I haven't said much about Minneapolis because I don't think there's much I can add to what is plainly obvious for everyone to see, and all I can add is to voice optimism at the fact that even Trump himself seems to have lost the will to bother to defend it except in the broadest terms.  The whole ICE effort was clearly designed to terrorize immigrant communities, and more generally those "blue" governments which accomodate them, but now at least it seems that the effort is proving to be politically untenable for those people who may actually vote Republican as well.  Even that Trump and his team have received conservative backlash from the guns-rights wing after they've used the fact that Alex Pretti had a legal concealed-carry permit as an excuse to show his inherent threat should prove pretty interesting.

Part of the back-firing plan is also that Minnesota is an important swing state, an essential piece of Trump's victories in both '16 and '24, and that it was clearly targeted for ICE raids based not on the state's immigration issues so much as to intimidate its Somali communities, using the recent Covid-era fraud scandal (which was actually investigated and initially prosecuted under the Biden administration) as an excuse to flame partisan paranoia, and, more relevantly, to try and coerce the state into giving up its voter roll data, which could be used for any manner of manipulation to effect the midterms or future elections.  These pretenses are obviously false - there is no substantial"illegal" population among the Somalis in Minnesota and the long-held conspiracy theory of illegal immigrants voting in our elections has been overwhelingly debunked.  These issues are simply not linked.  District Judge Katherine Menendez called out this gangster ploy explicitly: "Is the executive trying to achieve a goal through force that it can’t achieve through the courts?"

On a related underreported issue, the DoJ recently publicly aknowledged that at least two members of DoGE improperly accessed and "misused" private Social Security information, "using links to share data through the third-party server ‘Cloudflare'".  This story mentions an email sent to, among others, Musk's senior advisor for DoGE which "included a password-protected file containing private information of about 1,000 people contained in Social Security systems".  1000 people.  That sounds awfully specific.

Rampop II wrote:

Additional alarm is being raised over the fact that, inexplicably, National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard was present at the FBI raid. It's only the latest episode in her prolonged and unprecedented overreach of authority looking for proof of voter fraud in the 2020 election.

She's following orders.  Trump pretty much publicly demanded proof of 2020 election theft, at Davos last week he promised imminent prosecutions were coming.  Tulsi has already failed at her first assignment, which was to find ways to prosecute Obama and Hillary Clinton, and other "deep state" actors, for allegedly conspiring the "Russia hoax" in 2016.  (I've already posted on the Tulsi's failure on this where seemingly every attempt to provide evidence proved to directly contradict her claims.)  It is interesting that in the wee morning hours after Tulsi's ballot raid that Trump was posting about this Obama/CIA "coup" to "maufacture intelligence", almost as a reminder of Tulsi's disappointment, before then also posting about how corrupt the Georgia vote count was in 2020.  Like a lot of his posts, it looks like he may have just got off the phone with Tulsi after giving her the orders.

The scary thing is that, unlike 2020, Trump no longer has anyone capable or professional or shameful enough to refuse such orders in his administration.  No Bill Barr to tell him, "No, you can't just go in and seize ballots and voting machines".  And Trump is already saying that he shouldn't have listened to these people back then anyway.  There's no reason to think that he won't do exactly that either in the midterms or in 2028, unless he's faced with some very serious judicial pushback over this recent specific action in Fulton County.  That's the test he's posing here.

Note also that the Trump administration has only been suing blue states for full access to their voter roll information, and sadly nearly half of those states have already complied.  Thse who haven't have seen a correlative immigration crackdown from ICE (recently Minnesota and Maine) or have been threatened with escalation (California and Oregon).  AG Pam Bondi made this correlation explicit.  Threats rarely work if they're not explicit.

Jinnistan wrote:

Note also that the Trump administration has only been suing blue states for full access to their voter roll information, and sadly nearly half of those states have already complied.  Thse who haven't have seen a correlative immigration crackdown from ICE (recently Minnesota and Maine) or have been threatened with escalation (California and Oregon).

