Archives for category: Elections
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Dana Milbank: Trump Is Just Plain Vulgar!

By dianeravitch
September 4, 2024 //
45

Dana Milbank is a regular columnist for The Washington Post. He writes here about the essence of Trump: Vulgarity.

He began:

The New York Times ran a fine specimen of unintentional comedy this week: an essay by conservative writer Rich Lowry titled “Trump Can Win on Character.”


The only thing that could have made it better was if it had been under the byline of Stormy Daniels.


Lowry’s argument itself wasn’t quite as absurd as the headline. He was only suggesting that Trump repeatedly call Vice President Kamala Harris “weak,” which Trump probably won’t do, because he’s too busy calling her a communist, a copycat, stupid, a recent conversion to being Black or someone with a crazy laugh who is not as good looking as he is.


Trump could win on various things: inflation, immigration, isolationism. But the notion that a felon and adjudicated sexual abuser who shouts barnyard obscenities and vulgar epithets at his rallies would return to the White House on the strength of his upstanding character? Well, let’s just say there are very fine people on both sides who would have trouble making that argument.
As though in answer to the suggestion that he can “win on character,” Trump responded over the next couple of days by:

• Holding a campaign event in front of graves at Arlington National Cemetery, where his staff reportedly pushed aside a cemetery official trying to enforce rules against politicizing the sacred ground. Trump posed graveside with a big grin and a thumbs-up, and his campaign set the Republican nominee’s cemetery visit to music and posted it as a TikTok video. When a Harris spokesman commented on the “sad” event, Trump’s running mate, Sen. JD Vance of Ohio, declared that Harris herself “can go to hell.” (Vance, after a cool reception last week at a doughnut shop in Georgia, got booed by firefighters this week in Boston.)


• Announcing that two of the nation’s most prominent conspiracy theorists — Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard — would be co-chairs of his presidential transition if he wins the election, with influence over key appointments and policies. Gabbard’s trumpeting of Russian propaganda has been labeled “treasonous” by Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), and Kennedy’s long-shot presidential campaign somehow fizzled after he acknowledged, among other things, having a brain worm and leaving a dead bear cub in New York’s Central Park.


• Rolling out his latest attempt to cajole his supporters to line his own pockets. This time, he offered another round of “digital trading cards” featuring a Trump superhero. Supporters who parted with $1,485 or more in this Trump-enrichment scam would be sent a piece of the fabric cut from the “knockout suit” he wore during his June debate with President Joe Biden.


• Proclaiming that it was “Biden’s fault and Harris’s fault” that he was the victim of a failed assassination attempt, asserting without evidence that they prevented the Secret Service from protecting him and that he might have been shot “because of their rhetoric.” The FBI reported that the shooter, a Republican, had searched online for both Biden and Trump events and settled on the Trump rally as a “target of opportunity.”


• Sharing another fusillade of posts on social media that cited QAnon slogans, called for the imprisonment of his opponents, and suggested that Harris used sex to advance her career.
On Thursday, Trump was in Michigan and as coarse as ever — referring twice to Harris’s running mate, Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, as “Tampon Tim”; preposterously claiming that in Democratic states “you’re allowed to kill the baby after the baby is born”; and saying of Harris: “Nobody knows who the hell she is. She does not give a damn about you.” While complaining that the Army had said he used the Arlington National Cemetery visit “to politic,” he went right on “politicking” about it. Referring to the families of the fallen he met with, Trump said Biden and Harris “killed their children as though they had a gun in their hand.”


Trump can win on character!

Trump isn’t a fan of military cemeteries, wherein rest those who died for their country and who Trump regards as “suckers” and “losers.” (Trump denies voicing those sentiments, which his former chief of staff, retired four-star Marine Gen. John Kelly, attributes to him.) Trump canceled a visit to an American military cemetery in France in 2018, citing rain, and he skipped the presidential visit to Arlington on Veterans Day that same year. Just two weeks ago, he said the civilian Presidential Medal of Freedom is “much better” than the Medal of Honor for military valor because those receiving the latter “have been hit so many times by bullets or they’re dead.”

So why did he visit Arlington this week? There was something in it for him. He would use the fallen as a backdrop for a political attack against the Biden administration — specifically, attacking Biden for his handling of the Afghanistan pullout three years ago.


Army National Military Cemeteries cannot be used for political activities, but when a cemetery official tried to “ensure adherence to these rules” she was “abruptly pushed aside,” an Army spokesman said. Trump’s campaign accused the official of “suffering from a mental health episode” and Chris LaCivita, who is co-managing Trump’s campaign, called her a “despicable” person who shouldn’t represent the “hollowed grounds” of Arlington.

