Category Archives: Law and Justice

Read the new indictment of our criminal former president

To win a legal argument a lawyer must wield a blunt instrument, the law, with precision. A prosecutor must prove every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt or there is no conviction. There are many ways for wealthy, politically connected defendants to game the system and gain long delays in trial, conviction and sentencing. Ultrawealthy scofflaws enjoy tremendous advantages in court, as in life, and it is frustrating as hell to watch these litigious fucks run roughshod over law and decency.

Once in a blue moon we have a moment of seeming legal clarity. It is a beautiful thing to see an indictment lay out a case against one of these fucks that allows for no reasonable doubt. You can read that kind of indictment here, the very readable superseding indictment Jack Smith’s office recently brought against serial offender Donald J. Chrump.

The indictment uses plain language to lay out in clear, crisp detail, every element of each of the four crimes the Orange Polyp has been indicted for. The superseding indictment steers clear of the MAGA Supreme Court’s unconstitutional made-for-Trump July ruling that presidents may legally commit crimes, if they do this in the course of carrying out their core “official duties”. (Thought experiment challenge — imagine a criminal act that would be necessary for a noncriminal president to commit in order to carry out his official duties).

The revamped indictment removes references to losing candidate Trump’s “official acts”, as when he sought to promote an unqualified loyalist, American Eichmann Jefferey Clarke, to Attorney General to give an official stamp to his Stolen Election lie, or when he told officials just to lie and his allies in Congress would do the rest. It is an easy read that leaves the reader in no doubt as to the guilt of the infallible criminal candidate in knowingly spreading a lie about the rigged and stolen 2020 election, using that lie to whip up duped supporters and raise money, arm twist, wheedle and threaten government officials, inviting election officials of a state he lost to the Oval Office to convince them to change the votes in their states, signing on to a fake elector plan, exhorting an angry crowd he’d lied to for over an hour, at a private event, to “fight like hell or you won’t have a country anymore” and taking no action, for hours, outside of stoking the mob’s anger at Mike Pence, as the peaceful mob of reverent tourists he inspired shut down a joint session of Congress.

In Defendant’s defense, during his hour long, lie-studded harangue of the angry mob at the Ellipse, a private event paid for by private funds (as Smith points out), losing candidate Trump used the word “peaceful” several times. So when he told them to go down to the Capitol to fight like hell or you won’t have a country anymore, he meant to fight peacefully, you know, as one does when your country is about to be stolen from you.

The law is a blunt instrument and many serious harms are considered trifles by a system of law, designed for all, that routinely favors the rich and powerful. It is a refreshing thing to see a case laid out as beautifully, as indisputably, as Jack Smith’s office did in the reworked election interference indictment of Trump. We can lament the many delays a spoiled, entitled, unaccountable, law suit wielding, blustering, lying, ultra-wealthy bully like Trump always gets, and that Merrick Garland, a stickler for norms and rules, waited so long to appoint a Special Counsel, but, damn, this indictment is good. Check it out.

Now we just have to make sure very fine American Nazis don’t steal the upcoming election for their criminal figurehead so the trial can go forward, with all deliberate speed, in the several cases of US v. Trump (and his indicted co-conspirators).

Trump v. United States SCOTUS ruling

You won’t read this in the New York Times, necessarily, but this is the essence of what the Supreme Court ruled, 6-3, in regard to former president Donald J. Trump’s case against the United States claiming absolute immunity from prosecution for any criminal act he committed while in office, or afterwards. It is an obscenely anti-democratic ruling by six members of an extremist, doctrinaire judicial fraternity (The Federalist Society) in service to American oligarchs.

The highest court in the land ruled that a president, present or former, may not be prosecuted for crimes he commits in office, if those crimes were done in the course of his official duties. If he was speaking to another government official about committing a crime — official business. All other crimes he commits while in office, not strictly in furtherance of his core official duties (try to picture why any crime would be necessary to carry out any core presidential responsibility — ah, never mind), carry the presumption that he had a good and legally justified reason to commit the crime. This presumption must be rebutted by a prosecutor before charges can be brought.

Just to ensure maximum protection to the man they protected in this one and done, tailor-made for the felon candidate ruling, evidence of any protected criminal act, or conspiracy to commit a newly protected presidential crime, may not be introduced in any other prosecution of a current or former president, in any criminal case where he is not protected by the Supreme Court’s ruling.

