I am listening to the fascinating The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, a 2017 collection of essays written by about a dozen experts in various fields that came out after psychiatrist and former Yale Professor Bandy X. Lee convened a conference to discuss the professional duty to warn the public about a threat as dire as Donald. Below is yesterday’s YouTube video posted by Dr. Lee, in which she gives all the background and touts an upcoming September conference in Washington, DC to highlight perfect Donald’s psychopathology and the danger it poses to America and the world.
Lee was fired by Yale for not standing down when the university, the American Psychiatric Association and the New York Times all told her to shut the fuck up about her professional opinion that she had a duty to warn the public about a danger as enormous as that presented by Donald’s malignant, impulsive, vengeful personality disorder. They were attempting to silence her pursuant to the nonbinding Goldwater Rule (a rule of the American Association of Psychiatrists) that prevents psychiatric experts from stating conclusions about public officials that any other citizen of the nation is free to make.
The book is a masterclass in the personality type that can never be wrong, must destroy all critics, stubbornly embraces often ridiculous lies to support counterfactual views of the world, coerces others to obey them, on pain of terrible revenge. It is frequently noted that this type lacks empathy, which is certainly true, but one of the author’s notes the supremely fine tuned empathy of the predator toward the prey. He gives the example of a tiger, who must know, in order to succeed in its hunt, the minute changes in the feelings of the animal it intends to make dinner of.
“Goddamn!” I thought as I washed the dishes and listened to this chapter, “I’ve known many people who always acted like they admired and loved me, and seemed so attuned to my feelings and needs, only to turn into aggressive, famished beasts when the time came, in their black and white, nuance-free world, to kill or be killed.”
Robert J. Lifton, ninety-eight year-old psychiatrist and author of “The Nazi Doctors,” among other works, coined the phrase malignant normality to describe the normalizing of otherwise intolerable behavior.
It became a requirement for believers in Nazi “ideology” to accept that certain populations needed to be exterminated. Any Nazi voicing an objection to this new “normal” would be expelled from the party (and probably much worse). If it is what society normally does, like ripping infants from the hands of desperate parents and sending them a thousand miles away with no hope of a future reunion, then it is, by definition, normal. Normality may also be, as Lifton observed, malignant.
Gabor Mate elaborates on this observation at length in The Myth of Normal. He notes how easily we mistake “normal” for natural, healthy or desirable. If our society is ruled by the destructive myths of powerful psychopaths, there is nothing natural, healthy or desirable about the normality they impose.
The pathology that drives a Hitler, a Donald “Not A Loser!” Trump, a Sloppy Steve Bannon, is well known and easy to see. They cannot trust another human and therefore require unchecked power and loyalty oaths they make others swear to on pain of death. Treason and betrayal must always be punished by painful public execution or others will feel licensed to defy orders and, ultimately, uncover the infallible dictator’s murder-inducing terror of humiliation.
The powerful psychopath’s need for absolute power, their claimed right to define “normality” for everybody else, and a reflex to loyalty on the part of millions of admiring enablers, is the single biggest reason why human history is written in the blood of the meek. Any dissenting voice is the enemy of a maniac who cannot tolerate being questioned, criticized, made to feel vulnerable in any way. Loyalty or the sword, plunged slowly and deliberately through each hand, foot, arm, leg, etc., until you are begging for death. Which will it be, bitch?
Why would Louis DeJoy refuse to postmark ballots on the day they are received?
I attended the supremely unenlightening August 8th quarterly meeting of the postal board of governors. You can read my summary of that opaque corporate charade here.
