Oy, Nancy, Nancy

Defending herself against the charge that she is running out the clock on a House vote on articles of impeachment against a president she claims is currently engaged in criminal activities, as Congress goes on its August break, Speaker Pelosi said:

“We will proceed when we have what we need to proceed, not one day sooner.  And everybody has the liberty and the luxury to espouse their own position and to criticize me for trying to go down the path in the most determined, positive way.

Again, their advocacy for impeachment only gives me leverage, I have no complaint with what they’re doing, but I know ( … Mueller… presi …) what ( …uh, I keep calling him Special Counsel Mueller), Mr. Mueller said the other day CONFIRMED, confirmed in the public mind that the president has obstructed justice.  You know what he said. if he could have exonerated him he would have, but he didn’t. 

But he wasn’t able to investigate the president’s finances, personal business or otherwise,  and that is what we’re doing in the courts.  So I’m willing to take whatever heat there is there to say when we, the decision will be made in a timely fashion, this isn’t endless, and when we have the best, strongest possible case, and that’s not endless either, it may be endless in terms of the violations of the law that the president is engaged in, but that’s what I say to you.”

source

I’ve got only three words for you, Madam Speaker: what the fuck?

A Tricky Story to Tell

“You had only two uncles, me and your father’s brother,” he said.   

“Our father had a brother?” said the niece. 

“Yes, a few years older.   We only met him once, he was kind of estranged from your father and his father.   He was funny, and personable, and seemed like a very nice guy.   He was as big as your father, and had dark hair.   We sat on the back porch playing cards, at your grandparents’ house in Queens.”   

“How come we never heard of him?”   

“You’d have to ask your parents.   I have no idea.   Maybe it was the fact that they were estranged, had virtually no contact once the brothers were adults.   I  don’t know.   Maybe it has to do with his mental illness,” the sole uncle said.   

“Mental illness?” said the nephew.   

“Look, I know virtually nothing about the man, except for a pleasant afternoon we spent with him.   And that he was taking some psycho-pharmaceutical and his psychiatrist apparently had told him to have nothing further to do with the family, that it would only aggravate his condition.   And like I said, we only met him that one time, never heard about him after that.”   

“Whoa, his ‘psychiatrist’?”  said the niece.

“You know, in most families you have your pick of aunts, uncles, cousins.  You will have the ones you feel closest to, a real kinship, and many others will leave you cool, or even cold.  In our family, since the family tree was so ruthlessly pruned back in 1942, you get only one or two uncles — in your case one.   Your other uncle probably died before you were born, another reason you never heard of him, I guess.”   

“How did he die?” said the nephew.   

“That’s just speculation, we really have no idea.  He could still be alive, he’d be in his early seventies now”   

“Jesus,” said the niece, glancing at her phone.

“I can tell you what happened two generations ago, on your mother’s side, when the German army ran across the area we’re from, on their way to invade the heart of the Soviet Union.   Between the winter of 1941 and the winter of 1942 everyone in our family was murdered, except for the handful of people who arrived here between 1904 and 1923.    The areas they came from were, as they say, cleansed of Jews by the SS and willing local anti-Semites.   We know a few of their names, we know what happened to their towns, the muddy little hamlets they came from.   Everyone was executed, end of story.”   

“That would make you a little paranoid, I guess,” said the nephew. 

Claro que si, sobrino,” said the uncle.

“I can only say a little bit more, because to some people, well, this is ticklish to say… some people believe that anything that causes pain or anguish should be avoided.  The passive voice and all that.   You don’t touch a nerve that’s raw.  If it’s bad, or makes you feel bad, especially if it evokes shame or anger, don’t talk about it.  Talking about it is very dangerous,” he turned to his niece.   

“You know, when you were a baby and first learned to sit on the potty to do your business, your mother asked you once why you have no hesitation to sit there and pee but the other thing, the shitting business, you weren’t ready to do that in the potty.   She asked why.  You said, with great seriousness and conviction, and you couldn’t have been more than two:  it’s very dangerous!   

“Ha, I forgot about that,” the niece said.   

“What I hear you saying between the lines, Uncle, is that you are very dangerous,” said the nephew.   

“Yes, nephew, if you believe in making sure every source of shame and anger is completely repressed at all times, someone like me is very dangerous.   I’m as dangerous as pooping in a potty, more dangerous, actually,” said the uncle. 

 “Some people believe it’s better to lie than to expose and talk about regrettable, shameful or terrible things.   We have a president like that.  Never made a mistake, never been wrong, never had any reason to reflect or do anything differently, nothing to apologize about, anything bad that ever happened in his life was somebody else’s fault.   You know, a lot of people live that way.   I try not to judge those motherfuckers, but I can’t live like that.  If I know I hurt you, and I care about you, I’m going to try to make it right, starting with an apology.  Unfortunately, not everybody does that.”   

“This is getting a little awkward,” said the niece. 

“I agree,” said the uncle, “where are we going for lunch?”

Iron-willed Ditz and Birther “Judge”

Nancy Pelosi is Neville Chamberlain, as history will soon show, unfortunately.   An iron-willed version of Chamberlain, no doubt, one who knows how to wield power and get her party in line with whatever she decides.   Her party, according to Madam Speaker, is waiting for something more dramatic, more convincing, more of a total popularly approved slam dunk, than this seamless pattern of a mere ten obstructive acts detailed in the report Mueller handed to presidential bodyguard Bagpiper Bill now four months ago.   Each act was part of a long (and ongoing) pattern of obstruction of justice, each was done to impede or end a lawful investigation, with the intent to impede or end that investigation:  

1  President Trump asked the FBI director to shut down the investigation into National Security Advisor Michael Flynn

2  President Trump said he fired FBI director Comey because of the Russia Investigation

3 President Trump ordered White House counsel Don McGahn to fire Robert Mueller   

4  President Trump attempted to curtail the Special Counsel’s investigation 

5  President Trump prevented the public disclosure of evidence 

6  President Trump wanted Attorney General Sessions to “unrecuse” from the Russia investigation   

7  President Trump directed White House counsel Don McGahn to create false documents that covered up the truth from investigators

8  President Trump tried to discourage Campaign chairman Paul Manafort and National Security Advisor Michael Flynn from cooperating with the Special Counsel’s investigation 

9  President Trump encouraged Michael Cohen to lie about Trump Tower Moscow

10  President Trump tried to get his longtime lawyer Michael Cohen not to cooperate with the investigation.   

But according to Speaker Pelosi, this is not a very dramatic and convincing pattern of corrupt and arguably illegal actions by our in-your-face contemptuous president.   

