Nancy

Documentation. Witnesses. Facts. Truth. That's what they're afraid of.
Showing posts with label #ItCanHappenHere. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #ItCanHappenHere. Show all posts

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Lowering the Boom

Of course Medicare and Social Security are on the table. In a truly big way:

“It is my intention to leave Social Security as it is!” announced Trump in a March debate. He told the Heritage Foundation – the neoliberal far-right think tank that drafted the budget outlines used by Republicans in Congress – that “I’m not going to cut Social Security like every other Republican and I’m not going to cut Medicare or Medicaid. Every other Republican is going to cut, and even if they wouldn’t, they don’t know what to do because they don’t know where the money is. I do.”
But it appears Donald Trump, pathological liar and ideological weathervane, is backtracking on his promises yet again. The Hill reports that the budget reductions are based off a Heritage Foundation outline, and a Mother Jones analysis found that this means the Trump Administration will be cutting Medicare by 41%, Medicaid by 41%, and Social Security by 8%.

The big reveal: Paul Ryan is Darth Sidious.

Tomorrow

Looks like no one's coming to save us. We're together, but also on our own.

I haven't decided what I'm going to do with myself tomorrow. I'm admittedly freaking out a bit. No, a lot.

This is fine. This is fine. This is fine. No work and all play make Jason fine. This is fine. This is fine.

Teapot Dome on a Massive Scale

Per the Guardian (h/t Kevin Drum):

Republican lawmakers have quietly laid the foundation to give away Americans’ birthright: 640m acres of national land. In a single line of changes to the rules for the House of Representatives, Republicans have overwritten the value of federal lands, easing the path to disposing of federal property even if doing so loses money for the government and provides no demonstrable compensation to American citizens.
At stake are areas managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), National Forests and Federal Wildlife Refuges, which contribute to an estimated $646bn in economic stimulus from recreation on federal lands and 6.1m jobs. Transferring these lands to the states, critics fear, could decimate those numbers by eliminating mixed-use requirements, limiting public access and turning over large portions for energy or property development.
According to the Outdoor Alliance, US public land is the government’s second largest source of income after taxes. In addition to economic stimulus in outdoor activities, federal land also creates revenue through oil and gas production, logging and other industrial uses. According to the BLM, in 2016, it made $2bn in royalty revenue from federal leases.
Ignoring those figures, the new language for the House budget, authored by Utah Republican representative Rob Bishop, who has a history of fighting to transfer public land to the states, says that federal land is effectively worthless. Transferring public land to “state, local government or tribal entity shall not be considered as providing new budget authority, decreasing revenues, increasing mandatory spending or increasing outlays.” 

Land theft like this brought down the Harding administration. Granted, there's no one bribe or one company; this is a whole party being wholly owned by energy corporations, which makes it somehow legal.

We're rolling back the 1900s....

The Republicans are living their dream and the dream of their ancestors -- To rape America. Full stop.

Russia is Stealing Our Stuff

Trump and the Republicans really are getting ready to eliminate everything good in the world. If they have their way, we won't recognize this country in four years. And that's exactly what these fuckers want. From a Hill article on Trump's budget:

The departments of Commerce and Energy would see major reductions in funding, with programs under their jurisdiction either being eliminated or transferred to other agencies. The departments of Transportation, Justice and State would see significant cuts and program eliminations.
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting would be privatized, while the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities would be eliminated entirely.

It's really all just evil:


"Elections have consequences?" What an understatement.

In Plain Sight




Moore is right. I thought things were going to be quite bad, but the transition period has been even worse than I'd expected.

I fooled myself into thinking that Trump would retreat for a bit during the transition, but he hasn't. Not even a bit. You've all seen the Tweets, so I'm not going to rehash them. Aside from his Tweets, Twitter has been almost paralyzing. Something insane every 15 minutes.

His cabinet picks really couldn't have been worse. I had something else in mind to post here, but I peeked at Twitter for a second about five minutes ago, and we get this:



This is while DeVos and her absolute ignorance of anything to do with education is being exposed, but already probably pushed into the background. While Tom Price may be about to be referred to the SEC. Tilllerson, Sessions, the list just goes on.

Trump's disaster of a press conference. The desire he expressed today to HOLD MILITARY PARADES! That always turns out well.

But this post isn't really about that. It's about me not understanding why we're here. The Trump/Russia and Trump/Comey stories are barely even being hidden by Trump or anyone else. Denied on the surface level, but not hidden. Trump talking about removing the sanctions on Russia, for instance. Mike Flynn calling Russia FIVE TIMES the day after Obama announcing new sanctions. The changing of the RNC platform to ease up anti-Russian language. Appointing Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. I really could run off dozens of these.

The above is all circumstantial evidence, but they're all things Trump would do if he were, in fact, in bed with Russia. Circumstantial evidence doesn't really get you anywhere in court, though. However, there is so much more solid stuff out there, too, particularly two stories that came out today.

One is this from McClatchy:

The FBI and five other law enforcement and intelligence agencies have collaborated for months in an investigation into Russian attempts to influence the November election, including whether money from the Kremlin covertly aided President-elect Donald Trump, two people familiar with the matter said.
The agencies involved in the inquiry are the FBI, the CIA, the National Security Agency, the Justice Department, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and representatives of the director of national intelligence, the sources said.
Investigators are examining how money may have moved from the Kremlin to covertly help Trump win, the two sources said. One of the allegations involves whether a system for routinely paying thousands of Russian-American pensioners may have been used to pay some email hackers in the United States or to supply money to intermediaries who would then pay the hackers, the two sources said.

Six agencies? Would they really be investigating a story like this if they didn't think they had something?

The working group is scrutinizing the activities of a few Americans who were affiliated with Trump’s campaign or his business empire and of multiple individuals from Russia and other former Soviet nations who had similar connections, the sources said.
U.S. intelligence agencies not only have been unanimous in blaming Russia for the hacking of Democrats’ computers but also have concluded that the leaking and dissemination of thousands of emails of top Democrats, some of which caused headaches for the Clinton campaign, were done to help Trump win.

So there's that, and then there's Comey. From HuffPo today:

Information presently public and available confirms that Erik Prince, Rudy Giuliani, and Donald Trump conspired to intimidate FBI Director James Comey into interfering in, and thus directly affecting, the 2016 presidential election. This conspiracy was made possible with the assistance of officers in the New York Police Department and agents within the New York field office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. All of the major actors in the conspiracy have already confessed to its particulars either in word or in deed; moreover, all of the major actors have publicly exhibited consciousness of guilt after the fact.

There's a lot more at the link. It's worth noting that Erik Prince is Betsy DeVos's brother.

