Thursday, January 30, 2025

No Politicization Politicization



The good news is that Kash Patel

President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the FBI, insisted to deeply skeptical Democrats on Thursday that he did not have an “enemies list” and that the bureau under his leadership would not seek retribution against the president’s adversaries or launch investigations for political purposes.

“I have no interest, no desire and will not, if confirmed, go backwards,” Patel said at a contentious Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing at which support for the nominee broke along starkly partisan lines. “There will be no politicization at the FBI. There will be no retributive actions taken.”

The reassurances were aimed at blunting a persistent line of attack from Democrats, who throughout the hearing confronted Patel with a vast catalog of prior incendiary statements on topics that they said made him unfit for the director’s job and raised alarming questions about his belief in conspiracy theories and loyalty to the president. Patel, for his part, sought to distance himself from his own words, accusing Democrats of taking them out of context, highlighting only snippets or misunderstanding his point.

The bad news is that President Trump's choice to be FBI director has a very bad memory. Ranking member Dick Durbin of Illinois asked Patel whether he is "familiar with Stew Peters," an alt-right, podcaster and "prolific anti-Semite.". After the nominee responed "not off the top of my head," Durbin reminded him that he he had "made eight separtae appearances on his podcast" and that Peters "promoted outrageous conspiracy theories and worked with a prominent neo-Nazi." Alas, Durbin failed to jog the memory of the nominee, who referred to "appearing on the media over a thousand times."

And Patel did not renounce or denounce his enemies list, which Minnesota senator Amy Klobuchar conceded Patel did not label as an "enemies list." Rather, in the appendix of his 2022 Government Gansters, Patel described  "Members of the Executive Branch Deep State" as being "a cabal of unelected tyrants" and "the most dangerous threat to our democracy." In December, Timothy Noah of The New Republic explained

The term “deep state” is most often used to disparage the civil service, which Patel more or less wishes to eliminate. In addition to reinstituting Schedule F, which would strip many civil service protections from government workers, Patel favors legislation that allows the president to fire civil servants directly. But almost all the people on Patel’s enemies list are political appointees.

The Definitely-Not-Enemies-List, according to Noah, includes

Michael Atkinson (former inspector general of the intelligence community)

Lloyd Austin (defense secretary under President Joe Biden)

Brian Auten (supervisory intelligence analyst, FBI)

James Baker (not the former secretary of state; this James Baker is former general counsel for the FBI and former deputy general counsel at Twitter)

Bill Barr (former attorney general under Trump)

John Bolton (former national security adviser under Trump)

Stephen Boyd (former chief of legislative affairs, FBI)

Joe Biden (president of the United States)

John Brennan (former CIA director under President Barack Obama)

John Carlin (acting deputy attorney general, previously ran DOJ’s national security division under Trump)

Eric Ciaramella (former National Security Council staffer, Obama and Trump administrations)

Pat Cippolone (former White House counsel under Trump)

James Clapper (Obama’s director of national intelligence)

Hillary Clinton (former secretary of state and presidential candidate)

James Comey (former FBI director)

Elizabeth Dibble (former deputy chief of mission, U.S. Embassy, London)

Mark Esper (former secretary of defense under Trump)

Alyssa Farah (former director of strategic communications under Trump)

Evelyn Farkas (former deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia under Obama)

Sarah Isgur Flores (former DOJ head of communications under Trump)

Merrick Garland (attorney general under Biden)

Stephanie Grisham (former press secretary under Trump)

Kamala Harris (vice president under Biden; former presidential candidate)

Gina Haspel (CIA director under Trump)

Fiona Hill (former staffer on the National Security Council)

Curtis Heide (FBI agent)

Eric Holder (former attorney general under Obama)*

Robert Hur (special counsel who investigated Biden over mishandling of classified documents)

Cassidy Hutchinson (aide to Trump chief of staff Mark Meadows)

Nina Jankowicz (former executive director, Disinformation Governance Board, under Biden)

Lois Lerner (former IRS director under Obama)

Loretta Lynch (former attorney general under Obama)

Charles Kupperman (former deputy national security adviser under Trump)

Gen. Kenneth Mackenzie, retired (former commander of United States Central Command)

Andrew McCabe (former FBI deputy director under Trump)

Ryan McCarthy (former secretary of the Army under Trump)

Mary McCord (former acting assistant attorney general for national security under Obama)

Denis McDonough (former chief of staff for Obama, secretary of veterans affairs under Biden)

Gen. Mark Milley, retired (former chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff)

Lisa Monaco (deputy attorney general under Biden)

Sally Myer (former supervisory attorney, FBI)

Robert Mueller (former FBI director, special counsel for Russiagate)

Bruce Ohr (former associate deputy attorney general under Obama and Trump)

Nellie Ohr (wife of Bruce Ohr and former CIA employee)

Lisa Page (former legal counsel for Deputy Director Andrew McCabe at FBI under Obama and Trump; exchanged texts about Trump with Peter Strzok)

Pat Philbin (former deputy White House counsel under Trump)

John Podesta (former counselor to Obama; senior adviser to Biden on climate policy)

Samatha Power (former ambassador to the United Nations under Obama, administrator of AID under Biden)

Bill Priestap (former assistant director for counterintelligence, FBI, under Obama)

Susan Rice (former national security adviser under Obama, director of the Domestic Policy Council under Biden)

Rod Rosenstein (former deputy attorney general under Trump)

Peter Strzok (former deputy assistant director for counterintelligence, FBI, under Obama and Trump; exchanged texts about Trump with Lisa Page)

Jake Sullivan (national security adviser under President Joe Biden)

Michael Sussman (former legal representative, Democratic National Committee)

Miles Taylor (former DHS official under Trump; penned New York Times op-ed critical of Trump under the byline, “Anonymous”)

Timothy Thibault (former assistant special agent, FBI)

Andrew Weissman (Mueller’s deputy in Russiagate probe)

Alexander Vindman (former National Security Council director for European affairs)

Christopher Wray (FBI director under Trump and Biden; Trump nominated Patel to replace him even though Wray’s term doesn’t expire until August 2027)

Sally Yates (former deputy attorney general under Obama and, briefly, acting attorney general under Trump)

"It's nevr a good time to bow down to a dictator," asserted Jim Acosta on Tuesday in his sign-off from CNN. Nor to his prsoanl FBI director, he might have added.