He’s right, by the way, in this case, to feel contempt for the Democratic party.   I feel it too.   I watched Adam Schiff’s body language as he stood next to the confidently dithering leader of his party, his face said it too.  He was having a hard time keeping a neutral expression on his face, a scowl off of it.    “We are using the courts to try to get a ruling,” Nancy Pelosi explained.  Jerald Nadler added that once the court rules, as it should, that this blanket protective executive privilege, this ridiculously over-broad claim of immunity, is groundless that they’ll be able to subpoena everybody and they’ll have to appear, and produce documents.   He did his best, next to the Speaker, but Nadler didn’t seem particularly convinced either.   They looked like the beaming Pelosi’s dazed captives up there.   Elijah Cummings gave Pelosi some fiery support, speaking with some force and gripping the podium with both hands (since he was no longer holding on to his walker).

The most powerful player in that party right now is an iron-willed ditz with an unshakeable theory — that impeachment that doesn’t result in Trump’s removal from office will strengthen the corrupt, lying strongman president in 2020.   The best thing to do, according to the iron-willed ditz, is wait — until he actually shoots somebody in the face on Fifth Avenue and skull fucks their corpse, on live TV.

You can understand her worry when you see the caliber of the president’s defenders.   They were on powerful display yesterday at the Mueller hearings.   I was lucky enough to catch Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert’s riveting performance.     Gohmert [1] went ballistic, after first holding up a pamphlet he introduced into evidence.   The pamphlet was called Robert Mueller Unmasked.  Gohmert was too modest to mention that he was the author of the 48 page illustrated document proudly displayed on-line at hannity.com.   It makes the case that Mueller is the worst, simply the fucking worst.   It ends:

If you want answers, and you CAN handle the truth, join me in demanding those answers from “Special Counsel” Robert Mueller, along with his resignation. If he were to resign, it could well be the only truly moral, ethical and decent action Mueller has undertaken in this entire investigation.

There’s a ton of great shit in there, and it’s impeccably reasoned and beautifully written, of course, and also illustrated.   I’ll give you just a snapshot, just the opening salvo, since it’s worth scrolling quickly through this well-done strong opinion piece in its entirety (if only to see the several illustrations):

ROBERT MUELLER: UNMASKED

by Congressman Louie Gohmert

Robert Mueller has a long and sordid history of illicitly targeting innocent people that is a stain upon the legacy of American jurisprudence. He lacks the judgment and credibility to lead the prosecution of anyone.

I do not make these statements lightly.

Each time I prepared to question Mueller during Congressional hearings, the more concerned I became about his work ethic. Then as I went back to begin compiling all that information in order to recount personal interactions with Mueller, the more clearly the big picture began to come into focus. At one point I had to make the decision to stop adding to this or it would turn into a far too lengthy project.

My goal was to share some first-hand information as other Republican Members of Congress had requested, adding, “You seem to know so much about him.” This article is prepared from my viewpoint to help better inform the reader about the Special Prosecutor leading the effort to railroad President Donald J. Trump through whatever manufactured charge he can allege. Judging by Mueller’s history, it doesn’t matter who he has to threaten, harass, prosecute or bankrupt to get someone to be willing to allege something—anything—about our current President, it certainly appears Mueller will do what it takes to bring down his target, ethically, or unethically, based on my findings.

 Since we now seem to  be living in the sound byte/twitter-ruled land of the freakish and the home of the braying, let me not assume an American attention span sufficient to read all of the material quoted above.   Here’s the takeaway from a former “judge” [2], Texas’s own Louie Gohmert:

This article is prepared from my viewpoint to help better inform the reader about the Special Prosecutor leading the effort to railroad President Donald J. Trump through whatever manufactured charge he can allege.

Spoken like a true Texas judge, circa 1858.   “We’ll give the filthy, thieving varmint a fair trial and hang him, and let’s make it quick, boys, Ah need lunch, Ah’m starvin’.”

Democrats yesterday tried to get Mueller to say that only the OLC memo prevented him from referring Trump’s obstruction case for prosecution.   Mueller would not go quite that far, though he said that the OLC memo prevented him from making a traditional prosecutorial decision about the sitting president’s actions (as his report said, though Barr claimed in his famously misleading summary, and afterwards, that the OLC memo had nothing to do with anything).   

Mueller confirmed for his Democratic questioners that Trump refused to testify, for about a year, and would have tied up a subpoena in court for a long time, preventing the completion of the investigation into coordinated, wide-spread Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.  Mueller’s task was to publish his findings about Russian interference in the presidential contest, which he documented, characterized as “sweeping and systematic”,  and warned of repeatedly (and which Mitch McConnell refuses to allow the Senate to address in any way — the help was good in 2016, it’ll be great in 2020).  Mueller added that Trump’s inadequate written answers were often contradicted by credible evidence.  Mueller-speak for “Trump was not entirely truthful in his inadequate. arguably evasive, answers”.   (Sworn answers to a federal investigator that are not truthful are… p-p-p-perjury…)

Republicans, in contrast, didn’t care about the old news report that Barr had already disposed of.  They focused on indignantly showing what a pathetic, corrupt dupe of Commies and transsexual Mexican zombie abortionists the “Special Prosecutor” (as Gohmert refers to him in his final challenge on the damning hannity.com pamphlet) is, and how viciously and ineptly the vile partisan Mueller went after a completely innocent man, a man who should never have been investigated in the first place (we’re looking into that!) and was revealed, even by these Trump-hating traitors, to be completely and totally exonerated, exculpated, found not guilty of every and all charges.

We get the government we deserve.  We have earned this shit show, we really have.