Forget logic, the plain text and original meaning of the Constitution Leonard Leo’s appointees pretend great deference toward, common sense, political wisdom, basic fairness, any concern with democracy. This unappealable ruling was made simply to protect the brazen, audacious, ever-cooperative figurehead presidential candidate whose electoral victory is their constituency’s only current chance for holding on to power. The 6-3 Federalist Society supermajority did what loyal, lifelong partisans always do — gave their teammate a uniquely tailored, unappealable assist.

The even more poisonous part of this demented ruling (demented from the point of view of democracy) is the holding that corrupt presidential pardons, even ones he openly sells to felons, his criminal co-conspirators, serial killers with billionaire sponsors, pardons given as the quo of quid pro quo favors done for him or his business, MAY NOT BE CHALLENGED IN A COURT OF LAW. This means a president may hire a hit man to murder a political opponent, or Rosie O’Donnell, and then pardon that hit man as soon as the murder is done — or by preemptive pardon, if needed to seal the deal. As was the clear original intent of the Framers of our experiment in democracy.

MAGA, the rebranded Republican party, the truckling followers of reality-definer Trump (in service to reactionary billionaire polluters and blasphemously false Christian leaders) strenuously opposes an enforceable ethics code for the Supreme Court, the one branch of government they are majority stakeholders in. These über-entitled motherfuckers always get what they pay for. NO ETHICS FOR OUR PARTISAN IDEOLOGUES! So ordered.

If you want to call these swine Nazis, you are currently within your rights as an American citizen to do so. At least until use of the term “Nazi” is recognized, when applied to those who behave like actual, historical Nazis, as verboten, strictly forbidden, illegal and grounds for immediate imprisonment, reeducation and worse, at the sole discretion of the infallible Führer.

Free speech for fucking bullies

Anyone who has ever been bullied either comes to hate and oppose bullies or becomes a bully himself. The first reaction takes a certain amount of integrity and a sense of self-worth, the second, only a reflex to appear tough and hurt others before they can hurt you.

Free speech protected in the United States includes verbal bullying, lying, divulging private details about others on-line, making many kinds of threats, claiming imaginary outrages are real (Biden is a pedophile who drinks the blood of his victims, etc.) and all sorts of disgusting speech. The truth does not always prevail over such speech. Here’s today’s bit from Trump v. United States and Common Decency, part 7,582.

This is 42 year-old Huyen “Steven” Cheung, MAGA loyalist and current Trump spokesman. Here are two quotes to give you the context of his general credibility, from his Wikipedia page:

Cheung was named the spokesman of the Trump 2024 presidential campaign. After Trump was criticized in October 2023 for his statement that undocumented immigrants were “poisoning the blood of our country,” echoing language of white supremacists and Adolf Hitler, Cheung responded:

That’s a normal phrase that is used in everyday life – in books, television, movies, and in news articles. For anyone to think that is racist or xenophobic is living in an alternate reality consumed with non-sensical outrage.[40]

After Trump was criticized in November 2023 for using language of fascist dictators by referring to his political opponents as “vermin”, Cheung said:

Those who try to make that ridiculous assertion are clearly snowflakes grasping for anything because they are suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome and their sad, miserable existence will be crushed when President Trump returns to the White House.[41]

Mr. Cheung was right that the phrase “poisoning the blood” is common in books, movies, television shows and news articles … about Adolf Hitler. Fuck that fucking puto.

Here’s Heather Cox Richardson, reporting on the recent stink Trump, Cheung and others made at a recent transgressive campaign photo op at Arlington National Cemetery that involved at least one member of Trump’s entourage shoving a female employee of Arlington National Cemetery who politely tried to prevent the forbidden campaign photo op. An Army spokesperson defended the professionalism of the employee, who although abruptly pushed aside avoided further disruption.

Spoiler, Trump spokesman Huyen Cheung graciously claimed that the Arlington National Cemetery employee shoved aside “was clearly suffering from a mental health episode”.

Heather:

A statement from the Arlington National Cemetery reiterated: “Federal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities within Army National Military Cemeteries, to include photographers, content creators or any other persons attending for purposes, or in direct support of a partisan political candidate’s campaign. Arlington National Cemetery reinforced and widely shared this law and its prohibitions with all participants. We can confirm there was an incident, and a report was filed.”

Republican vice presidential candidate Senator J.D. Vance of Ohio first said there was a “little disagreement” at the cemetery, but in Erie, Pennsylvania, today he tried to turn the incident into an attack on Harris. “She wants to yell at Donald Trump because he showed up?” Vance said. “She can go to hell.” Harris has not, in fact, commented on the controversy. 

