44/millionths of one percent

Documented prevalence of voting fraud by individuals 2000-2016 is 0.0000044%.

Say it loud.

Put it on fucking shirts and baseball caps.

It’s not that voting fraud by individual voters is extremely rare in the USA, it’s not that the RNC’s many ongoing lawsuits to restrict voting are based on zero actual evidence.

Voter fraud’s documented prevalence is:

44/millionths of one percent

And even if was a thousand times more than that, 44/thousandths of one percent– how would that change the story?

Why is this fraudulent insistence on widespread voter fraud not front page news in every major newspaper as our divided nation argues about “rigged” vs. “fair” elections?

Evidence vs. No Evidence (and the 44/millionths of one percent odds of winning on the merits, after exhausting all appeals)

We live in a bizarre and dangerous time when arguments presented without evidence can prevail — particularly in the algorithm-driven Court of Public Opinion. This court is not presided over by particularly sophisticated judicial minds. Any assertion that sounds legally plausible will do to support a claim already endorsed by partisans. Doctrines like Presidential Privilege, or Sovereign Immunity sound pretty impressive, and pretty darned absolute and unassailable. Case closed!

Blanket Unlimited Protective Presidential Immunity (for the president and anyone who has ever talked to him): BINGO! Sounds like a winner, unless you look at every previous Supreme Court ruling on less audacious claims of presidential immunity.

Fortunately for our democracy, laws and legal precedents govern when legal doctrines may be applied – and when they may not be applied. The final word on what is lawful is given to the courts of our country. These cases are won or lost based on who has the superior evidence for their claim. If powerful sounding legal doctrines are misused by the government, as Bill Barr routinely does, simply as stumbling blocks to delay the court’s final determination of a claim the AG (and every other legal scholar) knows will fall — that’s fatal for our democracy and the delicate system of checks and balances that upholds it.

Trump’s only hope for an outright, or at least arguable, electoral victory is chaos, confusion, fear, rage, violence and the suppression of millions of votes from people he’s alienated by his divisiveness and incompetence.

He’s favored in this hope by the winds of the highly infectious pandemic he decried and denied for months, a rampaging, deadly, airborne disease that creates chaos, fear, confusion. 39% of Americans couldn’t care less that he deliberately lied to the nation about the severity of the virus, as he revealed for posterity during his many recorded talks with Bob Woodward.

He’s favored by the discord he sows every day, the fear, rage and violence he inspires as he publicly strives to keep everyone calm. Those who follow him will insist he is the Law and Order candidate striving to keep everyone calm. They will faithfully repeat what the president himself has said, defending his decision to lie about the deadliness of the novel coronavirus.

He is NOT favored by the evidence for virtually any of his claims.

He’s not the brilliant dealmaker and great businessman he boasts about being; he’s a fraud and a snake-oil salesman, a serial failure saved from bankruptcy by vast family wealth over and over. Just before his election he settled a case to shut down his fraudulent university, as president his charitable family foundation has been shuttered for illegal activity.

Trump is well-known to be a compulsive liar. It is a compulsion, he literally has to lie. He is in jeopardy of prosecution for multiple crimes once he is no longer president. He’s been kept in office so far, in the face of massive evidence of his obstruction, abuse of office and other wrongdoing, only by fervent true believer AG Barr and soul-dead Senate leader McConnell. Trump is wounded and dangerous.

Please look at and memorize this number to trot out at your next virtual cocktail party: 44/millionths of one percent:

44/millionths of one percent

Rate of voter fraud in the United States 2000-2016: 0.0000044%

The president’s repeated claims about massive vote-by-mail fraud are not supported by any evidence. Voter fraud is a brazen lie told to help suppress the numbers who will be allowed to vote. You can read about the lack of evidence of voter fraud he and the RNC submitted in a federal suit they recently brought to limit mail-in voting during a pandemic [1].

Trump’s presidential commission on Election Fraud, created soon after his razor thin 78,000 vote Electoral College victory in 2016, tasked with finding the three million fraudulent Hillary voters that gave her a wide margin in the popular vote (many of these voters were dead Mexicans, as I recall Trump saying) found zero evidence. Headed by voting rights zealots Mike Pence and Chris Kobach, the commission shut down after two meetings, having turned up no evidence of widespread voter fraud.

By now, everyone should know Trump’s election rigging voter-fraud claim is false, a lie, 100% bullshit. The rate of demonstrated voter fraud is, let’s repeat it, to help remember the nano-percentage of cases of actual voter fraud, to drop into conversation:

44/millionths of one percent

Rate of voter fraud in the United States. 2000-2016: 0.0000044%

Yet the media continues to report on claims of widespread voter fraud like it is a real issue.