What happened to the millions who ran into the streets wearing pussy hats, flocked to airports to immediately protest the Muslim ban, who assembled in a huge throng to support climate science?    Got tired out and shouted down by an innocent mad man and his most ardent supporters (including America’s top law enforcement official) who, believe it, would not hesitate to beat you to death if they thought you posed a real threat to the spotless reputation of the greatest leader this country has ever had. 

Speaker Pelosi urges us all to wait and see.  Maybe the paperless 2020 election won’t be hacked by anyone (although an 11 year-old recently demonstrated how small a challenge it currently is to do so), maybe those 78,000 surgically targeted Electoral College votes won’t appear again, as if by magic, in the proper number in every single district needed to win each state’s electors and amass the Electoral College majority to legally elect this innocent and good man to another four years of glory.

Nancy Pelosi, by refusing to allow an impeachment investigation to go forward, is Neville Chamberlain.   The end of democracy is taking place on her fretful, calculating, vote counting, party disciplined watch.   An iron-willed ditz, confidently wringing her hands with that great smile as the clock runs out on protecting our constitutional system.

 

[1]  Early in Obama’s second term, Gohmert (apparently an ardent Birther) sponsored a bill to make sure we never again have a Kenyan secret-Muslim president.    As Wikipedia reports:

On July 29, 2009, Gohmert signed on as a co-sponsor of the defeated H.R. 1503. This bill would have amended “the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of president to include with the committee’s statement of organization a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the office of president under the Constitution”.[13]

Some of his other well-researched positions:

Gohmert does not believe in manmade climate change, and has asserted that data supporting the theory is fraudulent.[30] He opposes cap-and-trade legislation, such as the one that was passed in the U.S. House when it had a Democratic majority, and supports expanding drilling, and exploration and drilling in Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).[30]

Gohmert is pro-life and opposes abortion. He has stated that he believes that life begins at conception. Gohmert sponsored the Sanctity of Human Life Act. Gohmert voted for the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act, a bill that prohibits the transportation of a minor across state lines for the purposes of an abortion without the consent of the minor’s parents. He has 100% pro-life voting record rating from the National Right to Life Committee(NRLC).[39][40]

In December, 2018, Gohmert made national news headlines as a guest on Fox News. Gohmert digressed from the topic of Google to assert an unrelated and defamatory allegation about Holocaust survivor and philanthropist George Soros. The allegation, which is popular on right wing propaganda websites but has been thoroughly debunked by credible news sources, denigrates Soro’s childhood experiences during the Holocaust. Later, Stuart Varney of Fox News apologized for Gohmert’s “false allegations” against Soros.[74]

 

[2]   Gohmert actually did serve as a Texas judge.  The quotes around “Judge” refer to this:

join me in demanding those answers from “Special Counsel” Robert Mueller, along with his resignation.

HOAX of the lying, conflicted, Comey-loving witch hunter

The Honorable Robert S. Mueller III testified to two congressional committees today under subpoena.   He agreed to be bound by Bagpiper Bill Barr’s recent letter limiting the scope of his testimony.  Bagpiper had a fairly low level assistant write a snitty little legal letter laying out the limitations, asserted under the expansive new protective presidential privilege not to be subjected to anything that could possibly lead to his impeachment. 

Mueller (a former DOJ employee, we note — currently a private citizen) was informed by the DOJ that he may not impugn the president or speculate as to his intent or motives (both of which Barr has spoken extensively and conclusively about in defending his boss.)  The former Special Counsel was warned against directly contradicting any of the false and misleading things that Bagpiper has publicly said and written.  He was instructed not to comment on any member of Individual One’s family, or go into any detail not explicitly included in the report, or step near any redacted material, etc.  Mueller, good Eagle Scout that he is, stated that he’d abide by these restrictions.

If you watched the hearings wearing a MAGA hat, you had to laugh at this regurgitation of old, harmless news that Trump-haters put so much faith in.  The president, who said he wouldn’t be watching the lying, conflicted, Comey-loving, hoax-mongering witch hunter (whose report nonetheless TOTALLY exonerated him) was tweeting about the HOAX during the testimony he claimed not to be watching.   If you support Trump (or even if you despise him) you understand that all Trump has to do is brazen this one out, and he has decades of experience being as brazen as they come.  He has his all-powerful Roy Cohn, finally, an unprincipled, ideologically pure right-wing zealot who has proved his loyalty and his willingness to go beyond principle to defend his Unitary Executive master.

If you believe, as I do, as anyone who has read any portions of Mueller’s report does, that there’s massive evidence of impeachable conduct laid out in the Mueller report, you saw many answers by Mueller that hammered this home.   The president refused, over the course of many months of negotiation, to appear before Mueller and his “perjury trap”.   Mueller explained why he didn’t subpoena Trump (though, per Barr’s recent letter, he wouldn’t answer questions about why Koosay Jr., or smug, silent Jared, for that matter, wasn’t forced to testify).   Mueller said that a subpoena for the president would have been tied up in litigation (by the Roy Cohn-trained obstructor-in-chief) and unnecessarily hold up the crucial investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.   

Mueller elaborated about Trump’s written answers, which not only were “inadequate” but often were contradicted by other evidence.  He would not speculate, or give his opinion of Trump’s credibility, though he did note that he wasn’t satisfied with Trump’s answers, formulations that were inadequate and, as he said, often contradicted by other credible evidence.

Mr. Trump is, I’m trying to find the right New York Times tone to use here, a fucking liar.  He’s known as a compulsive liar, meaning, he seemingly cannot help himself.  He simply says whatever he feels he has to say at any given moment, to get maximum leverage in any given transaction.   What is Mueller’s opinion about Trump’s credibility?   Well, he gave inadequate answers that were often contradicted by other credible evidence.   So what are you saying?  That this known liar was lying in his sworn answers?   

That he stayed out the “perjury trap” of testifying falsely under oath on the strength of his long reputation as a lawyered up, action-taking knave.  He had a team of lawyers craft the answers he falsely claimed to have written himself, answers that stated he didn’t recall, had no specific recollection, was too busy winning to notice the detail asked about, didn’t remember, was coming up blank, really didn’t know because it slipped his mind, if he ever knew about it, which, for the life of him, he couldn’t say for sure if he did or not.   Answers that were often contradicted by credible evidence.  Nuff said?

