The Glue Trap of The Daily Horror

“Power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic.   Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love.”

                                                             ― Martin Luther King Jr. [1]

 

A friend told me the other day that he’d had a realistic anxiety dream that woke him in horror after a few hours of sleep.   A true nightmare that left him sitting bolt upright, breathing hard.  I empathized.  Shit, even in sleep, when you’re supposed to be relaxed, getting rest from all this, letting your body regenerate itself and regathering your strength, the daily horror all around us intrudes to rob you of that needed relief.  We talked about the dream for a moment then I expressed thankfulness that I rarely have such dreams (inviting Murphy, of course, to invoke his law).

Naturally, this morning, after maybe four hours of sleep, I woke up from a disturbing dream, not a nightmare, exactly, but disturbing enough to keep me from falling back asleep.   In the dream I’d been urged by an old friend to stop being such a hermit, to become friends with neighbors, people he’d met, who he touted as very nice people.   

These neighbors seemed friendly enough, until they began expressing their great admiration for Mr. Hitler, which was active and ongoing.   They considered Mr. Hitler a genius philosopher and benefactor of mankind and enthusiastically believed in the ideals of Nazism.   We eventually got into a violent confrontation over Mr. Hitler’s arguably one-sided view of human history.   It was several of them against me, and the facts we were disputing made no difference at all.

“Motherfuckers,” I thought as I sat up and realized that was going to be the end of my night’s sleep, “they got me too.”   

I checked my phone.   Herman Cain, wealthy black Trump supporter and former contestant for the Republican presidential nomination, had died of covid-19, contracted a month ago at Trump’s mask-free Tulsa rally.   

Louie Gohmert, vocal Representative from Texas, who proposed recently in Congress that the “Democrat” party be banned from the House of Representatives because they are the party of the KKK, a fiercely defiant “anti-Masker,” tested positive for covid-19 yesterday.   Gohmert does not allow his staff to work from home, social distance or wear masks in the office.  They were not wearing masks when he addressed them all personally in his office today, not wearing a mask himself (why would he?) to tell them he had covid-19.   They already knew, from this article on Politico.com.

Louie Gohmert said today that he probably got the disease from his mask, which he wears Texas-style, off his face around his neck, as he did at the recent Bill Barr hearing.  Some virus must have gotten on the mask, he said, and he must have breathed it in.   See, masks can kill you!  He said he’s taking the hydroxy now, like Mr. Trump claimed he was, like the dictatorial former military junta member leading Brazil to disaster, and the world’s second highest covid-19 infection and death rates, claimed he was when he became infected.

It’s a death cult, this science-denying, reasonable precaution-defying, mouth-breathing pandemic spreaders.   SO?  They love freedom and hate tyranny!   You got a fucking problem with that, puny earthling?

I’ve been trying to reassure worried friends that this idiotic death cult will not sweep all the same heedless criminals back into office in 2020.   I tell them that, after being pushed to accept increasingly unacceptable government by force, we have actually reached a national moment of conscience, a moral tipping point, that the margin of victory by the forces of ordinary human decency will be too big to rig.   

I point out that the military has not gone along with the would-be authoritarian’s command to forcefully clamp down on peaceful protesters.  Defense department leaders have distanced themselves from their Commander-in-Chief on this issue.   The courts still regularly uphold the laws that the president and his loyalists routinely violate.  They violate these laws still, true, (think of countless little Hispanic kids still in cages) and every norm of democracy, and the courts are now stacked with ideological rightwing zealots chosen for their loyalty, but still — we are a nation of laws. 

I emphasize to them that this is not a replay of 2016.  I point out that Biden, doddering, shit, sell-out, compromise candidate that he is, is not nearly as hated, or as awkward a politician, as Hillary “Benghazi” Clinton was — there won’t be the same reluctance by tens of millions to vote for him (as there was among millions who could not bring themselves to vote for Ms. Clinton) if it means getting rid of Mr. Trump, who has now proven what he is capable of, over and over.  And over.  And then doubled down on his bad bets, his cruel, divisive strategies. 

Then, in my dream, I find myself fighting with friendly Nazis who insist they would be my friends, if only I’d accept Mr. Hitler’s worldview.   I am suddenly stuck to the glue trap that is this present, perilous moment of human history.   With no clear way to band together in realtime with the millions of my countrymen and countrywomen who feel exactly as I do, I sit sweatily in front of a fan blowing hot air on me, fearing the worst again as the corporate Democrats continue to run the show, as they always do in the land where money talks and power walks. 

I think of the power of the irrational in human affairs, how every atrocity in history was committed by mobs whose blood was violently stirred by their masters.  I start recalling past Democratic presidential campaigns, particularly ones running weak, compromise candidates, where huge projected leads were squandered, and I begin to shudder too.  The fear in our United States of Fear is palpable and pervasive.

I found myself thinking about epigenetics again, the messages of despair deep in my DNA, or at least on approximately the same genetic level as my DNA.  After all, when my mother was a fifteen year-old girl, any of her twelve aunts and uncles who were sill alive, along with their families, and any of my mother’s surviving grandparents (and several were alive and corresponding with my young mother, until the letters stopped one day) were marched to a ravine on the northwestern edge of their Ukrainian town, shot and buried in layers in the soft dirt.   Shoot, that August, 1943 massacre was only of a few thousand souls, it’s not even recorded anywhere in the books, there were so many similar slaughters in those dark days of 1943.

My grandmother, by then an American citizen twenty years in the Bronx, was the only survivor from her large family.  My grandfather was the only survivor from his large family.   My mother was an only child.   When she was fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, was a word mentioned about all of these murdered relatives who suddenly stopped writing back to her?   I don’t know, but I’d wager not.   I myself rarely heard so much as a mention of any of them, even when I was old enough to start asking about them.

My grandmother drank more and more vodka as the years went by.   She was generally cheerful when she’d had enough vodka, with only flashes of weepiness and other wild emotions.  I never knew my grandfather drank vodka, but I once saw him down a good quantity like he was drinking cold water on a hot day.  It seems likely he did it more than that one time.   They were both silent about their painful losses, except for the fear they conveyed to me about the world.   Their fear was not passed on in any conscious way, but it wound up in how my genes allow me to organize myself to fight.

I assemble as many facts as I can.   I approach a position I find hateful and oppose it with arguments based on all the facts I can use.  I organize my thoughts, try to comb out excess emotion and express my ideas as clearly as possible.  I have achieved a reasonable degree of clarity in my writing.

I do this in a world that has no use for this kind of argument, this kind of unpaid, involuntary writing.  Sure, everybody I respect pretty much operates somewhat this way, you know, show me convincing evidence that I’m wrong, I’ll change my behavior.  The fear creeps in looking around at the world beyond my close circle, a world not ruled this way.  A world where irrationality is King.  