…
OK, so that… that has me frozen speechless with alarm. I think I need to go “touch grass,” in the parlance of our times. Paralysis does nobody any good. 

I’m extremely frustrated with the question, what can I do (besides vote)? I want a task, I want to be a part of the effort to change this. I’m not on social media and I suck at using it. I’m not an influencer. I’m not about to run for office, and even if I wanted to, or even if I wanted to work for a candidate, I’m already in a solidly “blue” region so there’s nobody to run against. I don’t have the capital to sway an election. I’d cry “boycott boycott boycott” at the top of my lungs if anybody would hear me, but again I’m not positioned for anybody to hear me. I’m sure as hell not Rupert Murdoch. I feel neutered to do anything but wait and see. If I were to sully myself with an account on Twit or Assbook and learn to piggyback on hashtags, I’d definitely want to get a burner phone and a spare email address first. 

 My imagination drifts into fantasies envisioning a wave of independent candidates to take office. Democrats are so compromised. I suspect independent candidates have more of a chance at flipping Republican seats than Democrats do, because of the number of disinterested voters and the number moderate Republican voters who hate Democrats so much that they’re willing to hold their noses and keep voting Republican just to keep the Democrats at bay. 

I’m dreaming, I know. I’m not about to go digging a bunker, either. I don’t even have a “kitchen table” to change minds one at–a time. My own brother is a Kennedy Jr fan who despises Anthony Fauci, for fuck’s sake! And I swear up and down, the boy is an intelligent individual! And I’ve met many like him, educated people, intelligent people, well–read people, who aren’t MAGATs by any stretch, they just hate the government, full stop. They’re not anarchists, exactly, just disillusioned to the extreme, having run businesses or worked in the legal system, or even having just tried to live on a farm close to nature, and have experienced firsthand the crippling corruption, bottomless grift, and callous indifference to injustice within a system we so idealize.I think that’s part of Trump’s appeal, beyond the racist, insane and stupid, the people so jaded by government they’re ok with a guy who’s ready to hamstring it.

Come to think of it, I guess I’m defining Libertarians, aren’t I. I think their blind spot is an idealization of a different kind, embracing the sentiments behind things like the French Revolution, but without contemplating Le Terreur. So jaded by the status quo that they’re blinded to the chaotic consequences of burning it all down and expecting something better to rise out of the ashes, instead of the more likely possibility of a weakened or failed state, vulnerable to foreign invasion and the rise of a ruthless emperor. 

Am I rambling? Ramblin’ Rampop, rattling out panic–sticken ramblings in the throes of paralysis. "Frozen speechless?” More like verbal hysterics. Maybe I need to get myself a plastic doll’s head.

Last edited by Rampop II (2/01/2026 10:39 pm)

No, Trump's post showing the Obamas as apes wasn't even the most racist thing they've done this week.  I'll get to that in a minute.  But it is a good example of the kind of shameless lying which would normally, for any other human, erode any and all respect for thou that speweth.  We know that Trump supporters like the fact that he lies, it's a feature.  They think it's funny.  And we also know that they're racist too.  And while I certainly believe that any number of Trump staffers are racist enough to have posted that video, we know it was Trump who posted that video, because he posted it late at night in the middle of posting several other things.  We also know that, even if Trump didn't hit the button himself, when Trump tells a staffer to post something they don't talk back.  And once the video started getting attention, the White House doubled down, calling it "fake outrage".  That was until it became more clear that in fact some Republicans (even some black folks) were quite sincerely outraged.  That's when Trump blamed a staffer, pleading ignorance.  More incredibly, for this minute-long video, everyone is saying that they didn't actually make it far enough to see the Obama-apes.  They posted a one minute video without taking the minute to watch it?  Clearly lying.

