 2017, we have conducted dozens of interviews with incarcerated perpetrators and people who knew them. We also built a comprehensive database of mass public shootings using public data, with the shooters coded on over 200 different variables, including location and racial profile

 What do we know about supermarket mass shootings?

Only one shooting in our database prior to 2019 took place at a supermarket. In 1999, a 23-year-old white male with a history of criminal violence killed four people at a supermarket in Las Vegas. However, there has been a raft of mass shootings at American supermarkets since.

The Buffalo shooting on May 14, 2022, is similar to an August 2019 shooting at a Walmart in El Paso, Texas. On that occasion, the 21-year-old white suspect posted a racist rant on social media before allegedly driving some distance to intentionally target racial and ethnic minority shoppers. He has been charged with killing 23 people.

Another shooting in 2019 took place at a Kosher grocery store in Jersey City, New Jersey. Two perpetrators, a man and woman, both Black and around the age of 50 with a criminal and violent history, murdered four people before being killed in a shootout with police. Social media posts and a note left behind indicated an antisemitic motive.

 

Then in March 2021, a 21-year-old man of Middle Eastern descent with a history of paranoid and anti-social behavior entered a King Soopers in Boulder, Colorado, and shot dead 10 people. Six months later, in September 2021, a 29-year-old Asian man killed one person and injured 13 others at a Kroger supermarket in Tennessee. The perpetrator, who worked at the store, was asked to leave his job that morning. He died by suicide before the police arrived on the scene.

No one profile of a retail shooter

Mass shootings are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and learn from each other, which may explain the rise in supermarket shootings in the past few years. However, the data shows there is no one profile of a supermarket mass shooter.

Racial hatred is a feature of about 10% of all mass public shootings in our database. Our analysis suggests that when it comes to retail shooters, around 13% are driven by racism – so slightly above the average for all mass shooting events.

Some grocery stores by their nature may be frequented predominantly by one racial group – for example, Asian markets that cater to local Asian communities.

 But racial hatred appears to be just one of many motivations cited by retail shooters. Our data points to a range of factors, including the suspect’s own economic issues (16%), confrontation with employees or shoppers (22%), or psychosis (31%). But the most common motivation among retail shooters is unknown (34%).

Like the Buffalo shooter, 22% of perpetrators of retail mass shootings left behind something to be found, a “manifesto” or video to share their grievances with the world. And nearly half of them leaked their plans ahead of time, typically on social media.

The lack of a consistent profile doesn’t leave us helpless. Our research suggests many strategies to prevent mass shootings – from behavioral threat assessment to restricting access to firearms for high-risk people. And the way to stop the social contagion of mass shootings is to stop providing perpetrators with the fame and notoriety they seek.

 

Tom Cotton forgot about that there is a First Amendment

Republican senator’s push to arrest abortion protesters meets GOP resistance

Some GOP senators say Sen. Tom Cotton is going too far with his call to arrest and prosecute protesters outside the homes of Supreme Court justices. by Scott Wong

 Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., wants the abortion-rights protesters demonstrating in front of the homes of Supreme Court justices to be swiftly arrested and prosecuted by the Justice Department.Some of his Republican colleagues, however, say that would go too far and that it could violate First Amendment protections

 “I think if they’re being peaceful and are staying off their property and are not disrupting neighborhoods or causing or inciting fear, it’s probably a legitimate expression of free speech,” Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., a former member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said Wednesday.

 “First Amendment rights are so, so special. … We should all be erring in favor of the First Amendment, in favor of freedom of speech, in favor of freedom of religion, in favor of the freedom of assembly,” she said. “Because if we start fearing our rights to speak and express our religious convictions, and if we fear assembly, the consequences of parsing those rights are extremely dangerous.”

 

 Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., said he, too, believes peaceful protests — even outside the homes of justices — is protected speech.

“I’m a First Amendment guy, and I think that cuts both ways,” Braun said in an interview. “If they’re there and they’re doing it peacefully, you know, I’m for that ability on either side of the political spectrum.”