I didn’t see Mueller’s entire testimony, but I was waiting for somebody to direct Mueller’s attention to his final written question to Trump about obstruction.   It was a long, complex question about the nefarious actions of disgraced former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.  It was Trump’s firing of Comey, because not only did he refuse to declare personal loyalty to Trump but he wouldn’t let the Flynn thing go, that led to the appointment of the Special Counsel.   The multi-part question about Flynn was a particularly important question.   Trump’s answer was, literally, [no answer provided].     

Yo, Democrats, do I have to do all your work for you?   

If the testimony today had been part of an impeachment inquiry it would have meant far more than an exploratory feeler as to the public’s willingness to maybe not hold it against Democrats in 2020 if they upheld their constitutional obligation to investigate the corrupt and illegal acts of a famously corrupt and law-ignoring president, acts set out in great detail in a long, detailed report.   A president who calls false emergencies to thwart the will of Congress, a president who routinely ignores court orders, who calls democratic norms, and credible critiques “bullshit” and who is intent only on “winning”– whether it’s the fight over whether stinking, unsanitary child prisons should be called “concentration camps”, whether calling black athletes “sons of bitches”, black female critics “low IQ”, Mexicans “rapists” makes him divisive, hateful racist, misogynist, xenophobe, whether raking in millions from his various businesses, and giving personal access to preferred paying customers and patron-lobbyists, is a breach of his duty to at least appear non-corrupt.   Not to mention his numerous clock-running court challenges to every legal demand for documents and testimony or the sure to be overturned assertion of a blanket executive privilege against anything that could possibly put this innocent child of God in a less than blessedly Christian light.

If the Democratic House does not start impeachment proceedings, based on political handwringing, Speaker Nancy Pelosi will go down in history as America’s Neville Chamberlain.   I heard a recording of the former British Prime Minister, given after his famous Munich Conference with Herr Hitler.   He stated, in flowing, measured, confident tones, that at the outset he found Hitler to be unreasonable, but as they spoke Herr Hitler had convinced him of the justness of his request, that all he really wanted was for Sudeten Germans to be reunited with their countrymen.    Chamberlain arrived back in London to cheers, he had averted war and preserved “peace in our time” by turning British and French ally Czechoslovakia over to the Nazis.  In hindsight, he came to view it as a political mistake.   He lost his job and is remembered in history as a pathetic “appeaser” of one of history’s greatest tyrants.

Hindsight is 20/20, they say, and giving in to one of the world’s most notorious mass-murdering lying psychopaths looks bad on the old resume.   I’m not comparing Trump to Hitler [1] (all Trump has done, to date, is set up a network of stinking child prisons for little “illegals”, no death camps, NO DEATH CAMPS!) but if everything he’s done in his first two and a half years is left up to an election in 2020 that can be won by another beautifully engineered surgical 78,000 vote electoral college “mandate” (even if he loses the popular vote by 15,000,000 this time, instead of a mere 2,900,000) — we’re done.  America’s long, troubled experiment in democracy is over.   Stick a fork in us.   Get your tattoo and move on to indicated train to the assigned privatized processing center for re-education.

Impeachment is the only constitutional remedy for this kind of openly corrupt public official.    As no less an authority on our democracy than Robert S. Mueller III wrote, in his report:

The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of the office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.

 

 

[1] outside of his personality, his inability not to lie, his disregard for law, his scorn for custom, his autocratic nature, his limited intelligence (which he boasts about as genius), his open hatred of disloyalty, the vitriol he directs towards enemies, his demands for unconditional personal loyalty, a superhuman faith in his own infallibility, his inexperience and temperamental unsuitability for leadership, his violent and overwrought language, his readily combustible temper, his hatred of any opposition, his appeals to the irrational rage of a desperate base, his tendency to pout and throw tantrums, his sadism, his readiness to employ cruelty, his scorn for “democracy”, his demand to be obeyed, he insistence that his word is law, that his ample ass be constantly smooched and several other minor things like that.

Plus, look, to be fair, nobody ever accused Hitler of being corrupt or a money-hungry lover of incomparable luxury.

Warmest Month in Recorded History — ah, who cares?

It’s actually hard to believe how little most Americans seem to care about the rapidly approaching end of a habitable planet.    The scientists keep publishing ever more dire predictions, irreversibly deadly things are happening more quickly than the most alarming reports concluded even a few years ago, we can feel the results in our own skins week after week, but — eh.

The Democratic party decided a month or two ago that it wasn’t necessary to hold a debate on how we’re going to slow climate catastrophe.    The number one issue is not catastrophic climate change, yes, there was another deadly climate event the other day, sure, and we all know it’s getting hotter and hotter,  but voters, polls show, are more concerned with the racist rhetoric of our unhinged attention-craving president.   The leaders of the Democratic party decided, no doubt based on extensive polling, that talking about steps to avert climate disaster is not a winning strategy for 2020.

The month that just passed, June 2019, was the hottest June on record.  This month is on course to become the hottest month ever recorded.   You know, if you live in an air-conditioned home, have good AC in your car, everywhere you go is cooled to a beautiful temperature, all the humidity removed, the hottest month on record is not as big a problem for you as for many millions of old people, tiny children, people with asthma and worse, living in quarters without even fans, or outside.

Global warming, largely the result of the carbon released from the continual burning of millions of tons of fossil fuel, is a big part of the crisis, the thing that’s driving it.  When the planet gets hotter the polar ice melts, sea levels rise, the warmer ocean means more severe, wetter, slow-moving, storms, more flooding.   The increased heat also means drought, wild fire, water shortages.   Coastal homes will be under water soon.  Several island nations in the south Pacific will soon be under the ocean.   Every day more and more species of animals and plants become extinct.   Mother nature is very, very pissed. 

You add up all the reasons to care about the biosphere, there are too many to count. We are part of nature, our hubris aside, we are creatures living in nature.   We are homo sapiens the “wise ape” and some very well-paid geniuses are now figuring out how to “terraform” Mars — you know, some of us will want to survive when this shit-hole earth is completely used  up, everything of value extracted from it, only a toxic hell-hole left.