 

 


Tuesday, January 28, 2025

Christian or Catholic- Say the Word



Blown out in the 2024 election cycle, Democrats know they need a new message. They're all over the place, however, and the only common theme is Mark Cuban's simplistic advice: "just getting angry is not the way to go."

True, but not much of a game plan. Democrats had a chance to annoy Donald Trump and get under his skin by referring repeatedly to "President Musk."  They did so briefly and Trump was forced to play defense, pleading "No, he's not going to be President, that I can tell you. And I'm safe, you know why? He can't be- he wasn't born in this country." They had gotten the President-elect off his game, and Trump doesn't play defense well. So they stopped- too rude.

Currently, Elizabeth Warren has a clue.  She has sent to Elon Musk as chairperson of the Department of Government Efficiency a letter outlining measures which would reduce government inefficiency and save taxpayers at least two trilllion dollars "over the next decade." Noting that she has introduced the bipartisan Stop Price Gouging the Military Act, Warren explains that the Air Force has been overcharged by 7,493 percent for soap dispensers. 

Would it be so difficult for Democrats to deride, say, "$27,000 soap dispensers"?  Ir shouldn't be, but has been. 

"By the mid-1980s," Wikipedia reminds us, defense "spending became a scandal when the Project on Government Oversight reported that the Pentagon had vastly overpaid for a wide variety of items, most nefariously by paying $435 for a hammer, $6,000 for a toilet seat, and $7,000 for an aircraft coffee maker."

The numbers were "inaccurate," apparently, and insignificantly. President Reagan appointed a commission which made several recommendations to reform the procurement process and in 1986 Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 219. Soon after, the Goldwater-Nichols Act reformed the Joint Chiefs of Staff and implemented some of the recommendations.

Positive change came about after the President had responded to misguided, hyperbolic outrage from the public. Understandably, then, when asked whether the Democratic Party should nominate a celebrity as a presidential candidate, Mehdi Hasan in early Janurary explained (at 3:32 of the video below)

Whether it's a celebrity or not a celebrity, whether it's a normal Senator politician, you need Democrats who are not afraid to say wild shit. Focus group bulshit has got to stop. Like, it's got to be- I said this in 2016- Democrats to go on Meet the Press and say "we're going to have a $25 minimum wage" or "we're going to spend a trillion dollars on health care."   

"How are you going to pay for it?"    "We just will. Trust me."    

How are you going to pay for it?"   Canada's going to pay for it."   

Just say absolute bullshit. Trump has set the bar. Say whatever the hell you want. I'm so fed up with a political system, this assymetric warfare which Donald Trump gets up and says "I'm going to buy Greenland and then we have serious discussions about him buying Greenland. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden or Kamala Harris produces a 27-page policy document on child care fully costed. 

That's assymetric warfare, right? It just seems to be it needs to be apresidential candidate who says "vote for me and I'll make sure $30 minimum wage. I'll make sure everyone has the best health care in the history of the world." Just say wild things because that's apparently what the American public wants and that's what social media is mainly.





Saying "whatever the hell you want" may take the form of extreme exaggeration, as Hasan points out, or misrepresenting the opponent's motives while highlighting the effect of his actions. Such an opportunity has been presented to Democrats on a silver platter, and Vice President J.D. Vance has given the good guys a blueprint:

 

The criticism by rhe US Conference of Catholic Bishops is telling because it opposes punitive immigration policies for two reasons: 1) it is generally welcoming to immigrants; and 2) most of the immigrants affected are Catholic.

If most of the newcomers were not Catholic, the Church still would oppose the Trump Administration policy. However, the leaders of the faith are aware of three things: 1) most of the affected individuals are Catholic;  2) most of these Catholics are more committed to their faith then American Catholics are and 3) the Church, facing declining numbers, need these immigrants, their numbers and the vitality they bring. 

This situation is simultaneously both fundamentally different and analogous to the Trump Administration's attack on immigration eight years ago. Campaigning for the presidency, Trump demanded "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on." Once he took office, he "stopped nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from being allowed to travel to America for 90 days."

The day before President Trump retroacitvely left office in 2021, the ACLU recalled

When Trump implemented his first Muslim ban, the public response was immediate. Crowds of protesters flooded airports in support of Muslims and other impacted communities who were immediately being detained or turned away all over the country. Lawyers and immigrants’ rights organizations nationwide, including the ACLU, filed a series of lawsuits as court after court ruled to block the ban. 

Despite the backlash, Trump issued new iterations of the ban to circumvent the law and conceal its real purpose, which in his own words was to block Muslims from entering the United States. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the third iteration of the ban to be implemented. The Trump administration then further expanded the ban, explicitly targeting Africans. As a result, people from 13 countries still remain barred from coming to the U.S.