More than one governor referred listeners to the Postal Inspector General’s recent report on postal operations. They gave no details, except to tout the report. They gave no link to the report, but a quick search showed a July 30, 2024 report entitled Election Mail Readiness for 2024. From the postal IG:
In addition, we identified processes and policies that could pose a risk of delays in the processing and delivery of Election and Political Mail. Further, we identified issues related to some Delivering for America operational changes that pose a risk of individual ballots not being counted. [1]
The governors acted with unanimity at the meeting, most avoiding any mention of poor, and declining, on-time delivery rates. They focused on cost savings and increased revenue, almost exclusively. They referred to the IG’s report without providing any context or detail at all. The IG, in the report relating to the upcoming election, notes that DeJoy refused to comply with two of their ten recommendations for improvements to secure the integrity of the mail-in ballot portion of our upcoming election. What is DeJoy refusing to do?
The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) considers management’s comments responsive to recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and corrective actions should resolve the issues in the report. We view management’s disagreement with recommendations 5 and 6 as unresolved and will work with management through the formal audit resolution process.
Recommendation 5: Develop and implement a process for delivery units to segregate Election Mail identified as Postal Automated Redirection System Mail prior to sending it back to a mail processing facility.
Recommendation 6: Update the postmarking policy so that all operations can postmark mail-in ballots.
We are deep in the corporate weeds here, but DeJoy is refusing to have a process for segregating election mail and for updating the policy so that all ballots can be promptly postmarked. Why would that be?
Could it have anything to do with the $2,500,000 DeJoy donated to Donald and the RNC in 2016? Could it have anything to do with every associate of Donald Trump being corrupt, criminal, spineless, cringing, or all of the above? Is there any reason to trust any associate of the transactional malignant narcissist to do the honest thing?
I feel like recently disgraced Cucker Tarlson, only asking questions, but are these not reasonable questions to ask on the eve of an election that Harris/Walz can win by 20,000,000 votes and not get elected because Donald got 10,000 more surgically placed votes in the Electoral College?
[1] What We Found
The Postal Service developed an Election Mail and Political Mail Guidebook that provides employees with many of the key resources that explain the longstanding, special-handling procedures required to facilitate the timely processing and delivery of Election Mail and Political Mail. For the period from December 1, 2023, to April 30, 2024, the Postal Service processed Political and Election Mail with on time processing scores ranging from 97.01 to 98.17 percent. However, as a result of our observations and inquiries, we found that Postal Service personnel did not always comply with policy and procedures regarding all clear certifications, Election and Political Mail logs, and audit checklists. In addition, we identified processes and policies that could pose a risk of delays in the processing and delivery of Election and Political Mail. Further, we identified issues related to some Delivering for America operational changes that pose a risk of individual ballots not being counted.
Recommendations and Management’s Comments
We made ten recommendations to address the issues identified in the report. Postal Service management agreed with eight recommendations and disagreed with two. Postal Service management’s comments and our evaluation are at the end of each finding and recommendation. The U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General (OIG) considers management’s comments responsive to recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, and 10, and corrective actions should resolve the issues in the report. We view management’s disagreement with recommendations 5 and 6 as unresolved and will work with management through the formal audit resolution process.
I am an old man, made older by an implanted prosthetic left knee that developed an intractable inflammation and limits my walking to the range of an 85 year-old. I am grateful to have finally learned this simple but elusive life lesson, after experiencing it many times since childhood: those who act abusively toward you are incapable of doing anything else.
You can employ every trick you know to get along with someone who occasionally treats you with contempt, in the end, your best efforts will earn you more contempt and anger. When you see rage, get away from it. It took me 67 years to learn this seemingly simple thing, and I am grateful to know it now, but damn.
How can something so simple be so hard to see? Our need for love and connection is powerful. We are instructed, by virtually everyone, in the importance of forgiveness. If someone we have a deep connection with acts like a psychopath once in a blue moon, the proper thing seems to be to see it in the context of a long, loving relationship and forget about it. It makes us feel good to act with this kind of philosophical maturity. It also marks us as the perfect victim of an enraged loved one who needs to take their anger out on others from time to time.