You tally up the reasons to continue destroying our planet: there’s gold in them thar hills!    

What the fuck?   Is it really as simple as “Manifest Destiny” (we have to kill all the indigenous savages who refuse to get out of the way because God said so)?    Seriously, what the fuck?

As near as I can figure, insanely wealthy old white men (I’m sure there are blacks, Asians and other “others” involved, but not nearly as many as old white psychopath bastards), profiting massively from the destructive fossil fuel industry, have decided that since they’re going to die soon anyway, fuck it, let’s rape the shit out of this place before we go.  Who cares?  We’ll be dead, and all of our efforts will not have been in vain if we can take everybody else with us.  

When these fossilized vampires reckon the price, the deaths of a million, ten million, a billion takers is a small item on the ledger.   Who cares?  What have these parasites ever produced, except for more parasites?   More than this earth can support.   It’s not as though love, care for others, stewardship of our natural world, our grandchildren’s future, is even remotely as compelling as the profit motive.  

It’s profits that make the world go ’round, exploiting the natural world for our advantage is our right as job creators.  How dare the weak, the useless, make any demands on us, try to use “democracy” to coerce us to curtail our liberty for the sake of some imagined future?!    Fuck them and their “future”.   Makers vs. Takers, motherfuckers.   

God bless the child that’s got his own, that’s got his own.

 

 

Tucking Melz in (Two)

An illustration of the inherent feebleness of even a well-reputed memory (such as my own).  

I noticed that yesterday somebody had clicked on an old post called “Tucking Melz In” and I told Sekhnet the story.   Later I read the piece and was amazed to find a significantly different anecdote, bearing little resemblance to what I’d just told Sekhnet, which was, minus the first paragraph (which she already knew) which was:

Five and a half years ago an old friend, Melz, succumbed to a rare and deadly form of soft tissue cancer.   When I say succumbed, I mean he died.   The funeral was conducted by his long-time bosom buddy, trained as a rabbi and with a great talent for humanistic public speaking.   He conducted a beautiful funeral.   It’s hard to say how he held himself together the way he did.

Afterwards, at the golf course-like cemetery (no head stones) as we gave our shovels to others who were taking turns burying Melz, according to our tradition, Alan and his wife Terri came up to me.  Alan said (referring to the wonderful funeral oration we’d just witnessed) “you realize, if we die before Sokoll, we’re fucked.  Who’s going to do our funeral?  Think about it!”

I did.  As I was thinking, Sokoll walked by and we told him our concern.  The good rebbe told us not to worry.  “I’ll bury all of you fuckers,” he said, without breaking stride.   Oddly reassuring words.    

After a moment Terri said “let’s go tuck Melz in,” and we walked over and took over the shoveling for a while.

(compare with the original, written a day or two after the funeral)

 

Other People’s Problems

Truly, and this is a feature of human nature, it seems, if you don’t actually feel the pain or discomfort of somebody else, the best you can do is express abstract, if sincere, sympathy.   If you don’t know what the full extent of the misery really feels like, meaningful empathy is pretty hard to pull off and action to change the painful condition is literally unthinkable.

The real-feel temperature here in New York City at the moment is, let’s see… ah, what am I even whining about?   Only 109.   Actual temperature 97, though it is only 89 in the living room where I was playing the guitar a few minutes ago. 

I whine, but I can easily get relief from this killing heat and humidity.   I can get into a car chilled to 70 degrees, head over to a refrigerated supermarket for some cold drinks (in fact, I think I will, as soon as I’ve finished this little bit here), sit in a frosty cinema being entertained, and cooled, for a few hours.

What if you can’t do any of these things?   Suppose you are too poor to afford a movie or even a cold drink?   If your city or town is merciful they will have cooling centers in public buildings on a day like this.   An air-conditioned room where drenched, stinking poor people can gather to cool off for a while.   It saves a few lives.   In a wealthy country, that’s possible, you can set up cooling centers in public buildings to save a few poor souls from their inescapable anguish.    In poor countries, in towns without mercy, you just have to persevere on a day like this.

Seriously, though, if you have central air-conditioning, or even a room in your home you can cool off, remove the humidity from the air, you can ride out this kind of brutal weather pretty easily.   

On days like this I keep thinking of the billions of poor people all over the globe who have no relief from common torments of this sort, who simply, if the going gets tough enough, die.  I’m thinking of those poor bastards Trump has locked up, the stinking children he doesn’t allow to wash, the ones he has warehoused in cages that he insists are better than the shit-holes they come from.   Other desperate refugees detained on their way, fleeing death in their own countries, looking to America for refuge.   America to the world’s desperate: fuck you, assholes!   Spoken in my voice, through the glorious megaphones of our great, exceptional democracy.

If my brain wasn’t parboiled it would make me want to holler.

I’d better shut down this poor laptop, I could fry an egg on the metal.  Stay cool, everybody.

Bagpiper Bill– INNOVATOR Extraordinaire

Bill Barr has always been an innovator, a legal visionary, skating on new edges of the law to defend his powerful clients when they appear to be on the ropes.    When George H. W. Bush, after losing his reelection bid, was deeply worried about being outed as an Iran-Contra participant in Cap Weinberger’s notes, Barr went to work.   Bush would be out of office when Weinberger’s felony trial began, powerless to prevent the detailed meeting notes Weinberger kept from coming into evidence.   Bush’s legacy would be tarnished (or worse), since he’d been insisting for years he knew nothing about the ongoing plan to thwart the will of Congress, illegally funding right wing death squads in Central America with illegal sales of military equipment to the mullahs of Iran.    Enter Bush’s new A.G. Bagpiper Bill Barr- et, voila (a flourish of the bagpipes, please) a genius solution: a PRE-Trial (why not?) PARDON.  NOTHING TO SEE HERE.  FOREVER.  THE END.

When Mueller’s report came out, after immediately sharing the unredacted pages with Trump’s actual White House attorneys, Barr strongly defended Donald Trump in a series of live televised infomercials for Trump’s innocence.   His explanation for a series of actions by Trump that have a strong appearance that the president was trying to thwart, or obstruct, investigations into his suspicious conduct was elegantly simple, and unique:  Trump knew he was innocent and so was understandably angry and frustrated, which is why he did what he did to stop the investigations into his innocence.   He acted out of anger and frustration, as any one of us would, not with the corrupt intent to obstruct justice.  You dig?

