Retribution

Here is Roger Stone in July claiming with a straight face

Donald Trump and his associates wre subjected to the greatest single dirty trick in American political history. That is nothing less than an abuse of power in which the full auhority of the United States government and the extraordinary capability of our intelligence agencies were used to utilize what they knew was fraudulent evidence.....

But now when we expose these things because that is an act of treason, we're accused of being for revenge or retribution. No, my friends, what we seek is a rebalance of the scales of justice so this country can return to one standard of justice, not thet wo-tiered justice system.

We are accused of being for “revenge” or “retribution.”

No, my friends.

What we seek is a REBALANCE of the scales of justice so this country can return to ONE standard of justice—not the two-tiered justice system. pic.twitter.com/t7FyBqpuIR

— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) December 30, 2024

Scoff all you wish- and you should- but there may be no one who ever has known as much about dirty tricks in American politics than Roger Stone, once described as "the state of the art Washington sleazeball." as Chris Hayes suggested five years ago. (This is selling Stone short. He had time also to be a Trenton, NJ sleezeball.)

 

If "we" are not for revenge or retribution, Donald Trump seems not to have gotten the memo. In a speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in early March of 2023, he declared 

In 2016, I declared I am your voice. Today, I add, I am your warrior. I am your justice. And for those who have been wronged and betrayed, I am your retribution.

A few weeks later, at a rally in Waco, Texas, Trump reiterated his message by remarking "I am your warrior, I am your justice. For those who have been wronged and betrayed... I am your retribution."  In an interview in March of 2024, he told the conservative pop psychologist Phil McGraw "sometimes revenge can be justified, Phil, I have to be honest. You know, sometimes it can." 

Revenge or retribution, Donald Trump can make it happen, especially with the likely assistance of President Musk. 

Share |

Row Over Imported Labor

                         

Vivek Ramaswamy went and did it. Boy, did he ever:

The reason top tech companies often hire foreign-born & first-generation engineers over “native” Americans isn’t because of an innate American IQ deficit (a lazy & wrong explanation). A key part of it comes down to the c-word: culture. Tough questions demand tough answers & if…

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) December 26, 2024

Reading from the same hymnal

Elon Musk, the billionaire CEO of Tesla (TSLA.O), vowed to go to "war" to defend the H-1B visa program for foreign tech workers late on Friday amid a dispute between President-elect Donald Trump's longtime supporters and his most recently acquired backers from the tech industry.

In a post on social media platform X, Musk said "The reason I'm in America along with so many critical people who built SpaceX, Tesla and hundreds of other companies that made America strong is because of H1B."

"I will go to war on this issue the likes of which you cannot possibly comprehend," he added.

Of course Musk will. He didn't get to become the President-in-waiting by being accomodating and

Musk, a naturalized U.S. citizen born in South Africa, has held an H-1B visa, and his electric-car company Tesla obtained 724 of the visas this year. H-1B visas are typically for three-year periods, though holders can extend them or apply for green cards.

For Musk, this is personal- personal power and finances. He has no particular affection for foreign-born individuals nor a heartfelt belief in a melting pot or the American mosaic. Thirteen months ago, Musk "tweeted his fervent agreement with an antisemitic tweet" when a tweet posted on X 

read: “Jewish communties [sic] have been pushing the exact kind of dialectical hatred against whites that they claim to want people to stop using against them.”

The billionaire owner and CTO of X, formerly Twitter, responded the same evening: “You have said the actual truth.” In another reply, he wrote: “I am deeply offended by ADL’s messaging and any other groups who push de facto anti-white racism or anti-Asian racism or racism of any kind.” Musk has feuded with the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) before, threatening to sue over its accounting of hate speech on his social media network....

Musk’s racial politics have been trending in this direction for months. In October, he wrote in response to a tweet mourning the melting down of a statue of the Confederate general Robert E Lee: “They absolutely want your extinction.” Replying to a tweet from @libsoftiktok, who he restored to X, which read: “Racism against white people is the only kind of discrimination that’s allowed,” Musk wrote last week: “It’s messed up and needs to stop.”

Defending himself from being criticized for his antagonism toward American workers, Musk tweeted in part (emphasis his)

OF COURSE my companies and I would prefer to hire Americans and we DO, as that is MUCH easier than going through the incredibly painful and slow work visa process.

HOWEVER, there is a dire shortage of extremely talented and motivated engineers in America.

Shorter Musk: "Immigrants are superior to American workers and we should make it easier to hire them, especially when I do."

But Ramaswamy, reading from the same hmymnal but singing a different hymn, took this in a somewhat different direction, decrying a culture he believes promotes mediocrity over excellence, the "prom queen over the math olympiad champ or the jock over the valedictorian."

He's wrong for attacking "normalcy," especially in a culture beset by increasing rates of suicide.However, he's right about the prom queen/math olympiad champ and the jock/valedictorian 

Ramaswamy is a little skeezy himself, obviously, and his tweet was all over the place, not unlike this post. Musk, though, is focused: focused on his own financial interests and has earned the condemnation of individuals who have learned, less than a month before he- uh, er, Donald Trump- is inaugurated.

And in news from West Palm Beach, Florida, Donald Trump now has sided with Elon Musk over the ex-President's base, which had thought that Trump was with them on immigration. Siding with Musk is not surprising, however; Donald Trump has no incentive to offend the incoming President.