But, no, this was not the most racist thing the Trump administration did this week.  That remarkable slab of racism was Trump's National Parks Service deciding to desecrate the Medgar Evers museum in Jackson, Mississippi.  Medgar Evers, for the record, was a black civil rights activist who was assassinated at his home in 1963, shot by an avowed member of the Ku Klux Klan.  

On Thursday, Mississippi Today reported that Trump’s National Park Service had “removed visitor brochures” from the Evers home museum. The purpose, according to Park Service officials who asked to remain anonymous, is to make edits that will include removing references that called [assassin] De La Beckwith a “racist.”

Because in Trump's Great America, it's worse to be considered a racist than a cold-blooded murderer.

Was the killer, Byron De La Beckwith, a racist?  How could we know?  How could we possibly judge?

The Mississippi Today article included a lengthy section detailing De La Beckwith’s open and public comments embracing racism and antisemitism, including an unsuccessful campaign for lieutenant governor in which he declared his belief in “absolute white supremacy under white Christian rule,” a prison stint after “New Orleans police caught him with a ticking time bomb that he planned to use to blow up a Jewish leader’s home” (and he “blamed his conviction on the ‘little Jewish prosecutor’ and ‘n***** women’ on the jury”), telling a reporter in 1990 that “n*****s are beasts” because it “says so” in the Bible, saying that Black churches burned down because “n******s are careless with matches,” calling Evers a “mongrel,” bragging that God supported him because Adam and Eve were white and nonwhites were “mud people” who did not have souls, and claiming Jews were the children of Satan and had inherited satanic powers.

Well, that could mean a lot of things, it could mean nothing at all.  Who are we to cast stones, or some other kind of lethal projectile, at a man defending his right to an opinion?

Lost in the shuffle of all of the other anti-DEI, anti-woke bullshit from last year was another desecration which flew under the radar: "Arlington National Cemetery, where Evers is buried, purged his bio from its website last March."

.......

On a slightly less disgusting side of racism, Kid Rock.  Aside from complaining recently about the "fucking Jews" on Bill Maher's show - because Kid Rock learned recently that Bill Maher isn't Jewish (Bill Maher's mother is, in fact, Jewish) - the Stone Child has decided to put on his own Super Bowl Halftime show as an "alternative" to something he appears to object to.  So of course he decides to lie through his rusted grill about the obvious racist motivations for this.  Let's assume that words have implicit meaning for a minute.  Note that Kid Rock's alternative halftime show is called "All-American".  As an alternative to what?  The all-American Puerto Rican performing at the actual Super Bowl?  Kid Rock says his show is for "our base", defined as "people who love football" (does Bad Bunny and his fans not love football?), "love America" (or certain types of Americans specifically?), "love good music" (Kid Rock makes "good music"?), "love Jesus" (isn't Bad Bunny Catholic?).  "It’s pretty much that simple."  I agree.  "Simple" is the operative word here.

The All-American Halftime Show will celebrate "American faith, family, and freedom."  I don't think Kid Rock understands the concept of "freedom".  Like, Bad Bunny should be "free" to perform at the Super Bowl, right?  Again, he's saying all of this about "faith and family" as if it's understood that these are not values shared by Bad Bunny or anyone who would choose to watch Bunny perform instead.

Now what I truly find despicable is this next bit where Kid Rock tries to act like the good guy.  "It’s too bad that we can’t just look at music as something that brings us together."  You're the one causing the split, dude!  You're the one with the purity tests for what's authentically American, authentically Christian, authentically music apparently.  "Where it doesn’t matter what your politics are."  Oh piss off.  You're the one talking about "our base" and "half the country".  It absolutely matters to you what the politics are here.  You're the one who can't set aside the politics enough to just take a shit instead of watching a halftime show.  "It’s okay to be vocal. It’s very, very okay to not be vocal."  Bob?  You are totally not OK with Bunny voicing his politics.  Stop this bullshitting.  You definitely are not OK with Bunny voicing anything in a different language, because you have a racist understanding for what 'America' is.  Does Bad Bunny not have the "freedom" to speak as he wishes?  Only you, huh?  