This novel “he was angry and frustrated” defense was based on placing reasonable (or even unreasonable, doesn’t matter for our purposes) doubt on a key component needed to convict someone of the crime of obstruction of justice: corrupt intent.  In Barr’s innovative and generous view (towards his patrons, all others– mange le merde, comme un dit), there was nothing corrupt about a man who is justifiably angry and frustrated, doing whatever he can to make people criticizing him just shut the hell up.  He added the absurd touch that Mueller “admitted” that the president had been “angry and frustrated” once the investigation targeted his actions.   You see?   Mueller agreed!   

The absurdity of this defense is embarrassing, but it was also effective for those who want to see our lying, sociopath president put another staunch Federalist on the Supreme Court.  How do you like 6-3, LIBTARDS!   How about another tax break for those making more than $50,000,000 a year?   And renewed protection of those pure, blameless fetuses, who must be born, and baptized, or else are condemned, prenatally, to eternity in hell’s flames?

This is all old news, of course, Barr made this intelligence insulting “angry and frustrated” defense of his master months ago.  What reminded me of the “angry and frustrated” defense was that another loyal Republican zombie (I believe it was House minority leader Kevin McCarthy)  used it the other day to justify Trump’s race-baiting tweet about brown-skinned Congresswomen going back to the crime-infested places you come from.    He’s not a racist, said the Republican, not at all, he was just angry and frustrated!   You know, wink, wink, how these black women can be such haughty bitches!   “Angry and frustrated” the new get out of jail card!

“Your honor, my client did not commit assault with intent to inflict serious bodily harm when he broke the victim’s face.   His intent was only that he was angry and frustrated, as anyone would have been, subjected to the victim’s harsh ‘wit’.   She had been openly and ruthlessly mocking him, your Honor, and my client doesn’t take that, even from a seventy-five year old woman in a wheelchair!   He was acting out of anger and frustration, that’s all.  When he said ‘I’ll kill you, you black bitch” he was only expressing understandable anger and frustration at this vicious loudmouth with the now justifiably broken face.”

The other great Barr innovation in defense of Trump is the “public” exemption for things that would otherwise appear to be crimes.  Barr reminds us over and over that all of these suspicious looking acts, OK, many of them, were done publicly.   The old legal principle applies:  if you publicly rape somebody, it’s not rape.   Same for murder, if you do it with a gun on Fifth Avenue during rush hour, openly and without trying to hide it, well, that’s not really murder is it?   It’s something else.  Nobody knows what, but, if it was done out of anger and frustration, you understand… well, who could blame the poor fellow?

I would much prefer hearing the plump, handsome A.G. play the bagpipes (he’s won competitions, I understand) than listen to anymore of his “legal” pronouncements piously spoken, breath scented with the pungent aroma of his master’s anus.

Fighting Helplessness

I was so distressed before the 2018 midterm elections that I determined to go into a neighborhood where a Democratic candidate was in a real fight for Congress and speak to voters, try to influence even a few undecided voters in a tight race.   I found the race in nearby Staten Island.   The Democratic candidate was Max Rose.  Rose was running against — it was too perfect, you’ve got to check this out (and I have to do a little quick research for the details of this next paragraph):

The Republican he was running against was Dan Donovan, Jr., former law and order DA of Staten Island and an ardent Trump supporter.    Donovan won a special election to take over Republican Congressman Michael Grimm’s seat when Grimm left Congress after his indictment for a string of felonies (he eventually served an 8 month prison sentence after pleading guilty to a single felony count and acknowledging– without pleading, oddly– that he had committed several others) [1].    Grimm emerged from prison and challenged Donovan in the 2017 Republican primary to get his seat back.   Donovan ran hard to the right of Grimm, out-Trumping the Trump-loving Grimm, and won a hard fought primary battle against his Republican predecessor.   Now he was facing an unknown Democrat, thirty-one year old Afghan War veteran Max Rose, in the general election.

I remembered Dan Donovan from the Eric Garner murder on July 17, 2014, Donovan was the DA at the time.   OK, calling it “murder” may be a bit incendiary — the medical examiner ruled Garner’s death a “homicide” —  let’s go with that.   Donovan wrote the unreturnable indictment for Daniel Pantaleo — the officer accused of (and videotaped) applying a chokehold to the much larger Garner, who repeatedly pleaded “I can’t breathe” until he stopped breathing — and submitted it to a Staten Island grand jury that would never indict a policeman on the charges Donovan asked them to vote on.   No criminal indictment against the officer who killed Garner was returned.    Pantaleo has been on desk duty for the five years since the homicide, drawing his regular $100,000 plus salary as a New York City policeman.   

In recent NYPD departmental hearings there was a vigorous legal debate by regulation-parsing lawyers over the legality of the precise hold Pantaleo applied to bring down the much larger man, a black man with a history of arrests, even a few convictions.   The hold, without dispute applied by Pantaleo, that resulted in the homicide of Eric Garner.    Garner was a large black man known to illegally sell “loose” cigarettes from packs that did not have valid tax stamps on them, allegedly refusing to be arrested and dragged to a cell on a hot day, for a second time.   A known criminal who was also known by locals as a laid back gentle giant and a peacemaker.

If you want to get really worked up about the sickening injustice surrounding the killing of an unarmed man who was not at the time engaged in any illegal activity, or posing any other threat to anyone, read Matt Taibbi’s gripping long-form report I Can’t Breathe: A Killing on Bay Street.  The details will make your blood boil, unless you believe that a large black man with a criminal history deserves to be taken down, every time, with or without cause, even if the result is, tragically, a “homicide” by police.  Among a host of brutal specifics, the detail of the man who videotaped the homicide on his phone, Ramsey Orta, being the only person to face justice in relation to the homicide investigation, is mind-fucking.  Orta was facing up to sixty years in prison, at one time, for post July 17, 2014 drug charges and possession of a .25 caliber handgun.  [2] 

A state case was never brought against officer Pantaleo, but there was talk about the Department of Justice bringing federal charges against the aggressive officer whose actions had resulted in homicide, basically the choking death of a much larger man arguably “resisting arrest”.  That talk ended yesterday.   