The graph of coronavirus infection is shaped like a pyramid in most countries.   Infections spread, authorities started to act, figured out what worked and what didn’t, as rates continued to climb, at the peak the “curve” was eventually flattened and began to decline.   The US graph, like Brazil’s, like Russia’s, is shaped like a ski jump.   It goes up, levels off, goes up again and continues to climb.   It is the highest ski jump in the world right now, like jumping off the edge of the Grand Canyon into the end of the natural world.

Sure, the president is a very nasty man, his few remaining loyal henchmen/sycophants are likeminded, unprincipled men on a mission.   Their mission is power and domination, on behalf of a tiny percentage of citizens, our few greatest citizens, people who increasingly enjoy most of the country’s vast wealth and a more merciful system of justice and health care than the rest of us.  Their mission is aided on the ground by millions of angry white men with grievances and guns, men willing to believe anything but what is actually coughed into their faces.   

The president and his very fine people care as much about these common, angry, fearful men as the wealthy Planters of the antebellum south who formed the Confederacy cared about the so-called White Trash they sent to fight their own country in a bloody war to preserve their privileged way of life. 

A way of life, based on proud, open and often grotesque inequality they call “liberty,” a thing worth dying for, the thing that most of the very wealthiest among us are still fighting like the Devil to preserve.

 

 

 

[1]  this was quoted by a commenter on this beautiful video of Bill Frisell’s  recent performance of a great Burt Bacharach tune.  Heck, this one:

Top Law Enforcement Officer in US Testifies Under Oath About Why the President’s Enemies Have No Rights A White Christian Man is Bound to Respect

I know that many people hate the combative, lawyerly, always smugly confident partisan Attorney General.   I know that I hate this brazen master of double talk who justifies every abuse of power that seems to favor his side in the “Culture War.”  Barr is a pugnacious zealot who seemingly has always welcomed a brawl.   Like his boss, whose favor he courted while auditioning for the job, Barr will always insist he is right, no matter what the facts might have to say about his side of the argument.  I watched about half of his performance in front of the House Judiciary Committee yesterday.   I have to say, it made me hate him no less.

A note about the unartfully produced 6:38 video montage of the violent, lawless, dangerously insane rioters that was shown as part of Representative Jim Jordan’s (R- Ohio) opening statement.   The portrait of terrifying American carnage featured a collage of lying liberal talking heads calling the protests peaceful (as rioters screamed, looted and set things on fire in the background).  A long memorial statement by a tearful police widow served as the narration for scenes of looting, disrespect for police, fires, gleeful anger, destruction of property and flag burning (they were miniature flags, but still!).   The video was designed to frame Trump and Barr as saviors of a nation threatened by masses of indigenous terrorists, a situation justifying a violent clampdown on all disloyal, lawless cities by federal anti-riot forces.  All necessary to preserve American freedom, by the only ones who can protect us from the mayhem of those who hate our freedom.

The emotional video contained at least one clip that was repeated at least twice.   A large black looter, with a scary looking head rag, pushing a cart through a vandalized Target. 

Screen Shot 2020-07-29 at 3.53.40 PM

The repetition of this same clip (less than a minute later) reminded me of Rumsfeld’s claim that there was no widespread looting of Iraqi antiquities after the US imposed chaos on Iraq in “Operation Shock and Awe.”  

“They keep showing that one guy carrying out the same vase, over and over, it’s kind of funny…” Rumsfeld chuckled, in more innocent times…

Back to Mr. Barr, who, among other things, after initial misgivings, is now leading the latest attack (in the Supreme Court) on The Affordable Care Act, attacking one of the American laws he is sworn to uphold.    He had the DOJ submit an argument on the unconstitutionality of the law that protects health care for millions of otherwise uninsured Americans during a pandemic.  Fair is fair.  Law is law.

Representative Eric Swalwell, (D- California) cited Barr’s response in his 2019 confirmation hearing that a presidential pardon for someone who was convicted of lying to protect the president would be a crime.   Barr confirmed that he said that.   Swalwell then turned to the facts of Trump’s commutation of Roger Stone’s sentence, swapping Stone’s promise of silence about the president’s likely perjury for a pardon (Stone communicated to Trump that he didn’t want a pardon, and that he’d dummied up real good for Trump, in spite of great pressure to talk, and now wanted his prison sentence commuted).   Swalwell then asked Barr if he was investigating the president. 

Barr said “Why should I?” a more succinct and mature way of answering “I know you are, but what am I?  You stupid idiot!”

A more universal and democracy-threatening example of Mr. Barr’s unethical behavior involves the upcoming election.  Voter fraud, for example, is a myth used by those who want to stay in power by disenfranchising as many of their political opponents as possible.   Every study, even the tireless work of Trump’s own election fraud committee (headed by Trump diehards Mike Pence and Chris Koback), finds that such fraud is extremely rare and statistically insignificant.  The kind of voter fraud Trump complains of has certainly never been a factor in any modern American election (unlike, say, sweeping and systematic efforts by Russia to influence a US presidential election).   

Yet Barr repeatedly insists, as he did yesterday after taking an oath to be truthful before the House Judiciary Committee, that it’s simply common sense that millions of fraudulent mail-in votes will be cast in 2020.   Asked to give evidence for the unfounded assertion, also repeatedly made by Trump, Barr again shook his head at the stupidity of the request and gave a variation on what he dismissively told a CBS reporter in a televised interview a few weeks ago “it’s obvious…”   

The results of an MIT study were introduced to refute this plain lie — incidents of fraud  in votes by mail were .0006 percent.   6/10,000ths of a percent.   

“Says the Chinese Communist Party…” Barr might have muttered, by way of conclusive refutation, if he’d been given a chance to respond.

Screen Shot 2020-07-29 at 1.36.27 PM.png

When confronted with his “get it done!” order to violently clear Lafayette Square of peaceful protesters on June 1, less than an hour before the president’s photo op with the borrowed Bible, Barr snarled that tear gas had never been used.  Huh?   He then proceeded to argue that pepper spray and pepper balls, that admittedly were used by the heavily armed riot squads to clear the square, are not “chemical irritants.”  Leaving aside that at least one empty tear gas canister was photographed at the scene on the day in question,  Barr then tried to start an argument that his distinguishing between weaponized chemical irritants was not “semantics”.

As for the documented peacefulness of the protest in front of the White House that he ordered dispersed by force in June, Barr insisted there were rioters threatening the massed riot control forces Barr had assembled to “dominate the streets” after Trump “activated” him.   “They started it!!” is a common trope among users of violence.   Barr’s claim of threatening violence from the crowd that justified his use of force against peaceful protesters that day has been widely disproved.

When Representative Primila Jayapal (D-Washington) raised Monday’s testimony by National Guard Major Adam DeMarco that the violently dispersed protest had been peaceful, Barr shot back that DeMarco was not “involved in any of the decision making.”  Huh?   

I was a little dismayed that her follow up was not “Irrelevant response.  To be clear, are you claiming that Major DeMarco was not present to witness the events he testified to?”   On the other hand, and to her great credit, Representative Jayapal did not allow herself to be distracted for a second by Barr’s feint. 