Modelo is too good for your cracker-ass corn-hole.

Should we get to these new Epstein releases?  I admit, I've kinda been dreading it, because...Jesus Christ.  The head, the tail, the whole damn thing.  I just don't know how to get a hold on this beast.  I think it's an elementary preliminary to state, and take for granted from here on, that all of these people are lying, and that their frightened anxiety at these releases makes an appropriate mirror-image to their totally entitled unconscionable complacency they express throughout these emails.

I guess I'll start with some 'greatest hits', as it were.  Let's take this March 11, 2014 email, "Thank you for a fun night...your littlest girl was a little naughty."  Interesting.  I wonder who sent this to Jeffery Epstein?  The sender's name was redacted by the DoJ.  I wonder why?  Is this sender a victim of Epstein's sex crimes?  Apparently a satisfied victim!  Now whether or not the sender was "a victim" of Epstein's blackmail operation is a more intriguing question, but, remember, according to Kash Patel (o o) there is no evidence, "that we have", that Epstein ever trafficked these little girls to anyone other than himself, so what could this sender possibly be blackmailed for?  Maybe she got away...maybe that's what made her such a naughty girl.  Here's another question.  Is it the naughty girls who end up falling through the trap door into shark-infested waters on his island?




DoJ statement: "We did not redact any names of men, only female victims."  This is clearly a lie.  But even if we were to assume that the sender was a woman, she clearly isn't a victim, and even if she were a lesbian pedophile, she should still be prosecuted.  The DoJ also redacted all of Epstein's co-conspirators mentioned in his "sweetheart" non-prosecution deal from 2008.  We already know that Ghislaine Maxwell was one of these co-conspirators, and she clearly is not a victim.  We also already know (from the hard work of Miami Herald's Julie K. Brown) that four other women were included in this immunity deal, and these women do appear to have at least once been victims, but who had been groomed to become procurers and accomplices to Epstein's operation.  One of these women was Nadia Marcinko.  There seems to be some ambiguity about whether Epstein actually purchased Marcinko from her poor Czech parents when she was a 15-year-old girl, but Epstein definitely bragged that he had, and refered to her socially as his "sex slave".  Once of advanced enough age, Marcinko would go on to aid in the procurement of young girls for Epstein and his parties.  So, in this very narrow sense, the DoJ statement is both slightly accurate and wildly misleading, at best.  But why would the DoJ redact the names of Epstein's co-conspirators when they've already been publicly reported in the Miami Herald anyway?  This pattern of redactions, appearing to shield Epstein's confidants rather than victims, is one of the most alarming elements in these documents.

Also alarming is the email which Epstein sent to *redacted*: "I loved the torture video".  Another reading "do you want me to try to do her … or just torture her on fri".  Also some intriguing exchanges with Harvard professor Martin Novak (for some reason not redacted this time) about Novak's apparent relations with a female "spy" who was "captured after completing her mission", to which Epstein inquires, "Did you torture her?"  Is "torture" here just code for some other kinds of illicit, possibly sexual, activity?  Perhaps.  Who knows?  That's the intrigue.  We do know, from previous document release, that Epstein enjoyed exchanging child sexual abuse material at the very least.

Some others?  A June 30, 2014 email from *redacted* informing Epstein that : "I give you permission to kill him.  He is apparently with *redacted*.  He lied to you and he lied to me".  Unredacted is the Sultan Bin Sulayem's reaction to the girls which Epstein had provided, "the Moldovian is not as attractive as the picture but the Ukrainian is very beautiful".  A "Margherita" asking if Epstein still "needs a fake wife".  Sounds like a joke, right?  But then she goes into a detailed description of a Russian woman, "Jewish and trustworthy" who "is looking for a job".  