By contrast, the Administration crrrently is targeting individuals who entered the USA through our southern border. They are from Latin America and with a few exceptions, are not Muslim. They are not Jewish or Hindu. They are Christian- mostly Roman Catholic, with some evangelical Protestants.

Layered upon that, the Vice President has called out the Church with which most of them identify. Vance asks rhetorically "are they worried about humanitarian concerns or are they worried about their bottom line?"

Both, ovbviously, but there is no shame in doing well by doing good. Nonetheless, the Administration- if Vance was not talking out of his posterior- is hostile to the interests of the Church in building its numbers. Yet only last September

"They're anti-Christian, and it's driving people out," (Catholic League President Bill) Donohue said in a phone interview of Democrats, citing similar comments from former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who recently endorsed Trump. "And the guys I'm talking to, it's not even so much abortion. It's just they feel like they don't speak their language anymore. This whole idea of letting men compete against women in sports abuses the bathrooms, they think they've just gone off the deep end”….

"Kamala Harris hates Catholics and everything we hold sacred. We can’t pretend otherwise. Our institutions, families, culture and belief in the sanctity of all human life are the antithesis of her vision for America. Donald Trump and JD Vance — and now RFK — are the antidote to the ruling class that has destroyed our country," Brian Burch, president of conservative non-profit, CatholicVote, said in the Trump campaign’s press release.

It's time to turn the tables, for Democrats to point out that Republicans are trying to drive Catholics,or more generally Christians, out of the country. When it was Muslims, Democrats were apoplectic, especially outraged because Trump was singling out individuals based on their religion. 

Now, the Administration is discrimating against Catholics and other Christians. Presumably, that's not by intent, though Vance's comments can be interpreted otherwise. It is, however, a blow against Christianity in effect

However, if Democras truly wish to change their message, the President and the Vice President, the former by policy and the latter by words, have given them an opening. You can drive a Mack truck through that gaping hole. Unfortunately, Democrats may be waiting for an electric-powered vehicle to take that drive.


Sunday, January 26, 2025

They Can Choke On It


Congresswoman: you may want to check out last November's election results.

Steele and the tweeter are realistic. However, at the end of this video (more complete video below), Representative Sarah McBride, Democrat of Delaware claims "I think the American people want to see elected officials be serious and work together."

Steele replies "no, they don't," a truth which virtually no one (and "virtually" may be misleading) appearing in media ever acknowledges. Unsurprisingly, McBride, misunderstanding (probably intentionally) Steele's last point, responds

You're right, you're right. They're not doing that. They're not doing that. They've made it clear from immigration to economic policy and taxes to basic human rights. They have made it clear that they are more interested in driving forward an extreme partisan agenda rather than pursuing collaborative common sense solutions. I totally agree.

No, you don't. Of course, Republicans are more interested in an extreme partisan agenda than in collaborative solutions. But Steele was expressly disagreeing with the naive assumption of the Democratic Party and of the mainstream center and left media that "the American people want to see elected officials be serious and work together."

McBride is right that Republicans have made it clear on various issues that they're disinterested in cooperation.  Although not yet a member of the US House of Representatives, the freshman from Delaware undoubtedly remembers when last May

Senate Republicans blocked a bipartisan border security bill for a second time, part of an attempt by Chuck Schumer to flip the script on immigration – a major political liability for Joe Biden and Democrats in this year’s election.

The 43-50 vote was far short of the necessary 60 votes needed to advance the legislation. Republicans, who have repeatedly demanded Democrats act on the border, abandoned the compromise proposal at the behest of Donald Trump who saw it was a political “gift” for Biden’s re-election chances.

And how did voters reward Democrats when the latter joined with Republicans in formulating a compromise immigration bill and then watching it go down because of Republican opposition?  They failed to regain the House, which at the beginning of the year they appeared to have an excellent chance to do; lost the Senate; lost the White House; and regressed slightly in control of state legislatures.

Voters knew which party wanted to work with the other, and which party knew what it wanted and would ruthlessly pursue its aims. "Wrong and strong," Bill Clinton would have called it.

Democrats must put Republicans on the defensive by putting them into a no-win situation. They can start by forcing votes Republicans to vote on "heads I win, tails, you lose" propositions, such as this one. It will seem rude to most Democratic members of Congress. But as Michael Steele put it, "they don't want to work with you, they're not going to work with you." So be rude, confrontational, and determined to win.


     .  



Friday, January 24, 2025

At That Time, In That Place

President Donald Trump was forced to sit in a church (no, he did not burst into flames) on Tuesday moring and listen to a dimunitive lady, Washington, D.C. Presiding Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde, plead

In the name of our God, I ask you to have mercy upon the people in our country. We’re scared now. The people who pick our crops and clean our office buildings, who labor in poultry farms and meatpacking plants, who wash the dishes after we eat in restaurants and work the night shifts in hospitals. They may not be citizens or have the proper documentation, but the vast majority of immigrants are not criminals. They pay taxes, and are good neighbors. They are faithful members of our churches and mosques, synagogues, gurdwara, and temples. I ask you to have mercy, Mr. President, on those in our communities whose children fear that their parents will be taken away, and that you help those who are fleeing war zones and persecution in their own lands to find compassion and welcome here.

Oh, the horror! Mr. Trump and acolytes were shockedt that a member of the clergy could ask for "mercy upon the people in our country," especially for the children who "fear that their parents will be taken away." His feelings hurt, the President posted on his ironically named Truth Social

She brought her church into the World of politics in a very ungracious way. She was nasty in tone, and not compelling or smart. She failed to mention the large number of illegal migrants that came into our Country and killed people. Many were deposited from jails and mental institutions. It is a giant crime wave that is taking place in the USA. Apart from her inappropriate statements, the service was a very boring and uninspiring one. She is not very good at her job! She and her church owe the public an apology!

That's a harsh critique from America's pre-eminent atheist. There is no "giant crime wave" taking place in the USA; Trump is confusing the past year with the last year, 2020, of his first term. Rev. Budde was polite, soft-spoken, and respectful, 

Yet, Budde joins a long list of people Trump has called "nasty": Danish Prime Minister Mette Fredericksen, Meghan Markle, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Omarosa Manigault Newman, April Ryan, Hillary Clinton, Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romeny, and Elizabeth Warren. It's a habit Trump enjoys almost as much as fantasizing about pleasuring two men at one time.


 



Still, the church service, as Sojourners pointed out on Inauguration Day, would not be partisan and thus

the church departed from the daily readings and chose scripture readings in conjunction with the Trump team.

All three scripture readers were close allies of the new Trump administration. Jack Graham, a Texas megachurch pastor and Trump advisor, read from Proverbs 3. Henry Stephan, a Catholic priest and mentor who baptized JD Vance, read 1 Peter 4. And Alveda C. King, niece of Martin Luther King Jr. and a Republican activist and politician, read from Galatians 3.

In addition to the scriptures, the church sang three hymns: “O God, our help in ages past,” “My country, ’tis of thee,” and “America the Beautiful.” All three selections are from The Episcopal Church’s hymnal.

Two of those three are not classic Christian hymns, but rather patriotic songs. Still, the pastor knew that the U.S. Park Police in June, 2020 delivered a volley of tear gas to clear the area between Lafayette Square and your church so the then-President, hostile toward Christianity, gets to hold a photo-op in front of your church without your knowledge. Five years later, that man, remaining pleased that non-violent protesters were squashed became President again and promptly signed an Executive Order to invalidate the 14th Amendment. Three days late, the federal judge considering the request for a restraining order recognizes the request is "blatantly unconstitutional" and notes "I have been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear."

The bishop then assumed the role of delivering a sermon to that individual, who is openly contemptuous of Christianity  If she had kept silent upon something which bears so heavily on her conscience and on the direction of the nation, it would have been an opportunity wasted, malpractice either in her role as a member of the clergy or simply as a concerned citizen.  

Afterward, Bishop Budde stated "I wanted to emphasize respecting the honor and dignity of every human being. I was trying to counter the narrative that is so divisive and polarizing and in which real people are being harmed." That narrative is being driven by the President, who has initiated, promulgated, and led a movement intended to be divisive and polarizing. The Washington National Cathedral on Tuesday was the right time and the right place to call out the demagogue behind it all.


 



Wednesday, January 22, 2025

Not Your Usual Gesture


"To be or not to be, that is the question" stated Hamlet in Hamlet. So was it or wasn't it?  The Economic Times explains

Elon Musk, the billionaire founder of Tesla and SpaceX, found himself at the centre of a storm of controversy after a gesture he made during a speech at a Donald Trump rally in Washington, DC. The tech mogul raised his right arm in a way that many onlookers quickly likened to the infamous Nazi salute, leading to widespread outrage online. This incident has ignited a debate over whether Musk intentionally mimicked a symbol linked to Adolf Hitler’s regime.

The controversy unfolded during celebrations for Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration at the Capital One Arena in Washington, DC. Musk, a vocal supporter of Trump and one of his notable donors, addressed the crowd. "My heart goes out to you. It is thanks to you that the future of civilisation is assured," Musk said, expressing his gratitude to the supporters.

In the midst of his speech, Musk struck a hand gesture, raising his right arm at a diagonal angle with his fingers extended and palm facing down. The gesture was repeated twice, once with his arm raised high and later at a slightly lower angle, after he thumped his chest. The gesture quickly gained attention, with social media users comparing it to the Nazi salute, a symbol infamous for its association with fascism and Adolf Hitler.



The reaction to Musk’s gesture has been sharply divided. Some historians and commentators have directly linked the gesture to the Nazi salute. Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a historian of fascism at New York University, stated on social media, “It was a Nazi salute and a very belligerent one too.” Similarly, historian Claire Aubin described it as a "Sieg Heil" salute, referring to the notorious Nazi greeting.

Ben Samuels, a journalist for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, also wrote that Musk’s gesture "appeared to conclude his remarks with a Roman salute, fascist salute most commonly associated with Nazi Germany," further strengthening the claim that it mirrored Nazi imagery.

However, not all experts agreed. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a New York-based organisation combating antisemitism, suggested that Musk’s actions were unintentional, calling it an “awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute”. The ADL encouraged people to offer one another grace and avoid jumping to conclusions.

The Anti Defamation League is confused  It argues that Musk merely "made an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm, not a Nazi salute." However, it then states that everyone "should give one another a bit of grace, perhaps the benefit of the doubt." Grace, as any credible theologian understands, is "unmerited favor," which is unnecessary if someone has not done wrong. However, the ADL contends Musk's alute was merely an "awkward gesture," which would make the gift of grace unnecessary.

Not so confused was this witty guy (or gal):

It turns out that Musk did have something to say about the controversy, at 9:57 p.m. on Monday evening, when he tweeted "Frankly, they need better dirty tricks. The 'everyone is Hitler' attack is sooo tired." That clarified..... exactly nothing.

Musk did not deny the charge, arguing only that the criticism is "tired." Thus, we can go to the record, and not only in the USA- in which Musk spent $250 milion to get Trump elected-  but in western Europe. There

In Britain, Mr. Musk revived a decade-old “grooming gangs” scandal that unfolded while Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whose center-left Labour Party is in power, was head of public prosecutions.