LaCivita knows something about making the hallowed hollow. He led the “swiftboating” of John Kerry 20 years ago and is now attempting to do the same to Harris’s running mate by disparaging Walz’s honorable service. And here was the Trump campaign desecrating Arlington’s Section 60, where Iraq and Afghanistan war dead lie, and posting photos and video of it across social media, with a voice-over by Trump attacking his political opponents.


Of course, Trump is the one who set the Afghanistan withdrawal in motion. Now, he’s setting another calamity in motion, by getting ready to force Ukraine to give up its fight against Russia’s invasion. “Look at what’s going on right now with Ukraine surging into Russia,” he complained this week, objecting to Ukraine’s recent success. “You’re going to end up in World War III and it’s going to be a bad one.”

Openly condemning an American ally’s success? Vladimir Putin couldn’t have said it better…

Kennedy’s crackpot ideas go well beyond covid to the debunked claim that childhood vaccines cause autism, that WiFi causes “leaky brain,” that chemicals in the water supply might turn children transgender, that AIDS might not be caused by HIV, that Republicans stole the 2004 election and that 5G networks are used for mass surveillance. And that was before the world learned about his brain worm and the bear cub.
Trump this week said Kennedy has “got some very good ideas” that “turned out to be right.” And he says he’d rely on the judgment of both Kennedy and Gabbard to staff up his administration.

Trump can win on character!


Hello, everyone. This is your favorite president, Donald J. Trump, with some very exciting news. By popular demand, I am doing a new series of Trump digital trading cards!


So begins the infomercial Trump posted on social media this week. For just $99 apiece, Trump supporters can pay with credit card or crypto to own digital cards showing a young and muscular Trump on a motorcycle, holding a lightning bolt, and praying. (This third offering of cards, the America First Collection, follows the Mugshot Edition.) Those who cough up $24,750 or more will get two tickets to “a gala dinner at my beautiful country club in Jupiter, Florida” — and a “bigger” piece of his debate suit.


Proceeds go not to Trump’s campaign but to a company he created for the racket.
Don’t care for the cards? “I have a FANTASTIC new Book coming out in two weeks, ‘SAVE AMERICA,’” Trump also posted this week. “I hand-selected every Photo.” This one is $99, or $499 signed; proceeds go to a company founded by Donald Trump Jr.

These follow other grifting ventures by Trump: sneakers, bibles — you name it. But his biggest scheme by far has been convincing supporters to buy stock in Trump Media, the parent of Truth Social. Investors who bought at the peak have now lost about 75 percent of their money, as the market adjusts to the realization that the business is fundamentally worthless. (It loses millions of dollars and produces scant revenue.) But Trump’s 59 percent stake in the company is still valued at about $2.2 billion — and he can start dumping his shares on Sept. 20. Company executives have already begun cashing out. Loyal Trump supporters who bought in on his assurance that Trump Media is a “highly successful” company are left holding the bag.

Trump can win on character!

The former president is befuddled. “Kamala and her ‘handlers’ are trying to make it sound like I am the Incumbent President,” he protested on X. (His return to the platform is another acknowledgment of Truth Social’s failure.)
This is true: He’s no longer running against an incumbent president, and Harris has been skillful in making the campaign about Trump’s record. Trump keeps pining for Biden’s candidacy. At a stop in Detroit, he admitted that people are advising him “don’t waste your time” on Biden — even as he mentioned his former opponent five times.


In his disorientation, Trump retreats to his instincts.

He makes up stuff. He claims that the Biden administration is to blame for the assassination attempt, that the U.S. military has “no ammunition,” that his “administration will be great for women and their reproductive rights.”
He is outrageous. This week, he shared QAnon slogans online (“nothing can stop what is coming,” “where we go one we go all”); doctored images of Biden, Harris, Hillary Clinton, “crazy” Nancy Pelosi and others in orange jumpsuits; and proposals to indict members of the House select Jan. 6 committee for “sedition” and to prosecute Barack Obama in a “public military tribunal.” His country club in Bedminster, N.J., will host a fundraiser next week for participants in the 2021 attack on the Capitol.

And he’s obscene. This former president of the United States shared a photo of Harris and Clinton as part of a post associating both women with oral sex. This came as Fox News prime-time host Jesse Watters, a Trump ally, fantasized on air about Harris “paralyzed in the Situation Room while the generals have their way with her.” (Watters says he “wasn’t suggesting anything of a sexual nature.”) Also, former Trump official (and Republican convention speaker) Peter Navarro responded on X to special counsel Jack Smith’s revised indictment of Trump to conform to a recent Supreme Court ruling: “What the f— is this Jacko? YOU are going to prison for election interference. You can have Merrick [Garland] as your bunkie.” (Navarro is just out of prison himself.)