Not so easy to look dispassionately at someone who swears they love us, someone we have shared many a wonderful time with, and grasp the brokenness in them, the terrible damage that makes them lash out unfairly, always blame others, insist on their indignant right to rage whenever they need to, at whomever they choose to direct it. Someone who acts this way is not a good partner for anything important. They are not someone you can work with or trust with your vulnerability. They lack all problem solving tools and any ability to compromise. Whenever the slightest conflict arises they always lash out in boundless, childish frustration.
Love them or not, believe their protestations that they love you or not, these damaged souls cannot be fixed. Not by you, not by a team of the world’s greatest experts. There is only one productive way to deal with them. It is not by trusting them to act less abusively next time. It is by completely removing yourself from their reach.
The greatest gift you can give yourself is learning this hard lesson and walking away from these unredeemable creatures whenever you encounter them. There is nothing you can do for them, and equally hopeless, nothing they can do for you — except rage at you, when the time is right.
Forget that psychologically those who pose as strong men are always the weakest of men. As far as a compelling story for the public to click on, as pure drama, the persecuted underdog who prevails and becomes leader of the Free world is a good story.
Sidebar, and not unrelated. Years ago, during the worst stress of my horrifying years working in the courts, I felt my aggravation rising one night and was afraid I was having a heart attack. I walked 3/4 of a mile to the closest emergency room, which should probably have told me all I needed to know about whether I was having a heart attack or not.
After a long wait they checked me in, I was feeling much better by then, and I heard the doctor tell his colleague that I was a good story. I thought this was good news and when the doctor returned I told her I was going home.
She cautioned me against it, advised an overnight in the hospital and said that if I wanted to leave I had to sign a document saying I was leaving the hospital against medical advice. I said “you just said I was a good story.” She explained that when ER docs are talking about a suspected heart attack, a good story is a man your age, your basic shape, and exhibiting the agitated aggravation that you have been exhibiting since you came in. “It makes you a good story to have a heart attack, in other words.“
Fuck me blind, I thought, as I signed myself out against medical advice and later came back to check in. It left me pondering the flexibility of the phrase “a good story.” Horrifying, sickening stories are also good stories, to fans of those genres.
This entire piece by Lawrence O’Donnell is excellent, contrasting corporate media’s lap dog acquiescence to (and normalizing of) Trump’s outrageous incoherence while it snarls contemptuously at Biden’s press secretary in pursuit of a fanciful story that Biden is a senile vegetable with a team of lying neurologists on call. He notes that the story about the lying neurologist and Biden’s senility were never reported on because it turns out there was absolutely no story there. But the press snarled and yelled over each other as the press secretary patiently and truthfully fielded as many of their shouted questions as she could get to.
He points out that mass media is giving Trump the same primadonna treatment it gave him in 2016. Airing a rambling, lie-filled “press conference” live from Mara-Lago where he answered not a single question, and was asked no follow-up to anything. O’Donnell compared this fawning coverage to the complete news blackout on Kamala Harris, at the same moment addressing the UAW live, and in between he showed the press repeatedly challenging Biden, who answered each question, and screaming at Biden’s press secretary about unfounded allegations of the cover up of his unfounded neurological decline.
The din in the White House press room and the aggressiveness of the screamed out challenges in stark contrast to the glazed silence that meets everything that pours out of corporate meal ticket Donald Trump’s mouth.
O’Donnell, in spite of his brilliance, doesn’t seem to realize who he works for, I guess, but his point is very important and the clip well worth your time.
For a period of time I persisted in writing impossible letters, longshot attempts to persuade people I cared about to communicate with me, even as I knew they were now well beyond reasonable discussion. These letters attempted to do something no letter can do, silently get through to someone on the other side of a locked, fortified door and change their heart. I have a number of them here on this blahg.That I kept writing these letters is proof that I had not yet grasped an essential feature of human life — there are deeply rooted emotional positions that can never be changed.