   

Share |

"Merry Christmas and Go to Hell"

In the true Christmas (one day late) spirit, let's give the devil his due. Most of this was well-put:

President Trump:
“The birth of Jesus Christ is the true miracle we celebrate each Christmas…Merry Christmas! 🎄” pic.twitter.com/8RIWY9BBEI

— Catholics for Catholics 🇺🇲 (@CforCatholics) December 25, 2024

Certainly, the setting (double flags to convey the impression he's President) isn't appropriate for an individual who is not President, and even Elon Musk himself will not actually be President until 12:00 noon on January 20, 2025. However, Vice President-elect Trump began by articulately stating

Melania and I would like to wish everyone a happy, joyous, and wonderful Christmas season. In this holy time of year, Christians everywhere give thanks that over 2,000 years ago, God sent his only son into the world to be the savior of all mankind. The birth of Jesus Christ ist he true miracle we celebrate each Christmas. He is the ultimate source of our joy,our hope, and our sense of peace and good will as we gather with family and loved ones. It is such a great time of year.

On camera and on script, he can be very good. But then the real Donald Trump comes to the fore:

Merry Christmas and may you rot in Hell! Added for comedic effect: "Again, Merry Christmas!" This is par for the course for the Vice-President elect, one of whose Christmas messages last year concluded "MAY THEY ROT IN HELL. AGAIN, MERRY CHRISTMAS!”

Which is the real Donald Trump? Of course, it's Donald Trump the tweeter. The other is a performance delivered from a veteran actor, the riveting, even captivating, leading man of the Apprentice.

Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of men? We've begun to find out, and will find out more as the Administration of President Musk and Donald Trump takes shape.

Share |

The Anti-Christian Christian and His Advocate

It's hard to say whether the conservative Cardinal Timothy Dolan has been duped or is merely carrying water for the President-elect. In the video (beginning at 5:21) below, he tells the right-wing Fox News partisan Maria Bartiromo

And what I'm happy to see, Maria is that- what shuld I say? Experts and scholars who are ot religiously driven are fiding this out. They say "uh oh, sales of the Bible, sales of  books on spirituality are going up and there seems to be, there seems to be, a newfound appreciation for the role of faith, especially in our country, okay? I think President Trump tapped ito that, don't you?

He's referring to President-elect Trump, but that's an on-purpose mistake many dishonest people have been making since Donald Trump became the GOP nominee for President in the summer.

Sales of the Bible have been increasing, probably for a myriad of reasons, even as identification with Christianity and organized religion generally has declined.  Ironically, Dolan cites an increase in book sales on "spirituality," which- given that it s a poorly defined term- may suggest that the overall increase in such sales is due to something other than increase in religous faith.

Nevertheless, after Bartiromo agrees with Dolan that Trump "tapped into that," the Archbishop continues

I've had talks with him before in the past. He can't say that he was raised as a zealous Christian but we takes his Christian faith seriously. He has a lot of memories about Norman Vincent Peale, the famous preacher here in New York and down aways on Fifth Avenue. And I think he means it.

Norman Vincent Peale was a charlatan. A wise blogger on the Catholic "Women of Grace" website (I can be ecumenical) once wrote of Peale's very famous book

"The Power of Positive Thinking" is riddled with New Age-inspired gimmicks such as the use of imagery and repetitious phrases that are a form of auto-hypnosis. If you train yourself to think a certain way, certain things will happen. In other words, if the mind can conceive it, a person can achieve it – which is precisely what the New Thought movement of the 19th century was all about. There’s nothing wrong with training yourself to think positively, but when you believe your thoughts can actually change reality, then you’ve crossed the line and are now making the mind into a god.

If Donald Trump "takes his Christian faith seriously," this is a case in which, as his supporters enjoy putting it, he should be taken seriously, not literally.  Trump has taken contempt for Christianity to a whole new level, or depth: his reference to "Two Corinthians"; using an Episcopal Church and a Bible as props while racial justice protestors in the D.C. were tear-gassed; equating himself with the Jewish messiah/Jesus Christ: maintaining that he never has had to ask God for forgiveness; attempting to put money into a communion plate; suggesting that Communion is "asking for forgiveness," though the pastor literally says "do this in remembrance of me." 

And now we learn

President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team is reportedly planning an interfaith prayer service the day before his inauguration, where participants can worship alongside the businessman and his wife, Melania.

But those who want to join need to weigh the price of prayer: Tickets to the service will be awarded only to those who donate at least $100,000 to Trump’s inaugural ceremonies, or who raise $200,000.

 Earlier this month, Axios cited a seven-page prospectus that listed the service alongside several other donor-only events, such as a “cabinet reception” with Trump’s nominees and “candlelight dinner” with Trump and Melania.

According to the report, if a donor gives $1 million or raises $2 million, they’ll earn six tickets to the suite of inauguration events.

So if Donald Trump "takes his Christian faith seriously," Trump, earnestly demonstrating contempt for Christianity, is seriously trying to erode fiah in Christianity.

Cardinal Dolan continues

And I think- I think the assassination attempts kindof renewed in him oh my, there's something beyond me that I think is watching over me, and it's got a task for me. And what he expresses personally semes to be expressed more and more throughout the world. 

After Bartiromo argues that God saved Trump from assassination, Dolan adds

Yeah. You know, I think of, Maria, I think of Ronald Reagan and John Paul II. Both men survived assassination atempts very close to one another. And when the two of them met for the first time, Ronald Reagan said to Pope St. John Paul II, Mother Teresa told me that she things the Lord spared me because the Lord had something special in mind for me and Pope St. John Paul II smiled and said she told me the same thing. They both believe that, and look what they were able to accomplish. The world was changed for the better because of them.

As for Mother Teresa, the late Christopher HItchens was only slightly exaggerating when he called her "a fanatic, a fundamentalist, and a fraud." And the middle and lower classes still haven't recovered from President Reagan's attacks on organized labor and on consumer and business regulation, deep cuts in income taxes for the wealthy, and assault on the faith of citizens in their government.