“I always look for good words, highly sophisticated — I’m highly educated, I like sophisticated words,” Trump said in Detroit this week. But for his opponents, he went on, “there’s only one word I get. That’s stupid — they’re stupid people.”


In his reflexive name-calling, he confirms that there really is one word that describes him better than any other. Vulgar.

Categories Character, Elections, Trump

Thom Hartmann on CNN Interview of Harris and Walz

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2024 //
80

I don’t know about you but I was disappointed by the CNN interview of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. Interviewer Dana Bash wanted her colleagues to say she was tough, so she asked several gotcha questions. In particular, I was annoyed by the “what will you do in your first day in office?” question. It seems to be a standard question, but the answers it elicits are either banal or unrealistic. I recall that Trump told Sean Hannity that he would “drill, baby, drill” and “build the wall” on his first day. Oh, and he would be a dictator on day one. Harris just offered some platitudes about starting “the opportunity culture.” The realistic answer might be “I’m going to meet with my new staff; I’m going to find out where the bathroom is; I’m going to check out the desk drawers and arrange my family pictures; I’m going to plan our legislative agenda.” If Harris were coming in after Trump, she would have many executive orders to sign, reversing his bad ideas. But she follows Biden, and it is unlikely she will reverse anything.

Thom Hartmann was disappointed by the CNN interview. He explains here:

CNN shows everything that’s wrong with 2024’s repeat of 2016’s election coverage. In an interview with Vice President Harris and Governor Walz Thursday night, CNN’s Dana Bash chose to repeat pathetic rightwing attacks on the candidates instead of engaging in issues of importance to a majority of Americans. Only four of the questions she asked during the entire interview were not rightwing talking points. She could have asked about their pledge to protect Social Security and Medicare after Trump proposed cuts to both programs every year for his 4 years in office, or the 90% of Americans who want weapons of war off our streets, or their efforts to revive labor unions in the face of GOP opposition, or how they feel about Republicans on the Supreme Court thwarting Biden’s efforts to cut student loan debt, or what they’d do about the severe ethics problem with bribed Supreme Court justices Alito, Roberts, and Thomas, or their support for the queer community in the face of unrelenting attacks by JD Vance and other rightwingers, but, no. Instead, she had to ask about a one-word misspeak by Walz five years ago, whether Harris identified as Black or Indian or what, and why Walz implicitly lied when he said he and his wife had undergone “IVF” treatment for infertility when, in fact, they’d undergone the similar “IUI” treatment. As if anybody, anywhere, gives a damn. Probably the best analysis of the interview is here on Substack by Jeff Teidrich. Meanwhile, CNN’s management is ebullient about having pulled in a “whopping 6 million viewers.” Like I said, money over country…

Categories Elections, Harris, Kamala, Media, Walz, Tim

Margaret Sullivan: False Equivalence Between Harris and Trump in The New York Times

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2024 //
23

Margaret Sullivan was the ombudsman (public editor) for the New York Times. She writes a blog called American Crisis. There are so many amazing blogs these days that it’s hard to keep track. This one appeared in my email today, and it speaks to a debate among readers on this blog about whether the media, and most especially The New York Times, normalizes Trump’s behavior and ideas in an effort to be “fair.” I’m subscribing.

She writes:

I once asked Jill Abramson, the former top editor of the New York Times, to name the best reporters she had ever encountered.
I recall she mentioned her friend and co-author Jane Mayer — definitely on my list, too — and a few others. Mayer’s book, “Dark Money,” about the Koch Brothers, is a classic of investigative reporting.

Another one was James Risen, the renowned investigative reporter formerly of the New York Times, and later at the Intercept. I agreed again, particularly because of an investigation that Risen did during the George W. Bush administration about the government surveillance of American citizens through warrantless wiretapping. (There’s quite a backstory there, but suffice it to say that Times editors held back the investigation for many months after the administration claimed that publishing would threaten national security; Risen eventually forced the hand of his editors, resulting in the publication of the blockbuster co-authored with Eric Lichtblau — and it won a Pulitzer Prize.)

I heard from Risen a few days ago, as I do from time to time; I got to know him while I was the Times public editor or ombudswoman. He wrote to express his outrage at his former employer for a recent story. I pay particular attention to him as a former Timesman himself and a journalist of integrity.

“At first, I thought this was a parody,” Risen told me. Unfortunately, it wasn’t. Even more unfortunately, the lack of judgment it displays is all too common in the Times and throughout Big Journalism as mainstream media covers Donald Trump’s campaign for president.

