Charles Blow of the New York Times reminds his readers that the election of Donald Trump is far from normal.
The durability of our democracy is not destined. It is not impervious to harm or even destruction. The Constitution can’t completely prevent that, nor can protocols and conventions. The most important safeguard against authoritarianism is an informed, engaged citizenry vigorously opposed to acquiescence and attrition.
In other words, it may well be that the only thing that can protect America from the man who will sit at its pinnacle of power is the urgent insistence of the public that radical alteration of our customs and concepts of accountability are not on the table, that authority in a democracy is imbued by the ballot, but it is also accountable to its people.
And people are already ill at ease with Trump. There is increasing resolution on the dimensions of Russian interference in our election — an effort that, according to recent reports, appeared aimed at injuring Hillary Clinton and installing Trump as president. The implications of such a breach, something that comes close to an act of war, are absolutely staggering.
The fact that a hostile foreign government executed a plan to influence, and therefore irrevocably damage, the bedrock of our democracy is unfathomable. The repercussions are nearly incalculable: it corrodes faith in the process, faith in elected officials, faith in national security, faith in our assumed autonomy.
To have a president who refuses to acknowledge the violation in order to avoid the asterisk by which he might be forever marked a Manchurian candidate or, more plainly, Moscow’s mule, is not normal.
Furthermore, to have a president who is disturbingly complimentary when discussing Russia; whose onetime campaign manager had pro-Russia ties; whose son said in 2008, “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,” and continued, “We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia”; and who has nominated for secretary of state a man on whom Vladimir Putin bestowed Russia’s Order of Friendship, is not normal. Americans shouldn’t have to worry about whether the White House will become an annex of the Kremlin.
Furthermore, to have a president surround himself with a rogue’s gallery of white supremacy sympathizers, anti-Muslim extremists, devout conspiracy theorists, anti-science doctrinaires and climate-change deniers is not normal.
To have a president for whom we don’t know the extent of his financial entanglements with other countries — in part because he has refused to release his tax returns — is not normal.
To have a president with massive, inherent conflicts of interest between continued ownership of his company and the running of our country is not normal.
Presidents may be exempt from conflict of interest provisions in the law, but exemption from legal jeopardy is not an exemption from fact or defilement of the primacy of a president’s fiduciary duty to empire above enterprise.
To have a president who nurses petty vengeances against the press and uses the overwhelming power of the presidency to attack any reporting of fact not colored by flattery and adoration is not normal.
It doesn’t matter if he is motivated by calculation — particularly toward diversion — or compulsion: His behavior remains unsettling and even dangerous.
To have a president who apparently does not have time for daily intelligence briefings, but who can make time for the most trite anti-intellectual stunts, like staging a photo-op with a troubled rapper and twilight-tweeting insults like a manic insomniac, is not normal.
I fully understand that elevated outrage is hard to maintain. It’s exhausting.
But the alternative is surrender to national nihilism and the welcoming of woe.
The next four years could be epochal years in the history of this country. They could test the limits of presidential power and the public’s passivity.
I happen to believe that history will judge kindly those who continued to shout, from the rooftops, through their own weariness and against the corrosive drift of conformity: This is not normal!

I agree completely.
Everyone in the Trump transition whom I have seen on television is pitching his conduct as if not just acceptable but will be the new normal, so just get used to it.
I will not.
LikeLike
His behavior may be our saving grace . The American people have proven time and again to be less than the inhabitants of a shining city upon a hill .
When the Chinese get sick of him and the supply chain halts tanking the American economy. They will not worry about other peoples jobs. As shelves of Walmart empty out and the price go up.
What we have found out through much blood and pain . It is not as easy to govern the world as it is gullible Americans. Today I heard some knucklehead on CNN state Trump may be like Reagan restoring respect for America.
Lets see ,can we than expect a few embassy bombings , a barracks bombing a commercial aircraft bombing, a German nightclub bombing……… Watch out Grenada the tough guys back in town.