Donald Trump was saved from being killed by two would-be assassins. In one,he was wounded by either the bullet or, more likely, fragments from the bullet. Escaping death. But the "something special in mind" for Donald J. Trump may not be something positive for the nation and the world. One Christian website explains 

In Revelation 13 the apostle John records visions that he saw, including a sign of a dragon and a terrible beast that had “ten horns and seven heads, with ten crowns on its horns, and on each head a blasphemous name” (Revelation 13:1). As John watches, “one of the heads of the beast seemed to have had a fatal wound, but the fatal wound had been healed. The whole world was filled with wonder and followed the beast” (Revelation 13:3). The significance of the healing of the beast’s deadly wound is that, because of the healing, the world unites in following the beast...

The apostle Paul calls him the man of lawlessness and the son of destruction (2 Thessalonians 2:3). This one will come in great power and deceive many—even with a counterfeit resurrection. The purpose of the Antichrist’s deception is to swindle many into believing that he is the savior and the one who should be worshiped. But, unlike the true Messiah, this beast’s deadly wound was only temporarily healed. He will later be killed and judged, while the true Christ will be victorious and establish His kingdom in righteousness.

The world has not- at least yet- followed the beast. However, the wound- a bullet to the head- which could have been fatal was followed by rapid hearing and the country uniting (sort of) in electing the guy. And clearly, many people believe Donald Trump should be not only supported, but worshiped.

This may be far-fetched. However, it's a whole lot realistic than the view of Cardinal Dolan that Donald Trump is a man of deep Christian faith.  A whole lot more realistic by a country mile, or even a city mile. 

            MERRY CHRISTMAS                                          HAPPY CHANUKAH

Share |

Clear and Present Danger

This I cannot disagree with:

FETTERMAN: “I’m not rooting against [Trump] because if you're rooting against the President, you are rooting against the nation.”pic.twitter.com/pnmGvWOR0y

— Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) December 22, 2024

However, on This Week With George Stephanopoulos with Jonathan Karl, Jonathan Karl spoke to Pennsylvania senator John Fetterman about Donald Trummp's nominee for FBI director, Kash Patel.  Karl noted "he's talked about going after Trump's enemies" and Fetterman responded

Yeah, and I've -- and we -- we've had conversations, but we -- we had, you know, all of, all of these -- all of these interviews were all off the record and -- and those things. So I'm not going to go into detail, but -- but he absolutely, I -- is that, that's -- you know, that's never going to happen, you know, like he was -- he was very looking forward to that.

So Karl asked "he's not going to use the FBI to go after Trump's enemies?" and Fetterman replied "yeah- no, that's not it."  Seconds later, he added 

and I found out, you know,his family's origin story and immigration... and we talked about that, and my wife, my family immigration and things.  And so I- I learned things about him. I never knew that he was a public defender.

It shouldn't be so easy for a nominee to play a United States senator. However, this guy Patel is no dummy. MSNBC (video below). Timothy Noah writes that in his (in) famous book Government Gangsters

Patel includes on his enemies list the last three Democratic nominees for president: Kamala Harris, President Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton. Former President Barack Obama, for some reason, is left off the list, even though Obama’s chief of staff John Podesta is on it.

Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris are losers. Joe Biden is blamed by some Democrats, especially the elites, for holding out so long that Kamala Harris had insufficient opportunity to sell herself to the public. (This is specious argument but unfortunately gaining traction, especially as a means to avoid blaming the candidate herself.) Moreover, there is no prosecution that would rile up Democratic voters, especially the Democratic base,  more than prosecuting the first- and thus far only- black person to be elected President.

More telling

Patel may be “fiery,” as newspaper euphemism puts it, but he’s also opportunistic, which probably explains why no member of Congress made his enemies list (excepting Senator-elect Adam Schiff and Representative Eric Swalwell, whom he mentions as numbering among those “other corrupt actors of the first order” he regrets leaving out). When he compiled this list, Patel knew that in a future Trump administration he might score a Cabinet or sub-Cabinet nomination requiring Senate confirmation; that obstacle course now lies before him.

Of course, at the time the book was written and published, "Senator-elect" Schiff was United States Representative Adam Schiff, not Senator Adam Schiff, who will be eligible to vote on the nomination of Patel. It is unclear whether the nominee would have named the Californian had he been psychic and was aware that the latter would be a U.S. Senator with an opportunity to turn thumbs down on Patel.

Fetterman may be getting fooled. Not so naive, but very dangerous, is the ex-con and prime Trump ally: 

“Kash didn’t try to hide the football. Steve Bannon didn’t try,” Bannon asserted, speaking in the third person during a one-on-one interview with The Bulwark following his speech to Americafest, a yearly gathering of MAGA diehards hosted by Turning Point USA.

“He made a fucking movie that’s called Government Gangsters and the first guy is Merrick Garland, okay. And Lisa Monaco’s in there, who the nation doesn’t know—we’re trying to make these people famous. So no. First of all, it has to happen. Number two, it’s going to happen.”

It's not clear whether John Fetterman will vote to to approve the nomination of Kash Patel to be director of the FBI. Nor is it clear that a Director Patel will go after Donald Trump's enemies. But it's an awfully good bet.

              .

Share |

It Is the Guns, Ben

Devout Orthodox Jew (but I repeat myself) and married, conservative podcaster Ben Shapiro used the Washington Post's article "What We Know About the Wisconsin School Shooter, Natalie Rupnow"as a launching pad to promote his view of marriage and family.

New information on the 15-year-old female Wisconsin school shooter suggests her parents repeatedly divorced and remarried. Family turmoil is one of the leading causes of societal dysfunction. We need to return to the fundamentals: family and marriage come first, and they’re not… pic.twitter.com/9RoGU6IPHA

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) December 18, 2024

 

Nonetheless, Shapiro's comments emphasized his conviction that "family is first" and that the most important function of marriage is to raise children. He comments (at 2:35 of the video)

Marriage should be the predicate to sleeping together and having children. I know these are old-fashioned ideas but they existed for a reason. And I think that what we are now experiencing in the West is a new understanding that maybe the old, those things we didn't understand so we just uprooted them, many of those things wer there for a reason. Many of those social institutions existed the way they did for a reason. Maybe, for exampe, the focus on not sleeping together until you were married , that focus- which was a focus for all of the West and indeed most of civilization for all of human history- maybe that was a smart idea because it channeled sexual passion into family building.