Enter Bagpiper Bill Barr (on a break from gently bagpiping his master’s increasingly sweaty balls, one assumes) who ordered the U.S. Attorney from the Eastern District of New York, the office contemplating bringing federal charges against the death-causing policemen whose actions resulted in the homicide of Eric Garner, to stand down.   The U.S. attorney said:

“Let me say as clear and unequivocally as I can that Mr. Garner’s death was a tragedy,” Richard Donoghue, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, said at a news conference. “But these unassailable facts are separate and distinct from whether federal crime has been committed. And the evidence here does not support charging police Officer Daniel Pantaleo with a federal criminal civil rights violation.”

source

 

All roads lead back to Mr. Trump, the undisputed non-racist, scrupulously honest leader of his lockstep Republican party.   Trump is, of course, not the cause for any of this — not directly.   He is the toxic chicken coming home to roost, the logical outcome of decades of unprincipled and very effective conniving by some very determined, very wealthy “job creators”.  He is a symptom, like projectile vomiting or explosive diarrhea, not the disease itself.   A herpes zoster on the genital politic, we might say.

A feeling of helplessness is a motherfucker, I’m here to say.   Time to get serious about impeaching this deserving, largely unqualified 78,000 vote (0.0006% mandate, yo)  Electoral College president.   He may be a symptom, but he is an especially ugly one and he will be hard for the unyielding extremists who support him, and have put all their faith in riding his stinking coattails, to replace on the 2020 ticket.   It is also past time to start making some fundamental, and long-overdue, changes in our recently faltering experiment in democracy.  Either that or we should all go back where we came from…

 

[1]  Wikipedia gives us the skinny on Grimm:

On April 28, 2014, Grimm was charged by federal authorities with 20 counts of fraud, federal tax evasion, and perjury.[2] On December 23, 2014, he pleaded guilty to a single count of felony tax fraud, and “acknowledged committing perjury, hiring illegal immigrants, and committing wire fraud”.[3]After initially vowing to retain his seat, Grimm announced on December 30, 2014, that he would resign from Congress effective January 5, 2015.[4] On May 5, 2015, Daniel M. Donovan, Jr. won the special election to replace Grimm. On July 17, 2015, Grimm was sentenced to eight months in prison for tax evasion.[5] He began his prison term on September 22, 2015 after a brief delay for medical treatments.[6]

On October 1, 2017, Grimm launched a campaign to attempt to win back his old House seat in New York’s 11th District.  On June 26, 2018, he lost in the Republican primary.[7][8]

source

[2]  written some time in 2015 (no attribution in original post)

In the last year, Orta’s life has been upended. He has been arrested three times since August 2014. The first, for criminal possession of a handgun he allegedly tried to give a 17-year-old, came a day after Garner’s death was ruled a homicide by the city’s medical examiner. In February [2015], he was arrested again on multiple charges of selling and possessing drugs. The third came on June 30 [2015] when he was accused of selling MDMA to an undercover cop. A lab test later showed that the alleged MDMA was fake and the charges were reduced.  All told, Orta is facing more than 60 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

(He eventually pled guilty and took a four year sentence)

source

Asking Unanswerable questions

I’ve long had the intrusive habit of asking of what often seem to be unanswerable questions.   They’re not unanswerable because there is no explanation, no cause and effect that can be laid out, no illuminating reasons that can be produced to get closer to the truth of what’s actually going on. 

They’re unanswerable because they are fucking hard questions, the true reasons are ugly reasons, and great forces are arrayed to make sure they are answered only in self-serving, inadequate ways, like Mr. Trump’s (no reply submitted) reply to Mueller’s last long, compromising written question about the actions of his disgraced former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn.   

The real answer will often cause more trouble than its worth — to those who have something to lose by it.  The anodyne answer (like the ones the New York Times specializes in) is always preferable, though it’s usually only a partial answer that, while accepting the status quo as the way it should pretty much be, makes no trouble.   Except that it also provides no real clue about anything but how important it is not to make trouble if you want everything to continue pretty much as it is.

I get that I seem to be acting as though humans are mostly rational creatures, animals who use sophisticated tools and logical means to enjoy the many wonders of nature and live in harmony with our miraculous world.  A clever person could say it’s illogical to proceed as if logic ruled the world.   Indeed, the world, we can see at a glance, is clearly not ruled by Reason.   That doesn’t invalidate thoughtfulness as the best we can do in a world often ruled by selfish, enraged brutes.    Understanding is always a net gain, it seems to me, as is honest connection to others.

I also understand that my clinging to “understanding” is an emotional thing, stemming from my childhood need to feel heard and addressed.   Not to say some explanations are not far better than others, only that in seeking them feathers will often be ruffled and emotions raised to the boiling point.   I grew up in a home where that happened regularly.   Some of my parents’ outbursts were understandable to me, I’d touched a raw nerve I had reason to know would be raw — but some were just rage doing what rage does — raging.    What the hell is up with rage?

After our father died, my sister used a great phrase to describe a force that decisively shaped his life (and to a large extent our mother’s as well).  “Shame-based” she said, and it’s a phrase that explains a lot.   The main characteristic about shame is that it compels the sufferer to hide that painful emotion, to rationalize, defend, develop plausible sounding explanations for actions that are not always easy to justify, and often, to lash out violently at others.

Shame is a powerful force in world history.   Adolf Hitler spoke directly to the shame and thwarted national pride of his audience.  He spoke magic words to larger and larger crowds of desperate, angry Germans after Germany’s humiliating defeat in World War One and its submission to a harsh and destructive treaty.  According to the self-taught Mr. Hitler, the German army had never lost the war, not at all; Germany had the greatest military in the world, but it been savagely betrayed, you see, it was stabbed in the back.   No reason to feel national humiliation, the punitive Versailles diktat was heaped on a great and victorious nation by vicious, scheming, inhuman traitors, you understand.   Inferior traitors who continue laughing at Germany, traitors whose laughter will turn to whimpers and screams when we turn the tables!!!