I read one in the NY Times the other day, grotesquely contorted to appear fair and balanced, that made me hate them anew. All they needed to do in that article was somewhere provide the number of actual, documented voting fraud cases from 2000-2016: 0.0000044% (or use the equally descriptive “statistically insignificant”). They dared not cite that damning fact, for whatever accursed reason, in assessing the truth or falsity of Trump’s claims of massive voter fraud and a rigged election.

You read the NY Times article and emerge with the idea that some very smart lawyers believe that mail-in fraud is much more widespread than in-person fraud. Perhaps as much as 200% more prevalent: 97/millionths of one percent, one imagines. Even if it is 1000% more prevalent, that’s 44/100,000ths of one percent. Come on, Grey Skank… sheesh, what is in it for you?

Trump has been pushing this load of crap since he announced that he was running for president in 2016. Check out this report from the Public Broadcasting System, October 2016, completely debunking this ignorant blowhard talking point.

As for American votes actively suppressed, recently, votes already legally cast and yet actually not counted, keep reading. This exchange is from the latest interview by national treasure Bill Moyers, about a federal lawsuit this Republican election lawyer is bringing to trump the multiple frivolous Trump lawsuits arguing for the need to curb unsubstantiated, widespread voter fraud [and also to throw a wrench into Trump’s ongoing conspiracy with mega-donor Postmaster General DeJoy to slow the delivery of mail]:

DAVID BERG: We have to prove imminent harm. In order to get any kind of injunctive relief from any court in the country, you have to prove that you are in imminent danger of losing, in this case, a valuable right, for which no money can compensate you. This is at the heart of this democracy: a free, unfettered right to vote. In this case, we were able to show, this is what we think is the harm. This is what we think we can say to the court. “Look, your Honor– ” I wouldn’t say, “Look, your Honor.” But I would say, “Your Honor– we have four people here. Their experience, from all published reports, is no different from millions of Americans. Their right to vote was unconstitutionally burdened, as the test goes.”

BILL MOYERS: In their primaries.

DAVID BERG: In their primaries. Yes, exactly. And in the runoffs. So, we say to the court, “That’s not something that a voter should have to confront.” And we can’t be certain, given everything that’s happened with the United States Postal Service, that this is not going to happen again. “This” being the failure to deliver the ballots in response to applications. And then, and this is also critical, because this is unknown to the voter. There were tens of thousands of votes that arrived too late at election officials’ offices during the primary season, and in the runoffs, Bill. And they weren’t counted. Used to be that, you know, you postmarked your mail-in ballot on the last day before the election, and it’ll get counted. We don’t have that assurance anymore.

BILL MOYERS: So what are you asking the court to do?

DAVID BERG: The court can look to the causes. There are four causes of the slowdown, probably more that we don’t know about. But there are four that widely publicize. The most serious of the causes, you’ve probably heard DeJoy and other of his cohorts at USPS–

BILL MOYERS: Postmaster DeJoy, President Trump’s appointment to be postmaster general.

DAVID BERG: Yes, exactly. He’s bragged about the fact in an email to all of the 600,000 employees of the United States Postal Service that the rate of delivery has really improved. On-time delivery has gone from 83% to 94% in just a month. That’s just about as trustworthy as when he, DeJoy, said he would suspend all the changes. Which was just a head fake, was just three card Monty with our election. When he said he’d suspend the changes that he was making at the post office claiming it just to be for cost-cutting, what he really meant to say was, I’m not going to reverse the changes I’ve already made, which has created slowdowns in mail delivery, failure to deliver mail all over the country. Especially more pronounced in some parts than others. So what we’re asking the court to do is lift the hiring freeze. Thousands of postal workers have been sidelined by the Coronavirus. And the fallacy of this business about delivering on time, Bill, if your trucks all leave on time, that’s one thing. But they leave on time without the mail. They are no longer allowed to do late deliveries or special deliveries to customers. So the mail stacks up, and that makes the delay even worse. So yes, he’s telling us the trains are running on time. But they’re empty.

[1] Trump’s claim in the case — that mail-in voting:

… denies any procedural visibility to candidates, political parties, and the public in general, thereby jeopardizing the free and fair public elections guaranteed by the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions. The most recent election conducted in this Commonwealth and the public reaction to it demonstrate the harm caused by Defendants’ unconstitutional infringements of Plaintiffs’ rights. The continued enforcement of arbitrary and disparate policies and procedures regarding poll watcher access and ballot return and counting poses a severe threat to the credibility and integrity of, and public confidence in, Pennsylvania’s elections.

full amended complaint here

is not only unsupported by evidence (in apparent contempt of a judge’s order) but these claims are identical to Kremlin talking points about the upcoming US election. How a federal lawsuit is allowed to go forward, unsupported by evidence of any kind, in spite of the unambiguous order of the federal judge that Plaintiff’s submit evidence or STATE THAT THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE, is a modern American judicial mystery.  The failure of the news media to report on it is a modern American media mystery. 

self-dealing source 

History Lesson for September 11th

featuring an excerpt from Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People Who Fight Back.

