Challenger to Iowa Rep. Steve King withdraws candidacy

[Rogue 9]

Des Moines Register

Kim Weaver withdraws her candidacy in Iowa's 4th District race for Congress

Molly Longman and Jason Noble, Des Moines Register 6:49 p.m. CT June 3, 2017

Kim Weaver is ending her campaign for Iowa's 4th Congressional District.

In a Facebook post Saturday, Weaver, a Democrat, cited threats to her safety, financial security and her mother's ongoing health problems as reasons for her withdrawal.

"Beginning during my 2016 campaign, I have received very alarming acts of intimidation, including death threats," Weaver said in the Facebook post. "While some may say enduring threats are just a part of running for office, my personal safety has increasingly become a concern."

In an interview with the Des Moines Register on Saturday, Weaver added to that rationale, alleging that the state of Iowa's Office of Long-Term Care Ombudsman, where she is an employee, saw its budget cut this year as "punishment" for her political candidacy.

The office received a $164,000 cut this year — a 12 percent reduction from the previous year.

"I'm feeling guilty that we lost this funding because I'm running for office," Weaver said, adding that she was prepared to take a "voluntary layoff" if the cut requires a staff reduction.

Weaver said she was told by her supervisor of the connection between her candidacy and the budget cut, and that the supervisor, in turn, was told by a state legislator.

Weaver, of Sheldon, added that her decision was driven in large part by negative responses she's received since the Register's publication of a story describing her efforts to build a career as an internet psychic.

Since the story published in mid-April, Weaver said she's received intimidating phone calls emails and said someone raised a "for sale" sign in her yard — an act she interpreted as a demand that she leave town.

"To me, that sent a message that 'we want you out of here,'" she said of the for sale sign.

The district, which covers 39 counties in north-central and northwest Iowa, is now served by U.S. Rep. Steve King, R-Kiron. It includes Ames, Fort Dodge, Sioux City and Mason City. King previously defeated Weaver in the districts' 2016 race.

[Link to her statement on Facebook]

Weaver said in the post that she would redirect funds already raised for her campaign to "the district to continue to oppose Steve King."

Weaver originally announced her plans to run in 2018 for the Democratic nomination for Congress in Iowa’s 4th Congressional District in March on MSNBC's "AM Joy."

She seems a bit of a kook because of the Internet psychic thing, but death threats and official retaliation against the government office she works for from the legislature are outrageous.

[Flagg]

Does it say how old she was when she was an "internet psychic"? Because, while bullshit, it's not really any different than a Christian minister or priest from the church you pay tithes to giving you advice in an email. Plus, since the GOP redefined "in my youth" as being younger than about 40 with Dubya's drunk driving and cocaine coyboy days as being "youthful indiscretions" despite him being in his 30's 40's at the time

But stupid shit like this point rthat shouldn't matter since Nancy Reagan had an astrologer and gave her traitor husband advice based on "readings" is beside the point and shouldn't be in articles about a sitting House Republican's supporters acting like a bunch of fucking fascist thugs and I'm sure they strongly insist at "having absolutely no connection" and strongly condemn such actions.

Though I wonder how many of the neo-na- err, "alt-right" fucksticks doing all of this shit while out of their uniforms (brown shirts and red armbands with a red white and blue elephant in the white circle) will get jobs from the shitlord who needs to change his last name to "Tool" (hehehe "S. Tool" [/Beavis]) so he can't be confused with the wordy but prolific author.

[Gandalf]

Is there any sort of legal appeal available, perhaps to get King done for corruption and abuse of power?

[The Romulan Republic]

Appalling.

Hopefully this is an exception, and not the new norm. And hopefully it is dealt with competently and honestly by law enforcement. Because while threats against politicians are, sadly, nothing new or even very rare, threats to the point of forcing a candidate out of the race are. If that becomes common practice, then democracy is dead.

Which is part of why, as heartless as it may sound, I think that Ms.Weaver probably made a mistake in stepping down. I understand why she did, I suppose, but concessions in the face of threats will only encourage more of them. To my mind, the possibility of being threatened or assaulted is part of the job when you run for political office, a professional hazard such as those faced by firemen, police men, etc., and if you can't face that, and not be defeated by it, then you should not run for office to begin with.

I also hope that people on the Left will not respond in kind, though I expect that some will. For one thing, threats to Republican officials, for example, would not do much to deter harassment from Right-wing radicals, since I presume (and certainly hope) that they are not personally coordinating the terroristic harassment of their opponents. Nor would threats directed at the trolls/terrorists themselves, since their will always be more of them, operating behind the relative security of the Internet. If anything, I expect it would simply encourage an escalating series of tit-for-tat responses, and as I said, if this becomes the new norm, democracy is dead.

I likewise hope that the Left will remember the lessons of the War on Terror, that an overly broad and heavy-handed response to terrorism can do more damage than the initial attacks in the long run, and lead to further terrorist attacks. We should not respond in the same knee-jerk manner that we rightfully condemned George W. Bush and Donald Trump for.

However, a strong response to this sort of terrorism (because that is what it is) is certainly called for. I would say that three major things need to happen in response, though as I am not a legal or security expert, there may be practical difficulties and/or other options that I am overlooking:

1. The Democratic Party, and Liberals and Progressives in general, need to make a strong public response to this: condemning it, drawing attention to it, and, if we have the slightest chance of unseating King, throwing as much support as possible behind doing so. We need to show that we will not be cowed into silence, and that terrorism is not an effective tactic to silence us.

2. Hopefully law enforcement will investigate properly, but if not, political pressure must be brought to bear on them to compel them to do so.

3. It might not be a bad idea for the Democratic Party to begin considering, as part of our usual campaign expenses, paying for quality private security for candidates in higher risk areas or who receive unusual levels of threats, since Secret Service protection does not extend to Congressional candidates or office holders. Candidates have a right to personal security, and a legal deterrent to those who would do violence or use threats to intimidate us is needed.

[Flagg]

Is there any sort of legal appeal available, perhaps to get King done for corruption and abuse of power?

Oh, you were serious?



Of course not. What do you think this is, a nation of laws?



Literally all he has to do is say he abhors violence, would never authorize such things, is the real victim, and his shills will be on the TV Box saying everything from "Crazies did all of it and it's not related to the campaign", to "We question the validity of these events, blah, blah, blah."

These people are scum. Like, toilet scum.

[The Romulan Republic]

Is there any sort of legal appeal available, perhaps to get King done for corruption and abuse of power?

Not a lawyer or judge, but I expect no, unless you could prove that he was directly behind either the threats, or the loss of funding to "punish" his opponent. The former is more likely random Right-wing nut jobs not directly affiliated with him, and the latter, if indeed it was politically motivated, is apparently a state government decision, not something a Congressman would directly decide (though he could doubtless exert influence in that direction if he wished to). I suspect that tying him to either would be very hard, and he might well be personally innocent of either action.

Of course, Republican politicians have gotten very good at riling up the crazies without actually crossing any legal lines themselves, and either don't care about the consequences or actively encourage them, but there's nothing that can be done about that without abandoning the concept of the First Amendment.

Their is, of course, one way to hold them to account: vote them out of office. But that requires enough voters who are not either politically ignorant, or supportive of this sort of shit. Which the Republicans have made ever-harder with voter suppression and gerrymanding (though I don't know how much either of those is a factor for King's district).

On the plus side, Illinois is apparently implementing automatic voter registration of some kind, which should help counter the suppression, if not the gerrymandering. But that doesn't help us in Iowa.