@DineshDSouza I wrote a book detailing southern Dems support for segregation and repeatedly noted that obvious fact on Twitter.
You, meanwhile, invented a fake Dixiecrat senator and implied that politicians who died in the 1940s and 1950s were still Democrats in the 1960s. That's #FakeHistory
@DineshDSouza If I'm trying to hide the Democrats' racist past as the defenders of segregation, I'm really doing a horrible job.
Here are just a few quick samples from my book.
@DineshDSouza When historians say you're a horrible liar, what they mean is that you're horrible at lying.
Like when you claimed "progressive textbooks" were hiding the "secret" about Democratic support for segregation. All these ones do:
@DineshDSouza I've criticized the Democrats' clearly racist past repeatedly in print, in lectures and on Twitter too. You can pretend otherwise all you want, but that doesn't make it true.
Just because you're a partisan hack with no principles, that doesn't mean your many critics are, too.
@DineshDSouza Wow, look at how I hid the secret of Democrats' role as the party of slavery and segregation in this very hidden secret Twitter thread:
@DineshDSouza If you'd taken a single US history course at Dartmouth -- where they do teach this, like everywhere else -- you'd know these basic facts and now sound like an utter moron.
“The tradition going back to the 1880s has been if a vacancy occurs in a presidential election year, and there is a different party in control of the Senate than the presidency, it is not filled."
Normally, when we talk about a "tradition going back to [year]," that means that we started doing something in [year] and -- now, @senatemajldr, this is the *really* important part if we call it a "tradition" -- it also means we have been doing it regularly ever since [year].
First of all, yes, there actually was a SCOTUS nominee in the 1880s who was nominated by a Republican president and denied a hearing by a Democratic Congress.
But it happened *after* a presidential election, during the true lame-duck period of January 1881.
McConnell claims that instance of an election-year SCOTUS appointment doesn't count because-- while a Democratic Congress *did* confirm the GOP nominee -- it was originally a recess appointment and the formal confirmation didn't happen until early 1957.
Then the claim that there hadn't been an election-year nominee confirmed *by an opposition party* which was, of course, refuted by William Brennan and Anthony Kennedy.
By the late 1940s, Fifield had become a little burned out with all the national political work.
He originally tried to hand Spiritual Mobilization off to his friend Norman Vincent Peale, but Peale ultimately decided he could make more money staying in NYC and writing books.
Instead of Peale, Fifield wound up turning Spiritual Mobilization over to James C. Ingebretsen, the former US Chamber of Commerce official and lawyer who had served as his aide.
(I talk about him briefly in the book, but his papers and Pew's were the key to my research on SM.)
The role of white southern businessmen as a factor in the civil rights movement has been addressed by a number of people, largely following the lead of this edited collection: amazon.com/Southern-Busin…
I wrote about it a bit in White Flight, too.
As I showed there, businessmen were divided on the issue. Smaller businessmen tended to defend segregation statutes, while corporate figures were more concerned with keeping up Atlanta's PR image of "the city too busy to hate."
If you've had a rough week, check out "Won't You Be My Neighbor?"
It's a beautiful documentary. Out now on demand.
Among others, the documentary features thoughts from @TomJunod, talking about what he learned about, and learned from, Mister Rogers while interviewing him for one of my all-time favorite profiles: esquire.com/entertainment/…
"Won't You Be My Neighbor?" is directed by the brilliant Morgan Neville, who previous work includes the phenomenal documentary about backup singers, "20 Feet From Stardom."
There's no single "charge" here, There's an array of criminal acts that has now -- through the guilty plea and sworn statement of Trump's own lawyer -- implicated Trump directly in a federal crime. And that's serious.
Nixon's critics wanted to impeach him over the illegal war in Cambodia, but articles on that issue went nowhere.
The House Judiciary Committee still advanced articles of impeachment for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, and contempt of Congress. (Not treason!)
The investigation into Bill Clinton started as an inquiry into the failed Whitewater land deal and while Ken Starr found that to be a dead-end, he still produced enough evidence for House Republicans to impeach him on articles of obstruction of justice and perjury. (Not treason!)