 Protesters have been chanting and holding up signs in front of the homes of three conservatives: Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Samuel Alito, who wrote the leaked majority draft opinion that would overturn the constitutional right to abortion enshrined nearly a half-century ago in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision.

 More demonstrations are planned for Wednesday night at conservative justices’ homes in the Washington area.

In a stern letter Tuesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Cotton slammed “left-wing mobs” that have protested outside the homes of conservative justices after the draft opinion leaked.

Cotton, who said in 2020 he supported the use of military force to suppress the protests against police violence sparked by the murder of George Floyd, called the recent protests illegal and a “blatant violation” of a 1950 law that says anyone who “pickets or parades” near a building or residence used by a judge with the intent of influencing the judge shall face fines or imprisonment. If the Justice Department doesn’t act, Cotton told Garland, perhaps the next Congress should begin impeachment proceeding

 

Cotton, a potential 2024 presidential candidate, said Wednesday in an interview: “There is a federal law that prohibits the protesting of judges’ homes. Anybody protesting a judge’s home should be arrested on the spot by federal law enforcement. If [protesters] want to raise a First Amendment defense, they are free to do so.”

“I don’t advocate for arresting people protesting on public streets in Washington, D.C., the nation’s capital. I do believe they should be arrested for protesting in the homes of judges, jurors and prosecutors,” Cotton said. “Federal law prohibits an obvious attempt to influence or intimidate judges, jurors and prosecutors

 

Cotton spoke the same day Senate Republicans — along with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. — blocked a Democratic-backed bill that would have codified abortion rights into federal law.

Asked whether he believed people could legally protest at the home of an elected official such as himself, Cotton replied: “I generally suggest protesting in public spaces, not in front of public homes of any person. But that’s not against federal law. That’s why Chuck Schumer is wrong.”

 Schumer, D-N.Y., the Senate majority leader, told reporters Tuesday that he was OK with people peacefully protesting outside the justices’ homes, saying such demonstrations are “the American way” and noting that people protest in front of his home in New York “three, four times a week.

 

White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Tuesday that President Joe Biden believes “violent threats and intimidation of any kind have no place in political discourse.” But she said the White House understands the “outrage” in the country over the potential loss of abortion rights.

“And we believe, of course, in peaceful protests,” she said. “And we certainly continue to encourage that outside of judges’ homes, and that’s the president’s position.”

Cotton isn’t on an island. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the protests were “far outside the bounds of normal First Amendment speech or protest,” adding, “It is an attempt to replace the rule of law with the rule of mob

 

And Wednesday, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, demanded in a letter to Garland that the Justice Department protect justices and prosecute the targeted justices' homes.

At the state level, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan tweeted Wednesday night that he and Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin had called on Garland to “provide adequate resources” to ensure the safety of Supreme Court justices and their families. In their letter, the GOP governors asked the Justice Department to enforce the 1950 law cited by Cotton.

 

Justice Department spokesman Anthony Coley said in a statement that Garland continues to be briefed on security matters related to the justices and has directed the U.S. Marshals Service to “help ensure the Justices’ safety” by assisting the Supreme Court police and the court marshal.

Some Republican senators said there can be a middle ground when it comes to the demonstrations.

Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas, the son of a police officer, said he would like authorities to engage in dialogue with and issue warnings to the protesters before they make any arrests.

 

“I would prefer a softer approach. I would prefer some type of warning to the crowd, much like getting a speeding ticket,” Marshall said. “Sometimes there’s a place for a warning, so I’d like to see those crowds get warnings before we move all the way to prosecution.”

Other GOP senators said they were unsure whether protesting outside a judge’s home qualifies as breaking the law, but they also condemned the recent demonstrations.

 

“Whether or not it’s legal, it’s inappropriate, and they should not be harassing the justices,” said Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who called police this week after protesters wrote messages in chalk outside her home urging her to vote for a Democratic abortion rights measure.

Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, who’s also had protesters outside his home before, said the Supreme Court grounds are where people should make their voices heard.

“I think generally that a justice’s home should not be the place that we protest,” Romney said. “We've got a Supreme Court building, and that’s probably the best place to do that."