Fanning the flames that were kindled by right-wing media outlets, Mr. Musk has called Mr. Starmer “utterly despicable” and says he should be “in prison.” Last week he asked his 212 million followers to vote on whether “America should liberate the people of Britain from their tyrannical government.”

According to British media reports, Mr. Musk is also considering a $100 million donation to Britain’s far-right Reform Party, which would be the country’s largest political donation ever. The party’s leader, Nigel Farage, one of the chief campaigners for Brexit, has met Trump several times, most recently at Mar-a-Lago last month….

In Germany, which is holding snap federal elections next month, Mr. Musk is encouraging voters to vote for the far-right AfD, offering it the legitimacy that has long been denied to a party under surveillance by Germany’s domestic intelligence service for its links to neo-Nazis.

In an opinion piece for a major German newspaper published Dec. 28, he called the AfD the last “spark of hope” for Germany. The country, he said, is “teetering on the brink of economic and cultural collapse.”…

Since Mr. Musk first endorsed the AfD in December, Ms. Weidel’s posts on X have routinely gone viral, in part because he reposts them, along with numerous neo-Nazi accounts that have been reinstated and amplified. Researchers watching the online scene say far-right German influencers now post on X in English to get Mr. Musk’s attention.

If Musk were nearly anyone else, he'd deny that the salute- uh, er, "gesture"- was not a Nazi salute. But he has not. He has not done so because, whatever was intended, he wants the public to view it as a signal of approval for the new Administration and its anti-democratic policies and procedures. Elon Musk may not be a Nazi or even a fascist but he wants us to know that we better be very, very careful about what we say, write, or do.



Monday, January 20, 2025

Unforeseen and Unpleasant



At 1:42 of the video below, John Bolton, former National Security Advisor and Ambassador to the United Nations, is asked by CNN's Kasie Hunt, "Do you think President-elect Trump deserves credit for the dealbetween Israel and Hamas?" He replies

Well, I think he's responsible for the deal. I wouldn't take credit with it. I think it's a very bad mistake by Israel. I think they're acquescing because of the pressure that Trump put on the Netanyahu government. I don't think this deal was good over the last seven months. The outlines were basically what was put out by the Biden Administration in May, if I'm not mistaken, and it doesn't make it any better the fact that Trump now endorses it. In fact, it contradicts a basic element of Trump's pretty succssful efforts in his first term to get American hostages released, which is you don't swp hostages. 

The Israelis have had a long policy of doing it. I think it's been a long mistake for Israel. I think this is the wost time to give Hamas six weeks of a ceasefire or any Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and I'm very worried it's going to have long-term implications but I think Netanyahu is doing it because Biden has only four days left in office and he's got four years of Trump to face but I think it's the wrong way to
start.


      




Of course, the Israelis don't swap hostages because the Israelis don't detain anyone as a hostage. They arrest individuals to be prisoners. However, Bolton's major point, that "the Israelis have had a long policy of doing it. I think it's been a long mistake for Israel," is a good one. No doubt he's thinking at least in part of when

On October 11, 2011, the Israel government approved an agreement for the release of Gilad Shalit. On October 18, he returned home to his family.

August 28, 2011 was Gilad Shalit's 25th birthday - his sixth birthday in Hamas captivity.

June 25, 2011 marked the fifth anniversary of the abduction of Gilad Shalit by Hamas terrorists from within Israeli territory, near the Kerem Shalom crossing.

On June 25, 2006, then-Corporal Gilad Shalit (later promoted to Staff Sergeant) was kidnapped by Hamas terrorists from within Israeli territory and taken to the Gaza Strip. The kidnapping was part of an unprovoked attack which involved seven armed terrorists using a tunnel dug under the Israel-Gaza border. Gilad was 19 at the time of his abduction.

Among those 1,027 Palestinian and Israeli Arab (or perhaps Arabic-Israeli) prisoners released by Israel for one one individual was Yahya Sinwar, who

had spent over 22 years in Israeli prisons from 1988 to 2011, a period that reportedly hardened his radical views. According to experts, his time in solitary confinement and his interactions with other prisoners further solidified his leadership within Hamas.

Israeli authorities described him as "cruel, authoritative, influential," with significant endurance, manipulative tendencies, and the ability to rally crowds. Sinwar's ability to maintain authority inside prison, including negotiating with prison authorities and enforcing discipline among inmates, helped solidify his position as a key Hamas leader.

Following his release, Sinwar called for more kidnappings of Israeli soldiers.... 

He went far beyond that. When Sinwar was killed by the IDF in a raid last October, Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy think tank stated "The death of Sinwar for Israel is the equivalent to the death of Osama Bin Laden to the United States. He is the mastermnd of the worst terrorist attack the nation has ever suffered- more broadly, the worst attack suffered by Jews in any one day since the Holocaust."

Levitt understated the enormity of the attack. Eight days after the slaughter, the Executive Director of the same institute wrote

By latest count, the attacks by Hamas—the Arabic acronym for the Islamic Resistance Movement—killed more than 1,300 Israelis and third-country nationals, including at least 29 Americans, in a country whose population is less than 10 million. In America, that would be equivalent to killing nearly 40,000—13 times more than the number of Al Qaeda victims on 9/11....

As terrible as 9/11 was, tens of millions of Americans woke up the following morning in our vast country not knowing any of the victims or their families. In Israel, a country whose width is less than the daily commute of many Americans, not a single family was untouched by the attack, either directly, through a neighbor, friend or classmate.