Shapiro is entitled to disapprove of pre-marital sex, but there is little support on the left, the right, or the center for the notion, nor should there be. Further, the historical reasons people favored marriage include the lowly social status of women, the economic benefit of two people sharing incomes, and (ironically, given Shapiro's anti-intercourse argument), the ready availability of sex. Fortunately, women are now permitted to have (sometimes lucrative) careers, and social media has become a convenient vehicle for the platonic and the not-so-platonic to hook-up.

Ironically, Shapiro's values were echoed by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy in his majority opinion in Hodges v. Obergefell. Striking down state prohibitions on same-sex marriage, Kennedy claimed in part that "the right marry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals;" marriage "safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education;" and marriage is "a keystone of the Nation's social order."

Whatever its constitutional clarity (weak), the premise that individuals cannnot thrive without being married is clear. (The four liberal Justices could be muttering under their breath "he's an indiot but we'll take it.")

Nonetheless, the very unacceptability of Shapiro's outlook within the broader American public renders it less dangerous than his opening remark. Noting that Rupnow's father was active on Facebook,  Shapiro stated (at 1:15)

But there is one post from August that has attracted more scrutiny than others in that a photo which appears to show the suspect wielding a gun and taking aim at a firing range. So obviously, this means that the left is going to focus in on gun control as the chief issue here.

His first clue that it should be might have been the photo of a nine-year old girl firing a pistol on a firing range. The second clue could have been that (aside from the perpetrator herself, who committed suicide), the eight individuals who were killed or wounded, generally a nifty trick in the absence of a firearm. The third is a reality of which Shapiro already must have been aware. While the USA  "ranks at the 93rd percentile for overall firearm mortality," the rate of death by firearm is closer to countries experiencing "active conflict" than it is to the rate in nations not so plagued.

And ponder that among adults in the USA

One in five (21%) say they have personally been threatened with a gun, a similar share (19%) say a family member was killed by a gun (including death by suicide), and nearly as many (17%) have personally witnessed someone being shot. Smaller shares have personally shot a gun in self-defense (4%) or been injured in a shooting (4%). In total, about half (54%) of all U.S. adults say they or a family member have ever had one of these experiences.

Predictably, Ben Shapiro's concern  would "focus in on gun control as the chief issue here" is not aging well. The left continues to be fairly unconcerned with gun safety. Legislation would not disproportionately assist the LGBTQIA+ community, and though the generational African-American community is disproportionately harmed by gun violence, a large amount of it is perpetrated by individuals therein because of the debilitating impact of distressed neighborhoods. It thus may be, unfortunately, perceived as a double-edged sword.  And the right's love affair with the proliferation of firearms is unabated.

On Tuesday, Charlie Pierce wrote "Saturday was the 12th anniversary of the unfortunate exercise of Second Amendment freedoms at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, which was going to be enough for the country to do something serious about its insance attraction to its firearms." In 359 days, it will be 359th anniversary of the exercise of Second Amendment freedoms, which still will not be enough for the country to do something serious about its noxious attraction to its firearms.

Share |

Not Presently

He is, he does, and he's wrong on both counts.

Josh Hawley: “Some will say now that I am calling America a Christian Nation. So I am. And some will say that I am advocating Christian Nationalism. And so I do."
pic.twitter.com/d25AzXSTkf

— The Intellectualist (@highbrow_nobrow) December 18, 2024

In some narrow sense, the USA is a Christian nation.  The PRRI survey of "The American Religious Landscape in 2020" indicates that slightly less than 70% of the public identifies with a religion that is generally considered "Christian": Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon).

That number is well below that of several generations ago and obscures a significant shift in religious practice. In March of 2021, Gallup reported

Americans' membership in houses of worship continued to decline last year, dropping below 50% for the first time in Gallup's eight-decade trend. In 2020, 47% of Americans said they belonged to a church, synagogue or mosque, down from 50% in 2018 and 70% in 1999…..

The decline in church membership is primarily a function of the increasing number of Americans who express no religious preference. Over the past two decades, the percentage of Americans who do not identify with any religion has grown from 8% in 1998-2000 to 13% in 2008-2010 and 21% over the past three years.

On September 4, Senator Hawley spoke before the National Conservatism Conference, outlining "The Christian Nationalism We Need," focusing on family and faith.  There was emphasis on "work, home, and God," as if Christians held a monopoly on these values.

Of course, there was no talk of the underpinnings of the Chritian faith, nor a call to Americans to return to church, or to prayer, or to reading the word of God. That would have required too much persuasion by the Senator in a country which has increasingly turned away from religion- and from God, notwithstanding Hawley's embrace of the "In God We Trust" motto. Generating misconception is the Missouri senator's specialty.

It was not a religious speech nor a Christian speech but a political one in which Hawley attempted to entangle God with country, which neither honors America as a land of religious mosaic nor glorifies the Almighty. Josh Hawley calls America a "Christian nation" and advocates Christian nationalism, doing his small part ultimately to undermine both God and nation.  

Share |

Now Above the Law, He Plans to Be the Law

Julianne MCShane of Mother Jones notes

ABC News will pay $15 million to settle a defamation lawsuit that president-elect Donald Trump brought against the network, centered on incorrect comments that anchor George Stephanopoulos made about the civil lawsuit against Trump brought by writer E. Jean Carroll.....

The lawsuit focused on a March 10 interview that Stephanopoulos conducted on the network’s Sunday morning show, “This Week,” with Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.). In that interview, Stephanopoulos confronted Mace—who has said she’s a rape survivor—about her endorsement of Trump, falsely noting that “judges and two separate juries have found him liable for rape, and for defaming the victim of that rape.”