With someone who constantly bobs, weaves, reframes, selectively answers, distorts, misleads, misstates, claims to have no knowledge of things it is highly unlikely he didn’t know about, who snarls and dismissively imposes his will by bullying, punctuating his performance with bursts of sardonic laughter, it is hard not to get distracted while trying to get a straight answer.  He is a very muscular and agile Giant Squid, Mr. Barr, not particularly graceful, perhaps, but someone with his power doesn’t need to be.

To save you having to wade through much of yesterday’s disgusting show, I offer this one exchange, with Washington’s Primila Jayapal, to stand in for the rest.  I salute Ms. Jayapal for her excellent use of her five minutes.

 

The discrepancy in Barr’s reactions that Jayapal highlighted was his armed response to the June 1 peaceful protest in D.C. (the photo op fifty minutes later, Mr. Barr ridiculously claimed, was a “coincidence”) and lack of any response to (or even statement about) the protest of armed Trump supporters in Michigan who, two hours after the president’s tweet to “Liberate Michigan” stormed the state capitol guns in hand to demand freedom from the tyranny of quarantine.

The Attorney General claimed to have no knowledge of the violent threats made against the Michigan governor, by an armed and angry group of right-wing, Trump-inspired protesters (complete with Confederate flags and swastikas) demanding freedom from tyranny, the right to do whatever they want during a pandemic.   

Sound about right, Bill?

“Yeah, but only the one in DC was federal, you arrogant, smart-ass, culture warrior bitch,” insisted Barr in a quote I just made up, based on his body language, facial expression and dismissive tone in selectively answering Ms. Jayapal’s questions. 

It’s not like anyone can reasonably accuse the totally independent Barr of doing everything Mr. Trump wants in every situation.  COINCIDENCE.   Great minds think alike, prove otherwise, Social Justice Warrior CUCKS.

 

Here we go… Federal Authority for secret federal riot police goon squads! SUCK IT, CUCKS!

Executive Order on Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence

 Issued on: 

 

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1.  Purpose.  The first duty of government is to ensure domestic tranquility and defend the life, property, and rights of its citizens.  Over the last 5 weeks, there has been a sustained assault on the life and property of civilians, law enforcement officers, government property, and revered American monuments such as the Lincoln Memorial.  Many of the rioters, arsonists, and left-wing extremists who have carried out and supported these acts have explicitly identified themselves with ideologies — such as Marxism — that call for the destruction of the United States system of government.

Anarchists and left-wing extremists have sought to advance a fringe ideology that paints the United States of America as fundamentally unjust and have sought to impose that ideology on Americans through violence and mob intimidation.  They have led riots in the streets, burned police vehicles, killed and assaulted government officers as well as business owners defending their property, and even seized an area within one city where law and order gave way to anarchy.  During the unrest, innocent citizens also have been harmed and killed.

These criminal acts are frequently planned and supported by agitators who have traveled across State lines to promote their own violent agenda.  These radicals shamelessly attack the legitimacy of our institutions and the very rule of law itself.

Key targets in the violent extremists’ campaign against our country are public monuments, memorials, and statues.  Their selection of targets reveals a deep ignorance of our history, and is indicative of a desire to indiscriminately destroy anything that honors our past and to erase from the public mind any suggestion that our past may be worth honoring, cherishing, remembering, or understanding…

full rant (with the force of federal law) HERE  

Berlin, 1933 anyone?

A year ago Saturday our president asked the Ukrainian president for a simple favor, though. Barr loudly calls “bullshit!”

William Barr, a professional who confidently misleads, will be testifying tomorrow in Congress.  I was thinking about this diehard monarchist the other day, and read up a bit on his criminal investigation into the origins of the Mueller Investigation and Obama’s illegal “spying” on the Trump campaign.  The “oringes” as our president said.  Very suspicious oringes, by a man who was not even constitutionally eligible to be president!

Heather Cox Richardson sent a great Letter to Americans last night, reminding everyone that she wrote her first nightly letter following the story of the July 25, 2019 call between Trump and Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky when Trump asked for a favor in return for already approved US military aid to Ukraine.  The famous “perfect call,” the complete non-quid pro quo the Democrats tried to impeach the president over in the first public federal trial in US history without witnesses or evidence presented [1].   

The timeline the historian provides, with Barr urging the acting Director of National Security to disregard the law by covering up the “credible”, “urgent” whistleblower complaint about the call, reminded me of another heavy criminal count against Bill Barr that should be part of his impeachment.

Barr, who auditioned for Trump by writing an unsolicited memo explaining how he’d do much better than Jeff “Recuse me,” Sessions in protecting the president, how he’d make the Mueller Report go away, no matter how damaging the findings might be.  He was then as good as his word.  Only Barr’s smooth, brazen lying account of the findings of the investigation kept a lid on the damning report (Mueller showed sweeping and systematic Russian interference in the 2016 election on behalf of Trump, with many contacts with the Trump campaign, and led to successful prosecutions of Trump operatives who lied to the FBI, Mueller and Congress about them, and established a triable case that Trump was guilty of a long pattern of criminal obstruction of justice, something he and Barr continue to practice every day).   

A little less than a year ago, when the new acting Director of National Intelligence got the report on Trump’s phone shakedown of Zelensky, a complaint determined to be “credible” and “urgent,” instead of forwarding it to Congress, as required by law, he ran it by Trump’s new Attorney General Bill Barr.   Under the law, the DNI had to forward a credible, urgent whistleblower complaint to Congress within a certain short time frame.  Barr told him to forget about it.  The complaint that led to Trump’s impeachment only came out because the Inspector General (Michael Atkinson, recently fired by Trump) informed Schiff and other, eh… “sick, dangerous traitors” of the whistleblower’s complaint that was being illegally withheld from Congress at Barr’s advice to keep the complaint to himself, no need to send it to Congress.  

Recently Barr lied about ordering unmarked federal troops (from the Bureau of Prisons, Border Control, Homeland Security etc.) to unlawfully clear Lafayette Park for Trump’s bible photo op— there’s video of him talking to the commanders right before the violent assault on peaceful protesters.  Barr stated recently that Roger Stone had been “righteously” prosecuted and convicted of those seven felony counts and that the DOJ was never influenced by political considerations of any kind (even though Barr, seemingly in response to Trump tweets, infamously reduced the sentencing recommendations right before Stone was sentenced).  A day or two after making his comments about the “righteous prosecution” of self-proclaimed dirty trickster Roger Stone, when Trump commuted Stone’s sentence, Barr acknowledged that Stone was perhaps a victim of an illegally started partisan scheme to topple the president.   

Same deal with General Michael Flynn — in spite of his two guilty pleas, Barr decided that the man was an innocent victim of Trump’s enemies — someone who fell into a treacherous “perjury trap” set by vicious Deep State haters of America!  He twisted the meaning of “material” to mean that the lies Flynn had admitted to telling were, essentially  harmless white lies he’d been tricked into telling, certainly not a criminal matter.  The real criminals, according to Trump and Barr — many of whom are now under a searching criminal investigation by Barr’s most zealous prosecutor, are unAmerican traitors like Robert Mueller III, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Stzrok, Lisa Page, John Brennan, James Clapper etc.   