 CLARIFICATION (May 12, 2022, 9:17 a.m. ET) A previous version of this article had an incorrect reference in a quote from Sen. Tom Cotton about who could raise a First Amendment defense of protests outside the home of Supreme Court justices. He was referring to protesters, not fellow Republican senators. The quote has been corrected: “If they [the protesters] want to raise a First Amendment defense, they are free to do so.”

 

 

Greg Norman: Is it all about the money?

'We've all made mistakes,' says golf great Greg Norman of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi's murder

By Amy Woodyatt, David Close and CNN Sport staff, CNN

 

(CNN)Golf great Greg Norman has appeared to downplay the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi ahead of the new Saudi-backed LIV Golf professional series.

"This whole thing about Saudi Arabia and Khashoggi and human rights, talk about it, but also talk about the good that the country is doing in changing its culture," Norman said at a LIV Golf event at Centurion Club in St. Albans, England. Norman is LIV Golf chairman.

"Look, we've all made mistakes and you just want to learn by those mistakes and how you can correct them going forward," Norman said, according to news organizations in the UK.

A US intelligence report named Mohammed bin Salman, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, as responsible for approving the operation that led to the 2018 murder of Khashoggi -- something bin Salman denies.

 

 

The country's human rights record is also widely criticized: political dissidents, human and women's rights activists, journalists and online critics have historically been harassed, detained, prosecuted and incarcerated for denouncing the Saudi government, according to Amnesty International and other international human rights groups.

"I haven't had a personal conversation with MBS, I've never met the guy, but at the same time I do read that the Saudi government has made their statements and comments about it and they want to move forward," Norman said Wednesday.

Norman has previously said that the lucrative Saudi Arabia-backed golf league is a "new opportunity" for players and the sport.

Earlier this week, LIV Golf, which debuts this June, revealed a new $2 billion investment and expanded event schedule on Tuesday. 

 

 

The lucrative Saudi Arabia-backed golf series says the latest financial commitment "will be used to fund ongoing expansion and prize purses for the new LIV Golf."

Former world No. 1 Norman announced the formation of the new team-based, professional golf league earlier this year.

The venture, backed by Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund (PIF), pledges to award $250 million in total prize money while hosting eight tournaments, held June through October. 

 

LIV will "back players up"

The PGA Tour, in a memo dated Tuesday, has denied permission for players who wanted to play in the first event of LIV Golf, citing schedule conflicts.

The memo, which CNN has obtained from the PGA Tour, cites that the Saudi Arabia-backed golf series' opening event in London is the same week as the RBC Canadian Open, a PGA Tour event.

"We have notified those who have applied that their request has been declined in accordance with the PGA TOUR Tournament Regulations," the memo says. "As such, TOUR members are not authorized to participate in the Saudi Golf League's London event under our Regulations."

World No.1 Scottie Scheffler said he had not given the PGA Tour's decision to deny golfers release waivers much thought.

 

 If you're playing here on the PGA TOUR, playing in something that could be a rival series to the PGA Tour, being a member of our Tour, it's definitely not something where we want our membership to do because it's going to harm the tournament that we have opposite that and that's, I'm sure that's why they were, why they did not release the players," said Scheffler.

"Because if we have 15 guys go over there and play, that hurts the RBC and the Canadian Open," added Scheffler ahead of the first round of the AT&T Byron Nelson.

Norman said that LIV will "back up" players wanting to participate in LIV Golf. Asked if his legal team had injunctions in place to protect players in the face of any bans, Norman replied: "Yes."

 

"We are going to back up the players, we are going to be there for them, for whatever that is. We're ready to go. We don't want to go, but we're ready to go," added Norman.

"It will be the player's choice. I'm not going to begrudge any player who makes a decision to play wherever he wants. We're giving them the ability because we believe LIV is here for a long period of time.

"If you want to go exclusively to the PGA Tour, happy days, go do it. I guarantee that a lot of people will come eventually to play with LIV Golf," he said.

"I've said to the players, 'we've got your back. Simple as that'. We will defend, we will reimburse and we will represent," he added.