Stephanopoulos was referring to the lawsuit brought by E. Jean Carroll, who alleged that Trump raped her in 1996 in the dressing room of a New York City department store; as my colleague Russ Choma reported, while the jury found that Carroll’s attorneys did not prove the rape allegation, they did agree that Trump forcibly sexually abused and defamed her, and ruled that Trump had to pay Carroll $5 million.

While Trump has claimed he now believes a free press is “vital,” there are fears that he and his acolytes could use baseless lawsuits to go after journalists whose coverage is unfavorable to him—particularly after Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) this week blocked a federal shield bill that, if passed, would protect journalists from being forced to reveal their confidential sources.

Determining whether Trump was found responsible for "rape" is complicated. As described here, the act the civil jury in May, 2024 found Trump had committed was not "rape" under New York State law at the time but is now because of a law Governor Kathy Hochul signed in January of 2024. And even at the time, the act fit the definition under federal law. Judge Kaplan explained that the absence of a finding of rape by the jury “does not mean that she failed to prove that Mr. Trump ‘raped’ her as many people commonly understand the word ‘rape.’” He added "as the evidence at trial recounted below makes clear, the jury found that Mr. Trump in fact did exactly that.”

Further, if the individual is a public official or public figure (as is, and was, Trump), the plaintiff must prove either that the defendant knew the defamatory statement was false or "acted with reckess disregard for the truth." Having not made up the statement out of whole cloth, Stephanopoulos likely believed it was truth. ABC- or more likely, parent company Disney- caved.  

So there was ample reason for the "fears" cited by Mother Jones" MCShane. Andthere is even more now that

Donald Trump promised Monday to launch a lawsuit against the Des Moines Register over a preelection poll that found Vice President Kamala Harris had “leapfrogged” the Republican candidate, in a state he went on to handily win.

During a press conference at Mar-a-Lago, one journalist asked Trump about his ongoing defamation cases, asking, “Could you see moving that to other people with individual platforms, social media influencers, people that—”

“Or newspapers, yeah.” Trump interrupted.

“Yeah, oh I do. I think you have to do it, because they’re very dishonest,” Trump continued. “We need a great media, we need a fair media. We need, uh, it’s very important. And we need borders, we need walls, but we need borders and we need fair elections.”

Trump went on rambling on about how they were still counting votes in California, which is not true. The weave eventually wove itself back, and the president-elect continued his pledge to sue newspapers over alleged defamation.

“I have a few others that I’m doing, uh I’m gonna, as an example, we’re bringing—I’m doing this not because I want to, I’m doing this because I have an obligation to—I’m gonna be bringing one against the people in Iowa, their newspaper, which had a very, very good pollster, who got me right all the time. And then just before the election, she said I was gonna lose by three or four points, and it became the biggest story all over the world … because I was gonna win Iowa by 20 points. The farmers love me, and I love the farmers,” he said.

Trump was speaking about pollster Ann Selzer, whose Iowa poll anticipated that Harris would lead Trump by three points in the state. In reality, he won Iowa by 13 points, making for a 16-point error. Selzer & Co. had previously been considered the gold standard of polling in the country.

Legally, the President-elect has little or no case. Of course, with Trump, the term "legally" is the inoperative word. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Trump v. United States, discovered a new and novel constitutional right for one individual among hundreds of millions of American citizens. Henceforth, an ex-President would have complete criminal liability for "official acts" or anything heor she might do using the pw=owers of the office. Henceforth, a President can do anything, declare it an "official act," and get a free get out of jail card- or "cannot be prosecuted" card. Sweet.

Three days after the election, Conor Friedersdorf of The Atlantic (behind paywall) wrote "I hope that Trump willl normalize himself, too" by "what he says and does," a President "who reassures the nation that he will adhere to the law, the Constitution, and basic human decency."

Donald Trump is not President yet, and that ship already has sailed. Nor will it end with the Des Moines Register and ABC News. 

President Trump will not have to suppress and oppress his enemies. He will issue more threats- some empty, some not- before he can bring the media to heel. Intimidation will be a prime elemnt of his governing strategy and his ambitions are not modest. So as for this tweeter's assessment of Trump as a "fascist clown": yes and no, respectively.

Donald Trump says he's going to sue Ann Selzer and the Des Moines Register because he didn't like her poll that had him losing.

Fascist clown. pic.twitter.com/xxOL9Jh3Np

— Art Candee 🍿🥤 (@ArtCandee) December 16, 2024

Share |

Wrong and Strong, Seemingly

Steve M in his No MoreN Mr. Nice Blog makes a very good point.

Remember the end of Donald Trump's 2024 campaign? The town hall that concluded with Trump dancing onstage for a half-hour? The anecdote about Arnold Palmer's penis? The Madison Square Garden rally -- in a state Trump had no chance of winning -- that turned into a racist, profane grievance-fest? The fry cook and garbageman cosplay?

We thought the wheels were coming off the bus. We thought the public would recognize Trump's obvious unfitness to serve. Instead, he won the election, won the popular vote for the first time, and received more votes and a greater percentage of the popular vote than he had in his first two elections.

So am I saying that the 2024 Trump campaign wasn't a shambolic mess? No. In many ways, it was a shambolic mess. But it appears to have been a shambolic mess in such an aggressive, in-your-face way that millions of voters responded positively to the preposterousness of it all. They liked Trump's arthritic dance moves and granddad music playlist. They decided, somehow, that the unapologetic way Trump would say any WTF thing he felt like saying meant he was just the crazy bastard America needed to take on the bad guys.....