The Comey and Russia stories tie together, as well:

[...] FBI Director Comey was intimidated into revealing the status of the Clinton case on October 27th but would not, even in the face of numerous allegations of federal crimes against the president-elect, reveal anything about the Bureau’s investigation into that matter; or that the Clinton and Weiner investigators at NYPD and the FBI appear to have leaked repeatedly to the Trump campaign, yet there have been no leaks whatsoever regarding the FBI and CIA’s ongoing investigation into Trump’s ties with Russia. It is thus clear that better understanding the scope, purpose, and players of the domestic conspiracy to elect Donald Trump will also shed light on how the FBI and CIA managed to conduct little or no investigation of criminal allegations exponentially more serious than any of those leveled against Hillary Clinton. 
So Comey held back information on Trump colluding with Russia, but released info on Hillary's e-mails??? Shouldn't be surprising, given the news that just dropped on him:

FBI Director James Comey—blamed by many Democrats for costing Hillary Clinton the presidential election last year—was excited about pursuing a criminal investigation into President Bill Clinton's most controversial pardons more than a decade ago, newly released FBI files show.
A FBI memo about the grand jury investigation into Bill Clinton's last-minute pardons of fugitive financiers Marc Rich and Pincus Green says that when Comey was about to take over as the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan in 2001 he expressed strong interest in the case.

And Comey has a history of this stuff:

Comey’s first brush with them came when Bill Clinton was president. Looking to get back into government after a stint in private practice, Comey signed on as deputy special counsel to the Senate Whitewater Committee. In 1996, after months of work, Comey came to some damning conclusions: Hillary Clinton was personally involved in mishandling documents and had ordered others to block investigators as they pursued their case. Worse, her behavior fit into a pattern of concealment: she and her husband had tried to hide their roles in two other matters under investigation by law enforcement. Taken together, the interference by White House officials, which included destruction of documents, amounted to “far more than just aggressive lawyering or political naiveté,” Comey and his fellow investigators concluded. It constituted “a highly improper pattern of deliberate misconduct.”

I wrote this on Facebook yesterday:

I'm not going full Godwin here and saying Trump is Hitler. Hitler wasn't "Hitler" when he came to power. However, I don't think anyone here would question the idea that Hitler should've been declared "illegtimate" and all options should've been on the table to Germans who opposed him and the Nazis after a certain point. What would that point be? Kristallnacht? Nuremberg Laws? Sometime before that?
I'll repeat... Trump isn't Hitler. But there are an awful lot of lines being crossed right now that I never thought I would ever see an American President would cross. So I find myself struggling with the same stuff. And I think that if I'd asked myself a couple of years ago whether working with a hostile foreign power to turn an election and enrich oneself would be one the serious "red lines," there's almost no way I would've said no.
Somehow, we're here. 

We crossed that line. And it's OBVIOUS. So while it's nice that over 60 Democratic Representatives won't be attending the inauguration in 36 hours, I don't know why they're not calling to postpone the inauguration. Shouldn't Trump collaborating with Russia and the FBI be disqualifiying?

I've asked this question a number of times, but given that the inauguration is now tomorrow and there's likely nothing we can do for at least two years once it's over. We'll have to just take the corruption, the Trump family enriching itself, the abuse of the press, the kakistocratic tendencies, the dismantling of government and the safety net, the defunding of public education, the crushing of labor.

How the FUCK did this happen? Oh yeah. E-mails.

Saturday, January 7, 2017

A Vaster Right-Wing Conspiracy?

I really, really need to be told I'm wrong on this. But it's a feeling that's been creeping into my head a lot lately.











If it's true, what are we getting into? What are we as citizens?



Friday, January 6, 2017

Word to Kate McKinnon

Your Kellyanne Conway impression is really cute and funny, but I just wanted to remind you that she's not cute nor funny, she's calculating and evil:

In case you lost count, that was six times that Conway said “by anyone” instead of acknowledging what 17 intelligence agencies have said on the record, and in Senate testimony.
And despite Conway’s insistence that Trump’s incoming administration has “great respect for the intelligence communities,” it was Conway herself who revealed that Trump plans to replace intelligence officials with “his own people.”
This is not an administration that respects the intelligence community, but one that is seeking to discredit it. And it is further an administration whose loyalties are in question, as Trump and Conway behave more like Vladimir Putin’s defense attorneys than they do American leaders seriously concerned with the subversion of our democracy.

Might be time to change course on the character... I think the same goes for Alec Baldwin. At some point, making light of treason is no longer helpful. Or have I just lost my sense of humor since November 8th?

Wednesday, January 4, 2017

More Economic Anxiety on the Upper West Side

I think this is the third time in the last month the poor working class people of the UWS got so stressed out they just had to express it.



We all know the swastika is the universal symbol for "I'm afraid my job is going to China."

I think the thing I'm seething with is empathy.

UPDATE (1/4/2017, 9:57 PM): Technically, that's like a mile or two north of the UWS...

That's Not the Way a Fascist Autocrat Would Operate, Right?

From The Hill:

President-elect Donald Trump is crafting plans to restructure at least two of the nation’s top intelligence agencies, according to a new report.
Trump is eyeing overhauls of the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday.
“The view from the Trump team is the intelligence world [is] becoming completely politicized,” an individual close to Trump’s transition operation said. "They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring agencies and how they interact."
Trump is targeting the CIA and the ODNI as he publicly wars with the U.S. intelligence community over its conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
The president-elect has vehemently denied that Russian hacking of Democratic organizations before Election Day aided his White House bid.
Trump wants to shrink the ODNI, as he believes the agency established in 2004 as a response to the 9/11 terror attacks has become bloated and politicized.

Totally normal...

Saturday, December 31, 2016

Not on Our Side

I couldn't have woken up to a more perfect example of why we have to band together in 2017:



We have a President-Elect that refers to us as his "enemies." To use a colloquialism, HOLY FUCKING SHIT.

Happy 2017, Kids!

Saturday, December 24, 2016

When Only One Side Plays By The Rules

Well, isn't this fun?

North Carolina can no longer be considered a democracy, according to a new report from the Electoral Integrity Project (EIP), which rated the state's overall electoral integrity at the same levels of those in authoritarian states and "pseudo-democracies" such as Cuba, Indonesia and Sierra Leone.
The state scored 58 out of 100, with ratings so poor on the measures of legal framework and voter registration that it tracked closely with those in Iran and Venezuela. The state got a score of 7 out of 100 for the integrity of voting district boundaries.
According to the report, North Carolina was the worst state for unfair districting in the United States and the worst ever analyzed by the EIP in the world. These ratings mean that the state can no longer be considered a democracy.
It's pretty incredible, but that's where we are. A U.S. state is no longer considered a democracy (I bet there are more).