VoteVets, a progressive organization that works to elect veterans to office, called the Arlington episode “sickening.”

In an interview with television personality Dr. Phil that aired last night, Trump suggested that Democrats in California each got seven ballots and that he would win in the state if Jesus Christ counted the votes. As Philip Bump of the Washington Post pointed out today, Trump has always said he could not lose elections unless there was fraud; last night he suggested repeatedly that God wants him to win the 2024 election.  

source

Heather, in a follow-up posted early this morning:

And now the U.S. Army has weighed in on the scandal surrounding Trump’s visit to Arlington National Cemetery for a campaign photo op, after which his team shared a campaign video it had filmed. The Army said that the cemetery hosts almost 3,000 public wreath-laying ceremonies a year without incident and that Trump and his staff “were made aware of federal laws, Army regulations and [Department of Defense] policies, which clearly prohibit political activities on cemetery grounds.” 

It went on to say that a cemetery employee “who attempted to ensure adherence to these rules was abruptly pushed aside…. This incident was unfortunate, and it is also unfortunate that the… employee and her professionalism has been unfairly attacked. [Arlington National Cemetery] is a national shrine to the honored dead of the Armed Forces, and its dedicated staff will continue to ensure public ceremonies are conducted with the dignity and respect the nation’s fallen deserve.” 

“I don’t think I can adequately explain what a massive deal it is for the Army to make a statement like this,” political writer and veteran Allison Gill of Mueller, She Wrote, noted. “The Pentagon avoids statements like this at all costs. But a draft dodging traitor decided to lie about our armed forces staff, so they went to paper.”

source

American hero, to millions…

From the great Heather Cox Richardson

And then, this evening, Quil Lawrence and Tom Bowman of NPR explained the story behind the surprising photos of Trump on Monday giving a thumbs-up over a grave in Arlington National Cemetery. The reporters wrote that “[t]wo members of Donald Trump’s campaign staff had a verbal and physical altercation Monday with an official” at the cemetery, where “[f]ederal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities.” When a cemetery official tried to prevent Trump campaign staff from entering the section where the grave was located, “campaign staff verbally abused and pushed the official aside.” A Trump campaign spokesperson said the official who tried to prevent the staff from holding a political event in the cemetery was “clearly suffering from a mental health episode.” 

The elephant in the room these days is that most Republicans, along with many pundits, are pretending that Trump is a normal presidential candidate. They are ignoring his mental lapses, calls for authoritarianism, grifting, lack of grasp on any sort of policy, and criminality, even as he has hollowed out the once grand Republican Party and threatens American democracy itself.

It’s hard to look away from the reality that the Republican senators could have stopped this catastrophe at many points in Trump’s term, at the very least by voting to convict Trump at his first impeachment trial. At the time, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) said, “Out of one hundred senators, you have zero who believe you that there was no quid pro quo. None. There’s not a single one.” Republican senators nonetheless stood behind Trump. “This is not about this president. It’s not about anything he’s been accused of doing,” then–majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told his colleagues. “It has always been about November 3, 2020. It’s about flipping the Senate.”

When the Framers wrote the Constitution, they did not foresee senators abandoning the principles of the country in order to support a president they thought would enhance their own careers. Assuming that lawmakers would jealously guard their own power, the Framers gave to the members of the House of Representatives the power to impeach a president. To the members of the Senate they gave the sole power to try impeachments. They assumed that lawmakers, who had just fought a war to break free of a monarch, would understand that their own interests would always require stopping the rise of an authoritarian leader. 

But the Framers did not foresee the rise of political partisanship. 

In the modern era, extreme partisanship has led to voter suppression to keep Republicans in power, the weaponization of the filibuster to stop Democratic legislation, and gerrymandering to enable Republicans to take far more legislative seats than they have earned. The demands of this extreme partisanship also mean that members of one of the nation’s major political parties have lined up behind a man whom, were he running this sort of a campaign even ten years ago, they would have dismissed with derision. 

Finally, devastatingly, the partisanship that made senators keep Trump in office enabled him to name to the Supreme Court three justices. Those three justices were key to making up the majority that overturned the nation’s fundamental principle that all people must be equal before the law. In July 2024 they ruled that unlike anyone else, a president is above it.  

In May 2016, South Carolina Republican senator Lindsey Graham famously observed: “If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed…….and we will deserve it.”

source

Free Speech, Nazi style

Free speech is crucial to informed debate in a democracy. Without the right to freely exchange ideas, to speak and write freely without government prosecution, we’re pretty much done as a democracy.

