As Donald Trump continues his rise in the presidential election–from a businessman joking about running for president to the man who will almost certainly be the Republican Party nominee–several Republican leaders have had to decide whether or not they are going to suck it up and support him. While some Republicans have refused to support Trump or have withdrawn their endorsements because of his repeatedly racist rhetoric, many leaders have given him their political blessing as it has become apparent that he is all they have left.

In the beginning, there was obvious hesitation to support trump. Around a month ago, Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House and highest ranking GOP official, was nowhere near willing to commit to the Donald Trump bandwagon. Ryan had slammed Trump for his plan to ban Muslims from entering the country, pointing out the plan’s unconstitutionality and inherent lack of conservatism. And when Trump refused to disavow David Duke in February, Ryan responded by saying,

If a person wants to be the nominee of the Republican Party, there can be no evasion and no games. They must reject any group or cause that is built on bigotry. This party does not prey on people’s prejudices.

It seems that Ryan and others have decided to weaken the Republican Party stance on bigotry, however, as several party leaders have now readily accepted Trump as their nominee, brushing off his inappropriate behavior and rhetoric as accidental.

A recent example of this hypocrisy? This week Trump has been under fire for inherently racist comments against U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel. In an attack add, Hillary Clinton’s campaign capitalized on Trump’s statement and some Republican Party members’ decision to speak out against him.

The video shows clips of Trump’s racist interview claims that Judge Curiel could not fairly judge his case because of his Mexican heritage. His statements are then followed by different clips of prominent Republicans disapproving of his racist claims.

Paul Ryan admitted that Trump’s statements were textbook examples of racism and that he regretted the comments. Mitch McConnell criticized Trump’s statements as stupid inappropriate. Newt Gingrich labeled the comments inexcusable and Trump an amateur. But, while these Republican leaders are disavowing Trump’s remarks on TV or in the news, the sad thing is they and the rest of the party are continuing to support him nonetheless. Party leaders have repeatedly acknowledged Trump’s blatant bigotry, inappropriate rhetoric, and repeated racism, but they still stand behind him and continue pushing for him to be our next President.

At best, Republican support of Donald Trump is some kind of misguided attempt to hold the party together. At worst, the support is grounded in a firm belief in Trump’s plan to destroy all racial diversity and cultural variety in America. GOP leaders need to wake up and realize that the remarks that Donald Trump keeps making on air and in interviews, time and time again, aren’t just silly mistakes–they are who he is. And, then, if party leaders really want to put the force of their party behind the bigoted monster Trump has become (or has always been), they need to accept the consequences that decision will have for their future as a political party and our future as Americans.

Alexandra Simone

Alex Simone is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street and a student at The George Washington University, studying Political Science. She is passionate about law and government, but also enjoys the finer things in life like watching crime dramas and enjoying a nice DC brunch. Contact Alex at ASimone@LawStreetmedia.com

The post Republican Party Leaders Acknowledge They’re Backing a Racist appeared first on Law Street.

In 2012, then-Presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich talked about a colony on the moon. On the campaign trail in Florida, he stated, “By the end of my second term, we will have the first permanent base on the moon and it will be American.” Many of us, myself included, mocked him relentlessly for this proposal. Well today, I think I may need to offer Mr. Gingrich somewhat of an apology, because apparently, he wasn’t actually that far off. The United States government has taken a very early and tentative step toward creating commercial development of the moon.

Recently, Reuters released information it received from a letter from the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) to Bigelow Aerospace, a company that has worked with the International Space Station and has intentions of creating living stations on the moon. According to the letter, the FAA stated that they could:

Leverage the FAA’s existing launch licensing authority to encourage private sector investments in space systems by ensuring that commercial activities can be conducted on a non-interference basis.

I know that sounds kind of like mumbo-jumbo, but essentially what it means is that a company like Bigelow could set up its proposed moon habitats, and it would be the only company with a license in that particular space (yes, pun very intended.) As Bigelow itself explained:

It just means that somebody else isn’t licensed to land on top of you or land on top of where exploration and prospecting activities are going on, which may be quite a distance from the lunar station.

This move has, of course, launched concerns about the global ramifications of the FAA’s actions, given that the United States doesn’t have a unilateral claim to the moon. There was a 1967 United Nations Treaty that governs international affairs in relation to the moon that the FAA, and the rest of the U.S. government, will have to take into consideration.

So, besides it being obviously super cool, why would Bigelow Aerospace (and presumably, other companies) want to send people to the moon? How do you make money off that? Well, Bigelow is going to start by working on a space habitat at the ISS, and then continue its work on “orbital outposts.”

Orbital outposts are basically like giant spaceships on which humans would be able to comfortably live. (For late 90s Disney fans, think “Zenon: Girl of the 21st Century.”) Bigelow has already started working on these–it launched its first space module in 2006 called Genesis I. Bigelow wants to extend access to these space modules and orbital outposts to paying customers, including governments, researchers, and tourists. Finally, Bigelow would move toward establishing a series of bases on the moon, ideally by 2025.

It’s a pretty cool idea–but I don’t think it’s anything to get too excited about just yet. While the FAA’s move is certainly a surprising step forward, I don’t think we’re going to be taking a quick Spring Break jaunt to the Moon anytime soon. That being said, the FAA’s move to carve out space for companies on the Moon is almost amusingly classically American, and shows that the U.S. government does see potential for lucrative ventures beyond our terrestrial boundaries. Newt Gingrich, for one, is probably pretty excited.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post FAA Allowing Companies to Call Dibs on the Moon appeared first on Law Street.