I wrote these letters to try to repair painful estrangements. Only one, a letter to an old friend, a rabbi, ever achieved its short-term goal of reestablishing dialogue. That letter was perfected over the course of weeks, calmly making every painful point I needed to make while removing anything that could make the rabbi, who had behaved with surprising hostility toward me, feel defensive. It appealed irresistibly to his desire to be a mensch, to be admired, forgiven, to have his vanity stroked. We had a single warm but pointless talk as a result of that excellent letter. I realize now that the most moving letter I can write will change nothing.
At one point, after much agonizing, I wrote one of these letters to my niece and nephew, after years of estrangement. My sister is humiliated about certain true things that I witnessed in her family. She lives in terror of my big fucking mouth. If her children had relationships with me, the odds, she fears are overwhelming that eventually I would impart some of these humiliating true things to her children and she would never be able to reclaim their admiration and love.
A smart young man, around my niece’s age, offered to read the drafts of the letter and give me his feedback. He soon found himself at a loss. I mentioned to his father what a hard job his son had signed on to, and that I felt a little bad to have put that weight on him. The father volunteered to read the letter-in-progress as well. In the end, father and son both told me that my final draft of the letter was warm, loving and an excellent attempt at reaching out. I sent it.
I never heard back from my niece or my nephew. I have not heard from my sister since the letter to her children arrived. That was around three years ago. Now for a bit of impossible irony.
My old friends’ son, who had read the letter, visited us in a rented vacation house. He was unusually hopped up. His father had shared my pain about the silence from my niece and nephew. There was inexplicable, rising tension in that house that eventually became unbearable. Within a year the son would move back in with his parents and, two days later, be locked in a mental ward. His father and mother, after months of silence punctuated by anger, would be spreading the dubious, but apparently emotionally convincing, claim that I am the reincarnation of Adolf Hitler. I am dead to all of them. At least I’ve finally grasped the ridiculousness of writing impossible letters.
We live and learn, those of us capable of profiting from our most painful mistakes. Many have learned everything essential that they will ever learn by the time they are two years old, clenching their fists and vowing never to be hurt again, no matter what kind of person they are obliged to become. Writing a letter hoping to successfully question this kind of rigid, brittle self-confidence is pointless. Success is impossible, and the mission is futile, if also a supreme artistic challenge. I have finally learned that it is hubris to expect to succeed in that particular challenge.
Years ago an old friend, let’s call her Gina, decided that her old friend was not her friend anymore, in fact, that they were never really friends, in spite of their closeness in former times. She told others that the woman, in whose apartment she lived for a year or two decades earlier, was an “energy vampire” and everyone simply accepted that, like any of us, she had an absolute right to choose her own friends.
The old friend she rejected, and smeared as an energy vampire, was understandably devastated by this sudden repudiation. In my experience she is not an energy vampire, but the charge was enough for people who barely knew her to assume that Gina had every right to cut ties to someone who was demanding and emotionally draining. I had zero insight, at the time, into the narcissistic psychopathy of dear Gina, the woman who decreed her former close friend a life-draining energy vampire.
Fast forward a decade or so. I now have 100% insight into the raging personality problems of this damaged, controlling, easily enraged, terminally insecure woman of great charm, and former beauty. I, in fact, was reckoned far more dangerous than an energy vampire and she and her sychophantic [1] husband (she holds a humiliating secret over his head and she’s not shy about playfully flaunting it) deliberately assassinated my good name among a group of old friends.
I had a call the other day from a friend in France. At one point he mentioned a satire of a reality TV show called What We Do In The Shadows. A film crew lives with a group of vampires. He was laughing that the most feared vampire in the house doesn’t drink blood, it is an Energy Vampire. He’d never heard the term, he loved it, and he described the creature beautifully.
The energy vampire finds an empathetic listener, plays to the person’s kindness and then proceeds to latch on and suck them dry by droning on with the most boring possible monologue for hours on end. The energy vampire preys on its victim’s empathy and is expert at eliciting sympathy as it moves in for its long, painful drink. Once it senses kindness it gets its hooks into the person and never lets go until it has drunk its fill of the nice person’s empathy.