“Harris and Trump Have Housing Ideas. Economists Have Doubts,” is the headline of the story he was angered by. If you pay attention to epidemic of “false equivalence” in the media — equalizing the unequal for the sake of looking fair — you might have had a sense of what was coming.

The story takes seriously Trump’s plan for the mass deportation of immigrants as part of his supposed “affordable housing” agenda.
Here’s some both-sidesing for you, as the paper of record describes Harris’s tax cuts to spur construction and grants to first-time home buyers, and Trump’s deportation scheme.
“Their two visions of how to solve America’s affordable housing shortage have little in common …But they do share one quality: Both have drawn skepticism from outside economists.” The story notes that experts are particularly skeptical about Trump’s idea, but the story’s framing and its headline certainly equate the two.

There’s only one reason I disagree with Risen’s reaction. He wrote: “This story is unbelievable.”

I wish.

Stories like this run rampant in the Times, and far beyond. It matters more in the Times because — even in this supposed “post-media era” — the country’s biggest newspaper still sets the tone and wields tremendous influence. And, of course, the Times has tremendous resources, a huge newsroom and the ability to hire the best in the business. Undeniably, it does a lot of excellent work.

But its politics coverage often seems broken and clueless — or even blatantly pro-Trump. There’s so much of this false-balance nonsense in the Times that there’s a Twitter (X) account devoted to mocking it, called New York Times Pitchbot. 

Sometimes, sadly, it’s hard to tell the difference between the satire and the reality. Hence, Risen’s parody line.

At the same time, when Trump does something even more outrageous than usual, the mainstream press can’t seem to give it the right emphasis. Last week, NPR broke the news that Trump and his campaign staff apparently violated federal law — and every norm of decency — by trying to film a campaign video at Arlington National Cemetery and getting into a scuffle with a dutiful cemetery employee.

Of course, the story got picked up elsewhere and got significant attention. But did it get the huge and sustained treatment that — let’s just say — Hillary Clinton’s email practices did in 2016? Definitely not, as a former Marine, Ben Kesling, wrote in Columbia Journalism Review:

“Lumped together, the reporting this week left readers and listeners, especially with no knowledge of the military, at a loss to understand what actually happened — and crucially, why it mattered so much. The Trump campaign had successfully muddied the waters by alleging that the photographer had been invited to the event by family members of soldiers buried there.”

It came off, he wrote, “like a bureaucratic mix-up or some tedious violation of protocol,” not a deeply disrespectful moral failure, which it surely was. “The sacred had been profaned.”

The political cartoonist Darrin Bell, however, certainly got the point across in a time-lapse video cartoon. Check it out here. (Open the link to see this).

Why does this keep happening, not just in the Times but far beyond? 

Nearly 10 years after Trump declared his candidacy in 2015, the media has not figured out how to cover him. (My last major piece in the Washington Post laid out how coverage should change if Trump decided to run again, and I’ve also written recommendations here from the Media and Democracy Project.)

And what’s more — what’s worse — they don’t seem to want to change. Editors and reporters, with a few exceptions, really don’t see the problem as they normalize Trump. Nor do they appear to listen to valid criticism. They may not even be aware of it, or may think, “well, when both sides are mad at us, we must be doing it right.” Maybe they simply fear being labeled liberal.

American Crisis is a community-supported project where I explore how journalism can help save democracy. Please consider joining us! Subscribe

All of this matters immensely as the extraordinarily important campaign for president heads into its last couple of months. I’ll be continuing to monitor coverage here, and trying to find ways to improve it.

Categories Accountability, Democracy, Elections, Harris, Kamala, Media, Propaganda, Trump

CBS News Interviewed Biden After He Stepped Aside

By dianeravitch
September 3, 2024 //
9

The Republican Party is flailing around in search of a way to attack Kamala Harris, looking for any way to discredit her. As expected, they have made snide comments about her race, her gender, and her intellect. Trump says she’s “too dumb” to be president, which, coming from a man who refused to read his briefing books, is hilarious. He has even repeated revolting remarks about her sexual history, which is funny in a sick way since his is a disgrace and is well-documented.

One of the absurd charges against Harris is that she failed to tell the American public that Joe Biden had become senile. She “covered up” his mental decline, say the GOP critics.

But was he in fact in declining condition? Was he unable to carry out the functions of the presidency?

Biden announced his decision to step aside on July 21. Robert Acosta of CBS News conducted the first interview of Biden on August 12.