Ryan Cooper at the Hill believes that the Shit, I mean Tar Heel State is a testing ground for the rest of the country (bolding is mine -- it's something worth knowing if you don't already):

This sort of tyranny seems to be the Republican aim — and it's important to realize that despite the traditional bleating American chauvinism about liberty, such a quasi-tyrannical system is not remotely at odds with our history. On the contrary, a South Africa-style partial tyranny is how North Carolina has been governed for most of its history. (It's probably more accurate to call the apartheid system Jim Crow-style, since the American version was first.) Wilmington, North Carolina, rang in the worst phase of Jim Crow, when white supremacists executed a violent coup d'etat in 1898 against the duly elected local government — the product of a "fusionist" black-white populist alliance — killing dozens of people and torching many black homes and businesses. The first target and the spark for the coup was a black newspaper — freedom of the press often being the first thing to go when democracy is abrogated. After that, North Carolina (and most of the rest of the South) was a brutally repressive tyranny until 1965, when the Voting Rights Act and Civil Rights Act were passed. Tyranny is not the exception in North Carolina. For much of America's history, it was the rule.
It's not hard to predict how Republicans will attempt to cement their control of political power during the Trump years. Indeed, the tyranny is already some distance towards completion. Part of the plan will be what they have already been doing since they won the 2010 midterms and especially since the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013. They'll continue gerrymandering district boundaries to make it as hard as possible for Democrats to win (indeed, the way those selfsame state legislative districts are drawn in North Carolina is already an unconstitutional abrogation of civil rights, according to a federal court). They'll enact further targeted vote suppression measures to disenfranchise as many minorities and white liberals as possible, this time at the federal level if they can manage it. And for Democrats who manage to jump through all the hoops, they'll make it as onerous as possible for them to vote by restricting polling locations and hours in Democratic-leaning locations.
Finally, as we're seeing in North Carolina, any inconveniently lost elections can be overturned so long as the GOP controls enough other chunks of government. Legislatures can core out a governor's power, or Supreme Court decisions can overturn legislation with reverse-engineered legal argle-bargle. Who knows where it will stop. And from there it's really quite a short distance to stuffing ballot boxes or rigging the election counts. It has all happened before.

These are people who will do anything to win. And when they don't win, they change the rules. And when they can't change the rules, they break them.

This is seriously asymmetric warfare. There should be a referee who stops this, but there isn't. If the Democrats keep letting Republicans get away with this stuff, it's just going to get harder and harder to make up ground. Nearly all of the real solutions are against the rules, but if the Republicans don't care about them, why should we?

I know that sounds a lot like Trump's justification for torturing ISIS members. I don't feel terribly comfortable saying it, but I really am hitting my limits as far as coming up with democratic solutions in a democratic system that's being deliberately dismantled. When will enough be enough?

Thursday, December 22, 2016

Wan-Nazi Be Starting Something

OK, you come up with a better post name about Nazis and provoking fights...

I was debating whether to publicly share what I'll be sharing in a few paragraphs because it really hit me hard personally, and frankly I'm still debating whether I actually will be able to write it.

But before I give it a shot, some context.

Talking Points Memo today highlights two instances of members of the incoming Trump regime rubbing elbows with politicians who could be described as at least "Neo-Nazi-adjacent."

The first involves Mike Flynn (who else?):

We learned overnight that Trump's designated National Security Advisor Michael Flynn met secretly in Trump Tower with the chief of the Austrian Freedom Party. The Austrian Freedom Party is not just any foreign political party or even any right-wing populist party. The Freedom Party was founded in 1956 by former Nazis, though that lineage can be slightly misleading. It is not and was never simply a refounding of the Austrian Nazi party. Still, it is a far right nationalist party, made up in its early years disproportionately of former Nazis which for many of these early years was shunned in national politics but also provided a home for people who were shunned by or unwilling to join the country's big two political parties. In more recent years it has had surges of popular support as a far-right anti-immigrant party.
I actually disagree a bit with Josh Marshall here about the lineage being slightly misleading. It really isn't. Any Jewish person following trends of anti-Semitism in central Europe in the last couple of decades will remember that the Austrian Freedom Party was the party of Jorg Haider:

Haider was frequently criticized for statements in praise of Nazi policies, or considered antisemitic.[43] International reports on Haider often referred to his remark that the Nazi government had produced a "proper employment policy" as compared to the SPÖ government. He was forced to resign as governor of the Carinthia province in 1991 because of the incident. Haider years later apologized.[15] On one occasion during a parliamentary debate, Haider described World War II concentration camps as "punishment camps."[15]
On several occasions Haider made remarks about Austrian World War II veterans that were represented as broad endorsement of the war and of the Nazi SS. Speaking to a gathering of veterans from several countries in 1990, he said that the veterans were "decent people of good character" and "remain true to their convictions." Haider stated that he did not specifically address Waffen-SS veterans with his remarks.[15] On another occasion, he said, "the Waffen-SS was part of the Wehrmacht (German military) and because of that it deserves every honor and recognition."[44] In 2000, at a gathering of Wehrmacht veterans in Ulrichsberg, including Waffen-SS veterans, he said, "Those who come to Ulrichsberg are not the old Nazis. They are not neo-Nazis, they are not criminals."[45]
Haider also compared the deportation of Jews by the Nazis to the expulsion of Sudeten Germans from Czechoslovakia after World War II.[46] Haider's detractors also pointed to a punning reference to the leader of the Jewish community of Vienna, Ariel Muzicant; Haider indicated that he did not understand how someone named Ariel (also the name of a popular laundry detergent) could have gathered so much filth, implying the real estate agent's business methods were crooked.[47] Haider's critics characterized the remark as antisemitic.[47] Haider also maintained that Muzicant faked antisemitic hate letters to himself. He later withdrew this and other accusations, and apologized for his "derogatory remarks."[48]
Haider was closely watched by Mossad, the Israeli secret service; FPÖ secretary general Peter Sichrovsky - a Jewish-Austrian politician and formerly one of Haider's closest aides - had gathered inside information on Haider's controversial contacts with prominent "Arab dictators".[49] Due to Haider's perceived contacts to Holocaust deniers, the Israeli Foreign Ministry on 29 September 2008 declared it was heavily concerned about the 2008 Austrian elections;[50] a spokesman of the ministry said that Israeli officials were "very worried about the rise to power of people who promote hatred, Holocaust denial, and befriend Neo-Nazis. We see it as a disturbing development and are following the matter very closely".[51]

 And these were his parents:

Haider's parents had been early members of the Austrian Nazi Party (DNSAP, the Austrian affiliate of the NSDAP, the German Nazi Party). They were from different backgrounds. Haider's father, Robert Haider, was a shoemaker. His mother, Dorothea Rupp, was the daughter of a well-to-do physician and head of the gynaecology ward at the general hospital of Linz.[4]
Robert Haider joined the DNSAP in 1929 as a fifteen-year-old boy, four years before Adolf Hitler came to power in Germany. He remained a member even after the Nazi Party was banned in Austria and after Engelbert Dollfuss had dissolved the Austrian parliament and established the Ständestaat, a fascist dictatorship. In 1933, Haider senior moved to Bavaria but returned to Austria the following year after the failed Nazi attempt to overthrow the Austrian government. He was arrested and chose to move back to Germany where he joined the Austrian Legion, a division of the Sturmabteilung.[5]
Haider senior completed a two-year military service in Germany and returned to Austria in 1938 after it was annexed by Nazi Germany (the Anschluss). From 1940, he fought as a junior officer on the Western and Eastern Fronts in Europe during the Second World War. Having been wounded several times, he was discharged from the Wehrmacht with the rank of lieutenant. In 1945, he married Dorothea Rupp, at that time a leader in the Bund Deutscher Mädel (BDM).

So, yeah, Mike Flynn welcomed a Neo-Nazi to Trump Tower (think about how surreal those last six words are!).

The second story might even be crazier:

A representative of President-elect Donald Trump's transition team was among a group of conservative lawmakers and officials from the U.S. and Europe who boycotted a meeting with Israel's Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely this week over her decision to exclude a far-right Swedish pol from the briefing, the Times of Israel reported Wednesday. A spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry told the Times that the delegation had canceled its briefing with Hotovely (pictured above) because she would not allow the attendance Swedish pol Kristina Winberg, whom the spokesperson described as "a member of a party with neo-Nazi tendencies."
A representative for the group also told the Times that the delegation was boycotting the meeting in protest of Winberg's exclusion.
Becky Norton Dunlop, deputy to the senior adviser on Trump’s transition team for policy and personnel, was among the delegation scheduled to participate in the briefing. She is in Israel for the three-day Jerusalem Leaders Summit, a gathering of conservative politicians and advocates. The meeting with Hotovely in the Knesset was canceled just hours before it was scheduled to begin Wednesday, the Times of Israel said.
Apparently, the Trump transition team chose to side with a Neo-Nazi over conservative Israelis? Not that Israel is my beat, but if you ever hear a Trump supporter talk about how Trump is "good for Israel." send them the link to that story.

Moving from Neo-Nazis to another one of Trump's Nuremberg rallies, where he's busy helping his adoring supporters transition into Brownshirts:

“You people were vicious, violent, screaming, ‘Where’s the wall? We want the wall!’ Screaming, ‘Prison! Prison! Lock her up!’ I mean, you are going crazy,” Trump said during a stop in Orlando, Florida on Friday.
“You were nasty and mean and vicious and you wanted to win, right? But now, now it’s much different. Now, you’re laid back, you’re cool, you’re mellow, right? You’re basking in the glory of victory,” Trump added.

I really don't want to share the video because I don't want his face permanently on my blog, but click through if you'd like and hear the venom in his voice as he praises these awful, awful people for being "nasty and mean and vicious." Yeah, that's gonna end well.

So, with that as background, we move to the results of the Presidential election, where the final count has Clinton winning by quite a bit:

The Democrat outpaced President-elect Donald Trump by almost 2.9 million votes, with 65,844,954 (48.2%) to his 62,979,879 (46.1%), according to revised and certified final election results from all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

That's not so much the news as how Trump stormtroopers are reacting to it. Chez Pazienza points out:
The latest Team Trump talking point is that Trump actually won the popular vote. All you have to do is remove New York and California and -- presto! -- Trump wins by three million votes. Yes, the conservative Daily Mail seems to have started this ridiculous meme and it's of course caught on like wildfire among the Trump faithful. Just pretend two entire states and the 60 million who live there don't exist and suddenly Little Donny can sleep at night without throwing a fucking tantrum because he didn't get what he wanted. By this logic, of course, we could just remove, say, Florida and Michigan, and Clinton is officially president because she'd beat Trump in the electoral college.
Or, in the same spirit in which the knock at New York and California is surely being offered, maybe we just eliminate all those flyover states and their extras-on-Hee-Haw populations and make it a rout for Clinton? See how that works? 
The fact that a lot of Trump's supporters are comfortable going to these kinds of supremely stupid lengths to prop up the unprecedentedly flimsy presidency of Jabba the Putz speaks volumes about the overall era that's now upon us. It's not just post-fact; it's the outright twisting of reality in an effort to make it fit a preconceived design, one from which its adherents absolutely refuse to deviate.

Jumping back to Nazis (I'm worried I'll be typing that often in the next few years), I didn't much like Philip Roth's The Plot Against America because I thought of it as alarmist and trying to tell us "it can happen here" when I've always insisted it couldn't. But read this and substitute "Trump" for "Charles Lindbergh," "Shmuley Boteach" for "Lionel Bengelsdorf," "Carl Icahn" for "Henry Ford," and "a treaty with fascist Russia and Vladimir Putin" for "a treaty with Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler," and squint a little.  You'll start to see it.

The novel is told from the point of view of Philip Roth as a child. It begins with aviation hero Charles Lindbergh, already criticized for his praise of Hitler's government, joining the America First party. As the party's spokesman, he speaks against American intervention in World War II, and openly criticizes the 'Jewish race' for trying to force American involvement. After making a surprise appearance on the last night of the 1940 Republican National Convention, he is nominated as the Republican Party's candidate for President. Although criticized from the left, and hated by most Jewish-Americans, Lindbergh musters a strong tide of popular support from the South and Midwest, and is endorsed by conservative rabbi Lionel Bengelsdorf. Lindbergh wins the election over incumbent president Franklin D. Roosevelt in a landslide under the slogan 'Vote for Lindbergh, or vote for war.' He nominates Burton K. Wheeler as his vice president, and Henry Ford as Secretary of the Interior. With Lindbergh as president, the Roth family begin increasingly to feel like outsiders in American society.
Lindbergh's first act is to sign a treaty with Nazi Germany and Adolf Hitler promising that the United States will not interfere with German expansion in Europe (known as the 'Iceland Understanding' after the place it is signed), and with Imperial Japan, promising non-interference with Japanese expansion in Asia (known as the 'Hawaii Understanding').

Trump and his people mingling with those who swing towards the swastika and praising violence to cheering crowds who deny facts....Here's where it gets personal for me.

Last night, I visited a local watering hole in Brooklyn that I tend to frequent. I was busy studying for an exam, so I pretty much had my head in a book for much of the night. However, I couldn't keep it there because there were not one, but two incidents of Trump supporters in this bar (where there were maybe 15 people) trying to provoke others.

First, a very inebriated 40-something white male stumbled into the bar and began shouting threats and racial slurs at a Latino guy and an African-American guy while praising Trump. The Latino dude actually slapped him twice, but the guy kept yelling at the other two and wouldn't leave when the bartender asked. I ended up calling the police, who escorted him out about 15 minutes later.

Shortly afterward, three military guys in their 30s, one from Tennessee and two originally from NYC, struck up a conversation with me about my studies. Right off the bat, we were in strange territory when one of the three stated that he believed that fewer people should be allowed to go to state colleges because going to college provides an unfair leg up over those who don't, and because he didn't like paying taxes toward it. Over the course of about 20 minutes, the conversation became increasingly heated as we touched on the following topics:

  • How exciting it is that Trump will be President, particularly his Cabinet picks. They felt especially strongly about James Mattis as Defense Secretary, despite the fact that his selection blatantly disregards the rules about who is eligible for that position
  • How climate change really isn't happening because there was once an Ice Age (huh?)
  • How the media can entirely not be trusted because they only support Democrats
  • How transgender people should not be allowed in the bathrooms of their choice because, "What if I said I wanted to go into the girls' room? You're OK with that? Well, how about if I went in, took a woman out to the corner, raped her, and smashed her head in?" (where the f**k do their minds even go to envision this stuff?)
  • How they wished they could bring their guns into bars in NY so they could feel safe
The gun issue was where any sense of cordiality started to vanish. I shared that having a gun statistically does not make you safer. The Tennessean said "that's only because people aren't trained. I've been shootin' a gun since I was at my mama's teat!" (I'm not making that up). I tried to cite statistics on lower gun violence in countries where there is more gun control (you're 46 times more likely to be shot in the US than the UK!) -- that's apparently because of the "thugs" in "Chicago, Baltimore, and other cities" -- and then that U.S. states with less control tend to have a higher gun death rate per capita. The three of them began to get more agitated and began to ask me why I'm talking about the 30,000+ gun deaths per year when a million abortions (which are apparently murders) are performed annually or the GMOs that are giving hundreds of thousands of people heart attacks (*scratches head*). The Tennessean helpfully noted that if I wanted to ban guns, why wouldn't I want to ban barstools, since he could bash me over the head with one? I probably should've walked away there, but they continued to cite statistics about abortions and telling me that any statistics I gave them were totally false because the "liberal media" invented them. They finally got to me. I banged my fist on the bar and exclaimed, "Are you stupid? These are scientific studies! This is science! This is math! If you don't believe in science and math, you're stupid?"

The Tennessean then asked me if I knew what the "wood treatment" was. I said no, and he said, "It's when I slam your head into the bar." Despite the fact that he was much bigger than me, I thought to myself that I had a moral obligation to stand up to him. I did exactly that -- I got off my seat, and said "You think so?" and he somehow backed down, and then the three glared at me as they left without finishing their beers.

I was actually a bit embarrassed. I'm not the kind of guy who gets into physical fights. I apologized to the bartender for the situation, and he said, "No, don't apologize. I thank you, because someone needs to give actual facts and statistics to guys like that."

So, two in a night. That's actually four incidents started by rowdy Trump supporters that I've witnessed in New York, three involving me directly, since Trump was nominated back in the spring. I'd say "Maybe it's me," but I've lived in NYC for eight years before and have never come close to fighting anyone.

These guys are getting brazen, and it's dangerous. They proudly deny facts and counter them with Alex-Jones-inspired lies and threats.

When you start seeing swastikas on the Upper West Side and Trump agitators in Brooklyn, what do you imagine it's like in less progressive parts of the country? I'm really worried, if you couldn't tell. I can't believe "bystander training" is becoming part of my vocabulary.

Wednesday, December 14, 2016

Fight, Dammit! (UPDATED)

I'm sitting about two blocks from the White House as I type this...




I only have a minute, but Dahlia Lithwick and David S. Cohen have a piece up at the NYT about the Democrats' possibilities of overturning this election:

There’s no shortage of legal theories that could challenge Mr. Trump’s anointment, but they come from outsiders rather than the Democratic Party. Impassioned citizens have been pleading with electors to vote against Mr. Trump; law professors have argued that winner-take-all laws for electoral votes are unconstitutional; a small group, the Hamilton Electors, is attempting to free electors to vote their consciences; and a new theory has arisen that there is legal precedent for courts to give the election to Mrs. Clinton based on Russian interference. All of these efforts, along with the grass-roots protests, boycotts and petitions, have been happening without the Democratic Party. The most we’ve seen is a response to the C.I.A. revelations, but only with Republicans onboard to give Democrats bipartisan cover.
Take the recount efforts in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. While the Democratic Party relitigates grudges in the press, Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate who received about 64 million fewer votes than Mrs. Clinton, has led the effort. The Democrats have grudgingly participated from the sidelines, but only because public perception forced them to. This effort has proved feeble, with a Pennsylvania judge denying the request because it was “later than last minute.”
Contrast the Democrats’ do-nothingness to what we know the Republicans would have done. If Mr. Trump had lost the Electoral College while winning the popular vote, an army of Republican lawyers would have descended on the courts and local election officials. The best of the Republican establishment would have been filing lawsuits and infusing every public statement with a clear pronouncement that Donald Trump was the real winner. And they would have started on the morning of Nov. 9, using the rhetoric of patriotism and courage.
There are so many conflicting opinions and stories, but what I do know is, when Dahlia Lithwick writes about the law, you listen. Democrats, FIGHT!

UPDATE (12/14/16. 6:41 PM): Rude Pundit has more on exactly why this is so urgent:

After all the lunatic conspiracy theories of this stupid century that's in its hormonal teenage years, the 9/11 insider job, the climate change "hoax," birtherism, and the multiple nefarious crimes of Hillary Clinton and her cronies, we are facing something that is more real than any of it. Right now, there is more evidence than all of those combined times 1000 that Russia, a nation that is antagonistic to the United States, might have, at the very least, taken advantage of a trove of hacked emails to push the needle just enough to get a dangerously inexperienced egomaniac with business ties to Moscow elected president. (This is not to mention the assist from the Republican FBI director.) It's also entirely possible that Russia fucked with the election on multiple fronts, up to and including manipulation of a candidate. And the evidence is not coming from internet savages and talk radio masturbators, but from sources at intelligence agencies and major media outlets. Yeah, the CIA has done a shit-ton of evil in the world. But they sure as hell aren't always wrong.
So all of this is scary, man. Like stomach-dropping scary. One preservation instinct that will kick in really quickly is to try to forget about it, to just let the installation of the Trump presidency happen and go about our business. We all pretended that George W. Bush actually won in 2000 and didn't burn the joint down. Except this time is different. People across the political spectrum understand that Trump is a real and present danger to Americans, whether through eliminating their health insurance or getting us into more idiotic wars. We need to know the extent of Russian interference as quickly as possible. And, if such interference existed, the election itself needs to be challenged on every possible front. Take things to the Supreme Court. If President Obama has evidence that the Trump campaign had any coordination with Russia in regards to the hack, the response needs to be forceful and direct, possibly including arrest of those involved. Either we give a damn about democracy or we don't. At the very least, let us believe that Trump was elected without foreign intervention. Let us just be disappointed with his idiot hordes as he sends us to the reeducation camps.
Not one word in there is hyperbolic.

There is no "proof" of Russian interference (i.e. no smoking gun), but based on the kind of evidence that's come out over the course of months or even years, there is no court in the country, including conservative ones, that would not put a stay on any actions going forward until things are sorted out in any other context.

If Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelosi do nothing about this, it will change my opinion of  them and their legacy drastically for the worse. I do not want the first set of political heroes I've ever had in my 36 years (man, I've been cynical) to go down as cowards who allowed a hostile foreign government to have caused every goddamn thing that they've accomplished to be flushed down the toilet and then have that toilet stuffed with dirty, fetid baby diapers.

Sunday, December 11, 2016

The Evidence, Presented

Two really comprehensive posts to share on Russia's interference with this election...

Marcy Wheeler provides a very detailed, somewhat technical roundup of the evidence:

At a minimum, to blame Russia for tampering with the election, you need high degree of confidence that GRU hacked the DNC (item 2), and shared those documents via some means with Wikileaks (item 8). What is new about Friday’s story is that, after months of not knowing how the hacked documents got from Russian hackers to Wikileaks, CIA now appears to know that people close to the Russian government transferred the documents (item 8). In addition, CIA now appears confident that all this happened to help Trump win the presidency (item 13).
On Twitter (I've become a Twitter junkie for the first time ever), Grudge (@grudging1) lists everything that he/she can think of that ties Trump to the Russians, beginning here:

I'm not going to editorialize much here; it's safe to say that I was in the Obama camp of being pretty sure (in his case, it seems he outright knew) that Russia was trying to manipulate the election in Trump's favor but that I didn't think it would be worth bringing up more than Clinton and her people did because I didn't think he had a chance of winning (and if I'm kicking myself now, I can't imagine how Obama will ever forgive himself).

Ultimately it is the President, invested with the powers as Commander-in-Chief, who could have chosen to act aggressively against Moscow. But he wanted to present a unified front across the American political spectrum. He wanted bipartisan support—and when McConnell rebuffed this effort (more on that in a bit), the White House decided to take the cautious route to “name and shame” the Russians.
This was, to put it mildly, an ineffective strategy.
The White House should have pulled out all the stops to halt this obvious threat to the electoral process, and let the political chips fall where they may. Obama is well aware of the GOP’s massive resistance strategy against his policies—just ask Merrick Garland—but this serious challenge to our civilization should have stiffened this President’s resolve. But it didn’t.
Obama could have retaliated brutally, clandestinely, mercilessly, creatively, painfully, unilaterally—but he didn’t.
Ultimately, a mild reaction was Obama’s decision; a poor decision. But it was his decision.

It all adds up to Trump's illegitimacy, according to Justin Rosario:

The time for debate is over. Donald Trump's "win" is not legitimate by any definition and every position he fills, law he signs or executive order he pens must be considered an illegal power grab by the Republican Party.
.
.
.
Legitimizing the slow moving coup Republicans are on the verge of pulling off means the end of the American Experiment. We allowed our election to be stolen by a foreign power and the greedy Republicans enabled it with no thought to the cost. The Democratic Party is all that stands between the world and a super power now turned rogue nation. If they can't fight back, we're facing a new Dark Ages we may not recover from.

I still see only one solution to pursue. Say it with me: #LockThemUpandRunItBack

Saturday, December 10, 2016

#LockThemUpandRunItBack

Someone was talking about the Republicans as traitors a few hours ago...

Been waiting for something good to be written about tonight's big news, and Karoli at Crooks and Liars did that.

Shall we take a moment to allow that to sink in? Mitch McConnell, Senate Majority Leader, sworn to uphold and defend the United States Constitution, chose to threaten the White House with a smear if they disclosed this information to the American people.
What happened to defending against enemies, domestic and foreign, Senator McConnell? Is this treason?
What makes this really interesting is what we can see in the rear view mirror. The Trump campaign fought tooth and nail to end the Michigan recount, in a state where there is some evidence seals were broken on voting machines there.
We don't know if malware was installed on those machines. We do know many machines in Detroit malfunctioned on Election Day, however. But what we don't know is how that impacted the final counts in Michigan, mostly because they ended the recount.
Yes, we had reports of Russian hacks. We had daily dribbles from Wikileaks, clearly intended to drive a wedge between Bernie and Hillary supporters while painting Hillary Clinton as Satan in a pantsuit.
But there's more. There's always more. You may recall the day that Rep. Michael McCaul inadvertently slipped during an appearance CNN and said the RNC was hacked by the Russians, too.

We must be getting closer to the Democrats really doing something. From what I've read so far tonight, Trump (and by extension, probably Pence), McConnell, Ryan, Comey, and others could be implicated. Can Obama cut a deal to kill the investigation in exchange for a Clinton Presidency? Probably not, so we really need a new election.

It's gonna be an interesting next few days... I don't think this story is going anywhere.

Friday, December 9, 2016

Normal

Hot off the presses from TPM...

Republicans apparently aren't going to be satisfied with phasing out Medicare. They're going to try to pass huge cuts to Social Security this year too. Not Bush-style partial phaseout but just big, big cuts. And you're out of luck even if you're a current beneficiary.
More shortly. (JASON'S UPDATE, 12/9/16, 5:02 PM: Here's the more)
I'm about to lose my lunch. They need to be stopped cold.

And here's a reason to do it.

President Barack Obama has directed U.S. intelligence agencies to conduct an investigation into hacking attacks related to the U.S. election and issue a report before he leaves office next month, White House counterterrorism adviser Lisa Monaco said.
The report, which will be provided to Congress but not necessarily made public, will examine what impact hacking by Russia may have had on the election last month, Monaco said Friday at a breakfast in Washington hosted by the Christian Science Monitor.
Reiterating what I said yesterday, only now 100X so:

This cannot be about "grace," or "hashtags," or "the burden of being the President of the United States." Donald Trump doesn't give a shit molecule about your "concerns" or "fears." It can't be about a "Sincere and Inspiring" farewell speech. It can't be about crossing our fingers and hoping Mitch McConnell doesn't end the filibuster or begging three Republicans to stand on the side of good on some issues when there is not a single issue or nominee on which the other side is pushing abject evil.
We need to hear more from how the top of our party plans to handle this and what we should be doing, because we're fighting the top of theirs. This is a state of emergency. No more words. Plans. Actions. Barack, Hillary, Joe, Tim, Nancy, Chuck... do something. 
Back to the Bloomberg story:

"We may be crossing into a new threshold and it’s incumbent upon us to take stock of that," Monaco said. The report will “impart lessons learned,” she said.

This also cannot be about "imparting lessons learned." This has to be about stopping history from repeating itself. All of the times the Republicans have gotten away with treason. Treason. No exaggeration.

Nixon and Vietnam:

President Johnson had at the time a habit of recording all of his phone conversations, and newly released tapes from 1968 detailed that the FBI had “bugged” the telephones of the South Vietnamese ambassador and of Anna Chennault, one of Nixon’s aides. Based on the tapes, says Taylor for the BBC, we learn that in the time leading up to the Paris Peace talks, “Chennault was despatched to the South Vietnamese embassy with a clear message: the South Vietnamese government should withdraw from the talks, refuse to deal with Johnson, and if Nixon was elected, they would get a much better deal.”

And Johnson let him off because:

Though the basic story of Nixon’s involvement in stalling the Vietnam peace talks has been around before, the new tapes, says the Atlantic Wire, describe how President Johnson knew all about the on-goings but chose not to bring them to the public’s attention: he thought that his intended successor, Hubert Humphrey, was going to beat Nixon in the upcoming election anyway. And, by revealing that he knew about Nixon’s dealings, he’d also have to admit to having spied on the South Vietnamese ambassador.
And Nixon became President for the next two terms.

Reagan's "October Surprise":

In January 1992 I published my first journalistic article ever. Published in Puerto Rico’s Claridad weekly newspaper, it was titled “The October Surprise”. In it I affirmed that the 1980 Reagan-Bush campaign bargained secretly with Iranian radicals for the postponement of the liberation of 52 Americans that they were holding hostage. These hostages were employees of the US embassy in Iran’s capital city of Teheran, which had been stormed by militants loyal to the Ayatollah Khomeini in November 1979. This secret deal, known as the October Surprise, frustrated the attempts of US president Jimmy Carter to obtain the hostages’ release in time for the elections in November. This failure cost Carter his reelection, and swept Republican candidate Ronald Reagan into the presidency. Polls carried out before the election showed that the hostage issue was of top importance in the minds of the American electorate.
The Republican campaign’s main negotiators in this deal were George H. W. Bush, vice presidential candidate and former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director, and William Casey, the campaign’s director and veteran spook who spied for the Office of Strategic Services during World War Two. Once elected, president Reagan appointed Casey to direct the CIA.
The hostages were freed the same day Reagan was sworn in as his nation’s fortieth president on January 1981. What was in it for the Iranians? Weapons, tons of them. Iran needed them badly in order to repel an invasion by Iraq.

This one's not confirmed like the others, but given the context of the others, particularly the next one, is pretty damned likely. And Reagan ended up President for two terms.

Iran-Contra:

The Iran–Contra affair (Persian: ماجراي ایران-کنترا‎‎, Spanish: caso Irán-Contra), also referred to as Irangate,[1] Contragate[2] or the Iran–Contra scandal, was a political scandal in the United States that occurred during the second term of the Reagan Administration. Senior administration officials secretly facilitated the sale of arms to Iran, which was the subject of an arms embargo.[3] They hoped thereby to secure the release of several U.S. hostages and to fund the Contras in Nicaragua. Under the Boland Amendment, further funding of the Contras by the government had been prohibited by Congress.
The scandal began as an operation to free the seven American hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah, a paramilitary group with Iranian ties connected to the Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution. It was planned that Israel would ship weapons to Iran, and then the United States would resupply Israel and receive the Israeli payment. The Iranian recipients promised to do everything in their power to achieve the release of the U.S. hostages.[4][5] Large modifications to the plan were devised by Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council in late 1985, in which a portion of the proceeds from the weapon sales was diverted to fund anti-Sandinista and anti-communist rebels, or Contras, in Nicaragua.[4]
While President Ronald Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause,[6] the evidence is disputed as to whether he authorized the diversion of the money raised by the Iranian arms sales to the Contras.[4][5][7] Handwritten notes taken by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger on December 7, 1985, indicate that Reagan was aware of potential hostage transfers with Iran, as well as the sale of Hawk and TOW missiles to "moderate elements" within that country.[8] Weinberger wrote that Reagan said "he could answer to charges of illegality but couldn't answer to the charge that 'big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free the hostages'".[8] After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the United States did not trade arms for hostages.[9] The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[10] On March 4, 1987, Reagan returned to the airwaves in a nationally televised address, taking full responsibility for any actions that he was unaware of, and admitting that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages".[11]
Several investigations ensued, including those by the U.S. Congress and the three-person, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither found any evidence that President Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[4][5][7] Ultimately the sale of weapons to Iran was not deemed a criminal offense but charges were brought against five individuals for their support of the Contras. Those charges, however, were later dropped because the administration refused to declassify certain documents. The indicted conspirators faced various lesser charges instead. In the end, fourteen administration officials were indicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Eleven convictions resulted, some of which were vacated on appeal.[12] The rest of those indicted or convicted were all pardoned in the final days of the presidency of George H. W. Bush, who had been vice-president at the time of the affair.[13] The Iran-Contra Affair and the ensuing deception to protect senior administration officials including President Reagan has been cast as an example of post-truth politics.

And we ended up with three terms of Bush presidencies.

There are others that are less talked-about, like Dana Rohrabacher's adventures in Afghanistan and his support of Russia in Crimea. And he's rumored to be up for Secretary of State.

So checking back in with "Cheeto Benito" (TM Rick Wilson),

“Why not get along with Russia?” Trump said, adding the Russians can help defeat Islamic State. On the perpetrator of the cyber attacks, he said, “it could be Russia, and it could be China, and it could be some guy in his home in New Jersey.”

This is what Trump sounds like when he's doing what Chez Pazienza calls acting like "the kid in their class who never studies and forgets to do his homework and so basically just wings it." We know very well by now that if he's doing it in reference to something where the truth has been totally established, he's lying. Just like Rudy Giuliani lied about his contacts with the FBI, which fit in perfectly with all of the above, and meanwhile using the following projection over and over about Clinton:

Giuliani, who said that he prosecuted and jailed thousands of people for doing a fraction of what Hillary Clinton did, said the Wikileaks emails prove the Clinton camp intended to break the law.