One of Barr’s first appointments after taking office as Attorney General was a federal prosecutor to investigate the “oringes” of the politically motivated witch hunt investigations into candidate Trump and his connections to Vladimir Putin.  Barr assigned longtime federal prosecutor John Durham, an aggressive criminal investigator, with full subpoena powers, to come up with evidence to support criminal charges for those sick, dangerous bastards and their ilk who had illegally spied on Trump’s campaign.  Some criminal indictments would be a delicious October Surprise.  Durham and Barr have been working on this criminal investigation, internationally, for almost a year and a half [2].

Last winter Inspector General Michael Horowitz, who investigated the same thing, released a report of his office’s investigation into the legal predicates for an investigation into the Trump campaign’s now known to be extensive ties to the Russian efforts to get Trump elected.   His report concluded that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was adequately authorized and predicated under existing Justice Department and FBI policy.  Not without its problems, and partly due to problems with those policies, but adequately predicated in reasonable suspicions of wrongdoing.

Barr and Durham immediately, publicly, shot back:

Barr: “The Inspector General’s report now makes clear that the FBI launched an intrusive investigation of a U.S. presidential campaign on the thinnest of suspicions that, in my view, were insufficient to justify the steps taken.” About thirty minutes later, Durham offered his own statement that “[l]ast month, we advised the inspector general that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.” Durham added that, unlike the inspector general, his team had access to “developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.”

In April 2020 Barr spoke with FOX opinion host Laura Ingraham and said:

My own view is that the evidence [gathered by Durham] shows that we’re not dealing with just mistakes or sloppiness. There is something far more troubling here, and we’re going to get to the bottom of it. And if people broke the law, and we can establish that with the evidence, they will be prosecuted.”

and

I think what happened to [Trump] was one of the greatest travesties in American history. Without any basis they started this investigation of his campaign, and even more concerning, actually is what happened after the campaign, a whole pattern of events while he was president. So I—to sabotage the presidency, and I think that— or at least have the effect of sabotaging the presidency.

OK, you will say (if only to shut me up), Barr’s a fat, ruthless, unprincipled Nazi fuck — but he is also, literally, an authoritarian enabler and the biggest reason Trump is still in office.   He has spent his life fighting a culture war, to the death, to destroy once and for all those who do not hate Communists as much as all Americans should hate those godless bastards.   He believes Christ tells him what to do, like Torquemada did as the head of the Spanish Inquisition when they interrogated non-believers by tying them to a stake and setting them on fire. 

“My lawyers, the Jesuits, Protectors of the Faith, say the auto de fe is exactly what Jesus most dearly loves, the screaming of heretics dying in agony purifies us all in our devotion to the Prince of Peace and his vision of God’s infinite mercy…”   

Barr, by the way, like Scalia and Kavanaugh, is in the intellectual line of those defenders of the faith, the Jesuits, geniuses at using their interpretation of God’s law (and man’s) to fully justify the worst things imaginable as Christ’s will.  

Without Barr, Trump’s new Roy Cohn, Trump would already be gone.   Barr has been a criminal AG, as corrupt an AG as Trump is a corrupt president.   Speaker Pelosi, who squashed a Criminal Obstruction of Judgment count (well-supported by Mueller’s findings and in evidence continually since Mueller’s report came out) in Trump’s impeachment, won’t let talk of Barr’s impeachment be a distraction to Biden being elected, to maintaining the current power structure of the Democratic Party, whatever the unwashed protesting masses may think about it. 

Maybe all the polls are right this time and Biden will win.  We have to hope he does, if Barr doesn’t pull out all the federal stops to block voting in major cities, round up “agitators”, bring in violent riot squads, mobilize ICE and the US Marshals and goons from the Bureau of Prisons to close voting sites.   These same squads of unmarked riot police will defend Trump in his White House bunker (POTUS’ll only be inspecting it– not hiding in it!) in the event Trump loses the rigged election, the election Barr and Trump both insist will be stolen by millions of fake mail-in ballots. 

In the event the election goes against Mr. Trump, Barr will be there next to him in the bunker, barking orders until the last protester is safely out of commission or in a privatized detention/death camp — or until POTUS puts a gun in his mouth.  Bet your last Confederate dollar on it, boys and girls.

 

[1]  Historian Heather Cox Richardson:

 

A year ago today, Trump had a phone call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky and promised to deliver the money Congress had appropriated for Ukraine’s protection against Russian military incursions. Then he added: “I would like you to do us a favor, though….”

While Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, who was on the call, told his superiors what he had heard, someone else filed a whistleblower complaint. That complaint went to Trump’s own appointee at the Intelligence Community’s Inspector General’s office, Michael Atkinson. Atkinson agreed that the matter was both “credible” and “urgent” and that House and Senate Intelligence Committees must be informed, as required by law.

Atkinson followed the law, passing the information to the acting Director of National Intelligence, Joseph Maguire, on August 26. Maguire had only taken office ten days before, on August 16, after Trump’s first DNI, Dan Coats, and Coates’s second-in-command, Sue Gordon, both resigned. As an acting director, rather than a Senate-confirmed leader, Maguire served at the pleasure of the president.

Maguire was supposed to scour the whistleblower complaint of all classified information before forwarding to Congress by September 2, as the law required. But, instead, Maguire took the complaint to the Department of Justice, headed by Trump loyalist Attorney General William Barr. On his advice, Maguire decided not to turn over the information to Congress.

When that happened, Atkinson told the relevant congresspeople that the DNI was illegally withholding the complaint. On September 10, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff (D-CA) demanded that acting DNI Maguire produce it. Maguire refused, saying that the complaint was about someone not in the Intelligence Community, and therefore not covered by the whistleblower law. (The law does not give him the authority to refuse to deliver a complaint his IG considers credible and urgent. It says he MUST deliver it.)

On Friday, September 13, Schiff wrote a scathing letter to Maguire that brought this whole issue to public attention, noting that it sure seemed like Maguire might be protecting the president, and demanding Maguire follow the law and hand over the whistleblower complaint.

I happened to be scrolling through Twitter when Schiff’s letter dropped, and I recognized it for what it was: a powerful member of Congress accusing a specific member of the Executive Branch of breaking a specific law… the sort of moment on which American history turns.

And that, my friends, is how these Letters began.

Since then, the House impeached Trump but the Senate exonerated him; Vindman is gone; Atkinson is gone; Maguire is gone. But as Trump has increasingly consolidated his power, Americans have woken up and taken to heart that democracy is not a spectator sport.

It has been a year by the calendar, but an eternity in the history of this nation.

Still, for all that I yearn for a time when we can go for days without worrying about what’s going on in the White House, I am profoundly grateful to have discovered so many other people who care as deeply as I do about this country.

There is plenty of news today, but none of it breaking, so I am going to let it go for a night.

See you all tomorrow.