The conversation was wide-ranging. They discussed his decision to withdraw; why he decided to run in 2016; his belief that Trump is a threat to the security of the U.S.; his hopes for a lasting ceasefire in Gaza; his belief in the importance of NATO.

He spoke slowly and chose his words with care. He hesitated while thinking through his answers. He stumbled and corrected himself once or twice. His manner was that of a man past his prime. He is old.

But his answers were pointed and clear. He showed no sign of cognitive decline. He was on top of all the issues (as he was in his post-NATO press conference, where he gave what some commentators called a “master class” in international relations.)

He spoke from the depths of his wisdom and experience. He left the race to save the nation from another chaotic and divisive Trump term.

Kamala Harris was not protecting or hiding Biden. She has nothing to apologize for.

Biden has been an incredibly effective president, working with a deeply divided Congress. He came to realize that the campaign would be about his age, not the issues. The greatest thing he could do for his country was to step down, and he did, for the sake of the democracy he loves.

Categories Biden, Character, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, Harris, Kamala

Biden and Harris Bring the Campaign to Pittsburgh for Labor Day

By dianeravitch
September 2, 2024 //
1

Watch President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as they speak to union leaders and members in Pittsburgh today!

Please note: President Biden is old and he shows it, but he is mentally sharp and animated.

The clips are contained in a post called “The Meidas Touch.” The speeches by Biden and Harris are the second of three videos. The third video is Governor Tim Walz in Wisconsin, speaking to union workers.

Sixty-six days until Election Day. Early voting starts in a couple of weeks. Will the nation build for the future or go back to the past?

Categories Biden, Democracy, Elections, Harris, Kamala, Trump

Elon Musk Posts Fake Image of Kamala in Communist Uniform

By dianeravitch
September 2, 2024 //
13

Twitter (X) has few rules but one of them bars fake images.

X belongs to Elon Musk, the richest man in the world. He can do whatever he wants on X. Rules are for others. So he did.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk, a supporter of former President Donald Trump, on Monday posted a fake image of what appears to be Vice President Kamala Harris dressed in a red communist uniform.

“Kamala vows to be a communist dictator on day one. Can you believe she wears that outfit!?” Musk posted on X, the social media platform he owns, in response to the vice president’s post warning about Trump being a “dictator on day one.”

According to X’s policy, users “may not share synthetic, manipulated, or out-of-context media that may deceive or confuse people and lead to harm. … In addition, we may label posts containing misleading media to help people understand their authenticity and to provide additional context.”

Musk’s post does not have any such label on it.

Last month, Trump posted a fake, AI-generated image depicting Harris speaking in front of a communist symbol at the Democratic National Convention. 

The least trustworthy tweets are those posted by Musk.

Categories Billionaires, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, Lies, Media

Jennifer Rubin: Brave Republicans and Those Who Are M.I.A.

By dianeravitch
September 1, 2024 //
10

Jennifer Rubin was a solid conservative journalist and lawyer who was hired by the Washington Post to express the conservative view on politics in a column called “Right Turn.” After Trump’s election, she became increasingly critical of him and eventually reversed her ideology. She is today one of the most incisive critics of the MAGA movement. In this column, she chastises Prominent Republicans for remaining silent in this election.

She writes:

One of the most uplifting parts of last week’s Democratic convention was the presence of so many Republicans, such as former Illinois congressman Adam Kinzinger and former Georgia lieutenant governor Geoff Duncan. Both decided to put country over party and self.

“I know Kamala Harris shares my allegiance to the rule of law, the Constitution and democracy, and she is dedicated to upholding all three in service to our country,” Kinzinger said. “Whatever policies we disagree on pale in comparison with those fundamental matters of principle, of decency and of fidelity to this nation.” Likewise, Duncan said, “Let me be clear to my Republican friends at home watching: If you vote for Kamala Harris in 2024, you’re not a Democrat. You’re a patriot.”

The day after the convention, a dozen former lawyers from the three Republican administrations before Donald Trump’s published a letter endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris. They wrote, “Trump’s attempt to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after losing the election proved beyond any reasonable doubt his willingness to place his personal interests above the law and values of our constitutional democracy.” They argued that returning Trump to office “would threaten American democracy and undermine the rule of law in our country.” Then, a four-star general who served under President George W. Bush and hundreds of former Republican staffers endorsed Harris.

So, the question remains: Where are the rest of the Republicans who understand Trump is an existential threat to democracy? Most of the big names still refuse to follow Kinzinger and Duncan’s lead.