If we are too nice we can fall victim to these creatures, sure enough. That’s why maintaining healthy boundaries is so important.
Thinking more about energy vampires, and that unfair charge my old friend Gina made against her old friend, I realized how ironic Gina’s smear is. For one thing, Gina is not the least bit empathetic, though she does a convincing performance of it socially. Feelings make her very uncomfortable and she is adept at making anyone who needs to talk about feelings feel weak and pathetic. Energy vampires are powerless against someone like her, they will die of thirst if she is their only target.
Additionally, in her need for admiration, Gina is far more of an energy vampire than the woman she smeared as one. The moment you question Gina’s right to control everyone else, she rages. In her inchoate, irrational anger she is capable of things far worse than sucking someone dry of energy. She is capable of anything any tyrant ever thought of. I’d rush into the arms of an energy vampire to get away from someone as damaged and soul-destructive as her.
[1] sycophantic
Of or pertaining to a sycophant; characteristic of a sycophant; meanly or obsequiously flattering; courting favor by mean adulation; parasitic. Similar: parasitic
Nobody was federally prosecuted for Donald’s attempt to overturn the election results in 2020. The DOJ indicted The Donald for those efforts but his lackeys on the court have given him every benefit of every doubt he doesn’t deserve and delayed both federal trials until beyond the 2024 election. Nothing is more bracing to an unrepentant career criminal than endless delays in accountability and the chance to make all prosecutions, convictions against him, and any prison sentence, disappear with his reelection.One thing history teaches us, fascists will always do everything in their power to seize control, they are tireless criminals who exonerate themselves and punish their opponents when they take power.
The radical reactionaries in the War Room at the Willard Hotel on January 5th and 6th? Bannon, Giuliani, Kerik, Eastman, with back up from Roger Stone (who left DC on the 6th to avoid being connected with the riot his body guards had a central role in) and Mike “Q-Anon” Flynn — no criminal conspiracy indictment for any of them. They sat in a command center, during the riot, apparently coordinating the riot which, on cue, interrupted their planned “Green Bay Sweep” where Lyin’ Ted, Josh Fist/Flee Hawley and over a hundred members of the House would contest Biden’s electoral college victory and send the presidential election back to MAGA state legislatures for a final decision.
In part MAGA bravado flows from the fact that their main criminal leaders all so far have gotten away with their crimes, at least on a federal level. Plus, they control mail delivery. Don’t forget that a pugnacious MAGA mega-donor is in charge of how many of the expected 50,000,000 mail-in ballots get counted, if they arrive in time to be counted at all. He has already slowed mail delivery nationwide to record lows. He has already targeted a few Democratic leaning cities for even lower on time mail delivery rates.
A requirement for membership in Donald’s MAGA Republican party is openly declaring that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen, presumably by a cabal of cannibalistic pedophiles. Any Republican who admits there is no proof of a stolen, or rigged election, has been ousted from the party. Espousing belief in the Big Lie is literally an article of faith, a requirement for membership in MAGA. Every Republican election official in every state is an adherent to the Stolen Election Truth. In the Nazi’s rise to power the galvanizing myth was The Stab in the Back, the victorious German army had been betrayed by weak, scheming Jews and communists, The November Criminals. If you count the votes, it is much easier to call the election into question. MAGA has many state officials, and state legislatures, in place and committed to a Trump victory, even if the populist Donald loses by 20,000,000 “popular” votes.
Then we have the most corrupt 6-3 Supreme Court majority that money and sheer will to win (at any cost) can buy. Put nothing past these six diehard Nazi motherfuckers, if the fate of a presidential election winds up in their hands again.
Beyond that, every violent Ku Klux Klan type freedom lover is down with killing anyone who needs killing. Many are itching for “payback,” waiting for the day they get to spill rivers of blood. It is unclear how many of these enraged fuckers are embedded in the military, the national guard, police forces around the country. It is a safe bet that in many swing states there are a good number of these “patriots”, the kind who believe in “frontier justice,” in law enforcement. They’ve grown up on violent westerns where powerful white men of iron will break others with their unhesitating use of deadly gunfire and unstoppable lynch mobs.