It seems to me that voters don't care what Trump is doing -- they just like the fact that he's doing whatever he's doing vigorously and forcefully. Once again, it appears that a famous 2002 Bill Clinton remark was correct:

"When people are feeling insecure, they'd rather have someone who is strong and wrong rather than somebody who is weak and right"...

Trump is proving that there's apparently no limit to how wrong you can be and still get the benefit of seeming strong.

That is the only way- or at least the best way- to make sense of Trump bragging about this, and getting away with it.

 

2020 in his last year so gas, food, anything transported/trucked cost American people more for first couple yrs of Biden presidency until another failed trump deal expired. https://t.co/moqGFO1xyI

— Jumbo Elliott (@JumboElliott76) December 14, 2024

In the video, Trump comes off as a strong, first-class dealmaker, as he typically- successfully- tries to do. Though not the paragon of objectivity, Climate Power- in what has never been refuted- two months ago explained 

In April  2020, Donald Trump cut a deal with Vladimir Putin, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, and OPEC to intentionally increase oil prices and bail out his biggest oil donors after a price war between Russia and the Saudis sent oil prices plunging.

Trump cut the deal after his biggest fossil fuel backers lost billions from their net worth in just weeks, including Trump’s most crucial oil donor, Harold Hamm, who convinced Trump to bail the oil industry out after he lost $3 billion in days. 

Hamm leveraged his years of support for Trump, convincing him to host a whole roomful of oil executives at the White House to hash out the deal. Attendees included Kelcy Warren, Jeff Hildebrand, Vicki Hollub, and, of course, Harold Hamm. 

If any of those names sound familiar, that’s because they all responded to Trump’s April request for $1 billion by cohosting multiple fundraisers for him over the past six months. That includes the CEO who told Trump that she was upset at the FTC for requesting her cell phone record while they were reportedly investigating her over allegations of potential collusion with OPEC to raise gas prices....

 A USA Today editorial asked, “Amid coronavirus pandemic, why is Donald Trump trying to push up fuel prices?”… The editorial board wrote that  “the most unambiguous winners of higher prices are countries like Russia and Saudi Arabia, not the United States, which is still a net importer. What’s more, his move attempts to help oil companies by imposing higher costs on U.S. consumers, workers and fuel-reliant businesses.”

Trump boasted "said we got to get it up a little. I called Russia and the King of Saudi Arabia. We had a three-way call and we cult back on the oilbecause it was so incredible- helped fill up the Strategic national reserve" (i.e., Strategic Petroleum Reserve).  

There was little or no downside for the President because he declared victory as Democrats chose not to highlight the issue. It was a twofer for Trump- pleasing both his energy donors and boosting the economy of one of his favorite countries, Russia. Six months later, Saudi Arabia threw $2 billion dollars to son-in-law Jared Kushne, thereby consummating what Trump might satisfyingly call a "three-way."

Share |

Not Enlightening

Smug meets smug. Audie Cornish and Scott Jennings are both wrong.

Jennings: Are you saying I'm not a Christian?

Cornish: It's a values based comment.

Jennings: Are you saying I don't have any values?

Cornish: He needs a clip for the internet. pic.twitter.com/et1yCs9IN4

— Acyn (@Acyn) December 11, 2024

As best as I can make out, the exchange went as follows:

Audie Cornish (to Jennings): You go after people all the time for a variety of things.

Scott Jennings (to Cornish); You keep referring to Neely as the victime. I think Penny is the victim in this case and I think people on that tain thing he's the victim.

A.C.: I call the people who die a victim. But we have different ideas bout that. Um, but to my mind someone who lost a child and I'm always going to feel for that person. That' just how I'm built. It's a Christian thing. But the reason I'm asking is-

S.J.: Are you saying that I'm not a Christian?

A.C. I'm not at all. I just want to make sure you uderstand it's a value-based comment, not a political one.

S.J. Are you saying I don't have any values about.... (not easily understood)?

(Someone off-camera): She's not saying that.

Of course, Cornish, of whom I'm a fan, was saying that. Or she was saying that Jennings is not a Christian. And it's more a human thing than a "christian" thing to sympathize with someone who lost a child.

Still, Cornish understood that Neely was the individual who was the object of an alleged crime. (His death may have been the first clue.)  If there were any doubt that Daniel Penny killed Jordan Neely, Penny would not have been charged. Perhaps Jennings meant that the ex-Marine was the victim because he was prosecuted- but he did not say that.

But more interesiting is Cornish's suggestion that the only legitimate Christian perspective is empathizing with Neely rather than Penny. This seemingly contrasts with the sentiment of a minister from St. Joseph, Missouri quoted by author and journalist Tim Alberta in The Kingdom, The Power, And The Glory (emphasis Alberta's). Of wrapping oneself in the politics of being Christian

There's this fale assumption of action we're called to take. The task of the Church is simply to be the Church. All of this high-blown rhetoric abouit changing the world- we don't need to change the world. We're not called to change the world. We're called to be the world already changed by Christ. That's how we're salt; that's how we're light.

I talk about Jesus in the context of His kingdom. The idea that Jesus is some mascot for the donkeys or the elephants- it's a catastrophe for the gospel.

For the Church, and for helpful political dialogue, which this was not.

Share |

Tulsi Gabbard's Identity

Besides possibly being a Russian assset, Tulsi Gabbard has at least one interesting acquaintance. "

Back in 2017 DNI pick Tulsi Gabbard visited Syria and met with brutal dictator Bashar al-Assad. Throughout the war she repeatedly voiced support for Assad's regime crushing the Syrian Revolution.

Now that he's fallen she can't even bring herself to say his name. pic.twitter.com/EVRw6mmpR0

— Thomas van Linge (@ThomasVLinge) December 10, 2024

Last month, Nikki Haley noted Gabbard had gone "to Syria in 2017 for a photo-op with Bashar al-Assad while he was massacring his own people. She said she was skeptical that he was behind the chemical weapons attack. Now, this to me is disgusting."

