BREAKING: A Waukesha, Wisconsin school just banned students from singing the song "Rainbowland" by
@MileyCyrus
and
@DollyParton
because they believe kids are too immature to hear this song that they claim focuses on "controversial issues". The lyrics in question are as follows:

"Wouldn't it be nice
To live in paradise?
Where we're free to be exactly who we are
Let's all dig down deep inside
Brush the judgment and fear aside
Make wrong things right
And end the fight"

Are you kidding me? Singing about "freedom" and not caring about "judgement" are now "too woke" for Republicans?

Anti-wokism is a facade for Fascism!
(Listen to the lyrics below)

Where was Ron DeSantis on 9/11?

A new spot from the Lincoln Project contends that you wouldn’t have a good answer based on the Governor’s fumbling response in a recent friendly longform interview with Piers Morgan.

DeSantis was beginning his year teaching at the Darlington School in Rome, Georgia when the terrorist attacks that changed America were orchestrated. But those who listened to the Morgan interview would have had no clue that he was shaping some of Georgia’s brightest minds on that dark day.

“I think I’d just graduated college and I didn’t have a care in the world and all of a sudden, Boom. You know, it happened,” DeSantis said.

The Lincoln Project’s Rick Wilson offered explanatory excoriation of the Governor’s gaffe as being of a piece with recent missteps as he continues to move toward a run for the Republican Presidential nomination.

“Every American knows where they were on 9/11, and though he refuses to say it, we know Ron DeSantis was teaching at the elite Darlington school in Georgia on that day. Why he refused to answer has left America questioning his honesty,” Wilson said.

Although Trump’s team asked the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to stay Howell’s ruling, it refused his request Wednesday after a lightning round of briefing. And therefore, Corcoran is required to produce the documents — in fact, he might already have done so — as well as testify.

That development has led to all sorts of questions from friends, family, colleagues and even near-strangers as I travel with my family this week. For one, yes, it is indeed unusual, if not unheard of, for a lawyer to be litigating against a party one day and then testifying under court-ordered examination by that same party the next one. But putting aside that oddity, folks have asked me another, harder question: After the D.C. Circuit refused Trump’s request for a stay on Wednesday, why didn’t Trump seek immediate Supreme Court intervention to stop Corcoran’s testimony?

Trump and his legal team aren’t saying, but I’ll venture a guess. It’s not solely because he would have lost, as some have speculated, although any rejection by the court would be as embarrassing as it would be legally damaging. After all, Trump has made clear he believes this Supreme Court — controlled by conservative justices, three of whom he appointed — owes him one.

But my hunch is that Trump’s team let Corcoran’s testimony happen because of what’s likely involved in any request to pause, much less, review a crime-fraud-related ruling: the evidence. Put another way, if Trump had petitioned the Supreme Court to stay Corcoran’s testimony and document production, the justices would have seen some, if not all, of what Judge Howell and the three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit have already reviewed: proof that Trump misled Corcoran and engaged in criminal conduct.

And for someone whose one last hope, if he is ultimately charged or tried by any of the multiple entities now investigating him, is that same Supreme Court, letting the justices see evidence of his alleged crimes now would be a bridge too far. Even if that means Corcoran’s notes and transcripts of “personal audio recordings” are now in the DOJ’s control, even if Corcoran had to return to the grand jury as a witness the day after arguing the application of Trump’s other privileges, Trump can’t afford to lose the Supreme Court yet.