 

[2] From Lawfare (at the link above and HERE)

The fruits of the Durham investigation will reportedly be disclosed later this summer, or in the fall. This post does a deep dive into what has been publicly reported about the Durham investigation, and then offers analysis. We include Barr’s commentary on the investigation, but not the president’s. The bottom line is that (1) the probe as it developed is not one that should have been conducted by a federal prosecutor conducting a criminal investigation, and (2) Barr’s tendentious running commentary on the investigation violates Justice Department rules, politicized the investigation and damaged the credibility of whatever Durham uncovers. (The post is long. If you want to skip the lengthy factual recitation and jump to the analysis, click here.)

from that analysis section:

No contemporary attorney general has, like Barr in the Durham investigation, offered such extended, opinionated, factually unsupported and damning public commentary, naming names and drawing conclusions, about an ongoing investigation that is at least in part a criminal investigation.

Human Pigs at the Trough, fattening themselves on Pandemic Profits, in the dark

Our president, the son of a corrupt sociopath, is a corrupt sociopath. I say that in a nonjudgmental way, based solely on his compulsive lying, uncontrollable bragging, greed, constant anger, vengefulness and absolute lack of empathy.

Congress passed a more than two trillion dollar ($2,400,000,000,000.00) “stimulus” bill in late March, providing $1,200 for every American householder with an income of less than $75,000, expanded unemployment benefits for the more than 20,000,000 Americans who lost their jobs during the pandemic and many, many hundreds of billions for businesses and industries hurt by the coronavirus.

Oversight and transparency were going to be big problems in an administration that hates both of those things, with a Senate that rubber stamps whatever the president demands and a president who makes his will known by tweet.

The president, believing himself to be the smartest and most ethical (and unfairly persecuted) man in the world, chafes at the idea of anyone investigating anything to do with him and his cronies. He condemns all such attempts at oversight as illegal, politically motivated witch hunts. His current Attorney General backs him up: the president is being unfairly targeted by unscrupulous enemies, constantly, with unprecedented ferocity, possibly with criminal motives, motives that are currently under DOJ criminal investigation.

On April 1, 2020, Bill Moyers interviewed Neil Barofsky, the special investigator general appointed by George W. Bush in 2008 to track the $750,000,000,000 in TARP bailout money as it was being spent. You will recall that the financial industry, the guys who engineered the massive falsely triple A-rated toxic asset-based fraud that smashed the world economy for a few years, were “made whole” by the bailouts — getting their huge personal bonuses, the industry emerging from the crisis of their making more profitable and more powerful than before. None of that was special inspector general Barofsky’s fault — he fought every corrupt maneuver as it was happening, possibly thwarted a few.

Moyers and Barofsky spoke of the need for strict oversight and complete transparency for distribution of this vast stimulus/bailout package. Much of the oversight, it appeared, was to be done by Trump’s Secretary of the Treasury, Steve Mnuchin. As for transparency, the money was to be distributed by Mnuchin, to those most worthy to get it, with no public accountability as it was handed out. Moyers:

They wanted the Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, to be free to choose who gets the money and who doesn’t. And to keep his choices from the public for six months. McConnell then tried to weaken a strong oversight proposal. Finally, as we saw, both sides compromised, and the bill was passed with, you know, amazing bipartisan support.

Yet, when the president signed the bill last week, the only people he had in the Oval Office with him were Republican members of Congress and the Secretary of the Treasury. Now, what do you take from that? As a moment of bipartisan triumph, the first time in years this happened in Washington, the only people who get invited to celebrate with the president in the Oval Office are Republicans?

The compromise included this provision:

Bill Moyers: I’m sure you noticed that Congress actually borrowed ideas and even language concerning the inspector general’s office from the first bailout bill, to include it in the bailout bill we’re talking about.

The language about the new inspector general is supposed to monitor how the Treasury Department extends loans and loan guarantees to businesses. And the new legislation requires the new inspector general to notify Congress immediately if the White House doesn’t cooperate fully with an audit or investigation.

At one point, Moyers described Mnuchin’s many untruthful responses and non-responses during his Senate confirmation:

But at the same time, Neil, the new law gives the Treasury Department broad discretion over how to disperse these billions upon billions of dollars. And the fellow running Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, has been implicated in so many scandals, I wouldn’t want him in the same room with my kid’s piggy bank.

During his confirmation he failed to disclose to the Senate Finance Committee nearly $100 million in assets. He didn’t tell them about his role as a director of an investment fund in the Cayman Islands, where very rich people send their money to be laundered. He lied to Congress about foreclosure misconduct activity by a bank he managed. He reportedly misled Congress about a deal the Treasury Department struck with a Russian oligarch close to Vladimir Putin.

This is the man President Trump wants to hand out billions of dollars to corporations and to Wall Street, a guy up to his neck in various conflicts of interest, self-dealing, and ethics lapses. All you have to do is read David Dayen’s book Chain of Title— to see how he chronicles the way Mnuchin got fabulously rich while hundreds of thousands lost their homes. What does that do to your optimism about the potential success of this bailout?

And they spoke about the crying need for real, professional, dispassionate, nonpartisan oversight, beyond the president’s promise that he would provide the oversight, make sure everything was done fair and square. What could go wrong with a greedy, corrupt, compulsively lying, secretive, justice obstructing, increasingly desperate, litigious man hiding his own taxes, financial records, school transcripts and everything else being in charge of oversight and transparency?

As Moyers and Barofsky spoke about the need for oversight, and their relief that a special inspector general had been agreed to in a bipartisan compromise, I kept thinking: didn’t Trump fire a bunch of inspectors general? Google was quick with the answer.

Screenshot_20200727-001641_Chrome

During a pandemic, Mr. Trump took the opportunity to rid himself of five pesky, disloyal inspectors general. Inspectors general:

are appointed by the president and are supposed to be confirmed by the Senate, although many current IGs are in an acting capacity and have not been confirmed by the Senate.[13] The president may dismiss an inspector general, but is supposed to give Congress 30 days’ notice and an explanation of the reason for removing them.[14] The 30 days’ notice requirement was added to the 1978 law in 2008; its purpose was to re-emphasize the role of the IG as an independent watchdog and to dissuade presidents from retaliatory firings.[12]

The first to get the ax, on Friday night, April 7, was Michael Atkinson, the Intelligence Community IG, the man who determined the whistleblower complaint about Trump’s perfect July 2019 call to Zelensky, (the famous NOT quid pro quo for which Trump was totally exonerated by McConnell, Lindsey Graham and Alan Dershowitz) was credible and urgent. Atkinson got the Alexander Vindman treatment.

Also fired on Friday, April 7 was Glenn Fine, Defense Department IG, the man selected to head the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC) team of IGs tasked with overseeing the spending of $2.4 trillion in CARE Act funds. His crime, apparently, was being selected head IG for overseeing distribution of the $2.4 trillion covid relief package.

When Trump signed the coronavirus funding bill, he had issued a signing statement challenging the required oversight committee, and said that he personally would take the oversight role and would be in control of what information was sent to Congress about the use of the $2 trillion in relief funds authorized by the bill.