September 11 is probably a good time to transcribe this evocative passage from the opening chapter of the 2006 book by Amy Goodman and David Goodman that I have long been meaning to transcribe and post here.

Journalism is often called the first draft of history. These investigative reports from the first term of the Bush/Cheney administration detail the real-time actions of people struggling against a new regime in which torture was legally (if secretly, at first) redefined as “enhanced interrogation” and dark practices that were previously hidden were now flaunted as part of the US’s tough new zero-tolerance policy towards “Terror”. How did this official U.S. embrace of torture change history? Our current president, when he was a candidate, boasted that the tortures of Bush and Cheney were nothing compared to what he was prepared to do. In that sense, at least, Mr. Trump has kept his word.

Americans are famously prone to amnesia when it comes to history. The name Maher Arar will not ring any bells for most Americans. He was a Canadian citizen, born in Syria, who was detained at JFK airport on September 26, 2002, separated from his family (they were en route to Canada after a vacation) interrogated for days, drugged, diapered, shackled and “rendered” to Syria, where he was kept in a hole in the ground and tortured daily for a year before Canadian efforts finally got him released.

As Amy and David Goodman record: “Three hundred and seventy-four days after he landed at JFK, Maher Arar was released from the Syrian prison. Charges were never filed against him.”

Canada eventually issued a public apology to this innocent Canadian architect, a man with a name similar to someone the US suspected of being a terrorist, and paid him millions in damages. The U.S., in the name of “national security,” (and on several other grounds as well) dismissed the lawsuit Arar brought in U.S. federal court. Nothing to see here, dipshit, we’re fighting evil!

Years later President Obama would admit “we, uh, tortured some folks,” explaining that good people had done it with the best of intentions during very fearful times, but that it was still, you know, kind of wrong. So our first multi-racial president, whose election wiped the slate clean of racism once and for all, made a clean breast of our descent into barbarity, under cover of law. He said it was wrong. I will let the Goodmans take it from the beginning of their 2006 book, a work of journalism that is now a straight up history book (and one I highly recommend):

The United States is an outlaw nation.

The laws that used to govern the behavior of American leaders evolved from basic codes of conduct for civilized nations. In 1215 the Magna Carta asserted that no one, not even the king, was above the rule of law, and it established the concept of habeus corpus — a prisoner’s right to challenge his or her detention in a public court of law. Kidnapping, murder and rape, all nations agree, are crimes. The four Geneva Conventions, the first of which was adopted in 1864, established that even in wars, civilians and combatants have rights. The conventions prohibit murder, torture, hostage-taking and extrajudicial sentencing and executions.

These have long been the publicly proclaimed ideals of Western nations. In private, they have been routinely violated. From the Native American conquest, to slavery, to Vietnam, where torture and extrajudicial killing were staples of the CIA’s Phoenix program, to Latin America, where US-backed death squads rained terror on civilians throughout the 1970s and ’80s, to the US Army School of the Americas, which counts among its graduates a who’s who of Latin American dictators and humans rights abusers, the United States has been secretly involved in the torture business for years.

Yet even by these sordid standards, the United States is now probing new lows.

For this, we must credit President George W. Bush. A failed oil-man, he lost the 2000 election but was selected as president of the United States by the Supreme Court. Having lost the popular vote nationally that year — including, as recounts proved, losing in Florida– Bush proceeded to declare after the attacks of 9/11 that he had a God-given mandate not just to rule America, but to wage war across the globe. He reportedly told Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, “God told me to strike at al Qaeda and I struck them, and then he instructed me to strike at Saddam.” Bush decreed that neither international law nor U.S. law applied to him or his administration.

Bush was not able to achieve all this on his own. A compliant Congress, lubricated by contributions from self-dealing lobbyists and multinational corporations, together with a deferential American media have been essential parts of his arsenal.

In the Outlaw Nation that has risen up where the United States once stood, holding humans in offshore cages and denying them fair trials is fine. Kidnapping has become an essential tool of foreign policy. The vice president personally lobbies the Senate to legalize torture, while the secretary of defense decides which medieval torments are acceptable (drowning and freezing are in, disemboweling is out). The secretary of state trots around the globe to forcefully and unequivocally reassure squeamish allies — on whose soil the kidnappings and torture occur — that what they know is happening (and secretly assisted) is not really happening. The U.S. media speaks politely about possible “abuse” and refers delicately to things like “stress positions”.