Former president George W. Bush must be in a witness protection program; he has virtually disappeared. Former Wyoming congresswoman Liz Cheney courageously stood up to Trump when he tried to stage a coup. But, sorry — if you pledge to do everything possible to prevent Trump’s return to power, you have an obligation to endorse Harris, the only person who can beat him.

Former New Jersey governor Chris Christie, who shredded Trump in the primaries, previously objected to endorsing President Joe Biden because of Biden’s age. (“President Biden, in my view, is past the sell-by date.”) What is his excuse now for refusing to endorse the new, 59-year-old Democratic nominee?

Paul Ryan, a Fox board member and former speaker of the House, was quoted in May as saying, “Character is too important for me. … [The presidency] is a job that requires the kind of character [Trump] doesn’t have.” But Ryan too lacks the nerve to support the only viable alternative. When he rationalizes his refusal to endorse a Democrat on the grounds that he differs on “policy,” he is telling us that preserving democracy is not a high policy priority for him.

The list goes on: H.R. McMaster (actually commending Trump’s foreign policy in the Atlantic!), Jim Mattis, Condoleezza Rice. Moral cowardice, or craving for access in future Republican administrations, seems to have silenced even those most vocal on America’s defense of Ukraine and other allies. History will not treat them kindly.

Certainly, getting some Republicans to refrain from voting for Trump is helpful. But if they are as devoted to democracy and as committed to the international world order as they say, there is no moral argument for refraining from going the rest of the way to endorse Harris, especially after such a robust affirmation of her foreign policy views.

Biden gave up the presidency for the sake of our democracy. Can’t these Republicans give Harris their votes?

Categories Accountability, Citizenship, Courage, Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Freedom, Harris, Kamala, Republicans, Trump

Mary Trump: Why Isn’t the Army Prosecuting Convicted Felon Trump for Breaking the Law Again?

By dianeravitch
August 31, 2024 //
28

Mary Trump, Donald’s estranged niece, asks an important question: Why did the U.S. Army decide not to bring charges against Donald Trump for law-breaking? He knew that it was illegal to bring cameras into Arlington National Cemetery; he knew it was illegal to stage a campaign event there. When the aide on duty reminded his crew not to break the law, they shoved her aside and ridiculed her. I assume the Department of the Army is acting out of self-interest. Those who made the decision know that if Trump is re-elected, he will wreak vengeance on them.

Mary T. writes:

Donald Trump and his minions were warned against politicizing a visit to Arlington National Cemetery. They did it anyway, violating self-evident norms and the law: military cemeteries cannot be used to stage partisan political events. When it became clear that Donald’s staff was going to ignore this prohibition, an employee at the cemetery sought to restrict photography in accordance with federal regulations. 

Arlington is “the final resting place of more than 400,000 U.S. troops, veterans and family members. Donald was there to mark the third anniversary of a suicide bombing that killed 13 U.S. troops during the evacuation of Afghanistan,” an anniversary he did not see fit to commemorate in 2023 or 2022.

Cemetery staff had made it clear ahead of time that official photography was not allowed in Section 60, where veterans of recent wars are buried. When the employee sought to reinforce the guidelines, she was, according to a report released by the Army, “abruptly pushed aside” by people in Donald’s entourage. The last part should surprise no one. Donald is a foppish, chubby overlord who relies on the unquestioning thuggery of the conscienceless jackals who comprise his inner circle and staff who exist to make him look tough. For him, “toughness” means being an unrepentant asshole; people in his orbit simply follow his lead.

Arlington National Cemetery is run by the Army. The woman who tried to make sure the guidelines, and the law, were followed by Donald’s team, is employed by the Army. After the altercation with members of Donald’s staff, she filed a report. It’s understandable that she does not want to press charges—after all, she remains unidentified because of concerns for her safety—but why won’t the Army? What exactly is gained by allowing this act of desecration to go unpunished? And, by the way, engaging in the kind of behavior Donald and his campaign staff engaged in isn’t simply indecent, it’s illegal. So why is the convicted felon allowed to commit more crimes with impunity?

But let’s summon the will to be shocked, shall we? Let’s be shocked that the former Commander-in Chief is such a despicable narcissist that every interaction he has with service members is simply a means simultaneously to steal their honor while denigrating them. 

Is this the worst thing Donald’s ever done? Not by a long-shot. But the combination of selfishness, thuggery, menace, and his willingness to bring the entire weight of his power to bear on a private American citizen is a pretty good encapsulation of everything that is wrong with and disqualifying about him.

It’s time for corporate media to catch up and refuse to let this one go.

Categories Accountability, Character, Disruption, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Trump

Ruth Marcus: Why President Harris Should Not Pardon Former President Trump

By dianeravitch
August 31, 2024 //
26

After Richard Nixon resigned the Presidency in 1974, his successor Gerald Ford pardoned him to unite the country and end “the nation’s long national nightmare.”

Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus writes that President Kamala Harris should not pardon Trump; she believes he should face the consequences for his crimes.

Marcus writes:

Just a few weeks ago, the question seemed almost preposterous: What should happen to the federal prosecutions of Donald Trump if he is defeated in November? Today, it might be premature to imagine a President Kamala Harris grappling with whether to allow the cases against Trump to go forward or whether, before or after any convictions, to grant him a pardon.
But this is a discussion worth launching now, in part because, as the prospect of a Harris victory comes into focus, there could be a “long national nightmare” impulse to put all things Trump in the rearview mirror. Under more ordinary circumstances, in more ordinary times, my sympathies would tend toward such calls for national reconciliation, the sentiments that animated Gerald Ford, 50 years ago next month, to pardon Richard M. Nixon.

In pardoning Nixon, Ford invoked the continued suffering of Nixon and his family, along with Nixon’s years of public service, but said his decision was driven by the need for national healing.

In retrospect, that decision looks wise and selfless. But it’s not the right template for thinking about Trump. Harris should allow special counsel Jack Smith to proceed with his prosecutions against the former president, or what’s left of them after the Supreme Court’s ruling on presidential immunity. If Trump is convicted and the conviction is upheld, Harris should not use her power to pardon Trump or commute his sentence.

Why? What’s the difference between Ford and Nixon then and Harris and Trump in a not-so-theoretical future?

First is the matter of consequences for bad acts, something that Trump has magically managed to avoid for most of his 78 years. Short-circuiting his prosecutions or upending his convictions would be the maddening capstone to a life of evading responsibility for wrongdoing.

A sitting president can’t be prosecuted, under long-standing Justice Department policy, so the findings by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III that Trump might have committed 10 acts of obstruction of justice went nowhere. The House of Representatives voted twice to impeach Trump, but the Senate failed to convict — the second time largely because Republican senators (and Trump’s own lawyers) pointed to the prospect of criminal prosecution for efforts to interfere with the election results. Then the Supreme Court carved out a broad sphere of immunity for Trump, jeopardizing at least part of Smith’s prosecution.

When it comes to Trump, accountability is a can endlessly kicked down the road. That’s not in the interest of justice — and it sets a bad precedent for future presidents. We can hope that it doesn’t take the threat of criminal consequences to dissuade presidents from wrongdoing, but rules and laws without consequences are meaningless. And the charges against Trump — that he plotted to overturn election results and obstructed justice to improperly retain classified documents — involve serious misconduct that calls out for enforcement.

Second, Trump is no Nixon, and I don’t mean this in a good way. Nixon’s wrongdoing was egregious, and criminal. But he did not pose a threat to democracy on the same level as Trump, with his incessant claims of a system rigged against him, of elections stolen and politically motivated prosecutions. Nixon left office under political pressure, but, still, he left office.

Nixon cannot accurately be called repentant, but in accepting the pardon he acknowledged “my own mistakes and misjudgments,” adding, “No words can describe the depths of my regret and pain at the anguish my mistakes over Watergate have caused the nation and the presidency — a nation I so deeply love and an institution I so greatly respect.” It is impossible to imagine anything approaching this degree of contrition from Trump. Those who accept no responsibility deserve no mercy. Those who continually incite discord should not receive a pass in the name of calming the turmoil.

Third, about that turmoil: Times have changed since Ford pardoned Nixon. The country has grown angrier and more divided. Ford openly worried about this in his day, warning that if he allowed a criminal case to proceed, “ugly passions would again be aroused. And our people would again be polarized in their opinions. And the credibility of our free institutions of government would again be challenged at home and abroad.”

Back then, for all the fury generated by the pardon, it was a reasonable judgment that it would calm the waters overall. Today, I wonder whether that would happen. If Harris were to order the prosecutions dropped or grant a pardon, would that have the same salutary effect as Ford envisioned in 1974? Polarization has edged into antipathy, not mere disagreement but vehement disdain for the other side. Political tribalism reigns; it takes precedence over the national interest. It is hard to imagine an act by Harris toward Trump that would magically alter this ugly reality.

So, my advice for former prosecutor and possible president Harris is to let Smith do his job and the criminal justice system work its will. She can decide down the road about a pardon, but she should be wary of taking the lessons of a half-century ago as a road map for what is best for the nation today.