Which Trump also did regarding Donna Brazile (and about Hillary other times on the stump):

“She should be fired from the DNC. By the way, could you imagine if I did that? Bobby what would happen to me if I did that?” Trump said, turning to Knight, who was off to the side. “Electric chair, I think. The electric chair. If I did that, can you imagine?”
And Qusay Trump took to the absolute lowest level with this:

"The media has been her number one surrogate in this. Without the media, this wouldn't even be a contest. But the media has built her up. They've let her slide on every indiscrepancy, on every lie, on every DNC game trying to get Bernie Sanders out of the thing," Trump Jr. told Philadelphia-based conservative talk radio host Chris Stigall on Wednesday.
"I mean, if Republicans were doing that, they'd be warming up the gas chamber right now. It's a very different system -- there's nothing fair about it," Trump Jr. added.

Let's call them on it. Hillary did nothing wrong with her e-mails and they made references to gas chambers and execution. They are traitors and all of them should at least be in jail. LOCK THEM UP!

So, you know what? I'm not going to say this isn't normal, and I'm not going to say it's the new normal. It's been normal for 50 years, and we have to end it. Now. Democrats, are you listening? For all of our sakes, I really, really hope so. President Obama, call a State of Emergency, and sort this out. It may seem dictatorial, but we've got precedent.

Thursday, December 8, 2016

I Don't Think Our Leaders Get It

#sorrynotsorry that my first day posting in a couple of days has been all doom and gloom, but this is where we really are.

Despite my initial well-documented skepticism (it's nice to have my archive back), Barack Obama is easily the favorite U.S. President of my lifetime. Hillary Clinton would've made a phenomenal successor and I think that her team is not getting enough credit for the job they did. It looks like Hillary may exceed Obama's 2012 vote total despite the fact that there were a huge number of third-party voters and that she was running to succeed a two-term President. Jennifer Palmieri and her team deserve a lot of credit for the job they did, despite the fact that they were institutionally cheated out of the election (forgetting anything hinky happening on Election Day at the polls, or the Electoral College).

In today's WaPo, Palmieri wrote:

I know how to be a gracious loser.
I could have let it go last week when Kellyanne Conway, Donald Trump’s campaign manager, challenged me to look her in the eye and say she ran a campaign that gave white supremacists a platform. I considered for a split second. I knew you were supposed to be gracious when you come for the post-election forum at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. But I decided this was a year where normal rules don’t apply. Speaking the truth was more important. 
.
.
.
Our candidate gave us a good model to follow. She had the grace to call Trump on election night to congratulate him and concede. But in her concession speech she also challenged all of us to defend our rights and principles under the Constitution — rights and principles that she and many of the people who voted for her feared could be under threat in a Trump presidency. The campaign has ended, and we accept that Trump won. But we are not laying down our principles or abandoning our supporters.
.
.
.
If we are not to take Trump’s words literally, he needs to explain what he does mean. The Trump team likes to tell Clinton supporters “hashtag ‘he’s your president.’ ” But this isn’t a one-way street. If Trump expects the Americans who did not vote for him to accept him as president, he needs to show that he accepts all of them as Americans. He needs to show that he understands their concerns and hears their fears.
I suggest he and his team try “hashtag ‘we are all Americans.’ ” We all have a role to play here. But it’s the winner who carries the burden of taking the lead in uniting the country. It’s the burden of leadership. It’s the burden of being the president of the United States.
 
I know Hillary had to make a concession speech. She lost, and she was following protocol. And Obama had to at least start working on a peaceful transition, because that's protocol too, and we (Team Blue) are CLEARLY the good guys. But once the Bannon and Sessions nominations happened, that had to be it. From Ari Berman:

And then, of course, Labor Department against labor.

This isn't normal. This is the complete destruction of everything that makes America prosperous, things that keep millions off the street, out of the hospital, and from death. On top of that, it disenfranchises voters to the point where democracy is a joke, and potentially sows the seeds of mass persecution. Hell, forget isn't normal. This is light years beyond that.

In the face of that, I feel like everything I've seen and heard from the Democratic leadership is bringing a pen to a nuke fight. We can't continue to ignore the fact that we've been put in a place where a majority of Americans vote for Democrats for the Presidency, the Senate, and the House (often by huge margins) and are ignored. It can't be about having a conservative Supreme Court only because the Senate Republicans were willing to flout the crap out of "advise and consent."

This cannot be about "grace," or "hashtags," or "the burden of being the President of the United States." Donald Trump doesn't give a shit molecule about your "concerns" or "fears." It can't be about a "Sincere and Inspiring" farewell speech. It can't be about crossing our fingers and hoping Mitch McConnell doesn't end the filibuster or begging three Republicans to stand on the side of good on some issues when there is not a single issue or nominee on which the other side is pushing abject evil.

I stumbled upon a post from Edge of the American West from Election Night 2008 where the poster wrote, "The arc of the moral universe feels unbearably long right now, even as a I celebrate President-elect Obama." That's because the other side is doing every goddamn thing they can to bend it towards injustice, and that arc is on the verge of breaking.

We need to hear more from how the top of our party plans to handle this and what we should be doing, because we're fighting the top of theirs. This is a state of emergency. No more words. Plans. Actions. Barack, Hillary, Joe, Tim, Nancy, Chuck... do something.

I'm going a little further than how I ended my last post... If the seat of your pants isn't brown, you're not paying attention. Because that's the color of the shirts the other side might wearing if we don't act in proportion to the gravity of the situation.

Thursday, November 17, 2016

NOT NORMAL!

This isn't anything that every other blog hasn't posted, but we all need to, because since Donald Trump became the GOP nominee, the media and many people have treated Trump like a regular nominee (and now a -- GULP -- so hard to say -- President-Elect). TRUMP. IS. NOT. NORMAL (h/t Betty Cracker).

Stories like Facebook friend posted today from CNN about him reducing corruption are not only not true, they overlook the entire point. The man is an autocrat and a fascist. No exaggeration there on either point.

This article is discussed in so many places, but I need to reference it for posterity because it's so important -- Masha Gessen's Autocracy: Rules for Survival.

If CNN is going to keep posting crap about Trump's lobbying rules and the Washington Post writes about how Steve Bannon simply "doesn't understand what makes American great," then Gessen is right on with Rule # 3:

Rule #3: Institutions will not save you. It took Putin a year to take over the Russian media and four years to dismantle its electoral system; the judiciary collapsed unnoticed. The capture of institutions in Turkey has been carried out even faster, by a man once celebrated as the democrat to lead Turkey into the EU. Poland has in less than a year undone half of a quarter century’s accomplishments in building a constitutional democracy.
I'd use the analogy of the frog in the boiling water, but 1. it's a myth, and 2. shit, no frogs right now, please.