Torturing enemies in secret is not new for the United States. But the open — even proud– embrace of it is unprecedented. Let us take a look into the dark alleys, behind the iron bars, and into the dungeons to shed some light on the secret actions of the Outlaw Nation.

Static: Government Liars, Media Cheerleaders, and the People Who Fight Back. pp. 17-19 (c) 2006 Amy Goodman and David Goodman

A Defense of the President

On a US government website you can read this timeline of Republican talking points of how the Deep State put “Operation Crossfire” into motion, that baseless attempt to illegally set up Mr. Trump, his campaign, his donors, every patriotic citizen actively trying its best to make America great again, before it’s too late (2045 — the year US whites are expected to be a minority).

I don’t know what to make of those talking points being posted on a government website, except that the government itself has been weaponized by Mr. Trump in ways previously impossible to imagine. This is nothing new, certainly but conspiracy theories and random incendiary talking points have never been as commonly endorsed by government officials (Barr- massive voter fraud, for which there is no evidence, is “obvious”) as under “the most transparent president in history” as the president’s latest press secretary called him the other day. I’ve been meaning to transcribe the intro to Amy and David Goodman’s great Static, a pre-Obama work of journalism that is now a history book. I’ll do that soon (here you go, well-worth a read).

It’s always possible to defend anything, literally. Here is the defense of a well-spoken pro-Trump caller to yesterday’s Brian Lehrer show on WNYC (NY Public Radio) during a segment about the release of some exchanges from Bob Woodward’s recorded interviews with Mr. Trump showing that although Trump knew the pandemic was serious, deadly and airborne, he kept downplaying the severity of the virus:

David in Paramus (at 16:10 at “Trump Called COVID ‘Deadly’ Despite Publicly Downplaying It”)

I’m a little bit taken aback by your guest today, he seems to think that you have Trump painted into a corner, that he said things to famous Watergate author Bob Woodward that maybe he thought wouldn’t go out into the public air, which we all know, obviously he knew it would all be played at some point, but why play it today and what’ll be played tomorrow and what’ll be played over the next two months prior to the election? He did the thing that he thought was best, that’s why we elected him president, and that was to set a tone to keep the country at ease [1].

He wasn’t a fact finder, he’s not a scientist, he’s going on the best information that he had at the time, that you had, that I had, that we all had, which is what is the coronavirus and where is it going? And for him to err on the side of not causing panic is a much better option than telling the whole country “oh, this is really, really bad!” [2].

And I’d like to bring up the point with regard to 9/11, I remember nineteen years ago tomorrow, George Bush sitting in that classroom with that look on his face when his aide whispered in his ear that the towers had been attacked. George Bush didn’t turn around and jump up and tell America “run for the covers!” It was a moment when he made the best decision with the facts he had at hand and he did keep the public from going into a panic [3].

And the comment with regard to panic on the street, Wall Street, I feel it’s also not appropriate.

Lehrer: …if he knew that it was more deadly than the flu and he turned around and told everybody it’s not so bad, you can go about your normal lives, why isn’t that like a doctor (who fails to give sound medical advice after detecting a potentially deadly heart condition in a patient)?

David: That’s an excellent point, I won’t say I’m not 100% fantastically appreciative of what he did on that day, I’m saying that I take it with a grain of salt, I don’t wake up in the morning and say “well, President Trump said this today so I’m going to conduct my life the way he said to. I feel strongly about not inciting panic, I think that’s a tremendous responsibility, and to the young lady that lost her father, who I send my my condolences to, that spoke at the Democratic National Convention, for Trump to say it’s OK to go out to karaoke tonight and don’t wear a mask, it just falls flat for me, on its face [4].

I’ve see Facebook responses from people that I went to high school with that feel strongly that this is the most momentous thing that they found that Trump did that was so egregious and his responsibility for the 190,000 deaths that have occurred. I don’t blame the Trump administration, I wouldn’t blame Biden, or Roosevelt or anybody else for an insidious pandemic that struck the world like we’ve never seen in our lifetime, any more than I would blame you or anybody else.

Very fair-minded, David.

some caviling, tell-tale notes:

[1] It is a key part of the job of the president to keep us calm during a national crisis. “We have nothing to fear but fear itself,” was famously uttered by FDR during a very frightening time in world history. Mr. Trump often fans fear, of things real and imagined (a cabal powerful cannibal pedophiles; evil, black uniformed men flying in to cause riots) because it leads to other strong emotions, like anger and violence, that he and his political base feed on. There is some irony in this defense of the president as the man who keeps the country calm.

[2] This is the precise reason that the weather service NEVER broadcasts terrifying predictions about incoming killer storms. It only causes panic, and keeping people calm before a raging climate event is a small price to pay for a few theoretical extra deaths.

[3] OK, I’ll leave off with this beating of a straw man, y’all get the point. If you select a single talking point, in this case “keep everyone calm,” you can beat it like a drum, over and over, no matter what other points are raised. This is called “making an argument” in Trump’s America.

[4] One last note: the “resistance” the “tyranny” of mandatory wearing of face masks and social distancing is a regular feature of every Trump news conference and campaign rally. The president refuses to wear a mask and has weaponized the wearing of protective gear, one of the few proven ways we have to minimize risk of infection. So that last bit, about “don’t just blindly do what the Leader says” and making his dead follower responsible for blindly following his calming advice about no need to fear the “pandemic”, well, for Trump’s base, that claim falls a bit flat, for me, on its face.

Irreconcilable Storylines — not a problem

The thing about contradictory storylines that can never be made to meet, in any detail, is that Americans today will believe one or the other depending on the color of the hat on their head. There is no convincing anybody who is undyingly loyal and determined in their true beliefs, no set of facts that will change anybody’s mind about these irreconcilable narratives. It’s sad as hell, but there we are.

Every “fact” you can produce to make a persuasive argument is now instantly met with a “counter-fact” from the equally compelling world of “alternative truth.”

It makes people feel good to be right, and, say what you want about him, it’s never been easier to be right than in Donald J. Trump’s America.

There’s been a lot of buzz about Bob Woodward’s new book, Rage, based on hours of recorded interviews with the president and his indispensable minister with many portfolios Jared Kushner. Apparently many inside the White House urged them not to speak to the dogged journalist whose reporting brought Nixon down, but they felt they had nothing to hide and had confidence that they could easily out-maneuver the liberal hack.

On recordings most of us have heard snippets of by now, Mr. Trump candidly tells Woodward, on February 7, more than a month before he ordered the limited national pandemic emergency in mid-March, that he knows how much deadlier than the flu Covid-19 is, five times deadlier, and highly contagious through the air. “But I don’t want to create a panic” says Mr. Trump to Mr. Woodward. This conversation about how deadly this infectious airborne disease was happened in early February, then the president continued to tell the American public that the China Virus, no more serious than the common seasonal flu, was a Democrat HOAX, a made up story to bring him down, and crash the greatest economy America has ever known, to damage him in the upcoming election.

The shocking revelations in Woodward’s book (and shame on him for not reporting these months ago when they happened, another John Bolton… preserving maximum books sales trumps trumping Trump…) will cause no ripples among the die-hard 39% who love Mr. Trump no matter what. The president speaks their language, he’s crude, he’s spicy, sometimes nasty, he honestly tells it like it is, like he believes it is, he’s not afraid to be “politically incorrect,” he’s not a pussy, he may lie, as do we all, but always in the name of a higher Truth.

Let’s take a quick look at a few facts and counter-facts.

Fact: the president’s weeks-long delay in declaring a national emergency when Covid-19 hit, and his failure to use his powers to produce and distribute desperately needed protective gear, cost thousands of American lives.

Counter-fact, this is part of a lying hoax, fake news, a false narrative spread by traitors wildly determined to hurt Trump (and who also, by the way, did nothing to stop the spread of the virus). The US did a great job fighting the pandemic, better than almost any other country in the world. They have statistics to back this up, too, you can ask the Governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, he went to Yale and Harvard and has all the granular numbers for you science worshipping pinheads.

If you’re following the president’s current story, we can all relax about this pandemic, because we’ll have a patented American Covid-19 vaccine in record time, an amazing achievement only possible because the president is the greatest man in history. Problem solved, by Election Day, even though it’s already not a problem, since the administration took such strong, decisive early action to defeat the China Virus — the same China which is illegally helping Joe Biden, by the way, along with Iran.

Or, as government epidemiologists repeatedly tell us, as well as several of our largest drug companies, in an unusual show of noncompetitive unity, it’s almost impossible that sufficient tests will be done to ensure the safety of any effective vaccine to have it ready for use before Election Day, as the president keeps promising. Also, Russian electoral interference on behalf of Trump in 2016 and 2020 is well documented by numerous investigations, including a Republican-chaired Senate investigation; China’s and Iran’s efforts to hurt Trump in 2020 are not nearly as well-established.