Haley's political star has plummeted and Assad has fled Syria for Russia but Gabbard may be on her way to being Director of National Intelligence. But aside from the major issues- Syria and Russia swirling around her, Gabbard is a flaming hypocrite.

Tulsi Gabbard was born in American Samoa and raised in Hawaii. She is a Hindu who married a Hindu, Abraham Williams, in Oahu in 2015 in what she dexribed as a "Hawaiian-style Hindu wedding" with Vedic customs. However, the Democrat turned Independent turned Republican in May stated

Many of those who are in great positions of poer in the Democratic Party, whether they admit it or not, or realize it or not, they see themselves as God. They appoint themselves as the authority. They view themselves as the ones who get to decide how we live our lives, what we're allowed to say, who we're allowed to hear from (and) how we get our information.

When Gabbard says "God," it is not clear to what or whom she is referring because

The majority of Hindus believe in one supreme God ((The Brahman). Everything is a part of and a manifestation of Brahman, the ultimate reality; however, Brahman's qualities and powers may be represented by a great diversity of gods/deities, all of which emanate from The Brahman. The concept of Brahman and the relationship of the Supreme Being with nature, indvidual souls, and TheBrahman's various manifestations are the subject of many different Hindu schools of philosophy/belief. 

The unvierse, Earth, and all creatures were created by Brahma, one of the many gds that emanated from The Brahman.

Thus, there is a monotheistic aspect of Hinduism.  Nonetheless, it is not considered among the three major monotheistic religions, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and for good reason.

Tulsi Gabbard is is no position legitimately to lecture Democrats, the overwhelming majority of whom identify as Christians, Jews, or Muslims. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are monotheistic. Yet, Gabbard, who belongs- and identifies with- a religion which seemingly recognizes a few gods, claims Democrats see themselves as "God."

Nor does Gabbard herself appear to believe in God. Below is a video in which she and her husband are singing along to John Lennon's Imagine. The lyrics begin

Imagine there's no heaven. It's eay if you try. No hell below us. Above us, only sky....

Imagine there's no countries. It isn'thard to do. Nothing to kill or die for. And no religion, too.

"Imagine there's no heaven (and) no hell below us, "and no religion, too."  Fortunately, there is no religious test for public office in the USA. and there are more important reasons to reject Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence. But it may be one more indication that the nominee, who has ducked questiosns about her relationship with Bashar Assad and is Russia-friendly, is not exactly whom she appears to be.

Share |

The Once, Still, and Future President

Shortly before the tweet below, NBC News noted

Foreign leaders have lined up to speak with him. He has rattled Mexico and Canada with threats of steep tariffs and warned there would be “hell to pay” for militants in Gaza unless they release the hostages by the time he’s sworn in.

That won't happen for another 45 days, but Donald Trump, the president-in-waiting, isn't shying away from acting like the president-in-reality.

Trump can't sign a bill or issue an executive order yet, but he is crowding out Joe Biden as the sitting president winds down his term and steadily recedes from public view. In two foreign trips since the election, Biden has answered all of two questions from reporters.

He has been left to kibitz about Trump’s pronouncements — “I hope he rethinks it,” he said of Trump’s plan to impose 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico — rather than drive an agenda of his own.

Why TF is Donald Trump in France for the reopening of Notre Dame and meeting with President Macron?

What a total disgrace. pic.twitter.com/2PbOe0POfC

— Art Candee 🍿🥤 (@ArtCandee) December 7, 2024

Throughout the campaign this summer and fall, Republicans routinely referred to their candidate as "President Trump" or "the President."  Many broadcast "journalists" did so also and only on rare occassions would the news host \offer the correction of "ex-President" or "former President."

If there was one essential prenuse if Trump's candidacy, it was that he has been "President Trump" all along. AP reported in March

Republican Donald Trump has launched his general election campaign not merely rewriting the history of the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack, but positioning the violent siege and its failed attempt to overturn the 2020 election as a cornerstone of his bid to return to the White House.

At a weekend rally in Ohio, his first as the presumed Republican Party presidential nominee, Trump stood onstage, his hand raised in salute to the brim of his red MAGA hat, as a recorded chorus of prisoners in jail for their roles in the Jan. 6 attack sang the national anthem.

An announcer asked the crowd to please rise “for the horribly and unfairly treated January 6th hostages.” And people did, and sang along.

“They were unbelievable patriots,” Trump said as the recording ended.

Having previously vowed to pardon the rioters, he promised to help them “the first day we get into office.”

In September, Trump admitted that he had lost the 2020 election "by a whisker." That was six months after falsely claiming "eighty-two percent of the country understands that it was a rigged election" and three months after whining that Biden "only attained the position of president by lies, fake news, and not leaving his basement."

It's who he is- or rather, whom he pretends he is. He always has to be the Big Man on Campus and wants to portray himself as having always been President. He's still the guy who brushed aside the prime minister of Montenegro at a NATO summit in Brussels in May, 2017. He always has to be the Big Man on Campus, who became the President, was cheated out of a second term, and will be President indefinitely.

        

Share |

Fine Supplicants

It's actually worse than this.

Joe and Mika are butthurt by the backlash from them going to Mar-a-Lardo to slurp on trump’s tiny 🍄. “We went there to get the read of the man.” 🙄 What’s to read? We already know he’s a racist, fascist, criminal piece of shit. They can go fuck themselves.pic.twitter.com/N2hvBeVxla

— 😱 Scary Larry 😱 🇺🇦✊🏻🇺🇸🗽 (@aintscarylarry) December 5, 2024

In a classic example of platforming a demagogue and totalitarian whom pre-election they had labeled a "fascist," Joe Scarborough on Thursday morning

defended a meeting that he and Brzezinski had earlier this month with Trump. Their revelation of the off-the-record visit to Mar-A-Lago drew a backlash, as they had previously warned of Trump’s authoritarianism and even compared him to a fascist.