Shame is the source of much rage and violence.    The need to hide shame and act out to keep it hidden is behind many of the terrible stories of savagery we see, many tragedies that unfold before us.  Shame leads directly to abuse, in its many forms. 

 A few years back I heard a great interview on this subject with a psychiatrist named James Gilligan who’d spent many years in prisons working with violent offenders.   He put his finger on shame as the common denominator for violent acts of domination, horrible things done out of a sense of being “disrespected”.    You can read his article on the subject here.    Every sadist was once humiliated, and the reaction to that humiliation is often expressed in a desire to humiliate others.   The vicious cycle (literally) is turned harder by the fact that we tend to blame ourselves for our shame, and for the sometimes shameful things we sometimes do to avoid further shame, which makes everything ten times worse.    

There is a great scene in the movie Goodwill Hunting that vividly illustrates the first step on path away from shame  — addressing the pain and forgiving the self for feeling it.    The psychiatrist, played by Robin Williams, finally get’s through Will’s (Matt Damon) resistance to gaining real insight.   The young man is clearly in pain, and his nerves are painfully exposed after he lays out the violence of his childhood, the terrible punishment inflicted on him by a brutal parent for no reason.    Williams tells him “it’s not your fault”.   The statement is undeniably true — the kid is not responsible for the uncontrollable violence of his angry drunk father.   Will tries to nonchalantly acknowledge this, but he is only retreating back to his tough guy pose.   The shrink, not going to miss the opening, tells the kid again “it’s not your fault.”   He keeps repeating this statement, in the face of his patient’s rising emotions.    In the end the young man breaks down in the older man’s arms and it’s a moment of great progress in his treatment.

Of course, it’s a Hollywood movie.  We know all about successful Hollywood movies — they are pretty much mostly bullshit.   Every time a couple has sex on screen — they come together.   Every time a victim gets a gun, she shoots her sadistic victimizer dead in the final scene.   The poorest characters live in beautiful homes.   Violence is cathartic, makes everything better.   Plus, for good measure, showing a naked woman or man is much more offensive, for purposes of ratings, than showing people being shot, blown up, smashed in the head with baseball bats.    Still, the essence of that scene between Robin Williams and Matt Damon crystalizes something deep and true.

We tend to blame ourselves, which increases our sense of being worth less than others who, aggravatingly,  do not seem to blame themselves.   Except in rare cases, nobody shows us how not to blame ourselves when we feel guilt, or regret, or shame — or rage, for that matter.   It’s our fault we are (slug in your pet fear here).   The poor, generation after generation of these hard-pressed fuckers, have only themselves to blame for their poverty.   After all, hard work and determined ambition is always rewarded in a free nation like ours — just look at all the successful people who worked their asses off to become celebrities!    Surely the poor can grab ahold of their own bootstraps and perform the physics-defying feat of lifting themselves off the ground by their own heels.   Even the metaphor is absurd — but no worries, the image is good enough for our purposes.  Our purpose, to sum it up, is “fuck you.  It’s not me, not us, not the way we do things here, it’s you, asshole.”

So it is down the line with superficial, stupid answers to troubling questions.   Husband, finding himself in a tight spot, as a result of unsuccessful embezzling and numerous lying attempts to cover up his crimes, about to declare bankruptcy he’s kept secret from everybody, suddenly threatens mass murder– stabbing, beheading and killing by fire — of his entire family.   What the fuck?  “He was under unbearable pressure!”  Decades later, the wife who never left, dismisses the homicidal raging as an isolated thing that only happened once.   Her children, two of the intended victims, must never know about the shameful, terrifying episode.   She can’t understand why she still has tremendous anxiety, even though her life is objectively pretty much stress-free, though, admittedly, she does blame herself for the low self-esteem that prevented her from leaving her volatile, serially untruthful husband.

A woman tells you, after a few glasses of wine, that she has always hated everybody.   Present company excluded, she adds with a wan smile, realizing how bad that categorical statement must have sounded.   We all laugh about it, admit that we hate most people too.   Then, over time, it emerges that this woman does hate EVERYBODY– present company now included.  Doesn’t talk to her brother or sister, rages at her children, is in a constantly escalating war with her husband, etc.  She hates everybody because, when it comes down to it, her life is shit and she hates that too– and, most unbearable of all,  it’s all her own fault.

A guy praises and thanks his old friend, offering to do him a favor he then, without explanation, decides not to do.   When questioned about this change of heart the guy explodes — “this is the last straw, you demanding fuck, I don’t owe you shit, I don’t owe you an explanation, you pushy fucking fuck!    I love you, man, but we have a gigantic personality conflict here, so maybe better if you just fuck off and die.”   The guy, on some level, must know he’s overreacting and trashing a long friendship over what seems to be a pretext, but, for whatever reason, it feels good for him to rage at this guy.   Certainly better than feeling whatever shame is behind his emotional outburst.

In any of these cases, the facts don’t speak for themselves.   The true causes are murky and, most likely, shame-based, as my sister said of our father’s frequent outbursts.   The wife whose husband threatened to kill everyone would need, at minimum, a sincere apology from her murder-threatening husband before they could move on together in their lives.    The woman who says she hates everyone is reaching out, clearly in pain, feeling isolated, no matter how justified her feelings of hatred may otherwise seem to her.  The guy who loves his friend would, it seems, extend a tiny benefit of the doubt rather than attacking, but, who’s to say?

You probe these kinds of shame-based scenarios at your own peril.  As we have seen over and over, many people would rather punch you in the face than look squarely at something that causes them shame, or even discomfort.   Turn on the news and you will hear the latest “social media” attack by a powerful man whose overbearing, inhumanly demanding, brutish father (and loveless, materialistic mother) instilled in him a lust to blame others as loudly as possible as the better alternative to dealing with the lifelong terror of shame and a deep sense of his “inadequacy”.   Better to put three, four and five year old enemies in prisons, let them stink and catch all the diseases unsanitary confinement produces, then brazenly lie about their conditions of captivity, than realize your entire life is based on unbearable desperation not to feel the shame inflicted on you by relentless sadists, no?