You might notice that, especially with some of the more incendiary documents, it's been difficult finding more mainstream links, although screenshots of these emails are readily available on various social media platforms.  The corporate media has made their decision that they largely don't want to touch any of this outside of what can be used for whatever daily partisan gristle.




That looks a lot like a "oh shit!" face to me.  In these new photos which show the former Prince Andrew crouched above a woman, it's not entirely clear whether the woman is conscious or not.  At least she's not dead - one photo does show her left hand raising slightly - but it isn't clear to what extent she is cognizant.  Her face is redacted and blacked out, further obscuring any clue as to her state.  But, it kinda looks to me like maybe the mickey might have been a little too strong?

Naturally, this is going to have to be an ongoing story, given everything included, for one post to contain all of the crazy revelations in these Epstein documents, and most people still haven't gotten through most of them.  I have at least a couple more items to highlight.

The hits keep coming from the Epstein files.

One FBI memo from 2020 summarizes one unnamed 'confidential human source' (CHS) who offered some intriguing thoughts on Epstein's relationship with Israel, specifically Ehud Barak, a former Israel defense minister and prime minister, who has also been featured prominently as a close Epstein associate from previous email releases.  "CHS became convinced Epstein was a co-opted Mossad Agent", "Epstein was close to the former Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, and trained as a spy under him".  In another email between Epstein and Barak, Epstein asks Barak if he could "help Obtain former mossad agents to do dirty investigations".  This CHS also believed that Epstein's lawyer, Alan Dershowitz who was instrumental in designing Epstein's "sweetheart" plea deal in 2008, had been "co-opted by Mossad and subscribed to their mission".  Apparently it was Dershowitz himself who told Alexander Acosta "that Epstein belonged to both U.S. and allied intelligence services".  "CHS shared phone calls between Dershowitz and Epstein during which he/she took notes. After these calls, Mossad would then call Dershowitz to debrief."  It's also of note that Jared Kushner was been described by Dershowitz as his "student", and this FBI memo states that "Trump has been compromised by Israel. And Kushner is the real brains behind his organization and his Presidency".

Interestingly, Benjamin Netanyahu has tried to dampen such an assertion, saying "Jeffrey Epstein’s unusual close relationship with Ehud Barak doesn’t suggest Epstein worked for Israel. It proves the opposite".  But that seems quite strange, given Barak's status in the Israeli government and long-time Israeli intelligence ties.  It also ignores Epstein's long-term relationship with Yori Koren, another Israeli military intelligence official, who once lived with Epstein while receiving cancer treatments which Epstein had paid for.  It makes more sense when one considers that Barak and Netanyahu are political rivals, as in what Bibi may be saying here is that Epstein and Barak may have been working against Netanyahu's own interests (and Netanyahu, much like Trump, tends to conflate his own interests with the state he happens to be running at the moment).  Even still, Epstein is shown in these releases to have been a generous patron to a number of right-wing settler-colonialist groups with which Netanyahu is now aligned.  A British Army intelligence officer, Lynette Nusbacher, has tried to clarify the likelihood of Epstein's relationship with Mossad, "There’s a tremendous mystery, widely discussed, about where his money came from.  And is it possible that some of his money came from state sources for him to act as an intelligence asset.....Is it possible that Epstein was an asset to the Mossad? Yes. Do I think he was an agent of any intelligence agency, I think it was unlikely."

This could also explain why Epstein was averse to visiting Israel personally under Netanyahu's government.  Although here, even as Epstein rebuffs an invitation from Deepak Chopra, Chopra is not discrete enough to ask Epstein to "bring your girls", while Epstein had asked Chopra to find a "cute Israeli blond" for him.

The FBI memo of the CHS goes on to suggest that Trump himself had been "compromised by Israel", specifically a group called Chabad-Lubavitch.