He acknowledged that people were upset and that “maybe we should have given them more of a warning,” but “the main complaint was that we called Donald Trump’s rhetoric fascist during the campaign, and then we went down to have an off the record comment with him.” Brzezinski noted that other news outlets like The New York Times, The Washington Post and even The Atlantic have done the same. 

When on November 18 the two revealed they had a chat with the President-elect

Scarborough said, “we didn’t see eye-to-eye on a lot of issues, and we told him so.” But “what we did agree on was to restart communications,” Brzezinski said, suggesting that their behavior should be a model for others..

Brzezinski said Trump was cheerful, upbeat and “seemed interested in finding common ground with Democrats on some of the most divisive issues.” She did not specify which ones.

In her explanation of the meeting, Brzezinski pointed to Trump’s election victory and said “Joe and I realized it’s time to do something different, and that starts with not only talking about Donald Trump, but talking with him.”.

Three+ weeks later

On Wednesday, during a segment on former Fox News host Pete Hegseth’s teetering nomination as Trump’s next secretary of defense, (Atlantic writer David) Frum quipped, “If you’re too drunk for Fox News, you’re very, very drunk indeed.” That was in response to an NBC News report that colleagues on Fox & Friends Weekend had concerns over Hegseth’s drinking.

With stick stuck squarely up her rear end

Brzezinski followed up the segment by telling viewers that Frum’s comment was “a little too flippant” and that “we have differences in coverage with Fox News, and that’s a good debate that we should have often, but right now I just want to say there’s a lot of good people who work at Fox News who care about Pete Hegseth, and we will want to leave it at that.

Frum responded

This morning, I had an unsettling experience.

I was invited onto MSNBC’s Morning Joe to talk from a studio in Washington, D.C., about an article I’d written on Trump’s approach to foreign policy. Before getting to the article, I was asked about the nomination of Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense—specifically about an NBC News report that his heavy drinking worried colleagues at Fox News and at the veterans organizations he’d headed. (A spokesman for the Trump transition told NBC, “These disgusting allegations are completely unfounded and false, and anyone peddling these defamatory lies to score political cheap shots is sickening.” )

I answered by reminding viewers of some history:

In 1989, President George H. W. Bush nominated John Tower, senator from Texas, for secretary of defense. Tower was a very considerable person, a real defense intellectual, someone who deeply understood defense, unlike the current nominee. It emerged that Tower had a drinking problem, and when he was drinking too much he would make himself a nuisance or worse to women around him. And for that reason, his nomination collapsed in 1989. You don’t want to think that our moral standards have declined so much that you can say: Let’s take all the drinking, all the sex-pesting, subtract any knowledge of defense, subtract any leadership, and there is your next secretary of defense for the 21st century.

I told this story in pungent terms. It’s cable TV, after all. And I introduced the discussion with a joke: “If you’re too drunk for Fox News, you’re very, very drunk indeed.”

At the next ad break, a producer spoke into my ear. He objected to my comments about Fox and warned me not to repeat them. I said something noncommittal and got another round of warning. After the break, I was asked a follow-up question on a different topic, about President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son. I did not revert to the earlier discussion, not because I had been warned, but because I had said my piece. I was then told that I was excused from the studio chair. Shortly afterward, co-host Mika Brzezinski read an apology for my remarks.

A little bit earlier in this block there was a comment made about Fox News, in our coverage about Pete Hegseth and the growing number of allegations about his behavior over the years and possible addiction to alcohol or issues with alcohol. The comment was a little too flippant for this moment that we’re in. We just want to make that comment as well. We want to make that clear. We have differences in coverage with Fox News, and that’s a good debate that we should have often, but right now I just want to say there’s a lot of good people who work at Fox News who care about Pete Hegseth, and we will want to leave it at that.

After the Wednesday incident and the responses to it, two additional things have become known while one thing remains unknown, despite speculation.

David Frum has never understood that the modern Republican Party, which he abhors, did not come out of thin air and had its antecedents at least as far back as the Reagan presidency. However, he obviously has a great deal of integrity, as his Hedgeseth remark, his willingness to move past it, and his written explanation evince.

We still cannot be confident of the reason for the visit by the Scarboroughs to Mar-a-Lago. It has seemed to me and to most observers that they were caving to Trump because they fear being among those who will be prosecuted and persecuted after January 20 for exercising their First Amendment rights. However, on Wednesday, Joe stated "Let me tell you something: You can talk to anybody that’s worked in the front office of NBC and MSNBC over the past 22 years, [they] will tell you I am not fearful. You talk to anybody who has served with me in Congress, they will tell you — not fearful of leadership.”

Times change, circumstances change, and people change and perhaps Joe and Mika- whatever Joe's past- are now scaredy cats, and justifiably so. Alternatively, they've read the tea leaves. Donald Trump is returning to the presidency, MSNBC is up for sale, and they may need an alternative in journalism or even a different career. 

Currying favor with such a man, access journalism run amok, would be worse than merely acting out of fear. Interviewing Donald Trump on the latter's own turf, doing so without video, and choosing not to report the details of the chat are very bad indeed, made even worse when Brzezinski did Trump's bidding by claiming he was "cheerful, upbeat" and was "interested in finding common ground." Ms. Brzezinski is a fine stenographer but leaves unclear whether the President-elect played them or they're trying to play their viewers.

Yet, if their motive is not completely certain, the content of their character is. It's bad enough to suck up to Donald J. Trump. However, they exacerbated the situation when a flunky (with or without their direction) tells Frum not to repeat the comment. As requested, Frum avoids the subject, then is kicked out. 

This is despicable behavior by the hosts and is making MSNBC look even worse than it has. And these days, that's difficult to do.

Share |