Totally free speech is a double edged sword, of course, since Nazis and Klansmen are as free as anyone else to speak publicly as they see fit. Our First Amendment prevents the government from making any law infringing our right to say or write pretty much anything we want (unless we are actively causing violence). It reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

They do this in a manner that is much clearer and more unmistakable than, say, in the Second Amendment which reads:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Aside from the use of the passive voice, and the context of a well regulated militia (conveniently omitted by most gun lovers), the gun amendment is much more squishy and subject to interpretation as to regulation than the freedom of religion, speech, the press and our right to peacefully assemble amendment.

Tech giant Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who famously told his executives that “you go to the mat” if the government tries to regulate Facebook in any way, spoke out recently (in a letter to pugnacious dickhead Jim Jordan, no less) against pressure he claims to have received from the Biden administration to monitor and flag pernicious lies that spread virally on Facebook.  Zuckerberg’s position is the same as virtually any working billionaire’s — you do whatever is necessary to prevent any government action that can lessen your profits, even by a penny.

Note the elegance of that Fox headline: Zuckerberg “admits” Biden is persecuting him and trying to force him to censor Americans.

Biden responded that he was asking all social media giants to behave as responsible citizens by flagging harmful lies that kill people. Facebook was among tech giants that allowed, among other things, countless viral videos touting the alleged harmfulness of the Covid vaccine that Trump fast-tracked with Operation Warp Speed. Biden pointed out that the deadly Covid pandemic is now only killing the unvaccinated. How much money would it cost Zuckerberg to post warnings on deadly lies embraced by millions because they show up over and over in a social media feed?

Who gives a fuck?

Free speech isn’t free, of course. It has to be fought for, against a formidable enemy — the brutal, incendiary, viral lie — as powerful as free speech itself.

When the government attempts to curb lies, powerful liars are outraged. They cite their right to say whatever they please, as guaranteed by the First Amendment. Unfettered free speech, particularly when it goes viral, is supremely useful for climbing to power. Once in power, Nazi free speech is famously whatever the fucking Fuhrer, and his handlers, say it is.

In late April [2022], the Department of Homeland Security announced the creation of the Disinformation Governance Board, whose mission would be recommending best practices to counter disinformation related to homeland security. The head of this board, Nina Jankowicz [1], was cyberbullied until she resigned. Operations of the board were promptly “suspended”. As far as I’m aware, the cyberbullies prevailed.

Biden subsequently opened an office, the White House Task Force to Address Online Harassment and Abuse, to combat the pernicious threat of vicious “social media” and specifically to police cyberbullies who make gender-based attacks. Not much has been reported about the task force since it was launched with some fanfare in June of 2022.

Now Zuckerberg is bitching again about his right to be the number one richest man in history, which, weighed against the health of our Nazi besieged democracy, is the only thing that counts to a billionaire who, by definition, can never have enough.

I’ll leave you with an example of free speech from the New York Times. See if you can spot the difference in these two paragraphs, the lead paragraph in a recent article about “MAGA jurisprudence” (an oxymoron if there ever was one).

As for freedom of the press, so necessary to protect democracy that the founders chose to protect the press in the First Amendment, they have a right to publish any opinion they choose, even in news articles. I’ve tweaked one sentence in this New York Times first paragraph to make it more accurate. See if you can spot the sentence I fixed:

The Supreme Court term that ended this summer delivered a number of big wins for traditional conservative causes. The court made it easier to challenge federal regulations. It made it harder to prosecute former presidents who commit crimes while in office. And it delivered another decision that expanded the rights of gun enthusiasts.

The original:

The Supreme Court term that ended this summer delivered a number of big wins for traditional conservative causes. The court made it easier to challenge federal regulations. It made it harder to prosecute former presidents. And it delivered another decision that expanded the rights of gun enthusiasts. 

Let’s leave aside that the editorial frame of “traditional conservative causes” is a poor description of these truly radical, reactionary decisions.

“It made it harder to prosecute former presidents” is a true statement, as far as it goes. A more accurate statement, one that better informs and underscores the revolutionary nature of the Supreme Court’s radical rightwing decision in Trump v. United States is: “It made it harder to prosecute former presidents who commit crimes in office.”

Freedom of fucking speech, sisters and brothers, mind that shit carefully.