The permanent elimination of bin Laden took place a decade after 9/11/01, almost three years after the USA gave control of the Green Zone (home to coalition headquarters) to the Iraqui government, and a month before Congress formally ended its authorization for the war.   By Sinwar was killed only twelve months after the terrorist attack upon Israel and while the war against Hamas was still raging.

That hostage/prisoner swap of 2011 cost Israel dearly, beyond even what was obvious with a ration of 1:1,027. And yet then-President Biden crowed "The elements of this deal were what I laid out in detail this past May, which was embraced by countries around the world and endorsed overwhelmingly by the U.N. Security Council." Trump boasted (emphasis and erratic punctuation his, of course) "This EPIC ceasefire agreement could have only happened as a result of our Historic Victory in November, as it signaled to the entire World that my Administration would seek Peace and negotiate deals to ensure the safety of all Americans, and our Allies."

This episode should bring to mind the idiom "be careful what you wish for." Among the prisoners to be released by the Netanyahu government, there could be another Yahya Sinwar, or other repercussions.. As John Bolton realizes, the consequences of the Hamas-Israel/hostage-prisoner agreement will in all likelihood not be what both now-former President Biden and President Trump envision.


Saturday, January 18, 2025

Hollywood's- or America's- Heir to David Duke


What, was David Duke unavailable?

 

While many prominent Republicans such as Lauren Boebert complain about "Hollywood elites"

President-elect Trump is leaning on some of his famous friends to influence Hollywood, tapping actors Jon Voight, Mel Gibson and Sylvester Stallone to serve as “special ambassadors” to the entertainment industry.

In a Truth Social post, Trump called Hollywood a “great but very troubled place” and claimed it was losing business to foreign countries.

“These three very talented people will be my eyes and ears, and I will get done what they suggest. It will again be, like The United States of America itself, The Golden Age of Hollywood!” Trump posted.

Voight has been a longtime Trump supporter and was awarded the National Medal of Arts in 2019. He likened Trump’s 2020 election defeat to the “greatest fight since the Civil War.”

Stallone during the 2024 campaign compared Trump to the “second George Washington” and introduced Trump during a postelection gala at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Gibson has caused controversy for making racist and antisemitic comments. He has supported Trump in the past and ridiculed Vice President Harris’s intelligence during the 2024 campaign.

In June, 2020 actress Winona Ryder accused Gibson of having

referred to her as an "oven dodger" in an apparent reference to her Jewish background.

Gibson's representative said Ryder's allegations, which she made in 2010 and repeated in a recent interview with The Sunday Times, were "100% untrue".

Ryder responded by asserting again that she and a late friend had been "on the receiving end of his hateful words".

The Stranger Things actress described the alleged encounter as "a painful and vivid memory".

Ryder first made the claims in an interview with GQ in 2010. She told this weekend's Sunday Times: "We were at a crowded party with one of my good friends, and Mel Gibson was smoking a cigar, and we're all talking and he said to my friend, who's gay, 'Oh wait, am I gonna get Aids?'

"And then something came up about Jews, and he said, 'You're not an oven dodger, are you?'"

Ryder, 48, said Gibson, 64, had tried to apologise to her at a later date.

The Braveheart star's representative disputed Ryder's version of events, however, accusing her of "lying" about both the alleged comments and apology.

Gibson, he claimed, "did reach out to [Ryder], many years ago, to confront her about her lies and she refused to address it with him".

Ryder responded by offering more details, including that the encounter occurred "around 1996"….

It is not the only time Gibson has been accused of using the offensive term, which alludes to the mass murder of Jews in Nazi death camps during World War Two.

In 2012 screenwriter Joe Eszterhas accused the actor of using it while they were working on a film about Jewish hero Judah Maccabee.

Gibson, who made widely documented anti-Semitic comments when he was arrested for drink-driving in 2006, called Eszterhas's claims "utter fabrications".

 Oh yea, sure.  When the Passion of the Christ was all the rage in 2014, The National Catholic Reporter (not my usual source, but when right, they are right) explained

Gibson made a film that confirmed many stereotypes of the Jews, such as depicting the moment when the bag of silver was tossed to Judas in slow motion and Judas looked at it lovingly; the "bad" Jewish men with fang-like teeth and the "good guys" with nice teeth; the sneering hatred from the high priest when he questions Jesus; and Pilate calling the Jews "filthy rabble." Certainly not the first to do so, Gibson uses stereotypes, some more subtle than others, to create a group of "bad" Jews to confront the "good" Jews consisting of Jesus, Mary and their followers who would be thought of as aligned with Christians today.

As a non-actor, David Duke wasn't available for appointment as a "special ambassador" for Hollywood. And the former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan and prominent anti-Semite has drifted out of the public sphere since he controversially supported Trump's presidntial bid in 2016 and was crushed in a U.S. Senate bid.  Appointment of Mel Gibson for anything by Donald Trump is only one more reminder of the latter's embrace of bigotry at practically every turn. So it is striking that in his victory speech upon defeating Duke in the Louisiana gubernatorial election in 1991, Democrat Edwin Edwards appeared to anticipate the last decade of national politics in remarking

Prophecy is reserved for those who are given that special gift, which I do not possess. But I say to all of America tonight, there will be other places and other times where there will be other challenges by other David Dukes. They too will be peddling bigotry and division as their elixir of false hope, they too will be riding piggyback on the frustration of citizens disaffected by government … We must address the causes of public disenchantment with government at every level … Tonight Louisiana defeated the darkness of hate, bigotry and division, but where will the next challenge come from? Will it be in another campaign in Louisiana? Or in a campaign for governor in some other state? Or a campaign for president of the United States?