Counterfact: the president’s first national security advisor, Mike Flynn, fired by the president for lying to the Vice President, and then lying repeatedly to the FBI, who pleaded guilty for telling these lies, was actually innocent. Yes, he was framed by vicious partisan members of the Deep State who set him up, lured the innocent patriot into a “perjury trap” and then savagely “unmasked” him. Then, when the Department of Justice, under patriot Bill Barr, finally sought, in the interest of justice, to belatedly make the unfair case disappear, a judge, also from the Deep State, refused to follow the law. A coup d’etat by an overreaching judge who illegally insisted on usurping the power of the Executive Branch. The appellate judge who ordered the usurping judge to obey the law and immediately dismiss the case ruled that there was no reason for a hearing, since this is not the unusual case that merits special scrutiny before dismissing it.

Or, it is actually a highly unusual case, a defendant, fired by his boss for lying, who twice pleaded guilty to a felony count of “willfully and knowingly” making false statements to the FBI, having his case suddenly dismissed by the DOJ without reason or a hearing — (and yes, Barr made a call on the “materiality” of Flynn’s lies, so there is a rationale, if not a nonpolitical reason.) The appellate judge who ordered the trial judge to immediately dismiss the case without a hearing was rebuked by the full panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, who vacated her order and found her ruling legally incorrect by a vote of 8-2.

Similarly, when the president calls a woman who accused him of rape in a Bergdorf-Goodman changing room a liar and claims he never even met her (in spite of at least one photo showing them together), and she in turn brings a defamation suit against the president, the Department of Justice steps in ten months later to make that case go away.

If Barr hadn’t stepped up to take the case the other day, under a fanciful interpretation of a Federal Tort law (that will be litigated and appealed for months, if not years, like Barr’s novel, flimsy but effective ‘blanket protective immunity’ claim for everyone who ever worked for President Trump), the president was in danger, weeks before a hotly contested election, of having to submit DNA to prove it wasn’t traces of him on the woman’s clothes — along with possibly being deposed in that case in a certain “perjury trap”.

You remember Monica Lewinsky’s blue dress? That was case closed for Lyin’ Bill Clinton. Even Slick Willie couldn’t lie after his DNA matched dried spunk on that blue dress, yo. This would be worse, because the woman (like all the others who accuse the president of similar things) is a liar and, besides that, a dog someone of Mr. Trump’s famously good taste in the ladies wouldn’t molest with Mike Pence’s dick.

Fact: more than twenty women accused then-presidential candidate Trump, who bragged about being able to “grab women by the pussy” because he was a star, of various sexual trespasses. Trump threatened to sue all of them, dogs and skanks one and all — and attention seeking liars — he promised he’d drag them all into court right after the 2016 election (along with providing a great, much more affordable and comprehensive health plan once he abolished Obamacare). None of these gold-digging partisan liars were sued (and no health plan was ever offered).

Counterfact: this lying, homely woman is just looking for a big pay day, and is probably already on the payroll of George Soros and the rest of the cannibal pedophiles Q has been warning us all about.

But here’s the thing that bugs me in this perilous moment, the consolidated media, run by advertising dollars and owned by very wealthy, connected corporate men, continues to pretend that cutting the baby in half is the way King Solomon would do it– if he was beholden to advertisers and wanted to maintain his access to the president’s administration. They have absolutely no sense of irony about this baby cutting they reflexively do, or any recognition that Solomon did not actually cut the baby, he only used the threat to be fair and chop the baby in half to learn who was the real mother. Or, more to the point, they don’t care about cutting your baby in half if there’s profit in it.

Here’s the Grey Lady on Barr’s sudden decision to intervene to make sure Trump doesn’t have to give DNA or be deposed in a defamation suit he brought on himself by publicly insulting a private citizen and calling her a liar from the bully pulpit. The headline repeats Barr’s claim that this is it unprecedented for the DOJ to step in and defend an American president in a civil suit — anything whatsoever that the president says in the course of his presidency is protected absolutely by this doctrine — ask Alan Dershowitz, nothing the president honestly thinks is right can be wrong:

Sure, perfectly normal. Presidents are regularly defended by the Department of Justice in defamation suits. It happens all the time. It could have been phrased “Barr defends unprecedented DOJ intervention as Normal” but that would only piss the administration off– and for what? What reminded Barr to take the case after so many months had passed?

Normal, you know. Not the sort of unusual, never seen before kind of case that merits any kind of close scrutiny. Happens virtually every day. Obama, yeah, he used it, sure he did, why wouldn’t he?

Perfectly normal, in Trump’s America. And you chumps can take that to the ballot box. Right after you get your vaccine, which will be safe, effective and free to everyone the day it is released.

Anarchist Jurisdictions

Manifest Destiny. The Lost Cause. Rugged Individualism. Social Darwinism. The War to End War. Isolationism. Separate But Equal. American Exceptionalism. The Shining City on the hill. Climate Change Skepticism. The Death Tax. White Supremacy. States’ Rights. Eugenics. Race-neutral color-blindness. Morning in America. Law and Order. Birtherism. Libertarianism. Felon disenfranchisement. Russiagate. Pro-life. Illegal Aliens. Second Amendment solutions. MAGA, man.