If not for that vestige of slavery, the Electoral College, benefactor of Republican presidential candidates who lose the popular vote, there would be no worry heading into an election where the candidate who favors democracy should beat the demented autocrat by fifteen million votes, at least. It is only that bit of American Exceptionalism, a mechanism by which a powerful minority can overturn a landslide democratic victory, that has me concerned.
Add in Louis DeJoy, a piece of shit in human form, a cartoon villain version of a despotic CEO, and his ability to target mail BY ZIP CODE, and that is what keeps me awake some nights. The fact that nobody, NOBODY, is reporting on why Biden’s three nominations for Postal governors are languishing month after month in a Senate Committee where Kyrsten “I’ll blow any CEO for $2,000,000” Sinema is the swing vote — is the stuff of my democratic nightmares. Seriously, does nobody else see the fatal threat in democracy’s inability to unseat a crooked, partisan political appointee who could hand the election to the candidate he’s given a million or more to?
I had a concept in mind, since taking my first philosophy course at City College: deleterious cognition. I knew what it meant, knowledge that can only hurt you with no possibility of helping. I like deleterious cognition as a phrase, but I always had a devilishly hard time defining it (just like ‘catastrophizing pain’, a potentially revolutionary modality for pain management, but for the lack of an agreed on definition). The chairman of the philosophy department, KD Irani, after listening with a furrowed brow to my struggle to define my term, suggested that I might be referring to cognitive dissonance. I wasn’t, but, at nineteen, I couldn’t explain exactly why.
The other day, after an alarmed, alarming call from a kidney specialist about things that showed up on a recent CT scan, I had a moment of insight.
Deleterious cognition is a rumination on actual known facts with no hope of coming to anything but more fear, anxiety and other psychic harm.
In other words, had I taken up any of the numerous email invitations to see the full results of these worrisome scans, I would only open the door to deleterious cognition. I’d be looking at cold scientific facts, context free, with no option but to worry more. Hence, any cognition based on a scary report I have no intelligent way to interpret would be deleterious. Better to wait for a medical consult with someone who can put the scary facts into perspective and offer the best options.
A stickler would quibble about ‘cognition’ in that phrase, since the word means “mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses”.Can a terrified worst case scenario reading of scary medical information, without context, be called ‘cognition’? Who the fuck knows?
All I can say is that pondering the worst facts presented to you, fully considering each terrible piece of information and all of the inevitable extensions, reasonable or not, without the proper training and experience, can only lead to deleterious cognition.
The Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960, 1964,1968 , 1990 and 1991 [1] attempted to address, and end, racist practices by government officials done under “color of law”. If a local sheriff was performing his official duties in transporting prisoners, and those prisoners happened to be met on the road by a pickup truck full of angry vigilantes, and the prisoners wound up mutilated, murdered and buried in an earthen dam, well, there was a presumption under the law and local customs that the sheriff, acting within the scope of his official duties, was immune from prosecution. If local racist sheriffs didn’t have full immunity to perform their duties as they saw fit, who would respect them? Who in their right mind would take the job?
This presumption that any crime committed during the performance of official duties, “under cover of law” is no crime has long been the get out of jail free card for any criminally inclined person who manages to acquire a cloak of legal power. The Federalist Society Supreme Court extended this extra-legal presumption, and absolute immunity for criminal acts performed by the president within his core official duties, to convicted felon, adjudicated rapist and serial fraudster Donald Trump last month. The ruling echoes Alan Dershowitz’s demented argument at Donald’s second impeachment that if the president honestly believes he is not breaking the law, well, by God, he can’t be breaking the law. This is a restatement of Nixon’s audacious, legally incoherent “when the president does it, that means it is not illegal, by definition.”