Share |

Friday, January 17, 2025

Pamela Jo Bondi Schultz


The Democratic National Committee is looking for a new chairperson. Virtually everyone recognizes that the Party has been inept in its messaging, yet it need not wait to improve its public relations efforts. This should give it an idea:


John Banner, the actor who made "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I know nothing" famous in the mid 1060s'- early 1070s' sitcom, Hogans Heroes, serves as inspiration for Donald Trump's nominee for Attorney General, Pam Bondi. 

Questioned by Hawaii senator Mazie Hirono in her confirmation hearing on Wednesday, Pam Bondi did the fictional Hans Schultz proud. 

At 4:35 of the video below, Hirono can be seen asking the former Attorney General of Florida 

Meanwhile, though, you have an incoming President that said "I have the absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department. And in fact, President-elect Trump considers a DOJ to be his law firm. I ask you this: if Preisent-elect Trump asks, suggests, or hints that you, as Attorney General, should investigate of his perceived political enemies, would you do so?

After the nominee and the Senator get into a little tiff about the latter evidently failing to meet with the former, Hirono asks "I would like to know whether if the President suggests, hints, asks, that you, as Attoreney General should invstigate one of his political enemies?" Bondi responds

Senator, I certainly have not heard the President say that. But what I will tell you is two-thirds of Americans have lost faith in the Department of Justice and it's statements like that, I believe, that we will continue to lose faith....

On December 29, 2017, President Donald Trump was asked by The New York Times about Hillary Clinton's emails. Pivoting to the Russia investigation, he contended

I have absolute right to do what I want to do with the Justice Department. But for purposes of hopefully thinking I'm going to be treated fairly, I've stayed univolved with this particular matter.

At 1:38 of the video, Hirono can be seen stating "I want to ask you a factual question, who won the 2020 presidential election?" Bondi, once deeply involved in election denialism, remarked "Joe Biden is the President of the United States."  The Senator noted "I can say that Donald Trump won the 2024 election. I might not like it but I can say it. You cannot say who won the 2020 presidential election. It's disturbing that you can't give voice to that fact."

Disturbing, and significant because the Attorney General is the chief law enforcement officer (and prosecutor) of the USA and Trump

has repeatedly called for retribution for this supposed 2020 fraud, saying to “START ARRESTING THE POLL WORKERS AND WATCH HOW FAST THEY TELL YOU WHO TOLD THEM TO CHEAT,” and those involved “should all be ARRESTED for cheating and Election Fraud…GET TOUGH REPUBLICANS.” He has even raised grievances about the 2016 election. In one post, he asked if a former FBI official who was investigating his ties to Russia will “get the Death Penalty for treason.”

Immediately following the election denialism discussion, there followed an exchange abour the attempted coup:

Hirono: Are the felons convicted of breaking into the Capitaol on January 6 hostages or patriots? I'm quoting Trump, as President-elect Trump has said repeatedly. Do you agree with his characterization of the felons that I referred to?

Bondi: I am not familiar with that statement,Senator. 

Hirono: I just familiarized you with that statemnt. Do you agree with that statement?

Bondi: I'm not familiar with it, Senator.

Hirono: No answer.

At a rally in Newton, Iowa on the third anniversary of the insurrection, Trump declared

You get indicted once or twice if you kill people, but then you get put in jail so you don't get indicted after that.... If you are a certain person, you don't even get in trouble if you do, okay. But if you're with us, they put you in jail. Look at what's happened with the J6 hostages. The hostages- That's a horrible thing.

He claimed also "Some people call them prisoners. I call them hostages" and "Release the J6 hostages, Joe (Biden). Release them, Joe. You can do it real easy, Joe." 

Between the two exchanges is one in which Hirono and Bondi discuss/not discuss my favorite Trump quote. Not because he is right, because he is not, but because of all the criticism of Trump as "racist," this one seemed designed to prove his critics right.  Hirono notes "he (Trump) has also said illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation. He said that in December 2023. 
Do you agree with that statement?"

Bondi replied "Senator, I am not familiar with that statement. But what I can tell you is I went to the border a few months ago...."

As the Senator apparently was referring to, Trump had posted on Truth Social in December of 2023 "illegal immigration is poisoning the blood of our nation. They're coming from prisons, from mental institutions- from all over the world."  Bad enough, but worse was his claim the day before at a rally in New Hampshire that

They let- I think the real number is 15, 16 million people into our country.When they do that, we got a lot of work to do. They're poisoning the blood of our country. That's what they've done.They poison mental institutions and prisons all over the world, not just in South America, not just to three or four countries that we think about, but all over the world. They're coming into our country from Africa, from Asia, all over the world.

This, a reference to immigrants themselves "poisoning the blood of our country" was marginally worse than referring to the process of immigration " poisoning the blood of our country." Brazenly racist is slightly worse than blatantly racist but repetition allowed us to understand fully that he is racist. The only thing worse would have been had the ex-President bragged "I am racist and proud of it"; well, maybe.

Senator Hirono should have brought the receipts- date, place, and exact quote. Still, it became obvious that the nominee for Attorney General is thoroughly dishonest and completely without integrity. It is difficult, though, to satirize or ridicule Pam Bondi, choice of an incomparably dishonest politician elected to a second term as President, for being bereft of character. 

So ridicule her as reimniscent of Sergeant Schultz.Design a t-shirt, probably a sweatshirt also, with John Banner's likeness replaced with that of Panela Jo Bondi. It probably wouldn't be enough to derail her nomination but it would justifiably undermine her credibility- and would be fun, too.