Anarchist Jurisdictions [1].

Catchy slogans are great and American as apple pie and The Peculiar Institution. I have nothing against slogans, as slogans. It’s just that so many of them are so clearly stupid and destructive, created by wordsmiths, hired by “ideologues,” to serve what a less measured blogger might call “evil.” Lately we have a new one, created for a lawyered up, all-powerful Unitary Executive who is having walls built around the White House (that the Anarchists and leftist fascists he denounces are paying for) to symbolize his oneness with the people who elected him: Anarchist Jurisdictions.

These are places where teaching students the history of American slavery and our long, sluggish struggle against violent racism and other social evils is done openly. These Anarchist Jurisdictions do not obey the unwritten laws we believe to be sacred and inviolable– the truths we hold to be self-evident and unalienable [2], like our freedom itself. The president has threatened to come down hard on any state or city that is teaching young people about America’s history of racist violence. Anarchist jurisdictions, you understand. Defund the police? Defund your fucking n-word curriculum! Anarchist Jurisdictions!

Or, as Bill Barr, Mike Pompeo and Mike Pence would call them Anti-Christ Jurisdictions. These are places where God’s plan for Christendom and mankind and His generous gift of His only Son’s Uniquely Precious Life, slaughtered by (well, you know who) to cleanse the world’s Original Sin (and also our extra-crispy sin) is denigrated. De-NIG-grated. These Anti-Christ Jurisdictions refuse to recognize the divinity and sovereignty of Jesus Christ. Of Jesus Christ! While claiming we are unChristian in our hearts. US!!!

We will bring the fist of justice down hard on these rabid dogs, fight these infidels with every righteous weapon in Jesus Christ’s great arsenal. We will extirpate this sinfulness, starting in every Godless Anarchist, Anti-Christ Jurisdiction we designate!

[1]

We will leave aside, for purposes of this discussion, a small problem with this slogan, an inherent contradiction, if you like.

Jurisdiction is defined as: the practical authority granted to a legal body to administer justice, as defined by the kind of case, and the location of the issue. In federations like the United States, areas of jurisdiction apply to local, state, and federal levels. Wikipedia

[2]

Unalienable describes things, especially rights, that cannot be taken away, denied, or transferred to another person. Unalienable means the same thing as inalienable, which is now the standard term.

source

further attempts to shed light on this hideous story

I just wrote to Bill Moyers (and I have a few other news outlets on my list for today, including FAIR, the Intercept and VOX):

I am a long-time admirer of Bill Moyers (a national treasure) and was delighted recently to discover his podcast, which continues his excellent and sorely needed journalism.  I am hoping somebody at BillMoyers.com will delve into this unreported story with direct effect on the 2020 election:

Trump appears to have ignored a federal judge’s 8/13/20 order to produce evidence of vote-by-mail fraud or state that he has no evidence.

Citing often-debunked mail-in voting fraud claims, the Trump campaign and the RNC brought a federal lawsuit against the Pennsylvania AG and all 67 counties for making voting easier and safer during the pandemic (Trump v. Boockvar).  Judge Ranjan (a Trump appointee) ordered Plaintiffs to produce evidence of their claims OR STATE THAT THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE, by August 14. 

Several news outlets reported on the judge’s order, and his subsequent stay of the case (abstaining while state courts rule on many of the claims) but only one article (on The Intercept) has featured the lack of evidence presented by Trump and the RNC in their 524 page submission. 

 Stoking fears about mail-in voting fraud was recently reported as a Putin talking point for the US election.   It does not seem that Trump and the RNC submitted any evidence for their claims of massive mail-in voting fraud.  Not big news?

A headline might be:  Trump, in contempt of order by Trump-appointed judge, refuses to admit he has no evidence of voter fraud.    

I am happy to do my part fleshing out this important news story, which I have been following since Judge Ranjan’s 8/13 order.  McClatchy, the NY Times, Democracy Now!, the Intercept, Pittsburgh Public Radio station WESA (the federal court is in Pittsburgh) and other news organizations I contacted do not seem to have followed up on my pitch a few weeks back.   The media silence is puzzling and dismaying.   You can find links to my research HERE (along with the online docket for the case, which is HERE).   Please contact me if I can be of assistance with this story.   Here is what I posted yesterday:

Election Fraud: evidence or no evidence?

Why isn’t this “high profile” case front page news? It turns on the demonstrable falsity of Trump’s repeatedly debunked claims of massive voter fraud. These false claims are being actively spread by Putin, as well, according to US intelligence reports.