The next three IG firings and demotions followed within a few weeks, while the country struggled to conduct its uncoordinated, failed covid-19 response.

IG of the Transportation Department (run by McConnell’s wife, heir to a Chinese shipping fortune), Mitch Behm, who among other duties (all quotes are from this piece from lying CBS):

is listed as a member of the Pandemic Response Accountability Committee (PRAC), which is tasked with overseeing implementation of the $2.4 trillion coronavirus relief packages passed by Congress in response to the coronavirus pandemic and composed of 20 inspectors general.

Christi Grimm, acting IG of Health and Human Services, was replaced after she:

released a report detailing testing and supply shortages in hospitals responding to the coronavirus pandemic. Grimm found “severe” shortages of testing supplies, “widespread shortages of PPE,” difficulties in maintaining adequate staffing levels and in expanding hospital capacity.

The president called the report “just wrong” in a briefing with reporters and demanded to know when Grimm was appointed to the position. On Twitter, Mr. Trump questioned whether she scrutinized the H1N1 pandemic that occurred during the Obama administration and accused her of falling to speak with top military officials and Vice President Mike Pence about the response to the coronavirus.

Steve Linick, IG of the State Department, who had the temerity (stupidity, really… from a short-term career standpoint) to open a corruption investigation into Trump’s current loyal Secretary of State, pious Christian anti-communist Mike Pompeo. Linick had apparently been begging for it, daring Trump to fire him:

The White House said Trump had dismissed Linick at the request of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Linick had been investigating whether Pompeo had used government employees to run personal errands for him.[7] In a separate, almost completed investigation, Linick was reportedly looking into whether Pompeo had evaded Congressional limitations on arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates by declaring an emergency, even though none existed.[31] A third line of inquiry into Pompeo was his regular hosting of several dozen lavish, taxpayer-funded “Madison Dinners” at the State Department for hundreds of attendees, including many influential business and media figures; there were concerns that Pompeo had been using the dinners to further his own political career (assembling the names and contact information of possible future contributors and fundraisers), rather than for official diplomatic purposes, potentially violating the Hatch Act.[32][33][34]

So disloyal, SAD!

Eliot Engel, a New York congressman who chairs the House Foreign Affairs panel, said in a statement Linick’s office was investigating Pompeo and said his “firing amid such a probe strongly suggests that this is an unlawful act of retaliation.”

Senator Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa who led the call for a more thorough reasoning from Mr. Trump for his removal of Atkinson, again reiterated the president’s responsibility to provide justification to Congress when firing an inspector general.

“A general lack of confidence simply is not sufficient detail to satisfy Congress,” Grassley said Saturday.

“No reason to get excited,” the thief he kindly spoke.

“Nothing to see here, you vicious, dangerous, sick, disloyal pricks,” muttered the innocent president to nobody in particular, as he made preparations to deploy more riot-geared federal goon squads to violently protect anything within ten square blocks of American historical statues in America’s most openly disloyal cities.

A very stable genius, you’d better believe it.

Christ…

Screen Shot 2020-07-26 at 3.47.48 PMScreen Shot 2020-07-26 at 4.39.28 PM.pngScreen Shot 2020-07-24 at 2.55.17 PM.png

What’s America coming to when you can’t even listen to a decent American Congressman argue on youTube that the racist “Democrat” [1]  party should be outlawed in peace these days…?

these ads are out of control… why do we have to get past these when we’re trying to digest a straightforward patriotic expression from a member of Congress!

Mr. Gohmert (R-Texas) introduced a resolution in Congress that would ban the Democratic Party.   Because they are the party of the Ku Klux Klan and slavery, argues Gohmert.  Beyond that:

“Their strategy is if we can keep America in turmoil, the riots, the economic problems that Covid has caused, then it’s better for getting rid of Donald Trump.  And it’s sad, but it appears they don’t care so much about letting America heal because they want the political advantages they think come from seeing America devastated, just so they can get back in power.   That is horrendous, the Republicans have never felt that way and still do not.”

 

 

[1]  Representative Gohmert does slip up and refer to the hated Democrat Party as the Democratic Party a few times.

History is always written in blood

History is always written in the blood of the powerless.  Famously written by the “victors,” it casts the suffering and deaths of those who wound up on the short end of things as somehow necessary, a historical necessity for a greater good.   “You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs,” some winners are prone to saying, by way of expressing minor regret about the inevitable — that some “eggs” had to be “broken” so we could enjoy what we have on the table in front of us now.

We watched the public lynching of an American man recently, under the knee of a cop who kneeled on him for 8 minutes and 46 seconds — the last almost 3:00 of which the dying man was already unconscious.  We know the exact time frame because of an uninterrupted video of the slow-motion murder by suffocation. 

The video, taken by a high school girl who filmed the entire 8:46 without flinching, left no doubt that we were watching a lynching, a brutal murder committed with, at minimum, depraved indifference to human life.   The man who was killed was handcuffed, subdued, lying face down on the ground begging for his life, in the end calling for his mother.   

George Floyd’s public murder woke people up.   With a serial scofflaw as president, condemning those who took to the streets to protest this lynching as “antifa” extremists (being anti-fascist was until recently a mainstream American value), invoking police violence against peaceful protesters as “law and order,” the time was past due for an accounting.    America has never had a reckoning of any kind with our murderous history of enforced inequality at law.   

That’s an uncomfortable thought for the powerful (and even more so for the powerless, I dare say).   You cannot have forgiveness without some kind of process of reconciliation, some remorseful acknowledgement by the perpetrator that it was wrong to — say, tolerate lynching for hundreds of years.     The symbols of American racism are all around us.  The Edmund Pettus Bridge, where the recently departed John Lewis had his head split open by police while peacefully protesting, in fact, kneeling to pray, in 1965, was named for a Confederate officer, US Senator and Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.   Very uncomfortable!!!

Mike Pompeo, to the rescue.  The Koch Brothers’ former personal congressman from Witchita, one of America’s most powerful religious Evangelical Christians, did a little history writing of his own the other day.   With supreme confidence, he made the following remarks at a recent meeting of the Commission on Unalienable Rights.    Note the several sleights of hands Mr. Pompeo employs to make history right.

“These days, even saying that America’s fundamentally good has become controversial… They want you to believe that America’s institutions continue to reflect the country’s acceptance of slavery at our founding.   This is a dark vision of America’s birth.  I reject it.” 

“They want you to believe…”– how ominous!    Pompeo, Trump’s Secretary of State, went on to single out and flay a favorite right-wing whipping girl, the New York Times. 

“The New York Times’s 1619 Project, so named for the year that the first slaves were transported to America, wants you to believe that our country was founded FOR human bondage.   They want you to believe that America’s institutions continue to reflect the country’s acceptance of slavery at our founding.     They want you to believe that Marxist ideology that America is only the oppressors and the oppressed.”