 



Wednesday, January 15, 2025

Triumphant



It was August of 2022 and the FBI had executed a search warrant of the Mar-a-Lago resort and home of former President Donald Trump, at which boxes of classified documents were classified.  NBC News had obtained a copy of the warrant and Glenn Kirschner, MSNBC columnist and NBC legal analyst, reasonably and logically concluded

Even if the Mar-a-Lago search warrant is “only” about Trump illegally possessing government documents, if feels like a shift in the tectonic legal plates. With Garland’s Justice Department reaching the conclusion that it’s time to begin using search warrants as part of its criminal investigation of a former president, it seems that things may be snowballing in the direction of accountability, and maybe even justice.

Accountability and maybe even justice. Similarly, there must have been an NFL general manager somewhere outside of Kansas City who in April, 2017 mused "that Mahomes kid from Texas Tech is just going to be a bust." 

In July of 2024 Federal Judge Aileen Cannon, with a dream of being nominated to the United States Supreme Court in a second Trump Administration, dismissed the indictment on the spurious notion that the appointment of Jack Smith to be special counsel violated the Appointments Clause and the Appropriations Clause of Article II of the US Constitution. 

In August, Smith asked a federal appeals court to reinstate the indictment but it was too late. Attorney General Merrick Garland had waited seventeen (17) months to appoint a Special Counsel. Trump used his immense wealth and influence to run out the clock and was assisted by the paralysis which plagues the criminal justice system when confronted with formidable defendants.

At least Smith, who resignedJanuary 10 beat a possible hangman's noose by ten days- has now delivered his final report, as is customary at the conclusion of an investigation authorized by the Justice Department. However, it covers only the 1/6/21 case because 

The Justice Department had been expected to make the document public in the final days of the Biden administration, but the Trump-appointed judge who presided over the classified documents case granted a defense request to at least temporarily halt its release. Two of Trump's co-defendants in that case, Trump valet Walt Nauta and Mar-a-Lago property manager Carlos De Oliveira, had argued that the release of the report would be unfairly prejudicial, an argument that the Trump legal team joined in.

The department responded by saying that it would withhold from public release the classified documents volume as long as criminal proceedings against Nauta and De Oliveira remain pending. Though U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had dismissed the case last July, a Smith team appeal of that decision related to the two co-defendants remained pending.

But prosecutors said they intended to proceed with the release of the election interference volume.

Good; also completely irrelevant. The portion of the report pertaining to the insurrection four years ago has been released and we have learned- or, rather, been reminded 

The Department’s view that the Constitution prohibits the continued indictment and prosecution of a President is categorical and does not tum on the gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government’s proof, or the merits of the prosecution, which the Office stands fully behind,” Smith wrote.

Indeed, but for Mr. Trump’s election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial.



Good on the Special Counsel for laying it out but we already knew Donald J. Trump is a criminal. Last May, he was convicted in New York City, NY on 34 counts of falsification of business records, a felony which garned him an unconditional discharge last week.  Nine months after conviction, the ex-President was sentenced to nothing because, well, No One Is Above The Law.

Everyone in this country, except individuals who have not been here the past 48 or 39 months, has not only heard about the attempted coup in January 2021, but has seen video of it, repeatedly. Some- only some- people who watch only Fox News and other right-wing outlets have seen video edited to include protesters merely hanging out inside the Capitol. However, they have viewed clips and have their mind made up, as have the rest of us.. 

Even a spattering of loyal Trump supporters knew that he did wrong on January 6, 2021 and even committed a crime, yet decided to vote for him, anyway. Everyone has had a working knowledge of that day and has had his or her mind made up a long time ago.

Yet, little is known about the classified documents case, which has mostly escaped attention of the public. Donald Trump may have kept top-secret and other classified files merely to satisfy his ego. Or he may have intended to turn them over to Russia, Saudi Arabia, or other enemies or rivals. Or he may have intended to keep them for the time being and kept them as a chip to bargain with nations for personal advantage. We don't know.

So, this: The Justice Department, helmed by a Democrat in a Democratic Administration, will not be releasing the portion of the report which pertains to a matter of the highest national security and which might foster justified concern about the President-elect. It is the matter not well understood by the American people because there has been relatively little attention paid to it by news media or politicians, and the matter which might engage the public's interest if details about it became known.

It appears that this portion of the report could have been released (and could be in the next 4-5 days) were it not for charges pending against Nauta and De Oleveira, who appear to be creeps. Creeps who would not have committed their crimes if not for Donald Trump. Creeps whom only a few people have heard of and whom have been forgotten by most of those. Creeps who even if acquitted will never become members of the United States House of Representatives or Senate, let alone President of the USA.

But prosecutors must have their trophies, even if they let the big one go. The cases against Nauta and De Oliveira will almost certainly be dismissed by the Trump Justice Department. It turns out that Donald Trump was right about two things. There is a Deep State, only not that which Trump whines and lies about. It is a legal system which, whether because of a feckless Attorney General or a malevolent, opportunistic federal judge, will opt for prosecuting nobodys rather than a very big, very significant somebody. 

The other is that Donald Trump has won. Oh, for now and pending adjudication of an appeal of the jury verdict in New York, he is a convicted criminal. He also, for the second time, will be President of the United States of America after an election which he would not have won had Merrick Garland not spent several months dithering. Now, with the blessing of the Supreme Court, free to do virtually anything he wishes in the office, Donald Trump has emerged victorious. Not only has he slammed the Democratic Party, he has scored a knockout victory over the vaunted American legal system.


Not Quite Color Blind

Racist? No. Inaccurate? Well, no. But from the spokesman for President Trump, he who (successfully) nominated Marco Rubio for Secretary of ...