MiddleEast Eye.net wrote:

Chabad-Lubavitch, a religious Jewish sect founded in Russia, has grown to an estimated 90,000 members. Its messianic, ultra-Orthodox ideology has repeatedly been linked to hardline settler colonial politics in Palestine.  The memo also cites Berel Lazar, a Chabad member and the former chief rabbi of Russia, describing him as a close adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin.  "Chabad is basically state-sanctioned Judaism. It is used by Putin to keep tabs on all the Russo-Jewish oligarchs," the FBI memo adds.  It identifies Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as a supporter of the group and a key force within Trump’s inner circle.

Meanwhile Poland is taking Epstein's possible ties to Russian intelligence very seriously:

TheTimes.com wrote:

Donald Tusk, the Polish prime minister, earlier this week said he has was setting up a team to examine the numerous mentions of Putin and other Russians in the Epstein files.  He said it was likely that the “unprecedented paedophilia scandal was co-organised by Russian intelligence services” to harm the Polish state. “This can only mean that they also possess compromising materials against many leaders still active today,” he said.

Maria Drokova, the former press secretary of Nashi, a pro-Kremlin youth movement, appears to have been in contact with Epstein. Drokova, who received a US green card in 2017, was introduced in an email to Epstein as an “outstanding very successful for her young age lady who will be glad to meet you and show you her current plan to conquer the world” by a person whose name was redacted by the US justice department. Emails suggest Epstein later asked her to send nude photos.

There are quite a number of references to Russian girls/women in these documents, leading to questions as to who was supplying them to Epstein.  There's lots of shady suggestions, but nothing concrete, about Epstein's possible ties to Russian organized crime.  Epstein appeared to focus on girls from Eastern Europe, usually from poor backgrounds, and using the lure of modeling or similar job opportunities.  

tvpworld.com wrote:

Daniel Siad, one of Epstein’s hunters, in 2009 sent an email to Epstein saying that he would spend June and July “scouting in small villages” in Poland, the Czech and Slovak republics and Hungary for girls.

In an email to Groff in January 2014, Epstein suggests that two girls share a room together in an apartment building he used to house girls in transit to the island after being told all the other rooms were full.  A witness statement made to the FBI in 2019 said that Epstein used the building “to house ‘girls’ whom he had imported from places like ‘Ukraine’.”  It added that Epstein had been forced to introduce keypad locks on the rooms because so many of the “Easter European beauties” had run away, taking the room keys with them.

Elsewhere, we see Steve Bannon helping Epstein set up a meeting with Russian Foreign Affairs minister Sergei Lavrov (the same Russian official that got Trump's National Security Advisor Michael Flynn to resign for lying to the FBI about meeting).  And Epstein claiming in 2013 that he wanted to help Putin "reinvent the financial system" in Russia.

There's not much else to add about the Epstein files that some 300 gallons of sulphuric acid can't clarify.  Outside of all of the pervy sex and shady intelligence connections, Epstein was also apparently quite precoccupied with eugenics, because they can't call it a "deformed egg-shaped penis" if you seed your genes to create a new race of men with normal egg-penises.

..........

As Bari Weiss has said, our news media needs to "meet the American audience where they are".  Unfortunately, way too many Americans are hunkered down in racism, so this means that our news media has to treat this racism as just a matter of opinion, and at whatever cost avoid as much as possible pointing out the blatant racism currently on display in the Trump administration.  After fumbling their obligation to address head-on the nefarious "White Replacement" theory during the election (when it mattered) and accurately report to the American people that the bulk of Trump's proposals on immigration happened to be based on an unfounded racist conspiracy theory, our news media today is no more inclined to further illustrate how this toxic presumption of Caucasian persecution continues to permeate.  The Kid Rock thing is a good example, although we can thankfully just laugh at his incompetence.  But the fact that so many other people felt safely entitled to feel offended over this display of Puerto Rican culture is not a social pathology which is easily going to dissipate.  At some point, our news media is going to have to grown some tits and realize that they're going to have to risk actually offending these people by pointing out the very racist basis for their beliefs.  Maybe even point out that such racism shouldn't really be socially acceptable or politically reasonable positions.