So, as often in humanity’s past, powerful racist motherfuckers get a pass for violations of laws, norms and common decency. Donald (he hates being called that, according to his niece Mary) attempted to bully a group of Black female journalists the other day. Every member of the Klan who watched his tired show of sneering dominance over the journalists high fived each other. Nobody who wasn’t a racist failed to see the desperate weakness, and smirking racism, behind Donald’s attempted bullying.
Yesterday the DOJ Inspector General released a report into Donald’s violent June 2020 dispersal of peaceful protesters in Lafayette Park, using DOJ personnel to “dominate” the street and show that the president, who’d been hiding in a bunker, and had built a wall around the White House (Mexico didn’t pay for that one either), was a tough guy. Bill Barr, as big a racist piece of shit as any Ku Klux Klan sheriff anywhere, (he huffily opined that there is absolutely no institutional racism in the US and that Blacks better respect the cops if they expect police protection) ordered hundreds of federal prison guards and others to forcibly clear the streets so Donald could walk to a nearby church and hold up a Bible. The miracle of that day is that the holy book of Christianity didn’t burst into flames in Donald’s hand.
Barr, of course, didn’t testify during the DOJ investigation into his actions. He wasn’t legally required to (as the DOJ cannot compel former officials to testify, for some reason) and he declined. There was nothing in it for him but shame, hard questions and blame. The DOJ Inspector General told the whole hideous story, four years late, fair enough, but still, an ugly story of abuse of government power. That criminal abuse, under Trump v. US, would be perfectly legal now.
Why were protesters in the park and street near the White House, shortly after the on camera murder of George Floyd by police officers in Minneapolis, a gruesome example of not uncommon racist brutality by police officers? Exercising their First Amendment right to peacefully assemble and petition the government for a redress of grievances. Donald was outraged, did the only thing he knows how to do when challenged, adamantly doubling down, like an angry drunk at the roulette table. The Blacks and others protesting were the racists, Donald claimed, Trump no racist, least racist white man ever! They, the antifa terrorists in the street were the racists and they needed to be given a taste of the full force of the state.
Under the new Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States(dig the fragrant irony of that fucking shit…) Donald could have ordered snipers to shoot peaceful protesters, and if he had done it with his Attorney General present it would be an unquestionable official act, even though also a despicable criminal act. No harm no foul, under the new ruling the president could not be indicted ever for ordering snipers to take out peaceful protesters. The snipers could be criminally prosecuted, but the president has an unchallengeable, absolute right to pardon anyone for any reason, criminal co-conspirators included, and even charge them $1,000,000 for it. What is power for, if not to use it to do whatever you want?
If there weren’t already a thousand reasons for anyone not in the Ku Klux Klan (or the many fine people in the American Nazi party, or the National Socialist Movement) not to vote for Donald, his racism alone should alert you to the kind of malignant, exploitative, unreflective, uncurious, vindictive, petty, indecent criminal fuck he is. Look no further than the five “colored” teenagers, wrongly convicted of raping a jogger in Central Park, whose execution Donald called for in a full page NY Times ad (one of whom is now on the New York City Council) and who he still insists were the actual rapists, in spite of their exoneration. He also denounced the settlement as a disgrace. [2]
Donald, on the other hand, if he wins the Electoral College by even a single vote and becomes president again, could rape whoever he wants, and if the woman is someone involved, however tangentially, in official presidential business, full immunity, baby! He could rape her on the resolute desk, as long as his Attorney General, or a member of his cabinet, held her down. The best part of the Leonard Leo-conferred new presidential power to do criminal things if they involve his core official powers is that 100 such official duties rapes cannot be introduced in any other rape case against Donald, ever. Suck on that, libtard cucks!
[1]
[2] (from Wikipedia)
The settlement was officially approved in September 2014.[102][110] Santana, Salaam, McCray, and Richardson each received around $7.1 million from the city for their years in prison, while Wise received $12.2 million because he had served six additional years. The city did not admit to any wrongdoing in the settlement.[111]
gratuitousblahg 