LikeLike
About Blow’s article: How refreshing. Basically, I think Trump went into this thinking he was inheriting a tyrant-kingship, where he could do anything he wanted, period, (instead of a constitutional democracy). I’d call him a rank amateur except that I know many better, and well-founded and rounded, amateurs. I quote below three sections of Blow’s article, then two parts of Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution (about the legislature) which I thought were relevant to these parts of the article.
BLOW SAYS: “To have a president for whom we don’t know the extent of his financial entanglements with other countries — in part because he has refused to release his tax returns — is not normal.
“To have a president with massive, inherent conflicts of interest between continued ownership of his company and the running of our country is not normal.
“Presidents may be exempt from conflict of interest provisions in the law, but exemption from legal jeopardy is not an exemption from fact or defilement of the primacy of a president’s fiduciary duty to empire above enterprise.”
I guess the Oath of Office is also important here. It is my understanding that the President-Elect is supposed to take that Oath seriously.
From Article 1, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution:
2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
3: No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
(definition of Bill of Attainder according to Dictionary.com: “an act of legislature finding a person guilty of treason or felony without trial.”
LikeLike
I read this article yesterday. Trump is so unbalanced, I don’t know how we can undo the harm he has already done and the harm to come.
LikeLike
I was listening to CNN a few minutes ago, and one of their experts said it was especially dangerous that Trump is not interested in intelligence briefings since he is the most ignorant person elected president in our lifetime. He has a bubble around him of people like Mike Flynn, who says that Islam is not a religion, it is a cancer. With views like this, we will have no allies to help us defeat ISIS.
LikeLike
AMEN, Diane! MINORITY president-elect is plain nuts. How he got this far shows the “sickness called GREED” OF this country and our broken two-party system.
But then … most of Congress live in a bubble. They can only talk “in circles” to each other.
The White House will need major cleansing when MINORITY president-elect trump is gone. Where’s the SAGE? Better stock up now for a lot of SAGE will need to be burned.
LikeLike
Diane: I just heard on Chris Matthews (Joy Reid MS-NBC) that Flynn met, at Trump Towers, a few weeks back, with a group from Europe that was started a couple of decades back by a Nazi. I’ll wait for more, . . . .
LikeLike
One factor no one seems to take into account is the U.S. Military, and its role to protect the U.S. Constitution.
For instance, the oath of office differs between enlisted troops and officers.
The Oath of Enlistment (for enlistees):
“I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
The Oath of Office (for officers):
“I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God.”
Did you notice that for officers there is no phrase that says, “I will obey the orders of the President of the United States?
What is it that U.S. military officers must defend?
“I will support and defend the Constitution of the United Sates against all enemies, foreign or domestic …”
What happens when/if the generals and admirals decide that Little Fingers (Donald Trump) is a domestic threat to the U.S. Constitution?
As of Feb. 29, 2016, there were 411 one stars, 299 two stars, 139 three stars, and 37 four-star active generals and admirals. It’s obvious to me that the military is the last line of defense for the republic and the U.S. Constitution.
Will the generals and admirals be as blindly docile and obedient as the electors of the Electoral College were?
But maybe the oligarchs already thought of this, and have put plans in action to make sure the generals and admirals do not defend the U.S. Constitution.
LikeLike
Lloyd: The below article from the Huffington Post today is interesting, but really telling–in the light of your note above about levels of military position and their allegiances.
**12/20 TRUMP REPORTEDLY PLANS TO KEEP PRIVATE SECURITY DURING HIS PRESIDENCY^^ Which would be an unheard of break with the security protocols for presidents. [Mary Papenfuss, HuffPost]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-private-security_us_58582298e4b039044709b933?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Morning%20Email%20122016&utm_content=The%20Morning%20Email%20122016+CID_bc8146e8fa0f9a15acbbce2635093d1e&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=Mary%20Papenfuss%20HuffPost&ncid=newsltushpmgnews
LikeLike
Catherine Blanche King
Two Thoughts
Confusion good.
Bill de Blasio no pay no play pull the security detail.
LikeLike
I don’t think any security will be enough if the military decides to send in special forces teams, for instance, from Delta Force, with full tactical support. We don’t hear much about Delta. Mostly we hear about Navy Seals. When ranked against other special forces units, Delta is the one that earns the #1 position, but they shy away from media attention while Navy Seals seem to love it.
If the military sees Little fingers as a threat to the U.S. Constitution, the only way for Little Fingers to survive is for him to vanish and stay in hiding probably in Russia, if he is warned ahead of time by a mole; that would be highly unlikely.
The next few years will be a test, if Little Fingers attempts to subvert the U.S. Constitution, to see if the military honors the oath they took.
LikeLike
Lloyd: By having a different security apparatus, I had to wonder what aka Little Fingers is anticipating.
LikeLike
He doesn’t trust the Secret Service. I did a Google search to see what kind of oath a Secret Service agent might have to take but couldn’t find it. It’s obvious Little Fingers doesn’t want to have guards he doesn’t pay for. He wants guards hanging around that he thinks he can trust when he’s on the phone with his master, Vladimir P.
Little Fingers is paranoid crazy. The space between his ears is a septic tank filled with conspiracy theories.
LikeLike
I’ve read that the Air Force, in particular, is heavily evangelical. Will they protect the Constitution or do “God’s will”?
LikeLike
You beat me to it .
LikeLike
The generals know who they can trust.
LikeLike
Lloyd Lofthouse
Really Lloyd .
http://www.alternet.org/story/67385/the_evangelical_christian_takeover_of_the_military
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/12/evangelical-christianity-_n_807635.html
https://thinkprogress.org/retired-army-general-to-tea-party-group-i-would-lead-a-coup-against-the-u-s-government-43a91f51de8a#.1wp1wa4h5
I don’t know, but like the FBI . I would be a little more concerned with Trump using the military than with the military containing him. There was a reason for Posse Comitatus
LikeLike
The three sources you site aren’t exactly stellar.
Trump’s Unimpressive Support From Military Leaders
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/why-trumps-support-from-military-leaders-isnt-that-impressive/498806/
The Disgraced and Little-Known Generals Backing Donald Trump
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/06/the-disgraced-and-little-known-generals-backing-donald-trump.html
LikeLike
“Now there you go again” Lloyd I never quote that other Californian you must be getting to me. Those sources are as reputable as the Atlantic. However how is the Editorial board of the Nations paper of record.
LikeLike
No idea.
But Little Fingers only had 88 generals and admirals backing him.
HC had 110.
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/09/09/hillary-clinton-tops-trumps-88-list-110-generals-admirals-backing.html
LikeLike
http://usnews.newsvine.com/_news/2012/12/04/15676692-west-point-cadet-quits-cites-criminal-behavior-of-officers
LikeLike
Diane, Please comment in your blog about the hate mail sent to Jackie Evancho. Hate mail of any type is disgusting and represents an educational failure!
Sent from my iPad
>
LikeLike
Jackie Evancho’s sister is transgender, she is getting a lot of blow back from the LGBTQ community. They are upset that she will be performing for an administration that is very anti gay rights, same sex marriage and transgender rights (think Penceism). And then there are vicious Internet trolls who specialize in being hateful no matter what.
LikeLike
Who is Jackie Evancho?
LikeLike
She is am amazing 16 year old singer who is proudly singing the Star Spangled Banner at the inauguration.
LikeLike
Never heard of her.
Why couldn’t he find an A list performer to sing the National Anthem?
LikeLike
Adult female performers didn’t want to get groped. Male performers knew the check would bounce.
LikeLike
Check out her videos on YouTube. She has an amazing God-given voice. You will be enchanted!
LikeLike
Interesting description for someone who thinks evolution is a scientifically proven fact.
“A God-given voice…”
LikeLike
Tea partiers and clintonistas are from the same narrow mindset of their different faiths, beliefs and treatment of those who don’t have their narrow mindset.
LikeLike
Ouch
And now after a legacy of Donald Trump as his greatest accomplishment .Who will probably turn us back to the 1920s POTUS is going to push Tom Perez so we are sure to get more of the same. .
How bad was this loss well lets judge that by who they lost to.
Laugh about the unemployment rate TOM with 5.4 million working part time involuntarily.and a worker participation rate 2 points lower than in 2000..
Yes the Neo liberal Dems don’t give up do they.
LikeLike
The military coming to the rescue? Isn’t that what happened in Egypt? What about all the military coups in the South America of many decades ago. Would we be exchanging one authoritarian figure for another? When Bush debarked on his war of choice, the military went right along with it. No rebellion against Bush’s disaster.
LikeLike
And the two Bush presidents didn’t vote for Little Fingers.
LikeLike
Decades no need to go back that far . Add two soft coups in Argentina and Brazil . All engineered by USA, USA, USA, USA
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/analysis/6-Coups-Against-Latin-Americas-Left-Since-2000-20160511-0021.html
LikeLike
No rebellion in that sense is a plus . Bush was dead wrong but we do have civilian control of the Armed forces no matter what the generals think about policy. Mass resignations would be the only acceptable actions.
LikeLike
Another excellent article.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/can-american-fascism-be-stopped
LikeLike
I wonder if democrats were as worried when the US ambassador to the U.K. was a nazi sympathizer, had good things to say about a man who killed the handicapped children and WW1 war heroes who were wounded in the service for their country.
Have not found much of that in historic records.
I wonder how democrats reacted to a Democrat president who selected a number of his rich buddies for important positions in his government.
Have not found much about that either in historic records.
I wonder how democrats reacted when the democrat president divided the world between him and a Russian mass murderer.
Have not found much in historic record on that one.
I wonder how democrats reacted to a Democrat presidents whose actions led to the death of 53000+ deaths in about seven years.
We know how democrats reacted to a republican president who was responsible for the death of about 5000 soldiers over a period of 15 years.
Still measuring with a double standard, aren’t we
LikeLike
This is supposed to make us feel good about the idiot who won the election?
LikeLike
No. It’s called a pit calling the kettle black. It seems people forget their own history too conveniently. Washington post had an interesting article about the North Carolina going-ons.
How the democrats killed the role of a republican lt-governor when the democrats had the majority. How the democratic governor fired 169 policy makers.
Childish behavior – but both sides seem to be plagued by that. Remember removing w’s from keyboards in the White House?
LikeLike
The party in power controls appointments.
What happened in NC is a disgrace. It is an attack on democracy, not business as usual.
LikeLike
Clearly the writer buys into intelligence agency propaganda hook, line and sinker. The assumption that “there is increasing resolution on the dimensions of Russian interference in our election” is absurd.
“The FACT that a hostile foreign government executed a plan to influence and therefore irrevocably damage the bedrock of our democracy…” is nonsense. We have anonymous sources, and NO evidence.
LikeLike
JB2 quotes and writes: “‘The FACT that a hostile foreign government executed a plan to influence and therefore irrevocably damage the bedrock of our democracy…’ is nonsense. We have anonymous sources, and NO evidence.”
To put your comment aside for a moment, I think (and we all can assume) that much is going on behind the scenes that we can speculate about, that is implicated, but that we don’t know about. Though conspiracy theories are born of such situations, there is legitimacy to secrecy also. For instance, legitimate and truthful anonymous sources might be, well . . ., killed; and, in any case, will be a trusted “source” no more. WE have anonymous sources, but probably sources are not so anonymous to those who are making decisions.
And back to your note: nor do you know that information is coming from “intelligence agency propaganda.” So your skepticism on the matter, especially put forth as factual, is clearly an overreach and has less ground on that score than my trust in those who are privy to more facts than can be made public. Though you probably disagree, I think there’s greater cause for that trust in the President–at least the one we presently have–and again, certainly more than in your speculative theory of propaganda. (If you or someone here has more evidence than that, I am not aware of it and would like to be apprised.)
Of course we would all like to hear what a bipartisan commission would be able to uncover and expose for us. However, again, we do have a President who already has what information is available. . and who is responding to the situation in a way that points to such planning, which is what we want in a President. The election is over–and now we just have to see if the Republicans in Congress can get their heads out of their, . . . uh . . ., party politics, and rise to the level of their Oath.
While (as far as I can see) we don’t have the kind of evidence you or I would like to have as American citizens, it’s what we can have at present.
The other thing is, and though your quote doesn’t mention Russia but only a “hostile foreign government,” Russia’s Putin and the facts of his predatory behavior, coupled with the history of the KGB and Russian politics over the years. And then there’s the absence of Trump’s taxes, and Putin’s coziness with Trump and the people who have surrounded him for a good while (e.g., Maniport). It doesn’t look good to me.
LikeLike
Catherine,
Fortunately, the facts that we know are sufficient. The CIA-FBI does not disclose its methods and sources. But it is plain and clear that emails from Podesta and the DNC were hacked and released, not all at once, but drip drip drip. The goal was to harm one candidate, not the other. Who hacked them, who gave them to Assange? Who wanted to help Trump? Maybe as Trump said, it was a fat guy on his bed in NJ. The CIA does not agree.
LikeLike
Diane: How many times have we talked about the hacked e-mails here and heard it again and again on the news. I agree: “It is sufficient”–the leaking was all about Hillary and none about Trump. Frankly, I think “we” would be stupid to think otherwise. But if you are a Trumpie, none of that counts.
BTW, there is an article from Mother Jones that might be of interest to you and others here. It’s about the nitty-gritty situations of many Trump supporters and why they voted for him. I do think there is a Jim-Jones element in some of his followers; but the article speak more to the point that these followers have the disease and are aware of at least some of its symptoms–but of course, it still stands that they chose the wrong cure.
View at Medium.com
LikeLike
JB2,
The director of the CIA is NOT an anonymous source
LikeLike
My skepticism began with the Church Committee in the ’70’s.
LikeLike
JB2,
I remember the Church committee.
Given a choice of believing Putin or the CIA, I believe the CIA.
LikeLike
Prison profits: here’s a story posted today on crooksandliars.com:
This Private Prisons CEO Is Super Excited About Jailing ‘Unique Populations’ Under Donald Trump
12/21/16 5:00pm
Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) CEO Damon Hininger said this week that he expects profits to soar under the new president’s immigration policy.
Although CCA’s stock dipped over the summer after the Justice Department announced plans to phase out the use of private prisons, Donald Trump’s win caused the company’s share price to skyrocket 43 percent on election day alone.
In a Tuesday interview with CNBC, Hininger said that CCA, which recently began rebranding itself as CoreCivic, saw a several opportunities in the first year of Trump’s presidency, including a need for increased detention capacity for the housing of undocumented immigrants.
“You guys profit if there’s more people in jail,” CNBC host Brian Sullivan noted. “And that’s not a way any company should be run. You have contracts and limits that say, well, you need to have 90 percent occupancy in a prison.”
Hininger argued that Sullivan’s charge was “baloney” because the company encourages inmates not to re-offend by offering education and vocational programs.
“We’re providing a great service!” the CEO insisted. “We’re making sure these individuals once they’re released, they can support themselves and their family and not come back into the criminal justice system. That’s great value to the government.”
Hininger said that the company could “look forward to” a number of favorable circumstances in the next year under the new president.
“First of all, there’s immigration,” he explained. “If there is a need for more detention capacity on the border, we can provide that solution or if there’s a unique population that we need to help serve with ICE.”
Additionally, Hininger sees an upside in Trump’s promise to rebuild infrastructure, which he believes can be provided by the private prison industry.
“A lot of discussion with the Trump administration about criminal justice reform,” he promised.
LikeLike
County jails make money off housing federal prisoners. So much so, that some counties have a detention budget that counts in 50% or more comes from housing federal prisoners.
So one can be upset that business tries to make money, but local counties do exactly the same, and calculate that revenue in new construction. They CAN get into financial difficulties if the federal prisoners don’t show up.
LikeLike