I don't want to spoil Pam Bondi's moment this week.  She had her fun.  But dare I say that the funniest Congressional hearing this week, which was the most surreally jaw-dropping in its way, got a bit obscured in mainstream coverage.  Unfortunately, the name 'Jeremy Carl' was not one of the most ridiculed memes of the week.  Carl is a long-time racist right-wing shit-poster who wrote a book, The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart.  In Carl's mind, white people are this "unprotected" class who are perpetually oppressed.  But these kinds of books from right-wing provocateurs are a dime a dozen.  JD Vance has a shelf full of 'em.  Carl also happens to be nominated by this Trump administration to be the State Department's liaison to international organizations, a pretty important position for someone who should ideally not be a racist.  So Carl was on Capital Hill to answer questions from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who eventually have to decide whether or not they're going to confirm him for the gig.  I don't want to say the hearing didn't go well exactly.  Compared to Bondi's appearance, I guess it's all relative.  It went well in the sense that it seems clear that there's very little chance that these Senators plan to confirm this guy.  But what I find most remarkable isn't just the overt - basically lazy - flavor of racism in which Carl peddles, but in his proud staunch entitlement to simply be a racist.  Which obviously wouldn't be the case if, as a white man, he truly was so perpetually oppressed as he feigns.

Carl takes the "replacement" thesis to a saturation point.  It isn't enough to say that immigrants are replacing white communities in America, but that all non-white cultures pose an existential threat to the survival of the "white race".  The entire point of Carl's book is that "white identity" itself is under threat.  As a white nationalist, Carl believes that white culture is inherently superior, so that this replacement, this dilution with other necessarily lesser cultures (what Carl calls "white erasure"), is also an existential threat to "America" as he, and his fellow racists, has conceived it.  Sen. Chris Murphy asks Carl on this point: "You speak about white identity. So tell me the values that stitch together white identity, that make it different than black identity."  The following exchange is like an SNL-worthy caricature of the laziest of racist tropes:

 Carl: “I would say the white church is very different than the Black church in terms of its tone and style, on average. Food ways could often be different. Music could be different.”

Murphy: “And those are being erased?” 

Carl: “Well, if you look at the Super Bowl halftime show, which was not in English …"

Murphy: “Our ability to access white churches or white food or white music is being erased?”

For racists who hold a terminally zero-sum worldview, such differences as food, music and worship "tones" must be terrifying intrusions.  But "white" is not a term of ethnicity (a fact which Sen. Murphy noted), and clearly "white culture" is not so homogeneous as Carl likes to pretend.  There's certainly quite a disparity in "tone and style" between, say, white Catholic worship and white Baptist worship, and even those few Baptists who like to shake snakes and speak in tongues.  There's a bit of disparity between bluegrass and death metal as well.  The fact that Carl, and his ilk (and, yes, JD Vance is adjacent), prefer to define culture along such black-and-white lines should be as disqualifying as need be.

As I mentioned, it's significant that not only was Carl unembarrassed by this display, he made it a point to emphasize that he would not be apologizing for this belief in this theory of the supposed (and supposedly intentional) erasure of white culture.

Jeremy Carl, though, was more eagerly apologetic over several of his past statements regarding the Jews and the Holocaust, because, you know, white enough.  (Carl, apparently, is Jewish by birth.)  And, true to form, most of the Republicans saying they will not support his nomination are specifically citing his antisemitism, while ignoring the other white erasure stuff about these insidious black churches.  I do find it funny that someone who is capitalizing on his own perceived persecution complex has the beytsim to claim that "Jews have often loved to play the victim".

We should still probably be a little more disturbed at how casual these racists are getting.  Like they're comfortable.  Not a good symptom for a society.