You understand the logic here:  only a Marxist (godless Commie) could see any connection between our centuries of race-based chattel slavery, a bloody Civil War followed by a hundred years of unchecked, violent Ku Klux Klan rule in the former Confederacy, racist laws nationwide well into the twentieth century [1], a punitive criminal justice system singling out people of color for incarceration and destroying countless lives for non-violent “drug crimes”, the murder by police, without legal consequences, of unarmed civilians, mostly people of color.   This is clearly a strictly Communist-only reading of our great history.  Only a godless Marxist could see it in that hateful way, real Americans understand that, says Pompeo.  

“The Chinese Communist Party must be gleeful when they see the NYT spout this ideology.   Some people have taken these false doctrines to heart.  The rioters pulling down statues thus see nothing wrong with desecrating monuments to those who fought for our unalienable rights, from  our founding to the present day.  This is a dark vision of America’s birth.  I reject it.”

Reject away, sir.   Historical facts, documented and recited, equal Communist-approved “ideology,” nicely done legerdemain, Mike.  Great men, including men who took up arms against our nation, heroes like Edmund Pettus and Nathaniel Forrest Bedford, daring Confederate general and founder of the Ku Klux Klan (photo below) must be remembered in monuments to their greatness, whatever lawless, godless, Marxist, America-hating  rioters might feel about it.

nathan-bedford-forrest-gettyimages-515298300.jpg

“It’s a disturbed reading of our history, it is a slander on our great people.  Nothing could be further from the truth of our founding.”

That the first slaves arrived on these shores before the Mayflower brought the families of our founding fathers here, false!   A disturbed reading, a slander.  Nothing could be further from the truth!   

What the hell do you actually mean by these fighting words, Mike?

I’m tempted to simply say “fuck that fucking pig-faced puto,” but that will change no hearts or minds.   Assuming hearts and minds are still involved, once this kind of angry, determined erasure of history is forcefully undertaken by powerful men.

Do you have a duty to forgive someone who has badly hurt you and then tells you to just fucking get over it, asshole?   Kneeling on your neck until you’re dead — your problem, jerkoff, not mine.  Critical “history” — a bunch of deliberate Commie slanders, NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.  Who are you going to believe, the lying New York Times or my unidentified riot-geared federal troopers and their tear gas, truncheons and blanket immunity from prosecution for breaking your head?

Ah, fuck that fucking pig-faced puto.  America is better than his ilk.

 

 

[1]  Bill Moyers: Let me read to you. Here’s a quote from a Maryland statute in 1957 — 1957! — that you include in the book:

All marriages between a white person and a Negro, or between a white person and a person of Negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, or between a white person and a member of the Malay race or between a Negro and a member of the Malay race, or between a person of Negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, and a member of the Malay race, or between a person of Negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, and a member of the Malay race or between a Negro and member of the Malay race, or between a person of Negro descent, to the third generation, inclusive, are forever prohibited and shall be void; and and any person violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of an infamous crime and be punished by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not less than eighteen months or more than 10 years.

That was Maryland law. 

[not ruled unconstitutional until 1967]

and

Moyers:  Bilbo [powerful racist Senator from Mississippi, Theodore Bilbo] said, “One drop of Negro blood placed in the veins of the purest Caucasian destroys the inventive genius of his mind and palsies his creative faculty.” Is it true that the Nazis thought the one-drop rule too extreme?

Whitman: They did indeed. They never proposed anything nearly as extreme as the one-drop rule.

(source– an excellent, if chilling, rundown of some of America’s racist laws and their influence on racial law in the Third Reich)

Of course, as every real American knows, Bill Moyers, long time PBS talk show host (PBS… yo), who, as a young man, worked for and applauded LBJ for his Civil Rights legislation, is a freedom hating old Marxist who spreads slanders against our great, white, Christian nation.

1924 (5)

All this focus on the year 1924, a time when there was still no federal law limiting child labor, before any kind of governmental social safety net existed, when the resurgent Ku Klux Klan was at its all time peak in membership, and organized xenophobia, following a senseless World War, a massive slaughter the exact cause of which nobody has ever rationally explained, was at fever pitch… why?

It was the boiling world my father was born into. Add to it that young Irving was a tiny, impoverished member of those teeming, sweating immigrant masses that so alarmed the descendants of the original Anglo-Saxon Americans. Add to it that fear of drunken foreigners was one of the driving forces of the Temperance movement that led to the ill-fated Eighteenth Amendment, which stated “the manufacture, sale or transporting of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States … for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.” 1924 was year five of the failed fourteen year experiment in banning alcohol.

Eliyahu, my father’s father, a man who never drank alcohol, died young of liver disease. My father was a lifelong “teetotaler,” as he would say from time to time explaining why he almost never lifted an alcoholic beverage to his lips. He’d have a sip of sweet red wine, on ceremonial occasions, but outside of that, I don’t believe he ever drank so much as a beer. He certainly never tasted whisky. By sheer coincidence, Irv died of liver cancer.

My teetotaler father was a lifelong student of history. When I used to have a “current events” assignment in grade school my father stressed the importance of making sure I clipped the date of the article I was reporting on. He instilled this habit in me, the historian’s instinct to place events into a sequence that could be followed later, to note, to the extent possible, cause and effect in historical progressions.

Finally, unable to restrain himself, the skeleton of my father sat up in his grave outside of Peekskill, in Cortlandt, New York. “OK, look, Elie, I know the thought of going through those 1,200 pages of your first draft is exhausting to you– but don’t you think it’s time? Are you seriously trying to write draft two completely from scratch, with this clunky chronological time line? Telling instead of showing, since you know so little about my early life, outside of a few stories from Eli.”

“Well, I do see your point, dad, but I can’t very well skip to the drama of the misshapen blue pants I was so reluctant to wear for the visit to NYU hospital when you were hospitalized with bleeding psoriasis, the round of temper tantrums my refusal to put on those hideous pants caused…”

“Sure, go right there, that’s the way to do it…” the skeleton rotated his head, for effect. “Obviously, I’m in no position to tell you how to write this, or do anything. I’m just saying, it makes a certain amount of sense to review that huge draft you’ve already written and start organizing the best of it into draft two, where you act like you knew what you were doing all along.”

It does make sense, a lot of sense.

For example, I could include something like this (I Just Want You To Be Happy, Nov. 18, 2017):

We were driving north on the Throgs Neck Bridge, my lifelong adversary at the wheel. When my sister and I were little kids, and the family drove back to Queens over the Whitestone Bridge after visits to the U.S. mainland, my father would point to the towers being built in the channel between the East River and the Long Island Sound. “When that bridge is done, we’ll have a much quicker ride home,” he said, or words to that effect. He must have said it several times, because the bridge opened when I was four and a half and I clearly remember him pointing at the bridge being constructed across the Throgs Neck.

We were heading to my apartment on the northern end of Manhattan, I’d had dinner with my parents in Queens, as I did periodically in the years before they moved to Florida. I was close to forty, and had finally gotten rid of my car (impossible to park in my neighborhood). I used to make the drive, around 25 minutes each way, but once I ditched my car it was a ninety minute trip each way by subway and walking. My father was driving me home this particular night. It was a rare stretch of just the two of us being together in a car. On the Throgs Neck Bridge, about five minutes from their house, I asked him, point blank, what it was that he wanted from me.

“You seem eternally unhappy, disappointed, disapproving of my choices in life,” I told him. It must be said, at that point I’d been fired from a series of jobs and most recently blacklisted from teaching in the public schools after a long ordeal by bureaucracy. “What would you like me to do to relieve you of those, no doubt painful, feelings? Is there anything? Would law school do it for you?” I asked. “Would you be happy if I became a lawyer?”

I remember the dark Long Island Sound stretching out to the right of us as we headed toward the Bronx. My father paused. Then he told me that he would feel differently about my life if only I were happy in what I was doing. My happiness, he said, was the most important thing to him. I managed not to say anything snide.

“You know, if you were happy being an artist… you know, I never understood why you don’t try getting a show in a library, or a hospital, or some place like that, just to get some exposure, get a foot in the door. You work in isolation and you… I mean, it just seems like a very unhappy life. I just want you to be happy. If you were happy, I’d be satisfied.”

I explained to him that a show at a library or a nursing home was not a stepping stone toward becoming a professional artist. An artist only makes a living working in advertising, illustration or becoming a darling of wealthy art collectors, curators and influential art critics. None of those options appealed to me, I told him, yet I love to draw and that’s that. I asked him again what it was that I could do that would leave him feeling I was not wasting my life.

“You don’t have to do anything for me,” he said, steering his Cadillac into a lane for the toll booth. “I don’t know where you get the idea that you have to do anything for me. You’ve never sought my advice or input before, I’m a little surprised you’re asking me now.”

I’m asking you now, I told him, weary from decades of senseless war I had little insight into. I’d been an antagonistic newborn, an implacable infant, a relentlessly defiant toddler, an angry, fearful school boy, a rebellious, sharp-tongued, disrespectful teenager. I’ve digested all of these things by now, the first few being patently absurd, the remainder fairly predictable, based on being treated as a challenging little adversary from before my first memory, but at that moment in the car I was seeking a way off of this boundless, senseless battlefield.

“Only if it would make you happy to become a lawyer,” he said. “I mean, obviously, I think you have the mind to be an excellent lawyer.”

And extensive experience with adversarial proceedings, I pointed out. I don’t recall much more about that long ago conversation, except that I took the LSAT review books out of my local library and took a few sample tests. I learned later that many people take courses to prepare them for this highly specialized test, but I had long experience cramming for Regents Exams in high school and had always had a knack for these standardized tests (though I had mediocre scores on my SATs, as I recall, but those were taken at my personal height of not giving a fuck about anything).

I did well enough on my LSATs that, with my college transcripts, I was accepted to all three of the law schools I applied to. I chose one, took out loans (that I am still repaying more than twenty years later) and the rest, as they say is history.

“So you’re saying you went to law school in an attempt to please a father you knew to be impossible to please?” said the skeleton of my father, a much different creature than the man who drove us across the Throgs Neck Bridge that night.

Pretty much. I’ve spent the day today immunosuppressed, working out different ways to play Hoagy Carmichael’s great Lazy River on guitar. What a beautiful, bluesy, ingenious tune. Hoagy graduated law school and passed the bar exam on his first try, just like I did. He was a musical genius and was soon making money as a musician and so never had to experience the grinding that is the fucking law. I, on the other hand, was forced, for more than a decade, to earn my crust of bread by the stinging sweat of my brow, in the manner of Cain, cursed by his maker.

Playing that tune, with an involuntary smile when he pulls out some of those great lines, I can forget all about it, until it’s time to put the guitar down.

“Well, you know Elie, we all have to put the guitar down some time,” said the skeleton with great tenderness.

The federal courts under Trump

I found out recently that 86 year-old national treasure Bill Moyers could finally no longer stand to sit idly by.   A few months ago he started a podcast version of his great long-running PBS interview and reporting show.   In March he spoke with Dahlia Lithwick, award-winning reporter on the Supreme Court.    You can hear the whole interview here (or, if you’re pressed for time,  more quickly read the whole transcript).   

Donald Trump, a man with no particular political ideology, outside of a deep, lifelong commitment to the privileges of the wealthiest, is the perfect tool for his ultra-conservative and fervently Christian backers.   He has no objection to picking judges off a list prepared by an extreme right/religiously conservative organization.   Both of his Supreme Court picks came off the Federalist Society list of committed conservative ideologues.   His lifetime appointments to the federal bench are all chosen for their loyalty to a conservative corporatist, “pro-life” worldview.   Trump himself doesn’t care, he was for abortion rights before he was against them, but his wealthiest and most religious backers certainly care fervently.   When it comes to his donors, Mr. Trump aims to please.

At the end of the discussion between Bill Moyers and Dahlia Lithwitck we hear this:

Bill Moyers: Dahlia, conservatives have long understood that elections every two and four years are as much about the courts as about the legislature and the executive branch. And they’ve made the appointment of judges, well, quite frankly perhaps the chief issue in their campaigns. That’s been a pretty smart strategy, hasn’t it?

Dahlia Lithwick: I’m glad you asked about this, because since the Meese revolution, there has been a concerted effort—

Bill Moyers: Ed Meese was the attorney general, for Ronald Reagan.

Dahlia Lithwick: This is a decades-long, very organized, very focused, very well-funded effort to win the courts and with an understanding that if you control the courts, almost nothing else mattered.

And what we’ve seen, if I can go back to the 2016 election, we went into that election with one vacancy. Antonin Scalia had died the February before the election. Mitch McConnell had held up the Merrick Garland confirmation, and so there was a vacancy on the court.

There was an 83-year-old, an 80-year-old, and a 79-year-old on the court that year. And with no disrespect intended to octogenarians, it might have been a good time for progressives to look at the court and say, “Holy cow. This is the most important issue going into this election.”

Donald Trump campaigned on the fact that he was going to change the court, only appoint people who would overturn Roe. There were people like Ted Cruz and John McCain who went into that election in November of 2016 pledging in their Senate races that if Hillary Clinton won in 2016 they would hold the Scalia seat open for four more years or eight more years. No one was going to be seated on their watch.

And on the other side, we had Democrats running for the Senate who had had a seat stolen under their noses and said nothing in their Senate races. And by a two-to-one margin, voters who prioritized the Supreme Court broke for Donald Trump. So that was entirely — sort of choice that voters made in 2016 that whatever their issues were, the court was not amongst them.

And as a consequence, we saw not just the two Supreme Court seats that Donald Trump has been able to fill with Gorsuch and with Kavanaugh. But we’ve now seen 191 federal judges seated in three years. That outpaces Obama’s record for seating judges in eight years. It is unprecedented for anybody to pack the courts the way Donald Trump has done it. And it is for exactly the reason you started with. It is because, for whatever reason, conservatives laser focus on the courts and progressives rank it number eight, nine, 10, or 11 in their priorities.