[1] She gives examples of free speech she was treated to while heading the Disinformation Governing Board:

And then beyond that, there were calls to create deepfake pornography of me and then the violent threats, which were numerous. And I was reporting at least one a day to the department for the three weeks that this campaign was going on before I resigned – things like, go hang yourself, you leftist, C-word. You’re the new Goebbels; will you meet the same end? Of course, Goebbels killed himself. One person said, this is a hill to die on; get ready – we will not tolerate this. And this, to me, seems to have come directly from a tweet that Representative Lauren Boebert sent out saying that this was Stalinist or Mao level, and this was a hill to die on, so directly echoing her language and the threat. People saying, you will regret this. Kill yourself, you subhuman sack of S-word. You and your F-ing family should be sent to Russia to be killed. Hey – I don’t know how to describe this word, a pejorative for a woman – quit And then beyond that, there were calls to create deepfake pornography of me and then the violent threats, which were numerous. And I was reporting at least one a day to the department for the three weeks that this campaign was going on before I resigned – things like, go hang yourself, you leftist, C-word. You’re the new Goebbels; will you meet the same end? Of course, Goebbels killed himself. One person said, this is a hill to die on; get ready – we will not tolerate this. And this, to me, seems to have come directly from a tweet that Representative Lauren Boebert sent out saying that this was Stalinist or Mao level, and this was a hill to die on, so directly echoing her language and the threat. People saying, you will regret this. Kill yourself, you subhuman sack of S-word. You and your F-ing family should be sent to Russia to be killed. Hey – I don’t know how to describe this word, a pejorative for a woman – quit your job before we destroy your life. Everything you’ve ever cared about will be taken from you. And you’re nothing but a freaking liar. And you’re going to pay for it with a heavy price, you stupid B-word, before we destroy your life. Everything you’ve ever cared about will be taken from you. And you’re nothing but a freaking liar. And you’re going to pay for it with a heavy price, you stupid B-word. That’s just a few of them. (source)

Project 2025 = Gleichschaltung

Wikipedia:

The Nazi term Gleichschaltung (German pronunciation: [ˈɡlaɪçʃaltʊŋ] ⓘ) or “coordination” was the process of Nazification by which Adolf Hitler — leader of the Nazi Party in Germany — successively established a system of totalitarian control and coordination over all aspects of German society “from the economy and trade associations to the media, culture and education”.[1] 

Although the Weimar Constitution remained nominally in effect until Germany’s surrender following World War II, near total Nazification had been secured by the 1935 resolutions approved during the Nuremberg Rally, when the symbols of the Nazi Party and the state were fused (see Flag of Nazi Germany) and German Jews were deprived of their citizenship (see Nuremberg Laws). The tenets of Gleichschaltung also applied to territories occupied by the Nazis. . .

. . .  Another measure of Nazi Gleichschaltung was the enactment of the “Law for the Restoration of a Professional Civil Service” (7 April 1933), which mandated the “co-ordination” of the civil service – which in Germany included not only bureaucrats, but also schoolteachers and professors, judges, prosecutors, and other professionals – at the federal, state and municipal level, and authorized the removal of Jews and Communists from these positions, with limited exceptions for those who had fought in the First World War or had lost a father or son in combat.[19] . . .

. . . With Reich President von Hindenburg fatally ill, the Reich government enacted the “Law Concerning the Head of State of the German Reich” (1 August 1934). This law was signed by the entire Reich cabinet. It combined the office of Reich President with that of Reich Chancellor under the title of “Führer and Reich Chancellor,” and was drawn up to become effective on the death of the Reich President, which occurred the next day. Again, this flagrantly violated Article 2 of the Enabling Act, which forbade any actions interfering with the office of the Reich President. With this law, Hitler became not only Germany’s head of state, but also the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.[32] 

It also removed the last remedy by which Hitler could be legally removed from office, and with it all checks on his power.

source

And of course:

One of the most critical steps towards Gleichschaltung of German society was the introduction of the “Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda” under Joseph Goebbels in March 1933 and the subsequent steps taken by the Propaganda Ministry to assume complete control of the press and all means of social communication. This included oversight of newspapers, magazines, films, books, public meetings and ceremonies, foreign press relations, theater, art and music, radio, and television.[37] To this end, Goebbels said:

[T]he secret of propaganda [is to] permeate the person it aims to grasp, without his even noticing that he is being permeated. Of course propaganda has a purpose, but the purpose must be concealed with such cleverness and virtuosity that the person on whom this purpose is to be carried out doesn’t notice it at all.[38]

This was also the purpose of “co-ordination”: to ensure that every aspect of the lives of German citizens was permeated with the ideas and prejudices of the Nazis. From March to July 1933 and continuing afterward, the Nazi Party systematically eliminated or co-opted non-Nazi organizations that could potentially influence people. Those critical of Hitler and the Nazis were suppressed, intimidated, or murdered.[10]

Every national voluntary association, and every local club, was brought under Nazi control, from industrial and agricultural pressure groups to sports associations, football clubs, male voice choirs, women’s organizations—in short, the whole fabric of associational life was Nazified. Rival, politically oriented clubs or societies were merged into a single Nazi body. Existing leaders of voluntary associations were either unceremoniously ousted, or knuckled under of their own accord. Many organizations expelled leftish or liberal members and declared their allegiance to the new state and its institutions. The whole process … went on all over Germany. … By the end, virtually the only non-Nazi associations left were the army and the Churches with their lay organizations.[39]

same source

The difference between Hitler’s 37% and Donald’s

Nazis will be Nazis, tireless, fanatical, unafraid to look stupid or desperate, hellbent on avenging humiliation and dominating/humiliating/destroying all enemies. I think of them the same way I think of corporations, which, in their single-minded lust for profit above all else, are the implacable, eternal, legally-created embodiment of the narcissistic personality.

Driven by conformity to a black and white worldview that tells them who is to blame for their troubles, and proposes subjugation and destruction of these hateful enemies as the only cure for those troubles, they are not folks you can have a meaningful discussion with. They are closed minded. Our present American Nazis are the same as all Nazis anywhere, unalterably convinced of their righteousness as they support an angry maniac who calls for immediately rounding up millions and putting them into concentration camps.

The present MAGA threat (rebranded from the Tea Party, rebranded from the John Birch Society — with all of the same longtime players) must be taken seriously, particularly when so many of our 1,000 American billionaires [1] are, by inclination and self-interest, supportive of an American Hitler they can work with. They have been giving mountains of dark money to bring about a glorious white American version of the Thousand Year Reich to permanently solve, among other ills, the extreme and unfair anti-billionaire bias of commies, socialists, trade unionists, integrationists, humanists, intellectuals, fascists and other cannibalistic pedophile cucks.

I’ve been thinking about Hitler’s high water mark of support in the 1932 election, the margin that brought him to power, 37% of German voters. I always shudder to think of that same margin of angry citizens here, Trump’s diehard base. I did five minutes of painstaking internet research today that I share with you now.

In the German parliamentary system in 1932 it took 305 votes to gain a majority. At the peak of the fascist party’s electoral power, in 1932, the Nazis got 37% of the vote and captured 230 seats. I keep thinking of this Nazi 37% which has got to be pretty close to Donald’s diehard support. I don’t believe that 37% of this country is in the Klan or supports American Nazism, necessarily, and though I’d be horrified to learn that such a large number of Americans hold these views, I can’t rule it out either.

The difference between Hitler’s 37% and Trumpie’s is that Hitler’s support was surging in 1932 when he got that 37%. Hitler doubled his numbers from the previous election, in percentage and number of seats in the Reichstag. Donald’s 37% is a stagnant number, he’s not gaining any new voters and he’s not doing anything to create a wave of popular support he can surf into a second term on. Check out these factors (and think of their present-day analogues here in the USA):

Nazi membership rose from 293,000 in September 1930, to almost 1.5 million by the end of 1932. The amount of papers controlled by the party rose from 49 in 1930, to 127 by 1932. Völkischer Beobachter‘s circulation rose from 26,000 in 1929, to over 100,000 in 1931.[5]

Joseph Goebbels was placed in charge of the Nazi’s propaganda and campaign in 1930.[6] Goebbels’ staff was expanded and his role formalized by the Reich Propaganda Directorate (RPL) in 1931.[5] In prior elections the Nazis relied on membership dues, but started receiving financial support from businesses in 1932.[7] The ban on the Sturmabteilung and Schutzstaffel was lifted by Papen, against the pleas of state governments, in exchange for Nazi tolerance of his cabinet.[8]

source

Consolidation of mass media and the market share controlled by right-wing and right-wing friendly corporate forces in the US. — check. An organized propaganda campaign, based on outrageous and infuriating lies that have been disproven many times over — check. The vigorous, secretive support by “businessmen” who in many cases inherited vast fortunes — check.

The one thing they don’t have at the moment is a rising tide of voter support. Which is worrisome in another way — it increases the likelihood of organized chicanery, with proven MAGA extremist fucking Mike Johnson in position to help his master if the MAGA state legislatures who have changed the rules and closed ranks behind MAGA can’t swing the Electoral College their way in the handful of states that decide presidential elections. The fucking Electoral College, a wonderful vestige of the Founding Fathers’ deal with pious Christian enslavers…

[1] I exaggerate, there are just over 800 of these insatiable parasites:

Much of the gains [on the billionaire wealth list] come from the top 20, who added a combined $700 billion in wealth since 2023, and from the U.S., which now boasts a record 813 billionaires worth a combined $5.7 trillion.

source

[2] A few of MAGA Mike’s greatest hits:

The legal brief that Johnson submitted along with 125 of his fellow House Republicans, claimed that “unconstitutional irregularities involved in the 2020 presidential election cast doubt upon its outcome and the integrity of the American system of elections.”

Hours after the January 6, 2021, insurrection was quelled, when Republicans objected to the Democratic electors from Arizona and Pennsylvania, Johnson voted for the objection, which would’ve deprived Biden of 36 electoral votes that he legitimately won.

On the House floor – the scene of an armed standoff, mere hours earlier, between police officers and the pro-Trump mob – Johnson inaccurately claimed there had been  a “usurpation” of authority by judges who changed voting rules in 2020. (In truth, as the Supreme Court later affirmed, judges have the power to review state election laws.)

The longshot bid to nullify the results from Arizona and Pennsylvania, which would’ve disenfranchised 10.3 million voters, was defeated by a bipartisan majority of lawmakers.

source

Loyalty and malignant normality

Robert J. Lifton, ninety-eight year-old psychiatrist and author of “The Nazi Doctors,” among other works, coined the phrase malignant normality to describe the normalizing of otherwise intolerable behavior.

It became a requirement for believers in Nazi “ideology” to accept that certain populations needed to be exterminated. Any Nazi voicing an objection to this new “normal” would be expelled from the party (and probably much worse). If it is what society normally does, like ripping infants from the hands of desperate parents and sending them a thousand miles away with no hope of a future reunion, then it is, by definition, normal. Normality may also be, as Lifton observed, malignant.

Gabor Mate elaborates on this observation at length in The Myth of Normal. He notes how easily we mistake “normal” for natural, healthy or desirable. If our society is ruled by the destructive myths of powerful psychopaths, there is nothing natural, healthy or desirable about the normality they impose.

The pathology that drives a Hitler, a Donald “Not A Loser!” Trump, a Sloppy Steve Bannon, is well known and easy to see. They cannot trust another human and therefore require unchecked power and loyalty oaths they make others swear to on pain of death. Treason and betrayal must always be punished by painful public execution or others will feel licensed to defy orders and, ultimately, uncover the infallible dictator’s murder-inducing terror of humiliation.

The powerful psychopath’s need for absolute power, their claimed right to define “normality” for everybody else, and a reflex to loyalty on the part of millions of admiring enablers, is the single biggest reason why human history is written in the blood of the meek. Any dissenting voice is the enemy of a maniac who cannot tolerate being questioned, criticized, made to feel vulnerable in any way. Loyalty or the sword, plunged slowly and deliberately through each hand, foot, arm, leg, etc., until you are begging for death. Which will it be, bitch?

Postal Inspector General’s report

Why would Louis DeJoy refuse to postmark ballots on the day they are received?

I attended the supremely unenlightening August 8th quarterly meeting of the postal board of governors. You can read my summary of that opaque corporate charade here.

More than one governor referred listeners to the Postal Inspector General’s recent report on postal operations. They gave no details, except to tout the report. They gave no link to the report, but a quick search showed a July 30, 2024 report entitled Election Mail Readiness for 2024. From the postal IG:

In addition, we identified processes and policies that could pose a risk of delays in the processing and delivery of Election and Political Mail. Further, we identified issues related to some Delivering for America operational changes that pose a risk of individual ballots not being counted. [1]

The governors acted with unanimity at the meeting, most avoiding any mention of poor, and declining, on-time delivery rates. They focused on cost savings and increased revenue, almost exclusively. They referred to the IG’s report without providing any context or detail at all. The IG, in the report relating to the upcoming election, notes that DeJoy refused to comply with two of their ten recommendations for improvements to secure the integrity of the mail-in ballot portion of our upcoming election. What is DeJoy refusing to do?

The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) considers management’s comments responsive to recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and corrective actions should resolve the issues in the report. We view management’s disagreement with recommendations 5 and 6 as unresolved and will work with management through the formal audit resolution process.

Recommendation 5: Develop and implement a process for delivery units to segregate Election Mail identified as Postal Automated Redirection System Mail prior to sending it back to a mail processing facility.

Recommendation 6: Update the postmarking policy so that all operations can postmark mail-in ballots.

We are deep in the corporate weeds here, but DeJoy is refusing to have a process for segregating election mail and for updating the policy so that all ballots can be promptly postmarked. Why would that be?

Could it have anything to do with the $2,500,000 DeJoy donated to Donald and the RNC in 2016? Could it have anything to do with every associate of Donald Trump being corrupt, criminal, spineless, cringing, or all of the above? Is there any reason to trust any associate of the transactional malignant narcissist to do the honest thing?

I feel like recently disgraced Cucker Tarlson, only asking questions, but are these not reasonable questions to ask on the eve of an election that Harris/Walz can win by 20,000,000 votes and not get elected because Donald got 10,000 more surgically placed votes in the Electoral College?

[1] What We Found

The Postal Service developed an Election Mail and Political Mail Guidebook that provides employees with many of the key resources that explain the longstanding, special-handling procedures required to facilitate the timely processing and delivery of Election Mail and Political Mail. For the period from December 1, 2023, to April 30, 2024, the Postal Service processed Political and Election Mail with on time processing scores ranging from 97.01 to 98.17 percent. However, as a result of our observations and inquiries, we found that Postal Service personnel did not always comply with policy and procedures regarding all clear certifications, Election and Political Mail logs, and audit checklists. In addition, we identified processes and policies that could pose a risk of delays in the processing and delivery of Election and Political Mail. Further, we identified issues related to some Delivering for America operational changes that pose a risk of individual ballots not being counted.

Recommendations and Management’s Comments

We made ten recommendations to address the issues identified in the report. Postal Service management agreed with eight recommendations and disagreed with two. Postal Service management’s comments and our evaluation are at the end of each finding and recommendation. The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) considers management’s comments responsive to recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and corrective actions should resolve the issues in the report. We view management’s disagreement with recommendations 5 and 6 as unresolved and will work with management through the formal audit resolution process.

Corporate media loves a strong man with a good story

Forget that psychologically those who pose as strong men are always the weakest of men. As far as a compelling story for the public to click on, as pure drama, the persecuted underdog who prevails and becomes leader of the Free world is a good story.

Sidebar, and not unrelated. Years ago, during the worst stress of my horrifying years working in the courts, I felt my aggravation rising one night and was afraid I was having a heart attack. I walked 3/4 of a mile to the closest emergency room, which should probably have told me all I needed to know about whether I was having a heart attack or not.

After a long wait they checked me in, I was feeling much better by then, and I heard the doctor tell his colleague that I was a good story. I thought this was good news and when the doctor returned I told her I was going home.

She cautioned me against it, advised an overnight in the hospital and said that if I wanted to leave I had to sign a document saying I was leaving the hospital against medical advice. I said  “you just said I was a good story.”  She explained that when ER docs are talking about a suspected heart attack, a good story is a man your age, your basic shape, and exhibiting the agitated aggravation that you have been exhibiting since you came in. “It makes you a good story to have a heart attack, in other words.“

Fuck me blind, I thought, as I signed myself out against medical advice and later came back to check in. It left me pondering the flexibility of the phrase “a good story.” Horrifying, sickening stories are also good stories, to fans of those genres.

This entire piece by Lawrence O’Donnell is excellent, contrasting corporate media’s lap dog acquiescence to (and normalizing of) Trump’s outrageous incoherence while it snarls contemptuously at Biden’s press secretary in pursuit of a fanciful story that Biden is a senile vegetable with a team of lying neurologists on call.   He notes that the story about the lying neurologist and Biden’s senility were never reported on because it turns out there was absolutely no story there.  But the press snarled and yelled over each other as the press secretary patiently and truthfully fielded as many of their shouted questions as she could get to.

He points out that mass media is giving Trump the same primadonna treatment it gave him in 2016.  Airing a rambling, lie-filled “press conference” live from Mara-Lago where he answered not a single question, and was asked no follow-up to anything. O’Donnell  compared this fawning coverage to the complete news blackout on Kamala Harris, at the same moment addressing the UAW live, and in between he showed the press repeatedly challenging Biden, who answered each question, and screaming at Biden’s press secretary about unfounded allegations of the cover up of his unfounded  neurological decline. 

The din in the White House press room and the aggressiveness of the screamed out challenges in stark contrast to the glazed silence that meets everything that pours out of corporate meal ticket Donald Trump’s mouth.

O’Donnell, in spite of his brilliance, doesn’t seem to realize who he works for, I guess, but his point is very important and the clip well worth your time.