Trump v. Boockvar is the federal lawsuit brought by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and the Republican National Committee to prevent the Democratic Attorney General of Pennsylvania and the Election Boards of all 67 Pennsylvania counties from making voting easier and safer during a pandemic. The aim of the lawsuit is clearly to suppress the vote in a state whose twenty Electoral College votes Trump won by less than one percent (0.7%) in 2016. The judge has allowed the case to proceed without evidence of voter fraud being presented by the president’s lawyers (who were ordered to produce evidence by August 14th)

A sitting president and his party’s national committee are using campaign donations to fund an expensive federal lawsuit, forcing the massive expenditure of tax payer funds by a state/defendant trying to make ends meet during a pandemic.

Doesn’t seem quite right, does it?

Here’s the recent NY Times report about how Trump uses campaign funds to finance his many presidential legal battles.

Here’s the skinny on the flood of lawsuits Trump is having paid for by donors.

Incidentally, Trump’s claim in the case — that mail-in voting:

… denies any procedural visibility to candidates, political parties, and the public in general, thereby jeopardizing the free and fair public elections guaranteed by the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions. The most recent election conducted in this Commonwealth and the public reaction to it demonstrate the harm caused by Defendants’ unconstitutional infringements of Plaintiffs’ rights. The continued enforcement of arbitrary and disparate policies and procedures regarding poll watcher access and ballot return and counting poses a severe threat to the credibility and integrity of, and public confidence in, Pennsylvania’s elections.

full amended complaint here

is not only unsupported by evidence (in apparent contempt of a judge’s order) but these claims are identical to Kremlin talking points about the upcoming US election [1]. How a federal lawsuit is allowed to go forward, unsupported by evidence of any kind, in spite of the unambiguous order of the federal judge that Plaintiff’s submit evidence or STATE THAT THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE, is a modern American judicial mystery.  The failure of the news media to report on it is a modern American media mystery.  

Judge to Trump and Putin: put up or shut up!

The judge in the case, J. Nicholas Ranjan, a Trump appointee, ruled almost a month ago that Plaintiffs must submit evidence of the massive fraud they are claiming will take place if Pennsylvania’s voting modifications for the pandemic are allowed to go forward or STATE THAT THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE.  

Judge Ranjan didn’t necessarily want to make this order against his benefactors, Trump and the RNC, he granted defendants’ motions asking for that order. Trump and the RNC plainly didn’t have good enough arguments for the judge to allow him to deny the motion and let them continue the case without a shred of evidence.

A federal lawsuit where the incumbent president and his massively wealthy party are using campaign funds to fuel a suit against a state to prevent the expansion of voting in a presidential election, during a pandemic — based on MASSIVE FRAUD they have produced no evidence of — eh, nothing to see here.

NOTHING TO SEE HERE?

[1]

A bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security alleges that Russian state actors are seeking to “amplify criticisms of vote-by-mail” in the U.S. election, with specific critiques echoing those made by President Trump and his allies.

additionally:

A bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report released in August found “irrefutable evidence of Russian meddling” in the 2016 election, concluding that Russia and China are both working to “disrupt our democracy, exacerbate societal divisions, and sow doubts about the legitimacy and integrity of our institutions, our electoral process and our republic.” National Counterintelligence and Security Center Director William Evanina said in a statement that Russia is actively working to “denigrate” former Vice President Joe Biden and “boost” Trump’s candidacy

source

Hyperbole and the H-word

Over the course of Donald Trump’s increasingly divorced from reality presidency (speaking of Covid-19 in the past tense as US leads the world in infections and deaths, railing against baseless witch hunts against the stable genius, denying Russian meddling in 2020 in spite of several reports, including the bipartisan Republican-led Senate report, and so on) it is tempting, to people like me, to compare the president to current dictators and fascist leaders of the past.

Some regard these comparisons as hyperbole. “Please, Hitler killed MILLIONS! Mussolini made his enemies drink oil until they shit themselves! Please! You dilute the monstrousness of world-class, history-shaping fascists by comparing this relatively mild-mannered autocrat to them!”

So while a president who believes his power is virtually absolute, supported by an Attorney General who shares his beliefs in a Unitary Executive whose powers may not be legitimately checked or balanced by judges or Congress, may resemble an authoritarian strongman in various ways, one should be very careful comparing a US president, whatever his flaws of excesses, to, say, Hitler.

All that said, neo-Nazis all love Mr. Trump, a man who speaks their language, backing them on every issue dear to them. Recently German far-right extremists, in Berlin, mounted a pro-Trump rally. I’m not saying these Hitler-revering Germans should have the last word on Mr. Trump’s politics and potential, I’m just sayin’.