Categories Accountability, Biden, Corruption, Elections, Extremism, Failure, History, Trump

Heather Cox Richardson: Trump Has Remade the GOP in His Image

By dianeravitch
August 30, 2024 //
31

Historian Heather Cox Richardson weaves together the events of the past few days and demonstrates the submission of the Republican Party to one angry man. At the Republican National Convention, the party’s elders were notably absent. No Bush or Cheney; no Romney. Trump put his daughter-in-law, Lara, in charge of the Republican National Committee. It’s the Trump party now, and he controls all its levers of power. Note below that he hasn’t stopped hawking merchandise, even in the middle of his campaign. If you can open a tweet, this is an example of Trump turning his campaign into a money-maker for himself.

She writes:

…Trump began the day by posting an advertisement for the fourth “series of Trump digital trading cards,” or NFTs (which are unique digital tokens) featuring heroic images of Trump. People who buy 15 or more of them—at $99 apiece—get a physical trading card as well. Trump said that the physical card has a piece of the suit he wore at the presidential debate, and Trump promises to sign five of them, randomly. Up to 25 people who buy $25,750 worth of the cards with cryptocurrency will be invited to a gala next month at his Jupiter, Florida, golf club.

In the ad, Trump made it a point to emphasize his enthusiasm for cryptocurrency, an emphasis that dovetails with Trump’s recent promotion of an “official” cryptocurrency project. He linked to a Telegram channel run by his sons Don Jr. and Eric that, at the time, was called “The DeFiant Ones” but has been renamed “World Liberty Financial.” While there is little public information about the project, the channel has almost 50,000 subscribers.  

Hawking merchandise was an odd move for a presidential candidate, and it suggested his focus is elsewhere than on the election. Also today, Trump announced that he plans to make former Democrats Robert Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard, both of whom have endorsed him, honorary members of his transition team. Kennedy told right-wing personality Tucker Carlson that he would “help pick the people who will be running the government…” 

And then, this evening, Quil Lawrence and Tom Bowman of NPR explained the story behind the surprising photos of Trump on Monday giving a thumbs-up over a grave in Arlington National Cemetery. The reporters wrote that “[t]wo members of Donald Trump’s campaign staff had a verbal and physical altercation Monday with an official” at the cemetery, where “[f]ederal law prohibits political campaign or election-related activities.” When a cemetery official tried to prevent Trump campaign staff from entering the section where the grave was located, “campaign staff verbally abused and pushed the official aside.” A Trump campaign spokesperson said the official who tried to prevent the staff from holding a political event in the cemetery was “clearly suffering from a mental health episode.” 

The elephant in the room these days is that most Republicans, along with many pundits, are pretending that Trump is a normal presidential candidate. They are ignoring his mental lapses, calls for authoritarianism, grifting, lack of grasp on any sort of policy, and criminality, even as he has hollowed out the once grand Republican Party and threatens American democracy itself.

It’s hard to look away from the reality that the Republican senators could have stopped this catastrophe at many points in Trump’s term, at the very least by voting to convict Trump at his first impeachment trial. At the time, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) said, “Out of one hundred senators, you have zero who believe you that there was no quid pro quo. None. There’s not a single one.” Republican senators nonetheless stood behind Trump. “This is not about this president. It’s not about anything he’s been accused of doing,” then–majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told his colleagues. “It has always been about November 3, 2020. It’s about flipping the Senate.”

When the Framers wrote the Constitution, they did not foresee senators abandoning the principles of the country in order to support a president they thought would enhance their own careers. Assuming that lawmakers would jealously guard their own power, the Framers gave to the members of the House of Representatives the power to impeach a president. To the members of the Senate they gave the sole power to try impeachments. They assumed that lawmakers, who had just fought a war to break free of a monarch, would understand that their own interests would always require stopping the rise of an authoritarian leader. 

But the Framers did not foresee the rise of political partisanship. 

In the modern era, extreme partisanship has led to voter suppression to keep Republicans in power, the weaponization of the filibuster to stop Democratic legislation, and gerrymandering to enable Republicans to take far more legislative seats than they have earned. The demands of this extreme partisanship also mean that members of one of the nation’s major political parties have lined up behind a man whom, were he running this sort of a campaign even ten years ago, they would have dismissed with derision. 

Finally, devastatingly, the partisanship that made senators keep Trump in office enabled him to name to the Supreme Court three justices. Those three justices were key to making up the majority that overturned the nation’s fundamental principle that all people must be equal before the law. In July 2024 they ruled that unlike anyone else, a president is above it.  

In May 2016, South Carolina Republican senator Lindsey Graham famously observed: “If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed…….and we will deserve it.”

Categories Accountability, Corruption, Democracy, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, For-Profit, Republicans, Scandals, Trump
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »